From the Editor’s Desk After 3 long years, the time has come for me to deliver my vote of thanks. First and foremost, my editorial board for tolerating my temperament, enjoying my elation, and assuaging my anger as and when needed. Thanks are also due to Arnaav Bhavanani, Krishna Lohiya, and some others who have acted as guinea pigs, freelance editors, and most importantly, wet blankets for my more outlandish ideas. As I tell everyone who lends an ear, publishing a magazine is hard work, and more so when you have 2 months to prepare it rather than 4! In my A- and S-forms, as Graphic Designer of The Doon School Information Review, I vehemently opposed any mention of a ‘Founder’s Issue.’ I came up with countless arguments, which of course were a lot more convincing at a higher octave. Of course, for me, the real issue was lethargy above all others. The challenge of designing a magazine in a matter of days rather than weeks is extremely intimidating for an average 16-year-old. (At 17, of course, it is a different matter altogether!) For one, since the intended audience has expanded to include adults of varying ages, it is a struggle to select a particular theme. No two generations in recorded history have ever perfectly related to each other. There are stark differences between my generation and the one my parents belong to. This leads to many children growing up while hearing of prominent figures of their parents’ generation. This is by no means a bad thing; Pink Floyd truly is sublime, and I am a huge fan of Francis Ford Coppola (who also directed The Godfather Parts I and II). However, the artists and entertainers of the 21st Century can’t be compared to those of the 20th Century, just as Impressionistic paintings can’t be compared to ‘modern art’. I believe it is safe to say that an age is defined by the style of entertainment that exists within it. For the ancient Romans, it was watching gladiators. For the Elizabethan Age, it was Shakespeare. With the turn of the century, entertainment has become more focused on screen and sound. Our generation, thanks to our parents, is sure to be somewhat educated about the entertainers of our past. If not through parental means, then surely through past issues of the DSIR (if I may give our humble publication that much credit), which have included ‘retro’ themes and entertainers specifically from the 20th Century. In an effort to bridge the gap, I offer to the generation that raised us the best of our generation. This year, we have cherry-picked articles from a multitude of movies that have been released over the last 15 years. Since we needed a yardstick to define what a great movie, book, TV series, or album was, we took a little help from the critics fraternity and jury. In honour of the DS80 Founder’s Day Celebrations, we took the plunge. The Board’s (intermittent) labours have borne fruit, and we hope the crop is sweet. Without further ado, we present to you the DSIR.
1
Movies
4
Birdman
Reviewed by Mr Umung Varma, this film won the Academy Award for Best Picture as well as various other Academy Awards in 2015.
Whiplash
At the 2014 Academy Awards, this film, reviewed by Rishabh Agarwal, was nominated for Best Picture and received the Best Supporting Actor Award.
7
6
A Beautiful Mind
Reviewed by Chaitanya Kediyal, this film won the Academy Award for Best Picture in 2002.
TV Series
8
The Daily Show : With Jon Stewart
Reviewed by Chaitanya Kediyal, this show has won the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Variety, Music or Comedy Series for ten consecutive years.
Modern Family
Reviewed by Krishna Lohiya, this show has won the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Comedy Series for five consecutive years.
10 House M.D.
9
Game of Thrones | New Moralities Of An Amoral World
Mr Debasish Chakrabarty doesn’t review the winner of 26 Primetime Emmy Awards, instead, he gives his take on why such a show is needed in today’s society.
Abhayraj Jain reviews the Primetime Emmy Award Winner for Outstanding Direction (2008) and three time nominee for the Primetime Emmy for Outstanding Drama Series.
12
Music
14
In The Lonely Hour | Sam Smith
Reviewed by Shlok Jain, this artist won a Grammy Award for the best Record of the Year in 2015, as well as the Best New Artist for the year 2015.
How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb | U2
Reviewed by Sasyak Pattnaik, this album won all nine Grammy Awards for which it was nominated, including the Album of the Year in 2006.
16
15
The Social Network | Soundtrack
Dhruv Johri reviews the soundtrack of the 2010 awardee of the Academy Award for Original Score.
Literature
17
Sense of an Ending | Julian Barnes
Aditya Bhardwaj reviews the novel which received the Man Booker Prize for the year 2011.
The White Tiger | Aravind Adiga
Madhav Singhal reviews the novel which received the Man Booker Prize for the year 2008.
18
Previews
Star Wars Episode VII : The Force Awakens Deadpool
25 | Adele A Head Full Of Dreams | Coldplay
19 Lucifer Suicide Squad
Movies Academy Award for Best Picture (2015)
Birdman:
Or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)
Birdman is a barrel of koans and and clichés, but it also speaks to our deepest fears and desires. At one point the Birdman growls, “you’re an imposter here; eventually they will figure you out.” Insecurity. Alejandro González Iñárritu’s 2014, Academy Award winning film trudges up from the very depth of our souls an insecurity known to big-screen mega-stars, famous authors, billionaires, Prime Ministers, Ivy-League graduates, bosses, coaches, teachers, and school captains the world over. Birdman is the sinister voice in your head telling you that no one loves you, but that it doesn’t matter, because you are better than everyone around you. The movie follows an actor who was famous for playing a super hero twenty years ago. He made a lot of money off those movies, but he hasn’t done meaningful acting in the decades since. Now he’s risking everything to write, direct and act in a play on Broadway. In a brilliant piece of casting, our hero is played by Michael Keaton who himself was Batman (1989), adding a hilarious undercurrent to the entire gag. Like all great stories, Birdman asks the fundamental questions: who are you, and what do you want? Achilles’ mother wanted him to be immortal; Freud thought men wanted to die; Warhol said everyone wanted to be famous; Alfred thought some men just want to watch the world burn; and the band Tears for Fears sang a song exclaiming that everybody wants to rule the world. In Birdman, what Michael Keaton’s character seems to want is to be an artist. But scratch beneath the surface, and a darker undercurrent emerges. “We have to end it on our own terms, with a grand gesture,” Birdman whispers in his mind. Our hero wants to have done great art, but then he wants to keep that reputation forever. He wants permanent proof that he existed. The film brilliantly uses Emma Stone to play our hero’s millennial daughter who possesses a trending metric for what really matters. “You don’t even have a Facebook page,” her character tells her dad. “You’re the one who doesn’t exist.” “I don’t exist.” Those words are repeated many times. Fame, popularity, Likes, blogs – these are the metrics to which the characters in Birdman turn for some reassurance that they have left a mark. A man on the street shouts lines from Macbeth at the top of his voice, but without an audience, he is invisible to the city around him. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. The villain of the story is the Theater Critic for the New York Times. Despite all the nasty things said about her, the film cannot quite bring itself to equate a newspaper review with the maya jaal of retweets and viral videos. In the end, in a page right out of Ratatouille (2007), the critic is deeply moved to pen a favorable review of our hero’s play. When our hero’s best friend (Zach Galifianakis) shows him the glowing newspaper review and says that this means he will be performing the play again and again and again, we can guess that the end is near. If you treat your life like a performance, then every day is
MR UMUNG VARMA
another chance that you might fail in the public eye. I won’t spoil the movie’s closing, but I will say that the twist reminded me of K-PAX (2001). When you feel like an imposter, then the only way to seal your reputation is to end the show on a high note. There is a scene in Birdman where Michael Keaton’s character finds himself on a literal precipice. In a moment of shattered identity, a kind stranger keeps him from plunging into the abyss. A flight of fancy imagines our hero jumping off and soaring through the streets of New York. “This is where you belong, above them all,” a Sith-like Birdman reassuringly strokes his ego. “Gravity does not apply to you.” There are points in life when things seem to be happening to someone else, and it feels like you’re just watching from up on high. The opening night of a Founder’s Day play. The first day of college, a first date, the death of a parent, your first day at work. These out-of-body moments can make you giddy and they can give you vertigo. The French call it nausea. The Germans call it anxiety. After these moments of levity, you keep waiting for someone to say “you did it; you passed.” At one point in the movie Naomi Watts’ character, who can hardly believe she is opening on Broadway, says, “I keep waiting for someone to tell me I’ve made it.” But that can never be, because there is no “it” to be made. Life is not a test, and life is not a performance. The quote Michael Keaton’s character has taped to his mirror reads: “A thing is a thing, not what is said of that thing.” Tat Tvam Asi. Life just is. Until it ain’t.
