Translation

Song Title: Aankhon Ki Gustakhiyan
Music Director: Ismail Darbar
Lyrics: Sameer
Singer(s): Kumar Sanu, Kavita Krishnamurthy
Movie: Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam (1999)
Director: Sanjay Leela Bhansali

Aankhon ki
Gustakhiyan.. maaf hon
O aankhon ki
Gustakhiyan... maaf hon
Ek tuk tumhein dekhti hain
Jo baat kehna chaahe zubaan
Tumse vo ye kehti hain

Aankhon ki
Sharmohaya... maaf ho
Tumhein dekhke jhukti hain
Uthi aankhein jo baat na keh sakin
Jhuki aankhein wo.. Kehti hain
Aankhon ki
Gustakhiyan... maaf hoon

Kaajal ka ek til tumhare labhon pe laga loon
Haan chanda aur suraj ki nazron se tumko bacha loon
Oh palkhon ki chilman mein aao main tumko chhupa loon
Khayaalon ki
Ye shokhiyaan… Maaf hon

Har dam tumhein sochti hain
Jab hosh mein hota hai jahan
Madhosh ye krti hain
Aankhon ki sharmohaya
Maaf ho

Ye zindagi aapki hi amaanat rahegi 
Dil mein sada aapki hi mohabbat rahegi 
In saanson ko aapki hi zaroorat rahegi
Haan is dil ki
Naadaniyaan maaf hon

Ye mere kahan sunti hain
Ye pal pal jo hote hain bepal sanam
Toh sapne naye bunti hain
Aankhon ki
Aankhon ki
Gustakhiyan... Maaf hon
Sharmohaya... Maaf ho

---

Let the (playful) mischief of these eyes be forgiven
They keep staring constantly at you...
And that what the lips wants to utter,
These eyes convey exactly the same...

Of these eyes, the shyness, be forgiven!
They hide themselves on seeing you
that which the raised eyelids couldn't express,
the half-closed ones leak out.

Let me put a black spot on your lips
To save you from the eyes of the moon and the sun
Come, let me hide you behind the screens of my eyelids
Of these thoughts, the vividness, be forgiven!

They think of you with every breath...
When I am in my stream of consciousness
They make the world blurred
Of these eyes, let the playful mischief, be forgiven!

This life shall remain, a treasure only of you
In this heart, forever shall remain, love only of you
These skipped moments of breaths shall always need you
Of this heart, let the innocence be forgiven

Where does it listen to me?
In each moment that gets uncontrollable
It weaves a new fantasy

Of these eyes, let the playful mischief, be forgiven
The shyness, be forgiven.

Anuj Daga

An attempt to converse

on Indian politics

(certain chunks of this chat are removed)

---

Me

what modi debate you are are doing?

Xyz

listen his thobaad is everywhere

i want to puncture it

and all this middle class development morality

is fuelling his rise to pmship

ill be so ashamed if he becomes pm

Me

what is wrong in the middleclass development morality_

Xyz

its like citispace

doesn’t give a fuck about anything else but itself

Me

how is the situation any better now

'better' for the lack of a better word

may be - different

no basically i am just trying to understand

i am too bad at politics anyway

and i think its high time i educated myself

so asking...

Xyz

i dont care if it gets better

i have a moral problem with fascist hindu politics getting the upper hand

i would be ashamed of a country in which the majority voted for that

and believed in that

Me

u think hindu is being linked to some kind of developmental idea?

i dont think modi ever brings 'hindu' in his speeches - atleast the ones i have seen

Xyz

nope

i think being hindu is being linked to

being indian

well you should see the billboards all over the city

claiming that he is a hindu nationalist

he did an interview on a tv channel also which got facebooked a lot by his fans who lauded his "guts" at saying that

Me

but what happened to the whole debate on corruption?

accountability?

