Fair, fair, fair! It's just not fair.

All the time and everywhere, there are ads for fairness creams. More ads, newers ads, new-concept ads...!!

Argh.

Why, why, WHYYYY?

What is this maddening want for being fair all about? Do people care about really being FAIR? No...

It's just skin-deep.

Are n't there enough attractive, DARK people to prove the point? But no, they want 'Nalla colour' ('good' colour) or 'maaniram irundhaa kooda podhum' (at least the colour of a deer). Yes, the colour of an animal is attractive apparently! Why not be the colour of an elephant? or a hippo? or a ...crow? Who decides brown is better than black?

It's all a matter of personal taste. But just as we appreciate nature in all her colourful glory -- various hues, why can't we look upon ourselves-- humans, in the same way? It becomes a matter of acceptance does n't it?

And why is the general preference for skin colour always tending towards 'fair' anyway? Is it the influence of the whites who invaded us? Or deeper seated than that? Have blogged about this fairness business before, but I find it as appalling now as ever.

Ideally, it's Ok to say 'fair' or 'dark' whilst describing someone, but now, I have to think twice before I classify someone as 'dark' lest they take offence.

Can't it just be a matter of FACT?

Hrumph.

'Aadhavan' Film -- with Surya

Surya. No matter that I find him really handsome, I was a bit annoyed at the way he acted when I almost bumped into him at a hotel recently. He kept those nice-looking eyes of his downcast (bad habit!) and made a great show of standing aside in a long-suffering stance, as he made way for a few of us ladies to pass him. He was obviously avoiding recognition. HMPH to him. Wear a 'mohamoodi' then next time, I say!

Anyway, the next day, I was booked to go for his latest flick 'Aadhavan'. What irritated me right away along with the opening titles, was the photo of Surya with wife Jyothika and daughter that was flashed on the screen. Please. How much sucking up do they want to do? There are superior actors out there who don't do this kind of thing and this is quite silly. By 'they' I think I mean the producer and director. Apparently, Surya is really hot property despite giving run-of-the-mill storied films (with admittedly good music overall) with a LOT of Surya in them. Thankfully, he is eye candy, so the tolerance is more.

But nobody had better find fault with Kamal Haasan any more for alleged obsession with 'the self'. This guy is going all out on himself.

The movie itself is a weird story with not much originality in it. The hero is seen as a bad guy -- a paid assassin who goes about shooting people with unerring accuracy. Major rifle pandi. Then, he gets to shoot some judge and misses. Supposedly upset at that, he manages to find himself a place in the judge's strangely and inexplicably mazhalai pattaalam household through one number crazy cook there (comedian Vadivelu)... and all this just to assassinate the judge.

The story has many needless twists and turns with the judge turning out to be Surya's father (Surya's name is Aadhavan in the film) and the actual story is that Aadhavn actually turned 'approver' for the police after his botched attempt at the judge and that he knowingly missed his target, etc. And all the time they were trying to fool the audience into believing that Surya was trying to kill the judge, he was actually only trying to protect him. Yes, the police WOULD entrust the significant job of protecting a high-profile judge to a criminal turned good guy (even if they knew he was actually the judge's son).

Actually, vaat a stupheed story I sayyy.

So, as a boy, Aadhavan had run away from home after shooting some police guy. Nice kid. Nice track record. And nice 'heroes' being portrayed in films these days!!! I mean, SHOULD they be showing the hero as a bad guy who runs around shooting people? It's not like Naayagan where the boy is pushed into a corner...this kid is from an affluent family and just went astray. Not a good idea, me thinks.

Anyway, Vadivelu was a riot. Had many big laughs and enjoyed his acting. His timing was superb. His fear and chagrin at Aadhavan's 'ways' is hilarious. He has outdone himself in this film. Only problem: there was too much Vadivelu in Aadhavan ...presumably to make up for the lame story?

Nayantara the heroine, is a super example of uppuku-chappaani in this film. Just a side dish that is not even all that tasty really.

Saroja Devi, yesteryear's over-sweet heroine (although I did like her a lot! Argh.) is also present in this film. Somewhat closer to providing comic relief than anything else. The comic relief business in this film is very high I must say again, as I am sure everyone making the film knew it was simply necessary.

