Sunday, March 29, 2009

Misanthropes, friendships.

No man is in the deepest sense a misanthrope
Ironical as it seems, it is society that creates misanthropes

Those that are similar are bound to come together
They don’t even have to ‘try’ –
Things just fall together naturally like matching pieces

What great feeling it is to have someone else’s heart resonate with yours;
What a great sense of place you have in this world

When you have someone else to vindicate you too -
To reassure you that you are not alone;
That their heart beats, their mind moves, in a similar way to yours ...

If you have to 'try' -
Then you're with the wrong person :).

The thing about true friendships, and true love is that -
You can just be yourself -
You need not 'try', in any sense, at all -
And things will just unravel naturally
Magic will occur from the unmagical
You will marvel at how things just, simply, 'happen'...

Misanthropes don't really exist
There only exist people that can never understand them.

Misanthropes and loners can have friends too.
Someone just needs to show them that it is possible.
Someone just needs to show that it does not require perhaps as a big effort as they imagine it to be.
Someone just needs to show that they really are not alone, that there are others like them too...

Saturday, March 28, 2009

What it means to be alone.

Being alone is not about being physically isolated -

It is about being socio-culturally isolated.

One can be amidst a million people yet still be alone.

It is being utterly, irreconcilably different to all other people. Socially, culturally.

Of course, there are certain things, that as humans we share with other people - but in everyday life, these barest of 'lowest common denominators' don't really play much of a part.

This incomprehendable difference, rift and gulf between oneself and others produces and perpetuates the loner. One is irrevocably seperated and continues to drift further and further away from other people.

There are very few things normal people will 'have in common' with loners. They are socio-cultural aliens. Incomprehendable, irrecognisable. An enigma. Someone best to 'leave alone' - as you can see, the creation of a loner is a two-way process.

Mired in social anomie.

Cryptic. Incomprehensible. Irreconcilable

These words describe things in either directions - I view society like that; society views me like that.

Why pitying is bad

Pitying is bad because when you pity someone, you implicitly place yourself above them. Sure, you might think that you’re providing ‘love’, ‘care’ and ‘concern’ to those being pitied –

But you make it pretty obvious to them that they didn’t really ‘earn’ your 'love / concern', that you are only doing it because you feel you are above them, and you feel that hence you possess the power/right/position to be the one who 'pities', whereas the other person lacks that power/right/position hence is the one who is 'pitied'.

You think that you’re the only one in control; that they only exist to receive your pity; that they're 'under' you, hence they 'deserve' your pity, by virtue of being in that perceived
position...

Why did the phrase ‘as cold as charity’ arise when charity is supposed to be a 'good' thing?

Because, in my view, so often charity was (and sometimes still is) based on pity.

Pity is designed to seperate - to seperate between you, the pitied, who is 'under' me, and myself. What this constructs is a chasm between those that pity and those that are being pitied.

Heh. Never would it occur to the person who pities that perhaps - they may one day be the person at the receiving end. To them, pity would be something they would be all-too-willing to give, but all-too-unwilling to receive.

And I guess this is why pity doesn't constitute true love. LOVE is something you will be BOTH willing to give and receive. Why the golden rule - treat others as you would like to be treated yourself describes love so well. No one, in their right mind, would go 'looking for pity' - often, being pitied is a last resort which they must endure - because they know what those that pity you really feel - that they are above you, somehow more valuable as human beings than you.

To pity anyone is wrong.

To love them - horizontally - no power-relationships - this is true love. To embrace who you would otherwise 'pity' as fellow brothers-in-arms. To embrace them as being just like you. To acknowledge that you are no better than them - that you are just as frail and weak a human being as them, but that at the same time both you and them are strong, willed human beings too.

Only at such an equal-footing can true love be given and received. Only upon such an acknowledgement.

Always think of this especially when you try to love or care about someone who society otherwise labels as 'lowly' - because they are not, and with those 'vertical', 'power' spectacles you will never practise true love. When you see beggars, when you see criminals, when you see disaster-victims, when you see addicts, when you see disabled people, when you see orphans -

Know that really, you are no different to them, they are no different to you, and THIS is why we should care about them and love them. NOT because we are 'above' them in any way.

