Hawks Eye

Dear All,

I have moved the blog from this domain to the following. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.

http://www.upuls.net/category/blogs/hawks-eye/

Hope you guys will stay with the blog.

Cheers!

when everything comes in a row
all you have wantd n all you have ever wished for
all you have hated n all you have never called for...
what can you do, if the destiny reinforces it's iron fist on u...

knw u may, that
acceptance is a necessity even if it's not the best interest at heart...
the variation of pressure makes it possible...
mind reacts with the change of attitude...
back it up and proceed...
thinking of sacrifice for the greater good...

This is actually about an incident I know personally. Let's identify the girl in question as y and the guy in question x. So this x is some kind of a flirt, or to be exact, more of a I-ask-anyone-out,please-someone-say-yes typo! To say the least, a pretty desperate one. So he goes out and keep asking girls out of the blue and expects them to say yes. I'd be damned if they do, but for some odd reason, one girl actually gave in and said yes to him.
Now x was overjoyed by it, I mean simply and totally. It wasn't really a matter of asking out a girl and getting a positive response from her, but it proved the world to him. I don't blame the chap either, for he sure was pretty desperate in any case.
So these two started going out and hanging around each other and literally glued together; or rather x was glued to y was more like it. The whole thing went on for a while and suddenly erupted like a volcano. Silence before a storm was the pre-play and the actual storm was pretty hard not to notice. x and y had a big row, and split up and went their separate ways. It was no ordinary lovers' quarrel, it was something absolutely serious and x had a real hard time coping up with it. y was taking it more gallantly and silently though. So anyways, you guys might think I'm actually cooking up some random bull of a quarrel among lovers into a blog post, but that was not the intention. We got a chance to analyze the whole situation, well actually we had to do something about it because it was a real pain seeing x moaning and whining around.

So myself and a friend decided to talk to the guy and find out what actually happened. The guy was actually truthful and told us the whole story. As I've mentioned before, he has been overjoyed finding himself lucky with a girl all of a sudden. This has led him to have a considerable rein over y which has gradually started to make y annoyed. It is fair in that kind of situation because x actually has tried to impose some rules on her. Rules? say okay for some general stuff, but this guy has made y to only have a limited male friends, and even a little portion of them she could hang out with if x is not there. Literally the list was limited to 6 and 4 including y's bother and father. This of course has irritated y enormously and x was confessing that y has been protesting for sometime continuously that life just isn't fair that way. But at the end, when y couldn't bear the pressure, the volcano has erupted and all that big scene was made and they broke up!
What I'm trying to emphasize is this, without no advice from us, x has actually understood what went wrong between them. But the saddest part is that, it took him such and incident to understand the dynamics of the game. It is important to be able to get into one's shoe's and look at a problem in their perspective in order to have a thorough and 360 degrees understanding.
Fortunately they were able to get into an understanding together after sometime and y must have missed x as well. At the end of the day, they are a happy couple as far as I know for today and so x must have adopted to the dynamics of the situation.

I say, it's great if she's only mine, but that doesn't mean she shouldn't socialize with others or hang out with others. The edge of possessiveness has a dependency somewhere along the line that can only be fixed with a thorough understanding with each others' mindset. Again, it all depends on your personal perspective, this was a common generalization of the effect.

Are you a matador?

I've always had this question over what actually makes one to help another and how does the variation of us helping one another happens with one moving higher up in a corporate ladder. Sometimes we think it's ubiquitous and one tends to help less and less as one climbs higher and higher. Somebody actually had a row with me telling me that even thinking about it is futile and it's just too apparent. But I beg to differ for I have found, more than once that is, people who are actually in a high stance in the corporate ladder helping the bloomers in various ways, simply out of goodwill. So as a generalization, I don't think that statement is true, but rather it depends on the circumstance and mostly on the person itself.
If one is brought up in such a way to appreciate the finer things in life, and by finer things I mean the contribution phase, they are more prone to be a helping hand no matter where they reside in. That is the beauty of it, they have realized that actually by lighting another candle, your light doesn't get dimmer. The counterpart of this is where we encounter most of the time and that is why my friend was actually arguing that one just doesn't appreciate helping when they are up the corporate ladder. Of course, I can't blame him either, he has been let down once too much.
Anyway, moving on, the counterpart is actually branches into two categories. There are people who doesn't help at all, but the only thing they do is not helping. They don't show any interest further. But the dangerous kind is the one who acts like matadors. They not only don't help you, but they actually try to run you down. This is mostly an issue of self esteem as far as I could gather through the experiences I could relate from my friends. It it actually a real barrier to get across these types of people. If you come across them, the best thing is to give side and just let them be.
But what actually made me write this post was something happened to me today. It actually made me realize again that no matter what my friend say, people who help without an apparent expectation in mind are there. The best thing about them is, they are really willingly help us and take it up to the next level and do a follow up as well. It's amazing how much self confidence one can gain through simple incidents like this, but I would gladly reckon that it is indeed a pleasure to see such collaboration, dedication and contribution coming with such guidance, all in the face of good will.
I was determined to be a helping hand wherever necessary from the time I've been on my foot, my ground and my decision space and I was more and more determined to keep it that way from all the experiences I've gained throughout the time.

One needs to understand that your light doesn't get dimmer even if you light another thousands of candles!

breathtaking scent comes first
Only to be followed by the bowl that looks dazzling
Swoosh swoosh its hot
The first sip is small, just to start
Fully inside the mouth making its way to the bottom
and comes the next sip, that is full
And so it commences

Then comes the beauty of the day
Dressed in mild coat of oil, and plenty of precisely carved pieces to make it prettier
and ummm this tastes so good, tastes so right
And so it continues!

