The Power Of Habit

Research shows that more than 40 percent of the time, we follow some automatic patterns or habits in response to certain situation without going through conscious decision making. Identifying the physiological causes and effects of habit formation has led individuals and businesses to be able to modify and manipulate these patterns to achieve their desired objectives. In retrospect, knowledge of habits have helped in stopping riots, streamlining workplace routines, launching countrywide social movements, generating large business revenues and abolishing various types of addictions.

Being an acclaimed business section reporter for New York Time, Charles Duhigg has remarkable insight into the organizational routines and structures. In The Power Of Habit, he has explored how organizations have configured their daily activities and business protocols to function habitually and how individuals develop and change their lifestyles. He commences the discussion by looking into the first logical question: what are habits, how they are formed and how our common practices program our brain to follow specific patterns. The concept of habit loop consisting of cue-routine-reward pattern is illustrated with a number of examples involving both people and businesses.

Duhigg examines how some grand institutions like Alcoa were transformed by inculcating "keystone habits" in the workers and how Starbucks trained their staff to effortlessly handle the most stressful situations whereas in other instances, habits resulted in passively following a track leading to disaster. He also discusses in detail the factors most likely to trigger change in habits and so can be exploited for damage control and introducing reforms in any organization. Some intriguing business tactics used by data analysts show that habits of customers can be identified by the patterns drawn from their previous records and are being used for targeted advertising resulting in much larger revenues. Habits also play a vital role in our social lives by infusing habits of friendship and unity that can literally lead to revolutions, if only we learn to identify and guide them in the right direction.

Duhigg's writing is simple and has the quality of making the reader proceed effortlessly. The book is a collection of anecdotes and case studies of real people and organizations, which thoroughly cover the small and large scale causes and effects of habits, drawing insight into the numerous ways that human brains are programmed and reprogrammed to adopt and abandon various practices and rituals. In the end, Duhigg shares his personal experience in which he systematically diagnosed and modified an unhealthy habit of his own. He cautions the reader that it takes time and effort to modify one's habits but they are not something unchangeable and no one is a hopeless case unless he or she passively chooses to be one.

Never Let Me Go

“Sometimes I get so immersed in my own company, if I unexpectedly run into someone I know, it's a bit of a shock and takes me a while to adjust.”  
Never Let Me Go

This is partly how I felt while reading "Never Let Me Go." The contemplative narrative with such unsettlingly mundane representation of the fictitious situation leaves you disoriented, like when you have a dream full of non-sense, disconnected, yet reality-like events.

There is one thing I enjoy most about first person narrative: seeing the world through his or her eyes. It gives a feeling of actually living in that fictitious world, not just visiting it. We get to know the world the same way as the protagonist did. In this regard especially, Ishiguro has produced a masterpiece.

The Emperor of All Maladies

Having persistently challenged the medical community for centuries, cancer has proved to be the most recalcitrant and most versatile of all villains claiming the lives of humankind. Understanding the causes and mechanism of cancer, devising a method for its prevention and finding a cure for it have been defying the pathologists, surgeons and doctors for centuries. Not only has it been a scientific mystery but it has also presented itself as a political, philosophical and financial challenge. "The Emperor of All Maladies" is a comprehensive account of the historical events marking the triumphs and despairs of those seeking to demystify and remedy cancer and a glimpse into the future of this perennial movement.

Siddhartha Mukherjee, a cancer physician and researcher by profession, has put together a profound "biography" of cancer. He describes the book as "an attempt to enter the mind of this immortal illness, to understand its personality and to demystify its behavior." He speaks with the authority of a professional cancer physician, with the insight of a historian and with the compassion of someone who himself has closely seen and felt the pain of dying. He embarks upon the journey starting from the first documented appearances of cancer thousands of years ago through the decades of struggle to cure, control and comprehend the disease to finally uncovering its essential features, while the quest for a more lasting cure still continues.

The battle against cancer has presented itself as a mountain to climb on every front. Surgeons have fought to eradicate it through extraordinary measures. Chemotherapists have chased a perfect blend of drugs to kill cancer cells, trying hard not to kill the healthy ones in the process. Pathologists have struggled hard to find its causes and mechanisms but somehow every answer kept turning into another series of questions. It has not only been an academic and scientific pursuit, but it also became a political movement. People invested their money and doctors invested their lives in launching clinical trials to find a cure for the disease. Today, oncologists have an understanding of the essence of cancer and tools to diagnose it, but the realization for a lasting cure for cancer has still a long way to go. Mukherjee writes with a cautious optimism about the future of cancer medicine while relating the gradual but remarkable progress in the field during the last century.

The history of cancer is full of unexpected surprises and unrelenting challenges. Mukherjee not only describes the disease itself as having a distinct personality but also relates the idiosyncrasies of the doctors and researchers confronting it throughout the history and most importantly, he tells stories of real people who have suffered and struggled against the disease. He explains the intricate concepts of medicine with a literary eloquence, which is both intelligible and gripping. The book is a magnificent combination of literary and scientific writing. From beginning till end, it continues to inspire, maintaining that however difficult it might be, unwavering patience and unremitting efforts will always be fruitful in the end.

Introversion is not all bad

A Review of 

Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking 

by Susan Cain

Quiet is a compendium of extensive research carried out by psychologists, sociologists and neuroscientists about the causes and effects of two types of personality traits - extroversion and introversion. The author Susan Cain, who herself is an introvert, has exploited the research to bring the merits of being an introvert to the foreground. She is a proponent of the notion that every type of personality has some strengths and some weaknesses, as opposed to the "Extrovert Ideal" which is adopted by many nations, America being on top of the list. She maintains that it is scientifically wrong to expect every person to be overtly expressive and outgoing - the key features of extroversion, as experiments and studies carried out by neuroscientist have revealed that personality traits are, to a large extent, genetic in nature.

Our choice of friends, professions, hobbies, preferences for social activities and the manner in which we evolve as a member of a home, a company and the society depends on where we fall on the so called "introvert-extrovert spectrum." In most of the parts of modern world, extroversion is considered to be the preferable personality trait. A friendly, expressive and easygoing person is liked in general whereas a quiet and reserved person is thought to be either having bad time or suffering from depression. Introverts are largely misunderstood and underestimated. The modern man has evolved to get inclined to concur with the person who speaks the loudest and with utmost enthusiasm rather than the person who is actually voicing the right thing. In fact, the reason for introversion being perceived as the cause of retarded progress or even failure is that people hold on to the extrovert ideal. The most enthusiastic person seems to be doing most of the work. The most vocal person appears to be presenting the right solution. The person who smiles most widely is the best at heart. The most socially dynamic person is thought to be most productive because group activities are supposed to be more yielding than individual work. The introverts are often detained not because they lack the capabilities but because they do not fit well with the perception of success. They often try to mould their behavior against their nature for social acceptability but a constant battle with oneself resulting in emotional fatigue cannot be expected to result in any personal satisfaction whatsoever.