and blah

Xyz

i find all that very annoying

Me

i mean modi's speeches seem pretty rational

Xyz

yes of course

especially when he is talking about muslims

Me

:P

Xyz

luckily i am not a court of law

i don’t have to believe he is innocent because no one could prove that he was not involved in the massacre of muslims

the inventions of muslims as a race

as number one enemy

to rouse stupid chauvanistic sentiment

Me

yeah - that is a bit scary to think of

Xyz

the development - just look at sabarmati- bimals project

cited as a showpiece project

which is a bullshit project

lapped up by architects urban designers as a visionary project

which takes the water from the sardar sarovar to make a naturally perennial river into a waterfront for real estate development

that doesnt allow farmers on the edge to draw water from it even

Me

hmm - i didnt know about htat

but then, what is development after all?

and do we even need development?

Xyz

that is the best question

Me

because it is always going to be political

Me

it involves money and resources and big people and will

Xyz

this development rhetoric completely ignores all the other infill-healing type things we need

small things

Me

you think development is an induced desire?

or it is an acquired one?

Xyz

i think its one of your blindness things

same idea

what do you think

Me

well, i would like for everyone to have some basic infrastructure

i feel horrible when i read about lakhs of crores of rupees pocketed by some greedy idiots

Xyz

problem is the image of development

is not skywalks- sardar sarovar

etc

Xyz

there are so many statistics to prove all gujrat development is also a huge pr game

where bihar and other states do well on other indexes

Xyz

he is a chauvinistic hindutva promoter

what will happen to us as a nation

Xyz

the sabarmati project is one of the sickest projects ever

but people would call it development

please

i am an atheist

i can tolerate someone being religious

but to say India is a Hindu nation is disgustingly chauvinistic

and what is this hundutva that the bjp promotes

what will be the message to muslims

Xyz

and you have to see the new billboards all over the city

you havent heard him talk about muslims and family planning

or relief camps?

do a search for huindu nationalist

the problem is that all hindus cannot see that their claim to the nations identity can be very othering

that scares me

Me

othering to non-hindus?

Xyz

of course

Xyz

i really believe he is a murderer of muslims

if you hear the stories of what happened at cept

and the terror of it

and his smugness just angers me

Me

any record?

Xyz

everywhere

ask *** how he hid and trembled

ask *** how he was afraid to move to ahmedabad after he married a hindu girl

Me

hmm - that scares me

Xyz

it scares me too

and i love how all my hindu chauvinist friends who argue rationality can brand muslims as a race belive the constructed history of difference and conquest

can believe in bloated images of development and cannot see what muslims will feel

if we all put our votes to vote in a bigot

what it means to vote for a fascist

because we want a "clean slate"

STATE

sorry

like hitler

india will rise

under a fascist

kind of idea

Me

you think history like such repeats?

or would it if modi came?

Xyz

if modi came to power it would prove that we think of ourselves a a hindu state

and that is a crime

when the same people cry about islamic states

Me

but thats too metaphorical to claim

Xyz

no its not

it is the first thing

the development argument is just eyewash

Me

would hinduism intensify if modi came to power

Xyz

no it would just get its justification-

Me

ah i see - you mean to say his agenda is to "clean" the sate?

state*

his underlying agenda that is

Xyz

all his claims are like his pr agency's claim that he went and rescued 15000 pilgrims in a day

hilarious

Me

why didnt other states help then?

Xyz

please

is this an interstate competition?

Me

exactly - its not a competition

its about just caring for a single cause

why were resources not pooled togehter?

Xyz

so what

Me

well i feel not coming together in times of crisis is more political

more petty

was that not a massacre?

