More Reviews (Bandit Queen)

[Indranil]

This review is a few months belated for sure. But I am targetting the
particularly selective viewers who would not see a much too hyped film
before they have heard the 100th independent word of praise.

After a long period of self denial, I finally gave in and borrowed a
cassette of Bandit Queen from the recently established Kashmir Grocerry
Store of Brookline. Turned out that the Indian version is a dud. There
was no film in the video, only interviews of Khushwant Singh, Madhu
Kishwar, Javed Akhtar, Shekar Kapur and other personalities connected in
one way or other with the promotion or censure of this much talked about
film.

So for over an hour I listened to Khuswant Singh arguing convincingly
that our grandparents must have adopted more or less the same postures
during love-making that we apparently do ourselves and to Madhu Kishwar
explaining why the film violates certain ethical aspects (I didn't follow
her entire argument). In between the interviews the documentary cut to
show clips of "Bandit Queen". There was an intensity about those clips
that made me put my jacket on and rent a tape with the version released
in America from Videosmith a half hour before midnight. Apart from the
censor board's objections there is some legal controversy surrounding
the film. I did not follow that part closely enough to feel competent to
talk about it. However there is plenty I want to say about the film
itself.

A few words about Shekhar Kapur first. SK is a Punjabi director with a
longtime connection with Bollywood. In my opinion he is solidly placed
to carry on the mantle of Gulzar. He made his name with "Masoom", a film
about a nerdy couple with beautiful kids and a single incident of illcit
love. In the summer of a year when Bollywood had finally severed all
ties with sensible film-making SK walked to the finish line with
virtually no competition. "Masoom" was a huge box office hit. SK had won
with two "art-movie" type actors (Naseer and Shabana) and some
semi-classical music.

A few years later he made "Mr. India" which I saw in Benares with a
ticket purchased at five times the price printed on it. For the first
time in my life I saw Sridevi's celestial oomph given the artistic
exposure it had long deserved. Whether it was "Hawa Hawai" or "Kate nehi
kat-ti ye din ye raat .." the screen sizzled so much that one was lucky
it didn't burst into flames. Indeed I was veritably running a
temperature by the evening and had to catch the next day's train to
Delhi to recuperate.

Since then I have counted on Sekhar Kapur to "deliver". A trusted
film-maker whose films are worth five times the ticket price. If only
for the fevers that really last a lifetime. Therefore, one way or other,
I was going to see "Bandit Queen" anyway.

However, when I saw the clips, I knew that this film was going to be
"different". SK himself implied as much when he admitted that he had
made the film for himself, not caring about an audience, whether at home
or abroad.

And "different" it was. The most striking (and talked about) part is the
liberal (and completely realistic) use of expletives. Not the made up,
sanitized expletives like "kutte" or "haraamzade" that are normally
allowed in the Hindi films, this film has hardcore street
language. Whoever SK was making this film for was not a member of the
censor board. There is no way it was ever going to be approved for
viewing in India. The film is intense from the beginning to the
end. From the very first scene where a 10 year old, flat chested, puny,
dirty looking girl gets married off to a man about three times taller, I
couldn't tear myself from this compelling tale of perpetual, never
ending battles. The humour, if there could be humour in such a story at all,
is crude and sensitive at the same time. In one scene a puny, semi-naked
10 year old girl tells another that, "Aadmi to hote hi hain
matherchod". It turns out that she has no idea what "matherchod" means
but assures that other girl that it had to be something good!

Scenes from Phoolan's early youth are replete with instances of caste
related harrassments. The language in these scenes is quite rustic, down
to earth. For the sake of a viable script SK would have had to present a
watered down version of the rural India. Nevertheless the portrayal is
far true-er than anything else I have seen on screen. In the scene where
Phoolan is being "interrogated" in the Police lock up (on a trumped up
charge), the Policeman's question catches even me by surprise by its
ruthless obscenity which is nevertheless completely realistic. "Hum donon
ko le legi tu? Ek ko age se ek ko pichhe se?". Phoolan has no answer to
these questions for a long time. And they keep appearing now and then in
many forms. In the scene where she is bought by Babu Gujjar and taken
away, in the scene where she is paraded naked before the village of
Behmai as Sriram drags her by the hair and asks, "Is this the Bandit
Queen? The Devi?". Then there is the Phoolan who survives. Lives through
all the humiliation to come back for a graphic massacre. At the same
village of Behmai.

Technically the film is so much better than the normal Bollywood fare
that you might as well call it perfect for lack of anything superior to
compare with. The photography is excellent. Perhaps a Bertocelli could
have done a better job of shooting in Chambal. Maybe there ought to have
been a few more night-time scenes of the ravines. The score, by Nusrat
Fateh Ali Khan is totally super. There are no songs really, only a
background music. Seema Biswas as Phoolan displays a sensitivity that
the real Phoolan may lack. But her interpretation of SK's Phoolan is
brilliant. Nirmal Pandey gives a charismatic performance as Vikram
Malhan. Unless Bollywood is not just stupid but also blind, this guy
should be on his way to stardom.

There is some controversy regarding SK's interpretation of Mala Sen's
biography of Phoolan which the movie is apparently based on. Whether the
screen Phoolan does justice to the real Phoolan is something that only the real
Phoolan may know. Whether the "Bandit Queen" is an accurate depiction of
history may also be a moot point. The common viewer need pay no
attention to SK's claim that it is a true story. It is a good film in
its own right.

You could actually see the film from many angles. It is possible that
some of us will be convinced that it is a story of caste wars in North
India. Others may think it is a story of land ownership; after all the
entire life of the self proclaimed "baghi"s seems to revolve around the
same villages that they were born in but could not belong to. You may
also see it as a story of a woman's humiliations.
In being so brutally naked, the film may have succeeded in showing some
truths on all these counts.

In the last scene the director brings back the 10 year old Phoolan of
the first scene for a funny-sad shocking-sweet parting shot.

"Main hoon Phoolan, Phoolan Devi, Behenchod!".

It is a Phoolan that some of you may want to meet.

IDG

[Indranil]

sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
: In article <5efei3$c...@news.bu.edu>, Indranil <dgu...@budoe.bu.edu> wrote:
: >
: >compare with. The photography is excellent. Perhaps a Bertocelli could

: >have done a better job of shooting in Chambal.

: You mean Bertolucci, not Bertocelli.

Who is Bertolucci? The Bertolucci of Bertolucci's Pizza?

: >There is some controversy regarding SK's interpretation of Mala Sen's

: >biography of Phoolan which the movie is apparently based on. Whether the
: >screen Phoolan does justice to the real Phoolan is something that only the real
: >Phoolan may know.

: The real Phoolan has gone on record (from what I have read) saying that
: she has been misrepresented in the film. Apparently she was
: never shown the final script.

: If this is true (and I'll take Phoolan's word for it), then Kapoor
: has no right to claim that "this is based on a true story". It is
: a fundamental matter of honesty that if you are claiming truthfulness
: and presenting the story as fact, not fiction, you have to have your
: subject's informed consent. Otherwise it just becomes juicy exploitation.
: This was the reason why I boycotted the film when it was showing in Ann
: Arbor last year.

More recently, I heard that the real Phoolan had been absconding again
after being summoned by a court. Like I said, this is a moot point but
ever since Phoolan became a full time politician she has been making
contadictory statements. So one never knows which Phoolan to believe. SK
claims to have followed Mala Sen's biography. Whether his claim is true
or not can be decided in court. The outcome would not necessarily shed
any light on the accuracy of the film.

The Policemen who criminally assaulted Phoolan would certainly claim
that this is NOT a true story. If Phoolan gave her blessings to the film
but these Policemen cried foul, would you still claim it's exploitation?

IDG

[sayan bhattacharyya]

In article <5efei3$c...@news.bu.edu>, Indranil <dgu...@budoe.bu.edu> wrote:
>

>compare with. The photography is excellent. Perhaps a Bertocelli could
>have done a better job of shooting in Chambal.

You mean Bertolucci, not Bertocelli.

>There is some controversy regarding SK's interpretation of Mala Sen's

>biography of Phoolan which the movie is apparently based on. Whether the
>screen Phoolan does justice to the real Phoolan is something that only the real
>Phoolan may know.

The real Phoolan has gone on record (from what I have read) saying that

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

Great review.

Felt almost exactly the same way.

Shoumyo.

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

sayan bhattacharyya wrote:

> If this is true (and I'll take Phoolan's word for it), then Kapoor
> has no right to claim that "this is based on a true story". It is
> a fundamental matter of honesty that if you are claiming truthfulness
> and presenting the story as fact, not fiction, you have to have your
> subject's informed consent. Otherwise it just becomes juicy exploitation.
> This was the reason why I boycotted the film when it was showing in Ann
> Arbor last year.

Sayan:

I cannot remember the exact source now, but I read in a newspaper
interview of SK, that he did not want to represent Phoolan's reality.
"Reality has many faces", he said, "this is my interpretation. Take it
or leave it."

If you boycotted it, let me tell you, you missed something.

Shoumyo.

[Apratim Sarkar]

IDG,

Bhalo legechhe jene khushi holam. One of those rare ones, I guess, jeta
tomar amar dujoner'i bhalo laglo. Ja hok, ekta proshno: Karur ki mone hoy
je cinema'ti prinarily so-called Western audience'r kotha mone rekhe toiri?
Incidentally, I saw the movie in a theatre in a relatively affluent part
of Boston (The Coolidge Corner Theatre in Brookline, for those who know),
and the audience comprised mostly of the so-called barolok buddhijibis.
Their reaction was one of shock, disbelief, awe in some sense,
tarpore The Uff Feeling. The movie, it seemed to me, was judged not by
how the story developed etc., but simply by how shocking the story was.
[Which is ironic.]

Nothing inherently wrong about that, but a disturbing trend, IMO. Aro ekjan
director'ke e kotha bolte shunechhi, one of our leading directors. Kyano
Satyajit'r chhobi deshe cholto ebong ekhonkar lokeder chole na, er uttore
tini bolechhilen bidesh'r kotha bhebei cinema toiri hoy. Tai tyamon golpo
niye which has a lot of "meat", so to say, for the West.

Mahasweta Debi Gyanpith pelen bhalo lekha'r jonyo, na "bhalo" jinish niye
lekha'r jonyo? Bandit Queen bhalo cinema bole bhalo, na "bhalo" topic niye
cinema bole? Bertolucci Stealing Beauty toiri korlen, Shekhar Kapur kobe
korben?

Apratim.

[Indranil]

Apratim Sarkar (asa...@bu.edu) wrote:

: Bhalo legechhe jene khushi holam. One of those rare ones, I guess, jeta

: tomar amar dujoner'i bhalo laglo. Ja hok, ekta proshno: Karur ki mone hoy
: je cinema'ti prinarily so-called Western audience'r kotha mone rekhe toiri?
: Incidentally, I saw the movie in a theatre in a relatively affluent part
: of Boston (The Coolidge Corner Theatre in Brookline, for those who know),
: and the audience comprised mostly of the so-called barolok buddhijibis.
: Their reaction was one of shock, disbelief, awe in some sense,
: tarpore The Uff Feeling. The movie, it seemed to me, was judged not by
: how the story developed etc., but simply by how shocking the story was.
: [Which is ironic.]

: Nothing inherently wrong about that, but a disturbing trend, IMO. Aro ekjan
: director'ke e kotha bolte shunechhi, one of our leading directors. Kyano
: Satyajit'r chhobi deshe cholto ebong ekhonkar lokeder chole na, er uttore
: tini bolechhilen bidesh'r kotha bhebei cinema toiri hoy. Tai tyamon golpo
: niye which has a lot of "meat", so to say, for the West.

Apparently Madhu Kishwar also felt that "Bandit Queen" was made for a
western audience (SK claims he made it only for himself). I can not help
thinking that if "Bandit Queen" was released in India, it would be a
smashing hit. SK's movies have at least one element that guarantees
commercially viability (in this respect his movies may differ from
Budhdhadev Dasgupta's or Mrinal Sen's movies). They have a full dose of drama.

Whether a story comes across as shocking or poignant or whatever owes a
lot to the cinematography too. Numerous Phoolan Devi inspired films had been
shot and released in India before SK stepped in with his "official"
version. All were flops. So I'd think that SK has reason to be proud if
his film is appreciated, even if the audience does not seem to talk as
much about the style as the story. There are instances to the contrary
where the style is appreciated more than the story (like Pulp Fiction,
which in my opinion is a wholly mediocre but "Hey, I am cool" kind of
movie). Improvised or "experimental" styles can catch the attention of
the audience, but the self-effacing "tell the story" style, where one is
often oblivious of the presence of the camera or the editing scissors
will continue to be a solid benchmark of competence.

IDG

[sayan bhattacharyya]

In article <5egpjv$5...@news.bu.edu>, Apratim Sarkar <asa...@bu.edu> wrote:

>The movie, it seemed to me, was judged not by
>how the story developed etc., but simply by how shocking the story was.

That may be a reflection on those who are doing the judging than on
anything else.

Also, can the material and the treatment in a film (or in any work
of art) really be separated in the way you seem to like it to be?
This may be possible in non-representational art such as (non-verbal)
music or abstract painting, where there is no content
per se, and everything is form. But is it really possible in any
representational art?

[c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu]

In article <5ehs7q$k...@news.bu.edu>,
dgu...@buphy.bu.edu (Indranil) wrote:

> Apparently Madhu Kishwar also felt that "Bandit Queen" was made for a
> western audience (SK claims he made it only for himself). I can not help
> thinking that if "Bandit Queen" was released in India, it would be a
> smashing hit.

Wasn't it released in India? last June I heard that it was released
in Calcutta. People, I heard, were in general shocked to see the horror.

Chaitali

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

[Soumitri Mukherjee]

your review of Bandit Queen is well written! Bertolucci may be the
director you wanted to name! To me personally, it's the humiliation of
women depicted in the movie drew more attention than the views from
other angles like caste(obvious) or class struggle(between land owners
and landless) one can associate with.

---soumitri

[Apratim Sarkar]

Otai to gNyaRa - cinema to dekhlo na, shock'ta'i pelo. Ghure fire
shocked hote giye hoito tinbar rape scene'ta'i dekhe fello ...
kNadte kNadte beriye eshe mone holo sufficiently shocked haowa
hoy ni, nude scene'ta arekbar dekha proyojon.

IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar mote)
bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune jyamon
lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.

Apratim.

--
Amai jodi dei tara noukati Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are
Ami tabe shatshota dNaR aNati are my own and shouldn't be construed in
Pal tule di charte pNachta chhata any way to represent that of my employer.
Mithye ghure beRai na ko hate|

[Apratim Sarkar]

In article <330D30...@erols.com> smu...@erols.com writes:

>To me personally, it's the humiliation of
>women depicted in the movie drew more attention than the views from

Kabar dekhlen rewind kore?

>other angles like caste(obvious) or class struggle(between land owners
>and landless) one can associate with.

>---soumitri

Apratim.

[Mandar Mitra]

Apratim Sarkar writes:

> IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar mote)
> bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune jyamon
> lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.

"Chakra"?

[ArvindSodhi]

Indranil wrote:
>
(snip)

>
> A few words about Shekhar Kapur first. SK is a Punjabi director with a
> longtime connection with Bollywood. In my opinion he is solidly placed
> to carry on the mantle of Gulzar. He made his name with "Masoom", a film
> about a nerdy couple with beautiful kids and a single incident of illcit
> love. In the summer of a year when Bollywood had finally severed all
> ties with sensible film-making SK walked to the finish line with
> virtually no competition. "Masoom" was a huge box office hit. SK had won
> with two "art-movie" type actors (Naseer and Shabana) and some
> semi-classical music.
>

(snip)
>
> IDG
------------------------------------------------------------
MAASOOM was based on the novel 'Man, Woman and Child' by Eric Segal.

Regards.

[Helle Bunzel]

In article <5elj4f$o...@twinkie.cs.cornell.edu>, mi...@cs.cornell.edu says...

Ta Chakra jokhon release kore, cinema'tir poster khana dekhechile? Oi
"bathing scene" er chobi. Ta "lok'er" dosh ki?

BTW, Chakra mone hoye na Shyam Benegal'er chobi!

-Joydeep
(posting from a friend's a/c)

[Arnab Gupta]

hb...@cornell.edu (Helle Bunzel) writes..

>In article <5elj4f$o...@twinkie.cs.cornell.edu>, mi...@cs.cornell.edu says...
>>
>>
>>Apratim Sarkar writes:
>>
>

..[deleted]..

>"Chakra"?
>
>
>Ta Chakra jokhon release kore, cinema'tir poster khana dekhechile? Oi
>"bathing scene" er chobi. Ta "lok'er" dosh ki?
>
>BTW, Chakra mone hoye na Shyam Benegal'er chobi!

Rabindra Dharmaraj

[Soumitri Mukherjee]

Apratim Sarkar wrote:
>
> In article <330D30...@erols.com> smu...@erols.com writes:
>

> >To me personally, it's the humiliation of
> >women depicted in the movie drew more attention than the views from
>

> Kabar dekhlen rewind kore?----aapnar moton aykhono oto PERVERT hoye uThini je video rewind kore 'humiliation of women' dekhte jaabo! cinema-ta aami aykbaari edeshe cinema hall-a giye dekhechhilaam! nijeke oto khelo kore fyalen kyano opor chaalaki maarte giye? Chaitali'r posting-er uttoreo dekhlaam aei rokom khelo maarka montobbyo korechhen! jaaihok, Indranil babu'r lekha bhaalo shomalochona poDe aamar cinema-ta dekhe jaa monehoyechhilo taai likhechhilaam! aei byapare aar aami konokichhu bolte chaai na!----soumitri

>
> >other angles like caste(obvious) or class struggle(between land owners
> >and landless) one can associate with.
>
> >---soumitri
>

[c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu]

Apratim likhechen :

> >Wasn't it released in India? last June I heard that it was released
> >in Calcutta. People, I heard, were in general shocked to see the horror.
>

> Otai to gNyaRa - cinema to dekhlo na, shock'ta'i pelo. Ghure fire

Cinema ne dekheyi shock pelo?

> shocked hote giye hoito tinbar rape scene'ta'i dekhe fello ...
> kNadte kNadte beriye eshe mone holo sufficiently shocked haowa
> hoy ni, nude scene'ta arekbar dekha proyojon.

Shocked hole manush khoob akta kNadteyo pare na. Aar shocked state-e thik
akta particular nude scene aro dekhle hoto bole moneyo hoye na. Ami
jader kotha bolechilum tara thik shocked hote gechhilo bole mone hoyeni.
Shocked hoyechilo cinema-ta dekhe.

> IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar mote)
> bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune jyamon
> lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.

Dekhun gota India'r lok jodi akta karoneyi cinemata dekhte jaye tahole
byaparta ki khoob normal hobe? Apnar karon onno karur karoner shonge
na mille, onner-ta bhul karon amon kotha bolchhen kano?

> Apratim.

[Indranil]

Mandar Mitra (mi...@cs.cornell.edu) wrote:

: Apratim Sarkar writes:

: > IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar mote)

: > bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune jyamon
: > lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.

: "Chakra"?

"Mandi" bodh-hoy. Darun chhobi.

Apra, tomar post amar server-r ashe ni. Ele bakitar uttor debo. Tumi
jodi Bandit Queen-er nude scene-tar kotha bolo tahole bolbo o scene-ta
kete dileo cinema super-hit hobe. Tobe cinema kon karone cholbe sheta
ekta alada bitorko (ebong she bishoye amar kichhu bolar nei). Je kono
karonei cinema-ta jodi bharote super-hit hoy tahole ar SK-ke ei bole
dosh deoa jay na je tini shudhu western audience-er jonyo chhobi
tulechen.

IDG

[Arindam Banerjee]

Shoumyo Dasgupta <txd...@silmaril.smeal.psu.edu> writes:

>I cannot remember the exact source now, but I read in a newspaper
>interview of SK, that he did not want to represent Phoolan's reality.
>"Reality has many faces", he said, "this is my interpretation. Take it
>or leave it."

The "reality" behind Phoolan Devi seems to be a matter of interest.

In 1980 I bought a biography of the lady. It was written in Hindi, and
I read it while journeying from Delhi to Ranchi by Tata-Amritsar Express.
Some points did stick. At that time, the devi was still on the loose
and there was every chance of her appearing in dramatic style, so
the book made exciting reading...

* Phoolan Devi was a strong-minded wilful child, getting into
trouble with her family very often
* Her sense of independence grew with time - she definitely did not fit
into the mould
* She was a rebel who turned to banditry - that came naturally, given
the environment
* She was badly used initially by the bandits. She was also abused by
her caste enemies
* Phoolan had a love affair with a bandit, and they killed the chief.
(This was a not-done thing among bandits.) However, Phoolan thus had her
own gang.
* Phoolan took revenge upon the high castes by murdering 24(?) or so
cold-bloodedly. Some among them had indeed been responsible for her
former abuse. But most were innocent. Later evidence shows that at
least 2 of her victims were complete outsiders, not high castes at all.
* Phoolan was responsible for the abduction and rape of several young and
beautiful high caste women. Later, Phoolan stoutly denied this
allegation, but that was stated in a matter-of-fact way in the
biography.

Further comments: Phoolan has been made a heroine by the Left, and
a symbol of protest against social evils. Her deeds have
been justified and glorified. She is a Honourable Member of
Parliament, and a great movie has been made in her honour. I have not
seen this movie, but from what I have heard about it, it does not square
with the idea of reality I had about the Devi. The movie apparently
makes a big deal about caste inequities, and Phoolan is shown a great fighter
against oppression. In the biography, Phoolan is shown not to care
too much about caste or class, rather she was driven by her own
passionate and tempestuous nature. I have no doubt that given the right
upbringing, a person like Phoolan could have done much good. It would
have helped if Phoolan had turned out nicely after all her murders, but
I had long suspected that jail would not improve her. When sentimental
reporters tried to write her up her after her capture, they found a
most ugly and coarse person, to their dismay.

Arindam Banerjee
Disclaimer: My opinions do not involve my employer.

>Shoumyo.

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

Arindam Banerjee wrote:

<snip, logical article>

Agreed. I don't have any nits to pick on this.

I was just quoting SK.

Often, you will find that when a film-maker or a playwright "adapts"
something from another art-form or real incident, they transform it to
something else. In Rabindranth's lines, "Ami apon moner mashuri mishaye
tomare korechchi rochona...".

Whether the transformed reality is far from "truth" is not an issue. It
should not be, IMHO. Because "truth" in art can be subjective.
Remember Akira Kurosawa's "Roshomon" ?

Again, I understand your point, and believe the "facts" as you state
them.

Shoumyo.

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

Arindam Banerjee wrote:

<snip, logical article>

Agreed. I don't have any nits to pick on this.

I was just quoting SK.

Often, you will find that when a film-maker or a playwright "adapts"
something from another art-form or real incident, they transform it to

something else. In Rabindranth's lines, "Ami apon moner madhuri mishaye

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore. Ami kauke chchoto
korchchi na ba chchoto mukhe boro kothao bolchchi na tobe gotokal
Scheindler'r List dekhar pore baki onek cinema'ke just faltu bole mone
hoi. Ami kaaj'er chaape beshi bhalo kore dekhte parini ebong age jokhon
Hall'e eshechchilo tokhon'o somoy kore dekhte jete parini. Tobe ja
dekhlam tate ami khoob'i moved. Somoy korte parle ei weekend'e bhalo
kore dekhbo.
Time pass korar jonno kichchu chchobi toiri hoi aar kichchu boi sotyi
bhalo bhabe monojog diye dekhte hoi. Ami Bandit Queen dekhechchi tobe
amar ektu beshi prokot legechchilo. Tobe osadharon kichchu noi jar upor
lok gontar por gonta adda mere katate pare.

Cinema prosonge mone porlo jara Baltimore/Hopkins Area'e achchen tara
hoito oneke janen na je Hopkins'er Eisenhower Library'te Satyajit Ray'er
besh bhalo ekta collection achche. Age ora okhane boshei dekhte dito
kintu aajkal ora video overnight issue kore. Sutorang jodi keu
interested thaken to contact kore dekhte paren.
Ta chchara'o India'r upore oder bhalo video collection achche. One of
them is Ayodha'r Babri Masjid bhangar upor "In the Name of God." Dekhte
paren.

Subho

[Apratim Sarkar]

In article <5emu2p$b...@newsstand.cit.cornell.edu> hb...@cornell.edu (Helle Bunzel) writes:
>In article <5elj4f$o...@twinkie.cs.cornell.edu>, mi...@cs.cornell.edu says...
>>
>>

>>Apratim Sarkar writes:
>>
>>> IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar
>mote)
>>> bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune
>jyamon
>>> lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.
>>
>>"Chakra"?
>
>

>Ta Chakra jokhon release kore, cinema'tir poster khana dekhechile? Oi
>"bathing scene" er chobi. Ta "lok'er" dosh ki?
>
>BTW, Chakra mone hoye na Shyam Benegal'er chobi!
>

>-Joydeep
>(posting from a friend's a/c)

Actually problem'ta composite. Lok'r expectation, director'ke'o
cinema'ta chalate hobe ... dosh karur'i noi, ekdal poisa diye
dekhchhe, arekdal cinema baniye khai.

Cinema'r details Mandar ar Arnab diyechhe.

[Apratim Sarkar]

In article <8567313...@dejanews.com> c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu writes:
>Apratim likhechen :
>
>> >Wasn't it released in India? last June I heard that it was released
>> >in Calcutta. People, I heard, were in general shocked to see the horror.
>>
>> Otai to gNyaRa - cinema to dekhlo na, shock'ta'i pelo. Ghure fire
>
>Cinema ne dekheyi shock pelo?

Nandangami aNtel'der ashadhya ki bolun?

>> shocked hote giye hoito tinbar rape scene'ta'i dekhe fello ...
>> kNadte kNadte beriye eshe mone holo sufficiently shocked haowa
>> hoy ni, nude scene'ta arekbar dekha proyojon.
>
>Shocked hole manush khoob akta kNadteyo pare na. Aar shocked state-e thik
>akta particular nude scene aro dekhle hoto bole moneyo hoye na. Ami
>jader kotha bolechilum tara thik shocked hote gechhilo bole mone hoyeni.
>Shocked hoyechilo cinema-ta dekhe.

O.

>> IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar mote)
>> bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune jyamon
>> lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.
>

>Dekhun gota India'r lok jodi akta karoneyi cinemata dekhte jaye tahole
>byaparta ki khoob normal hobe?

Did I claim that it would be so?

>Apnar karon onno karur karoner shonge
>na mille, onner-ta bhul karon amon kotha bolchhen kano?

'For the wrong reason', e'i standard phrase'ti keu byabohar korlei
ki apni e'i proshno koren? IMO lagaleo?

>> Apratim.
>
>Chaitali

[Apratim Sarkar]

In article <330F7C...@erols.com> smu...@erols.com writes:
>Apratim Sarkar wrote:

>> Kabar dekhlen rewind kore?----aapnar moton aykhono oto PERVERT hoye uThini je video rewind kore 'humiliation of women' dekhte jaabo! cinema-ta aami aykbaari edeshe cinema hall-a giye dekhechhilaam! nijeke oto khelo kore fyalen kyano opor chaalaki maarte giye? Chaitali'r posting-er uttoreo dekhlaam aei rokom khelo maarka montobbyo korechhen! jaaihok, Indranil babu'r lekha bhaalo shomalochona poDe aamar cinema-ta dekhe jaa monehoyechhilo taai likhechhilaam! aei byapare aar aami konokichhu bolte ch
a
>ai na!----soumitri

Miscommunication dekhun. Ami to puro cinema'ta rewind kore dekha'r
katha'i bolte cheyechhilum.

[Srabani Banerjee]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
>
> Ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore. Ami kauke chchoto
> korchchi na ba chchoto mukhe boro kothao bolchchi na tobe gotokal
> Scheindler'r List dekhar pore baki onek cinema'ke just faltu bole mone
> hoi.

[...]

amar to Schindler-s List besh pati legechhilo. by your logic,
`ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore?'

Srabani

[Apratim Sarkar]

Mandar Mitra (mi...@cs.cornell.edu) wrote:

: Apratim Sarkar writes:

: > IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar mote)

: > bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune jyamon
: > lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.

: "Chakra"?

Arnab to bollo tai. Amar thik mone nei. Thanks for the correction,
though.

Apratim.

