When popular movies get things wrong

From the other side of the Ocean (I mean India), America is a fascination and been there for ever I would say and to a large extent mis understood. It becomes even worse when mainstream movie makers like Suresh Heblikar, Nagatihalli Chandrashekar or Sethuram get's it completely and illogically wrong.

Lets start with Heblikar, the man is amazing focusing his movies on mental health issues with movies like Kaadina Benki, Prathama Ushakirana and so on. I have great respect for him. But the case I am arguing here is, with the Ushakirana movie, it is illogical because a simple engineer along with his wife who is a complete simpleton and guessing by their kids age must be in early 30s come to America in a simple shirt and pant and her in Saree and return just after 3 years as though they won few million dollars in lottery and like in Avatar, just got transformed to a version only made sense to him in a jiffy. I have spent more than a quarter of a decade here and have friends in all spectrum and in general those who come for such short durations that too such orthodox folks can't even get used to the food let alone culture. Their primary aim is to save up and send home and return rich. Also, for the whole period of 3 years there were no vacations, the couple never went back to see their kids? Of course these are logical questions and that's not for everyone.

For Chandrashekar, in his movie America America the couple in USA manage to buy not a starter home but a huge house within a few years of marriage and that too in posh LA for what would be present day ~$700K. I would like to know from the director if he can find me such a house in middle of LA. or SFO, can't remember. The cassette part is another big miss, all the years it was lying around in USA and never was played. The party scene of Ramesh is laughable for 1995 India had just opened up and America was struggling with effects of Iraq war and conflicts in Africa. The dude loses job and how the hell did he manage to stay in the country, maybe because Trump was not the president then :). There are lot more loop holes but again logic, something to left outside movie halls.

Lastly my favorite (for real) Sethuram. in one of the serials he did his daughter-in-law gets a chance to go to "America" and not his son and she goes with her boss. The boss is also owner of the company and he promises all good behavior but apparently breaks them when he lands here. In short, he starts exploiting her and she returns back to India dejected. The lady was ready to seperate from husband while in India but couldn't muster courage to file a complaint against her boss while in USA?

I am all for entertainment and all for baseless and no logic movies like James Bond or Bourne or our own home brew from YRF but please don't make these stupid and logical mistakes and call it a movie based on real life situations. For the truth is miles away from your fiction.

The saddest reality is movies like these truly formed the public perception back in the day with some conservative families not even wanting to send their children either to study or work abroad or America means instant wealth and not highlighting other struggles like life style adjustment, loneliness and for present day visa issues.

Teaching history in a complex country like India

 I have written quite a few blog posts on India and its history, whether it is rich or poor depends on one's perspective.

One cannot deny it’s a civilizational state with a constant occupation and change and being a country linked by land to both Middle East and Europe has a long history. In fact each and every region of the country has history going back by a thousand years if not more. To top that curriculum designers must account for nation building and highlight the history from Delhi centric perspective too. Last but not the least is the freedom struggle itself which technically started with first war of independence in 1857 and ended with 1947.

Keep in mind, we cannot ignore the world history which is shaping our contemporary world affairs also, at the least world wars 1 and 2 followed by Cold War to fall of Soviet Union to the present day conflicts and the dictatorships and so on.

I am only talking history and haven’t even touched the geography or the constitution/law or what we used to call Civics.

I truly pity the NCERT people for their job is not easy.

While I stated the problem statement here are some suggestions to make it slightly better.

1. Add history and others as a compulsory subjects for grade 11 and 12, adding 2 more years to the system of education helps a lot
2. Like they do in this country, dedicate a year worth in high school to learn about local history meaning in my case history of Karnataka. Dedicate another year on the world history and so on
3. Eliminate switching to Sanskrit or even English as first language in grade 8 and stick to local language or Hindi as first language from beginning to end, advantage is that students would have had great mastery over language and can digest complex literature and I myself learnt a lot with studying Kannada literature which otherwise I would not have learnt. Example : Jhansi rani Laxmi Bai is mentioned in history books but Kitturu Chennamma or Keladi Chennamma were learnt through kannada literature which were part of the curriculum.
4. Stop teaching history as dates and events but focus on drawing parallels and finding what Google likes to call “system analysis” for example how being religious zealots destroyed empires time and again across the globe with no exception. Or my favorite, any kingdom especially the big ones get destroyed by inner rot and court room politics than an external invasion
5. Its been 80 years since independence, at the rate of 12 years of education umpteen batches have passed through, time to teach real history be it about Jihad of Aurangazeb or Inquisitions by Spain in Goa or the Naval revolt of 1947 or how bankrupt England was at end of WW-II that it couldn't really control its "colonies"
6. Constantly I heard that "History is dead subject", this has led to people thinking it is set in stone and cannot be changed and more I have learnt over time, if anything its the opposite. It is as alive as Science and probably as fascinating

Of course all these require systemic changes in thinking and might need new ways of drafting curriculum and training teachers and probably a generation or two to go through.

My fundamental problem with the way I learnt history was, it was sorry to say completely Delhi Centric and sadly when I read Nehru Discovery of India, he was so freaking light on south of the Vindhya’s I was flabbergasted.