"The archetypal extrovert prefers action to contemplation, risk-taking to heed-taking, certainty to doubt. He favors quick decisions, even at the risk of being wrong. She works well in teams and socializes in groups. We like to think that we value individuality, but all too often we admire one type of individual—the kind who’s comfortable “putting himself out there.” Sure, we allow technologically gifted loners who launch companies in garages to have any personality they please, but they are the exceptions, not the rule, and our tolerance extends mainly to those who get fabulously wealthy or hold the promise of doing so.

Introversion---is now a second-class personality trait, somewhere between a disappointment and a pathology."

Cain starts by an introduction of the meaning of introversion and extroversion, explaining how to identify each of the traits. Then she goes on to tell about the commonly experienced ill-acceptance of introverts in a world that sees extroversion as the desired personality trait. In spite of the fact that at least one out of three people (in another study it is one out of two) are introverts, introversion is perceived as an abnormality of behavior. Although introverts are more often behind the great inventions, discoveries, creative writings and the success of many great companies, the extrovert-loving world rules them out as an exception- they are obviously good at what they are doing but they are not good at relationships. So a common person, who is not a high-achieving tycoon or a world famous author of a best-seller, has no business being an introvert - he or she should better change into an extrovert for good, because otherwise, he or she is a freaking destroyer of all the fun. Following this, she clarifies some of the common misconceptions about introversion. That it is only a personality trait and is not synonymous to being a hermit or misanthrope or shy. Then she presents a set of questions that the reader can use to evaluate where he or she falls on the extrovert-introvert spectrum. Also she makes it clear that being a 100% extrovert or a 100% introvert will surely render one a lunatic. Quiet is about those who are more introvert than extrovert.

There was a time, not so long ago in the past, when people looked for "character." They valued integrity, good deeds, honor, dutifulness and reputation. Slowly, the "culture of personality" took over the "culture of character." Now we are impressed by personalities. May be, we unconsciously think that we no longer have time to delve into actually knowing a person's character but if he or she looks good and friendly, he might as well be the same at heart. And if he or she does not look friendly and expressive, then he or she might have something to hide or something to be ashamed of. Even if either is not true, it is just too much work to try to get to know him or her. So now we look for things like charisma, magnetism, forcefulness and attractiveness.

"People who pass us on the street can’t know that we’re clever and charming unless we look it"

Cain gives a detailed account of how over many decades, this change happened. How industrial development changed social preferences and every person is now expected to be a "performer". Everyone is now expected to be able to "sell" himself. The culture of personality is actually a stage for performing or marketing. Everyone is expected to have the qualities of an excellent salesman. Yes, that is the irony. In the quest to become dynamic leaders and gregarious socialites, all people are actually trying to be are salesmen!

Cain has presented quite a lot of counter-intuitive revelations in the book. She reveals the results of some researches carries out by psychologists in which they studied the comparative productiveness of group thinking and individual work. Individual thinking produced better results, both qualitatively and quantitatively, as compared to group brainstorming. Psychologists explain that when people try to come up with ideas in a group brainstorming session, they are also facing the peer pressure. They have ideas thrown at from every side, which disturbs their thinking process. Also people are more self-conscious and apprehensive about presenting their ideas, fearing that their idea might be rejected or looked down upon. This fear of rejection or peer pressure impairs productivity. But with the prevalence of the Extrovert Ideal and the Culture of Personality, the trend of brainstorming in groups also emerged as the preferable method of planning and problem solving. Many large companies like Google and Microsoft constructed  "Open-Plan" buildings for their offices, so that their employees could be together all the time and work together in groups. But a psychological research reveals that open-plan offices reduce productivity and impair memory. Working in such environments makes people sick, unmotivated, hostile, insecure and unnecessarily pressurized.

"Open-plan workers are more likely to suffer from high blood pressure and elevated stress levels and to get the flu; they argue more with their colleagues; they worry about coworkers eavesdropping on their phone calls and spying on their computer screens. They have fewer personal and confidential conversations with colleagues. They’re often subject to loud and uncontrollable noise, which raises heart rates; releases cortisol, the body’s fight-or-flight “stress” hormone; and makes people socially distant, quick to anger, aggressive, and slow to help others."

Cain also narrates the results of many neuroscience researches, disclosing the fact that personality trait are literally embedded in our DNA. Neuroscientists studied the brain activities of a number of a few month year old babies and found that they all respond differently to novelty. Some were "under-stimulated" as they accepted the new sights and sounds easily and remained calm. Others were "over-stimulated" suggesting that they were not as adept at accepting novelty. After many years, when the babies had grown into adults, they were again examined and it was revealed that those who were over-stimulated as babies are more often introverts while others are extroverts. This suggest that the reaction of certain parts of the brain to same experience is different for introverts and extroverts. More importantly, it does not completely depend upon one's environment (environment does affect personality but only partially), rather it is a part of one's DNA and personality traits are something one is born with.

The book tells about the introverted personalities of some of the great business tycoons, scientists and writers.  Interestingly, many of the most successful people were introvert-extrovert pairs. When introverts and extroverts accepted each other and had an understanding that they somehow completed each other, they achieved miracles. Also the personality traits differ with geographical regions as well. Asians are incidentally more  introverted than American. Because that is life. Sometimes we have to take action and be energetic and just live in the heat of it all. At other times, we need to think deeply and rationally and to have thorough understanding of the problem at hand. And we do not always want quiet people around us. Similarly we do not want to live with people who cannot stop talking. We need to have a balance and for that we need to acknowledge our differences and figure out how to benefit from them.

Cain also gives some valuable advice to introverts and parents of young introverts. She acknowledges the fact that for better or for worse, we live in the world dominated by extroverts, so we have to make our way into the world. For that she has some very valuable advices to offer.

I admit that I picked this book because I thought that the synopsis gave a description of my own personality and reading it I found that I am not as abnormal as people think I am. My friends cannot understand why I don’t get excited about parties and class trips. I think I am mostly defensive and sometimes angry at such times and even if I go to the parties, I rarely enjoy but I still do because I want to be with my friends. It is pretty complicated. But I really liked reading this book and I sincerely think that it has the potential to change lives. At least it will make you feel good about yourself if you are an introvert.

