Leadership Advice from Russell Brand

When I told my parents about being elected President of the Student Council, I asked for some advice, I asked ‘How do I be a good leader?’

One of the many suggestions was to watch an interview with Russell Brand. It’s quite a strong one and to be sure, controversial one. However, while every single person I knew was reposting it on facebook saying that it was amazing all I could think was:

“What a god damn ass.”

I’m all for change. I think change is the one think that keeps us as a human race from going extinct. Granted, that also results in the death of millions of species and the general screw up of our global environment, but Hey! Change is happening.

What Brand talks about, actually defends himself about is the fact that he doesn’t vote. He never has, and he never will. I think that that’s great. Each to his own, and I admire him for sticking to his guns.

However, what I hate is that this man, is a Comedian/Actor by profession. He isn’t a political thinker, or a philosopher. He is a comedian who says that ‘the system sucks, so I won’t work with it. I want a new system’

Those words were searing hot, but they have no strength to it. It will get ample of support, because the apathetic people that I spoke about last time? They love it! They’ll make a statue of this clown because he said what ‘had to be said’.

Let’s go back a second, ‘what exactly did he say?’

That the government needs to represent the interests of the people. That they need to solve the economic disparity between the rich and the poor.

Again, we are not privy to all the intricate decisions that a government makes. That’s a separate argument all together, however what we are doing? Blindly saying that the government isn’t working for us.

That’s not how it works. I love that Brand was calling people for a revolution, and I want a revolution, but I want a revolution where the people storm the houses of Government and say, “You will do this for us. We want this. Nothing else.”

But by saying that you should revolt by not voting? That’s not going to solve anything. Your vote is important simply from the perspective that it’s your vote. If you choose to not vote, you are saying that you do not care and you refuse to be a part of the system that exists.

That is unbelievably childish. It’s as good as seeing all your friends playing a game, refusing to play the game, sitting in the mud and decisively saying that you won’t play until everyone plays your game.

And the problem that extends from that; is that everyone will have their own game, or at least different variations of the same type.

Secondly, Russell Brand is hardly a person to talk about the disparity between the rich and poor. Yes, this is a personal attack, however, considering the nature of the statement, a personal touch is required.

Russell Brand is a celebrity, he recently trashed his Hugo Boss sponsor at an event because of some god forsaken reason, and a couple of years ago, he got married in Rajasthan and must have blown more than a couple of million dollars in that wedding that lasted less than a year. If his dream is to cure the economic disparity, would it not be more effective to actually take a personal effort in it?

It’s great to applaud a man who takes it upon himself to say the things that everyone wants to say. But if you look at what he’s saying, and realize how unbelievably retarded it is, you’ll be quick to click the next link.

Last Friday

Last Friday, I was elected President of the Student Council of my college, the Symbiosis School for Liberal Arts.

Woo hoo! Celebrations right?

– No, not quite.

See while I am extremely glad that I have been elected to this position, I have also been one strongest voice in the crowd at college, constantly pushing for change and better practices. So when I was elected, the first clear thought that came to my head was:

“Shit, I actually have to do something.”

Being elected President is a huge honor, but more than the honor, it’s the sense of responsibility.

As a global society, especially here in India, we are extremely quick to say that our leaders are pathetic and that they have selfish motives, etc. Granted, they just might have those motives, but what exactly do we know? Are we there listening to their conversations, or seeing what they’re doing? Not exactly (and I know the witty ones will point out that they’re doing it to us)

How is that related to responsibility? Well, the problem is that my college is filled with a bunch of people who are completely apathetic towards any system of any kind. It doesn’t matter if it’s the college, or the state or the country. They just do not give a shit.

When it comes to quotable quotes, I believe that America nearly a hundred times more than the rest of the world, so to quote JFK:

“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country”

I am completely quoting out of context, in the sense that these words appeal to my current situation and I choose to apply them here (quick disclaimer)

When I read that statement, you can see how far the system has fallen. When was the last time the Government, any government asked us, as the people what we want? It’s always a duel, where they’re armed with a meter long sabre, and we’re fighting for our lives with a pocket knife.

Linking the dots. When you have a society that doesn’t believe in the system, because they feel that the system has turned their back on them, it becomes scary to become the person in charge of a system. Not for any other reasons, but because now all the comments are going to be about you.

They might not want it to be personal, but face it. When was the last time the Indian Government wasn’t called a farce, because Dr. Manmohan Singh doesn’t looks like a person who can’t pick his nose without asking someone else?

The system is a reflection of its leader.

So if this system goes belly up, I can blame whomever I want, I can say whatever I want, but at the end of the day, it’s going to be my fault.

I can deal with that. Honestly, I can deal with a hundred people coming and attacking me about a decision that I made, however, what I feel like telling each and every one of them, is do you have a better solution? Did you not think that I personally weighed out the options?

As a society, we are so quick to criticize. To quote Patrick Stokes, a philosophy teacher from Deakin University, who’s article I read a few years ago who starts his semester by saying to all his students who believe that they can say whatever they want and hide behind ‘it’s my opinion’

“You are not entitled to your opinion; you are entitled to what you can argue for.”

I sometimes feel that this is a statement that should be plastered on every street and put on every page of every book. Too many people feel that it’s their given right to complain. Mind you, when I used the term argue, I meant what it actually means, to cite evidence for your opinion. People seem to misunderstand that.

Something that I would like to apply to every single situation that I have to deal with in this next year will be under a banner that comes from all of these thoughts. I plan on asking each person who comes and complains to me about something or another, just one thing. Do you have a solution?

Granted, it’s not their job to think of a solution, but if they’ve thought about a solution, then they personally know that their idea isn’t full of hot air, nor is it invalid. Whether the solution is the right one or not isn’t the question, it’s simply proof to me that they invested in their problem. That’s something that I can work with; because by getting them to invest that little tiny part of themselves into the problem means that they are no longer apathetic towards the problem.

As the newly appointed President of the SSLA SC, I know that since Friday, my biggest problem, and the problem that will hound me for the rest of this year is trying to cure apathy. It’s a challenge and I’m hoping that if I achieve it, I won’t sit back and think to myself:

“Great job kid, you’ve cured two hundred, you’ve only got six billion, nine hundred and ninety nine thousand, and seven hundred people to go”

Hello, Old Friend.

It’s certainly been an age since I wrote on this blog. I’ve constantly had it on my mind, like an old flame that just won’t go away, but just like that old flame, one never has the guts to throw caution into the wind.

So why am I writing today, after so long.It’s because of the title of this blog: Inside the Asylum.

It’s because today, oddly, I remembered that as much as I love to believe that I might someday, leave the asylum. I am simply entering another asylum.

Oddly enough, love it or hate it, I am forever Inside the Asylum.

Been a long time

It has been an age since I have even accessed blogspot.

I must confess, I don't miss the blog, however it is sad to not have a place to just write my thoughts and rant about stuff.

That being said, I could argue that the lack of subjects to rant about shows that I am thinking more clearly - which I clearly feel.

But also I have begun to feel that there is an immense apathy that is extended towards people like me, who jump onto the internet and criticize politics, authors, filmmakers and more. Who am I to say that something is crap? I have no authority, no academic backing that makes me a person that knows what I am talking about.

So instead, I started learning. I listen, I observe, I read.

Because the asylum is also the world. And only the true madman can make sense of it.

Let's see if I can get out there and embrace the madness.

The Xbox One: Microsoft's Horrible Step Forward

If you've been in touch with your Gamer side, you'll know that Sunday marked the start of the Electronic Entertainment Expo or E3 as it is called. If you were even more in touch with said side, you'd know that the big thing everyone was looking forward to was the release of the new consoles from Sony and Microsoft.

Sony had kept a huge shroud of mystery over their brand new PlayStation 4, from simply releasing the controller to that really mean teaser for the PS4.

