?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Rand(omish)ness!

  • Jun. 20th, 2005 at 1:53 AM
Over Stand
"Masterpieces of Ayn Rand"

¿?¿? ! Duh ! ¿?¿?

I've heard it said so often! I even have acquaintances who attempt to preach, in solemn notes, the ideology of the above said lady. It's appalling I must admit. Such people should be debarred from the breeding-cycle altogether!

Yes, I've read a bit of her work.... It's what I refer to as obsessive compulsive disorder. It's fascinating how someone can write like that.
It's even more of a shock when you see how many people can lap it up and turn reclusive with absolute lust for her ideology. She starts off on a specific note, she goes on, then you flip the page, and find that she's still going on.... You shut the book, then nudge it off the edge of the table. It falls to the floor and falls open randomly to some page. You pick it up and look at it and Whoa!! The skies be damned, she's still hammering on about the same darned thing!! How lousy can one get!?

Frankly speaking, I'd say her ideas are great, she's got a mind, definitely!! But she lacks the ability to churn beyond mere words. She relies too much on tentative detail.

Still, I believe the modern generations of today require just this. And Ayn Rand is one person who's been able to give it to them. I'm sure she knows and understands this fact very well. (why else do her books exist and continue to sell as they do?) :o)

Having read more than my fair share of authors and done more than my fair share of research on the people of art and literati, I've come to the conclusion that todays generation does'nt fill a gap, it makes a huge void that needs a phenomenal amount of pseudo-space to fill up.

Detail can be brought into the picture beautifully. Bland is the current taste of the generation. How sorry it looks.... Actually, it is a sorry scene! Ayn Rand has filled a void. A void of megalithic proportions, a void that stands as a display of our generations inability to think for ourselves. Rand is not at fault here. She never was! The fault is that of societies inability to bring up it's fledgling properly. Not giving them the freedom of creative thought, barring them from the intellectual growth that only the self can give.

By brooding over Cricket and Movies, India has managed to effectively turn itself into a paranoid, touchy and utterly dull population. Our populations rise, and they shall continue to do so even past a time where birth-control is made into a law. On the one hand, we have illiteracy, on the other, we have extreme brilliance. We have people who are so brilliant, they can narrate the Oxford Advanced Learners dictionary backward. We've got specialists in so many fields. We've got the IIT crowd that are so incredibly awesome. But what of it? They fall face-down in marshy soil every time they're confronted with the real world.

They might be geniuses, they might be great people, but they are absolutely "ZERO" when it comes to being able to think fr themselves! Ask them a question, they'll reply like a bolt of lightening. They'll even tell you where they learned the answer that they just gave you. They've read and mugged up enough data to put them in that position. But when you ask them to stop and think for a moment, they'll stare back at you dazed. "What is think?" They honestly don't know what it is, let alone how to do it!

Poor poor mankind, it's doomed!!

You notice of course, that I don't say I am doomed, also, I don't say We are doomed. Procrastinate about that! :o)

Kaydeeyoh!

Comments

ex_ga_woo wrote:
Jun. 19th, 2005 08:55 pm (UTC)
Reading 'The Fountainhead' right now. For the first 100 pages, I was more sympathetic to the antagonist than I was to the protagonist :) Not sure if she intended that...

I don't think I'm going to become an Ayn Rand cult member when I finish the book though :) She fails to convince me. I read her 'Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal' which was a bunch of essays and naahh....she didn't get to me :)

angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 19th, 2005 10:50 pm (UTC)
I doubt any of her intentions. She's not passionate about her character, she's merely evolving and re-evolving a character. One with traits and dimensions that she's astutely unsure of.

Frankly, (speaking for myself only) I can't imagine any thinking individual who'd be capable of falling into cult worship. It's unthinkable with Ayn Rand in any case. :)

She can be initially interesting (new style, new way of putting ideology across, etc.) but she wears off pretty darned quick. :) She's more like a fad. What in the world of music is referred to as "one hit wonders", she's something like that. She hit the right bunch of people with "The Fountainhead", but it's so not a classic! And it was definitely just a fad. It lasted an instant, it's no longer a book worth looking at.