“You’re anything but invisible. You’re big. You’re kind of a great mess. It’s like a candle burning at both ends, but it’s beautiful.”
DSIR ‘15
5
Movies Nominated for the Academy Award for Best Picture (2015)
Whiplash
“There are no two words in the English language more harmful than good job”. These terrifying yet profound words from Damien Chazelle’s Whiplash give quite an apt and concise description of the entire mood of the film. Though this might seem like quite a one-dimensional perspective on the film, I personally failed to see another dimension to this dramatic jazz feature. The ambition to improve and seek the approval of ruthless conductor, surprisingly seems to be all that is on the mind of a young nineteen year old boy living at the heart of New York City. But this is not quite the only gaping, baffling error in this film. As an intermediate musician, I feel it its essential to point out that music does not encompass just practicing mechanically at odd hours of the day. Granted, it is essential for every musician to have the kind of practice ethics and determination to achieve greatness. But greatness in its true sense is not the ability to just reproduce a series of notes at a precise specified tempo with a hundred percent notional accuracy. It is only a part of what ‘great’ music entails, which I hope am correct in assuming is the intended objective of those studying at Shaffer Conservatory, a school of professional music. This movie just portrays notes, not music. There is absolutely no element of personal expression on the part of the musicians. Music, however professional, has to have a certain sense of freedom and enjoyment for the performers, whereas the film shows J.K Simmons’ character Terence Fletcher taking away the rights of the performers to have either. Music as early as that of J.S. Bach, who was considered to be a strictly textbook composer, allowed room for the performer to improvise and was open to interpretation of the performer in terms of its tempo and dynamics. This is jazz we are talking about. The earliest form of jazz, the blues which originates from the native music of Africa, is about expression of pain and the soul. Jazz is pillared on the concepts of improvisation, which is basically creating music as it moves along, and expression through instrumental and vocal solos. But Whiplash seems to disregard an entire era of 20th century American Music, to support the fiendish character of Terence Fletcher.
The Director takes a leaf from history’s book, making a reference to the infamous ’27’s Club’ - “I’d rather die drunk, broke at 34 and have people at a dinner table talk about me than live to be rich and sober at 90 and nobody remembered who I was.” These inspiring words from the movie’s protagonist Andrew Neiman might resonate with the ambitions of a few of us, but I am afraid are quite far fetched for him. I am not saying that composers or music producers are the only ones who are to be commended for their creativity while the performers who put in years and years of practice are to be looked down upon. If one was to consider any famous performer today be it on any instrument, one would realize that what makes them great is the incorporation of an individual style, a certain thought-out musical interpretation of every piece that they perform into their skilled control over the instrument. The mindless style of playing jazz that is portrayed by Chazelle is at the least an insult to the rich and beautiful art form that is jazz. Having said that, the movie is at least a fair attempt at producing something different for the audience. Overlooking the fact that it stretches this one dimensioned idea of hard effort required in music beyond the point of absurdity, it is a good watch.
RISHABH AGARWAL
DSIR ‘15
6
Academy Award for Best Picture (2002)
A Beautiful Mind
A brilliant performance by Russell Crowe; spectacular direction by Ron Howard; four Academy Award to bear testimony that A Beautiful Mind is truly an amazing film. The movie is a biopic, revolving around the life of John Nash, a mathematician and an economist, who won the Nobel Prize for his work in Economics. The movie starts from his early days at Princeton University. From the very start we can see that there is something unique and peculiar about this man, and his ambition to be able to publish something ‘original’. He spends his years at Princeton madly trying to get an idea about which he can write. Finally, when at a bar, he gets his idea, when he argues that a co-operative strategy would make it better for his friends to get a girl to dance with, and so the game theory was born. He is then hired by MIT as a lecturer where a student of his, asks him out for dinner, and after a while they marry. The movie goes on to depict his life. John Nash began to suffer from paranoid schizophrenia, and he begins to hallucinate having roommate, the roommate’s niece and an America spy. His life takes a turn for worse and he thinks that he’s working for American intelligence and he makes elaborate schemes, attempting to decode magazines and books for ‘Soviet’ messages. When his wife finds out she threatens to leave him, and when giving a lecture at Harvard he flees midway, thinking that Soviet spies were chasing him, and assaults one of the professors. He is sedated and sent off to a psychiatric facility. He is soon discharged, and once he realizes that he had been hallucinating, he tries to control himself without using medicines. Something unique about the film is the beauty with which it portrays John Nash’s life, one wants to know more about this man, and his great work. When Nash begins to break down bit-by-bit it is heart wrenching and almost painful to watch. Tears come to my eyes, when I remember and imagine the pain and depression this man must have endured. And to see him tackle this, and rise once again is truly inspiring, and it brings out raw emotions of happiness in the audience. One scene that I will always fondly remember is towards the end of the movie: the ‘pen ceremony’, in which all the professors in the university come and place their pens in front of John Nash as a sign of respect and excellence. The scene is a culmination of all that has happened in his life; all the ups and downs finally lead to that scene, and at that moment is indescribable. Another distinct feature of this movie is the sheer excellence of the cast. The acting is natural and the effect that it has on the audience is simply spectacular. As mentioned before Russell Crowe was truly amazing and it is a shame that he wasn’t able to win the Academy Award for Best Actor despite being nominated for it. Jennifer Connelly went on to win an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress for her role as John Nash’s wife, Alicia Larde. Though the film was critically acclaimed it did receive criticism for the inaccurate portrayal of John Nash’s life, and certain sections were said to be highly dramatized and downright false. Throughout his life he isn’t appreciated, and what is worse is that he is actually ostracized for his mental condition. It moves the audience because of the hardships that this man faces. Ultimately this film is a definite must-watch, it is inspiring and instills respect for the genius that was John Nash.
