There is an extremely queer phenomenon with most of us including me which I find hard to describe. We tend to become biased with our judgements when something pre-established in terms of popularity comes up for debate. Its not that we like that thing but perhaps we are too occupied to give it a real thought and perhaps we are too blinded by general conception. In due course of time our stance takes the form of a prejudice and we tend to amalgamate ourselves into the flow of mass acceptance, all the time forgetting our duties as rational human beings. Following is a list of some of those things which have come to punctuate our generation and age but which probably deserved a more critical examination on an individual basis. It is by no means comprehensive and by no means universal (just my opinion):
1. Garfield : I must say, if they ever decided to make a cartoon strip with its main character being played by a charred log of wood and its subject mainly consisting of showing that log of wood lying lifelessly in different positions, they could not have made a more morbidly stupid and intellectually dormant strip than Garfield. The strip has come to be accepted widely across the world but nothing takes anything away from the fact that Jim Davis is probably the most overrated retard and his creation Garfield, the most stupid cat even by the standards of dumb cats and Garfield's owner, probably the closest human ever got to be labelled as Jellyfish.
2. Star Wars : Now people may take offense at this but let me just put it this way: The premise of Star Wars is so incredibly stupid that I would rather bang my head on the sidewalk than watch Star Wars. Hell, I would even think about watching KKKG once since that way I can atleast make fun of the movie. If I try to make fun of Star Wars, my comrades, hopelessly caught in the myth that Star Wars represents something deeper than what they show on screen, will sneer at my lack of artistic standards. Here is a newsflash: Star Wars is not any of the following:
a. Social movement
b. Philosophy of life
c. Breakthrough in the art of movie making (watch 2001, A space oddysey)
What Star Wars really is - the incoherent, extremely boring ramifications of a confused mind which when loosely put together, vaguely represents a movie. I say if Star Wars is deep then so are Harry Potter and Eragon.
3. Anything that Mel Gibson does and Forrest Gump: I don't know why Mel Gibson is kept in such high regard artistically but frankly speaking all of his work is pretty darn mediocre. He seems to have perfected the art of playing upon basic human sentiments and emotions just so that people won't be able to pinpoint his glaring failures as a competent actor and director. Whenever I talk about movies like Patriot and Braveheart, people go crazy about how well the movies were made. When I ask so what was so good about those, I am generally met with incoherent explanations elaborately interspersed with Ahs and Ahems. If you have to think twice about whats good in a movie you love, you are just following the tide. Finally, Passion of the Christ is the most blatant exposition of mediocrity elaborately dressed to cash in upon human feelings I have ever seen. If showing the torture of a person for 2 hours is Gibson's idea of a good movie, I for one would be ready to provide him with a roundhouse kick anytime. And yes, FORREST GUMP. I could never really suffer through the complete movie. Ooooooo, "life is like a box of chocolates", I am impressed. Now will you please execuse me so that I could go ahead and commit suicide ? Watching the escapades of an IQ 70 person as he sloths his way through childhood, adolescence and adulthood is not my idea of intelligent entertainment. For those people who have sympathy for Mr. Gump, I have a newsflash: Mr. Gump is not a real person. The probability of a such a person doing the things Mr. Gump does is lesser than my that of my getting the next field medal. Hell, you should have sympathy for me because even though the probability of my getting a field medal is higher, I am still not getting it.
4. Apple : Let me just mention here that I own an Apple laptop and an iPod so I am blaming myself more than anyone else. The problem with Apple's philosophy is that it is trying to sell a lifestyle more than a product. Its products are not necessarily bad but they intend to encourage trend following and elitism in society. Their customers are supposed to be hip and 'in'. People try to find their own individual identity by owning Apple products and forget the inherent contradiction which arises from trying to define your own separate personality upon definitions created by a mulitnational conglomerate. Companies like Apple, Abercrombie and Fitch, fashion designers etc. try to cash in on the basic human necessity of forging individual identity in a society marred with uniformity. They present a universal ideal (Apple presents the hipness, Abercrombie presents sexuality and fashion designers present exclusivity) and drive people to buy products that they would otherwise not need in order to attain that ideal.
5. General trend following: This is one of the most potent weapons if you want to flip me out. Ask me this : "Where is F1 held in US ? " I would say:
"Indianapolis" (and I will pronounce it as Indiana (as in Indiana Jones) + pol (as in pole) + is)
and then correct me with the following pronounciation:
"Indianapolis" (as in India (with the stress on Indi) + NA + polis (as in police but with much less stress))
and I would say:
"You may kindly go to hell"
What the hell man! First of all, Indianapolis is a proper noun and howsoever stunted my knowledge of English language might be, I am certain that no son of a gun in the whole wide world can command me as to how a proper noun should be pronounced. Secondly, whats the point copying someone else's accent if you can convey your meaning properly with your own ? And who the hell decides whats the correct pronunciation for Indianapolis anyways? There is only one person who can have any official jurisdiction over the matter. The guy who first coined the word and I am guessing he is dead now. So while your pronunciation might be more socially conformal, I think I am good.
