IRONIC? II

I don't really like sequels. The only ones that I felt were better than their original counterparts were Hot Shots Part Deux, Terminator 2, and yeah sure Spiderman II, coz the villain's jaw actually moves in this one.  The first movie with spiderman underneath his mask and the Green Goblin with a fixed mask looks more like a Chinese movie with English voice overs! But back to the point, I guess sequels sometimes arent meant to entertain the audience, and simply reveal that the creator doesnt have closure on his first creation!

So, I am back to fighting about whats Ironic! As I pointed out I am not the only one to feel this way about Alanis' song Ironic! While browsing bloggish sites, I came across this one which kinda tore her song down too harsher than I did and there was a comment that stated:

"Hi, I'm an English teacher. I hate to tell you, but you are all sadly "unenlightened." There are 3 different types of irony. Here are some definitions for you:
Situational Irony: This occurs when there is a discrepancy between the actual circumstances and those that would seem appropriate, or between what one anticipates and what actually comes to pass (The song is full of situational irony)
Verbal irony: The discrepancy between what is said and what is meant. Sarcasm is a form of verbal irony. It is exhibited when Mr. Play It Safe thinks "Well, isn't this nice?" He actually means the exact opposite. Now, don't you feel stupid? Maybe Alanis is smart after all.

Now, I know that this comment was not made out to me though I am gonna address it. But I love it when someone pulls out an "Oxford dictionary" definition to prove their point. Worst way to begin a debate, worst way to end it, unless you are in the 1st grade. And yeah bless the souls of the kids who learn English from this teacher! 

To elucidate why I am being mean, the comment has exactly the same weakness as the song! Sometimes it takes more than a line to reveal Irony which is why Alanis toppled, sometimes it takes more than a line to explain the meaning of a word or expression such as "situational irony!" topple goes the English Teacher!

Lets say I anticipated I would be working today at 12:00, and come 12:00 I really havta take a shit! This discrepancy in what I anticipated and what comes to "pass" (haha) does not make my shitting/passing IRONIC! 

If I am waiting for a taxi, anticipating availability, and there is none, this is NOT situational irony!

Situational Irony requires much more of a playback in events, thought, etc to be established!

This is how I look at irony!

Case I: Lets consider Julius Caeser being stabbed:

Julius Caeser did not expect to get stabbed, and he did get stabbed! Is that Ironic! Fuck no!

Julius Caeser did not expect to get stabbed and he went to the senate that day just to meet Brutus, who stabbed him! Ironic? Borderline Ironic!

Julius Caeser was warned of the ides of March, knew he was in danger, dint know whether he should go to the senate that day , but thought, nothing can happen to me, my friend Brutus is there! and  Brutus stabbed him!  YES, IRONIC!

Case II: Very hindi movie setting, a business man who takes bribes and hides money from the IRS is busted

The lala has black money, doest expect to get busted and gets busted. Ironic? NAHIN!

The lala started taking bribes, evading taxes so that his son could be a rich man, and avoid all the hardships he went through as a child, but the son becomes a police affsar, and busts him! Ironic? BAHUT IRONIC!

Okay, now I have closure, I can go to sleep in peace. 'Thank you', Alanis, coz you oughta know!

IRONIC?

What the hell is Ironic? Is it Ironic that we are discussing the meaning of Ironic? No! but if we were a group of people discussing the meaning of Ironic and none of us knew what it meant, I guess that would be rather Ironic!

Lately, I passionately wonder if things that happen, are said, are thought, etc, are ironic or not. Why? Coz the word is passed around like a cheap whore, just like the “open and end quote” gesture (future blog). My first meeting with Irony was during high school English classes when we were studying Shakespeare. Shakespeare worked dramatic irony into most of his plays, often scenarios where the actor delivers a dialogue without presently knowing its impact, but the audience does and is greatly amused! I barely remember a scene where Orlando is practising courting Rosalind, on Rosalind, who is dressed as a boy, Ganymede. The audience knows that Ganymede is his love, Rosalind, but he doesn’t, making the scene ironic. Milking the irony Shakespeare makes Orlando ask her of her actions, “But will my Rosalind do so?” and she replies “By my life, she will do as I do!”