[Apratim Sarkar]

sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:

: In article <5egpjv$5...@news.bu.edu>, Apratim Sarkar <asa...@bu.edu> wrote:

: >The movie, it seemed to me, was judged not by
: >how the story developed etc., but simply by how shocking the story was.

: That may be a reflection on those who are doing the judging than on
: anything else.

Sure. But what if such audience was specifically targetted in
the movie?

: Also, can the material and the treatment in a film (or in any work

: of art) really be separated in the way you seem to like it to be?
: This may be possible in non-representational art such as (non-verbal)
: music or abstract painting, where there is no content
: per se, and everything is form. But is it really possible in any
: representational art?

No point in debating subjective preferences, Sayan, which anyway
you have misunderstood as usual.

Apratim.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Indranil (dgu...@buphy.bu.edu) wrote:

: "Mandi" bodh-hoy. Darun chhobi.

Mandi khub'i bhalo chhobi. Nasir in particular pagla puro.

: Apra, tomar post amar server-r ashe ni. Ele bakitar uttor debo. Tumi

: jodi Bandit Queen-er nude scene-tar kotha bolo tahole bolbo o scene-ta
: kete dileo cinema super-hit hobe.

Ar ami bolbo na. E niye takko kore labh nei, verification jekhane
possible na.

: Tobe cinema kon karone cholbe sheta

: ekta alada bitorko (ebong she bishoye amar kichhu bolar nei). Je kono
: karonei cinema-ta jodi bharote super-hit hoy tahole ar SK-ke ei bole
: dosh deoa jay na je tini shudhu western audience-er jonyo chhobi
: tulechen.

Ta thik. Anyway shetao amar main point chhilo na. SK chamatkar ekti
chhobi tulte tulte hathat hathat baddo cliche jinish niye poRchhilen
ja kina lok'e khabe (deshe-bideshe) sheta'r byaparei bolchhilam.
Dosh'o dichchhi na, uni to cinema tulei khan.

: IDG

Apratim.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Indranil (dgu...@buphy.bu.edu) wrote:

: Apparently Madhu Kishwar also felt that "Bandit Queen" was made for a
: western audience (SK claims he made it only for himself). I can not help

SK knew for sure that his movie won't be allowed to release in
India. So he had to target a different audience. Nothing wrong in
that. Third-world stereotypes (which, indeed, are often true) sell
well in the first-world. But is that art?

: thinking that if "Bandit Queen" was released in India, it would be a
: smashing hit. SK's movies have at least one element that guarantees

: commercially viability (in this respect his movies may differ from
: Budhdhadev Dasgupta's or Mrinal Sen's movies). They have a full dose of drama.

As I have mentioned in a separate post, yes, but perhaps not
because of the "full dose of drama".

: Whether a story comes across as shocking or poignant or whatever owes a

: lot to the cinematography too.

Of course. And SK IMO was largely successful in this respect.

: Numerous Phoolan Devi inspired films had been

: shot and released in India before SK stepped in with his "official"
: version. All were flops. So I'd think that SK has reason to be proud if
: his film is appreciated, even if the audience does not seem to talk as
: much about the style as the story.

I don't see the connection here. Whether or not the other onces
were flops is beside the point. SK's film was stylistically
quite strong, but my impression is that SK was not quite sure that
that alone would guarantee apprciation, hence he threw in a "full
dose of" other (extremely cliche) stuff, humiliation and what not,
an extended rape scene which should have been, to quote an expression
from another post in SCB, mercilessly edited.

Which, I reiterate, is ironic IMO.

: There are instances to the contrary

: where the style is appreciated more than the story (like Pulp Fiction,
: which in my opinion is a wholly mediocre but "Hey, I am cool" kind of
: movie).

Pulp Fiction (again IMO) does suffer from the problem that it
includes a lot of "cool" stuff, which often hides its technical
competence.

: Improvised or "experimental" styles can catch the attention of

: the audience, but the self-effacing "tell the story" style, where one is
: often oblivious of the presence of the camera or the editing scissors
: will continue to be a solid benchmark of competence.

I believe that I forwarded the example of Stealing Beauty (by
Bertolucci of Betolucci's Pizza) and not Pulp Fiction. So I do
not think that I was championing 'Improvised or "experimental"'
styles. I was championing good editing, however, and avoiding
cliches to gain (audience-sensitive) appreciation.

For example, the extended rape scene in PD was mostly superfluous,
IMO. It hardly focuses on the Phulan character and her reactions.
And it becomes repetitive after a while, but drags on nevertheless.

In contrast, consider the restrained scene of Phulan coming out
of the police station after a night of lock up (and nobody knows
what really happened that night, except for some suggestive
statements which you had mentioned) with an expression of
helpless anger (and excellent dialogue, do you remember?) which
goes a long way to explain, so to say, where Phulan came from.

After all (again IMO) the job for the creative artist is not to
depict reality as is (a reporter's job), but to make new
reality. To interpret characters, not just to depict experiences.
[Again, the real Phulan may not have reacted to the night of lock
up in the way the Phulan on screen did, but that is beside the point,
as you had noted.]

However, the extended rape scene was an instant success with the
audience due to it's bold portrayal of attrocities committed against
women in the larget democracy in the world and what not (and I am
sure it would have been with the audience in India, albeit for
different reasons). But was that art, beyond the Monaj Kumar
variety? Same goes, to a lesser extent for the nude parade scene
which dragged on for minutes, but hardly any time was spent of
exploring the reactions of the Phulan character, not even a close
shot of her face (as opposed to her body), which makes me suspect
that something other than developing the character of Phulan was
on the director's mind when shooting that scene.

One question, what were the scenes that caught your eye on seeing
the Indian edition of the movie, which caused you to put on the
jacket and go out in the chilly night etc.?

: IDG

Apratim.

PS: Let me mention again, I liked the movie in general.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Arindam Banerjee (bane...@newsserver.trl.oz.au) wrote:

: The "reality" behind Phoolan Devi seems to be a matter of interest.

<deleted>

The real Phoolan is inconsequential as far as the movie is concerned.
All creative art is created, e byapare to daRibabu ja bolar bole gyachhen,
Ram'r janmobhumi Ajodhya na Balmiki'r imagination?

Add IMO to taste.

Apratim.

[Indranil]

Apratim Sarkar (asa...@bu.edu) wrote:
: Indranil (dgu...@buphy.bu.edu) wrote:

: : Apparently Madhu Kishwar also felt that "Bandit Queen" was made for a
: : western audience (SK claims he made it only for himself). I can not help

: SK knew for sure that his movie won't be allowed to release in
: India. So he had to target a different audience. Nothing wrong in
: that. Third-world stereotypes (which, indeed, are often true) sell
: well in the first-world. But is that art?

I agree the Sk must have realized that BQ was not going to be released
in India anytime soon. And that he has found a receptive audience in the
west. But to say that he made the movie only for a western audience is
like saying Pasternak wrote Dr. Zhivago only for the west.

Third world stereotypes are not necessarily art. And are often not
necessarily appreciated as art.

: : thinking that if "Bandit Queen" was released in India, it would be a

: : smashing hit. SK's movies have at least one element that guarantees
: : commercially viability (in this respect his movies may differ from
: : Budhdhadev Dasgupta's or Mrinal Sen's movies). They have a full dose of drama.

: As I have mentioned in a separate post, yes, but perhaps not
: because of the "full dose of drama".

The drama would be sufficient though.

: : Whether a story comes across as shocking or poignant or whatever owes a

: : lot to the cinematography too.

: Of course. And SK IMO was largely successful in this respect.

: : Numerous Phoolan Devi inspired films had been
: : shot and released in India before SK stepped in with his "official"
: : version. All were flops. So I'd think that SK has reason to be proud if
: : his film is appreciated, even if the audience does not seem to talk as
: : much about the style as the story.

: I don't see the connection here. Whether or not the other onces
: were flops is beside the point. SK's film was stylistically

No. Why is it besides the point? Doesn't it at least prove that the
"story" and the screen drama are not trivially related?

: quite strong, but my impression is that SK was not quite sure that

: that alone would guarantee apprciation, hence he threw in a "full
: dose of" other (extremely cliche) stuff, humiliation and what not,
: an extended rape scene which should have been, to quote an expression
: from another post in SCB, mercilessly edited.

: Which, I reiterate, is ironic IMO.

I may not be a terribly discerning viewer when it comes to stylistic
techniques. What I found in BQ was good storytelling and well dramatised
scenes. The "extended" rape scene you refer to , IMO, was an extremely well
shot gang rape scene. I did not feel that it was unduly extended in any
manner.

: I believe that I forwarded the example of Stealing Beauty (by

: Bertolucci of Betolucci's Pizza) and not Pulp Fiction. So I do
: not think that I was championing 'Improvised or "experimental"'
: styles. I was championing good editing, however, and avoiding
: cliches to gain (audience-sensitive) appreciation.

: For example, the extended rape scene in PD was mostly superfluous,
: IMO. It hardly focuses on the Phulan character and her reactions.
: And it becomes repetitive after a while, but drags on nevertheless.

: In contrast, consider the restrained scene of Phulan coming out
: of the police station after a night of lock up (and nobody knows
: what really happened that night, except for some suggestive
: statements which you had mentioned) with an expression of
: helpless anger (and excellent dialogue, do you remember?) which
: goes a long way to explain, so to say, where Phulan came from.

I think if SK had given the gang rape scene the same treatment as the
scene you now refer to, the script would seem repetitive. Personally I
liked both scenes, separately, and together.

: After all (again IMO) the job for the creative artist is not to

: depict reality as is (a reporter's job), but to make new
: reality. To interpret characters, not just to depict experiences.
: [Again, the real Phulan may not have reacted to the night of lock
: up in the way the Phulan on screen did, but that is beside the point,
: as you had noted.]

I agree completely.

: However, the extended rape scene was an instant success with the

: audience due to it's bold portrayal of attrocities committed against
: women in the larget democracy in the world and what not (and I am
: sure it would have been with the audience in India, albeit for
: different reasons). But was that art, beyond the Monaj Kumar
: variety? Same goes, to a lesser extent for the nude parade scene
: which dragged on for minutes, but hardly any time was spent of
: exploring the reactions of the Phulan character, not even a close
: shot of her face (as opposed to her body), which makes me suspect
: that something other than developing the character of Phulan was
: on the director's mind when shooting that scene.

IMO, the "extended" rape scene and the scne in which Phoolan is paraded nude
were both done quite artistically. The nude parade scene did not drag on
for minutes (I can time it if you want). In these kind of sequences, my
natural reaction is to hope that it will be over soon and better times
will prevail. Therefore any undue "extension" normally bothers me a
lot. I did not feel that these scenes were any longer than necessary,
something that I also felt to be true of the graphic concentration camp
sequences from Schindler's List. In the scene were Phoolan is being
paraded nude, nudity is shown for only a few seconds. The camera goes
into a close up of Sriram and Phoolan's faces soon afterwards. I think
SK planned both these scenes very very well and executed them almost
perfectly.

I am drawing a distinction between a cliche and a dramatic
scene. If you wish, the whole film is a cliche. Then so is Schindler's
List or Mandi.

: One question, what were the scenes that caught your eye on seeing

: the Indian edition of the movie, which caused you to put on the
: jacket and go out in the chilly night etc.?

The scene in which Phoolan digs her rifle into her ex-husband, the
scene in which she comes back and meets her mother, the scene in which
she is called home from the river to be given away to the bridegroom,
a scene or two with Vikram Malha and her gang .. A few more, actually.

IDG

[Anindya Ghoshal]

Indranil (dgu...@buphy.bu.edu) wrote:
: sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
: : In article <5efei3$c...@news.bu.edu>, Indranil <dgu...@budoe.bu.edu> wrote:
: : >
: : >compare with. The photography is excellent. Perhaps a Bertocelli could

: : >have done a better job of shooting in Chambal.

: : You mean Bertolucci, not Bertocelli.

: Who is Bertolucci? The Bertolucci of Bertolucci's Pizza?

ei Bostonian Babu-der niye ar paara gelo naa..arey moshai ota hobe Bertucci Pizza..
daroon pizza..brick oven-er upon thin pizza..difference holo in heating
ar vegetable-gulo je bhabe cut kore dei. tobe aapni oi UNO's Pizzarina'r
fan...aapni Bertucci-ke Bertolucci banaben arki..nischoi chicken pizza khaan..
ake-baare bichiri..

tobe hya..ekebaare jodi kono kaaj-kommo naa taake tobe oi Little Buddha baa
Last Emperor jatiyo boi-gulo dekte paaren..kharap lagbe naa..baarite dekle
oi Domino's baa Pizaa-hut-er pizza khaaben..;-)

--
email address: agho...@eng2.uconn.edu

Life is a series of stochastic errors.

[sayan bhattacharyya]

>sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
>
>: Also, can the material and the treatment in a film (or in any work
>: of art) really be separated in the way you seem to like it to be?
>: This may be possible in non-representational art such as (non-verbal)
>: music or abstract painting, where there is no content
>: per se, and everything is form. But is it really possible in any
>: representational art?
>
> No point in debating subjective preferences, Sayan

Apratim, why do you think of everything as "debating" ? In the passage
quoted above, I was NOT debating. I asked a simple question because I
really wanted to know what you think. I wasn't trying to score any
"debating" brownie points here! Why do you take everything in such
a confrontational way? It is disappointing as hell.

I have noticed this earlier too -- when you are asked a direct question
you rarely give a direct answer. You rarely make it clear what your
own position is even when you are asked. In the discussion on Sunil
Gangopadhyay last year, I asked you what YOU thought of Sunil's writing.
I genuinely wanted to understand your position. You replied with a
sneering "Bore koro na". Bojho THela.

Anyway, I don't see why you bring in "preferences" here. I was not
expressing ANY preferences, subjective or otherwise. If you read
carefully, you'd have seen that my question was about "possibility",
not about "preference". The question of preferring A over B only
arises if both A and B are possible, and the question I was asking
was if both A and B were POSSIBLE in this case.

Anyhow, I think you have sufficiently made clear that substantive
discussion is not something you are interested in, so I don't think
I'm going to ask again. No big deal!

Best regards,

-Sayan.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Kon cinema'ta kaar pati lagbe seta bola amar kaaj noi. Jemon oneker
kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.
Well, se sob debate'e na jaoai bhalo.
Arekta byapar "SL" boita amar ekhono bhalo kore dekhe uthte parini.
Tai beshi torke gelam na. Bhalo bhabe dekhe eshe tarpor nambo. Sediner
jonno prostut thakben.

Subho.

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:

> Sediner jonno prostut thakben.

Shubho, Ostad, eta gurudeb dialogue hoyechche. Mama, amra mugur-fugur
niye ashbo. LoRe jao ostad!

Shoumyo.

[c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu]

In article <5essmk$s...@inet-nntp-gw-1.us.oracle.com>,

asa...@us.oracle.com (Apratim Sarkar) wrote:
>
> In article <8567313...@dejanews.com>
c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu writes:
> >Apratim likhechen :
> >
> >> >Wasn't it released in India? last June I heard that it was released
> >> >in Calcutta. People, I heard, were in general shocked to see the horror.
> >>
> >> Otai to gNyaRa - cinema to dekhlo na, shock'ta'i pelo. Ghure fire
> >
> >Cinema ne dekheyi shock pelo?
>
> Nandangami aNtel'der ashadhya ki bolun?
>
> >> shocked hote giye hoito tinbar rape scene'ta'i dekhe fello ...
> >> kNadte kNadte beriye eshe mone holo sufficiently shocked haowa
> >> hoy ni, nude scene'ta arekbar dekha proyojon.
> >
> >Shocked hole manush khoob akta kNadteyo pare na. Aar shocked state-e thik
> >akta particular nude scene aro dekhle hoto bole moneyo hoye na. Ami
> >jader kotha bolechilum tara thik shocked hote gechhilo bole mone hoyeni.
> >Shocked hoyechilo cinema-ta dekhe.
>
> O.
>

> >> IDG, desh'e e cinema cholbe tate amar sandeho nei, kintu (amar mote)
> >> bhul karon'e cholbe. Smita Patil bathing scene korchhen shune jyamon
> >> lok'e Shyam Benegal'r (naam'ta mone ashchhe na) dekhete gechhilo.
> >

> >Dekhun gota India'r lok jodi akta karoneyi cinemata dekhte jaye tahole
> >byaparta ki khoob normal hobe?
>
> Did I claim that it would be so?

Kintu "right reason"-er jonno cholchhe na bolchhen to?

> >Apnar karon onno karur karoner shonge
> >na mille, onner-ta bhul karon amon kotha bolchhen kano?
>
> 'For the wrong reason', e'i standard phrase'ti keu byabohar korlei
> ki apni e'i proshno koren? IMO lagaleo?
>

"Wrong reason" phrase-ta besh strong, tayi prosnota kora. Onno postgulo-te
praye shob angle of a cinema running successfully alochona hoye gechhe,
tayi aar kichhu bolar neyi amar.

> >> Apratim.
> >
> >Chaitali
>
> Apratim.

Chaitali

> --
> Amai jodi dei tara noukati Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are
> Ami tabe shatshota dNaR aNati are my own and shouldn't be construed
in
> Pal tule di charte pNachta chhata any way to represent that of my
employer.
> Mithye ghure beRai na ko hate|

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------

[Srabani Banerjee]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
>
> Srabani Banerjee wrote:
> >
> > Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> > >
> > > Ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore. Ami kauke chchoto
> > > korchchi na ba chchoto mukhe boro kothao bolchchi na tobe gotokal
> > > Scheindler'r List dekhar pore baki onek cinema'ke just faltu bole mone
> > > hoi.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > amar to Schindler-s List besh pati legechhilo. by your logic,
> > `ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore?'
> >
> > Srabani
>
> Kon cinema'ta kaar pati lagbe seta bola amar kaaj noi.

precisely.
kintu ta'le o'rom jyathamoshai-er moto chokh pakachchhilen kano bolun
to?

Jemon oneker
> kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.
> Well, se sob debate'e na jaoai bhalo.
> Arekta byapar "SL" boita amar ekhono bhalo kore dekhe uthte parini.
> Tai beshi torke gelam na. Bhalo bhabe dekhe eshe tarpor nambo. Sediner
> jonno prostut thakben.

baba! bhoy dekhachchhen naki?

Srabani

[Arnab Gupta]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
>
> Srabani Banerjee wrote:
> >
> > Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> > >
> > > Ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore. Ami kauke chchoto
> > > korchchi na ba chchoto mukhe boro kothao bolchchi na tobe gotokal
> > > Scheindler'r List dekhar pore baki onek cinema'ke just faltu bole mone
> > > hoi.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > amar to Schindler-s List besh pati legechhilo. by your logic,
> > `ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore?'
> >
> > Srabani
>

> Kon cinema'ta kaar pati lagbe seta bola amar kaaj noi. Jemon oneker

> kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.

Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
`Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
achhe ....

Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.

Arnab.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Srabani Banerjee wrote:
>
> Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> >
> > Srabani Banerjee wrote:
> > >
> > > Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore. Ami kauke chchoto
> > > > korchchi na ba chchoto mukhe boro kothao bolchchi na tobe gotokal
> > > > Scheindler'r List dekhar pore baki onek cinema'ke just faltu bole mone
> > > > hoi.
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > amar to Schindler-s List besh pati legechhilo. by your logic,
> > > `ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore?'
> > >
> > > Srabani
> >
> > Kon cinema'ta kaar pati lagbe seta bola amar kaaj noi.
>

> precisely.
> kintu ta'le o'rom jyathamoshai-er moto chokh pakachchhilen kano bolun
> to?
>

> Jemon oneker
> > kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> > Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.

> > Well, se sob debate'e na jaoai bhalo.
> > Arekta byapar "SL" boita amar ekhono bhalo kore dekhe uthte parini.
> > Tai beshi torke gelam na. Bhalo bhabe dekhe eshe tarpor nambo. Sediner
> > jonno prostut thakben.
>
> baba! bhoy dekhachchhen naki?
>
> Srabani

I bite too !!

"Dr. Subho Mozumdar" <smo...@research.umbc.edu> writes:

>Jai hok ami to agei bolechchilam Bangal'ra loud jaat,

[...]

>Ja bolar seta sposto bhashai boli. Setake jodi tumi
>vulgarity bolo tahole kichchu bolar nei.
>Amra Ghotider moto Minmine-Pinpine jati noi - Geyichi-kheyichi'r dol.

Orthaat, nijeder shoshobdo baatkormo-ke byaghro-gorjon bole
mone koren!

Sambit

[Arindam Banerjee]

Shoumyo Dasgupta <txd...@silmaril.smeal.psu.edu> wrote:

> Often, you will find that when a film-maker or a playwright "adapts"
> something from another art-form or real incident, they transform it to
> something else. In Rabindranth's lines, "Ami apon moner madhuri mishaye
> tomare korechchi rochona...".

I have not seen "Bandit Queen", and since you have, let us know
whether and how much SK mixed madhuri in the creation of Phoolan Devi's
character, in the light of the "facts" as I found them.

Actually it was a disappointment to find Phoolan so unattractive
physically. If she had been half as beautiful as at least one of those shot
by the police, she would have been our Prime Minister by now.

>
> Whether the transformed reality is far from "truth" is not an issue. It
> should not be, IMHO. Because "truth" in art can be subjective.

Then such "truths" should not be mixed with objective truths, such as
the question of whether or not our representative to Parliament
should be an unrepentant murderess, no matter how much a darling she
be to many?

> Remember Akira Kurosawa's "Roshomon" ?

Sorry, I have not seen that movie. I have only seen the "Seven Samurai".
I found that quite realistic.

>
> Again, I understand your point, and believe the "facts" as you state
> them.

O I do not believe anything, and I do not see why you should. I only
ascribe probabilistic values to the validity of "facts" I have not
completely verified for myself.

[National Pension Admin.Corp.]

Apratim Sarkar wrote:
>
> In article <330F7C...@erols.com> smu...@erols.com writes:
> >Apratim Sarkar wrote:
>
> >> Kabar dekhlen rewind kore?----aapnar moton aykhono oto PERVERT hoye uThini je video rewind kore 'humiliation of women' dekhte jaabo! cinema-ta aami aykbaari edeshe cinema hall-a giye dekhechhilaam! nijeke oto khelo kore fyalen kyano opor chaalaki maarte giye? Chaitali'r posting-er uttoreo dekhlaam aei rokom khelo maarka montobbyo korechhen! jaaihok, Indranil babu'r lekha bhaalo shomalochona poDe aamar cinema-ta dekhe jaa monehoyechhilo taai likhechhilaam! aei byapare aar aami konokich

> a
> >ai na!----soumitri
>
> Miscommunication dekhun. Ami to puro cinema'ta rewind kore dekha'r
> katha'i bolte cheyechhilum.
>
> Apratim.

> --
> Amai jodi dei tara noukati Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are
> Ami tabe shatshota dNaR aNati are my own and shouldn't be construed in
> Pal tule di charte pNachta chhata any way to represent that of my employer.
> Mithye ghure beRai na ko hate|

jodiyo aami aager posting-a likhechhilaam je aei byapare aar konokichhu
bolte chaai na,
taao bhaablaam aaraykbaar mukh khuli! hNaashi pelo aapnar lekhaa poDe!

prothomoto jokhon aamar uttore jaanlen je aami cinema hall-a giye
dekhechhilaam movie-ta
tokhon aabar otichaalaker moton 'miscommunication'-er kotha tulchhen
kyano video
rewind korar byapare? chepe jete to paarten! naaki nijeke explain
korchhen?

aapni C. Basu'r posting-er uttore bolechhilen je "Otai to gNyaRa- cinema
to dekhlo na,
shock'ta'i pelo. Ghure fire shocked hote giye hoito tinbar rape

scene'ta'i dekhe fello..

kNadte kNadte beriye eshe mone holo sufficiently shocked haowa hoy ni,
nude scene'ta

arekbar dekha proyojon"----aabar edike aamar 'Bandit Queen'-er opor
first posting-er lekhaa poDe kaayda mere jiggyesh korlen je "kabar
dekhlen rewind kore?"---aar aykhon bhaalo maanusher moton bolchhen je
miscommunication, aapni mean korechhen je purota rewind kore dyakha'r
kotha? bolun purota rewind kore aami ki dekhbo? humiliation of women,
naa rape scene aar nude scene? naaki aapni C.Basu'r uttore aykrokom
chinta korechhilen, aar aamar kyalani kheye aykhon bolchhen
miscommunication! maairi dada, aapnari kothaa, paalti ekei bole! dada,
kore khaan ki kore? vinno vinno lok-ke vinno vinno jhaaDchhen? aeibhaabe
ayddin Oracle-a aapnar tNike thaakai to 'Miracle'.
aar dada, jodi 'cinema hall-a dekhechhi' shonbaar poreo rewind korar
kothaa tolen, ta'le desher loker obocheton moner dike na vebe, taara
kobaar cinema-ta dekhlo na bhebe, bhaabun aapni ki korlen! aare aykta
meyer opor chhotobyala theke oi rokom ottyachar dekhle to ayk fNota
chokher jol-o loker berote paare! aar er mathaay ghurchhe nude scene! a
ki cheese maairi! puro 'le haalua'!

Apratim Sarkar,
aapnar,
maatha dyakhano
dorkaar!
Nije, kobaar
dekhlen 'Nude Scene',
rewind kore 'Bandit Queen'?
jodi dekhe dekhe mete na aash,
felben naako 'Dirghoshwash'!
Na kNede fuliye ThNot,
video ene dekhun "DEEP THROAT".<:)

----soumitri

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Arnab Gupta wrote:
>
> Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> >
> > Srabani Banerjee wrote:
> > >
> > > Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore. Ami kauke chchoto
> > > > korchchi na ba chchoto mukhe boro kothao bolchchi na tobe gotokal
> > > > Scheindler'r List dekhar pore baki onek cinema'ke just faltu bole mone
> > > > hoi.
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > amar to Schindler-s List besh pati legechhilo. by your logic,
> > > `ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore?'
> > >
> > > Srabani
> >

> > Kon cinema'ta kaar pati lagbe seta bola amar kaaj noi. Jemon oneker

> > kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> > Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.
>

> Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> achhe ....
>
> Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
>
> Arnab.

Right, apnar ei daroon dristi-bhongi onek pranider punoujjibito korbe.

Shesh'er Kobita kebol golpo noi ota ekta kobita.
Ota bhetore ekta chchondo achche, ekta sur achche.
Sesh'er Kobitar golpo kothao danriye thake na, kothao nonchot kheye
danriye thake na.
Take par koranor jonno obantor jinish'er asroy nite hoi na.
Nijer goti'te, nijer talete chole.

Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.
Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
dileo parten.

Well, jodi na pore thaken othoba onek kaal age jodi pore thaken tahole
janaben amar kachche ek copy achche. Pore dekhben ekhon onekta bhalo
lagbe.
Oboshoi "Papa kahte hai....." pore kono kichchui nao bhalo lagte pare.

Subho Mozumdar

[Arnab Gupta]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
>
> Arnab Gupta wrote:
> >

..[deleted]..

> > Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> > `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> > tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> > nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> > onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> > kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> > achhe ....
> >
> > Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> > Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
> >
> > Arnab.
>
> Right, apnar ei daroon dristi-bhongi onek pranider punoujjibito korbe.
>

Thanku...ami aytota jonogoner shebai ashtey pari jantey pere darun
bhalo laglo.

> Shesh'er Kobita kebol golpo noi ota ekta kobita.

kirokom bhabey `ota ekta kobita' ?

> Ota bhetore ekta chchondo achche, ekta sur achche.

thhaktey paare (bujhiye jodi boltey paaren chhondo ba sur-ta
kemon taholey bhalo lagbe)...kintu bishoy-ta sheta noy. Apnar
motey `shesher kobita'r golpo strong...ontoto QSQT-r thheke to
botei. Apni `style'-er proshno anben na. Oti boro murkho-o janey
je e byapare shompurno duto madhyomer duto jinishke tulona
kora jaina. Apnar moto uchhobuddhishomponno jibeder je eta
ki korey mathai ashe na ta amar moto nimnobuddhishomponno
lokeder kachhe aykta darun bishmoy.

> Sesh'er Kobitar golpo kothao danriye thake na, kothao nonchot kheye
> danriye thake na.

golpo `danriye thhake' byaparta kirokom ? Eta janley tulonata
bujhtey shubidha hoto.

