Generational clash?

Hi Mom, Dad! What's Up? 

Greeja De Silva

The moment Elvis Presley went on stage gyrating his pelvis, belting his then-new number 'Hound Dog', the elders went white. To them, his suggestive moves were the mark of the beginning of the end, Armageddon. Nearly seventy years on, we are, however, still very much rocking.

Ironically, almost all toddlers make Superman out of their fathers. This admiration slowly dwindles as puberty hits when opinions about the perspective of life clash. They grow apart with the passing years only for the toddler, now a middle-aged father of an adult child himself, to realise the 'Superman-Ubermench' capabilities of his old man. 

All these are nothing new but generational gaps. The generation next looks at their predecessors as obsolete and the elders at their offspring as decadent and self-destructive. Even Socrates must have thought the same of the youngsters of his times that he thought his death by hemlock would awaken them. 

Of course, we can now point all these clashes to the relatively incomplete development of the frontal lobes on one side and the genuine desire to impart life lessons to the kids on the other. The kids are overwhelmed with unabated exposure to the outside world and the unfettered ability to verbalise their thoughts.

Technology is a double-edged sword. Cursed for causing divisiveness between generations, it has also found its uses to unite them. Like the Elvis moment, the elders viewed unrestricted access to information as dangerous. Detractors to this assert that the 'Superman' wisdom will prevail. It is envisaged that the cyber-savvy generation will realise that great powers come with big responsibilities. Hopefully, a steady state will prevail.  

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A little too much!

Recently, during my last trip to a town right in the centre of the Hindi heartland, I had the fortune of interacting with some friends who would be relatives. A chance conversation with some female members of the society jogged my memory back to a time when my girls were developing into late teenagers, growing horns and their pointed devil's tails were sprouting. 

My wife was getting acquainted with two female members of the family. This is somewhat the direction the conversation took. 

"Hi, since we know each other now," wifey said. "Maybe we should exchange numbers and contact each other!"

Our hosts, almost in unison, replied, "...but you have our husband's numbers. You can call that number. "

"No, I don't have your numbers."

"We share the same phone." was the reply.

I could see my wife's eyes pop in amazement. 

"But, but I am sure you want to check your Facebook, WhatsApp, etcetera."

The homely girls cooly replied, "Nah, we don't need them."

"How about when you go out shopping and need to call someone?" wifey asked.

Again, the girls looked at each other, kind of bewildered. "When we are at home, you can contact us at the home landline. When we go out with our husbands, we use their phones!"

It looked much like a non-issue to them.

Ten years previously, my wife and I were in the same predicament. My teenage daughters were up in arms like they felt it was their right to own a mobile phone at that age. In their eyes, it was a natural passage of rites to be initiated into a digital world to mark their presence as human beings on Earth. All rules and regulations on parental controls just went down the drain. It is all water under the bridge now, all done and dusted. 

It looks like we had initiated ourselves into the first world by acquiring their problems. We were not worrying about basic needs but digital availability and access. There was a need for digital expression and digital freedom. We were not talking about covering the bare essentials but demanding the right to expose more than needed.

We are trapped in a conundrum between one side that demands too much versus the other that needs too little. When you have little, you demand more. When you have in abundance, you want less.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Away with human interaction?

Jexi (2019)
Director: Jon Lucas, Scott Moore

There is nothing groundbreaking about this movie. It reminds me of at least two films which dealt with the same theme. In 1984 'Electric Dreams', a desktop computer, Edgar, falls in love with the protagonist's crush. After successfully wooing his beau with the help of his computer, his life turns into a living hell. His computer controls most of his home devices and goes hyperdrive to sabotage the protagonist's work and love life. In 2013 'Her', the protagonist falls in love with an Operating System, AI.

All three films show us how hooked we are to our digital devices. We avoid human interaction and feel most comfortable left to our devices. Furthermore, interaction with the same kind becomes increasingly more difficult. Even though we were told that we are social animals who thrive on human dealings, somehow, it becomes more and more an uphill battle. People demand. They want to be treated special. They demand the right not to be offended. We need to be politically correct when addressing them. The power dynamics put them in such a place that they can get away with murder. 

They say the customer is always right, so they demand their rights to be served as if the servant has no rights. There is no such thing as implied consent. It seems like everything has to be written, signed and glazed with a seal of legal approval.