These days this word that used to pique my interest makes me furious. All credits to Alanis Morissette and her masterpiece Ironic! I guess there is a lotta controversy as always, coz fans will explain anything, and critics will tear down anything, coz we havta be unquestionably Democratic or Republic, black or white, gray is just not allowed. Here are my feelings for Alanis other than this song: “U oughta know” blew my mind away, the music, the voice, the lyrics, her other songs mostly rock, and yeah! I did not enjoy her being naked in her video for “thank you”, I felt like saying, “Thanks but no Thanks!”

Well, lets get right down to the point. The song is called Ironic, and I believe she was listing things which she believed could be Ironic. Will get to the controversy in a bit but here is the break down.

An old man turned ninety-eight
He won the lottery and died the next day

Okay, let’s start! That is very unfortunate, NOT Ironic. If the old man committed suicide the day before coz he wasn’t winning the lottery, then maybe, this way, NO, NO, NO!

It's a black fly in your Chardonnay

That is just weird, take the fly out and drink the damned Chardonnay, woman! But even though not Ironic, since Chardonnay is white, and the fly is black, and she wont drink her drink, I’ll give her half a point outa 10!

It's a death row pardon two minutes too late

Again, boo hoo, and the word for the boohoo feeling, is SAD not IRONIC!

It's like rain on your wedding day

Seriously?

It's a free ride when you've already paid

What?

It's the good advice that you just didn't take

That’s just bloody stupid. Call the song “Bloody Stupid”

Mr. Play It Safe was afraid to fly
He packed his suitcase and kissed his kids goodbye
He waited his whole damn life to take that flight
And as the plane crashed down he thought
"Well isn't this nice..."

Mmmmm! Well, this time she spent an entire verse describing the event, as an ironic situation might require, and maybe one more line would completely bring out the irony, but cool, I give it to you, this one is Ironic, esp the sarcasm!

A traffic jam when you're already late

Here we go again! Somebody stop her! Boo hoo, waah! UN-fucking-FORTUNATE!

A no-smoking sign on your cigarette break

It doesn’t matter coz you’re on dope Alanis, and on dope anything can be anything! But sure, why not, 1 outa 10. hahaha

It's like ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife

Not unless you normally carry ten thousand knives! Otherwise, ten thousand times Un-fucking-fortunate!

It's meeting the man of my dreams
And then meeting his beautiful wife

What can I say, good for the man! But the good news is “I saved a bunch of money on my car insurance by switching to geico!”, just kidding (I miss my little cousin, he just loves that joke), the good news is that’s the last line we havta dissect.

Well, I am sure all of you have different notions of ironic. Her examples to me just don’t cut it. Some fans argue that the ironic part is that there is nothing ironic in the song and then others come up with dictionary definitions of situational irony. Pretty wishful thinking in my opinion. Wikipedia even reports that she has said that that’s what the title means, its ironic coz nothing in the song is. The report awaits citation. If it’s true, nice way to save your ass Alanis. If that’s what you intended, and you yet included the lines

And isn't it ironic...dontcha think
A little too ironic...and yeah I really do think...

We should just go back to calling the song, BLOODY STUPID!

Honestly, I know tons of people have spotted this too. I kinda forgot about it. Was in Radioshack to buy a power strip, instead the salesmen managed to entice me into buying an expensive surge protector to protect my computers, distortion unit, etc from voltage fluctuations. I gave in owing to my love for these gadgets. While checking out he asked me if I wanted to add $8 for a 2 year insurance to which I immediately said no! Just outa curiosity I asked him “So what’s the insurance for?” He said “Well, the surge protector might blow in case of a voltage fluctuation!” Alanis, is that just stupid or was there some irony in the situation?

NostraDumAss?

Is it a blessing to be paranoid? Usually I expect paranoid people to be pushy, biased and generally weird. Hero's are cool, composed and practical. But could a paranoid man save the world? Or could a hero miss saving the world coz he wasn’t paranoid enough? Will come back to this digression in a minute.

