Guru represents the return to form of Mani Ratnam after recent critical failures in hindi such as Yuva and Dil Se. Mani succeeds in blending style and substance, a balance he has not always got right in the post-Roja phase of his career. The strength of the movie lies in the script which manages to pack about 40 years in the life of Guru in a little under 3 hours. Mani's visual style is a big plus as the script breezes through the stages in Gurukanth Desai's growth from a small-time trader to a business tycoon. Although the technique used for these portions is conventional, the fast-paced narrative is a relief since no one wants to sit through how a business tripled its turnover or quadrupled its EPS. Another plus is how the complex (or dull depending on one's view) business/policy jargon is simplified - examples include the scene where Guru announces that Shakti Corporation plans to do a public issue and the scene where Madhavan demonstrates how Guru flouted export-import policies to circumvent limits on import of capital equipment.
Although he doesn't actually portray how Shakti Corporation goes from strength to strength, early in the film itself Mani takes care to show us glimpses into Guru's thinking, which is characterised by ruthlessness, opportunism and hunger for success. Guru's proclivity to profit from any situation is shown by his offer to marry Sujata, (who had eloped earlier and returned home spurned by her lover), wherein he "earns" a dowry (which becomes his capital for business) as well as Sujata's gratitude. Similarly, his never-say-die attitude is exemplified when he successfully breaks open Mumbai's textile exchange which operated as a cartel of a few traders, controlled by textile barons. His ability to cultivate powerful friendships and put them to good use is highlighted by his using the newspaper baron ManikDas's papers to smash open this aforementioned cartel. To top it all, his intelligence is underlined when he gets the government to withdraw a ban on textile trading; later in the movie there is an encore when Guru persuades a supposedly honest minister to give approval for a petrochem plant despite there being "loopholes" in the project. That Guru does not have scruples is also evident when he bypasses his brother-in-law (an equal partner in the business) in taking important decisions, because he (Guru) deduces that his BIL does not have the appetite for risk-taking. Guru's rise owes a lot to lucky breaks and happenstance. But he is shrewd enough to capitalise on these openings and he never loses sight of his goal, which is simply to keep growing.
The other strength of the movie is (in Ash's words) "finely etched characters". Guru's character is well fleshed out, as expected. But other characters also have their moments. Unlike Yuva for example, no character is left hanging. Sujata, who is a reluctant bride to start off, slowly warms to Guru and by the end of the movie is his voice, his 50-50 partner in every sense of the word. The character matures in front of our eyes; although hurt by the knowledge that Guru probably married her only for money, she gets over it proving Somerset Maugham's(?) adage that familiarity breeds something approximating love in a woman. By far the most interesting character in the movie is the newspaper baron, Manikdas Gupta, who is a Gandhian, a stickler to principles and is as obstinate as they come. Manikdas's relationship with Guru is akin to that of a father-son but he never lets the emotion cloud his displeasure with Guru's tactics. Once Manikdas feels that Guru has used him/his newspaper he decides to go after Guru. This is about the only turning point in the movie. The viewer senses that Guru has gone one step too far in trying to peddle his influence. From that point onwards the relationship between Guru and Manikdas becomes strained; although both men retain the warmth for each other, they cannot but be opposite poles.
The scene where Manikdas personally warns Guru about the start of hostilities crackles like a livewire. Mani has a way of fashioning scenes depicting confrontation between (male) lead characters- a skill he probably honed to perfection with Agni Natchatram, although his earlier Pagal Nilavu also had its share of lead characters crossing paths. The situations in Guru are complicated further when Shyam, the reporter employed by Manik to go after Guru, marries Manik's grand-daughter Meenu, a personal favourite of Guru. Meenu's presence in the movie and her romantic interlude with Shyam may be seen as an unwanted distraction by some, but it serves two purposes. One is to add an element of complexity to Guru's feelings towards Shyam - not only can Guru not bring himself to hate Manik, he is duty-bound to feel ambivalent towards Shyam as well. More importantly, Meenu's character helps us get an insight into Guru's ability to love unconditionally - he is not profit-driven always! In that sense, the Guru-Meenu interaction is similar to showing the hero petting a dog, to accentuate the white portions amidst Guru's grey shades. Come to think of it, there is no surprise that Mani has woven an uncomfortable relationship between Guru, Meenu and Shyam. Most of his (earlier) movies explored this face-off between characters who have something in common, who are related. Velu Nayakar and his daughter, Gautam and Ashok, Surya and Arjun – all these pairs were related, had more things in common than they realised but were riven apart by fate, situations and convictions. Agni Natchathiram was probably the best of the lot in exploring this angle as the step-sibling rivalry held enormous promise to start off with. The difference in Guru is that Guru’s character towers above everyone else bar Manikdas’ that the notion of rivalry between Guru and Shyam never gets off the ground.
