Learn to agree to disagree!

President Thomas Jefferson, left, and his predecessor,
President John Adams. (Feuding Fathers)
Getty Images

At this time of one's life (stepping into the seventh decade of existence), one often wonders about all the people who made their appearances all along my life. Some of theirs were short and sweet. Some left with a sour aftertaste. Some got lost in the annals of times. Occasionally, I had people who took everything wrongly and left anything but amicably. One did not like the sight of me and had nothing nice to say about me. Well, what can I say but that the feeling was mutual.

Recently, I read about the friendship between the two Founding Fathers of the United States of America. They were not really best friends. They had a big job to do for a greater cause. They looked at things from different perspectives; both felt compelled to defend their conviction until the end. Towards that end, they argued ferociously and wrote stinging letters to each other but all the time, acquiring brickbats and respect simultaneously.

After the British were sent packing from the 13 colonies of the New World, the new nation had to decide how to run its country. Would they want tight central control like the British had before Independence? They realised every colony had its own need, and to have one vision for the whole nation would be disastrous. It was like the British all over again. The other side was modelling a country with Republic principles after Rome.

The Independence Declaration was no divine decree. For a long time, the founding could not agree upon its execution. Adams believed in a strong central government, whereas Jefferson championed states' rights. They competed against each other for Presidentship after Washington refused to hold the post for a third term. Adams became the second President of the USA. He offered Jefferson the post of Vice President, but Jefferson declined. The subsequent election was won by Jefferson, leaving Adams bitter.

The duo refused to communicate with each other for 12 years till a fellow Declaration signer, Benjamin Rush, made them write to each other. They vehemently argued the merits of their convictions via more than the 185 letters that they wrote to each other. Each did not want the other to outdo them. Coincidentally, they died four hours apart on July 4th, Independence Day. A sweet end to two men who gave much of their lives to the foundation of America.

Closer to home, I recall another intense discussion panel that my friends and I used to attend. It was an adrenaline-rushing, temper-flaring, emotionally charging discussion on life and its meaning. We learned many things from each other that no teacher or school could teach. All that came to zilch because of some other unrelated miscommunication. Now, we are all left groping in the dark again, finding our own answers alone through our own follies.

Rashomon: The Truth Is Often Mutable And Ambivalent

We should learn that opinions vary. We should learn to agree to disagree. The truth is an elusive shadowplay. As Rashomon tells us, the truth has many forms. All can be right.

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

Any way the wind blows?

I have always wondered whether one should take sides in an argument when he is not the actually affected party. Being quite aware of Rashomon's effect of different perspectives on what actually transpired during an event, should anyone go all four barrels against the other just because one side is related to us?

We know we sometimes make our decisions rather prejudicially, guided by personal appearance, gender, common ethnicity or overt display of emotions by one aggrieved party, and the affected party is related to us. Still, when the push comes to the shove when our own kind is under the spotlight, where do you stand?

Is blood thicker than water, and do we support our flesh and blood no matter what? Do we drone down in support of loved ones, or do we go against the grain and take the side of where we think the truth lies?

What if the scandal happened within the family fold? Do we hush everything and sweep it under the rug? Still, there will come a time when a definite decision needs to be made. What do we do? Do we play two sides? Do we go with the flow to maintain peace or swim against the current to prove a point? What is the matter? Is something serious, something that could damage another's future or even criminal? Does protecting family honour supersede everything else?

*The Rashomon effect is a storytelling method in which the individuals involved give contradictory descriptions of the same event, thereby providing different perspectives and points of view of the same incident.

P.S. Tomorrow may rain, so I’ll follow the sun!🎶🎵©️

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

Jesus Complex?

Sometimes you wonder. Is it just you, or is everybody going a little mad? Are people increasingly indulging in self-defeating activities which will, in a matter of time, blow up right in their faces?

Why do they open themselves up to vulnerability? Is their desire to express themselves so important that it has to be imprinted digitally to the end of times. Why is there a pressing need to be with them or against the rest? Is there no middle ground? Why do they think it is a test of love to exhibit bedroom antics to the full view of the public? And still call it expression, even when others call it exhibitionism.

You know there is no wrong or right answer? Truth is a multifaceted son of a gun with the last laugh when it finally comes to the fore. Your time is getting near, and you want to ride in the sunset, hurting fewer and fewer people every day. You want to thank your lucky stars for the times in your life, which you had in your own right, which had been unpredictable, but in the end, you hope you really had the time of your life.