CHAITANYA KEDIYAL
DSIR ‘15
7
TV Shows Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Variety Series (2003-2012)
The Daily Show
with Jon Stewart
It is very rare that one finds a show which is not only a reliable source of current affairs but also keeps people entertained, however The Daily Show with Jon Stewart is perhaps one of the most iconic TV shows which successfully informs, entertains and ridicules. Since Jon Stewart took over in 1998, the show has never looked back and has been on an upward trajectory ever since. What made the show so memorable was the perfect balance that was struck between political satire and pure comedy. With an average viewership of two and a half million every episode, despite being a late night show, Jon Stewart has succeeded in undermining the importance of networks far bigger than their show - Fox and CNN. Sadly, though, this August Jon Stewart left the Show, and Trevor Noah was handed a 16-year legacy to uphold. Craig Kilborn hosted the Daily Show from 1996 to 1998, after which Stewart took over. Stewart started his career as a stand-up comedian, doing small gigs at local bars, until he entered the television industry, and hosted the show ‘Short Attention Span Theatre’ for Comedy Central. He went on to work for MTV where he hosted his own show called ‘The Jon Stewart Show’ as well as a show called ‘You Wrote It, You Watch It’. From his early days in 1999, one could see that Jon Stewart was clearly a cut above the rest, and the ten consecutive (from 2003 to 2012) Primetime Emmys bear testimony to this man’s genius. Furthermore, the show has been awarded eight other Emmy Awards, as well as two Peabody Awards in 2000 and 2004. What made The Daily Show so different was the comfort that was provided to the audience. The show connected well with its viewers, and the ‘fake’ newsman was trusted and loved by most, especially the youth. Stewart was captivating; his monologues at the start of a show, his frustration and his happiness could genuinely move the people. The show was unique because of the political shades that it had as well as ‘fake’ news show that it aired, something that was new to late night shows. Other such shows generally discussed celebrities, pop culture or hosted guests, but Stewart did not limit himself to this. He focused on American politics and national media, and never held himself back from lambasting their glaring hypocrisy, inaccuracy and at times incompetency. A liberal at heart, it was no surprise that he repeatedly criticized the conservative GOP or their unofficial spokesperson Fox News. The show would also have interviews with individuals ranging from actors to politicians.
“If you don’t stick to your values when they’re being tested, they’re not values: they’re hobbies.” -Jon Stewart
Another entertaining aspect of this show would be the correspondents, who added to satire and comedy through their overly dramatized acting and the unusual roles that they would adopt such as ‘Senior Casual Racism Correspondent’. John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, Steve Carell and Ed Helms are just some of these ‘correspondents’ that have worked under the mentorship of Jon Stewart. Stewart is credited for having found such talent and giving them the necessary stage to form their own style, which millions have grown to love. These very individuals have gone to act in movies that have been huge successes like ‘The Hangover trilogy’ and ‘The 40 Year Old Virgin’. Shows like ‘The Colbert Report’ and ‘Last Week Tonight with John Oliver’ have stemmed from The Daily Show, and both Colbert and Oliver have always expressed their immense gratitude to Jon Stewart. This critic has nothing but a glowing review, and recommends the show to anyone who wants to enjoy a bit of comedy while also learning about US politics and policies. While the general viewership is said to be between the ages of 19 and 40, it truly is a show that can strike a chord with anybody. Jon Stewart will definitely go down in history as one of the pioneers of 21st century political satire and one of the greatest entertainers of his generation. It will definitely be tough to fill his shoes but all eyes are on Trevor Noah, and one can only wait and watch to see whether the legacy of The Daily Show endures.
CHAITANYA KEDIYAL
DSIR ‘15
8
Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Comedy Series (2010-14)
Modern Family
A conservative 60-something war veteran married to a young and beautiful Colombian woman whose 12 year old child becomes the half brother of the man’s 40 year old daughter who herself has three children who are all older than her 12 year old half brother. Oh wait, did I mention that the old man also has a gay son who has adopted a Vietnamese baby with his partner? Modern Family is the incredible amalgamation of familial love, goofiness, peculiarities and just plain comedy. The show aims to highlight the confusion in the lives of three families and how that intensifies when the entire group comes together. Indeed, the greatest thing about the sitcom is that in nearly every episode, there is an element of chaos and miscommunication as the combinations between characters and families are continually changed. Set in the suburbs of Los Angeles, the show veers away from the Hollywood-y nature of the city and focuses on the life of a normal (well, not quite) family where mishaps and mistakes abound. The show is light, sweet, entertaining and is everything one would want in a sitcom about a family that is rather out-there. Called a “mockumentary”, the show is filmed from the perspective of an unseen filmmaker. It moves away from the use of the laughter track which many contemporary sitcoms employ and this decision of the creators has been hailed by most critics. Modern Family has also been praised for its casting. Each character, initially, was a shot in the dark, the creators have admitted as much, but as the show went on, the director allowed the actors to understand and create the soul of their own characters and that turned out to be the masterstroke that has really catapulted Modern Family to the top of the pile of currently running TV sitcoms as evidenced by the five Emmy Awards for the Outstanding Comedy Series that it has won in a row.
The main focus of the show is to capture the eccentric nature of ‘modern’ families and the casting does complete justice to this weirdness, and then some. One of the more iconic portrayals is of Gloria Pritchett by Sofia Vergara. She is the Colombian trophy wife and the real gangster in the house as she occasionally proves with her ability with a gun. Her high-pitched, piercing voice is one of the most recognisable aspects of the show. She likes to force her culture down the throats of the family, even if some of those things aren’t strictly speaking Colombian. Her drama and her mispronunciations drive her family, and especially her husband, mad, but she really is the life of the Pritchett family. Another iconic portrayal is that of Cameron - Mitchell’s partner. Played by Eric Stonetreet, ‘Cam’ is the ‘good daddy’ of their Vietnamese daughter Lily and perhaps the most multi-talented of all the characters - an ex-clown, a Christmas caroller, a history teacher, a music teacher and a football coach, all in one. From the heartland of America (Missouri), occasionally selfish and really very dramatic, Cam’s hands and his little facial expressions speak much louder than his words. He has a very big heart and, although very easily offended and moved to tears, he cares very much about the children in the family. In all honesty, Modern Family is neither intellectually challenging comedy, nor is it slapstick; rather, it is a subtle hybrid of the two. Littered with the occasional laugh at sticky situations, it is replete with highlighted innuendos. The light-hearted nature of the comedy is most appealing to nearly any viewer because, and here I speak from personal experience, Modern Family has the ability to put a smile on your face. However low and unwilling to smile you may be feeling, the characters have the ability to make you laugh. From ‘Phil’s-o-sophy’ to Mitchell’s obsessive, controlling nature, to Manny’s hopeless attempts at a successful and lasting moment of teenage love, the show has it all. The title is more than apt, as the show really captures what it is to be a family in this modern age - all the craziness, all the fun, all the weirdness but above all, all the bonding and all the love. Family is key to happiness and to fun and there is nothing that stands truer to that notion than Modern Family.