Surprisingly for a Mani Ratnam movie in Hindi, the dialogues (Vijay Krishna Acharya) add to the script. Mani’s earlier Hindi movies made one wonder how a man who rewrote the rules of Tamil movie writing can struggle to capture the Hindi ethos. The dialogues in Guru strike the right balance between simplicity and depth, a balance that Mani perfected quite early in his career with Mouna Raagam. The scene where Guru characterises his approach to influence-peddling with a simple analogy stands out. The dialogues also hold up in the climax, a prerequisite for a drama which climaxes in the court room.
Ah, the climax itself. The climax of Guru has probably provoked more debate than the movie itself. Mani has gone trough the entire gamut when it comes to climax. He has copped out without making a judgement (Nayakan), made it uplifting (Roja, Yuva), given the audience what they wanted (Bombay), made it too verbose (Kannathil Muhtamittal) or just made a hash of the whole thing (Dil Se). Thankfully in Guru he doesn’t skirt the issue of examining the hero’s methods. In a courtroom (a tribunal enquiring into Guru’s business practices) that is reminiscent of the British courts (Roshan Seth in a nice cameo as judge), Guru defends his methods by invoking a parallel with MK Gandhi’s civil disobedience movement no less. What stands out at first is the audacity of it all – of Guru, of Mani Ratnam himself in using the example of a man who never believed in the “ends justify means” maxim that is so beloved of Guru himself. I am not going into the morality of it. But what is striking is that with this climax, Mani strikes a blow for capitalism and free markets. After all, in Guru’s eyes, the socialist license-permit raj was no less oppressive than the British rule. So he was right in trying to circumvent these restrictions that tried to curtail personal and economic freedom. As one columnist had pointed out capitalism usually doesn’t make for good cinema. Ideologue directors are usually left leaning; even apolitical directors feel more comfortable depicting socialist or communist themes. While the early fifties, sixties movies took off from the independence struggle and the issues of those days such as land reforms, the seventies and eighties anti-establishment heroes were instinctively part of the proletariat. Guru is unique in that sense he is unabashedly materialist, wants to get rich quick and is prepared to work for that. Mani Ratnam has always had an urban upper-middle class sensibility. And he went to a B-School, remember?. So it follows he didn't have the ideological baggage that is the bane of Indian intelligentsia. If Guru is remembered for nothing else, at the least Mani has broken new ground in Indian cinema with the subject and the climax. And it comes as no surprise that this movie has come out in 2007 when India is the flavour of the month. The climax is sure to make many feel ambivalent towards the movie and its message. A fellow blogger has suggested that the climax is inspired by a similar scene from Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged". Having steadfastly stayed away from Rand, I am not qualified to comment. But I fully expect Mani to have read it, so who knows?
