Words were always my strong suit. I’d be able to talk myself into a
rational state of mind. I’d also always be quite poetically blunt with those
around me. I was a straight shooter and never was afraid to speak my mind.
My words and thoughts eventually
backfired. My confidence slowly was smothered by the rain of abandonment. I
always was good with words and could articulate anything to anyone until I
started to think too rationally. I always meandered through each avenue
of possibility and this brought my words to a screeching halt. As someone who
thrives off of his words, I became nothing when they became too difficult to
speak or even think of.
However it was not just the loss
of words that restrained me; it was the loss of meaning. I have lost words
before, thus I scribble them on a paper. There existed no word that I did not
know of, and no word intimidated me. This was up until I was introduced to a pair of
words, a name, which then turned into three words, and four words, and so on,
until I had lost all my words. And I hadn’t just lost my words, I lost all meaning.
What is a mathematician without
numbers; a doctor without science; a lawyer without law? How to uphold and
continue these very arts without the art existing itself? Perhaps it is all a fabrication
of the mind, but that disappeared once I closed my eyes, and built an entirely
new entity; with my words. But these words only resonated the invalidity of
themselves, their meaning, and of me. For a poet losing his words is only a writers block. A
poet that has lost his meaning is a travesty.
The very idea of using my words
to get out was abolished; they had no meaning. I did not want to be petty and
the perfectionist in me did not want to deliver a less than perfect stanza. I
stunted myself through my thoughts, which in turn destroyed my very art. And
everyone else stunted me by maintaining the status quo. I was once a promising
young man, but as I learned time and time again, most promises are too
difficult to understand.
And after what felt like years,
my words faded and turned into smiles; smiles of hesitance and smiles of second
guessing and deliberateness. It became too hard to speak. My seemingly rosy
world never was rosy; it only appeared so after I found my words, only to have
them lost and taken away. As a person who thrives on speaking, I could not say
one word. My words disappeared. My meaning disappeared. I disappeared.
My own strength became my
weakness. Much like the proverbial double-edged sword, my words betrayed me. Soon
after I became familiar with that inspiring face, I only found, that I did not
know, and it became seemingly impossible for me to find out. Words abandoned me. More importantly, those three words destroyed me.
They say they want to live in dreams,
And so I question that.
Why? Do they know what they are saying?
What that really means?
In the morning I go to work,
I drink my coffee and do my deed.
Look for my answer,
I can only concede.
I pass the filter, the green, my very being.
Only hoping for the call,
To that cloud labelled 9.
Instead, I drive home past all the bees.
They're blind robots.
No, Not all of them.
Some have found it,
Some have gone from clouds to pillows,
Pillows to clouds.
Literally. Figuratively. Metaphorically.
Perfectly.
They smile in their joy.
I sit and read,
Or so I say;
But all I really do, is sit on this carousel,
And draw my false parallels.
They tell me to walk,
To write, and make lists.
Organize and rationalize.
But all I do is hesitate. Deliberate.
I deviate.
While I try to create,
A fate that will never be.
And that's why it just sounds so silly.
But they say, shoot for the stars,
And you'll at least land on a cloud.
I like clouds, but you can fall through.
Even though, sometimes I like rain.
They say when you're up there,
You'll smile as the sun graces you.
And I do, I smile.
And they say I look happy.
I lock my door, I go to bed.
The sun is gone, and that's when it happens.
I realize, criticize, hypothesize, rationalize.
And it's silly again.
The sun is gone; the clouds rumble and roar.
The rain pours.
They say I'm happy.
Realize. Criticize. Lies.
I don't want to live in a dream.
I want it to be.
But then tell me, why do those rhymes sound so damn stupid?
Create, deliberate, hesitate, deviate, fate, too late.
Why is it, that the day is sweet?
But the night brings out the truth;
Only to have the morning destroy it.
Because I have nothing better to do, while on the bus, I listen to a random assortment of music from my Itouch. The travel time from home to wherever it is I go, is usually somewhat lengthy and the Itouch acts as a bit of a distraction for me. Just the other day, I started thinking about the particular lyrics of one song, and tried to, in some sense, apply it, or understand why it is we even listen to music as human beings.
In general, I assume many of us listen to music for shear entertainment value, some because it provides some type of emotional effect. I started thinking of even why music is created, or produced (hence, I blog), and similar to the very reasons I write, a musician may sing for entertainment, as a release, to share views and so on.
As this dawned on me, I started diving into a song that was currently playing. And I found that it transcended the simple purpose of entertainment, and that it carried some meaning. I found it inspirational, somewhat touching. And I'm sure that is exactly what John Lennon intended.
This is the legendary John Lennon's "Imagine." For those of you that are unfamiliar with John Lennon, he used to be a member of the Beatles, but also produced his own music, like above. I urge you all to listen to the song above, and I believe it really has some significant merit. And for those of you that did not know, shortly after Lennon produced this song, he was shot and killed.
You may ask, or wonder, why is this guy writing this post? Or you may wonder, why is this song so special when their are probably many more songs carrying a similar tone. And you are probably absolutely right, their are plenty of other songs like this. However my point is, it echoes (in my humble opinion) the right message. It's also a song written in the early 70's. In fact it is based on an even earlier short poem.