Surya. Yes, he acted alright and is looking slim and good and all that, but overall, I do feel he cuts a sorry figure substance-wise. The scenes where he is hanging upside down from some crane and certain miraculous escapes shown, deliver this film stupid and average-masala stuff. Does this actor really want his career graph slipping into say, Vijay's (Ilayathalapathy!) line of films? Not to really insult Vijay or anything, whose films have their own average-entertainment charm, but just to prove a point!!

Surya's performances in Nanda, Pithamagan and even Vaaranam Aayiram put him on a rung far above this sort of idiotic, insulting-the-audience's intelligence type of film. Quite full of himself he is these days...

There were the last minute appearances from the director and producer of the film. Clearly, they wanted to be a piece of the silly pie they created, but it was so lame! They had nothing to say really, and wasted some five minutes more, by acting stupid.

And why should n't they? The film and story were also stupid, right?

Food and more

Being a foodie is just a way of life with me. I love food and that's that.

A peculiar habit that goes with being a foodie in many a case is...eating your food and watching TV, or reading a book, at the same time. Why? I mean, is it not enough to just eat the good stuff? Why should I also want my favourite show to be on Tv during a yummy meal? Is this what they call having the cake and eating it too? (which saying I never liked anyway. I mean, who would want to have a cake but not eat it?That's not asking for too much, right. You 'have' a cake only because you want to eat it!Sheesh.)

Reading books and eating is another thing. Apparently, the more interesting the book, the more amount of food goes in. This is the reason my mother gives me for banning books from the dining table. However, when I am in the phase of controlling my food intake (which is er, a beet rare!), I find that reading a book whilst eating less or controlling intake, is actually quite soothing. A comfort factor really.

Nowadays, health experts go on about gazing at your food and eating it, in the most admiring way possible -- chewing it, tasting it, savouring it, swirling it around and what not! No other distraction they say. Just the food.

Why can't I come to terms with that? If I am a real foodie, shouldn't just the food be enough?

Body Talk

Lokku. Lokku. LOKKU LOKKU.

Why is it that I feel embarrassed when overcome by a coughing fit? People know I cannot help it, right? People know that one coughs only because one has to and tha it is not voluntary. Coughing is, apparently, as explained to me by one-number boring, staid ol' doctor, something to be thankful for -- one of God's miracles. It is a protective mechanism that the body has. Great. But each time I cough, I try to remember this miracle business but all I come up with in my head is: "Oh, no, please make it stop!"

Note: Why I call that particular doctor boring is because he is very slow and deliberate in EVERYthing he does, has neatly combed, well-oiled hair with a side parting, and writes down stuff over, and over again like there is no tomorrow. Actually, tomorrow often arrives by the time he is done writing. Apparently a good doctor, though I can't say I am personally 100%convinced of it. He is soft-spoken but not particularly 'sweet'. Has potential to become a Dolores Umbridge if you ask me. (You will only get this if you read Harry Potter.)

Sneezes. Another catostrophy in social situations. Earlier, I was so careful about sneezing and so conscious about not spraying other people that I would say: Ah!...mmmmMM. No 'A-chooooo' for me. My family is full of big sneezers. They can bring a house down or at the very least, shatter the atmosphere in the room. Finally, when I heard (whether true or not, I can't say I bothered to find out) that supressing a sneeze is bad for health, I have joined the Big Sneezers Club. A-Chooooooo for me too. And what is this 'excuse-me' and 'God bless you' business? Yes, I heard that when you sneeze, your heart stops or something and therefore people say 'bless you' to get the heart going again, but would n't 'excuse me' be relevant for coughs too?

Burps. Apparently disgusting to others, this offers relief for the burper and unfortunately, has the potential to stink. I don't let out too many burps myself, and must admit, don't appreciate them in others try as I might!! Burps are usually followed by a 'sorry'. For what, exactly? Yes, you need to be sorry perhaps, if it stinks, and needless to say, I would demand a 'sorry' in that case, but if this is an involuntary bodily thing, why are we going around apologizing to other creatures who are themselves fully capable of burping right back?