Nostradamus, the man who saw tomorrow! Nostradamus was born in 1503 in France, and lived till 1566. Many people believe that Nostradamus could predict the future. I don’t know if this is true but he definitely managed to make himself part of the future. Stories have been told of his great powers, one being, during a visit to Italy, Nostradamus passed a group of Franciscan monks, and suddenly exclaimed and threw himself down on the ground, bowing and clutching the garment of one of the monks, Felice Peretti, a former swine herder. When questioned about his act he replied "I must yield myself and bow before his Holiness!" 19 years after Nostradumas' death, Felice Peretti became Pope Sixtus V. After facing several ups and downs in life, Nostradamus settled down, writing down his predictions in 10 books named the Centuries, each containing 100 predictions written in 4 line verses called quatrains. Historians have dedicated their lives to making sense of his predictions, and their greatest shortcoming lie in the fact that almost no one has been able to flag a prediction before the occurrence of the event. More than half his predictions are believed by some to have been true in 20/20 hindsight. This is attributed to the cryptic nature of his quatrains, maybe to evade persecution in his time.

Now, if you believed that I had the power to fortel future events, and I was a quack, I could sit down and write cryptic prose about a terrorist bombing (coz I know someday terrorists are gonna get their way), about a famous assassination, (coz some prominent figure will be assassinated someday in the future), about a devastating hurricane, a flood maybe just to cover global warming. After I am dead and gone, if any of these events come true and if enough people believe in my shit, they'll correlate it to whatever events match, wherever they match. If you wanna believe, you will believe. If I predicted events in 3000A.D and the world ended in 2500AD would that matter? No! When the world is ending, no one would be chanting "Oh Amrit fucked up!" hahahahaha. They'd be scrambling to save their behinds!

But, why would an extremely intelligent man, who knew he had the power to save people from the deadly plague, spend his time predicting events way into the future, knowing that correct predictions would benefit him in no way! Either he was crazy and warped, or he actually wanted to warn people of the visions he believed to be true.

Back to the points I want to focus on. Most of what I learnt came from an article I found online. It spoke of how Nostradamus predicted 3 powerful and tyrannical leaders or antichrists. The first is now believed to be Napoleon of whom Nostradamus is reputed to have written:

An Emperor shall be born near Italy.
Who shall cost the Empire dear,
They shall say, with what people he keeps company
He shall be found less a Prince than a butcher.

From a simple soldier he will rise to the empire,
From the short robe he will attain the long.
Great swarms of bees shall arise.

There are more passages that are believed to be about Napoleon and his conquests.

The second antichrist Nostradamus spoke of was argued to be Adolf Hitler from the passages:

He shall come to tyrannize the land.
He shall raise up a hatred that had long been dormant.
The child of Germany observes no law.
Cries, and tears, fire, blood, and battle.

A captain of Germany shall come to yield himself by false hope,
So that his revolt shall cause great bloodshed.

Beasts wild with hunger will cross the rivers
The greater part of the battlefield will be against Hister.

The article points out that experts believe that Nostradamus almost spelt out the name "Hitler" but missed it by an alphabet, others, further explain the difference in the alphabet with calligraphic explanations. The word Hister before the advent of Hitler however was believed to refer to the Danube (Ister).

And here comes the interesting part on the third antichrist in the article.

Out of the country of Greater Arabia
Shall be born a strong master of Mohammed...
He will enter Europe wearing a blue turban.
He will be the terror of mankind.
Never more horror.

In the year 1999 and seven months
From the sky will come the great King of Terror.
He will bring back to life the King of the Mongols;
Before and after war reigns.

The article then explains that Nostradamus predicted some long lasting war, and says that he predicted the first target:

The sky will burn at forty-five degrees.
Fire approaches the great new city

The piece then goes on to explain that Nostradamus used the words, New World, for America, and experts believe that the “new city” could be New York, especially since New York lies near 45 degrees latitude. It also says that this “strong master of mohammed” could be Saddam Hussain, but many believe he is yet to come.

