Friday, October 1, 2010
Sunday, September 5, 2010
What is human being?
I can’t even understand myself so I am not able to say anything about human being. Here I am trying to tell something which related with my views. An ancient maxim tells us that the proper study of man is man. It lies at the heart of the philosophical questions of man's place and destination in a world that is being discovered and transformed in the name of humanity, the highest of all values. The main goal of social development is the formation of human abilities and the creation of the most favorable conditions for human self-expression.
Nothing in the world is more complex or more perplexing than a human being.
Many sciences study people, but each of them does so from its own particular angle. Philosophy, which studies humanity in the round, relies on the achievements of other sciences and seeks the essential knowledge that unites humankind.
Idealism reduces the human essence to the spiritual principle. According to Hegel, the individual realizes not subjective, but objective aims; he is a part of the unity not only of the human race but of the whole universe because the essence of both the universe and man is the spirit.
In ancient philosophy man was thought of as a "small world" in the general composition of the universe, as a reflection and symbol of the universe understood as a spiritualized organism. A human being, it was thought, possessed in himself all the basic elements of the universe. In the theory of the transmigration of souls evolved by Indian philosophers the borderline between living creatures (plants, animals, man and gods) is mobile. Man tries to break out of the fetters of empirical existence with its law of karma, or what we should call "fate". According to the Vedanta, the specific principle of the human being is the atman (soul, spirit, selfhood), which in essentials may be identified with the universal spiritual principle—the Brahman. The ancient Greeks, Aristotle, for example, understood man as a social being endowed with a "reasoning soul".
In Christianity the biblical notion of man as the "image and likeness of God"( if God exists), internally divided owing to the Fall, is combined with the theory of the unity of the divine and human natures in the personality of Christ and the consequent possibility of every individual's inner attainment of divine "grace".
Proceeding from this dualistic understanding of man as a being belonging to two different worlds, the world of natural necessity and that of moral freedom. The first should study what nature makes of man, while the second is concerned with what he, as a freely acting being, does, can or should make of himself. Unlike that of the animals, man's bodily organization and sense organs are less specialized, and this is an advantage. He has to form himself, by creating a culture. Thus we arrive at the idea of the historical nature of human existence. According to Nietzsche, man is determined by the play of vital forces and attractions and not by the reason. The point of departure of the Marxist understanding of man is the human being as the product and subject of labor activity. ". . . The essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations."
who am i
WHO AM I…?
Every living being longs always to be happy untainted by sorrow; and everyone has the greatest love for himself, which is solely due to the fact that happiness is his real nature. Hence, in order to realize that inherent and untainted happiness, which indeed he daily experiences when the mind is subdued in deep sleep, it is essential that he should know himself. For obtaining such knowledge the enquiry, ‘Who am I?’ in quest of the Self is the means par excellence.
‘Who am I?’ I am not this physical body, nor am I the five organs of sense perception.
I am not the five organs of external activity.
I am not the five vital forces.
I am not even the thinking mind. Neither is I that unconscious state of nescience, which retains merely the subtle Vasanas (latent impressions or mental tendencies), being then free from the functional activity of the sense organs and of the mind, and being unaware of the existence of the objects of sense perception.
Who am I, is the question which has been haunting me from my childhood. Now I got a chance to solve this problem
There is only one thing in this life that changes with situations and conditions; personality. Therefore defining it is a very difficult proposition.
I have not yet reached a station in life from which I am able to identify my own personality. There have been only a few people who have succeeded in this Endeavour. Any attempt to do so will make it difficult for a person like me. What I have understood about myself from this small period of life is WHO I AM NOT. In this world I prefer being a fool because it is only a fool who is able to laugh open-heartedly under any circumstances in life
I know that without knowing myself I am not eligible to live this life, but now I can’t do anything to solve this issue because everything in the world is a byproduct of so called LUST
The only way to overcome my weakness is being a FOOL
So I am very glad to say that I AM A FOOL
I AM A FOOL
I AM A FOOL
(Aham brahmasmi)
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja
Making a historical film is not something everyone can do. Hariharan who is the director of ‘Oru Vadakkan Veera Gadha’ is back with his trump card M.T Vasudevan Nair and effectively supported by Mammooty in the new venture Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja has graced theatres this morning.