Personally I think it is important to be different and be able to collaborate. I don’t like to imagine a world full of either extroverts or introverts. In fact, roughly half the world population are extrovert and other half are introverts. The book is evidently written to help introverts but at some points I think the writer made extroverts look like a little short of idiots or having shallow personalities or having less intellectual capabilities. I only want to emphasize that there should be a sense of proportion, a balance between the two types of personalities. This can be done in a better way if people are made aware of the merits and demerits of both types and they should be able to judge what route to take in life.

The Sense of an Ending by Julian Barnes

“How often do we tell our own life story? How often do we adjust, embellish, make sly cuts? And the longer life goes on, the fewer are those around to challenge our account, to remind us that our life is not our life, merely the story we have told about our life. Told to others, but—mainly—to ourselves.”

The Sense of an Ending is a story about how one tells one's own life story. How an old man feels when looking back at the lost time of his life. At one time or another in our lives, we all say that history is not absolutely reliable. In our perception, it mainly depends upon the credibility of the narrator and his source of information. But it also depends upon how the narrator himself sees the situation in question. His own character, preferences and role in the historical event often moulds the history into a defense of his own. The narrator might not be intentionally deceiving, rather he might himself be deluded by his own memory.  And memory is imperfect and can only partially tell the truth. But the tricky part is that you don’t always realize that your memory is impaired by your own opinions in addition to passing of time.

“History is that certainty produced at the point where the imperfections of memory meet the inadequacies of documentation.” 

"I survived. 'He survived to tell the tale'—that’s what people say, don’t they? History isn’t the lies of the victors, as I once glibly assured Old Joe Hunt; I know that now. It’s more the memories of the survivors, most of whom are neither victorious nor defeated."

The book is about the poignancy of old age. When there is nothing more to expect for the future. The only things that remain are the memories that the idle mind of a retired man thinks over again and again and mould them according to what he wanted them to be. And what would it be like then to realize at a later point in life that your own memory of your own life is an illusion, a fortress you have created to protect yourself from your own past but only to realize that the walls are half dissolved into the air. From where you stand, all that can be seen are some foggy, disconnected images. You can let life go on like that and be contented. After all, being contented is all one wants at the end. Whether the contentment is borne out of one's good deeds or from only the illusion created by memories does not really matter. Old Tony was living just that kind of life. Retired. Alone. Letting life happen to him. Having stopped planning for future. Just living one day at a time. Reminiscing about his youth and had preserving some guarded memories. Getting nostalgic about lost emotional attachments. Until some ghosts from the past rose to haunt him with his own doings.

"when you are young, you think you can predict the likely pains and bleaknesses that age might bring. You imagine yourself being lonely, divorced, widowed; children growing away from you, friends dying. You imagine the loss of status, the loss of desire—and desirability. You may go further and consider your own approaching death, which, despite what company you may muster, can only be faced alone. But all this is looking ahead. What you fail to do is look ahead, and then imagine yourself looking back from that future point. Learning the new emotions that time brings. Discovering, for example, that as the witnesses to your life diminish, there is less corroboration, and therefore less certainty, as to what you are or have been."

"But I’ve been turning over in my mind the question of nostalgia, and whether I suffer from it. I certainly don’t get soggy at the memory of some childhood knickknack; nor do I want to deceive myself sentimentally about something that wasn’t even true at the time—love of the old school, and so on. But if nostalgia means the powerful recollection of strong emotions—and a regret that such feelings are no longer present in our lives—then I plead guilty."

About the great mystery:

I really liked this book and I think that it would be my absolute favourite. But the story which is supposedly a shocking mystery does not make much sense to me. All right, Tony had a shallow personality. He was neither an intellectual nor thoughtful. He had been stupid and non-serious as a young man, used to making fun of everything and everyone. He had conveniently forgotten some his extremely thoughtless acts and living a peaceful, more or less contented life at an old age. But why should the blame of his friend's affair rest on his shoulders is something I don’t really understand.

-------------------------------

***Spoilers Alert! ***

Tony had a girlfriend called Veronica who broke up with him and later had an affair with Tony's friend Adrian, who was supposed to be a great intellectual at philosophy and later committed suicide. When Tony heard about it, he wrote an angry letter addressing both Adrian and Veronica, trying to poison them against each other. Honestly, the letter was very immature and very obviously written to appease the writer himself by taking out his anger at the couple. It was the kind of letter that would make you marvel at the extent of human stupidity. It was totally senseless like someone bursting with anger, not knowing what he is saying. But Adrian, the genius, was naïve enough to take it seriously. He went to Veronica's mother on Tony's suggestion in the letter. Even up to this point, if her mother did not turn out to be very convincing about Veronica and he broke up with Veronica, the blame, to some extent, could be placed upon Tony for poisoning their relationship. But how could he possibly imagine that Adrian would take a fancy to Veronica's mother. Not just that. He got the old lady pregnant and this turned out to be the reason of his suicide. In his suicide note, he had given some strange philosophical reason for taking his own life and to my utter disgust, everybody actually admired his "bravery" and commitment with his beliefs. Well,  many decades after his death, it was revealed that Adrian had killed himself out of shame for having got his former girlfriend's elderly mother pregnant, who later gave birth to his son. Now I don’t understand how Veronica could have thought that Tony will guess and understand all this by himself as she kept telling him in disgust that "You will never understand" again and again. Nobody can think that wildly. How could he possibly guess that telling Adrian to meet Veronica's mother would make him have a physical relationship with her. That was unforeseeable, even if Tony had been in foreseeing mood while writing the stupid, overrated letter. Even the old lady thought he was responsible for her affair as she left him "blood money" and Adrian's diary. Still I don’t believe that Tony had any significant place in the so-called chain of responsibility. But Tony, Adrian, Veronica and her mother were all convinced of his role. Strange, isn't it?

-------------------------------

The book has a truly shocking ending and I was left with a literally open mouth. But the thing about the chain of responsibility simply eludes me. 

