It’s roughly eleven forty five (which means that 15 minutes from now) yet another morning belonging to my eclectic existence will depart hand in hand with a bit of my being to dissolve in the fog that last evening was. The evening in question commenced around nine-thirty subsequent to my arrival at a local bar followed by the familiar embrace of a pint of their local finest! A hard day was about to dissolve along with the rising di-oxide bubbles and (hopefully) good and meaningless banter.
And then the almighty laughed!
I believe my departure was stamped around mid-night and somewhere in the said time line, in order to defend (to be read as re-hash) a point I had made earlier, a statement involving some unfortunate combination of Lip-stick, lump of cow dung, her appearance, etc. escaped the black hole that my oral cavity is! In my defense, the offending statement was driven ONLY by genuine concern for the said colleague (which even she agrees to).
Unfortunately, she ended up rather offended and all that (maybe rightfully so) and thereafter there was nothing I could say that was presently acceptable to her or others. Anyway – to abbreviate the pain in this story, a well researched course on public speaking and basic sensitivity to ladies' sentiments etcetera followed. I sat there, gallantly, took it all in, even braved a coat of the said lip-stick and then legged it to the nearest exit without much regard to finesse after that.
On the way back home, having cranked up my gassed up vehicle and my aerated brain and engaging both in the required gears, I tried to see the reason behind my delightful evening. I agree that the apart from the gender there are quite a few difference between a man and a woman. I can, at a purely acoustic or basic plane agree that the statement might have packed more than the required wallop and could have been delivered in better “taste”. However, what confounded self was that since when did the underlying meaning and thoughts got relegated to the back seat? It’s a dangerous slope and here is why…
<<Analytical reasoning>>
Every other person apart from ourselves can be interpreted as a collection of attributes that we prioritize in our heads, which alters their proximity in our personal space. One of these attributes is “meaning”. If we prioritize meaning over the surface, transparency will follow.
Otherwise, at best one can hope for is selective familiarity!
<<slightly human reasoning>>
Nothing says it better than what was said by Martin Luther King Jr. …
“In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
Either way, lessons learnt are:
- Silence really is golden!
- Next time, drink alone! (spare your friends…)
- A "light" brew after Bass, just does not cut it.
- Some lessons will have to be learnt the hard way!
So much food for thought and all this for $20.00 (including tip, and taxes …)
Hmmm….could have been worse.
-A
21 comments:
To avoid the whole situation, just don't drink with women :] They can be a flighty, mercurial bunch
At the risk of sounding cynical, I would have to admit that the grace with which you have attempted to pen-down some of your observations on the human race in general (complimented by your analytical reasoning)..... the same would have come in handy had you gracefully ignored the situation instead of trying to overload the operator-surprise.
Hello there...
Thank you for taking the time out to (not only read) but also leave your feedback. You mentioned something very "on the nail" about being able to "gracefully ignore". However, being graceful is a very fluid concept and tends to differ from one individual to another. No contest towards the fact that had i continued SILENTLY on the road to inebriation, nothing would have precipitated. The question that I am posed with is - what provides a good bench mark to suitable access what should be ignored and what should be risen to. I guess my selection criterion in that regard are sufficiently ignorant. Someday - there will be light...
pip-pip !
ps: Did you also mean that i write well ? ;-)
In my opinion there is no such thing as a 'good' benchmark, especially when it comes to commenting on the appearance of any member of the fairer sex. No self respecting person would want to look obnoxious on purpose.
Your theory of perceiving every other person as a collection of attributes seems like a work in progress. Each of these attributes in my opinion would depend on time. An attribute applicable to this episode would be receiptability too.
You are again right about the "work in progress". One of the biggest challenge in the same is the dynamic nature of the other person. Nevertheless, just as you say - the degree of receptiveness is equally important - and also depends upon time. That is the prime reason why I ended up writing about the episode in the first place.
It's not a question about scraping away at the self respect of the person. I couldn't care less whether the look sported by the lady was the creation of a magic genie or the fallout of some other event.