Guru is not flawless. There were a number of glaring negatives in the form. The music, or rather the use of music is a let-down. At least two songs hamper the narrative and the movie comes to a dead halt during these songs. Mani does away with the Mallika item number in the title song (small mercies). And while the rain song that introduces Sujata's character is formulaic (think Chinna Chinna Aasai in Roja) it is pardonable. Ae Hairathe is chopped up and passes off in the background. The first of the offending songs "Tere Bina" comes when Guru-Sujata split up briefly. Instead of just a musical interlude covering happier moments from the flashback, Mani makes the actors mouth the lyrics and tries our patience. The song itself and the location are superb but the placement of the song is wrong. The second interlude is more offensive and shocking in its grossness. I am referring to the "Ek Lo, ek muft" song. It is an irredeemable disaster and nearly derails the momentum built up by the narrative. One never thought Mani will stoop to such levels. The picturisation and the concept are out of keeping with how Guru's character develops in the movie. Some have speculated that Mani has lost interest in filming songs. Or it could be he is finding it difficult to live up to his own lofty standards in filming a music video. The biggest strength of the movie is also its weakness. We all know it is a thinly veiled biography and many of us would have revelled in identifying characters, parallels with real life. But after sometime this ‘spot the trivia contest’ can’t sustain our enthusiasm. (One useless piece of trivia - Guru's daughters - not sons - in the movie are named Disha and Drishti after Amar Singh's daughters!) Like Omkara, Guru starts dragging in the second half because we know most of the developments and can approximately guess the climax. That is a problem Mani also faced with Iruvar. As the story develops, as the characters grow, the dramatic impact starts waning.
Technically the movie is awe inspiring as befits a period film. Rajiv Menon’s camera work and Samir Chanda’s production design come to the fore. The 50s Bombay has been stunningly recreated including trams in junctions (in Binny Mills, Chennai?) and Marine Drive (Pondicherry). Similarly, the New Indian Express press in Chennai suits the setting for ‘Swatantra’ newspaper. The lighting also stands out and keeps pace with the transitions in Guru’s life. It is diffused early on in Istanbul and gradually gains intensity. One particular scene strikes you – the Parsi wedding (family wedding of Guru’s rival, Arzaan Contractor) that helps to move the story forward some 5 years. The lighting (starting with the flashbulbs) is reminiscent of the wedding event in Nayakan when Velu first meets with other dons – Lala, Reddy et al. Lot of work has gone into editing as one gathers that Mani had shot lots more footage – Mallika apparently had some dialogues, Shyam and Manikdas had a scene clashing over the former’s love for Meenu etc – and the movie has been skilfully cut. Overall, the authentic look lifts Guru to the level of Hollywood period films – LA Confidential for example. Guru also reminds me of another iconic Hollywood film, 'Citizen Kane'. But I have to see the movies again to develop this idea.
Among actors, Abhishek has put in lot of hard work for an author backed role. He is convincing in the climax and ages perceptibly, gracefully through the movie. Rightly he has got lot of plaudits for this role. But one feels the praise is overdone. Kamal’s performance in Nayakan sets the standard for portraying stages of life in Indian cinema. Against that yardstick, Abhishek is not fully convincing. He tries a bit too hard and it shows. The showstopper according to me is Mithunda, who shows that a plethora of B grade movies later, he still has the goods. He is commanding and carries off his role with ease. Seeing him for the first time in many years, one is surprised at how majestically he has aged and how he can hold his own with today’s stars. Aptly his name gets top billing in the credits. Aishwarya gives a convincing performance for the first time in years. It is a wonder that almost all her notable performances have come with Tamil directors (Mani and Rajiv Menon). The Abhiwarya pairing clicks. After all Mani is a master at depicting matrimonial romance. Madhavan is surprisingly slim and effective. He is suave and unruffled when he goes after Guru. Vidya Balan is a breath of fresh air in Hindi cinema and she does her reputation no harm in a short role. She and Madhavan get to share a really romantic, sensual kiss. Not the Emran Hashmi lip-grab, this one.
Ultimately, as the story of a man who refused to be tied down by the license-permit raj, guru has a strong resonance in today's India, which has benefited from the unshackling of its entrepreneurial spirit. Manmohan Singh, India's Prime Minister, famously quoted Victor Hugo when he launched economic liberalisation back in 1991, "No power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come". Guru is the story of a man who had the idea earlier than most and went to any lengths to achieve his goal. The movie deserves to be seen for the bold message, technical finesse and some fine performances.