Xyz

we can go on about other parties and how states and how bad they are or were

no it was not a massacre

Me

no i am just trying to take a current example

Xyz

please do Not compare it to what happened in Gujarat

its not so trivial

Me

i thought it was pretty logical for all states to come together in this crisis

Xyz

the massacre happened at several levels

the entire development argument that states and the centre make are weird

Me

if massacre leads to death of people as an end result, then pretty much

Xyz

no

murder

and negligence are two entirely different things

states may not know better

and states may know better

Me

when you know people are dying and still not save them, it is almost as good as that

Xyz

the displacements of the sabarmati no one talks about in the name of development

Me

ah - is the pain from death by negligence different from that of murder

Xyz

just as no one talks about the hydel projects in uttarakhand

yes it is

if someone comes after you maliciously

to kill your kin

to kill, you

because of your religion

it is much more painful

it causes a historic scar

that your ineptitude to save people

Me

hmm

worthwhile thinking

Xyz

chl anyways

i sleep now

Me

hehe

Xyz

lock up the grills 

----
I request my co-chatter to contact me in case one finds this objectionable.
The above is only a record for the fact that - I learnt.

Image Update

The World of Art

I was wondering this morning about my engagement with the three large areas of knowledge that structure the world, or atleast the conventional world that our Indian school boards define for us - arts, science and commerce. I was generally concerned about my proximity with each of these three fields and was carefully considering my engagement with all the three. My general irritation with commerce stems from multiple facts - my inability to contribute to a conversation when I am with my family consisting of people talking about economics and money all the time, my in-congruence with with capitalistic ideologies, my aversion to empirical world and my general lack of interest in politics of business.

I have been an artistic person, or atleast I would like to believe so, given my strong interest in music, literature, craft and creativity. Strangely enough, arts always remained a peripheral subject in my early life. At the same time, emphasis on science as a vocational subject was something I was virtually convinced about. In addition, during my time, one could only get into architecture if one took science. So I ended up pursuing science - and I learnt a lot of jargon. However, what always kept on fascinating me was the ways in which people arrived at concepts in science. I wondered how people came to think of several ideas historically? For a long time, I had a hard time understanding the subjects of calculus, electricity, space, black holes - all of that...I never understood why was I studying them, or why would someone think of such things?

There is an artistic way to appreciate and learn the potency of all the scientific concepts - I have begun to discover this as I visit the numerous art works in the museums here, as well as when I read thoughts of various artists. The artistic way of learning the world is much more close to human nature, much more of a cognitive process. One arrives at important questions about the unsolved world by just peeping inside oneself or pondering about the incomprehensible outer world.

Looking at various exhibtions, compilations and works of artists around here, and deeper engagement into humanities and arts has allowed me to feel more confident of my questions. A lot of times, to my surprise, I concur upon questions that once have passed my mind earlier while visiting an artist's works. "I thought it too!" - I tell myself! But it's just a matter of getting the question out of your head, voicing it as sincerely and honestly as possible! Unlike the artistic world, the factual mind tries to resolve your questions far too quickly for you to even consider it at length.

For example, I wonder WHY can't I get a hang of geography? I confuse when people tell to me places, locations and cities all the time - I cannot figure them mentally on the cartographic map. When someone talks of Jordan or Israel, I confuse their location completely on the map. It is recently while visiting the Metropolitan museum of Art that I discovered that Mongolia, from where Mughals came, is in the Far East, ie, China's east. for some reason, I always assumed and mixed Mongolians and hence the Mughals with to come from the West of India, since their historically they came after the Muslims. Muslims came from the west of India, but since most invasions in India have happened from the west, I assumed the Mughals to come from the west too! I felt surprised, but I educated myself! I would feel awkward to share my under-information with anyone. But there is an strong philosophical question here.

Why did I assume the above assumption? Why did I never think of this before? What constructs geographical imagination in absence of the cartographic map? How do we imagine places through mediated facts? How do we situate them in our mind? What map does the mind make? What is the comparison of that map to the factual one? How is it important, rather when does it become important to align the map of the mind to the scientific map? What happens in the collision of the mental artistic map and the empirical scientific map? Why does it become a matter of joke, if one confuses this map of the mind to the map of the world? And why does this quickly become the aspect of evaluation, knowledge and judgement?

