They shared the same bathroom, but his cup holder in the washroom was red with a colgate tooth paste tube sticking its head out of a neatly rolled up crimp.
In her’s was a blue Binaca toothbrush, basically bought by her for those little plastic dolls kept to lure the children. Beside that brush was a Pepsodent toothpaste all squeezed randomly that one can’t make out if she was squeezing in the middle to make the crimp end of the tube bulge up instead of the mouth-end.
Their marriage boiled down to their preferences shown in squeezing the bottom or the middle!
They parted ways and now they share the same bathroom but have separate toothpastes, a choice not based on aesthetic or health reasons, but their inability to conciliate. But it has its benefits, when she kissed him she could sniff a hint of his Colgate and he could the Pepsodent. They are beneficiaries of a benevolent Nature. They stay together but they live single.
STAY DOUBLE, BUT LIVE SINGLE.
Oh, how beautiful‼️
While others had striven to make a reader/ listener to understand an imagery or a metaphor, Shakespeare is unconcerned. He’d said it and they like arrows shoot on all directions from his bow, grasp if you can. But while you are still grasping many, arrows streamingly dart out. Shakespeare isn’t trying to hold a mirror to a reader’s ignorance, if you miss the images and metaphors, you still have the plot to feel gratified. But grasping the aptness of his images and metaphors elevate your associative awareness – an introduction to the past; sewing it up with the present and predicting the probabilities of the future. Alabaster is itself premium, but monumental alabaster is the unmatched homage to the memory of that Imperial past. Lilies do fester, but who could have related it to the smell of the weeds and redeemed those weeds? None besides Shakespeare!
The interpretations of Prometheus herein is based on the THEOGONY of Hesiod.
Prometheus was on the winning side of the war among the Greek gods.
But Prometheus did two deeds, which infuriated Zeus, the Chief of the Gods, on whose side Prometheus had once played the games of the gods.
The problem about interpreting the later falling out or rebellion or testing Zeus, by Prometheus has bred many literary, art & cinema based interpretations.
For me Prometheus, like any follower of a victorious man assumes that once the victory is won, EVERYTHING should be made possible for the followers, forgetting that the followers has added volume to the cause and not necessarily the right inputs which led to the victory.
The crowd which had followed either would have had no opinion at all or even if they had one, not a very balanced one. The leader provides the greatest inputs: balance & prioritising the action plan, which in the Altar of Time gets sanctified as Victory!
Prometheus turns a rebel creates man and restores fire against the WILL of Zeus!
Zeus, whom I tremendously admire, keeps his once vanquished foes in Tartarus, alive and kicking but severely constrained through rationing and sequestered from external interaction. Zeus knew fully well that if an external enemy is eliminated, sure enough even for gods, inimical forces would sprout from within!
Hiranya Kasiphu had to counter Prahlad his own son. Likewise, Kamsa had to decimate his own nephew. The principle of UNIPOLARITY OF UNCHALLENGED EXISTENCE is denied even to the Greek gods! A great piece of wisdom.
Prometheus, is thus the voice of modesty of the victorious wilful SELF.
But, it has its own pangs. The pangs of INGRATITUDE which visitS every night to peck at the liver of Prometheus! The liver is restored each morning but the eagle visits every night and inflicts the excruciating pain of being pecked at by the eagle. In Sisyphus, it was a repeated FUTILE TASK, which was only an exercise in futility in its unadulterated form, but Prometheus’ punishment was crying for mere relief every night and probably the days spent in anxiety over the impending nights!
Yet, the spirit of Prometheus to debunk Zeus wouldn’t subside!
Prometheus restored fire to mankind, but that led to Pandora and her box of gifts! The bigger evil came visiting MANkind!
There once was a garden in which stood a huge banyan tree. The tree had by its longevity spread its seeds through the centuries by birds which had eaten its fruits. The garden became a forest and subsequently, filled the nation with banyan trees all over.
Suddenly, a few insects had invaded the banyan and started gnawing at them, or so the farmer thought. This spread and most of the banyan trees got afflicted with those insects.
A farmer saw the plight of the huge banyan in his vicinity, losing its majestic qualities and merely living off the structural support of the aerial roots which had become trunks to the main banyan tree. The main banyan has become hollow, sheltering the birds and rodents. The farmer tried to resuscitate the main trunk, but to no avail.
The farmer took the issue to an agricultural scientist for a solution.
The scientist after prolonged study discovered that the main trunk was no more the conduit for the nutrients of the water and minerals from the ground, as the passages had been clogged over the years and that the aerial roots which had become trunks, after supplementing to the efforts of the main branch, had taken over the functions because of Necessity.
The scientist discovered that the main trunk by forwarding all the nutrients and water to the branches, had not utilised the same nutrients and water for nourishing itself, even though God had designed it to be not merely a conduit for conveying but also a beneficiary of such conveying. The scientist invented another specie of a Banyan, which had followed the God designed principle of deducting the user charges, for conveying the nutrients and water.
The scientist advised the farmer, see: we cannot restore the health of all the existing banyan trees of this strain, but we can GRAFT the specie of the banyan which collects user fee into this banyan and over a period of time attempt to grow a breed of Banyan, which would not be prone to this self-inflicting debility.
Thus the Grafting of another specie into the original banyan was done.
Generations later, the hybrid (grafted breed) replaced the old banyan trees after half a millennium.
