Sunday, 24 May 2009

what dreams make sense

i have been trying to write something recently, but all that comes to mind as i sit staring at the screen are my attempts to criticise the political and administrative shortcomings of the country (that i perceive through my biased and narrowly-squinted eyes). even before keying in the potential entries, i see there is much to be desired from such posts, as they are neither my forte, interest nor strong point of discourse - though they should be at least two of the aforementioned. as such, instead i furnish you with a followup, to 'what dreams may come' bearing fruits courtesy of my attempts to record dreams. such is from today's adventure:

i wake up mildly annoyed and greatly distressed from a deep sleep gratuitiously attributed to my journey upstate with some friends today (although admittedly i slept throughout the forward journey). which was about 3am, noting i slept at about 9.30pm. as i drift off back to sleep, i notice this dream manifesting almost immediately - i am a jar of peanutbutter.

i am a jar of peanutbutter. not sure if i was smooth, crunchy or extra-crunchy, but i do remember my jar being glass,not plastic (which plays into the story in a bit). someone whom i know (family member or friend) is a bear. big grizzly bear with brown fur and black eyes. and is mauling the shit out of me. broken glass is sharding everywhere and as my peanutbutter innards are spilling all over the place, i'm screaming (wtf?). said bear is hungrily licking the peanutbutter from its paws and proceeds to relentlessly jar-rape yours truly. end of dream.

now, before the psycho-analysis begins, i'm particularly interested in knowing if bears, particularly of the grizzly type, are fond of peanut butter. i mean, i can dig it if it's yogi bear. or even boo-boo bear (face it. as cute as he is, he's damn well an accomplice to all those pic-a-nic heists. why else would he still be hanging out with yogi? plus, he isn't actually the most deterrant person-bears for yogi. god knows what he does with big brother in lieu of commercial breaks. i digress). also, grizzly bears are brown, aren't they? pretty sure they're not black. could be mexican for all i know or even eastern-european. but that's a bit racist, and geographically-ignorant.

in a nutshell, wtf does this dream mean? god, such horribad symbolism.

Monday, 11 May 2009

my little napoleons

it's very interesting what power does to people. as a kid i used to imagine what i would do if (when) i finally am able to graft adamantium unto my endoskeleton, or get bitten by a radioactive spider, or find out that i was actually from the planet krypton and was turning of age to fully potentiate my powers. and in all honesty, they weren't all virtuous and selfless intents.

as i grew up, naturally these notions grow further and further away (still hoping, though!) but what replaced it was other related questions: are people corrupted by power? or is it that people are naturally with ill intent and power enables them to fulfill their callous desires? moreso, is it possible that true virtuosity is only a means, and that once a person is in a position of power to enact, these promises are by no reasons part of the ends?

in any case, such a philosophical exercise is not my intention today, especially since my last couple of entries have been heavily so. instead, i come to the real-life story as to why i pose this in the first place.

as i am writing this, i have been set with a dilemma, whether to chose integrity and self-actualisation, or chose to succumb to the norms which have been imposed upon me (albeit i cannot say against my will) - mix in a financial ultimatum worth one million dollars and some social / familial imperatives, and spice it up with some intra-personal double-guessing and self doubt, and voila, we arrive at my situation.

succinct to say, irrespective of me being vague, the crux of the problem (if any such thing exists, as 'problem' is a relative term) is that i was applying to change from situation A to situation B, of which there should be no problem, but the person(s) in charge of enabling this change decides to disallow it. as to why, i cannot really say, as the reasons given are weak, at best, and shallow (and pedantic). video link for reference. in any case, this isn't an isolated situation. many times have i encountered bureaucracy with this result, and though it annoys me to mount my high horse, i think my father put it very well when he said that all the smart people end up in professional jobs, and the class dunces end up running the country. to a lesser extent, i can project this onto any type of managerial position - the day shift manager at your local grocery never made it past 5th grade, so now you're eating sour grapes in both literal and figurative terms. or your kids' gym teacher never got why you can't use the chain rule in intergration like how you can in differentiation, so now your kids are getting beat up for not being able to bench-press 20. <insert more lewd and inappropriate stereotypes>.

in any case, i acknowledge this is a rant, but humor me this - can you deny that you've been in the same situation, and that it's thoroughly frustrating. and it just pisses me off to see that these little napoleons find sadistic joy in complicating the most meager of tasks, just to show you they're boss and you will submit to their every whim (if at least in their little corner of the world).

suffice to say, should i ever find myself in a position to determine such a person's future, although moreso if i am to know the person from similarly past experience, i cannot promise that i will be the bigger man - for all i know i will relish every little bit of the time i crown myself the napoleon of his dilemma and screw him over as royally as possible. one can only hope.

p/s: there's actually some origin of 'to eat sour grapes' in the Bible? i think but i cannot find it on the internet right now (aka too lazy) but you can go find it yourself if you're interested. fine, i went out and found it for you anyway.

p/p/s: also, all that government propaganda about 'enabling people' and letting you be all you can be is pretty much bullcrap. something i should have obviously seen earlier on in life, but it only stings as much when it happens on a personal basis. in all honestly, the system has treated me well up to this point, but i'm going to be every bit the little baby i can and bitch about this one circumstance as long as i have right to.