But that is probably the difference between being a listener to a story and being a part of it. The book is also about how people are prone to placing and accepting blame. Those who have led only an average life with some achievements, some regrets and some sorrows and have only a mediocre life but a high opinion of themselves have the tendency to doubt themselves much more than others. Tony, who was just that kind of person, did not have the energy to defend himself or may be he wanted to feel important. How would he defend himself against the ugliness of the letter, however immature and stupid ! And Veronica had probably had a better chance of preventing what had happened so many years ago but she still accused Tony for leading Adrian to his fate. But here again is the thing about history and imperfections of memory and of trying to protect one from one's own actions. Who could be certain of right and wrong or responsibility and blame after such long time when even the events in question are only some nebulous, distant, imperfect biased and self-preserving memories.Tony probably just did not know enough to understand the extent of his role. May be it was his self-centred-ness that made him accept a more important role than pointing it out to Veronica that he was not really supposed to "get it". The only evidence of the past was what was there in written form: the letter. And now it was too late to find out the complete truth. His sense of coming to the end of life and his passivity were probably the reason of silently accepting his role as suggested by Veronica.

The story makes it look as if life is but an enigma in the end; you don't know yourself what happened to you and what you made happen in all those years !!

About the writing:

The book is, simply put, excellently written. It has, as the synopsis states, "psychological and emotional depth and sophistication". It delves deep into the matters of memory and history, responsibility and misunderstanding and human beings' instinct for self-preservation and how importance it is for people to appear good to themselves. Barnes has packed a lot of irony in quite a small book.

Don't get mean, get even..

A Review of Not a penny more, not a penny less by Jeffrey Archer

It might be because of being more demanding than usual that I did not really enjoy this book. Or may be it was just not good enough for my taste. To put it in the shortest possible way is that it lacks the emotional intensity: the excitement, the shock, the despair and the exhilaration. The characters behave in a strange mechanical way and there are more figures and mathematics of gambling and speed driving than I can deal with. Here's an account of the main characters playing something (whatever) at a casino.

"The next hand gave Jean Pierre a three, Harvey a seven and the young man a ten. The dealer drew himself a seven. Jean Pierre drew an eight and doubled his stake to six francs and then drew a ten–vingt-et-une. Jean Pierre did not blink. He realized he was playing well and that he must not draw attention to it, but let Harvey take it for granted. In fact Harvey hadn’t even noticed him: his attention was riveted on the young man on his left, who seemed anxious to make a gift to the management on every hand. The dealer continued, giving Harvey a ten and the young man an eight, leaving them both no choice but to stick. The dealer drew a ten, giving himself seventeen. He paid Jean Pierre, left Harvey’s stake and paid the young man."

The same monotone continues through several pages and after that a new monotone starts for the next several pages. My point is I do not know what is meant by giving a three or a seven or drawing an eight. That are only facts and figures of a specific game whereas I am interested in the characters and how they are feeling sitting next to their arch enemy. The same game could be turned into a thrilling match if only the writer decided to take us into his characters' minds instead of focusing on the comings and goings of cards in a gambling show.

The only thing that I liked about this book and am willing to give it three stars (which means saying I like it) is that it is quite well researched. The author takes us to many placed from art museums to casinos to the great Oxford university's annual celebrations. The description of the strange royal trends of Oxford university is the most interesting thing in this book, though it is also described in the same monotone. I also liked the last couple of chapters better than most of the book. And well, I liked the concept as well: "Don't get mean, get even..". The story was different because all the four main characters decided to systematically get back what was rightfully theirs in a thoroughly planned manner instead of the usual emotional drama. Though it was too thorough and free from emotions to be close to being natural.

The story is something like TV thrillers or may be a combination of such thrillers. A wicked, corrupt businessman launches a company, spread some rumours to raise the price of its shares, makes an innocent, enthusiastic young business school graduate into his scapegoat to get people purchase all the shares within a short time and then next day the company quietly vanishes. Now there were four people who had whimsically put their faith in the company by trusting the young representative of the company who had enthusiastically advertised the expected raise in share prices. All four of them ill-advisedly spent all their savings to buy these shares and suffered from the shock of their life when they realized that all their money was sunk as the company stopped functioning. They get together and make a plan to get their money back. The plan involves the participation of all four of them and it is decided that each of them will come up with a plan according to his professional expertise while all others will help to conduct the plan. It is rather a strange assortment of an Oxford professor, a doctor, a curator of an art museum and a British lord (who was no good really but still a lord). Well, the manner in which they set upon their mission is rather like taking up a research project. At least the description is like a research report or may be the way in which police might document an investigation. It was well-planned and well-executed and the story had its fair share of surprises in the end as well. Only if it had been just as well narrated, it could be one of my favourites.

I don’t call it a waste of time but I think I would be rather reluctant to read Jeffrey Archer's novels in future. In fact, this book was highly recommended by a close friend who herself had a great time with this book. I myself think that it was a pretty good story but for the monotone and the lack of feeling and the overa-bundance of figures and uninteresting details.

The Hobbit by J. R. R. Tolkien

Tolkien singled out the word CUTE and started fantasizing about it until a book called The Hobbit came into being. Mostly we are used to mighty magical creatures living in magnificently magical world. Tolkien thought: but what about the fantasy of living in secluded peaceful communities, free from the worries of the world, not trying hard to behave intelligently to make your way into the world, wearing bright clothes, eating six times a day, living in comfortable places having bedrooms, bathrooms, lots of pantries, wardrobes and even rooms devoted to clothes, kitchens (yes, that is a plural), dining rooms (here is another one), all on the same floor (so that there nothing as inconvenient as stairs) and spending your time eating and cooking and eating again and smoking and singing and what a great thing it would be if all this could be done without having to worry about shoes (only some people like me can understand this bit of fantasy). All this IS fantasy. If that could exist in the real world, then even I could be a hobbit. So what if "there is little or no magic about them", they still exist in some ancient, magical, unreal world.

The accommodation described above had just one little inhabitant Bilbo Baggins. I can give all the stars to this book for just this one character, The Hobbit. As Bilbo Baggins was spending just another day of his life, he had an encounter with the wizard Gandalf, who was known to be involved in great adventures and therefore was not liked much in the hobbit community who valued the quiet and peace. So Bilbo did not act as graciously as he was used to. While Bilbo had only  a lowly opinion of adventures of any kind, Gandalf was probably having a private joke with himself about dragging the cute, comfort loving and dinner loving hobbit out into the roughest of adventures:

"We are plain quiet folk and have no use for adventures. Nasty disturbing uncomfortable things! Make you late for dinner! I can’t think what anybody sees in them." (Bilbo Baggins)

But Gandalf was not someone who could be so easily "good-morninged" by a hobbit so he gets himself invited to tea at Bilbo's house and thought it was quite prudent to overwhelm the little hobbit into getting employed in an adventure by a party of thirteen dwarves that unceremoniously arrived at the appointed tea time (offering their own services and asking the hobbit to cook all sorts of delicacies for them). Now Bilbo found himself dragged into being a "Burglar". The dwarves were robbed of their kingdom by a dragon and now they employed a burglar to rob the dragon itself. After a lot of mayhem at Bilbo's house, they set upon the adventure.