Farts. Aha. Tricky business. Do it quietly and stealthily and you can often get away with it. But others have to pay the price for the awful stink that often accompanies the silent ones. In my crazy family, we would actually sing a particular song for the silent ones! The noisy fart is clearly an ice-breaker.

Oh, and why are farts funny by the way? Is it because it is funny when your backside makes a noise? Is that it? But believe you me, nobody is going to be amused if your backside does anything other than fart!

I have come across many farts (er, not people, but the actual function...er, others' I mean) and have invariably giggled or guffawed. Nowadays, with maturity -- unpopularly known as 'age', I have learned to try to act as if nothing happened. Which I sometimes think, is how it should be.

This no-real-point-to-make post reminds me of a coaster we had many years ago, which was a favourite: "I am a bit of a bullshitter myself, but YOU go ahead. I'm listening."

Well, I really am...

Cheers!

Tending to the sick

I wonder, what is the pre-requisite for being a patient-attender? You know, for one to effectively tend to the sick?

If ever there was a grey area, this is it. Sick people require matter-of-fact 'tenders'. From my understanding, having seen my mother tend my grandparents (her in-laws) and an aunt attend to hers, I have come to the conclusion that you need to have some of the following going for you if you are a caretaker: -
(Note: I have myself done a fair amount of tending...so I dare to launch a post into this subject)

1. Be cheerful but not overly chirpy, as you may thereby cause the ill to develop a complex!
2. Be matter-of-fact and not emotional or overly expressive since this can go either way with the patient. Emotional 'tenders' will be just that and this may not be in the patient's best interests. A sick person is already slightly emotional probably, and would not want faces to be pulled, long faces or to witness any smirks. I guess this is why nurses are all mostly a very objective and slightly detached lot.
3. The matter-of-fact business has to include a good level of 'lack of disgust'. Bodily functions are not always pleasant and one needs to deal with it or be prepared to at least. This is perhaps the most important point.
4. A good level of compassion and a slightly lower level of sympathy is required.
5. A sense of humour is most important. Rather than mere smiles for the patient, drawing out a chuckle or a laugh is far more beneficial and of course, more fun.
6. Handling people -- the whole matter-of-fact thing comes into play again. People will say many things and give many opinions (mostly useless) and mess with the atmosphere around the sick bed. They need to be politely and firmly refuted. After all, most of these folks will not walk their talk, so shutting them up is a good option.

There are more points am sure, and it's not as if I am an expert or can be in line with more than one or two of the above points, but having closely observed the general, productive ways of caretaking, I just wanted to ponder more about it aloud in a post...

One thing is for sure. Anyone can fall sick enough to require special care. It can happen to anybody. Remembering this is jolly good. The 'it has not happened to me' business is rubbish thinking.

Oh..and remembering Point 1 above,... CHEERS!;)

Pissing Off

It's a tough world for the females. If we want to relieve ourselves anywhere, can't just stand up and do the act. We need proximity to the ground or appropriate toilet bowl. Being female, I do know that.

At a busy traffic light spot in Adyar, near the Adyar bridge, our car stopped right behind a tourist SUV. Even as the light was going to turn green, I saw a couple of men alight from the car in the MIDDLE of the road next to the median and one of them had a toddler-girl in his arms. he proceeded to remove her panties and got her to squat in between the car and the median (2 feet space perhaps?) for the 'relief' (pee). The light turned green and amidst honking, we did manage to swerve around this vehicle and proceed, but I continue to feel appalled by this. I mean with a toddler and travelling, would you not be prepared with a diaper or two?Or at least a nappy pad? If you can afford to hire a tourist car surely you can afford a nappy pad? Not that I have anything against them, but this was clearly a North Indian family -- er, to clarify, not that I think a South Indian family would not do this...

Then this morning, outside a school, JUST outside the school gate on the platform mind you, and not even at the corner near the wall as many men are wont to peeing(UGH), this was right as you step up on to the platform... I saw a mother with a 3 year old setting her daughter with underwear down for a quick pee on the edge of the platform, before entering the school!