As one famous person once said, "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

Shivaji, Sambhaji and Maharani Tara

 Having read the 2 books and listened to one book by Medha Deshmukh Bhaskaran, I have to admit her story telling skills are amazing. She has the ability to put things in right perspective and not amplifying things beyond required. I picked up her books for Shivaji has been a fascination since early childhood and no history book actually depicted the same properly. To that extent Medha's books are the best for anyone looking for a good clean reference to understand that time and part of history.

I agree Shivaji or Chatrapathi Shivaji Maharaj was a thorn in the flesh of Mughals starting from Shahjahan to Aurangzeb. Yes our history book dedicated a 2 page chapter on him and the highlight was the title bestowed by Aurangazeb of “Mountain rat” and it was glorified and was called master of guerrilla warfare. Without mentioning any details about his great cavalry or his system of tax collection. I still remember reading about Sher Shah Suri and his tax systems but not about Shivaji and his system and more importantly how his family resisted the Mughals for almost 30 odd years. In context, Aurangzeb ruled for 45 years and 2/3 of the time he spent in southern India either personally or through his generals and one can say the empire got destroyed because of the “Deccan Campaign”.

The entire book of both Sambhaji and Tara (wife of Rama Raja) reminded me that 400 years ago any life unless you are a nobility had no value, you were expendable and animals for sure suffered worse. To an extent if one sees the movie Black Hawk down, one can relate to it. Since nobility was placed so much higher than the rest, it was lot easier to make them corrupt with bribe of a rank or elevation to the next level.

Apart from Aurangazeb’s military tactics and cunningness which one can argue is his sharp mind, it was the buying out of nobility with respect to Bijapur and Hyderabad that led to their defeats. I have to give Bijapur its credit for they did stand against but Golkonda was literally surrendered without much of a fight. One thing that I am not able to understand is the fact that Aurangazeb’s hatred of Shia Muslim was known and even then the Bijapur and Hyderabad surrendered trusting the emperor will keep his promise, which he had time and again had broken. If you want to get an idea of Aurangazeb's cunningness one needs to see how he killed the prince of Mewar with smallpox.

This brings to the important aspect of history, we read all stories of how one army was better in war tactics and so on, my take is if the empire or dynasty was rotten from the inside meaning the top talents are either eliminated or have fled or the king is a rotten soul, all the external force has to do was to give a small nudge and it all falls apart. I need another post to justify my argument and maybe I will do that. Sadly, history only records the outcome of a war or event and leaves out details that led to that outcome.

Another salient aspect that came from reading the books is the fact, again not told in our school books was the fact that no Mughal emperor succeeded without a blood riot and killing his brothers and kin and some times in case of Jehangir, his own son. In a way one can argue it would lead to survival of the fittest but the cost of lives is beyond imagination. Although the Mughals were big emperors in India, the Muslim heirarchy, recognized Caliph who was in Persia and time and again the Caliph used to send reprimands to the Mughal emperor and one of Aurangazeb's son did escape to Persia hoping to get help from Caliph himself to over throw his own dad.

A thing to note, several European historians have noted that Mughals carried their harem and wives along to the battle fields and in case of Deccan campaign it was a total of 18 years when Aurangzeb came down, I am sure there must be kids born through that time and what would happen to them? I am sure someone has done a study of those.

In a way one can say Maratha's survived the Aurangazeb's onslaught for they were not a city but hill forts and hundreds of them all over Maharashtra. if they were like Bijapur or Hyderababd it would have been completely a different story.

Lastly one points to the fact that Sambhaji’s son Shahu was a weak emperor and eventually led to Peshwa’s taking over but the fact that is not told is that poor guy spent his formative years as a captive in Mughal prison.

ps: We all know Talikota war Viijayanagar was destroyed and how come we never learnt about Gilani brothers who placed religion over their kingdom loyalty.

Google says - just trust me

 If you are like me then you do use Google maps for distances that needs timely arrival like school drop off or band pick up and so on. Time and again I have tried to use my brain instead of blindly trusting Google and the success rate of me beating Google is going lower and lower.

Last night thanks to weather patterns. the high school football match ended pretty late and while picking up kid after the match I asked Google to map my way home and its suggestion was to go around town and reach home in 23 minutes and I was like, no my other way would be easier for I could cut across I-35 and hit Mopac and will be home in about same time. I took my route, over rode Google only to get badly stuck in downtown traffic and there was an event that attracted stream of audience that it blocked my way and I had to come back to I-35 and go back towards downtown again for I knew before hand that I-35 south had an accident and was blocked badly. after about 45 minutrs on the road we reached home completely tired.

Yes, Google had the last laugh and yes I could have saved time and energy had I listened to Google Maps in first place :).

More historical ramblings …..

Another one on history and hopefully the last one on this row. The way history is taught in schools is about facts, at 1757 battle of plassey happened and that led to British foothold in the country or that Aurangzeb defeated Sambhaji in 1689 and so on.