The adventure is action packed, full of blunders, full of grumping, bickering and blaming and a number of battles they had to fight together against hunger and dark among other even more deadly enemies. Tolkien has managed to include all sorts of magical and fantastical creatures in the story. First the party encounters trolls and our little hobbit, unable to figure out what to do, went pick-pocketing a troll and got cornered as a result. Then they were met by cruel goblins and Bilbo had an episode of riddles with a creature called Gollum, from whom he stole the invisibility ring. After somehow escaping the goblins, they were surrounded by wolves and then rescued by eagles. They also visited a community of friendly elves, where they got their strength back after resting for days and replenished their food supplies. After that they become prisoners of some less friendly wood-elves and finally reach their destination via a barrel-riding adventure. There were a great many events in the adventure and slowly Bilbo Baggins gained the respect of the dwarves, having saved their necks on a number of occasions. So now they faced the dragon and although it was quite unexpected but the dragon got itself killed by someone outside the party and the dwarves found themselves the masters of their kingdom again. Yet, it was not so simple. There was a war brewing up and here Bilbo Baggins played his role in trying to avoid the war, resulting in banishment from the party by angry, greedy dwarves. At the end, he only wanted to return to his quiet life and did not care much for the wealth that the dwarves had promised him for his services.

So Bilbo Baggins returns a hero and a changed man, having faced and overcome great hardships that other hobbits could not even imagine. Though he found, to his dismay, that his house was being auctioned by his hobbit relatives who thought him deceased, he again settled comfortably in his former life style.

"He took to writing poetry and visiting the elves; and though many shook their heads and touched their foreheads and said 'Poor old Baggins!' and though few believed any of his tales, he remained very happy to the end of his days, and those were extraordinarily long."

I have a long-standing problem with the genre of fantasy: I keep comparing it with Harry Potter series. Chronicles of Narnia did not live up to the standard and neither has The Hobbit. The Hobbit has humor, history, action, magical creatures, songs and riddles and wisdom which sum up to be all the necessary ingredients of children's literature. But unlike Harry Potter series, the book does not have a strong plot. There are no intelligently woven details or mystery or suspense that could make the reader voraciously read till the end. It is not a page-turner. It was just a series of adventures. They were all interesting but a bit tiring to read one after the other. I liked the first few an the last few chapters very much but the middle of the story was just too much adventure for my taste. Most of all I liked the characters. None of the characters was perfect or extraordinary (except Gandalf perhaps) but they still made their way through the adventure, not without mistakes and imperfections but they still managed it.

Freedom !!

Today... is finally my first day of freedom. All the final year project related stuff is done and all I have to do is sleep. It is just unsettling to know that there is no impending deadline anymore. I just said to my mother yesterday that I want to sleep continuously for a whole week because I could not sleep peacefully for quite a long time, thanks to some really stupid dreams. According to my mother's diagnosis, it was due to "increased brain activity". But well, sleeping soon bores me. Many times, I thought of writing about my final year project as it was quite an "extraordinary" experience in many ways but just could not bring myself to do so, well, because I was busy having that experience and I suck at multitasking.

Working on the project was like walking on friction-less ground. We tried and tried and tried by just could not move forward. It soon became a seemingly pointless exercise of waking up at 6 in the morning, going to my university and then going to AIR university to work in the lab till 7 in the evening and reaching home at half past 8. The only thing that kept me going was the belief that hard work always pays off in the end, in one way or the other. I am still hoping that it will pay off in the way that we want it to as the final result is not announced yet.

I, along with my two group mates, selected this project as a continuation of a project done by our seniors, who had told us that they could not achieve their ultimate targets due to the lack of funding as it required some very expensive hardware. Knowing that, we started looking for funding. We talked to the a senior person in the research department of AIR university and he was interested in the project. He became our supervisor. Now I absolutely don't mean any disrespect. He helped us greatly and at times even did stuff for us that we were supposed to do ourselves and I am very grateful to him. But still I will always remember him as one of the most odd people I have ever met. On our first meeting after deciding that we are taking up the funded project, he told us that we have to learn all about LabVIEW (the engineering tool that we would be using) and run our senior's prototype using LabVIEW within a month, after which the equipment that he had ordered would arrive and we will have to deliver the project within two months. It was the start of February when we had this meeting. So over the next month, we learnt LabVIEW and tried running the old system. But it turned out that it was not a simple task of running an already built system. Along the way, we discovered some major mistakes in their project. Finally, we gave up trying to run their system and programmed the whole algorithm from scratch. After months of efforts, we were able to get good enough results. Now the next step essentially required the hardware that was ordered earlier.

The equipment that was supposed to be delivered in March finally reached us on July 1st, exactly two days before open house where we had to demonstrate the whole project. I don't think I can even imagine now my own anxiety when the delivery of equipment was delayed further and further and we had no clue what to do in the meanwhile except running the the old system with little changes. Without the required hardware, we did not even know whether or not those small additions would work with the real system.

Anyways, when our equipment finally reached us, we had exactly one day left to do whatever we could do. Actually, the project required testing with gunshot sounds. For that we had to go to a Firing Range. Getting security clearance for the firing range is another story. Well, on literally the last day of available time, we took our system for testing after merely replacing the old hardware with new. The equipment with which we were supposed to work with the whole semester was finally in our hands on the very last day and we did not have a clue how exactly it would work. The first time that we ran our system with gunshots, my only reaction was of sheer surprise or may be shock would be more appropriate word. Anyways, after some quick thinking and some guesswork, we were able to run the system. To be really honest, I did not expect that we could get good results in such conditions but we did. We at least had something to tell in the open house next day.

Meanwhile, people from our own university did everything they could to make it more and more challenging ("challenging" is a very nice word compared with what I really want to say). Just 3 days before open house, we were told that we were supposed to design pamphlets and posters. So we spent last days designing and printing and framing, along with all the hassle of going to firing range. After the open house, we participated in a competition, which took two whole days of sitting and waiting for judges and not being able to do anything else. Just two days after that, we had our final presentation. This was the scariest part of the game. We had to present our project in front of the whole faculty of department of electrical engineering and answer their questions. After the presentation we had to write the project thesis in three days and after that getting it printed was not a simple task either (with load shedding and around 20 people at printing shop, each getting 4 copies of their theses printed). I also had my masters interview on the same day that I was getting my thesis approved submission.