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Silence with grace

Let me reveal to you today a truth that those who medicalise, label and stigmatise silence never realise.

I have realised that there are two types of silence in this world: silence with awkwardness, and silence with grace.

We are all too familiar with the first type of silence.

But here’s a thought: Do awkward silences exist insofar as one decides to feel awkward in that moment of silence? And then that such perception perpetuates itself; one actually starts acting awkwardly, uncomfortably; the silence is unbearable and one wants to do something about it.

Yes, that is the only type of silence that this modern world seems willing to recognise.

Silence in itself is a lost virtue in today’s world.

*

I wish to suggest and live a second kind of silence -

Silence with grace.

What is this?

It is to embrace silence. To enjoy silence. To cherish it; to revel in it.

It is NOT treating silence as a source of awkwardness - no, no, no!

It is to live a graceful silence; where one has accepted one's silence and embraces it.

Accepting, enjoying tranquility.

A problem is only a problem insofar as one continues to perceive it as a problem. One's silence will cease to be a problem when one has accepted it, invited it to be a part of oneself.

And then, one will start to become a 'master of silence' - where one enacts silence to a degree that... it is no longer 'awkward' to them; it is natural, it is part of themselves, and hence one will be able to show what it means to be silent with grace.

This is a truth that those who stimagtise silence will never understand until they actually open their eyes and try to understand us as human beings, beautiful as who we are, individual as who we are.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Impromptu speech, on-the-spot thinking, spontaneous creativity, ‘speaker’s block’.

It’s not that I cannot think; rather, it’s the fact that when I am put on the spot my thinking ceases to function.

Often, minutes later, when that spotlight has worn off of me, I can think of a million brilliant things that I could have said.

But… when that spotlight is on me to say something, I cannot think properly!

My mind erases into a blank white slate. I just don’t know what to say. Suddenly, I forget everything. I feel that I need to respond, to say something, but I cannot think of anything. All I see is this blank, whiteness.

Not to mention the incredibly short time ‘society’ allows for a response, before things start drifting off into ‘awkwardness’. It’s certainly in the sub-second range.

So, I guess, it’s wrong trying to think of what to say after someone has finished saying something; rather, you must be actively be constructing your response before the other person has said everything.

Perhaps that’s what I’ve been doing wrong. But then again, sometimes you’re told to speak on very short notice.

I call it an art, really, in such cases – where people begin their talking while they’re trying to think of what to say next. True multitasking. And not saying incoherent things either – all the while saying socially, situationally, grammatically appropriate and coherent things.

I call it spontaneous creativity.

I will even go far as to say this is the origin of human creativity. In my view, human creativity blossomed once language had been invented. Now, people had to be incredibly creative on very short notice to merely have a simply conversation.

I guess something is inhibiting my free-flow too much. The thoughts are there, but something is blocking it.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

The Grand Paradox of Human Interaction

I don't know how people enjoy talking about, what to me are quite 'trivial' matters.

Let me list what to me are the list of boring, trivial topics people seem to enjoy talking about:

- asking 'how you are' 'how it's going'
- the weather - not just today, but how it has been / will be for the past month / year.
- how bored they are of working / doing something / being here.
- other people. (and what they think of them)
- past interactions with someone else. ("I was like ...." "He was like ...." etc.)
- The Weekend - what they did, plans for it.
- when the next break will be. What they want to eat or drink. Or, comments on what they did eat or drink in the last break.
- their / others' clothes.
- How they 'feel'. (No, not the 'grand' feelings such as intense sorrow / happiness.. just the mild, trivial 'feelings'.)
- latest TV show / music / movie.
- 'neighbourhood' or 'in-group' news / current events. (No, not 'world events')
- Their domestic life.

Yeah. To me they just seem like trivial topics 'not worth' talking about. I guess this is why I often can't think of what to say - I just don't value the above sort of things, whereas other people clearly do! Well, I'm fine with that. I don't want to have conversations about 'nothing'. Sure, they call it 'social lubrication' or whatever, but... I don't wanna do it - yes - even at the expense of social interaction, because... I don't want to be doing something I don't want to.

Why can't people talk about things more interesting!!!

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Companionship

I guess all I want in life is simple.

I just want some companionship.

Real companionship... someone whom I can share things with...

Someone whom to casually just talk to...

