Guru

This movie is about Bollywood telling India what Deng Xiaoping so successfully told China: "to get rich is glorious." Bollywood shapes India's attitudes. Bollywood delivering this message - to an India that has been wallowing for decades in the Gandhian mythology of self-denial, and in the consequent hypocrisy, mediocrity and poverty - just the concept makes this film a winner.

At heart, this is a thinly disguised Bollywood style documentary on Dhirubhai Ambani. There's a great item number with Mallika Sherawat, set in Istanbul. Aishwarya Rai plays Kokilaben (I'm sure Kokilaben is flattered) and is introduced to the film in a peppy dancing-in-the-rain sequence. Dhirubhai makes a big speech in the courtroom denouement, kind-of-sort-of comparing himself to Gandhi. It's fun to watch.

But the film never goes from being visually interesting to being viscerally compelling. There is no knot, no conflict, no tension that drags to plot forward until it is resolved. Nor is their any character development. Dhirubhai seems to have been born being Dhirubhai. For instance, there is no conflict between Dhirubhai's high aspirations and the sordidness of the bribes he needs to give out to meet those aspirations. The only attempt to create inner tension was with Nanaji, a Ramnath Goenka like character, who starts off as a father figure to Dhirubhai and then proceeds to wage a crusade against him. That storyline didn't really work.

That might be why Guru was not a box office blockbuster. It's not going to have a Sholay or Lagaan-like impact on India's psyche. A pity. Because the "to get rich is glorious" message really is reshaping India.

Safe in the warm after glow of victory...a gentleman's agreement?

Of all the daft things that have surfaced in this India-Australia series, the daftest has to be the gentleman's agreement between the captains about taking the fielder's word on catches. Kumble should have figured out that the agreement would break down at the pivotal moment when a catch made a vital difference. That’s exactly what happened. It’s common sense.

And if this were about the mythic spirit of cricket, why should a gentleman’s agreement be limited to claiming catches? Why not nicks? One can't blame umpire Benson for asking Ponting if Michael Clarke's catch was clean. That is what the captains had agreed to.

Kumble was naive (or gullible) to have agreed to Ponting's proposal. Jayawardene, one of the most gentlemanly modern players, was smart enough to turn down the same proposal.

The more interesting question is around why Ponting is proposing this agreement. It feels out of character. He has also made his team sign up to a spirit of cricket pledge. Which, in addition to feeling out of character, is bureaucratic and suggests Ponting does not understand that spirit describes what can't be codified.

What's going on here? Is Ponting trying to capture a special place cricket's pantheon that his gracelessness on the field just doesn't support?

Ronting's Australians are the easily the least loved champions in the history of cricket. Just think back to the reverence Clive Lloyd's West Indians inspired to get that into perspective. One of the defining memories of Ponting will be his spontaneous and passionate swearing after being run out by Gary Pratt at Trent Bridge in the 2005 Ashes. The day after the Sydney test, the BBC quoted a poll which showed 82% of Aussie cricket fans rating Ponting a bad captain, despite having delivered 16 wins on the trot. Does this lack of respect hurt prickly little Ponting?

The comparison that hurts Ponting most is with Steve Waugh. Like Ponting, Steve Waugh inherited a great team. Like Ponting, Steve Waugh played to win: his most important contribution to cricket's lexicon was the "mental disintegration" which did not happen to Saurav Ganguly. But Steve could take the Aussie team to lay a wreath at the ANZAC memorial at Gallipolli and look authentic. He raises money for Udayan, a charity for the children of lepers, without provoking a snigger. He won a special place in my heart when we spoke of how cricket would be poorer with Zimbabwe, deprived of quality players like Neil Johnson (one of my obscure personal favourites). Steve Waugh didn't do spin. He meant what he said. He cared. It showed. The gravitas came naturally.

Waugh's nicknames are Tugga and Iceman. Ponting's nickname is Punter. Maybe Ponting fears that he is destined to be a Miandad...snapping away in the shadows the the Imran like figures - Border, Taylor, Waugh - who came before him. Maybe an Indian captain can sense that insecurity, and twist a dagger into that chink in the armour, and engineer a "mental disintegration" at Adelaide that would make even Steve Waugh cringe.

