Whats New(s)?

Today, the News Reader app in my phone had news about a nuclear scientist executed in Iran because he was suspected of being a spy, along with prospects of Baahubali 2 at the box office versus that of Kabali, followed closely by the unrest in Kashmir (Unrest?!) rubbing edges with a title, “Here’s why some girls friendzone guys” (!U#@&#^@@!!)

Yesterday and the day before that and the day before were no different.  News about Hollywood, and Bollywood and all the deadwoods besides political statements are interspersed with some news about collapsed bridges or buildings and rapes and gang wars and some leftover space for the unrest in Kashmir.  There is of course no mention of farmers now.  A farmer suicide has become commonplace. So what’s new(s)?

Believe me when I say that I tried to customise the app, but it refuses tweaking beyond a control point.  Perhaps if we could ascribe attitudes and emotions to software, then I could call the programme completely insensitive and numb and blind.  However I realise that we (I) are also all of that.  Or we simply make the choice to be that way because we just don’t have it in us to handle the overwhelming deluge otherwise. 

If I lived in a time when information say, even about the death of a relative, could only travel at the speed of foot, or horses or carts, then I would have much lesser choice about the news and kind of news I got.  I would have thus have a lot of time after the actual event in which my reaction can materialise and then some more time before it can reach any targets beyond the immediate neighbourhood.  As a matter of fact, I may be blissfully unaware of things beyond my experience for the most part.  My immediate surroundings would first hold my concern then. My expert comments and opinions then may truly be nearing expertise because my truth and my experience is in the vicinity and definitely similar if not the same.  And my response to news from a far-off place would fall under broader categories of approach and experience.  For instance, I do not have experience of the violence and the kind of struggle that Kashmir is experiencing now.  So if this ‘news’ had come to me at a non-digital, non-speed-travel time, I wonder how would it have come to me (in what form, what story etc) and how I would respond. I wonder whether I would react from such polarised locations as is happening today.  One important factor is that the whole information exchange process would be slower.  There is time and space for some sensitivity. 

But just contemplating a what-if scenario is neither here nor there.  Taking a look at reality: There is so much happening all across the country and beyond, and with the people around me, which I am privy to through all the stories, essays and news.  And I am adding to that about all and sundry.  Every day there is something new or old, to write about and share. 

I am having an internal dialogue around this consumption and churning out process of information and news,

I am as much a participator, perpetrator and initiator of all the news crunching.  But then, do I want to opt out of it? No.  I question myself whether it is a feeling of missing out, when I read or write and put myself through that examination once in a while. 

Who am I writing for?  Yes, I am writing for myself, but then is that enough?

How am I any different from my ‘insensitive’ news app in which all kinds of news jostle for space and attention. 

However, is that judgement true really? We each take our pens, our creative direction and implements towards that which moves us, if done consciously, and / or follow peer / conditioning / popular trends etc. 

But then, news, and creative writing and stories are also responses to triggers, right? That which is moving one to react / respond. What is the problem with that? Are all these triggers 'external' alone, outside of me.  However, it is true that writing as a reaction or response to stories and news maybe a habitual pattern, knee-jerk and lending itself as a trigger for further reactions and this goes on. 

This then means that I am in a healthier (authentic?) location when following my internal triggers rather than react to external ones. (I always have questions about this dichotomy of internal and external). 

However, this point in the conversation takes me back to my initial question, who am I writing for? If I am following my internal triggers, how is it of interest and / or use to another person? Does it help her in some way?  Do I want it to help her in some way and / or do I want to influence her with my opinion of the topic? Why are they reading this piece now?

My pet peeve with the information trappings of these times is that they seem to have bypassed the lessons in sensitivity.  There is something mind numbing about the colossal amount of information available to us without real learning / truth / reflection / wisdom. At the very least, a seeking for the truths of people and situations.    

However am I being and doing the same thing when I write?  One day it is about an environmental crisis, another day it’s a short story and the third day a personal one, as I follow my whimsical muse. 

This makes me put forward the question, why is it that each of us is reading so much, and why is it that we are all writing so much for others to read more?

Even while asking that question, I see that it’s a personal and subjective question, and I will do well replacing the “we” with “I”.  And yet, there is also a collective energy and movement that I perceive.

So I ask these questions, say that I am sitting on an enquiry with these questions, and scoot to the blinking and vibrating news app on my phone! 

Young At Heart or Old and Wise?

Image from hrrindia.com

Am I young or Am I old? Using this particular question and a situation, I realised I was wading through a larger, general problematique of 'tradition and modernity'.

A popular apparel brand has as part of its advertising paraphernalia, the slogan, "Stay young always".  I saw this put up somewhere recently with images of 'hip' teenagers wearing trendy, western clothes and in different poses.  We see this emphasis on youth, all the time, everywhere, and in advertisements, certainly.  It seems like only specific and niche themes want to represent the older population, say, savings and investment towards a house for retirement.  (The themes themselves, what themes target the old and what the young, is in itself a subject of examination but not within the current scope)

The obvious, first explanations for this interest and infatuation with being young are known and understood: youth is associated with beauty, vigour, vitality, strength, adventure and so on.  I believe that all this is true. 

