Yesterday I was reading William Dalrymple’s interview in which he said that he would never write a novel on Bombay because Suketu Mehta had done such an exhaustive job. That got me thinking, would I ever write a novel on Bombay? And I decided I would not either. But not for the reason mentioned above.

I wouldn’t write one because 90 per cent of Bombay is a slum and slums or slum dwellers don’t interest me. Excreta piled up waist high and people wading through it may excite Mehta and Boyle’s creative juices but it doesn’t do anything for me apart from conjure up a distasteful image.

I don’t identify with slum dwellers, have nothing in common with them and they are not my audience. So pray, why should I care? What if some day you have to live in slum, a friend asks me. This is, of course, accompanied with the usual deterrent to the evil eye of god forbid and crossing of fingers. To that I have to say, why would I ever have to live in a slum? I do my bit for society. I pay for my maid’s child’s education, I stop my car to let pedestrians cross the road and once in a while I treat a beggar child to whatever he/she wants to eat. So why, and where, would I pile up enough bad karma for such a thing to happen?

Another aspect of Bombay which finds prominent mention in all written works is the underworld. And I realise I’m too much of a coward to venture into those areas to do any research. Recently I had occasion to visit Dongri. For those who’re unfamiliar with the area, this is where Dawood Ibrahim and other big gangsters come from. Apparently, Ibrahim’s sister still goes around intimidating people and collecting hafta.

I was looking around apprehensively, expecting gunfire to erupt any moment. I was behaving much the way first timers to Bombay do when they ask, “Have you seen Shah Rukh Khan?” (And no, I haven’t. I’ve seen Amitabh Bachchan, Hrithik Roshan, Sanjay Dutt and even Aamir Khan, but I haven’t seen SRK. Tip: the best place to spot these guys is the airport.) The high point of my visit? On the way back, I got to see some whores (oops, sex workers. Sorry.) on Falkland Road.

And that brings me to the point of this post. And that is, I’m too safely ensconced, too comfortably numb in my middle–class cocoon to attempt to step out of it. Not even to write a potentially seminal work.

After I wrote my post yesterday, it occurred to me that I was being a tad unfair to producers. When you’re making a film, there are multiple risks at different stages involved.

The first is at the story level. Writing a story/screenplay is quite an art. Just because someone has a good idea doesn’t necessarily mean they will be able to translate it into a good story. A good story is driven by characters and conflict. There are ebbs and flows of emotion in the narrative and a good story paces them out well. An intensely emotional or suspenseful sequence needs a comic relief or downer immediately afterwards. You cannot pile an emotionally charged sequence on top of another.

Then there’s the direction. Just because you have a good script doesn’t mean it will translate into a good film. The director’s vision can either lift the script to a subliminal level (Lucky # Slevin) or reduce it to trash (Richard Kelly’s Domino). It has to be said here, though, that the chances of a good script turning out to be a bad film are rare, no matter how bad the director. As a caveat, I have to add that judging something like this is highly subjective. What I may consider a good script badly executed may well be someone else’s bad script made better.

Assuming the director’s vision translates the screenplay into a gem of a film, the marketing and promotion of the film may fail. The communication may leave the audience cold or target the wrong consumer group altogether.

Assuming everything turns out well – the script is good, the direction exceptional and the publicity succeeds in tweaking the viewers’ interest – the film may still turn out to be a box office dud.

You see, a film is a commercial venture involving millions of rupees. So, perhaps, the producers are not wrong to back winning horses against untested ones.

I have acquired a minor celebrity status in the film circles and, I must say, it is extremely agreeable. Right after I optioned Kkrishnaa’s Konfessions for film rights, at least two other producers/directors have expressed interest in the book. And since Kkrishnaa’s Konfessions has already been optioned, they are now they are now offering to buy the rights to the soon-to-be-released Piggies on the Railway, A Kasthuri Kumar Mystery.

Why am I talking about it? Aside from blowing my own trumpet, of course, it is an interesting Bollywood case study.

Dearth of ideas: Bollywood is suffering from a lack of good, original stories. It is a veritable drought. Producers demand and writers keep coming up with the same old same old. The result? All the best, Golmaal, Hungama etc.

Risk aversion: The second point springs, in part, from the first. You see, producers aren’t willing to back risky ideas. So even if writers do come up with interesting and unconventional ideas, producers will give it a miss. They would much rather someone else undertook the risk. And with a best-selling fiction title out in the market, they reckon it’s worth a shot.

Validation: Now, I mentioned that they are willing to buy rights for my second book, based solely on a sneak peek of the manuscript. They figure that a writer has scored with the first one, so chances are that she will with the second one as well. They would much rather keep working with someone who has already proved themselves rather than give a new comer a chance.

Conclusion: For all you Bollywood aspirants out there, write a book.

That’s right. I hate cricket. I hate cricket because I never know who to support. You see, for us media people it’s never easy.

Do I support India and hope they quickly trot up to 3-1 in the series? But what about my friends in Neo? As it is they were griping about the slow pace of the third ODI. I was watching the match with them and they kept fretting about traffic shifting to other GECs during the match. When an Indian victory became imminent, they kept worrying about India performing so well and winning a commanding lead earlier on in the series. If India quickly notched up a score of 4-1, people losing interest in the series and go back to Balika Vadhu or Utran for the remaining matches.

