Hunger Games

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins is the first book of a trilogy. The story is set in an uncertain time in the future in what is now North America and in the book, the country of Panem.

Panem consists of a Capitol surrounded by 12 districts. Each year, to remind the districts of the consequences of rebellion against the Capitol, the Capitol holds the hunger games. Each district is required to send one boy and one girl between the ages of 12 and 18 to participate in the games. To win the Hunger games the participants must eliminate each other within an artificially created environment known as "The Arena" till only one of them is alive. The Games are televised and broadcast across the country as a show of the Capitol's power over the districts. In its setting and premise the book is highly reminiscent of  Battle Royale, the Japanese movie. There too rebellious adolescents are kept in place by a fight to the death.

The Hunger Games begins in district 12, the poorest of the districts with Katniss Everdeen volunteering to take her 12 year old sister's place in the Hunger Games. As a thriller Hunger Games scores full points. There are enough moments, nicely interspersed to keep you flipping the pages, enough to make me want to complete the trilogy.

As an exploration of war and its effects on freedom and morality it falls short. I would have liked to see Katniss make a few more tough choices. The book circumvents tough choices in fairytale fashion with the Capitol relenting almost too easily. Personal conflict is almost absent as Katniss hardly faces a dilemma that calls for her morals, actions or choices into question. What would she have done if it came to her survival vs. that of a friend? Would she value her life more than a past kindness? Would she consciously rebel against the Capitol and the powers that be? There is no choice that Katniss is called on to make that compels the reader to evaluate the ethics of war, dictatorship and rebellion; choices whose consequences are unpalatable for Katniss and the reader.

While there is promise of retaliation by the Capitol in the other two books of the series, I do wish this one had examined the personal choices that people make in situations of extreme stress with a little more depth.

A P.S to the Post: After reading the other two books, I think the only key character who represents the personal crisis that is created by war, dictatorship and rebellion is Gale. At the very end of the tale, it is his choices that are worth thinking about. I wonder if he would have played the Hunger Games differently as opposed to Katniss or Peeta. Sure would have made for an even more engrossing read.

In a P.S that is longer than it should be, I should also say that I think the ancillary characters add much more meat to the story than do the protagonists. They represent the entire spectrum of choices that people must make in situations where Peace is not an option.

The death of the villian

 For many decades Bollywood has had iconic baddies. From Ajit as LION to Amjad Khan as the unforgettable Gabbar Singh to Amrish Puri as Mogambo. They were unabashedly bad making no excuses for their actions. You had to hate them and in doing so love the characters. They often became more defining than the heroes themselves, stronger protagonists whose destruction became the raison d'être for the film.


Somewhere today this memorable character has disappeared. In the fuzz of grey characters there are no villians anymore. Only people with questionable actions and morals spanning the spectrum between black and white without being either. So much so that the category of "Best actor is a villainous role" has all but disappeared from award shows. 

One could argue that this is more real, more nuanced, that people are hardly all good or all bad; that it is time that Bollywood got more realistic and less over the top in its portrayal of characters. And this is an argument that does hold good. Films have gotten more realistic, less melodramatic and on the whole more relate-able. I don't think I ever believed that someone like Mogambo or Shaakaal could exist with all the fancy hideouts with women dancing in silhouettes. 


While I am all for realistic portrayals and characters who are relate-able, I do wonder if the blurring distinction between good and bad is what has led to audiences often complaining that they don't understand what the movie is trying to say. Yes, all of us are grey and by that token, grey characters should probably be easy enough to decode. Only they aren't; they aren't because in a two-three hour film, you get but a fleeting glance of their lives and their thoughts; they aren't because decoding them is too much work when you are out looking just for entertainment; they aren't because decoding them raises uncomfortable questions about your own life and actions. 


And lastly I lament the passing of the villain because I wonder if it also means the passing of the hero. Batman, after all, wouldn't be Batman without The Joker.

