Bore­dom is intrigu­ing. In this age, when there are count­less activ­i­ties, hob­bies, spe­cial inter­ests, and diver­sions both online and offline, bore­dom seems a dif­fi­cult pin­na­cle to achieve. Yet it is as com­mon today as it was in ear­li­er times when peo­ple had to occu­py them­selves with far few­er things. When­ev­er I watch a peri­od film, one of the things I always won­der about is “What the hell did these folks do in their whole days in that era”?! If I had lived as a human any time before, say, 1940, I think I would have died of bore­dom.

Obvi­ous­ly, it doesn’t work that way. Our thresh­old of get­ting engaged is decreas­ing at the same rate as our inge­nu­ity in invent­ing new ways of occu­py­ing our atten­tion.

When pop­u­lar­ized, I am sure the tele­phone must have saved many souls count­less hours of bore­dom — the abil­i­ty to call a far­away friend must have led to excite­ment that last­ed sev­er­al years, if not decades. We treat voice calls on the tele­phone most­ly as a nui­sance today. When the TV start­ed appear­ing in many house­holds, it must have been a very excit­ing era for the whole fam­i­ly to get togeth­er to watch news and enter­tain­ment. We now call it the Idiot Box. It was thrilling to be able to chat over the Inter­net on IRC chan­nels with unknown friends dur­ing the ‘90s and mes­sen­ger apps with known friends lat­er. Now we dis­able chat when we check Face­book and log on to Skype and oth­er mes­sag­ing ser­vices in “Invis­i­ble” mode.

How­ev­er, this uber-con­nect­ed­ness with oth­ers, this end­less sup­ply of online stream­ing music and videos and games, doesn’t pre­vent bore­dom. At times, we still get bored.

When I get bored, I feel a bit guilty. You know, so many things to do, so lit­tle time. How can I get bored when there is so much I can expe­ri­ence, check out, play, con­nect, com­mu­ni­cate, share, etc.? There are hours of music, dozens of movies, innu­mer­able arti­cles, many books, and so on that I have yet to expe­ri­ence that were rec­om­mend­ed by my friends. Time is already run­ning so short that I think my life is not long enough to ade­quate­ly con­sume these while doing jus­tice to each, and I am get­ting bored with noth­ing to do?! That’s the guilt. But yes, I still do, and noth­ing alters that fun­da­men­tal truth.

All bore­dom is a prob­lem of the engage­ment of atten­tion. Tech­no­log­i­cal advances have expo­nen­tial­ly increased the “price”, or thresh­old, of our atten­tion. Ear­li­er, it was rel­a­tive­ly easy for a phone call to get one’s full and undi­vid­ed atten­tion, because it was com­pet­ing with few oth­er dis­trac­tions. Today, it is per­ceived as a nui­sance because our atten­tion is already devot­ed to oth­er things at the time.

True bore­dom is when we do not wish to pay atten­tion to any­thing or any­body.

On the one hand, bore­dom is a sig­nal that noth­ing excites you any­more, there is noth­ing you look for­ward to. On the oth­er hand, bore­dom may sig­nal that you want to break away from rou­tine and seek new expe­ri­ences and adven­tures. Bore­dom — lack of enthu­si­asm — is some­times mis­per­ceived.

Some folks get bored quick­ly if they’ve not done any­thing inter­est­ing or new for some time, while oth­er folks get bored because there just isn’t any­thing inter­est­ing left for them to do. The dif­fer­en­tia­tor lies in whether there is a desire to do any­thing. The for­mer is a tem­po­rary state of rest­less­ness, the lat­ter is when there is no desire what­so­ev­er to do any­thing. The for­mer is just rest­less­ness, the lat­ter is true bore­dom.

Posted in Personal | Tagged | 2 Comments


I was fly­ing on a quest
With a great deal of zest
When I fell down
Into a cuckoo’s nest

Thus I had a frac­ture
And lost all my rap­ture
While I kept pon­der­ing
The rea­sons for my cap­ture

All my friends told me
The nest was the best for me
And as the days went by
I for­got how to fly

As my mind reeled
My lips were sealed
My frac­ture healed
But my fate was sealed

Posted in poetry | Comments Off on Grounded

Indian Housewives and Their Maids

The rela­tion­ship many Indi­an house­wives have with their maids is in many ways like that of arranged mar­riages.