Microsoft on the other hand, has been a rather brutal entity these last few months. When I typed brutal, you could choose to read it as blunt, the story stays the same. Microsoft released it's new console, the Xbox One to huge fanfare and eager anticipation (read nerds screaming like little girls)

It's been pretty much a downhill for Microsoft since then.

The Xbox One's predecessor, the Xbox 360 was an amazingly successful console, for a few simple reasons. Microsoft pumped up the fact that it was a family console. It was meant to dominate the living room and that meant that the family had to like it. For gamers, the 360 came with some pretty epic exclusive titles like Gears of War and of course Halo (sorry, I'm an FPS gamer and i'm not familiar with the other exclusives). Sony on the other hand, came into the game with a console that was really expensive, close to $500 USD while the xbox was much cheaper. The plus side, that the PS3 would have free online gaming. Other than that, Sony started off the console life of the PS3 on a rather bad footing.

So what's different? These two guys are competitors so of course they're going to be compared like this to one another.

Ah, but the thing that is important is what these companies have learned from their experiences. Sony has learned, it's learned a lot. It's learned to listen to consumers and understand them, playing on their demands rather than the demands of a company/industry. Microsoft, has made the assumption that people will buy the console because it's the next-generation Xbox.

This assumption is where Microsoft is failing badly. They're not really giving a damn about the consumers thoughts and outrage. Whether it be the 'Always On' Kinect or the 'Always online' the DRM policy, Microsoft is trying to bulldoze through the consumer protests by adding on more exclusives. However, this is exactly the ploy that Sony is thriving off. Sony is getting a huge fan following, not because people love the PS4 or that they have new exciting exclusives, it's just cause a huge number of gamers are hating, I'll repeat for emphasis, hating the Xbox One.

Sony is riding the wave and Microsoft is sitting like a stubborn kid on the beach getting drowned by the wave all the while thinking, 'No!'

A lot of critics point out that Microsoft has been a leader when it comes to gaming innovations; take Xbox Live for example, the development of this system has been monumental to the Original Xbox and Xbox 360's success. Being able to play games with friends that lived in other parts of the world was a huge crowd puller. However that system has been mastered, and everyone's working on it now.

Last year, Microsoft released it's newest OS, Windows 8, an OS that was described as being more for a touch interface than the regular keyboard-mouse configuration. This OS has been used in the latest series of Lumia phones from Nokia as well, and it got amazing praise.

So here's what I think, I think that Microsoft is not trying to win the market, it's trying to create a sort of interlink between the various Microsoft products that exist. Apple has a visual link between it's products but that's about it. Microsoft is pushing all the limits to ensure that your entertainment experience, never has to end.

Now take a look back at the new Xbox One console. It's been said that it's got to do a lot with TV and using non-gaming software without having to switch channels and modes. You take that, and then see how Microsoft rebranded games on phones under the Xbox title and suddenly you start to see a connection.

Microsoft is doing something different, in the sense that they're trying to create a platform that is interconnected and everpresent. I presume that in an ideal circumstance, you'd have a Windows 8 Tablet in your room, a Windows Phone in your pocket and an Xbox One in your living room, all devices (like apple products) connected together with the availability of internet.

If this was, in fact, the intention of the Xbox One and the game plan of Microsoft, well then someone in marketing needs to be fired cause it's been implemented horribly. Microsoft has come across as uncouth and unappreciative to fans when they might actually be kickstarting the next big thing in technology.

I mean it's not like they've never done it before!

Halfway from Freedom, Halfway to Freedom

I'm starting to near the end of my second year in college, half way done! I've noticed that my appreciation for many things has changed in this time. To scratch the surface, my appreciation for international politics and current events has skyrocketed. There was a time that I would seldom read a newspaper, let alone pick it up. Hostel life has helped me achieve this, by removing the concept of a newspaper, I am able to pickup on the main new headlines from sources like BBC. Websites filled with journalists that have some sort of standard for writing (as compared to some of the newspapers in India)

Take for instance, the current situation between India and Italy. The case of the two Italian Marines, firing and killing two Indian Fishermen in, apparently, International Waters. Earlier, I'd have listened and taken note of the event, not giving it much attention. However, after becoming more aware of the international system, and how countries react to each other, I am honestly much, much more attentive about this. I read the article 20 minutes ago, and my mind is racing.

How will this affect the EU and India? What's going to happen if the Italian Government says "screw you" and takes the Italian Ambassador back to Italy? India's response will set a standard as to how India reacts towards many future international events. Similarly, Manmohan Singh will be looking to have a stronger stance so as to ensure that the people of India are able to, once again, think that he - and by extension, the Congress, is able to handle such events. Would this result in the Indian Judicial System developing a much stronger stance towards international criminals and international crimes?

My opinion on the Italian dialogue is that the government has acted very stupidly, they have destroyed their reputation in the Italian political system. There was the cancelled helicopter deal which was in the news recently, on top of that there is this. The Italian Ambassador staked his entire countries reputation on the request for bail. For them to, less than a week before the deadline, to backtrack shows that they never had any intention to follow the court order at all. India should be offended that it's courts are seen as a simple piece of paper. The Italian Governments claim, that the charge was not applicable, since it happened in International Waters, is a stance that they maintained from the start of the situation. However, to make a legal promise and then go back on that shows extreme insult to India and the relation between the two countries.

Another current event, the new Pope; I am not a catholic, but I was paying rapt attention to it, not for anything else but because countries are built around a political ideology, and the one thing that clearly cuts through it is religion. The entire story, from the resignation of Benedict to the appointment of Francis is intriguing to me. It opens up so much, because the concept of a Pope and the Vatican is so unusual in today's world. The Vatican is considered a country, and as a result, whenever you have a pope elected, you are having a head of state come in from another part of the world!

What also has begun to dawn on me is that plenty of people still don't see the world as the interconnected jigsaw puzzle it is. Not literally, cause it is physically interconnected, (duh!) but in terms of distance and how what happens to one affects another. Even if that person is thousands of miles away in a different country, following a different faith. I remember when Pope John Paul II died, there were Indians who felt said, not because of faith or anything like that, but just because he was a good man, who did good things.

There is so much that can come out of such events, but it's only stuff that is coming out after my mind has been opened up due to studying International Relations.

My Major in college is Media Studies, and while I've started to appreciate film much more, attempting to understand characters, how the story is going to progress and why certain camera angles are used. I still find myself enjoying simple rock-'em sock-'em movies where 1% of my brain is required. Sue me, I like movies for the fun they give me when I'm just relaxing. However, if I go out to watch a movie and a cinema hall, you can be sure that I will analyze every damn thing that comes on screen. I've paid money and I want to get the most out of the experience.

But the class has been so infectious, simply from how it's changed how I look at media forms. I haven't necessarily studied about comic books, or music or photographs. And yet, when I listen to my music, I find myself getting sucked into the music, going down, past the basic tune and falling into the meaning of the music How the artist has blended different genres. I might not appreciate it like how a singer or a musician might, but I like to think that I have developed a different appreciation for it.

Comic books are something that I have and I think, always will, (much to my mother's dismay I'm sure) but while as a kid I loved superheroes for their outfits and the 'biff'-'bam'-'boom', now I've started to appreciate the story that the writers have created. Theirs is an amazing, unappreciated art, they have to write an entire story with such detail that the artist know what he has to draw perfectly. The stories are so beautifully designed, and the characters developed so well that it's a wonder that most comic book writers don't become authors. They certainly have better plots than some books.

I've been able to make the transition from looking at comic books as drawings to individual pieces of art. I've learned how to see what the artist is doing with their shading and perspective. More amazingly, I've actually become able to know which artist has done which comic, just by seeing the cover of the comic!

My appreciation for superheroes has also changed drastically. With a greater understanding of what each hero represents and how they go about it, my appreciation for heroes like Batman, the Punisher and Captain America has magnified tremendously. Not for anything else, but because they are heroes that know the world and still fight for what is right. As a child I loved Superman, however now, I love alternate versions of the character, who takes charge of the situation and uses his overwhelming force to impose order. The appreciation for the character of superheroes and their individual personal demons is something I value a lot.

