Chanakya's Chant

A book that has been on the bestseller list for about a year now. A book that is among the list of “Crossword Recommends” and “Landmark Top 10” and all the others. A book that has been called everything from “mesmerizing” to “very engaging” to “unputdownable”. And offered to me as part of “Sponsored Review” program. All the hype makes it very difficult for me to tell the world that 1) it is very much putdownable 2) it was just about average. But then, I believe in honest reviewing. So let me tell you at the start that this book is very much like a Bollywood movie- all plot and masala. And without even the ethics that Bollywood tries to have.

So if you are looking for a book that has a good plot but nothing else to offer (oh yeah, you get to flaunt to friends that you read a historical novel and sound intellectual), this is a very good Indian book. If you want to read a book that doesn’t tax the intellect or the conscience, and shows you the worst of India, this is again a good choice. If you have read enough history to know it well, or if you have some little morality left in you, this book will leave you with a bad aftertaste. 

Getting on to the plot.. As the cover says it is a parallel story of Chanakya and Gangasagar Mishra. The former wants to crown Chandragupta (Maurya) and the latter Chandini Gupta. (Yes, it really IS that obvious!) Both use unconventional (read most unethical) strategies to achieve their goals. Not only bribing prostitutes (which is still ok) and hiring eunuchs to castrate a man , but also falsifying documents, double-crossing friends, murder- just about every wrong thing you could dream of is there in the book. Of course, you know they will win in the end. And you know it in the first scene when Chandini is sworn in as Prime Minister. (And if you did any history at all in school, you know Chandragupta also became an emperor). So not much of a mystery (which is why I found it putdownable). But yes, the plot moves fast, and Ashwin untiringly thinks up newer and newer “strategies”. The plot could have been better if Chanakya or Ganga failed at some point, and the reader would want to know how they shot back. But Ashwin makes them invincible, which also means unreal.
 
Characters.. The beauty of the story is that nobody has any sort of character (not even a bad or evil character). Like their strategy for winning elections, the character is to have no character. The only character I remember is the honest ex-home minister who is the only one immune to Ganga and who appears in the story for about 2 lines.
 
Theme.. Politics and history. Unfortunately, the politics shown is so dirty that at no point of time do you sympathize with Ganga. If the other guys are bad, he is worse. Why would a reader want him to succeed? Because he is the protagonist? That is so typically Bollywood movie type logic, which I am quite incapable of. And history. I can write a separate book on the number of anachronisms and wrong language usage in the book. If it was supposed to be a historical comedy, they would have been appropriate, I guess.
 
What makes the book really bad is that it was a very promising plot. A good writer could have created a masterpiece with memorable characters and real mind-blowing strategies. And yes, he could have used original quotes. There is no fun in reading a book where almost all the witty lines are lifted from brainyquote and thinkexist*. Google can do that. The talent of a good writer lies in his originality. If the plot was historical, one could have given it a fresh perspective. And one could have sculpted characters who nobody would forget. All I can say to readers is- if you want to read a real strategy story on Chanakya, read MudraRakshasa. And if you want a real modern day political novel, read The Prodigal Daughter (it has really amazing and “original” quotes and a pretty good plot, which is why Archer is such a successful writer.)
 
Sorry Chanakya’s Chant, but no donuts for you this time!

* As one can verify from the appendix, many of them are not even from Chanakya himself. And the few Chanakya quotes available are not among the best of his.

This review is a part of the Book Reviews Program at BlogAdda.com. Participate now to get free books!

The 6pm Slot

Nothing important in life ever starts with appropriate background music prepping you for it. The same is true of my first sponsored review. It started with me expressing interest to review books as part of BlogAdda's free review program... and here I am reviewing “The 6pm slot”- a book by Naomi Datta, whose amazing first line I just paraphrased! :)

Intriguing first line. Even better is the line that says "Everything important starts with a PPT" (I loved the author for that one!)
And intriguing cover (shown aside), to be sure. That is, if you have some taste for adult content. But if it leads you to think that the book, like the anchor whose picture decorates the cover, might be all looks and no brains, let me warn you. Luckily, that isn’t true.

ECE

I was reading this math post. It is about puzzles and one simple method of solving most math puzzles- thinking of an extreme example. What he means is that you can assume some extreme values for the variables involved, and deduce the answer by logic. (I like the puzzles listed as well!)

Admittedly, this is a very useful method. Especially in your competitive objective type exam scenario (Though for this scenario, I personally think "Inky Pinky Ponky" is undoubtedly the method of preference!)