When Lennon wrote the song, he knew that finding peace, or freedom is not a new cause. Instead, he is only trying to continue advocating it. With this song he's only asking us to 'imagine'. Imagine a world where we are without today's norms, or perhaps even a utopia. It really strikes me, as he hits many notes, asking us to imagine a world without possessions, superficiality, and even hatred.
Overall you can't really argue or go against this message, and if you do, I would love to hear why. What really strikes me however, is the chorus. I only keyed in on these particular lyrics, words, when I jokingly sent the lines to a friend via text to throw them off. Instead I began thinking deeply.
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one
The first two lines are quite self-explanatory, some may even say its fantastical. But think about it for a second, a world where we are all living life in peace, a happy world, free of bombardment of trauma or stress; it would be remarkable wouldn't it? It would be absolutely unbelievable, to live to see such a day. And many would agree and discount this thought.
This is where the the next line comes in. "You may say I'm a dreamer." This is Lennon, speaking to you, speaking to me. He believes in it. He thinks that their is the potential for such a world, and call me crazy, but I want to- and will believe it too. This potential for a peaceful world, a world where people can co-exist, accept each other, embrace each other and really appreciate the world as it exists.
Thing is, if I am, if Lennon is, or if you are being called nothing but a dreamer for thinking like this, it will never happen. When Lennon says "I'm not the only one", he's showing us, that we can all believe in this, take part in such a drastic idea as well. He's inviting us to believe in a peaceful and embracing world. And this is seen through the next lines as well. Until people start believing in such words, and until people act upon their yearning for a safe and yes, happy world/life, then we all have to think like this. Only then will the world live as one.
I really love this Lennon song. It's inspiring to me, and I hope it is for you too. These thoughts are echoed in music today too. Today we see that we do have issues and problems, that we, as a human populous must overcome. I've seen this in many other songs, such as Lupe Fiasco's "Words I Never Said". (You can click on the link to listen to the song) Fiasco is another remarkable individual who I believe is trying to convey a similar message. In his song, he only highlights the seeming animosity we live in today. I don't want to dive too far into his words or the song in general, however I do think they are important, and that you should give it a listen. Do you see where I'm going? I hope so. Comment if you do, on my Facebook wall, in this very post, anywhere! "If you don't become an actor, you'll never be a factor."
Another song I really appreciate and feel falls in line here is Changes by Tupac. These songs in style and genre are very different from Lennon, but I feel that the beauty of the message of peace is shining even more due to this. These differences, within mere music, striving for the same thing, peace, can embody us as humans itself. We are all different, we all want the same thing, so lets do it, right? Lets see some changes! A similar song, Runnin, by Tupac and Biggie, composed by, I'm not sure who, looks at this delicate issue as well. I want you to pay attention to the last few words in the song (along with the chorus), but more particularly, the consequences we all can potentially face. How do we treat each other?
One final song I want to bring up is the following:
This song is called "Dear God" by The Roots. It again highlights the natural and unnatural issues we face today. Why am I showing these songs as well? Well, I'm hoping that everyone sees, that this is far from a perfect world. It is imperfect, and I believe it is unacceptable for it to deteriorate. The Roots want to "do away with these anomalies" and we should too. All these artists, all these musicians, want to find a way to reach peace. They all want to reach out to us as well, and get us thinking about acting in such a manner.
Music in general may not all be about this one single thing, however every artist, whether they write, sing, paint, crunch numbers, we all are trying to do something. Some songs may be about hardships, love, or whatever. They all strive for resolution though. They all want to help in some way. They want to achieve some type of, well, peace of mind.
So I ask you all, what is it we look for? What do we want for ourselves? What about our parents, our brothers, sisters etc. We would want the well being of these people, our friends. And the stranger across the street also has parents, siblings, friends that he or she may want to look out for. My point here? We should all look out for each other.
Looking at the very idea of unity, of solidarity. Countries strive for this, all of humanity should as well, as one big nation. Because really, we are all humans, we all have similarities, and we are also all different in some ways. That is the beauty of each individual. We should appreciate and magnify these strengths. I know it's really easy to say, but we really should all strive to be one, just like John Lennon said. And it won't happen if just a few people believe this, but everyone should.
I've probably said and bitten off more than I can chew. The idea that we are living with imperfections, should be unacceptable. To accept these imperfections here, would simply be arrogant, because as long as their is suffering, not everyone is happy.
I hope these words in some way, have motivated you to strive for greatness, in a way that strengthens and helps others. I believe that this can happen, and that small kind, everyday actions can work miracles. A simple smile can work wonders. I will continue to dream of this, and hope for such a world and day to come, where people are not afraid to be who they are, feel what they feel, and we can embrace each others difference. Don't be afraid, don't let negativity prevent you. Every single voice counts and a simple thing such as believing and acting, can tip scales. Every, single, one, matters.
I dare everyone to know this; I dare everyone to dream this.
Then again, you may call me a dreamer...but I can assure you, I'm not the only one.
I hope some day you'll join us; and the world will be as one.
So today I woke up anticipating a probable boring day; when
I logged onto my laptop, I was sent quiet an interesting video by an awesome
and inquisitive person. I initially groaned as I noticed that the video was
like 18 minutes long; to me that is long. I mean it was some British guy I have
never heard of…but then I just watched and…it was fantastic.