> Take par koranor jonno obantor jinish'er asroy nite hoi na.
> Nijer goti'te, nijer talete chole.
>

Eshob chhNedo kotha, apnar kolponar byapar. Paaren to bujhiye
din na shohoj kothai golpe-r element hishebe `Shesher Kobita'i
aymon ki achhe ja QSQT-r thheke onek beshi akorshoniyo. Amar
pochhondo-ke galgal deoar thheke sheta borong onek constructive hobey.
Ayto bojhen aar eta bojhen na je pochhondo byaparta subjective ?

> Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.

Bojhar khub aykta kichhu nei otey, IMO. Tobey apnar, nijer pith
nije chaprano dekhey besh moja pachhi. Chaliye jaan.

> Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
> dileo parten.
>

Ki aar kora! nirbuddhidero to bakshadhinota thhake. Aar aykta byaparo
bhebe dekhun...bhaggish nirbuddhira lekhey..noiley apnara nijeder
shommondhe "Ami ki honu" bhebe anondo peten ki korey ?

> Well, jodi na pore thaken othoba onek kaal age jodi pore thaken tahole
> janaben amar kachche ek copy achche. Pore dekhben ekhon onekta bhalo
> lagbe.

`Shesher Kobita' sheshbar bhalo legechhilo class nine-e. Tarpor
jotobari porechhi totobari otakey kothar phuljhuri aar chomok
deoar cheshta chhaDa kichhu mone hoini. Bhashata Rabindranath-er
onyanyo lekhar tulonai adhunik, obhinobotwo-o achhe kichhu... tobey
overall khubi phNapa byapar mone hoi, ontoto `content'er dik thheke
to botei.

> Oboshoi "Papa kahte hai....." pore kono kichchui nao bhalo lagte pare.
>

`pore' boltey ki `gaan shuney' bojhatey chaichhen ? Taholey boli oi
gaan-er shonge komor dolabar moto ichhey ei boyeshey na thhakleo,
shuntey mondo laage na. Aar chhobita, orthhat QSQT, ami dekhini. Golpo
shunechhi. Khanikta plot meley, erokom aykta ingreji natok-o porechhi.
Golpo hishebe je `Shesher Kobita'r thheke onek bhalo tatey shondeho
nei, IMO.

Arnab.

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

Arindam Banerjee wrote:

> I have not seen "Bandit Queen", and since you have, let us know
> whether and how much SK mixed madhuri in the creation of Phoolan Devi's
> character, in the light of the "facts" as I found them.
>

I have not read the Hindi story-book (or fact-book?) on Phoolan. Most of
my knowledge about her is based on newspaper-readings which have
probably faded a lot by now.

But that's not the point. When I watched BQ, I took it to be an
independent interpretation of SK. Of course, at the back of my mind, I
did have the knowledge that this movie is built upon some facts. But, I
expected dramatization.

IMO, the acting and the music (who else but Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - seen
Dead Man Walking, or Last Temptation of Christ, or Natural Born
Killers?) was mind-blowing.

Yes, I was shocked by the sharpness of the dialogue (which we all know,
is so much closer to the reality in India, far from the opium Bollywood
serves), and the overall treatment of the sequences.

> Then such "truths" should not be mixed with objective truths, such as
> the question of whether or not our representative to Parliament
> should be an unrepentant murderess, no matter how much a darling she
> be to many?
>

True.

> > Remember Akira Kurosawa's "Roshomon" ?
>
> Sorry, I have not seen that movie.

See it. I am serious.

>
> O I do not believe anything, and I do not see why you should. I only
> ascribe probabilistic values to the validity of "facts" I have not
> completely verified for myself.
>

???

Please explain.

On a personal note, I miss your episodes. Will you write again soon ?

Regards,

Shoumyo.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Arnab Gupta wrote:
>
> Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> >
> > Arnab Gupta wrote:
> > >
>
> ..[deleted]..
>
> > > Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> > > `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> > > tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> > > nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> > > onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> > > kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> > > achhe ....
> > >
> > > Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> > > Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
> > >
> > > Arnab.
> >
> > Right, apnar ei daroon dristi-bhongi onek pranider punoujjibito korbe.
> >
>
> Thanku...ami aytota jonogoner shebai ashtey pari jantey pere darun
> bhalo laglo.

Aro jonogoner seba'e asben jodi bhobishot'e erokom aro kichchu pondit'er
moton likhe jete parle.

>
> > Shesh'er Kobita kebol golpo noi ota ekta kobita.
>
> kirokom bhabey `ota ekta kobita' ?

Kobita'r sombondhey je apnar gyan khoob'i olpo o sthulo seta bojhjha
jai. Amio khoob ekta strong noi tobe ....

Kobita mane je chchondo miliye-miliye cholte hobe tale tal diye
'Tal gachch ek paye danriye
Unki Mare Akashe'
erokom nao hote pare.
Kobita mane something which is smooth, something which flows naturally,
swotosfurto bhabe. Seta'e kobi'r ekta bhab prokash pay. Sobdo toronger
dhara'e jonmo ney ekta chitro ja Monalisa'r chchobir moto sundor. Golpo
aar kobita'r modhey ekhanei tofat.
Golp'e chai ekta plot. Golp'er story-line o taar romancho bojay rakhte
gele khanikta artificiality lekhok'er ojantei eshe pore.
Jodi Kobita sombondhey aro kichchu shunte chaan tahole Net'er bondhdhu
Soumyo ba Indranil'er kaachch theke jene neben. Ora apnake bhalo kore
bujhjhiye deben.

>
> > Ota bhetore ekta chchondo achche, ekta sur achche.
>
> thhaktey paare (bujhiye jodi boltey paaren chhondo ba sur-ta
> kemon taholey bhalo lagbe)...kintu bishoy-ta sheta noy. Apnar
> motey `shesher kobita'r golpo strong...ontoto QSQT-r thheke to
> botei. Apni `style'-er proshno anben na. Oti boro murkho-o janey
> je e byapare shompurno duto madhyomer duto jinishke tulona
> kora jaina. Apnar moto uchhobuddhishomponno jibeder je eta
> ki korey mathai ashe na ta amar moto nimnobuddhishomponno
> lokeder kachhe aykta darun bishmoy.

Dekhun je manush janena take jodi Robishankar'er concert'eo niye jaoa
hoi se bolbe ota ki korchche piring-piring kore.
Je bojhjhe se gontar por gonta dhore shone.
Je bojhjena se New York City'r MOMA'te giye Monet'er Water Lily dekhe
Bou'ke bole "Cholo cholo e dekhe ki korbe".
Je bojhjhe se Gontar por Gonta boshe kebol chchobitake dekhe aar
Shilpi'r sritike dekhe.
Jodi kichchu na janen tahole chup kore thakun. Seta bodhoi besi bhalo.
Nijer pandityer bohor Biswo'ke janiye nijer porichoy deoar ki khub ekta
dorkar achche?

Ta chchara Robi Thakur nijer lekha'e oi golpei bole gechchen je dorkar
porle tar kobita'r sobha theke uthe aste. sutorang apnar apotti'ta
kotha'e. Ami Robi Thakur'er kobita je KOBITA'i eta proman korar jonno
ekhane ashini. Onek tothho achche. Pore neben.

>
> > Sesh'er Kobitar golpo kothao danriye thake na, kothao nonchot kheye
> > danriye thake na.
>
> golpo `danriye thhake' byaparta kirokom ? Eta janley tulonata
> bujhtey shubidha hoto.
>

Right janbar cheshta korun. Na parle lokjon'er sahajyo nin. Taar'o jodi
somoy na thake tahole kichchu bolar nei.
Ekta Golpo boli ebar.

Ekbar Meghnad Saha (bikhyato Boigyanik o atheist) Iswar je nei seta
proman korbar chesta korchchilen. Ta bhalo, onekei setar pokhe o
bipokhe. Kintu ekbar uni ekta bephansh kaaj kore boslen.
Uni ek Sadhuji'ke jigyesh kore boshlen "Achcha tumi amay bujhiye bolo
Iswar'ke ki rokom dekhte.
Sadhuji ki aar bole, bollen 'Apni to Boigyanik lok, koto kichchu janen.
Ta oi je malita bagan'e jol dichche oke Apnader Bose-Einstein theory'ta
ektu bujhjhiye din na.
Megnad Saha ki bolen. 'Ta ki kore bojhabo. O to nirokhor, Ko okhor
Gomansho. Oke ki kore bojhjhabo oto sokto theory.'
Sadhuji bollen 'Sob kichchu jante gele'i Baba ektu porashuna korte hoi,
ektu chorcha korte hoi. Na hole kichchui bojhjha jai na.'
Golpo'ta onekei janen. Sadhuji je ke setao onekei janen, bishesh kore
jara Ramkrishna Mission'e gechchen.

> > Take par koranor jonno obantor jinish'er asroy nite hoi na.
> > Nijer goti'te, nijer talete chole.
> >
>
> Eshob chhNedo kotha, apnar kolponar byapar. Paaren to bujhiye
> din na shohoj kothai golpe-r element hishebe `Shesher Kobita'i
> aymon ki achhe ja QSQT-r thheke onek beshi akorshoniyo. Amar
> pochhondo-ke galgal deoar thheke sheta borong onek constructive hobey.
> Ayto bojhen aar eta bojhen na je pochhondo byaparta subjective ?
>

Ekshobar subjective.
Apnar bhalo na lage apni porben na. Ba apnar dekhte bhalo lage apni
dekhben. Kintu seta nijer ghore boshe dekhun ba apnar bondhdhu'der niye
dekhun, tate karur kichchu bolar nei. Dhenra pitiye o nijer budhdhi'r
porichoy na diye'o seta korte paren.
Monalisa'r chchobi na dekhe tahole Playboy'er chchobi dekhun. Anondo
paben. Kintu ta bole bolben na je Monalisa'r chchobi or samne danrate
pare na.

> > Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.
>
> Bojhar khub aykta kichhu nei otey, IMO. Tobey apnar, nijer pith
> nije chaprano dekhey besh moja pachhi. Chaliye jaan.
>
> > Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
> > dileo parten.
> >
>
> Ki aar kora! nirbuddhidero to bakshadhinota thhake. Aar aykta byaparo
> bhebe dekhun...bhaggish nirbuddhira lekhey..noiley apnara nijeder
> shommondhe "Ami ki honu" bhebe anondo peten ki korey ?
>

Ekhane torko'ta cholchchilo amar sathe. Hotat 'Apnara' sobdo'ta elo
kotha theke. Amar dole ki aar keu achche?
Naki apni ekjon kalponik sokti-gosti'ke danr koriye ekai lore jachchen
aar chitkar kore jachchen.
'Ami ki honu' bhab'ta America'r culture. This country is a country of
salesman. Nijer motamot o chintadhara'ke by any means sell koratai e
Desh'er lokhkho. Sutorang se dole ami eka noi. Apnio e dole nijer
ojantei.

> > Well, jodi na pore thaken othoba onek kaal age jodi pore thaken tahole
> > janaben amar kachche ek copy achche. Pore dekhben ekhon onekta bhalo
> > lagbe.
>
> `Shesher Kobita' sheshbar bhalo legechhilo class nine-e. Tarpor
> jotobari porechhi totobari otakey kothar phuljhuri aar chomok
> deoar cheshta chhaDa kichhu mone hoini. Bhashata Rabindranath-er
> onyanyo lekhar tulonai adhunik, obhinobotwo-o achhe kichhu... tobey
> overall khubi phNapa byapar mone hoi, ontoto `content'er dik thheke
> to botei.
>

Class nine'ta khoob critical somoy. Onek'e onek kichcu pore o kore.
Tarpor kichchu lok budhite, shoktite bare aar kichchu lok shoktite
barleo budhite thik okhanei theke jai. Apnar hoito tai hoyechchilo.
Thik kore bhebe dekhben to oi somoy emon kichchu hoini to ja apnake
erokom ekta gondo-murkho toiri korechche.

> > Oboshoi "Papa kahte hai....." pore kono kichchui nao bhalo lagte pare.
> >
>
> `pore' boltey ki `gaan shuney' bojhatey chaichhen ? Taholey boli oi
> gaan-er shonge komor dolabar moto ichhey ei boyeshey na thhakleo,

Aha khoti kotay'e? Komor duliye ba neche dekhben. Anondo paben.
This is a country of young. Ekhane karur boyesh barena.

> shuntey mondo laage na. Aar chhobita, orthhat QSQT, ami dekhini. Golpo
> shunechhi. Khanikta plot meley, erokom aykta ingreji natok-o porechhi.
> Golpo hishebe je `Shesher Kobita'r thheke onek bhalo tatey shondeho
> nei, IMO.
>
> Arnab.

Right, bishesh kore jodi college'e pora o prem kora kalin jodi Premika'r
Baba ba nijer Baba'r kachche choti peta kheye thaken, tahole darun bhalo
lage. Besh ekta revenge-revenge bhab ashe.

Kolkata'e ekjon bhodrolok achchen jini Howrah Station o nanan jayga'e
chitkar kore sobaike bojhan je Surjyo naki Prithibi'r chari dike
ghoorchche. Onar kachche naki NASA theke pathano kichchu kagoj-potro'o
onar kachche achche bole claim koren..
Apnar obosthakhana khanikta se rokom mone hoi.

Subho.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Arnab Gupta wrote:
>
> Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> >
> > Arnab Gupta wrote:
> > >
>
> ..[deleted]..
>
> > > Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> > > `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> > > tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> > > nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> > > onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> > > kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> > > achhe ....
> > >
> > > Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> > > Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
> > >
> > > Arnab.
> >

Shesh'er Kobita aar golpo kotha'e purotai to kobita.

Subho.

[Sharmila Mukherjee]

National Pension Admin.Corp. wrote:
>
> Apratim Sarkar wrote:
> >
> > In article <330F7C...@erols.com> smu...@erols.com writes:
> > >Apratim Sarkar wrote:
> >
> > >> Kabar dekhlen rewind kore?----aapnar moton aykhono oto PERVERT hoye uThini je video rewind kore 'humiliation of women' dekhte jaabo! cinema-ta aami aykbaari edeshe cinema hall-a giye dekhechhilaam! nijeke oto khelo kore fyalen kyano opor chaalaki maarte giye? Chaitali'r posting-er uttoreo dekhlaam aei rokom khelo maarka montobbyo korechhen! jaaihok, Indranil babu'r lekha bhaalo shomalochona poDe aamar cinema-ta dekhe jaa monehoyechhilo taai likhechhilaam! aei byapare aar aami konoki

> > a
> > >ai na!----soumitri
> >
> > Miscommunication dekhun. Ami to puro cinema'ta rewind kore dekha'r
> > katha'i bolte cheyechhilum.
> >
> > Apratim.

[...]

> aapni C. Basu'r posting-er uttore bolechhilen je "Otai to gNyaRa- cinema
> to dekhlo na,
> shock'ta'i pelo. Ghure fire shocked hote giye hoito tinbar rape
> scene'ta'i dekhe fello..
> kNadte kNadte beriye eshe mone holo sufficiently shocked haowa hoy ni,
> nude scene'ta
> arekbar dekha proyojon"

Kothata khub aykta bhul bolen ni uni, IMO. Nahole bolun aamader
Bollywood-er so-called masala-film-e obodharito rape scene thaake kyano?
Public-er kotha chinta korei producer-ra ayk dose gaan, nach, rape etc.
dhukiye thaaken.

Sharmila

--
All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and then success
is sure.
-- Mark Twain

[Arnab Gupta]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
>
> Arnab Gupta wrote:
> >
> > Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> > >
> > > Arnab Gupta wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > ..[deleted]..
> >
> > > > Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> > > > `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> > > > tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> > > > nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> > > > onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> > > > kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> > > > achhe ....
> > > >
> > > > Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> > > > Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
> > > >
> > > > Arnab.
> > >
> > > Right, apnar ei daroon dristi-bhongi onek pranider punoujjibito korbe.
> > >
> >
> > Thanku...ami aytota jonogoner shebai ashtey pari jantey pere darun
> > bhalo laglo.
>
> Aro jonogoner seba'e asben jodi bhobishot'e erokom aro kichchu pondit'er
> moton likhe jete parle.
>

Bhabben na ei niye...ami likhboi...jonogoner upokaar to hobei,
shei shonge upri labh apnaar bhNaDamo.

> >
> > > Shesh'er Kobita kebol golpo noi ota ekta kobita.
> >
> > kirokom bhabey `ota ekta kobita' ?
>
> Kobita'r sombondhey je apnar gyan khoob'i olpo o sthulo seta bojhjha
> jai.
>

`guess' korey torko kora uchit noi. Aar ta jodi na korey thhaken
taholey asha kori apnar porer uttor-e apnar ei kothatar shopokhhe
kichhu tothwo pabo.

>Amio khoob ekta strong noi tobe ....

sure na holey mukh na kholai bhalo. Tateo oboshyo kono kono srenir
lok mukh kholey..

> Kobita mane je chchondo miliye-miliye cholte hobe tale tal diye
> 'Tal gachch ek paye danriye
> Unki Mare Akashe'
> erokom nao hote pare.
> Kobita mane something which is smooth, something which flows naturally,
> swotosfurto bhabe. Seta'e kobi'r ekta bhab prokash pay. Sobdo toronger
> dhara'e jonmo ney ekta chitro ja Monalisa'r chchobir moto sundor.

Khub shundor. Apni cheshta korlei aykta `On Poetry and Poets' likhtey
parben. Tobey Monalisa-r chhobita abar amar thik temon shubidhar
lagey na.

Golpo
> aar kobita'r modhey ekhanei tofat.
> Golp'e chai ekta plot. Golp'er story-line o taar romancho bojay rakhte
> gele khanikta artificiality lekhok'er ojantei eshe pore.

`Catcher in the Rye' porechhen ? Otateo lekhoker aykta `bhab prokash
pai' ja `smooth', `something which flows naturally, shwotosphurto
bhabe'. Apnaar `kobita'-r shonge purotai miley jai shudhu `plot'
achhe aykta ei ja.

Mushkil ki janen, `plot' diye jachai kortey geley `kotha o kahini',
thheke shuru korey Ramayan, Mahabharat, tabot kaler joto plot shuddhu
kobita baad ditey hoi. Othoba `Catcher in the Rye'ke ba `Shesher
Kobita'ke `ota ekta kobita' boley chalatey hoi.

> Jodi Kobita sombondhey aro kichchu shunte chaan tahole Net'er bondhdhu
> Soumyo ba Indranil'er kaachch theke jene neben. Ora apnake bhalo kore
> bujhjhiye deben.
>

Sheto kobita shommondhe jantey holey. Kintu apni agey bolun `shesher
kobita' ki korey `ota aykta kobita'. Nin, shuru korun, ami kaan petey
achhi.

> >
> > > Ota bhetore ekta chchondo achche, ekta sur achche.
> >
> > thhaktey paare (bujhiye jodi boltey paaren chhondo ba sur-ta
> > kemon taholey bhalo lagbe)...kintu bishoy-ta sheta noy. Apnar
> > motey `shesher kobita'r golpo strong...ontoto QSQT-r thheke to
> > botei. Apni `style'-er proshno anben na. Oti boro murkho-o janey
> > je e byapare shompurno duto madhyomer duto jinishke tulona
> > kora jaina. Apnar moto uchhobuddhishomponno jibeder je eta
> > ki korey mathai ashe na ta amar moto nimnobuddhishomponno
> > lokeder kachhe aykta darun bishmoy.
>
> Dekhun je manush janena take jodi Robishankar'er concert'eo niye jaoa
> hoi se bolbe ota ki korchche piring-piring kore.
> Je bojhjhe se gontar por gonta dhore shone.
> Je bojhjena se New York City'r MOMA'te giye Monet'er Water Lily dekhe
> Bou'ke bole "Cholo cholo e dekhe ki korbe".
> Je bojhjhe se Gontar por Gonta boshe kebol chchobitake dekhe aar
> Shilpi'r sritike dekhe.
> Jodi kichchu na janen tahole chup kore thakun. Seta bodhoi besi bhalo.
> Nijer pandityer bohor Biswo'ke janiye nijer porichoy deoar ki khub ekta
> dorkar achche?
>

Abar chhNedo aar aykrash baaje boka. Parle bujhiye bolun,
proshno-ta abar korchhi:

`shesher kobita'-r golpo kibhabey `QSQT'r golper thheke beshi bhalo
ba akorshoniyo ba `strong' (jodi tai mone hoi) boley apnar mone
hoi ?

> Ta chchara Robi Thakur nijer lekha'e oi golpei bole gechchen je dorkar
> porle tar kobita'r sobha theke uthe aste. sutorang apnar apotti'ta
> kotha'e. Ami Robi Thakur'er kobita je KOBITA'i eta proman korar jonno
> ekhane ashini. Onek tothho achche. Pore neben.
>

Rabindranath-er kobita je `kobita' sheta to apnar kachhe bujhtey
chaini. Apni `shesher kobita' jetake, uponyash bolei dhora hoi, shetake
`ota ekta kobita' bolechhen. Ami shudhu jantey chaichhi ki korey
`ota ekta kobita'. Parley bujhiye din, na parley bolun `parbo na'.

> >
> > > Sesh'er Kobitar golpo kothao danriye thake na, kothao nonchot kheye
> > > danriye thake na.
> >
> > golpo `danriye thhake' byaparta kirokom ? Eta janley tulonata
> > bujhtey shubidha hoto.
> >
>
> Right janbar cheshta korun. Na parle lokjon'er sahajyo nin. Taar'o jodi
> somoy na thake tahole kichchu bolar nei.
> Ekta Golpo boli ebar.
>
> Ekbar Meghnad Saha (bikhyato Boigyanik o atheist) Iswar je nei seta
> proman korbar chesta korchchilen. Ta bhalo, onekei setar pokhe o
> bipokhe. Kintu ekbar uni ekta bephansh kaaj kore boslen.
> Uni ek Sadhuji'ke jigyesh kore boshlen "Achcha tumi amay bujhiye bolo
> Iswar'ke ki rokom dekhte.
> Sadhuji ki aar bole, bollen 'Apni to Boigyanik lok, koto kichchu janen.
> Ta oi je malita bagan'e jol dichche oke Apnader Bose-Einstein theory'ta
> ektu bujhjhiye din na.
> Megnad Saha ki bolen. 'Ta ki kore bojhabo. O to nirokhor, Ko okhor
> Gomansho. Oke ki kore bojhjhabo oto sokto theory.'
> Sadhuji bollen 'Sob kichchu jante gele'i Baba ektu porashuna korte hoi,
> ektu chorcha korte hoi. Na hole kichchui bojhjha jai na.'
> Golpo'ta onekei janen. Sadhuji je ke setao onekei janen, bishesh kore
> jara Ramkrishna Mission'e gechchen.
>

baaje boka ki apnaar mudradosh naki oboshor katabar poddhoti ?

> > > Take par koranor jonno obantor jinish'er asroy nite hoi na.
> > > Nijer goti'te, nijer talete chole.
> > >
> >
> > Eshob chhNedo kotha, apnar kolponar byapar. Paaren to bujhiye
> > din na shohoj kothai golpe-r element hishebe `Shesher Kobita'i
> > aymon ki achhe ja QSQT-r thheke onek beshi akorshoniyo. Amar
> > pochhondo-ke galgal deoar thheke sheta borong onek constructive hobey.
> > Ayto bojhen aar eta bojhen na je pochhondo byaparta subjective ?
> >
>
> Ekshobar subjective.
> Apnar bhalo na lage apni porben na. Ba apnar dekhte bhalo lage apni
> dekhben. Kintu seta nijer ghore boshe dekhun ba apnar bondhdhu'der niye
> dekhun, tate karur kichchu bolar nei. Dhenra pitiye o nijer budhdhi'r
> porichoy na diye'o seta korte paren.

Ami kyano nijer buddhir porichoy dichhi sheta na bhableo apnar cholbe.
Apnar jodi net-e bini poishai bhNaDamo korar odhikaar thhake taholey
amaro bini poishai net-e shei bhNaDamo upobhog korar odhikaar
achhe - eta bhuley jaben na please.

> Monalisa'r chchobi na dekhe tahole Playboy'er chchobi dekhun. Anondo
> paben. Kintu ta bole bolben na je Monalisa'r chchobi or samne danrate
> pare na.
>

Sherokom mone holey aykshobaar bolbo. BTW, onekbaar mone hoyeochhe.
Abar boli: `bhalo lagata' torker bishoy hotey paare na. Apnakey je
proshnogulo korechhi shegulor parley jobab din please.

> > > Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.
> >
> > Bojhar khub aykta kichhu nei otey, IMO. Tobey apnar, nijer pith
> > nije chaprano dekhey besh moja pachhi. Chaliye jaan.
> >
> > > Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
> > > dileo parten.
> > >
> >
> > Ki aar kora! nirbuddhidero to bakshadhinota thhake. Aar aykta byaparo
> > bhebe dekhun...bhaggish nirbuddhira lekhey..noiley apnara nijeder
> > shommondhe "Ami ki honu" bhebe anondo peten ki korey ?
> >
>
> Ekhane torko'ta cholchchilo amar sathe. Hotat 'Apnara' sobdo'ta elo
> kotha theke. Amar dole ki aar keu achche?
> Naki apni ekjon kalponik sokti-gosti'ke danr koriye ekai lore jachchen
> aar chitkar kore jachchen.

Baki oneker shathey apnakey ayk jaigai tolar jonye du:khito. Nin, thik
korey abar bolchhi: "....noiley apni nijer shommondhe "Ami ki honu"
bhebe anondo peten ki korey ?" khushi ?

> 'Ami ki honu' bhab'ta America'r culture. This country is a country of
> salesman. Nijer motamot o chintadhara'ke by any means sell koratai e
> Desh'er lokhkho. Sutorang se dole ami eka noi. Apnio e dole nijer
> ojantei.
>

Kothar khei hariye prolap bokchhen. Bishoytatey thhakbar cheshta
korun, eishob gondogol hobey na.

> > > Well, jodi na pore thaken othoba onek kaal age jodi pore thaken tahole
> > > janaben amar kachche ek copy achche. Pore dekhben ekhon onekta bhalo
> > > lagbe.
> >
> > `Shesher Kobita' sheshbar bhalo legechhilo class nine-e. Tarpor
> > jotobari porechhi totobari otakey kothar phuljhuri aar chomok
> > deoar cheshta chhaDa kichhu mone hoini. Bhashata Rabindranath-er
> > onyanyo lekhar tulonai adhunik, obhinobotwo-o achhe kichhu... tobey
> > overall khubi phNapa byapar mone hoi, ontoto `content'er dik thheke
> > to botei.
> >
>
> Class nine'ta khoob critical somoy. Onek'e onek kichcu pore o kore.
> Tarpor kichchu lok budhite, shoktite bare aar kichchu lok shoktite
> barleo budhite thik okhanei theke jai. Apnar hoito tai hoyechchilo.
> Thik kore bhebe dekhben to oi somoy emon kichchu hoini to ja apnake
> erokom ekta gondo-murkho toiri korechche.
>
>

Taholey bolchhen `shesher kobita'tey golpo strong noi bollei, ba otake
`phNapa' mone holei, apnaar kachhe sheta gondo-murkhami ?
Mairi apnar ei gondo-murher moto buddhibicharer byaparta besh!

> > Oboshoi "Papa kahte hai....." pore kono kichchui nao bhalo lagte pare.
> > >
> >
> > `pore' boltey ki `gaan shuney' bojhatey chaichhen ? Taholey boli oi
> > gaan-er shonge komor dolabar moto ichhey ei boyeshey na thhakleo,
>
> Aha khoti kotay'e? Komor duliye ba neche dekhben. Anondo paben.
> This is a country of young. Ekhane karur boyesh barena.

hmmmmmm...ayto galagal shuni ajkaal e desher naam-e. Kyano je lokey
e desh-e tao ashe..

> > shuntey mondo laage na. Aar chhobita, orthhat QSQT, ami dekhini. Golpo
> > shunechhi. Khanikta plot meley, erokom aykta ingreji natok-o porechhi.
> > Golpo hishebe je `Shesher Kobita'r thheke onek bhalo tatey shondeho
> > nei, IMO.
> >
> > Arnab.
>
> Right, bishesh kore jodi college'e pora o prem kora kalin jodi Premika'r
> Baba ba nijer Baba'r kachche choti peta kheye thaken, tahole darun bhalo
> lage. Besh ekta revenge-revenge bhab ashe.
>

Mairi bolchhi, prem korechhi botey, tobey juto khaini. Bishwash
korun.

