Uncategorized

When I was in college, a 16 year old girl promised to marry me. She wanted to name our baby “Sachin”. I believed her.

When a policeman once asked me whether I’d like to get my passport on time, I smiled with gratitude and slammed the door on his face.

When I once read, “Ron Paul is a gynecologist, and he is self-taught.”, I did not understand why this evoked laughter in an audience. I still do not.

I’ve always had a tenuous understanding of sarcasm and double-speak. I take words literally. When I was a child, it took me many years to understand hidden insults. 

I’ve never had it any other way. I was not sarcastic as a child. I was too innocent to understand the art of insinuation. When a teacher was sarcastic to me at 9, I understood her only a year later. When I fully understood her, I felt numb, as if I were struck by lightning. I stood still, staring at my coconut tree. It was too late, because I’d left that city and moved into another school. There was nothing much I could do about this. This was deeply unsettling. Continue Reading

Books, Uncategorized

I think she had all the relapses after that.

I have never read VS Naipaul, but this passage from the New Republic is striking:

Naipaul, who won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2001, is known for what one commentator described as a “terrifying honesty”—but not so much for his sensitivity. As his first wife, Patricia Hale, battled breast cancer, Naipaul left her alone for long periods, carrying out serious affairs with other women. When Hale was temporarily in remission, in 1994, Naipaul discussed his past visits to prostitutes in an interview with The New Yorker. “I think she had all the relapses after that,” he told his official biographer, Patrick French. “All the remission ended.” Of her death two years later, he added, “It could be said that I killed her. It could be said. I feel a little bit that way.” The day after the cremation, Naipaul invited Nadira, a Pakistani journalist, to move into the Wiltshire home he had shared with Hale.

“I must thank Nadira for bringing Augustus into my life,” Naipaul continues. He is visibly upset, and I ask when the cat passed away. “This last September,” he replies. It is October 1, and I offer a cliché about time healing all wounds. “No, no, the previous September 26th,” he explains, sounding deeply wounded. “A year ago. The terrible part of it is that people suggest to me that I get a new cat, that I invite this new cat into the home I shared with Augustus. As if this one should just be replaced so soon. It shows a lack of understanding.” Continue Reading

Books

Sarcasm and socially unacceptable behavior has nearly ruined my life in all normal ways. It has also made it incredibly amusing and funny on a deeper and much more important level.

As every human action boils down to trade, I have to admit that overall my strategy was not at all a rip-off. In fact, it was a wonderful deal, a reasonable trade-off.  I have behaved in such a manner for various reasons which are rather complicated. I would say it is often because of my honesty, good-will, benevolence, deep love for humanity-and of course, my naïve, gullible nature!

It is often said that “Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit”. We also hear “A sarcastic person has a superiority complex that can be cured only by the honesty of humility.” I have always wondered whether there could be notions which are so far from the truth. How someone of normal intelligence can seriously hold any of these moralistic, “church sermon” like rationalizations is completely beyond me! Rational inquiries of moral philosophers were confined to politically correct, “mushy” virtues like unconditional love, kindness, compassion and benevolence. Even moral philosophers who took pride in their political incorrectness had confined their rigorous analysis to more worthy virtues like integrity, honesty, justice, productiveness, pride and of course, selfishness. Very few have anything good to say on one of the most feared, despised, sickening, malevolent, humiliating form of doublespeak which makes people flee and shun the light of the day: sarcasm. When even apostles of selfishness like Nathaniel Branden say “Aside from cases of violent coercion, as when someone points a gun at you, you are responsible for your reactions. No one “makes” you become sarcastic”, we should know that the fate of sarcasm is bleak indeed. A bit of iconoclasm is therefore in order.