The above would easily become a strong ground for a research on epistemology . But the art world is soft enough to accommodate the above questions. It allows you to have them, pursue them and feel confident about them, unlike science which may put you down. But the intelligent scientist will constructively draw the artistic questions above into an imaginative workable solution. I always remain baffled by Einstein's invention of the 'microwave'. I once saw a documentary which revealed how Einstein resolved his question on microwaves or the relation between energy and light. His mother would tell him when he was still a small kid - "Dear son, all things in this world are connected!"

Einstein's innocent mind grew up to translate that simple philosophical proposition from his mother to the biggest invention of the century, and probably the most important equation in the history of science (E = mc 2)! I hence come to conclusion that the greatest scientist has to be rooted deeply into philosophy...

I have come to an understanding that it is ART that creates the world. It is through art that we produce the world. The branches of art - language, drawing, sculpture, poetry, music and so on gives the first expression to our understanding of the world, to something that our inner mind needs to articulate of the outside world in order to communicate, survive. The art world negotiates the boundary between the inside and outside. Art makes comprehensible something that is yet unanswered. It opens up large questions for the world to think about, to ponder upon. It constructs imaginations and makes way for science to act towards resolving them.

It is science that resolves the art-world. It pursues art more seriously to investigate if imaginations from art are viable, relevant. The scientific world resolves and makes the negotiation bearable - or it rests the unstable mind to some extent (or a large extent?). Science has also come to dialectically work with art.

It is commerce, that mobilizes science and art. The commercial world, today, ironically makes the outer world again unstable! I still do not find how commerce conceptually completes the triad with science and art, apart from merely giving it a value of exchange, quite a banal affair. However, as soon as I arrive at commerce, I feel at lack of words to talk about. So I must end this post here for people in the stream of commerce to explain their contribution in production of the world, beyond the realm of money.

Thoughts on Indiffrence in American Culture

The culture of indifference pervades America. It is indifference that constitutes individualism, as well as exemplifies liberty. People here do not like to share themselves, their space. A lot of what actually goes on in their minds is also not shared. There is no one to share happiness, no one to share loss, no one to look up to in case you are in trouble and no one to generally talk when you just want to talk to someone. They have built themselves on this foundation. I am not sure if this also prevails in the Midwest and the west American coast. But as far as I have known the north east, that is the rule.

I do not know how they manage their social space. Many rely on social networking websites. Even on these platforms, either their names, or their images are changed. The notion of privacy on such platforms too, is very high. Initially I used to wonder why any kind of application forms that we fill up in the US provide two spaces for names – one for maiden name, and the other for “how you prefer to be called” – but after coming here, I have experienced how strictly people guard their own space. They want to, and do decide everything for their lives by themselves, of course, as soon as they are mature.

I have experienced how indifference can be disturbing for a person who comes from a place where social space is absolutely different, interdependent and interwoven. It makes one feel left out, insignificant, non-proximate or of least consequence to any one else around him or her. There is no feeling of belonging-ness, thus not obligated to anyone. The difficult balance one thinks of is whether it is possible to belong to someone without being obligated?

It is not that people don’t share their thoughts because they don’t want to. It is just that they do not bring it out unless asked. I often wonder what makes the people here keep their happiness or deep sorrows within them. In that sense, the Indian society is much more expressive, not verbally, but gesturally. I have found only few Americans to express true emotion. But is 'bhaav' or emotion is a consequence of interdependence, or can it be kept just within the mind without bringing it on face?

But what does keeping one’s things to oneself mean? Does it mean being to self centered? Or does it mean to keep one’s world to oneself? Does it mean that one need not project their experiences to any one else? What is the point of an isolated world that does not intersect with another’s? How then would any one expand the idea of the world?