I've never been able to finish the book. She lacks beauty in her writing. She lacks detail. She will write and write and go on and on, but she's not telling the reader anything. She's just running in circles that dissolve into each other.

At the end of each chapter, if you discard all the contradictions and affirmations, she's said absolutely nothing!! Everything, like a long mathematical equation, cancels out. You have a Zero on both sides of the equation!

Say "x + y = 0" or "x + y + z + p + q + n + i + j = 0" or say "0 = 0", you're still saying nothing. Definitely nothing new! Ayn Rand is a pro at just that! And she does it like she was born for that very purpose. :o)

Kaydeeyoh!

P.S.: I'd like to know your opinion of the book once (if ever) you're done with the book.
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 19th, 2005 11:03 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 20th, 2005 11:15 am (UTC)
(no subject) - vijucat - Jun. 20th, 2005 02:21 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 20th, 2005 09:47 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:11 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:13 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:12 pm (UTC)
well btw for ur info - samsat_iit - Jun. 21st, 2005 05:02 am (UTC)
Re: well btw for ur info - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:07 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - vandyvandana - Jun. 20th, 2005 08:18 am (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 20th, 2005 11:08 am (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 20th, 2005 02:46 pm (UTC)
ex_ga_woo wrote:
Jun. 19th, 2005 08:56 pm (UTC)
You screen your replies! That is so not cool!! :)

:P
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 19th, 2005 10:39 pm (UTC)
I screen them for that is the only thing I've found, that encourages commenting on my journal.

A lot of people prefer to remain screened and therefore, request screening.

It was really bad at one point in time. My posts were default (unscreened) and I'd get between 8 and 16 e-mails about my posts instead of comments. You'll notice, as you go backward through my journal, there's fewer and fewer comments on my journal. I did have a lot of friends even then, but Most were too scared to post.... :(
(no subject) - shoan - Jun. 20th, 2005 07:22 am (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 20th, 2005 10:33 am (UTC)
subtle_blues wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 09:48 am (UTC)
Never really talked to them IITians .. cause they are all so unapproachable.. so full of shit.. I have a general term for all of them .."PSYCHOS"

They've read and mugged up enough data to put them in that position.

Nay ji! That's absolutely not true. That maybe the case with the persent ones. But that's not a true IITian. I have known few of 'em psyhcos. They are anything but mug pots. I don't think they are any different form the "thinking" amongst us.Being an IITian doesn't necessarily void them from "emotional and rational" thought processes. I think it's a common prejudice held against the lot. The ratios will all remain the same " IITians who can think to those who can't " and "non-iitians who can think to those who can't".

On the other hand.. it's ok to ostracise them. cause they are all so full of shit! :P

As for Ayn Rand...
The only book of hers I read was "Fountain Head" just cause like "Dan Brown's DaVinci Code" it was the 'in-thing' then. It scared me. A person who is moderate or even a lil low in his/her class would be shattered (if s/he is the "highly impressionable" kind.. i used that cause u think I am "impressionable!"). She kinda drives mediocrity to the point of suicide.

Though I somehow managed to get to the end of the book, her philosophy didn't quite hit the mark. I could not associate my life with it. Power philosophy..that's what it's called. Her idea of Love is even more intimidating. That book has all the "masala" that's expected of a "box office conscious" movie!

p.s. how do u do the "upside down ?"? :-D
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 11:04 am (UTC)
I've lived in extreme close-quarters with a lot of IIT'ians. Nice people, most of them. But in the head, they're astonishingly blank.

I agree that not all of them are mugpots. I was bringing generality into play there. But to elaborate a bit further on your point. Even the non-muggers happen to be plagued by a shocking picture.

Their lives rotate around what they study. To such a great extent in fact, that a joke, if even mildly witty shoots way through the stratosphere of their minds.

They are'nt mentally very flexible. Ask them a toughie that's based in their subject of preference (or forced preference at times, if you may), and the answer will be fired at you like you were a dummy target in an army firing range.