At this point in the article I was very confused! How come there was nothing about the events of September 11^th? And how come Bin Laden had not been tied to the third antichrist. I scrolled to the bottom searching for his name, and then scrolled to the very top to start the search again, and came across what did send a chill down my spine. The article was written in 1993!

After the events of 9/11, there were several sites/emails, that distorted the last two lines about the 45 degrees to make people believe that Nostradamus had predicted the attacks. They were all well-refuted and rightfully so.

However, nothing changes the fact that there is an article in 1993, that says that Nostradamus predicts that: The third antichrist is yet to come, will be a strong master of Mohammed, out of the country of Greater Arabia, and his first target will be New York which will have flames in the sky!

These are the last words in the article:

“Was Nostradamus a fraud or a prophet? There are some who say that the seeming accuracy of his quatrains are a result of their facile interpretations (Guentte). Still, more than four hundred books and essays about his prophecies have been published since his death in 1566, along with a great number of articles and other commentaries, in numerous languages (Randi 5). Even skeptics pay careful attention to Nostradamus' predictions of the three anti-Christs. If Nostradamus truly predicted Napoleon and Hitler we should take heed of his words about the future. Perhaps we can prevent the dismal fate Nostradamus has predicted (Guentte)”

Maybe if our author was more paranoid, someone who decoded one of Nostradamus’ predictions 8 years before the event, could have saved the day!

Synchronization in Human Beings!

    I remember in Moral Science class back in middle school, all the kids were taught the Golden Rule! The rule more or less stated "Do to others as you would have them do to you!" Now in the field that I going to discuss this I am probably going to trip over my own words and trip the circuits in both ur and my brain. Anyways, the truth is this Golden Rule is awesome for issues like "If you dont want to be kicked in the balls, dont kick someone else in em!" U follow it and find out "Damn, the Golden Rule works, I dont kick people in the balls, and my balls remain safe!" However, in relationships this rule totally falls apart. (Assumption and Definition: Relationships are with people who dont want to kick you in the balls as a prerequisite!)

    Okay, so let me explain. Say, you and me are in a relationship, any kind. When you are troubled by something, and want to talk it out with me and I ask you if something is wrong, you first say "No nothing is wrong!" However, at this point, you wish I wud ask you one more time "Are you sure?" Now, the deciding factor at this point is "Am I the same type as you in this respect?" If I am and I follow the Golden Rule, I would want you to ask me again if I were in ur shoes and so I ask you "Are you sure?" and things are rosy coz I know something is wrong and would ask you till you tell me and both of us are happy! Now, what if I am the opposite variety? What if when I am upset, I want everyone to leave me the fuck alone? Then following the Golden Rule, I would not ask you a second time, coz I wudnt want to be asked a second time if I were in ur shoes, thus, I would have you leave me alone, so I would do to you as I would have you do to me and leave you the fuck alone! Breakdown, breakdown, breakdown! At this time you would have been upset with me and the Golden Rule fails. The same applies in the converse situation, if I were the one upset, you would keep asking me if I were okay, which is the way you would have had me behave and I would be upset with you coz I would rather have you leave me alone!

    So rather confusing, but what I am saying is that in relations, it isnt important to act as you would have others act with you, but to act as they DO with you. So since you are the "need to be asked again" variety and have done that to me before, when you are upset, I shud keep asking you till you tell me whats wrong. Conversely, the moment I say I'm fine or I dont wanna talk about it, U, knowing that I am the "leave me the fuck alone" variety should do exactly that! See, we disobeyed the Golden Rule, and things worked out just fine. Another example of where it works is next. Lets say, a couple is in a relationship. Everytime, lets say the girl gets angry and says she wants to be left alone, the guy does exactly that, and she spends the next few hours wishing he would just ask her more times. The next time the guy is angry and says he wants to be left alone, shud she keep talking to him remembering how bad she felt when he gave her "space"  or should she remember that he walked out and figure out that he did that thinking that wud make her happy, and give him "space" coz now she knows that thats the way he likes it! Easy, give him space! Conversely, Guy, dont walk out!