Here is the video. I
recommend and request that you watch the video before reading the rest of my
jargon.
See at first glance, I was a little intrigued about what
this may have been about, whether it was an attack, motivation, defence, I
didn’t know. As I kept watching, it seemed to fall closer and closer to some of
my own philosophical views.
I have every intention of becoming a teacher, an English
teacher more specifically. And I’d first like to say, that the video was not an
attack on education. In fact, it only advocates it further. This should be
obvious to everyone because education really is the building blocks for
anything and everything. In order to gain knowledge and do anything, you need
to be educated in some way, shape or form.
This can be seen through the Robinson’s portrayal of how
education has evolved. Now it’s not just about the degree, it is about a lot
more. And in a sense, this is a little tedious. All of a sudden, this
certificate is the dictator of what we do and how we are perceived. Not only
this, but a false hierarchy has been created.
Not only through education but parental and exterior factors
has this hierarchy been created. In general, people have become more orientated
towards exercising the left side of their brains. The perception of the maths
and sciences have trumped the arts and languages.
These areas of study in general are deeply associated with
specific systematic procedures and rules. In a sense, school and education has
enforced these rules as well.
For instance, how many times have you been told ‘do not
colour outside of the lines’. But why not? Why not indulge in the areas where
things can be ambiguous? Where you should be disinterested and skeptical? By
subjecting ourselves to rules and only the absolute science that we have
already proven, how else to we learn and expand our minds and potentially open
doors we never thought we could open.
The arts, English, things without rules. These help us
search outside of the box and not solely focus on the answer. They look at the
process, they allow us to be silly, they allow us to make mistakes and learn
from them. It’s not all about the calculated norm and the rules drawn out for
us. Why be boring, why follow the mundane? By confining yourself to only rules
is only another way to conforming.
Let’s look at school spirit for a second. Many would
question, why bother? Is it even important? I can’t go to a “insert event
here”, because I have homework. Homework is important, and it should definitely
be done. But it’s most probably a left brained exercise. A school rally or
spirit event should allow for people to step beyond those rules for a second.
Experience something new and be willing to unleash a new type of though. Be
ready to indulge and engage in a more whimsical way, to be more, creative.
It’s not only the math and the sciences and the rules and
the norms that bring us where we are, or allow us to progress. It’s that fresh
mind, that allows to think outside the box and breaks the norms. It’s because
we have so much more potential to do and think, but these rules are preventing
us. We are only restraining ourselves by telling ourselves what we have to do,
and how we have to do it.
By doing this, we are narrowing ourselves to a set of
instructions and nothing else. All of a sudden, this system has become the
means to do whatever that task may be, and only this system works for it. I
disagree with this, and this is why I love English. It allows for conflicting
possibilities. It allows these possibilities to also be valid. Even in math or
sciences, although the answer may be 5, there is still a variety of ways to
come to that conclusion. Possibilities exist.
In the video above, I’m a big fan of Robinson’s story of the
little boys in the play. As children, before we have this notion of right and
wrong, or fear of mistakes, we are willing to give things a go. Even if they
are right or wrong, we are willing to make an attempt at things, draw all
willy-nilly and be able to learn from our mistakes. It’s this potential for
‘digression’ that allows for creativity. Digression is not bad, the GPS was
created due to digression. Math is important, but so is creativity, even more
so. I mean, I’m sure it took a creative person to create a system of numbers
and algorithms.
All forms of education are important. All of them. This is
why every single area of study should be treated with care. Students, children,
anyone should be encouraged to pursue whatever it is they like, enjoy and most
inevitably are good at. Academics are diverse, just as the world is and this is
why the study of possibility, creativity, through language, arts etc.
Today however it is all about the answer. What has happened
to motor skills? The process? Creativity should be allowed to roam freely, and
it should not be intimidated or intimidating. Part of this battle may be caused
by parents, and part of the rules set for us. However the majority of the
battle must be taken upon the subject itself, us. We need to work to our
fullest and not discount anything; to be willing to go above and beyond, and
not just stay within.
I remember, not long ago, I asked a student, and a very
talented one at that, to write me an editorial paper. I told this student to
‘Have fun with it, go crazy. Do anything you want!’ At that moment, I was
crazy, and over the weeks, we went through how to cast away the rules, and
really go crazy with it. Today, this student has further learned to step
outside of the box and not be intimidated to think of something new and fresh.
Additionally, I often tell people that I am crazy; and sometimes people themselves call me crazy, but not in a bad way. I use this word crazy, because it signifies differences. It shows that their is no fear to be different, which is what all individuals are. It also shows that we are willing to think outside the box, far-fetched and outlandish thoughts. Now they may be far-fetched and outlandish, but a lot of genius ideas are derivatives from these types of thoughts.