On the other hand, if you ask a CS guy specializing in AI about alpha blending or coordinate systems of 3D space morphed into 2D space, they'll give you a blank stare and tell you that you're off topic or something.

And that's even though you've merely asked him a question that anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of Computer Graphics will answer without a moments hesitation. In fact, anyone who's studied coordinate systems in class XII should be able to think it over and formulate the inevitable response.

I learned the subject by trial and error. These people are spoon-fed! Their knowledge is bound with limitations. "Know everything, about your subject, Don't care a damn about anything else!" seems to be their dictum.

Their minds are incredibly fragile. I once shattered an IIT'ians brain (he was specializing in Nuclear physics BTW) into tiny little wedges through an argument with him on Einsteins theory of Relativity. He was so incredibly sure that Einstein was right. He even had data supporting his claims. But evidently, he did'nt have enough.... Not as much as I had NEways. In half an hour, he was reduced to a mumbling plague, crawling over formulae and books, trying to figure out how I could possibly be right.

Their rigidity of mind puts them in a place where they refuse to accept things that their books or professors tell them is true. They never once question their mentors, they never once consider the fact that knowledge might be incomplete or misleading, or even outright wrong! It's that that makes them so myopic and incapable of true thought.

You can argue as much as you like in their behalf, saying that they can think and stuff. But what is thought if you're unable to do it yourself? What is thought if you're only coming to conclusions based on another individuals thoughts? What is thought if it's not theirs?

Say "nay ji! That's absolutely not true." all you like. But it does'nt change the facts. Of course, I'll grant a few of their number having minds of their own, but when you take IIT'ians as a force unto themselves, generalizing them.... All you have is an empty fist. And really, there's no point....

continued....

(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 20th, 2005 11:06 am (UTC)
n thts the reason - samsat_iit - Jun. 21st, 2005 05:09 am (UTC)
Re: n thts the reason - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:17 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 20th, 2005 06:16 pm (UTC)
teemus wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 11:53 am (UTC)
It's what I refer to as obsessive compulsive disorder
ROTFLMAO.
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 03:02 pm (UTC)
:o) Yay! I gave teemus something to laugh at! :o)

*does a happy jig*
(no subject) - crabbycool - Jun. 20th, 2005 12:35 pm (UTC)
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 03:32 pm (UTC)
This may be because I am not the sort of reader that Rand was writing for, or appeals to.

You're intelligent! What were you thinking!?? You're definitely not a typical Rand(om) follower. You could never be! You're the breed of humans who can think for themselves! :o)

I had the same depressing feeling that I get when I read philosophy

You should read "Paradigms Lost" by 'John L Casti', it's a great book, got tons of philosophy, but you hardly realize it's there.... Another good book is "The Dancing Wu Li Masters" by 'Gary Zukav'.... Good one that! I'm sure you'll love it. :o)

>:D<
Kaydeeyoh!
(no subject) - crabbycool - Jun. 21st, 2005 03:41 am (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:18 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - mansu - Jun. 20th, 2005 03:48 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 20th, 2005 05:05 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 20th, 2005 05:33 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 20th, 2005 06:09 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - mansu - Jun. 20th, 2005 05:47 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 20th, 2005 06:32 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - mansu - Jun. 20th, 2005 07:15 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:35 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - crabbycool - Jun. 21st, 2005 03:47 am (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:46 pm (UTC)
when u start living the book - samsat_iit - Jun. 21st, 2005 05:13 am (UTC)
Re: when u start living the book - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:23 pm (UTC)
Re: when u start living the book - samsat_iit - Jun. 23rd, 2005 03:56 am (UTC)
Re: when u start living the book - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:20 pm (UTC)
vijucat wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 02:26 pm (UTC)
Awesome rant! Yep, thinking for yourself counts for a lot.
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 04:53 pm (UTC)
Hehe! I'm one of those people who totally love ranting. :) If I was debarred from ranting, I'd perhaps shrink away into non-existance. :">

What a miserably small world it is that I live in! :o)
thekamajournals wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 02:35 pm (UTC)
I cannot stand Ann Rynd after reading the book's cover. Period.
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 04:55 pm (UTC)
Haha! now that is definitely about the most intelligent choice to have been made till date! Even I went beyond the cover, only to be whacked back to reality in no time at all.... She sux! Horribly!
mansu wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 03:42 pm (UTC)
Jim, There is one point you miss though.
I agree that Ayn rand is not a good novelist. Infact i find davinci code more interesting than FH. I only read a handful of novels todate but there was one thing that made me complete this novel was to know "What was the whole point of the 1000 page book?"

