Coffee or Toffee? (a.k.a the Great Love vs. Arranged Marriage Debate)

A love marriage seems romantic while an arranged marriage, as the very name suggests, is deliberate. A love marriage takes some arranging as well and similarly, an arranged marriage also involves love.

How do you select a partner? Do you expect to fall in love at first sight or otherwise someday? Or do you decide the time has come to marry, and start scouting for a suitable boy or girl?

Many friends in love marriages have told me that they think arranged marriages are better- at least they can blame their parents if things go wrong. That’s a strange way of looking at things- wouldn’t you rather want things to go right?

I’ve seen many successful arranged marriages. They key seems to be similarity and difference. Similarity in class, and personalities that complement each other. In a love conquers all scenario, practicality often falls by the wayside. Even if wrinkles crop up, they tend to be ironed out in favour of being in a relationship.

The media hype which being in love gets, the privileged status it has in culture is nothing compared to that which being arranged enjoys- unless we equal it to getting a mate rather than being alone.

Getting companionship is often the driver, whether it is an arranged marriage or a love marriage. “Is your marriage arranged or love?” asked the parlour wali. “Arranged.” I replied. “Have you met?” was the next question. “Of course.” I said indignantly. It often seems that if you were a wallflower, only then would you go for the last ditch option- an arranged marriage.

You could be just picky. Maybe you don’t want to be in love for the sake of being in love. First impressions count- it’s probable a job interviewer thinks yes or no within the first few minutes of meeting you. Going with your gut is a good idea. Trusting your subconscious, which considers factors you may not even be fully aware of, is prudent.

Anyway, a love or arranged marriage only deals with the pre marriage stuff. What about after marriage? The making of the happily ever after? That takes work. It doesn’t matter if you met by chance or through a middleman. Once you’re married, being a duo instead of flying solo takes some getting used to.

It’s fun to be a we and not an I. The relationship is equal whether it’s a love or an arranged marriage. In a love marriage you both know each other equally well and in an arranged marriage you both know nothing much about each other. Living together, managing expectations is more similar to living with a room mate than being a friend. Nothing is hidden anymore- whether it’s an untidy cupboard or a TV addiction!

Fashionably You

If fashion is related to our clothes, social media is getting connected with how we fashion our inner selves. I was reading this and it has a point. We create content on social media, which is read by marketeers who shape products which we buy again to showcase our identity.

Is there a way out of this circle? Do we want an out? Just as fashion is sometimes what we chose to rebel against, but can't ignore, social media is similar. Even if we choose to not be on social media, it says something about us.

We construct different selves for different audiences- family, friends, colleagues. On social media, they are grouped together as 'Friends'. Can we have one identity online and split it up offline? A Limited Profile can hurt the feelings of people you exclude.

How do you explain to them that you are vainly trying to compartmentalize your life? Is it even possible? Parts will leak through, often in a graphic manner. tagging, comments, the system basically- keeps you on your toes deleting, untagging and so on in a vain attempt to keep silos intact.

Be yourself. Offline and online. Or else, you could go crazy :)

What's his face- Mark Zuckerberg a.k.a Frankenstein

After watching The Social Network, I wanted to know more about Mark Zuckerberg. I went to Wikipedia, which factually more or less confirmed what was mentioned in the movie. I watched an interview of his on YouTube, in which he came across as very different from his movie persona.

As I was multi-tasking while listening to the interview, I stopped paying attention to what Mark Zuckerberg was saying after a while. A comment by the interviewer stayed with me though. He said that Facebook seemed to enroach on our privacy as a default, only stepping back and raising its hands when it was obvious that it had gone too far.

That seemed to check out with the movie's portrayal of Facebook's founder too. Sometimes I think that privacy on Facebook is oxymoronic. If we wanted privacy, we wouldn't be on Facebook. I think Facebook is breaking new ground because it is media that is personal and social. Unlike books, radio, TV, internet.

Maybe that's why we spend more time on it. It's our filter for other media. Will the collective consciousness improve? Will we know more, read better articles, watch more educational videos as they are shared by our more learned friends?