Someone to be just there for me.

They don't have to do anything, they don't have to say anything;

Just be there for me...

Not speaking a lot takes its toll after a while ... you just want someone to talk to.

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

The power of labels

The human brain works in a funny way.
The moment we label something, we lose our ability to see much beyond that label.
For example – if you label oneself –
You may end up limiting yourself to that label, like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

*

Sometimes it’s best not to label at all.
Then they can be ‘free’.

*

Descriptions are tricky things.

By describing something, we are summarizing something, in some ways, reducing something to that description.

We must remember – descriptions often fail to capture everything; we lose / distort large amounts of ‘information’ as we try to ‘capture’ objects / phenomena of the world in words / other media.

This is why I think ‘theories’ differ from ‘reality’ – theories, by their very nature, simplify things down – intentionally or not – hence they fail to ‘encompass’ or ‘capture’ everything.

Also, in my view, we say a literature / work of art is ‘good’ when they in fact do manage to ‘capture’ surprisingly a lot - things that we often fail to capture in normal ‘descriptions’. To borrow Alexander Pope’s words, good writing / art expresses -

“What oft was thought, but ne'er so well expressed.”

In fact, this quote was said about wit. Indeed, sometimes humour ‘captures’ certain things unexpectedly well. (And perhaps part of why we find things 'funny')

Sometimes, narratives, or ‘personal stories’ may capture more than ‘hard, factual’, accounts.

Sometimes, not telling certain things – omitting certain things may tell more than including them. It may ‘capture’ the essence of something more than trying to brutally describe everything. There is a quote I remember from high school English class that I’ll never forget – “Always show, never tell.”

I always kind of wondered why there were so many different forms of writing / art. I'm slowly starting to understand - each form captures certain things other forms cannot. Sure, we can interpret from one form to another - as you would translate between languages. For example, one can 'describe' a poem using prose. But no matter what you do, it will fail to capture everything in that poem; to do that reliably... one will have to write the poem itself.

Doctors vs. Scientists

Today... we had an interesting discussion.
It was to differentiate between medical doctors and scientists.
And... in a group of medical students, it's not hard to get some prejudiced images of scientists, and some ideal images of doctors.

The group 'consensus' was that doctors had to deal with 'more' than scientists - that not only do doctors need to know the science, they need to know people too. And they also said that a doctor's job is more 'complex' because not only do they have to deal with swathes of facts, but swathes of 'emotions' too.

They somehow painted the picture that scientists were these unemotional, passive beings who sat in dim-lit labs over petri dishes, 'not caring'; to them patients were just labels, not 'real people'. Scientists had no social / communication skills. They were detached from the 'real world'.

Well.

My heart couldn't disagree more.

Really. Scientists - especially those in life sciences - are very concerned about people. Let me just put it this way - their passions are directed... in a slightly different manner to doctors. They are trained in... different... skills and roles. But to question their emotions and intentions, is wrong.

The people that will be finding the cure for cancer will be scientists. The people that will be finding a cure for heart disease will be scientists. Patients will thank the doctor that delivers these treatments, but we know, that really at the back there were some great, dedicated scientists out there - who directed their passions and acumen to a noble and worthy goal.

Yeah. I am a scientist at heart... I know it...

The lengths one will go to not break someone's heart.

Tomorrow was supposed to be D-day.
Tomorrow was supposed to be the day I would break someone's heart.

I had been tossing and turning the past few days because of this.
My mind has been very heavy.
I didn't know what to do.

You see, no one in their 'right mind' breaks someone's heart for no reason. Usually there is a moral dilemma associated with it. Usually, there is an other side to the equation.

In my case, it was myself. The troubles my heart would go through. The fears, the worries, the anxieties, the awkwardness.

Yet here I am. I called it off. I will not break their heart. No - no, no ... it is such a cruel thing to do. You would never do that to a person ...

Instead... I'd rather suffer myself. I'd rather take it on myself. I'd rather live through the pain head-on. I'd rather walk on the burning path. I will take all the shame, I will take all the embarrassment, I will live through the awkwardness, I will be that sore thumb, I will be that piece that doesn't fit in, I will be that loner;

But no, I will not break someone else's heart. Not after what they have done for me. I would rather suffer myself.