Showing posts with label Dr Bashir Badr. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr Bashir Badr. Show all posts
I want to be the bridge between poets and listeners of music-Kavita Seth
8:28 AM
Kavita Seth on taking further her music series that celebrates poets, with Amrita Pritam
Sonia Lulla (MID-DAY; September 2, 2019)
After reviving the works of Urdu poet Wasim Barelvi, Kavita Seth has trained her focus on the late Punjabi poet, Amrita Pritam to further her music series, Main Kavita Hoon. The passion project evolved from a web series, to live concerts, and finally, a line-up of albums, all of which, she says, have been well-appreciated, "with or without promotional nudges".The success recipe, she suggests, lies in selecting songs that first boast of their lyricism instead of their ability to make for good compositions. "I started this series with the aim of promoting good poetry. The criterion for selecting any poem is hence the lyrics; we think about the composition later. I recall that the album based on Wasim ji's works enjoyed good streaming numbers, even though there was no promotional work involved. That's because good lyrics always find takers. It's also the lack of promising lyricism that has reduced the shelf-life of today's songs," she says, asserting that she even taps into the works of the less celebrated, if their verses have had an impact on her. "I am not promoting only the famous. I am also reviving the works of the less popular so that their poems are not restricted to books alone."
For Pritam's poetry, she recalls being challenged while composing the eight tracks that comprise her latest album. "While [her poems] have rhythm, there are many free verses as well. Composing for them was hence hard. I had her book in hand 24 hours a day, and would even sleep with it under my pillow. Once, I woke up with a tune at 2 am and began to work on it. She had a specific way of writing that was unique to her. The manner in which she describes her relationship in Main Tenu Phir Milangi is something only she could do."Working on Dr Bashir Badr's (left; above) poetry, on the other hand, was simpler because "the way he wrote was simple". The Urdu poet's collection will be part of Seth's forthcoming album that eyes a release after two months. "We enjoyed practising for the recording of his poem, Kaun Aaya Raste Aaina. But when we took the song into the studio for the live recording, we enjoyed it even more," she says when prodded about her most memorable numbers. "I'm proud that I've grown up listening to such material from our artistes. So, I want to be the bridge between poets and listeners of music."
I was told to remove Shakespeare from my script or my film wouldn’t get money-Vishal Bhardwaj
8:12 AM
Niharika Lal (BOMBAY TIMES; December 19, 2018)
The last day of Jashn-e-Rekhta saw the venue swarming with people who had come to attend Vishal Bhardwaj’s session, and while most were expecting a discussion on politics, Shakespeare and Bollywood, they were left pleasantly surprised when Vishal unveiled his inner poet and started reciting shayari from his all-time favourite, Bashir Badr, as well as his own. Vishal’s shayaris were unique not only because of topicality, but also because he spoke about the modern man’s woes like Google Maps, network, phone and e-mails, too.
‘JAB ISS TARAH KA SUPPRESSION HOTA HAI, USS WAQT ART ZYADA KHILTI HAI’
Vishal Bhardwaj spoke about the Sabarimala temple issue through his first shayari, which concluded with, “...pujte ho devi ko lekin aurat ko mandir mein nahi jane dete, aap bhi bas”. Talking to the audience, he said, “Aaj ke waqt mein toh ‘Bol ke lab azad hain tere’ bahut hi zaruri hai. Mujhe lagta hai jab bhi iss tarah ka suppression hota hai, uss waqt art sabse zyada khilti hai, kyunki jab tak koi dabayega nahin hamare gale ko, toh hamari cheekh kaise niklegi?”
Vishal also spoke about how phones keep making their way into his ghazals, saying, “Meri ghazlon mein phone ghoom-phir ka aata rehta hai, mere har naye sher mein phone aa hi jata hai.” He then went on to recite his phone-inspired ghazals, “‘Aankh ka lihaj tha ya ke hausla na tha, usne text mein likha keh sake jo lab nahi.’ Ek aur hai, ‘Woh baat karte-karte hi khamosh ho gaya, mujhko laga network toot gaya’. We also keep checking travel time on Google Maps even if we know that we won’t go, so I wrote this, ‘Tumse milna namumkin hai, phir bhi dhoondte hain Google pe ki ab nikle toh kab tere ghar pahunchenge’.”