The devil is always in the details, in the case of Siraj us Daulah he barely ascended the throne, lasted for a year and was killed in that time and his own general and the finance person took revenge on him. The general was also an old man by those days standards and for the army which pretty much was a decentralized structure back then to back him and not the king is something that is not explicitly stated. On other hand Sambhaji was crowned right after Shivaji death and lasted almost a decade and led successful campaigns against his other Deccan rivals. He and his people stood strong against the might of Mughal ruler Aurangzeb. And for a fact he was backed by the army, which was led by his step mothers own brother when some ministers in the council decided to place his 10 year old step brother on the throne.

There are ample such stories when the ruler didn’t take people to confidence he lost the throne in no time or in a short time. Case in point our own Mysore kingdom, Hyder Ali managed to keep the throne for he at the least placed if for name sake ruler from wodeyar family and while his son wanted to do away with it and thanks to his fanaticism for Islam he eventually lost it. Or the Nayakas of Chitradurga when the Dalavayi’s tried to take over the throne as shadow rulers.

Go to the present to Wikipedia you will see exactly opposite, both Siraj ud Daulah and Tipu Sultan are freedom fighters while Sambhaji was a useless son of great Maratha ruler.

Again, it’s not their fault for they quote sources and in case of Sambhaji who are the sources, the Portuguese of Goa for they were forbidden from fanatically spreading Christianity in Goa. Irony is, folks who were happily engaged in slave trade by shipping people of India across the globe blamed Maratha for unthinkable things. Even our own “historians” like Jadhunath Sarkar quote directly from the Jesuits documents without taking it with a few grains if not a load of salt. Or the fact that the same is probably missing or not available in British documents who were right there in Bombay.

Since I am reading about Sambhaji, a hero made famous to me by the movie Chavva and if one looks at mere facts, he defected to Mughals for a year and fought in a battle or two with them and he came back.

But the details of how he was sent away either for safe keeping or what ever else by his own father who was heading on a southern campaign. How he lost his mother at a very early age and father was busy with nation building. The jealousy of the step mother who became even more powerful in the royal household after his grandmother’s death.

The fact that some of the ministers for whatever reason didn’t trust him to be the next king and really wanted to place the young Rajaram on the throne, this begs the question who will be the regent on behalf of the king, the king maker?

Historical Fiction

 I love history and ok with fictionalized versions too for they add some amount of emotions and human aspect to the whole story. Example the story that Sambhaji, son of Shivaji the chatrapathi of Marathas defected to the Mughals and joined them for a couple of years and that’s fact but what was the political conditions that led to this is fleshed out in the book The Life and Death of Sambhaji by Medha Bhaskaran.

Anyways, this one is not about that but something else that caught my attention. I was reading the history of Nayakas of Chitradurga and reading the full line of books by Ta Ra Su. When I was reading his book Vijayothsava he made a statement or rather a paragraph about the ruler of Keladi Somashekara Nayaka, husband of Chennamma of Keladi. That he was the worst womanizer and women in his kingdom were not safe and sort of equated him to the worst of the medieval rulers.

I didn’t buy the story multiple reasons for one, Keladi Chennamma is a very famous historical figure and has earned her name in history for being a righteous ruler who stood against the great Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and was loved by her people till she died and gave their lives to defend their queen against the greatest odds. Also, they did not have a child of their own and Somashekara Nayaka was experimenting with drugs to solve the same is something else I remember reading from childhood days. Lastly with the AI search I got to know another story of how he fell in love with a dancer and ignored the kingdom for her sake.

None of the above says Somashekara Nayaka was a lecherous being in any sense and makes me wonder why Ta Ra Su says so in his book. Yes it’s writers liberty but in the process of showing something great one should not cast wrong impressions about something else which is equally good.

Ps: the childhood memory of reading got triggered when I saw the name Bharame Mavutha in the search

Pps: this story I had a background and hence didn’t believe makes me wonder if other stories where I have zero background how much or Authors liberty has been ingested 🤔

Something to ponder over

 This incident happened when I was rewatching BR Chopra’s Mahabharata and the incident happens between a Brahmin and his eldest daughter. The scenario is in Ekacbakranagari where Bakasura has to be fed and the turn is of the Brahman family.

The story goes, he has 2 kids with eldest being the daughter and son too young to go to the demon. The father decides to go but stopped by the daughter who volunteers herself and the reason the Brahman gives for not sending his daughter is what baffling me.

The man says, daughter is “some one else’s property” she has to marry some day and go with her husband, fair point for patriarchal system then and to this he adds “you are the earth on which new life needs to grow”, I am assuming here he is talking about the progeny and the sperm being the seed and so on.

For the ancient Indian science and the renowned sages/scientists didn’t we know the kid has both mom and dad aspects in it and women is not playing the role of earth alone by providing nourishment but also altering the genetic code of the baby by adding her own to the mix, which if I understand science right earth never does.

Maybe I am overthinking this as always or maybe the dialogues said more and I only remember this.

Anyways, just another post.

Ps: there is a bit of background to the story for I overheard someone saying, if not for this mom I would have been born to someone else with the same dad and that made me think, then you won’t be you, you would be someone else😊