The point I’m trying to make is quite simple. I usually do
not like to be so straight forward or direct with my thesis, or message, but I
will here. We are capable of more. We can do more. The answer is great, but the
journey, the road, the process is empowering. To be able to walk down processes
and coming to your own destination, is nothing short of fantastic. So do not be
afraid to step outside the box, do not be afraid to be yourself, whimsical or
new. Be willing to question and ponder, look at all angles. I push you to think
beyond the rules, and push yourself to your instincts, and not just the cold
hard facts. We are all capable of so much more, so let yourself function at
full throttle. Next time you think of a rule or restriction, dispel it to see
what good you can achieve. Allow yourself to go beyond the limits. Don’t conform.
Do what you wish, whether it be math, science, art, English etc. We shouldn’t
squander ourselves due to our different and enormous skill-sets, we should only
harness the tremendous capabilities we have. And what I mainly want to say
is…don’t be afraid about being creative. It’s what will make you a superstar.
I came across a piece I wrote a while ago, it was for a writing class I had taken. Turned out pretty good and I tried to make it a relatively heavy piece. For those that know me, I am quite mild with language. I stepped away and broke a few of my own rules with this one. Hope you can enjoy and appreciate.
The past cannot be changed, but the future can be molded.
An Introduction
These days, apparently I am despised, yet people still seem to invite me over. People find me to be a good solution to any problem; however, many people learn to hate the side effects I present. I’m not sure why, but all the commendations and criticism I receive, I can simply say, are derived specifically from people themselves.
I am the way I am because of you. You have driven me to my endless limits, and you continue to drive me even further. I was once considered a gentleman, maybe even a honourable sport of some sort. There was a time when I would have a structured plan of events, when I had a code of ethics. In my earlier years, I would be called only in certain circumstances.
However, things have changed. Now I am the possessor of immense power. I can grant authority and I can take it away. I can give riches and money and whatever else may be desired. I can also steal it all away.
I can solve petty arguments in the most severe and aggressive fashion, and teach lessons that no one can quite understand until they have dealt with me. All I really need is a spark to ignite the fire. In fact, these days I find that I am much easier to set ablaze. I just need that opportunity to begin the lesson that I teach.
I can destroy enemies. I can also destroy allies. I can even destroy families. Because of me, the bond between brothers can be shattered like fragile glass. I can even make them kill each other. I can drive them to murder, rape, and steal. I can dim the light of love, and extinguish the flame of hope. I can do more than just ruin the lives of mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and entire families.
I can force tears out of dry eyes, and I can make people speak bitterness. I can make people struggle and make them teeter and totter on the brink of their very existence. I can tear the finest to shreds, and put the weakest into their own graves. In fact, I can put anyone into his or her grave in a matter of moments.
I can cause chaos and create mushrooms in the sky to turn day to night. I’m always in the heads of those with problems. I can wreak hell in mere moments, and force people into tiny trenches, filled with dirty water and mud. The stench of people themselves and the shit I put them through are ignored because I give them the false promise of glory.
I can ensnare children and put fire in their eyes. I can turn them into little devils that see false images caused by candy. I can surprise anyone at any time. I can pillage a small city or shred a beloved teddy bear. I can steal (a grandmother’s) heirloom and take away the dignity of any man or woman. I can make people beg, beg for mercy. In a matter of moments, I can change the lives of millions of people. I can cause ripple effects through every country on the planet.
I can destroy our mother, the Earth. The trees and mountains and rivers and plains we all once shared, I can turn into a barren wasteland or hole. I can destroy people, nature, love, and even life itself.
I used to be a gentleman, but now I’m more than any monster. I’m not the Boogieman or Frankenstein. I’m not God, and I’m more than any disaster. I’m beyond powerful and destructive. I am not a supernatural power, but I am more than an immovable object or unstoppable force. I’m so fucked up that I’m incomprehensible. I don’t think I understand myself. I am after all, your creation.
Oh, allow me to apologize. I still have not properly introduced myself. It is pleasing to make your acquaintance, though you may not agree. My name is War.
I wanted to post a quick message to all that actually read this blog. I wanted to specifically take a moment and acknowledge you all and thank you all for lending your ear for a few moments. I am deeply grateful whenever anyone cares to read a few of my outlandish and farfetched thoughts/comments.
Just recently, I also received a lovely message from one of my readers who stated their enjoyment of this blog and my writing. Hopefully those of you that read 'Lost in a Bowl of Minute Rice' also find some type of value, entertainment or findings in the posts. Also, I hope you continue to read this blog and enjoy future works; more importantly, find motivation and your own emotions within the writing. I write mainly for my reader, so I really hope you enjoy.
Don't thank me for the words I write or say, because I thank you for taking heed. People are my inspiration and it's most likely people like you.
We've all read Romeo and Juliet, and it's definitely an interesting play. I was asked earlier this year to look at it and write an essay on it, so I took a different approach, put aside the love story, and tried to do a little digging on what we can take out of it. Hopefully you find it interesting.
So here is something a little different:
Fallacies of Authority
The notion of authority is, without question, an abstract concept. Authority is the idea of having certain power and right over constituents. Usually, this authority is used to govern and maintain order within a society. However, authority can also cause people with less power in a society to blindly follow. By this definition of authority can be viewed negatively, displaying just how subjective it can be. In Romeo and Juliet, there are a variety of characters with some type of authority and most, if not all of the major characters with power prove to be inept at wielding such authority. It becomes clear through the renowned Shakespearian play that authority itself may just be a romantic fantasy and that without trying to adamantly enforce and impose authority, life may in fact be much easier and simpler due to the avoidance of conflict. All in all, obtaining and truly enforcing a successful authority with regards to all constituents is impossible.
