Tuesday, June 25, 2013

Of Superheroes and Synopses- By Kasturi Moitra


After watching the latest Superman movie — Man of Steel — I couldn’t help wondering how alarmingly akin the making of a superhero flick is to the writing of a PhD synopsis. Few reasons as to why I didn’t think Man of Steel was a good superhero film were: 1) The Superman wasn’t handsome enough 2) The villain in Superman was not formidable enough 3) The set-up was too fantastical (aliens!) 4) There was nothing new in the film. I realized to my horror that often our PhD synopses get rejected for the very same reasons! Behold.
For starters, a good superhero film needs a good and noble hero; a terrible crisis that plagues the world; and most importantly, a very, very evil supervillain.  Now how about you juxtapose these with the three elements of your research — the hypothesis (hero), the research questions (crisis) and the empirical evidence that you would use to falsify your hypothesis (super villain).
First, it is imperative that you have an appealing set of hypotheses; robust, eloquent, sophisticated, with no extra flab (else nobody will watch ur superhero flick)! Second, a superhero, however gallant, cannot win the minds and hearts of people if he doesn’t rescue the world from some big problem. The more unprecedented and intractable the problem, the more laudable is your superhero. An old problem that has cropped up in a new avatar could also do the trick, as long as it has an angle which neither the world nor the superhero has had to deal with before. In such a case, past experience or knowledge of the old problem (literature review) is necessary, but not sufficient to be able to address the new dimension of the problem for which the superhero’s prowess is irrefutably required. However, the world should not bother superheroes with every small problem or try to create ones where there are none (else it shall incur the wrath of the Gods!). It is only crises that they cannot solve by themselves, which should be handed over to the superhero.
Finally, we have the most crucial element of the superhero flick—the super villain. The super villain’s singular quest is to try and take down the superhero. He (or she) could employ either brain or brawn to achieve this but the point remains that he has to be formidable, tough and seemingly invincible. A superhero is but nothing without his super villain. The more evil the super villain, more heroic is the superhero. When the two clash, the audience should have the impression that either could win (even though everyone expects that the hero would finally prevail over the villain). However, even if the superhero dies in the end, no matter. Your film would probably get more applause for ‘keeping it real’.
Other things to look out for are as follows. Choice of weapon and combat technique – how will the superhero bring the super villain down on his knees? Good research methodology and research techniques are indispensible for executing a cleanly shot action sequence. The superhero’s familiarity and dexterity with the weapons would certainly hold him in good stead. An unwieldy weapon could give the opponent an advantage. In every case, it is the context and situation of the problem as well as the nature of the villain that determines the combat technique. Sometimes, however, plans may go awry and the superhero may have to improvise along the way.
Again every superhero has his limit. Since he cannot solve all the problems of the world, he has to chart out and define his mission carefully. For example, Batman is only concerned with keeping Gotham City safe. Others may have a slightly more global or even inter-galactic scope. So it is important to define the scope right at the beginning, lest your audience is disappointed by your superhero’s achievements. It would also be a good question to ask—what’s in it for the superhero? Why is he doing it? Is it for fame and glory, or to get the girl, or to settle some old score?
A person decides in the first half hour of a movie whether to dive out of the hall or stay glued to the seats even during interval. This goes on to show the importance of the introduction of your synopsis, to the entire enterprise. Similarly, there has to be some connection between the beginning and end of your superhero flick. You have to come full circle, tie all the loose ends. Again, a good film (superhero or otherwise) needs very, very good editing. You have to know what bits to leave out and what bits to keep. If your audience cannot effortlessly make the transition from one sequence to the next, then it will lose interest. You can use innovative narratives like flashbacks or dream sequences or other webs of intricacies, perhaps even an Inception-type plot, if you please, but be sure to keep the audience in the loop. Also watch out for faux pas like spelling errors, grammatical errors and logical errors as nothing can be more frustrating that watching a good movie on a bad quality sound system.
It is a good idea to make somebody go through your creation before sending it to the theatres or exposing it to the movie critics. They might see something that you may have overlooked, simply because they are not looking through the director’s lenses.
Lastly, being a superhero does not mean that he has to go it all alone. This by no means is a mark of being a superhero. A good superhero needs help and guidance because even superheroes can often lose their way. And indeed he will find both – people to show him the way forward and egg him on, as well as people to scoff at him and make him doubtful of his own capabilities. However, he must not give up. He may falter, be down and bruised, get tired, even disillusioned, but at no cost does a superhero hang up his cape.

Kasturi Moitra ,
PhD Candidate,
International Politics Division,
Center for International Politics, Organisation and Disarmament,
School of International Studies,
Jawaharlal Nehru University

    

Friday, May 10, 2013

On India-Iran in WPR


As U.S. Leaves Afghanistan, India Reconsiders Iran Policy

By Yogesh Joshi, on Briefing
Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid visited Tehran last weekend to attend the 17th meeting of the India-Iran Joint Commission. Though the most surprising outcome of the visit was the agreement on a common diplomatic initiative for resolving the Syrian crisis, a number of other agreements, including for the expansion of the strategically important Chabahar port on the Arabian Sea, signal a closer alignment on a more critical geopolitical interest that the two sides share: ensuring long-term stability in Afghanistan. Clearly the scheduled U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan is driving a new diplomatic engagement between India and Iran. 