This kind of an understanding, this kind of appreciation for the arts would not have happened had I not been studying the subject. The exposure has allowed me to stop glancing and start observing, to stop hearing and start listening.

At this milestone in my college education I am proud of my development, for how could I dream of valuing or enjoying a job with my degree if I didn't enjoy my passions with the same teachings of such a degree?

Update: Seems like Francis I will actually also be making some connections to my Media class, it's rumored that he's going to be stressing much more on public relations, something which the Vatican has been happy ignoring. His statements are growing more and more and more interesting, from the quip that the Vatican had to look to the end of the world to find a new Pope, to saying that the Church should be like a 'Compassionate NGO'. I am extremely interested in how this will all develop!

My First, and Possibly Last, Podcast

More than a year ago, when SSLA was in it's first year and I was running around trying to get the clubs set up, or as some people might say, being a complete dictator, a friend pf mine, Navroze Anwar (you might remember him from here ) ran up to me and said,

"Vir, you know what would be awesome? If SSLA had a podcast."

The minute I heard the idea, I was sold. Podcasts are an amazing medium to communicate with the world and they are a great asset for people to get out of their shells and express their opinions.

I am not one that believes in destiny or a singular path to life, but I have to say that things really seemed to fall into place for this one. During a trip to Hong Kong, I picked up a microphone, intended for my Canon 500D (So that I could shoot some awesome movies) however, my camera didn't support the mike. So I tucked it away, waiting for someone either for someone to buy it or to find some use for it.

Then one night the memory of what Navroze said to me came rushing back and I suddenly had a new idea for a new project.

I met the college web team to discuss it and figure out how they wanted to go about it. I made it very clear that this was going to be run by me, and I wouldn't want any sort of faculty interference (except for regulating content, which I can do rather well, if I may say myself.) I said confidently that I was going to hold auditions and select interested students to make up the 4 hosts.

Naively, I was quick to place myself as one of the hosts.

I held auditions the next week, after sending email after email to the entire college explaining the idea and trying to sell the concept to them. I got 13 names, 3 showed up for auditions, 2 called in sick. I'd admit, it felt like I had tripped a bit, nevertheless, I kept a positive outlook. Three people had come, and they weren't bad at all. Their interest spoke more than audition was intended to cover.

After all, to me, this Podcast was to be a place where interested people could come and speak on a variety of subjects.

That night, I was talking to a friend about the auditions and how only three people came, and how it was going to work and she asked me, rather directly, why I hadn't thought of making a sort of a group to judge and select the hosts.

I defended as much as I could, my stance being that since it was my initiative, it was not wrong for me to have the only say in how the episodes went down. However, as the discussion continued in the real world, a small debate occurred in my mind. The debate was as to whether this was a resurrection of my dictatorial side. (Read more on that kind of a dilemma here)

By the end of the night, I had realized my mistake. I was placing myself in a position that was completely against the spirit of the podcast. I wanted a series that anyone and everyone could speak on, so why was I putting myself as the selector?

Instead, I sent out another email, with a new structure. I told my classmates, that the auditions were scrapped (much to the disappointment of those who auditioned) and that instead, the podcast would have 4 hosts who could be anyone. There was no permanent posting. I said that I would be sitting in, however, if 4 people turned up, I'd vacate my seat and let them run the show.

So today we had the first episode , in my professional opinion, I believed that it was a bit shaky, a bit rusty, then again, this was the first time that any of us were doing this. So how prepared could we have possibly been?

The people who shared the mike with me were Aditya Joshi, an actor, filmmaker and photographer. He knows how to speak really well, and he proved that with how he enunciated every word and made perfect sense. There was Palak Sharma, debater, 'munner' and public speaker - Those interests say enough for how she speaks. And finally there was Sanjana Rastogi, who has interests in Model United Nations, and brought clear concise arguments to the episode.

When I played back the recording when it came to editing; I was met with the cold, harsh bitch-smack of reality. The biggest weak link that I found, was me.

Now I'm not fishing for sympathy or some nonsense like that, and I'm sure that when I tell my friends tomorrow about this tomorrow they'll say, "you were awesome!" and other inspiring words. However, listening to the content of my words, I feel I was a bit out of sync.

So, some introspection has come about, I've decided that I will play much more of a role in setting up the episodes and creating interesting content for the episodes. Of course I would jump back into which episodes suit my fancy.

It is merely an extension of the concept of the SSLA podcast, where SSLA has a voice with the world. Each episode should be unique, each starting sequence should be different, each discussion should bring a new person to the show.

That is what I aiming for, but as they say in some fields of photography, that sometimes, you need to craft the perfect photo. Maybe I need to craft the perfect show, and I can't do that behind a mike. I draw people in, once that is done, the perpetual motion of these programs will drive themselves.

So that was the story of my First, and probably, Last Podcast.

Thanks again to Navroze Anwar for coming up with this idea.
Thanks to Aditya, Palak, and Abhinav for coming and auditioning.
A big Thank You to Aditya, Palak and Sanjana for making the first SSLA Podcast a hit!

Iron Man 3 Trailer Speculation and Plot

Iron Man 3 is coming out this May, and a new trailer was released today.

The trailer actually confirmed a lot of facts that were as of yet, speculated, but not confirmed. One such fact was the appearance of the Iron Man Armory.

The Iron Man Armory is, essentially, Tony Stark's Iron Man wardrobe. Inside the Armory is every iteration and variation of the Iron Man armor ever developed. It was initially created to house the number of armors that Stark came up due to the variation of his adventures. He had a Space Armor (which, after the Avengers, seems a bit necessary) and a Hulkbuster Armor (also necessary after the Avengers) along with a whole lot more.

The main armor that Stark is supposed to be using in the movie, is an adaptation of the Extremis Armor. What makes this armor special is that it was the first armor that allowed Tony Stark to mentally summon the armor. It has been mentioned by the Director that he was basing it off the Extremis Storyline, however, after watching the new trailer. I have a different opinion.

The trailer shows some scenes that are completely alien to the Extremis story arc. Extremis is a story of how a virus makes a man stronger than Tony Stark's Iron Man suit, this allows him to launch a series of devastating attacks on the USA. Tony realizes he has to upgrade to match this and undergoes the Extremis process and becomes practically seamless with his suit.

Now that sets the stage of a terror attack, however, it doesn't explain the explosion at the start of the trailer and a scene where the Mandarin is standing with a bunch of men attached to some metal frame.

This sort of a process bears a similarity to what was seen in the pages of Iron Man: The Five Nightmares.

In this arc, a villain is able to recreated the arc reactor that Tony developed; recreate and weaponize it. Just like how Ivan Vanko did at the end of Iron Man 2.

The trailer shows scenes where there are peoples shadows burned onto the walls, which is testament enough that there will be some reference to the weaponize of the arc reactor. Which would make it insanely easy for the Mandarin's character to gain such notoriety that the US President would launch a man hunt for him.

As far as the image of Pepper is concerned, the rig that is shown above is near identical to rig that all those guys are connected to in the upper image. So maybe the Mandarin is going to use Pepper as leverage against Tony. (Not seen this in a comic, but it has probably happened before)



The closing images of the trailer echoed the exact closing scenes of 'The Five Nightmares' where Stark Industries' various headquarters are about to be destroyed by bombers. Tony is told that 'you can't do it alone, you need backup' (or something like that) With that, Tony calls in the Armory and saves the day by EMPing the entire area.

So, it seems like that Iron Man 3 might just be a combination of Extremis and The Five Nightmares. However, I hope that the director has taken some attempt to add his own original flair to two otherwise amazing story arcs.

Another possible story that might be incorporated, which I now sort of doubt, is the concept of the Sentient Armor.

Here's to an exciting two months of waiting and speculating as to how Tony Stark will finally come face to face with the Mandarin! Is he going to have a host of Iron Men supporting him or is it going to be just him and the Mandarin slugging it out? I can't wait! Can you?

