Digging for Meaning

Salman Khan is not merely a criminal , a terrible actor or one of the most influential and loved people in India. He is a new archetype for the 21st century India. He is an archetype that answers a quintessential Indian yearning. Unfortunately the yearning reflects how pathetic and infantile humanity can be. When infants, we believe that we are at the absolute center of the universe, where all our acts deserve recognition and appreciation. To grow up is to grow out of this belief. The 'Salman Khan as an archetype' answers the yearning to be forever an infant. To forever enjoy consequence-less freedom. People refuse to see the bad in him. The 'true fans' of this horrible person get readily offended and aggressive when someone speaks ill of their 'bhai'. When someone points out facts of his monstrosity - killing homeless people , making his driver a scapegoat (what a ' hero '!), killing a harmless animal , domestic abuse , intimidation .... - the fa

Context: Out from a deep slumber, the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India has gotten into a hyper active mode. It started with discovery of Maggi making us eat poison . Soon it turned out, half the products that we daily depend on for maintaining our lifestyle are fucking with us one way or another. Aftermath: Some people have stopped using some of these products. But the most visible and loud portion of Indian humanity - the upper middle class that is active on social media - has responded in a surprising fashion (and hence this blog). They feel cheated! They sense a rat - not in the product, but in the discovery. They have responded with a sense of loss. They see it as an an unjust act of aggression by the government. They see it as an attack on their way of life. See this idiotic video for instance. What does this reaction mean? 1. People trust companies more than government in India. Edelman's trust barometer had found out that earlier. But this episode

Art is what a very rich white man says art is. A blank canvas. A urinal. A gaze. All of these are works of art. Because someone had the balls to bluff and a rich white man thereafter decided to agree. What if the rich white man does not agree? Then the thought remains a failed though - an attempt, a shot at the game of chance.