To start with, the elab­o­rate maid-hunt­ing process begins much like bride-hunt­ing in arranged mar­riages, where you first seek ref­er­ences for qual­i­ty maids. After short-list­ing suit­able can­di­dates, they are then ‘screened’ in an inter­view where the capa­bil­i­ties of the maid are assessed in con­junc­tion with her expec­ta­tions. After the screen­ing process for every can­di­date maid, feed­back and impres­sions are dis­cussed between the fam­i­ly before mov­ing onto the next can­di­date. After some rounds of dis­cus­sions about the nature of work­load and what is a fair pay for that work, a can­di­date is cho­sen after a lot of nego­ti­a­tion. Vet­er­an house­wives nag and scoff at the unre­al­is­tic expec­ta­tions of today’s maids, just like moth­ers-in-law nag and scoff at the unre­al­is­tic expec­ta­tions of today’s brides.

The cho­sen can­di­date begins her work in the home much like a bride join­ing a fam­i­ly after mar­riage. The maid’s boss, the house­wife, acts like a moth­er-in-law does with a bride. Every aspect of her work is observed through a micro­scope in an overt­ly judg­men­tal fash­ion. The maid, like a new bride, has an innate accep­tance that this is nat­ur­al. Dur­ing her ini­tial days at work, she demon­strates her best behav­ior. The house­wife takes care not to appear too demand­ing, lest the maid run away. For the house­wife, it is a tricky game of how many demands of work you can get away with for the amount of pay agreed with­out los­ing the maid; for the maid, it is a tricky game of how super­fi­cial­ly you can do the assigned work for the amount of pay agreed with­out los­ing the job.

At this stage, it is cus­tom­ary for the house­wife to nag and com­plain about a few aspects of the maid’s work. The cleaned uten­sils still have some left­over soap pow­der or aren’t being cleaned prop­er­ly, there is always some dirt left in this area even after dust­ing, she has been late at work two times in the past two weeks, it was her duty to inform before­hand when she skipped work the oth­er day, and so on. Ear­li­er gen­er­a­tions of maids may have tak­en this crit­i­cism pas­sive­ly or sim­ply deflect­ed it to domes­tic prob­lems, but mod­ern maids, like mod­ern brides, have evolved their own retorts. The qual­i­ty of the soap being used, the cheap mop that should have been replaced long time back, how oth­er maids in oth­er house­holds do much less work for much high­er pay, etc. are now weapons in the maid’s arse­nal that are used judi­cious­ly. It is a game of cards, where both the house­wife and the maid strive to retain their aces up their sleeve should the need arise, while con­tin­u­ing to play counter-attack.

Like arranged mar­riages, many of these con­trived rela­tion­ships sur­vive this ini­tial chal­leng­ing phase. Nei­ther side’s expec­ta­tions are ful­ly met, but there is accep­tance of the dis­sat­is­fac­tion as a price to be paid for the ben­e­fits of the rela­tion­ship. After all, if there were no maid, the house­wife would have a tremen­dous bur­den on her shoul­ders man­ag­ing all the house­hold chores by her­self. On the oth­er hand, the month­ly pay for her work is finan­cial secu­ri­ty for the maid, whose hus­band usu­al­ly can’t be relied on to pro­vide suf­fi­cient­ly for her children’s future.

Jeal­ousy, like in many mar­riages, is a anoth­er fac­tor between neigh­bor­ing house­wives, about who has the best maid. Chat­ter between house­wives breaks the ice with dis­cussing how awful or awe­some their maids are, and if the rela­tion­ship devel­ops, ends in how awful or awe­some their hus­bands are.

The maid’s role extends well beyond the house­hold work. She is the back­bone of the grapevine in the soci­ety. From the daugh­ter of neigh­bors so-and-so who is ready for mar­riage for whom they’re look­ing for suit­ors and how neigh­bor so-and-so has many domes­tic argu­ments, to how there was a brouha­ha about that par­ty last week and who was say­ing what about it to whom in the soci­ety, the maid is the dom­i­nant under­ground chan­nel of com­mu­ni­ca­tion.

In a few cas­es, again, like in those rare mar­riages, the rela­tion­ship blos­soms. The maid’s qual­i­ty of work is adju­di­cat­ed as excel­lent and best in class. The house­wife can now brag to her neigh­bors about how she was able to find the per­fect maid, just like how some women brag about find­ing the per­fect hus­band. Over and above her usu­al Diwali bonus, the maid gets gifts for her chil­dren. Her absences at work due to domes­tic issues are treat­ed with sym­pa­thy. She is giv­en free med­ica­tion and med­ical advice when­ev­er required. Old clothes are no longer dis­card­ed, they’re instead donat­ed to the maid’s fam­i­ly. From children’s toys to antique fur­ni­ture, the maid enjoys the char­i­ty of the gen­er­ous house­wife.

