How can...
how can I...
how can I have you slut?
Nope, no embellishments,
no euphemisms,
it's stark.
Blazing fire of the groin
that I want to extinguish,
and no kindling of the hearty flame.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Thursday, June 14, 2007
An elopement and some questions
What’s right? What’s wrong? What’s moral? What’s immoral? Philosophers have been racking their brains for centuries to reach a conclusion for these enigmas. Cutting across the realms of Physics and Philosophy these questions sure have answers, though not unanimous. Thus we have: “It’s all relative”, “there’s no absolute truth” and the much mundane “morality is the lack of opportunity” and so on. Feminists often make much hue and cry over the double standards in morality. In an interview in ‘Star Dust’ Gul Panag breathes fire against this discrimination (Who is Gul Panag? Your guess is as good as mine. However she seems adequately sane). According to her, “if a man had to flaunt his conquests he’s a stud, and if a woman were to do that she’s a slut obviously”. One of my friend, an absolute play boy, who is all set to go to UK to do his MBA and make some ‘foreign collaboration’, always wanted to marry a girl from his village. The reason: He wants his wife to be chaste with her hymen in tact. (Yet another supposition that 100% girls from villages and semi-urban areas remain virgins since there is no ‘pub-going, party-going and boozing’ [sic]).
Pre-marital and extra-marital affairs exist in our society, if to say it mildly and politely. But a mere mention of these topics is enough to invite the wrath of moral brigade. When a bachelor maintains a physical relationship with a married woman, and though a narrow section of the society, mainly his friends, are aware of it, it never goes beyond listening to the usual graphic description of the lusty details. But when the same guy elopes with the woman, it all changes. He even stops to be a friend for some.
Recently a friend of mine did it with a married woman with whom he has been ‘in touch’ for quite some time. Though some of us were aware of it, his ‘beginning-a-new-life-with-a-married-woman’ (it’s her third marriage) startled all of us without a single exception. It seemed a Gordian knot. Since shock was the prevailing mood, hardly spoke anyone on day 1. But within 24 hours the mood changed drastically. For me it still remains an enigma that the collective response was almost same though we all come from different backgrounds. We lampooned and ridiculed him. We sympathized towards his family, especially his mother. We wondered how he would make a living.
As per the complaint from the woman’s family both of them were taken to the Police Station. Reportedly, everyone present, including the policemen, forced him to ‘get out of the trap he’s in’. But the ‘fool’ remained adamant. His version (of course reportedly): ‘If I wash my hands out of this she will have to go to the streets’. (Oom chivalric he is).
Now, the question I’ve been asking myself is which is wrong? His secret affair or his public acceptance of it culminated in their living together. (Here I can’t help leaving the woman aside. Why she did it? How stable she could be when it comes to a relationship? Is it worth trusting such a woman? These are not my concern since I hardly know anything about her. And to speak purely of the morality of her gesture, I’m afraid it will be a never ending exercise).
A majority has the opinion that he ‘shouldn’t have gone this far’. In other words he remained an adorable stud until he made the blunder of going public over the relationship.
Must we be all filthy hypocrites to maintain such double standards of morality in life? Is there public and private morality? How much one needs to care about one’s family and friends before taking important decisions? I don’t have an answer for any of these. My head is flooded with angry voices from friends and acquaintances. But I don’t have any plans to judge him. It’s not because there’s no point in crying over spilt milk. It’s because of the feeling, ‘who am I to judge’?
How many of us are capable of taking decisions only after pondering over or taking into consideration of everything/everyone around us? How many of us think of Jean Paul Sartre and his doctrine of ‘being responsible’ while in the heat of the moment? Though we have been ‘taught’ to act wisely, or familiar with philosophical preaching, at moments of passion don’t a majority get derailed? Is it enough to prove that man take decisions- or is it correct to say, ‘reach to decisions’- not on the basis of his acquired knowledge rather ‘wisdom’, but on the basis of ‘idiotic’ impulses?
There are soothsayers who predict nothing less than doom for the couple. I could only wish them to be wrong. But leaving aside all the big questions and approach it on a personal front I don’t find much to cheer about. For this friend of mine is too lazy to do anything. He prefers reading, churning out poems, drinking, smoking, pan chewing…But still I keep my hope, though against hope, that he would change with this incident, a better change. For I’ve read, heard and seen changes the female of the species can brings in. Long live the duo.