February 26, 2007
February 16, 2007
Oz wobble getting dissected
Mukul Kesavan in his own inimitable way provides his take on Aus's stumble in the second CB final and also lists the learnings from the other matches on the same day. I am not fully convinced about SA; their exceptional home record is flattering their prospects. But they are pros and can be expected to go about their business efficiently in the super eight stage. I still think that they will struggle against teams with good seam attacks.
On breaking news, Oz have had another horror show in the first match of the Chappell-Hadlee series. They have suddenly been stripped bare by injuries to batsmen and Brett Lee. Shaun Tait should provide some quality in bowling but already the selectors' decision to drop Stu Clark and pick Mitchell Johnson appears to be folly. Buchanan will be more concerned about the poor showing in the field, notwithstanding the absence of Ponting and Symonds. At the minimum, expect them to put up a vastly improved show while fielding at Auckland on Sunday.
Momentum is a funny thing in sport - when the going is good and the team is winning even the small things fall in place and the team gets the lucky breaks. Australia are now in that situation where nothing is going right. Indeed, it is a moot point whether they will gain anything by playing in NZ at this time of the year. If my memory serves me right, India had a horror tour of NZ prior to 2003 world cup and it took them couple of matches into the tournament to sort out their batting. The wickets in NZ are not conducive to batting at least in the early part of the day, this time of the year. So matches become some sort of a gamble, dependent on toss. Not the ideal way to prepare for the world cup.
On breaking news, Oz have had another horror show in the first match of the Chappell-Hadlee series. They have suddenly been stripped bare by injuries to batsmen and Brett Lee. Shaun Tait should provide some quality in bowling but already the selectors' decision to drop Stu Clark and pick Mitchell Johnson appears to be folly. Buchanan will be more concerned about the poor showing in the field, notwithstanding the absence of Ponting and Symonds. At the minimum, expect them to put up a vastly improved show while fielding at Auckland on Sunday.
Momentum is a funny thing in sport - when the going is good and the team is winning even the small things fall in place and the team gets the lucky breaks. Australia are now in that situation where nothing is going right. Indeed, it is a moot point whether they will gain anything by playing in NZ at this time of the year. If my memory serves me right, India had a horror tour of NZ prior to 2003 world cup and it took them couple of matches into the tournament to sort out their batting. The wickets in NZ are not conducive to batting at least in the early part of the day, this time of the year. So matches become some sort of a gamble, dependent on toss. Not the ideal way to prepare for the world cup.
February 11, 2007
Book review - In spite of the Gods - The Strange Rise of Modern India by Edward Luce; Little Brown; 388 pages; Rs 695
This is a gem of a book. If someone out there hadn't heard the India story then he or she must have been in a cave the last couple of years. So one has to be careful before picking up yet another book on India. This one is similar in some respects to the ones out there (and ones which may be written). It has the usual stuff -about demographic dividends, the success of IT industry etc. But where it scores is in its sweep, insights gathered from encounters with ruling class as well as ordinary folk (along the way the author runs into police, underworld and religious types) and a detached yet understanding view of the country.
Edward Luce has been partly Indianised, I guess, both by his stint in India as FT's bureau chief and his marriage to an Indian. He starts off promisingly debunking the spiritualism bullshit that has been peddled by too many foreigners (and quite a few Indians along the way) in the past. Having got that off his chest, he proceeds to look at India from different angles - economic, social, political, geopolitical, religious. In doing so, he doesn't come up with startling conclusions but reiterates some obvious home truths. That being a democracy is India's strength. That India's diversity and the regional coalitions that make up the government keep India on the democratic path. That the welfare state's good intentions end up harming the very poor that it is supposed to help. That India's future doesn't lie in villages and consequently India must proceed on a rapid urbanisation, creating durable urban infrastructure to absorb the millions who will migrate from the villages.
