adversity and humility; further thoughts on man

thankyou, dear reader, if you are actually reading this post. I've found most of my traffic goes to some post I had aaaaages ago that was just a bunch of tumblr pictures. loltumblr. and no updates = no regular traffic, but I don't mind, since this is really a blog of ramblings now; junk, you may say (hence the name of the blag)

I read a biography (the only one?) of Kurt Vonnegut in the last week. I'm thinking of studying some biographies of great men to help with my goal. He's the renowned author of Slaughterhouse-Five and Cat's Cradle (both of which are marvelous concepts, albeit written in a style that is alien to many readers). His life was one of hardship and adversity, which led to a life of loneliness while still having many children to care for. What I do enjoy about the book is that it shows the reality of life without needing to emphasise or highlight the high points of a person's life. Obituaries commonly do this, and our society has some sort of sanctity for people who have recently died.


What I realised is that much success is born from adversity. When you're able to overcome meaningful challenges in your life, or survive harrowing situations, you become more aware of, well, everything in life. It becomes more precious. (This is also a reason why I believe there is less "success" or "purpose" in life today and a reason for the aimlessness of adolesence; a lack of real, meaningful challenges)


Nobody who went through the World Wars would say they enjoyed it. Life was hard; as a soldier you could die at any minute, as a civilian you could get shelled and die, or starve and die. Things that we take for granted today would have been astonishing pleasures for those who lived in those times.


A mindset we should have is to be grateful for things we have in life. Sure, we can complain about our lot in life, but we need to realise that what we have are privileges, not rights, and that someone will always have it worse than you do. From this, one can learn humility, which is one thing that many men cannot attain; they have to uphold their pride and look better than someone else. Sometimes it is much better to accept your mistake, and take responsibility. That is a much stronger measure of a man.


Writing this has made me feel morose. Go and play now, child.

xenocide and Neil DeGrasse Tyson

finally read this book (Xenocide) after however long it's been since I read the second of the Ender series (It's a sci-fi series). Raises some interesting moral questions about what constitutes intelligence (as if we met alien species) and also about how subtle changes in the structure of idelogies can have massive changes.

Orson Scott Card is a nice read. He tells stories well, and though he does concentrate on characters and what they're thinking and feeling for a bit too long, it doesn't detract from the book as a whole. I started reading him when I was younger due to the fact that the protagonist was young as well, and yet had such an awesome life. He captured my attention and I've now read all his sci-fi! :)

---

anyway, I found a quote by the great Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson (an amazing astrophysicist) on reddit today:

The problem, often not discovered until late in life, is that when you look for things in life like love, meaning, motivation, it implies they are sitting behind a tree or under a rock. The most successful people in life recognize, that in life they create their own love, they manufacture their own meaning, they generate their own motivation.

 So deep! I may try to adopt this philosophy...to try more things, to make things happen and (for myself) no regrets. Everything we do in life is for a reason, we just don't know it yet.

---

I'll get around to detailing my 52 week project stuff soon =P a bit of a backlog but I've been keeping up so stay tuned!

Sherlock Holmes; an enthusiast's musings

Apologies for the long post, bear with me. I'm not usually passionate for anything :P

 

"...when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth..." -  Sherlock Holmes, The Sign of Four

As some of you may know, I am quite a Holmes fan. I don't know when it started, but I grew a deep affection for Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's greatest creation; Sherlock Holmes. He was referenced in pop culture everywhere, and I guess I just wanted to know what all the fuss was about. The picture above is my copy of the complete works of Sherlock Holmes (bought long ago at Borders (sadfaec)), and I finally finished it for the second time recently.

I believe the genius of his work stems from every human being's appreciation for a sharp, intelligent mind. For those who have specific passions, it is easy to appreciate a master at work. For example, as a violinist myself, while watching Itzhak Perlman play the haunting theme from Schindler's List, or the exciting gypsy tune Zigeunerweisen, I'm able to appreciate the subtle things that he does with expression or how he plays, because I know how hard it is to do. However for an outsider, it may only be the tune itself that makes an impression. 

Two things that all humans have in common is a brain and a body. It is no wonder then, that when people rise to master these two aspects of themselves, that the whole world can appreciate it. Sportsmen are revered around the world for their athletic finesse, celebrities are given much popularity by how they look, and (increasingly) scientists such as Stephen Hawking or my favourite, Neil deGrasse Tyson [twitter], who are also admired by many.

Sherlock Holmes is an example of an expert mind at work. The logical deductions he makes seem so simple when illustrated for us in the novels or short stories, but from the facts alone, we would not know what to deduce. Obviously, being a story, he's always right in his deductions (okay, there are some stories where he screws up, but still!). But this is the reason why we love Sherlock so much; we understand the logic that is required to arrive a certain conclusion, but we could never do it ourselves.

