Hanuman Ansh – Review

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” – Albus Dumbledore

My sister and I generally do not agree on movies. She is more of a Dabangg-girl; I am more of an Interstellar-guy. I’ve long learnt not to entertain her recommendations, and she knows this better than anyone else. So naturally I was surprised when she came and told me that not only would I enjoy Hanuman Ansh, but she would watch it again as well.

I checked out the movie. The cast and crew were unknown. Not just unknown, but the director, lead actor, singers… nobody even had a Wikipedia page. The movie barely had one. The songs seemed to be all traditional folk songs with no particular lyricist. Normally, I would ignore such movies as the futile attempt of some overzealous assistant director from Oshiwada who was doomed to fail. But my sister’s excitement got to me. I agreed and we booked a Sunday matinee show.

The theatre was full, contrary to my expectations. Even before the movie began, there were subtle hints of what was to come. There were absolutely no posters of the movie throughout the cinema hall, which was unusual. There weren’t many ads at the beginning of the movie. With a budget of only Rs. 2 Cr, I guess they didn’t spend on marketing at all. Come to think of it, how do you make a movie for Rs. 2 Cr in modern India anyway? Even Masaan was made on a budget of Rs. 7 Cr; but it did enjoy relatively known faces like Richa Chadha and Vicky Kaushal from recent Gangs of Wasseypur fame. Hanuman Ansh seemed to be made by a rag-tag group of theatre actors who wanted to get into filmmaking. But more on that later.

The movie begins with a disclaimer, which was a herald of things to come. Hanuman Ansh is the story of Neem Karoli Baba. It should classify as a devotional movie or a biopic – a controversial genre in contemporary India. Normally such movies follow a long disclaimer. The disclaimer of Dhurandhar: The Revenge runs into 15 lines putting all kinds of legal liabilities behind the movie. The disclaimer of Mahavatar Narsimha runs 7 lines emphasizing the religious nature of the movie and dramatization of some events. The disclaimer of Hanuman Ansh is just 3 lines – more like bullet points than sentences

• This is a devotional movie
• Some events are dramatized for the purposes of cinematic representation
• The ultimate interpretation to the wisdom of the audience

The usual long disclaimers about not hurting the sentiments of any community or any resemblance to any person being coincidental are absent. Rather, the wisdom of the audience is trusted. It has been a long time since a movie has trusted the wisdom of the audience. As a writer myself, I have difficulty trusting my audience anymore. This movie operates on conviction. And thankfully, finds its audience.

There are 2 scenes where this conviction is tested. One is when Baba leaves the town of Neem Karori. The entire town tries to stop him. When Baba does not relent, the town cries for a long time. Another is a scene where a person chants the Hanuman Chalisa in a night-scene in a forest. It is not a musical recitation of the Hanuman Chalisa. It’s just a man reciting it. With abrupt pauses, no rhythm, and no sense of melody. It’s like any average person would recite the Hanuman Chalisa when they find themselves in a spooky forest in the middle of the night. Both scenes run for over a minute on screen. Moviemakers don’t make such scenes anymore. There is always the risk of losing the short-attention span of the audience. People might forward the scene or check WhatsApp messages watching the movie screen-in-screen on their phones. This has been a point of debate among cinematic circles in recent times. Hanuman Ansh moves forward putting two scenes where they risk alienating the audience. The audience doesn’t budge. After a long time, we see a movie made with honesty and sincerity which feels refreshing. This movie does not chase TRPs; and that works with an audience starved for honesty.

Another point to note is given the right-winged times of the world propounded by movies like Dhurandhar and Kashmir Files. This movie does not delve into any politics or propaganda of any kind. It remains true to its devotion to Neem Karoli Baba and does not sway from it.

Coming to the cast and crew, long-time moviegoers will immediately recognize the crew as theatre trained. There is a fair bit of neck-acting, formally known through the Natya Shastra in Indian traditions. The most famous master of the art in recent times being Pankaj Tripathi. The camerawork is on spot, which syncs perfectly with the music, telling you that this is not an amateur crew, but a very experienced one who just haven’t worked on a big budget before. Thankfully, they will be able to now.

The background setting, minimal VFX, and costumes, dissolve seamlessly into the movie with nothing bothering the eye – just as good infrastructure should be. The Director comes with some experience over a few other projects, which I am now excited to watch. The lead actor is experiences as an assistant director with this being his first acting assignment. Like all good assistant directors, he delivers. It would be a miracle if this movie ends up grossing higher than Namit Malhotra’s Ramayan, but that may be a possibility. At least in terms of remaining true to the core message, Hanuman Ansh does a phenomenal job that any high-budget movie will not be able to do due to production constraints.

I walked out of the theatre with an unusual problem. At no point does the movie claim that the story is true. In fact, it takes efforts to disclaim the supernatural claims as fantasy and tricks on the eye. But I came out wanting the fantasy to be true. The engineer in me wasn't convinced. But perhaps that is exactly what the movie intended when it left the ultimate interpretation to the wisdom of the audience. Now that Hanuman Ansh has seen success, I hope it encourages filmmakers to look beyond the familiar mythology and tell more of these strange, forgotten stories of mystical India. We may not believe all of them. Perhaps we don't always need to.

Sitaram!

Winter has Come

I record these words in the manner expected of a sworn maester of the Citadel, though I fear the quill trembles more from futility than cold. A maester is meant to chronicle wars, lineages, treaties, and the slow workings of governance. For most of my life, I believed such things to be the true machinery of the world, the gears upon which the fortunes of kings and smallfolk alike turned. Yet for years… mayhaps for decades… my memory adheres to dates now only loosely, like old wax to a candle stub. For a long time I warnings of something far simpler and far graver – the Others.

