Through a glass darkly

Existential questions have always intrigued me. The answers are often unanimously dogmatic, with people belonging to different wavelengths of the colourful spectrum of opinions trying to vociferously voice his/her own opinion as the eternal truth. The enigmatic nature of the questions sometimes makes the answers seem equally probable, though it might not be the case in reality. But what is this reality we are trying to define here? Isn’t reality another name given to a product that’s a powerful edifice chiselled by the human mind? The problem with trying to answer existential questions is that, the answers are likely to be dictated by your subconscious. Your thoughts and actions are guided by your beliefs, rationalism plummets to the backseat and your emotions reign supreme. Equivocation becomes the debater’s best friend in times of intellectual oblivion, obfuscation the obvious strategy of the argumentative disputant trying to establish himself as the unquestionable oracle. 

The ones that try to tread on the neutral path, plainly trying to examine the mysterious unknowns with the curiosity of an innocent child asking his dad what exists beyond the sky and the stars are often belittled. You’re likely to be accused of being a chicken not big enough to form an opinion. But these opinionated myopic eyes that disparage you of being indecisive don’t realize the fact that such a cold-eyed stance could actually help you stay at the centre of the spectrum thus enabling you to gape at the titanic beauty of nature which encompasses these talking heads.

A dispassionate stance, one that appreciates the exquisiteness of the phrase “I don’t know” with all the humility in the universe can actually lead to a comprehensive analysis that subtly tries to take the best out of every extremist stance. The study of a mind with such a stance or the study of a work of a person with such an attitude can be extremely fascinating. One such mind is Ingmar Bergman and one such work is “Through the glass darkly” , which tries to investigate diverse perspectives from a birds-eye viewpoint, coincidentally and ironically playing god in the process, though playing or reaching a conclusion about god maybe the last thing on such a person’s mind.

Whether Bergman was an atheist is a debatable question but the pointers seem to be too evident especially in the latter part of his life. There is no explicit confession in his autobiography too, but you’re tempted into conclusion, like in most situations, including the god question. Bergman could have died an atheist but my instincts tell me that Bergman hadn’t formed an opinion when he made this film. He was born into a religious family, his dad being a pastor. He probably started questioning faith during his formative years and “Through the glass darkly” was probably a product that resulted when his mind was witnessing a tumultuous war between his theistic persona that could be attributed to his upbringing and an iconoclastic, inquisitive side that wasn’t willing to ignore the logical loopholes in his beliefs anymore. The convolutions have resulted in one of the best films I have seen, probably the best you are likely to see.

I’d like to share a few interesting things about the movie here. The only female character in this movie, Karin, is shown to be a mentally ill person. She has supernatural visions and is shown to be living in her own sweet world and she seems to enjoy that. Her problem begins the moment the line that separates her perceived world and the real one starts blurring. This probably represents the state of mind of Bergman in his earlier years when he started questioning religious faith. He wouldn’t have had problems being a closet theist but the disastrous nature of the “disease” would have started troubling him the moment his intellect started questioning the veracity of the holy angels close to his heart. Rational questioning and introspection can be assumed to be a disease only by a fanatically raised theist told to be embroiled in his faith, come what may. His atheistic side or the rationalist side should I say, takes over satirically as he takes a dig at revelations and supernatural envisioning by allegorically classifying them as a mental delusion that keeps the victim away from material reality. On the other hand, it was hard to ignore the fact that the other characters in the movie would have appeared to be mentally ill from Karin’s point of view. This is evident from the way she disregards her own husband at the expense of a god that might (MIGHT) make an entrance through a big door in that perceived reality of hers. Bergman probably tries to imply here that the extravagant possibilities and the positives that could arise out of the existence of such an omnipotent god actually drive people into frenzied faith and hope that they exhibit; so much so that they disregard the immaculate material advantages that their faculties could appreciate, like a caring, freethinking and handsome husband in this case.

