Discussing ‘Whiplash’, part 1

Photograph: C21 Mall front, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, Diwali 2014.
© radyamalhari. All rights reserved (which all feels very stupid to say, had the world been just simple honest…).

The movie to me was recommended by a friend, and it is one of the finest movies I’ve ever watched. This is not  a technical review of the movie, rather a discussion of the content or subject of it.

So then, the subject– the main themes I picked up were of by nature principles whether there be limits to the ways to achieve perfection and secondly, which is the protagonist’s point of view, of being ‘one of the greats’. As seen from the Master’s angle, he senses that desire in the boy and starts pushing him forthright and hard to derive the best out of it; the methods he uses raise eyebrows, they will because that comes under the heading of ‘human rights’ in any modern law, if I’m not very much mistaken, indeed, I’d right myself and try to make a more appropriate andpolitically correct declaration—that the modern democratic forms of government see (or else the democracy tries to make them see) the matter a basic candidate for the judicial giveaways.  Apropos the contrary to the argument the proposition comes in light is that given the Master is really good, that is, if the actually have the know-hows of their trade, they can to the extent they wish be allowed to handle the pupils the way they want. Which also brings with it the intrinsic risk of infliction of severe physical and mental harm to the subject, still, given the acute sense of the desire of the individual in question, they shall have to be ready to sacrifice whatever it takes. In support can be cited the example of any military-related institution which demands, above all, severe discipline, determination and suffering if need dictates. Else there would be no army-men, right? The same logic applies to the present case of the student of a discipline and the concern over the severity they may have to bear in order to endeavour to achieve what they wish to, if not, well, you can always be average, and average people do live happily, without any sarcasm intended.

However if the Master be not what it takes to be, the other side of the debate snatches a victory straight. There’s not a single point laying waste lives of people at the hands of a lunatic or a mediocre average. Which is happening by and large today, unfortunately. Convincing examples can be cited for the previous claim but why that would be indispensable is unclear to me.

The preceding line of thought brings to the stage another thread in the same vein: “Another brick in the wall , part II”, in essence a song attackingly questioning the education system and its usefulness. To take a side on it would be the same unsolvable task as is the current topic of debate because, it will be agreed, that again the matter is subjective than objective.

Today’s is an objective world and therefore the solutions come quite cleanly as to the decision is concerned; Democracy, if exercised at each level, naturally degenerates to objectivity and objectivism, which unfortunately is not the solution to many problems we have entered the 21st century facing since recorded history.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s