I spoke of them not as the singers do, cladding truth in pretty liesso that a frightened child may sleep; nor as the old maids do, twisting fear into fables to keep children from wandering too far. No, I relied on dusty accounts preserved in rotten parchment and faded ink, the sort of scholarship that kings assume carries no blood. These were not stories. They were records, measurements, testimonies, and observations. Dry things. Tedious things. The sort of things only maesters pretend to find stirring. Yet I believed, with a young man’s stubbornness, that if truth were laid bare plainly enough, even the thickest lord might at last take heed.

I spoke their warnings plainly. I wrote treatises. Tedious, meticulous, footnoted treatises. I implored lordlings and septons, even the Citadel itself. I spoke to any steward or captain or hedge knight fool enough to lend an ear – but few cared to listen. Few cared. Fewer still believed. Those who did were dismissed as fools – men unhinged from reason, or worse, men seeking attention.

A wandering wildling would sometimes stagger south of the Wall bearing warnings – breathless fragments about the dead stirring, the woods whispering, the cold walking. These men had little in the world – no property, no noble sigil, not even a name worth recording. Their words were worth even less. They were waved away with the same casual motion one uses to scatter crows from grain.

The North was supposed to remember. A proud boast, repeated around hearths, embroidered on banners, recited with the solemnity of prayer, etched into the very identity of their houses. But remembering is not the same as understanding. They remembered the words, not the meaning. They repeated winter is coming as one might repeat the humdrum greeting of a passing acquaintance, never pausing to ask what winter meant, what it required, what harbingers announced its arrival, or what winter demanded of them.

Winter does not always announce itself with roaring winds and white horizons. It begins subtly. A frost lingering longer than it should. A sickness that spreads in odd patterns. Crops that turn to grey mush before harvest. A dull haze clinging to the air, dimming the sun to a copper smear. A strange stillness in the city.

All things I dutifully noted, dated, compared with records centuries old. It was my duty to be dull, and I was dutiful in it. I presented my findings before maesters far more learned than I – men who had forgotten more than I would learn in a lifetime – they nodded politely while their eyes drifted to more fashionable concerns – trade fleets, naval skirmishes, the lineage of some minor house’s third son.

So winter bided its time. Then it leapt.

It happened faster than any chronicle could capture. Villages emptied overnight. At first one. Then three more. Then dozens. Ravens stopped returning. The forests to the far north went silent. When the truth could no longer be denied, the great lords sent out their men, but swords and shields forged in the south do little against cold that devours not only flesh but will. Steel cannot wound cold. The Wall fell. the winds that followed were not winds at all, but something older wearing wind as a mask.

Still I wrote. I recorded. It is the maester’s duty. I noted the creeping chill in my bones, the dimming of the sun, the way ink froze at the tip of the quill before I could shape a full sentence. I wrote even when my breath smoked and vanished faster than I could draw the next. I can hear them outside – patient, tireless, without breath or warmth or haste. They have no need for haste.

I had believed, foolishly, that scholarship might serve as shield. I thought knowledge, once shared, would rouse men to action. But the scrolls gathered dust while the world burned white. Men preferred their comforts, certainties, routines. Their markets and their little disputes. Even as the cold thickened around them, they clung to the familiar warmth of denial.

Some whispered, in those last days, that this winter was unlike the others. They were correct, though far too late in being so. Winter had not merely arrived. It had awakened.

Perhaps that is why I write this last entry. Not for men, for there are none left to read it. But for myself, to pretend that I once belonged to a world that believed in reason.

My hands grow stiff. My breath smokes and then fades. The ink congeals. My heart slows. I understand, now, that I am the last. The last to think, to fear, to remember. When I fall, the world of men ends.

They are at the door.

I can feel the cold fingers already pressing into my bones, hollowing out my bones one breath at a time. There is no pain. Pain belongs to the living. Soon I will stand again, pale and silent, and whatever thoughts once lived behind these eyes will scatter like snow in a hard wind.

These are my dying words.

No human will ever read them.

No maester will stumble upon these scrolls. No child will whisper these lines as bedtime fright. No king will consult them for counsel. The last eyes capable of understanding this script are the ones growing dim even as I write.

And when I rise again, I will not remember the warnings I gave, nor the truth they carried, nor the world that ignored them until it was far too late.

Winter has come, and there is no one left to heed it.

Dr. Strange and the Knife’s Edge

"Look, if it´s you or someone you love who´s on that operating table, and it´s life or death, I´m the one you want holding the knife." – Stephen Strange (deleted scene from Multiverse of Madness)

Dr. Strange’s story across the MCU is not just of a man mastering magic, but of a man wrestling with the illusion of moral mastery, forever on the edge between savior and sinner. The audience first meets the powers of the sorcerer supreme is through the Ancient One. We see that the sorcerer supreme wields an immense amount of power, that obviously has the potential to corrupt. The Ancient One is not immune to this and is seen to draw her powers from the dark dimension. She is able to maintain her moral ground with no overreaches of power except that one aberration. But this shows the potential for corruption that the power holds. The Ancient One could have gone down a darker path, but she didn’t. Her student, Kaecilius, did.

Kaecilius going astray is proof that mystical power has scope for corruption. There is one guiding light that the Ancient One gives to Dr. Strange as her dying words, which become his moral compass.

“Arrogance and fear still keep you from learning the simplest and most significant lesson of all – It’s not about you.” – The Ancient One

This simple truth, the knowledge that the higher order of things is more important, becomes Strange’s guiding light, even though he continues to struggle with it.

