Monday, November 21, 2005

Lovelution

How poetry ever got written -- that never struck me!
- Richard P. Feynman

The Prologue:
I agree to the above statement to various degrees at different times. But never did it strike as completely false to me. And in a peculiarly similary way, it applies for love too in my life.

The Post:
Recently, I read Bharath's write-up on this thing called love (though I felt it was more about loss of one's love), and started musing what it meant in my senselessly stupid life. I talking about love is like camels talking about bungee-jumping. Even as I type this, I realise that I have given a rather nice form to love (bungee-jumping), here. Sometimes, I end up comparing it to several unsavory things (toilets, for example).
Not that love was/is impossible for me. Its only that I don't seem to have actually felt considerable amount of love for anybody till now. If you want to get a fairly accurate depiction, think Rajesh from Gautam's Minnale (I don't quote examples from inane movies or those which I don't admire; but the characterization, with the right amount of ineptness, never got closer than this). Hold on. Before you think I was roaming around bullying people around wearing thick black jerkins and bunch of fancy chains around my neck, the comparison was strictly meant for the level of interaction with girls and the directions it took during the few times I did interact (which is mostly when we are pulling the legs of some poor guy linking him unsavourily to some quiet/enthusiastic girl in the class).
The general (and hence senseless too) perception is that, in the social setup in which I spent my time as a teenager, for a guy to fall in love with a girl (or at least run/crawl after skirts in general), he had to be this hip guy (another inept description; but the material seems to deserve it) or the mushy-mushy "you-are-what-I-live-for" love. Unfortunately, yours truly was neither and (hence?) belonged to the rest {a real fat percentage at that, who never actually fall in love until some day they get married} theorizing love among friends (not quite similar to Vivek in those several "college-romance" flicks, but in the same ballpark; note the innumerous inane references in Tamil films throughout in this post).
Honestly looking back (and pointlessly theorizing why I was the way I was), I never grew up from being the boy who fiercely competed with fellow female classmates in acads and local quizzes during my school life to become the prototype adolescent who flirts in a real dumb way with the fairer sex. By the time I grew up and started appreciating the finer aspects of the female species (like Psmith would have put it), I was far off from being the dude whom I would describe henceforth (for the sake of discussion) as the "I-need-girlfriends" type (another phrase conceived by Pa. Vijay for Boys; need I repeat that it is another reference to an inane movie?). I admit I had crushes; in fact, lots of them. But, none of them turned out to have even 1/10th of the mush quotient (no disrespect here; to reduce the mock-factor, let me make it 'emotional quotient') required to be actually called love or to deliberately introduce some familiarity with the girl concerned. The result was this total absence/stray occurrences of interaction with females. And like the true boy-next-door-in-a-town-in-Tamilnadu {unfairly neglected in the representation of youth in Kollywood cinema considering the sheer numbers in which they are bred in real life; except for those rare cases like Sethu}, I was better off being one who laughs his ass off when a guy mumbles/explains/cries about his true love for some femme fatale.
This post does ring a bell with my "love life".
Yes, I did sit in last bench for most part of college life. I use profanity of all kinds in all languages. I did sometimes think (perhaps, quite stupidly) my sense of humour (take it with a pinch of salt, now ;)) is alien/didn't match with many of the females I had known (at least from what I had heard about things they *choose* to giggle at). I yak a lot of bullshit in any topic but can't really say if I can/can't "start a topic with a member of the oppoisite sex", because I never deliberately did it (loads of ego, perhaps). I am not anywhere close to being a fan of rock music too (though my close friends worship it). Yes, all thru my college life, I belonged to this boys gang in which nobody had a girlfriend. {On the flip side, I hate Gaana songs and I really hate Deva. I am a guy with two left feet. I watch all kinds of movies. eat any food; somehow I maintain this vegetarian thing which might jolly well go for a toss any day.}
But the key difference is {I learn from here that it is called post hoc ergo propter hoc} that while that dude is explaining "why we never get them" (thus giving a cause-effect relationship), I never seemed to have even tried hard to get them (thus thinking of this as a correlation). To sum it up, I never indulged myself into love and took some immense stupid pride in it.
When in a relatively saner state, we (I and my friends) have tried to reason (for discussion's sake) why we are what we are, and came up with different reasons which ranged from frequency mismatch (assumption of intellect), too emotional for the pieces of wood that we are, multi-layered futility {which, I realise, is the most important factor - this observation updated much later; on Feb 6, 2:15 p.m.} etc. Sometimes we were even told that it will happen to us one day when we get "matured".
I don't question why things are the way they are. Well I do - actually way too often - but, only for the sake of a discussion. When it comes to deeds, I just float like a piece of wood (a rather dull description of a rather joie de vivre life ;)). Hence, as much as I don't question the existence of love, I also don't question the inevitability of a marriage (an arranged marriage at that). Interestingly(?), in Minnale, Rajesh eventually meets his kind of girl. Every man has an opinion of his kind of girl (even as I type this, I feel this definitive urge not to write it; call it a big fat ego not to reveal your need for something to anybody or plain shyness). Mine is some girl who is very similar to me - who can yak about bullshit (preferably with a vocabulary with rich profanity that challenges mine :); am not an expert, btw) for hours, which will make me feel at home. In short, she should be able to comprehend this senseless/worthless/stupid ramble and its undercurrents :).