The Film is about Pazhazzi Raja’s fight against British East India Company to withdraw Company’s power and army from the state of Kottayam. Kerala Varma questions the logic of Foreigners who came as traders are now collecting tax and governing the country. The amount fixed as tax by Company was unreasonable and people didn’t have the capacity to pay that much.
People gave stiff opposition to the company on the tax issue. The film starts with Veeravarma played by Thilakan making a letter to company that he will collect taxes on their behalf. In the latter part Thilakan disappears from the film and Pazhayamveedan Chandhu played by Suman gains prominence. Pazhassi who does guerilla warfare provide great defense and creates atrocity to British. So Company makes a treaty with Kerala Varma which was later not followed by the former. This provokes Kerala Varma to start war.
Mammooty has taken effort to portray his character.
Sarath Kumar is Edachena Kunkan as the right hand of Kerala Varma is a delight to watch. His manliness and devoted character provides an air of dignity when ever he is onscreen.
Kaniha as Pazhassi Raja’s wife Makkam adds glamour. Manoj K. Jayan has showed his acting capabilities. Suresh Krishna as Kaitheri Ambu gets chunk of a role in this film. Suman and Jagathy were good.
Lalu Alex as Emman Nair, Captain Raju as Unni Mootha gives good support to Pazhassi. Actors who acted as British East India Company’s employees did well. Peter Evans as Major James, Harry Key as Thomas are to be specially mentioned.
The song ‘Aadi ushas sandya’ starts with Kerala Varma Pazhassi Raja’s white horse coming through water, which can be considered as one of the most beautiful shot in Malayalam cinema.
The negatives are, Padma Priya who appears as an Adivasi girl has dubbed herself and a foreign slang is noticed. In individual fight scenes, the choreographed action (rope) looks awkward. This film can’t be said to be thoroughly entertaining. It doesn’t bring the spirit of fighting. Historians may say the story is manipulated history.
The film has successfully recreated 18th century. Art director and his crew have done great work. Unlike other films this film starts with out showing technicians name.
This incomparable movie is three hours fifteen minutes long. Quality wise the film can be compared with Hollywood movies. Putting a mark for this film will be my ignorance as we can’t compare gem with gold.
Applause goes to Hariharan who captained this ship. Writer M.T Vasudevan Nair is one of the key brains behind this artwork. The camera by Ramanth Shetty is classic. Sound design by Resul Pookkutty stands out. Ilayarajas scoring may not be very well received.
