Chemistry and the mundane

I heard someone remark how they thought science could contribute to how food was made. I am sure we have heard these wide eyed comments before and not just on this subject. That someone would suggest such a thing amuses me. Food is the basis of chemistry, biochemistry and the application of physics. While it is mundane it is most vital, it is probably how we learnt some of most vital aspects of dealing with chemicals. A friend of mine has always eaten cake with fascination and why not, cake she claims is the invention of a very clever chemist. Cooking is magical if you think about it, combing flavours in different way with different temperatures is very scientific, and yet we take this fro granted.

I spent this weekend making kimchi (Korean pickled cabbage). It was fascinating to think how someone came  up with the idea in the first place. The careful process of draining excess water out of cabbage, adding various spices and vegetables to the mixture all to have vegetables during a cold winter. Cheese is just as fascinating. At what moment in time did we decide to drink another animals milk and when did we realise we could cook this milk to make something completely different out of it? The first cooks probably felt a sense of adventure to create different tastes and textures, preserving food, making it more palatable, heating or cooling it. Even now when you see a good cook you get the feeling that they know something innate about combing ingredients and dishing out something tasty.

It also brings me to my next question- have we lost our most basic understanding of how things are created? As a child I was fascinated by basic experiments, it made my world come alive, boiling water bubbling away on a hot stove, a magnifying glass enlarging small objects. The very basic of these activities are some of the most profound. We live in a world where we are surrounded by very complex technology however the most basic of these is what started it all. Everything around us is technology from the humble door latch to a touch screen computer.  It is not the complex that informs the basic but the other way around. 

How do you measure feminism in films?

Is there a test to measure feminism in films? – Yes there is hooray! Ok so I have jumped the gun. Here’s the back story before I give you my take on the issue.

The Bechdel test was introduced by Alison Bechdel ( an American graphic novelist) in her comic strip 'Dykes to Watch Out For' (1985). In a strip titled ‘ The Rule’ two female characters  are talking to each one of them says to the other that she only watches a movie if it satisfies the three following requirements:

1.  It has to have at least two women in it,
2. Who talk to each other,
3. About something besides a man.

And here is the strip.

Image taken from http://dykestowatchoutfor.com/the-rule. There is more info about the strip on the website.

 Bechdel has been ambivalent of the test. It was never meant to be making a strong feminist statement, it was a joke. 

Ok so it doesn’t really measure feminist content or indicates if the film is feminist friendly, it does however point out that a lot of films don’t meet some of these criteria. Feminism and its portrayal is a lot more complex. The test only indicates if women are represented on screen in a certain way. Spin offs of the Bechdel test have looked at LGBT issues etc…. You get the idea. It is interesting how most popular films are not representative of minority groups …. although ones does not expect such films to be representative. A friend recently wrote about how Expendables 3 did not pass the Bechdel test, did anyone expect it would? To be self-critical I would ask why not? Why shouldn’t popular entertainment reflect my reality or a fictionalised version of it on screen? The Bechdel test does not allude to being a feminist test to point the way out, but it does point out how women don’t have any role to play in films except for filling a gap in the narrative. This does not indicate if the film is one that deserves critical attention. Popular cinema has no such responsibility, it is meant to play on our prejudices.

Feminism and other isms are complex issues that are bigger than mere representation. Popular cinema might incorporate such issues in but only throws them in the main narrative as subplots. Or when popular cinema pretends to have taken criticism of itself aboard it subverts criticism to create the same material but sells it as ethically engaging. Chick flicks are meant to be female friendly films but they end up presenting a very narrow vision of what women can be. Closer home Bollywood films claim to be empowering women by including 'item numbers' and bikini scenes. Emotive and positive terms such as empowering are misleading, but they seem to work for the filmmakers. I would like to go into detail about why I resist an emotive culture but that is for later.  Representation is important os is the quality of the narrative in which these  are involved. 

Guacamole

A few weeks ago a friend asked me for vegetarian/vegan recipes that were easy to make this is one of the simplest. 2 ripe (soft to touch) avocados are mashed with the juice and zest of one lime. I add salt and chilli flakes to taste and sometimes for colour. The final picture isn't the best  as my hand shook as I took the pic. Watch this space for more vegetarian and vegan recipes. 

Summer Garden

Our neighbours grew some nasturtiums this summer and they were lovely thought of putting them on a card. The brown flecks in the middle are sprinkles of gold dust. This is my interpretation of Uncle Stan's garden. 

Exotic and exploited the role of women in Indian films

I have never liked popular cinema in India, it gets on my nerves to be quite honest. I am not fond of all art cinema either. Both genres have a purpose for their existence.

Both genres have one thing in common they are eroticised. Here in the UK most people I talk to speak of the popular Bollywood films they have seen – man and woman dancing around a tree. A few people might have watched some of the nicer films – I can have intellectual conversations with those people.