Pre-marital and extra-marital affairs exist in our society, if to say it mildly and politely. But a mere mention of these topics is enough to invite the wrath of moral brigade. When a bachelor maintains a physical relationship with a married woman, and though a narrow section of the society, mainly his friends, are aware of it, it never goes beyond listening to the usual graphic description of the lusty details. But when the same guy elopes with the woman, it all changes. He even stops to be a friend for some.
Recently a friend of mine did it with a married woman with whom he has been ‘in touch’ for quite some time. Though some of us were aware of it, his ‘beginning-a-new-life-with-a-married-woman’ (it’s her third marriage) startled all of us without a single exception. It seemed a Gordian knot. Since shock was the prevailing mood, hardly spoke anyone on day 1. But within 24 hours the mood changed drastically. For me it still remains an enigma that the collective response was almost same though we all come from different backgrounds. We lampooned and ridiculed him. We sympathized towards his family, especially his mother. We wondered how he would make a living.
As per the complaint from the woman’s family both of them were taken to the Police Station. Reportedly, everyone present, including the policemen, forced him to ‘get out of the trap he’s in’. But the ‘fool’ remained adamant. His version (of course reportedly): ‘If I wash my hands out of this she will have to go to the streets’. (Oom chivalric he is).
Now, the question I’ve been asking myself is which is wrong? His secret affair or his public acceptance of it culminated in their living together. (Here I can’t help leaving the woman aside. Why she did it? How stable she could be when it comes to a relationship? Is it worth trusting such a woman? These are not my concern since I hardly know anything about her. And to speak purely of the morality of her gesture, I’m afraid it will be a never ending exercise).
A majority has the opinion that he ‘shouldn’t have gone this far’. In other words he remained an adorable stud until he made the blunder of going public over the relationship.
Must we be all filthy hypocrites to maintain such double standards of morality in life? Is there public and private morality? How much one needs to care about one’s family and friends before taking important decisions? I don’t have an answer for any of these. My head is flooded with angry voices from friends and acquaintances. But I don’t have any plans to judge him. It’s not because there’s no point in crying over spilt milk. It’s because of the feeling, ‘who am I to judge’?
How many of us are capable of taking decisions only after pondering over or taking into consideration of everything/everyone around us? How many of us think of Jean Paul Sartre and his doctrine of ‘being responsible’ while in the heat of the moment? Though we have been ‘taught’ to act wisely, or familiar with philosophical preaching, at moments of passion don’t a majority get derailed? Is it enough to prove that man take decisions- or is it correct to say, ‘reach to decisions’- not on the basis of his acquired knowledge rather ‘wisdom’, but on the basis of ‘idiotic’ impulses?
There are soothsayers who predict nothing less than doom for the couple. I could only wish them to be wrong. But leaving aside all the big questions and approach it on a personal front I don’t find much to cheer about. For this friend of mine is too lazy to do anything. He prefers reading, churning out poems, drinking, smoking, pan chewing…But still I keep my hope, though against hope, that he would change with this incident, a better change. For I’ve read, heard and seen changes the female of the species can brings in. Long live the duo.
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Of Neutral Zones
‘The New Indian Express’ dated on 17-05-07 carries a news item which I found interesting enough to write about. Appears under the title ‘Driver asks passengers to push train’, it narrates an incident in Bihar. The driver of a passenger train asked the passengers to ‘get out and push’. And the hapless passengers did it and it took half an hour to move the train 4 metres. The reason: one among the passengers pulled the emergency chain and the train halted in a ‘neutral zone’ ie ‘a short length of track where there is no power in the over head wires’.
As I read the news a flurry of thoughts flashed in my mind. But the first thing the news evoked in me was a hearty smile. Yes, though I enjoy all the comfort technology brings in, whenever I see technology ‘overpowered’ by ‘raw humanism’ I get amused. This is the reason why I smile when I see a mile long trail of vehicles including BMWs, Benzes, Hondas and the like, led by a bullock cart at traffic signals on the busy roads of Bangalore. And just see where the train caught in ‘neutral zone’, in Bihar, the land of Lalu Prasad Yadav, Railway Minister of mythical status.