I doubt this sce­nario exists any­where out­side India. It is a unique sym­bi­ot­ic tri­umvi­rate, where the maid works, the house­wife orches­trates and the hus­band pays. Jai Ho!

Posted in society | Tagged , | 6 Comments

A Photo Essay on Friendship and Criticism

Some­times, a friend’s crit­i­cism cuts so deep, it hurts.


It caus­es such anguish, that our love for the friend­ship momen­tar­i­ly turns to dust.


Crit­i­cism can leave a per­ma­nent imprint.


Nev­er­the­less, how­ev­er hurt we may be, crit­i­cism can smoothen the rough edges in our char­ac­ter.


A true friend is one who doesn’t pre­tend we are per­fect, and who has the sin­cer­i­ty to crit­i­cize us when we deserve it. A true friend some­times needs to be bru­tal.


(These pho­tos were inspired by Atul Sab­nis, whose pho­tog­ra­phy often teach­es me to “see”.)

Posted in photography | Tagged , | 4 Comments


Every­thing in nature fol­lows a sequence. From cater­pil­lar to but­ter­fly, from seed to tree, from stars to black holes. Enter humans and the sequence is bro­ken. In com­mu­ni­ca­tion, in behav­ior, in action.

When humans break a nat­ur­al sequence, order turns to chaos.

Some con­text before we pro­ceed.

It all start­ed with my first meet­ing with a new friend bum bum bhole on Twit­ter:

A series of sequen­tial tweets from me had the fol­low­ing response:

My dear friend Gaiz­abonts shared his love of playlists:

When bum bum bhole respond­ed

I said

My mean­ing explic­it:

This was then inter­pret­ed as my being against playlists, to which Gaiz­abonts rose In Defence of Playlists.

A series of tweets from me was my sequence of thought, expressed through a medi­um restrict­ed to 140 char­ac­ters at a time. It led to whether that was “cheat­ing tweet­ing”.

The max­i­mum length of a tweet is 140 char, of a Face­book post 63,206. The max­i­mum length of time you can talk to your friend is unlim­it­ed.

How well can online social net­works like Face­book, Twit­ter or LinkedIn han­dle the sequence of our thoughts, emo­tions, careers, and lives? Are we now liv­ing in a world where a person’s sequence of thoughts, expressed through what­ev­er medi­um of com­mu­ni­ca­tion is being employed at that moment, con­sid­ered “cheat­ing” for not adher­ing to that spe­cif­ic medium’s restric­tions?

If you text me using 115 char­ac­ters, in two SMS mes­sages, are you “cheat­ing”? No, that is ridicu­lous.

The con­cept of “playlist” came into being with the era of dig­i­tal music from the days of WinAmp. There were no playlists when I grew up. There were no playlists when Kumar Gand­har­va or Kishorib­ai sang. There were no playlists when Mozart or Beethoven had their music per­formed.

Yet, there was a sequence to their music. Music, by def­i­n­i­tion, has sequence. With­out sequence, it is not music.

Most of West­ern Clas­si­cal or Hin­dus­tani Music CDs we get today have “assort­ed mix­es” with­out sequence. It is not music.

Each of my music cas­settes, whether West­ern or Indi­an, had painstak­ing hours of sequenc­ing behind them. Every friend of mine whom I’ve gift­ed such care­ful­ly craft­ed cas­settes remem­bers me not just for the songs, but for the sequence in which I arranged it. Some sen­si­tive audio­philes also appre­ci­at­ed the dif­fer­ence between how many sec­onds of gap I’d kept between each song and why.

Can you imag­ine how Mozart’s 41st sym­pho­ny finale would sound with­out the first three move­ments? It would be like arriv­ing to watch an action movie’s final cli­max scene with­out know­ing who the char­ac­ters are and what they’re doing.

Every post on this blog is a con­tin­u­a­tion of a sequence. Every move­ment in a sym­pho­ny or a con­cer­to is in a sequence. Every­thing our friend is say­ing is in a sequence. We break that sequence when we inter­rupt and don’t lis­ten.

Rela­tion­ships have a sequence. In romance as well as in friend­ship, all rela­tion­ships have a sequence, and when we try to fight the sequence, there is fric­tion.