‘IRRFAN WANTED A FEW MORE LINES SO I WROTE ‘MAIN’ IN HAIDER’
In Haider, Irrfan recites a nazm, Main – “Darya bhi main, darakht bhi main … Jhelum bhi main, chinar bhi main … dair bhi hoon, haram bhi hoon … Shia bhi hoon, Sunni bhi hoon, main hoon pandit … main tha, main hoon aur main hi rahoonga,” – which became quite popular after the film’s release. Talking about why he wrote these lines, the director said, “There was a scene between Irrfan and Narendra Jha, and Irrfan asked me to give him more lines. I told him that if I will write more, toh woh shayari ho jayegi. Usne kaha, haan mujhe shayari karni hai, that’s when I wrote this.”
‘FINANCER TOLD ME NOBODY WILL GIVE YOU MONEY’
Talking about literature, Vishal Bhardwaj said that the film industry resists literature because they consider it to be boring. He said, “On my script, it was written, ‘inspired from Shakespeare’, and a financer friend told me that I should remove Shakespeare’s name from my script because nobody would give me money. Whenever we talk about literature, the first thing that one assumes is that it must be boring because anything related to literature is boring, which is definitely not true. In school, Shakespeare scares you, I think the age when I read Shakespeare was the right age, for me. In gang wars, people kill each other and it ends there, but I wanted to go deep to find out the equations of a gang war. Maine bahut shiddat se usko chaha tha, toh woh mujhe mil gaya.”
Before the session ended, Vishal sang some songs for the audience including, Yeh Ishq hai and Pehli baar mohabbat ki hai, and the audience responded by giving him a thunderous applause for the performance.
Our society's 'agree with me or I'll kill you' attitude is frustrating for us filmmakers-Vishal Bhardwaj
8:17 AM
Anshul Chaturvedi (BOMBAY TIMES; February 24, 2017)
Rangoon tells the story of
many hanging loyalties - some of your characters see their loyalty chang
ing from one person to another, some from a cause to another, some see
an overlap of both. As a storyteller, what do you find stronger - the
bond with a person, or with a cause? Which love is stronger?
I think ishq with a philosophy is always bigger than ishq with a person. Because when you are in love with a philosophy, or a cause, or a thought, it is not basis reciprocation from the other side. Woh ishq sufiana ho jaata hai... That is more difficult to accept, for others also, and often they are like 'Saala bada ishq tha, ab pata chala?'
So the magnitude of an ideological break-up is bigger than that of an inter-personal break-up?
Of course. Inter-personal mein toh phir bhi doosre taraf ki galti ho sakti hai. Ismein toh doosre taraf ki galti hai nahin, philosophy toh change nahin hui, aap change huye. When you fall out of love with a person, you can always say that person changed. But when you fall out of love for a philosophy, it has not changed, you have. And that's totally justified. People can change. You can evolve and think differently.
Where did this story start off in your mind?
I happened to meet Matthew Robbins, who is now a friend, at a film school Mira Nair had started. We were all there as mentors. He has written for Steven Spielberg and Quentin Tarantino. We thought we should work on a film together. And he researched and came up with this part of World War II - Indians fighting each other...
What gave him the idea that it stopped after the war?
(Laughs) True. But this story started there. We don't read much about India's engagement with the world.
We are not really very aware of what happened in the world in those years. Is it because for us, the 1940s sort of are all about what happened in 1947? The magnitude of what happened across the globe is some what lost to us. Our sole moment of military valour in the line of national pride in a very long time, the INA, becomes a romantic peg for our memories...
That's perhaps true. We have not been a very belligerent nation, for a long time, agar dekha jai. Bashir Badr sahab ka sher hai, 'Dil ki basti purani Dilli hai, jo bhi guzra hai usne loota hai'. Everyone who came this side... Spiritually, we talk about the transience of the body, of the soul being immortal, but we have not been so forthcoming about laying down the body in defence of the country. And we sometimes explain it as this was a land of peace, of the Buddha. We will hesitate to say that well, this is how it was, we did not manage to do very well militarily and all these invaders, up to the British, did defeat us and thereby ruled this land. We don't reconcile with history.
Or we look to rewrite it - as we are perhaps trying to do with Haldighati currently?