People here work their ways out in a different way. Most of them find their callings by trial and errors along their growing up period, and observe the trajectory of people whom they want to work with. They contact them, get in touch, express their interest and apprentice many a times. Though these people and networks developed by their own interests, they create a world which feeds their aspirations. On the other hand, people from Indian culture are exposed to a lot of things equally right from the beginning – our schools teach us all subjects, our families emphasize the importance of all subjects in studies, most of our parents would have loved for us to be all-rounders. But in this, so many worlds intersect, and often conflict with one another. Much of our life is spent in resolving, negotiating or understanding this conflict. But the opportunity this conflict offers is to peep into different worlds, different people and different ideas. The world that thus gets stitched is much more multidimensional. It has multiple entry points, multiple exits. There are so many loose stories that never get completed – they are left as lingering unexplained thoughts of life.

Whereas, the American will connect all the possible dots – but where were there ambiguous dots anyway? One finds the next dot only after connecting the previous! What do I mean by this metaphor? An average story of an American, if asked about how one landed at point A in their career would be pretty linear. He/she would mostly be able to explain his extremely logical trajectory step by step – carefully calculated. There are hardly any chances or opportunistic moments.

Don’t much of our Indian lives happen by chance? Or am I just exaggerating it too much? There are so many things in our life that we wish to do – by ‘things’ I mean not always materialistic, but something that would satisfy our soul. For example, a doctor would have loved to give a musical performance, or an engineer would have liked to paint for his life, or a government servant would have like to be an artist! There are no “would be-s” in the American system. You just do it! There is no one to stop you, question you, or project their ideas or desires on you.

But to talk of this American attitude as the ‘liberating experience’ is not expounding! Where was anything tying the American down in the first place to feel liberated? Were there any societal expectations anyway? There are no parents who are waiting to be taken care of once you start earning, there is no wife whom you cannot leave, there are no kids whom you have to take care of all your life, or there are no social expectations you have to fulfil in terms of pressures of money or maintaining a social status. When I talk of this, I am talking in the liberal framework, that you are not bounded by any social codes where you have to maintain your status quo. I have seen people with a degree working for money at odd places here. Apart from the fact that they may have no options to earn money, they also do not face any social shame in taking up something that is below their qualification. This is something we would understand as “dignity  of labour.” But this is also something that comes off as the characteristic of indifference.

Indifference sometimes may also result in “who cares?” attitude.  I am talking of this attitude only in a social sense, not city, not governance, not lawful sense. I am thinking of all the above ideas in the sphere of ethics and morality, in the sphere of social space that gets codified by only the practice of everyday acts and decisions. What would be the point of morals and ethics in a society that hardly interacts with each other? What is the point of morals when the morality of one doesnot influence, harm, affect, depend on the other – since all acts are individual, limited to oneself? There is only the personal project, there is no common goal. This is the private world – the world of private capital, private interest, private space, private circle, private work – nothing that any one can peek into, unless advertised!

It is then understandable that Americans are so good at marketing and adverstising – since when something that is only within the private space needs to come out, it almost erupts, explodes and is loud. It is the repressed indifference. Through advertising, one aims to connect, to reach out, to touch the other world, allows oneself to be seen. I think thus, advertising is a formal channel through which America negotiates indifference. It is the psychological cure for keeping one’s emotions in one’s own world of privacy – the world that no one is able to peep into.

(rambling thoughts)

Napkins

Notice

It was extremely sensitive for the Heat Advisory (Director of Facilties and Safety) to send out an e mail to us this morning!
I was quite surprised of the concern:

--

Dear All,

There's a heat advisory for the city today and tomorrow, with temperatures expected to hit 90s.
During periods of extremely hot and humid weather, electricity use rises, which can cause power disruptions.  Please follow the steps below:

·         Close your window blinds to prevent direct sunlight heat into your office space

·         Stay inside air conditioned room as much as possible

·         Turn off all light switches and appliances to prevent overloaded circuits

·         Drink plenty of water or other fluids, even if you don’t feel thirsty

 We’ll continue to monitor advisory reports from NYC Office of Emergency Management and keep you posted of any further information.