Comics in Superhero Movies: Inspirations or Copied?

When one casts a glance back at modern superhero films: Batman Begins, the Avengers, Iron Man 1 & 2, etc. They've all taken something from the comic books.

I mean it'd be stupid for the directors to NOT take stuff from the comics, the comics have the best stories and twists, it's a treasure trove for the superhero genre.

However, it seems that off late, that a bit too much is taken from the comics. It's fine of course, but when it greases the wheels of the film to the extent that the independent, original story gets pushed to the back, then it becomes a problem.

Now there are examples that support what I'm claiming and examples that don't, in the true spirit of insanity and arguing with myself, I'll give you both and battle it out.

Too much from Comics: The Dark Knight Rises

Too little from Comics: Iron Man 2

The Dark Knight Rises

The ending of Nolan's amazing run with Batman reached a crecendo with The Dark Knight, now whether it was because of hype in the wake of Ledger's death or the actual amazing story, it was truly a story that reflected originality and took the correct cues from the comics, but was very much an independent, unique story.

I get the feeling that Nolan rushed the production of TDKR, the story was flimsy at best. I'll break it down for you, so if you are a TDKR fan, please do not be angry with me for ruining anything.

First off, what did Nolan take from the comics:
Batman's retirement and reappearance - The Dark Knight Returns
The breaking of Batman's back and Batman's triumphant return - Knightfall
The blockade of Gotham and the lack of involvement from the US Govt - No Man's Land

Now when I write only three comics, it doesn't seem like a lot, however, these three comics are absolutely ground breaking stories that have shaped the Batman Mythos completely. It's like trying to combine Artemis Fowl, Harry Potter and Percy Jackson and then wanting some original elements. It's impossible.

As a result of combining all these stories, with the films intended plot, you were actually given a much weaker story than you should have been given. The reason is that the stories don't gel. If you combined any two, I can guarentee you would have had a much stronger plot.

If Bane had broken Batman's back and then spent the next few months taking hold of Gotham and then holding it ransom for a few more months, it would have allowed Batman to recover with some reality in place.

I'll let this video further elaborate on the plot holes in TDKR

Iron Man 2

When compared to TDKR it is important to restate that the Iron Man universe is much more fictional than the intended universe that Nolan created, thus, Iron Man having an electronic disk in his chest can make some sense.

Iron Man 2 takes its main cues from the following story arcs:
Tony's alcohol abuse at his party - Demon in A Bottle
The spreading of the Iron man armor and Arc Reactor Tech - Armor Wars

Again it is not like the director is taking a massive number of comics and smashing them together, however, when I look at this movie, I can't help but feel that there was much more depth that could have happened with the whole alcoholism angle that Demon in A Bottle brings.

Demon in A Bottle is a story arc where Tony Stark, through alcohol abuse gets a person killed while in the Iron Man suit and is kicked out of Stark Industries; Rhodey takes over the Iron Man suit and Tony is left penniless. He rebuilds and takes back his company by fighting Stane (Similar to how Iron Man 1 went down).

Armor Wars was an arc where Tony Stark discovers that his technology has been recreated and people have been able to create crude Iron Man replicas and cause havoc in 'rogue states' and are used by mercenaries.

I felt that in the movie, the whole sensation of Armor Wars was very much there, however, the downward spiral that Tony Stark falls into was a bit lacking. Again, this is only commenting from the perspective that Stark could have been shown to have had a much greater reliance on alcohol and this lead to his mismanagement of the Suit. I mean, you can't get tossed around your house and have a fight with your best friend without being at the bottom of a deep, dark bottle.

So why am I harping about this influence of Comics in Superhero Movies?

Check it out here.

Reflections in the Wake of Batman Incorporated #8

It's kind of silly,

I just wrote a post, about how amazing Scott Snyder's 'Death of the Family' arc was so amazing just because of the fact that no one died. He changed the game by making death mean different things.

Two weeks have passed and what do you know? Grant Morrison decided to spice up his Batman Incorporated run by killing the newest boy wonder.

Damian Wayne is dead.

I won't say that he died badly, many heroes couldn't ask for a better death. However, it seems to me that the comic left very little doubt in the readers mind that Damian was going to die. The cover was a spin on the popular cover used to usher in 'Batman R.I.P' which changed the status quo of all future Batman comics.

 

See the similarity?

The entire issue of Batman Incorporated #8 set the stage of Robin's death. From the cover (seen above) to the dialogue that occurs between characters. Damian has small talks with the other Robins, making amends and saying what he had to before he crossed into the grand beyond.

There is a symmetry to how Damian dies as Batman is otherwise occupied, it seems to reflect how Jason Todd died at the hands of the Joker.

What I don't really understand is why Grant Morrison decided to take this decision of killing Damian. He ended the first issue of Batman Incorporated with a cliffhanger that suggested that Damian was dead, this time, he's made it much more permanent, but as the Joker would say. "What's the fun of repeating a joke?"

Speaking of the Joker, considering the other events in the Batman Universe, Death of the Family, Damian's death is unnatural and out of place.

The DotF arc resulted in the Batfamily not trusting Batman and being unsure about what he has and hasn't told him. Bruce realized how important his family is to him, which seems to explain why he wanted to save Damian rather than seeing him dead.

Scott Synder had written about how if he killed someone in DotF it would have actually brought the Bat Family together, so the events of Batman Inc #8 seem to essentially ignore this premise and assume that the scars of DotF will keep the rest of the Batman family to cry in their rooms alone.

Another important thing that will come out of this is that Alfred is going to feel some crazy guilt. He let Damian out of the cave and when Batman returns with a dead Robin, no one is going to feel the punch more than Alfred.

I can't seem to understand what is going to happen after this, the series has already seen the death of Knight, the Batman of England. With the death of Robin, the objective of showing the war between Batman Inc and the League of Assassins is clear, with losses on both side. However, there is a line between killing grunts and key characters who's deaths will be felt in the pages of other books.

I can't help but feel sad for Damian who was really becoming an amazing Robin. He was like a mini-Batman and it was nice to see that fatherly instinct come from Batman to protect Robin more than once. It made it nice when Robin disobeyed his father as it was an instance that any kid could relate to. Doing something you weren't supposed to and then saying sorry and living with the accusing stares (then again, not many of us would go and kill people and then get the stares).

In Batman and Robin's recent Annual Damian was connecting to his Wayne legacy and becoming closer to his father. While some people might say that this makes the death all the more painful on Batman, it actually seems a tad premature. There was so much character development happening that killing Robin now seems a bit abrupt and anti-climatic.

Sadly what is done is done.

DC has released some new covers that will represent the Bat-Families anguish over the death of their youngest parter, however, what I've found is that none of them is as impactful as Batman and Robin #18

Batman and Robin issues have been characterized by having Robin and Batman present on the cover, or at least some representation of them. This cover seems to drive home the solitude that Batman would be feeling with the death of Damian, as he now patrols Gotham, alone. The dark textures further this solitude and when you compare it to the official cover of Batman and Robin #18 it simply removes Damian from the cover and changes the colour scheme, making it much more about Batman and the fact that he is now alone.

Deaths in comic books are as permanent as the writers want the deaths to be. Synder had stated that if he had killed someone in DotF they'd stay dead as long as he could manage it, however, the resurrection and demise of characters can often be a managerial decision and might actually not be what the writer wants to do.

Considering the new path this puts the Dark Knight on, I hope DC gets a good amount of insight into how Batman has gone from being the 'Son who lost his Parents' to the 'Father who lost his Son' the character of the hero is certain to change as the rage of this fact is bound to push him into dangerous corners.

I'm excited to see what happens, but sad that one of the most Bad ass Robins is dead.

Oh and don't get on me about spoilers, the NY Times had published an article on it, and every DC Comic has a backup where it is clearly stated that Robin is dead. Like I said, DC wants everyone to know that he's dead. What they do with all this attention, is a different story entirely.