Epilogue:
I guess, I kinda understand the need/desire for a female company in the life of any man. But I seem to ask, "well.. what's the hurry?". Yeah, I am like Jeff, the Dude, in Big Lebowski.

10 comments:

  1. duh,
    no, I am not.
    I am this ordinary typical tamil chap who is attracted to lots of females; but, a little too less familiar with the ones to whom I am attracted to.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have read almost all ur posts and i ve felt like "yeah yeah u r right"every time i read ur posts.But Iam sorry to say this.u r totally wrong here.I agree its ur opinion about love.But what do u think s going to b a major problem for u to accept girls wen u cud accept all craps on earth?ur post clearly shows ur aversion for girls and underestimation of their knowledge.Though I wanna discuss abt ths to u in detail,let me jus put in short.U will fall for a girl(ur kind of girl as u wish) for whom u will definiotely do all such minute thingfs which u were making fun off wen ur friends did.the only difference s ur friends and others have experienced it earlier and u will experience it later.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have read almost all ur posts and i ve felt like "yeah yeah u r right"every time i read ur posts.But Iam sorry to say this.u r totally wrong here.I agree its ur opinion about love.But what do u think s going to b a major problem for u to accept girls wen u cud accept all craps on earth?ur post clearly shows ur aversion for girls and underestimation of their knowledge.Though I wanna discuss abt ths to u in detail,let me jus put in short.U will fall for a girl(ur kind of girl as u wish) for whom u will definiotely do all such minute thingfs which u were making fun off wen ur friends did.the only difference s ur friends and others have experienced it earlier and u will experience it later.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Anon (if ever you come back and read this; I hope you do),
    This write-up was essentially more of a satire (if I could pompously categorize it) on people who never fell in love to a substantial level (so common in our society, I thought) than on those who did fall in love and did the "minute" things. If ever the former category assumed something superior about themselves (which often is the case), it's pretty stupid, an adjective, which I have clearly used twice in the same context. Their state is just a result (or side-effect) of the way the system has worked.

    [..] multi-layered futility {which, I realise, is the most important factor - this observation updated much later; on Feb 6, 2:15 p.m. [..]
    When I wrote this, I meant something. Either the subtext is not visible at all, or you didn't get the point.

    So, no hard feelings.