Anyways,it is over now. I am free, at least for some time. Everyone at home thinks that I have gone insane because I keep laughing all the time apparently for no reason. But it is a very satisfying feeling that you know that you did your best whatever the circumstances were. Because then, you have the right to expect that you will get the outcome that you wish to have. And I still very strongly believe that efforts always pay off.

Fingers crossed for the final result !

There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact

I realized that it is somewhat peculiar that every reader is looking for something new in a book of fiction. If you read the reviews, the cause of disappointment with a book is very often the same one. I think if somebody studies the statistics of why a book is disliked, this particular reason might be a big percentage. Yet, people are also skeptical about ideas that are too far-fetched. They also demand that the concepts should be able to survive practically and that they should be germane to the theme of real world. Why I find it peculiar is that the ideas that we call hackneyed are the ones that we really never think about or even bother to observe, although it is by them that we are affected the most.

I finally completed reading all of the three Mohsin Hamid's books and I think I see now what his pattern is. He simply picks up a stereotype and turns it into an enigma. Though I would like to add that the settings might not be cliché for Western audience but being a Pakistani, I can tell that all his characters are those that we already have in our minds. All the things about his characters are what we say when we talk about those class of people in general and we even have commonly used maxims for the concepts.

The characters in Moth Smoke are the general egoistic, vindictive and licentious elite class with restless and unhappy marital relationships and the hopeless, unemployed, educated and intelligent but morally timid and ease-loving middle class and the impossible friendship between the two.

The Reluctant Fundamentalist talks about what we have been hearing for years now: the changing of the attitude of West towards the Muslims after 9/11 and America's self-righteous attitude towards the East despite her own cruelty to Afghanistan and Iraq and the double-standards in her dealings with Pakistan and India. Really, this is all this book is about, yet you don’t know until the end what really is the point the writer is trying to make. The most remarkable thing is that the character Changez is just an average Muslim without any emotional attachment to his religion or his country. He is a good person culturally. He is honest and hard-working and determined to make his way into the world through honesty and hard work, but he refuses to play in the hands of a nation that was the cause of threat to the well-being of his family. Some of the quotes from the book where I think Hamid has very intelligently summed up the situation:

"On the flight I noticed how many of my fellow passengers were similar to me in age: college students and young professionals, heading back after the holidays. I found it ironic; children and the elderly were meant to be sent away from impending battles, but in our case it was the fittest and brightest who were leaving, those who in the past would have been most expected to remain. I was filled with contempt for myself, such contempt that I could not bring myself to converse or to eat. I shut my eyes and waited, and the hours took from me the responsibility even to flee."

"I had always thought of America as a nation that looked forward; for the first time I was struck by its determination to look back. Living in New York was suddenly like living in a film about the Second World War; I, a foreigner, found myself staring out at a set that ought to be viewed not in Technicolor but in grainy black and white."

"that America was engaged only in posturing. As a society, you were unwilling to reflect upon the shared pain that united you with those who attacked you. You retreated into myths of your own difference, assumptions of your own superiority. And you acted out these beliefs on the stage of the world, so that the entire planet was rocked by the repercussions of your tantrums, not least my family, now facing war thousands of miles away. Such an America had to be stopped in the interests not only of the rest of humanity, but also in your own."

In short, through the character of Changez, Hamid states what a man of principles would do in the circumstances.So really nothing new, but presented in a way that echoes its truthfulness.

Then there is How To Get Filthy Rich In Rising Asia. Here again is an image of rise and fall in the life of a stereotyped corrupt business man, whose desire for money has its origin in the extreme poverty and it drives him to overcome all obstacles however he can. The most remarkable and interesting thing I found in this book is that it is written in a very unique way. It calls itself a seIf-help book which is supposed to instruct the reader about how to become filthy rich in contemporary Asia. However, it does so by telling a story of nameless common man, so you can call it a novel. It is very personalized for a self-help book and extremely impersonal for a novel. You want to know what really is going inside the nameless character's head what you never manage to do it as he continues his journey through life committing crimes, giving bribes, getting married and then divorced and then being betrayed and then finally getting together with the love of his life. All the time, the character is a mystery and yet, he is so typical. You might hate him or may be sympathize with him to some extent or pity him if you could somehow know how he was feeling all the time but till the very end, he remains as distant as ever.

Other than that, when I started reading it, I felt that this was going to be overly skeptical and bitterly sarcastic about the Asian culture, which I think is mostly the South-Asian culture. It was like that in the beginning with some very crude descriptions. But later, the tone was more resigned. It looked like one thing was the consequence of the other and that your nameless character starts to blend in the picture about which he was sarcastic earlier as an outsider.

As I said, his journey through life is really nothing new to hear. He was just a common man coming from an extremely poor family and having seen disease and death at the hands of poverty, he obviously wanted to rise to the status of the rich. Having no strong family background and no monetary support available and more importantly having no regard for principles and values, he enters a life of crime and deceit. As he rises, he has to face rivals in the form of business competitors and the state bureaucrats. At the same time, he has to deal with a failed marriage. The reason was probably  his never-ending love for another girl the "pretty girl", who herself was struggling to escape the claws of poverty and secondly, may be his own disturbed and restive mind because of the life he was living. Like I said, you really don’t know what was going inside his head. It is a story of pursuit of a strong financial status and of love in the time of great social and economic upheaval.

So they are all really mundane characters in a really commonly-viewed form of world. But still Mohsin Hamid managed to make three really good books without adding any fantastical adventure in the mix. 

Hello to me again!

“Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers are simple.”
― Dr. Seuss

Today is a great day. I finally got my senses back. It feels like I had gone to live some other person's life and now I have come back to being myself. For one thing, I had got hold of my tablet again and have started going through my to-read list, which I have not been doing for last three or four weeks.

I think everybody has to pass through difficult times in life when things become too entangled and you cannot find the end of thread to grab and unravel the net. What I am talking about is probably not considered a great hardship but it was surely a tiring period.

I think I would prefer not to discuss the context here lest I should read it at some time in future and start to recall this previous month, which I want to forget with all my heart. May be I will write about it some time later but I certainly do not feel like going through the ordeal now. Let's just say that I overstretched my nerves a little too much by indulging in what seems like a twenty excessively demanding tasks and of course, simultaneously. Thing is that when you run many heavy processes on your computer, it gets heated up. Well, it looks like my head is not much different. But thank God, it did not get warm enough to explode, though it might have caused some nearby explosions or may be something dangerously close to that.