"You still think there will be no consequences, Strange? No price to pay? We broke our rules. Just like her. The bill comes due. Always!" – Karl Mordo

At the end of the movie, Dr. Strange defeats Dormamu by meddling with the laws of nature. Mordo gives his ominous warning. This almost becomes a pattern with Strange where he continues to break the rules, and pays the price. This begs the question, is Strange working to fulfil his duties to the multiverse or for his own glorification?

In Infinity War, Strange makes several key choices. Firstly he is upfront about willing to sacrifice his companions, Tony Stark and Peter Parker, in favour of an infinity stone. However, once having gone through alternate futures, Strange makes the morally ambiguous choice to sacrifice the stone, himself, and half the universe to save Tony Stark. This one decision, would come to haunt him later.

In No Way Home, Strange again makes the choice of meddling with the memories of the entire world to fulfil the whims of a boy. By doing so, Strange literally messes with free will and chooses to play God, taking decisions for the entire world upon himself. In the wake the fallout from that decision, Strange is willing to send back the multiversal visitors to their own universe which would mean their inevitable deaths, without offering them a chance at redemption – a point where he disagreed with Spiderman. Dr. Strange’s reasoning being that the order of the multiverse must be preserved to prevent incursions and a multiversal collapse, i.e. the greater good. History is witness that when a single man takes it upon himself to sacrifice others for the greater good, that’s where morality starts to become dubious.

“You break the rules and become a hero. I do it and I become the enemy. That doesn't seem fair.” – Wanda Maximoff

Arrogance was already a problem with Strange. It was a tool when he was a doctor. It was what made him drive recklessly on a cliff. Like the demon Raavan from Hindu scriptures, Strange was a perfect human specimen capable of playing God – extremely learned and capable. But his arrogance had potential to lead him astray.

This pattern of meddling with the universe continues in Your Friendly Neighbourhood Spiderman where Strange enters a new universe to fight a symbiote, only to create a bootstrap paradox that ends up creating the symbiote in the first place.

Next we are shown the alternate paths Strange might have taken through the multiverse. In What If we first meet an alternate version of Strange where Christine Palmer dies instead of him. This sets Strange on a path where he ultimately becomes Strange Supreme. He consumes many powerful beings to increase his own power, to the point that he is  barely able to contain them. And they in-turn begin to control him. He is so driven to madness with his ambition that he ends up destroying the universe. For the first time, the audience witnesses what Strange could have been.

This idea is explored further in Multiverse of Madness. Nicodemus West confronts Strange with the question if the blip was the only way to save the world. Strange knows that there were other ways, and he had made a choice for the world.

“I guess what keeps me up at night is wondering did it have to happen that way? Was there any other path?” - Nicodemus West

There’s a deleted scene from Multiverse of Madness where Strange and Chritine are asked about a new surgical method. The scene recounts that Strange is willing to use risky techniques, till he holds the knife. He trusts no one else with the power. But this begs the question, should be much power be allowed in any hands? But this scene is deleted for being too similar to the opening scene with Defender Strange.

The movie opens with Defender Strange making a choice to take America Chavez’s powers for himself because Strange thinks that the kind of massive power America holds is not safe for a child and only Strange can be allowed to wield it safely. For this, he is willing to sacrifice America Chavez as well.

“This is the only way.” – Defender Strange

In the same movie, we also see the Strange from Earth-838 using the darkhold to defeat Thanos on his own. This again, breaks the rules of mysticism. But Strange takes it upon himself to break those rules for the greater good. He even accepts death as punishment from the Illuminati for his discretion.

Next, we meet Sinister Strange in the movie, who also made choices that led to the destruction of his universe, where he was left stranded. But Sinister Strange had reached beyond redemption and fought the original MCU Strange for Christine Palmer.

At the end of the movie, Dr. Strange does consider taking America’s powers like Defender Strange did. But it’s like the Ancient One’s advice comes back to him – “it is not about you”. And he encourages America to take on the Scarlett Witch on her own. Here, we see a character development for Strange. He let’s go of the knife and believes in someone else holding the power. But this may not be true for his variants.

Strange walks the same tightrope in every universe. One misstep – love, duty, ego – and he falls into darkness. Like the law he mirrors, Doctor Strange’s morality is both his shield and his trap – built to protect the world, yet destined to break under its own weight. Strange is the MCU’s purest utilitarian, willing to sacrifice the few for the many. But the question reverberates whether he should be the one holding the knife.

I, Phone

“We can only see a short distance ahead, but we can see plenty there that needs to be done.”

– Alan Turing

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The new Direct Tax Code, 2025, allows tax officers to access a taxpayer’s “computer system” during a search, which is defined to include remote servers, cloud servers, and virtual digital spaces. If a password or access code is not provided, officers can "override" it to gain access.
2. The “virtual digital space” includes a wide range of digital environments including email servers, social media accounts, online banking and trading accounts, cloud storage platforms, digital application platforms etc.
3. The said powers, in their current form, fail to recognize that in the modern era, a mobile phone is not merely an object or tool, but an extension of the person – integral to livelihood, identity, communication, privacy, and access to justice.
4. Multiple investigating authorities – including but not limited to the Income Tax Department, the Enforcement Directorate, and Police Authorities – now routinely seize mobile phones, laptops, and storage devices during searches and surveys.
5. While such powers may have been conceived as mere procedural tools, in practice, the seizure of a person’s phone today is equivalent to seizing the person himself, or worse.
6. A person deprived of his phone in the 21^st century is stripped not only of communication but of his ability to transact, identify himself, access his finances, run his business, and even defend himself legally.
7. The consequences of such seizure are not temporary inconveniences but existential disruptions that strike at the heart of Article 19(1)(a), Article 19(1)(g), and Article 21 of the Constitution.

