Tuesday, November 23, 2004

"Kid, You need some Supplement"

I call Sunday a day for some 'Good Stuff'. That includes a couple of weekend games in the Premiership and the La Liga, maybe a weekend race, a football match with friends and probably a good book. This list I must say has altered, it has one missing entry that would probably have the first a couple of years ago. That coloured 4-page supplement with the Sunday Times, they now call 'Life!'.
One might say that this article is inappropriate for a blog, which intends to criticize the Pune Times. However one must remember that PT is a welcome absentee on Sunday. The now-extinct 'Review' used to be a welcome change. It probably compensated for the weeklong torture that PT readers had to undergo. The writing talent they had and probably still have was absolutely amazing. Mini Chandran Kurian, Abha Shrivastava, Nona Walia, Priya Pathiyan are some of the excellent journalists still working with the Sunday Times. However the way in which the continuously keep on churning the stupid articles on 'Mobile Phone Hazards', 'Is Bipasha Basu Still the Nation's Sex Symbol', '10 Tests to Know if You and Your Spouse Have Problems' ! Such topics not only waste the latent talent of all the journos working with them. It's like putting Sachin to bat at No.9 or bringing on Wasim Akram when only 2 overs are left.
What the "Review" used to provide was a breath of fresh air. Maybe they did concentrate too much on filmstars, but then again they never neglected the cricketers, the hockey stars, IT czars, writers and maybe sometimes 'Society' types. They never had a supplement without an article on an environmentalist or probably a budding film--maker, probably an amazing article that asked people questions no one ever did before. It was truly a deep insight into people, not fully an interview, not fully a third - person article, it did something which nothing else I remember has managed to match (probably RD). It was an insight in to people's minds. What puts it aside was that unlike books(i.e. biographies and autobiographies) which focus on a single person in extreme detail, it was a glance at a lot of people at the same time. It beautifully encapsulated their lives, their struggles, their moments of victory and probably a very impartial third person, a sort of out-of-the-world synopsis overlooking the small wrinkles and bringing to us the beautiful inner face of the subject. It sometimes wove an unseen thread between the various people featured saying 'all these people fought through the hard times and came out on top. That was truly amazing !
I never remembering Review ever resorting to sensationalism, ever indulging in fruitless, futile gossip (less said the better for PT) or ever specifically glorifying/bringing down the public image of a famous personality. It never targeted anyone specifically but brought a balanced view of things in general. That does not mean it shied away from the tough questions. Esp. with regards to filmstars. I personally am not on the bandwagon, which opposes anything that some of us like to call 'commercial/masala' cinema. I think this is mass cinema, the masses (and sometimes, yours truly too) like these forms of entertainment and therefore The Review cannot be blamed for according the Shah Rukh Khans and the Kareena Kapoors their big coloured centre/main page slot. However what mattered was that some people get too soft while questioning filmstars while some go the HardTalk way and there is nothing but a slurry of futile personal questions. The Review did ask a few hard hitting questions however they never over-emphasised the personal life of their subjects nor did they make such matters the centrestage of their articles.
Then one Sunday morning suddenly people at the Times probably suffer an alien burgling of their minds or maybe they donate their rationality at the Alpha Centauri Local Centre for aiding greater research into the Mostly Harmless ones. They suddenly come up with this seemingly amazing idea of 'Men & Women'. They decide that the erstwhile Review needs a super trimmer programme and make it a four page supplement from the previous 6 pages. They decide that the ad area remains the same (obviously), so that most of the times, most of the paper is staring at us proclaiming that Arrow invented the collar. They come up with this flabbergasting idea of 'comparisons'. The review compared people without actually saying so. It as I said wove them in a sort of spell, M&W made it obvious and therefore tasteless and bland. Also probably some PT rejects were promoted (?) so that when two filmstars were compared they invariably would be Kareena Kapoor and Shahid Kapur. Ummm.. very subtle.. Then sometimes they came up with these weird ideas about how various people relaxed, what they wore etc etc. Notice how again the subtle comparisons of its predecessor is replaced by a more tasteless direct comparison. Still the supplement retained its focus on 'people' but in a much different way. We only knew what XYZ eats. There was no tantalizing foreplay, no more beautiful sign-offs , no more an 'article'. What we had was a collection of n number of facts presented together. That was bad.
They then deal the sucker punch. They give us "Life!". It's supposed to be everything. Health, Entertainment, Food, etc etc etc... It ends up being nothing. Again we do have good long articles but the supplement loses it backbone, - it forgets it focus on 'people'. Now we have long drawn out reasons for sibling rivalry, 10 reasons to find out if you have chosen the right man etc, etc. Even listing the topics would be terrible, let alone reading. Maybe the techno section saves the day, but why not leave that to the Digits and the CHIPs and the C@Hs to sort that out. All we want is a high class, well-written focus on people, as it was before. This is not a case of being old-fashioned, or not accepting change but a simple case of opting for the better. I've heard that the journo community is tuned in, so this is a fervent plea to give all the faithful readers those old times back. Till then, have a good Life!.

