Review: On the Shortness of Life

On the Shortness of Life by Seneca
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This is a book that creeps into you and slowly affects the way you look at things, not least of all, your own life. Life is lived on two levels - the actual living as well as the parsing and analysis of life later. This book offers wonderful guidance on the first as well as serving as an invaluable guide to the latter. If I started to quote from the book, I would surely end up being guilty of copyright breach, I would only urge you to read it, wherever you are in life, whatever your state of mind. It shall add riches to your years.

View all my reviews

Review: Crash and Burn

Crash and Burn by Artie Lange
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Addicts are not weak, slithering reptiles from another planet. An addict is a person just like everyone else. To all those who sit in smug superiority as being 'stronger than that', it is important to realise the micron-wide cracks of life that can guide people towards painful paths. Lange's book is not funny in any way, but stark and well-meaning. It is a sobering read, probably more interesting for those familiar with Lange on the Howard Stern show, but interesting nonetheless. Artie is a comic, and quite funny, but he is right in that there is nothing attractive, funny, charming or cool about the path he took and was lucky to extract himself from, for now.

View all my reviews

Review: Summer Requiem

Summer Requiem by Vikram Seth
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Vikram Seth's most recent collection of poems is new and at the same time old. Reading this book and then revisiting his earlier collections, I was surprised to see how they are all of the same voice. This is not a criticism, but rather a statement of awe : Seth the poet seems to have been fully formed from an earlier age. His remarkable felicity with words, ability to evoke the most beautiful of images with a wonderful economy (there are parts of An Equal Music that read like poems) is evident everywhere in this slender book, that allows itself to be carried around to dive into when one needs respite from life. The very good 'What's in it?' recalls very strongly, Byron's superior 'When We Two Parted', 'Can't' appeals to every one of us who has had to go work on Monday mornings; the best of the lot might be the plaintive 'Caged', which resembles in spirit The Eagles' 'Best of My Love'.

View all my reviews

Review: Federer and Me: A Story of Obsession

Federer and Me: A Story of Obsession by William Skidelsky
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

I suppose it is not fair to read a book written by an obsessive and then expect it to be totally fair and balanced. Having said that, Skidelsky's book is not without merit. The strongest portions are the ones where he discusses the advancement of the game, expertly analyses the Federer forehand and compares the same with other (older and newer) forehands. However, the ground is slightly shakier when Skidelsky talks about his own life, narrating how he lost his virginity (?) and attempts to amuse us with his experience in a restroom in Halle. Think Bill Bryson-lite. I finished the book feeling quite sorry for the author's then girlfriend who became his wife. His description of the amazingly recuperative powers of Federer’s game to allow them to heal after a particularly painful personal episode raises many questions, best answered by a therapist. Still, perhaps that is the price of being married to a person who has a self-proclaimed obsession. The descriptions of Nadal are predictably one-eyed, undoubtedly lapped up by Fedheads everywhere, but not particularly original or inventive. What has always amused me is how fragile Federer's fans are, given his success. Instead of the granite confidence of other sports fans, the Federer fan is always insecure - far more than needed, it seems. Skidelsky does the Swiss no favours by drawing a line to him from Graeme Hick - the Zimbabwean's most ardent fans would balk at that. Near the end of the book, Skidelsky comments on the unevenness of his relationship with Federer (as must be with almost all fans and their idols). Like the Ethan Hawke character in Before Sunset, maybe this book was written with that subliminal motive or getting the attention of the Swiss player. And he may yet be rewarded. A good read for Federer fans, uneven for tennis fans.

View all my reviews

Review: American Psycho

American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This book was powerful but eventually left me with a bad taste. Not everything that is thought needs to be committed to paper. We live in an age when an unexpressed thought is considered to be some kind of waste. But, there are passages in this book that I truly struggled to read. My mind could not comprehend why an author would want to describe the death of a child in such a way. Some books are better left unread.

View all my reviews

2016 - Novak Djokovic's Grand Slam quest

While the final in Basel pointed to Nadal making steps towards his best and offered a good look at Federer at his aggressive best, it is still hard to look beyond a certain Serbian to be overwhelming favourite at all the tournaments that count next year. I believe Djokovic has ‘Grand Slam’ on the mind and here are some reasons why he should be reasonably optimistic.