You want to reduce your sins, collect brownie points, and make the remaining times on Earth less controversial. You tell yourself to let bygones be bygones. Lest, you need not forgive nor forget, but let it be.

But hell no! People do not want to let it be. They want to have the final say. They find joy in holding tightly to the rein. They find joy in saying, ‘I was right; you were wrong!’. If I, an able body, can think this way, why not a more confident people who exude piety through all their orifices can indeed assess the whole imbroglio in such a manner?

You give up. In times like these, you develop a Jesus Christ complex and engage in a solitary soliloquy with yourself. Forgive them, God, for they know not what they do.

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

Past 'use-by-date' shelf life?

The Bad Guy (2022)
Director: Pierre Perifel

Covalent bonds are hailed as one of Nature's strongest bonds. Nevertheless, with the correct amount of energy and the help of appropriate enzymes, it can be broken down into its basic structures. Unlike bonds cemented by DNA or the ones sanctioned by the Elements of Nature, friendship is a convenient arrangement amongst misfits who share the same mental illness. What others refer to as self-demeaning and a sheer waste of time, they find joy and purpose in life.

Since nothing is cast in stone, friends make rules as they go on. They call it a 'bro code'. The code, a whimsical array of regulations that are made up as the friendship goes on, protects each other's interests and maintains zen in other concrete long-lasting relationships.

In the good old days, before our digital devices filled up the void of long-haul journeys or protracted stop-overs, we actually struck up a conversation with a fellow passenger who looked charming enough. We may open up knowing pretty well that the friendship would last no longer than the journey.

Do all friendships stand the test of time? Do they all have a 'use-by-date' shelf life? Is friendship as flitting as a showroom of a departmental store that has a makeover with each season sale? Since this bond is not tangible but written in the sands of time, even a zephyr can erase it. A little dent in ego, a misspoken utterance, an unintended gesture here and there, an unsaid, undone action all may crumble this loose association.

What was supposed to be like taking a bullet, sharing the joy, the cries, the sweat and seasons in the sun can just go bust in a moment.  Keeping secrets, warts, and all are, just self-pleasing dialogues that act as fillers for time-pass. Will it end like in a feel-good movie, or just one mentioned in eulogies about the good old times remains to be seen?

Five misfits, often mentioned as the scum of societies, the Big Bad Mr Wolf, the serpentine Snake, the mean Shark, the poisonous Tarantula and the meat-chewing Piranha live up to the expectation of society. They are The Bad Guys, the lean, sleek, suave bank robbers.

Their last haul trying to steal the coveted 'Golden Dolphin' award goes all wrong. They are busted and have the chance to prove that they can be reformed. Meanwhile, the goody-good two shoes Prof Marmalade, the guinea pig turned scientist-philanthrope, has some things up his sleeves. The Governor, Ms Foxington, tries to convince the gang that it pays to be good despite the bad reputation they have picked up over the years.

A feel-good, chirpy and colourful animated film.

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

Love thy neighbour, they say!

Fauda (Chaos, Hebrew/Arab; 2015-2019)
(Miniseries S1-3)

Is it not ironic that the Western nations want to police the whole world but failed miserably at finding peace at the heart of the Judeo-Christian stronghold. It seems that the brothers of the Book perform poorly when it comes to showing brotherly love. Also funny that a place that four great religions of the world look up to as their holy land cannot be protected by their Protector. A land hardly larger than 30,000 square kilometres, but this piece of land had not seen peace since time immemorial. 

The feud has lasted so long that nobody can remember who drew first blood. Both parties, the Palestinians and the Israelis, claim legitimate historical rights on that piece of land. Looks like all that talk of the religion of peace, the religion of love and the religion of compassion is mere rhetoric. The reference to 'brotherhood' is only offered to the brethren of the same faith, not of the whole of mankind.

I am sure God must be in a quandary. It is like the old Indian saying or maybe an old movie dialogue. It is akin to asking a mother which child she wants to support; she would say, "you are asking me whether I love my right eye more than the left eye. I love them both." Probably that is why there are no permanent solutions here. Let both brothers fight it out till both exhausts each other. The trouble is that their course has sympathisers from people elsewhere. Everybody else is drawn into the bottomless wormhole. 