But that way, we will never evolve as a nation. We can't say that hum khud nahin badlenge, apni history badal denge!
If you had to summarise the larger picture - keep aside the personalities of your key characters - what is the conflict within this story you are narrating?
The one deep question, I think, which stays, is - which philosophy was better: Gandhi or Bose? And it isn't as simple as non-violence and violence. I have raised the point in the film - I question myself also. My enemy's enemy is my friend, perhaps, but on that account, was it right, in retrospect, to shake hands with Hitler? Having said that, everyone spoke about the brutalities of the Germans but it is not as if the British were not brutal in how they ruled us. Was Jallianwala Bagh not equally brutal as killing someone in a gas chamber? Did people know of the concentration camps when we were reaching out to Germany? Some writers are of the view that resorting to a fast unto death to press for any political point is also a form of violence. What we call passive-aggressive now, perhaps. When we do that in a family, we describe it as emotional blackmail. I also heard Osho talking about this once, that the Gandhian way of protesting was not necessarily non-violent.
Some British historians have spoken of Imphal-Kohima as being the decisive battle of WWII, ahead of even Stalingrad, given that the expansion of the Japanese westwards stopped at this point geographically. If it had gone the other way, if the INA had been more than a romantic story and part of an actual military success - there are many who say that a Bose-led India would have been a more structured, disciplined, militaristic state after independence than what we became. You have a point of view on that after your re search for Rangoon?
Yes, this is what people say... But when any military-controlled system has taken power here, it has not given it up easily, as you can see from the subcontinent. The point I think is not that, of a more militarised India. The point is what Bose was - in the romanticised, charismatic way he had a dream and he worked to wards that dream. And it was quite possible at the time when he was trying to work with the Germans and the Japanese that they may win the war. Those possibilities and Bose's charisma make this a story that still engages us. If just a harder state was aspirational, even the Emergency would have been something people are nostalgic about.
Gandhiji advocated non-violence as a primary philosophy; Bose thought of that as passivity and advocated the use of violence when necessary. The question of which ideology is -or was -correct, and which is relevant to India, hasn't been a debate resolved conclusively to this day, has it? Are you taking a position or are you also going to play it safe? At the point when Haider was releasing, you had made the point that we are so touchy about our leaders that any attempt to make a realistic movie about anyone is bound to get the filmmaker beaten up. Is that why, even in placing a movie in the pre-independence INA phase, you're barely talking about Gandhi or Bose, neither in the movie nor in your interactions?
We take everything personally, you know. Hum retrospective mein jaa kar bhi evolve nahin hote hai. Yeh nahin ki mud ke dekhein ki woh cheez sahi thi ya galat thi, as a nation, accept karein, ya open discussion karein. We can agree to disagree. But that doesn't happen. Our attitude is that either you agree with me or I kill you. This is a major problem with how we handle things as a society. This is really frustrating for us filmmakers.
So what you want to say, and what you say on screen - there's always going to be a gap there?
Haan, because you always have to be cautious. Freedom of expression ki baat is always questionable. Aap itna keh sakte hain or itna nahi keh sakte hain.
Kitna keh sakte hain?
Aap utna keh sakte hain jitne mein aap zinda reh sakein. Nahi toh aap ko patak denge. Dekhiye what happened with Bhansali. People get in and beat you over an imaginary sequence about perhaps an imaginary person. We see people as Gods. A leader, a king is also a human being and will also have human weaknesses. But we will believe ki woh idols hain, woh galat ho hi nahin sakte hain.
When do we get to see strong, incisive, probing movies on Nehru, Bose, Patel? Why don't we have a definite biographical movie on almost anyone of political consequence for this country?
You can't show them as humans. You can't show them falling in love. The problem is not that we can't make movies on our leaders. We can. The problem is that the state doesn't give us protection. There are many platforms today, or you can choose not release a film in India, not even need to raise funds in India. The simple problem is that physically, I am not given protection by the state. I am not saying give me Z category security because I made a film. But I am not willing to lose my sense of freedom. I am not ready for that, and so I will not pay that price to make a movie.
What will you do then?
I don't want to be a political voice. I don't want to change the world. I want to change myself first. As you grow older and you mature, you realise that you have so many flaws. I would rather work to change myself, internally . Why do I need to change the world?