Um, hallo? Is it me? Am I fussing for nothing? Is this normal behaviour?

It's not as if I am talking unsympathetically. I have been there. And have always been prepared...with a child, you need to plan, anticipate, prepare and stay prepared. Not bring out the junglee in you for the poor kid to imitate.

'Pisses' me off, really.

Diet means food, food, food!

Diet. The D word. The ultimate four letter word. One of the worst. Stinks of 'less food' if you ask me. *sniffle*


Except, nowadays, the definition of food itself has changed and so also has 'more food' replaced 'less food'.

We hear about so many diets all over the place. The more popular ones involve eating small meals every two hours. EVERY TWO HOURS. That's a heck of a lot of eating, really. And more than the eating, it is the whole planning-the-food business that's daunting.

8 am breakfast

10 am a soup or a sandwich (I suppose)

12 noon 2 phulkas and dhal and veggies

2 pm a fruit

4 pm biscuits (hrrrumph)

6 pm sundal

8 pm dinner.

Oh dear God.

Think of the preparation! Sure, Miz. Size Zero Kareena Kapoor can do it cos she has to just turn around every two hours and find her plate full of diet goodies in front of her, whipped up by her 'Maharaj' or equivalent. (Er, not feeling 'J' or anything, but ...that's life...for her).

Me, if I have to just turn around, I will just see a flash of light in a red background that reads 'I AM HUNGRY and ANGRY'. At that point, nothing but fried potatoes, sambar rice with a generous dollop of ghee, will do. The dietician will require a calculator to sum up the calories consumed...hmph.

So this whole dieting business is much much more about food than in the case of a normal, easy going 'bulgy foodie' who just goes about his or her day with a coffee, breakfast (masala dosai! ya, ya, ya), a 'good' lunch, another coffee or tea, and then dinner. Simpler times. Eat what's available and when hungry. Don't fret over eggjact number of calories consumed, which soup, salad and sundal and get all weepy.

Actually, I am neither here nor there. I have to make huge efforts to remember to eat small meals and unlearn so many things about food -- going by the 'today's fad' that is, that every 2-3 days I get tired and slump back to life as I knew it.

Three square meals.

Bon Appetit!

Contagious stuff

Not just colds and swine flu, but...

1. Yawning

This is MOST contagious. Amazing how one yawns and immediately, the next person too does. I have asked some folks including doctors why this is so, but no real answers seem available. Even whilst talking on the phone, if I yawn, the person at the other end miles and miles away, also yawns!

2. Crying

Guess this is for the 'weepier' souls, but usually, if someone cries -- really heartfelt and reasonable tears, I automatically feel MY water tap opening up. Very embarrassing and really, not of any help or use. But, there it is.

3. Snapping

Snap at someone and see them snap back. Usually. Except for the highly calm folks (know very few myself and these are people who merely clam up as opposed to handling it maturely...which is WHAT I don't know!).

4. Smiles

Whether they are contagious or not, they ought to be returned and therefore termed contagious. Else...how rude!

5. Giggles

Giggles are not really contagious. In fact, I do know that they can really bug some people. You, know, the non-gigglers who in fact, can unknowingly cause more giggling. When I as a giggler come across an extremely straight face whilst in the middle of a big giggle session, things just get more giggle-worthy! Anyway, I can feel at least a smile coming on if I chance upon gigglers (unless of course, they are giggling at ME. Then, 'Hmph' to them).

Tribute to Michael Jackson concert

Sunitha Sarathy the singer, is an old friend of mine. We go way back. KG days in school. As we grew older, in our teens, we would sing together and won many competitions mostly because she sang wonderfully whilst not overpowering the rest and our band had instrumentalists, which was quite rare for girls' schools to have. Her solos even then, clinched the prize for us am sure. Later, she pursued singing and has a truly gifted voice -- sings very very well. Am not convinced that she has got all the accolades her singing deserves, but that's another matter.