KRISHNA LOHIYA
DSIR ‘15
9
TV Shows Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Drama Series (2015)
“Valar Morghulis” (High Valyrian Greeting: All men must die) -Game of Thrones
Game of Thrones
New Moralities of an Amoral World “oel ngati kameie” (Na’vi greeting: I see you) -Avatar
It is not every day that a mythical universe is constructed out of the remnants of the past. Yet, our fascination with the past or the mythical unknown is such that we cannot seem to sever the umbilical urge of this utopian tryst— an opportunity to accost a possibility. In IB English, in their Part 4 assignment, the students are sometimes offered such “what if” opportunities and some students do bravely indulge in such moments. What if the author meets the characters a la Pirandello’s Six Characters in Search of an Author? Or what would our reactions be if we were to travel into time past and face similar situations as our protagonist a la Zemeckis’ Back to the Future series? Or what if we were to be transported to Burroughs’ Mars or to an Asimovian dystopia or a Clarke-Kubrick Odyssey? How would we react? Questions of this ilk must be doing rounds of so many Literature classrooms around the world. Hence, when the DSIR cornered me to pen a piece on the 12 Emmy-winning wonder, Game of the Thrones, I was caught in a moral cleft. While I do know that more Doscos are reading the R.R. Martin tomes than any other book and the senior forms are all well aware of the televised version, I am also aware that recently, a friend’s friend was sacked by her School for keeping A Song of Ice and Fire in the IB Part 4 syllabus. The book and the television series (Game of Thrones), are by most counts, suitable for adult reading/viewing, receiving an R16-R18 rating in most countries. Yet, the popularity curve of the fantasy/historical/ sci-fi/superhero genres in general and the Game of the Thrones in particular begs our attention. This article, is hence, not a review of the tele-series Game of the Thrones, for that is available across 16,80,00,000 results in the Google. This article seeks to understand why at the turn of the century do we need a narrative like the Game of Thrones? What moral compunctions fuel such narrative constructions? For our present purposes we will refer to the moral universe of the Game of Thrones in particular. The turn of the century is best symbolized by the Roman God Janus (after whom the first month is named January). It is always a look at the past to find solutions for the future. At the turn of the 19th C, Europe saw a return to the Renaissance principles to redefine the boundaries of creativity in Art and Architecture; the Indian struggle for Independence saw Tilak and Bose return to Ganesha and Durga to give a religious sanction to the freedom movement. In a similar vein, the turn of the 20th C is seeing Hollywood, Bollywood and many others return to the established mythical, historical and superhero narratives of the past to extract new insights into the moral universe of our times. This is not an arbitrary claim. If we go by the Box Office response to the fantasy/historical/sci-fi/superhero genres, we realise how much the financial data allows us to read the nature of human choice. Statistics say that in Hollywood, between 1995 and 2015 alone, 10,318 movies grossed $183,663,315,323 at the box office, approximately 99.81% of the total revenue from Cinema. Of these the fantasy/historical/sci-fi/superhero genres had 2686 movies (26.04%), grossing a whopping 49.53% of the total box office revenues at $90,984,064,588. A mere fourth of all movies grossing half the revenue is a clear indicator of the way Hollywood is leaning. Since Hollywood retains its media hegemony, despite India leading the film making annual record, we will go by the moral standards set by Hollywood as well.
Top-Grossing Creative Types 1995 to 2015 Movies Total Gross Average Gross Market Share 1 Contemporary Fiction 5,252 $79,312,634,022 $15,101,415 43.10% 2 Kids Fiction 405 $22,423,297,058 $55,366,166 12.19% 3 Fantasy 682 $22,221,124,143 $32,582,293 12.08% 4 Science Fiction 486 $21,849,104,279 $44,957,005 11.87% 5 Historical Fiction 1,039 $14,263,599,410 $13,728,200 7.75% 6 Dramatization 697 $10,541,148,445 $15,123,599 5.73% 7 Super Hero 74 $10,226,939,698 $138,201,888 5.56% 8 Factual 1,659 $2,712,049,178 $1,634,749 1.47% 9 Multiple Creative Types 24 $113,419,090 $4,725,795 0.06% Source: http://www.the-numbers.com/market/creative-types
This is not all, a sample statistics from the IMDB shows how well these fantasy/historical/sci-fi films/shows do qualitatively at the various awards. A typical Oscar winning film like American Sniper has 11 wins and 31 nominations. A popular tele-serial like Modern Family has 99 wins and 252 nominations across 7 seasons, while the Game of Thrones in 5 seasons has 125 wins and 233 nominations! Pirates of the Caribbean Series: 66 wins; 114 nominations Avatar: 84 wins; 106 nominations Game of Thrones: 125+ wins; 233+ nominations (one season left) I do think all these stats point to one thing alone—we are all looking to establish new structures of ‘the Moral’, but we cannot risk doing the same in the ‘Real’ universe, which we inhabit. We have to do so in a simulated world, a limbo where new morality can be experimented upon. MR DEBASISH CHAKRABARTY
The Game of Thrones unequivocally tells us that erstwhile virtues like “honesty”, “loyalty”, “truth” and “selflessness”, like “chastity”, are passé—they only lead to death and obliteration. The new virtues are risktaking, collaboration, coercion, planning, managing perception, marketing oneself and stealth. The Starks of Winterfell pay with their lives for holding on to the virtues of the age of chivalry. The family is butchered and scattered. Tyrion Lannister, Daenerys Targaryen, Arya Stark, Petyr Baelish and Lord Varys signify the new morality—the morality of survival. Tyrion Lannister, naturally disadvantaged in the looks department, makes up with his ability to collaborate with the wily Lord Varys and take calculated risks. Daenerys, the last Targaryen left, shows a blend of risktaking, planning and perception management. Arya Stark, Petyr Baelish and Lord Varys thrive on shady liaisons, secret information and a propensity for stealth. What all of these characters have in common along with Cersei and Jaime Lannister, and Margaery Tyrell is that they all know how to use their body both as a text and a currency. Whether it is alternative sexualities or marriages of convenience these characters do not balk at the absurd; rather, they embrace it. Come to think of it, the Royalty of Europe have been practising this art of intrigue, coercion and perceptionmanagement for quite some time. The political elite the world over are adept at this art. In fact, for anyone interested in popular culture like yours truly, the thematic similarities between Spartacus, Rome, Borgias and Game of Thrones are palpable. What this also forces us to question is the broader paradigms of Biblical virtue that the common man is saddled with, while the powerful, discard the same paradigms at will! The body as a currency and text has been used since the dawn of human history. While the body-as-text has been always the prerogative of the individual, as seen in the form of tattoo or decoration or ritual piercing/ flagellation, etc., the body-as-currency has been always at the cost of the other where the other body is enslaved by the owner. The sense of machismo was in possessing or trading another’s body and writing on one’s own. In the Game of Thrones, this paradigm seems to be fusing. The control that the characters have over their own bodies and sexualities is remarkably modern for a play set in the medieval world order of knights and dark magic. It is this sense of authority over the body that allows one to use it both as text and currency consciously that makes the tele-serial such a darling of the modern world. This politics of the body is perhaps, not accessible to the average teenager. If the Historical genre is stuck in the mire of moral conundrum, the Sci-fi and the Super-hero have ploughed ahead to create new moralities too. A concern for the environment and the esoteric world of nature required Cameron to fashion out a new world in Avatar, complete with new aliens, animals, language, et al. As if only Eywa could teach the world about the dangers of mining! Super-heroes are literally different beasts. I guess they satisfy the human desire for the impossible and play on the pitiable lack in the nature of the common man. Everything the common man is not, the super-hero is. Stark among all failings of the Super-hero, however, is the capacity for compassion and empathy. The Super-hero, in his/her effort to save the world, a bit too frequently uses the argument of collateral damage to explain away loss of life and livelihood. For every life a Super-hero saves, (mostly his/her love interest) a few hundred others seem to die. The right to Justice seems to be the only priority of this League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and Women. In their search for justice, they frequently destroy half the world! Quite like the Game of Thrones where wanton royal nature rides rough-shod over the common, not really different from our world of political dynasties and intrigues. The world of popular mass media is torn between this play of nascent moralities, just as the new Pope is torn between the play of many Christianities. While we, in the small well called Chandbagh plod on, hoping to turn each Dosco into enquiring, knowledgeable, thinking communicators, who are principled, open-minded, caring risk-takers capable of balanced reflection, the world outside is churning up an alternative world order that just might be contra-Dosco. The question to ask is what is at stake in this Game of Thrones? DSIR ‘15
11
TV Shows Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Direction in a Drama Series (2008)
“Everybody lies. The only variable is about what.”