The answer to this book was simple, "To the creator people do not matter".That was the whole point. If you got that i do not think there is anything else the book is worth for.I know that this is just one way of looking at things, but the other ways are dependent on this thing.

Toohey( he tells people what they want to listen), Keating, Gail they all do not realise this. Even Howards boss, Henry Cameroon did not realise that and hence had the pain.

If sometime you come across a junction in your life at which everyone is against you, thats precisely when i think this issue matters. I have found myself in such situations before. In some cases i succeded but i failed in many. I know the difference. I also realise now that the major hurdles when you are alone are not social/technical/ecomomic but they are more emotional.

There is a difference when to comes to anti-social behaviour though because these people live for themselves. But the creator of Ayn Rand lives for the world even though everyone is against him. I think this makes it complicated. Howard Roark(Creator) lives for himself, but does something for mankind and thats where the trouble araises and the path becomes difficult.

It is more of a paradox where in you work for the people, but ignore them for they are ignorant no matter how much elite the society marks them as.

To summarise the whole thing it says, " Block every sense organ and open your mind", if i can exaggarate this.
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 06:07 pm (UTC)
lol! I like your comparison to "Da Vinci Code", That's another book that totally bugged the dickens out of me. Apart from a brilliant plot, it was abut the worst book after "The Fountainhead" I've ever seen from as close as a ten-mile radius.Rather than calling it the answer, I'd say it's more like the authors plot, the one-liner upon which the whole darned story was written.

My own procrastination has led me to observe other plot-lines to adhere to my own life. As miserable as it might seem, it's still one that's self-possessed and completely functioning. In greater detail, it can be summed up easily: "There is no creator!".

I've had times when the whole world was against me, I've seen life from exactly the opposite end of the telescope too, so to speak. And each vantage point has it's economies of understanding.

I've never had to have a book detail out to me my method of extrication. I've never had to search for satisfaction beyond my own abilities or thoughts. Infact (as referred to in many of my earlier posts), I've even found it in myself to help other people handle their emotional and sociological problems effectively.

I'm a very emotional individual. Those among my readers on LJ who've been around when my website still pointed to server space, will readily recollect the Lucid-Journal and the random bits of poetry strewn all over it. Emotion floods out of it all and the greasy mess left is seldom fun to play around in. yet, I pull through. Ayn Rand would'nt be able to help me, perhaps if I was brain-dead and could'nt think for myself, Rand would be of assistance, but beyond pure mumbo-jumbo, I believe it's just another bony hand without the soft touch of glazed emotion. Rand made a mess, and no matter how dumb she might seem, she's done a huge ton of help to the sub-mucous Indian slime. she's taken their decisions away from them. She did'nt force it on them, they lapped it up and made it their own.

Hail the Ruin!

"Block every sense organ and open your mind"

Now that totally makes sense.... :o)
(no subject) - mansu - Jun. 20th, 2005 07:47 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - fugney - Jun. 20th, 2005 04:55 pm (UTC)
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 05:22 pm (UTC)
People have always thunk....thinked....whatever! They've had thought at their disposal. When I mean think I mean the ability to generate thought. That's as opposed to mere refinement of existing thought.

I could always take something you say, rephrase it, and fire it back at you. Or replace yourself with someone else. I take someones thought, rephrase it and fire it at someone else. What good would that be!? Not much, I assure you, except of course as an information relay. Pretty much the gateway as opposed to a random sparring program.

