Team Fanny!

If you neither know nor care about Fanny Price, you can stop reading now...

(Ok ok, here's a quick recap : Fanny Price is the heroine of Jane Austen's book Mansfield Park. Fanny and Edmund are cousins, Fanny's in love with Edmund. Enter Mary & Henry - a delightful brother and sister pair who completely outclass Fanny & Edmund in likability. Mary pursues Edmund, Henry pursues Fanny but the boring couple ends up together and the exciting brother & sister are disgraced.)

Broad mindedness is a virtue very much in fashion today. Yet nothing is so amusing as the narrow mindedness of the fashionably broad minded.

Fanny Price is a quiet, intelligent girl with strong morals, what one would call a "good" girl. But unfortunately good girls are no longer the thing. Heroines today are feisty, out spoken, slightly unscrupulous and (adorably) self involved. And for all our pretensions to liberality, we aren't really accepting of different-ness. Only of the one specific kind currently sanctioned by popular culture. Quirky, rebellious, bitchy girls are cool but demure, shy girls are unacceptable even though nowadays they are in reality more "different" than the other kind.

Criticisms of Fanny fall into two categories; the first is that "Mary should be heroine". I honestly don't understand this train of thought. If Jane Austen had wanted Fanny to sparkle in contrast to her rival, she would have made Mary less appealing. If she had wanted a saucy heroine with sparkling eyes, she would have written Pride & Prejudice. Fanny is Fanny and Mary is the vamp for a reason. Each of Jane Austen's novels are about a human failing, and by the end of each book the failing human learns a lesson. Emma is about vanity, Pride & Prejudice is about - well, you can guess. Mansfield Park is about seduction. Mary and Henry come to Mansfield and seduce (metaphorically) everyone including the reader. Detractors criticize the book for having two such delightful characters as its villains, but seducers are always delightful - to start with. By the end of the book their evil side is revealed (well, as evil as any Jane Austen character could be). Mary can't put aside her greed even for the sake of Edmund's love. Henry, for vain, selfish pleasure, seduces a married woman he isn't really interested in.

Mary and Henry are a metaphor for 'Society' with a capital S. You know; the one Oscar Wilde said is only criticized by those who can't get into it. It is dazzling and brilliant, it is delightful and exciting, it is beautiful people in skimpy clothes and colourful cocktails and shiny lights and loud music and lots of laughter. It brings excitement and pleasure. What it doesn't bring is happiness. Just like Mary and Henry. Edmund and Fanny are the "countryside" to Mary & Henry's "London" - less glitzy, less glamorous but of real, lasting sterling worth.

Mary and Henry are also a cautionary tale. They do have a shot at real happiness. Beneath the superficiality they have substrata of kindness, love and what Jane Austen calls "moral taste". These qualities surface when they retreat from Society to the more sedate but wholesome company of Edmund and Fanny. And almost overcome their weaknesses. Almost. But they go back to Society and get sucked into its depths of shallowness. And lose that one chance of real happiness they had accidentally stumbled upon.

If this were Hollywood, the same lessons would be learnt but in a different manner. Mary would give up all ambition of a rich husband and be satisfied with Edmund. Henry would reform, give up his playboy lifestyle and marry Fanny. And all the Mansfield Park haters would be satisfied. Personally I think Jane Austen wrote a better story line, certainly less saccharine and probably more realistic. How many playboys have really reformed and settled down because they met the 'right girl'? And if they do, why should their past unfaithfulness be so conveniently forgiven? And how many women, brought up in luxury with expensive things, have turned on a dime and settled into hardworking, frugal, happy homebodies? Jane Austen's books may be called romance novels but she was far too perceptive to have romantic misconceptions about human nature.

