"…एक विचित्र अशा ऐतिहासिक न्यून गं डाने मराठी माणसाचे व्यक्तिमत्व आधुनिक का ळात फाटून गेले आहे.. त्यात भर घातली आहे ती मराठी वृत्त पत्रांनी , मथळ्यान्मधे , उप मथळ्यान्मधे मजकुरामधें जणू शिवाजीमहाराज किंवा विष्णूशास्त्री चिपळूणकर यांच्यावर सूड घेतल्यासारखी इंग्रजी शब्दसमुच्चयांची मस्तवालपणे भेसळ केली जाते . तेच बोलतानाही . सांस्कृतिक आळस व स्वभाषेबद्दल तुच्छता !…"
(ललित , मार्च 2013)
Jaywant Dalwi (जयवंत दळवी) writes in his essay, dated 1980's, on his close friend Vasant Sarwate (वसंत सरवटे) that if he asked Sarwate about a book and if the reply was "it's interesting", it meant only one thing- "trash" (भिकार)!
When I first read this I could not stop laughing, for the way Dalvi used the Marathi word 'bhikar'.
Luckily, I have now met Mr. Sarwate a few times, also spoken to him on phone a few times, and have always heard very carefully if he calls anything "interesting". (He might have called this blog 'interesting' once or twice!)
These days Marathi speaking "TV celebrities" use only following words to describe anything- from their poodle to cinematic or theatrical experience-:
'cute, amazing, incredible...'
"...judging something “cute” often “infantilizes" the beholder, as we melt into a puddle of oohs and aahs at the sight of a baby bunny eating a baby carrot. But just as a child might love a doll to tatters, our absorption with “cuteness” is born of both tenderness and aggression. Something cute is something we condescend to, even as we desire to touch and ruffle and hold and possess it...
...At its most thoughtful, calling something “interesting” might be an expression of indeterminacy, a placeholder for a future conversation. But more often than not, it’s just conversational filler, something dropped in when you don’t feel like judging at all."
(Hua Hsu, Slate, Review of 'Our Aesthetic Categories: Zany, Cute, Interesting' by Sianne Ngai)
"moments when our assumptions around cuteness—the stability of feeling somehow “above” the cute object—melt away, for these images manage to be “helpless and aggressive” at the same time."
Artist: Yoshitomo Nara, 'Yellow in blue', 2005
"Does anyone ever mean it when they say something is “interesting”—or do we all, in art and conversation, merely aspire to be interesting enough? We usually ponder the present condition by considering our consumer choices or modes of self-presentation. But perhaps the line around our imagination starts elsewhere, in those aesthetic experiences that happen on the edge of comprehension. Before we are inventories of symbols and things, we are thinking, feeling people navigating a fluid, ever-changing world—a world where everything is interesting but not much more, where cuteness and zaniness are the only scales available to us when confronted with global vastness."
Artist: Robert Weber, The New Yorker
In this cartoon of Mr. Weber for The New Yorker, we find as the woman does household chores with great intensity, a kid- presumably her- has appeared in the doorway and is saying:
'That was an incredible nap!'... Nothing less- just incredible. She could have also said: That was an amazing nap!
"The meaning of the cartoon was clear to me -- it is a hilarious comment on the fact that we live in a culture that feels comfortable saying that anything is incredible, or, more often these days, "Amazing!" We have incredible lattes, amazing socks, etc. But apparently some readers didn't get this.
I have a theory I just came up with in this moment -- perhaps people don't get the genre of ironic cartoons because they themselves are incapable of irony. But then again, I have only had this theory for a few moments, and it may be completely off base."
Most middle-class Marathi readers, at least in this century, have been raised only on the diet of horseplay on TV / cinema masquerading as humour. I can say with some confidence that most of them don't get the genre of ironic cartoons because they themselves are incapable of irony.