Ironically, all that remains to be done is my Final Year Project, which by the way is on one bumpy road, find a job and get admission in MS. Ha!! Still I am saying that I feel free. One good thing about difficulties that we face in life is that you stop complaining about frivolous problems and start learning to adjust with them. At the same time, you learn the immense value of blessings you already have and start cherishing and appreciating them better. I remembered a saying of our Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), that I find in perfect compliance with what I am feeling right now:

Hadees e Nabwi: " RASOOL ALLAH ( S.A.W.W.) ne 1 admi ko naseehat krte hue ye bat farmai" tum 5 cheezon ko 5 cheezon se qabl ghaneemat jano'
1: apni jawani ko burrhape se pehle
2: or apni sehat ko bemari se pehle
3: or apni khush'hali ko muhtaji(tangdasti) se pehle
4: or apni faraghat ko mashgooliat se pehle
5: or apni zindagi ko mot se pehle

So I am glad that I could at least comprehend some of my answers and that I shall be thankful to Allah for what I have.

Humor at its Best

مشتاق احمد یوسفی کی کتاب 'چراغ تلے' سے کچھ اقتباسات

"ترقی یافتہ ممالک میں مارچ کا مہینہ بے حد بہار آفریں ہوتا ہے۔یہ وہ مہینہ ہے جس  میں سبزہ اوس کھا کھا کر ہرا ہوتا ہے اور ایک طرف دامنِ صحرا موتیوں  سے بھر جاتا ہے تو دوسری طرف "موجہ گُل سے چراغاں ہے گزر گاہِ خیال"

اس تمہید دل پذیر سے میرا یہ مطلب نہیں کہ اس کے بر عکس پسماندہ ممالک میں اس مست مہینے میں پت جھڑ ہوتا ہے اور "بجائے گل چمنوں میں کمر کمر ہے کھاد" توجہ صرف اس امر کی چرف دلانا چاہتا ہوں کہ بر صغیر میں یہ  فصلِ گل آبادی کے سب سے معصوم اور بے گناہ طبقے  کے لئے ایک نئے ذہنی کرب کا پیغام لاتی ہے' جس میں چار سال سے لے کر چوبیس سال کی عمر تک کے سبھی مبتلا نظر آتے ہیں۔ ہمارے ہاں یہ سالانہ امتحانوں کا موسم ہوتا ہے۔ خدا جا نے محکمہ تعلیم  نے اس زمانے میں امتحانات رکھنے میں کون سی ایسی مصلحت دیکھی ورنہ عاجز کی رائے میں اس ذہنی عذاب کے لئے  جنوری اور جون کے مہینے نہایت مناسب رہیں  گے۔ یہ اس لئے عرض کر رہا ہوں کہ  کلاسیکی ٹریجڈی کے لئے موسم انتہائی ضروری تصور کیا گیا ہے۔"

-----------------------------------------

"۔۔۔۔۔۔۔وہ نفسیات کے کسی  فارمولے کی گمراہ کن روشنی میں اس نتیجے پر پہنچ چکے تھے کہ مل کر بچھڑنے میں جو دکھ ہوتا ہے ' وہ ذرا دیر مل بیٹھنے کی وقتی خوشی سے سات گنا شدید اور دیر پا ہوتا ہے اور وہ بیٹھے بٹھائے اپنے دکھوں میں اضافہ کرنے کے حق میں نہیں تھے۔ سنا یہ ہے کہ وہ اپنے بعض دوستوں کو  محض اس بنا پر محبوب رکھتے ہیں کہ وہ ان سے پہلے مر چکے تھے اور از بسکہ ان سے ملاقات کا امکان  مستقبل قریب میں نظر نہیں آتا تھا لہذا ان کی یادوں کو حنوط کر کے انہوں نے اپنے دل کے ممی خانے میں بڑے قرینے سے سجا رکھا تھا۔"

----------------------------------------

(اس مضمون میں مشتاق احمد یوسفی نے کافی کے لئے اپنی نا پسندیدگی کا اظہار کیا ہے۔)

ایک صاحب نے مجھے لاجواب کرنے کی خاطر یہ دلیل پیش کی کہ  امریکہ میں تو کافی اس قدر عام ہے کہ جیل میں بھی پلائی جاتی ہے۔ عرض کیا کہ جب قیدی خود اس پر احتجاج نہیں کرتے تو ہمیں کیا پڑی کہ وکالت کریں۔ پاکستانی جیلوں میں بھی قیدیوں کے ساتھ یہ سلوک روا رکھا جائے تو انسدادِ جرائم میں کافی مدد ملے گی۔ پھر انہوں نے بتلایا کہ وہاں لاعلاج مریضوں کو بشاش رکھنے کی غرض سے کافی پلائی جاتی ہے۔ کافی کے سریع التاثیر ہونے میں کیا کلام ہے۔ میرا خیال ہے کہ دم نزع  حلق میں پانی چوانے کے بجائے کافی کے دو چار قطرے  ٹپکا دیئے جائیں تو مریض کا دم آسانی سے نکل جائے۔

--------------------------------------

ایمان کی بات یہ ہے کہ جھو ٹے الزام  کو سمجھدار آدمی نہایت اعتماد سے ہنس کر ٹال دیتا ہے مگر سچے الزام سے تن بدن میں آگ لگ جاتی ہے۔

-------------------------------------

سنا ہے کہ شا ئستہ آدمی کی یہ پہچان  ہے کہ اگر آپ اس سے کہیں کہ مجھے فلاں بیماری ہے تو وہ کوئی آزمودہ  دوا  نہ بتائے۔ شائستگی کا یہ سخت معیار صحیح تسلیم کر لیا جائے تو ہمارے ملک میں سوائے ڈاکٹروں کے کوئی اللہ کا بندہ  شائستہ کہلانے کا مستحق نہ نکلے۔

-------------------------------------

میرا یہ دعوی نہیں کہ ہنسنے سے سفید بال کالے ہو جاتے ہیں' اتنا ضرور ہے کہ پھر وہ اتنے بُرے معلوم نہیں ہوتے۔ 

I wandered lonely as a cloud.....

For some time now, I have been getting tired of myself ! Why I can never agree with literally anyone is becoming a source of increasing frustration. Even more worrisome is my excessively rare sociological illness that entails not volunteering my opinion in a discussion on any important subject unless I actually "know" about it, and scarcely any subject is fortunate (yes, that would be fortunate!) enough. I call it a rare illness because almost everybody else (with very, very few exceptions) seems to enjoy perfect health. Most do not show even the slightest symptoms. Many of them just think that they were born with a height of wisdom that, for no more reason than glorifying the world with their existence, gives them the authority to pass judgments on some very serious matters of social and moral importance. Those who are humble enough not to deem themselves to be great philosophers are intent on making as much fun of everything as they can manage with their hapless sense of humor. At other times, which is most of the time, there is never ending gossip to endure.

