Re: geelii ha.Nsi and other odd metaphors [was Re: Javed Akhtar (poet) Interview]

UVR wrote:
> Vinay wrote:
> > UVR wrote:
> > > V S Rawat wrote:
> > > > Asif wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Sirf ahsaas hai ye rooh se mahsoos karo
> > > > > Pyaar ko pyaar hi rahne do koi naam do
> > > >
> > > > Are you claiming that you have eventually understood the meaning
> > > > of "saanson ki mahakati Khusboo". No kidding. No one could.
> > >
> > > If it was 'saanson', even I could have understood it. But it's not.
> > > It's "aa.Nkho.n kii mahakatii Khushboo"!
> > >
> > > But that's only half as bad as "giilii ha.Nsii". That one conjures
> > > up nasty images of spit flying about in every which direction.
> >
> > aah, so it's Gulzar bashing season again. Well.. why not, it is over a
> > year now since we had this..
> >
> > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.music.indian.misc/browse_frm/thread/819b75553e23edb3/be255aa4bb38ee2b#be255aa4bb38ee2b
> > (Or, http://tinyurl.com/bxkj9)
> >
> > Not surprisingly however, the examples have not changed.
> >
> > Although in that thread I tried to answer your question about 'giilii
> > ha.Nsii' in general (and with a hint at the end of my post), let me try
> > more specifically here to present *my* interpretation of it, despite
> > the fact that I hate to explain poetry (especially Gulzar's).
> >
> > I am sure you know about the connotations of the word 'sookhaa', apart
> > from it's literal meaning 'dry'. 'rookhe' kii sangat se
> > (rookhaa-sookhaa) ise kuchh aur maayane mil gae hai.n. You can use it
> > as an adjective with a lot of things to express the "uninterestedness"
> > (in lack of a better word); while 'rookhaa' is more like 'rude'.
> > sookhaa jawaab, sookhaa swaagat, wagairah. In the same vein 'sookhii
> > ha.Nsii' would mean a deliberate, uninterested laugh. And there comes
> > the word-play. What's the opposite of the literal 'sookhii'? - 'giilii'
> > of course. And 'giilii ha.Nsii' would mean, to me, a genuine,
> > wholehearted laugh.
>
> Very creative! Gulzar must be proud to have fans like you :)
>
> So, let me ask you, if "geeli ha.Nsi" is 'wholehearted laughter',
> what's 'maddham' doing as a qualifier to that? I mean, you
> can either have a 'maddham' (mild, light, faint) ha.Nsii (aka
> muskuraahaT), or you can have full-bodied, wholehearted
> laughter. "maddham+geeli ha.Nsi" must be a special kind
> of mixed-breed mongrel!
>
> Oh, and how about 'sun ke ham ne saarii pee lii ha.Nsii', as
> someone else pointed out? How does Gulzar 'drink' laughter?
> In a mug with cream and sugar, or in a dainty cup "wi' but
> a spot of milk, please"?
>
> I'm sorry, your explanation is not convincing to me. I still
> feel that Gulzar is trying to pull a fast one here.
>

Fair enough. To you it's 'thook', to me it's 'khuloos bharii ha.Nsii'.
To each his own :). Come on, I expected better than that from you. If
you start taking poetry literally, I give up. One can even ridicule
'ham aapakii aa.Nkho.n me.n is dil ko basaa de.n to' by saying
'aa.Nkhe.n pho.Danii hai kyaa'. I don't want to overemphasize the
'giilii ha.Nsii' thing. It was just one possible interpretation, and it
was the image that *I* conjured. Even with my version, I am not saying
that it is a great metaphor. I am not a fan of the song either, as I
mentioned last time. But I don't think it's about fooling people.
That's where my objection is. You are putting a big blame here and you
cannot even prove it. Because all you can show is YOUR interpretation
of it, which is as unacceptable to me as mine is to you.

> > As for 'nasty images of spit flying about in every which direction',
> > here's my counter question. What would be your answer if someone says
> > that Ghalib's 'kaun jiitaa hai terii zulf ke sar hone tak' gives
> > him/her images of a bald woman. You would probably just laugh.
>
> (LOL!)
>
> Comparing Gulzar with Ghalib, eh? It's not something you
> should be doing lightly -- I suspect even Gulzar would say,
> "Whoa! Hold on now!" But ok, let us humor you for the time
> being. Yes, I would laugh if I heard the bald woman stuff
> you just said.
>
> But you see, there's a BIG difference between Gulzar's 'geeli
> ha.Nsi' and Ghalib's 'zulf ke sar hote tak'. Ghalib was NOT
> inventing a new phrase! There phrase '[kisi cheez kaa] sar
> honaa/[kisi cheez ko] sar karna' were already en vogue in
> his day. Respectable dictionaries even list this phrase (see
> Platts', for instance). So, if you know 'sar honaa' and you
> know 'zulf' (and you know the pleasure there is in attaining
> the zulf of the beloved), then coming up with a reasonable
> real-world experience that embodies 'zulf kaa sar honaa'
> is a relatively short trip down Interpretation Alley. But even
> though I know what 'giilii' is and 'ha.Nsii' is, and even though
> I know how exhilarating the smile/laughter of a beloved
> can be, getting to 'giilii ha.Nsii' is a circuitous hike on Smelly
> Onion Trail. My clothes still stink from that trip!
>
> > But it
> > happens. I am sure you would have across people who still think that. I
> > do all the time. But if those people want to understand (and in turn
> > enjoy) it better, they try to find a better explanation of it. This
> > search does not normally begin if they don't know or accept that what
> > they know is not the (or one of the) intended meaning. Sometimes it can
> > take time, and a better understanding of poetry and idiom of the
> > language in general, and the style of the poet in particular.
>
> Agreed (with this last statement). The '*IDIOM* of the language' is
> the key. Idiom is not invented by one person (not even by someone
> of the caliber of Ghalib!). It is something that 'evolves' amongst the
> masses. A poet can't try to force the masses into accepting whatever
> random mutations (= 'ai.ND bai.ND' metaphors) he wants to create.
> Just because it's grammatically acceptable to use any adjective with
> any noun, it doesn't become an idiomatically acceptable metaphor.

