Story of a lost journalist

January 11, 2010

Interpretations of love

Filed under: life,love,Theory — Cris @ 13:56

The Cris School of Relationships has now brought forth before you, dear readers, the different interpretations of that misused word ‘love’.

1. The duty-doers: They understand love as a duty they are to perform towards the people they are expected to. They mostly do it life-long, just as a machine that works as long as it has its batteries charged.

2. The companions: They need someone to take lunch with, go to the mall with and they think they love the people who could accompany them. When it is time to leave the place and find new people for lunching and malling, they fall in love all over again.

3. The crushies: Temporary. Everything is temporary for these fellows. When love strikes, it strikes strong and they think and dream and do all for the loved one every minute of every hour. But ouch, the clock doesn’t stay still and so doesn’t the love.

4. The floaters: They cry for you, they smile for you, but their love only goes this deep. They honestly believe it is strong, but the best they could do is sit and cry as they watch you drown.

5. The buyers: These people think that a certain crow won’t fly above money so that should mean money is love. To them, love means buying gifts and spending money on loved ones. Spending time with them? Nonsense.

6. The mothers: And of course, the creator, they say, could not be everywhere so landed our mothers on earth. People who are mother-like, when they love, they love. Call it a feeling that never goes away, that is always felt wherever you are and whatever you do. It has no definition, it is just there.

Ouch, we reach the magic number, which means it is time to end another lovely chapter in the Cris School.

January 6, 2010

Theory on relationships

Filed under: People,Theory — Cris @ 04:30

Latest theory formed by the Cris School of Relationships is that everyone who is in a relationship becomes helplessly immature. Study of varied specimen and speciwomen proved that every little thing seems like a volcanic gigantic problem at the time.
Cure: none so far since absence of the above symptom means relationship ceases to exist (or one of them is cheating).

Disclaimer: Theory comes from study/observation of sample pieces and has no direct link to author’s personal life.

Note: The author shall not take any consultations (no bar for consultation/thank-you charges).

March 23, 2009

Malayalam of “you”

Filed under: Theory — Cris @ 23:23

Back. Aint that fast?

Its this short thing. Something concerning Malayalam language.

I had once talked in this blog about the difficulty of addressing new people cause of the strange chechi-chettan, uncle-aunty, mr-miss rules that Mallus follow.

Here is a new problem. The Malayalam of you. Is it “nee”, “ningal” or “thaangal”.

Problem is you cant use the same word in every context. When you respect someone ‘nee’ wont be good enough, at least that’s the general rule. ‘Thaangal’ works fine, thought it’s a tad too formal.

Now my understanding is that ningal is the plural of nee. Which means if you want to address more than 2 people you use ningal. And from what I have learnt from home, ningal used for a single person amounts to insult.

So I was pretty shocked when in my office I found everyone calling each other ‘ningal’. I asked today and they said that ningal was considered respectful in many parts of Kerala. That’s strange. Whats insult to some was respect to some others.

I still cant stand that word and please, if you want to respect me call me anything but that!

August 26, 2008

Short blog posts winning over long! Hmph!

Filed under: Theory — Cris @ 21:30

I have found out something. People like to read short stuff more than long stuff. Analysis formed on the basis of studying a typical human’s behavioral patterns on reaching blogs. Typical human was me.

Come a short entry and my eyes welcome them with a smile. My eyes also read them with a smile. Unless the short entry decides it had seen enough smiles for a day and it was time to turn ugly. “I will teach that smiling idiot a lesson. I will be a completely nonsensical post. All words, jumble up and all sense, turn away and run, that’s an order!”

I learn my lesson and move with my eyes to other longer blogs. But eyes are in the habit of wrinkling and mouth in the habit of yawning on seeing lengthy posts. With a bored expression I start and after line 1, if unlike the shorter entries that has a thing against smiling readers it doesn’t turn ugly, I transmogrify into a happy reader. My downturned lips curl up, my eyeballs bulge out, my cheek bones dance.