I actually cared to ask about the same,but erred on part of assuming that the other person would recognize the sentiment behind the same.
So yes...it's a work is progress!
By the way - thanks again for your response. :-)
-A
Given, the in-human hour of my previous response, I had to succumb to the extremely loud call of you may know what...
So here is the unsaid part. No "correctly manufactured" human would purposely display anything undesirable intentionaly. Many however do. What's more, negative or unpleasant sights usually tend to have a higher tendency to attract attention of the audience.
From the said audience's perspective, who's to say that, what he/she beholds is "natural" or "causal".
Finally, another person's self respect (degree thereof) has no bearing on my own existence. I am confident that given due diligence, it can be modulated, however the real question is - what is the gain therefrom...
My opinion is - absolutely nothign at all. Ignorance is bliss. The real question that I am trying to find an answer to is - where is the delicate point of balance....?
.. that between ignorance and concern for things/people around me....
pip-pip.
-A
First off, the categorisation of what one sees as undesirable and desirable is again a fluid concept, especially when it comes to appearances(natural or causal). I am not qualified/inclined to question your existence or your intent(we wouldnot be having this discussion then).
That said and you having agreed to the degree of 'receptiveness', I feel that the delicate point of balance that you are striving for can be only acheived if you can clearly/confidently assess the same.
Question about your comments:
The real question that I am trying to find an answer to is - where is the delicate point of balance....?
.. that between ignorance and concern for things/people around me....
and
In my defense, the offending statement was driven ONLY by genuine concern for the said colleague (which even she agrees to).
Now, exactly what were you concerned about?
...another anonymous
Right then..
Now that there is yet another Anonymous reader (which incidentally really makes my day and all that), to keep things untangled - I am going to take the liberty of addressing one as A1 and the "other anonymous" as A2. I could have used Yoda and/or Popeye, but this way feels better....
A1 :--->
I don’t think there is much debate as to what the norm says is wanted(desirable) or unwanted (undesirable) stimulus. A couple of examples:
1.) A person laughing around you OR you hear the same sobbing. Which of these would leave some bells ringing?
2.) You are seated at a coffee shop and a car passed by with tragically loud music... OR you hear tires screeching!
What I was trying to say is that we get conditioned to accepting and subsequently skimming over most of events/sights or sounds around us that have a positive or "normal" flavor.
Similarly - having seen this friend/colleague walk in one morning without the customary/usual enhancement - i went onto query the reason behind the same. Hopefully you would find it palatable, my claim that there was no attempt to question her dignity or self respect or anything like that.
So no, I don't believe there is much debate about what is desirable or otherwise (in any respect - not only visual).
Finally, immunity to such events or sights can be achieved by ignoring it all. Then who's to say, sensitivity has prevailed or not?
A2-->
Well to answer the first one, trying to minimize all these ripples in my daily life (which clearly is a work in progress),I try to employ selective reception. Towards that end - (a) i interact with very few people around me (reasons not withstanding) and (b) those who i don’t interact with - I try not to pay any cognizance to them and their activities.
To answer your second query - refer to the response to A1 in this post.
By the way - it's really very tickling to get grilled like this. Thank you for taking the time out to do this (especially when it’s rather late in the day). :-)
pip-pip!
ps: How about some names ?
You didn't answer my question! In both comments you used the word "concerned". ??????
A2
Hello there..
Let me quote from my previous response...
"having seen this friend/colleague walk in one morning without the customary/usual enhancement - i went onto query the reason behind the same. Hopefully you would find it palatable, my claim that there was no attempt to question her dignity or self respect or anything like that."
That stated, you may be feeling that the connotation of the term "concern" I am trying to draw out is that of something grave. Nothing like that. Peripheral - yes !
So I guess it was my curiosity that you may feel I am masking as my "concern" for why the lady didn't look her "usual self".
Ofcourse I can be sentenced on the grounds of why, in the first place, did it concern me - what her visual index was in the first place and we can start all over again - but i will say this - that in this particular instance, the "sight" was a stimulus that led to the reaction.