It is clear from the very first act and scene of the play that order is near impossible in Verona due to the longstanding dispute between the Capulet and Montague families. We can also see an act of disobedience from the two families, in relation to the Prince of Verona. The Prince is an authoritative figure in the play, and another example of a character that is inept at the ability to use authority. Despite having rule over the land, the Prince cannot control his constituents, namely the Capulet and Montague and due to this, frequent frays occur, leading to even more death. The fray in 1.1 clearly displays the chaos in Verona and lack of control the Prince has. At the end of the riot however, the Prince declares that future conflict will be dealt with strictly, through blood. In 3.1, after Romeo and Juliet have been wed, another brawl occurs in Verona, resulting in Romeo killing Tybalt. In this instance the Prince declares Romeo banished from Verona, not dead. Also, in 5.3 after the death of Juliet, Paris and more, the Prince’s action is seemingly weak. The death and chaos is a notion of failure to uphold any civility and only magnifies his inability to establish any authority in Verona.
Not only do the households of the Capulet and Montague also hold authority, but both families share a sense of pride and cross the border of arrogance. Arrogance is a preventing factor to establish successful authority. Both families bear an “ancient grudge” as outlined by the prologue, and a grudge which bloodies the “civil hands” of each other. Upon examining the ancient grudge first, it becomes apparent that “ancient” implies that this tension between the two households has been prevalent for quite some time; so long that it is impossible to even assume that the two parties can coexist. Given that they bloody the others’ civil hands, this shows that this grudge is leading both groups astray. Without the presence of the other household, Verona could very well be a peaceful city. This ultimately leads to the impossibility of Romeo and Juliet to ever be together.
This tension between the two households and the authority of the parents displayed towards both Romeo and Juliet is a manifestation of just how foolish the two families are. It also shows the similarities and discrepancies of authority. There is absolutely no doubt that the marriage of Romeo and Juliet would be unacceptable for both families. However, the fact that Capulet allowed Romeo to escape from the masquerade he held in 1.5 shows just how slippery authority is. Capulet denied Tybalt his wish to slay Romeo at the masquerade. This shows an act of civility but the idea of Romeo marrying or even being interested in Juliet is by no means acceptable. It is this authority and mindset of the parents that ultimately creates the conflict. This instance also exemplifies the arrogance within the authority of each set of parents through their disapproval of the opposite household. This shows exactly why arrogance is a preventing factor towards a successful authoritative role, as Capulet (and for that matter, Montague too) would never approve the marriage of Romeo and Juliet. Arrogance ultimately negates proper usage of authority, specifically shown by Capulet when he allows Romeo to flee the masquerade unharmed. Capulet avoids a fray by letting Romeo go. However, by disapproving the marriage of Romeo and Juliet, he only shows just how impossible authority is, and how quickly it can be rendered useless.
The deaths of Romeo and Juliet are a consequence of a vast sequence of events and inept ability to use apparent authority. The parental authority of both Capulet and Montague denies Romeo and Juliet the right to love each other, or even see each other for that matter. Ultimately, conflict is created and it is through this persistent arrogance and inability to compromise, which leads to numerous deaths. These deaths are also a factor of the disobedience to authority and the most obvious examples of this are Romeo and Juliet. Both willingly disobey their authoritative figures [their families], in hopes of being together. Not only is this an act of disobedience, but it is an act of finding a solution by stepping away from authority. Ultimately this displays that in order to find solutions with certain conflicts, that authority must be dispelled and that stepped away from. Although disobedience is natural with respect to any authority, it shows just how problematic and impossible a truly successful and universal authority is.
The Nurse is another exemplar of a character that goes against and disobeys authority. She is clearly under the rule of Capulet and Lady Capulet however the Nurse disobeys them by aiding Juliet. If the Nurse was caught, she would have certainly been punished and dispatched by Capulet. However, in order to find a resolution for dear Juliet, she feels the need to undermine and step away from her authorities. By extension this dispels the notion that authority can truly work again. Although it can be argued that the Nurse is under the authority of Juliet, the Nurse also takes Capulet’s feelings into account. Her wavering between the two different authorities once again shows that authority is a mere idea from person to person and that authority amongst all constituents is seemingly impossible and that the variation of authority creates conflicts.
Friar Laurence perhaps best displays the act of stepping away from authority in order to find solutions to chaos and conflict that authority has otherwise caused. The Friar is a holy man devoted to Church and God. However, the Friar clearly steps away from the Church and ultimately his supposed holy persona in more than one instance. The first instance of Friar Laurence stepping away from not only the authority of the Capulet and Montague household, but of the Church as well, is by marrying Romeo and Juliet. By doing so secretly, the Friar has undermined both families and committed a clearly unholy act. Despite having good intentions, the Friar is still stepping away from a greater authority in order to find a solution and this shows that authority is subjective and can vary based on situation. Once again, this dispels the notion that one true authority can ever exist.