Or will we click on titillating links, treat Facebook like our personal idiot box? Will there be a mass dumbing down? We still don't know what Facebook is, can, or will be. It evolves constantly, and we evolve with it.

It is truly two way media. Often we find it's intuitive, easier to use. Another part of Mark Zuckerberg's interview stayed with me. This 27 year old asked high school kids what email they used.

They thought email's slow. I too find it cumbersome nowadays to type out a subject line and text. It's just easier to keep others in the loop by writing on one friend's wall on Facebook. I also watched some hilarious videos of Facebook in the offline world. People poking each other actually, writing on wall, and shouting out comments.

We write about the real world online. It's still funny to imagine the virtual world offline. Maybe one day it will be the other way round.

Facebook's not our Newspaper, it's our Ad

I'm often irritated when I see photos of happy friends at birthdays etc on Facebook. People don't seem to share the downs as much as the ups here. Although no one likes a wet blanket friendship does mean sharing the good with the bad.

Is Facebook making us more optimistic? I don't think so. Our editing skills are improving definitely. We may not be happier but by choosing to only share our high points we are projecting illusions. These are only part of the truth.

Would any purpose be served by status updates which moan, grumble, and seek reassurance? Maybe not. Facebook is not a personal newspaper, it is an advertisement. You don't objectively report the good, bad, and ugly in your life.

You try to sell your life to others and yourself. Look at the fun I'm having! See how wide I'm smiling! Rather than candid photography, it seems posed. A Polaroid which gets instant reactions. Ironically half the time the people who react to our updates are the ones to whom we are supposedly close.

The real conversations happen offline, where we share our desires, dreams, and fears. I too like posting happy updates. If I don't post one for a while I wonder whether my life has become unexciting.

But life is like that. Chronos lasts longer than kairos. We would get tired if we were cutting cakes, dancing, or climbing mountains all the time:) So let's not forget Facebook's our movie, offline's our reality to which we return when we finish watching pictures of others' lives.

The Naked Ape today

Just read a couple of chapters of The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris. Interesting stuff, specially where he talks of exploration. The child scribbles, then has an Eureka moment when she makes a face. Pictorial representation starts then, which chimps cannot do. Singing and dancing are also primitive exploratory activities which can continue well into adulthood. He also defines play, which is very close to art for art's sake. Writing too is included, as a documentation of thought. Neophilia seems to be a family characteristic of the Maskaras.

Routing

Servers such as artists

Thespians, painters, scripters

Are our escapes.

Do we translate them in

Pastoral leaders?

Jane, Goodall

Spoke to an eager audience @ the British Council, yesterday.

She started with a chimp noise, which was answered by an Indian tiger in the audience.

We learnt of how young Jane got into the chimp line-
I wanted to. I liked Tarzan, but not the wimpy Jane he fell for. When a vacancy for a secretarial position came up, I applied. So, I reached Africa.

We also saw her soft toy-
A chimp with a partly peeled banana. A 25 year old who went blind gave it to me, fo inspiration.

We heard of Dr. Jane-
Scientists did not look upon chimps as living. I knew less than nothing about taxonomy. i just felt the pain in a young gorilla's eyes, when he was seperated from his mother.

Kids-
I knew a gorilla who used a blade of grass as a tool. Another big, broad hottie tried to maul me. Well, we have a Tshirt now- I survived Friedo. As far as human kids go, Nat Geo sent a photographer- and we had a kid as well.

On saving the planet from the apes-
As humans are the fifth kind of apes, it is important that we be sensitive towards our big brothers. Kofi Annan made me a UN Ambassador of Peace so that I could spread the message of sweetness and light all round the globe in an apolitical way.

What more could we say to that irrefutable logic?
We gave her a standing ovation.

Lucky chimps.
Aside- The emcee called her John Goodall. Ah well, perhaps somewhere, there is one :)
Disclaimer- the above post is an impressionistic rendition of her keynote address, not a verbatim rendition of an original.