So where is Fanny in all this? The second criticism is that she has no positive traits, that she is washed out, negative, passive and yet somehow annoyingly flawless and always right. There is some justification here: Austen's books always follow the same pattern - blunder, lesson, happiness. Usually it is the heroine who commits the blunder. At Mansfield Park it is the other residents who misjudge Mary & Henry while Fanny is never deceived. The book does give a credible reason for this - Fanny is the mousy quiet person who sits in a corner observing everything and participating little. So much easier to avoid deception when you have an outside perspective rather than being the one the deception is aimed at. But yes, it is not completely unfair to claim that Fanny is "always right". But flawless? Only a completely non-shy person could see no flaw in her excessive timidity. True it doesn't lead her into any single tragic event but it is like a giant boulder on her fragile shoulders, wearing her down all the time. And make no mistake about it, the author is fully aware of this burden. Jane Austen knows her Fanny as well as she does her Emma or Marianne, and paints her with a gentler but equally perceptive touch. Witness a time when Fanny pauses before joining her uncle in the living room : "she paused for what she knew would never come, a courage that the outside of no door had ever given her". As for positive traits - her quiet determination to do the right thing in the face of all opposition is very much that. A silent hero, if you will, one who doesn't claim the center of attention but quietly, persistently follows the path she believes in.

Of course, nothing I say can make Fanny more entertaining than she actually is, and every time I read the book I root for Fanny and Henry getting together and leaving Edmund to Mary. But the book is brave enough to not just hand me the easy ending I want. You know, just like real life. If Fanny is boring, she is neither less good nor less real for that. And the author's sharp tongue amply compensates for Fanny's bland one, the book itself is a classic gem of satirical wisdom.

Re-read it with an open mind and you will find such a difference between your expectation and your experience as "time is for ever producing between the plans and decisions of mortals, for their own instruction and their neighbours' entertainment".

A trip to France

David and I went to France in July. We spent a week in Paris and then traveled to the Loire valley to do some chateaux watching.

Full picture album (without annoying narration) :

https://picasaweb.google.com/116423174638525205555/Paris?authuser=0&feat=directlink and

https://picasaweb.google.com/116423174638525205555/LoireValley?authuser=0&feat=directlink

Paris

We got to Paris on July 11 from Cayman Islands, where we had been attending a friend's wedding. We stayed at a nice, cozy little place called the Familia Hotel in the Latin quarter. It is a nice neighbourhood to walk around in, with some cool ethnic restaurants for when this poor vegetarian got tired of eating some combination of bread, cheese and chocolate. It is also walking distance to the Pantheon and Notre Dame. Which is where we strolled down to that same evening...

From Paris

The Seine river runs through Paris, and has two small islands in it. Notre Dame is on one of the islands - Ile de la Cite. (But the other island has a famous ice cream shop, so it's a tie)

The cathedral is massive and sufficiently grand with beautifully intricate carving and flying buttresses. (I'm vague on the concept of flying buttresses but David was excited about them and took lots of pictures) Its interior succeeds in creating that indefinable atmosphere unique to great places of worship - the kind that makes even the most atheistic person come over all spiritual. Unfortunately in addition to being an incredibly popular tourist destination it is still an active place of worship. You can't help feeling sorry for the priests trying to preach in spite of the throngs of tourists wandering through the church taking pictures.

The next day we went down to the Eiffel Tower. To be honest I expected it to be ugly but it looks quite classy. Up close the metal is a cool brownish color that gives it a sepia tone. Of course this was easily the most crowded place I've ever visited and there were lots of annoying souvenir dealers selling little Eiffel Towers.

From Paris

We spent the next few days exploring the normal tourist destinations, eating a lot and walking a lot. We took a boat trip down the Seine which was very enjoyable, especially on that hot summer afternoon. We went to the Arc de Triomphe and walked down the Champs Elysees. The Montmartre district is a cute, quaint neighbourhood to wander around in - David's father recommended it to us. It is on a hill and at the top of the hill is the Sacre Coeur Basilica. The Louvre is a beautiful building but completely overwhelming as a museum. For one thing it took us more than an hour to buy tickets (you really really should purchase those online). Once in, we took one look at the map and decided that all we could hope for was to glimpse some of the highlights. The most disappointing moment was the Mona Lisa - I sincerely recommend that no one even try to view this painting. All you can see is a sea of people holding up cameras, craning to take pictures over everyone else's heads. And you are forcefully reminded that you too are that most ridiculed of characters - a tourist. Oh well. If you only have a few hours to give the Louvre, its best to stick with the exterior.