House M.D. - Dr Gregory House
When a medical drama series is mentioned, one tends expect an overly dramatized soap with grossly incorrect medicine and alarmingly attractive physicians. House MD, I am glad to say, is an exception. While I cannot comment on the accuracy of the medicine practiced by Dr Gregory House (Hugh Laurie) and his colleagues, I can state with complete certainty that House (the man and the show) will have you hooked. In an overarchingly polite society, it’s refreshing to encounter someone who speaks their mind – even more so when that person couldn’t care less if their comments are received with shock and mild psychological damage. Dr House is by far the most sarcastic, scathing, ingracious, and lovable misanthrope on television. He is characterized by his limp, caused by an aneurysm which turned his quadricep muscle necrotic. At great risk to life and limb, he chose not to amputate his leg, causing him to suffer from intense pain in the damaged area. His aneurysm didn’t just affect his leg, it changed his life – he became a sour cripple addicted to painkillers, and succeeded in alienating almost everyone in his life. His wife left him, and the only people who continue to tolerate him are his best friend, Oncologist Dr James Wilson (Robert Sean Leonard) and Dean of Medicine Dr Lisa Cuddy (Lisa Edelstein). House’s relationship with both is strange to the point of being dysfunctional. He also believes staunchly in the philosophy – “Everybody Lies.” He trusts absolutely no one, and often places his trust in the fact that the patient is not telling the truth, leading to a diagnosis far removed from any that another diagnostician would have made. Anyone who watches the show may be led to believe that breaking and entering a patient’s home or workplace is common enough for doctors, but this method is exclusive to House’s practice. Commendably, it often works spectacularly, saving the lives of many. Every television hero needs a sidekick; a partner in crime, and Dr Wilson delivers in spectacular fashion. Dr Wilson is the only man who stands by House throughout the series, even though House plays pranks on him, abuses his mild manner, steals his prescription pad to obtain large amounts of Vicodin, and never once verbally appreciates Wilson for standing by him. To add to that, House is also Wilson’s most honest and scathing critic – to the point of being more destructive than constructive. Wilson shows himself to be an extremely caring person, (case in point, his multiple ex-wives) and tends to get overly attached to his patients. Some say this is the mark of a good doctor, as it humanizes the patient and makes every decision a choice between life and death. Dr House believes in the polar opposite. He, as a rule, never sets eyes on the patient, unless he needs to conduct an examination himself (displaying his utmost faith in his staff ) to make sure it’s done right. This isn’t as bad as it sounds – House argues that it makes his decisions objective and ensures that logic prevails – but its largest benefit is probably the psychological well-being of the patient. Anyone who accuses House of mincing words will (or may not) live to rue the day. His scathing manner, however rude, certainly gets the point across, while adding comedy to the mix. Patients have been known to leave in tears. Dr Lisa Cuddy is House’s love interest in the show, but, true to his childish nature, he would rather die than admit it. Their banter and House’s jokes are of such a sexual nature that scores of people accused Dr Cuddy of being intimate with House. The rumours were so widespread that even House jokingly asked if there was anything to it! Their special relationship stems in part due to House’s refusal to acknowledge and obey any form of authority. This makes him
ABHAYRAJ JAIN
practically unemployable, despite the fact that he is renowned as one of the world’s greatest diagnosticians. Cuddy hires him despite his inability to deal with anyone - supervisors, subordinates, staff or patients – and pays for it by repeatedly being subjected to sexual harassment (House’s form of courtship). House’s trivialization of issues often works to his detriment, but is of comic benefit. At a meeting with a medical inspector, the inspector greets him by saying, “Dr House, I’ve heard your name.” to which House replies, “Most people have, it’s also a noun.” The only reason House still has a job is because no one, not even those who despise him, can argue that his methods are ineffective. Speaking of people who despise him, kudos must go to the supporting cast. Every doctor in House’s department (some who are alarmingly attractive physicians) has a deep, dark secret, personality flaw, or other form of weakness, which House promptly finds and reveals unto all. He then proceeds to use that weakness to control their every action. Whenever he does make a reference to their soft spot, it is apparent that he receives perverse pleasure from watching them squirm. I believe that he does so simply to put them on an equal footing with him, as his infirmities are plainly obvious – drug addiction and his fragile emotional state. Dr House’s idiopathic behaviour doesn’t go unnoticed. Over the 8 brilliant seasons, I witnessed changes. Changes in House, changes in Wilson, and changes in everyone who worked with him for however short a time. The changes in House’s attitude were slight, but sure. He became a little less emotionally broken over time, and almost admitted he cared on multiple occasions! House had the greatest effect on Wilson. Over the course of 8 years, House’s muddied morals darkened and sullied Wilson’s previously pristine ethical code, and before the finale, it is clear that he too shared some of House’s disregard towards the rules. As for the doctors in House’s department, there were many over the years. Every fellow in his department was affected by House, and even left once his immoral and dangerous methods became too much for them. Dr Eric Foreman (Omar Epps), House’s brilliant new hire in the first season, goes on to become a brilliant doctor, but not before he absorbs some of House. As Foreman states in Season 3, he does not want to turn into House. House countered by saying that he was already like him, and in many ways more selfish. By far the most interesting of House’s fellows, however, is ‘Thirteen,’ as she is called throughout. The nickname is a result of House’s mass hiring technique after his old team quit and he couldn’t be bothered to remember the names of all the new applicants – but of course. Thirteen (Olivia Wilde) is an extremely secretive character whose name isn’t revealed for a long time, and no personal information about her ever becomes privy to the audience. She mysteriously disappears during the course of the series, offering no reason and lying about her destination. Apart from politically incorrect jokes and harassment of all forms, the show has a dark edge to it. House’s consistent abuse of the painkiller Vicodin has turned him into an addict. However, Vicodin makes him a better doctor – without a painkiller of comparable strength, the pain in his leg is too acute for him to think straight. This leads to psychological degradation and many of the effects of an addiction – including complete dependence. I cannot reveal more without considerable spoilers, but suffice it to say that House’s flippant attitude hides his grim reality – one of all-encompassing physical and emotional pain. To conclude, I must state that House MD is not a series for the faint of heart or humour. If it is craving medical accuracy that ails you, I’d politely recommend Scrubs. If drama, high heels, and perfectly styled hair catch your fancy, I would redirect you to Grey’s Anatomy. On the off chance that sarcasm and political incorrectness are your drugs of choice, I am afraid only Dr House’s (fictitious) Department of Diagnostic Medicine can help you. And even if he can’t, well, Valar Morghulis - Everybody Dies.