There is also another picture of youth (not portrayed in ads as a rule* for obvious reasons) that is held by society, wherein youth also means irresponsibility, irreverence, rebelliousness, a devil-may-care attitude, brashness and so on. I believe all this to be true. 

Neither do I feel like putting a 'positive' label to the former set of attributes, nor a 'negative' label to the latter.  

The sudden indignant question that arose in me when I saw that ad took me a little by surprise: why should I always stay young?  I realised,

- I at last feel "grown up", even old sometimes;

- I feel that much of youth-time (from my experience, and also that of my peer group, close and far, that I see) has been / is a struggle with life, struggle to understand, not-peaceful, full of drama and so on and I loved most of it;

- I also feel that in my "old age" I am 'settling' to responsibility and I am loving it;

- I feel old and I feel much more gathered, coherent, and at peace with my self than ever before.

I many times see that others in my friends' circles, my contemporaries feel similarly in varying degrees and ways, though they may not use the same vocabulary.  

Then why is there this insistence on staying young?  This staying-young perspective also seems to fear words like 'responsibility' and 'settling' ('settling' is always actually 'settling down' - perhaps this is to do with putting down roots?) 

This fear I believe is the crux of the matter.  Most current public idiom of a certain kind seem to originate and revolve around this fear: the fear of old age.  Because old age means disease, and death.  The inherent fear is that of death.  And hence, none of the products and ads want to become old - a cream to remove 7 or 8 or 9 signs of aging; clothes that are young and trendy; music and technology and food and schemes to stay young all the time, these hit us 24X7, leveraging on that increasing fear of old age.  

image from nirdeshak.com

At the same time, I also constantly encounter an idiom of another kind (although it is growing lesser and lesser I feel).  An idiom, which respects and gives 'old age' and becoming an elder a certain, special place in human engagement, be it personal, social, at the work place... it takes different forms in different contexts.  I believe that traditional Indian culture gives old age a certain respect and place.  And by doing this, I believe that it demands of them certain ways of being that befits them (I sort of explain what I mean by this a little later), through its colourful and intricate tapestry.  For instance, in traditional contexts, I see elders always being graciousness and generosity personified.  And it is a taken that they are that way.  Of course in an Indian context, they are much of the time also hierarchical and authoritative, however I see my elders holding both effortlessly; one doesn't negate the other.  

At the same time, I believe that traditionally young age is also given a certain respect and place; and by doing this, I believe that the same cultural tapestry demands of them certain ways of being that befits them. An immediate situation that comes to mind is that of learning and exploration.  

It seems to me that the codes and grammar of Indian culture evolve in such a way that it is constantly reminding people of their context and station in life.  However, I hasten to add that this does NOT mean that we have to get caramelized into our respective ages such that we don't have the value for, or practice other attributes in necessary contexts.  For instance, I definitely don't think that it is to be understood as, the elderly must not learn or question or be adventurous, or that the young must not be generous. I believe that tradition does deem appropriateness and context as important factors to consider.  Everything has its time, place and context. 

And hence, old and young age, both have their right value, purpose and journey.  There seems to me a gracefulness about this acceptance of, and going with the flow of a natural rhythm of life.  And all practices, rituals, thought-systems, structures etc seem to be built around this understanding and acceptance of the natural rhythm of life and its processes.  What befits each entity is born out of this afresh all the time.  Everyone is on this journey.  

A modern context is always to gain, by its very nature of being modern, because the modern is here, contemporary, in with the changing times, and resultant advantages, an important one being that of individual autonomy and pursuit.  However it is losing out in many significant ways; one such is the loss of this acceptance of a natural rhythm and order.  And hence, the fear of old age.  

The modern inclination to stop the flow and dam everything into compartments has an interesting result.  What in a traditional context is a taken and natural process, and which the path of Yoga gives as a committed and systematic practice, contemporary writings have made into a one-time privilege that is received.  All of the discussion on "old souls" that I have encountered have clearly isolated ideas of maturity in thought, wisdom and so on, saying that there are some blessed ones who are born this way - the old souls.  While the descriptions of old souls are all beautiful, lyrical and tugging at our spiritual and romantic selves, they all seem to be saying that these ideas are available only to a few.  

image from vedicodyssey.com

So, am I young at heart, or have I grown old? :-|

I seem to be in a phase of finding tension areas wherein I simply cannot make an either-or choice; here, the constant tug of war between tradition and modernity.  And I find I cannot choose one over the other.  I cannot also give up both and say that I am beyond either of them.  I am not saintly at all.  My choice and work is in including both, and simultaneously holding tradition and modernity, and keep discovering the truth of life, herein. It is not dammed (damned?) at one point, but a flow!  I am young at heart, "not having a care in the world" as I am playing with my daughter, and completely old, having absolute care for her safety and needs and wants, as we play. 

-----------------------------------------------

* There are always exceptions to rules