Posted in music, Personal | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Sequence

The Challenges Of Unselfish Parenting

We cap­ture every pos­si­ble pic­ture and video of our chil­dren today. We cap­ture the audio of the first sounds our child makes. We cap­ture the video of the first time our baby begins to crawl, and the first time our baby stands, and the first time our child walks.

We accu­mu­late all such mem­o­ries so that when our child grows up, he/she can see and expe­ri­ence his/her child­hood in all its glo­ry.

We grew up in a time when such con­tin­u­ous record­ing of moments and their accu­mu­la­tion was not pos­si­ble. So we do our best to do what was not pos­si­ble dur­ing our child­hood.

At the same time, we dis­pose of our own child­hood pho­tographs casu­al­ly, as we don’t think they are rel­e­vant any­more. We dis­pose of our school mem­o­ra­bil­ia, the whole class pho­tographs, the now-sil­ly-look­ing cer­tifi­cates of our extra-cur­ric­u­lar achieve­ment, etc.

We let go of our child­hood because we are now focused on our child.

Let us take a step back here.

Did we not try to explore our par­ents’ child­hood? After see­ing a few pic­tures of our par­ents’ as kids, did we not thirst for more? Did we see any pic­tures of our par­ents in school? How many of us have seen cer­tifi­cates of scholas­tic or extra-cur­ric­u­lar achieve­ments of our par­ents? Wouldn’t we like to?

There was a point in time when our par­ents dis­posed of such mem­o­ra­bil­ia, because they thought their kids’ lives were more impor­tant than their own.

This is exact­ly the same prac­tice we repeat, gen­er­a­tion after gen­er­a­tion. And every par­ent thinks he/she is being com­plete­ly unselfish and devot­ed to the kid(s) when doing so.

In fact, it is the oppo­site.

As par­ents, we are not unselfish­ly con­sid­er­ing what our child would con­sid­er impor­tant after he/she grows up. We are mak­ing deci­sions our­selves, in antic­i­pa­tion, with assump­tions, because we think we know what is best for our child. We are not being gen­er­ous enough to let our child have the free­dom to explore mem­o­ra­bil­ia of our own lives.

While think­ing to our­selves that we are being the epit­o­me of unselfish­ness in our parental mind­set, we are actu­al­ly being the most self­ish of all.

The parental par­a­digm is con­trar­i­an to the indi­vid­u­al­ism mind­set. It is often devi­ous enough that as par­ents we think we are act­ing in the best inter­est of our child as an indi­vid­ual. It is often wise to relin­quish the parental par­a­digm and rethink.

Posted in parenting | Tagged | Comments Off on The Challenges Of Unselfish Parenting

How We Should Or Should Not Use Social Networks

This is a com­pan­ion post to The Dis­il­lu­sion­ment of Social Net­works. If you have not read it, please do, before con­tin­u­ing to read.

What I did not dis­cuss in that post is our expec­ta­tion from oth­er peo­ple about how they should be using social net­work­ing or how they should go about their online com­mu­ni­ca­tion in gen­er­al.

  • You con­nect with some­one on Face­book, which you use only to share per­son­al stuff, only to find that they use it only to reshare fun­ny or inspir­ing or (insert your own adjec­tive here) pic­tures and mes­sages.
  • You fol­low a “thought leader” on Twit­ter, only to find the per­son rant­i­ng about the traf­fic, or politi­cians, or sim­ply singing prais­es of oth­er thought lead­ers, or sim­ply RTing any and all pos­i­tive men­tions of them­selves.
  • Some­one you fol­low on Twit­ter sud­den­ly goes into over­drive, and there are a stream of tweets that drown every­thing else in your time­line.
  • All you see from your friend/relative on Face­book is the great time he/she is hav­ing or has had with great friends. There is no real per­son behind all the shares, it is all just an image he/she wish­es to por­tray on social media.
  • Some­one tweets mul­ti­ple thoughts on a top­ic and we think it would have been bet­ter if he/she had blogged about it, since the essence of Twit­ter is its 140 char­ac­ter lim­it.

Sounds famil­iar? There are many exam­ples and I won’t both­er to enu­mer­ate them.

What under­lies our dis­il­lu­sion­ment? Our expec­ta­tion.

We have very spe­cif­ic ideas about how one should use a social net­work. When our expec­ta­tions are not ful­filled, we are dis­il­lu­sioned. As far as our dis­il­lu­sion­ment is about a social net­work, it is okay. But often, we cross the line. Often, we are already dis­il­lu­sioned about the per­son who has not met our expec­ta­tions of how he/she should use social net­works. This is scary and it hap­pens all the time.