Another thing that struck me about the characterization of Karin is the degree of sexual exuberance and tension on exhibition, scene after scene, something that’s brave and anachronistic considering the fact that the film was made in the black and white era. The way she goes about happily kissing and embracing her brother with evidently palpable lust, the manner in which she uses subtle occasions to trigger conversations about her brother’s sexual fantasies give us brief glimpses of the free spirit that Karin could be without the societal limitations. The allegories happen to be the dad and her husband for the patriarchal stranglehold the society (she moves about without restrains and converses without inhibitions when her dad and husband are gone) has over women and the supernatural visions for the influence of religion over the freedom of women. The portrayal of incest again appeared to be subtle here. The director must have had all the audacity in the world to choose incest as an abstract representation to convey something. For a promiscuous viewer, it might appear to be blatant proselytism of incest but the brother here probably just represents a non-chauvinistic male community ready to give women their due with respect to sexual freedom.

The movie has a universal theme that is likely to be relevant perpetually. The music (J.S. Bach?) is haunting and extremely appropriate. The film is basically a drama caught in camera but then an intricate study of the camera is likely to reveal something else. The movie as such is extremely talky and the director chooses to go for long shots when he could have gone for close-ups everytime just to give us a taste of the setting and the abstract expressionism on display. The outdoor shots in the movie are exquisite. We often get to see the splendid, calm sea through a window as the characters engage themselves in a serious conversation inside a room. It seemed to be subtle mockery of the behaviour of the human race that is always seriously involved in its own problems, failing to appreciate the beauty to the big, gigantic embodiment of gorgeousness around it.

The dad’s character in the movie makes a good case study again. He’s shown to be in possession of a vacuous emotional drive with the anomalous expressive bursts happening occasionally.       He finds out at one point that life is possibly pointless and even contemplates suicide. He miraculously escapes death and the twist in the tale enamours faith and hope in him again. He develops new found love towards his children and becomes relatively selfless. He drops a tear at the family reunion, the allegorical play that his children stage strikes a chord. He garners the guts to confess his errors and makes an honest attempt to complete his transformation process. The theist in Bergman takes over here as he even makes an explicit statement before the curtains are drawn: “Love is the evidence of god”. The son, Minus, asks a few questions that put his dad in a soup but the dad reassures him that there is hope as long as there is love. The boy appears confused, but is convinced: not because his dad was cogent but because his dad had finally spoken. His dad, his idol, his hero probably, whose ways were unknown to him, his symbol of hope and his personal god that he was ready to trust.

Qutub Minar: A few clicks and observations

I recently visited the national capital Delhi. Just like any other tourist, i visited the Qutub Minar . I made some interesting observations. I also made a few comparisons to the other monuments I had visited during my childhood. I discovered a few things, clicked a few pictures and returned home a happy man, my heart filled with nostalgic thoughts and memories. The monument and the structures around it are an ode to the slave dynasty: Qutubuddin Aibak, its first ruler, constructed the Qutub Minar. The enclosure also contains Iltutmish's tomb, the iron pillar which has remained corrosion free for the last few centuries and tombs of Iltutmish and Alauddin Khilji, other rulers of the same dynasty.

P.S: I'm not an expert on architecture. Just an inquisitive traveller who loves comparisons and constructs his own beliefs based on personal observations.

The big one: the full view.

Typical Muslim architecture: Urdu all over the place, beautifully textured walls and wonderfully improvised use of basic geometric figures to create splendid boundaries.

 

What can  I say? Dumbfounded, Spell-bound! Absolute beauty! Classy: Delicious texture.

 

One very interesting discovery was the pillar design. In Hindu temples, all the pillars have a very uniform design i.e all pillars look the same, at least the ones in the same corridor. but this was quite startling. Every pillar in this photo has a distinct design.

This one was a little queer. The Muslims are not known to be idol worshippers but this one reminded me of the usual stone carvings one is likely to find on the walls of any Hindu temple. The arch like enclosure and a deity inside the same is a very common sight in a Hindu temple. this may still be something else ( I'm no expert on architecture) but I have never come across Muslim architecture that depicts idols and human-like figures. They're known for their extensive use of basic geometry to create intricate designs and the omnipresence of Urdu inscriptions.  This one was quite a surprise.