I think ishq with a philosophy is always bigger than ishq with a person. Because when you are in love with a philosophy, or a cause, or a thought, it is not basis reciprocation from the other side. Woh ishq sufiana ho jaata hai... That is more difficult to accept, for others also, and often they are like 'Saala bada ishq tha, ab pata chala?'
So the magnitude of an ideological break-up is bigger than that of an inter-personal break-up?
Of course. Inter-personal mein toh phir bhi doosre taraf ki galti ho sakti hai. Ismein toh doosre taraf ki galti hai nahin, philosophy toh change nahin hui, aap change huye. When you fall out of love with a person, you can always say that person changed. But when you fall out of love for a philosophy, it has not changed, you have. And that's totally justified. People can change. You can evolve and think differently.
Where did this story start off in your mind?
I happened to meet Matthew Robbins, who is now a friend, at a film school Mira Nair had started. We were all there as mentors. He has written for Steven Spielberg and Quentin Tarantino. We thought we should work on a film together. And he researched and came up with this part of World War II - Indians fighting each other...
What gave him the idea that it stopped after the war?
(Laughs) True. But this story started there. We don't read much about India's engagement with the world.
We are not really very aware of what happened in the world in those years. Is it because for us, the 1940s sort of are all about what happened in 1947? The magnitude of what happened across the globe is some what lost to us. Our sole moment of military valour in the line of national pride in a very long time, the INA, becomes a romantic peg for our memories...
That's perhaps true. We have not been a very belligerent nation, for a long time, agar dekha jai. Bashir Badr sahab ka sher hai, 'Dil ki basti purani Dilli hai, jo bhi guzra hai usne loota hai'. Everyone who came this side... Spiritually, we talk about the transience of the body, of the soul being immortal, but we have not been so forthcoming about laying down the body in defence of the country. And we sometimes explain it as this was a land of peace, of the Buddha. We will hesitate to say that well, this is how it was, we did not manage to do very well militarily and all these invaders, up to the British, did defeat us and thereby ruled this land. We don't reconcile with history.
Or we look to rewrite it - as we are perhaps trying to do with Haldighati currently?
But that way, we will never evolve as a nation. We can't say that hum khud nahin badlenge, apni history badal denge!
If you had to summarise the larger picture - keep aside the personalities of your key characters - what is the conflict within this story you are narrating?
The one deep question, I think, which stays, is - which philosophy was better: Gandhi or Bose? And it isn't as simple as non-violence and violence. I have raised the point in the film - I question myself also. My enemy's enemy is my friend, perhaps, but on that account, was it right, in retrospect, to shake hands with Hitler? Having said that, everyone spoke about the brutalities of the Germans but it is not as if the British were not brutal in how they ruled us. Was Jallianwala Bagh not equally brutal as killing someone in a gas chamber? Did people know of the concentration camps when we were reaching out to Germany? Some writers are of the view that resorting to a fast unto death to press for any political point is also a form of violence. What we call passive-aggressive now, perhaps. When we do that in a family, we describe it as emotional blackmail. I also heard Osho talking about this once, that the Gandhian way of protesting was not necessarily non-violent.
Some British historians have spoken of Imphal-Kohima as being the decisive battle of WWII, ahead of even Stalingrad, given that the expansion of the Japanese westwards stopped at this point geographically. If it had gone the other way, if the INA had been more than a romantic story and part of an actual military success - there are many who say that a Bose-led India would have been a more structured, disciplined, militaristic state after independence than what we became. You have a point of view on that after your re search for Rangoon?
Yes, this is what people say... But when any military-controlled system has taken power here, it has not given it up easily, as you can see from the subcontinent. The point I think is not that, of a more militarised India. The point is what Bose was - in the romanticised, charismatic way he had a dream and he worked to wards that dream. And it was quite possible at the time when he was trying to work with the Germans and the Japanese that they may win the war. Those possibilities and Bose's charisma make this a story that still engages us. If just a harder state was aspirational, even the Emergency would have been something people are nostalgic about.
