Two family friends had come from India to visit and I took them around the university campus. We put in a visit at the Rose Garden and the old couple (Uncle Tim and Aunt Sally) stopped to smell the roses. They got close-ish to one bush and took a deep sniff.
"These Canadian roses don't smell like Indian roses."
Another sniff.
"It's very strong, the smell."
Sniff, sniff.
"It's not bad, not bad at all. I quite like it, in fact. But it's different. In fact (this is Uncle Tim), I have smelt this type of rose before. When I was in England. Yes, yes, I remember it now. It's a special type of Western rose. You don't get this sort of rose in India. We should really introduce this there, let the locals know what they're missing. Am I right R (R being yours truly) !?!"
"Well, Uncle, actually, umm,.... it's uh, umm...."
"Oh you wouldn't know. You engineer types stay all day in the lab and stare at computers. This is not your field. No, trust me, this is a special kind of rose. I know my roses."
We took the far exit out of the garden past the inspected bush, and thus past a young man reading a book, sipping coffee...
... and smoking a joint the size of a Subway sandwich.
If Uncle Tim and Aunt Sally made the connection, they sure didn't let it show.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Monday, June 22, 2009
Hughes Mearns Wrote Some Deep Stuff
"ONE FINE DAY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT
Ladies and Gentlemen, skinny and stout,
I'll tell you a tale I know nothing about;
The Admission is free, so pay at the door,
Now pull up a chair and sit on the floor.
One fine day in the middle of the night,
Two dead boys got up to fight;
Back to back they faced each other,
Drew their swords and shot each other.
A blind man came to watch fair play,
A mute man came to shout "Horray!"
A deaf policeman heard the noise and
Came to stop those two dead boys.
He lived on the corner in the middle of the block,
In a two-story house on a vacant lot;
A man with no legs came walking by,
and kicked the lawman in his thigh.
He crashed through a wall without making a sound,
into a dry creek bed and suddenly drowned;
The long black hearse came to cart him away,
But he ran for his life and is still gone today.
I watched from the corner of the big round table,
The only eyewitness to facts of my fable;
But if you doubt my lies are true,
Just ask the blind man, he saw it too."
Ladies and Gentlemen, skinny and stout,
I'll tell you a tale I know nothing about;
The Admission is free, so pay at the door,
Now pull up a chair and sit on the floor.
One fine day in the middle of the night,
Two dead boys got up to fight;
Back to back they faced each other,
Drew their swords and shot each other.
A blind man came to watch fair play,
A mute man came to shout "Horray!"
A deaf policeman heard the noise and
Came to stop those two dead boys.
He lived on the corner in the middle of the block,
In a two-story house on a vacant lot;
A man with no legs came walking by,
and kicked the lawman in his thigh.
He crashed through a wall without making a sound,
into a dry creek bed and suddenly drowned;
The long black hearse came to cart him away,
But he ran for his life and is still gone today.
I watched from the corner of the big round table,
The only eyewitness to facts of my fable;
But if you doubt my lies are true,
Just ask the blind man, he saw it too."
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Another Random Post
I had been a fairly consistent atheist for a long time. Despite the fact that my parents and grandparents are/were religious Hindus (though by no means fanatics), I had, since my teen years, always had a tendency to question practically anything that I found inconsistent or awkward. It is ironic, therefore, that while in those fairly pious surroundings I had been steadfast in my disbelief of God, in my current environment of an intensely liberal, 'all that God talk is shite', Canadian university, I have begun to doubt.
Partly, no doubt, this is due to my contrary nature. I have an instinctive desire to take a position that's against the norm (often, even if I fundamentally agree with the prevalent point of view). I have noted that since I came to Canada, my views have shifted distinctly to the right. Of course, given the fact that I was quite a leftist before, this means I am probably merely left-centrist (I certainly wouldn't consider myself right wing), but in my current surroundings, I do seem to stand out as very conservative.
But I digress. As I said, the contrary nature has something to do with it, but perhaps another reason is just that I'm getting older. At the age of 17, the thought of death is so distant as to make everyone believe themselves practically immortal. Just avoid obvious death traps and don't jump in front of any buses and you'll live forever.
All that changes as you get older. I am merely 27, technically in the prime of life. However, in that decade, I have seen both my grandfathers pass away, seen many of the 50 year olds of my childhood visibly age and stoop and been involved in a near death scenario in an auto accident myself. Life no longer seems as eternal as it did 10 short years ago. And with growing conciousness of the reality of mortality there comes the hope that there is something beyond, that this isn't it.