There is thought involved in rephrasing. Only rudimentary (As I see it! I know people who end up with blue BSOD's every time they try it!) thought goes into rephrasing stuff. _Real_ thought is different, very very different! To _really_ think is something!!

Yes, I generalize. Did I ever say "ALL IIT'ian freaks"? Naah.... When I say "MOST", that's called generalization with astute Admission of the fact. I'm very careful about what I say and how I say it, you can trust me not to make as silly a mistake as catching myself by the scruff like that, thank you. :o)

I also specifically mentioned the fact that there are those who can think.... So your re-statement of the same, though with the inflection of my inaccuracy, does'nt mean I'm wrong. Check out the following:



Poor poor mankind, it's doomed!!

You notice of course, that I don't say I am doomed, also, I don't say We are doomed. Procrastinate about that! :o)



That's the last few lines from the post itself. You've basically restated my last statement. I speak in metaphors.... if you read through my posts, you'll find this fact running through the central core of my thought processes. I don't work with language. I let language work for me....

Kaydeeyoh!
(no subject) - fugney - Jun. 21st, 2005 02:28 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:19 pm (UTC)
chinni wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 06:57 pm (UTC)
you should read this one book peter pan's version..my professor wrote something related to obsessive compulsive behavior!
its called margaret's smile!
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 07:10 pm (UTC)
Hmmm.... Sounds interesting.... Perhaps I'll do a search to see if I can get my hands on it....

Obsessive compulsive behavior is a known psychological ailment. many writers suffer from it. And I'd be the first to admit that I'm one of them....

I can't stop my thoughts from flowing. No matter what I do, my mind's one thing that's beyond my control. For the same reason, I'm an insomniac, spending hours just lying in bed, staring that the ceiling, thinking.... Thoughts whirl around me and there's simply no end to it. Sleep evades me for hours on end.... My life as such is in a perennial trough of tiredness....

Maybe I'll be okay one day.... for now though, I'm caught in my thoughts and I guess I'm feeling around to see what could possibly be the best way to utilize my weaknesses to my advantage....

Kaydeeyoh!
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 20th, 2005 07:41 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 05:45 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:01 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:01 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:04 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:20 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:24 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:32 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - subtle_blues - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:15 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:03 pm (UTC)
As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 21st, 2005 11:21 am (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 05:46 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:08 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:18 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:26 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:39 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:42 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:43 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:45 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:58 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:03 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:10 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:14 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:18 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:21 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:26 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:29 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:34 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 12:52 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:17 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:21 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:37 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:40 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:57 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:57 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:59 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:07 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:10 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:40 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:58 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:00 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:02 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:15 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:18 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:22 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:26 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 06:29 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 08:04 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 08:08 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 08:20 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 08:21 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 08:30 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:33 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:44 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:49 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 07:59 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:00 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:09 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:16 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:24 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:27 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:33 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:45 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 09:21 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 12:50 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 04:50 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:19 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:53 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 12:37 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:16 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - subtle_blues - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:22 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:39 pm (UTC)
Re: As Good As It Gets - ex_ga_woo - Jun. 23rd, 2005 05:43 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - chinni - Jun. 21st, 2005 05:35 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 05:50 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - chinni - Jun. 22nd, 2005 05:55 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:03 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - chinni - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:13 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:15 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - chinni - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:16 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:22 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - chinni - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:24 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:30 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - chinni - Jun. 22nd, 2005 08:42 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 09:04 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - chinni - Jun. 23rd, 2005 12:41 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 23rd, 2005 04:52 pm (UTC)
appaji wrote:
Jun. 20th, 2005 09:30 pm (UTC)
> On the one hand, we have illiteracy, on the other, we have extreme brilliance

Literacy has got nothing to do with intelligence (which is what I assume you are refering to when you say brilliance)

> We have people who are so brilliant, they can narrate the Oxford Advanced Learners dictionary backward

A special skill, not brilliance, besides, and one could still be illiterate inspite of being able to do this.

> They fall face-down in marshy soil every time they're confronted with the real world.