From Paris

July 14th was Bastille Day. We were told there would be fireworks at the Eiffel Tower, so we headed down there that evening. Half of Paris was there but we cleverly managed to maneuver our way to a great viewing position, just a few hundred feet away from the tower. Now we just had to wait for darkness to fall. This was a long wait, summer days are really long in Paris and even at 1opm there is some daylight. Eventually around 11 it got dark enough, there were sounds of activity and then the fireworks started... off to our left, over the river, not the tower at all! Fortunately we still got to see them, although the view was not nearly as good. Returning to the hotel was a challenge, with such massive crowds we had to walk a long way to reach a subway station that wasn't suffocatingly crowded.

Around our 5th day the weather changed. It had been beautifully sunny and warm, even in the evening. But now the rain started and it didn't quit for the rest of our trip. Unfortunately neither of us had expected rain so there was some scrambling for appropriate gear. I bought a hideous sweatshirt with PARIS scrawled across the front in big bold letters. After that, David was no longer allowed to take pictures of me.

Versailles

My cousin Darshan lives in Germany and came down to Paris to spend the weekend with us. Which was great because we hadn't seen each other in about 10 years. Together the three of us went to Versailles, which is about a 90 minute train ride from Paris. It was raining when we got there and I hadn't yet acquired the PARIS sweatshirt. Darshan was the only one of us prepared for this weather. So of course I simply stole his jacket. Having learnt from our Louvre experience, I had been very careful to buy tickets in advance this time. I was gloating about this all the way to Versailles but on getting there we discovered that there was a long line just to enter the palace. We stood shivering and wet in the courtyard for another hour while the line slowly snaked forward. Versailles may be a grand palace but my main impression of it was of a stuffy, incredibly crowded place. Only a few of the chambers are open for viewing and everybody gets into a single line and is herded from one room to another. I was too demoralized to even get my camera out as long as we were indoors. After lunch, however, the rain stopped and we ventured into the famous gardens (separate charge).

From Paris

The next day we spent the morning wandering around town and then David & I headed off to Blois in the Loire Valley and Darshan went back to Germany.

The Catacombs

But before I get to Blois, I must tell you about the Catacombs.

Our guide book had a small paragraph on the "catacombs" of Paris which it suggested were worth visiting. The cemeteries in Paris had become over crowded in the 18th century and so many of the bodies had been dug up and reburied in a part of the catacombs - underground passageways. It wasn't clear what there would be to see down there: some graves, maybe a couple of skeletons tossed in a corner. But it sounded like a change from all the history and culture we were feasting on, so I decided to give it a shot. David and I wandered down there one morning only to discover it was Bastille Day and the catacombs were closed. The next day we decided to give it another shot but were out of luck again. The catacombs were open, but there was some glitch. Due to a "technical problem", half the place was closed off and so they could allow only a small number of people down at a time. The wait was a couple of hours, it was recommended we come back another day. Then on Sunday we went there again with Darshan. Third time lucky. Not so much. Yet again there was a long line outside the entrance. Yet again, a helpful official came by with a placard that explained half the place was closed - this time because of "safety concerns". The placard went on helpfully to emphasize that the entrance fee was not reduced. An anticipated 2 hour wait. We left again - as my mother would say "the catacombs weren't in our destiny".

But by now the catacombs began to feel like the most attractive place in Paris and I couldn't rest easy without going there. It turned out that we returned to Paris the day before our flight home and we had half a day to kill. We made a beeline for the catacombs, waited patiently in another long line (this time the placard advertised 'security reasons' for the reduced capacity), got rained on but finally made it in! This was possibly the weirdest place I've been to. As I said before, we didn't know what to expect. A somewhat creepy experience, a couple of skeletons lying in a corner. But we weren't prepared for this :

From Paris

The walls were lined with skulls and bones. No, the walls were skulls and bones - plastered into place - all along the passageway. In places they were arranged in bizarre decorative formations. How anyone could think this was an appropriate way to treat their ancestor's bodies is beyond me! It was creepy and deeply disturbing, I can't believe this is a tourist attraction and I am so glad we did get to see it.

Loire Valley

Anyway, so on to the Loire. The Loire valley gets its name from a river that runs through it. For some reason the valley is filled with chateaux and the chateaux is what we wanted to see. Our first stop was in the town of Blois, which turned out to be an absolutely adorable medieval town fulfilling all my old Europe fantasies of narrow alleyways, cobblestones and cute buildings. Its also a popular base for touring the nearby chateaux.