The second instance where Friar Laurence steps away from authority of the families and the church is when he devises the plan for Juliet to take the poison. Once again, this is an unholy act by the Friar in order to deceive both families and allow Romeo and Juliet to elope and live a secret married life. The magnitude of this deviation from the authority is much greater because the Friar has stepped away, not just from the families, but from the Church and even God to an extent, which can be considered rather blasphemous. The Friar is defying the very authority he believes in as a purpose for his life shows that deviating from authority is at times necessary. This then begs the question and pondering of whether authority is even necessary and again perhaps dispels any notion that an authority that works can ever be achieved.
As a result of the fallacies of each character’s authority, a large number of citizens die and suffer without finding any resolution. Instead of providing a sense of order and civility, this authority only provides conflict and chaos. None of the characters in Romeo and Juliet can properly use their authority without causing conflict or contributing to an existing conflict. The ineptitude of controlling such authority implicates that without it, perhaps conflict can be avoided. However the elimination of authority altogether would be unreasonable and chaos would still exist. Human nature itself leads citizens to strive for greatness and this can potentially be at the expense of another. This is the ultimate reasoning behind the introduction of authority. However through the play, it becomes strikingly clear that the mastering of authority and ability to use it in such a way to avoid conflict is just a mere romantic fantasy. Romeo and Juliet displays just how insidious authority can be. The concept of authority is an abstract idea that flirts with the idea of order and civility, despite it being nearly impossible to accomplish when there is a single entity with power over another less powerful citizen. There will always be those that choose to undermine or step away from authority to find resolution in their lives, as shown through the disobedient actions displayed in Romeo and Juliet.
It's very often that I see or hear from people who have to write a report or even something on their own time. Even more so, I've seen many people have trouble with their writing, and quite often they consult me with the task of proof reading, editing or just taking a look at their ideas.
Why these writers potentially come to me, I'm not quite sure. They claim I am a good, polished writer; this may in fact be true, but, I go through these same writers blocks and troubles too. Very often I don't know where to begin, if I even have a beginning or if their is any validity to what I am writing at all. Quite often, within my writing, I call myself out on this too.
I decided that I'd blog about this then (after a very long hiatus from blogging in general), I would write about how to write (that sounds funny to me). Or at least this is my perspective on this, by no means do I think I'm a super duper awesome and talented writer. Heck, the moment I press the 'publish' post for this very blog, I begin questioning and thinking. Then, ironically, I start writing again.
Anyways, writing is a tricky thing, and I totally love it; their is something about creating a puzzle with words that draws me towards it. But, before writing anything, generally, you should know why you are writing or what you are writing about. For instance, I write in attempt to inform and be heard. It's also a neat way to dress up your thoughts. However, I don't want to get into my own writers manifesto, my entire goal here, is for my fellow writers (and whoever else writes, would be a writer in my opinion) to continue to have the confidence that they have the ability to write.
As stated, the first important thing to know of while writing is your topic. What are you writing about? If you can't answer this, you probably have a problem...unless you are just a really, really talented rambler (that's what I think I am). And sometimes figuring out what you want to write about takes a long long time! Takes me weeks sometimes.
After you have found something to write about (which is a big step), it is very difficult to write it down right away, point blank. You always need a little time, I call it marination time. Let that idea sit in your head, think about it, how are you going to frame your thoughts? What type of approach are you going to take towards it? Is it creative or formal writing? If it's formal you probably have a relatively drawn out path for you, if it's creative, kalabunga!!! My main point here though, is if you look at the past few lines, I asked 3-4 questions. Yeah, these questions are going to come up, and in order to write something that you will like, that others will probably think is phenomenal, is being able to answer these questions and have them integrated into your writing. Confusing?
Here, let me say it again, so it's not in that mammoth paragraph: make an outline.
Yup, an outline. It's such a beautiful thing that allows you to get your thoughts and process onto paper. It allows you to mix and match, find where things should be, and create a logical progression. It allows you as the writer to sit and visualize in some way, whatever it is you want to write. Trust me, outlines help, they are key! Note, it doesn't have to be some awesome, pretty and elaborate outline. Could simply be a piece of paper with like...10 lines on it. Easy stuff.
After creating an outline for whatever you want to write, you get into the tricky part: actually writing it. This is a time where I sometimes get cold feet and ask myself if I really want to write this and I usually convince myself to go on anyways. Then when it comes to putting the ink on the page, I usually go through a lull, and a little session of 'what the hell do I do now?'
This is probably common, because if you ask me, beginnings are the most difficult. An outline is a tool to hopefully make them a little easier, but obviously you want the start of your writing to be somewhat appealing. This is a time where I would once again say, take your time, no rush. Sometimes you just need to mull more things over and let your ideas marinate a little more. That's perfectly fine! I usually never start writing until I have at least a few lines in my head that I think are brilliant or awesome, or something good enough to write down and share.
Hopefully after you've gotten this far, you have more of a flow and can go through your writing with some fluidity. I find that after breaking through the first little bit, the rest just comes naturally. I personally also like to write in one sitting, so I go from start to end without getting up. This works for me, but I'm sure some people like to take breaks or something, so if that's you...go for it.