> Kolkata'e ekjon bhodrolok achchen jini Howrah Station o nanan jayga'e
> chitkar kore sobaike bojhan je Surjyo naki Prithibi'r chari dike
> ghoorchche. Onar kachche naki NASA theke pathano kichchu kagoj-potro'o
> onar kachche achche bole claim koren..
> Apnar obosthakhana khanikta se rokom mone hoi.
>

Shunun Shubhobabu shahityo/shilpokola aar bigyan ayk jinish noi.
`shesher kobita' bhalo - eta dhrubo shotto meney neoar kono karon
nei. Khub jotil, bujhtey onek buddhi lagey - eta bhebe nijer ego-ke
dhNyara pitiye barabar jukti no nei-i, jodi na chhotobyalar proti
tanta aytoi probol hoy je bichar buddhiteo ota phirey petey ichhe
korey.

Shohoj byaparta bujhiye di, apnaar hoito shubidha hobey:

1. Shesher kobita-r golpo besh weak, QSQT-r thheke to botei, IMO.
Ami tar karon-o bolechhi.

2. Pochhondo byaparta `subjective'. Ota niye alochona hoi, torko
hoi na `amarta bhalo apnaarta kharap' ba `amar bhishon buddhi
tai ota bhalo laage, apni bhishon boka tai apnar lage na'..ityadi
boley atmoslagha baratey paaren, apotti nei, tobey amar mul proshner
jobab hoi na.

3 In case apni mul proshnotai bhuley giye thhaken, sheta shongkhepe
boli.
a. `Shesher Kobita'r golpo `QSQT'r golpo-r thheke kibhabey
beshi strong boley apnar mone hoi ?

b. (Eta original alochonai chhilo na, amar janar ichhe
oboshyo achhe, ageo sheta bolechhi)
Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?

Arnab.

[Arnab Gupta]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
>
> Arnab Gupta wrote:
> >
> > Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
> > >
> > > Arnab Gupta wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > ..[deleted]..
> >
> > > > Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> > > > `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> > > > tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> > > > nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> > > > onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> > > > kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> > > > achhe ....
> > > >
> > > > Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> > > > Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
> > > >
> > > > Arnab.
> > >
>

> Shesh'er Kobita aar golpo kotha'e purotai to kobita.
>
> Subho.

Ami to dekhechhi beshirbhag jaigatei `bondhonheen gronthi'r shathey
`cholti haowar ponthi' gochher mil achhe. Taholey bolchhen je
jaigagulote free-flowing kothabarta achhe shegulo-o asholey kobita ?
onte-mil-heen kobita: tai ki ?

Aar `golpo'i jodi na holo, taholey QSQT-r thheke `shesher kobita'
bhalo `golpo' holo kibhabey ? Eta kintu serious byapar, bhebe dekhben.

Arnab.

[Apratim Sarkar]

txd...@silmaril.smeal.psu.edu writes:

>IMO, the acting and the music (who else but Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - seen
>Dead Man Walking, or Last Temptation of Christ, or Natural Born
>Killers?) was mind-blowing.

Dead Man Walking'r last duet'ta Nusrat Fateh ali Khan ar Bruce
Springsteen - ashadharan. Sambit'ke mone poRe ekbar eta'r kotha
bolechhilam. NBK'o oti uttom, beRe bolleo beshi bola hoi na. Last
Temptation'e jodiyo amar ato najor kaRa kichhu scores mone ashchhe na.
Tomar kon angshogulo bhalo legechhilo?

[Apratim Sarkar]

Arnab Gupta <GUP...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu> writes:

>Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
>Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.

O'i "Gajober din dykhao ekbar, khushir e'i din dyakha ekbar, tumiyo
ekla amiyo ekla moja jomechhe besh, mairi bolchhi", gaan'ta fatafati.

>Arnab.

[sayan bhattacharyya]

Arnab Gupta <GUP...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Shesh'er Kobita aar golpo kotha'e purotai to kobita.
>

>Ami to dekhechhi beshirbhag jaigatei `bondhonheen gronthi'r shathey
>`cholti haowar ponthi' gochher mil achhe. Taholey bolchhen je
>jaigagulote free-flowing kothabarta achhe shegulo-o asholey kobita ?
>onte-mil-heen kobita: tai ki ?
>

One thing both of you are neglecting to consider, is that Shesher
Kobita is a highly tongue-in-cheek and ironic piece. (Complete
with self-referentiality, self-irony, and the elaborate Nibaron
Chakraborty spoof). It IS meant to be taken seriously, but not to be
taken at its face value. It is a playful piece.

[Arnab Gupta]

Apratim likhechhe...

>Arnab Gupta <GUP...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu> writes:
>
>>Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
>>Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
>
> O'i "Gajober din dykhao ekbar, khushir e'i din dyakha ekbar, tumiyo
> ekla amiyo ekla moja jomechhe besh, mairi bolchhi", gaan'ta fatafati.
>
>>Arnab.
>

Bere bangla-ta namiyechho guru. BTW, ei chhobi-r shob gaangulor
ingreji version beriyechhilo. Mairi bolchhi, kharap hoini byaparta.
Sur-tal-loy shob-i bojai chhilo.

> Apratim.

Arnab.

[Arnab Gupta]

Sayan likhechhe

Khub bhalo kotha. Puro boitar shomporke tomar ei
analysis-er shonge aykmot na holeo, kono kono jaigar khetrey
tomar kothata khatey, eta mani. Kintu egulo motamuti `style'
shomporkito byapar. Shey jaiga thheke to ami `shesher kobita'r
shonge QSQT-r tulona kortei pari na. Duto shompurno alada
madhyom. Amar boktobyo: `shesher kobita'r thheke `QSQT'te
golper element onek beshi achhe. Note, QSQT-r er jonye khub
baaje chhobi hotey kono badha nei (in fact ami chhobi-ta
dekhiini).

Arnab.

[Apratim Sarkar]

bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu (sayan bhattacharyya) writes:

>Apratim, why do you think of everything as "debating" ? In the passage
>quoted above, I was NOT debating. I asked a simple question because I
>really wanted to know what you think. I wasn't trying to score any
>"debating" brownie points here! Why do you take everything in such
>a confrontational way? It is disappointing as hell.
>
>I have noticed this earlier too -- when you are asked a direct question
>you rarely give a direct answer. You rarely make it clear what your
>own position is even when you are asked. In the discussion on Sunil
>Gangopadhyay last year, I asked you what YOU thought of Sunil's writing.
>I genuinely wanted to understand your position. You replied with a
>sneering "Bore koro na". Bojho THela.
>
>Anyway, I don't see why you bring in "preferences" here. I was not
>expressing ANY preferences, subjective or otherwise. If you read
>carefully, you'd have seen that my question was about "possibility",
>not about "preference". The question of preferring A over B only
>arises if both A and B are possible, and the question I was asking
>was if both A and B were POSSIBLE in this case.
>
>Anyhow, I think you have sufficiently made clear that substantive
>discussion is not something you are interested in, so I don't think
>I'm going to ask again. No big deal!

Abhiman korle Sayan?

>Best regards,
>
>-Sayan.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Bangla bodhhai Baidurya'r kora. Naki Baidurya'r bondhu Dhrubo'r?
Baidurya, mane JHU'r B Bhatchaj jini post kore thaken.

>Arnab.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Arnab Gupta <GUP...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu> writes:

> Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?

Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?
E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano Subhobabu?

[Partha Banerjee]

Even though the present scb "reviews on Bandit Queen" are way off the
original topic, here is part of an article I wrote quite a while ago on
this subject, and thought maybe I could post it here in case some readers
find it interesting or informative.

Then, we can go back to our "modus addandi" (=adda mode) again.

:)

________

OPPRESSION OF INDIAN WOMEN: A SAGA OF ATROCITY AND LIE

Partha Banerjee

...

*Bandit Queen, City of Joy, and other insipid lies in the name of
"liberal" entertainment (emphasis: this is exploitative and outright
conservative).*

I had a chance to see the movie Bandit Queen (finally!). In spite of
the fact that cinematographically it is of high-quality, I can't say
anything positive about the way the movie used the personal life of Phoolan
Devi and made money (and a lot out of it, I am sure).

I heard that as of late 1994, Phoolan Devi, the legendary lower-caste
woman bandit of central India (who took up arms as an act of rebellion
against oppression carried out by the upper caste social and political
leaders and police) was never shown the film by the director/producer even
after repeated requests. Second, as of the making of the film, Phoolan
Devi never disclosed to anyone that she was brutally raped by the upper
caste Thakur clansmen or the police (the possibility of such rape albeit
always a possibility). The writer of the story on which the film is based
(Mala Sen: India's Bandit Queen, Indus/Harper Collins, 1993) didn't write
about it either. Then how come the producer and director were so sure
about the rape? Isn't this a violation of Phoolan's privacy (actually
punishable by Indian Penal Code)?

Worse is that if Phoolan got raped once in the police custody, she was
raped again, this time by the profiteering moviemakers who did it in front
of a western audience hungry for such "luscious news items".

What can we do about it?

The many rapes and other knee jerking situations in the movie (e.g.,
"selling" 11-year old Phoolan by her father to her adult husband for a
bicycle and the subsequent forcing of sex by the husband on the little
girl; stripping of Phoolan in public in the village of Behmai and the
subsequent Behmai massacre by Phoolan as an act of revenge) are all made
up because Phoolan Devi reportedly NEVER disclosed these incidents to be
real.

On the other hand, believe it or not, *Phoolan's womb was surgically
removed by the prison doctor*. The female doctor explained to Mala Sen
that "they" did not want Phoolan to breed more Phoolans, or for that
matter, her sons.

As far as the Behmai village massacre, how come the moviemakers decided to
put her on that spot by which her life could again be endangered? In
fact, this endangerment of her life could be one reason Phoolan recently
decided to get married to an upper caste man. Irony? Maybe. Reality for
a brutally oppressed Indian woman? For sure!

I find it hard to believe that a Bollywood (Bombay-Hollywood)-style
film is produced, internationally shown, and tons of money is made by
falsifying the life story of an illiterate Indian woman where *she is
never shown the film*. I also heard that the producer/director called
Phoolan names because she yelled at them upon seeing some snippets here and
there. How far these profiteering film-makers can go with their lies?

This type of money-making deal out of serious sociopolitical issues
has become commonplace these days. Bandit Queen reminded me of "City of
Joy", a film made on Calcutta where the city of Calcutta and its great people
were outright exploited and the political issue was totally depoliticized.

Someone mentioned about John Boorman's Beyond Rangoon which supposedly has
the same characteristic: lies in the name of "liberal" entertainment
(actually, this brand of pseudo-entertainment is only exploitative and
rather conservative in nature as it trivializes and marginalizes the
struggle of the oppressed in all possible manners).

In case of Bandit Queen, the director/producer could have used a name such
as "Dhoolan Devi" instead of Phoolan Devi (with a customary note that the
stories depicted in the movie are all fictitious and any
resemblance...,etc.) which would perhaps not be legally offensive.
Instead, the film proudly describes the story to be REAL.

In case of City of Joy, the western producers were more clever (they
sacrificed some sensationalism by NOT making it to be "real" -- it's a
fiction-film based on the French fiction by Dominique Lapierre who uses
made-up names and all that -- and of course shows Calcutta and its people
from a biased and one-sided angle). Thus, City of Joy, in spite of having
the same characteristics of malice and misrepresentation, does not become
LEGALLY offensive and also does not get nominated for an Oscar or two the
latter being a possibility (?) for Bandit Queen. (I wrote this a while ago
-- this nomination never happened.)

[Arindam Banerjee]

asa...@bu.edu (Apratim Sarkar) wrote:
>
> Arindam Banerjee (bane...@newsserver.trl.oz.au) wrote:
>
> : The "reality" behind Phoolan Devi seems to be a matter of interest.
>
> <deleted>
>
> The real Phoolan is inconsequential as far as the movie is concerned.

Does the director say so in the movie?

If he does, fine; if he does not, then most of us have to judge
Phoolan from the movie, as Gandhiji was judged by Attenborough's film.
As our MP, and potential PM, Phoolan Devi is a person
of much greater consequence than
any of us, and we should know her as she is, not as the fancy of some
creative movie maker.

> All creative art is created, e byapare to daRibabu ja bolar bole gyachhen,

I thought movies were more commerce than art, though naturally directors
and actors would like us to think otherwise.

> Ram'r janmobhumi Ajodhya na Balmiki'r imagination?

Kay jaanay?

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

Apratim Sarkar wrote:

> Temptation'e jodiyo amar ato najor kaRa kichhu scores mone ashchhe na.
> Tomar kon angshogulo bhalo legechhilo?

LTC-te kintu puro kono "gaan" nei. Majhe majhe Nusrat-er alaap aachche.
Aykta desert scene-e anek-khon alaap-ta diyechchilo, mone poRchche ?

Tobe oi CD-ta jodi shono tahole specifically jaygata peye jabe mone hoy.

Shoumyo.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Oh, ar cinema'te shur'r kotha bolte hole Shine'r kotha to bolte hobei.

Apra.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Right, abchha mone poRchhe. Anekdin ager dyakha, CD'te nei. Collect
korbo. NBK'te duto jaiga, ekta prison riot arek'ta jekhane the
prostitute is being murdered (pagla cinematography'o), mone ahschhe.
Now that you have brought these movies up, arekbar dekhte hobe.

Amar shona best cinema'r music abashyo 2001: ASO. Onyo keu kichhu
suggest korle dekhte pari. Philadelphia'te bhalo gaan achhe Bruce'r,
ekta Maria Callas piece achhe, jodiyo melo-dramatic, moter opor kharap
na. Last'ter'ta Verdi ki, mone ashchhe na?

Thanks!

Apratim.

[Shoumyo Dasgupta]

Apratim Sarkar wrote:

>
> Amar shona best cinema'r music abashyo 2001: ASO.

Offff! Oshamanyo! The Blue Danube. Johann Strauss.

Shoumyo.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Arnab Gupta wrote:

> Shunun Shubhobabu shahityo/shilpokola aar bigyan ayk jinish noi.

> Arnab.

Etar ekta uttor apnake boli:

Manfred Eigen'er naam hoito shune thakben.
Tini ekbar Cornell'e seminar deoar somoy bolechchilen, there are two
ways in which one can describe a phenomenon either by describing in
words or painting (ja apnar kachche shahityo/shilpokola) or one can
write a mathematical equation describing that phenomenon. Given the
proper parameters he claimed he could even draw an elephant with
mathematical equations.

Mushkil'ta holo amader mathematical language'ta ekhono bodhoi otota
strong noi. Tai amra ekhono sob kichchu mathematics diye likhte ba
prokash korte parina.
Sutorang apni ekhono ki kore bolen je bigyan o shilpokola alada seta
janina.

Asha kori amar e uttor apnar monoputo hobe.

Subho.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Arnab Gupta wrote:
>

Deleted

Apnar proshnogulor jobab tahole ek ek kore di.
Shesh'er theke shuru kori, "Shesh'er Kobita" to!

1. Prothomei apni bolechchen

> Shesher kobita-r golpo besh weak, QSQT-r thheke to botei, IMO.
> Ami tar karon-o bolechhi.

Motamot'ta apnar.
Ami kintu kothao bolini je Shesh'er Kobita'r golpo beshi strong.
Amar ager lekha for your reference quote korlam.

> Jemon oneker
> > kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> > Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.

> > Well, se sob debate'e na jaoai bhalo.

Ami categorically bolechchi je, 'se sob debate'e na jaoa'i bhalo.'
Sutorang apni nijei swechcha'e eshe bola shuru korechchen je QSQT'r
golpo onek beshi strong.
Ebar apnar lekhar theke udhriti dichchi.

> > > > > Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> > > > > `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> > > > > tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> > > > > nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> > > > > onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> > > > > kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> > > > > achhe ....
> > > > >
> > > > > Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> > > > > Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
> > > > >
> > > > > Arnab.

Sutorang, the onus is one you to prove or disprove your statement/s.

2. Dwitiyoto, apni bolechchen je

> Pochhondo byaparta `subjective'. Ota niye alochona hoi, torko
> hoi na `amarta bhalo apnaarta kharap' ba `amar bhishon buddhi
> tai ota bhalo laage, apni bhishon boka tai apnar lage na'..ityadi
> boley atmoslagha baratey paaren, apotti nei, tobey amar mul proshner
> jobab hoi na.

E byapare je ami o apni ek mot seta amar ager lekha arekbar porlei
bujhjhte parben.
Quote kori

> Jemon oneker
> > kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> > Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.

> > Well, se sob debate'e na jaoai bhalo.

Ami porishkar Bangla bhasha'e (apnar moto slang byabohar na korei)
bolechchi je "se sob debate'e na jaoa'i bhalo".
Sutorang apni abar torko korar jonno torko korchchilen.
Apnar dwitiyo proshn'er baki onshotar jobab deoa obantor (ontoto amar
kachche).

3. Apnar mul proshn'er jobab:

a. `Shesher Kobita'r golpo `QSQT'r golpo-r thheke kibhabey
> beshi strong boley apnar mone hoi ?

Abar boli kon golp'er plot kontar theke beshi strong seta proman korar
dayityo apnar amar noi.
Apni oboshyo apnar slang Bangla'e jotota sombhob chesta korechchen.

Seta kotojon'er kirokom legechche seta janina.
Tobe motamot'ta je apnar seta apni'i bolechchen.

> > > > > Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
> > > > > `Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
> > > > > tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
> > > > > nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
> > > > > onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
> > > > > kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
> > > > > achhe ....
> > > > >
> > > > > Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
> > > > > Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.
> > > > >
> > > > > Arnab.

Ebar apnar dwitiyo mul proshn'e asha jak:

> b. (Eta original alochonai chhilo na, amar janar ichhe
> oboshyo achhe, ageo sheta bolechhi)
> Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?
>

Proshn'er uttor:

A. Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?

E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano
Subhobabu?

>Arnab.

Apratim.

B.> > Kobita mane je chchondo miliye-miliye cholte hobe tale tal diye

> > 'Tal gachch ek paye danriye
> > Unki Mare Akashe'
> > erokom nao hote pare.
> > Kobita mane something which is smooth, something which flows naturally,
> > swotosfurto bhabe. Seta'e kobi'r ekta bhab prokash pay. Sobdo toronger
> > dhara'e jonmo ney ekta chitro ja Monalisa'r chchobir moto sundor.

Ami e'o bolichchi

> Golpo
> > aar kobita'r modhey ekhanei tofat.
> > Golp'e chai ekta plot. Golp'er story-line o taar romancho bojay rakhte
> > gele khanikta artificiality lekhok'er ojantei eshe pore.

Er pore'o apni proshno korben je "Shesh'er Kobita" kobita na
golpo/uponyash?

Ebare apnar baki proshnogulo'r (kichchu personal) jobab di.

>
> > Kolkata'e ekjon bhodrolok achchen jini Howrah Station o nanan jayga'e
> > chitkar kore sobaike bojhan je Surjyo naki Prithibi'r chari dike
> > ghoorchche. Onar kachche naki NASA theke pathano kichchu kagoj-potro'o
> > onar kachche achche bole claim koren..
> > Apnar obosthakhana khanikta se rokom mone hoi.
> >
>
> Shunun Shubhobabu shahityo/shilpokola aar bigyan ayk jinish noi.
> `shesher kobita' bhalo - eta dhrubo shotto meney neoar kono karon
> nei. Khub jotil, bujhtey onek buddhi lagey - eta bhebe nijer ego-ke
> dhNyara pitiye barabar jukti no nei-i, jodi na chhotobyalar proti
> tanta aytoi probol hoy je bichar buddhiteo ota phirey petey ichhe
> korey.

Prthome'i boli apni amar nam'e ekta extra H add korechchen.
Jai hok seta mind korlam na.

Apnar mote shahityo/bigyan ayk jinish noi.
Eta apnar mot.
Bikyato boigyanik Einstein tanr violin bajanor somoy e kotha bhabten
kina janina.
"Shesh'er Kobita" bhalo - eta dhrubo sotyo mene neoar kotha ami ekbar'o
bolini. Amar bhalo lage seta amar personal byapar, ebong seta kobita
hishabe setao ami bolechchi.
Nirbudhita'r kotha ke kontake bojhe seta noi, nirbudhitar kotha ke
kibhabe alochona korchche.

> Mairi bolchhi, prem korechhi botey, tobey juto khaini. Bishwash
> korun.

Slang byabohar korata bodhoi apnar shobhabgoto byapar.

> > > Oboshoi "Papa kahte hai....." pore kono kichchui nao bhalo lagte pare.
> > > >
> > >
> > > `pore' boltey ki `gaan shuney' bojhatey chaichhen ? Taholey boli oi
> > > gaan-er shonge komor dolabar moto ichhey ei boyeshey na thhakleo,
> >
> > Aha khoti kotay'e? Komor duliye ba neche dekhben. Anondo paben.
> > This is a country of young. Ekhane karur boyesh barena.
>
> hmmmmmm...ayto galagal shuni ajkaal e desher naam-e. Kyano je lokey
> e desh-e tao ashe..

Amito ekbar'o e Desh'er ninda korini. Ami bolechchi je e Desh'ta
young'der Desh. Eta ki bhool kotha bolechchi naki e Desh'ke galagali
diyechchi?
Keno ashe janen e Desh'e amader moto lok?
Tahole kan khoole shunun.

E Desh'ta khoob sundor Desh. Onek kichchu dekhar o janar achche. Kintu
apnader moto kichchu lok achche jara nongrami o kada chonra-chunri kore
somoy katate bhalobashe. Nijeder Desh theke chole eshe e Desh'er mukto o
poriskar batash'e durgondho chchorate bhalobash'e.
Amar mone hoi amader moton lok e Desh'e ashe o ashbe apnar moto lok'ke e
Desh theke tarabar jonye. Jate e Desh'er lokera mone na kore je shob
third world country'r lokera erokom.

>
> > 'Ami ki honu' bhab'ta America'r culture. This country is a country of
> > salesman. Nijer motamot o chintadhara'ke by any means sell koratai e
> > Desh'er lokhkho. Sutorang se dole ami eka noi. Apnio e dole nijer
> > ojantei.
> >
>
> Kothar khei hariye prolap bokchhen. Bishoytatey thhakbar cheshta
> korun, eishob gondogol hobey na.

Kothar khei bodhoi ami harai ni karon apni'i enechchen 'Ki honu bhab
kothata'.
Ami ja diye shuru korechchi je Shesh'er Kobita karur bhalo lage o QSQT
karur bhalo lage. E byapare debate chole na.
Apni'i shuru korlen na QSQT onek bhalo o tar sopokhe onek jukti dilen
ebong tar'i modhey hotat kothaye 'Ki honu bhab anlen'.
Kothar khei ke hariyechche seta ki bujhjhlen?

> > > Ki aar kora! nirbuddhidero to bakshadhinota thhake. Aar aykta byaparo
> > > bhebe dekhun...bhaggish nirbuddhira lekhey..noiley apnara nijeder
> > > shommondhe "Ami ki honu" bhebe anondo peten ki korey ?
> > >
> >
> > Ekhane torko'ta cholchchilo amar sathe. Hotat 'Apnara' sobdo'ta elo
> > kotha theke. Amar dole ki aar keu achche?
> > Naki apni ekjon kalponik sokti-gosti'ke danr koriye ekai lore jachchen
> > aar chitkar kore jachchen.
>
> Baki oneker shathey apnakey ayk jaigai tolar jonye du:khito. Nin, thik
> korey abar bolchhi: "....noiley apni nijer shommondhe "Ami ki honu"
> bhebe anondo peten ki korey ?" khushi ?

Onek bolte apni kake-kake amar dole tanlen seta bojha gelo na.
Janle aro khushi hotam.

> > Ekshobar subjective.
> > Apnar bhalo na lage apni porben na. Ba apnar dekhte bhalo lage apni
> > dekhben. Kintu seta nijer ghore boshe dekhun ba apnar bondhdhu'der niye
> > dekhun, tate karur kichchu bolar nei. Dhenra pitiye o nijer budhdhi'r
> > porichoy na diye'o seta korte paren.
>
> Ami kyano nijer buddhir porichoy dichhi sheta na bhableo apnar cholbe.
> Apnar jodi net-e bini poishai bhNaDamo korar odhikaar thhake taholey
> amaro bini poishai net-e shei bhNaDamo upobhog korar odhikaar
> achhe - eta bhuley jaben na please.
>
> > Monalisa'r chchobi na dekhe tahole Playboy'er chchobi dekhun. Anondo
> > paben. Kintu ta bole bolben na je Monalisa'r chchobi or samne danrate
> > pare na.
> >
>
> Sherokom mone holey aykshobaar bolbo. BTW, onekbaar mone hoyeochhe.
> Abar boli: `bhalo lagata' torker bishoy hotey paare na. Apnakey je
> proshnogulo korechhi shegulor parley jobab din please.

Apnake keu mana koreni bolte.
Apnar proshn'er jobab ami agei diyechchi.

> baaje boka ki apnaar mudradosh naki oboshor katabar poddhoti ?

Ha, Ha, Ha!
Life thou art wonderful.
"Ma tor koto rongo dekhbo bol."

> > > > Sesh'er Kobitar golpo kothao danriye thake na, kothao nonchot kheye
> > > > danriye thake na.
> > >
> > > golpo `danriye thhake' byaparta kirokom ? Eta janley tulonata
> > > bujhtey shubidha hoto.

Ami abar bolchchi "Shesh'er Kobita" ekta KOBITA. Otar ekta golpo achche,
seta apnar kachche mone hoi baje.
Amar kachche mone hoi golpota smooth.
Jake apni bolen kotha'r "Phooljhoori" ba "Fool-jhoori", take ami (ba
apnar bhasha'e amader moto lokera) boli sobder sfooron, ja swotosfurto
bhabe, nijer goti'te o chchonde beriye ashe.

Abar boli, amar (ba again apnar bhasha'e amar moton loker) bhalo lage
mane je apnaro bhalo lagbe eta ami kokhonoi bolini.

> > Ta chchara Robi Thakur nijer lekha'e oi golpei bole gechchen je dorkar
> > porle tar kobita'r sobha theke uthe aste. sutorang apnar apotti'ta
> > kotha'e. Ami Robi Thakur'er kobita je KOBITA'i eta proman korar jonno
> > ekhane ashini. Onek tothho achche. Pore neben.
> >
>
> Rabindranath-er kobita je `kobita' sheta to apnar kachhe bujhtey
> chaini. Apni `shesher kobita' jetake, uponyash bolei dhora hoi, shetake
> `ota ekta kobita' bolechhen. Ami shudhu jantey chaichhi ki korey
> `ota ekta kobita'. Parley bujhiye din, na parley bolun `parbo na'.

Apni ki bujhte cheyechchen seta apni'i janen tobe apnar proshn'er jobab
ami agei diyechchi.

> Abar chhNedo aar aykrash baaje boka. Parle bujhiye bolun,
> proshno-ta abar korchhi:
>
> `shesher kobita'-r golpo kibhabey `QSQT'r golper thheke beshi bhalo
> ba akorshoniyo ba `strong' (jodi tai mone hoi) boley apnar mone
> hoi ?

Abar amar uttor:
Apnar proshn'er uttor ami agei diyechchi.

Apni'i bolechchen je QSQT'r golpo beshi strong. Apnari dayitto seta
lokjonke bojhano.

Apni bolechchen:

Kintu apni agey bolun `shesher
> kobita' ki korey `ota aykta kobita'. Nin, shuru korun, ami kaan petey
> achhi.

Ami agei se kotha bolechchi.

> `Catcher in the Rye' porechhen ? Otateo lekhoker aykta `bhab prokash
> pai' ja `smooth', `something which flows naturally, shwotosphurto
> bhabe'. Apnaar `kobita'-r shonge purotai miley jai shudhu `plot'
> achhe aykta ei ja.
>
> Mushkil ki janen, `plot' diye jachai kortey geley `kotha o kahini',
> thheke shuru korey Ramayan, Mahabharat, tabot kaler joto plot shuddhu
> kobita baad ditey hoi. Othoba `Catcher in the Rye'ke ba `Shesher
> Kobita'ke `ota ekta kobita' boley chalatey hoi.

Ami porini tai bolte parlam na.
Kintu Golpo o Kobita'r modhey je kothae tofat seta ami bhalo bhabei age
bujhiye diyechchi.

> Golpo
> > aar kobita'r modhey ekhanei tofat.
> > Golp'e chai ekta plot. Golp'er story-line o taar romancho bojay rakhte
> > gele khanikta artificiality lekhok'er ojantei eshe pore.