This last point is germane to the debate in India today about conversion of agricultural land for industrial purposes. Luce points out that the NGOs'/liberals' favourite rural idyll exists only in paper. Villages are the hotbed of caste-based discrimination and suffer from limited opportunities afforded by an agrarian economy. History suggests that an agriculture based society cannot sustain as the surplus from land alone is not enough to support the growing population. For India to reap the true rewards of its demographic dividends, more people have to be shifted out of agriculture into industry and cities. As Luce observes, the advantage, for the lower castes, in shifting out of villages, is that in cities, caste based discrimination is less commonplace and more opportunities come by everyone. However India's elites, including the ruling classes - conditioned by Mohandas Gandhi's anti-industrial bias - don't frame the problem in this manner and are content to perpetuate rural poverty. Luce is scathing about the rural employment guarantee scheme that is the UPA's flagship pro-poor programme. Indeed, the programme, Keynesian in its vision, is no more than digging up holes and filling them. Be that as it may, urban migration is an inexorable trend that can at best be slowed, but not stopped. As the book points out, overhauling urban infrastructure is one of India's big challenges.
While Luce funds that caste boundaries blur in cities, no such claim can be made about religious differences. Religious identities are sharper in India today than they were sixty years ago and this represents some sort of a success for the Sangh Parivar's Goebbelsian propaganda machine. Luce finds that the RSS is unmistakably fascist in its symbols and convictions; indeed if he had chanced to converse with closet RSS sympathisers he would discover that they marvel at the organisation's discipline,much the same way wiser men across Europe marvelled at the Nazis' industrial success and military strength prior to the second world war. The chapter on Indian Muslims is the most delightful in the book and should help dispel the urban legends that have gained currency amongst Hindus. (As an aside, the short description of the origins of the Deobandi movement is fascinating and is a microcosm of the issues Muslims face reg. modernity) The finding that the Gujarat riots targeted the more tolerant branches of Islam is poignant. Luce's conversation with Modi is predictable as the latter lapses into his brand of chest-thumping bigotry that is so beloved of the knickerwallahs. Despite the conclusion that Hindu nationalism is here to stay, there is hope. By being a preserve of upper castes, the Hindu cause has suffered electorally; hence, according to Luce the future of the cause lies in co-opting the lower castes, much the same way as the nascent Hindu evangelical movements have started doing. Indeed there are reports that the VHP is already going down that route. As the communists found out in the past, India's caste identities can't be wished away in favour of other divisions. Whether this will blunt the edge of this dangerous movement is yet to be seen.
Engrossing as these insights are, the most compelling chapter in the book is the one looking at India's role in today's geopolitics. And Luce is spot on when he opines that the triangular interactions between US, China and India will shape global affairs in years to come. While it is interesting to read how the US has decided to play 'midwife' to India's birth as a global power with the Indo-US nuclear deal, one feels that Luce has reckoned without the political cycle in US throwing spanners in the works. One is not surprised to read accounts of how Indian diplomats are generally perceived by foreign diplomats as pompous and naive. The Indian communists take the cake in advocating suicidal, dogmatic foreign policy but it appear Nehruvian socialists weren't far behind. Altogether the take on India's geopolitical emergence is a frank mix of history and analysis.
Some minor misgivings remain even in a book of such scope and meticulousness. The bit about India's challenge to lift '300 million' out of poverty is ctrl ced,ctrl ved from some world bank powerpoint slides. Luce presents a laundry-list of dos. Disappointingly, he trots out the usual suspects of government needing to step up spending in primary education, health care and so on. Given that he has found that the private sector in India has succeeded in creating world class enterprises in fields as diverse as software and textiles and his own experience of how Muslim women in Hyderabad prefer to send their kids to neighbourhood private schools, the failure to see private sector as the answer for these problems is a glaring omission. I am still waiting for the day when liberals start mentioning the words "vouchers" and schools in the same sentence. Among other gaffes, the small section on Hindi movies is stereotyped and thinly researched. But that is excusable as I am tired of themes like crossover and Bollywood being India's best export. The chapter on Nehru-Gandhis' doesn't break any new ground on Sonia Gandhi, but that may not entirely be Luce's fault. Apropos of nothing, one is reminded of Churchill's remark when someone said that Attlee was a modest man. "He has much to be modest about" the old man opined.
