Programming can be a frustrating experience.
Programming when no financial gain is even on the horizon - can be frustrating and is (without any exception whatsoever) painful too.
However - programming when done towards research (on a Friday evening) when the whole world other than your own physical self is embracing some alcoholic drink or a member of the opposite gender - whereupon your IDE (what that stands for - really is immaterial) crashes....well that just takes the cake and quite frankly oblivious to the physical and emotional pain - can be a very lucrative and opportune motive to quite frankly end it all.
So last Friday, self and his faithful notebook were involved in a flirtatious dance at the command prompt and the evening was progressing along with the increase of the merriment at my neighbor's doorsteps, where young people were - well enjoying themselves. At one of those crucial moments (among the countless many that occur in the process of bugging and sequential DE-bugging your code) - my system just stopped responding. Hindsight is usually unusually clear - I guess it was signaling something. And I just lost it.
Now - given my usually docile nature when faced with the dilemma of pursuing the code or leaping off my second floor apartment - I chose the middle ground - namely that of emulating a gold fish.
The 5~10 odd mts. that separate our apartments is a fairly conservative separation and over the course of my stay at this particular apartment - I have concluded that neither my vocal sentiments nor my frantic gestures are attenuated beyond the comprehensive threshold - prior to stimulating the appropriate faculties of any neighbor who may be present at such opportune moments to see me in my element of pathetic.
Clearly they noticed my inactivity and one of them (praise his being) suggested rather delicately that "I dash it all, whatever I was doing and come on over to share a few cans of revitalizing beer". After a nano second of deliberation - the suggestion proved it's merit to my depleted faculties and with utmost rapidity - I presented myself at their doorstep and was in the possession of a heartwarming and consoling drink - and soon (as it's known to happen more often than not) the conversation steered in the direction of social issues. Upto this moment - my mind (or the remains of the the same ) was preoccupied with what I was doing wrong in the inversion of my mapping matrix. One of the young women in the gaggle ( I was a part of), proclaimed that she for one would never give up her maiden name after marriage.
Given my education (which several may question the validity of) - I do believe myself to be sufficiently equipped with the necessary breadth of outlook to accept and be able to subscribe to such a "drastic" claim. I mean - yet another woman of the new times has voiced yet another intention to break yet another thread of this ageless tradition - nothing wrong - and I grant that.
However - I was foolish enough (in hindsight - remember excreta does smell too), I posed a question -how many more of such post marriage traditions that have existed ad-infinitum was she willing to break out of ?
And that pretty much and very accurately flagged the beginning of a debate that I really wanted to avoid. Not because I was not in possession of all my marbles, but due to the fact that it really didn't matter.
Nevertheless, there we were headlong in a pool where sentiments and opinions (rather candid at that) were being washed up the shore without any regards to their validity or application. Upon the ejaculation of the question from my oral cavity - there was fractional silence followed by "what" that was reminiscent of a yelp from a sleeping tiger whose slumber had been rudely interrupted by a descending 50 pound hammer. Thereafter - despite being riddled at what felt like 60 bpm (bullets per minute) of verbal assault comprising of utter exclamation and feigned outrage and other closely related sentiments, I regained consciousness to realize that my original question had still not been answered. And finally - the trump card was laid out - that being that evidently matrimony had not been considerably given attention to - hence the lack of proper answers.
To be reasonably honest - I did have trouble buying that, simply because anyone who has managed to suitably accesses the pros and cons of giving up the maiden name, and the futility therein, cannot claim ignorance to other fallout of a marriage. But I was not going to say that (for explanation to that refer to the analogy of the tiger et al.)
Marriage and social norms, granted the surrounding fabric that has been woven, may not (infact is definitely not) the most intricate and refined in its weaving and atristry - nevertheless, one thing its got going in its favor is that it has managed to weather the passage of time and it's only prudent to (should one choose to cover him/herself with that fabric), ensure that we don't puncture it at our whim and fancy. Passage of time do and should lead to a change in the ideologies and beliefs - lest we may stagnate. That said - a conscious attempt should also be made by all of us to not out-run ourselves so that we may end face down on the stairs to our own liberation. Marriage has its associated benefits and changes that it brings to the lives of both (or more given the nuances of religions) the individuals. One cannot expect to walk the aisle and expect that the next day - wake up to the realization that it was just another really thrilling and realistic movie.
Our mind set defines us. But to define a good and successful marriage - there is a need for modulation of each individual mindset. A trapeeze artist can provide the most fundmental lesson - namely the balance. To achieve that - central ideology may prove to be beneficial. Along the way - the institution of marriage may need a few tweaks and adjustments - but if all is done in a methodical and systematic manner - one can almost be guaranteed not to fall.
Finally - what's in a name ? The face that is attached with that name is what matters. In a marriage the name also signifies something more fundamental. It identifies one as a person who is making an effort and with each passing day is getting closer to the ultimate realization that the other person in their lives is walking right next to them - till that very end.
Perhaps the words of Peter De Vries may explain it much better...The bonds of matrimony are like any other bonds - they mature slowly.
2 comments:
Dear Ashutosh,
I so enjoy your vivid description of the difficulty of crossing boarders and engaging human variables who may or may not have the ability to understand your perspective.
Unfortunately it seems to me that people are less willing to hold to traditional views of marriage or the reality of compromise due to many factors. One being our American concept of personal rights, another being a fear or disdain of traditional marriage as this generation watched the deterioration of it's parents marriages. We, as a generation, want to think that our marital fates will be different from those of our parents as we seek to find our way. We are unsure how to respond to what has failed except to buck norms that we find distasteful, while at the same time we are unaware if any of our ideas are truly solutions in any way.
It seems to me that the kind of love and commitment that is foundational to a marriage is the kind that leads those involved to renounce their own rights and to dedicate themselves to the service of the other partner. Renouncing personal rights is absolutely counter cultural and frightening to many, but it is through that kind of trust and vulnerability that a loving marriage bond is fostered, so I am told. I desire to give, forget about receiving, and therefore have no demands or expectations which I will hold as wounds if my hopes are not satisfied in the actions of my future spouse. Marriage is committed mutual service, not mutual self-indulgence. At the same time, there have been many injustices that females resent and fear and this fear and even sometimes rage causes much resistance if we are asked to lay down our rights. I think women want to know that they are marrying men they can trust, but for the most part we are skeptical if such men exist. For this reason many women keep up a protective barrier so as not the let enemy men hurt them. Obviously, I am not talking about resistance to loosing one's maiden name, but to the bigger phenomenon of women's defenses to traditional ways that they fear will hurt, trap, or abuse them.
The mutual renunciation of rights and a commitment to protection and service is what women want to see.
Christin !
That was very very well written and i must admit that everything that you mention rings of sincerity, and true belief. I do have one question though ? When you refer to a "traditional marriage" and the "american concept", i am not sure what has changed since the last two generations ?
We seek to find OUR way ? I hope that is a joint effort. Deteoration begins, when care stops and neglect prevails. The only trait(for the lack of a better expression) that one should renounce is rigidity. flexibility allows transversal through several "paths" that rigidity excludes.
Finally I dont deny that women have had to face countless incidents of sheer injustice. Nevertheless, present times present a whole new setup and a whole new school of thoughts that allow and (if not SHOULD allow), the room for cumulative growth (which incidentally manifests itself subsequent to personal improvement).
How to achieve that - now that is the small and unknown path we must all REALLY find and travel upon.
Post a Comment