Opinion Apparently definitely
The idea is to be as communicative and clear as possible but so often we find people on television determined to make statements...
The idea is to be as communicative and clear as possible but so often we find people on television determined to make statements which make no sense,deliberately or unwittingly. Its as though they are unsure of what to say. Thus,NewsX,last Friday,while describing Rahul Gandhis visit to Mumbai,said: He seems to have called the Shiv Senas bluff. At least apparently.
Thus,Rahul Bhatt,when asked what David Headley had told him about being in Pakistan by NDTV 24×7,replied,He spoke of Pakistan as the Wild West.
NDTV: What did he mean?
Bhatt: As in the Wild West? Right,gotcha.
Perhaps Bhatts problem was that he believed if he repeated himself often enough,he would be believed. That,or he had been told to rein in his tongue (just to keep the Wild West in its saddle!). At least,apparently.
NDTV: You did not know his name was Rana?
Bhatt: Absolutely not.
NDTV: You never heard of Rana?
Bhatt: Absolutely never.
NDTV: Blah,blah,blah?
Bhatt: Absolutely not.
This was one of those interviews in which the person asking the questions parted with more information than the person who answered them. Definitely. For sure. And any other definitive terms you can think of.
Shah Rukh Khans speech defect is that he talks too much. Absolutely too much. And in quotable quotes format. Especially when he is pitted against himself,as he was last Monday night when he answered Barkha Dutt on NDTV 24×7 even as he listened to Rajdeep Sardesais questions on CNN-IBN. You are entranced by his way with words but at the end of the 60 minutes,its as if you have watched him in a full-length Bollywood blockbuster because he has run through his entire acting repertoire: funny (all the time),smart and Kennedyesque (dont ask if Mumbai belongs to all,ask who belongs to Mumbai I belong to Mumbai),tearful (I am great at being an Indian),modest ( I am not powerful),caring (Uddhav is a very sweet person),combative (No one can take away my Indianness),frank (I am a self-serving actor),so on and so forth.
It was a quintessential SRK performance,full of bravura and throwaway lines you caught but could not hold onto because they were coming at you by the dozen. Two remarks left their imprint: he admitted to Dutt that the decision not to choose Pakistani players for the IPL was a business one and to Sardesai he promised to speak up on issues that troubled him: The time has come. What can we say but Absolutely?
And should we say,Absolutely not to India TVs comparison of Raj Thackeray with Mohammed Ali Jinnah? Reporting on Thackerays latest comments on Mumbai for Maharashtrians,the news channel suggested that Raj was behaving like the founding father of Pakistan and that he would eventually try to separate Maharashtra from India. We could not stop Jinnah, it proclaimed in awful tones,but Raj can be stopped. Whereupon one Raj look-alike popped up on the TV screen dressed like Jinnah! We may accuse Jinnah of many faults but comparing him to Raj T?
In a week when national politics has been a soap opera worthy of Ekta Kapoors skills,dominated by the exploits of an ageing patriarch,his loyal son and heir,his rebellious nephew,the divided Thackeray family found itself on the defensive against SRK and Rahul Gandhi whose Mumbai visit and diversionary tactics ensured that TV news stayed with him rather than straying towards the Shiv Sena black protests. It was eventually rescued from its self-inflicted wounds by none other than another Maharashtrian,Sharad Pawar.
News24 described what happened at the meeting between the NCP leader and Bal Thackeray in words that seem to have left little room for confusion or misunderstanding: Thackeray ke saamne,Pawar ka surrender.
At least apparently.
shailaja.bajpai@expressindia.com
Share
