The Responsibilities of Ideation

Now, honestly I don't know whether the word 'ideation' exists. But it is strewn about by MBAs and so I thought be a cool add-on.
To the topic at hand. Ideas and the creative process at work that generates the ideas as such do not have any responsibility. And it is better not to weigh the creative process with values and so on. There are very few things I believe on, but I have absolute belief in liberty in all forms of creation, including ideas.

But there is one more thing I steadfastly believe on- every creative form can and ought to be subjected to questioning. A critique is not a caricature. It is a process that may actually enrich both the maker and the observer. I don't think I am naive. Obviously, there'd be many voices that will not make sense and may prove to be disparaging enough to set your creative spirit ablaze. But then that is where detachment comes in. And self-control.

Though I'd admit, in spite of the heavy words used above, the first creative form that comes out of a creationist has special meaning to him. Detachment may seem logical, but it wasn't cold reason that made him create. Every critic has the responsibility to take this as a special case. This is where you bring out the kid gloves. I'm sure it feels great to sound like a big guy and brand a new thing as trash. But that is not what a fan of creation does.

So, essentially I wish to say, is that the observer ought not to go ga-ga over a new form (could be an idea) needlessly neither should he criticise it in such forceful terms that it sows self-doubt in the creationist or antagonise relations to such an extent that neither listens to each other. In both ways, the whole point is lost.
Last night, I met a man (for the second time, the first time I barely got to know the guy) who's about to formally launch a new rock band. We discussed his ideas on how he wishes to shoot his video. Since both have little command on the form, we discussed the plot. I am not at liberty to discuss it fully, but then I'll offer a glimpse: imagine a brown man, disturbed by his complexion. He tries many things to be fair, predictably all in vain. But then one fine morning, he goes out and sees a Black man. It changes the way he thinks- he feels good that his case (sic) is not as bad as his. And then other such scenarios follow.

The idea is nothing new. Explored and dissected in many forms of culture and refined to the extent the aforesaid idea seems a little hackneyed. But then I nodded along, amidst one guy gushing about it (this guy, also my flatmate, considers Tom Clancy as his favourite author. Easy to guess why he is not an audience that needs to be taken seriously). The Rocker put more perspective- in India, where bands sell teeny-bopper romance and puppy love, this is quite a remarkable break. Usual videos have a typical fare- pretty men and women flaunt their bodies, teach people how to make out, and sometimes double up as travelogues for exotic destinations.

This made me look at the idea afresh. It obviously didn't seem any brighter, but at least I knew what he was saying when he claimed that it'd be different.

But what disturbed me was the fallibility of such an idea. The purpose of the idea is not at fault: it wishes to make people feel good about themselves. But the way it seeks to do it is gravely at fault. When you look at the black man on the street and consider yourself lucky, you're still trapped in the world of comparisons. It can only give you temporary solace. One can argue that it will make the person think about his obsession about his shortcomings and come to terms with what we are but does it naturally follow?

I think not. If you are stretching boundaries, stretch them a little bit more. A black man on the street will make you happy today. It won't make you happy tomorrow when you see someone with a paler complexion. If you think I'm making a case out of nothing, then think of this: how many times one has looked at a destitute and considered himself lucky? Has it led to a life-altering epiphany that what you are what you are and one ought not to be bothered about falling back in the great race of life? NO. Everyone still runs the great race, constantly checking how the other guy is doing to make sure he does not fall behind.

The only way, I think, you can escape the vortex of this constant pursuit of "Happiness" is to transcend the realm of comparisons. The brown man has to come to terms with his skin and find the beauty in it, but not by seeing himself as superior to the black man. I am not stupid enough to think that its easy to stop doing what people has accepted as being natural. But I have the responsibility to say that the idea falls short on this and can perpetuate the compare-and-compete world we live in.

Stretching the piece too far, and just for the benefit of my JNU brethren, the "feel-good" the idea propagates reflect the class system. The finest among us sit atop the pyramid, marveling us with their blessed gifts (gift? - or a gene matter? subject matter of another post). The intermediates are stuck in between and feel satisfied that they're better than the worst.
The worst, well, we all know what the class system thinks of the worst.

Isn't rock music supposed to be radical?