Hopefully this answer you..?
This is really very invigorating !
pip-pip
ps: So no possibilities of any real names eh ?
I beg to disagree with the 'absolute' in your perception of the 'norm', given that your defition of what is 'cool' may not neccesarily meet the approval of another(despite the pseudo-profound lame exapmles that you provided). Especially with the norm being subjected to constant change.
Keeping in mind that this can be the topic for a more generic discussion (where one can try solving world hunger), I shall reiterate a few points since this discussion seems to be getting convoluted for no apparent reason:
What happened : You reacted to a situation(for whatever reasons that you thought were appropriate - no debate over that from my side) which involved discussing/questioning the cosmetic sense(for the lack of a better expression) of your colleague.
Your quesion : How to delicately express your views on her cosmetic sense.
My Answer : Among other things, keeping her degree of receptiveness in mind while communicating the same.
Pardon my general impatience/crass.
A1.
Right then!
So two examples that I thought aptly highlighted our selective responsse to different stimuli didn't meet your approval(analytical and otherwise which is clearly underscored by your profound suggestion towards hinger etc.) No arguments there - I don't have any trouble agreeing to my inferior tastes and aptitute..
You say this discussion is getting convoluted - then how can i disagree!
But here is something i didn't quite find in any of your responses. How do YOU figure out how receptive a person is before you utter your opinion ?
Clearly, going by the confidence in your responses so far, number of ensuing "fall flats" have been significantly less that in my case !
And here is the part that tickles me. I am reasonably confident that you will not be able to give me a scale that doesn't extrapolate the gray ! Why is that ? I will wait for your delicate (or impatient response).
Furthermore, I think you are mistaking norm with social values and all that. I was referring to a purely stimulus and response domain. You may want to think about that (in context of each 24 hours span).
And to tidily sum it up... this desire (need) of opining about any thing is risky. Cosmetic appeal (or lack thereof) is really pale in comparison to changes in other attributes.
pip-pip
-A
ps: So no real names ? hmmm... Hell make up one :-)
I completely agree with you on all accounts!
-The norms that you and I have been referring to are totally different(my mistake).
-I cannot provide you with a definitive guide for assessing an individual's receptiveness (that leading to constructive criticism) without offending him/her. I sincerely doubt if there is one, and if you ever figure it out please feel free to share the same.
A1
Now i feel that you are offended (probably rightfully so - given upon retrospect, my response could have been a little softer).
Ofcoure yet another reason might be that you most definitely have better and actually meaningful tasks to attend to than respond to a rambling buffoon like me.
Eitherway - there is no mistake or anything (as you said in the last post). It's an exchange of ideas and with any medium that involves a time lag of almost 24 hours, some aspect of a point we try to make tends to get left behind - subsequently snowballing into a "convoluted" discussion. :-)
Please dont hesistate to send more feedback - and this is clearly a very selfish request, given my attempt to improve myself using other's perspective.
pip-pip..
-A
I am not offended! Picking an offense is a convenient way out. I fail to comprehend your inherent eagerness to justify your existence for an event as simple as this. Especially when you agree that your statement could have been delivered in better 'taste'.
Your examples make sense in a very ideal/simplistic manner categorizing responses into a crisp 'if-then-else' logic. An individual who might have had enough drama for the day may not even be concerned. Sure you might want to add yet another 'if' your theory. Where does this end?
Ok!
You are of the opinion that it is simple ... then we differ apart from other facts, even on the ground we stand (to read this is as basic level).
But you sure do seem more adept at sensing other's state of mind. Thanks for your patience, but i have run out ... given this realization !
pip-pip..
Sure! Let's leave it at that...
Your circumloction style of writing has me wondering if there was another motive behind this so called "discussion".
A2
Oops! That should read circumlocution.
A2
Hey! It's a new year! You should post something! Hope all is well in the universe of Ash :]
here's to a great 2006~
Post a Comment