(I think they must have gone into a collective orgasm when India lost yesterday and evened the series at 2-2).

So I figured I’d support Australia in fourth ODI. But then I started watching the match along with some friends from a leading GEC (general entertainment channel). They started off happily enough when Australia posted a modest total. They even began to enjoy themselves when India began her innings and Sehwag gave India a dream start with his dhunandhar baalebaazi. And then Sehwag went. Followed by Kohli. And Sachin. India lost amidst sounds of strident wails. Now the best they can hope for is India winning the next two matches if they are to salvage any TRPs before the 13th.

And I’m hoping with them. It is they, after all, who pay my rent.

It’s that time of the year again. I have to write about sex. Contrary to what people think considering my books are always big on sex, I’m not a big fan of writing on the subject. In fact, I positively cringe at the prospect.

It always takes me longer to write one sex/love-making scene than it does to write a whole chapter. This hold-up happens because I can never quite decide how to approach it. Do I describe it as it is happening as in the physical description of the act of making love? Or do I concentrate on feelings?

If I just write about the physical act, do I make it rough and raunchy? Or am I in danger of getting smutty? Should I make it funny? What words should I use various body parts, the biological ones or slang? If slang, then which slang, because there’s a variety of words that can be used, ranging from funny to downright derogatory. Will I be accused of writing porn?

The other argument is that I should just concentrate on feelings. Since my books are not shooting scripts for porn films, I should just concentrate on the situation. A few details in the physical is all I need. The rest is setting the emotional connection between the lovers. I tell myself that writing sex is like writing about any other emotion or situation. That all I need to do is make the reader feel what the characters are feeling at that moment. But then how many ways are there to describe ‘that melting/rippling feeling in the pit of my stomach?’ And if I do take the second approach, will I be guilty of being overly sentimental?

So far I’ve been able to dodge the bullet since my books have been chicklit and a little flippancy is always welcome. But now it’s a genre and the levity will not be appreciated.

Verily ’tis a quandary, I tell you. I guess the art is balancing the lust and intimacy in the writing. Not so easy to write. Perhaps I shall take the easy way out and skim over the whole thing. After all, when in doubt, go back to the rules. And the rules say Less is More.

Gem is a precious stone. It is used to describe stones like topaz, ruby, diamond. It is also used to describe a person of thing as stellar. For example, a gem a of a p[erson, a gem of an idea. It is also used a suff`ix, examples of which I cannot think of right now.  When written in the reverse it is Meg, which is the short form of the name Megan. It may also stand for Megan, I’m not…

No, I haven’t completely lost it. This is what I wrote (exactly as I wrote it) about GEM in my allotted sixty seconds at OneWord.com. OneWord is a resource site for writers, one which I go to sometimes when I’m in urgent need of unclogging my mind (what, sometimes professional writers need help too). Hell, I do it before beginning my writing for the day anyway.

The way it works is this. You are given a topic and sixty seconds to write on it. Your time starts from the moment you load the page. Obviously the idea behind the idea is to prompt you to write. Not think, just write. After you’ve finished, you submit your stuff after which you get to read what others have written about the topic. Even though you already intuitively know it, you’ll be amazed at how many ways there are to look at a particular word.

It’s great fun. Try it!

I met up with a friend over the weekend and he asked me what was new in my life. I told him that my second novel had been typeset and was on target for an early 2010 release. (Come to think of it, he was more an acquaintance than a friend because friends already know, courtesy me harping on incessantly about it.)

As I was basking in his fulsome praise, out came the spoiler. He asked what was next and I told him I’m attempting something different for my third, and since it’s an area relatively unknown to me, I’m doing research. Since when, he asked me. Since two months, I told him. Be careful, he warned me, you look like you’re stuck in a research rut.

And then I came back and caught Steven Soderbergh waxing about his latest offering, Che on the telly. And he was talking about them getting stuck in a research rut and having to wade through a veritable information glut as a result.

That got me a little anxious and I immediately booted my laptop and hacked out a detailed (I already had a fledgling plot in mind) plot. Then I broke it down in order of scenes. How does the novel open, what happens next, what happens after that, where is plot point I, where is the interval, what is plot point II, etc. That’s how I usually write. It’s impossible for me to think up a story in terms other than a screenplay.

And you know what, it really helped. Now I know exactly what information to seek, instead of aimlessly reading up trivia.

At that point, I was feeling so good about myself that I even hacked out the first five hundred words. And then someone told me that that day was Naag Panchami and a very auspicious day for new beginnings (tautology, or what?). That augurs well for the project, n’est pas?

I have been on a long sabbatical, basically to recharge my batteries. I was overcome with a strange lethargy after I finished my second novel and decided to take a break. What better way to do that than to travel. Which is what I have been doing – in India and Europe.

Besides travel, I have also been working on/researching the plot of my third novel. It is completely different genre from what I’ve been writing so far. While it is too soon to talk about it, it has gotten me very excited and pumped up.