Prejudice. Unjustified prejudice against length. Discrimination. I call it unfair. For though, I showed signs of depreciating longer entries, I am in the habit of churning them out. Study made on attracting readers to longer entries suggests making beginnings as juicy, err interesting as possible. Trap them. Put them in a situation where they can’t rest without knowing what happened to the remaining paragraphs – did they stay as paragraphs, did they look cheery or sad, did they jump around and sing. Make them ask all these questions. Michael Corleone if he was here would have smiled to say “Give them a post they cant refuse”.

Studies were good. But to study effect of first paragraphs, the typical human I chose may not be sufficient. So I invite volunteers to offer themselves as test materials. There wont be any tying up or gluing up to chairs as some competitor analyzers make their workers, err readers, do. There wont be nasty long blogs thrown at. All you have to do is sit idly, enjoy yourselves reading what you have always loved to read – my blog.

August 25, 2008

The art of talking

Filed under: My Musing Moments,Theory — Cris @ 22:33
Tags: , ,

Yesterday a chat friend (CF) I have chatted with for 2 or 3 years now made a call. This is how the conversation started:
CF: Hello
CF: Hello
CF: Hello
Me: Gum – attempt at hello

So I am not a talks-person, I am more of a write-type person – grammatically horrendous statement. But years of saying “gum” to people had convinced me that it will do the world and me a lot of good if I just stuck to typing my hellos. Leave the talking to the rest of the world.

But interestingly and surprisingly, my critics had to wonder, if in the act of writing me off as far as the spoken language was concerned, they had been too rash. For speak I did. CF though had to employ his ears to the best of their purpose, soon found it hard to get a word out in between the outflow of words proceeding from Ms Gum-Greeter. Any audience, if present, would have suspected an impersonation taking effect.

After the call though, strong analysis of the matter revealed the following
1. Talking was an art no doubt, but it was not always an impossible feat. The people who said gum in place of hello and gulp in place of howdy did so only to people who brought with them an image of human biters. This is what led to the foundation of what is popularly known as a comfort zone. Some people fell into this zone with the grace of a, err, graceful faller. Point is it is easy to talk to some people even if it is for the first time. Whereas with certain others, no matter how much you talk, you still find the same burning desire to jump up and run for the nearest exit. Everybody has their comfort zones. For me, if Scooby Doo fell into the comfort zone, for Watson it was probably Holmes.

2. And the strain is off once you have exposed your innermost identity. In the words of Ms CC, “You know it’s a relief when a person completely knows what kind of an utter idiot you are and still like you. I mean you don’t have to worry about losing anything anymore”

So that’s that. Effective from yesterday I have resigned from the anti-verbalization club.

August 10, 2008

Non-living friends: nothing abnormal about it

Filed under: life,Theory — Cris @ 22:36
Tags: , ,

There is a movie of Tom Hanks. Cast Away. I haven’t watched it but heard the story. Bringing that up cause it has got a volley ball. Yeah like that’s the best reason for someone to blog. You see Tom Hanks talks to this volley ball. Aha always knew ol’ Tom was losing something – his head. He is stranded in this island somewhere for years and only has the ball to keep him company. Name, Wilson. Not Hanks’s. I meant the volley ball.

Some people may sometimes for some unknown reason be attached to mm, things. My favorite word, things – fits into any place. Other than human beings. Some people have their pet animals. Some have their garden of flowers. Some have their book collection or some other collection. Second to ‘things’, ‘other’ – always handy. Whatever. You guessed right, yup it’s the third. And then some people like Tom Hanks have things with faces. (He draws a face on the ball). Faces which are not in the habit of inhaling oxygen. Cause oxygen undoubtedly calls for bad reputation. Those that never change expressions.