Now comes the fun part, at least I think it's the fun part. It's where you get creative and drill out whatever you want to say. I like to have fun with words, say what I think, dress them up using metaphors, similes, synonyms, with nature and any other parallel you wish to use. The beauty here is that anything goes! You decide what puzzle or adventure to take the reader on. You get to decide what the reader should be thinking or feeling as they learn a little bit about your words. Just write, it's as simple as that! I'd highly urge proper syntax, grammar etc though. I'd also discourage using words just to sound smart, because usually, they don't work. Words should have purpose and meaning, my philosophy is that we should respect the words we use, because they deliver our message.
Endings are a little tricky, for me, personally, I'm a hater on the summary ending, but as anyone would, I love leaving things off with a bang. You want to drive home your message, or at least get your reader to think about your message. This can be done in a variety of ways, perhaps by restating your thesis (believe it or not, all writing has some form of thesis) or by asking a question? Again, the choice is yours.
Now I make it sound somewhat straightforward above, and it hopefully made sense to you. But the most important tips I can give to any writer aren't any of what I mentioned above. Those are just rules. Writing is more than rules. Writing is difficult when you don't know what to do, it becomes simple, when you have an idea. Having all the freedom in the world to write something, can in fact be intimidating. I think it is, and it's because their is so much to write about! But as writers, we can never be able to cover the entire intricacies of the world with one little piece, maybe 1000000000000 volumes, but never with a little bit of leisurely writing. So don't fret! On top of this, even if you feel like you have written something which is weak by your own standards, that is okay. Everyone writes something meh from time to time. To be able to let that out of your system, helps you become a better writer. You have to go through some less than stellar ideas, to get the great ones. Trust me, I've written a lot of garbage.
Another thing is, don't be intimidated to write what you want to write about. As a writer, I can only respect when someone else is willing to put out something they cared enough to share. I know that sometimes it's a little intimidating to put your thoughts on a silver platter for others to read and perhaps disagree with and criticize. In some sense, the disagreements and criticism is good, because you have gotten your reader thinking and engaged, you've evoked a response, you have succeeded. (Especially because I could probably guarantee you, someone would probably agree with your message)
Overall, writing is only as difficult as you want, and it can be as easy as counting to 3. This is literally true, if you know how to count to 3, then you can easily do it. If you know what you're writing about or what you're doing, then you can do it. This is why I'm never a fan when people say 'I wish I could write like you.' Well the fact of the matter is, you can, and you can probably do better. If I were to tell you why I write well, I'd tell you something cliched. I'd tell you, I write what I think, what I see and what I say. I write what I feel and I use my heart. Then I just get creative.
Everyone has the capacity to think, to have an opinion, to voice it and to be creative. Everyone can write down what they feel or dress their words up in whatever matter they want. Trust me, your own opinions and outlandish ideas have their own beauty; it's all about saying what you want to say, and being able to say it. Only thing that gets is respect. So I challenge you, voice your opinion, say what you want to say. Write what you want to write, don't be intimidated!
I recently read a TS Eliot piece, I'm a really big TS Eliot fan. He writes some pretty interesting and awesome stuff. It's usually always pretty dense, and complex and tough to follow along. Pieces include 'His Coy Mistress', "Love song of Prufrock'...The other week I read 'Tradition and the Individual talent' and I decided to write on it as a paper. Here is the actual Eliot piece.
http://www.bartleby.com/200/sw4.html
Here is my critique on a genius mentor:
The encouragement of literature and literature studies thrives on the basis that literature provides a universal truth and meaning. T.S. Eliot argues through “Tradition and the Individual Talent” that as a poet or artist, one must remain completely disinterested. There is certainly merit to this claim, however, Eliot also states that complete repression of emotion is also necessary, to create the most beautiful pieces of art. He states that the author must step away from the writing and disengage entirely and that as a new critic, apart from the piece being analyzed, absolutely no external information should be taken into account; I for one believe this is impossible and there are subtle contradictions in Eliot’s words which agree.
One of Eliot’s main theses is that ‘the progress of an artist is a continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality.’ When looking at this line in particular, it can be questioned whose personality is being ignored? The word ‘self-sacrifice’ states that the author must repress his own persona. This is in fact a reasonable claim, especially with the objective of providing a universal message. All humans perceive differently, which advocates the idea of being disinterested. If the author were to write only with the lens of his or her own, it would be very difficult to interpret ideas as a member of the audience without any knowledge of the author. This in general complies with Eliot’s claim; however, if the author were to wholly banish personality from the piece of art, no living being would be able to correctly interpret such writing. Instead the author must take a disinterested, neutral personality. This of course means that personality is not being repressed, it is just being monitored
Eliot also says that ‘the business of the poet is not to find new emotions, but to use the ordinary ones and, in working them up into poetry, to express feelings which are not in actual emotions at all.’ This would further prove that some type of emotion is necessary while writing. The idea of expressing feelings which are not true emotions would hint that the author must strive to provide the reader with something different. In order to achieve great writing or poetry, the author must be able to provide the reader with something different; otherwise the author can fall victim to blatant paraphrasing or plagiarism. This would mean that the new feeling the author unearths is so magnificent that the author is only striving share his or her discovery.
