If you were a stickler for categorisation of books, you may put this under self-help or guides. The back of the book claims it belongs to ART/CreativiIf you were a stickler for categorisation of books, you may put this under self-help or guides. The back of the book claims it belongs to ART/Creativity - but to my mind, this is misleading - to an extent.
Yes, the book has been written for "in-service artists" (painters and writers, the author says), though I found the matter in the book quite relevant. The problem there is not about whether one is creative (as the author describes towards the end of the book), but, probably about who is an artist?
Visual and performance arts have always been considered the domains where creativity abounds. To my mind it flows in every aspect of our life. And if there are sixteen principles to help define the authenticity of your creativity, I think they might be well useful for all of us.
Dense with embellishments, full of decorative adjectives, meaty metaphors, exploration of complex philosophical constructs, and a slow, repetitive stoDense with embellishments, full of decorative adjectives, meaty metaphors, exploration of complex philosophical constructs, and a slow, repetitive storytelling format, for effecting reinforcements, is what this book is all about. The translation - I strongly suspect - is utterly faithful to the original, else the meat in this story is hardly twenty pages. The book is an extract of a small episode in the Rāmāyan; the period of exile and the abduction of Sitā and ends, with the army of monkeys setting off, in search of Sitā to the four corners of the world.
I was a bit surprised that there was no mention of the Lakshman-rekha; the line that Sitā crossed which allowed Rāvan to abduct her. Perhaps I have my versions mixed up, which is good; means some more research-based reading.
I do recommend the book for the stylistic aspects; some insight into the art of the exaggerated storytelling that I believe is peculiar to Indian mythology...more
It's a good book. Let's start by saying only that much.
Especially the first two parts: "Voice and Heterodoxy" and "Culture and Communication". These tIt's a good book. Let's start by saying only that much.
Especially the first two parts: "Voice and Heterodoxy" and "Culture and Communication". These two sections take a very unusual take on India's history - far away from the usual format of a history book - whether written by an Indian or an outsider. And it is because Dr. Amartya Sen chooses a very narrow scheme to explore the concept of India. The language is impeccable, precise and often complex - but never confusing. For me, a paragraph like the one below, required serious slowing down:
"The absence of a conceptual congruence between different types of deprivation does not preclude their empirical proximity along a big dividing line, which is a central feature of classical class analysis."
I do realise that out-of-context it is even more vague - but even within context it took me a while to understand this concluding sentence. Perhaps it is just me.
The book, essentially, is a collection of previously written essays, some of which have been modified for the book. What this means is that there is significant repetition of certain examples and concepts and that can usually get you a but irritated. But books that are collections of essays have to be read in a different way - fairly independent of each other.
Somewhere in Part 3, I found a complete lack of the theme of argumentativeness - and that caused some reading pain. I say this, only as fair warning - not to criticise Part 3 as such. The content itself lacks nowhere; it has been researched well - and presented without emotion or unfounded passion. In the social and cultural crises that India finds itself, it may well worth be a book for most Indians to read - especially the bigots leaning on tradition and past culture. There's an interesting lesson in history for them. To the others, it is a wonderful exposition on India itself - and very interesting manner of looking at the country. For those of you who are not Indians, again, it is a fresh perspective - different from the dogma that has circulated so hard, it has created a permanent persuasion of what this country is.
Lovely quick introduction to Portuguese Goa, from the British point of view. A simple historical context the the development of Goa, especially land hLovely quick introduction to Portuguese Goa, from the British point of view. A simple historical context the the development of Goa, especially land holdings, and general trade. Of course, we need to be careful not get pulled into some of the obvious then-British bias.
Generally a good read, if you don’t mind the academic style. The theme is compelling, for sure, however, the book is too broad-based for my liking. PeGenerally a good read, if you don’t mind the academic style. The theme is compelling, for sure, however, the book is too broad-based for my liking. Perhaps that’s the message of the book, come to think of it.
I can’t say I thoroughly enjoyed the book, yet I cannot say I disliked it either.
As an amateur history enthusiast, there are many parts of the book that fail to leave an impression. Also, the repeated references to climate change were uninteresting.
In fact, if you do not want to go through the book, read the introduction — it provides a very good overview of what the book is all about, and should satisfy an amateur’s understanding of the three approaches that the book talks of.
In conclusion, I think this books is written for a very specific audience; and it’s not me....more
The Maratha Confederacy is a chapter in Indian history that guarantees great conversation if you are objective and very heated arguments if you are noThe Maratha Confederacy is a chapter in Indian history that guarantees great conversation if you are objective and very heated arguments if you are not. Being a Maharashtrian, my interest in the Maratha Confederacy in general and Maratha history in particular, is often considered to be a matter of blind regional pride. And while I have attempted several times to explain that my interest is curiously academic, I often fail to convince.
And my curious academic interest is why I have been slowly reading this book for a while and finally have a slightly better sense of the Confederacy. Prof. Kadam's book, while a stellar research on the confederacy, fell short of making an impact in a better understanding of its "origin and the development."
In recent times I have been seeking books of Indian origin about Indian history to better understand local and cultural perspectives, which may have been absent in the chronicles by foreign writers. Thankfully, many Indian writers, especially academic, have risen to the task and are now re-documenting Indian history. And perhaps there lies the problem: for one, the books read more like research papers than books. Almost every book is a derivative of a Ph.D. thesis, slightly enhanced.
Consider this book: it has in-depth research, micro-level facts (often irrelevant) across the various aspects that contributed to the rise and decline of the confederacy. Yet, because of its structure, it is unable to make a lucid explanation of the "history" of the confederacy. This is not to say that all the research is useless, on the contrary, it provides pointers into the makings of, the coming together and the breaking apart of the, Maratha power. The facts are all there, the analysis is irregular and often missing. It is left to the reader, to laboriously piece together all contributing issues and make sense of the "origin and the development (and the signifiers of the decline)."
It is not very clear whether this books was written as a reference book, a research paper or a history book. If it was the later, it fails, else, if you have an (objective) interest in the study of the Maratha Confederacy, this book is for you....more
For a long time, we have all been besotted by intelligence and intelligent people. "I didn't understand a word he said, he must be very intelligent,"For a long time, we have all been besotted by intelligence and intelligent people. "I didn't understand a word he said, he must be very intelligent," is an oft heard statement.
De Bono makes the distinction between intelligence and thinking-skill.
He uses an example of the power of eyesight and the ability to look in the right direction. Without the ability to look in the right direction, your power of eyesight is pretty useless.
From somewhere in the middle of the book, however, it all seemed to become an advertisement of all his processes and models that he has invented. It was almost a brochure.
It's a small book, and only the first half is relevant to the title....more