When I heard that she was singing in a tribute to MJ concert, I was quite kicked. As it is, i consider myself a major MJ 'appreciator' and now this. So, I paid a thousand bucks to attend this concert, with the proceeds going towards a cause. I knew there were others as well: Shankar Mahadevan, Benny Dayal, Blaaze, and so many others, but the main attractions for me were Sunitha, Shankar and Blaaze.

As we walked in to take our places on Wesley Grounds, my friend remarked: "You know, MJ has not yet been buried so if these guys don't sing well, he will get up and come and slap their faces!". Hmmm. Something to think about.;)

At the concert, I found out just how tough it was to have even dared to do a tribute to a performer like MJ. Clearly we are grossly challenged in the dancing department, but it was a shock that we were challenged in the singing department too. Honestly, not because she is my old friend or anything, but Sunitha Sarathy saved the day! She can sing and her passion for MJ was evident in her body language too. Other saviours were Blaaze, Timmy and Naresh Iyer. Anu was not bad either.

The rest of the female singers other than Anu were like some hotel/nightclub singers. RJ Suchi as Radio jockey and playback singer Suchitra is better known as, sang Beat It and it was ...nothing to get excited about. She should have just sung it in her bathroom and been done with it. Oh and the actress Andrea who sang did not do wonders, but no blunders either. There was just not enough MJ in her singing, that's all.

Other singers were 'pitchy' too. Benny Dayal was soooo insipid in his rendering of MJ songs, it was an outrage. Why sing when your heart is not in it? Especially when it is NOT a free show? Nee maduraikkey poidu pa.

The others like Kavitha, Suvi, Roshni, etc. whilst not particularly pitchy, gave very hotel-like and nightclubby performances. Ok for an evening out with nothing to do but drinks and eats. Not Ok for a tribute concert, dearies.

Naresh Iyer was good. Did justice to the songs he sang and is a sincere singer. Sincere to the music. We need that. Haricharan also seemed sincere but sadly, a bit pitchy. Was most enthu and anyday, i can forgive an enthu singer who makes a few mistakes when compared with a know-it-all who ...just does not cut it.

Shankar Mahadevan: The great attraction and wonderful singer. Came on stage, raised expectations to the sky and sang 'aaaaaaaaaa' for a MJ number (did not recognise it but assume MJ number) Indian ishtyle, which was nice but not nice enough. Tribute to MJ, remember? And then, he introduced his son to the audience and got HIM to sing the song. Ummm, hallo? Pulikku pirandhadhu poonai aagumaa and so on is so NOT impressive when you try to shove the poonai down our throats. You, Shankar, made a mark on your merit. Allow your son to appreciate that. Don't hoist him onto your golden platform, cos we do not appreciate it. Let him sing his way up and not ride uppu mootai on your back. Capiche?On top of that, there was a nephew of his also around. Puh-lease.

Blaaze I quite enjoyed. He is cool and the chorus of his own composition as a tribute that went "one: I like Michael, two: you like michael, three: WE like michael" was slightly childish but at least something refreshing. Plus the rap style and 'yo'yo' business was quite perfect.

Then there was a powerful performer called Timmy who was very good. Not GREAT for MJ style, but otherwise great. Thank you, sire for being there. One of the saviours of the tribute.

A young girl sang a childhood number of Michael's and she too fitted the bill. Forget her name.

Blink and you'll miss him was Karthik. Frankly, the nightclubby singers quite put me to sleep that I had to rouse myself for the better numbers with difficulty. Why then did I stay for the entire show? Oh, because it was tribute to MJ and not about these various singers with only 4 out of a dozen worth a 'watch and listen' that night.

At the end, predictably, we had 'Heal the World' and 'We are the World'. Both were fine because we, the audience, sang along.;)

The music was produced by Pravin Mani and whilst it was a good effort, it was not good enough. The dancers should have practiced better and if a singer was not cutting it, he or she should have been cut out. Please, people! When are you going to give credit ONLY where it is due? Why does everything have to be diluted by pleasing this bozo and that? There was one dancer who stood out with a cool moonwalk to his credit. Very smooth. MJ would have been proud. Another good thing was they had a screen as the backdrop that had many an MJ still. That was cool and a great respite from much of the singing!