That said, I feel much lighter. 

----------------------------------------------

Lately, I have developed a queer habit of coming across articles and debates on feminism. The involuntary nature and frequency of this "coming across" is not what I would regard as particularly gratifying. I am not fond of the topic. Mainly because the writers of the articles and the debaters do not realize the implications of what they are saying. There is not even a single article that I can say is rationally thought of. They are mostly emotionally motivating (both for and against feminism) speeches, failing to integrate reason into them. Some get condescending, some angry, some feel personally attacked or insulted and others feel mystically glorified of their own accord. Well, to be reasonable, you have to be calm and objective and you need to leave room for the possibility that you might be wrong in your interpretations. As a matter of fact, I am not fond of the topic because I have experienced that the debates on this topic tend to go literally wild. So when I start this uninviting but impossible-to-ignore-anymore task of talking about feminism, I am leaving all the room on earth for disagreement with just one humble condition: think analytically before you argue.

As I said I do not volunteer to present my point of view on a matter of importance unless I have credible knowledge about it, so I will say only that I am certain about. 

Being against or in favor of a theory depends upon how that theory is interpreted. If we go by the dictionary, feminism means the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men or a doctrine that advocates equal rights for women. 

My first question: Why should women's rights be "equal to men"? Rights and duties are supposed to facilitate our lives, which necessitates that they should have a fair distribution among men and women; the distribution being based on how they spend their lives, what their needs are and what they can do best. Now let us ask ourselves: are men and women exactly similar in all these things? I don't think so!! I need not enlist all the differences. There are sufficient proven facts, surveys and researches available in the fields of medicine, psychology and sociology that can support my assertion. 

My point is that women's rights and duties should be defined for what women need and can take responsibility for. Their needs and abilities are different; not insignificant or inferior, but different from those of men. If two things are not similar in nature, it is illogical and unscientific to talk about their equality. 
Even if, by some argument, it could be proved that men and women ARE equal, then I would ask how that equality would benefit the society? Every single person's individuality defines his or her importance. If I am able to do everything with just as mush efficiency as everyone else can, then why would I tolerate anyone at all? What will motivate me to develop a lasting relationship? We live with others and stand by them so that we can collaborate with one another to achieve a common goal. If two people are exactly equal in their capabilities, their relationship will become competitive instead of collaborative. Competition has some occupational hazards: the two parties have ego clashes, they are prone to cheating and at the end of the day, there is a winner and so, there is also a loser. Accepting even an above average moral rank, I think it is extremely optimistic to expect both the winner and the loser to live together happily ever after. While it could be beneficial for two different entities, businesses for example, it cannot serve to keep two parties together as one entity with common goals. To keep the institution of family intact, which lays the foundation of social life, men and women need to collaborate. And as I said earlier, collaboration is motivated by complementary differences and is incentivized by some benefits anticipated from the other party that one cannot hope to achieve alone, while claiming equality fuels competition.

One thing that always eludes me is that why people are attracted to getting more rights; more rights come with more liabilities. Why they want to be answerable to larger number of duties and why overstretching oneself is such a desirous business is beyond my scope of comprehension.

My second objection is against the interpretation of "advocacy of women's rights". There is nothing wrong with the words as they are; the problem is that they are interpreted with an unwarranted exaggeration. In advocating for women's rights, people have an inclination for asking much more than their fair share of rights. What I have understood so far is that "women liberation movements" do not exactly ask for the acquisition of what rightfully belongs to the women, but they somehow try to create new rights for them. I am not an expert in history but what I have gathered from the literature from 19th century writers including Jane Austen, James Hilton and Bronte sisters is that those were the times when somewhat similar conditions existed in western countries and similar women liberation movements were being originated there. Where have these movements landed them? Are they more respected now? Do they still not face emotional turmoil? Are they not a victim of violence anymore? Do they make stronger families? Do they represent a stronger and more stable character? If somebody says that now they actively contribute in the business of their countries, I would say that they cannot contribute more than the women of our Pakistani villages, who do as much work in the farms as their men do and who actually are suffering the greatest violation of rights.

My point is that we should advocate for women's rights but for those women who are actually suffering. There is no success gained by tilting at the windmills; probably an illusion of success but nothing tangibly important.

I assert that the key to attain the required balance of rights and duties is education and law enforcement, not creating media circus.

I am not against women's rights; I totally accept the fact that there is a need to save them from violence and help them attain their basic rights. But should that entail abandoning of Hijab, breaking of marriages and driving them away from their home right into the midst of a self-created media hype? Because that is what our media is promoting in the name of feminism.

Speaking for myself, I would want to maintain my own identity. I would never want to step into another person's shoes and fool myself that I can walk with just as much grace.

Now there still remains a very important question: who, and on what grounds, would decide about the fair distribution of rights among men and women?

However hard a man tries, he can never know exactly what a woman needs. Even if he knows some women particularly well, there are no grounds for the assumption that he can understand all the women of the world. How then, will he devise some rules for the distribution of rights and duties? And will he be able to give his own interests an importance that is neither more nor less than fair for himself and for every other man in the world !!.. Same goes for a woman as well. So there should be someone who knows literally everybody inside out: our Creator. Our best option is to believe that the system Allah Almighty has devised for us, is the system of an ideal society. So instead of trying to create new theories, we should, I am saying it yet again, educate our masses about the best existing way of life and our rulers should enforce the laws given to us by Allah Almighty.

Finally,what I think feminist motto should be: Now it is unfortunately true that women are suffering injustices in our society, which calls for steps to be taken for the restoration of their respectable and rightful status. I think it would be more logical and practical to say that women's basic rights should be deemed equally important, not exactly equal. I sense that it is getting confusing. What I want to say is that the matter should be looked into in detail from every perspective and feminism should be redefined in a more logically satisfying way, along with and in consent with the targets that need to be achieved, in a well-defined order of priority.

For those who just think feminism is just being proud and thankful to be a woman, I have absolutely no objection.

----------------------------------------------

Actually I had may different things on my mind when I started writing this blog post. Feminism was just one of them. But now I realize that I have already spent quite a lot of time here. It was more challenging and interesting to write on a general subject than reviewing a book that I usually do here. I hope someday we will be able to figure out a little about this enigma called life and find a way to make it worthwhile.