Ebong amar uttor je apnar monoputto hoyechche seta apnar lekhar thekei
tule dichchi.

> Khub shundor. Apni cheshta korlei aykta `On Poetry and Poets' likhtey
> parben.

Apnar proshnoguli'r jobab thikmoto holo kina janaben.
Tobe Shesh korar age duto kotha boli.

Apni bolechchen

1. Tobey Monalisa-r chhobita abar amar thik temon shubidhar
> lagey na.

2. chhobita, orthhat QSQT, ami dekhini. Golpo

> > > shunechhi. Khanikta plot meley, erokom aykta ingreji natok-o porechhi.
> > > Golpo hishebe je `Shesher Kobita'r thheke onek bhalo tatey shondeho
> > > nei, IMO.
> > >
> > > Arnab.

Apni Monalisa'r ashol chchobi'ta konodin dekhlen na, QSQT'r moton
cinema'o dekhlen na, Shesh'er kobita sei class nine'er oprapto boyesh'e
porlen aar na.
Apni Monalisa'r kono forgery dekhen'ni to? Ekhon kintu emon forgery
beriyechche je original shilpi'o bhirmi khabe.
Cinema'ta na dekhei tar sopokhe eto kotha bole phellen.
Ki kono bondhu bolechchilo bujhi? Se thik golpo'ta bolechche to? Naki se
tar extra kichchu Masala add kore bolechche?
Naki se jokhon bolechchilo QSQT'r moton daroon cinema dekhe elam, tokhon
take bolechchilen "Dhoor ota abar kono golpo holo naki?"

Shesh'er Kobita ki apnader school'e pathyopustok chchilo naki. Amar abar
school'er pathyo-pustok gulo keno jani bhalo lagto na. Apnar'o ki tai
naki? Naki sobai porchche bole pore felechchilen, kono Meye'ke impress
korar jonye? Peer pressure to!

Jai hok Sesh korar age ekta upodesh di. Apnake original Monalisa
dekhanor moto poisa amar nei nahole dekhatam tobe QSQT oboshoi dekhben.
Amake janaben, ami nahoy apnake ek dollar pathiye debo othoba Net'er sob
jonota ChaNda tule apnake dollar pathiye debo. Emon daroon cinema miss
korben na.
Dekhe eshe nahoy abar ashore namben. Tokhon amrao apnar sathe sobai mile
gola miliye gaibo
"Papa kahte hai Bada Naam Karega...."
By the way ami tar Maithili version jani

"Papa kahalwa Bada Naam Karalwa...."
Khaini khete-khete daroon lage. Ami amader IIT'r besh kichchu
bondhubandhob niye daroon anondo kore geyechchi.
Otar lyrics pathiye debo dorkar porle.

Dekhben Tathagata ki daroon tabla bajay taar sathe aar Indranil "Tokhon
tumi jekhanei thako stage'er pashe chole esho....".
Guru jome uthechche je!
Jome borof ekebare.

Subho.

P.S.: Uttorta bishal holo. Jai hok dorkar porle print kore neben. Tahole
porte subidha hobe.
Netter'ra Arnab'babu'r ager lekhata pore neben dorkar porle.

[Mandar Mitra]

Some time back, Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:

begin quote

Ki hobe e shob pati cinema niye mundo path kore. Ami kauke chchoto
korchchi na ba chchoto mukhe boro kothao bolchchi na tobe gotokal
Scheindler'r List dekhar pore baki onek cinema'ke just faltu bole mone

hoi. Ami kaaj'er chaape beshi bhalo kore dekhte parini ebong age jokhon
Hall'e eshechchilo tokhon'o somoy kore dekhte jete parini. Tobe ja
dekhlam tate ami khoob'i moved. Somoy korte parle ei weekend'e bhalo
kore dekhbo.
Time pass korar jonno kichchu chchobi toiri hoi aar kichchu boi sotyi
bhalo bhabe monojog diye dekhte hoi. Ami Bandit Queen dekhechchi tobe
amar ektu beshi prokot legechchilo. Tobe osadharon kichchu noi jar upor
lok gontar por gonta adda mere katate pare.

end quote

More recently, he writes:

[...]

> Ekshobar subjective.
> Apnar bhalo na lage apni porben na. Ba apnar dekhte bhalo lage apni
> dekhben. Kintu seta nijer ghore boshe dekhun ba apnar bondhdhu'der niye
> dekhun, tate karur kichchu bolar nei. Dhenra pitiye o nijer budhdhi'r
> porichoy na diye'o seta korte paren.
> Monalisa'r chchobi na dekhe tahole Playboy'er chchobi dekhun. Anondo
> paben. Kintu ta bole bolben na je Monalisa'r chchobi or samne danrate
> pare na.

[...]

If you make the following transformations to your own suggestion, I think
you will have a paraphrase of a point that Srabani Banerjee and Arnab Gupta
have been trying to make.

porben na => mundo path korben na

Monalisa => Bandit Queen

Playboy => Schindler's List

Mandar.

[sayan bhattacharyya]

Apratim Sarkar <asa...@us.oracle.com> wrote:

>Oh, ar cinema'te shur'r kotha bolte hole Shine'r kotha to bolte hobei.
>
>Apra.

And Milos Forman's "Amadeus".

[Indranil]

Partha Banerjee (pba...@wadsworth.org) wrote:
[..]

: *Bandit Queen, City of Joy, and other insipid lies in the name of

: "liberal" entertainment (emphasis: this is exploitative and outright
: conservative).*

: I had a chance to see the movie Bandit Queen (finally!). In spite of
: the fact that cinematographically it is of high-quality, I can't say
: anything positive about the way the movie used the personal life of Phoolan
: Devi and made money (and a lot out of it, I am sure).

: I heard that as of late 1994, Phoolan Devi, the legendary lower-caste
: woman bandit of central India (who took up arms as an act of rebellion
: against oppression carried out by the upper caste social and political
: leaders and police) was never shown the film by the director/producer even
: after repeated requests. Second, as of the making of the film, Phoolan
: Devi never disclosed to anyone that she was brutally raped by the upper
: caste Thakur clansmen or the police (the possibility of such rape albeit
: always a possibility). The writer of the story on which the film is based
: (Mala Sen: India's Bandit Queen, Indus/Harper Collins, 1993) didn't write
: about it either. Then how come the producer and director were so sure
: about the rape? Isn't this a violation of Phoolan's privacy (actually
: punishable by Indian Penal Code)?

: Worse is that if Phoolan got raped once in the police custody, she was
: raped again, this time by the profiteering moviemakers who did it in front
: of a western audience hungry for such "luscious news items".

: What can we do about it?

[..]
: In case of Bandit Queen, the director/producer could have used a name such

: as "Dhoolan Devi" instead of Phoolan Devi (with a customary note that the
: stories depicted in the movie are all fictitious and any
: resemblance...,etc.) which would perhaps not be legally offensive.
: Instead, the film proudly describes the story to be REAL.

A sad thing about the so called liberal left in India is that the people
spearheading its campaigns are about as dogmatic as the fundamentalists
they often deride. Sayan, in an earlier post has said that he'll take
Phoolan's word for the claim that she has been misrepresented in the
movie. It is an incredibly stupid thing to say and yet I am almost sure
that it is the popular line to pursue if you fancy yourself to be a
liberal feminist do-good-ing Indian.

There is very little to debate here. Let me state four facts and invite
people who can think to think.

1. Neither Mala Sen nor Sk need Phoolan's permission to write her
biography or make a film out of it.

2. Anyone's objection to the factual accuracy of his or her biography is
not a criterion for banning or restricting the publication of the work.

3. Valid legal challenges to the publication of the work would involve
more than mere disagreement with the facts stated in the
biography. A defamation suit may be valid. Our penal code is quite vague
on these issues. Personally I believe that all right thinking people
should place freedom of expression above most other considerations when
judging these issues. Laymen are referred to "People vs. Larry Flint"
for convincing arguments (and more).

4. Even if Phoolan wins a legal challenge against SK on subjective
grounds (such as: the showing of the film endangers her life e.t.c),
that would not in any way prove that what is shown in the film is
untrue.

I also invite Partha-babu and Sayan to brake hard on their freewheeling
emotions and stop for a full two seconds before shooting off on ethical
issues. Who is being expoited in BQ? Is it Phoolan? Is it one or all of
her real life (some still living) oppressors? What if SK called it
Dhoolan Devi? What is the legal or ethical point in the name? Must two
people with different names be different? Or must two characters with the
same name represent the same individual?

If there is a legal problem
here, let SK deal with that in court. If there is an ethical problem
here, it is in your dogmatic confidence. What do we KNOW about SK's
motives? Nothing.

IDG

PS: I took soc.culture.indian out of the newsgroups line. The first post
in this thread was not posted there and neither would this one be.

[Joydeep Bhattacharya]

In article <33150A...@research.umbc.edu>, Dr. Subho Mozumdar says...

>
>Arnab Gupta wrote:
>
>> Shunun Shubhobabu shahityo/shilpokola aar bigyan ayk jinish noi.
>

>> Arnab.
>
>Etar ekta uttor apnake boli:
>
>Manfred Eigen'er naam hoito shune thakben.
>Tini ekbar Cornell'e seminar deoar somoy bolechchilen, there are two
>ways in which one can describe a phenomenon either by describing in
>words or painting (ja apnar kachche shahityo/shilpokola) or one can
>write a mathematical equation describing that phenomenon. Given the
>proper parameters he claimed he could even draw an elephant with
>mathematical equations.

[...]

>Subho.

Haati je onko diye aNka jai, na hoye bujhlam; manusher moner (even haati'r
moner!) gobhirotoro chinta, anando, akhankshya, bhoi..... e gulo'o ki oNko
diye bojhano jaye? Amaar to mone hoye na. Ek matro sahitya/shilpokala
diye'i e gulo bojhano jai. Thik ki na?

Arnab was possibly hinting that the scientific "way of thinking" (testable
hypotheses to be rejected by data...) may not be a very useful way of thinking
about issues in art.

Joydeep
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone talks about apathy, but no one does anything about it!

Joydeep Bhattacharya
Marshall School of Business, USC
Los Angeles CA 90025
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[sayan bhattacharyya]

Joydeep Bhattacharya <joyd...@rcf.usc.edu> wrote:

>Haati je onko diye aNka jai, na hoye bujhlam; manusher moner (even haati'r
>moner!) gobhirotoro chinta, anando, akhankshya, bhoi..... e gulo'o ki oNko
>diye bojhano jaye? Amaar to mone hoye na. Ek matro sahitya/shilpokala
>diye'i e gulo bojhano jai. Thik ki na?

In practice, yes, perhaps, but certainly not in principle. After
all, human brains are made up of material substances, so in
principle anything that we do with our brains is ultimately
subject to the laws of physics.

(In practice, this may not be feasible because of the sheer
complexity of our brains; for one thing, the mathematics involved
are almost certain to be non-linear, and even today non-linear
systems are very poorly understood). So _in theory_ Eigen
is perfectly correct.

[Arnab Gupta]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:

..[deleted]..

Taholey byaparta erokom:

1. Apni bollen: `shesher kobita'r golpo onek shundor.
2. Ami bollam: Amar to mone hoi ultota shotti. Kyano ta mone
hoi, tao janalm.

Amar prothom post-e ami `slang' (ei kothata niye alochonai ashbo
porey) byabohaar korechhi - eta ashakori apnaar mone hoini.

Amar dharona eiporjonto kono torker jaiga chhilo na, alochonar jaiga
chhilo. Jyamon apni janatey parten kyano apnar `shesher kobita'r
golpo beshi bhalo laage. Pochhondo niye to torko choley na.

Apni ta na korey amakey ja ja bollen tar kichhu udhriti dichhi:

<quote>
***************************************************************

Right, apnar ei daroon dristi-bhongi onek pranider punoujjibito korbe.

Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.

Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
dileo parten

Well, jodi na pore thaken othoba onek kaal age jodi pore thaken tahole

janaben amar kachche ek copy achche. Pore dekhben ekhon onekta bhalo
lagbe.

Oboshoi "Papa kahte hai....." pore kono kichchui nao bhalo lagte pare.

*****************************************************************
<end quote>

khanikta slesh, khanikta bidrup, khanikta `personal attack'.

Subhobabu, ami apnaar `line'e apnakey uttor diyechhi. Apnaar
sheta `slang' mone holey sheta apnaar dai.

> 2. Dwitiyoto, apni bolechchen je
>
> > Pochhondo byaparta `subjective'. Ota niye alochona hoi, torko
> > hoi na `amarta bhalo apnaarta kharap' ba `amar bhishon buddhi
> > tai ota bhalo laage, apni bhishon boka tai apnar lage na'..ityadi
> > boley atmoslagha baratey paaren, apotti nei, tobey amar mul proshner
> > jobab hoi na.
>
> E byapare je ami o apni ek mot seta amar ager lekha arekbar porlei
> bujhjhte parben.
> Quote kori
> > Jemon oneker
> > > kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> > > Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.
> > > Well, se sob debate'e na jaoai bhalo.
>
> Ami porishkar Bangla bhasha'e (apnar moto slang byabohar na korei)
> bolechchi je "se sob debate'e na jaoa'i bhalo".
> Sutorang apni abar torko korar jonno torko korchchilen.
> Apnar dwitiyo proshn'er baki onshotar jobab deoa obantor (ontoto amar
> kachche).
>

Taholey `nirbuddhitar' proshno othey ki korey ? Apni to mene nilei
paarten `ota amar pochhondo, eta apnaar'. Apni amakey `boka' bolben,
ami sheta chup korey mene nebo ? Aytota `nirbuddhita'r porichoy
deoa bodhoy thik na.

Apnar prothom reply-tir karon ki chhilo ?

> 3. Apnar mul proshn'er jobab:
>
> a. `Shesher Kobita'r golpo `QSQT'r golpo-r thheke kibhabey
> > beshi strong boley apnar mone hoi ?
>
> Abar boli kon golp'er plot kontar theke beshi strong seta proman korar
> dayityo apnar amar noi.
> Apni oboshyo apnar slang Bangla'e jotota sombhob chesta korechchen.
>

Na ami cheshta korini. Paarle dyakhan. Aar hNya, ebar-e `slang'er
byaparey ashi. Aykta list korun to ami ki ki `slang' byabohaar
korechhi. Korben kintu, eriye jaben na!

..[deleted]..

> Ebar apnar dwitiyo mul proshn'e asha jak:
>
> > b. (Eta original alochonai chhilo na, amar janar ichhe
> > oboshyo achhe, ageo sheta bolechhi)
> > Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?
> >
>
> Proshn'er uttor:
>
> A. Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?
> E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano
> Subhobabu?
>
> >Arnab.
>
> Apratim.
>

Ashakori eta iyarkichhole likhlen.

> B.> > Kobita mane je chchondo miliye-miliye cholte hobe tale tal diye
> > > 'Tal gachch ek paye danriye
> > > Unki Mare Akashe'
> > > erokom nao hote pare.
> > > Kobita mane something which is smooth, something which flows naturally,
> > > swotosfurto bhabe. Seta'e kobi'r ekta bhab prokash pay. Sobdo toronger
> > > dhara'e jonmo ney ekta chitro ja Monalisa'r chchobir moto sundor.
>
> Ami e'o bolichchi
>
> > Golpo
> > > aar kobita'r modhey ekhanei tofat.
> > > Golp'e chai ekta plot. Golp'er story-line o taar romancho bojay rakhte
> > > gele khanikta artificiality lekhok'er ojantei eshe pore.
>
> Er pore'o apni proshno korben je "Shesh'er Kobita" kobita na
> golpo/uponyash?
>

Thhake, karon apni aykhono kichhui bolen ni.

Apni kobita kakey boley bolechhen.

Golper shonge kobitar tophat boltey shudhu `plot' ke enechhen.

Ami example diye apnar kobita-r definition-er contradiction
kothai bolar cheshta korechhi.

Shutorang, aykhono `shesher kobita' kichhu kobita shomet aykta
uponyash-i roye jai.

..[deleted]..

>
> Prthome'i boli apni amar nam'e ekta extra H add korechchen.
> Jai hok seta mind korlam na.
>

Ami du:khito.

> Apnar mote shahityo/bigyan ayk jinish noi.
> Eta apnar mot.
> Bikyato boigyanik Einstein tanr violin bajanor somoy e kotha bhabten
> kina janina.
> "Shesh'er Kobita" bhalo - eta dhrubo sotyo mene neoar kotha ami ekbar'o
> bolini. Amar bhalo lage seta amar personal byapar, ebong seta kobita
> hishabe setao ami bolechchi.
> Nirbudhita'r kotha ke kontake bojhe seta noi, nirbudhitar kotha ke

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kibhabe alochona korchche.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

tai ? taholey abar apnar lekha thheke udhriti di:

<quote>

Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.

Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
dileo parten.

<end quote>

Eta `kibhabe alochona korchche' tar nirbuddhita ? Aar aykbaar porun to.

> > Mairi bolchhi, prem korechhi botey, tobey juto khaini. Bishwash
> > korun.
>
> Slang byabohar korata bodhoi apnar shobhabgoto byapar.
>

konta `slang' ekhaney ? `mairi' ? Eta niye apnaar shomoshya ? Onyo
thread-e ja form dyakhachhen, tar poreo ?

..[deleted]..

> Keno ashe janen e Desh'e amader moto lok?
> Tahole kan khoole shunun.
>
> E Desh'ta khoob sundor Desh. Onek kichchu dekhar o janar achche. Kintu
> apnader moto kichchu lok achche jara nongrami o kada chonra-chunri kore
> somoy katate bhalobashe. Nijeder Desh theke chole eshe e Desh'er mukto o
> poriskar batash'e durgondho chchorate bhalobash'e.
> Amar mone hoi amader moton lok e Desh'e ashe o ashbe apnar moto lok'ke e
> Desh theke tarabar jonye. Jate e Desh'er lokera mone na kore je shob
> third world country'r lokera erokom.
>

Aha! Erporeo `slang' niye apotti ? Onyo thread-e gondho niye oto
alochona-r poreo ? Apni hashalen - `mairi' bolchhi.

..[deleted]..

> Onek bolte apni kake-kake amar dole tanlen seta bojha gelo na.
> Janle aro khushi hotam.

Apnaar moto `buddhimaan' jibeder bujhiyechhilam. Specific kauke
noi, apnar `moton' buddhir lokeder, bojha gyalo ?

..[deleted]..

> >
> > Sherokom mone holey aykshobaar bolbo. BTW, onekbaar mone hoyeochhe.
> > Abar boli: `bhalo lagata' torker bishoy hotey paare na. Apnakey je
> > proshnogulo korechhi shegulor parley jobab din please.
>
> Apnake keu mana koreni bolte.
> Apnar proshn'er jobab ami agei diyechchi.
>

Korenni ? Okay, abar quote korchhi..

<quote>

Ekshobar subjective.
Apnar bhalo na lage apni porben na. Ba apnar dekhte bhalo lage apni
dekhben. Kintu seta nijer ghore boshe dekhun ba apnar bondhdhu'der niye
dekhun, tate karur kichchu bolar nei. Dhenra pitiye o nijer budhdhi'r

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

porichoy na diye'o seta korte paren.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<end quote>

Ki maane uporer kothtar: Apni apnar pochhonder kotha boltey paren,
ami pari na ?

..[deleted]..

> Ami abar bolchchi "Shesh'er Kobita" ekta KOBITA. Otar ekta golpo achche,
> seta apnar kachche mone hoi baje.
> Amar kachche mone hoi golpota smooth.
> Jake apni bolen kotha'r "Phooljhoori" ba "Fool-jhoori", take ami (ba
> apnar bhasha'e amader moto lokera) boli sobder sfooron, ja swotosfurto
> bhabe, nijer goti'te o chchonde beriye ashe.
>
> Abar boli, amar (ba again apnar bhasha'e amar moton loker) bhalo lage
> mane je apnaro bhalo lagbe eta ami kokhonoi bolini.
>

Ta bolenni botey, kintu ami to shey niye apnaake proshno-o korini.
Apni Bangla bhashai amai janalen je ami boka ebong chepe jaoa bhalo.
Sheta jotheshto apottikor, noi ki ?

> > > Ta chchara Robi Thakur nijer lekha'e oi golpei bole gechchen je dorkar
> > > porle tar kobita'r sobha theke uthe aste. sutorang apnar apotti'ta
> > > kotha'e. Ami Robi Thakur'er kobita je KOBITA'i eta proman korar jonno
> > > ekhane ashini. Onek tothho achche. Pore neben.
> > >
> >
> > Rabindranath-er kobita je `kobita' sheta to apnar kachhe bujhtey
> > chaini. Apni `shesher kobita' jetake, uponyash bolei dhora hoi, shetake
> > `ota ekta kobita' bolechhen. Ami shudhu jantey chaichhi ki korey
> > `ota ekta kobita'. Parley bujhiye din, na parley bolun `parbo na'.
>
> Apni ki bujhte cheyechchen seta apni'i janen tobe apnar proshn'er jobab
> ami agei diyechchi.
>

jodi abar cheshta koren...

> > Abar chhNedo aar aykrash baaje boka. Parle bujhiye bolun,
> > proshno-ta abar korchhi:
> >
> > `shesher kobita'-r golpo kibhabey `QSQT'r golper thheke beshi bhalo
> > ba akorshoniyo ba `strong' (jodi tai mone hoi) boley apnar mone
> > hoi ?
>
> Abar amar uttor:
> Apnar proshn'er uttor ami agei diyechchi.
>
> Apni'i bolechchen je QSQT'r golpo beshi strong. Apnari dayitto seta
> lokjonke bojhano.
>

`strong' bisheshon'ta amar, ami phiriye nichhi. Apnarta holo `bhalo'.
Ami to janiyechhi amar kyano QSQT-r golpo beshi bhalo laage. Apnarta
jantey chaichhilum. Apni tatey na giye `style' niye aykraash kotha
parlen (ke `kobita-r moto, ke na, ityadi, ityadi..)

..[deleted]..

> Apni Monalisa'r ashol chchobi'ta konodin dekhlen na, QSQT'r moton
> cinema'o dekhlen na, Shesh'er kobita sei class nine'er oprapto boyesh'e
> porlen aar na.

Shob chhobi apni original dekhey bichar koren ? Amar shamorthho
nei, sorry. Boley jiboner shadh aykta Picasso ba Munch ba Kandinsky
original dyakha, tai hoye uthlona, to `Monalisa'!!!

`Shesher Kobita' class nine-er por bar charek porechhi. Alada
kichhu lageni.

QSQT-r golpo niye kotha bolchhilam. Cinema-ta roddi hotey paare.
golpo-ta jantey holey dekhtei hobey cinema-ta, erokom kotha
achhe naki ? Apni chhotobyala golpo shonen ni kokhono ? Ami
shuntam, aykhono shuni.

...[deleted]...

Arnab.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Joydeep Bhattacharya wrote:
>
> In article <33150A...@research.umbc.edu>, Dr. Subho Mozumdar says...
> >
> >Arnab Gupta wrote:
> >

> >> Shunun Shubhobabu shahityo/shilpokola aar bigyan ayk jinish noi.
> >

> >> Arnab.
> >
> >Etar ekta uttor apnake boli:
> >
> >Manfred Eigen'er naam hoito shune thakben.
> >Tini ekbar Cornell'e seminar deoar somoy bolechchilen, there are two
> >ways in which one can describe a phenomenon either by describing in
> >words or painting (ja apnar kachche shahityo/shilpokola) or one can
> >write a mathematical equation describing that phenomenon. Given the
> >proper parameters he claimed he could even draw an elephant with
> >mathematical equations.
>
> [...]
>
> >Subho.
>

> Haati je onko diye aNka jai, na hoye bujhlam; manusher moner (even haati'r
> moner!) gobhirotoro chinta, anando, akhankshya, bhoi..... e gulo'o ki oNko
> diye bojhano jaye? Amaar to mone hoye na. Ek matro sahitya/shilpokala
> diye'i e gulo bojhano jai. Thik ki na?
>

> Arnab was possibly hinting that the scientific "way of thinking" (testable
> hypotheses to be rejected by data...) may not be a very useful way of thinking
> about issues in art.
>
> Joydeep
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone talks about apathy, but no one does anything about it!
>
> Joydeep Bhattacharya
> Marshall School of Business, USC
> Los Angeles CA 90025
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dekhun ami agei bolechchi je amader onko ba mathematical language ekhono
otota strong noi tai sob kichchu bojhate parina onker dwara.
Janina bhobishote'o hobe kina.
Eigen saheb'o sei kothai mean korechchilen jokhon hint korechchilen 'If
given the proper parameters...'
Moner gobhire probesh korar kotha bolchchilen, se kotha'e khoob khude
Biological Scientist hisheb'e bolchchi, imaging'er dwara dekha gechche
je ek jon manush jokhon taar emotions dekha'e tokhon taader mon orthat
brain'er bhitore kirokom poriborton hote thake.
Etake to bigyan bolben. Hyan kichchui na, ekhono e shob shishu tobe je
bhabe Biological Sciences ogroshor hochche tate kichudin bade apnar
nanan emotions gulo'r je kichchu ongsho ekebare interpret kora jabe na
seta thik noi.
After all ekhon ami dhire-dhire mone korte shuru korechchi je amra sobai
ek ekta Chemical Engine. Eta oboshyo amar motamot.

Jani Arnab'babur ja bolte cheyechchilen setake udeshyo kora holo kina,
tobe eta bolte pari je bhalo Shilpokola dekhle jemon mon'ta bhore othe
temni kono bhalo onko ba bigyan dekhle'o nijer anondo prokash na kore
thakte parina.

Basically kono kichchu bhalo jodi hoi setake upobhog kora uchit othoba
bola uchit je janina ba bujhina. Obogya kore thatta kore dhulishat kora
uchit noi.
Thatta korte korte sobtai jeno Thatta na hoye jay.
Etao Shesh'er Kobitar'i ekta line.

Subho.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

sayan bhattacharyya wrote:

>
> Joydeep Bhattacharya <joyd...@rcf.usc.edu> wrote:
>
> >Haati je onko diye aNka jai, na hoye bujhlam; manusher moner (even haati'r
> >moner!) gobhirotoro chinta, anando, akhankshya, bhoi..... e gulo'o ki oNko
> >diye bojhano jaye? Amaar to mone hoye na. Ek matro sahitya/shilpokala
> >diye'i e gulo bojhano jai. Thik ki na?
>

> In practice, yes, perhaps, but certainly not in principle. After
> all, human brains are made up of material substances, so in
> principle anything that we do with our brains is ultimately
> subject to the laws of physics.
>
> (In practice, this may not be feasible because of the sheer
> complexity of our brains; for one thing, the mathematics involved
> are almost certain to be non-linear, and even today non-linear
> systems are very poorly understood). So _in theory_ Eigen
> is perfectly correct.

In other words our mathematical language is still not developed enough.

Subho.

[Apratim Sarkar]

Also Richard Struass, Also Sparch Z. Which are both wonderful pieces.
But more interesting is the way they are blended, the waltz with
the ship "dancing" in space, the later with mankind's first discovery
of work tools and weapons. Excellent thematic blends, both.

[Indranil]

Sayan likhechhe

>One thing both of you are neglecting to consider, is that Shesher
>Kobita is a highly tongue-in-cheek and ironic piece. (Complete
>with self-referentiality, self-irony, and the elaborate Nibaron
>Chakraborty spoof). It IS meant to be taken seriously, but not to be
>taken at its face value. It is a playful piece.

Sayan tumi shahitye PhD korle na kano? Shorkari permit chhaDa ato aNtlamo
kora uchit noy he.

IDG

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

This is again a layman's idea.
I saw the movie (rented it from a local Indian Store).
The print was horrible.
The subject matter together with the rampant brutality, my wife's
occassional shreeks and the horrible print made me completely nuts.
Anyway, about Indranil's questions I think the answers are difficult and
I think it is even more difficult for SK to answer.

The fact that the character on whom it was based is still alive
complicates the issue further.
Though I prefer not to make broad generalization, I cannot prevent
myself from making this comment.

We Indians like to take radical stances on everything, either we make
people Gods or Saviours or simply condemn them as Demons.

The subject matter of the movie was bold and vivid.
It is difficult to watch such movies with your family.
So the only thing which the movie rests on is facts.
If the facts are all screwed up then the movie converts itself to any
other movie.
If it does so then I would rate "SHOLAY" as a much better and complete
film than "BQ".
So I do not care for the scores, I do not care for the dialogs, I only
care for the facts. If they are authentic then it is a good movie. If
the facts are not straight then it is a movie which is not worth a dime.