As human interaction becomes increasingly laborious, many find solace in the company of sologamy and interactive digital devices. It can be switched off at will and does not leave a substantial legal bill. Maybe not. Our digital footprints stay in the cloud forever, waiting to be picked up and used against us when the time is ripe. If you do not believe me, ask Rashmi Samant, who won the Oxford Union Presidentship in 2020. She was cyberbullied and forced to resign after her past internet entries of years previously alleging racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, you name it!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Engage, disengage or disappear!

Omphaloskepsis!
(Omphalo = umbilicus,
skepsis = act of looking)

Just how often have we seen people who appear almost in a stuporous state, unarousable by external stimuli? Viewed from this side of the table, it may look like he is self-absorbed or awestruck at the sight of his own genitalia. A clinician may diagnose him to have narcolepsy. In Western Africa, the doctor may give him the spot diagnosis of Trypanosomiasis @ Sleeping Sickness.

A man of the clergy would assume that he is engaged in sincere prayers, engaging with a plea with his Maker bargaining so that everything will be alright. Of course, the correct explanation is none of the above. He is merely immersed in his own digital devices. Being in an almost trance-like state, he insists that very much in touch with the present and that his generation excels in multitasking, something alien to my kind, he asserts.

Navel-gazing?
© Amethyst Aziezéé

A few years ago, a series of pictures used to appear on people's social media pages showing off their pictures of their perfect life as they lie whaling on the beach or sunbathing by the pool. The view is as if they are lying down gazing at navel level. These self-absorbed acts, called navel-gazing, are mere pursuits to ruin the media consumer's day.

Actually, the original word 'navel-gazing' has its origin way back during the time of the Eastern Orthodox Church. The monks in a Greek monastery were described in an 1830 publication jocularly as "...pretended or fancied that they experienced celestial joys when gazing on their umbilical region, in converse with the Deity". Many traditional practices like yoga and qigong use the umbilicus as an energy point to rejuvenate the hidden powers of the body.

The men of God thought that our God-given senses were the ones that get us into trouble most of the time. Our eyes give us evil thoughts; so do our auditory, smell, touch and taste. Hence, they thought that by looking away from stimuli, 'the windows to the soul' can be protected. 

Modern men use it as an excuse not to interact with strangers. Those with an inferiority complex, sociophobia or extreme introvert use navel-gazing (read digital device fixation) as an outlet to keep aloof from the surroundings. He can opt to engage, disengage or disappear with their digital friends. Interacting with a person in the flesh is more cumbersome; the cursory greetings, the niceties, the eye contact, the physical contact and the small talk - too time-consuming!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The hurtful zap of the keyboard

Credit: depositphotos.com

The social media wants us to believe that there is only One Truth, the one that we seem to be churning. The constant words of approval and barrage of 'likes' make us convinced that we are indeed God's gift to mankind, little geniuses, knowing the secrets of life and the rules of the Game.

In the comfort of the cocoon of our private spaces with the security of nods of yeomen who agree and add on in agreement to whatever we say, we go on a roll. 

The squeal of dissent is muffled and vilified by roars of mobs of netizens on our platform. What we fail to realise is that these disapproving netizens are equally loud in their own social backyard cheered correspondingly by loud spectators who agree with them. Together they glorify each other in the sweet melody of their echo chamber.

With the splurge of adrenaline spiralled by cheering of bystanders, the momentum to act and to react snowballs. Keyboard warriors with their fangs and steely knives call for blood. They scream for punitive or exemplary actions. 

Little does anyone realise that society already has its own check and balances to deal with issues that arise, but somehow this particular topic becomes a national crisis.

As the growl reaches deafening levels, sanity fails. The leaders, wanting to stay relevant are pushed, or try to steal the limelight, issue statements. Narcissistic politicians, thinking of their next elections, speak gibberish to pacify both sides of the warring factions.

The blinkers stay on. Nobody realises that every argument has two sides. The truth is always a spectrum. There are many ways to skin a cat. Nobody bothers about the collateral damage to the parties involved. When soil hits the ceiling, everyone moves on to tackle the next perceived crisis.

Many live in a uni-dimensional universe. We bask in the glory that we know everything, and there is no need to acquire anything new. It just makes it easy. Thinking is hard work.

(In the good old pre-digital days, we also had many individuals with warped views of the world. We just ignored them or accepted them as aberrations of Nature that make life colourful. There was no need to paint our unicolour brush on them. They still enjoyed their place in the sun just like we did. )

https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.