Which brings me to another point. Notwithstanding the fact that I want very much to have an eternal and happy life, if there is no proof of an entity such as God who will provide me with one, isn't it merely wishful thinking !?! Surely the argument, "Well, there is no conclusive proof that there is no God" is rather inadequate. How can I justify belief in something that, at the heart of it, has no proof !?!
Well, for one thing, as has been stated so often elsewhere, it is in the realm of belief precisely because there isn't proof. And as beliefs go, it's a nice one to have. If I am to die, and we all are, I would rather face death believing that there is happiness beyond than with the miserable, sinking feeling that my inconsequential and pointless life, in which I barely got to realise a mere fraction of all that the world had to offer, will forever end.
Furthermore, from what I have seen thus far, people have to believe in something. People seem unable to accept that they are the best there is out there. They (or rather we) feel the urge to bow to something superior to ourselves. And no one seems to be spared this. For instance, the aforementioned left-wing atheists (of which I am/used-to-be one) who sneer at the pious themselves tend to believe in a whole lot of nonsense that has very little proof to back it up - such as their cornerstone belief of large scale socialism, or even communism. It is, without a doubt, an idea that has bombed spectacularly, but many of these 'skeptical' atheists refuse to give it up. It is as if, having turned their backs on God (or gods) they have promptly given themselves up to the worship of the State. All told, therefore, it seems that there is no escape from the need to believe. So why not believe in some Entity out there who tells you to be kind and to love your neighbour !?!
This is not an anti-atheist rant. If you don't believe in God, fair enough. If you do, again, good for you. It is merely the musing of a somewhat confused 27 year old who has begun to look at the world with a different perspective than one he had held for most of his life.
Partly, no doubt, this is due to my contrary nature. I have an instinctive desire to take a position that's against the norm (often, even if I fundamentally agree with the prevalent point of view). I have noted that since I came to Canada, my views have shifted distinctly to the right. Of course, given the fact that I was quite a leftist before, this means I am probably merely left-centrist (I certainly wouldn't consider myself right wing), but in my current surroundings, I do seem to stand out as very conservative.
But I digress. As I said, the contrary nature has something to do with it, but perhaps another reason is just that I'm getting older. At the age of 17, the thought of death is so distant as to make everyone believe themselves practically immortal. Just avoid obvious death traps and don't jump in front of any buses and you'll live forever.
All that changes as you get older. I am merely 27, technically in the prime of life. However, in that decade, I have seen both my grandfathers pass away, seen many of the 50 year olds of my childhood visibly age and stoop and been involved in a near death scenario in an auto accident myself. Life no longer seems as eternal as it did 10 short years ago. And with growing conciousness of the reality of mortality there comes the hope that there is something beyond, that this isn't it.
Which brings me to another point. Notwithstanding the fact that I want very much to have an eternal and happy life, if there is no proof of an entity such as God who will provide me with one, isn't it merely wishful thinking !?! Surely the argument, "Well, there is no conclusive proof that there is no God" is rather inadequate. How can I justify belief in something that, at the heart of it, has no proof !?!
Well, for one thing, as has been stated so often elsewhere, it is in the realm of belief precisely because there isn't proof. And as beliefs go, it's a nice one to have. If I am to die, and we all are, I would rather face death believing that there is happiness beyond than with the miserable, sinking feeling that my inconsequential and pointless life, in which I barely got to realise a mere fraction of all that the world had to offer, will forever end.
Furthermore, from what I have seen thus far, people have to believe in something. People seem unable to accept that they are the best there is out there. They (or rather we) feel the urge to bow to something superior to ourselves. And no one seems to be spared this. For instance, the aforementioned left-wing atheists (of which I am/used-to-be one) who sneer at the pious themselves tend to believe in a whole lot of nonsense that has very little proof to back it up - such as their cornerstone belief of large scale socialism, or even communism. It is, without a doubt, an idea that has bombed spectacularly, but many of these 'skeptical' atheists refuse to give it up. It is as if, having turned their backs on God (or gods) they have promptly given themselves up to the worship of the State. All told, therefore, it seems that there is no escape from the need to believe. So why not believe in some Entity out there who tells you to be kind and to love your neighbour !?!
This is not an anti-atheist rant. If you don't believe in God, fair enough. If you do, again, good for you. It is merely the musing of a somewhat confused 27 year old who has begun to look at the world with a different perspective than one he had held for most of his life.
