Saturday, 21 July 2012

equal or lesser than

when we're feeling vulnerable due to a failure, we often generalise to make it easier to feel sympathetic for ourselves. failed a job interview? down with corporate oligopolies. pay being cut? government choking the people. got dumped? men/women are all the same. couldn't break that high score? damn lag. always. and the other guy was cheating.

it's a natural response, but it takes someone outside the scene to look into the situations when all is going well, and try to answer the hard-hitting questions.

so when all is being neutral, look upon your neighbour, your father, your daughter, your cat and your anonymous brother in arms. and ask yourself, is he really the face of everyone? or is individualism the new, unblamable hypocricy?

Wednesday, 18 July 2012

scientific breakthrough

the buzz word around the hipster science world right now is 'higgs boson'. or for the less scientifically articulate, 'god particle'. in 2004, when i was studying medicine, drudging through the lifelessness of physiology, anatomy and biochemistry, i would often escape into the elegance and beauty of physics, and one thing that caught my mind so enthrallingly was the large hadron collider and its postulated results. it is so unfortunate that now, when i hear so many people talk about these things which i used to struggle with (and still do, to a large extent, for i am not a physicist), i enquire to find that they have only a superficial, media-scraping mastery of the subject. which is to say, they know nothing at all, and just throw around obfuscating terms to seem intelligent.

as such, i have forgone the interest in striking a conversation relating to the higgs boson. when someone talks about it, i feign ignorance, all the while face-palming in my head at their lack of knowledge, and once they have talked of their (little) understanding of the field, they will have no choice but to change subjects. and therein lies sweet relief!

yes, i am being a nerdy elitist here. why? because these people deserve not to be acknowledged as 'smart' for being able to use google and hitchhike the latest trends. why? because ingenuity and the amazement that is science is only defaced and scarred by their hipster attempts to be cool (for nerdy is apparently the new cool). why? because the world does not revolve around being superficial, especially when you try to emphasise otherwise.


because if you really believed that i was ranting on about a scientific advancement that everyone has a right to see and feel and know and debate...

then you are missing the point.

that i am ranting because it is the only thing that i can understand.

because i don't understand you.

Monday, 16 July 2012

pictures i like

i stood in front of a gathering once. a class, if you may. and in my mind i imagined a simple picture. i told everyone, 'draw a picture with a tree'.
'a house, and an orange sunset, and birds upon the horizon.
'in it, there should be no persons, and no complexities of technology like cars and computers and phones.
'and be done in an hour'.

so, we all set out to draw, myself included.

of course, none of the pictures were the same. some were prettier than others. some were more vibrant, some were more memorable. but they were all essentially from the same idea. and this encompasses what is perception. we remember, and we see and feel and know of the important things. the big things. the momentous ones. but in between, we fill the blanks however we want. and there is so much room for artistic license that we often get carried away - that what someone fills in with a lake or a shade or the colour blue, another may have the total opposite (if there are opposites for those things).

and this has been my problem for so long.

p/s: i hate falling in like. it makes you vulnerable to the weirdest, most unreasonable things. and for me, letting go is impossible. it's been so many years. ten to be exact, maybe slightly more. and i still cannot imagine how i came here to be this way, but i still think that the future is devoid. how i hate this. and from it how i hate myself for it. though the painter is to blame for his drawing, maybe it is the person who seeded the idea who is to blame for it being an existence in the first place?

Tuesday, 3 July 2012

he wrote

he wrote for lengthy abstinence,
he wrote for futures sought;
he wrote for future reference,
and did so without thought.

so dazzled are our common wits, to prance at rainbow suns,
and speak with narwhal and fox kits, and play with perfect puns;
but little do you know the rhyme behind a darkened sill,
to decipher such obtuse signs requires more than will.

beyond the door that locks itself, beyond the wind billowed,
a creature lurks that no-one cares for except for those that bode
well for themselves and for others, with intent pure as ice,
but, then, you see, in itself is this one's unruly vice.

because to write is not to have a creature to have read,
you'll notice it much simpler to eat loaves of garlic bread;
but -mmm- that smells so very nice, like oranges, you say?
what kind of spell is this, pray tell! that might, that would, that may?

that june and july, and august, too, and september, why not?
a writer can have writer's block, a reader can leave rot
so terrible a writing i must say can only source,
from desperation and from care, from like and from dull force;
you see, again, this is all much, too much for one so frail,
that even is a trouble for iridescent narwhale,
and silly sops, like wily wops, that care little for truth;
in fact, such arbitrary tales are vulgar and uncouth.

so, why, my man, why did he write? what did he seek to see?
i cannot tell for anything, not for the life of me!
but maybe God can shine and bless and all those fancy tries,
if one deserves to like, to lust, for -oh my, i smell french fries!-

now where was i, i've lost my thought, oh yes! of why he writes...
i cannot say, i may not know, except that wrong he rights.
but who can care? surely not you, nor reader, you or you,
i guess that's that -some ice cream here- and with that we are through!

he wrote for lengthy abstinence,
he wrote for futures sought;
he wrote for future reference,
and did so without thought.