We are pre­dis­posed to a per­son who we have met online, but have nev­er met in real life, just because of how that per­son behaves online.

This is the oth­er side of the Con­flict of Online & Offline Iden­ti­ties.

Why should we have expec­ta­tions about how oth­ers should com­mu­ni­cate online? Why should we have expec­ta­tions about how oth­ers should use social net­works? But we do, just because we are accus­tomed to using that spe­cif­ic online com­mu­ni­ca­tion chan­nel in a spe­cif­ic way, and any anom­aly offends us as a vio­la­tion.

If we allow our own spe­cif­ic ideas of online com­mu­ni­ca­tion and social net­work­ing to dis­il­lu­sion our­selves about peo­ple, the only thing we end up achiev­ing is dis­tanc­ing our­selves from them.

Instead of online com­mu­ni­ca­tion being a vehi­cle for greater con­nect­ed­ness, it can end up dis­con­nect­ing us from peo­ple.

Posted in psychology | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on How We Should Or Should Not Use Social Networks

How Our Intelligence Makes Us Bad Listeners

The more intel­li­gent we are, the more we (think) we under­stand peo­ple. The more we are able to under­stand what they say. The more we are able to antic­i­pate what they are going to say. The more we are like­ly to stop lis­ten­ing because we have not only fig­ured out what they are going to say, we have already for­mu­lat­ed our response pre­emp­tive­ly.

This is a trap I some­times find myself falling into, even sev­er­al years after try­ing to imbibe Seek First To Under­stand, Then To Be Under­stood.

There are usu­al­ly four lev­els of lis­ten­ing:

  • ignor­ing
  • pre­tend­ing
  • selec­tive lis­ten­ing
  • atten­tive lis­ten­ing

What most of us fail to do on a reg­u­lar basis is the high­est form of lis­ten­ing – empa­thet­ic lis­ten­ing.

Even after study­ing about empa­thet­ic lis­ten­ing as the pil­lar of human com­mu­ni­ca­tion, we some­times stray away from it. The prob­lem is often our intel­li­gence.

Our intel­li­gence dic­tates that com­mu­ni­ca­tion is intend­ed for com­pre­hen­sion. In real­i­ty, most com­mu­ni­ca­tion in close rela­tion­ships is intend­ed to con­vey emo­tion.

Our intel­li­gence, work­ing like an over­clocked CPU, becomes hyper­ac­tive in antic­i­pat­ing what oth­ers are say­ing, rel­ish­es the dis­cov­ery of our antic­i­pa­tion prov­ing cor­rect, gets high in nar­cis­sis­tic self-approval while the resid­ual part of our brain spits out our already for­mu­lat­ed response. By this time, our intel­li­gence is already antic­i­pat­ing prob­a­ble respons­es to what we have spit out, and ready­ing our respons­es to it.

Intel­li­gence is often lethal to empa­thy.

There is a high­er intel­li­gence that can help us iden­ti­fy sit­u­a­tions where com­mu­ni­ca­tion is not intend­ed for com­pre­hen­sion but to con­vey emo­tion. There is a high­er intel­li­gence in under­stand­ing that com­pre­hen­sion con­sti­tutes only 10% of the com­mu­ni­ca­tion; 30% of it is in the tone, 60% of it is in the body lan­guage. Our intel­li­gence can cause myopia in focus­ing on that 10% of ver­bal com­mu­ni­ca­tion.

We need to teach our intel­li­gence to under­stand that it can be a very inef­fec­tive tool for human com­mu­ni­ca­tion, unless its pow­ers are har­nessed not for com­pre­hen­sion but for more empa­thy.

Posted in psychology | Tagged , | 9 Comments

Western Classical Music in Films

[This post is #9 in the West­ern Clas­si­cal Music Series]

Movies have used clas­si­cal music since for­ev­er, and they help keep it alive in our cul­ture. Here are a few of my favorite scenes in movies fea­tur­ing West­ern Clas­si­cal Music.

Also Sprach Zarathus­tra invokes mem­o­ries of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey more than its com­pos­er Richard Strauss. Here is a unique (re)take on the clas­si­cal music in 2001:

Also Sprach Zarathus­tra in 2001: A Space Odyssey

Do study the long note on the video at YouTube, it is an entire blog post in itself.

Wagner’s Ride of the Valkyries was used to dev­as­tat­ing effect in Apoc­a­lypse Now:

Ride of the Valkyries in Apoc­a­lypse Now

Who can for­get Cav­al­le­ria rus­ti­cana in the open­ing cred­its of Rag­ing Bull?