II. THE PHONE AS AN EXTENSION OF SELF

8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), recognized that the right to privacy is intrinsic to life and liberty under Article 21, and extends to informational privacy. Today, that informational privacy is materially embodied in the smartphone, which stores the intimate digital self of every citizen – communications, photographs, health data, bank accounts, professional records, social interactions, and behavioural patterns.
9. The dependence on mobile phones is not a matter of luxury or convenience.

1. Businesses are run entirely on mobile applications – banking, accounting, client communication, and commerce.
2. Government services such as Aadhaar, PAN, DigiLocker, and GST compliance are mobile-linked.
3. Bank accounts and payment gateways (UPI, net banking) require phone-based authentication.
4. Social media and messaging platforms are the principal channels for professional engagement and public expression.

10. A recent Supreme Court judgment has already recognized that access to the Internet is a right and necessity in the modern age, not a privilege (Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020)).
11. In a country where legal tender itself can be demonetized suddenly overnight, the ability to communicate, transact and adapt through the phone becomes vital for survival.
12. Therefore, the phone today is not a mere communication device. It is an instrument of livelihood, an identity token, and an economic engine.
13. Empirical surveys confirm that more than 70% of Indian MSMEs depend on smartphones for day-to-day operations. Women entrepreneurs in rural areas report 80% mobile-first dependence. Entire informal sectors – delivery, retail, logistics, and service providers – operate solely through mobile applications.
14. The economy of small traders, gig workers, digital marketers, influencers, and local service providers operates exclusively through mobile devices. Seizure of such devices not only cripples the individual but destabilizes economic micro-units that rely on continuous phone access.

III. SEIZURE EQUALS VIOLATION OF SELF

15. The act of seizing a smartphone is not akin to seizing a book or a file. It is akin to seizing the mind and memory of the individual. The data within represents thoughts, correspondences, and intentions. Extracting it without consent violates the principle that no person shall be compelled to make an involuntary statement against himself, protected under Article 20(3).
16. The argument that “the phone is merely property” ignores technological and social reality. When a phone holds one’s identity, bank access, and private communications, its seizure becomes an intrusion into the self.
17. The seizure of phones has a chilling effect on:

1. Freedom of speech and expression (Article 19(1)(a)), as individuals become fearful of their private communications being accessed.
2. Freedom to practice any profession or carry on trade (Article 19(1)(g)), as businesses lose functionality upon phone seizure.
3. Personal liberty (Article 21), as the deprivation of a phone amounts to a deprivation of autonomy and informational control.

18. The Direct Tax Code, 2025, provides no meaningful procedural safeguards – no clear time limits, no data minimization principles, and no protection against fishing expeditions into unrelated digital material.
19. The result is a structural imbalance: the State gains access to the totality of a person’s digital being, while the person loses his ability to function, communicate, or defend himself.
20. The relationship between man and machine has evolved to the point where the boundary is indistinct. The phone acts as the human’s external brain – a memory, diary, and financial control system combined.
21. Popular culture reflects this symbiosis. The film Khel Khel Mein (starring Akshay Kumar) dramatizes how the entirety of a person’s secrets, social identity, and reputation exist within his phone – and how loss of it destabilizes the self.
22. Therefore, in both law and lived experience, the phone is not separable from personhood.

IV. RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN LEGAL PROCESS

23. It is a settled principle of law that an individual has the right to join proceedings against him, to consult counsel, and to present his defence.
24. Today, such participation frequently requires online access – for video hearings, document submissions, OTP-based verifications, communication with counsel, or even simply appearing before the court.
25. Depriving an individual of his phone during investigation directly impairs this right to effective legal representation, violating principles of natural justice.

V. PRAYER

26. The provisions of the Direct Tax Code, 2025, and other statutes that permit seizure of digital devices and extraction of personal data be read down to require:

1. Prior judicial authorization;
2. Proportionality and necessity tests;
3. Time-bound custody limits; and
4. Independent oversight mechanisms.

27. It be declared that a mobile phone constitutes an extension of the self within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution, attracting the highest standard of privacy protection.
28. It be further declared that seizure or access to mobile data amounts, in appropriate circumstances, to compulsion of self-incrimination under Article 20(3).
29. The State be directed to frame comprehensive guidelines governing digital device seizures, including data protection, return timelines, and business-continuity safeguards.

VI. CONCLUSION

In an age when the phone embodies identity, livelihood, and thought, to seize it is to paralyze the person. To access its contents is to trespass upon the mind. A law that allows such acts without proportionate safeguards violates the constitutional promise of dignity, privacy, and liberty.

ASOIAF - From King to Heir

Season 1 episode 1 of House of the Dragon (HoTD) came with a massive plot point not previously known anywhere in the books – that Aegon the conqueror foresaw the coming of the long night. Note Viserys’ quote carefully.

This reveals Aegon knew that something was lurking in the north beyond the wall, but didn’t exactly know what. Viserys categorically avoids mentioning the word “whitewalkers” or “dead” or “Others” which were common words used by many Westerosi to describe the demons of the long night. King Viserys was a big history nerd and surely knew the words. Yet he chose to remain vague and said only the words “whatever dwells” to show that he does not believe in the story of the whitewalkers, but knows that some threat exists.

The white walkers would not appear for another two centuries. In this post we explore the following questions:

1. How this secret was passed down from king to heir,
2. Times when it almost became lost and how was it found again,
3. Who apart from kings and heirs knew about it, and
4. How it was finally lost for good

Sons of the Dragon

There are no clear accounts of Aegon the conqueror officially naming an heir. Logically, Aenys was the likely successor to Aegon.