Excelsior - My first film (shot in 4 hours)

This weekend, I got an amazing opportunity to make my first film. It was part of a college fest being conducted by the Symbiosis Law School, Symbhav 2013. The fest was to cover 3 days, and the Documentary making competition happened on the first day.

I'll admit that I was a bit nervous about the competition, there were two things that made me feel like this. One, I was not a film maker, I had wanted to sign up for the photography competition but they ran out of slots (on hind sight, I should have really submitted photos considering how crappy the winning photos were). Two, the week before, I had gone for another college fest, held by the Symbiosis Institute of Media and Communications and I saw the enteries for a 24-hour film making competition and the concepts and the films just blew me away. So I was extremely nervous about the competition and being out of my depth.

Luckily, I had a trump card in my sleeve, I had worked with not just one, but two production studios as a result I knew much more theory on how to make a film and the actual execution of a film (even though I'd never made a film before!)

My team was composed of two great friends of mine, Navroze Anwar and Aditya Joshi. Aditya, believe it or not is an actor, and he has his own production house, so him being on the team gave us a huge boost in the collective knowledge. Navroze while not having had experience in films, made up with his enthusiasm and passion. So as a team we were confident that we'd at least make it into the next round.

The organizers alas, didn't get the turn out they had expected with only 5 teams showing up for the first round. In a desire to stick to the schedule, they started us on the first round.

The first round was narrated simply, but was much more complex. The teams would be given a unique random topic which floated around the fests central theme of 'Essentially Desi'. My team was given the topic of 'Bandh Kitab: Dreams and Expectations' The topic was rather self explanatory to me, we had to shoot a film about someone who had had a dream. The positive or negative outlook was completely up to us.

The round would see the 5 teams conceptualize, shoot and edit the film in 4 hours. That's right, from 10 am till 2 pm we had to shoot the film, and edit the film. The film also had to be 5 minutes long, so that's even tougher to execute.

I mean, the 24-hour films that I had seen the week earlier were all 6 to 7 minutes. And made by students who wanted to be pros.

Needless to say, we came up with an idea that all of us, as students could relate to and we began shooting. Aditya would operate the cameras as he knows how to frame the subjects perfectly, Navroze would take center stage, utilizing his own personal emotions to connect with the character and push the acting part of it out the window and make it a pseudo-real story (that might not make sense, but bear with me). I helped with the dialogue and also provided the equipment that would be used. (essentially making me the producer :P) I also used whatever editing skills I had learned from my internships.

We ended up winning first place at the fest, which was awesome! But as my team members celebrated I was really unhappy. Not for anything else, but that the final product that we had given was extremely shabby. Plenty of other teams had much better editing software, I had managed to get strapped with using Window Movie Maker, and so the editing was laughable at best. In my personal opinion, the reason that we had won was because the film had enough of a story and content to outshine the lackluster effect that it had.

So, I made a decision that I'd not close the book on this project, but I'd make it into something that I would be proud of. I'm sure Aditya and Navroze would have felt compelled to do the same if they ever made a mistake in their roles (thankfully they didn't).

So, after a weekend of editing (like 6 hours really) I finished the editing. I got myself Adobe Premiere Pro and edited it as much as I could.

Enjoy the final product,



I learned a lot from this film and all the other ones that I saw and have now been bitten by the film bug.

All I want to do is make more and more films!

Conclusion of Death of the Family

Scott Snyder is a brilliant writer.

Scott Snyder has been the chief writer for the Death of the Family crossover that has happened in Batman over the last few months. Snyder was given the monumental task of bringing the Joker back with an adequate bang and he has... oh he has.

Spoilers Ahead.

Scott Snyder has been receiving a fair amount of flack for his unconventional ending to the crossover.

Credit to him for breaking the mold, he decided to not kill anyone.

He had a number of reasons, and all of them make perfect sense. If one member of the family had died, it would have resulted in the rest of the family actually getting much closer to each other. Snyder also made a very important point and one which applies to the current pages of Superior Spider-Man (Amazing Spider-Man #700 killed Peter Parker with Doc Ock taking over his body, however, Parker's been brought back to life as a mental projection already) So if Snyder had killed someone, be it the Joker, or a member of the Bat family, it would have only been a matter of time, or until a new writer came on board that the veil would be lifted and the dead would return as they always seem to do in Comics.

Damn Superman for starting that trend.

IGN gave the issue a massive 10 on 10 which is proof enough that it was an amazing issue.The most moving panel for me was however, was the one where the entire Bat-family (minus Bruce) lay holding each other as a true testament to the strength of a family.

While Batman #17 doesn't see the death of any main characters, it instead sees the fragmentation of the ENTIRE Batman Family. The Joker uses the element of suspicion of the others on Batman to drive a firm wedge between the entire Bat-family and Batman.

So it was essentially the death of a family that was really becoming way too close for the Dark Knight. Only thing was that the death wasn't a physical death, just the destruction of a bond between the members of that family which essentially killed the family.

The reappearance of the Joker was absolutely mind blowing, and considering the rotting state of his face at the end of the issue, I'm rather interested to see how he'll return next time.

As for Batman and the Bat-family, I'm looking forward to some guest appearances as Batman needs to now prove to all his allies that he trusts them and that their family is still stronger than the words of a raving lunatic.

Even if that lunatic is right.

P.S. I am so so happy that Batman showed some sort of fatherly actions - When he freed the family, the first person he ran to was Damian. Thank God!

Corrupted Power

The saying goes that Absolute Power, Corrupts Absolute.

The saying is pretty self explanatory - it is states that any person, if they have complete authority, and complete control of a situation, they will, in time, become corrupt.

A more complex explanation can be seen in governmental systems. In a democracy, this eventuality is circumvented by a constitution and a concept called the 'Three Pillars'.

The Three Pillars of Government are the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. The president and his/her administration represent the Executive, the Legislature takes the form of the US Congress or the Indian Lok Sabha and the Judiciary are the various houses of Justice. Each pillar is essentially equal from the perspective that they keep the other pillars in check and ensure that neither side gets too much power or oversteps its boundaries. However, some governments like to tweak this system of pillars and so you might find that this does not necessarily apply to all countries.

A dictatorship, however, is a perfect example of how Absolute Power, Corrupts Absolute. Any dictator, regardless of their initial intentions will at some point of time make that shift where they begin to become corrupt.

The best example of how a singular ruler, not a monarch, became a dictator is Julius Caesar. Caesar was part of a triumvirate which, though informal, balanced out the power and kept the others in check until they got greedy and Caesar emerged as the sole ruler of Rome. Now, whoever has read the Shakespeare play (though not historically accurate, provides a good backing) knows that the reason for the conspirators to kill JC was because he was beginning to be viewed as a corrupt individual. He was silencing people that were speaking out against him, and taking over powers and roles of the Senate. 


When I cast a line back, and look at the most influential people (in my opinion) and what they have done with that influence, a pattern emerges.
Gandhi can easily be cited as one of the most influential individuals of the last century, he lead a country to independence through non-violence and had the entire nation at his beck and call - Quite literally, as when he did call for a hunger strike, most of India would stop and take heed. However, he was very careful to keep as far out of the political process as possible. Stories say that he was offered the Prime Ministers post, but chose to not accept it.
Now I am not as well versed in history to know why he did not take the post, and I won't speculate (If you know, please enlighten me) however, of what I have read of Gandhi's past, in the Congress when he had issues with Subash Chandra Bose, he used his influence to push Bose out of the party. So it comes to show, that even a man as 'good' as Gandhi was not free from the influence of Power.

Another man, Nelson Mandela, was also an inspirational figure for his nation and helped march them towards independence, however, different from Gandhi, he did take up the post of President in the newly elected government of South Africa. Why was it different for Mandela? I feel that is was primarily because of the situation that Mandela moved them out of, a time of discrimination and divide. Had he taken up the post of President and misused his powers, he would have thrown his country back into the past. So what you could say is that Mandela's mission, for a better South Africa was more important to him than any power that could possibly tempt him.

