It starts even before when one is in the crib. The incumbent is expected to give a knee jerk to the human incubator when someone from the outside cajoles it. And if it doesn’t do so, out of it’s own sweet nonchalant will, the incubator is thought to be imperfect. Such patterns chase us all through our life.
A wayward child is made to sit silent and behave like a grown up. To be seated properly is a sign of a civilized upbringing and congrats to the parents for bringing up such a well-behaved child. Is a child supposed to act like a child? Or a grown up? Is it not denying the child the right to be true to his impish impulsive childish cravings?? And what is being proved by succumbing a child’s will to the “right & proper” will of his parents? A thumbs up celebration for the grownups for doing the job right, who have no other accolades under their belts except the conquering of the child’s mannerisms?
It is nothing except our fear of originality.
There is no greater tolerance, then to accept and embrace originality of the other without trying to tame it or mould it or conform it or amend it or correct it or alter it in any other form then it actually is. Because that is the denial of that person’s being. But that desired level of tolerance comes from the ability to accept, which in turn is derived by the strength of mind and character and hence rarely found?
Why is it so hard for us to accept the eccentricities of any person? Why do we have to evaluate a person’s originality? Why do we have to question the sanity of any man who tries to question the set patterns of beliefs? Isn’t this originality, the very essence of that person’s being, something that defines that person and makes him stand apart from others?
Isn’t the diversity of life forms the very beauty of mankind?
From the very tender ages we tame our little ones to become conformists. We cage their thoughts and provide limits to their minds. We teach them to walk; but not to run. We teach them to talk; but not to listen. We teach them to think, but never to imagine.
This adamant adherence to the status quo has become maddeningly suffocating for some selected few, those who have risen above the surface of conventionality, broken the boundaries and defied the limits. They are the ones who have chosen to think and imagine outside the box. They have dared to step outside the boundary, and looked inwards and thought, “What if”? They are the ones who have conceived the notion of, “Why Not”?
And what are the rewards for them, for those who have dared.
Social ostracism.
Character assassination.
Evaluations of moral standards.
Consistent “sincere” advices to return to the voice and reason of orthodoxy, insane though it might seem to the “Original” being.
ye kahaan ki dostee hai ke bane hain dost naaseh
koee chaarasaaz hota, koee ghamgusaar hota
[What kind of friendship is this, that friends are now advisers
Someone should ease my pain, someone sympathize with me]
And what is that original thinker forced to bear in a society full of traditionalists? He has to live a life analogous to the struggle and pain of a mountain climber. He is forced to appease the outer world and deny his own inner self the right to exhibit itself in its truest form. He is reduced to a pretension of respect for the bylaws and standards that he neither understands nor does he agree with.
He has to fight, and convince, and argue, and debate, and justify himself for being the way he is.
He has to ultimately apologize for acting the only way he knows how.
He ends up being sorry for not being anything other than what he truly is; an Original.
Such individuals live a life of continuous confrontation, starting from their personal lives at home, from their parents, to siblings, extending eventually to their spouse and kids (if they ever have one).
Socially, people either indulge them for the sake of little amusement and entertainment at the cost of their time and energy. Or people simply find them a social nuisance, they snub them and try and tame them.
People find it their moral obligation to probe into the individual’s life style and mind and question it and judge its propriety according to their own standards which by virtue of being widely accepted automatically are sanctioned as standard and approved as the higher, better and the correct way to act and speak and think.
The originals remain misinterpreted and misunderstood and ultimately live in an insulated isolation within themselves. Even those who claim to love the originals, are not much happy deep down so much so that they are actually ashamed of being associated with a social outcast. They fall in love with an illusion, an image, an ideal. To them the eccentricities are part of the charm that allures them to the Original. They temporarily become a pseudo-original whilst in valence of the Original. For them the Original is what they had always aspired to be (the rule-breaker), but could never be materialized. Secretly, they themselves yearn to be an Original, and it is this fascination that pulls them to the Original. That some way, somehow, some of the originality streak may brush off on to them. They long to draw some of the Original’s charismatic energy into their own worn out hearts and win some battles of their own.
But of course, it is all that they only think there is to it. Their mysticism of the Original is misconstrued for love. A vastly misplaced emotion which remains unreturned and unrewarded because the Original is too busy sorting out his own messed up life and priorities! Invariably, this high wave of so-called-Love quells down soon enough when confronted with the harsh realities of life and society which is in perpetual ailment of the incurable conformist mediocrity!
The Lover who was once enchanted by the lengthy diatribes of idealistic utopian thoughts is disappointed by the Original’s fall from grace, from the high pedestal where he had once placed his Demi-god. The irony strikes when the lover starts to mould the Original and tries to customize the Original according to his own wishes. In his own way, he is trying to “raise” the object of his affections in the worldly view; naïve as love is. Alas, the Original, doesn’t require the satisfaction of acceptance and certification of sanity from society. He is long past the need for that security! He holds a world within himself where he issues all warrants & licenses. The Original is therefore, nature bound to repeal the corrective, preventive, submissive, oppressive and regulatory advances of the good-intentioned lover.
The Original necessitates only to be heard and to be accepted as he is, not-impure; and to be loved and understood as an Original.
There is no guessing what the end to this Love-Triangle is!
The Original is forced to pay by bearing the pain of being a stranger to the one person whom he wanted to rely on without the fear of being rejected for being original. The price is to live with the loneliness while being in the arms of love which is doubly painful, as he is never understood or respected for what he actually is. He is punished to hide away his true self not only from the world, but from his own self as well. A sheer disrespect of life’s diversity!