We might say that sarcasm is a “conversational scapegoat”, and unfairly so. The socially beneficial effects of sarcasm need to be defended hard. Sarcasm goes against the inflicting person, but it helps the truth reach him faster, in ways which are not too obvious. A man faces a painful dilemma when he faces deeply insulting sarcasm. He is compelled to prove his backbone by a tight slap-or he can listen silently, smiling like an imbecile thinking he is being smart & tactful. The sad fact is that it proves that he has neither intelligence nor a backbone, as the one who hurled the insult might know too well that it is true and didn’t expect a slap, precisely for that reason! I remember an instance when I hurled an insult which hits where it hurts the most-family, and the victim listened silently, not out of fear of a more public humiliation, but because he knew it was just another general, categorical statement intended at no one in particular- and because only truth hurts-and because he was a man of immense self esteem. Well crafted sarcasm puts such a person in the position of a mink that walks blindly into a scented trap. If it hurts so much, it can only be because it is true and such sarcasm deserves the highest praise, not condemnation. Given certain narrow assumptions, truth as such should never hurt the innocent. Like happiness, “Truth” should be considered an Aristotelian “chief good”, pursued for its own sake. As scathing sarcasm is often truth, it should be ranked higher. Continue Reading

Books, Uncategorized

It is my dream to make a living out of writing and I had intended to do so till I pack my bags to hell. But, there are moments when it is hard for one to read or write. One such moment is when one knows he is supposed to be packing his bags to hell. It couldn’t get any tougher than this!

Two months back, I was having some pain in my tongue as of a lesion, and doctors said that it is highly probable that it is oral cancer. When I searched on the internet, I had all the symptoms, except that I had pain. I did not know why I was being singled out for this. I never smoked, used any tobacco product, tasted alcohol, had sex or even exposed myself to sun excessively. Even my young age made it highly unlikely. I do not deserve this, my mind said. Continue Reading

Books, Uncategorized

When Saddam was hanged, many publications all around the world shed crocodile tears over the ‘heinous murder’ of a mass murderer. I wonder whether any of those houses would have anything to say on Bill Gates being punished by a European court. One was a hard core criminal and death would have been the least punishment he had deserved. The other was a man we all owe a lot, being punished on the basis of unintelligible laws backed by a huge vacuum of Economic nonsense. While there would have been at least some men to damn Saddam, I don’t think an overwhelming majority would have any sympathy towards Gates.

Why is it that men have no empathy for victims when they are all praise for their tormenters? We will have to get to root of the problem to find an answer to it. It’s understandable that a complex mode of reasoning is needed in the case of Anti-trust laws and it is part of the reason why they hate Bill. It is impossible for a young or ill informed person to take a strong stance on such an issue. Does the same go for Saddam? Who knows not that he is a brute? It proves to us how much people can repress, how much they can hate a superior man, and how deep a fascination they have for the evil. They might deny it with all their sincerity not knowing the roots of their emotions. Roots of Anti-Americanism, environmentalism, statism, and socialism all could be traced to it. If they find US imperialism brutal, wouldn’t the same go for what controlled nations do to their own citizens? Why do the men who plan on so short a range in the case of economy, think of the ‘environment’ in terms of generations? If men know it not on a conscious level, it is only because there is a lot of repression going on. Repression is the clue!

You must all be wondering what it all has to do with ‘Daddy’s Girls’. The answer is-A lot! It is an amusing fact that most girls have an uncontrollable fascination for their father figure. We all have heard a lot many girls say that they see in their dad a role model, and that they love him the most. As things stand, there are few-very few men on earth deserving of love, respect and admiration. Few are true to themselves, love what they do and make sure they are the best. Even among such men, we all know how many of them exhibit clarity, in at least defining their terms when it comes to parenting. How is it then that all these girls find in their dad a role model?

Opposite poles attract-Is that adequate an explanation? When we see these men come around as utterly incapable, monstrous and sometimes, even tyrannical, could it be enough to say just that much? Let’s be honest. Things are much complicated than that. I am yet to meet a girl who doesn’t lust for her dad. “What? How monstrous you must be to give it such an interpretation? Wouldn’t it be better left unsaid even if it is so?” My answer is: The implications of such emotions are not as confined as one might think. And more: It disgusts me to hear that many find men not worthy of respect as their role models, and the mighty pride with which they assert it.

