Monday, August 9, 2010

A take on the theme

( Contributed by Jatin Gajwani )

Chaos prevails in the absence of order and predictability. A situation, where even the unknown may happen, but it will be unexpected. Really speaking, what is unexpected – that the unknown may happen? No, absolutely not. One does recognize the idea that the unknown may happen. But what’s unpredictable is the shape the unknown will take. What will it replace? What will it cause? Will it be good / bad? What it will CHANGE? What its EFFECT will be? Is chaos fearful?

Chaos can be an easier and faster means to desired result. Chaos can be caused to achieve that result. The genesis of every great idea is chaos. Lack of satisfaction with the current, or lack of complete satisfaction with the current. The desire to explore greater depths of satisfaction – an acceptance that the current is not the best, and that better can be found. Through chaos.

Trust a lazy man to find the shortest way to destination. That is the symphony of laziness and efficiency. But are all efficient lazy? No. Are all lazy efficient? Not at all. But both arise from chaos.

A lazy man accepts his laziness and refuses to bow to chaos. Lives life on his own terms. May be disappointed from his current state. But may not do much about it, despite a desire to live and do better. In a way, he defies chaos and fights it, by being the very same.

An efficient man refuses to accept status quo and decides he can do better, whatever be his limitations. His desire to do better, his courageous acceptance that his effort was his best, but not the best. Perhaps the reward of this psychological struggle is an efficient improvement, the result of chaos.

“Chaos and effect” as an idea, can also be measured in terms of the result of chaos, which is, often, different from the effect of chaos. There are various ways in which one can examine the result of chaos. Is result of chaos the change it brings? Or is it the effect? Can it be both?

An example – When Benazir Bhutto was martyred, there was a thought in Pakistan, if it could survive as a state. She was after all the – ‘charon subon ki zanzeer’ (Bond of the four provinces) – the beloved leader of her people. Were they Muslims or were they pro or anti PPP? Were they all Punjabis, Balochis, Sindhis, Pasthoons and Mohajirs? Or were they Pakistanis? Could they be all? That was the chaos. And the result was the violence that followed her death. The effect was the unpopularity of Prez. Musharraf. But the result was Zardari coming on national TV and saying – ‘Pakistan Khape’ (we want Pakistan). To assess the chaos, we saw the effect of it – the manifestation of chaos. To address the display of symptoms of chaos, we had the result. Does chaos exist in mind alone? Not in this case.

We visualize chaos through the effects of it, its best manifestations. But, its visible manifestations. How does one examine from the outside the struggles within the mind? What portrays outside that envelopes the struggles within?

Does chaos always throw up a leader? It certainly made Mr. 10% of Pakistan look like a perfect practicing democrat, unaffected by the ills of democracy. It threw up a leader, an alternative. Was it a better alternative? Yes, to the extent that the cancer of the past was eradicated. The unwanted were removed. That was the effect of chaos. That the effect dint live up to the expectations was the result of the chaos.

If necessity is the mother of invention, chaos is the father. Perhaps it is chaos alone that makes a dissatisfied person an inventor. The chaos enables him to travel the journey from inquisitiveness to answerability, from asking the right questions to offering the correct solutions, from the unknowns of the dark to the enlightenment of the bright.

Maybe chaos should be read and understood from the effect it has on each one of us. Does it make us explore more territories? Or do we want to live with status quo? Does this depend on what we think the unfolding of chaos will bring about. Do our responses differ on our innate abilities to experiment and take risk? Do we actually decide what our responses are?

Or does fate play a role? Really, to go back to the example of Bhutto, she landed amidst more chaos in October 2007, when she returned to her homeland. There were nearly 2 million people out on the streets celebrating her arrival. Her cavalcade was attacked. But she lived through it – through the chaos, killing. Her journey from the known to the unknown was unscathed. Was that not her fate? But, that didn’t stop her from meeting her end two months later. Towards a larger unknown!

No comments:

Post a Comment