Painting Portfolio

“And if their interest wandered, I would tell them, in the end, a love story, about a king called Shantanu and how, on the banks of the great river, he spotted a woman of dazzling beauty. This was of course, none other than the Ganga herself, but the king had no knowledge of this. On the banks of rivers even the most temperate of men lose their heads. King Shantanu fell in love, wholly, madly; he promised the river goddess that he would grant her whatever she wanted, if she chose even to drown her own children he would not stand in her way”

Love flows deep in rivers. With more than 700 rivers and tributaries flowing through the 55,598 square miles of Bangladesh, it is justly called a riverine country. Much of the men’s lives, their joys and sorrows happen around the rivers. The vast waterways flow ceaselessly shaping thousands of lives around them.  The sheer number of colors that float on these river channels is amazing. This portfolio is an attempt to recreate those hues and their alterations with the changing backdrops of sun, rain, wind and storm. Sometimes the subject shifted from the waters towards the land.

I have used experimental pigments in most of these paintings, namely, emulsion color. This is an industrial pigment that is used mainly for coloring walls. That makes it cheap, easily available and very long lasting. It can be used both as water color (commolex background) and oil paint (only it does not require linseed or turpentine). In the others, I used poster paint and a black gel pen for borders and highlights.

All Eat All

A lrb (London Review of Books www.lrb.com) essay. It draws on the various meanings of the term cannibalism, its historical sources, contexts and references. The essay starts with the story of a couple of real life cannibals – Amin Miewes and Bernd Brandis, modern people with decent jobs. The later voluntarily subjects himself to be devoured by the former. This news, the writer uses mostly to draw attention.

The essay is followed by the origins of cannibalism. He mentions Marco Polo's reference of cannibalistic and dog-headed colonies and later assertions of Columbus and Avramescu of such existence. The word, it is suggested, has its origins in 'carib' from Caribbean. There are references of Robinson Crusoe and implications on how colonizers had intentionally coined the 'savages' as cannibals to give meaning to their merciless exploitations.

There is a certain example drawn from Othello which lacked relevance. The essay eventually takes a more passive turn and reflects more on cannibalism's anthropological aspects quoting from and relating to the likes of Rousseau, Locke, Father Labat and Swift's 'Modest Prosposal'.

The ending was quite interesting and more so to me as it relates Freudian (lately my subject of interest) interpretations of greed behavior with cannibalism. It ends with the example of Sweeny Todd the movie and suggests that modern cannibalism is really the corporate greed devouring the common man.

It is probably the alacritous and mellifluous adeptness with which the essay addresses otherwise dry or rather pedantic issues that liked so much.

Also the way the writer seizes the readers' attention with an example that has almost nothing to do with the matter that follows is very noticeable.

Anyone interested to read the essay can follow the link below:

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n15/jenny-diski/all-eat-all

Question The Premises

Albert Camus had once written “There is but only one true philosophical problem and that is suicide. Judging whether life is or is not worth living amounts to answering the fundamental questions of philosophy.” This claim holds profound relevance as it encompasses the rudimentary elements and ideas of life. In context, however, it poses to ask whether life at large is worth living or not, but I see it in a different perspective. The question before us is whether we want to embrace the tradition of our society and not necessarily make it the only and dominant tradition. The idea of suicide, at a perfunctory glance may be altogether cowardly, but is it not really the premises of suicide that should really decide the relevance or meaning of the act? To condemn a situation without judging the set of events that precede it is but an act of foolhardy rashness.

Of a person, who has been continuously held back by series of rather unfortunate set backs and thus left unsure of his future endeavors, suicide poses itself as a rather quick and easy remedy. This is really a very tricky situation because the premises or determinants of well being set by his standards may vary from those of the norm. These standards surely offer flexibility for professional judgment but there are situations which are not so dubious and a common judgment to those can be availed. I have heard of various incidents of suicide or attempts of suicide where it appears to be the best decisive act.

A friend once told me of this fire accident that he had witnessed. A commercial building had somehow caught fire in the middle of the night and my friend who happened to have a warehouse in that building had to rush there immediately. What he saw that night were horrific realities that surface only in the close proximity of death. The fire had started on the second floor and was fast rising up. Three unfortunate victims got stuck in the 3rd floor. With no help approaching, they decided to jump off. It is obvious that in spite of what may seem like suicide they had only chosen an alternate/’preferable’ means to their ends. They only decided to end it quickly instead of being subject to prolonged suffering. In doing so, I believe they had undertaken an act of bravery.

But that is not the point of the incident. After two of the victims had jumped, the third could not decide whether or not he too shall jump. The direct consequence (immediate death) of the act had left him dubious. What had seemed like a cure was now nothing but exercising vanity. Judging the premises of suicide is a very delicate matter.

Social standards demean suicide. The laws try to prevent it. But, the implication that there are people who would not commit suicide because of the social stigma or the illegitimacy associated with it, is to me, the punch line of a very flat joke. It is only logical that a person, who has decided to end his life, does not bother much about such things as the law, and he definitely cannot be too pleased with people to care much for what they think is best for him to do. A person who has decided that suicide is a reasonable option cannot simply be expected to differentiate right and wrong through such social standards; his decision is an embodiment of his denial to those values.