The meaning of modernity

Mom was here recently and we were having one of our long winding, jumping from here to there, no end in sight discussions and the topic came around to one of the things that almost always crop up - the tradition vs. modernity dichotomy and what it really means to be modern. Is modernity only about blindly abandoning your tradition/culture? All around me I see  two extreme patterns. One is an endorsement of everything western and the abandon of everything Indian. The other is a fanatical endorsement of everything Indian and ancient and a denouncement of everything western as decadent and morally bankrupt. What I see very little of is questioning. What I see very little of is true progressiveness and a critical thinking.

To my mind, the blind adoption of an alien culture is a sign of capitulation to hegemony and not a sign of modernity or progressiveness. Modernity, the way I see it, is the ability to evaluate what values are important irrespective of their origin; to be able to use all the access to information and exposure to different cultures that we have to our advantage and find a balance that guides our choices and our behaviour through life.

At the same time, unquestioning obedience to one's own culture, at a time when life and society are completely different from the circumstances in which the culture and its practices originated, does lead to a situation where one's values are often impractical to follow or implement.

What is important, then, is to understand the larger purpose that a culture and a value system serves in preserving a civilization. Value systems are an ordering influence, a compass to align individual behaviours to be non-conflicting. They encompass broad values that determine the direction that a society or civilization takes, its attitudes towards production, distribution and consumption, its notions of right and wrong, of justice. It comes not with the legal sanction of the station but the moral sanction of the people who chose to follow it.

In that larger abstract framework, modernity lies not in the blind adoption of a system based on its origins but in the ability to recognize values that are universal, that benefit humanity beyond national borders and that provide support and direction in times of tension, dilemmas and choice.

More about Singapore - of winding lanes, dolphin hoops and deceiving flowers

Once I got back from Bali and was fully recovered, which by itself took a full day, I got a chance go around Singapore and explore somewhat. My experience of Singapore proper started with Arab street. Sister and her friends took me there for a lovely sit down dinner and I happily gobbled my way through lots of hummus and foul (now the name might be a tad deceptive there but it's actually a pretty tasty dish made with dried fava beans and loads of olive oil!) amid much conversation and merriment. But what really does catch the eye about Arab Street is the funky street art. The brightly painted walls of roadside cafes add a lot of character and much excitement at chancing upon something quirky as you wander through these little winding lanes (I doubt I could find my way around that place again!).

Singapore, by the way, is a foodie's delight. There's all the "stall" food, the food courts serving all sorts of Asian food and lots of lovely little restaurants. My favourite, and I regret not having my camera along as I went to meet a friend for dinner, was Marche's. A swiss eatery, more than the food, or the "pick what you want" from different counters, what I loved was the way the whole place was done up. Under the streets of Singapore, Marche's had recreated Heidi's farm - complete with vegetable and fruit cards piled high with veggies and fruits to a little barn - all in lovely wood and warm hues. The place looks so inviting that even someone stuffed like a Turkey would feel hungry there. In fact, I really do regret not taking more pictures of Singapore, the city.

But well... coming back to my chronological chronicle, after the night spent at Arab Street, I behaved like a good tourist and decided to make my way to Sentosa. So on to the MRT I got and headed straight to Vivo City. Apart from being the mall from where one takes the train to Sentosa, the star attraction for me at Vivo City was the Nat Geo store. I was all but lost in there for a couple of hours and after glumly picking up just one book (weight and cash constraints you see) I had to literally throw myself out of the place. I would have gladly spent the entire day in there browsing through all the photographs, magazines, books and maps they had in there. However, I did have an agenda for the day and so with another longing glance at the store, I left and went up the escalators and got myself on the monorail to Sentosa.

Sentosa looks very impressive from afar but as you draw closer the artificiality of it all starts to seep through. It's not the kind of beauty that I particularly appreciate. I'd prefer nature to do it's own thing, a little wild and unsculpted. Man trying to imitate nature at her own game is, to me, a bit of a losing battle. We are better off building steel and glass skyscrapers or the Taj as monuments to our skills. The imported silver sand beaches are nice to walk on but I much prefered Coronado, an island off the coast of San Diego, for that or even Goa simply because they are natural... the sands there belong there and the little rocky outcrops create delicious pools of water in which to wiggle your toes.