From Loire Valley

We hadn't rented a car, so our travel was limited by public transportation. There is a bus that goes to nearby chateaux and we took it to Chambord and Cheverny.

Chambord has a combination fort and hunting lodge feel with its keep, towers and large halls. It also has the most extensive grounds in France. It has an interesting double helix staircase in the center of the building. Two entwined sets of spiral stairs climbing to the top without ever meeting. It was a pleasure to wander at will through this castle after the restrictive, crowded tour of Versailles. I would have taken far more pictures here but I got separated from David and spent most of my time looking for him. He spent this time wandering around unperturbed, taking pictures...

From Loire Valley

After Chambord we went to Cheverny. This is a more modest chateau - I don't believe any kings ever owned it, only lowly noblemen. It is well known for (of all things) its kennel full of hounds.

From Loire Valley

The next day we took a train to Chenenceau, which is the most popular of the Loire chateaux. It has a unique location, built right on the banks of a river with a long hall that spans the river.

From Loire Valley

We were told that during the second world war, one bank of the river was in occupied France and the other in Free France. So resistance fighters helped people escape by bringing them in through the front door and out across the long hall. To be honest this sounds like a made up story to me. But I heard it several times and even Wikipedia says so, so it must be true! (By the way we saw several references to the "Resistance" in the Loire towns: roads, squares and even a Resistance museum right next to our hotel. We would have visited it but the museum hours had been explicitly designed to discourage visitors.) This was the most crowded of the Loire chateaux we saw, even though some tourists must have been kept away by the pouring rain. Fortunately the place is large enough that it was still a lot of fun wandering through the various rooms. We got to see the kitchen and pantry which was an opportunity to glimpse the behind-the-scenes life at a castle. Overall, in spite of the rain, it was a very enjoyable trip. Also the food at the adjoining restaurant was surprisingly good.

Oh, and the chateau was designed and owned by multiple women so its called the women's chateau. Which sounds a little soppy but maybe explains why it is so elegant looking.

From Loire Valley

(Several places had scaffolding due to ongoing construction work. And the scaffolding was always covered with fabric that was painted to look like the building. Not fooling anyone obviously, but much less of an eyesore. Quite a cute idea).

That brings us to the last couple of days of our trip. I'd been intrigued by a hotel called the Chateau de Verrieres in Saumur. Excited at the idea of staying at a real chateau and spurred on by the Trip Advisor reviews, I booked us into this hotel for the last couple of nights. It was a lovely place but disappointing from my point of view. The experience was that of staying at a luxury bed and breakfast, rather than a historic building. The chateau is very large for a home but small for a chateau! Still, the place is charming and the big bedroom and giant bathroom was a welcome change after the tiny "European" hotels we had stayed in so far.

From Loire Valley

And just like that, our trip was over. We went back to Paris on Friday, finally finally got to experience the Catacombs, stayed at an airport hotel and took the morning flight back to California.

A really fun trip in which I learned some rather random things. For instance that France (presumably all of Europe) has embraced 24 hr time with a vengeance. And that our US credit cards don't work in the Paris metro because they have no chip. Also three weeks is too long to stay away from work and I get impatient to return. And how much I like where I live, because I'm homesick even when I am at the most beautiful places in the world.

(More pictures at :

https://picasaweb.google.com/116423174638525205555/Paris?authuser=0&feat=directlink and

https://picasaweb.google.com/116423174638525205555/LoireValley?authuser=0&feat=directlink)

We interrupt our regular scheduled program ...

...

Ok, I have to get this off my chest. That whole picture Americans have of Europe being this sophisticated, socially progressive, liberal paradise that the US can only aspire to? Bull f*ing shit!!

Whatever one says about the United States - and a lot could be said - here's two things that are still legal: Minarets and burkhas!

You may not have caught on to the subtle tone of disagreement in the previous statements, so I shall be more explicit. I cannot believe that in the 21st century a so-called democracy believes it is acceptable to pass a law telling its citizens what they can and cannot wear.