1. Aenys was elder to Maegor by five years,
2. Aenys stayed close to his father unlike Maegor who mostly stayed at Dragonstone with his mother where Dragonstone was not yet the de-facto seat of the heir, and
3. From time to time Aegon allowed Aenys to practice with Blackfyre – Aegon’s sword

So it was no surprise when Aenys proclaimed succession upon Aegon’s death. Aegon would have surely been serious about the succession if he was serious about the prophecy being passed from king to heir. Or maybe every Targaryen at the time simply knew about the prophecy as a family secret.

 

Aegon was not the only one who conquered Westeros. He was joined by both his sister-wives – Visenya and Rhaenys. How would he have convinced them to leave generations of comfort at Dragonstone and conquest a continent by his side? If Aegon was inspired by his prophetic dream, wouldn’t the same have been the motivation for his sister-wives?

 

So maybe Aegon just told Aenys about the prophecy. Or maybe he told both his sons. Or maybe he told his sister-wives and Visenya told Maegor when he became king. Or maybe he just told anyone who would listen. But the secret survived to both Aenys and Maegor. However, Maegor never had children of his own. He did name princess Aerea as his heir, but her claim to the throne was never taken seriously. 

The Old King

 ‘Aegon the Dragon and his sisters conquered the Seven Kingdoms (six of them, at least), but it was Jaehaerys the Conciliator who truly made them one.’

-        writings of Umbert, Fire and Blood

 

It is understandable that Jaehaerys knew about Aegon’s prophecy.

1. Jaehaerys was an old wise king who single-mindedly worked towards improving and uniting the realm,
2. Viserys passing down the prophecy to Rhaenyra means at some point old king Jaehaerys passed it down to Viserys at some point
3. Jaehaerys took the matter of succession very seriously, knowing mayhaps that the Targaryen secret must not be lost
4. He established faith in the Targaryen dynasty – something none of his predecessors had done yet

Jaehaerys was only three years old at the time of his grandfather king Aegon’s death. So he couldn’t have heard it from the Dragon himself. Nor would he have heard it from Maegor who despised any children of his brother Aenys and had named princess Aerea as his heir. So Jaehaerys must have heard of the prophecy from his elder brothers. Aenys had named Aegon his heir and had likely told him of the prophecy. But Aegon was killed by Maegor. The only possibility remains that before dying, Aegon might have anticipated the coming conflict with Maegor and as a measure of safety, might have shared the prophecy with his brothers.

 

Another possibility exists. Aegon and Viserys, both elder brothers of Jaehaerys were children at the time of Aegon I’s death. Maybe Aegon did not consider the prophecy to be a “secret” and freely told his grandsons of the prophecy as he had told his sons and sister-wives. After all, the more people knew about the coming conflict, the more they would band together. That’s exactly what Jon Snow did as soon as he came to know of the threat of the whitewalkers. He didn’t consider it as a “secret”. In fact he rallied as many people as he could for the coming conflict. Maybe that’s what Aegon the Conqueror wanted to do. But over the generations, the “prophecy” took the shape of a “secret.”

This also set a new precedent that naming an obvious heir to the throne is one of the most important tasks of a Targaryen king, lest the prophecy be lost during succession. This is also why Jaehaerys understood why Targaryens could not afford another war for succession. He had already seen what a Targaryen civil war looked like. It risked the prophecy being lost. A war also meant that the Targaryens would not be as strong as they needed to be when the threat from the north finally arrived.

 

So the secret passed on from Aegon to Jaehaerys with whom it stayed quietly for the next 50 years.

 

Prophecy becomes a Secret

Towards the end of his reign with both his sons dead, old king Jaehaerys called for a great council where Viserys was named the heir to the throne. That’s when Viserys learnt about the prophecy. Either Jaeraerys revealed the prophecy to Viserys as a “secret” or that element was added by Viserys himself. Perhaps the “wise king” Jaehaerys added the element of secrecy so that Targaryens would never name multiple heirs to the throne, thus avoiding a confusion regarding succession for generations to come. But it becomes very difficult in a dynasty ruling over two centuries to avoid questions of succession and accidental deaths. At some point, some king (or queen) needed to establish a better mechanism than the prophecy simply moving from king to heir by word-of-mouth. It risked the prophecy getting diluted or confused over the years. Viserys didn’t care about these problems of secrecy or dissipating or getting misunderstood. He named princess Rhaenyra as his heir and told her of the prophecy as a “secret.”

The Dance of the Dragons

The Dance of the Dragons was a turbulent time in the Targaryen family when the question of succession was in confusion. We know for a fact that Viserys never named anyone his heir other than Rhaenyra and hence never passed on the secret to anyone else. So the secret was never passed down to Aegon II. Then how would the secret be passed on for the next two centuries? Even though Aegon II ruled after Viserys, his children or heir never ascended to the throne. The throne eventually went to Rhaenyra’s children. Both her living sons after the Dance of the Dragons eventually became kings. To protect the secret, Rhaenyra may have told all her children of the prophecy. Or maybe just the children she bore with her uncle Daemon whom she loved. Either way, the secret passed down to Aegon III, his children, Viserys II, and finally to Aegon IV. Where things went… “unworthy” again.

Aegon the unworthy

Aegon the unworthy did many heinous deeds in his time. But he named only one heir and never wavered in his decision. Even though in later years, Aegon IV’s favor may have shifted to his bastard son Daemon Blackfyre more than his legitimate son Daeron II. But he never officially changed the succession. Protecting the prophecy, and the secret.

 

The Prince that was Promised

The prophecy is not heard of in the books for the next 78 years passing from king to heir through Daeron II, Aerys I, Maekar I, Aegon V, and then to Jaehaerys II where we see the prophecy again. But by this time, it has taken a different shape. Rhaegar confirmed that it is still called a “song of ice and fire” as Aegon I had dreamt. But now it was added with elements of a Prince that was Promised (PtwP). Also now it is not just a secret passed from king to heir but also finds its way to some texts.