Once the train, passengers and the driver who asked them to ‘push’ are deleted from the scene, one element still amuses me. And that’s ‘neutral zone’. Have you ever been stopped in ‘neutral zones’? If yes, how could you manage to get on ‘track under live wire’? For us humans the criterion that decides a ‘neutral zone’ is not unanimous. One person’s ‘neutral zone’, where he fumbles and tripped over may not be the same for another. But most of us found ourselves in ‘neutral zones’ one time or another in life. And then there are those who bid adieu for ever ‘to get out of neutral zones’.
I’m no modern age Guru of positive thinking to find a way out of ‘neutral zones’. In fact I loathe them. But ‘neutral zones’ and the possibility of getting trapped in ‘neutral zones’ is no matter of dispute. My effort to get out of ‘neutral zone’ reminds me of a greased pole ( usually an areca nut tree) which I used to see at carnivals when I was a kid. Usually something valuable would be attached on the top of the pole. Whoever climbs to the top can take it and will be declared as the winner. The best part of it, like any other sport, is not to see some one winning, but to see the countless attempts to reach there. As one climbs up a feet, he will be slipped down two, thanks to the generous use of grease. This tedious process of ‘achieving progress’ lasts for hours. At times contestants would raise the game to thrilling heights by keeping us on our toes making us believe that he would snatch it at any moment. And when finally someone emerges as the winner, he will be cheered and even carried and paraded all over the ground.
Once the dust is settled, we would sit and talk about the winner and how he succeeded in ‘reaching over there against all odds’. ‘Authentic findings ‘would be aired. Arguments would be raised. But in the end there would be just one conclusion, “it’s all knack yaar”.
Yes, to get out of ‘neutral zone’ is a knack. But shouldn’t it be accompanied with a constant will and an undaunted spirit?
As I read the news a flurry of thoughts flashed in my mind. But the first thing the news evoked in me was a hearty smile. Yes, though I enjoy all the comfort technology brings in, whenever I see technology ‘overpowered’ by ‘raw humanism’ I get amused. This is the reason why I smile when I see a mile long trail of vehicles including BMWs, Benzes, Hondas and the like, led by a bullock cart at traffic signals on the busy roads of Bangalore. And just see where the train caught in ‘neutral zone’, in Bihar, the land of Lalu Prasad Yadav, Railway Minister of mythical status.
Once the train, passengers and the driver who asked them to ‘push’ are deleted from the scene, one element still amuses me. And that’s ‘neutral zone’. Have you ever been stopped in ‘neutral zones’? If yes, how could you manage to get on ‘track under live wire’? For us humans the criterion that decides a ‘neutral zone’ is not unanimous. One person’s ‘neutral zone’, where he fumbles and tripped over may not be the same for another. But most of us found ourselves in ‘neutral zones’ one time or another in life. And then there are those who bid adieu for ever ‘to get out of neutral zones’.
I’m no modern age Guru of positive thinking to find a way out of ‘neutral zones’. In fact I loathe them. But ‘neutral zones’ and the possibility of getting trapped in ‘neutral zones’ is no matter of dispute. My effort to get out of ‘neutral zone’ reminds me of a greased pole ( usually an areca nut tree) which I used to see at carnivals when I was a kid. Usually something valuable would be attached on the top of the pole. Whoever climbs to the top can take it and will be declared as the winner. The best part of it, like any other sport, is not to see some one winning, but to see the countless attempts to reach there. As one climbs up a feet, he will be slipped down two, thanks to the generous use of grease. This tedious process of ‘achieving progress’ lasts for hours. At times contestants would raise the game to thrilling heights by keeping us on our toes making us believe that he would snatch it at any moment. And when finally someone emerges as the winner, he will be cheered and even carried and paraded all over the ground.
Once the dust is settled, we would sit and talk about the winner and how he succeeded in ‘reaching over there against all odds’. ‘Authentic findings ‘would be aired. Arguments would be raised. But in the end there would be just one conclusion, “it’s all knack yaar”.
Yes, to get out of ‘neutral zone’ is a knack. But shouldn’t it be accompanied with a constant will and an undaunted spirit?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