Thursday, 7 May 2009

oh ye, monetary.

a moment's worth of thick and toil,
an era grown in barren soil,
i could not have gained a step or fallen, verily;
no more, or less, than painted paper,
the grim reaper, an undertaker,
i know you well, oh ye, monetary.

starless nights spent avoiding your existence,
only to embrace you with arms resistant,
for who else to ask for help? not god, obviously.
because as with everything else (at least which matter),
what makes men sick and the better, better,
who else? oh ye, monetary.

a bar of gold, a grain of rice, a goat with a hundred ticks and lice,
and education, a baroness, everything that mom said was priceless,
when quality counts for more than quantity?
what buys fear and tear, and makes us find comfort in beer,
that also makes and breaks, that gives and takes,
oh. ye. monetary.

and with this strength that i write, one that ebbs away, i find i cannot take what i do not bear to say,
to this breach of integrity, for what i have always believed in, you take in a second, still i say 'nay!'

oh ye, monetary.

- written in a spur of pure inspiration, as i was tending to guests in the living room. 6.15pm

Tuesday, 5 May 2009

... and therefore God does not exist

no, i have not embraced aethism, or anarchism, etc etc. this is a quote from the conclusion of a theory of knowledge presentation (part of the international baccalaureate programme) that was passed down to me (or up, considering the author is a junior colleague of mine). the major complaint that was brought to my attention (from one of the teaching staff) was not the issue of religious controversy, in the setting of a predominantly 'if-you're-not-with-us-then-you're-against-us-(and-hence-screwed)' society. do note that in this country, any form of independent thinking (be it religious, cultural, or political. especially political) is constantly under cynical scrutiny but any form of authority, and could end a person up in jail, or even worse, ostracism. in any case, the issue that was discussed (briefly, but which i can hopefully elaborate and extrapolate upon in this post) is the fact that the students have become dreary in thought. mundane, stereotyping and rigid. zombies of a cultural brainwash machine, in which goes the flesh of innocents, and out is churned the mindless throngs of black-and-white thinkers we know as 'adults'.

this is unsurprising to me. before you launch a crusade against me as a pompous, self-presuming person who thinks i'm better than these people and that i may perceive myself as the only intellectual amongst the drones of robot colleagues, calm. the. eff. down. this has nothing to do with my perception of the current state of students. it is in fact, what has been relayed to me by said teacher, and i happen to find it only too normal, considering how things have panned out for many people.

i digress. i'm not about to write my views on politics, education or religion, but about the thought process involved (as explained to me) in this title-conclusion. apparently, the definition of a well thought TOK presentation is :

1. pick a controversial issue.
2. discuss some pros.
3. discuss some cons.
4. conclude with a bang
5. ???
6. profit.

i realise that by stereotyping people into this algorithm of thought, i am being hypocritically that which i criticise. but bear with the argument for a second, my ostentation is to bring to your attention that 'original thought' cannot be stereotyped into a pre-formatted flowchart. it is by definition, unoriginal. sure, you can keep to your comfort zones. sure you can pick out a general set of beliefs and objectives for your now and future arguments. it is what makes us human, opinionated and assertive (as well as obtrusive and unmoving). i admit i have not read the entirety of this student's TOK essay and neither was i there for his/her presentation which ended in this unsultry conclusion, but the lack of coherence, as explained to me, and the audacity of making such a conclusion, from a half hour presentation, rivals such terrible works such as this entry!

philosophers have thought for lifetimes, mathematicians have written textbooks and theses on the subject, and have doubted their own works. and yet this person concludes such. amazing. the optimist in me would like to acknowledge this person as a genius of stellar proportions, but the cynic (as well as the statistician) in me says otherwise. (to digress again: need to remind myself to write on mathematics and proof of God's existence in a future post - subject of personal interest)

this is not a personal attack on the student, as much is it a criticism of how skewed a bold and sincere pursuit of education has been raped and desecrated, and integrated into this hive mind to emerge as another tool of uningenuity. how the mighty have fallen, so to quote. as fall out boy would testify, folie a deux, indeed.

i digress. as i have (un)thoroughly stated above, in my 8 minute entry, the exhausting pros and cons of an elaborate, and thought-provoking subject. i conclude that: sweet baby jewish jesus, please get the mind-control chips out of our childrens' brains and let them think for themselves (where the fault lies, even be it in the students themselves, i implore the readers to enlighten me, as i myself, as you can see from the above am highly biased).