“ Dying people lie too. Wish they’d worked less, been nicer, opened orphanages for kittens. If you really want to do something, do it. Don’t save it for a sound bite.” - Dr Gregory House DSIR ‘15
13
Music Nominated for the Grammy Award for Album of the Year (2015)
In The Lonely Hour Sam Smith
A fantastic beginning to a highly promising career, In The Lonely Hour, does but provides a glimpse into the potential career of one of the best vocalists of our generation. Sam Smith, who was unknown to most a couple of years ago, rose to fame overnight after featuring in ‘Latch’ by Disclosure. His vocals were applauded, and was brought to the notice of many critics who examined this British vocalist with much scepticism. Many were convinced of the rise of a revolutionary vocalist in the industry when he provided the base vocals in Naughty Boy’s ‘La La La’, and those who were still unconvinced declared otherwise soon after the release of his debut album, In The Lonely Hour. The world could only watch in awe as Sam Smith took the music industry and the Grammy Awards by storm, winning four in a single night, including three of the major ones - Best New Artist, Record of the Year and Song of the Year, which rightfully went to ‘Stay With Me’. His debut album also won the Best Pop Vocal Album for 2015 and his name, deservingly, is now etched in history. Before the release of the album, Sam Smith released ‘Lay Me Down’ as a single. It didn’t help him rise to prominence at all - instead, critics dismissed him as another fish trying to carve a niche for himself in the sea. Not dissuaded, he released another single, ‘Money on My Mind’, which broke into the top ten of the UK Charts. Some began to take notice of the rise of a vocalist of a prowess unseen since Marvin Gaye. Soon after, he released his album, which reached number one in the UK Album Charts and number two in the US Billboards. His album soon became the second most selling album in the US and UK, behind 1989 by Taylor Swift and X by Ed Sheeran, respectively. His subsequent singles, ‘Stay With Me’ and ‘I’m Not The Only One’, also cracked the UK Singles Charts and the US Billboards peaking at No. 1 and No.3 respectively. He was also the latest member to join the elite club of James Bond theme composers and singers, joining the likes of Beyonce, Adele, and Paul McCartney, with the release of ‘Writing’s On The Wall’ for the 24th instalment of the James Bond franchise, Spectre. Sam Smith’s ability to combine high and low extremes of pitch in a single verse, has been one of the key reasons for his multiple laurels. Instances of such are replete in his album, such as in,‘Life Support’, a sublime track narrating the sorrow of unrequited love, in which he recreates a vocal crescendo moving from a higher note in, ‘Won’t You Be’, to a lower, more impactful note in ‘My Life Support?’, emphasising his need for his love to be reciprocated. He uses these techniques to similar effect in other tracks as well, such as ‘Lay Me Down’ and ‘Leave Your Lover’. When questioned about his unique ability amongst male singers to move in tone, he replied that he was brought up listening to female vocalists such as Whitney Houston, and was heavily influenced by singers such as Adele and Amy Winehouse attributing the diva like quality in his voice to their works. The overarching theme of sorrow, or ‘sadness’ as put aptly by him, stems from his break-up with his boyfriend. He revealed his homosexuality in 2014, and thanked his boyfriend at the Grammy Awards Ceremony for having broken up with him, as the sorrow led him to win four of the most prestigious awards in the musical world. Though he now takes his break-up in good spirits, his music did not reflect the same, especially ‘Good Thing’ which he declared to be the most personal song in the album. In all, the response on his debut album was overwhelming for Sam Smith, who has talked about working on his second album soon after the release and response on his single, ‘Writing’s On The Wall’. Sam Smith’s vocals and music resonates with any person who is forlorn in love, and the sadness develops a deep rooted connection with the sadness beneath any man. Even if you are a happy-go-lucky man, his vocals will surely leave you melancholic, enamoured, and begging for more.