At the end, I have to say that MJ is inimitable and thankfully, we have the many videos and music recordings to listen to that will finally be the real tribute this golden performer deserves.

Immortal music and performances.

Now, you other so-called MJ fans-cum-pseudo singers out there, just BEAT IT!

The Film: Kandaswamy...hmph. REALLY.

After the review at www.blogeswari.blogspot.com, a wonderful read, you would think I would have nothing to say on this film. But I have to vent. Had I not been warned about the film, I would have been dumbstruck to see one of my most favourite actors -- Vikram, acting in this film with its sheer lack of substance or whatever it takes for a film to be at least 60% watchable. But I had been warned and still crept into the theatre at 9 am on a Sunday (great feat for Teesu. Only other time that saw such an effort was for a Harry Potter film), armed with a chilli cheese toast for breakfast!! Free tickets they were -- please note.

And so it began.

My immediate reaction to Vikram's get up as a rooster was (I hope it was a rooster!) ...why? It just struck me as a weird bird to choose for a superhero getup. Or is there something I am missing? Anyway, after a point Vikram's prancing and rooster-like postures and behaviour were indeed good enough even for the most critical eye.

Then came his super-CBI officer getup. I just wanted to launch myself out of my seat to wipe that smug smile off his face! Did n't know one had to have a smug mug to come across as a sharp guy. I mean even Kamal Hasan had smug looks only whilst romancing his heroines and that, in a man's Kollywood world (HMPH) is normal. C'mon Chiyaan Vikram, greater things are expected from you.

And then there was this woman-getup of Vikram's where he is to entice some jokers and then whack the daylights out of them. So, when I saw Vikram in a white jill jill saree trying to act all coy and seductive, I was shocked. Taken aback. And not in a good way. Vikram on screen is a man -- all man. A man's man. A woman's man. You get the picture. His innate manliness is a great part of his charm. Dressed as a woman, he looks frightening. True, his body language was superb as were his expressions and moves. But his body and face are so very SQUARELY in the male zone that you do shake your head and say 'tsk tsk, NOTHING like Kamal' who even in Avvai Shanmughi as a woman in her late fifties, could pass off for ultra feminine and bashful-o-bashful. Kamal has the advantage of a certain softness in his big expressive eyes. Yes, the eyes might have done poor Vikram in as well as his overly developed upper body -- sideways that is. Big biceps and enviable shoulders et al.

For this absolute STAR from films like Sethu, Dhool, Pithamagan and Anniyan to have acted in this mostly rubbish film is like a slap in the face. Please! Choose a better basket for your eggs next time. (heh heh, no pun intended. After all roosters don't lay eggs...I know that!)

Shriya. Oh dear. Shame shame, puppy shame! Now, now, NO cattiness here at all -- am highly OK to say Simran was sexy or Jyothika was cute or even Trisha is appealing, but Shriya's face just reminds me of MN Rajam's. No insult to the latter though. Villi-ish face and just because of her body, she gets these meaty roles? Kollywood needs to to grow up.

Shriya seriously needs to try wearing clothes and see if they suit her. I mean what else does she have going for her? Certainly not acting and CERTAINLY not dialogue delivery even in mere lip sync. DISGUSTING.

The film, such as it was, was disjointed. I actually felt sleepy somewhere in between which is truly a first for me. Why do the scenes shot in Mexico have to be yellowish? Why did the songs have to be so blah? (save one or two?) Why does Vikram have to overdo expressions like macho-pride-smugo so? Very disappointing. I can only think that this is a phase for this hardworking actor to have gone through and that he should be clear of the dark tunnel now!

After Anniyan, really...Bheema was a chappai matter but all was forgiven -- aftr all you cannot deliver a super duper hit EVERY time, but now this? REALLY.

Oh and Chiyaan Vikram must have really been talking through that feathered hat of his to have said that this movie is one for kids, etc. Which parent in his or her right mind would want their kid(s) to watch this unnecessarily sleazy flick replete with a drug-addicted, sex-addicted villain running rampant on screen? Huh?

REALLY.

Ok, stop rant Teesu! Idhuvum kadandhu poyaaachu. (This too has already passed)