Such as we have,
That’s precisely what this girl is known for – speaking her mind. She says she wouldn’t do an item song if she’s offered one, either. “I don’t like item numbers in the first place, and I don’t know how to dance. Why should I even learn to dance? These latkas and jhatkas may be shortcuts to success, but they aren’t my cup of tea. And most importantly, they don’t go well with my image, which is essentially that of an intellectual,” she says.
Indeed! But Gul’s not just saying it – she’s trying to live up to that image too. The Delhi gal is currently reading Catch 22 which, she says, isn’t a bit reader-friendly. “Every time I start reading the book, I can’t go beyond a few pages.” Is it lack of focus? “No, no. I’m a voracious reader. It’s just that the book is too complex. I thoroughly enjoyed Three Mistakes Of My Life, which I read before this.” [link]
When I take over the world, I will also kill all who use Delhi and intellectual in the same line.
Filed under: Just Plain Weird
I love your blog. but you can’t do THAT.
hm…i posted that and i realised i proved your point. i am from delhi and i reacted as if you are actually going to take over the world.
but in case you do take over the world, listen to this citizen and BAN all CHETAN BHAGATS. PLEASE!!
I think I will appoint all those who read Chetan Bhagat to take care of my horse!
when you say horse you actually mean goat dont you
HAR HAR HAR HAR
Gul is willing to do a commercial with an intellectual, Aamir….EVEN if it’s for something like condoms…why did she say that EVEN? she hammers down logic on condom being the essential to our society, while on the other hand she brings it down the “category hierarchy…she should not have said that EVEN”!
Is not she aware of the global award winner “Condoms ads”, where coolies/common man in the streets openly hug the word, shrugging off that discomfort attached to it. she should keep herself updatedabout worldly progress around
“latkas and jhatkas”, indeed, are like stimulating cup of tea. we indians love them.
” the attempt to escape makes escape impossible” defnitely is quite tough for an intellectual or non-i .
n I smirk @ her opinion on the Pink Chaddi campaign.
n I did not get this bit (am non-I) ”
she told her driver to inform her if he senses some trouble outside ….and she will jump out of the car ….hello, where is logic?
R, will support you as your dedicated humble soldier uring mission against “Delhi intellectual sentence sandwich”
she should feature self in HANSAPLAST CONDOMS TVC – Kid with mom’s permission one, where the kid hogs the story…when he gets caught doing things not-so-tiny kid like,unexpected ones from a tiny tot (like driving a huge automobile… various other situations) he claims that he took permission from his mom…in the end, we realise that tiny innocent tot takes permission from his mom who, everytime when he goes for taking her permission, happens to be In the bed room screaming ecstatically YESSSSSS , for everything he wants to do……
HANSAPLAST CONDOMS ..PURE PLEASURE
for R & his wonderful audience
Thank you. Totally awesome!
Catch 22 intellectual *snort*
Catch-22 is not a book for everyone. Regardless of Gaurav’s breathing problems, the book is not light reading. But unless you have some sort of opinion on the madness of war, you are unlikely to go beyond the first 50 pages or so. On personal anecdotal evidence, I have found that it is one of those books that people (who manage to finish reading it) either love or hate passionately. Most people who get stuck in the beginning never manage to finish it.
PS: Confused, as of now, you are the only one who has used those two words in the same sentence. It is not so in the article
Well, the excerpt.. I can’t possibly read that sort of intellectual article in full.
That is certainly news to me. I find it hard to believe that anyone would not like Catch 22!
It always reminds me of Raag Darbari by Sri lal Shukla…
Err,
I liked and enjoyed Catch 22 (mostly for black humour), but I never found it difficult to read (you want difficult try Ulysses). Reg. Intellectual, I know its core message of anti-war is intellectually fashionable and appeals to many, but I am not convinced with the message, war often is necessary, certainly WWII which is the setting of catch 22. As Heinlein put it, “Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor”
My mistake. I should have been clearer. I didn’t mean “not light reading” in the sense of Ulysses. I meant in the sense of having an easily identifiable message and following the arc of the story which often jumps from one time and place to another. Unless you are attentive, you could end up dismissing the book as just plain weird.
And I know quite a few people who didn’t like it. Considering how much I do, I have also find it hard to understand why many others didn’t.
The anti-war message of Catch-22 is obliquely expressed and has to be deduced. There are no AynRandesque passages that lay it out for you. It is for this reason that I consider it to be reasonably intellectually challenging.
Of course.. one could always read it for black humour. That’s what I do when I pick it up these days for reading from a random page
Of course it is not Ayn Randesque (one has to be actively ignorant to write anything of Atlas Shrugged magnitude), however I don’t think it was complicated, as I got its message very easily.
In fact I find Animal farm and 1984 to be much more intellectually challenging.
Now one reason for this might be the fact that we can decipher any literary piece based on available information. Now when I was reading catch 22, I was fairly familiar with pacifist argument, however when I read animal farm or 1984, I was unfamiliar with the debate between communism and capitalism.
Interesting but is it strange that all I wonder is how deep can a comment reply thread on WP.com go?
heh. Apparently up to 10. I had set it in on 5 and had to change it to reply to you.
Not liking is different from finding it difficult. Rushdie is difficult at times – yes. Catch-22: nope.
A book that describes the “divine fulcrum” episode is neither difficult nor can be disliked by most normal males.
Agreed. Not sure what is difficult about it..Overlord?
See comment above.
The part that I end up reading most often is the mathemagic of Milo Minderbinder’s international trade empire
Not liking is different from finding it difficult. Rushdie is difficult at times – yes. Catch-22: nope.
perfectly captured….