SHLOK JAIN
DSIR ‘15
14
How to Dismantle an Atomic Bomb U2
Grammy Award for Album of the Year (2006)
U2 have never stood still. Ever. The band, now 36 years old, has tried it all. Musically speaking, every song has been absorbed, carefully weighed, modified and yet, if still under their regular standards, simply discarded. Songs such as ‘Achtung Baby’ and the blues of ‘Rattle And Hum’ testify to that. Even today, the desire to be bigger and better than everyone else still exists. In How to Dismantle An Atomic Bomb, which released nearly 11 years ago, the band had returned to the epic sweep of the Unforgettable Fire (1984). It is, as their front man Bono called it, “U2’s first rock and roll album”. How to Dismantle An Atomic Bomb is unlike any other U2 album. Despite a bizarrely leading album title and a few overtly evocative songs, it is an intriguing record, unrelated to politics whatsoever. It is more about love, loyalty and peace than the omnipresent threat of global destruction that was present then. Moreover, for the first time, U2 managed to create a complete album of good music, instead of the usual 4-5 strong starters, accompanied by several fillers. In fact, the essence of this album lies in the songs somewhere in the middle of the playlist, such as ‘All Because Of You’. To me, this song is one of the major highlights of the album, and is recognized till date as U2’s most confident rock single. The lyrics are devoted to God, and this song, along with a few others, manifestly earn the album the title of a religious album. For the most part however, all the songs are intense. I personally find ‘Sometimes You Can’t Make it On Your Own’ an excellent track, owing to its fantastic slow intro, followed by a slow build up, and finally, a musical explosion of feelings and expressions. Another powerful song is the ‘City of Binding Lights’, which I feel should’ve been the first in the album. Nonetheless, the first song in the album, ‘Vertigo’, is unapologetically the most ‘fun’ U2 song ever, and is just as good. In fact, it’s summarizes the entire album in a 3 minute hit, which coincidently takes everything U2 and distills it. It also feels like a tribute to the Ramones due to the similarities in the lyrics and style. In my opinion, the album feels like Bono’s rediscovery of a younger ‘him,’ as the high pitched notes he achieves in the various songs are quite startling for a 40-year-old. I particularly enjoy this album because it marked an epic turning point in U2’s career. The boys had turned into men. The many recurring themes present throughout the album serve to point at an older, wiser U2; one that’s looking back
at the reckless adolescent, and smiling sadly. At that point of time, they knew their days were numbered, and hence, it was the perfect time to start framing elderly advices in their songs. So, from observation, one can point out that the band is primarily talking about the ‘world going wrong’ and ‘how our humanity will be the end of us’. ‘If we survive, its because of God’s blessings.’ The rock band received 9 Grammy Awards for this album. Despite this, it still is probably their most underrated record. In 2004, it just wasn’t ‘innovative enough’ for the people, according to Rolling Stone magazine. However, I feel that the range of sound, expressions, emotions and the thrill driven into the album makes it hard to resist. It’s a straightforward reminder that U2 isn’t one of the best rock bands due to their intelligence or clever ideas. It’s that special warmth the listeners receive from their music, which is tough to find in other rock bands, that makes U2 unique. The package of songs assembled together in this album perhaps constitutes their best. U2 have always been at the forefront of the best rock bands in the world. Today, their music is still cherished by musicians and fans all over. This is one of those albums that one can come back to over and over again, and still not get enough.
SASYAK PATTNAIK
DSIR ‘15
15
Music Academy Award for Best Original Music Score (2011)
The Social Network Soundtrack
The score for a movie is always something that demands an intense understanding of the moods of the movie and the visual pictures drawn by the director. Many while watching movies tend to ignore the impact the music makes. The ‘Social Network’ is a brilliant display of exactly that. The score written arranged by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is a combination of dark, electronic and orchestral music. The movies begins with the subtle use of an ascending piano three note sequence filling the scene of a snowy Harvard Yard. The movie, which is centred around Mark Zuckerberg’s brainchild, which has spread into the homes of so many people. The movie was eagerly received around the world as more and more people wanted to know the story behind the popularity of Facebook. If someone were to look at the movie from the perspective of judging the story, some may or may not argue for it to be fairly simple. The movie however, is transformed as a result of its direction and audio-visual qualities. From the competitive scene of Harvard University to the relatively relaxed lifestyle of the west coast. Something worth noting is how the filmscorers are able to drastically shift between genres as the movie progresses while making drastic changes in instrumentation. Also the simplicity of the story is observed with the change in instruments. A commendable attribute this is the use of composer Edvard Grieg’s piece ‘The Hall of the mountain and the king’. The heavy use of the string section helped build tension. Now while the movie is built around three meetings between the lawyers of all those people who filed cases against Mr. Zuckerberg, and of course his lawyer; the movie consists of various flashbacks. Now there often occurs a particular problem with such movies. Often the numerous flashbacks lead to the building of confusion in the minds of the viewers. This movie on the contrary has been able to avoid this by providing a systematic and chronological sequence of events which actually help the viewer understand the direction of the plot.
An interesting feature of this film is that from a viewer’s perspective you are left to be the judge of the story; by this I mean that at no point in the movie is any sort of bias expressed. You are left open to judge Mark Zuckerberg for his actions. This is commendable because many a time such mediums are utilised to sway public forums. That being said, the question of betrayal is sure to linger in the minds of many. It is sort of an open ended question being asked. The movie over its release period earned itself a whopping nine awards, all in the best original score category. The score, however cannot be confined to a particular genre as it is a work of highly elaborate fusion art. This is exhibited with the use of slow-progressive rock sections which are instrumented to give a more classical sound to the music. This helps make the score unique and is probably the reason for the success of the score. Considering the fact that we are a part of the ‘Facebook generation’, it is highly unlikely that people will not enjoy this movie. So I would definitely recommend this people across all ages.
DHRUV JOHRI
DSIR ‘15
16
Literature The Man Booker Prize (2011)
Sense of an Ending Julian Barnes
‘Memory is not the opposite of forgetting. Rather, it is a kind of forgetting.’ -Milan Kundera
Catharsis has always been a difficult task. The purging of any emotion requires one to begin by reviving a memory in its entirety; it is this process of recollection which hurts the most. In 2011, after 3 previous longlist nominations, Julian Barnes was finally awarded the Man Booker Prize for his novel The Sense of An Ending. The plot of the novel revolves around a single memory of the narrator concerning a weekend spent at his ex-girlfriend’s house. At that point, the narrator, Tony Webster, is studying at Bristol University, having lost touch with Adrian Finn, a close friend from school, now at Cambridge. Adrian had always been the brightest in their clique, the one seemingly destined for far greater things than idle conversations while sitting around lunch tables at school. It is this knowledge that provides Tony acceptance when he learns that Adrian is now in a relationship with the equally enigmatic Veronica, the aforementioned ex-girlfriend. However, these events are quickly followed by a tragedy; after returning from a trip to America, Tony is shocked to learn of Adrian’s suicide. Despite having made peace with this chain of events, Tony remains troubled by a missing link in his memory of the weekend spent at Veronica’s house. His distress is furthered when he finds out that Veronica’s mother has willed him a small fortune. This fact, along with the revelation that Veronica’s mother possessed Adrian’s diary, drives Tony to reestablish contact with Veronica after almost 40 years, seeking answers to long-unresolved questions. The narrative is, in many ways, a journey of self-discovery for the protagonist. Through the process of realization and recollection of past memories, Tony learns of the follies he made in his interactions with those around him. Tony Webster is essentially a mystery to himself, and it is the decoding of this mystery which gives the novel such a brilliantly coherent plotline. Ironically, he had earlier accused Veronica of having caused their break-up due to her “inability to imagine anyone else’s feelings or emotional life”; it was actually he who had avoided developing strong bonds for fear of future loss. Tony’s cognizance of his self-referential nature overwhelms him, and Barnes manages to articulate this element beautifully in his prose. The plot is structured to the point that even a transitory leap of half a century adds to the appeal of the narrative, rather than causing a fracture in the storyline. Perhaps the most impressive aspect of this narrative is the fact that the author manages to blend the final, ambitious twist with incredible subtlety in the story. Whereas the naivety of a lesser writer might have shown in the final stages of the book, Barnes’ eloquence and nuanced style enable him to create a seamless transition between the pre-climax and post-climax phases of the narrative. While this novel is a short one, it certainly doesn’t lack in depth of sentiment. They say Brevity is the soul of the wit. After having read this wonderful, succinct narrative of self-examination and the cognizance of loss, one would be hard pressed to disagree.