Everybody knows the story of Pinocchio. Loneliness, or friendlessness may lead to such ‘unusual’ associations and attachments. But then I argue absolutely normal people could have a non-responsive companion. Ok no more paradoxes, we are in for serious talk now. What they imagine these associates talk or do is another story. But what I feel bad about it is that people simply find it amusing or silly or absolute nonsense. Ok if they fail to understand the sentiment behind these affections, what is the need to bring those hapless souls to the centre of tease-land? Why can’t they leave that part of their life alone? It is, without argument, most personal. Dragging it into public in itself could be bad, but taking it up as a subject to laugh at is simply sadistic.

I have observed that many people fail to understand the importance one may give to his personal properties. To most people, only what they see important could be perceived in the limelight. Others are just silly fools who spoke too much, pay no attention to it – probably their favorite line. Human beings are well, if not anything else, weird. As has been argued for years, normalcy is always subjective. If one day the world became full of people who thought sleeping in daytime and working at night is the way to live life, who could argue that’s abnormal?

Of course all this outburst is obviously because I find people almost always laughing behind and most of the times right in front of me at my obsession with, hmm, certain possessions. But I am not saying this to prove a personal point. I think it is important that people respect other people’s whims and just leave them alone with it. If they find it an act of abnormality or outright farce, well they shouldn’t have been poking their nose into the other person’s personal affairs in the first place! Eavesdropping should be punishable! Anyway just want to conclude that affection is a human quality, and it is also a most incomprehensible quality – sometimes you give it when you expect something in return, otherwise you still give it expecting something in return although not always in the same terms. Meaning you expect some sort of satisfaction, if not affection itself, for your sake.

August 1, 2008

Thank You and Sorry – Good or Bad?

Filed under: My Musing Moments,Theory — Cris @ 22:11
Tags: , ,

Thank-you and Sorry (T & S for short). An acquaintance has been showing increasing aversion to these two words for a long time and told me he was going to blog about it. He has mentioned a smaller version of this in his blog today. And I am too impatient to wait for the big one. So I decided to think and write my ideas about it.

As a kid I guess things were more or less straightforward. So if you got a chocolate, it meant one line of action, namely immediate-consumption. So an elder present in the neighborhood had to do the stare-first-and-kick-next to pass a gentle reminder you were forgetting to say thank you.

Growing up I decided T & S were no longer qualified to be in your friends’ vocabulary. They decided the same for you. So these words just disappeared from the English language except when it was a tough stranger you had to ask a favor of (and especially when he looked like he could send you flying to Egypt if you forgot). Those were fine times and my friend KS made a habit of quoting some funny line from a Hindi movie. Sharukh Khan line. Let me search. Ah here -> “Bade Bade desho main choti choti baatein hoti rehti hai”

But growing up and decision making didn’t stop there (will it ever?). So thoughtful brain cells dug up these 2 words from the buried-list portion of the memory. New discovery was that there were moments you felt inexpressible gratitude and expressing it was as important as emm, err, well, let’s just say it was a very important thing. Same way, you felt inexpressible regret or guilt or whatever it is that calls for sorry. The problem now was you actually meant it when you said it now; it was not a signature at the end of every conversation and favor done (the starers and kickers gave up at age 14). But getting the idea across was difficult. Cause you were the president of the ban-politeness-formalities a little while ago.

So then you look for alternatives. “Wow this is nice” – translates to thank you. More thank-you-substitutes are “Wow I didn’t expect this at all” or a big fat smile. And when you are sorry, you say “Oh gee that is not good” or repeated “I messed up there”. Problem with all these substitutes are they are made up. You mean you are really so very happy and pleased at the favor, which in 2 words used to be thank you, historically. Or you mean you feel really bad at the mistake or trouble you have caused; ‘sorry’ for ancestors.

They just didn’t do. So I got back to my T & S. I took them up affectionately. Probably how Newton took those apples in his hands all those ages ago and happily called out “Gravity!”. And my T & S were reformed. I didn’t say them when I didn’t mean it – oh but it somehow crept into my signature in most official emails as part of my ex-job and still remains a habit. But the problem was few people like my acquaintance has not had another growing up and decision making phase after the ban stage. So my meaningful words are either eyed with disgust or thrown away to the nearest dustbin. Sigh. I don’t know if there is going to be a change-over and I would go back to Sharukh-Khan’s ideals of big cities and stuff. Till then I am living a sad, misunderstood, helpless life. Probably with a few other whiners. Hmm should make a club of whiners who thank and apologize (The WTA).