Cav­al­le­ria rus­ti­cana in Rag­ing Bull

Also in God­fa­ther III?

Cav­al­le­ria rus­ti­cana from God­fa­ther III

The great Charles Chap­lin, a com­pos­er of note him­self, once said in an inter­view:

Film music must nev­er sound as if it were con­cert music. While it actu­al­ly may con­vey more to the behold­er-lis­ten­er than the cam­era con­veys at a giv­en moment, still it must be nev­er more than the voice of that cam­era”.

Study how he used Brahms’ Hun­gar­i­an Dance No. 5 in The Great Dic­ta­tor, his actions speak­ing loud­er than the music:

Brahms Hun­gar­i­an Dance No. 5 in The Great Dic­ta­tor

Chap­lin is almost wield­ing a conductor’s baton! Most audi­ences would assume this music was com­posed specif­i­cal­ly for this scene.

Woody Allen used clas­si­cal music in almost every movie he made. After Walt Disney’s leg­endary 1940 visu­al­iza­tion in Fan­ta­sia of Gershwin’s Rhap­sody in Blue as depict­ing life in New York:

Rhap­sody in Blue in Fan­ta­sia

Woody used it in the open­ing of Man­hat­tan as “pul­sat­ing to the great tunes of George Gersh­win”:

Rhap­sody in Blue in Man­hat­tan

Who can for­get the moment in Out of Africa when Denys gets a gramo­phone for Karen, play­ing the Diver­ti­men­to it took me a very, very long time to find?

Mozart Diver­ti­men­to K136 in Out of Africa

One of the all time great, poignant scene in movies that always moves me to tears is the aria La Mom­ma Mor­ta (They killed my moth­er) from Philadel­phia:

La Mom­ma Mor­ta in Philadel­phia

Last­ly, this scene from The Shaw­shank Redemp­tion would have made a per­ma­nent mark on any­one who has seen it, fea­tur­ing the “Let­ter Duet” from Mozart’s The Mar­riage of Figaro:

The Mar­riage of Figaro in The Shaw­shank Redemp­tion

To afi­ciona­dos of WCM, its use in movies and adver­tise­ments can be tire­some as expressed here:

Purists ridicule the use of clas­si­cal music in films, com­plain­ing that the same pieces are used over and over again…Yet the truth is, clas­si­cal music, an art form that has been on life sup­port for at least one gen­er­a­tion, would have com­plete­ly fad­ed out of the public’s con­scious­ness by now were it not for films and tele­vi­sion com­mer­cials.

Films also help clas­si­cal music from expir­ing. Clas­si­cal music, used in hun­dreds of films, includ­ing movies where it is least expect­ed, keeps the lofty art form in the pub­lic ear, even when the pub­lic does not know what it is lis­ten­ing to, or can bare­ly hear the music in the back­ground. It also helps that hun­dreds of movie scores are ripped-off ver­sions of the clas­sics.

Can you imag­ine The Sev­en Year Itch or Brief Encounter with­out Rachmaninoff’s 2nd? Will it remain rel­e­gat­ed in our mass cul­tur­al mem­o­ry to a film by David Lean or one star­ring Mar­i­lyn Mon­roe? We now live in a world where if you are attend­ing a per­for­mance of this work, it needs a pre­lude of this kind.

I can­not end this post with­out a brief men­tion of the influ­ence of WCM in Hin­di movies, and espe­cial­ly Salil Chowd­hury.

We have already dis­cussed in detail the use of Coun­ter­point in Hin­di film music.

Salil­da was a great stu­dent of WCM since child­hood and incor­po­rat­ed it in unique ways in his com­po­si­tions, blend­ing it with folk tunes. We dis­cussed WCM’s polypho­ny before, as well as chro­mati­cism, see how Salil­da uses it in Rimjhim Ke Ye Pyaare Pyaare to cre­ate tex­ture:

Rimjhim Ke Ye Pyaare Pyaare by Salil Chowd­hury

Read this excel­lent post for a deep dive into this song.

Such was his love of Mozart that he adapt­ed the Molto Alle­gro from Mozart’s 40th Sym­pho­ny for Itna Na Mujhse Tu Pyaar Bad­ha:

Itna Na Mujhse Tu Pyaar Bad­ha

I hope this selec­tion of movie clips helps high­light some unfor­get­table music in movies.

Posted in Arts, cinema, music | 9 Comments