ADITYA BHARDWAJ
DSIR ‘15
17
Literature
The White Tiger Aravind Adiga
The Man Booker Prize (2008)
“In any jungle, what is the rarest of animals – the creature that comes along only once in a generation? The White Tiger.” The ‘White Tiger’ by Arvind Adiga is one such white tiger. Rare, brutal, beautiful, powerful. Published in 2008, Adiga’s debut novel won the 40th Man Booker prize in 2008. The win was controversial and numerous eyebrows were raised, but like a white tiger, in all its perversity succeeded in capturing the attention. Simple as ‘black and white’ the novel pounces upon the many evils in the Indian society, scarring perceptions and opinions, triumphing with humour. The plot is told through seven letters addressed to the Chinese Premier from Balram Halwai, the white tiger. These letters are written over seven nights and it is in these seven nights filled with dark humour, the story of our protagonist is told in a first person narration carried out by the present Balram- Ashok Sharma. Balram is the Nietzchean superman and the villain in one and is the white tiger being poached in the jungle of India. This tiger is one which cannot camouflage itself in the abundant corruption and evil of the jungle. As Adiga puts the jungle is made of two jungles - “an India of Light, and an India of Darkness,” both described to be wilder and more dangerous than each other. The irony is that despite being in the wild, the white tiger is caged in a cage, which Adiga refers to as the Rooster Coop. This is the first of the many metaphors which Adiga employs in his lucid narration to address the various evils of the Indian society. The metaphor of Darkness and the Light is own which is constantly used throughout the novel and plays a major role in plot development. The Darkness represents the poverty stricken regions of India, where the ‘animals’ are rendered blind, slaved and inhumane. The Light represents the more developed and economically prosperous regions of India (examples used being Delhi, Gurgaon and Bangalore). The story is about Balram’s escape from this Darkness into the Light, a journey which he realizes only when he gets more attention than the water buffalo.
“The moment you recognize what is beautiful in this world, you stop being a slave.” -Aravind Adiga
Caste discrimination, crime, corrupt election practices, invasion of privacy, servitude, economic disparity- all are addressed in this post-colonial text. There are lines which instantly paralyze the reader; lines such as “…the poor dream all their lives of getting enough to eat and looking like the rich. And what do the rich dream of?? Losing weight and looking like the poor.”, which instantly and simultaneously elicit fear and awe in the reader, as if one has just seen a white tiger. Then there are moments of epiphany, stimulated by strings of words such as, “The moment you recognize what is beautiful in this world, you stop being a slave”. The book may not have that finesse and complexity of prose such as that of its predecessors like Midnight’s Children but it is these lines which not only ‘seduce’ the reader but also leave one with a prey to hunt for. When I first read the book, my reaction was somewhat similar: I was left with a prey which I could not kill and devour; a prey whose pursuit helped me realize my chained state. This prey was a question. One which helped me see in the Darkness and blinded me in the Light: Was I not in the Darkness even though I lived in the light? I sometimes really wonder if the white tigers of India will survive extinction. And even if they do, will they be able to survive in this dark and deceitful jungle of ours?
MADHAV SINGHAL
DSIR ‘15
18
Previews
Star Wars Episode VII : The Force Awakens Release Date : December 18, 2015 Director : J J Abrams Cast : Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill George Lucas’ epic Saga, which leapt to fame in the 1970s, continues in December 2015 with the release of Episode VII: The Force Awakens. Excitement surrounding the impending release has been steadily mounting since the release of the first trailer on 28th November, 2014. In Episode VII, Long-standing fans of the franchise have engaged in wars of words over controversial teasers such as the light saber with a crossguard. With a fan base spanning multiple generations, the onus is on Disney (which bought Lucasfilm) to try to please millions of fans around the world.
Deadpool Release Date : February 12, 2016 Director : Tim Miller Cast : Ryan Reynolds, Morena Baccarin “With great power comes great irresponsibility.” Deadpool is perhaps one of the most loved comic-book characters, simply for his off-handed casual manner, wit, and over-the-top antics. Speculation mounted as a movie starring Ryan Reynolds as the main character was announced. Judging by the trailer, I’d say he is a perfect fit, and brings a fun side to Deadpool that few other actors can successfully inculcate.
Lucifer Release Date : TBA, 2016 Network : Fox Cast : Tom Ellis, Lesley-Ann Brandt, Lauren German The American drama series, based on the comics by Neil Gaiman and Mike Carey, revolves around Lucifer, the Lord of Hell, who decides to abandon his Throne to experience life in Los Angeles. Ironically, he loves helping the LAPD punish criminals. The show has come under a lot of scrutiny for it “will glorify Satan as a caring, likeable person in human flesh.” Nonetheless, the Warner Bros. show is highly anticipated.
DSIR ‘15
19
Previews Suicide Squad Release Date : August 5, 2016 Director : David Ayer Cast : Will Smith, Cara Delevingne, Jared Leto, Margot Robbie David Ayer’s star-studded Suicide Squad revolves around a group of super-villains who accept a government mission that may end their lives. The film is the third installment in the DC Extended Universe, continuing the cinematic universe shared by Warner Bros. and DC Comics. The movie, already packed with an impressive ensemble, is set to include a Batman cameo, according to its latest trailer.
A Head Full Of Dreams | Coldplay Release Date (expected) : November 3, 2015 Nothing can be more worrying for a music fan of our generation than the announcement of the break-up of one of the most revolutionizing alternative rock bands of our generation - Coldplay. This heightens the anticipation and tension in their last, studio album ‘A Head Full of Dreams’ before their apparent break-up. Riding on the immense success enjoyed by Mylo Xyloto and Ghost Stories, Coldplay’s new album is expected to debut at number one in the UK Charts. Though the release date is not yet finalized, it’s release date has been speculated on the same weekend as Adele’s 25, making for a good musical weekend.
25 | Adele Release Date : November 3, 2015 A hiatus of four years has taken a toll on everyone who was enchanted by Adele’s hauntingly beautiful voice. Her last single, ‘Skyfall,’ released a year after her last album 21 in 2012, still hasn’t been taken off the playlists of many, and everybody would agree that its time for her re-emergence. The 10-time Grammy Award winner will release her third studio album, 25, on the 3rd of November, which is predicted to debut at number one in the US Billboards 200, and includes collaborations with famed singers and music producers such as Ryan Tedder, Kelly Clarkson and Paul Epworth.
DSIR ‘15
20
Editorial Board Editor-in-Chief Abhayraj Jain Chief of Production Shlok Jain Editor Anvay Grover Senior Editors Yash Dhandhania Aditya Bhardwaj Associate Editors Chaitanya Kediyal Dhruv Johri Madhav Singhal Sasyak Pattnaik Senior Correspondants Arjun Singh Aryan Chhabra Faculty Advisor Ms Anamika Ghose