July 10, 2008

The life and ways of a Software Engineer

Filed under: life,Theory — Cris @ 21:19
Tags: ,

Relax everyone I am back! So is my net connection. Yippee!
For today, I will write something a friend of mine was telling me about today. Funny and yet sad!

She is a would-be Software Engineer so she finds it distasteful and unbelievable how the life of a Software Engineer could be such a drag! When this about-to-be-told incident happened, she was stalled in a road block inside her bus. So she was watching 4 lazy lousy just-woken-up SEs in action. This is how she said it.

“Chechi (elder sis), there was this house. And this typical Software Engineer with all Software Engineer qualities evident in his demeanor, appears yawning and he practically drags himself to this shop nearby, at the speed of 10 cm/10 seconds (that’s for effect, it translates to super slow motion). He reaches there, buys a banana and takes the 1cm/s journey back to the house.

Now guy 2 appears in front of the same house. And the same routine is followed, including the super-turtle steps to the shop, the banana buying and the return to the house. Guy 3 follows this and then guy 4 does too. Would anyone believe this if I told them Chechi! But seriously, this is exactly how it happened (the author added the speed measurement, so no exaggeration from the narrator).

And that’s not it Chechi. Now guy 1 appears again and he walks in this same pattern to a nearby tree, which apparently served the dustbin to the whole neighborhood. He drops the banana peel, returns, again to be followed in the same way one by one, by Guys 2, 3, 4”


I was laughing the hell out at the end of this. Thing is, as weird as it sounds, I knew the whole thing was just as easily possible. Having lived an SE’s life for over 2 years, I knew the pattern. Yup, it’s us all the way. This friend of mine was asking “Really Chechi, do people not talk to each other or anything when they are in a professional world? How come the first guy didn’t buy for all 4 or they didn’t all go together?”
I gave her a long pep-talk. She had to know the world she was entering. Leave all preconceived notions of die-for-you friendships behind. “This, dear girl was the professional world. Not your school, not your college.”

It’s not that everyone in the software world is averted to friendship or devoid of any human feelings. Cause of course they maybe software engineers, but there might just be a possibility there is a human in them somewhere, if you observe closely; though they show all signs of being otherwise. Not scientifically proven; but not unproven either. But don’t let yourself be carried away. It would be wise to study the actions of a typical machine, any machine, before you deal with one of them. The resemblance is astounding. Switch them on and they work, switch them off and they are zombies!

Note: Any personal attack against the author for this post will be regarded highly offensive. Freedom of speech and expression was injected into the Constitution to serve a purpose! Do remember that before you take any further action!

July 5, 2008

Same wavelength in friendship a must? Naaaa

Filed under: life,My Musing Moments,Theory — Cris @ 22:43
Tags: , ,

Another friendship question. The one before was on 2-sided intensity.This one on wavelength. Simple, one probably argued over the years. Do intellectuals only hang out with intellectuals, do simple minded creatures feel uncomfortable with complex creatures? Can Ms Cris hang out with someone as crude as her fancy pal Mr Jim? (“Hey I resent that!” says Jim. “Husshhhh I am on my blog! We have got to pretend be serious now!” says I)

So back to my serious question, for it is serious no doubt about that. I have got friends in all levels. The ones with the high IQs who go about emitting smokes and evaporating complex thoughts (one wonders how is smoke a possible chain reaction product of thoughts and complexity, an unexplained mystery!)
I have got friends who exhibit the same amount of natural bewilderment I do at things meant to be unimaginably simple, and devote themselves to the same or even more amount of blunderings every hour of the day.