    The conclusion suggests that in a relationship, we should not "do to others as you would have them do to you" but you should "Do to others as they do to you!". Sounds good, but there is an underlying fallacy. If everyone did to others what they do to them and followed my Golden Rule, people might already be doing things for the other based on their personality analysis, and this action might be the opposite of what they would want for themselves. Therefore, the rule should be ""Do to others as they WANT to do to you!" coz back to the first example, even if I learnt that you need to be asked twice and keep asking you, I still WANT to leave you alone, so  you should do what I WANT to do to you!

    Now, to figure out what someone wants is not the best solution. So the proposed algorithm involves a synchronization phase and a Processing Phase.

Synchronization Phase: In the synchro phase two people meet and should behave spontaneously. if you need to be asked twice, ask the other twice, if you need to be left the fuck alone, leave the other the fuck alone. So, everyone in the synchro phase should show what they want they want done to themselves. The other should record these events. In the Processing phase: the partners in the relationship shud start doing what the other did in the synchronization phase in a similar situation. The result will be perfect bliss! Hence proved!

 The synchro phase can be used to unveil tastes, desires, weaknesses, turn ons, unacceptable actions, etc etc. The more ground covered, I hope the happier and smoother and more honest the relationship. In the processing phase, each one blends to the recordings of the other in the synchro phase.

Duration of synchronization phase(friends): Synchronization phases of various lengths may be required for different pairs of people. Suggested durations, for friends, synchronize till you buy each other presents. (note: people who wanna be friends and not lovers, and buy you gifts within the first month of knowing you are CREEPS)

Duration of synchronization phase(lovers): Until the first time you sleep together. Well, if you are the variety who sleep with each other within 20 mins of meeting each other, please synchronize till ur first time one-month anniversary at least (Yes, yes, the Bandy et al "First Understanding, Common Knowledge (FUCK) Synchronization Algo" works for SLUTS too.  And yeah, if you are the variety who must refrain from sex before marriage blah blah, this might keep you synchronizing for ever, so synchronize till ur first kiss! If even that is gonna happen after ages, then keep synchronizing, God knows you'll need it! Bandy et al do not guarantee algorithm for people who kiss only after marriage!

Claimer: I am writing my thesis, and this is what one month of writing a thesis on clock synchronization and data fusion in  Wireless Sensor Networks has done to me. help! help! help! The sequel to this will be the intro to my Thesis stating how human beings are the best wireless sensor nodes. (provided my boss allows it!)

Less than PERFECT!

Thank god we are not perfect! Well, depends on what we consider perfect. Sexual attraction and its forces vary from person to person. Some people think that those who arent attracted to certain people based on their looks are fickle, in other words less than perfect. Again there are people who dont want to sleep with someone else coz they dont have the right personality. Which means that they fail to recognize the beauty within that person, coz everyone is beautiful right? So even they are less than perfect!

So imagine a world where we are all perfect. We are so perfect that every person of the opposite sex (or same depending on preference, lets assume opposite ...) would be able to appreciate both physical and spiritual beauty of each other, making every two people of the opposite sex (with a few exceptions) intensely mentally and sexually attracted to each other. Now would this be a beautiful scenario or a catastrophe? I wonder. We'd definitely be nicer people. Would hopefully hate less people, coz even when someone wrongs us, their beauty might outshine the wronging. But then again, in a world where people struggle to remain faithful to their partners, would being attracted to eveyone just make that concept collapse? or would monogamy not even exist in this case? I dont really know how "Laws of attraction" work in the animal kingdom. enlighten me! I do know that there is a sense of pairing amongst some creatures even after copulating. So, would this perfection make us more of animals? So is being human the art of being "Less than perfect"!

Coz loving only one person and being sexually attracted to one person is professed to be holy. Ref "Oh honey, I love you and dont feel like touching anyone else" -- most couples to one another. But is that an insult to everyone else and a procalamation that everyone else is ugly (or atleast not good enuff). If we were perfect and saw every bit of beauty in each other would exclusive "love" survive or would everyone just be sleeping with and loving each other.

 
Enuff babbliographical questions ... Will hit this up later. But seems like .. Thank God, we are less than perfect, fickle, choosy, hypocritical, mean, differentiating, racist ...... it makes the world go round and round!