Let's call a spade a spade. This is a blatant Islamaphobic law, born of bigotry and suspicion of Muslims. There have been multiple other arguments put forward in its favour, but I call bullshit on all of them:

1. "Security" : Apparently the French government thinks it is under imminent threat from terrorists disguised in burkhas. Now I have never been to France but I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that a burkha clad person kind of stands out on the streets of Paris - just a little. Not something terrorists are aiming for actually.

2. "It's for their own good" : This is the most annoyingly bigoted, condescending, culturally arrogant argument of all. So you assume that every one of your citizens wearing an outfit you disapprove of are doing so only because they are being forced to do it by scary patriarchs. And your solution is to stigmatize and humiliate these citizens as a means to "save them"?

3. "Social integration" : Don't make me laugh. No quicker way to alienate an entire community than by disrespecting their religion, insulting their women and declaring their customs "not welcome".

For you culturally tone-deaf people, let me explain how this sounds to the Muslim world: there are women who have gone around their entire life covered from head to foot. Who have never had an unrelated man look at their faces. Telling these women to now walk the street without their niqabs is like forcing an average American woman to walk around with her shirt off. How do you think "France forces American women to go topless!" would play in the United States? Don't forget to factor in the strong cultural attitude about women's "modesty" and "honour". And the general view of the west as morally corrupt. All this to change the sartorial habits of about 2000 out of more than 60 million people? Really? Maybe Sarkozy was secretly aiming to radicalize more Muslims?

An amusing side-effect - since the law needs to appear non-bigoted all kinds of face covering are banned. So I guess even if you're feeling cold, no balaclava for you!

Ajanta

Ajanta is a more dramatic setting than Ellora. Temples carved out of natural caves in the sheer cliff face of a hill, they are nearly invisible from most surrounding areas. The story is that they passed out of living memory and were 're-discovered' by an Englishman in the 19th or early 20th century. He was out hunting and saw the caves from a nearby hilltop.

You drive to the bottom of the hill and then pile into a bus that takes you close to the caves. Then you climb up several steep stairs to reach the caves and there are men with chairs to carry the less active tourists. Most of the caves are Buddhist temples or monasteries. The interior walls retain far more of the colourful painting than Ellora, hardly surprising since they are more shielded from the elements. Maybe this is why I have always associated Ajanta with paintings and Ellora with sculpture. But in fact Ajanta has just as much sculpture as Ellora and in a more tranquil, dramatic setting. The monastery caves are particularly interesting - the rectangular hall in the center with doors leading off into tiny bedrooms on two sides. Strange place to choose to live in, yet not unpleasant.

(One of the oldest from around 100 BC, I believe this is actually one of the few Jain temples there)

Sorting through our vast collection of pictures, I am quite disappointed not to have more pictures of Ajanta. It appears that our official photographer was either bored of caves or of taking pictures. So instead here's a look at the ubiquitous school trips.

Oh, funny story.... As I said in the previous post, Ajanta & Ellora are off the beaten path for foreign tourists. You meet a few but nothing compared to the crowds at the Taj Mahal. Also this is a fairly rural part of India and a lot of the other people we saw were from nearby villages.

All this to explain that most of them had never seen a white person before so David was quite a novelty. And since I was with him and wearing western clothes, some of them thought I was a "foreigner" too!

A group of girls in their late teens accosted me along the way and wanted to take my picture. I couldn't figure out how to clear up their misunderstanding and it seemed easiest to just comply. So I posed with a few of them. A man travelling with them was more perceptive. He looked at me suspiciously and asked me where I was from. "Mumbai" I explained with some relief. "Oh she's just a local" He tried to explain to the girls but they were already snapping away.

Afterwards a few of the girls came up to me and asked me my name.

"Mugdha". Ugh! not only was I Indian, I was a Maharashtrian just like them. So much for novelty! Just then David joined us.

"What is your name?" one of the girls demanded of him in English.

"David".

That was better. Perhaps this meeting wouldn't be a complete waste after all. Attention shifted from me to him.

"Where are you from?"

"United States"

blank stares all around

"America" I explained helpfully.

Ah, America.

"Tomorrow, we were seeing you walking there" the bold one spoke up, haltingly. "Yesterday" I corrected. The girls had evidently been doing the same tourist round we were.