My personal opinion of 'BQ' and the 'City of Joy' or 'Salam Bombay' is
they were made to cater to the Western World how real India is. It is
not all chandeliers and Persian Carpets and Taj Mahal but accute
poverty, oppression, etc., etc., etc.
Many of us have seen this face of India when we were growing up and to
us some of the abuses, etc. are normal.
Couple of train rides from Delhi to Kanpur or through the heart of Bihar
in the Third Class compartment is enough to tell you where real India
lies. You don't need to watch such movies to know real India.

Anyway it is upto you whether you want to see it.
But see it with an open mind. If you are of the emotional type like my
wife, please don't see the movie. Preferably see it alone. Never, never
with your family.

Subho.

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Sobar age SCB jonotar kachche ei Kada chonra-chunri'r jonyo khhoma
chaichchi.
Kan dhore jodi othbosh'o korte bolen tao nahoi kore nebo nahoi.
Ashole eta Holi'r somoy to, tai Rong'er bodole Kada niyei Ami aar
Arnab'bau ektu Holi khele nijeder ga gorom korchchi.
Khoma kore deben odhomer obimrishota.

Apni jodi ei statement'tar for'e jodi ekta amar lekha direct statement
dekhate paren tahole ekhuni ami apnar kachche khoma chaite raji achchi.
Sompurno bhabe chepe jete raji achhi.
Kono BaNka kotha (indirect statement) noi, chai direct statement.

> 2. Ami bollam: Amar to mone hoi ultota shotti. Kyano ta mone
> hoi, tao janalm.
>
> Amar prothom post-e ami `slang' (ei kothata niye alochonai ashbo
> porey) byabohaar korechhi - eta ashakori apnaar mone hoini.

Mone hoyechhilo bolei Boka bolechhilam.

Ami kon diker pokhhe "Shesh'er Kobita" na "QSQT", e sombondhey apni amar
purber lekhar theke ki ekta direct statement quote korte parben?

Ami Shesh'er kobitar sopokhhe kichhu bolechhi bote, kintu QSQT'r
birudhhe ektao na.

>
> Amar dharona eiporjonto kono torker jaiga chhilo na, alochonar jaiga
> chhilo. Jyamon apni janatey parten kyano apnar `shesher kobita'r
> golpo beshi bhalo laage.

Keno amar "Shesh'er Kobita" bhalo lage, seta'e pore aschchi.

Pochhondo niye to torko choley na.
>
> Apni ta na korey amakey ja ja bollen tar kichhu udhriti dichhi:
>
> <quote>
> ***************************************************************
> Right, apnar ei daroon dristi-bhongi onek pranider punoujjibito korbe.
>
> Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.
> Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
> dileo parten
>
> Well, jodi na pore thaken othoba onek kaal age jodi pore thaken tahole
> janaben amar kachche ek copy achche. Pore dekhben ekhon onekta bhalo
> lagbe.
> Oboshoi "Papa kahte hai....." pore kono kichchui nao bhalo lagte pare.
> *****************************************************************
> <end quote>
>
> khanikta slesh, khanikta bidrup, khanikta `personal attack'.
>

> Subhobabu, ami apnaar `line'e apnakey uttor diyechhi. Apnaar
> sheta `slang' mone holey sheta apnaar dai.

"Dai" bolte ki apni amar dayitto bojhachchilen?
Baba heavy khepechchen to Sokal sat'tae uthe rege-mege likhte-likhte
kothar chote atke-atke jachchen.
Sorry, apnake etota raganor jonno.

>
> > 2. Dwitiyoto, apni bolechchen je
> >
> > > Pochhondo byaparta `subjective'. Ota niye alochona hoi, torko
> > > hoi na `amarta bhalo apnaarta kharap' ba `amar bhishon buddhi
> > > tai ota bhalo laage, apni bhishon boka tai apnar lage na'..ityadi
> > > boley atmoslagha baratey paaren, apotti nei, tobey amar mul proshner
> > > jobab hoi na.
> >
> > E byapare je ami o apni ek mot seta amar ager lekha arekbar porlei
> > bujhjhte parben.
> > Quote kori
> > > Jemon oneker
> > > > kachche Rabindranath'er "Sesher Kobita"r chaite "Quayamat se Quayamat
> > > > Tak"er golpo beshi shundor.
> > > > Well, se sob debate'e na jaoai bhalo.
> >
> > Ami porishkar Bangla bhasha'e (apnar moto slang byabohar na korei)
> > bolechchi je "se sob debate'e na jaoa'i bhalo".
> > Sutorang apni abar torko korar jonno torko korchchilen.
> > Apnar dwitiyo proshn'er baki onshotar jobab deoa obantor (ontoto amar
> > kachche).
> >
>
> Taholey `nirbuddhitar' proshno othey ki korey ? Apni to mene nilei
> paarten `ota amar pochhondo, eta apnaar'. Apni amakey `boka' bolben,
> ami sheta chup korey mene nebo ? Aytota `nirbuddhita'r porichoy
> deoa bodhoy thik na.
>

Jak ontoto eta bojha jachche je apnake "Boka" bolar jonno apni etokhani
rag korechhen.
Sorry, jodi mone dukhho diye thaki tar jonye.
Afterall, America'r THE Ohio State University theke likhchhen jokhon
tokhon amar agei dhora uchit chhilo je apni khubi'i budhiman lok.
Sorry, amar ei bhool'er jonno.
(Ashole amar dharona chhilo HOPKINS'er moto school'i lekhe THE JOHNS
HOPKINS UNIVERSITY).
Amar ei bhantir jonye ami lojjito.
Ami amar kotha'ta phiriye nichhi ekhuni.

Rephrase korchi amar boktobbota.
Apnar moto eto budhiman lok ki bhabe je QSQT'r moto erokom "cutie-pie"
cinema'ta na dekhe tar sopokhye kotha bolte paren seta bujhhte ektu
oshubidha hoi amar.
Jai hok abar boli parle dekhe ashben nahoi cinema'ta. Aar kichhu na hok
bhalo lagbe.
Songe rumal niye jete bhoolben na, karon Shesh'e dukhho achhe.

> Apnar prothom reply-tir karon ki chhilo ?
>
> > 3. Apnar mul proshn'er jobab:
> >
> > a. `Shesher Kobita'r golpo `QSQT'r golpo-r thheke kibhabey
> > > beshi strong boley apnar mone hoi ?
> >
> > Abar boli kon golp'er plot kontar theke beshi strong seta proman korar
> > dayityo apnar amar noi.
> > Apni oboshyo apnar slang Bangla'e jotota sombhob chesta korechchen.
> >
>
> Na ami cheshta korini. Paarle dyakhan. Aar hNya, ebar-e `slang'er
> byaparey ashi. Aykta list korun to ami ki ki `slang' byabohaar
> korechhi. Korben kintu, eriye jaben na!
>

Slang'er list amay na korte bole ekta computer program likhun tate dhora
porbe kotogulo slang apni byabohar korlen.
Oboshyo seta boro kotha noi.
Mul torko'r thekeo alada.

> ..[deleted]..
>
> > Ebar apnar dwitiyo mul proshn'e asha jak:
> >
> > > b. (Eta original alochonai chhilo na, amar janar ichhe
> > > oboshyo achhe, ageo sheta bolechhi)
> > > Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?
> > >
> >
> > Proshn'er uttor:
> >
> > A. Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?
> > E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano
> > Subhobabu?
> >
> > >Arnab.
> >
> > Apratim.
> >
>
> Ashakori eta iyarkichhole likhlen.

Ekebare noi.
Apratim'babu khoob seriously likhechchilen tai onake quote korlum.

>
> > B.> > Kobita mane je chchondo miliye-miliye cholte hobe tale tal diye
> > > > 'Tal gachch ek paye danriye
> > > > Unki Mare Akashe'
> > > > erokom nao hote pare.
> > > > Kobita mane something which is smooth, something which flows naturally,
> > > > swotosfurto bhabe. Seta'e kobi'r ekta bhab prokash pay. Sobdo toronger
> > > > dhara'e jonmo ney ekta chitro ja Monalisa'r chchobir moto sundor.
> >
> > Ami e'o bolichchi
> >
> > > Golpo
> > > > aar kobita'r modhey ekhanei tofat.
> > > > Golp'e chai ekta plot. Golp'er story-line o taar romancho bojay rakhte
> > > > gele khanikta artificiality lekhok'er ojantei eshe pore.
> >
> > Er pore'o apni proshno korben je "Shesh'er Kobita" kobita na
> > golpo/uponyash?
> >
>
> Thhake, karon apni aykhono kichhui bolen ni.
>
> Apni kobita kakey boley bolechhen.
>
> Golper shonge kobitar tophat boltey shudhu `plot' ke enechhen.
>
> Ami example diye apnar kobita-r definition-er contradiction
> kothai bolar cheshta korechhi.
>
> Shutorang, aykhono `shesher kobita' kichhu kobita shomet aykta
> uponyash-i roye jai.
>

Seta apnar motamot.

> ..[deleted]..
>
> >
> > Prthome'i boli apni amar nam'e ekta extra H add korechchen.
> > Jai hok seta mind korlam na.
> >
>
> Ami du:khito.
>

Ami'o.

> > Apnar mote shahityo/bigyan ayk jinish noi.
> > Eta apnar mot.
> > Bikyato boigyanik Einstein tanr violin bajanor somoy e kotha bhabten
> > kina janina.
> > "Shesh'er Kobita" bhalo - eta dhrubo sotyo mene neoar kotha ami ekbar'o
> > bolini. Amar bhalo lage seta amar personal byapar, ebong seta kobita
> > hishabe setao ami bolechchi.
> > Nirbudhita'r kotha ke kontake bojhe seta noi, nirbudhitar kotha ke
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > kibhabe alochona korchche.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> tai ? taholey abar apnar lekha thheke udhriti di:
>
> <quote>
> Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.
> Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
> dileo parten.
> <end quote>
>
> Eta `kibhabe alochona korchche' tar nirbuddhita ? Aar aykbaar porun to.
>

Ami apnake boka bolar jonye apnar kachhe agei khhoma cheyechhi.
Nirbudhita apnar golpo'ta bhalo ba kharap bola niye noi, nirbudhita mone
hoyechhilo apni je bhabe nijer point'take put forward korchhilen kichhu
slang bhasha byabohar kore.
Jai hok khhoma kore deben amay er jonnye.
Er sathe mul tork'er kono sombondho nei.

>
> > > Mairi bolchhi, prem korechhi botey, tobey juto khaini. Bishwash
> > > korun.
> >
> > Slang byabohar korata bodhoi apnar shobhabgoto byapar.
> >
>
> konta `slang' ekhaney ? `mairi' ? Eta niye apnaar shomoshya ? Onyo
> thread-e ja form dyakhachhen, tar poreo ?
>

Ebare asha jaak slang byabohar kora niye.

Apni amar onno thread'e ki bolechhi seta quote korechhen.
Kichhu boli ebar nijer sopokhhe.

Jekhane slang niye alochona chole ba torko chole sekhane slang byabohar
korte amar kono apotti nei.
Onno thread'e amra Bangal'ra ki rokom slang byabohar kore thaki setar
nidorshon dichhilam.
Seta jodi apnar bhalo na lege thake tobe puro thread'takei baad dite
parten.
Ta chhara thread'ta shuru korechhilo IDG amra Bangal'ra oshobhyo bole.
IDG amar onek kal'er porichito tai or sathe jodi ami iyarki'o mere thaki
seta amader modhyer byapar.
Jekhane nirmol anonder majhhe loke khanikta kada chonra-chunri kore taar
modhye ami to kono dosh khunje pai na. Ami amar chhele'r sathe roj
erokom khela khele thaki. Shishuder mukher anondo amar bhalo lage.
(IDG kichhu mone korona tomay Shishu bollam bole).

Dosh sekhane jekhane loke Sahityo niye alochona korte-korte hotat nijer
point'ta rakhar jonye galagali kore, slang byabohar kore.
Apnak'e boka bole galagali ami prothom'e di ni.
Apni besh slang byabohar kore ektu macho-giri dekhiye neme porlen
prothome. Bhablen bhoy peye shore danrabo.

Monalisa'r chhobi apni dekhenni, apnar bhalo'o lagena bolechhen.
Bhalo kotha.
Tobe Monalisa'r chhobi bhalo lagena bole taar gaye khanikta kada lepe
deoa kintu thik noi.

Eta kintu khanikta sei BJP/Shiv Sena'r M.F.Hussain'er chhobi puriye
deoar moto danray.
Ami janina se byapare kaar ki mot, kintu amar kachhe seta ghrinno o
chorom kapurushota.

Jodi abar apnar mote bhool boke thaki tobe khhoma kore deben.

> ..[deleted]..
>
> > Keno ashe janen e Desh'e amader moto lok?
> > Tahole kan khoole shunun.
> >
> > E Desh'ta khoob sundor Desh. Onek kichchu dekhar o janar achche. Kintu
> > apnader moto kichchu lok achche jara nongrami o kada chonra-chunri kore
> > somoy katate bhalobashe. Nijeder Desh theke chole eshe e Desh'er mukto o
> > poriskar batash'e durgondho chchorate bhalobash'e.
> > Amar mone hoi amader moton lok e Desh'e ashe o ashbe apnar moto lok'ke e
> > Desh theke tarabar jonye. Jate e Desh'er lokera mone na kore je shob
> > third world country'r lokera erokom.
> >
>
> Aha! Erporeo `slang' niye apotti ? Onyo thread-e gondho niye oto
> alochona-r poreo ? Apni hashalen - `mairi' bolchhi.
>

Abar boli ekhaneo Sambit'babu kotha'ta enechhilen bolei likhechhilam.
Apnake boka bolle apni eto rege othen, bolen apnar bakswadhinota'e
hostokhep kora hochhe aar amar Lokjon'der galagali dile chup kore ami
seta hojom korbo.
"Temon Mera Amare Pao Nai..."

> ..[deleted]..
>
> > Onek bolte apni kake-kake amar dole tanlen seta bojha gelo na.
> > Janle aro khushi hotam.
>
> Apnaar moto `buddhimaan' jibeder bujhiyechhilam. Specific kauke
> noi, apnar `moton' buddhir lokeder, bojha gyalo ?
>

Broad generalization korar age dubar bhaba uchit chhilo.
Ke jane amar moto buddhiman jib kara?
Please janaben. Nahoi tader niye arekta SCB2 khoolbo.
Ami dol banate ostad.
Please janaben.

> ..[deleted]..
>
> > >
> > > Sherokom mone holey aykshobaar bolbo. BTW, onekbaar mone hoyeochhe.
> > > Abar boli: `bhalo lagata' torker bishoy hotey paare na. Apnakey je
> > > proshnogulo korechhi shegulor parley jobab din please.
> >
> > Apnake keu mana koreni bolte.
> > Apnar proshn'er jobab ami agei diyechchi.
> >
>
> Korenni ? Okay, abar quote korchhi..
>
> <quote>
> Ekshobar subjective.
> Apnar bhalo na lage apni porben na. Ba apnar dekhte bhalo lage apni
> dekhben. Kintu seta nijer ghore boshe dekhun ba apnar bondhdhu'der niye
> dekhun, tate karur kichchu bolar nei. Dhenra pitiye o nijer budhdhi'r
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> porichoy na diye'o seta korte paren.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> <end quote>

Ota apnake ekta suggestion chhilo.
Sorry seta'r jonnyeo.

Apni apnar pochhonder kotha boltey paren,
> ami pari na ?
>

Bole jodi shanti paan to bolben. Bhodrobhabe, slang byabohar na kore.
(Jodi oboshyo seta apnar shobhabgoto byapar na hoi).

Phiriye neben na.
Otai to mul torker sutropath.
Ami amar original lekha'e bolechhilam je "oneker kachhe RN'er Shesh'er
Kobitar chaite QSQT'r golpo beshi shundor.

Beshi'r khoob baje English translation'o jodi Strong hoi tahole seta to
ami'i byabohar korechhi.
Apnar to kono dosh nei. Apni kebol setake elaborate korechhilen.
Phiriye nite hole to amar neoa uchit.

Kintu ami phiriye nichhi na.
Ekhane kon golpo'ta beshi "Strong" seta niyei prosongo.

Ami bolechhilam Shesh'er Kobita ekta Kobita, apni manenni.
Ami bolechhilam Shesh'er Kobita ekta Masterpiece apni manenni.
Jai hok ami anek kichhui bolechhilam, ja apnar dharona'e bhool boka.

Apnar ebar mul proshno holo keno Shesh'er Kobita'r golpo beshi strong?
Ei to?
Bolchhi ektu bade.

Apnarta holo `bhalo'.
> Ami to janiyechhi amar kyano QSQT-r golpo beshi bhalo laage. Apnarta
> jantey chaichhilum. Apni tatey na giye `style' niye aykraash kotha
> parlen (ke `kobita-r moto, ke na, ityadi, ityadi..)
>
> ..[deleted]..
>
> > Apni Monalisa'r ashol chchobi'ta konodin dekhlen na, QSQT'r moton
> > cinema'o dekhlen na, Shesh'er kobita sei class nine'er oprapto boyesh'e
> > porlen aar na.
>
> Shob chhobi apni original dekhey bichar koren ? Amar shamorthho
> nei, sorry. Boley jiboner shadh aykta Picasso ba Munch ba Kandinsky
> original dyakha, tai hoye uthlona, to `Monalisa'!!!
>

Bhalo kotha, apnar ei sotyi kotha bola dekhe bhishon bhalo laglo.

> `Shesher Kobita' class nine-er por bar charek porechhi. Alada
> kichhu lageni.
>

Jodi seta prothombar na bujhhte pere class nine'ei jodi bar charek pore
thaken othoba class ten'e uthei pore thaken tahole alada kichhu lagar
kotha'o noi.
Kobe porechen o kibhabe porechen seta boro kotha.
Jai hok, se sob byapare na jaoai bhalo.

> QSQT-r golpo niye kotha bolchhilam. Cinema-ta roddi hotey paare.

Erokom generalized statement please aar korben na.
Cinema'ta sotyi bhalo. E byapare kono sondeho nei.
SL'er theke bhalo kina bolte parlam na tobe BQ'r theke je amar onek
beshi bhalo legechhilo eta ami holop kore bolte pari.
Oboshyo eta amar o ekanto amar motamot. E niye nahoi porearekta thread
toiri kora jabe.

> golpo-ta jantey holey dekhtei hobey cinema-ta, erokom kotha
> achhe naki ?

Dekhun, je cinema ami dekhechhi taar golpo aar je golpo apni shunechhen
seta je ek golpo seta apni guarantee diye bolte paren?

Bollam cinema'ta dekhe tobe nahoi taar golpo niye mat'te.
Apni shunlen na.
Ami dekhun bolechhi SL bhalo kore dekhini, tai beshi kichhu bolini.
Ami bolechhi age cinema'ta monojog diye dekhbo tarpore khaap khulbo.

Ekta upodesh di. Kichhu mone korben na. E Desh'e onekdin achhi to, tai.
Kono kichhu'te jhanpabar age HOMEWORK'ta bhalo kore kore neben.
Please mone korben na ei upodeshta dilam bole.

Apni chhotobyala golpo shonen ni kokhono ? Ami
> shuntam, aykhono shuni.
>
> ...[deleted]...
>
> Arnab.

Chotobela'e keno ekhono golpo shuni.
Kintu shona golpo niye lorai korina. Boli na "Ami daroon golpo
shunlam.Tui shunishni...."
E shob chotobela'e kortam. Ekhon korina.
Bhalo golpo shunle, bhalo kobita porle, bhalo shilpo dekhle, ekhon aro
char joner sathe seta share kori.
Sref somalochona korar jonno somalochona korina.

Ebar apnar original proshn'e asha jaak.
Taar age ekta chhotto request achhe.
Parle uttor deben, na parle deben na. Eta khanikta personal.

Amar original lekhar uttor'e Srabani'di uttor dilen.
Ami ektu chokh pakiye onake sabdhan korlam (khanikta iyarki mere).
Omni apni jhhanpie porlen.
Srabani'dio dekhlam OSU'r (oboshyo uni THE'ta add korenna).
Jai hok uni ki apnake kichhu bolechhilen naki?
"Offence is the best Defence" ei podhoti onekei niye thake.
Naki apni'i ektu macho-giri dekhate math'e neme porlen?
Sorry, apnar ego'te jodi hurt kore thaki ba Srabani'dir samne jodi apnar
image down kore thaki. Seta amar porikolpona chhilo na.
Seta niye arekta Shesh'er Kobita hok ba QSQT hok eta'o ami chai na.

Jai hok ebar apnar proshn'er uttor deoa jaak.
Onek-khon dhore chhoto chhele'r moto ghaynnor-ghaynnor, paynnor-paynnor
korechhen keno amar Shesh'er Kobita QSQT'r golpo theke beshi bhalo lage.
Likhte boshle onek lekha hobe. Ichha achhe "Konodin Purno Obokash'e,
Bosonto Batash'e" ta niye guchhiye lekhar. Line by line byakhya korar.
Seta nahoi hobe amar research.
Ekhon otota likhte ichha korchhe na.
Tai chhotto kore likhi keno Shesh'er Kobita'r golpo bhalo QSQT'r golpor
theke (ontoto je golpo ami cinema'tae dekhechhi).

QSQT'te ki holo? Khanik-khon prem-prem khela khele, gaan-faan geye teye
ultimately dujon premik-premika opogate more gelo.
Shesh'er Kobita'e ki holo? Khanik-khon prem-prem khele khele,
kobita-tobita bole tole ultimately dujon premik-premika nijeder jeebon'e
phire gelo, jeebon'e beNche roilo.
Konta beshi bhalo BeNch'e thaka na Mor'e jaoa?
Amar to mone hoi BeNch'e thakata beshi anonder.
Apnar mote ki Labonyer dukhhe Amit Ray na Amit Ray'er dukh'e Labonyer
atmohotya kora uchit chhilo? Naki edike Amit Ray bonam Shobhonlal aar
Ketoki bonam Labonyer ekta maar-maar kaat-kaat fight thaka uchit chhilo?
Jogomaya aar baki side character side'e boshe maar kheto aar BURNOL
ghoshto.
Ramgarh Parbat'er matha'e fight'ta heavy jomto. Dekhun apni jodi kichhu
add korte paren. Hindi film industry loofe nite pare. Apni to abar eshob
niye onno thread'e ki shob likhchhen.

Taito Baul gaan'e bole -

"Golemal'e golemal'e pirit koiro na...."

Subho Mozumdar.

P.S.: SCB'r baki jonotake uttokto korar jonno ei odhom khhomaprarthi.
Shesh'er Kobita'r ei rokom ekta daroon byakha korar jonneo RNT o Bangali
somaj'er kachhe ami khhomaprarthi.

Life is wonderful. Let us live peacefully.

[sayan bhattacharyya]

>Indranil wrote:

>> A sad thing about the so called liberal left in India is that the people
>> spearheading its campaigns are about as dogmatic as the fundamentalists
>> they often deride. Sayan, in an earlier post has said that he'll take
>> Phoolan's word for the claim that she has been misrepresented in the
>> movie.

I wouldn't have objected if the film did not claim to be a
TRUE STORY. But you yourself said that Kapur informs the
audience at the beginning that "This is based on a true story".
When you are making such a statement about a living subject
(i.e. Phoolan), who is also the subject of your film, then you are
leading the audience to believe that the subject (i.e. Phoolan)
actually agrees that this is a true story.

For example, there was the recent film "Ghosts of Mississippi"
about Myrlie Evers, the widow of the civil rights leader Medgar Evers.
The film claimed to be a true story and Myrlie Evers actually
acted as a consultant throughout the film making process. That is
the way it should be.

When I pointed this out to you, you took a relativist position
("all truth is relative"). But this line of argument does not
stand, because if you acknowledge that there are not one truth
but many truths, then the assertion "This is a true story" becomes
meaningless. Kapur (and you) cannot have it both ways. You cannot
hide behind a relativist position on truth AND present the audience
with an absolutist statement that what is being presented is THE
TRUTH.

>> and yet I am almost sure
>> that it is the popular line to pursue if you fancy yourself to be a
>> liberal feminist do-good-ing Indian.

Popularity or otherwise of this position has little to do with it.
Hell, the views that I hold on most things are extremely unpopular on scb.
If popularity was what I was after, do you think I'd have said
the kinds of things that I say on scb? I do and say what feels right
to me. I don't care if that makes me popular or unpopular.

>> 1. Neither Mala Sen nor Sk need Phoolan's permission to write her
>> biography or make a film out of it.

I don't know the legal issues here, but morally it seems darned
wrong to me to pass off the film or the book AS FACT AND NOT AS
FICTION.

>> 2. Anyone's objection to the factual accuracy of his or her biography is
>> not a criterion for banning or restricting the publication of the work.

Where did I call for banning the film? I said that I had boycotted
the film.

>> on these issues. Personally I believe that all right thinking people
>> should place freedom of expression above most other considerations when
>> judging these issues. Laymen are referred to "People vs. Larry Flint"
>> for convincing arguments (and more).

Freedom of expression does not mean freedom to exploit. In any case,
I have not called for curtailing Kapur's freedom of expression in
any way. Incidentally, you should read Gloria Steinem's counter-arguments
to your position on the Larry Flynt movie.

Irrelevant.

>> here, let SK deal with that in court. If there is an ethical problem
>> here, it is in your dogmatic confidence. What do we KNOW about SK's
>> motives? Nothing.

Indranil, whenever anyone sees an ethical problem anywhere in
the world, do you habitually ascribe it to dogma?

[Apratim Sarkar]

National Pension Admin.Corp. (smu...@erols.com) wrote:

: jodiyo aami aager posting-a likhechhilaam je aei byapare aar konokichhu
: bolte chaai na,
: taao bhaablaam aaraykbaar mukh khuli! hNaashi pelo aapnar lekhaa poDe!

: prothomoto jokhon aamar uttore jaanlen je aami cinema hall-a giye
: dekhechhilaam movie-ta
: tokhon aabar otichaalaker moton 'miscommunication'-er kotha tulchhen
: kyano video
: rewind korar byapare? chepe jete to paarten! naaki nijeke explain
: korchhen?

: aapni C. Basu'r posting-er uttore bolechhilen je "Otai to gNyaRa- cinema
: to dekhlo na,
: shock'ta'i pelo. Ghure fire shocked hote giye hoito tinbar rape
: scene'ta'i dekhe fello..
: kNadte kNadte beriye eshe mone holo sufficiently shocked haowa hoy ni,
: nude scene'ta
: arekbar dekha proyojon"----aabar edike aamar 'Bandit Queen'-er opor
: first posting-er lekhaa poDe kaayda mere jiggyesh korlen je "kabar
: dekhlen rewind kore?"---aar aykhon bhaalo maanusher moton bolchhen je
: miscommunication, aapni mean korechhen je purota rewind kore dyakha'r
: kotha? bolun purota rewind kore aami ki dekhbo? humiliation of women,
: naa rape scene aar nude scene? naaki aapni C.Basu'r uttore aykrokom
: chinta korechhilen, aar aamar kyalani kheye aykhon bolchhen
: miscommunication! maairi dada, aapnari kothaa, paalti ekei bole! dada,
: kore khaan ki kore? vinno vinno lok-ke vinno vinno jhaaDchhen? aeibhaabe
: ayddin Oracle-a aapnar tNike thaakai to 'Miracle'.
: aar dada, jodi 'cinema hall-a dekhechhi' shonbaar poreo rewind korar
: kothaa tolen, ta'le desher loker obocheton moner dike na vebe, taara
: kobaar cinema-ta dekhlo na bhebe, bhaabun aapni ki korlen! aare aykta
: meyer opor chhotobyala theke oi rokom ottyachar dekhle to ayk fNota
: chokher jol-o loker berote paare! aar er mathaay ghurchhe nude scene! a
: ki cheese maairi! puro 'le haalua'!

: Apratim Sarkar,
: aapnar,
: maatha dyakhano
: dorkaar!
: Nije, kobaar
: dekhlen 'Nude Scene',
: rewind kore 'Bandit Queen'?
: jodi dekhe dekhe mete na aash,
: felben naako 'Dirghoshwash'!
: Na kNede fuliye ThNot,
: video ene dekhun "DEEP THROAT".<:)

: ----soumitri

Apni ki pagol hoye gelen naki Soumitri!?