 

It appears that the prophecy does not focus as much on the threat that lurks in the north, but on the part that a good king must be on the throne when the threat emerges. By this time the Targaryens have also had their fair share of bad kings, so they know that merely being a Targaryen is not enough. The Targaryen needs to be an able king who can unite the seven kingdoms and rule well.

 

By this time, some other Targaryen dreams (or wishes?) seem to have also gotten incorporated in the prophecy. Jaehaerys II made his children Aerys II and Rhaella marry each other despite the protests of his king-father Aegon V and both the children. But Jaehaerys II was stubborn on the match as he has been foretold that “the prince who was promised would be born of their line”. Now the prophecy had changed significantly and makes no mention of a threat of a terrible winter. Or maybe that’s only what the records tell us. Maybe the prophecy grew to include a prince who would fight the northern threat in the coming long night. But the actual prophecy of the long night was still only passed down from king to heir. And so Jaehaerys II passed down the reign and the prophecy to Aerys II.

 

Rhaegar

Aerys II named Rhaegar his heir and passed the prophecy to Rhaegar. Where we meet a very significant deviation in the prophecy. Ser Barristan Selmy tells Daenaerys that one day Rhaegar was reading a scroll, safter which he said, ‘I will require a sword and armor. It seems I must be a warrior.’

 

There are many accounts which mention that Rhaegar did not like to fight. He loved his silver-stringed harp more than he loved his lance. But he excelled at anything to which he put his mind. So when he realized he must become a warrior, he got good at it.

 

Losing the prophecy

What did Rhaegar find in the scrolls that compelled him to become such a great warrior? Did he believe himself to be the PtwP? There was enough evidence for it.

1. Rhaegar was born on the day of the tragedy of Summerhall. The prophecy described the PtwP would be born “amidst smoke and salt”
2. He was a fine young man who bore the name of a great dynasty.

But Rhaegar did not know what was the intent of the PtwP. So he simply prepared himself for any challenge that might appear before him.

 

Question. Knowing the importance of the Targaryen prophecy and believing himself to be the PtwP; would Rhargar have risked burning putting the seven kingdoms in revolt and risking the Targaryen rule simply because he loved Lyanna? Or did he see a greater purpose behind it? What did Rhaegar know?

We also see that Maester Aemon, Aegon V’s elder brother, also had some idea of the prophecy. When Rhaegar mentioned the prophecy to Maester Aemon, the old maester agreed that Rhaegar might be the PtwP. But added that the dragon must have three heads. Rhaegar did not ignore this as mad rumblings of an old master, but carried it to the point that he married Lyanna Stark which eventually started Robert’s rebellion.

 

The old maester might have known more. At the time of Robert’s rebellion he wanted to go south and help Rhaegar. Rhaegar might have revealed the prophecy to Maester Aemon. Or maybe his father Maekar did, believing him to be a candidate for the throne. Either ways, by the time of Aerys II’s reign, the PtwP seems to be a prevalent story at least among the Targaryens.

 

Later, Rhaegar thought his son Aegon from Elia Martell would be the PtwP and his would be “the song of ice and fire,” which tells us that the prophecy of the PtwP is related to Aegon I’s prophecy of the terrible winter. But he also thought that he needed another son as “the dragon must have three heads.” And so he married Lyanna Stark in a secret ceremony to resulting in the birth of Jon Snow, who did eventually mitigate the threat from the north. But the secret, if it did exist that far, was lost when Robert’s warhammer fell on Rhaegar’s chest. And that’s when the prophecy was lost forever.

15 Last Words from ASoIaF

I recently read John Green's "Looking For Alaska". And since this is not a book review I will refrain from giving any opinion about the book on this post. The idea however, comes from the protagonist, "Pudge" who reads biographies so that he can know the last words of famous figures. As he quests for the last words of his love, an idea came to me. Which is the book that I've read with a lot of last words? It would be a book with a lot of deaths. Obviously, A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones) came to mind. And so, here we go. The 15 most memorable last words of from major death scenes through the series, in order of their death.

1. “For Robert!”  – Ser Waymar Royce

First death in the series

2. “Sister, please… Dany, tell them… make them… sweet sister…” – Viserys Targaryen

3. “I will give Lyanna your love, Ned. Take care of my children for me.” – King Robert Baratheon

Because every person must entrust Ned with the safety of their children

4. “I betrayed the faith of my king and the trust of my friend, Robert. I swore to defend and protect his children, yet before his blood was cold, I plotted to depose and murder his son and seize the throne for myself. Let the High Septon and Baelor the Beloved and the Seven bear witness to the truth of what I say: Joffrey Baratheon is the one true heir to the Iron Throne, and by the grace of all the gods, Lord of the Seven Kingdoms and Protector of the Realm.” – Lord Eddard Stark

5. “No. Must ride. Ride. No.” – Khal Drogo

Ironically, also his first word in the series.

6. “You will not hear me scream.” – Mirri Maz Duur

To which Dany replied, “I will.”