In order to create and express this new feeling, ordinary emotion is necessary. In order to do this, Eliot also says that ‘impressions and experiences combine in peculiar and unexpected ways’ and this is in order to create great poetry or art. There is merit to this statement, however experiences that an author may have and choose to write about, will certainly contain some extraordinary implication behind it. It would be impossible for the extraordinary instance to not have derived some type of emotion for the author as well, which would mean that the author is reporting on an incredible emotion they experienced.Impressions are also combined, and impressions are subsets of opinions, which can also be derived from emotion.
Also knowing that an initial experience or emotion is necessary, the objective correlative or calculated emotion becomes prevalent. Like any reaction, scientific or not, an action needs to take place. Eliot uses a scientific analogy using platinum as a catalyst between two gases. The idea behind his analogy is that the author be the platinum catalyst and engages in a reaction in order to create a new compound. Being the catalyst, the author is involved in the reaction however not used or consumed within the reaction. In essence, Eliot’s argument is that the author is simply the medium transfer a word from one place to another, more specifically, that the author writes without emotion (as a catalyst) and as the audience we read his art which is the end substance. The fallacy within this analogy is that the catalyst is necessary for a reaction. Of course the author is necessary for a piece to be written, however a catalyst must engage in a reaction for it to truly be successful. Therefore, by extension, an author must truly engage in his or her writing, in order to successfully create a true piece of art. The very nature of being engaged is to be knowingly involved. This would state that the author is involved with his or her writing and this would carry some type of personal involvement. In essence, the author is incorporating some of him or herself within the writing.
Eliot also states that tradition is important within writing and that as authors we must be knowledgeable of our predecessors and take into account their contributions to the literary world. He states that new pieces of writing involve past ideas, however with some distinct change within the literature. This of course would also require additional exterior knowledge in order for the author to write. The art itself would need additional care and attention. Also, in order to come across a distinct change within a new piece of writing, some type of variance must occur between the author and the words of his predecessor. If such a variance is not present, the very idea of producing a new piece of literature becomes null. In addition, such a variance can only become present if the present day author discovers something new, perhaps by way of experience, and this of course would imply additional knowledge and/or emotion that the author has encountered.
With regards to our predecessors of the literary world, Eliot also says that new pieces of writing and new authors should be set for ‘contrast and comparison.’ This would be necessary in order to find the distinct difference between the pieces of writing. Eliot also mentions that the aesthetics or style of writing may differ. This would implicate that the personality of the writers are different, and it would show through within their writing.
The very notion of keeping the dead poets in mind is to preserve some type of tradition. Eliot also states that in order to achieve this tradition, it takes a type of taxing and rigorous labour. This would encompass additional knowledge. As a critic, while reading, in order to understand the literature itself, the reader must also have some type of knowledge of past writers or events. In order to truly appreciate and understand the literature, the reader must be able to acknowledge the variance in the writing. This shows the flaw of new criticism in general. In order to be an active and concise reader, one must be knowledgeable or aware of matters outside the text at times. It is by very nature that an engaged reader would also make connection to his or her own life. This nullifies the notion of dealing with the text and the text only. However, this does not retract the power of close reading because the reader would be applying his or her own thoughts to the text in order to discover the universal meaning.
It would be impossible to identify the exact persona of the author will not be shown through their writing; however traces of their personality will be present. This is clear through the different aesthetics from writer to writer. With regards to personality and emotion, Eliot states that ‘poetry is not a turning loose of emotion, but an escape from emotion; it is not the expression of personality, but an escape from personality. But, of course, only those who have personality and emotions know what it means to want to escape from these things.’ In a sense, this is very agreeable, as authors and even readers may consider pieces of art as an escape from both personality and emotion. Eliot also then states that it is essential to have both, personality and emotion, in order to escape them. I would argue that this is what makes the most successful writing, however, not in the sense that there is no emotion or personality present within the writing. If stated without any emotion or persona, the end result would be nothing short of a bland and monotonous failure. However to articulate ideas and thoughts through a new personality, with a new extraordinary emotion is what makes writing successful. The idea is that the writer can, for an instance, step away from his or her own shoes in order to articulate a perception that is new or striking. This in essence is an escape from the writers own persona and emotion, but stepping into a new unknown persona and sense of emotion. Within the quote itself, it states that it takes an author with persona and emotion to step away from it. Literally, this means that the author must step away from his or her own emotion and persona, and then articulate a universal message with a slightly different attitude.
Eliot also mentions ‘that criticism is as inevitable as breathing, and that we should be none the worse for articulating what passes in our minds when we read a book and feel an emotion’. Criticism itself is the analysis or judgement of a particular subject. This inevitable criticism may be a parallel to emotions. It is inevitable as a human being to feel some way in order to stir up some type of judgement. In the line above, Eliot also mentions that we are better for articulating our thoughts and emotions as we read a book and this further proves that emotions are inevitable, whether they be mundane or extreme. In fact, this thought encourages the formulation of opinions and advocates processing our emotions while criticizing, and this process will come directly from the writing.
Eliot’s notion of being disinterested as a critic and an artist carries significant merit. However the idea of disengaging personality and emotion entirely as a writer is seemingly short-sighted and it would be inevitable as a critic or reader to relate a piece of art to the outside world. The idea of being disinterested only caters to subjectivity; it would be impossible to create or perceive true art without unique emotion, personality or knowledge.