It’s a gross denial of existence. . ah, the sins originality. . .
A wayward child is made to sit silent and behave like a grown up. To be seated properly is a sign of a civilized upbringing and congrats to the parents for bringing up such a well-behaved child. Is a child supposed to act like a child? Or a grown up? Is it not denying the child the right to be true to his impish impulsive childish cravings?? And what is being proved by succumbing a child’s will to the “right & proper” will of his parents? A thumbs up celebration for the grownups for doing the job right, who have no other accolades under their belts except the conquering of the child’s mannerisms?
It is nothing except our fear of originality.
There is no greater tolerance, then to accept and embrace originality of the other without trying to tame it or mould it or conform it or amend it or correct it or alter it in any other form then it actually is. Because that is the denial of that person’s being. But that desired level of tolerance comes from the ability to accept, which in turn is derived by the strength of mind and character and hence rarely found?
Why is it so hard for us to accept the eccentricities of any person? Why do we have to evaluate a person’s originality? Why do we have to question the sanity of any man who tries to question the set patterns of beliefs? Isn’t this originality, the very essence of that person’s being, something that defines that person and makes him stand apart from others?
Isn’t the diversity of life forms the very beauty of mankind?
From the very tender ages we tame our little ones to become conformists. We cage their thoughts and provide limits to their minds. We teach them to walk; but not to run. We teach them to talk; but not to listen. We teach them to think, but never to imagine.
This adamant adherence to the status quo has become maddeningly suffocating for some selected few, those who have risen above the surface of conventionality, broken the boundaries and defied the limits. They are the ones who have chosen to think and imagine outside the box. They have dared to step outside the boundary, and looked inwards and thought, “What if”? They are the ones who have conceived the notion of, “Why Not”?
And what are the rewards for them, for those who have dared.
Social ostracism.
Character assassination.
Evaluations of moral standards.
Consistent “sincere” advices to return to the voice and reason of orthodoxy, insane though it might seem to the “Original” being.
ye kahaan ki dostee hai ke bane hain dost naaseh
koee chaarasaaz hota, koee ghamgusaar hota
[What kind of friendship is this, that friends are now advisers
Someone should ease my pain, someone sympathize with me]
And what is that original thinker forced to bear in a society full of traditionalists? He has to live a life analogous to the struggle and pain of a mountain climber. He is forced to appease the outer world and deny his own inner self the right to exhibit itself in its truest form. He is reduced to a pretension of respect for the bylaws and standards that he neither understands nor does he agree with.
He has to fight, and convince, and argue, and debate, and justify himself for being the way he is.
He has to ultimately apologize for acting the only way he knows how.
He ends up being sorry for not being anything other than what he truly is; an Original.
Such individuals live a life of continuous confrontation, starting from their personal lives at home, from their parents, to siblings, extending eventually to their spouse and kids (if they ever have one).
Socially, people either indulge them for the sake of little amusement and entertainment at the cost of their time and energy. Or people simply find them a social nuisance, they snub them and try and tame them.
People find it their moral obligation to probe into the individual’s life style and mind and question it and judge its propriety according to their own standards which by virtue of being widely accepted automatically are sanctioned as standard and approved as the higher, better and the correct way to act and speak and think.
The originals remain misinterpreted and misunderstood and ultimately live in an insulated isolation within themselves. Even those who claim to love the originals, are not much happy deep down so much so that they are actually ashamed of being associated with a social outcast. They fall in love with an illusion, an image, an ideal. To them the eccentricities are part of the charm that allures them to the Original. They temporarily become a pseudo-original whilst in valence of the Original. For them the Original is what they had always aspired to be (the rule-breaker), but could never be materialized. Secretly, they themselves yearn to be an Original, and it is this fascination that pulls them to the Original. That some way, somehow, some of the originality streak may brush off on to them. They long to draw some of the Original’s charismatic energy into their own worn out hearts and win some battles of their own.
But of course, it is all that they only think there is to it. Their mysticism of the Original is misconstrued for love. A vastly misplaced emotion which remains unreturned and unrewarded because the Original is too busy sorting out his own messed up life and priorities! Invariably, this high wave of so-called-Love quells down soon enough when confronted with the harsh realities of life and society which is in perpetual ailment of the incurable conformist mediocrity!
The Lover who was once enchanted by the lengthy diatribes of idealistic utopian thoughts is disappointed by the Original’s fall from grace, from the high pedestal where he had once placed his Demi-god. The irony strikes when the lover starts to mould the Original and tries to customize the Original according to his own wishes. In his own way, he is trying to “raise” the object of his affections in the worldly view; naïve as love is. Alas, the Original, doesn’t require the satisfaction of acceptance and certification of sanity from society. He is long past the need for that security! He holds a world within himself where he issues all warrants & licenses. The Original is therefore, nature bound to repeal the corrective, preventive, submissive, oppressive and regulatory advances of the good-intentioned lover.
The Original necessitates only to be heard and to be accepted as he is, not-impure; and to be loved and understood as an Original.
There is no guessing what the end to this Love-Triangle is!
The Original is forced to pay by bearing the pain of being a stranger to the one person whom he wanted to rely on without the fear of being rejected for being original. The price is to live with the loneliness while being in the arms of love which is doubly painful, as he is never understood or respected for what he actually is. He is punished to hide away his true self not only from the world, but from his own self as well. A sheer disrespect of life’s diversity!
It’s a gross denial of existence. . ah, the sins originality. . .
--Scarlett