This miniseries shows, from an Israeli viewpoint, is about a group from an Israeli counter-terrorism unit in the Israeli Defence Force. They are often referred to as Mista'arvim, meaning living amongst Arabs. They speak Arabic and assimilate into the local population to collect intelligence on the latest Palestinian terrorist activities. In the series, we find a power struggle between the Palestinian Authority (PA), Hamas and the newbie around town, ISIS. It looks like PA wants to maintain law and order, but everyone else has their idea of which brand of Islam should prevail on their land. They want more possession of land, which they assert was theirs anyway, to start with. To die for such a course is divine; they have been indoctrinated and have the rest of Palestine (and the world) follow suit.

This is, of course, the Israeli perspective of things. The Palestinians should rebut with their own version of the ground situation, but then, there will be confusion on which version is acceptable. Each faction of society would insist theirs is correct and proclaim their claim is a pursuit worth dying for.

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

It happened once before!

 Joji (Malayalam, 2021)

We always complain about the conundrum that we are stuck in. We brood, curse and swear at the people who brought about all these. Then we stop and go about doing our own things.  When someone takes the trouble to push the boundary and actually try to change the course of their lives, nobody wants to be part of it. The rest do not want to be seen as complicit as it would tarnish their image of it but secretly, deep inside, they are happy that something is being done. 

When the plot hits a snag and the perpetrator is exposed, nobody wants to have any link to it. Conversely, they condemn the whole exercise and start talking about morality. They claim ignorance and assert that natural justice or the rule of law should prevail. Generally, people are unthinking sheep, quite happy following the shepherd like what the herd is doing. Little do they realise that the shepherd only has one sole purpose in life - to fatten his flock and march them to the slaughter.

This Malayalam film is supposed to be based on Shakespeare's Macbeth, but there are no three witches and their prophecies. In the strict Panachel Kuttappan household live three sons - Jomon, Jaison and Joji. Kuttapan, the controlling patriarch, has an iron-fisted way of controlling his offsprings and their dependents. He is pretty dogmatic about the management of his home and his property. Jomon is divorced, probably due to his drinking habit. Jaison is living in his father's estate with his wife and his teenage son. Joji is an engineering dropout, just loafing around, passing time, knowing that he will inherit his share of his father's large estate one day with his passing. 

Joji thinks his days of splurging were nearing when Kuttappan has a massive stroke and is bedridden. Initially, his moribund condition was supposed to be terminal, but with a craniotomy, he improves. Lucid and nursing back to health, Joji has a harrowing experience when he tries to con the old man to sign a cheque. The alert and buff patient almost chokes Joji. 

Realising that Kuttappan is not dying any time soon, Joji drugs him. A few family members appear seemingly aware of Joji's shenanigans but decide to turn a blind eye. The senior had been quite nasty to everyone in the family. The old man dies, but everyone is tight-lipped about his sudden demise despite an initial improvement of health. 

To a frightened child, every shadow of a movement appears like an apparition, they say. Joji, worried that his crime will be unrecovered, starts committing more crimes, burying himself more in the quicksand that he eventually finds too difficult to extricate.

Lesson to be learnt: People are forever looking for that sucker to do all the dirty job. Change is difficult, they know, and they promise all the support that the sacrificial lamb needs. When the push comes to shove, they bail out, preferring to hang on to the thicker branch for better support. People would suddenly talk about morality, not wanting to rock the boat and need to maintain equilibrium. 

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

Will go on, with or without you!

Marriage Story (2019)

You start a family appointing yourselves as the nucleus and the other appendages as equal partners and essential requirements of the cells. You do your part thinking that they would do the same. You assume that even though the nucleus is the first pre-requisite, the others would take their place and do their part for a balanced multifunctional cell. 

You think that everything is fine until it hits you one day. The nucleolus, which is an integral part of you starts telling you that you are evil. That you are gaslighting her. That you think that you are the only one that matters. 

Before you can realise what hit you, you are bamboozled with examples of your so-called ‘misdemeanours’ as if you did it for your own selfish reasons. You thought it was for a harmonious internal milieu, but it did not appear so. You thought every organelle was in concert with that - to maintain zen. Suddenly your every action is against you like you are some kind of evil bacteriophage that takes the bejesus out of every living organism. 

You relent. You think of other occupants amongst the cytoplasm. Is it a temporary hiccough in the differentiation process? You procrastinate. You assume everything will revert to normalcy. 

It does not. You find out that every member to pointing accusing fingers at you. You try to fight, but you would not want to hurt your own fluid and membrane. You relent. Everything changes. The dynamics that you had dreamt are now but a terrible nightmare. You do not matter anymore. You are redundant. The cell can still function without you, apparently.

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