Do you think poets creating new metaphors is a new thing? Or there is a
rule that says poets can't do that? If anyone, it is the writers and
poets who are supposed to do this, because they can do it better. A big
reason why I like Gulzar's work is those very metaphors which explain
the thought more succintly to me than probably a traditional phrase
would do. And then they are beautiful to boot. 'teraa aanaa bhii
garmiyo.n kii luu hai' may give some people images of the english
'loo', for me it works great. And this is as fresh (new) a metaphor as
it can be. The only requirement is that they should do it without
breaking the rule of the grammar. If a poet can convey a thought to a
few persons using new phrases, it proves that his metaphor is
successful, even if there are million others who don't get it.

> You seem to agree with this, below.
>
> > But once
> > they find a better and more reasonable (I would not use the word
> > 'right') explanation, they don't see the images of bald woman or
> > scatterted spit any more.
>
> You know what, 'more reasonable' is no less self-righteous a label
> than 'right' (interpretation). After all, if "more reasonable" exists,
> then 'less reasonable' also does. Which in turn means that the
> "spit" interpretation is one of the 'less reasonable' interpreations
> of this phrase. Ok, so I'd like to know why it is less reasonable.
> I mean, I have personally seen people who, when they laugh
> heartily, spit actually flies about! So, to me that's a more reasonable
> way to interpret geeli haNsi than your convoluted one!
>

More reasonable to themself - that's what I meant. Whether an
interpretation is 'right' or not is related to the poet's intention;
only the writer can tell you that (this is IMHO). I am talking about
the relative degree of sense that the words make to the *listener*; of
what *the listener thinks* the writer may have meant.

> > All said, I agree that words conjure vivid images in the mind of
> > readers and listeners and it is important for the poet to make sure
> > that they don't convey something that goes against or tone down what
> > he/she actually intends to (and there can of course be more than one
> > intended interpretation) say.
>
> This is what I meant above by saying that idiom evolves
> amongst the masses and can't just be created by a single
> poet or literateur, no matter how passionate his fans may be
> about everything he writes.
>

Answered above. We have a disagreement here. You are saying that poets
cannot create new metaphors. I am saying poets are actually supposed to
create new phrases/idioms/metaphors that explain
things/thoughts/emotions in a better way. The important thing that I
will add here is that only good poets can create new metaphors
successfully.

> > Where I disagree is that I think Gulzar
> > knows this better than most.
>
> I don't think Gulzar has the kind of power you're saying he
> has. If he did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
>

This is not a power. This is the basic requirement of any good writing.
You should know what you are talking about. You think Gulzar doesn't
know what he means? Well, I disagree again.

Vinay

> -UVR.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: HMONG DELEGATION VISIT LAOS DEC.5-13-2005
    ... First impression is by far one of the most influential images. ... might wanted to know...there are many other groups ranging from the ... not have suffered that much....the real reason why they're there is ... If no one else could attest to this I am sure big brothers Bee ...
    (soc.culture.hmong)
  • Re: wanted: PC/MAC C programmers (for apple II project)
    ... for no other good reason it's how I make a living. ... level of security to it to prevent or at least monitor that. ... the images to the alternate binary format on your own somehow. ...
    (comp.sys.apple2.programmer)
  • Re: Poltergeist caught on digital camera.... Now tell me this is a weather phenomena!
    ... Did you see the images or not. ... " Simple decency " what a crock. ... There's no reason why you should feel obliged to post here. ... take it to the newsgroup about African art. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Metaphor and simile
    ... Usually the images I use for metaphors and similes are already ... head of what it is I'm describing. ... some other Englishman despise him." ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: Why choose 17-85mm over 24-105mm?
    ... I would presume that the reason you are dissatisfied with the images you now ... obtain with your camera has less to do with the camera than your digital ... to need to read a bit more about the basic aspects of interchangeable lens ...
    (rec.photo.digital)