    P.S. 1: Hey, I have done those "minute" things as well, though not to a substantial level :).
    P.S. 2: I realise that my description of my kind of girl had little to do with the post and even myself. I think I was just deeply indulging myself.
    P.S. 3: And were you the one who made all the comments (about 5 comments, I mean) yesterday? This blog isn't prepared to handle that many comments on a single day :).
    P.S. 4: Do I know you?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I have read almost all ur posts and i ve felt like "yeah yeah u r right"every time i read ur posts.But Iam sorry to say this.u r totally wrong here.I agree its ur opinion about love.But what do u think s going to b a major problem for u to accept girls wen u cud accept all craps on earth?ur post clearly shows ur aversion for girls and underestimation of their knowledge.Though I wanna discuss abt ths to u in detail,let me jus put in short.U will fall for a girl(ur kind of girl as u wish) for whom u will definiotely do all such minute thingfs which u were making fun off wen ur friends did.the only difference s ur friends and others have experienced it earlier and u will experience it later.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Pal,
    The same comment yet again? Do read my reply that is present just a few lines above your 3rd comment.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Mr.Zero,
    sorry first to have posted same comment manytimes.
    1.gud u agreed that u have done those "minute things"too.
    2.i can understand well that your description of your kinda girl has very little to do with the post
    3.Yeah, i was the one to post 5 comments
    4.sorry, we both dont know each other
    my comment wasnt intended to be satirical,but still i realise it sounds so.The primemost thing that made me write so is "Sometimes, I end up comparing it to several unsavory things (toilets, for example)and To sum it up, I never indulged myself into love and took some immense stupid pride in it".Love s a prop for ones life to be in a good balance.Thats all I have to say about ths topic.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 1. Sometimes, I end up comparing it to several unsavory things (toilets, for example)and To sum it up, I never indulged myself into love and took some immense stupid pride in it.
    I thought it was obvious. But still, the post (and the above line) was only about the typical-teenage-boy-girl love (add "Tamilnadu" to that). (Why only pick that, you may ask. That's for another post.) Well, I was just being frank in recalling such comparisons that I have made.

    2. gud u agreed that u have done those "minute things"too.
    Did I deny that in my original post to agree upon it later? Just that I didn't mention the "sparks" I had.

    3. I didn't find your comment anywhere close to satirical at all. I found it to be an outcome of disagreement of what you had interpreted out of my post.

    P.S.:- And for heck's sake, there is no "aversion"!

    ReplyDelete
  9. When you look back at this you perhaps look at it as if someone else wrote it. (Then perhaps you don't). But let's assume you did. Then the one placing a comment on a dated piece is attempting to converse with a person who has passed on. Any replies from you may not be appropriate.

    Heck you may now only be a fellow commentator at best. Assuming this is the case, I will have no qualms appropriating this whole post as mine, in substantial measure.

    To reduce the range of the ruminations rather repugnantly (if I am going to write cliches, I'd rather have alliteration on my side) to a single dimension I can't help thinking of a cinequote.
    As Allen said as Balzac said: "there goes another novel". But I believe that applies to the wider ruminations too.

    So I, or should I say you....let me use the 'one', can gloat over the novels that one is sitting on, which should last all of posterity's needed supply of literary classics.

    The love lives of lovable men

    Daschund puppies are cute
    The statement is subjective
    But those who dare refute
    Cannot share the adjective

    Hear ye who exclusion dread
    Thus spake the sage
    The only staff of life is bread
    This I learnt with age

    The lovable ones with hearts of gold
    Who think they're sitting pretty
    One of these days they've got to be told
    They have His Infinite Pity

    Helplessly harbouring ideas of Spice
    Waiting for the Moment to come
    Shocking turnouts of the roll of dice
    Lead him to the arms of Rum

    The ensuing swing is drastic
    He loses long held values
    Morals he finds to be plastic
    The twin of RObert Bruce

    He sees the world at an angle
    A chuckle replaces his smile
    A novel disentangle
    As coffins of values pile

    From hereon

    Some put 'selves at first spot
    And forever live with a frown
    Other people, wiser or not
    Make peace and settle down

    The quest for truth is the shredding of poses
    Why search far and wide when
    All great philosophies have their sources
    In the love lives of lovable men.

    ReplyDelete