The Thing with Art

Now I really don't know what art (in the universal sense) means- but I do know what constitutes art to me. Memorable cinema, an eminently readable book (prose), music, a piece of sculpture that makes you feel so damn inferior that you wish to die (!!!), the art of capturing the world through lenses (photography) and of course art itself (paintings). There are dramas, poems, and a variety of other things that qualify as art bust since I am ignorant of these mediums, I won't consider them here as I really don't have anything to offer on them.
I am at a stage of life where one questions oneself- what is going to be the driving force? What is going to be that single-minded pursuit that makes you wish to live a little longer, die a little later?

For me the late realisation has been art. I am late at this game, but hopefully not too late. I have had so far exposure to very low brow stuff- but then I am born in a country that boasts of neither the Gallic flair or the American ingenuity.

There are perhaps two ways to the high pursuit of art- eclectics or the esoteric. For me, the time has not yet come to make such a decision. The two-year old kid does not decide between Oxford or Cambridge. I am at a cultural infancy and it could take a decade before I reach the stage where I may have to chose either.

Now why art?

Honestly enough, though it may seem to be a logical conclusion for a Bengali rice-eater, its sheer enjoyment that drives me to this goal. All I am valiantly trying to project here is that it is not the cultural pull or the omipresent desire to be cool is driving me. Or at least that is what I think.

As for coolness, honestly put, I move in a company that hardly appreciates my diligence. People ridicule me when I see an excellent movie twice in the theatre and throw up their hands when I refuse to give in to their pleas to accompany them to very below-average movies. To illustrate, I'd watch the Rashomon as many times as possible to grasp the narrative and the finesse of the craft but choose not to watch the regular potboiler. This is not to say I avoid all blockbuster material. In fact, I make it a point to see them. I value the presence of stars (the ones who can act) and find their utilisation a key aspect of the craft.

Coming back to what I was saying, all this is not helping me get cool. Its making me alone.

Interestingly, a very good friend of mine is much higher on the art scale than I am. Yet through some way, he retains all his old friends who have not, obviously, been on the same pursuit. He switches between avatars with remarkable ease. So in front of women, he'll be the gentle soft-spoken cultured guy. In front of me and another good friend (I like to think of us as the triumvirate, but both of them frown on it, as it affects their homophobic sensibilities!) who share the same tastes, he's the guy we like and know- the analytical, argumentative, radical and the really well read Sid. And in front of the guys, he is a raucous fellow showering expletives, one-liners, puns, toilet humour and yes, unsolicitously toughening them up (by simply taking them on fights- it helps he's huge)

Now I can be many different people too. But definitely not with ease. I have acted in my time (nothing so grand- skits and all) but those are meant for the stage. My general personality remains the same, except as someone very close alleged, it changes quite a lot over time.

So with this unvarying persona, I am finding it difficult to reconcile my sole aim in life with the very necessary need to make friends.

A difficult existence.

What bothers more that it is out of choice.

Cubicle Diaries II: Alienation?

Traversing through the corporate realm, I cannot feel but alienated sometimes. To convince myself (my blog does not boast of any readers) , let me recount two particular instances-

• Recently I heard the story of a fellow who just disappeared without a trace. He left his reasonably well paying job, the fast lanes of Delhi and his parents for a cult somewhere in the bowels of Middle India. Everyone knew his devotion to the cult (many a times colleagues and friends have noticed that) but no one guessed this would happen. While I discussed with some people I know, they all seemed to agree that the guy may be a little loony and such an action is certainly irresponsible. I am yet to find someone who thought the decision was mysterious and to an extent, required courage
• Interpretation of films has become a source of major irritation. The blatant labeling of brilliant movies like "Dark Knight" and "Fight Club" as action movies is somehow unacceptable to me. Sure they had elements of action, but the underlying theme was nothing but a direct contest between good and evil, embellished by car chases, kick-ass action and pyros. Yet otherwise smart men (boasting of impeccable degrees, certifications and work performance) do so. Why are people so lackadaisical in their attempt to understand mediums of entertainment?

The general reception to radical ideas are still met with ridicule, and at best skepticism. Reconciliation with such attitudes are extremely difficult. Why is everyone so dismissive?

Running away from it all requires conviction. The reason I have reserved my admiration for the runaway fellow's action is that, needless of how it finally turns out to be, the decision needed courage. And the execution a kind of daring that I can only dream of.

Despite all the talk, I have myself settled into a stasis that can hardly be shaken by anything. Only perturbed by events that somehow effect me, the whole spirit of idealism has been grinded to dust and everything seems past now.

The past in itself an alien world. I hardly reflect back- and I am yet to understand why.

Perhaps alienation works in many ways. One alienates from oneself, as well as from others