7. “…sharp” – Qhorin Halfhand

He had previously asked Jon if his sword was sharp enough, knowing that Jon will slay him later that day

8. “Who calls me bastard?” – Craster

9. “Tell Jorah. Forgive him. My son. Please. Go.” – Lord Commander Jeor Mormont

10. “Jeyne? Mother, Grey Wind…” – King Robb Stark

11. “No, don’t, don’t cut my hair, Ned loves my hair” – Catelyn Stark

Dying thoughts

12. “Oh. You know nothing, Jon Snow” – Ygritte

13. “It’s, kof, the pie, noth—kof, pie. I, kof, I can’t, kof kof kof kof…” – King Joffrey Baratheon

14. “I came to hear you confess. You raped her. You murdered her. You killed her children. You raped her. You murdered her. You killed her children. You raped her. You murdered her. You killed her children. You raped her. You murdered her. You killed her children. You raped her. You murdered her. You killed her children. You raped her. You murdered her. Elia. You raped her. You murdered her. You killed her children. Now say her name. I will hear you say it. She was Elia of Dorne. Elia. Say it! Elia. Of Dorne! Say it! ELIA OF DORNE! EEEEELLLLLLIIIIIAAAAA! If you die before you say her name, ser, I will hunt you through all seven hells. Say the name!” – Prince Oberyn Nymeros Martell

15. “Elia of Dorne. I killed her screaming whelp. Then I raped her. Then I smashed her fucking head in. Like this.” – Ser Gregor Clegane

Book Review – Shantaram

I bought my Kindle in 2015. 3 years down, being true to my engineering nature, I didn’t spend another single penny on any book. The rationale being that you do not need to pay money for things that appear on the screen. This rule finally broke when I picked up Gregory David Robers’ (GDR) Shantaram. It’s not that I was unable to find the book. Both Shantaram and the sequel were easily available. Only when I’d spent months devouring them and realized that the journey was about to end, I bought the special author’s edition of The Mountain Shadow (TMS). Honestly, it is unfathomable that an Indian engineer would pay for an e-book he already has. But that’s how much I loved GDR’s writing.

Shantaram and its sequel, TMS are the epitome of good contemporary writing. The books give you plot, style, humour, thought, wisdom, romance, and an insight into the mind of a city that I have personally come to love over the years. GDR’s autobiographical account of his life in Mumbai give you a new lens to see the city. One that takes you through the underworld, slums, back markets, and weird fetishes that exist only in a maximum city. But while grappling with difficult subjects GDR makes sure we are entertained and puts in the right dose of comedy whenever the plot starts to get too dry. He reveals his writing technique in the author’s edition of TMS. He finds a painting that includes elements of his plot and carves out non-linear portions from the image into his writing. That gives the text a sense of chaos that is fitting to Mumbai, yet leaves a coherent narrative. It also helps the author in coming back to side-stories that one may be tempted to write at a go. It also adds another layer to the book that the reader is rewarded with every time he goes back to the book. Never before had I encountered such a writing technique and I’m thankful to GDR for sharing the process. It was worth the money.

But there’s more. GDR’s books work on central themes and he carefully creates characters adhering to them. In Shantaram, the central theme is that of exile. Only when the book ends does one realize that every character in the book, no matter how significant or insignificant, is an exile in some way. In TMS, the same characters who evolve, and sometimes literally metamorphose in unexpected new ways explore the ideas of love and faith. And of course in the stream of characters like Prabaker, Didier, Kavita Singh, Lisa, and Lin, this review would be incomplete without the mention of Karla.

Karla is a character created out of the pure grit and honed writing skills of GDR. It’s almost as if GDR took the wittiest writing he’s ever written or read in his life and sculpted Karla out of those words. To the extent that even when she’s not in a scene, other characters would say something deep and immediately attribute the quote to Karla. But in TMS we discover that Karla is more than just words. She can be showrunner when GDR needs her to be. And quite honestly, we could not have enough of her. GDR has mentioned in his last interview that he would create spin-offs for Karla and Didier. I don’t know how a book created exclusively for Karla would work. Just like Karla needs GDR’s writing, she also needs Lin’s thoughts to reach the reader. I’m not sure if we would like her in her own head. But I trust GDR’s writing enough to know that he wouldn’t disappoint.

GDR understands that a reader invests a lot of life in reading an 800-page book. He respects their time. Usually when I read a book, I mark any interesting quotes I discover in it. The last book that I noted down quotes from was The Fault in Our Stars. I found dozens in Shantaram and TMS. Here, I want to share 22. Why just 22? Well, for one thing, I’d like you to visit the books yourself and discover your own wisdom. Secondly, it makes for much better decoration.

Quotes from Shantaram and TMS

"Greed is human Kryptonite." - TMS, Chapter 18

"Love: desire, stripped of hunger." - TMS, Chapter 47

"Power is the opposite of freedom." - TMS, Chapter 81

"Expectation, the ghost of reputation." - TMS, Chapter 69

"The truth is just inhibition, after 3 drinks." - TMS, Chapter 80

"If you're gonna do something, make an art of it." - TMS, Chapter 23

"The people showed thanks, rather than saying it." - Shantaram, Chapter 12

"An amateur is anyone who hasn't learned how not to do it." - TMS, Chapter 2

"Religion makes men soldiers, and war makes them apostles." - TMS, Version 15

"When will we demand peace, as passionately as we demand freedom?" - TMS, Chapter 80

"Depression only happens to people who don't know how to be sad." - Shantaram, Chapter 26

"News tells you what people did. Gossip tells you how much they enjoyed it." - Shantaram, Chapter 17

"Journalism, Didier once said to Ranjit, the media baron, the cure that becomes its own disease." - TMS, Chapter 34

"The Koran commands me to study everything, and learn everything, in order to serve Allah." - Shantaram, Chapter 33

"Corruption is a tax imposed on any society that doesn't pay people enough to repel it themselves." - TMS, Chapter 68

"The world is run by one million evil men, ten million stupid men, and a hundred million cowards." - Shantaram, Chapter 17

"It is always a fool's mistake, Didier once said to me, to be alone with someone you shouldn't have loved." - Shantaram, Chapter 42

"Friendship, for him, was measured by what men do and endure for one another, not by what they share and enjoy." - Shantaram, Chapter 31