Thank you.

No title

Being detached with any kind of popular media from India makes me realize how much it constructs us. I am talking about the television serials, soaps, films, newspapers, magazines or any such sources that mediate reality for us, make it ready for us to be consumed. It constructs us as much as we construct it. When our thoughts become real, the do not necessarily represent us completely. they are always fragments. When mediated (read realized in media), they are available for us to pass our judgments, critique and critically look back at what has been said and done. They are available for consumption, to take on identities, to define ourselves and to thus make up our own image.

Meanwhile there is nothing really to look forward to. Thus I save a lot of time thinking about many other things that I once used to think of. A huge repository of material that generally irritates us, but also gives us some common ground to talk about, creating some kind of space of dialogue, debate and general discussion. I wonder how much time does it take to absorb and be able to comment about a new culture? And would it be even appropriate to talk or pass opinions about a culture that one is not brought up in?

It was funny, today I saw a child (perhaps 7-8 year old boy) playing around the MoMA courtyard where a number of sculptures are placed. One of them is that of a lady almost in a falling position abutting the shallow pool. The sculpture is made up in black stone (perhaps), the lady is naked. The child goes to it and in amusement, looks at the naked sculpture. He soon explores it from all sides, and points out funnily, the ass hole of the lady to his sister. I dont know what exactly he felt - he laughed in amusement, perhaps finding it erotic, yet funny. He then pointed it to his mother, sharply laughing by now. The mother laughed too, that was her only response!

I wondered how would this incident take place in India? Would the reactions of the child and the parent be the same? We do have our temples filled with erotic sculptures. Would our parents sit and discuss them with us?

Anyway, I think I have digressed, but the this whole thing of lack of cultural understanding doesnot allow me to talk - I may be voicing a wrong opinion all the time in here, so I keep questioning and doubting myself when I talk about America. But all one can do is compare - being detached gives a perspective. Difference in everyday practices makes us experience the extent of deviation of doing things. Analysis of this deviation helps us to understand the way in which this society functions, thinks. All of these operations or thoughts are embedded in histories. And much of history is mediated - in which we believe, revel and find ourselves.

Being away from home is thus difficult. It limits your sphere of operation, but at the same time allows you to look beyond.

There are plenty of naiive questions I wrote here, and erased. Only because I know these questions cannot be answered. You only have to take a position!

Lessons in USA

Although I have not finished one complete year in the US, it feels like a circle, two semesters almost makes up for one year! This must be the period for reflection, sitting back and watching what happened, how it happened, and what it did to me!

I am already feeling hard to articulate. Today was the first day in my life in the US when I offered someone to come for a coffee. It has taken me a year to get over the value of a dollar and the potential of a coffee. Maybe I must make this as  a lesson chart. Here are a few of them

Lessons Learnt:

A dollar expensive only as long as you compare it to rupee in the US.

Coffee is the key to conversation. Casual conversations happen over coffees.

Formality is formality.

Golden words don't cost anything!

Personal space is reverential.

Having a car is hardly a luxury.

You grow up when you are 18 (even 16).

Keep things to yourself.

Keep up a good face.

Recommendations matter.

Learning NYC

A colleague at my new office (MoMA) told me today that a member of the MoMA who is on his visit to Mumbai for an upcoming exhibition to document urbanism in the city, sent her an image of a telephone booth (that is generally operated by visually challenged people in our city) to her as one of his documented images from the city. This colleague of mine seemed surprised with what the person inside the telephone station was doing! I tried to frame the context for her and later the conversation drifted into a history of the way in which long distance calls were made, and received. For me, it was difficult to take a position for this condition - this colleague was clearly finding the existence of such a condition outdated. By framing the context, would I represent India as still much behind in the "global" race, or non-developed? What would she make out of my contextualizing explanation? Would she think of the place, considered today a megacity, as something that is still to see so much?