Gandhiji advocated non-violence as a primary philosophy; Bose thought of that as passivity and advocated the use of violence when necessary. The question of which ideology is -or was -correct, and which is relevant to India, hasn't been a debate resolved conclusively to this day, has it? Are you taking a position or are you also going to play it safe? At the point when Haider was releasing, you had made the point that we are so touchy about our leaders that any attempt to make a realistic movie about anyone is bound to get the filmmaker beaten up. Is that why, even in placing a movie in the pre-independence INA phase, you're barely talking about Gandhi or Bose, neither in the movie nor in your interactions?
We take everything personally, you know. Hum retrospective mein jaa kar bhi evolve nahin hote hai. Yeh nahin ki mud ke dekhein ki woh cheez sahi thi ya galat thi, as a nation, accept karein, ya open discussion karein. We can agree to disagree. But that doesn't happen. Our attitude is that either you agree with me or I kill you. This is a major problem with how we handle things as a society. This is really frustrating for us filmmakers.
So what you want to say, and what you say on screen - there's always going to be a gap there?
Haan, because you always have to be cautious. Freedom of expression ki baat is always questionable. Aap itna keh sakte hain or itna nahi keh sakte hain.
Kitna keh sakte hain?
Aap utna keh sakte hain jitne mein aap zinda reh sakein. Nahi toh aap ko patak denge. Dekhiye what happened with Bhansali. People get in and beat you over an imaginary sequence about perhaps an imaginary person. We see people as Gods. A leader, a king is also a human being and will also have human weaknesses. But we will believe ki woh idols hain, woh galat ho hi nahin sakte hain.
When do we get to see strong, incisive, probing movies on Nehru, Bose, Patel? Why don't we have a definite biographical movie on almost anyone of political consequence for this country?
You can't show them as humans. You can't show them falling in love. The problem is not that we can't make movies on our leaders. We can. The problem is that the state doesn't give us protection. There are many platforms today, or you can choose not release a film in India, not even need to raise funds in India. The simple problem is that physically, I am not given protection by the state. I am not saying give me Z category security because I made a film. But I am not willing to lose my sense of freedom. I am not ready for that, and so I will not pay that price to make a movie.
What will you do then?
I don't want to be a political voice. I don't want to change the world. I want to change myself first. As you grow older and you mature, you realise that you have so many flaws. I would rather work to change myself, internally . Why do I need to change the world?
One can be sensuous or flirtatious without being cheap-Rekha Bhardwaj
7:50 AM
Urmimala Banerjee (MID-DAY; March 25, 2014)
As Rekha Bhardwaj prepares for her performance with flautist Pandit Ronu Majumdar and Taufiq Qureshi on Thursday, she speaks to hitlist about music and more.
Do you enjoy instrumental music as much as film songs?
I love any music that pleases my heart. I am excited about performing with two senior artistes I have been listening to since years. I have been following Ronu’s works since my college days.
How different is singing for other composers apart from Vishal?
I have been working with different composers since 2007. I am fortunate that they come to me with songs that they feel only I can do justice to. I feel extremely comfortable working with Pritam, AR Rahman and Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy.
How is it singing for Vishal?
He knows me too well! He listens to my riyaaz everyday ( laughs). He can create a song for me and challenge my limits as well.
What kind of songs will you never sing?
I can sing any song as long as it is aesthetic. One can be sensuous or flirtatious without being cheap. Prasoon Joshi and Amitabh Bhattacharya write unique lyrics without being crass.
What kind of music do you enjoy?
Jazz — Cassandra Wilson and Nina Simone are my favourites. I also love the Beatles, Bryan Adams, KD Lang and Sting. My son, Aasman, makes me listen to rap and hip- hop. Amongst ghazal singers, I like Mehdi Hassan, Jagjit Singh and Madhurani ji.
Do you feel your husband’s does not sing as often as he should?
Yes, Vishal should sing more often. He is shy about singing songs that he composes. There are certain songs that only he should sing. We are planning to work together on a few poems of Urdu poet, Dr. Bashir Badr.
Your views on the multi-composer trend?
It’s nice as it gives opportunities to youngsters. Nowadays, listeners have many choices; earlier this wasn’t the case. I liked Mithoon, Ankit Tiwari and Jeet Gannguli’s works in Aashiqui 2. I thought Arko Pravo Mukherjee is brilliant as well.