So what makes these two people different? Maybe it's a question of integrity? Or maybe it is knowing what would happen to you if you got that power.

I know what would happen to me if I got any kind of power.

It's taken me a long time to realize it and I'm rather sad at the conclusion.

I feel, from the bottom of my soul that if I had no supervision, if I had a chance to be in charge and have everyone listen to me.

I'd go mad with the power. I'd lose myself in it. I'd become a horrible person.

I find that my reasons for this analysis come from a number of things. Video Games, School Life and Personal Relations.

Video Games: These things are amazingly fun, and as a person who has spent a lot of time playing First Person Shooter Games, I know that what Videogames create aren't militants who will shoot up schools, but rather Control freaks and Alpha Males/Females. People who are used to being in control of a situation, people who are able to turn off the power if the situation gets too complex. Multiplayer has a huge amount of competition and a desire to come first. I mean if you are going to play for fun, then why play? People, and I used to play to win. When I lost, it hurt, it made me want a rematch. When I won, it was awesome, I wanted to rub it in peoples faces. However, when I saw someone else, someone younger than me do the same thing; get so agitated about winning a video game I began to see that it was at the end of the day a game, and games are to be enjoyed.

School Life: I won't lie, some people might say I had a good life in school, but honestly it was shit. I had grown up not being a bully and wasn't about to change. However, this did make me an easy target in a new school and sadly, it was a label that seemed to stick. For 5 years things were rather pathetic really, and in my last year of school, in 12th Grade, I won the Student Council elections and got a position of power and respect. There was where I realized the potential I had, the potential to come up with crazy, amazing ideas and also the potential to hold deep dark grudges against people and not want to earn respect, but rather demand respect. This scared me, it scared me as it showed me the paths that I could travel down. A path of brilliance or a path of hate.

It in fact very much inline with two stories.

The first story is from the Origins of Heracles, Heracles was a shepherd when he realized that a sheep was missing from his flock. Setting out to find the lost sheep, Heracles was presented with a choice by two Nymphs, Pleasure and Virtue (although some stories also speak of Janus) they gave him a choice of pleasant and easy life, or a severe but glorious life. Heracles chose virtue and became the Greatest Hero ever, but suffered more than most men could ever possibly consider. The Choice of Heracles is an ethical one, but the end message to me is that we are all presented with various options, and it is up to us to decode which one is the easy one out and which one is the tough choice, but the right choice.

The second story is actually more of a passage, which can be excellently described by this awesome work from zenpencils.com

Click to see it BIG!

The second one is actually hits home much more than the other story. Because it is only though your actions that you become reassured in what you are doing, and you justify yourself by making the same wrong choices.

Personal Relations: I've realized that as a person I am in a constant state of flux. I am in a constant quest for solace, but have a burning desire to be with my friends and loved ones. I want to be the leader and make the tough decisions, but still will want everyone to be happy and not hate me. I want to be comforted but will at the same time shrug off the comfort and possibly mistreat it.

In college, I've had ample opportunities to be a leader, to make decisions. Most of these decisions have lead to mistakes, severe, severe mistakes. Learning experiences, certainly, but evidence enough that I am one person who would certainly grow corrupt from even the slightest amount of power.

I mean, the other day, I was talking to a batchmate of mine, from the first year in college and they flat out told me, "Yeah, last year you were an asshole, Like a HUGE asshole"

I shall elaborate,

When college started, I took it upon myself to do certain things; coordinate the clubs, create the Student Council and do stuff for college. I thought I was doing the right thing, I thought it through and justified myself completely and said that I wasn't doing anything wrong. However, it was only after I had someone dear to me start to point it out to me was I finally able to realize that I was really being a mini-Hitler.

Believe it or not, whenever I would tell my school friends about what I was up to in college they would always reply with howls of laughter and call me Hitler, and a Dictator. Still it took me another 3 months to understand what I was doing. Crazy right?

So when I look back on the past year, and specifically to a post that I wrote shortly after my college held Student Council Elections where I did not get elected and I was rather bitter about it. I must say while I still hold strong opinions on that subject, I am glad that it did happen as it gave me the ability to come up with new ideas and projects without the slightest chance of me wanting or being able to usurp power (I wouldn't be able to, cause I wrote the charter)

This time has taught me that there is nothing better than a good idea. And that when you are in a situation like a college, or an office and you have an idea. You can be at the bottom of the food chain, but an idea will always be able to go the distance. Power is nothing without the will and the idea to drive it.

That being said, I still get scared of what might happen if I got that power.

The good thing is that by know that I can be corrupted, I can keep the amount of power available to me in check.

Here's to not becoming the next Great Dictator!

Emotions

Off late, I've started wondering whether everything is functional in my mind.

Yes, this is one of those venting, confused pieces, so if you aren't interested in reading further, please, come back next week - I'm sure to have something productive written by then.

Most of my life, decisions have been rather simple. If they seemed insurmountable, and after an exaggerated herculean effort, they were still choices that I could live with.

Now a days I just feel like every move I'm making is the wrong one.

It sucks that I can't stay on a straight line. Mainly because it means that most decision I make, say, yesterday, I might regret, today.

I'm so confused. And disappointed.

I'm ashamed to seemingly be unable to react emotionally to emotional situation. God know that I want to cry, but I just can't.

I don't cry when people die. I don't cry when a sad movie plays. I don't cry when someone precious to me cries.

I just feel hollow.

I feel, fake. I can laugh at jokes, hell, I'll crack 50 of them in an hour. But I can't seem to cry - and believe me, I've made people cry a lot.

It makes me sick to write that, but it's the truth. I've seen people cry because of me so many times, I've lost count. And all I can do is stare back at them - emotionless. Hollow.

But I'm not hollow, at least, I don't think I am.

So many of my emotions as a child have gone straight into the bitter box that I think after 7th or 8th grade, I just stopped crying about things that caused me emotional pain. I believe that I've just taken every emotion from then on and placed it in this huge box.

Anger, Rage, Greed, Hatred, Compassion, Hope, Despair, and all the others.

But most importantly Love. Love was placed in that box of turbulent, corrupt emotions.

I'd like to divert onto a tangent here, on Love:

What is love? (not a reference to the song) I mean, society tells us that we have to love our parents, that we have to love our family. But what is LOVE?

When you meet someone, how do you know that it's love? what makes one sure that it's not just a pure sexual attraction? Is it the emotional connection that develops? Is it an evolution of a similar strand of friendship?

Or is it just that you wake up and realize, 'I love that person'

It is a word that gets thrown around so much.

"I love this song"             "I love this movie"              "I love this dish"             "I love that shirt"

How do we know what we really love? Even a song that we love, we get sick of after putting it on repeat for 2 weeks.

The concept and term love has been perversed and polluted by television and media, so much so that it's actually become a synonym for sex.

So once again, where or rather how, do you define 'love'?

I have no idea.

So, all these emotions; Anger and Rage being some of the strongest emotions in there with the innocence of love.

I can imagine a 'pandora's box' like scene where the box gets opened, but rather than all the seperate components flying out, it's mutated. It's been corrupted into a mass of emotional muck.

Now, forensics is trying to sift through it. But it's taking time. And most often than not, they are finding wrong emotions with a degree of love in it. Fear, Worry, Care. All these things are embedded with love. If love was assembled, it would very much have these components in it. But at the same time, there are trace elements of love in Anger, Resentment, Sadness and other negative emotions.

How do these things work together?

If they don't then how do they get pried apart?

Does one need a helping hand? or can it be done alone?

So many questions. But never any answers.

I don't know about love. I don't know about my emotions.

All I know is that whenever I say goodbye, I wish I had never said it.

All I know is that whenever I say hi, I wish I had never said it.