The new generation of scientists after 500 years discovered certain health issues of the hybrid and had to decide whether to bring back the old banyan tree’s strain by eliminating the grafted strains which have become a part of the hybrid banyan trees.
A conclave was convened and all the farmers, scientists and vegetation enthusiasts met.
The squabbling went on for years.
The Traditionalists said that the GRAFTING was wrong, as the original banyan tree’s integrity had been compromised.
The Modernists said, we are people here by accident and our duty is to primarily rectify the issues, as is understood by us now, and continue with the historical grafting untouched. They further added as a compromise, we can accentuate the original strains without stymieing the grafted strains.
The Traditionalists said: No, elimination of the grafted strain was a must through stymieing the supply of nutrients and water through targeted policies.
The Functionalists, said: See, both are banyan trees and we have grafted only strains of another banyan into this Banyan, so why eliminate the benefits derived out of the newer strain grafted by our forefathers? We do not know the challenges faced by our forefathers 500 years ago, nor can we predict the inherent gains through the grafting done centuries back. The fact that the hybrid strain has coped with these 500 years, should vouchsafe for the benefits of the rectification. So let us not INTERPRET HISTORY in a cussed way, but allow the grafted strain to continue and provide more nutrients to the older strain of the original banyan.
The Purists would have none of it.
The matter is now escalated and it has been resolved that the whole country should participate in determining whether to eliminate the Grafted strain or to allow more nutrition to the older strain without stymieing the grafted strain.
The next conclave has been fixed for May, 2019.
God bless India.
Truth is beyond Fearlessness, it is Truthfulness. Voltaire was not one to merely set up an idol and leave it to your choice to follow, Voltaire destroyed the existing idols by setting his idol above the preexisting idols. He not only set up Sir. Isaac Newton but destroyed the conquerors by setting up Newton above the Caesar, Alexander, Tamerlane, or Cromwell. How Cromwell made it to that list should not be read ejudsem generis, but as referring to a contemporary, hence to each and everyone.
Not long ago,” said Voltaire, “a distinguished company were discussing the trite and frivolous question” (alas, this is an untimely quotation!), “who was the greatest man Caesar, Alexander, Tamerlane, or Cromwell? Someone an-swered that without doubt it was Isaac Newton. And right-ly: for it is to him who masters our minds by the force of truth, and not to those who enslave them by violence, that we owe our reverence.”
In India everyone believes he/she knows the law.
That there are broadly statutory laws and judicially pronounced laws, are known to the better informed.
That unless the Supreme Court had authoritatively pronounced on an issue, the High Court decision on the issue ought to prevail in that state is known to the legally minded.
That if a decision could be distinguished on certain grounds, the precedents set by the SCI and the HCs could be challenged is known to the lawyers.
If a matter has not yet been decided authoritatively by any court in India then such issues are classified as RES INTEGRA and beg for judicial determination!
Beyond all these is something called CONVENTION, which by common consent over a period of time has come to be accepted as the Law.
In Administrative Law there is a judgement delivered by Lord Greene, in the late forties of the last century, which enunciated certain principles which goes by the name WEDNESBURY PRINCIPLES.
There are three limbs to those principles relating to DISCRETION in administrative law. They are
0. Whether in the decision making process any irrelevant material has been taken into consideration?
0. Whether in the decision making process any relevant material which ought to have been taken into consideration has been left out?
0. Whether the decision is so unreasonable that the decision is UNREASONABLE.
I have been amused at the arguments put forward both in the TV news and sometimes even in the Supreme Court, that I wonder if we as a nation should spend so much time on ‘distinguishing facts’ to overturn the principles enunciated in precedents of force.
Some of the arguments which are laughable are
0. Whether the Anti Defection Law as mentioned in the Tenth Schedule would come into force only after an elected representative had taken oath 😂🤣
0. Which law provides for a person to start executing the office of the Chief Minister, immediately after swearing in, when he doesn’t have the support of 50% of the house. It is a constitutional necessity to be sworn in as a CM before proving his majority, but to start exercising its functions even before the floor test, especially when apparently the numbers are not there, and take administrative decisions is a ludicrous act.
0. Under which law of the land does it say that the largest single party or pre-poll alliance should be called to form a govt. overlooking the reasonable numbers of the post poll formation from the other side?
0. As a convention we have accepted the Goan, Manipuri and Meghalaya models, so it appeared as a convention to me that post poll alliance is also acceptable for consideration by the Governor.
0. Who told that when elections are called for, upon end of the previous term, if the party which was in ruling received fewer seats it has been VOTED OUT? It simply means the same party has not been VOTED TO POWER. Period. This cannot form the grounds for a less than majority party to stake claim that the previous ruling party had been ‘voted out’. Every party is voted to power for a period of five years and thereafter they have to seek a fresh mandate. After four years of Presidentship when a George Bush senior recontested, he was not voted out, he was not voted in for the second term. That’s it. To build grounds for claiming a better right on those grounds appear to attack ‘reasonableness’.
This hogwash of ‘dance of democracy’ of unreasonableness and irrelevant consideration and non consideration of relevant factors have to be stopped in the altar of Conventions.
It would be laudable if the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India came up with its own WEDNESBURY Principles and shorten and sanctify the procedures for determination of whom to call, by the Governors of the various states of India.