If it were such an isolated phenomenon, we wouldn’t find this many girls asserting it, and worse, I know not of any exception. Love or respect are too sacred emotions, and are to be handed out to the ones who deserve it. Who deserves it? Any man, who is true to himself, is willing to live for what he loves, and shows commitment to the things he undertake. In case of a parent, the responsibility is even more, as he holds the default responsibility to exhibit his commitment in that relationship too. It could be true that there are men and women worthy of love and respect, but they are few and far between.

I know that many would deny the whole thing.’ You’re reading too much Freud’. The evidence however, is too much that one doesn’t need any expert to testify. How could one explain the uncontrollable fascination with which they talk of their fathers and the inarticulate sense of fear, pain, confusion and discomfort they exhibit when they get to their right senses?It is as if a button had been just pressed and they have suddenly turned helpless and neurotic. Very often their fantasies have no relation to reality and this man they idealize could as well be a tyrant.

We are now getting to the other part of the problem-Why girls are attracted to men with a dark side. Men have always had a fascination for the dark. They had worshipped fire and thunderstorms. As long as there are rejecting or tyrannical fathers, girls will have a fascination for such men. It is also true that some men rationalize their complexes stating women don’t fall for nice guys. Some men haven’t a healthy sense of assertiveness that women can’t stand them at all. I have nothing to say of that. Women, in some cases may even fear that they would have to initiate everything, when they wouldn’t want it that way. Is that all?

There is considerable evidence, and it would be a gross understatement to say ‘considerable evidence’, that a lot many women want them to be treated like dirt and they constitute the majority. They want men to treat them as they were treated as a child. It is a severe mental disorder. It is an addiction, worse than any narcotic addiction or alcoholism. Nothing good can come out of such a relationship. Such women wouldn’t mind even turning the most innocent man abusive and they are too many that they can’t be cured by any mass program.

A year back, in a television show concerning women’s entry into Sabarimala temple, when a South Indian television anchor declared he see nothing wrong with men wanting to subdue women, all the rest stared at him as if they want to chew that barbarian alive. It is of course, true that no person has the right to subdue another. I am all for such an egalitarian world. Aren’t they all, but pretending not to see the point? Is there any woman who would want it that way? A lot many crave to be treated with contempt and that desire makes them all the more deserving of it!

I will draw your attention to Ayn Rand’s works to prove my point. She is, needless to mention, a person I admire a lot. She was the smartest woman ever lived. We’d look into her works as she is professedly dedicated to self esteem and independence of women. Her claims are rather spurious, as in ‘The Fountainhead’, Dominique falls in love with Roark, the man who raped her. A rape by invitation, of course! The same writer thinks no woman should be greater than the highest man. In all her works, we can see an insatiable desire for admiration, which the characters repress mercilessly.

I shall quote from ‘Atlas Shrugged’: Dagny asked “Do you suppose I should try to get D’s for a change and become the most popular girl in school?” Francisco stopped, looked at her and slapped her face. She felt pleasure from the dull, hot pain in her cheek and from the taste of blood in the corner of her mouth. She felt pleasure in what she suddenly grasped about him, about herself and about his motive.” Much earlier in the same work when Dagny’s brother Jim asks “You haven’t any pride at all. The way you run when he whistles and wait on him! Why don’t you shine his shoes?” This was her answer “Because he hasn’t told me to.”So much from a woman dedicated to self-esteem!