In the end the book is thoroughly enjoyable to read, a rarity given its mix of economics, social issues, politics and geopolitics. Lots of things have been written and said about India. For outsiders this is a good place to start as it surveys what others have said and backs it up or contrasts it with anecdotes as the case may be. For Indians, it is a good opportunity to take a break from the hype about ourselves and appreciate the enormity of the task. As Luce points out in passing in the last chapter, the country is already in the grip of a premature spirit of triumphalism (aided in no small part by the Bennett Coleman group, one might say). And that, more than anything else, is the biggest stumbling block facing India.
Edward Luce has been partly Indianised, I guess, both by his stint in India as FT's bureau chief and his marriage to an Indian. He starts off promisingly debunking the spiritualism bullshit that has been peddled by too many foreigners (and quite a few Indians along the way) in the past. Having got that off his chest, he proceeds to look at India from different angles - economic, social, political, geopolitical, religious. In doing so, he doesn't come up with startling conclusions but reiterates some obvious home truths. That being a democracy is India's strength. That India's diversity and the regional coalitions that make up the government keep India on the democratic path. That the welfare state's good intentions end up harming the very poor that it is supposed to help. That India's future doesn't lie in villages and consequently India must proceed on a rapid urbanisation, creating durable urban infrastructure to absorb the millions who will migrate from the villages.
This last point is germane to the debate in India today about conversion of agricultural land for industrial purposes. Luce points out that the NGOs'/liberals' favourite rural idyll exists only in paper. Villages are the hotbed of caste-based discrimination and suffer from limited opportunities afforded by an agrarian economy. History suggests that an agriculture based society cannot sustain as the surplus from land alone is not enough to support the growing population. For India to reap the true rewards of its demographic dividends, more people have to be shifted out of agriculture into industry and cities. As Luce observes, the advantage, for the lower castes, in shifting out of villages, is that in cities, caste based discrimination is less commonplace and more opportunities come by everyone. However India's elites, including the ruling classes - conditioned by Mohandas Gandhi's anti-industrial bias - don't frame the problem in this manner and are content to perpetuate rural poverty. Luce is scathing about the rural employment guarantee scheme that is the UPA's flagship pro-poor programme. Indeed, the programme, Keynesian in its vision, is no more than digging up holes and filling them. Be that as it may, urban migration is an inexorable trend that can at best be slowed, but not stopped. As the book points out, overhauling urban infrastructure is one of India's big challenges.
While Luce funds that caste boundaries blur in cities, no such claim can be made about religious differences. Religious identities are sharper in India today than they were sixty years ago and this represents some sort of a success for the Sangh Parivar's Goebbelsian propaganda machine. Luce finds that the RSS is unmistakably fascist in its symbols and convictions; indeed if he had chanced to converse with closet RSS sympathisers he would discover that they marvel at the organisation's discipline,much the same way wiser men across Europe marvelled at the Nazis' industrial success and military strength prior to the second world war. The chapter on Indian Muslims is the most delightful in the book and should help dispel the urban legends that have gained currency amongst Hindus. (As an aside, the short description of the origins of the Deobandi movement is fascinating and is a microcosm of the issues Muslims face reg. modernity) The finding that the Gujarat riots targeted the more tolerant branches of Islam is poignant. Luce's conversation with Modi is predictable as the latter lapses into his brand of chest-thumping bigotry that is so beloved of the knickerwallahs. Despite the conclusion that Hindu nationalism is here to stay, there is hope. By being a preserve of upper castes, the Hindu cause has suffered electorally; hence, according to Luce the future of the cause lies in co-opting the lower castes, much the same way as the nascent Hindu evangelical movements have started doing. Indeed there are reports that the VHP is already going down that route. As the communists found out in the past, India's caste identities can't be wished away in favour of other divisions. Whether this will blunt the edge of this dangerous movement is yet to be seen.