Oh, by the way, did I mention the name of my second book? After a lot of dithering we (my publishers and I) arrived at the name. It’s Piggies on the Railway – A Kasthuri Kumar Mystery. Do look out for it. Of course, I will publish an excerpt once Westland gives me the go-ahead.

Till tomorrow then

I saw Kaminey last night. And it didn’t appeal to me. And no, it wasn’t the burden of expectation because these days I leave all that behind. Whenever I find everyone raving about a film or a book, I immediately become cautious. So, I went in fully expecting to not like it. However, it wasn’t so much that I didn’t like it. It was more like I found it boring.

To begin with, the theme was boring. I find all gangsta movies boring, unless of course they’re Tarantino films. And in our case, with Ramu having ODed on them, I find I can without one more gangster film. The story is straight forward enough. It’s a classic story of identical twins – one good, one bad – and a mix-up. There it is. That’s the story.

Since the story is neo-noirish  (dealing with the corruption of the soul), predictably Vishal Bharadwaj’s treatment is the same – lots of dark shots, excessive use of the steadicam etc. The film is slow to build up. It takes up all of the first half (whatever happened to grip your audience in the first ten minutes?) and had me fidgeting within the first twenty minutes. While I understand the importance of a build-up, for me it was like get on with the story already. Why? I don’t know. I guess I didn’t find the characters funny, endearing or engaging.

For instance, I didn’t find the hotel scene at the beginning particularly cleverly written or shot. The characters of Francis and the two corrupt policemen were, well, yawn. In fact, most of what happens in that hotel is boring. What does Francis want, what does Tashi want, who are the twins, what do the policemen want…who cares?

At the outset it is clear that Bharadwaj’s inspiration is Tarantino. The story is straightforward enough but the telling lies in the treatment. It is all about random, ridiculous events altering the course of the story and allowing the underdog to emerge the victor. But while Tarantino’s random events are shock and awe (remember the scene in Pulp Fiction where John Travolta gets shot?) Bharadwaj’s are, what the F? The sidekick backing the car onto the senior policeman? Seriously?

And when Tarantino engages us in a long dialogue between John Travolta and Samuel L Jackson, we are riveted. The long, long, long pub scene in Death Proof has us hooked.  But when Bharadwaj does it (the whole episode with Bhope and his cronies in Charlie’s kholi), it induces fidgets. It does not flow naturally even though it does end with a vintage Tarantino shock incident. A case of trying too hard? Maybe.

The climax is long drawn out and seems to never end. The runtime is 150 minutes and I was fidgeting for 120 of them.

Having said that, I also say that Kaminey is the best Bollywood film I’ve seen this year. For one, at least the story is not the run-of-the-mill, boy-meets-girl romance or a ridiculous Neeraj Vora comedy. And two, the performances are good. The stars are playing the characters for the most part and not themselves, although Shahid does slip-up once in a while. Priyanka does a good job of the spunky Sweety.

Only Bharadwaj could have elicited such performances and goes to show that Vishal Bharadwaj is probably the best (commercial) director we have today. If only he could ignore that tag and not be compelled to ‘try too hard’ to live up to it.

And now I’m off on a holiday. See you guys on September 7.

I recently signed up to perform at an amateur comedy night. And bombed. Big time.

I don’t know what possessed me to do it – boredom with the usual routine, mid-life crisis or latent masochism – but the moment Vir Das’ company announced their HAMateur night open mike, I dashed off an email asking them to include me in their list of performers. Silly, right? Wait, it gets sillier. And then I actually went ahead with it!

Of course, I had my usual panic attack in the morning where I went, “Omigod! Omigod! Omigod! I can’t do this.” And my friend said, “Why?” “Can’t you see, I’m having a bad hair day!” And she went, “Oh, and I thought it’s because you suck at delivering jokes.”

Of course, ‘you suck at delivering jokes’ turns what was essentially a mild performance anxiety into a full blown self esteem issue, in order to overcome which she insisted that I had to perform as originally planned. I had to face my fears in order to feel good about myself. “So,” I said, “let me get this straight. I have to stand on stage, with a spotlight fixed on me, bombing in front of a room full of people…yeah, I can see how that’ll make me feel good about myself!”

You know, I have an issue with this whole facing your fears business. Why do we always have to face our fears in order to overcome them? They should have a pill or something, which when you pop, miraculously cures your mind of all fears. Wait a minute, they do – amphetamines.

This, in case you missed the point of the rant, subtle as it was with all the italicizing, was the content.

Oh, and I almost forgot about the opening joke: Isn’t it stupid how 4-5 swine deaths have the whole city running in a panic, covering their faces with masks. And yet, a million people have died of AIDS and they’re still not wearing condoms.

My phone beeped a message just now. It was someone texting me the very same joke! Damn, now I can see why I bombed.

Seriously, the content was fine. My delivery sucked. And that’s because I chose to gesticulate at the wrong time. As a result, I moved the mike away from my mouth and people missed the punch line.

 Still, I did what I have always dreaded – public speaking. The most difficult kind of public speaking. That ought to mean something, right? Wrong, it means nothing to me. I hate the fact that I bombed.