"Inspector Lestrade: In another life, Mr. Holmes, you would have made a excellent criminal. Sherlock Holmes: Yes, and you an excellent policeman." - Sherlock Holmes (2009)

The movies directed by Guy Ritchie are Sherlock Holmes with much more action. I enjoyed these movies (especially the second!) due to the fact that Sherlock was played so well by Robert Downey Jr. A curious mix of laconic and yet with bursts of energy and eccentricity that was his wont. Jude Law as Watson was also quite well done, and the way they interacted with each other was awesome. (epic bromance =D) The plots were original, and very well executed. Mycroft was beautifully enacted by Stephen Fry (another of my idols due to QI), but I think Irene Adler could have been better done (although Rachel McAdams is HOTTTT). EPIC MOVIES REGARDLESS.

"Anderson, don't talk out loud. You lower the IQ of the whole street." - Sherlock Holmes, Sherlock Holmes (BBC series)

Recently finished watching the Sherlock series by BBC; found it funny that each episode ran approximately the same length as the movies themselves LOL. The modern-day adaptation of the stories that came from the short stories was immaculate. A Study in Pink (Scarlet in the original), The Hound of Baskerville, A Scandal in Belgravia (Bohemia in the original) were all referenced quite well. The plots were well done for a modern-day adaptation, and the way technology was interspersed was amazing (texts, blogs, and the media showing off his public image with the deerhunter HAHA). 

I loved how it was presented. I especially adored the way Irene Adler was treated in this series...the series made the romantic connection between her and Sherlock quite well. However, the other characters I wasn't as impressed with. Moriarty was bonkers, literally, and not the upper-class sophistication as he was in the movie and the books. Mycroft was much too energetic for the lethargic, robust man he was in the books. Watson had a darker past than I thought was necessary, and Sherlock was...not as well played as Robert Downey Jr. He was good as an eccentric being, but he had no laconic, lazy feel to himself. That being said, the plot and writing was amazing; the comedy was contrasted by the darkness of the plot, and all the subtext was hilarious.

/poshrant

THANKS IF YOU'VE READ THIS FAR, I LOVE YOU =D you don't have to agree with ANYTHING I say; I'll still love you all the same.

new years resolutions: a few weeks late

but it's not my fault because I was all overseas and stuff! so that's okay. I don't think you missed me anyhow :D

INSPIRED by this lady's efforts (KELLEN'S RESOLUTIONS ARE MUCH BETTER THAN MINE, also she's doing a 365 which I am too lazy to do), BLOG RESOLUTIONS:

52 week project: Visit a place I've never been or somewhere I haven't been for the past 5 years...52 times HURHURHUR. No it's one every week...

Learn something from a random wiki page per month: SELF-EXPLANATORY...although sometimes you click onto some really weird stuff so if I can't find anything I'm using reddit~

Read one non-fiction and one fiction book per month: SELF-EXPLANATORY. hopefully be able to read some good stuff and impart some wisdom.

Oh, and regular blogging I guess. But my life will be all studyful this year with 28 contact hours per semester (EXCITING)

here's a picture of my baby cousin just to placate you rabid readers :)

A Fall of Moondust

Have you ever wondered what would happen if you and a group of strangers were the last people on Earth, or that they might be the last people you would ever see in your life?

Arthur C. Clarke tackled this well, and really got into the mindset of people in his novella 'A Fall of Moondust'. Mind you, this was written a little before we had actually got onto the moon, so his observations are pretty cool. The 'seas' of the moon are so called as they are barren plains of 'moondust'. In his story, a sort of hovertransport is going across one of these seas when suddenly they 'sink' under the dust and are lost to any transmission possible. What occurs later is the description of what happens inside that hovertransport. How people react, and what people do in response. This isn't a book review. Its a good book, but my point is different.

These days when I get on late buses by myself, and I've finished the paper or whatever I'm doing, I always observe. I don't have anything else to do. And I have a curious habit of watching people and seeing how they behave, how they speak and what they do. Sounds creepy, but its actually sort of interesting. Try it some time. You might see some pretty awesome stuff...anyway, I digress. I'm sure you would have worked out by now what I'm getting at.

If this bus was put into a life-threatening situation, how would each person react?

Now, I know this probably judging people on their appearance, and probably is quite shallow and superfluous. But what would you do? Usually there are a few types of people I identify. The leader, who naturally takes control of the situation. The calm one, who just takes it all in and just...chills. The HYSTERICALS who go crazy and try to do whatever they can to survive; the situation might actually cause them to do things they would not normally do. And then the malicious, those who want to screw up the situation even worse.

Just some thinkin' to do when bored ^^

NB I'm reading Sherlock Holmes at the moment. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was a genius. LOL I must like authors named Arthur XD