Contrast this week’s outcome to the March visit to New Delhi by the speaker of Iran’s parliament, Ali Larijani, who declared at the time that the two countries had developed some “major differences.”

If a chill had settled on India-Iran relations, it was largely due to adjustments New Delhi had made to its approach to the Iranian nuclear program. At the behest of the U.S., India voted at the International Atomic Energy Agency to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council. It reduced its oil imports from Tehran considerably, even though Iran had been one of India’s principal sources of crude for decades. It also extricated itself from the long-discussed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project, which many in Delhi saw as the solution to India’s energy insecurity, instead resting its hopes in the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline project, the completion of which still seems a distant dream.
For more, here is the original link.

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Lecture at Johns Hopkins University


So I had an opportunity to lecture the graduate class of the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University. Prof. Walter Andersen, who heads the South Asia department at SAIS invited me to talk to his seminar class on India-China relations which he co-teaches with his colleague, Prof. Pieter P. Bottelier. SAIS is considered to be the nursery for USA's diplomatic community. Most of those who join the state department come from this school. To talk to them was therefore a great honour. Thanks to Prof. Andersen and Prof. Bottelier to have invited me and special thanks to Dr. Anit Mukherjee to have introduced me to Prof Andersen. Here are the slides from that presentation:





 





















Tuesday, April 9, 2013

New Article in World Politics Review


India’s Plans for Sea-based Deterrent Open a Pandora’s Box in South Asia

By Yogesh Joshi, on Briefing
Since 1998, a major element of India’s nuclear doctrine has been the development of a nuclear triad: the ability to fire nuclear weapons from land, air and sea. Recent years have seen India concentrating on the sea-based element of its nuclear deterrent, in particular through efforts to develop a ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). 

All the major nuclear powers have placed their faith in SSBNs, primarily because they are extremely hard to detect and destroy, hence assuring a state’s retaliatory capability. The fear of a second strike, in turn, helps maintain effective deterrence between nuclear adversaries. ...
The entire article can be find here.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012




Why is rape- RAPE?

National dailies are riddled with coverage of people being murdered in cold blood, of the elderly being robbed and killed, of the young being kidnapped for ransom and of WOMEN BEING RAPED. 

 The capitalization of the last part of this sentence is intentional. When compared, with respect to the gravity of all these crimes, rape is viewed as the most heinous act against humanity. But why is that so? Why is the act of raping a woman (and here, I stress on the rape of women and not men to underline the uni-dimensionality of how the same is understood) more shameful than the act of robbing and killing another? 
The recent instance of gang-rape in the city has led to a public outrage with not just women’s rights groups raising their voice but social portals too teeming with ‘posts’ on the need to ‘stop rape against women.’
This development must be praised. People in the city are beginning to wake up to the need for laws and institutions to be in place in not just Delhi but other cities in the country that focus on protection of women’s rights.

 As a feminist, however, I see this a little differently. Graphic illustrations of a woman- blackened and behind prison bars have cropped up in several newspapers symbolizing the gravity of what has happened. This woman has been RAPED. She has been ripped off of her chastity, of her normalcy. “Oh that poor girl! my mother says, shaking her head in dismay, she was RAPED. This is why I tell you to not venture out of the house at night.” 

But I could also be robbed at gunpoint. How is being raped any different? 

Yet RAPE is different, society tells me. It is different because I may survive being robbed at gunpoint but I shall NEVER regain my normalcy nor my right to partake in society if I were raped. Because I’d be too impure to lead a normal life. So in a flash, I not only lose my right to say NO, I also lose the right to be treated like an ordinary living being in this society. I lose much more than I would if I were to get robbed. 

We, as constituents of this society, live by this fundamental distinction. So we sympathize with THAT girl because of all she has lost and underline how savage men are who have the power to render us- women powerless. We focus on the need to protect women from becoming victims of this “grave,”“heinous” crime by ensuring that women “dress appropriately” and “do not venture out late at night.”

I question the productivity of such debate. In fact, I cannot underline enough, just how COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE such discussion is.

THAT girl and all us women in not just this city but the world need to be told that while being robbed of ones’ right over their body is terribly unfortunate, it by no means suggests THE END OF ONES’ LIFE. What we need, firstly, is to rid rape of the social stigma that comes attached with it. 

One of my closest friends was date raped at the age of sixteen and she didn’t report it because she couldn’t cope with the thought of her family and friends getting wind of how SHE had ‘wronged’ THEM by ‘allowing’ her ‘piety’ to be taken away from her.

What I want from the representative institutions in this city is CONSTANT assurance that life shall go on. Instead of using THAT girl as a case-in- point to trigger debate about how MEN are cruel, and how unsafe this city is for women, what we need, as a society, is to provide women with a guarantee that rape shall no longer be something that rips them of their right to be normal, to live.

Maybe then, my friend shall feel SAFE, in every sense of the word,to put that bastard behind bars. 

Anindita Bose
M.Phil (INP), CIPOD 

This provoking piece is being posted in solidarity with the victim of the heinous and dastardly act of rape and torture, committed on a medical student which has rocked the conscience of common people in the city of Delhi and the entire country.