Anyhow, there I was at Sentosa and after a little bit of random ambling around I decided to head to Underwater world. Once again a pretty big disappointment. I was done touring the entire place in half an hour flat. After Monterey bay aquarium, a definite let down. Apart from the size, the thing that really disappointed me here was the lack of any substantial information near any of the displays and the complete lack of respect that visitors seemed to be showing towards the creatures. So out I walked into the sunshine and plonked myself with a cheese sandwich and my book (recently bought at the Nat Geo store) on the beach outside Underwater world to wait for the Dolphin and Fur seal shows.

This was the highlight of going to Sentosa for me. The pink dolphins and the fur seals are absolutely absolutely cute and adorable. Nothing in a picture or a film comes close to how you feel when you see their "smiling" (dolphins) and expressive (fur seals) faces up front. The show however generated mixed feelings in me. To be absolutely honest, I'd never end up seeing any of the animals up close except in a zoo/aquarium. I don't think I have the enthusiasm to go looking for them in their natural habitats. But watching them being made to do tricks to loud rock music with little fish being tossed to them as motivation for our amusement somehow seemed to make a mockery of their existence. It seemed to me that they were being made to earn their keep. Not fair... since humans are the ones merciless destroying their natural habitats in the first place. I'd be far happier to just watch them swim or waddle around at will. The fur seals also seemed to have similar thoughts as one of them completely refused to move and perform his bag of tricks mid-way into the show and needed much massaging and coaxing to get him moving again.

At this point, I got a call from sister's friend saying she was going to the botanical gardens to take some pictures. Since I'd been planning to visit the gardens myself and I was more or less done at Sentosa and in fairly low spirits, off I went. The Botanical Gardens, I am glad to say, was a lovely end to a day that I would have otherwise written off. Rolling hills, soft grasses, lakes tucked away behind huge trees and wonder of wonders... an entire sprawling section devoted to Orchids!!!

Now I should tell you, Orchids are my favourite flowers. I love them for the vibrancy of their colors, especially that vivid blue, and for the delicacy of their structure. They seem so frail and yet they are amongst the hardiest of flowers. And then this article in an issue of the National Geographic gave me even more reason to be fascinated by this highly diverse family of flowers. So imagine my happiness when I saw a signboard that said National Orchid Garden! Oh the sheer joy of it!!! Happy to pay the entry price and glad that I was carrying a spare battery and memory card for my camera, I joyously ran along and dragged friend also along. We clicked and chatted the evening through in, what was for me at least, complete bliss. As the sun set and more photography became impossible, two tired but happy girls headed home with plans to come back for sunrise the next morning. We did amaze ourselves by actually making it there for sunrise the next day and we shot the swans and wooden gazebos covered in creepers in that magic morning light. A hearty breakfast of fresh fruits and coconut water later we crashed and then saw only the Singaporean evening thereafter.

PS: Links in the article lead to the photo albums (except for the nat geo article link). So please do click on them :)

                                                                                                                                 Bali

Bali - Rain, sun, and some temple touring

When I said Bali, a dear friend immediately commented that my trip sounded like I was doing an Eat, Pray, Love number. Well, we (my sister and I) certainly did eat. We went to temples too (though I am not sure we prayed). And unfortunately we found no Xavier Bardems :( .  But I can't say I have any complaints.

Kuta, where we were staying, is the heart of touristy Bali. With a dozen lodges and inns, uncountable eateries, bars and discotheques and unending rows of shops, it caters to all the necessities of a tourist destination. Additionally, Kuta is also home to the Bali bombings (2005) memorial. Beautifully lit at night and smack in the middle of the busy Jalan Legian (the arterial road in Kuta), it draws almost every tourist in the area. It is also the only sombre note in an area that defines the 21st century notion of Fun.