Yup they are all there. But there is another factor called comfortableness. I define comfortableness as a quality that wouldn’t stop me from being completely and totally and indisputably me in the presence of the aforesaid tribe. (Jim gasps, “You call your friends tribe?? You must be arrested”. I said “I said hush Jim hush!”)

So considering my high IQ level… BEEP [Lie detected]
Aside: Dang, who turned it on now!!!
To the blog: Ok so as I was saying. If I am in the presence of a smoke-emitter, and I am not following one word of his vocabulary, then he belongs to the tribe if I am not bothered by that and I go on minding my own business. And of course he on his part should feel the same way. Then we are tribe-mates (Jim sneaks in at this point. Author having some aversion to the use of “Friends”. Hmm cause unknown, nature weird, conclusion : author is one of those incomprehensive mix of weirdness and dumbness. I come back and yell at Jim. “Jim erase that piece or you are dead!”)

So it is all about comfortableness. I can very well go on not understanding what a tribe-mate is saying, if I don’t feel a need to sweat and worry about not understanding it. And if I am interested enough, I can even stop the tribe-mate and interject a question in the lines of “Do you realize I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about?”
And the T-M will probably answer, “Yup I know that”

The moment I feel this whole need to run away from the smoke-emitter or even an under-rated (meaning under me in levels of intellectuality, yes there is a possibility that could happen against all odds!), the mate actually disqualifies to be in the tribe. Meaning I am not comfortable with the smoke-emissions, or the under-rated-ness. I feel most sick when I have to be careful of what I say and think out each word before I utter it to someone; those people definitely have no place in the Tribe. If I ever feel a need to match the wavelength of a T-M its time to kick him out of the T.

That’s my conclusion. I wonder if friends who get closer have some kind of unknown sensors working in the background to detect the matches and decide it’s a place you fit in well. No clue about that. And so long as I have all my TMs comfortably being in my T, I don’t have a problem. (“Sure Cris, sure. Now can we get unserious?” puts in Jim. “Alright, alright, that was too much pressure on me anyway. How do sullen people sit with sullen faces all day, I will never know” I say. “Talent Cris talent”, Jim says and I nod absent mindedly humming a song while he goes on to talk about… emm I didn’t really hear it so I don’t know. And we kept walking together till I don’t know when.)

June 26, 2008

Simplicity is the essence of good language, says Simple Cris

Filed under: My Musing Moments,Theory — Cris @ 22:00
Tags: , ,

It has been brought to my notice that my entries are sometimes cryptic. And it’s also been conveyed that there is no need to assume it’s my fabulous language that makes it so. Because, they tell me, my language is not that. I have been diminished to lower primary school text book language writer standards!

Well I dare say lower primary school text book writers are more than fabulous. They are fantabulous. And I would have gone on to say more, but my vocabulary stops short at fantabulous. Whatever comes after fantabulous, they are that!

I have always believed simplicity is the essence of good language. Reason, anything unsimple is only good for that – to look unsimple and ferocious and scare you. Infact complex language is like a monster. If movie monsters use fire and teeth and big noises to scare people, language monsters use enormously gigantic words. Words that could have done very well without ever having become words. They could have formed a language by themselves. “Boo we are the big words and we form the big language. Buhuhaha Buhuhaha”
There, a tagline is all ready; they just have to take it up from here now.

All said, it’s true that though we can fit all the words we’d need into one thin book, sometimes language doesn’t become language without the right words. It is not always the right meaning that you look for; sometimes it’s the right words that could say what you want them to say and give the feel you want them to give. I find myself using synonyms dot com when I won’t be happy with the word I came up with. Sometimes a different/stronger word just has to be there.

But bringing unheard words when they are not called for, to show its presence in your vocabulary should be a strict no-no. Cause rule number 1 for any writer is to make no compromise where language is concerned; it’s got a beauty of its own if we leave it natural. Add jumbo words and you are using make-up!

And I have just proved that I am a simple minded creature with simple words and simple language and anyone who calls me not simple is just not simple enough 😀

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at