Care to explain?
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:07 pm (UTC)
Literacy has got nothing to do with intelligence (which is what I assume you are refering to when you say brilliance)

When I say brilliance, I'm talking of academic brilliance. Intelligence is a different field of study altogether!!

Intelligent people can be illiterate. No mistake in my wording there, I am usually observant of my thoughts before I lay them out for public view. Four years of published material has led me to be weary of my footsteps. :o) Thanks for the concern though.... :)

A special skill, not brilliance, besides, and one could still be illiterate inspite of being able to do this.

Please go through my earlier comments. I've referred a few people to other areas of my journal. In fact, virtually every entry in my journal blares this fact out loud and crisply. I write in metaphors. To understand what i write, Understand the metaphor. there's no point if you try to read something if you understand something completely different.

If a person with an average education rushes through my journal, the chances of them ever leaving with anything more than what they came here with are virtually nil! They would'nt understand a thing. why? The reason is simple. They have to get into my frame of mine. Virtually everything is metaphorical in nature. EVERYTHING is contextual in nature. If someone drops out of a conversation half way, they're lost forever....

I can explain everything I write with dictionary definitions et al. But what's the point in communication if it's to be performed in as rigid a manner as that? Where's the beauty in anything if it's constricted by that? That's education, it's not learning....

Oh, and just in case you were wondering, English _is_ my mother tongue. Not Hindi, not Kannada, not Telugu, not Tamil, not anything!! It's highly unlikely that I would misuse a word as important as that. A genuine mistake occurs from time to time, and I'll admit that. But a recurring one? I think not.

Still, it's totally up to you to accept or deny it, That's your understanding and not of my calling.

Care to explain?

Read the lines immediately above that statement, you'll see what I meant and why it was that I used those specific words.

You are free to doubt the words and draw out supposed technical flaws in my words, but I would also appreciate it if you attempted to reason with the meaning behind the words. It's strange that you have'nt noticed any of that so far!!

No offense, but I'm shocked!
(no subject) - appaji - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:15 pm (UTC)
(no subject) - angiasaa - Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:16 pm (UTC)
samsat_iit wrote:
Jun. 21st, 2005 04:50 am (UTC)
well frm ur posts n arguments
all i cud know u r a misanthrope...who has closed his minds forever ..who doesnt want to get out of the bliss of ignorance whch he is in
angiasaa wrote:
Jun. 22nd, 2005 06:15 pm (UTC)
Re: well frm ur posts n arguments
Can you prove me to be in ignorance? If you cannot do so, please refrain from drawing wild conclusions of such a biased nature.

A closed mind suggests a refusal to accept or listen. You apparently preach (as opposed as have your say and leave it) your so-called blah and insist on it being accepted by all!

I, as an Individual, say what I want, what I believe and what I choose to say (whether I believe what is said, or not, is up to me!) If someone wishes not to accept it, I'm fine by that, it's their life. I don't force my opinions or thoughts on others. It's totally up to them to take it or leave it.

You're on my journal, telling ME what I should do. I suggest you consider the facts.

1. I am saying what I believe.
2. I'm not insisting that anyone listen (You included!)
3. I'm saying what I am on my journal. You have no compulsion to read it, let alone even believe it!
4. You're here at MY discretion.
5. If you wish to interact on a fair plain, feel free to do so, I have no quarrel on that matter.
6. I never force ANYONE to accept or believe what I say.

Finally, I DO NOT accept slander when it's not justified. If you claim I'm an asshole, please state your reasons why. Similarly, when you claim me to be closed minded, explain what you mean by the word. Explain also why you think it's so. Don't just say "Crap" and shut up thence forth!

That's the mark of an intellectually unsound coward.
Please live up to your name and standards. Assuming you've got them!

Kaydeeyoh!
Re: well frm ur posts n arguments - dritz - Sep. 18th, 2005 03:25 am (UTC)
psychog wrote:
Jan. 27th, 2006 06:53 pm (UTC)
arey mere bhai, yeh sab long-ass posts mat maar...mera bandwidth chud jaara saale poora padhte padhte....ne awwa