zuhair vazir May 20, 2004
#1 Posted by storyteller on May 20, 2004 11:29:28 am
a very honest insight.
i read somewhere that at the root of madness lies the belief that everything is set up against you. this is widely prevalent in our times and exists in varying degrees. it`s still madness nonetheless.
the wisdom of the sages is the opposite of this, that is, the belief that everything is rigged in your favor.
i read somewhere that at the root of madness lies the belief that everything is set up against you. this is widely prevalent in our times and exists in varying degrees. it`s still madness nonetheless.
the wisdom of the sages is the opposite of this, that is, the belief that everything is rigged in your favor.
#2 Posted by rahul_capri on May 20, 2004 11:29:28 am
Good one Zuhair.Somehow I feel this piece finds itself midway between a satire and spinechilling truth,tries to reach both ways but reaches nowhere. Also, almost each sentence is a compound sentence.Usage of more simple sentences would make it more readable.Anyhow, a really good attempt.
#3 Posted by temporal on May 20, 2004 11:48:29 am
zuhair:
well crafted, succinct, mad and maddening:)...was it written under the influence?
...and to boot you`re from karachi too...(if you read this `zeh`r` your `too` obsession is getting infectious;))
rgds,
t
well crafted, succinct, mad and maddening:)...was it written under the influence?
...and to boot you`re from karachi too...(if you read this `zeh`r` your `too` obsession is getting infectious;))
rgds,
t
#5 Posted by omar_r_quraishi on May 21, 2004 5:31:43 am
this is pure unadulterated crap -- i suppose though to praise something like this would be considered quite fashionable however
#6 Posted by Saminasha on May 21, 2004 5:51:52 am
re: 5
Yes...the author seems to be saying what exactly?
Yes...the author seems to be saying what exactly?
#7 Posted by temporal on May 21, 2004 6:46:58 am
omar:
coming from you (or any reader)this is acceptable: this is pure unadulterated crap...
--in this interactive medium anyone can express his/her personal opinion...
but this is not: -- i suppose though to praise something like this would be considered quite fashionable however...
--this is blatant and unwanted editorial intrusion;)
(i take back above if you understand the prelude to the love song of alfred j prufrock in its original format)
rgds,
t
ps: the word `editorial` is being used figuratively - no personal aspersions
coming from you (or any reader)this is acceptable: this is pure unadulterated crap...
--in this interactive medium anyone can express his/her personal opinion...
but this is not: -- i suppose though to praise something like this would be considered quite fashionable however...
--this is blatant and unwanted editorial intrusion;)
(i take back above if you understand the prelude to the love song of alfred j prufrock in its original format)
rgds,
t
ps: the word `editorial` is being used figuratively - no personal aspersions
#8 Posted by Urstruly on May 21, 2004 7:33:16 am
Credit goes to where it is due - zuhair has penned it very well. I think there is no escape from media induced depression these days. My day starts with the images of helpless human beings being sodomized by dogs in army facilities and ends with the pictures of charred corpses of 5 year olds in a wedding. Thanks a lot psycopaths, who have taken over this world now.
#9 Posted by tobateksingh on May 21, 2004 7:57:15 am
there is an edge to this article that elevates it above the plane of unadulterated crap that the fitter, happier Omar Qureshi projects it down to.
quite surprised by the subject and the intensity of the introspection too.
what he seems to be saying is that the over-exposure to media, combined with a gullible disposition, can lead a person (not necessarily the author, though the possibility is not excluded) to drug use in order to still the fierce but temporary protests of his original nature against the vegetating (and other dissipating) effects of said exposure.
interesting theory, but perhaps not applicable in its entirety to a large and heterogeneous population. some elements here and there, certainly, to some people, but not all to all. which might explain the consternation provoked here.
note to eds: needs some editing ``in my humble opinion``.
quite surprised by the subject and the intensity of the introspection too.
what he seems to be saying is that the over-exposure to media, combined with a gullible disposition, can lead a person (not necessarily the author, though the possibility is not excluded) to drug use in order to still the fierce but temporary protests of his original nature against the vegetating (and other dissipating) effects of said exposure.
interesting theory, but perhaps not applicable in its entirety to a large and heterogeneous population. some elements here and there, certainly, to some people, but not all to all. which might explain the consternation provoked here.
note to eds: needs some editing ``in my humble opinion``.
#10 Posted by tobateksingh on May 21, 2004 7:57:15 am
there is an edge to this article that elevates it above the plane of unadulterated crap that the fitter, happier Omar Qureshi projects it down to.
quite surprised by the subject and the intensity of the introspection too.
what he seems to be saying is that the over-exposure to media, combined with a gullible disposition, can lead a person (not necessarily the author, though the possibility is not excluded) to drug use in order to still the fierce but temporary protests of his original nature against the vegetating (and other dissipating) effects of said exposure.
interesting theory, but perhaps not applicable in its entirety to a large and heterogeneous population. some elements here and there, certainly, to some people, but not all to all. which might explain the consternation provoked here.
note to eds: needs some editing ``in my humble opinion``.
quite surprised by the subject and the intensity of the introspection too.
what he seems to be saying is that the over-exposure to media, combined with a gullible disposition, can lead a person (not necessarily the author, though the possibility is not excluded) to drug use in order to still the fierce but temporary protests of his original nature against the vegetating (and other dissipating) effects of said exposure.
interesting theory, but perhaps not applicable in its entirety to a large and heterogeneous population. some elements here and there, certainly, to some people, but not all to all. which might explain the consternation provoked here.
note to eds: needs some editing ``in my humble opinion``.