I want to make a decision. Stick with it from now till death does me in, but until I sort through this emotional mostrositiy that is ME..... I'll never be convinced that I made the right choice.

Hopefully then, I'll be able to cry, and maybe then I won't be considered such an emotionless robot.

The Modernization of Indian Music

If it's not broken it doesn't need fixing.

When was the last time you as an individual sat back and listened to some Classical Indian Music? Perhaps a folk song?

I'm sure that many Indians today would respond by saying that they haven't. Not since they sat with their parents and listened to it, possibly grumbling as it played.

Indian Music in the traditional sense has been observed to have belly-flopped when it comes to being used in a modern, commercial sense, and that too, on a global platform.

Indian Music can essentially (in my perspective, please forgive and correct me of any mistakes) be divided into Classical Music, Bollywood Music and Fusion.

Classical Music is really where the magic is made in my opinion, I find that the singers are so in tune with the concept of making a balad that the work immediately is given life that cannot be matched. The artist places their soul into the music, something that you won't really see in Bollywood Music.

Bollywood, the Indian derivative of Hollywood, this is where the popular songs come from. The songs that are written to win awards and give a Hindi movies a soul. (forgive me, but I can't help but laugh writing that Hindi Movies have soul. If one does, it's truly a rare case!) These songs are stolen, from Hollywood, from Western Artists, and others; truly, Bollywood is where the most basic work of art will be copied, twisted and defiled before being smacked onto screens across India.

Fusion is the main objective of this post.

Recently, I've come across a show that is run by MTV called Sound Trippin, the show involves a crew that travels across India, recording sounds that might seem random to any of us and turn it into a song. Yes, there is a great deal of sound mixing and 'autotuning' of the sounds to make them more rhythmic, however, after listening to their first seasons soundtrack, I am amazed, just because it really affirms that concept that there is music in everything, and that fact is one which (if I am correct) was essential in Indian Classical Music, that the sounds would represent something from life.

The songs are amazing - yes, there is a great deal of techno and bass drums that has been put into it, but it's not necessarily a remix as it's still random sounds.

Another show that is known for a similar theme is a show called The Dewarists. I haven't seen it, however, I believe that it looks more at classical music and renewing those tunes.

Reverting back to the quote at the start, I was asked a question, more than half a year ago, about what Indian Classical Music was lacking, why wasn't it popular with the youth today. I thought about it, and realized, that we would still find it moving and amazing if we sat and listened to it, however, it's hard to do that when literally the entire global thought process is to idolize computer generated tunes and to love the artists that can make a 'kick ass song' but be unable to perform on stage (you know which artists). Music has been commercialized, that part is very much certain.

I remember that my response when a little along the lines of encouraging some degree of fusion. There are good things to the computer tunes, just like how there are amazing things about Classical Music. The only way to revive one when the other is supreme is to mix it up.

You never know what might happen, but if the Music is Good. People will Listen.

Why Do We Travel

Go for a walk.

Go for a run.

Go out and loaf.

Why?

When a person travels, in my opinion, there must be a reason for it. One does not simply go out without a purpose.

Go and visit family, Go to the store, Go out to burn calories.

There is a reason to travel.

And we all have to find that reason, but traveling for the sake of traveling. Is like eating for the sake of eating. It's a zero sum game, nothing changes and so nothing will ever grow from it.

Sadly, when I think of jumping on my bike and pedaling away into the sunset. I mostly get stopped by the single horrifying thought: I have to get back too.

Like Samwise Gamgee, I keep faith in a return journey, when in reality, all that should be in my mind is the journey itself. However, doing that can be likened to jumping out of a plane.

I live in a city that I am still tremendously unfamiliar with, and to cycle out without a return plan - is a sure plan for me to realize kilometers from Pune that I'm shit tired, and I can't get back...

I am unfortunately chained to the city. By having luxuries like a bed, food, water coolers and even my laptop, it chains me to return. That is why one has to admire the Buddhist treatment of material possessions, they don't (ideally, and correct me if I'm wrong) have them. Nothing that isn't essential is kept. That's why they walk around in robes and have such happy faces (Again, subject to personal observation).

Letting go seems like such an unbelievably easy course of action. However, little do we know that it is now the toughest thing to do. It's an addiction. Ask a person who smokes, to stop smoking - and they will respond (possibly) with how hard it is. That difficulty is nearly hundredfold when it comes to surrendering the things that we no longer treat as luxuries, but rather as our 'god given right'.

Traveling is a fun and exciting thing, but the more look at it, traveling is either the celebration of having mountains of wealth and the safety that comes with it. Or it is the celebration of not having a fixed connection to the world, to know that you can sleep anywhere, because you don't have anywhere else to sleep.

Traveling should happen for the journey. And sadly, I feel that that journey can only happen when you don't keep checking your phone for the time, realizing that you have an assignment tomorrow or that you suddenly miss someone. You should be fit to sentence yourself to that reality, that you are committed to the trip and to turn back would be tantamount to failing your ancestors, after all. If they never made it out the front door, you'd have never been born.

Ride North

Remember how I've said that life is going great and all that jazz?

Forget that.

I remember a quote by Dr. Seuss, and I'm going to butcher it a bit "You know you can't sleep when reality is finally better than your dreams"

I've found myself agreeing with this statement from time to time, however, I will say loudly, that I do not agree with him.

When you can't sleep, that's when life sucks. Because your body is keeping you awake so that you do something so that you are able to sleep with some semblance of content.

I'm trying to write a book, but the words aren't coming.
I'm trying to start a company, but that is permanently shelved cause I don't have the time for it.
I'm trying to get fit, but can't be motivated.

I'm trying to do so much, when it is so easy to just sit and listen to music.

Instead. I guess, I have to do.

(Please understand that this little rant, is my way of giving myself a pep-talk. The asylum is sadly, understaffed. We had a few people abruptly quit and they stole everything that wasn't nailed down.)

Great, a song I positively detest has come on. I'd delete it, but it used to have happy memories attached to it, but not so much anymore, and the person who quit stole the delete button.

Bah Humbug.

When I set my mind to something, it is balanced on a needle point. Quite literally, ANY distraction will send everything into an abyss and I'll be forced to choose what to grab onto. So when someone comes and gives a nice big push, you get me, writing at 2 am about things which don't make sense, hearing songs that make my heart blacken ever so slightly.

I have a plan for 2013. And it's a tough one. I'm all set to learn more about myself, about my limits and what all I can achieve. But it's always scary to face this, and always so easy to run to comfort.

The one new thing I want to do is just travel.

I want to fill my water bottle, pack a bag, charge my camera, grab my helmet and leap onto my cycle and just ride. Ride North.

Ride north, away from Home, away from friends that don't talk to me, away from college. Away from familiarity. Not for anything else, but just the pure quest for something new.

Sadly, I'm too much of a chicken. I'll say these big and majestic things. But never do it.

Don't take this to heart reader, I'm just unhappy with today's productivity levels. Tomorrow begins the day anew and the Sun will rob my heart of the darkness that crept into it in the night.

Good night.

Thanks for Listening.

Another Month. Another Rape.

This just in.

India will never change.

Six held in new Indian 'bus rape'

Less than a month has passed since most of India was shocked by the rape of a student in Delhi, people stood and swore this wouldn't happen again, people kept talking about women's rights and laws to punish the guilty, but no one has yet to address where the rapes come from.

Yesterday, during a lecture by renown filmmaker Anand Patwardhan gave us a statistic that every day, 2 Dalit women are raped. Not to mention the other statistics that float around that say that more than 20 women are raped in India every day.

People are applauded by the numbers, by the fact that they've been ignoring such inhuman actions for so long.

But no one is finding a solution.

People should be acting on the fact that the key to slowing the rape rate is by educating people on the value of woman (since they don't value them) and on the fundamentals of human rights. Empathize, make a connection, but do something.

People are taking admirable steps in helping people report and ensure that people are convicted for the rapes. But no one seems to be looking at what can be done to address this issue.