Apratim.

[Debjeet Pal]

Apratim Sarkar wrote:

>
> Arnab Gupta <GUP...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu> writes:
>
> > Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?
>

> Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?
> E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano Subhobabu?
>
> >Arnab.
>
> Apratim.

Shesher Kobita-ay to onek phataphati kobita o dialogue achhay, "ekta
kobita" manay ki?

Debjeet.

***********************************************************************
Debjeet Pal | Email : d....@doc.ic.ac.uk
Dept. of Computing | Home-Page: http://www-students.doc.ic.ac.uk/~dp9
Imperial College | Phone : (00-44) 0171-3738664 / 0181-7512518
180 Queen's Gate |
London SW7 2AZ |
***********************************************************************

[Apratim Sarkar]

Debjeet Pal <d...@doc.ic.ac.uk> writes:
>Apratim Sarkar wrote:
>>
>> Arnab Gupta <GUP...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu> writes:
>>
>> > Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?
>>
>> Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?
>> E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano Subhobabu?
>>
>> >Arnab.
>>
>> Apratim.
>
>Shesher Kobita-ay to onek phataphati kobita o dialogue achhay, "ekta
>kobita" manay ki?

Bolun Shubhobabu.

>Debjeet.

[Arnab Gupta]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:

..[deleted]...

> >
> > Taholey byaparta erokom:
> >
> > 1. Apni bollen: `shesher kobita'r golpo onek shundor.
>
> Apni jodi ei statement'tar for'e jodi ekta amar lekha direct statement
> dekhate paren tahole ekhuni ami apnar kachche khoma chaite raji achchi.
> Sompurno bhabe chepe jete raji achhi.
> Kono BaNka kotha (indirect statement) noi, chai direct statement.
>

kono bNaka kotha noi, shoja shotti kotha ami bhul likhechhi. Apnaar
lekhai chhilo `oneker kachhe' `beshi shundor'. Kintu,apni je shey dol-e
non, sheta apnaar ei post-e lekha porleo dhora jai, taito ?

Amar proshno: Ami ki torko korechhilam ? Ami shudhu janiyechhilam
shei oneker moddhe amio aykjon. Kyano ami aykjon sheta bolar
cheshta korechhilam.

Taholey apnaar prothom reply-er karon ?

> > 2. Ami bollam: Amar to mone hoi ultota shotti. Kyano ta mone
> > hoi, tao janalm.
> >
> > Amar prothom post-e ami `slang' (ei kothata niye alochonai ashbo
> > porey) byabohaar korechhi - eta ashakori apnaar mone hoini.
> Mone hoyechhilo bolei Boka bolechhilam.
>

Amar prothom reply:

<quote>

Eta amar ontoto bhishon shotti kotha mone hoi. Ki achhe bolun
`Shesher Kobita' r golpe ? Prem-prem khyala khanikta shurutey kheliye,
tarpor `kaler jatrar dhwoni' shuniye byartho prem-e ektu burnol diye
nayok nayika-ke jar jar ghorey pathiye deoa holo. Tar cheye QSQT-r golpo
onek joDalo, onek beshi natokiyo. Tatey prem to achhei (aar shudhu
kothar kochkochani prem na), shonghat achhe...action achhe...uttejona
achhe ....

Shesher Kobita-r kichhu kobita oboshyo mondo laage na.....
Temni QSQT-teo mar-mar-kat-kat gaan achhe, shetao dekhtey hobey.

Arnab.
<end quote>

slang-gulo list korun. Porey dekhlam `program bananon' kotha boley
eriye gyachhen. Ebar jaben na.

> Ami kon diker pokhhe "Shesh'er Kobita" na "QSQT", e sombondhey apni amar
> purber lekhar theke ki ekta direct statement quote korte parben?
>
> Ami Shesh'er kobitar sopokhhe kichhu bolechhi bote, kintu QSQT'r
> birudhhe ektao na.
>

Tai ? Taholey Srabani Banerjee-r post-er uttorey tulona enechhilen
kyano ? Mone koriye di taholey. SC aar BQ-er tulona korechhilen.
Apni taar parallel tenechhilen Shesher kobita aar QSQT-r golpo-r
shonge. Erporeo bojhatey hobey ?

..[deleted]..

> > Subhobabu, ami apnaar `line'e apnakey uttor diyechhi. Apnaar
> > sheta `slang' mone holey sheta apnaar dai.
>
> "Dai" bolte ki apni amar dayitto bojhachchilen?
> Baba heavy khepechchen to Sokal sat'tae uthe rege-mege likhte-likhte
> kothar chote atke-atke jachchen.
> Sorry, apnake etota raganor jonno.
>

thik ta noi. Shuruta besh bhaloi korechhilen. Dekhey ujjibito
hoyechhilum. Tarpor dekhlum `slang' `slang' boley kNadtey shuru
korlen. Form-ta rakhtey paarle sroddha-ta barto apnar proti.

..[deleted]..

> >
> > Taholey `nirbuddhitar' proshno othey ki korey ? Apni to mene nilei
> > paarten `ota amar pochhondo, eta apnaar'. Apni amakey `boka' bolben,
> > ami sheta chup korey mene nebo ? Aytota `nirbuddhita'r porichoy
> > deoa bodhoy thik na.
> >
>
> Jak ontoto eta bojha jachche je apnake "Boka" bolar jonno apni etokhani
> rag korechhen.
> Sorry, jodi mone dukhho diye thaki tar jonye.
> Afterall, America'r THE Ohio State University theke likhchhen jokhon
> tokhon amar agei dhora uchit chhilo je apni khubi'i budhiman lok.
> Sorry, amar ei bhool'er jonno.
> (Ashole amar dharona chhilo HOPKINS'er moto school'i lekhe THE JOHNS
> HOPKINS UNIVERSITY).
> Amar ei bhantir jonye ami lojjito.
> Ami amar kotha'ta phiriye nichhi ekhuni.
>
> Rephrase korchi amar boktobbota.
> Apnar moto eto budhiman lok ki bhabe je QSQT'r moto erokom "cutie-pie"
> cinema'ta na dekhe tar sopokhye kotha bolte paren seta bujhhte ektu
> oshubidha hoi amar.
> Jai hok abar boli parle dekhe ashben nahoi cinema'ta. Aar kichhu na hok
> bhalo lagbe.
> Songe rumal niye jete bhoolben na, karon Shesh'e dukhho achhe.
>

khub bhalo kotha. Taholey bolchhen prothom reply-ta kono karon chharai
diyechhilen. Onekta prolap bokar moto ?

> > Apnar prothom reply-tir karon ki chhilo ?
> >

Etar aar proyojon nei. Thanku. Ei post-e agey jodi korey thhaki
proshnota taholey baad diye deben.

> > > 3. Apnar mul proshn'er jobab:
> > >
> > > a. `Shesher Kobita'r golpo `QSQT'r golpo-r thheke kibhabey
> > > > beshi strong boley apnar mone hoi ?
> > >
> > > Abar boli kon golp'er plot kontar theke beshi strong seta proman korar
> > > dayityo apnar amar noi.
> > > Apni oboshyo apnar slang Bangla'e jotota sombhob chesta korechchen.
> > >
> >
> > Na ami cheshta korini. Paarle dyakhan. Aar hNya, ebar-e `slang'er
> > byaparey ashi. Aykta list korun to ami ki ki `slang' byabohaar
> > korechhi. Korben kintu, eriye jaben na!
> >
>
> Slang'er list amay na korte bole ekta computer program likhun tate dhora
> porbe kotogulo slang apni byabohar korlen.
> Oboshyo seta boro kotha noi.
> Mul torko'r thekeo alada.
>
>

Baaje bokben na. Aykta obhijog korechhen, sheta paarle quote
korey promaan korun. Lyaj gotachhen kyano ?

> > ..[deleted]..
> >
> > > Ebar apnar dwitiyo mul proshn'e asha jak:
> > >
> > > > b. (Eta original alochonai chhilo na, amar janar ichhe
> > > > oboshyo achhe, ageo sheta bolechhi)
> > > > Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Proshn'er uttor:
> > >
> > > A. Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?
> > > E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano
> > > Subhobabu?
> > >
> > > >Arnab.
> > >
> > > Apratim.
> > >
> >
> > Ashakori eta iyarkichhole likhlen.
>
> Ekebare noi.
> Apratim'babu khoob seriously likhechchilen tai onake quote korlum.
>

Apnar `shesher kobita'ke kobita bolar karon ami bujhtey perechhi.
Amar kaaj shohoj korey deoar jonye dhonyobaad.

..[deleted]..

> > > Prthome'i boli apni amar nam'e ekta extra H add korechchen.
> > > Jai hok seta mind korlam na.
> > >
> >
> > Ami du:khito.
> >
>
> Ami'o.
>

Ki karoney ?

..[deleted]..

> > <quote>
> > Ota ekta onoboddo shilpo, ekta masterpiece, jeta bojhjha sohoj noi.
> > Nijer motamot prokashye prokash kore nijer nirbudhdhitar porichoy na
> > dileo parten.
> > <end quote>
> >
> > Eta `kibhabe alochona korchche' tar nirbuddhita ? Aar aykbaar porun to.
> >
>
> Ami apnake boka bolar jonye apnar kachhe agei khhoma cheyechhi.
> Nirbudhita apnar golpo'ta bhalo ba kharap bola niye noi, nirbudhita mone
> hoyechhilo apni je bhabe nijer point'take put forward korchhilen kichhu
> slang bhasha byabohar kore.
> Jai hok khhoma kore deben amay er jonnye.
> Er sathe mul tork'er kono sombondho nei.
>

`Mul' byaparta `proshno' chhilo `torko' noi. Agei bolechhi pochhondo
niye torko hoi na.

`slang'er obhijogtar shopokhhe promaan deben kintu, bhuley jaben na.

> >
> > > > Mairi bolchhi, prem korechhi botey, tobey juto khaini. Bishwash
> > > > korun.
> > >
> > > Slang byabohar korata bodhoi apnar shobhabgoto byapar.
> > >
> >
> > konta `slang' ekhaney ? `mairi' ? Eta niye apnaar shomoshya ? Onyo
> > thread-e ja form dyakhachhen, tar poreo ?
> >
>
> Ebare asha jaak slang byabohar kora niye.
>

shetatey ashchhi. Kintu uporer bakye `slang' konta ?

> Apni amar onno thread'e ki bolechhi seta quote korechhen.
> Kichhu boli ebar nijer sopokhhe.
>
> Jekhane slang niye alochona chole ba torko chole sekhane slang byabohar
> korte amar kono apotti nei.
> Onno thread'e amra Bangal'ra ki rokom slang byabohar kore thaki setar
> nidorshon dichhilam.
> Seta jodi apnar bhalo na lege thake tobe puro thread'takei baad dite
> parten.
> Ta chhara thread'ta shuru korechhilo IDG amra Bangal'ra oshobhyo bole.
> IDG amar onek kal'er porichito tai or sathe jodi ami iyarki'o mere thaki
> seta amader modhyer byapar.
> Jekhane nirmol anonder majhhe loke khanikta kada chonra-chunri kore taar
> modhye ami to kono dosh khunje pai na. Ami amar chhele'r sathe roj
> erokom khela khele thaki. Shishuder mukher anondo amar bhalo lage.
> (IDG kichhu mone korona tomay Shishu bollam bole).
>
> Dosh sekhane jekhane loke Sahityo niye alochona korte-korte hotat nijer
> point'ta rakhar jonye galagali kore, slang byabohar kore.
> Apnak'e boka bole galagali ami prothom'e di ni.
> Apni besh slang byabohar kore ektu macho-giri dekhiye neme porlen
> prothome. Bhablen bhoy peye shore danrabo.
>

Holo na. Ami apnakey konorokom `personal attack' korini prothom
post-e. Apni korechhilen. Kadachhorachhuri apnii shuru korechhilen,
ami shanonde o shechhyai jog diyechhi oboshyo.

> Monalisa'r chhobi apni dekhenni, apnar bhalo'o lagena bolechhen.
> Bhalo kotha.
> Tobe Monalisa'r chhobi bhalo lagena bole taar gaye khanikta kada lepe
> deoa kintu thik noi.
>

Ami diyni. Proshno ashe kotha thheke ?

> Eta kintu khanikta sei BJP/Shiv Sena'r M.F.Hussain'er chhobi puriye
> deoar moto danray.
> Ami janina se byapare kaar ki mot, kintu amar kachhe seta ghrinno o
> chorom kapurushota.
>

Ayki mot. Kintu ekhaney shei ghotona anar karon ?

..[deleted]..

> Abar boli ekhaneo Sambit'babu kotha'ta enechhilen bolei likhechhilam.
> Apnake boka bolle apni eto rege othen, bolen apnar bakswadhinota'e
> hostokhep kora hochhe aar amar Lokjon'der galagali dile chup kore ami
> seta hojom korbo.
> "Temon Mera Amare Pao Nai..."
>

khub bhalo jukti, I like it. Amio ei pothei egiyechhi kina ei thread-e.

> > ..[deleted]..
> >
> > > Onek bolte apni kake-kake amar dole tanlen seta bojha gelo na.
> > > Janle aro khushi hotam.
> >
> > Apnaar moto `buddhimaan' jibeder bujhiyechhilam. Specific kauke
> > noi, apnar `moton' buddhir lokeder, bojha gyalo ?
> >
>
> Broad generalization korar age dubar bhaba uchit chhilo.
> Ke jane amar moto buddhiman jib kara?
> Please janaben. Nahoi tader niye arekta SCB2 khoolbo.
> Ami dol banate ostad.
> Please janaben.
>

Apnar jodi apotti thhakey taholey janai je ami agey ekti post-e amar
ei statement `rephrase' korechhi.

>
> > ..[deleted]..
> >
> > > >
> > > > Sherokom mone holey aykshobaar bolbo. BTW, onekbaar mone hoyeochhe.
> > > > Abar boli: `bhalo lagata' torker bishoy hotey paare na. Apnakey je
> > > > proshnogulo korechhi shegulor parley jobab din please.
> > >
> > > Apnake keu mana koreni bolte.
> > > Apnar proshn'er jobab ami agei diyechchi.
> > >
> >
> > Korenni ? Okay, abar quote korchhi..
> >
> > <quote>
> > Ekshobar subjective.
> > Apnar bhalo na lage apni porben na. Ba apnar dekhte bhalo lage apni
> > dekhben. Kintu seta nijer ghore boshe dekhun ba apnar bondhdhu'der niye
> > dekhun, tate karur kichchu bolar nei. Dhenra pitiye o nijer budhdhi'r
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > porichoy na diye'o seta korte paren.
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > <end quote>
>
> Ota apnake ekta suggestion chhilo.
> Sorry seta'r jonnyeo.
>
> Apni apnar pochhonder kotha boltey paren,
> > ami pari na ?
> >
>
> Bole jodi shanti paan to bolben. Bhodrobhabe, slang byabohar na kore.
> (Jodi oboshyo seta apnar shobhabgoto byapar na hoi).
>

Baarbaar obhijogta korchhen, janaben kintu prothom post-e `slang'
kothai chhilo.

..[deleted]..

> > QSQT-r golpo niye kotha bolchhilam. Cinema-ta roddi hotey paare.
>
> Erokom generalized statement please aar korben na.

Ekhaney generalisation-ta kothai ????

> Cinema'ta sotyi bhalo. E byapare kono sondeho nei.
> SL'er theke bhalo kina bolte parlam na tobe BQ'r theke je amar onek
> beshi bhalo legechhilo eta ami holop kore bolte pari.
> Oboshyo eta amar o ekanto amar motamot. E niye nahoi porearekta thread
> toiri kora jabe.
>

khub bhalo prostab. Dekhley apnakey janabo.

> > golpo-ta jantey holey dekhtei hobey cinema-ta, erokom kotha
> > achhe naki ?
>
> Dekhun, je cinema ami dekhechhi taar golpo aar je golpo apni shunechhen
> seta je ek golpo seta apni guarantee diye bolte paren?
>
> Bollam cinema'ta dekhe tobe nahoi taar golpo niye mat'te.
> Apni shunlen na.
> Ami dekhun bolechhi SL bhalo kore dekhini, tai beshi kichhu bolini.
> Ami bolechhi age cinema'ta monojog diye dekhbo tarpore khaap khulbo.
>
> Ekta upodesh di. Kichhu mone korben na. E Desh'e onekdin achhi to, tai.
> Kono kichhu'te jhanpabar age HOMEWORK'ta bhalo kore kore neben.
> Please mone korben na ei upodeshta dilam bole.
>

golper byaparey `plot'e jodi na gondogol keu korey thhaken taholey
amar na dekhleo cholbe. Abar boli `golpo' niye alochona hochhey.
Cinematic quality ba `literary quality' niye noi.

..[deleted]..

> Ebar apnar original proshn'e asha jaak.

> Taar age ekta chhotto request achhe.
> Parle uttor deben, na parle deben na. Eta khanikta personal.
>
> Amar original lekhar uttor'e Srabani'di uttor dilen.
> Ami ektu chokh pakiye onake sabdhan korlam (khanikta iyarki mere).
> Omni apni jhhanpie porlen.
> Srabani'dio dekhlam OSU'r (oboshyo uni THE'ta add korenna).
> Jai hok uni ki apnake kichhu bolechhilen naki?
> "Offence is the best Defence" ei podhoti onekei niye thake.
> Naki apni'i ektu macho-giri dekhate math'e neme porlen?
> Sorry, apnar ego'te jodi hurt kore thaki ba Srabani'dir samne jodi apnar
> image down kore thaki. Seta amar porikolpona chhilo na.
> Seta niye arekta Shesh'er Kobita hok ba QSQT hok eta'o ami chai na.
>

naak-ta apnaar ektu beshi boro. Rakhar jaigar obhab ghotechhe ?

khub shundor hoyechhe. Apnaar motamot jene amar bhishon bhalo laglo.
Taholey duto byapar-i jana gyalo - Apnaar kachhe Shesher Kobita
kyano `ekta kobita' aar kyano taar golpo QSQT-r thheke beshi
shundor/strong....

Thanku.

Arnab.

pu: Prothom post-e slang-er byaparta niye chintito roilam kintu...

[Srabani Banerjee]

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:

> Amar original lekhar uttor'e Srabani'di uttor dilen.
> Ami ektu chokh pakiye onake sabdhan korlam (khanikta iyarki mere).
> Omni apni jhhanpie porlen.
> Srabani'dio dekhlam OSU'r (oboshyo uni THE'ta add korenna).
> Jai hok uni ki apnake kichhu bolechhilen naki?
> "Offence is the best Defence" ei podhoti onekei niye thake.
> Naki apni'i ektu macho-giri dekhate math'e neme porlen?
> Sorry, apnar ego'te jodi hurt kore thaki ba Srabani'dir samne jodi apnar
> image down kore thaki. Seta amar porikolpona chhilo na.

I would be obliged if you would kindly keep me out of this since my
relationship with Arnab has no bearing on the present discuusion.
Believe me, if I did have a say in matters like this, Arnab would not
be arguing with imbeciles.

Srabani

[Dadu]

Returning back to SCB (from oblivion) after a long time, made me
surprised; there is Kaberi on the other side, but no Daulat on the other
side- is it in the mood of Shubu, Daulat ran faster? Also I miss
'Rajendrani' of her proud presence..... but a couple of things don't
change either.

It is a well known fact that, married Bengali's are
"Macarena"-handicapped (ups Sharmila- correction: except for New Year's
eve etc.). So long evenings, and even longer weekends- gets often into
intellectual muscleflexing in the Anandabazar-i style. One such product
is the review of BQ- I couldn't help dipping my nose into it. Ei poster
opor Jodi keu baghrogorjon koren, soshobde-i korben amake naake rumaal
chapa diye sore porte help korben. I read all the posts in a single go;
and wish to comment almost all of them. So, it may be a bit juxtaposed,
but definitely without any malice towards anybody.

The first question comes in mind, how the mivie BQ shouls be taken; the
possibilities are,

1) A biographical documentary;
2) A biographical film (e.g. Tina Turner, Surviving Churchil, or what
Sayan reffered to; or Shantigopal's Jatra etc..)
3) An art film in the Indian context;
4) A documentary type film on social atrocity and violence (e.g.
Shindler's List?);
5) A lurid film with graphic scenes of rape and violence- (pulp fiction
etc.), spiced 'Indian'.

They all can have the same common elements, and be very different! A
biography can not be called a biography, if the concerned person
explicitly disagrees with it. Even if all the accounts are correct.
Phoolan Devi has had very strong objections about the contents of the
film (I don't know what she thinks about it right now; I heard SK
offered a handsome ammount of money to sowallow the film; may be she
succumbed). So BQ can not be called a biographical film, and the first
two possibilities are ruled out.

Before asking the question of artistic content (and/or entertainment
values) of BQ, lets look at the forth issue: BQ as a documentary of
social atrocity. Everybody knows, social violence is rampant in India,
perhaps one of the highest in any civilised (I do still like to present
Indian society as a civilised one, despite of everything), we take it as
a patch of ringworm in Calcutta summer, itchy, but keeps us going.
Another news of police violence is right now flashed in the SCB (police
rubbing tiger balm on seven suspect's eyes), nobody pays any attention.
Nobody remembered Maya Tyagi in these discussions. Or the Bengali girl
(is it her name was Sheema? I don't remember properly) whom police
treated with a baton through her anus in the SS Roy's era. I don't think
all the SCB-ites are so young that they didn't hear about them. Social
violence and police atrocity is not what SCB-ites are concerned about.
And, no reason why non-SCB people will take it differently. Probably,
all alike, will look for its entertainment values, possibly with Jyoti
Basu like innocent pretension ("keno, Sekhar to bolechhe, eta holo giye
'true story of Foolan Devi'?"), and look at the lurid parts of naked
"Foolan".

Probably the SCB-ites would agree that, watching a American nude and an
Indian nude in the screen is quite different. The way, listening the
word motherfucker from a 10 year old American kid, or 'motherchod' from
a 10 year old Indian girl (I've heard them both; the first in streets of
USA, and the second in the lanes of Benares, Delhi, Secundrabad; in
rural Bihar and Bengal abundantly) is. And when the word comes from a
10Y flatchested girl in a bright yellow-black sunset background grabbed
by a competent cameraman, what the Bengali intellectual can do other
than wriggling from one curl to another on a cozy sofa, remembering how
SK's other films were, and how this can fulfil the expections!

I heard, there was a secret chord
that David played and it pleased the Lord,
But you don't really care for the music, do you?

I've watched the movie in Nov'95 (about 1.3 year back the discussion in
SCB started) in Singapore. I never recommend to watch a movie back home
in VCR (though it saves quite a bit of money). I could almost smell the
dust of ravines, and the set is much less artificial than Sholay. I
liked that as a movie. But, I'd rather agree to Subho(?) that,
cinematically it is less entertaining than Sholay. Probably this was
supposed to be compensated with the "true" nature of the story. And
then, what is the film about, if it is not a biography, people do not
care of social atrocity, no more than a juicy piece of gossip, the
cinematic value is much less than comparable films, other than a social
pornography? I think when 'asircar' asks, how many times people rewinded
and watched (the nude scene?), he was only naive, and lacking Bengali
like "nakyami" (I praise the ghoti's for the word; no other language to
my knowledge has a term which comes even distantly close to it).

See all of you in near future....

Dadu

Dr. Subho Mozumdar wrote:
>
> Indranil wrote:
> >
> > Partha Banerjee (pba...@wadsworth.org) wrote:
> > [..]
> >
> > : *Bandit Queen, City of Joy, and other insipid lies in the name of
> > : "liberal" entertainment (emphasis: this is exploitative and outright
> > : conservative).*
> >
> > : I had a chance to see the movie Bandit Queen (finally!). In spite of
> > : the fact that cinematographically it is of high-quality, I can't say
> > : anything positive about the way the movie used the personal life of Phoolan
> > : Devi and made money (and a lot out of it, I am sure).
> >

> Subho.

[IDas...@erc.org]

In article <5f4pe8$6...@news.bu.edu>,

Apnar permit-ta-r photocopy pathhaben, please?

Indrani.

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

[Arindam Banerjee]

Shoumyo Dasgupta <txd...@silmaril.smeal.psu.edu> wrote:

Thank you, Shoumyo. I shall certainly see Bandit Queen at the
earliest opportunity, and Rashomon too.
> >
> > O I do not believe anything, and I do not see why you should. I only
> > ascribe probabilistic values to the validity of "facts" I have not
> > completely verified for myself.
> >
>
> ???
>
> Please explain.

I have found it more useful to replace belief and hope with knowledge
and feeling, as much as possible. Since it is very difficult to be
certain about anything, you have to ascribe a probabilistic account of
the validity of anthing, depending upon how much you can trust the
sources, or correlate from different sorts of sources. This is a
non-dogmatic approach, and so as I had once explained millions of
postings back, not suited for most minds.

In short I do not believe what I am told, to start with. On any subject.
Exceptions relate to the people I know and trust - to them I ascribe
a very high probability value. But then even they unknowingly could
be wrong.

> On a personal note, I miss your episodes. Will you write again soon ?

Thank you once again! Indeed I should concentrate upon writing alone and
not engage in meaningless discussions. Unfortunately (for this
purpose) my life belongs but little to me. I am overjoyed to have
discovered at least one person who follows my episodes! You have made
my day!

Arindam Banerjee
Disclaimer: My opinions do not involve my employer.
>
> Regards,
>
> Shoumyo.

[Soumitri Mukherjee]

sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
>
> Joydeep Bhattacharya <joyd...@rcf.usc.edu> wrote:
>
> >Haati je onko diye aNka jai, na hoye bujhlam; manusher moner (even haati'r
> >moner!) gobhirotoro chinta, anando, akhankshya, bhoi..... e gulo'o ki oNko
> >diye bojhano jaye? Amaar to mone hoye na. Ek matro sahitya/shilpokala
> >diye'i e gulo bojhano jai. Thik ki na?
>
> In practice, yes, perhaps, but certainly not in principle. After
> all, human brains are made up of material substances, so in
> principle anything that we do with our brains is ultimately
> subject to the laws of physics.

-----So? the functioning of a brain is definitely subject to the laws of
physics, but not the result of that function---not even in
principle----for example if i think that i am travelling through space
at a speed faster than the speed of light, then do you mean to say that
you will describe my thought process in a mathematical equation, and
here you can throw all your non-linear funda describing that equation,
which will describe my journey, even say just the physical process of
that journey, obeying to the laws of physics? now, well well well, don't
even think of saying that laws of physics have to evolve with my thought
process, may be at a speed faster than that of light!<:), and then you
will end up with preTTy Big inconsistencies. anyhow, i am not going to
delve into that now, but what i will say is that the physical process of
the functioning of the brain does create something which is not
physical, and it is called KNOWLEDGE. this 'knowledge' is not subject to
physical laws, and in the hierarchy it belongs to a category higher than
the category in which physical laws reside. so even though that you can
perfectly write down mathematical equations, using your non-linear
partial differential equations on not so smooth surfaces, describing
even a moving elephant and even writing programmes of it to show the
moving elephant on a computer screen, but don't even think of writing
any equation of describing what the elephant is thinking! let alone for
humans, even for clones!<:)---- So, finally, what Joydeep babu was
saying is indeed true that "maanusher moner bhaabna chintaa gulo oto
onko diye bojhaano jaay na, taar jonnye shilpo-shaahittyer
dorkaar"----and you know Sayan babu why this be true, because
shilpo-shattiyo gulo holo inconsistent knowledge, shilpo-shahittyer kono
rigorous consistency'r dorkaar nei----ogulo aykdom maanusher moner
moton!<:)

-----soumitri

ps: nicher part gulo aar delete kora'r proyojon bodh korlaam na! BTW,
etaa ki lokkho korlen je aei thread-er start hoyechhilo 'Bandit Queen'
diye, aar aamader discussion kothaay giye dNaaDiyechhe? aamra khub
consistently discuss kori subject matter gulo bolun? at least aei
SCB-te! taai na?:)

[Indranil]

sayan bhattacharyya (bhat...@skynet.eecs.umich.edu) wrote:
: >Indranil wrote:

: >> A sad thing about the so called liberal left in India is that the people

: >> spearheading its campaigns are about as dogmatic as the fundamentalists
: >> they often deride. Sayan, in an earlier post has said that he'll take
: >> Phoolan's word for the claim that she has been misrepresented in the
: >> movie.