Hope springs eternal :)

Betfair on Perth

Established behavioural economics finding: people are willing to pay more for insurance against death caused by an airplane accident than for insurance against death by any cause. Clearly death caused by an airplane accident is a subset of death by any cause. But when thought of a dramatic cause of death like an airplane accident is planted in the mind, the imagination takes over and makes that cause feel more real, tangible and likely than it actually is.

I have a hunch the same cognitive bias is happening on Betfair in assessing the odds of an Australian victory at Perth. Betfair thinks the likelihood that Australia will win is ~30%.

The point is: it is easy to imagine the Australian batsmen playing out of their skins to steal a memorable win. I remember Ponting's innings in the 2003 World Cup final, Gilcrist's innings in the 2007 World Cup final, Symond's innings in the first innings at Sydney...it's easy to imagine something like that happening again. The sheer ease of imagining another breathtaking, match winning performance from Australia might make the market over-estimate the odds of an Australian win.

What is critical is that India channel their imaginations into just putting the ball in the right areas and holding their catches. Think about nothing else. That's the action which will make the odds on India shorten.

BTW...writing this post hasn't quite given me the courage to go and bet on India. Not yet, anyway.

Perth

On the eve of the fourth day's play in the Perth test, I'm way too excited to sleep. 8 wickets to win. Five of those wickets need to be Ponting, Hussey, Clarke, Symonds and Gilcrist.

India are too close to not hope. And Australia have pulled off the impossible too many times (three wickets in five balls?) for me to let myself hope.

If I can't take the pressure 10000 miles away, how are the team coping? The good ones, the ones who've been around a while - Kumble, Sachin, Rahul, Saurav, Laxman, even Dhoni - they'd be immersing themselves in rituals. Sportsmen are called superstitious, but more accurately, they are ritualistic. The regimen anchors the spirit. Keeps the butterflies and demons from taking over. The same thing works on the field..adjusting the top of the pad, tapping the bat to the ground while taking guard, bouncing the tennis ball before serving...they work the same way. They help focus the spirit and mind on the task at hand.

It's harder for the less experienced players to stay calm because their regimen/ rituals are less well established. It's hardest on us watchers; we don't have rituals to anchor us or any task at hand to focus on.

Harmless snobbery

Observing the pristine, clean shoes of other people at the gym. People whose shoes have clearly not run 10 miles on muddy tracks last weekend while training for a marathon.

The Little Mermaid

Some gems from opera director Francesca Zambello's interpretation of Little Mermaid for a Broadway production:

- The mermaid ascends to the surface of the sea, her tail unfurling to reveal shapely legs. There is so much metaphor in that. It is like a rite of passage, her first menstrual cycle

- The wish-fulfillment element would give it broad appeal. Show me anybody in the world who hasn't wanted to be someone else. That's a universal theme. Everybody sees themselves as an outsider

- It was possible to interpret the little mermaid flight from the confines of the sea as a gay theme. The reality is that there are only two minorities who are born into families: disabled people and gay people. Every other minority is born of a family. That Ariel is an outsider in her own family connects...

- Mermaids have no genitalia. That's something you don't really think about until you work on mermaids, but then you think about it a lot.

Benazir Bhutto

The commentary about Benazir's assassination has been mainly about what a dangerous place Pakistan is. That is true. But all that geopolitical risk is obscuring is the poignancy of Benazir's life...the intense, shy, awkward, intellectual, ambitious young woman...wounded and humiliated by the hanging of the father she hero worshipped...who chose to marry to a hard-drinking, extravagantly mustachioed polo player, who swears like a wounded pirate and is nicknamed Mr. Five Percent the size of the bribes he routinely took...the big pile of Mills and Boon novels at her bedside...the pristine white head scarf and the scarlet lipstick...her uneasy truce with the mullahs who murdered her father...her cynical betrayal of the peace process with India...her heartfelt tears at the grave of her brother, a brother she once was close to, whose murder she had allegedly commissioned...her returning to Pakistan even when she could see in Musharraf's eye the shadow of Zia-ul-Haq, the man who murdered her father...

The British still take pride in the dramatic lives of Queen Elizabeth I and Mary Queen of Scots. The subcontinent still has royalty whose lives are similarly dramatic.

My wife spotted this great piece in the Asian Age.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/28/opinion/edyusef.php