How do you get a rapist to stop raping, without threatening to cut his balls off?

I emphasizes on this, because I read another article that said that South Africa has double the rape rate that India does. And South Africa is now considered to be one of the BRICS countries, clearly, development doesn't measure rapes.

But what really scared me in that article was that the people didn't seem to care. A man made aggressive advances towards a woman and was forced off her, and told that the police was coming. The woman continued to enjoy herself, the clincher was that the man didn't think that what he'd done, attempted rape, was worth getting up and leaving the establishment.

We are progressively getting to a point where unless it actually happens, violently and brutally, to us we will never get out of this phase. This moment of clarity is something that people will just sit waiting for, uninterested in going out there and finding that clarity.

If humanity was a person, we are all giving it the middle-finger every time we see a rape story and it doesn't inspire us to do something.

Paul's Seven Year Walk

Sunday, Lazy Sunday...

Gives me a chance to catch up on the news. Did you know a child was delivered on a flight to Armenia from Russia? Or that a National Level Rugby player was forced to drop out of a match because his dog ate his passport? The news can be fun and exciting... But it can also be complete crap. You really have to dig to find the good stuff, but believe me, there is a lot of good, and interesting news.

I read this article today, about a journalist, Paul Salopek who's decided to go for a walk. A seven year walk mind you. His objective is to cover the journey that ancient humans would have covered going from Eastern Africa into North America and progressively moving south till they reached Tierra Del Fuego.

I think the first time I read about the concept that ancient humans moved from Africa to the America's by such a path was in an issue of National Geographics. So it wasn't surprising to see that NatGeo was going to be sponsoring his trip.

What I really picked up on was this phrase:

"This was how we were designed to absorb information, at 5km an hour"

Paul Salopek will cover his trip with articles, videos and tweets. However, his philosophy of our natural processing power being at 5kmph makes perfect sense, and seems to be an essential 're-discovery' when one considers the overwhelming inflow of information that occurs every day.

Link to article: BBC News - Paul Salopek: Going for a seven-year walk

Our minds can't deal with it. People don't notice anything now a days unless it's right in front of them. Salopek likens today's journalism with today's concept of food (fast food). Both are fast, and only deal with surface level issues. Fast Journalism focuses on getting a story out; doing quick research, getting responses, putting a story together and throwing it out in record time. While 'Slow Journalism' essentially deals with more indepth research, looking at the possible influences that might not be so obvious and commenting on those. Paul Salopek has mentioned that today, we move so fast that we lose out on things and I agree completely.

"We miss texture. We miss colour. We miss flavour,"

He claims that if slow reporting, where the journalist moves with the story, rather than covering it immediately and then moving on, we might have been able to see the early signs of problems in current crises.

I really like the concept that Paul is going for a walk, and that he is essentially walking through our ancestors paths. He's passing through places where man had walked millenia ago, however, these are still the places where the story lie, waiting to be covered, or to develop into a crisis.

Where would you want to go for a seven year walk? Let me know in the comments below.

Why Superman Earth One is Amazing

For those of you who are in college and like me, are rather confused what to do in the future. Pick up DC Comic's Superman Earth One Vol 1 & 2, I can guarantee that you'll find something that speaks to you about your problems.

I've read both novels before, but never ever saw it from this perspective that DC Comics has brought iconic superheroes down to ground levels. The stories are heroic and all, but they also deal with individual futures, opportunity, belief and love.

In Superman Earth One, the comic begins with Clark Kent moving to Metropolis fresh out of Junior College. It deals with him looking at various job prospects, and this is where I began to see the connections. I am confused regarding what I want to do once I leave college and enter the real world. There are things that I am good at, there are things I am passionate about and then there are the things I want to do, Same as Clark. (except for him it's a vast ocean of options)

Clark tries out for a professional football team, and we know that Superman on a American Football field would have really resulted in some rather one-sided matches. Clark in this iteration of Superman is also in possession of a genius level intellect, which is highlighted when he is interviewed at a research-centric MNC.

He does spectacularly in both, and as he explains to his mother, taking any one of those jobs would result in him being set for life, he'd never have to worry about money or anything. As Martha Kent aptly puts it, parents aren't interested with their children monetarily supporting them. Tall and Strong children are meant to build the future.

These words resonate deeply with Superman as he is now poised with the nexus of choosing what he loves, what he is good at or what he wants to do. We all know the story, he joins the Daily Planet.

However, he doesn't join for Lois Lane or some nonsense like that, he joins because it is there that he sees people that stand for something, people who are willing to "Stay and Die for the Truth".

This makes the end message of Superman Earth One, one where it is clear that it doesn't matter if you do something that makes you money, you'll never be happy until you do what you want to do. Even if that is becoming the best Banjo Player in the world.

Another reference to us college students that we should be aiming for futures we want. Futures that we want to make.

Why I Wear the 'S'

I have a favourite t-shirt. It's a Superman T-Shirt (I'll confess, it's a Black and Red Superboy T-Shirt, but I consider it a Superman T-Shirt for the blue shirt is wasted on blind superman fans).
Off late, people have said to me, "Again?" "Don't you have any other clothes?" "Are laundry prices that high?" Sadly, not one of them has ever asked me "Why do you wear that shirt so much?"

An Image of the T-Shirt

The one thing I have always loved and respected Superman for, is his belief in Humanity. Superman, as many would know, has the power to change the world into whatever he wants. If he desired no war, he could have it. If he wanted to be supreme ruler, he could do so at a whim.

But he does not, for the simple reason that he believes in the humanity, he admires us for our ability to comeback from the worst of situations - stronger. He has been asked why he does not kill, or end dictatorships. Superman has always said that if he was to overthrow a government, it is not a popular movement - It is his movement. Similarly, he refuses to kill from the perspective that it is unfair for him to cast judgement on others when there is essentially none to cast judgement on him if he is wrong.

Superman Earth One Vol 2 - Really looks into the smaller parts of Superman

I admire that respect for humanity; what humanity can do, what it has done and how it constantly adapts and evolves. The 'S' Shield represents this and I respect Superman for his respect and thus I wear the 'S'.

Superman is often associated with the phrase: Truth, Justice and the American Way. People feel that it is old-fashioned, and American propaganda - I ask you to look into the deeper meaning of these words, and the meanings they could have.

Truth: Superman is at his core, an honest person, he fights for the down trodden, he fights for the truth regardless if it means admitting his mistake. This, in his opinion, makes him human. The ability to say, "I was wrong" is a very human phrase. It reveals a side of fault that might have been non-existent previously.

Justice: Superman is guided by an impeccable sense of moral code, he sees a situation and knows what is right. However, most often than not, (at least in the past) it was a desire to stop conflict and get people to the point of discussion. He has been wrong. He has been misled. But the key that Superman finds is that he listens to both sides to find the answer.
If a villain says "I didn't do it!"
Superman immediately asks, "Who did?"

The American Way: This is by far the most controversial part of the motto, simply from the perspective that it gives the impression of American superiority and all that nonsense. However, it has been made clear that when Superman says this, he is referring to the American spirit of revolution, entrepreneurial action and desire for a 'brighter tomorrow'.

I often will tell people that I hate Superman, but it's honestly from the same perspective that Lex Luthor hates Superman. It's the opinion, that Superman is just too damn good. While Lex seeks to destroy this good, I strive every single day towards being able to be that good. Because, Superman represents an ultimate.

People should believe in the notions of Truth, Justice and, maybe not the 'American Way', but a better tomorrow.

He represents an ultimate in terms of morals, in terms of strength; physical and mental, integrity, honesty, and potential. He isn't even human, and he's a better example of what people should be.

Good. Above All Else, Good.

So, when people (never) ask me why I wear my Superman t-shirt, I tell them, that it represents ideals and dreams that I hope to achieve. The day I can say that I am honest, fair and completely open-minded and have achieved that 'Brighter Tomorrow' then I'll think of just wearing that t-shirt for the awesomeness that it radiates.