#11 Posted by storyteller on May 21, 2004 12:07:49 pm
i think this article should strike a chord with anyone who reads it. what the writer has done is, ever so slightly, amplify the incoherence that lies at the basis of what passes for human thought in the times we find ourselves in.
the process starts early. raw minds are fed the staple diet of mass education that more often stunts natural impulses and gifts. a certain degree of conformist radicalism is allowed to give an illusion of free will. information is fed and intuitive knowledge is considered quaint, to say the least. with our fragmented thought processes it is so much easier, like the writer said, to become mere `receptors to an inferior outside stimulus`. our minds have been so enchained (or institutionalised, as morgan freeman said in shawshank redemption), that we cannot even see the shackles anymore.
but some can see......
the process starts early. raw minds are fed the staple diet of mass education that more often stunts natural impulses and gifts. a certain degree of conformist radicalism is allowed to give an illusion of free will. information is fed and intuitive knowledge is considered quaint, to say the least. with our fragmented thought processes it is so much easier, like the writer said, to become mere `receptors to an inferior outside stimulus`. our minds have been so enchained (or institutionalised, as morgan freeman said in shawshank redemption), that we cannot even see the shackles anymore.
but some can see......
#13 Posted by shandana on May 22, 2004 1:18:29 am
hey zuhair,
is this your first piece on chowk? if it is, welcome.
this is what i got out of it...
the writer has recently been told he needs to go on medication for depression/mood disorder/OCD or some such `mental illness`. he is unsure whether he is really depressed/manic and wondering how much of it is simply a natural reaction to the state of the world as it is today, as reflected in the news/music/entertainment/newmedia projects. if this is the case, i can relate. i can also relate to the need to ingest illegal substances to cope, a lot of people with `mental problems` self medicate with dope etc.
now zuhair, why dont you tell us (simply) what you were thinking :0
shandana
is this your first piece on chowk? if it is, welcome.
this is what i got out of it...
the writer has recently been told he needs to go on medication for depression/mood disorder/OCD or some such `mental illness`. he is unsure whether he is really depressed/manic and wondering how much of it is simply a natural reaction to the state of the world as it is today, as reflected in the news/music/entertainment/newmedia projects. if this is the case, i can relate. i can also relate to the need to ingest illegal substances to cope, a lot of people with `mental problems` self medicate with dope etc.
now zuhair, why dont you tell us (simply) what you were thinking :0
shandana
#14 Posted by Saminasha on May 22, 2004 7:53:37 am
Well okay...but one could argue that madness has existed since we came down from the trees and insisted that a God created Adam and then Eve...can this be boiled to:
1. Life is complicated.
2. Truth is complicated.
3. There is no one way of being/thinking/interacting in this world
4. Because I realize this and don`t God myself up, I`m f`ed up.
5. Ergo I take drugs
6. And thus going crazy.
If this is it, I`m not convinced.
1. Life is complicated.
2. Truth is complicated.
3. There is no one way of being/thinking/interacting in this world
4. Because I realize this and don`t God myself up, I`m f`ed up.
5. Ergo I take drugs
6. And thus going crazy.
If this is it, I`m not convinced.
#15 Posted by zero on May 23, 2004 12:06:10 pm
we never came down from the trees...
Shandana:
I was simply thinkng how good Larra Dutta looks in the rain. Only a matter of passive conviction here, i guess, nothing complicated.
regards
Shandana:
I was simply thinkng how good Larra Dutta looks in the rain. Only a matter of passive conviction here, i guess, nothing complicated.
regards
listing 1-16
1 2
Interact Index
Similar Articles
- Alex Beena Sarwar
- A Humanistic Approach Towards Mental Illness Khalid Sohail
- Are Artists Really Mad? Khalid Sohail
- Half a Confession II Temporal
- Sanity Xoheb Sheikh
US Elections 2008 Primaries
Latest Interacts
- adamkhan: Mantolives: An alliance DOES NOT... Living Gandhi and King
- MeiraJ08: #60, I don't know... Fathers and Daughters
- dost_mittar: bulleya#325: "...actually i give a... Historian Amaresh Misra on
- adamkhan: mantolives: I was merely pointing... Living Gandhi and King
- gowhargeelani: Re: # 12 Dear friend,... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- gowhargeelani: Re: I respect your... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- thinkingstorm: MeiraJ08, if I may interject... Fathers and Daughters
- MantoLives: PS. And even if... Living Gandhi and King








reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content