To be honest, I have not read many sensitive novels - but this one just blew me away.The book was simply amazing.
When I broke my leg and my wife gifted this to me, I started it only because people had given good reviews and it has been made into a movie. But characters, the setting, the vivid description of Kabul in the 70s, the description of man's desperation, how the secrets tumble out and the climax were simply fantastic.
Even if you are an insensitive sort of person, the minimum this book offers are 3-4 big lumps in your throat.
Fantastic, amazing and wonderful work by Khaled Hosseini.
Mar 11, 2008
Mar 5, 2008
Finally - Some sanity in Aussie media
Well well well....Do we finally have some sense dawning in the Aussie media? Seems to be so. Time will tell if I am hoping correctly or against hope.
Read this in the Herald Sun - Not a fan of shameful crowd behaviour
Till now, the only player they revered was Sachin - who I agree is the god of cricket - but then others were also carrying themselves very well. For example, the captain Dhoni - a man of immense stature. He seemed to carry the pressure amazingly well - the continuity from Kumble was almost perfect.
And our favourite player this season - the Aussie favourite Harbie? Lets give Symonds the benefit of doubt for the moment that he did not hear the racist term clearly.
(It is a different matter that he does not deserve one bit of that benefit. My Indianness makes me forget that he himself volunteered to be in the position; sticking up for ol' mate; saying to Harbie "You ain't got any mates in Australia'....and other such stuff. It is getting too much from my side, isn't it? ;)...)
Coming back to the point (that is, my senses) - What about the Aussie media. I have been following it a little bit during this series and, to be polite, it is partisan. To be blunt, I don't want to state what it was unlike Mr. ultra-polite Hayden.
The much hyped Peter Roebuck who was hailed as a neutral when he called the Aussies a "Pack of wild dogs" in his column - asked ICC to ban Bhajji to be banned for 5 years if found guilty of making those gestures! What about the much victimised Mr. Symonds? Hell, he knocked out a spectator and that too a drunk one! What about Mr. Hayden who called Bhajji a obnoxious something? So what if it was in jest? Did it occur to him to give the same benefit of doubt to Harbhajan?
Or is it too much to give the benefit of doubt to India which is emerging as a strong contender for the crown? But when it comes to such things Mr. Roebuck only remembers India's financial clout.
I smell smoke somewhere...
Read this in the Herald Sun - Not a fan of shameful crowd behaviour
Till now, the only player they revered was Sachin - who I agree is the god of cricket - but then others were also carrying themselves very well. For example, the captain Dhoni - a man of immense stature. He seemed to carry the pressure amazingly well - the continuity from Kumble was almost perfect.
And our favourite player this season - the Aussie favourite Harbie? Lets give Symonds the benefit of doubt for the moment that he did not hear the racist term clearly.
(It is a different matter that he does not deserve one bit of that benefit. My Indianness makes me forget that he himself volunteered to be in the position; sticking up for ol' mate; saying to Harbie "You ain't got any mates in Australia'....and other such stuff. It is getting too much from my side, isn't it? ;)...)
Coming back to the point (that is, my senses) - What about the Aussie media. I have been following it a little bit during this series and, to be polite, it is partisan. To be blunt, I don't want to state what it was unlike Mr. ultra-polite Hayden.
The much hyped Peter Roebuck who was hailed as a neutral when he called the Aussies a "Pack of wild dogs" in his column - asked ICC to ban Bhajji to be banned for 5 years if found guilty of making those gestures! What about the much victimised Mr. Symonds? Hell, he knocked out a spectator and that too a drunk one! What about Mr. Hayden who called Bhajji a obnoxious something? So what if it was in jest? Did it occur to him to give the same benefit of doubt to Harbhajan?
Or is it too much to give the benefit of doubt to India which is emerging as a strong contender for the crown? But when it comes to such things Mr. Roebuck only remembers India's financial clout.
I smell smoke somewhere...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