Engrossing as these insights are, the most compelling chapter in the book is the one looking at India's role in today's geopolitics. And Luce is spot on when he opines that the triangular interactions between US, China and India will shape global affairs in years to come. While it is interesting to read how the US has decided to play 'midwife' to India's birth as a global power with the Indo-US nuclear deal, one feels that Luce has reckoned without the political cycle in US throwing spanners in the works. One is not surprised to read accounts of how Indian diplomats are generally perceived by foreign diplomats as pompous and naive. The Indian communists take the cake in advocating suicidal, dogmatic foreign policy but it appear Nehruvian socialists weren't far behind. Altogether the take on India's geopolitical emergence is a frank mix of history and analysis.
Some minor misgivings remain even in a book of such scope and meticulousness. The bit about India's challenge to lift '300 million' out of poverty is ctrl ced,ctrl ved from some world bank powerpoint slides. Luce presents a laundry-list of dos. Disappointingly, he trots out the usual suspects of government needing to step up spending in primary education, health care and so on. Given that he has found that the private sector in India has succeeded in creating world class enterprises in fields as diverse as software and textiles and his own experience of how Muslim women in Hyderabad prefer to send their kids to neighbourhood private schools, the failure to see private sector as the answer for these problems is a glaring omission. I am still waiting for the day when liberals start mentioning the words "vouchers" and schools in the same sentence. Among other gaffes, the small section on Hindi movies is stereotyped and thinly researched. But that is excusable as I am tired of themes like crossover and Bollywood being India's best export. The chapter on Nehru-Gandhis' doesn't break any new ground on Sonia Gandhi, but that may not entirely be Luce's fault. Apropos of nothing, one is reminded of Churchill's remark when someone said that Attlee was a modest man. "He has much to be modest about" the old man opined.
In the end the book is thoroughly enjoyable to read, a rarity given its mix of economics, social issues, politics and geopolitics. Lots of things have been written and said about India. For outsiders this is a good place to start as it surveys what others have said and backs it up or contrasts it with anecdotes as the case may be. For Indians, it is a good opportunity to take a break from the hype about ourselves and appreciate the enormity of the task. As Luce points out in passing in the last chapter, the country is already in the grip of a premature spirit of triumphalism (aided in no small part by the Bennett Coleman group, one might say). And that, more than anything else, is the biggest stumbling block facing India.
Poms do it to the Oz at SCG
I didn't speak too soon. England completed a rain-affected (DL) win over Australia to win the CB tri-series, the first time Australia have lost in these finals in over 100 years, err 14 years. Didn't catch much of the match as it was constantly interrupted and I had to endure a painful India-SL match (which, India, true to form managed to lose), but still one heck of a performance from Freddie and co. Dalrymple's catch to dismiss Watson epitomised the final. The Aussie batting line-up is looking worryingly brittle and the old men in the Channel nine commentary box were close to tears by the time it all ended. And to those (primarily Aussie expats) who may argue that England sneaked a win, consider that of the six matches in this series, Aus-Eng stand at 3-3 with England winning three in a row and importantly the two that mattered.
Hats off to England, once again. They are getting some momentum going into world cup. Pieterson's return should strengthen them further. For my take on Aussie weaknesses see my earlier post. The world cup should be cracking. Of the eight 'big' teams, only Pakistan seem to be in doldrums. So that's seven teams fighting to fit into four semi-final spots. Can't wait.
Hats off to England, once again. They are getting some momentum going into world cup. Pieterson's return should strengthen them further. For my take on Aussie weaknesses see my earlier post. The world cup should be cracking. Of the eight 'big' teams, only Pakistan seem to be in doldrums. So that's seven teams fighting to fit into four semi-final spots. Can't wait.
February 10, 2007
Chink in the Aussie armour?
England are one win away from completing the ultimate smash and grab raid in the CB series. After getting hammered throughout the (Aussie) summer, they sneaked into the ODI series finals and pulled off an amazing 4-wicket win over the Aussies at MCG yesterday. Collingwood did the star turn with the bat and in the field. While the Pom media have predictably gone to town with what is (only) their second win over Aussies on this tour, even Cricinfo has found it fit to dwell only on the English side of the story. To me, the more engrossing development of this tri-series is the surfacing of some weaknesses in the Aussie team, when we are just a few weeks away from the biggie in the Caribbean. When Buchanan lamented that his boys are not getting a proper workout from Eng/NZ, he wouldn't have bargained for this.