Will Novak solve the riddle of Roland Garros in 2016 and achieve a Grand Slam?

He has no real rivals over five setters. Roger Federer and Andy Murray have challenged and beaten Novak this year, turning in stellar performances. But these wins were over three sets. They have been unable to really take a tilt at Djokovic at the Slams. Murray lost to Novak easily in Melbourne and folded in the fifth at Paris. Federer played a match for the ages in his Wimbledon semifinal against Murray, but was always playing catch-up in the finals. At New York, almost everything went Federer’s way - he played short matches, not dropping a set and being as fresh as possible, the crowd at Flushing Meadow was not even remotely fair, resembling a Davis Cup crowd rather than a neutral crowd and he managed to play superbly for two and a half sets. But the signs were always pointing to trouble. He came into the final not having dropped serve over two or more tournaments and found himself under severe pressure in almost every game in the first set. It really seemed as if Djokovic could break at will. And in a two-horse race, Roger was always second best. Beyond Murray and Federer stand Wawrinka, who plays his best at the business end of tournaments and does not suffer from the pressure of performance there and actually competes well with Novak especially in Melbourne and Paris,  and Nadal (if he continues to work his way back and even then, only on clay probably)

He is thinking about it. During the US Open, Novak was asked about his chances of winning the Grand Slam one year. His answer was very informative. Instead of the usual ‘take it one match at a time’ platitude that players love trotting out, he just said to the interviewer ‘from your mouth to God’s ears’. I think all the attention on Serena’s Grand Slam pursuit has put it firmly in his mind.

He ended up with a better Slam year than Serena in 2015: Djokovic had a better year in the Slams than Serena (27-1 to 26-1). Wawrinka played lights out tennis in Paris and that is pretty much what it takes to beat Djokovic anywhere.  His pursuit of the calendar Grand Slam is more realistically achievable than anyone since Federer in 2005 (before you-know-who came and bossed the clay). His celebrations of late have become more muted, which seems to indicate that he is chasing history.

He is not being stretched: After winning three Slams, Djokovic won the next two tournaments convincingly. Every match and every set was dominated except for one set against Tomic. On average, he broke his opponents twice each set they played. And he always seemed to have an extra gear. Who would bet against him running the table through to the end of the year?

Basel 2015: Roger Federer wins and Rafael Nadal leaves encouraged too

It was a good day for Swiss tennis fans.

It was the best result for them - their hero, unsatisfied with six titles, powered his way to a seventh. And the cherry on top was the fact that he did it against his primary rival, Nadal. They hadn't met since last year's Australian Open and you had to go further back for a meeting in a final (Rome 2013). Federer, second only to Djokovic indoors, was pretty much in control for almost all of the match barring a brief phase at the end of the second set, where Nadal reminded him of the slender margins of this game as well as laying a marker for the rest of the tour. For the rest of the match a wonderfully aggressive Federer was able to handle everything Nadal threw at him, served with great power and accuracy and rarely made to chase. Too much game on a surface that suits his game to a T, and his wonderful commitment to aggression over the last year and a half has only done him good.

Nadal, meanwhile, did not have too much to cry about. After a woeful 2015, he has started to approach consistency over the last three tournaments he has played - a runner-up to Djokovic at Beijing, a semifinal at Shanghai and now a runner up - these matches have shown him making his way back towards his best. More work has to be done, but it is thrilling to have him in the mix again. If the first set against Djokovic in Beijing showed glimmers, here he was able to mount a serious challenge at times, dazzling the crowd with some vintage shots.

I was hoping that tennis would win and while not a classic, the match was compelling with plenty of winners and almost customary ‘wow-did-you-see-that’ shots from both men. Federer and Nadal will leave Basel encouraged for the rest of the year and for 2016. And after that, who knows?

Both men are closer to the end than the beginning but rather than sadden, it need only make us enjoy each match they play a little more. Don't forget, this too shall pass.

It was a good day for tennis fans.