Most people bluff in front of the camera. Some stutter, a few speak shameless lies. Beware of crooks paying undeserving encomiums. Those offering platitudes are unbearable bores. Anyone making big, vague promises must be a socialist snake. For me, the proof of sincerity and transparency is in a man’s (or a woman’s) use of ‘Chew’ in a harangue- not just in the use of this non-abuse, but also in the frequency and manner of spitting it.
Those who claim to be offended by the stray use of Chew must know that Khushwant Singh translated it as ‘cunt-born’. Doesn’t this make Chew applicable to all mammals? Now, in uttering ‘mammal’, neither the tongue gets twisted, not do the muscles in the left-cheek get twitched. Neither does air get blown out of the mouth, nor are eyes able to properly express love or contempt. It is a straightforward delivery, lacking in punch.
Chew, on the other hand, allows the speaker to perform magic. If it is slid down one’s mouth with abandon, one comes across as Ramadhir Singh of Wasseypur, berating his worthless son. If your eyes throw the word like a grenade, the effect is Irrfan Khan-esque. If it’s a part of your usual vocabulary, you are Langda Tyagi of Omkara. ‘Do you consider me a chew’ is a rhetorical question whose answer, depending upon the situation, is given in either a ‘no’, or met with silence, but is almost always, ‘yes’. Because no no-mammal, non-cunt born shall ever ask this question, and if it does, is actually abusing by reminding you of your origins and identity.
The beneficiary, even in a sea of humanity, instinctively knows by the tone and tenor of the delivery, that he indeed is the intended recipient. Chew is a precision-guided missile that always finds its target. Sometimes, Chew is directed towards one person, but the whole of assembly gets the message. Everyone, after all, is a Chew. The one who disagrees is just ignorant of this truth. Of course, no two Chews are the same- the stripes, shades, styles and intensities are unique.
The public use of such a potent word as this, and with such dramatic appeal, is being objected to by many hypocrites around this country. The word is ‘un-parliamentary’, they aver. Has the Chew bomb been dropped inside the Parliament, then? Does not behove a leader to use it! Who better than the Leader to remind someone of the truth of his origins? Besides, who can be more appropriately addressed as a Chew than the video journalist who was filming the video himself?
I do have some issues with the actual performance, though. The word does not come out forcefully enough. There is not enough chill. It is stated too matter-of-factly, and is intended to neither hurt, nor sting, nor shock nor awe. There is no sign that the speaker derived any pleasure or pride out of the hurling exercise. He has not provided ample justification for celebrating this utterance.
This episode does remind me, though, of the Great Bansal Sir of Kota who used (don’t know if he still does) Chew as a noun, an adjective, a verb and as exclamation, as a term of endearment and scorn, to seek attention and to give it, to shame the conscience or to rouse it, as a salute and as an abuse, in songs and in prose, for himself, for his kids, and for his audience, at any point of time, or perhaps most of the time. No one quite has quite munched, kneaded, chewed and digested ‘Chew’ as he used to do (or still does), with due respects to Tigmanshu Dhulia, Manoj Vajpayee and Irrfan Khan. I could never bring myself to use Hootiya, Qtiya, Tootia, Doodhia, Lootiya, Mootiya, Kutia, Chukiya, rather settled for Chew, only because that is how the word is pronounced by its Master Practitioner, the Great Bansal Sir.
#chew #qtiya #tigmanshudhulia #irrfan #langdatyagi #chukiya #hootiya #bansalsir #khushwantsingh #cuntborn