Pazhassi Raja which is made at a gigantic budget by Gokulam Gopalan is worth spending every dime
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Eyes Of Latin America
Tomás GUTIÉRREZ Alea
Nationality: Cuban. Born: Havana, 11 December 1928. Education: Studied law at the University of Havana; attended Centro Sperimentale, Rome, 1951–53. Career: Worked with Cine-Revista newsreel organisation, late 1950s; following establishment of Instituto Cubano del Arte e Industria Cinematograficos (ICAIC) by revolutionary government, began making documentaries, 1959; later collaborated with younger filmmakers, in keeping with ICAIC policy. Awards: Union of Writers of the URSS Award, Moscow International Film Festival, for Historias de la revolucion, 1961; Grand Coral—First Prize, for Tiempo de revancha, 1982; Grand Coral—First Prize, for Hasta cierto punto, 1983; Silver Berlin Bear Award and Teddy Award, Berlin International Film Festival, Golden Kikito, Gramado Latin Film Festival, ARCI-NOVA Award, FIPRESCI Award, Grand Coral—First Prize, OCIC Award, and Special Jury Award, Sundance Film Festival, for Strawberry and Chocolate, 1994; Grand Coral—Second Prize, shared with Juan Carlos Tabío, Havana Film Festival,
Tomás Gutiérrez Alea
Films as Director:
- 1947La Caperucita roja; El Faquir
- 1950Una Confusión cotidiana
- 1953Il Sogno de Giovanni Bassain
- 1955El Mégano
- 1959Esta tierra nuestra (+ sc, ed)
- 1960Asamblea general; Historias de la revolución (Stories of the Revolution) (+ sc)
- 1961Muerte al invasor
- 1962Las Doce sillas (The Twelve Chairs) (+ sc)
- 1964Cumbite (+ sc)
- 1966La Muerte de un burócrata (Death of a Bureaucrat) (+ sc)
- 1968Memorias del subdesarrollo (Historias del subdesarrollo; Inconsolable Memories; Memories of Underdevelopment) (+ sc, ro)
- 1971Una Pelea cubana contra los demonios (A Cuban Fight against Demons) (+ sc)
- 1974El Arte del tabaco
- 1975El Camino de la mirra y el incienso
- 1976La Última cena (The Last Supper)
- 1977De cierta manera (One Way or Another) (+ sc); La Sexta parte del mundo
- 1979Los Sobrevivientes (The Survivors) (+ sc)
- 1984Hasta cierto punto (Up to a Certain Point; Up to a Point)
- 1988Cartas del parque (Letters from the Park) (+ sc)
- 1991Contigo en la distancia (Far Apart)
- 1993Fresa y chocolate (Strawberry and Chocolate)
- 1994Guantanamera (+ sc)
the man of malayam films
adoor gopalakrishnan
Satyajith Ray's role in revolutionising Indian cinema during 1950s with his first film Pather Panchali was taken-up by Adoor Gopalakrishnan in Kerala to create a drastic change in Malayalam cinema. Adoor's first film Swayamvaram (1972) pioneered the new wave cinema movement in Kerala.
 | While making films I am not concerned about strictly contemporary, day-to-day issues. Any good film has to survive the period of its making. It has to go beyond today to be relevant tomorrow. I am very particular about that. As a result these films also don't age, I hope. They remain contemporary. |
It was his interest in drama, which lead Adoor to take up the direction course in 1962 at the FTII at Pune, thinking that it would help him to enhance his skills in stage productions. But there he found that stage plays and cinema are entirely different mediums.
Notable 'literary' films like Neelakuyil, Chemeen and Oolavum Theeravum produced before Adoor's first film, but all had the regular ingredients of popular cinema, highly dramatic plot and song-dance sequences. Swayamvaram was a rejection of all these populist formulas. This radically different film was reluctantly taken by the mass. Only a minority eagerly waiting for a change in this powerful medium welcomed the film.
Apart from his films, Adoor's major contribution towards introducing a new cinema culture in Kerala was the constitution of the first Film Society in Kerala, 'Chitralekha'. He also took active part in the constitution of 'Chitralekha', Kerala's first Film Co-operative Society for film production. These movements triggered a fresh wave of good films, often termed 'art films' by directors like Aravindan, P A Becker, K G George, Pavithran, Raveendran etc.
Before Swayamvaram Adoor had made his first short film The Myth of 50 Sec duration for a festival in Montreal. His second short film And Man Created was Chitralekhas first production. He also directed numerous documentaries for different government organisations before he started his first feature Swayamvaram.
All the ten films he directed, from Swayamvaram to Oru Pennum Randaanum, were screened at several International film festivals and won him several National and International awards. He won the British Film Institute award for Elepathayam. He also won National Film Awards four times and several State Film Awards. Adoor received the Padma Shree in 1984 and the Padma Vibhushan in 2006.
The Nation honoured Adoor for his valuable contributions to Indian cinema by awarding him the highest cinema award of India, the Dabasaheb Phalke Award for the year 2004.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
the taste of death
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