I have never seen Naseeruddin this focused and excited-Abhishek Chaubey
3:41 PM
With Dedh Ishqiya , director ABHISHEK CHAUBEY has cracked a tricky formula of marrying a masala film with chaste Urdu culture. He tells KAREENA N GIANANI why the film never loses the plot when it comes to the attitude he wanted the film to carry
Kareena N Gianani (MID-DAY; January 19, 2014)
You’ve maintained that you did not make Ishqiya with the intention of taking it ahead as a sequel, and the decision was nerve wracking. When, then, during the making of Dedh Ishqiya did you feel that you had a fine film at hand?
I think it happened sometime in the scripting stage. I remember working on it with Vishal Bhardwaj and having a moment when it hit me. I thought, ‘Hey, so I am not simply making a sequel, I have something original in hand now.’ This epiphany had something to do with the fact we were creating an alternate world of Mahmoodabad in Dedh Ishqiya . For a director, there is nothing more exhilarating than having the liberty to create an alternate reality, craft new characters and explore a lost culture, a time warp.
Tell us about creating the alternate world of Mahmoodabad, its codes and its attitude.
I was really charmed by the location and the decrepit palace we were shooting at. Ishqiya was a more intimate film. There were these obtuse references to the jungle and a war, but the film was shot in a house with mainly three characters. We went all out in Dedh Ishqiya , and, at the end of it all, making this film was more wholesome.
The world of Mahmoodabad stands on the chaste Urdu we decided to use in the film. The credit for that goes entirely to Vishal. He has grown up with that language and culture, and he loved that kind of poetry. A few years ago, he introduced me to Dr Bashir Badr (whose poetry has been used in Dedh Ishqiya ) and I was hooked. Dedh Ishqiya is our way of paying homage to his work.
When you create an alternate world, I think the most exciting part is to create its code, its dos and don’ts. I knew I wanted the world of Mahmoodabad to be entertaining but not vacuous. Before being anything else, Dedh Ishqiya is a comedy, and I knew exactly the attitude I wanted the actors to carry — quick wit, care-a-damn-attitude and willing to make light of the most serious things. For instance, when Babban (Arshad Warsi) is chasing Khalu (Naseeruddin Shah) after the latter swindles him, and finally catches up with him, he first greets him with all the tehzeeb . Khalu, too, who knows he is going to be questioned, returns the greeting. That’s the spirit of Dedh Ishqiya , tongue-in-cheek; that’s how the characters see the world.
… As compared to the slapstick comedies, which go on to make it to the R 100- 200 crore clubs?
(Laughs) Sab ke sau crore sab ko mubarak hon.
Did you think Naseeruddin Shah was best suited for the role because he has experimented with a similar culture in his plays? And what about Madhuri Dixit?
Dedh Ishqiya is my fourth film with Naseer, and I think we are at a stage where we understand each other without even trying. He thrived on the sets because he was playing these two different kinds of characters — Khalujaan, the rogue and Iftekhaar, the nawab. He was simply having a ball and I have never seen him this focussed and excited.
As far as Madhuri goes, I so desperately wanted her to agree to do this film, because she was the only person I could see essaying Begum Para’s role. I observed that she is a very relaxed actor. In spite of the work she has behind her, she is still the sort of actor who wants a director to step in and fill her in on the character’s shades. However, she’s also very instinctive — so if you tell her to do something that she thinks might look fake on screen, she’ll tell you that. I think what amazes me the most about Madhuri is that she does not theorise and is very subtle at her craft. Many a time, I’d think she was being too subtle and might miss the point, but later, when I saw it on screen, I realised she knew just what she was doing by putting in just the perfect amount of emphasis on her expression or style. I don’t think too many actors can boast of that.
The supporting cast in Dedh Ishqiya — Vijay Raaz, Manoj Pahwa and Salman Shahid — were equally well- etched, irrespective of the screen time they may have had.
I am glad that came across, then (smiles). I think the writing did it, again. They don’t have three hours to tell their stories and their motivations, but the writer must, at all cost. You don’t want to fall flat when a supporting actor looks at you and doesn’t understand why he is doing something in the film. He must know it in his head, even if he doesn’t spell it out on screen.
What’s next for you?
I am working on another script, but it would be too premature to discuss what it is about. But it will be entirely different from Ishqiya and Dedh Ishqiya , in every way possible.
What do you want to do better, then?
Improve my strike rate, for one!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)