"Cruelty is a kind of cowardice. Cruel laughter is the way cowards cry when they're not alone, and causing pain is how they grieve." - Shantaram, Chapter 21

"Only a wicked man would derive such benefit from good works. A good man, on the other hand, would simply be worn out and bad tempered." - Shantaram, Chapter 17

"Praising people behind their back is monstrously unfair, because the only thing you can't defend yourself against is the good that people say about you." - Shantaram, Chapter 31

"She wasn’t in love with me, and I couldn't be in love with her. But we made the night bright and the sunlight right a lot of the time, and never felt used or unloved." - TMS, Chapter 8

Book Review - Rich Dad Poor Dad

Rarely ever do you find a book with such consistent reviews from all its readers. Wanting to dabble with a light financial read, most of my friends recommended Rich Dad Poor Dad to me. ‘I wish I’d read this book when I was young’ everyone said. Yet when I told some other friends that I was reading Rich Dad Poor Dad, I heard a lot of ‘it’s just another self-help book’. And I do agree that Rich Dad Poor Dad remains a self-help book at its core. However, we cannot overlook the fact that it is a self-help book giving a very unique perspective on many technical and personality issues in financial thinking.

The most striking feature of the book to me was the underlying political debate. The book shows the difference in perspectives of a highly educated and socialist Poor Dad against a tax-fleeing capitalist Rich Dad. To a younger reader, it might not come across as striking. To me, it was one of the few good arguments in favor of a conservative leadership in the USA (apart from Donald Trump’s Presidency).

The book imparts its wisdom in the form of 6 lessons, and then some more for bonus ones which are reproduced here in their skeletal form. To be sure, you need to read the book if you want to truly grasp their essence. I merely present them here for you to judge if the book is for you or not.

Lesson 1: The Rich Don’t Work for Money

Wealth is accumulated in 3 ways – (i) Earned, (ii) Expanded, and (iii) Created. In this lesson Kiyosaki argues that the Rich seek not to earn but to expand it. When you work for an income, you earn it. The Rich do not believe in that. Instead they seek to make money work for them thereby expanding it. He shares the perspective of most folks who seek to earn a higher income by working harder getting into a trap of higher needs and thus working further hard. It is not until you have money working for you that you can be free of this vicious cycle.

Lesson 2: Why Teach Financial Literacy

Kiyasaki introduces financial terms like “assets”, “liabilities”, etc in this chapter, but with a twist. While this chapter in no way prepares you for an accounting exam at college, it teaches you a perspective of looking at “wealth” which is quite intuitive, even if it doesn’t agree with the generally accepted accounting principles. To work with something we need to understand it first. And so Kiyosaki stresses upon the need for financial literacy. He then goes on to illustrate cash flow patterns for different types of individuals and welcomes you to choose what kind of person would you like to be. He also illustrates the different assets and liabilities and their impact on individual wealth.

Lesson 3: Mind Your Own Business

At the outset it seems like another chapter on being an entrepreneur. But that was Chapter 1. Here Kiyosaki explains the perspective of looking at businesses and understanding them. You need to know what you are doing. For example, Nokia looked at itself as a phone company and failed while Apple saw itself as a technology company, going wherever technology led it, and often leading technology places. What would happen if Google saw itself as an advertising company in the early 2000s? Next he explains the different kinds of investments you can make but always remember, that it is your business and hence your job to understand what it is.

Lesson 4: The History of Taxes and the Power of Corporations

Kiyosaki takes us on a history lesson now slowly revealing a very conservative outlook on money. On a personal note, it is heartening to see the conflict between conservative-capitalism and liberal-socialism. I’d have loved to read of a liberal-capitalism system in the book. But I don’t get to make choices about the world in live in. Kiyosaki explains how taxes were started in the USA and UK and how it inevitably led to the middle-class being taxed in effect while the rich escaped. He misses out, perhaps consciously, on the economic perspective of dealing with issues of disparity and unemployment. But Kiyosaki isn’t interested in the Macroeconomic issues. It only tells you one thing – shield yourself from the government and get rich!

Lesson 5: The Rich Invent Money

Ever wondered how some people just seem to get money out of a whim, as if it is indeed growing on tress. In this lesson Kiyosaki shares tips and techniques on how the rich are able to invent money from scratch. The foundation is laid in the previous chapters, i.e. of what is money. Once you learn that money is nothing but promises and trust, it’s easy to see how it can be invented out of sheer nothingness. The secret basically lies in 3 skills – (i) Finding opportunities which most people will miss, (ii) Raising money, and (iii) Organizing smart people.

Lesson 6: Work to Learn, Don’t Work for Money

Kiyasaki emphasizes on the importance of learning, especially learning sales. And the best way to do that is through practice. Learning to hear the resounding “no”. Learning persistence. And learning the perspective that only the Rich seem to know. He shares his own experience by illustrating a conversation with a very good writer who wanted to be a “best-selling author”. But she refused to acknowledge the difference between “best-selling” a “best-writing”. Similarly, it is not enough to be good at what you do. It’s important to do better things!

Kiyasaki then goes on to describe the obstacles people face in following the above lessons. Then he tries to comment on the motivations one needs to get started on the path. Lastly, he comes up with a bonus round of Do’s. Action steps if everything above was too much theory and nothing practical.

Kiyasaki ends with another parable on how to pay for a child’s education with just $ 7,000. And then the book has some advertising on other books and products Kiyasaki is associated with. After all, he too is looking to make money out of this.

Yes, you may argue that this is just another self-help book and the author is looking to be invited to another motivational talk session to some big university. And that is true. But there are a few good self-help books on the way. Rich Dad Poor Dad seems to be one of them. While it imparts no traditional financial knowledge, it offers a different perspective to look at things. And once in a while, it’s good to accept a newer perspective.