Masochism is all there is behind this perversion. Tawni O’Dell, too is worthy of attention here, as many others are. I shall quote from her novel,’ Back Roads’: “I wanted to pick up the brush and beat Amber senselessly with it. Not because I hated her. Not because she deserved it. Not because I wanted to make her fear me. Simply because it would feel good. The difference between Dad and me was that he always went ahead and hit one of us; and he was a much happier person. I knew it never occurred to Amber that I might hurt her. She believed violence was an act of strength, and she thought I was week.” I am drawing your attention to the fact that she doesn’t blame the dad in the picture. He is idealized as a much honest person. It is not rare among such writers to feel sympathy for the adult. She claims, where she grew up, in the coal mines of Pennsylvania, such behavior was acceptable. It is this idealization, which is the root of masochism, as it is of sadism.

Some turn to the other side of the coin warding off their pain and tender feelings as weaknesses. In Ayn Rand’s novels, not even a single hero, with the sole exception of Hank Rearden expresses any weakness or tender feeling at all, not even a desire for love or admiration. Heroes are portrayed as lonely, wooden & one-dimensional, while villains are sociable, timid morons. It is not surprising that she turned out to be a very lonely woman and couldn’t write a single fiction work in the last 25 years of her life. Things would have been much better if only she were a little more honest to herself and dared to question her idealization.

Camille Paglia, another female writer too, in her writings, find fault with abused women as they are weak & that they might be enjoying it covertly. I am not to question the merit of her argument, which could be right or wrong, as the case might be, but it is no coincidence that Paglia & Rand are Nietzschean’s. It is also, not a coincidence that Nietzsche, who believed in eliminating all weaknesses and tenderness, was a German. It was the brutal parenting in Germany, in those days, inspired by many writers including Shrebers, which created a Hitler, and many men who would march to his tune. Hitler, who was afraid of his father, too believed in rooting out all weaknesses and instilling cruelty. So, did his humiliated followers. Pseudo-strength and cruelty, they thought would let off their secret shame. It didn’t!

Many of you would have read of the merits of the superior culture of pre-World War I Germany. “Children were all disciplined and well behaved, as military cadets.” It is the very same culture which they praise, that paved way for a dictatorship. It was then believed that the will of a child is to be broken for him to be easily manipulated later. A child manipulated that way could be manipulated as easily, later, by an adult. She, in fact, would seek men who would be in control and manipulate her that way. She roots out her pain and humiliating imagining all these manipulations and abuse to be expressions of strength. It is such manipulations which makes things easier for Hitlers, Stalins & Saddams. Some learn the art from being once manipulated that way. It is worth noting that Saddam, Hitler, Pol Pot & Stalin all were extremely tortured as children.

It is the early idealization of father figure, based on a faith-Which means: not based on any rational evidence, which is the very root of this neurosis. It is the belief that children should love their parents. It is the belief that one shouldn’t be true to oneself, but act on a sense of duty. All religions and variants of totalitarianism, including statism are based on such faiths: that some acts or emotions are good in, by and of itself, and that one should act against his own self interest. Such notions help them to repress what was done to them in their childhood. They imagine themselves to possess a love which, in fact, is only a vague apprehension they can neither define nor cure. What else is the path towards virtuosity? When it comes to their mind what was done to them, the only solution it would occur to them would not be to hate their parents, but to idealize their acts. The same happens to men in a dictatorship too. They try to evade their hatred acting it out on others, by torturing their own selves or seeking others who would do that job much effectively. How far they are from their true selves! They haven’t even the wits to know such behavior was motivated by power hunger, humiliation and revenge and not by any benevolent motive. Love, discipline and charity aren’t to be instilled by a sense of duty. The only solution is to have their hatred rightly directed. One would ask: What is to be gained by such hatred? My answer is: No one gains anything by faking reality. No one can oppose injustice giving moral sanction to it. It is much better to have that hatred directed rightly. It is much better to be true to one self. Does that mean one should act on it? Not necessarily!

Most, if not all of these girls lust for their dad’s and I am sure a lot many of them know it too. If they have problems admitting it, so much the worse for them!