: I wouldn't have objected if the film did not claim to be a

: TRUE STORY. But you yourself said that Kapur informs the
: audience at the beginning that "This is based on a true story".
: When you are making such a statement about a living subject
: (i.e. Phoolan), who is also the subject of your film, then you are
: leading the audience to believe that the subject (i.e. Phoolan)
: actually agrees that this is a true story.

Why so? SK actually goes on to talk about the objections raised by
Phoolan.

Attenborough's Gandhi or the numerous bengali movies based on Achintya
Kumar's biography (again there is no way of knowing if RamKrishna would
aprove of it) of RK fall in the same category. A biography and an
auto-biography are different.

: For example, there was the recent film "Ghosts of Mississippi"

: about Myrlie Evers, the widow of the civil rights leader Medgar Evers.

: The film claimed to be a true story and Myrlie Evers actually

: acted as a consultant throughout the film making process. That is
: the way it should be.

"That is the way it should be"!!!! That is the way it should be if I
were to try writing a biography of Mr. Gaddafi of Libya or
Mr. Prabhakaran of Jaffna? No doubt that is how you would have wanted
the story of Hitler being told if he had not killed himself and done you
a favour!

Anyway, however ridiculous I find your views, you are entitled to have
them. What I do find hard to swallow is your statement that you'll take
Phoolan's word for the accuracy of her story. Why don't you try telling
that to the public prosecuter's office?

: When I pointed this out to you, you took a relativist position

: ("all truth is relative"). But this line of argument does not
: stand, because if you acknowledge that there are not one truth
: but many truths, then the assertion "This is a true story" becomes
: meaningless. Kapur (and you) cannot have it both ways. You cannot
: hide behind a relativist position on truth AND present the audience
: with an absolutist statement that what is being presented is THE
: TRUTH.

My biggest fear in starting an argument with you is that soon you'd
bury me with strawman arguments. The aforementioned "relativist"
position was not advanced by me. Neither do I support it. Please read my
posts again.

There may be many conflicting accounts of the incidents in Phoolan's
life. None of them may be true. Or may be one of them IS true. SK's
version may be true. But I distinctly remember having said that no one
need pay much attention to SK's claim that this is close to a
realistic account (even if that were true). The movie stands on its
own.

: >> and yet I am almost sure

: >> that it is the popular line to pursue if you fancy yourself to be a
: >> liberal feminist do-good-ing Indian.

: Popularity or otherwise of this position has little to do with it.

: Hell, the views that I hold on most things are extremely unpopular on scb.
: If popularity was what I was after, do you think I'd have said
: the kinds of things that I say on scb? I do and say what feels right
: to me. I don't care if that makes me popular or unpopular.

Once again a strawman. I didn't say you wanted to be popular. I said, I
was almost sure that a particular line of thought would have general
currency among a particular kind of people.

: >> 1. Neither Mala Sen nor Sk need Phoolan's permission to write her

: >> biography or make a film out of it.

: I don't know the legal issues here, but morally it seems darned

: wrong to me to pass off the film or the book AS FACT AND NOT AS
: FICTION.

Age bolle na kano? It is indeed purely a question of your
subjective moral standards again. There is no *reason* for you to take
Phoolan's word as true. There is circumstantial evidence (and
eyewitness's accounts) to believe that SK's version *may* be
true. Some people may believe that it would be darned wrong to pass the
film as fiction if SK believed it to be fact. No one knows (except SK
himself) whether SK believes in his own account or not.

: >> 2. Anyone's objection to the factual accuracy of his or her biography is

: >> not a criterion for banning or restricting the publication of the work.

: Where did I call for banning the film? I said that I had boycotted
: the film.

Where did I say that *you* called for a ban? (Although, as usual,
there have been no dearth of people in India demanding that the film be
banned).

: >> on these issues. Personally I believe that all right thinking people

: >> should place freedom of expression above most other considerations when
: >> judging these issues. Laymen are referred to "People vs. Larry Flint"
: >> for convincing arguments (and more).

: Freedom of expression does not mean freedom to exploit. In any case,

: I have not called for curtailing Kapur's freedom of expression in
: any way. Incidentally, you should read Gloria Steinem's counter-arguments
: to your position on the Larry Flynt movie.

I did not imply or say that *you* called for curtailing SK's FOE.

Are you saying that GS raises points that the defense of Jerry Falwell
overlooked?

: >> here, let SK deal with that in court. If there is an ethical problem

: >> here, it is in your dogmatic confidence. What do we KNOW about SK's
: >> motives? Nothing.

: Indranil, whenever anyone sees an ethical problem anywhere in

: the world, do you habitually ascribe it to dogma?

No. Only when I see people making swift and unflattering judgements on
things or people against which or whom thay have only subjective moral
biases. Reminds me of a stupid thing called religion.

IDG

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

Soumitri Mukherjee wrote:
>
> sayan bhattacharyya wrote:
> >
> > Joydeep Bhattacharya <joyd...@rcf.usc.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >Haati je onko diye aNka jai, na hoye bujhlam; manusher moner (even haati'r
> > >moner!) gobhirotoro chinta, anando, akhankshya, bhoi..... e gulo'o ki oNko
> > >diye bojhano jaye? Amaar to mone hoye na. Ek matro sahitya/shilpokala
> > >diye'i e gulo bojhano jai. Thik ki na?
> >
> > In practice, yes, perhaps, but certainly not in principle. After
> > all, human brains are made up of material substances, so in
> > principle anything that we do with our brains is ultimately
> > subject to the laws of physics.
>
> -----So? the functioning of a brain is definitely subject to the laws of
> physics, but not the result of that function---not even in
> principle----for example if i think that i am travelling through space
> at a speed faster than the speed of light,

First of all the speed of light - we need not argue about that.
Thought process of travelling faster than light - the question of fast
and slow though strictly qualitative, certain amount of quantitative
certainty is bound to come in - things like how much faster/ slower?

then do you mean to say that
> you will describe my thought process in a mathematical equation, and
> here you can throw all your non-linear funda describing that equation,
> which will describe my journey, even say just the physical process of
> that journey, obeying to the laws of physics? now, well well well, don't
> even think of saying that laws of physics have to evolve with my thought
> process, may be at a speed faster than that of light!<:), and then you
> will end up with preTTy Big inconsistencies. anyhow, i am not going to
> delve into that now, but what i will say is that the physical process of
> the functioning of the brain does create something which is not
> physical, and it is called KNOWLEDGE.

This KNOWLEDGE is based on memory and scientific thinking.
If today by some means one can wash out everything what you have learnt
so far (pretty scary) and you are asked to begin from scratch, you will
see that you again start aquiring knowledge by the same process as you
did in your childhood.
Watch a little child and you will see sometimes how rational and
scientific they are than us.

this 'knowledge' is not subject to
> physical laws, and in the hierarchy it belongs to a category higher than
> the category in which physical laws reside.

Knowledge is subjected to physical laws although they may sometimes be
ill defined.

so even though that you can
> perfectly write down mathematical equations, using your non-linear
> partial differential equations on not so smooth surfaces, describing
> even a moving elephant and even writing programmes of it to show the
> moving elephant on a computer screen, but don't even think of writing
> any equation of describing what the elephant is thinking! let alone for
> humans, even for clones!<:)----

So the question is not that stuffs like thinking, emotions, etc. cannot
be represented by mathematical equations, it is just that our
mathematical language is not sophisticated enough.

So, finally, what Joydeep babu was
> saying is indeed true that "maanusher moner bhaabna chintaa gulo oto
> onko diye bojhaano jaay na, taar jonnye shilpo-shaahittyer
> dorkaar"----

If you see an abstract art don't you try to identify it with something
you have seen before?
The artist who created the art also must have had an impression in his
brain of something which he had encountered somewhere on which he
created his art.
Is it possible to come up with something totally abstract?
I don't think so.

and you know Sayan babu why this be true, because
> shilpo-shattiyo gulo holo inconsistent knowledge, shilpo-shahittyer kono
> rigorous consistency'r dorkaar nei----ogulo aykdom maanusher moner
> moton!<:)

So the point I am trying to make is:
1. There is consistency in inconsistency.
2. We can analyze Shilpo-Sahityo scientifically but whether science
is mature enough to handle that kind of analysis is a tough
question.

> >
> > (In practice, this may not be feasible because of the sheer
> > complexity of our brains; for one thing, the mathematics involved
> > are almost certain to be non-linear, and even today non-linear
> > systems are very poorly understood). So _in theory_ Eigen
> > is perfectly correct.

So I think Eigen was still quite right.

Subho.

[Snehasis Ganguly]

Apratim Sarkar (asa...@us.oracle.com) wrote:
: Arnab Gupta <GUP...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu> writes:

: > Shesher kobita, apnar motey, `ekta kobita'. Kyano kobita ?

: Naam'e'i dekhchho kobita, tao abar eto proshno kisher he Arnab?

: E'i sahoj kotha'ta bojhate apnari ba etokkhon lagchhe kyano Subhobabu?

: >Arnab.

: Apratim.

Kobita lekha thaklei setaa kobita hoey gelo
naaki Apratim? Tahole amar chandyoheen(chandyoer gyan
amar nei) koek line ke (IDG'r Sayanke lekha kobitar
jobabe), tumi kobita hishebe dhorle na keno? Ami to
setake kobitai bolechi..
Snehasis

[sayan bhattacharyya]

In article <5fhja6$j...@news.bu.edu>, Indranil <dgu...@buphy.bu.edu> wrote:
>
>Why so? SK actually goes on to talk about the objections raised by
>Phoolan.

I did not know this. I am sorry.

If Kapur does actually go on in the movie to discuss Phoolan's objections,
then I take back my criticism of it. If Kapur actually did this, then I
have to admit that he was being fair enough.

>: For example, there was the recent film "Ghosts of Mississippi"
>: about Myrlie Evers, the widow of the civil rights leader Medgar Evers.
>: The film claimed to be a true story and Myrlie Evers actually
>: acted as a consultant throughout the film making process. That is
>: the way it should be.
>
>"That is the way it should be"!!!! That is the way it should be if I
>were to try writing a biography of Mr. Gaddafi of Libya or
>Mr. Prabhakaran of Jaffna? No doubt that is how you would have wanted
>the story of Hitler being told if he had not killed himself and done you
>a favour!

You are overlooking something very important. In the case of Hitler,
there is a lot of incontrovertible evidence out there as to what
actually happened, i.e. what were the facts of the matter. It is
a matter of public record. But in Phoolan's life story, as you yourself
said, there are lots of missing pieces about which no one except Phoolan
knows exactly what happened.

>Anyway, however ridiculous I find your views, you are entitled to have
>them. What I do find hard to swallow is your statement that you'll take
>Phoolan's word for the accuracy of her story. Why don't you try telling
>that to the public prosecuter's office?

I said I'll take Phoolan's word over Sekhar Kapur's if I had to choose
between them. I doubt if the public prosecutor would, er, give Kapur
any credence, considering he was never present as a witness to any of the
crimes!

>: When I pointed this out to you, you took a relativist position
>: ("all truth is relative").
>

>My biggest fear in starting an argument with you is that soon you'd
>bury me with strawman arguments. The aforementioned "relativist"
>position was not advanced by me. Neither do I support it. Please read my
>posts again.

The aforementioned position was advanced by those who mentioned
Rashomon. I did not see you protesting that position. That is
why I concluded that you too subscribe to the relativist position.
I will take your word for it now that you said that you do not.
I believe you.

>There may be many conflicting accounts of the incidents in Phoolan's
>life. None of them may be true. Or may be one of them IS true. SK's
>version may be true. But I distinctly remember having said that no one
>need pay much attention to SK's claim that this is close to a
>realistic account (even if that were true). The movie stands on its
>own.

But my point is that Kapur's claim, if he made such a claim, would
be irresponsible. All along this discussion, my criticism has not
been that of the artistic merits of the _film_ (how can I criticize the
film? I haven't seen it) but of Kapur's statement, as reported
by you, to the effect of "THIS WAS A TRUE STORY".

>: I don't know the legal issues here, but morally it seems darned
>: wrong to me to pass off the film or the book AS FACT AND NOT AS
>: FICTION.
>
>Age bolle na kano? It is indeed purely a question of your
>subjective moral standards again.

Of course it is. I thought that was implied in _any_ discussion
in s.c.b. In net discussion, any view I advance has got to be
my own, personal, subjective view, since I am speaking on my
personal behalf and not on the behalf of any organization or
group. This is so obvious that I find it remarkable that this
should occasion so much surprise to you.

Anyhow, since you have assured me that Kapur has indeed mentioned
in the film that Phoolan disagrees with the content, the grounds
for my objection does not exist any more. So we can hopefully
lay this issue to rest and part amicably.

i

[c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu]

In article <331BAC...@erols.com>,smu...@erols.com wrote:

> the functioning of a brain is definitely subject to the laws of
> physics,

Actually the functioning of the brain has more to do with the chemical
reactions of the elements present in different concentration in it.

> but not the result of that function---not even in
> principle----for example if i think that i am travelling through space

> at a speed faster than the speed of light, then do you mean to say that

> you will describe my thought process in a mathematical equation, and
> here you can throw all your non-linear funda describing that equation,
> which will describe my journey, even say just the physical process of
> that journey, obeying to the laws of physics? now, well well well, don't
> even think of saying that laws of physics have to evolve with my thought
> process, may be at a speed faster than that of light!<:), and then you
> will end up with preTTy Big inconsistencies.

Actually the end product of the reactions which take place obeying
some physical laws should in principle be possible to predict. In the
above example, the no. of possible imagination channels that you
can trigger is based on your past knowledge about space (from books
or otherwise). So a learning network, such as the brain will take into
consideration all such previous experiences as dynamic initial conditions.

> anyhow, i am not going to
> delve into that now, but what i will say is that the physical process of
> the functioning of the brain does create something which is not

> physical, and it is called KNOWLEDGE. this 'knowledge' is not subject to

> physical laws, and in the hierarchy it belongs to a category higher than

> the category in which physical laws reside. so even though that you can

Actually the physical laws guiding the chemical reactions are far more
basic. The acquiring of knowledge is more like accumulation of data in
the brain.

> perfectly write down mathematical equations, using your non-linear
> partial differential equations on not so smooth surfaces, describing
> even a moving elephant and even writing programmes of it to show the
> moving elephant on a computer screen, but don't even think of writing
> any equation of describing what the elephant is thinking! let alone for

> humans, even for clones!<:)---- So, finally, what Joydeep babu was

> saying is indeed true that "maanusher moner bhaabna chintaa gulo oto
> onko diye bojhaano jaay na, taar jonnye shilpo-shaahittyer

> dorkaar"----and you know Sayan babu why this be true, because

> shilpo-shattiyo gulo holo inconsistent knowledge, shilpo-shahittyer kono
> rigorous consistency'r dorkaar nei----ogulo aykdom maanusher moner
> moton!<:)

The problem in this whole process in the no. of paramters involved.
Even for an insect's brain it tends to diverge and hence no known
method can tackle the simulation which may mimic even partially the
function of any brain. But theoretically speaking (which IMO is absurd
to do) you can map the functions of a thinking process onto an infinite
set of non-linear PDEs.

> -----soumitri

Chaitali

[Dr. Subho Mozumdar]

c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu wrote:
>
> In article <331BAC...@erols.com>,smu...@erols.com wrote:
>
> > the functioning of a brain is definitely subject to the laws of
> > physics,
>
> Actually the functioning of the brain has more to do with the chemical
> reactions of the elements present in different concentration in it.
>

Right, but those chemical reactions must be governed by laws of physics.

> > but not the result of that function---not even in
> > principle----for example if i think that i am travelling through space
> > at a speed faster than the speed of light, then do you mean to say that
> > you will describe my thought process in a mathematical equation, and
> > here you can throw all your non-linear funda describing that equation,
> > which will describe my journey, even say just the physical process of
> > that journey, obeying to the laws of physics? now, well well well, don't
> > even think of saying that laws of physics have to evolve with my thought
> > process, may be at a speed faster than that of light!<:), and then you
> > will end up with preTTy Big inconsistencies.
>
> Actually the end product of the reactions which take place obeying
> some physical laws should in principle be possible to predict.

That is quite right as I mentioned earlier.

In the
> above example, the no. of possible imagination channels that you
> can trigger is based on your past knowledge about space (from books
> or otherwise). So a learning network, such as the brain will take into
> consideration all such previous experiences as dynamic initial conditions.
>

Quite right

> > anyhow, i am not going to
> > delve into that now, but what i will say is that the physical process of
> > the functioning of the brain does create something which is not
> > physical, and it is called KNOWLEDGE. this 'knowledge' is not subject to
> > physical laws, and in the hierarchy it belongs to a category higher than
> > the category in which physical laws reside. so even though that you can
>
> Actually the physical laws guiding the chemical reactions are far more
> basic. The acquiring of knowledge is more like accumulation of data in
> the brain.

I do not understand here.
Why do you think that physical laws governing chemical reactions are far
more basic?
True, aquiring knowledge is like accumulation of data in the brain but
that accumulation should be governed by some logical process. Moreover,
whenever we are subjecting ourselves to logic are we not subjecting
ourselves and our thought processes to Science?

>
> > perfectly write down mathematical equations, using your non-linear
> > partial differential equations on not so smooth surfaces, describing
> > even a moving elephant and even writing programmes of it to show the
> > moving elephant on a computer screen, but don't even think of writing
> > any equation of describing what the elephant is thinking! let alone for
> > humans, even for clones!<:)---- So, finally, what Joydeep babu was
> > saying is indeed true that "maanusher moner bhaabna chintaa gulo oto
> > onko diye bojhaano jaay na, taar jonnye shilpo-shaahittyer
> > dorkaar"----and you know Sayan babu why this be true, because
> > shilpo-shattiyo gulo holo inconsistent knowledge, shilpo-shahittyer kono
> > rigorous consistency'r dorkaar nei----ogulo aykdom maanusher moner
> > moton!<:)
>
> The problem in this whole process in the no. of paramters involved.
> Even for an insect's brain it tends to diverge and hence no known
> method can tackle the simulation which may mimic even partially the
> function of any brain. But theoretically speaking (which IMO is absurd
> to do) you can map the functions of a thinking process onto an infinite
> set of non-linear PDEs.
>

That is absolutely right.

> > -----soumitri
>
> Chaitali
>
> -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

Subho.

[Kousik Chakrabarti]

Besh bhalo lekhar moto ekti bishoy|Bitorker gondho choNya, juktibadi
abar kichuta kolpona makha|

Kichu lekhbar agei bole rakha bhalo ami thread tar naam sobshomoi bodle
dite bhalobashi| Tahole nijer kothatuku du kothay bola hoye jai|

Ajkaal dekhchi keu-keu khub boDoboDo posting koren| Dhorjyochuti
ghote|PoDbar khey hariye feli|Ei thread er o onek lekhai poDi ni|
Onekgulo abar pouNchoy na amar server er doulote|Kichu-kichu pouNchoy
deri kore|Esobh na-kintu r maje tay kono lekhar cutting-e rakhlaam na|

************************************************************************

Bijyaan manushke diyeche beg kere niyeche abeg, ete gotir anondyo aache
ney jotir ayesh|

Uporer uktitir prekhapote alochonay dhokar age proshno thekei shuru
kora jak:Manfred Eigen ja bolechen ta ki thik? Ek kothay khub thik|
Kintu proshnoti niye ar ektu bhable onek proshno eshe pore|Pashapashi
jorajori kora|

Bostuto: ekta udharoner sathe byapartake ektu sposto kora chole|GhoDi!
Khule dekhle pinion, wheel,kata etadi niye ekta jontro matro|Tahole
shomoi ki ghoDir bhetore thake na baire?

GhoDi shomoy noy|Shomoy ke dhorbar ekti proyash matro|

Manusher onubhuti ki onkyer equation diye bhojano jabe? Er uttor tao
tai| Manusher ghobhir onubhuti ke dhorte onkyo jodi ba pare ekdin kintu
ta konodini manusher onubhuti hote parbe na|

Bodhay ar ekta jinish amader ogochore theke geche|Bijyan jamon egoche
sahityo ki shebhabe egoche? Naki sahityo thomke aache shey
kochhop-korgosh er golper moto| Asole sahityer podocharona onek
sukkho|Tate bhaber adanprodan chole|Sutorang tar onaromborata onek
kom|Tai ta dristir aDale thake|Bijyan er joyojatrar paashapashi somaj
hoye uthche jotil,jibonjatra druto ar baNchar loday,urdhoshash abong
dirghonishaash shona jaache ghaDer paashe| Ei notun juger notun sahityo
kintu bhison ochena| Tai manusher bhab binimoy, sahitye sobdochoyon sob
kichute ekta bodol asche ba eseche ba hoyto ashbe|Tai sahityo theme nei
sheo egiye cholche|Sudhu tar podocharona nischol|Tai onekey ta ter pay
na|

Sahityo ar onke-r loDai konodin lagbe kina jani na| Tobe etuku jani
kono kichuy theme thakte pare na|Sutorong dutoi egiye cholbe notun
dishay ei swopnotuku niyey amadero potho chola||

~Kaushik

[Indranil]

IDas...@erc.org wrote:
: In article <5f4pe8$6...@news.bu.edu>,

: dgu...@buphy.bu.edu (Indranil) wrote:
: > Sayan likhechhe

: > >One thing both of you are neglecting to consider, is that Shesher
: > >Kobita is a highly tongue-in-cheek and ironic piece. (Complete
: > >with self-referentiality, self-irony, and the elaborate Nibaron
: > >Chakraborty spoof). It IS meant to be taken seriously, but not to be
: > >taken at its face value. It is a playful piece.

: > Sayan tumi shahitye PhD korle na kano? Shorkari permit chhaDa ato aNtlamo
: > kora uchit noy he.

: Apnar permit-ta-r photocopy pathhaben, please?

Ami correspondence-e MA korechhi.

IDG

[Indranil]

Arindam Banerjee (a.ban...@trl.oz.au) wrote:

[..]
: sources, or correlate from different sorts of sources. This is a

: non-dogmatic approach, and so as I had once explained millions of
: postings back, not suited for most minds.

Slightly ironical, but true, indeed! :-)

: Thank you once again! Indeed I should concentrate upon writing alone and

: not engage in meaningless discussions. Unfortunately (for this
: purpose) my life belongs but little to me. I am overjoyed to have
: discovered at least one person who follows my episodes! You have made
: my day!

Despite my occasional discomfort with what I consider a few non PC
sentiments in the later episodes, I still liked them and
hope to see more of them.

IDG

[c0ba...@homer.louisville.edu]

In article <331C9D...@research.umbc.edu>,

smo...@research.umbc.edu wrote:
>
> c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu wrote:
> >
> > In article <331BAC...@erols.com>,smu...@erols.com wrote:
> >
> > > anyhow, i am not going to
> > > delve into that now, but what i will say is that the physical process of
> > > the functioning of the brain does create something which is not
> > > physical, and it is called KNOWLEDGE. this 'knowledge' is not subject to
> > > physical laws, and in the hierarchy it belongs to a category higher than
> > > the category in which physical laws reside. so even though that you can
> >
> > Actually the physical laws guiding the chemical reactions are far more
> > basic. The acquiring of knowledge is more like accumulation of data in
> > the brain.
>
> I do not understand here.
> Why do you think that physical laws governing chemical reactions are far
> more basic?

What I meant by 'far more basic' is that these laws exist irrespective
of the presence of the right concentration of the chemicals needed
to trigger off the reactions.

> True, aquiring knowledge is like accumulation of data in the brain but
> that accumulation should be governed by some logical process. Moreover,
> whenever we are subjecting ourselves to logic are we not subjecting
> ourselves and our thought processes to Science?

The factors governing this logic of which data you store and which
you reject is more than often influenced by external parameters,
which themselves may or maynot be related to each other. Infact
that is the reason for the paramter space to be diverging. So even
though everything is ultimately science, to try to relate each
step with a finite set of logical rules is not feasible.

[National Pension Admin.Corp.]

c0ba...@capella.physics.louisville.edu wrote:
>
> In article <331BAC...@erols.com>,smu...@erols.com wrote:
>

> > the functioning of a brain is definitely subject to the laws of
> > physics,
>
> Actually the functioning of the brain has more to do with the chemical
> reactions of the elements present in different concentration in it.

-----chemical reactions can be interpreted as physical laws without
going into much detail, isn't it chaitali, at least in principle?

>
> > but not the result of that function---not even in
> > principle----for example if i think that i am travelling through space
> > at a speed faster than the speed of light, then do you mean to say that
> > you will describe my thought process in a mathematical equation, and
> > here you can throw all your non-linear funda describing that equation,
> > which will describe my journey, even say just the physical process of
> > that journey, obeying to the laws of physics? now, well well well, don't
> > even think of saying that laws of physics have to evolve with my thought
> > process, may be at a speed faster than that of light!<:), and then you
> > will end up with preTTy Big inconsistencies.
>
> Actually the end product of the reactions which take place obeying

> some physical laws should in principle be possible to predict. In the

> above example, the no. of possible imagination channels that you
> can trigger is based on your past knowledge about space (from books
> or otherwise). So a learning network, such as the brain will take into
> consideration all such previous experiences as dynamic initial conditions.
>

Chaitali, at least i thought that being a student of physics you would
understand what goes on when one travels at a speed faster than light,
and i did not expect you to "mukh khule ja noy taai aaromvo kore
deowa"----what are you babbling about 'possible imagination channels',
'dynamic initial conditions' and all that? say, number of my possible
imagination channels is countably infinite, or say, uncountqable! what
you gonna do about that! the sole purpose of that example i gave to Mr.
Sayan B., is to arrive at inconsistencies if one tries to interpret
travelling at a speed faster than that of light in terms of physical
laws. Chaitali, you must know this fact that as one tries to travel at
the speed of light, it's mass becomes infinity----so first interpret
this infinity mass in terms of physical laws----then if one travels
faster than the speed of light (my mind can though), it's mass becomes
imaginary---how do you interpret that in physical laws?----and i did not
even asked you SCB characters(don't take it personally chaitali,
sharmila'r onurodhe SCB-te dhuke aamiyo aykta 'character' hoye jachchhi,
taai shiggiri SCB chhaaDte hobe<:)) to explain in terms of physical
laws:

holde shobuj oraang-otaang,
iNt paatkel chiTpotang!
mushkil aashan uDe maali,
Dhormotolaay kormo khaali!

> > anyhow, i am not going to
> > delve into that now, but what i will say is that the physical process of
> > the functioning of the brain does create something which is not
> > physical, and it is called KNOWLEDGE. this 'knowledge' is not subject to
> > physical laws, and in the hierarchy it belongs to a category higher than
> > the category in which physical laws reside. so even though that you can
>
> Actually the physical laws guiding the chemical reactions are far more
> basic. The acquiring of knowledge is more like accumulation of data in
> the brain.
>

> > perfectly write down mathematical equations, using your non-linear
> > partial differential equations on not so smooth surfaces, describing
> > even a moving elephant and even writing programmes of it to show the
> > moving elephant on a computer screen, but don't even think of writing
> > any equation of describing what the elephant is thinking! let alone for
> > humans, even for clones!<:)---- So, finally, what Joydeep babu was
> > saying is indeed true that "maanusher moner bhaabna chintaa gulo oto
> > onko diye bojhaano jaay na, taar jonnye shilpo-shaahittyer
> > dorkaar"----and you know Sayan babu why this be true, because
> > shilpo-shattiyo gulo holo inconsistent knowledge, shilpo-shahittyer kono
> > rigorous consistency'r dorkaar nei----ogulo aykdom maanusher moner
> > moton!<:)
>
> The problem in this whole process in the no. of paramters involved.
> Even for an insect's brain it tends to diverge and hence no known
> method can tackle the simulation which may mimic even partially the
> function of any brain. But theoretically speaking (which IMO is absurd
> to do) you can map the functions of a thinking process onto an infinite
> set of non-linear PDEs.

-------hee, hee, hee, ... aeita bhaalo diyechhen guru, saala je jaa
paachchhe 'funda' loDaachchhe---infinte set of non-linear PDEs---saala
countably infinite set na uncountable set? etaa to oi 'number of
channels' orpor nirvor korchhe taai na?
>
nah, bhaai aami aar beshi "baatkomme" (hindi bangla misrito shobdo,
aykdom baaje maane noy) nei----aeikhaanei aangul thaamalam aei byapare!

> > -----soumitri