Abhishek
(for a change in all seriousness.)

6 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmmm. What do we have here? Nikhat Kazmi, one of the most celebrated 'Movie-critic' was found, like a certain Anu—indian idiot— Malik, looking for 'inspiration'. However, she liked Roger Ebert’s review on the Shark Tale in Chicago Suntimes so much that she was inspired to flick full paragraphs from it. What Kazmi doesn’t know is that it’s not the early 1980s no more when the reader had only the morning paper to dig into. Internet is a powerful medium and people—use it.

Jabberwock is a friend and this is what he found:

Times Syndication Service on Nikhat Kazmi

Arguably, India's best known film critic, Nikhat Kazmi is currently the Deputy Resident Editor and the Film Critic of The Times of India . She has been with The Times of India since 1987 and since then has been writing a weekly column on foreign and Indian films, considered to be the final word in the field of ratings and reviews.

She has written two books on cinema, 'Ire in the Soul', published by UBS and 'The Dream Merchants' published by Harper Collins. She has been on the National Film Jury and the selection panel of the International Film Festival of India.

Jabberwock on Nikhat Kazmi

Jabberwock reports about the "whorism in film writing", that is, in reviews of films in the Sunday Times Of India.

Entire chunks - whole sentences - of Nikhat Kazmi's review of Shark Tale in yesterday's Sunday Times of India are lifted from Roger Ebert's review for the Chicago Suntimes. (Just one sample: "Strange, too, that the movie's value system seems to come from The Godfather, a study in situational ethics that preferred good gangsters with old-fashioned family values to bad gangsters who sold drugs.")

And where an attempt is made to alter the original text in a small way, here's what results -
Original: The mob is ruled by Don Lino (voice by Robert De Niro, channelling Marlon Brando)...
Copy: The mob is ruled by Don Lino (voice by Robert De Niro, AKA Marlon Brando)...

8:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

jaiarjun.blogspot.com

8:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Haha...Pune, i think you deserve to read this one. Great stuff from jabberwok.

“Golly gee! People read! Books!” I have this recurring professional nightmare: on a 20-minute deadline, and with no research allowed, the Editor orders me to produce an overview of, let’s say, quantum physics or some such topic I’ve meticulously avoided thinking about for most of my life. I fancy the Times of India feels much the same way when it writes a story on books. I noted with alarm this morning that there was an article titled "Book, Line and Sinker" in the TOI’s city supplement, wherein the paper seems finally to have convinced itself that people do, in fact, read books and that this bizarre trend is on the upswing.

The first paragraph of this story is a masterful example of how an experience as commonplace (for some of us anyhow) as reading/book browsing can be prettily exoticised. Here goes:

"One would have thought that with TV, the Internet and other modes of entertainment hitting drawing rooms, reading books was a lost culture. Be surprised! For, most of Delhi’s well-known people, and the not-so-famous ones, have one thing in common: a passion for reading. Or to be more precise, the passion of just browsing through shelves after shelves of book at bookstores."

The above para is so rich in comic detail, it deserves multiple readings (which is apt I suppose for a story on the reading culture), just so you don’t miss anything out. (My personal favourite turn of phrase: "browsing through shelves after shelves of book...")

And later: "The classy among the rich and famous are fond of reading from various bookstores..."

This is probably what Alfred E Neuman meant about "rising to new depths", but I suppose one should at least allot points for intention. Me, I’m scribbling out that quantum physics piece now...


posted by Jabberwock @ 9:46 AM

1 Comments:
At 12:36 PM, samit said...
hey, same article came out in cal times not so long back. what fun. with cal celebs of course. many of whom read your favourite, paolo coelho, and are therefore 'very into reading'
they also had an article, when the booker nominations came out - but that was with quotes from delhi celebs, so i guess it was out in delhi first - about how indian writers werent getting enough booker nominations? why? why?
like its the olympics or something.
well, i have a cricket team ready for them if they want one...

7:13 AM  
Blogger Kavyaa said...

Hey,
(Sigh!)What relief!
And i thought only Delhiites suffered from the hazards of this 'advanced & new' print Media.
I agree with u that the new TOI supplement 'Life' is full of nothing but unwanted crap. Though, i think Men & Women was comparatively better over here. It had articles or rather interviews under the captions e.g. 'Innocence', 'I read', 'I fly', 'Inspiration' etc. which made a nice Sunday reading.
But supplements apart, i don't think there is much left in journalism now-a-days that can invoke the same awe as it used to in the earlier days. I mean, they don't know where to draw the line so that the privacy or the dignity of the newsmakers remains intact. There are so many examples which solidify the same like- The Saddam Hussein's investigation, or the whole Gudiya drama, or more recentky the MMS case or even the Kareena-Shahid thing.
Isn't it high time they got their act right?

12:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

8:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

2:55 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home