Few things I want to highlight though. One- You should think of the 'right' extreme example. Some extreme examples might not lead you to any conclusion at all! I remember how, in schools, teachers used to start explaining proofs by saying "draw perpendicular AD to BC" or "AM to NP" or some such thing. And immediately I would think how was I supposed to  know which perpendicular to draw? Later on I realized that if you understand geometry well enough, actually rephrase- if you know well enough to think from a geometrical angle (Pun unintended!) you will know exactly which perpendicular to draw. But point remains that you need to choose the "right" perpendicular (Oh! Again, pun unintended!) In the same way, one does not always know which extreme example to choose. And if you don't choose the right one, you might end up a) getting a long and roundabout proof or b) not proving anything at all!

Anyway, why I brought this up here is that this method is not only useful for mathematical problems. I find it a good tool to understand human behavior. For eg: When someone says I value money but I value family more, one easy way to verify it is to ask the question- "if you had to give up all your money so you could retain your family would you do that?" or something of that sort. Basically pick an extreme scenario and check your statement. In fact, this method helps even if you are simply trying to understand your own selves.

Anyway, I have used this method before, and though not mine, I thought someone should give a name for it. "Extreme Case Evaluation" sounds OK by me. Maybe I should publish a paper on it someday...
 

P.S: I hope people found out why the title is ECE... Ya ya, I know I am wicked .. :P

Ephemeral truths?

Talking about ephemeral truths and eternal lies.. I wanted to write about this truth test thing.

I personally find it funny/weird/childish for a CM to promise or ask someone to promise in front of 'God' about anything. Come on, even kids know how to lie.. Or in Hindu style, it is Kaliyug, for God's sake. Even if the CM had promised, I wouldn't have believed him entirely. But what he did in the end was funnier. He just dodged the issue entirely.

Huh?

He refused to take the truth test he himself devised and expects us to believe he is true? I hope he isn't as naive as that. But that brought me to another question. If you truly believe in God and if you truly believe God will punish you for misdeeds etc, isn't corruption a misdeed? Isn't trying to hide corruption a misdeed? If you are anyway going to be punished for all these, you might as well have promised. (Or) If you truly believed in God, why were you corrupt in the first place?

I have seen this kind of 'god-fearing' people a lot. (Like people who fast for one month thinking about Butter Chicken throughout!) People who spend their lives making black money, evading taxes, misappropriating funds, what not. ("Aisa nahi karoge, toh zindagi me kuch nahi kar sakte.." or the "Ner vazhi romba suthu kozhandai!"* types) And then they go and write off one crore to charity. I am honestly unable to understand if they think their God is that dumb- like he will forgive you if you pay him enough! It is like they believe in God in spurts when they realize he might punish them. And for the rest of their lives they continue without any morality. If I could be God for a day, I would spend at least some part of it ragging these people. You know, just keep arguing with them, until they accept they thought God was as big a fool as themselves.

Anyway, back to our CM. I was discussing this stuff with a friend and we came up with the theory that the CM thinks corruption is not wrong as such. But he knows lying to God is wrong. And that's why he didn't make the promise. That answered my confusion a little and the theory sounds OK to me, though I can't find for the life of me how anyone can think corruption is not wrong. I can imagine someone saying, "Everybody does it. Why penalize me?" or even "Without doing so, you can't become rich" but "NOT wrong"??? Honestly, either I am incapable of that level of self-deception or I am impractical by Indian politics' standards, but corruption IS wrong. Even to save your soul. 

And if you really think God exists, forget your double standards and better believe in him fully enough not to be corrupt in the first place. Or you will land up in this funny "God-promise I didn't do it" situation. And then, don't blame me for laughing!

*This was one of Sujatha's most awesome dialogues. I really really love Sujatha for this one! For those who don't recognize it, it came in Anniyan.

Ridiculously online...

Long morning. Continuous meetings and my head is really too full to get any work done until lunch. So was looking at some of my incomplete posts, and saw this one. It is a link I read long ago, and which is plain funny-- 6 RIDICULOUS arguments that actually happened on wikipedia.

I particularly liked this one "Is Adopting a Black Sheep on Farmville Stereotyping?" . Reminds me of a lot of things-- Barkha Dutt and Rajdeep Sardesai put together, a Dilbert comic (Scott Adams is a genius!) and farmville days of my life.... 

P.S: Actually reminded me of this comic as well...