Oh! meanwhile, I know that some of you might be gunning for my head after reading this. So I have conveniently removed the comments sections :)... Send me your comments at ankit_iitg@yahoo.co.in if you are pissed enough.
1. Garfield : I must say, if they ever decided to make a cartoon strip with its main character being played by a charred log of wood and its subject mainly consisting of showing that log of wood lying lifelessly in different positions, they could not have made a more morbidly stupid and intellectually dormant strip than Garfield. The strip has come to be accepted widely across the world but nothing takes anything away from the fact that Jim Davis is probably the most overrated retard and his creation Garfield, the most stupid cat even by the standards of dumb cats and Garfield's owner, probably the closest human ever got to be labelled as Jellyfish.
2. Star Wars : Now people may take offense at this but let me just put it this way: The premise of Star Wars is so incredibly stupid that I would rather bang my head on the sidewalk than watch Star Wars. Hell, I would even think about watching KKKG once since that way I can atleast make fun of the movie. If I try to make fun of Star Wars, my comrades, hopelessly caught in the myth that Star Wars represents something deeper than what they show on screen, will sneer at my lack of artistic standards. Here is a newsflash: Star Wars is not any of the following:
a. Social movement
b. Philosophy of life
c. Breakthrough in the art of movie making (watch 2001, A space oddysey)
What Star Wars really is - the incoherent, extremely boring ramifications of a confused mind which when loosely put together, vaguely represents a movie. I say if Star Wars is deep then so are Harry Potter and Eragon.
3. Anything that Mel Gibson does and Forrest Gump: I don't know why Mel Gibson is kept in such high regard artistically but frankly speaking all of his work is pretty darn mediocre. He seems to have perfected the art of playing upon basic human sentiments and emotions just so that people won't be able to pinpoint his glaring failures as a competent actor and director. Whenever I talk about movies like Patriot and Braveheart, people go crazy about how well the movies were made. When I ask so what was so good about those, I am generally met with incoherent explanations elaborately interspersed with Ahs and Ahems. If you have to think twice about whats good in a movie you love, you are just following the tide. Finally, Passion of the Christ is the most blatant exposition of mediocrity elaborately dressed to cash in upon human feelings I have ever seen. If showing the torture of a person for 2 hours is Gibson's idea of a good movie, I for one would be ready to provide him with a roundhouse kick anytime. And yes, FORREST GUMP. I could never really suffer through the complete movie. Ooooooo, "life is like a box of chocolates", I am impressed. Now will you please execuse me so that I could go ahead and commit suicide ? Watching the escapades of an IQ 70 person as he sloths his way through childhood, adolescence and adulthood is not my idea of intelligent entertainment. For those people who have sympathy for Mr. Gump, I have a newsflash: Mr. Gump is not a real person. The probability of a such a person doing the things Mr. Gump does is lesser than my that of my getting the next field medal. Hell, you should have sympathy for me because even though the probability of my getting a field medal is higher, I am still not getting it.
4. Apple : Let me just mention here that I own an Apple laptop and an iPod so I am blaming myself more than anyone else. The problem with Apple's philosophy is that it is trying to sell a lifestyle more than a product. Its products are not necessarily bad but they intend to encourage trend following and elitism in society. Their customers are supposed to be hip and 'in'. People try to find their own individual identity by owning Apple products and forget the inherent contradiction which arises from trying to define your own separate personality upon definitions created by a mulitnational conglomerate. Companies like Apple, Abercrombie and Fitch, fashion designers etc. try to cash in on the basic human necessity of forging individual identity in a society marred with uniformity. They present a universal ideal (Apple presents the hipness, Abercrombie presents sexuality and fashion designers present exclusivity) and drive people to buy products that they would otherwise not need in order to attain that ideal.
5. General trend following: This is one of the most potent weapons if you want to flip me out. Ask me this : "Where is F1 held in US ? " I would say:
"Indianapolis" (and I will pronounce it as Indiana (as in Indiana Jones) + pol (as in pole) + is)
and then correct me with the following pronounciation:
"Indianapolis" (as in India (with the stress on Indi) + NA + polis (as in police but with much less stress))
and I would say:
"You may kindly go to hell"
What the hell man! First of all, Indianapolis is a proper noun and howsoever stunted my knowledge of English language might be, I am certain that no son of a gun in the whole wide world can command me as to how a proper noun should be pronounced. Secondly, whats the point copying someone else's accent if you can convey your meaning properly with your own ? And who the hell decides whats the correct pronunciation for Indianapolis anyways? There is only one person who can have any official jurisdiction over the matter. The guy who first coined the word and I am guessing he is dead now. So while your pronunciation might be more socially conformal, I think I am good.
Oh! meanwhile, I know that some of you might be gunning for my head after reading this. So I have conveniently removed the comments sections :)... Send me your comments at ankit_iitg@yahoo.co.in if you are pissed enough.