"Oh you were at Daulatabad fort" David realised.

More blank stares.

"Daulatabad" I translated David's Marathi into Marathi.

"Yes! I was there and I am looking" another girl finally got up the courage to speak, looking delighted at her own boldness in speaking English to a stranger. David stared at her, waiting to hear the rest of what seemed to him an incomplete sentence. But this was too much for her and she collapsed into a fit of giggles, hiding her face in her dupatta.

Scintillating though the conversation was, I decided that David had had enough female attention for one day and so we left.

More pictures : https://picasaweb.google.com/mugdha.bendre/Ajanta

Midnight ramblings

They always say the best things in life are free. That is such a silly statement, it is the opposite of the truth. Far more accurate to say the best things in life are priceless. Available to everyone yet cannot be obtained at will, for all the money in the world.

Friendship, love, youth, wisdom, self esteem. And oh, a clear conscience.

India Trip Report - Ellora

David and I visited India over the Christmas break. We went to Ajanta & Ellora with my parents for a couple of days and spent another three days in Goa. The rest of the time was devoted to family in Bombay.

Ajanta is the site of several rock cut cave monuments containing (what used to be) beautiful paintings and sculptures, mostly Buddhist religious art. Ellora is a series of temples carved out of the rock face of the adjoining hills. Ajanta is the older site, with some caves dating from 200 BC. Ellora is 5th - 10th century according to Wikipedia. Both - they are usually bracketed together - are very well known within India though less so outside India. All the India guide books recommend them but they probably qualify as ‘adventurous’ for the average foreign tourist. Primarily because they are in the middle of nowhere tourism-wise - unless you count the water wheel in Aurangabad. The caves of Ajanta are particularly worth a look with their majestic setting in the side of a sheer cliff, looking out into a peaceful valley. And one is not incessantly harassed unlike the more popular tourist destinations in the north.

We flew in to Aurangabad which is the usual launching pad for a visit to Ajanta and Ellora. We went to Ellora on the first day in a hired car with a hired driver. It is less than an hour from Aurangabad while Ajanta is about twice as far. Both journeys are on crappy highways going through very rural country. You drive past several one horse (cow?) towns, sugarcane and cotton fields and countryside that is very green but in a burnt, dusty sort of way. The villages look painfully small and sparse, the huts tiny and primitive. However the inhabitants are not badly off. I base this on the fact that the cattle all looked healthy, well fed and content with life. In fact their horns were painted bright colours so they looked positively festive. It is an interesting drive if you have the mental discipline to ignore the insane maneuvering of both your own driver as well as the car careening towards you down the not-quite-2-lane highway.

The temples of Ellora are a wonderful sight despite their centuries long exposure to the elements. They must have been truly magnificent back when the statues still had noses and mouths. Interestingly the site has temples devoted to all three major religions born in India - Jainism, Buddhism and Hinduism. Of these the Kailash temple is the largest, best preserved and most famous. A two storey temple, twice the area of the Parthenon and carved out of a single rock 1200 years ago. So, an impressive sight.

In some parts we noticed a couple of patches of surviving paint. No dull browns these, the paint is startlingly bright greens and blues. Curious to realise that the original brightly painted, gay facades bear little resemblance to the dignified sand coloured columns associated with Hindu temple sculpture today.

A History channel program made the same point about Roman architecture: the noble marble structures we admire so much were once painted in gaudy colours. Our ancestors were not afraid of colour.

An enjoyable visit, but slightly marred by the presence of several school trips. Hordes of giggling girls and shouting boys did not enhance the atmosphere.

On our way back to town we stopped at Daulatabad Fort, one of those famously impenetrable medieval forts. Flashback to high school history class - In the 1300s the crazy Tughlaq ruler decided to move his empire's capital from Delhi to Daulatabad. Nothing wrong with that, except he took the ‘moving’ part literally and marched the entire population of Delhi 700 miles south to the new capital which did not have even an adequate water supply. Much misery and death ensued. Usually this fort is precisely the kind of place I enjoy scrambling around in, but I was tired by the time we got there so we only spent a short time there.

Rest of the pictures at : https://picasaweb.google.com/mugdha.bendre/Ellora