Weaknesses were never far from the surface in the recent Champions Trophy, but the Aussies successfully overcame them to lift the trophy. Australia are struggling to replace Damien Martyn and now it looks like they may have to replace Symonds too. Hodge should do the job in the middle-order but for some odd reason a middle order that also boasts of Clarke and Hussey has had more than its share of collapses. Other teams must be thinking along the lines of 'remove Ponting and you have an opening'. Indeed the game changed pretty quickly the other day once Ponting, who was motoring along, was dismissed. Still with so many (too many some would say) matchwinners in that batting line up, one gets the feeling they will turn it on when it matters.
Symonds' loss is the greater blow, in my view. It is not entirely clear if he will miss the world cup but assuming he does Australia have a problem, actually three problems. They need a powerful lower order hitter, an useful fifth bowler and a top class fielder to replace Symonds! Cameron White has been tried but is not upto scratch. Shane Watson is still to convince but he has improved his bowling and is the best hope Aussies have at this point of time. Problem is he is just coming back from injury and is running out of time to become match fit. Going back to the final, the Australian bowling appeared toothless whenever Lee was away from the attack. Hogg, who can be a handful on some days appears to suffer from rustiness. And whisper it but McGrath and Hayden belied their age in the field. Still it would be rash to bet against them - Lee, McGrath and Bracken are good to finish off most teams on most of the days. But when one of them is having an off day, do Australia have others to step up to the plate? What if the off day happens to be in the World Cup semi-final or final?
With Ponting and Gilchrist missing, not much can be read into the results of the forthcoming Chapell-Hadlee series against NZ. But their performances, particularly in the field, will be dissected minutely. If there is one thing the Aussies are really good at, it is in digesting losses/setbacks and rebounding strongly. India (2003-2004) and England (2005-2006) will testify to that. But if England manage to put it past the Aussies one more time, either at Sydney or Adelaide, those world cup odds on Ponting and co might just lengthen a bit.
Weaknesses were never far from the surface in the recent Champions Trophy, but the Aussies successfully overcame them to lift the trophy. Australia are struggling to replace Damien Martyn and now it looks like they may have to replace Symonds too. Hodge should do the job in the middle-order but for some odd reason a middle order that also boasts of Clarke and Hussey has had more than its share of collapses. Other teams must be thinking along the lines of 'remove Ponting and you have an opening'. Indeed the game changed pretty quickly the other day once Ponting, who was motoring along, was dismissed. Still with so many (too many some would say) matchwinners in that batting line up, one gets the feeling they will turn it on when it matters.
Symonds' loss is the greater blow, in my view. It is not entirely clear if he will miss the world cup but assuming he does Australia have a problem, actually three problems. They need a powerful lower order hitter, an useful fifth bowler and a top class fielder to replace Symonds! Cameron White has been tried but is not upto scratch. Shane Watson is still to convince but he has improved his bowling and is the best hope Aussies have at this point of time. Problem is he is just coming back from injury and is running out of time to become match fit. Going back to the final, the Australian bowling appeared toothless whenever Lee was away from the attack. Hogg, who can be a handful on some days appears to suffer from rustiness. And whisper it but McGrath and Hayden belied their age in the field. Still it would be rash to bet against them - Lee, McGrath and Bracken are good to finish off most teams on most of the days. But when one of them is having an off day, do Australia have others to step up to the plate? What if the off day happens to be in the World Cup semi-final or final?
With Ponting and Gilchrist missing, not much can be read into the results of the forthcoming Chapell-Hadlee series against NZ. But their performances, particularly in the field, will be dissected minutely. If there is one thing the Aussies are really good at, it is in digesting losses/setbacks and rebounding strongly. India (2003-2004) and England (2005-2006) will testify to that. But if England manage to put it past the Aussies one more time, either at Sydney or Adelaide, those world cup odds on Ponting and co might just lengthen a bit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)