This inscription, brought back memories of something I had read about the ASI in pertinence to the Muslims and the ASI's attitude towards the Muslims after partition. All muslims, regardless of their class or position were subjected to severe scrutiny by the ASI as every Muslim in India was thought to be a Pakistani agent. Hence every Pakistani was asked for details about his family and was told to bring back relatives residing in Pakistan to India. Sardar Vallabhai Patel was supposedly a key element in this movement. The Muslims in India, who were already feeling insecure, were made to feel even more insecure, thanks to such activities by the government.

                                                     

Kalaignar’s theory of opportune atheism

This article is a dedication to the connoisseur and founder of a non-religious religion termed opportune atheism. The great soul in question is none other than our “Manbhumighu” Tamil Nadu chief minister Mr.Karunanithi. According to the genius (no pun intended), one can choose to believe or not believe in god with regard to the situation. Hence, you may end up being a theist for 60% of your lifetime and an atheist for the rest of your life in spite of having the “privilege” of calling yourself an atheist during the whole life span.
I can’t help marveling at the power of this philosophy which has worked wonders for “Kalaignar”. God ceased to exist when he was campaigning for the DMK in the open grounds of Tamil Nadu in front of the masses but god sprang back to “life” when Karunanithi was “begging” the self-styled god-man Sai Baba shamelessly to offer financial help to clean up Cooum. He went to the extent of equating Sai Baba to god. Where is the question of comparing someone to god when one believes that god doesn’t exist? Kalaignar was all smiles when his own family members and “wives” fell on the god-man’s feet. Does this man have no convictions? I can’t help feeling bad for this individual because his own family members don’t seem to be having any kind of respect for his opinions.
He allegedly shared the stage with two more spiritual gurus, Mata Amritanandamayi and Sakthi Narayani Amma. Consistency and belief find no place in Kalaignar’s dictionary. Selfish motives and promotion of family interests seem to be his only preferences. It looks like a deliberate attempt to change his image and acquire acceptability amongst theist masses.
While he expects everyone to accept his command over Tamil in spite of the absence of a graduation certificate in Tamil to his name, what prompts him to think that lord Ram couldn’t have been an expert engineer because he didn’t possess a certificate to endorse his prowess. While he chooses to believe in the Tamil legend that Kannagi set the city of Madurai on fire in spite of absence of proof of her prowess in such a mystic art, why does he choose to not believe in Rama’s mastery in engineering?
Karunanithi is entitled to have his way. But what is he trying to achieve by means of mockery of popular beliefs? Has all these years of experience done nothing to instill a feeling of responsibility and respect for others’ feelings in this octogenarian? When is he going to address his own inconsistencies? Tamil poets like Thiruvalluvar, Avvaiyar had no doctorates to their credit! Does that make them lesser mortals? By virtue of possession of a piece of paper which looks inconsequential, does he feel he has become the greatest exponent of Tamil to have ever existed? Is there no end to this seemingly eternal spree of egotism?
The chicken in Karunanithi came to the fore on the thousandth year celebrations of the Brihadeeshwara temple. Former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated just a few weeks after she visited the temple and took the eastern entrance. Former Tamil Nadu chief minister and Karunanithi’s old buddy, M.G. Ramachandran became sick after taking the same gate and never recovered! This self-confessed rationalist and dispeller of superstitions clandestinely chose to take an alternative entrance. Hats off, sir!
Cho Ramasamy, noted journalist was shrewd enough to note that Kalaignar was wearing a white angavastram instead of the usual yellow one. White angavastrams are known to ward off evil forces and Karunanithi could have possibly acted as per the advice of an astrologer.
I'm not against atheism. It’s personal opinion. But hypocrisy has to be condemned. There should be no two ways about it!