Knowing that we had a little more than 2 days in Bali (technically we were there for 3 but counting arrival and departure we were left with about two and a half days), sister and I had packed in our sightseeing schedule with the things we absolutely wanted to see in those two days. What we didn't account for was the rain and cloudiness which forced us to adapt and change our plans on the 3rd April. With the rains playing spoil sport, we barely caught sight of Mount Batur and its caldera lake. But when we did, it definitely was a sight worth seeing. The next time I go to Bali, I am going to make sure I have enough time to do the midnight hike up Mt. Batur to the crater itself!

One of the reasons I had chosen to combine Bali and Cambodia (Angkor at any rate) was that they are both Hindu cults and there is, even today, an element of Indianization in their cultures and way of life. I figured they would give an interesting perspective on how religions and cultures spread and adapt.

During our stay in Bali, we visited three temples - Gunung Kawi, Goa Gajah and Uluwatu. The first two are smaller temples, the last a major tourist spot. One of the first things we noticed about temples in Bali is that they are very one with their natural setting (Angkor in this respect was more like India). They are not tall, imposing, cloistered spaces meant to intimidate or over awe. Instead they are squat, horizontally spread and with plenty of space for people to gather. At Gunung Kawi and Uluwatu, we could not see the main temple complex till we were very nearly at the doorstep. Another interesting departure from how the temple experience is constructed in India is that there is no priest at the temple officiating over everyday prayers. People of the community to whom the temple belongs may go make offerings and pray in whatever manner pleases them. Priests officiate only at special occasions and ceremonies. Our driver Gusti, at the Gunung Kawi temple, also performed an everyday ceremony for us... the way the locals would. He also took us to his village and while we were too late to see the ceremony at his family temple, the size of the temple offering his mother-in-law was carrying quite stunned us.

Temples in Bali are also highly personal in that each community has its own temple into which outsiders (including other Balinese) are not allowed. Larger temples such as Pura Besakih, Uluwatu and Tanah Lot are temples where all the Balinese pray (outsiders are still not allowed... even if you are Hindu) but the smaller community temples are meant for the community alone. The community gathers there each evening to pray, sing and dance, as Gusti informed us.

How religions adapt to local culture was evident in more than just how the temple is built and the absence of a priest. While in India it would be unacceptable to bring meat near a temple or religious ceremony, we learnt that in Bali, no ceremony is complete without the sacrifice of a pig and that the delicacy/offering for the day is made with the blood of the sacrificed pig! The depictions of gods and of Hindu mythology also varies pretty drastically. Gods in India are clean shaven and well groomed. Not so in Bali. They sport huge handlebar mustaches and elaborate hair-dos. Sis and I did end up having an interesting debate on why the Gods would end up looking so unlike the local people and figured it was probably an attempt to make them look more intimidating.

At Uluwatu we also saw the Kecak dance that is performed every evening for tourists at the temple's amphitheater. The Kecak is interesting in that it is not accompanied by any music but instead by a rhythmic chorus that tends to go on in a monotone. The dance that evening was depicting a part of the Ramayana (The Ramayana is the major epic in Bali and most dances will depict one or the other part of the epic) - from Sita's abduction to Anoman's (Hanuman) burning of Lanka. Based on a traditional village purification ritual, the dance began with the lighting of the lamp and the priest blessing the chorus. The chorus interestingly, is not just the chorus but also forms the set as well as the props for the dance. The high point of the dance was the actual lighting of Lanka for which the entire stage was set ablaze.

But Bali was not just about temples. We spent a good part of our second day on the island at the Nusa Dua beach jet skiing and sunning ourselves - much needed relaxation for the sister and me. About this though, the less said the better ;) I'd suggest anyone who wants to know how it was gets themselves a beach, a deck chair and a nice mocktail :)

Pics                                                                                                                First Impressions