Popular Indian cinema isn’t made to be meaningful, it plays on easy stereotypes to get its point across, and in short it is misrepresentative and offensive to many marginalised groups. However art cinema is expected to be more realistic and in touch with common people and their everyday struggles. I was reading this article by Madhu Kishwar on ‘Bandit Queen’. Kishwar for those of you who don’t know is an Indian feminist who has a popular magazine called Manushi. Bandit Queen is a film that is supposedly based on the life of Phoolan Devi. The film ran into controversy when it was released in 1994. I was in school at that time, I had heard about this ‘adult film in hushed tones. The film is graphic in its depiction of violence against women. In some quarters it was the film men would watch for titillation, this is nothing new men watch films like this India often. Cinema halls cater to the sexual needs of men who often learn about sexuality through films, the nature of the film does not matter as long as it is portraying women sexually.  

There was talk of the film being criticised by Phoolan herself which I remembered were dismissed by people on the grounds that she was being greedy and asking for the director for more money. However this article by Kishwar highlights another aspect of the film – it is a distorted and even eroticised narrative of violence against women in rural India. Being an art film it was to have a limited audience in India but a wider one around the world. Kishwar argues that liberties have been taken in narrating this story on screen, narratives which weren’t part of the book by Mala Sen on the subject of Phoolan’s life. It is understandable why this film was upsetting for Phoolan and why it could have sparked violence across the region.

My issue with the film and Indian films in general is how rape is commonly depicted and how it is a deliberate addition by the filmmakers to either entertain (in popular cinema) or to empathise (in art cinema). Both these reasons are insensitive to this issue or rape and sexual violence against women, which is easily dismissed in India. Phoolan was a poor illiterate woman, her story made the director lots of money. There are two issues here, Phoolan does not mention the rape in her interviews or in the book written by Mala Sen. The other issue is legal – one is not allowed to disclose the identity of a rape victim in India. However the spectacle of a naked woman exploited on screen is emotive and plays on our sense of right and wrong. It made audiences feel bad about the condition of women in rural India, however it played on a popular sentiment – India as a backward and horrible place for women. None of those accusations are false, however that is the only narrative one sees of India. The story presented in the film is not completely false it is a reality in India- except it is not Phoolan’s reality. It is made to sell a very disturbing idea of female sexuality that we have come to normalise.

Can Indian cinema ever portray women without offending them? Can any other cinema do that? bell hooks would argue otherwise as would Laura Mulvey. Sexualisation of women on screen is so common it is hard to realise it is there. Sexualised images of women are so common that they rarely get criticised. Indian women’s bodies are exploited on screen and off, this hardly gets anyone’s attention the exploitation that is. hooks contends that the makers of popular entertainment are not naïve but are guided by profit and popularity when constructing this misogyny. These stories are sold as compelling truths about Indian women. Again these cinematic liberties to portray a certain reality are carefully constructed image of women. both hooks and Kishwar point out how these stories gain credibility through depictions of  violence against women.

I remember while talking about 12 years a slave a friend pointed out how the violence presented in the film was made for titillation rather than raise the issue of slavery. The argument he presented was that it was easy to portray slavery from the past but modern day slavery would implicate us all as consumers of slavery which is a very disturbing idea and not something that would sell. Similarly the image of a certain kind of Indian woman being exploited in remote central India is not disturbing for most of us. The violence is exoticised, it is presented as alien to urban masses, who feel secure in knowing this is not their reality.

Should stories on such issues be made – yes, however they need to made with sensitivity with accuracy and not for titillation.

This is a link to the article by Madhu Kishwar –

Manushi- Film Review- the Bandit Queen

Midnight at Salford Quays

Every now and again I need a break and walk around the quays. This week has been hectic in Manchester with the students all over the city. It was nice to have the city to myself in the middle of the night. The sounds and sights at Salford Quays were magical, nightingales singing, the swoosh of the tram which sounded a bit like the TARDIS, voices of people speaking softly in the night, little colour changing lights all over the new BBC area, glistening water all around us. This little patch of lavender looked so lovely the way the light shone on it I had to take a pic.  

Save me from the good doctor

Medical procedures are almost always justified on the basis of brining cures to a larger population for the greater good. To reject or question a procedure is seen as rejecting science and giving into superstition. I find the defence of science problematic as it positions certain kinds of knowledge as superstitious and it has created an environment where to critique science is taboo. I am sure the doctors who worked on curing Henrietta were doing this for her own good and to help future generations their goodwill is not to be questioned but their ethical standpoint should be. Non-dominant groups of people have a deep sense of suspicion towards the medical establishment which is justified their bodies are used for experimental purposes. Apart from that there is issue of being mistreated while seeking medical help. We seem to have an implicit understanding that medical procedures are invasive and violating of human dignity. 

Here is a documentary by Adam Curtis  on how Henrietta Lacks cancer cells were used without her permission for research 

Garden at midnight

Looking at my garden with two cats on a wall staring into the distance wonder if they are smelling the lavender or just waiting to catch mice.....

..... last days of summer