I immediately contrasted it with the fact that even sweepers had mobiles today, but these telephone booths would become places to make anonymous calls, international calls, and so on. But another dimension that I got thinking about was that how, an everyday object like the telephone booth in Mumbai, becomes an object of curiousity for an 'outsider'. How then, so many things become matters of documentation for different cultures. Soon enough, I came to a comparative cross axis, thinking about what become objects of curiousity for me in the US. And the list was endless. Although I do not know in what light the MoMA member shall interpret his observations in Mumbai, but I certainly look at the new urbanity I am in here, through my critical lens. I don't have any glorified understanding of this place (New York),  but only look at things here to understand how people here think, as compared to us.

The buttons at the signals to cross the streets, the computerised systems, the non-manual booths and kiosks, the streets saturated with signages, the large spread-out or multistoreyed parking lots, the straight endless roads, the criss crossing numbered streets and avenues - all dictate a highly structured world. For any one coming from this environment, Mumbai will be an absolute mess. But both, Mumbai and New York are amiable cities, and what makes them such is people. The number of chance encounters with people and finding that you are part of some or the other network through which you can connect to a common event are very high in cities. You see people from different places, races, ethnicities and don't find yourself as alien as you would find yourself in a small town. 

Moreover, the city conditions people in similar fashions. Amongst the curious objects of the city, are also people - typified by the city life. People dozing off on the trains, sleeping on benches, spitting on the street, talking to themselves, shouting aloud abusing others, waiting for elses on the bus stops, shrugging about the missed signals or trains or buses, hopping in the rains without umbrellas, ignorant of the next person - you see bits of yourself somewhere in all of them. You relate to these conditions of the city in people if you have grown up in any city across the world as charged as New York or Mumbai. 

Traveling back on the subways, like the Mumbai locals, after about 9 months, I find my body fatigued exactly like before - something I never experienced in the town of New Haven. What is this fatigue, what happens to the body? What gets inside? Why do we doze off on the trains in the morning right after having a bath, when we are just beginning our day? After some basic pondering, I have come to the conclusion that it must be some simplistic exchange of energy systems when our body is subject to a speed other than usual. The way in which the city makes us move up and down tends to accumulate some potential energy in our body perhaps, which is not transferred into any other form. This potential energy until transformed, makes us feel heavy on head! Or is it the quality of air that we breathe? This might be such a silly theory, absolutely irrational. What's the harm in thinking about it anyway if it placates the restive mind?

But traveling in trains is always enjoyable. As I have written before, long before, I like to see the way in which the city gets framed and reframed in motion - through the windows and doors of the moving vehicles. 

I don't feel too alone in the city of New York - there is always activity to look at, unlike New Haven. Yesterday for example I trailed to look at the Seagram Building by Mies Van Der Rohe, which is right next to my office. And I absolutely loved it. Today I was told by my friend that there is another building right across the Seagram building designed by SOM as well as one by Saarinen. The aspect of "design" is so prevalent in this city - I believe that people are generally aware of design and style and like to know about things, and how they come into existence.

The amount of people that visit MoMA everyday is phenomenal. I see queues to its exhibits even before the Museum opens. The galleries are never empty - also, being summer, it remains overcrowded. All kinds of people visit it - MOMA is the place for contemporary art. I must detail this aspect on another post. But New York has given me back my experience of a city, rather, it has allowed me to relook at Mumbai through an altogether different perspective. Although New York seems extremely organized, it can be absolutely messy with its grid iron streets (primarily Manhattan). The character of the city is similar at most places and it is as easy to lose track as to orient oneself. Perhaps one needs some orientation with the signage. Otherwise, it's just my Mumbai hangover through which I constantly transgress the rules of this city.

But in what I have written above, I have hardly covered anything that I really wanted to say. I guess thoughts just evaporate when I ask them to become words. I am sorry about that. Meanwhile, this piece of junk will be all I post for this post.