Governmental Capitalism
A lot of my socialist friends are fervent supporters of democracy and the 'will of the people'. I find that rather amusing since, to my mind, democracy is a very capitalist form of government. Every party puts up its product (representative and policies) and then competes for the most cash (votes). People 'buy' the product they like best. It's copybook capitalism.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Doing Poorly At The Olymipcs - A Cricket Based Excuse
Major international sporting events - and especially the Olympics - bring up the question that every Indian dreads. 'Why do Indians suck so much at sport !?!' The most common responses - we're poor, and we're cricket obsessed - serve to explain only so much of the dearth of medals. Poorer countries than India (like Kenya and Cameroon) routinely take home a few medals. Moreover, India, though poor overall, has a middle class Wikipedia estimates to be around 300 million. Even if that's middle class only by Indian standards and just 10 percent of those 300 million are really wealthy, that's still 30 million. That about the same as Canada's entire population. Yet Canada, which is as mad about hockey as India is about cricket seems to perform respectably at the Olympics. So the cricket craze doesn't fully satisfy either.
But maybe there's more to that craze than meets the eye. Maybe it's not just that we are obsessed with one sport, it's that that sport is what it is - cricket. To get what I'm driving at, it's important to understand that cricket (and it's cousin - baseball) is fundamentally, crucially different from other sports.
Most other sports, whether they're racquet sports, ball sports or martial arts are centrally about directed, purposeful motion. The athelete is always on the go, continually changing position, adjusting balance, shifting weight. Footwork is key - without it, you won't get anywhere. So an athlete who grows up with one of these sports gets a solid grounding in footwork, and once that is learnt, it can then be transferred to other sports. Sure, the nuances will be different, but you won't be starting from scratch.
Cricket just doesn't work that way. You can go through a lifetime of cricket without having to learn much by way of footwork, at least in the way other sports use it. Of course, you have to run - occasionally. And pace bowlers have to run quite a bit. But no one has to do the elaborate dances that other sports demand. Hence, that crucial skill goes undeveloped. Moreover, the cricket obsession means most children won't even try another sport till they're somewhat grown up, thus compounding the problem. The end result is that we end up with athletes who are competing with opponents who have had a massive headstart in learning and perfecting one of the most crucial skills in most sports.
So what does one do !?! Banning cricket is a ridiculous idea - both in practice and in principle. Equally, it's difficult and impractical to get people actively intersted in other sports by merely telling them to like them. That liking for a sport, like love for anything else, can only come from within.
I humbly propose a simple and elegant solution - make Bollywood dancing a competitive sport.
Don't ask.
But maybe there's more to that craze than meets the eye. Maybe it's not just that we are obsessed with one sport, it's that that sport is what it is - cricket. To get what I'm driving at, it's important to understand that cricket (and it's cousin - baseball) is fundamentally, crucially different from other sports.
Most other sports, whether they're racquet sports, ball sports or martial arts are centrally about directed, purposeful motion. The athelete is always on the go, continually changing position, adjusting balance, shifting weight. Footwork is key - without it, you won't get anywhere. So an athlete who grows up with one of these sports gets a solid grounding in footwork, and once that is learnt, it can then be transferred to other sports. Sure, the nuances will be different, but you won't be starting from scratch.
Cricket just doesn't work that way. You can go through a lifetime of cricket without having to learn much by way of footwork, at least in the way other sports use it. Of course, you have to run - occasionally. And pace bowlers have to run quite a bit. But no one has to do the elaborate dances that other sports demand. Hence, that crucial skill goes undeveloped. Moreover, the cricket obsession means most children won't even try another sport till they're somewhat grown up, thus compounding the problem. The end result is that we end up with athletes who are competing with opponents who have had a massive headstart in learning and perfecting one of the most crucial skills in most sports.
So what does one do !?! Banning cricket is a ridiculous idea - both in practice and in principle. Equally, it's difficult and impractical to get people actively intersted in other sports by merely telling them to like them. That liking for a sport, like love for anything else, can only come from within.
I humbly propose a simple and elegant solution - make Bollywood dancing a competitive sport.
Don't ask.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Who's Your Daddy !?!
"Hey babe."
"Feelin' OK now, baby !?!"
"That's a sweet chick."
"That girl's cuuuuute..."
When did paedophiles get to define our terms of romance !?!
"Feelin' OK now, baby !?!"
"That's a sweet chick."
"That girl's cuuuuute..."
When did paedophiles get to define our terms of romance !?!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)