The next to impress comes with a thick brown coat, and pitch black lava inside
Complemented with the colour of vanilla,
The first sip to get through the coat
And then oozing lava to be mixed with vanilla to give a picteresque shade of brown
and so it continues too

The taste of warm soup for a soothing start,
A plate of anticipated nasi to fulfill all of your nerves that tastes,
And a chocolate lava to finish the meal,
And I hear they are all that's needed to make a prefect combination!
And you simply love it!

Alas, the irony of fate,
I touch them, I see them, I feel them,
But I never get to taste them,
Because um just the spoon you use to get to what you can't otherwise!
but one doesn't love spoons enough to give it the taste of all the elegance it touches, 
and dedicate himself to serve you!

I have always been fascinated by this particular TV series from the day I've started watching it. It has always startled me with this connection I had for it. And as I've started watching it again today and figured out what's been going on my mind at that time.
The prison break as a TV series concentrates on Michael Schofield, a desperate guy trying to break his brother out from a high security prison called Riverfox because he thinks that his brother was framed. It of course has a lot of dramatic effects and anticipation involved in getting the spectators to watch the episodes continuously. A lot of action is going on as well and above all, I thought his strategic planning was what attracted me the most. He has the map of the whole prison tattooed into his body and has planned everything in advance. He has done the background studies of the respective personnel and found out their weaknesses. These weaknesses are exploited in order to get exactly what he wants from inside the prison itself.
As much as these facts and the plot made me interested in the TV series, there has always been something subtle working on. I think I saw the prison as one's mind. The prison has good guys and bad guys inside, well to start with, you don't go to the prison if your a good guy, but keeping the datum out of the normal societal level and moving into the prison system, we can readily define good guys as well as bad guys inside. This black and white differentiation makes one to think about their mind as a prison and the feelings inside as prisoners trying to burst out. Another way to see it is that, the mind bottles up all kinds of feelings and keep a tight control on them just as the guards do to prison inmates. But somehow or other, a notorious prisoner always gets past the guard and bust out of the prison by some means. Is this not the case with the flow of thoughts too? Some way or other, if a feeling is too determined not to give up, it always bursts out from the mind. It may make a difference, it may even screw things up, or sometimes mend things, but somehow a prison break happens. And the irony of this is that, these kind of prison breaks happen all the time, sometimes even without us knowing that such thing happened. It is actually the beauty of the flow of thought, you never know when something will burst out, even you exercise the tightest control over it.

 Sway is a song sung by the Perishers, first heard it in One Tree Hill and recently reminded by a good friend of mine. When I got to think about it, this was what I came into my mind about the song.


I talk to you as to a friend
I hope that’s what you’ve
come to be
It feels as though we’ve
made amends
Like we found a way
eventually

It was you who picked
the pieces up
When I was a broken soul
And then glued me
back together
Returned to me what
others stole

I don’t wanna hurt you
I don’t wanna make you sway
Like I know I’ve done before
I will not do it anymore
I've always been a dreamer
I've had my head among
the clouds
Now that I’m coming down
Won’t you be my solid ground?

I look at you and see a friend
I hope that’s what you wanna be
Are we back now where
it all began?
Have you finally forgiven me?

You gathered my dreams in
When they all blew away
And then tricked them
back into me
You saved me I was
almost dead

I don’t wanna hurt you
I don’t wanna make you sway
Like I know I’ve done before
I will not do it anymore
I've always been a dreamer
I've had my head among
the clouds
Now that I’m coming down
Won’t you be my solid ground?

I don’t wanna hurt you
Like I know I’ve done before
I will not do it anymore...

I don’t wanna hurt you
I don’t wanna make you sway
Like I know I’ve done before
I will not do it anymore
I've always been a dreamer
I've had my head among
the clouds
Now that I’m coming down
Won’t you be my solid ground?


As far as I can make out, this seems to be a song sung by a lover to his/her ex possibly in the context of reuniting with the ex again. But possibly it might be a context where a one sided love exists while the other doesn't exactly feel the same way towards the other.
The singer is pretty determined not to hurt the other again. It seems that the singer has gone through a lot and has lost a lot as well as had her heartbroken. The words 


It was you who picked
the pieces up
When I was a broken soul
And then glued me
back together
Returned to me what
others stole


emphasizes how much it meant to the singer. The singers life has been in a rampage when the subject of the song has re-entered the arena and backed her up. Perhaps this is a post scenario of a triangular love story where the singer was loved by two and the choice singer made turned out to be a bad one and the other guy has been there for the singer to lend his shoulder when needed. The singer might have lead him to some extent it seems because she specifically says that she doesn't want to make him sway like before, which evidently means she has done it priorly. By which means, is not specified, but that seems to be the case. 


Now the subject of the song is there for her, but the singer isn't sure about her decisions anymore. She is afraid to take the risk and move onwards with life and she doesn't seem to be feeling sure about herself either. Thus she emphasizes that she doesn't want to hurt the subject like she has done before, and the best way to do that is to become friends, where it all started. The swaying is synonymous to her state of mind which changes from giving her heart to the subject to been just friends.
She has figured that she was confused about the whole thing in the latter stage of the drama and is determined to clear the clouds away. To do that she needs the subject to hold her tight and be there for her until she is on her nerves again. All these things she expect from the subject of the song while on a basis of friends where she wouldn't have the chance of hurting him. Her intentions can be seen as pure, but it doesn't seem that she is thinking on the perspective of the subject of the song.
Taking his perspective in to consideration, we can only conclude that even though he has agreed to been friends, that was half heartedly and by making amendments to his actions. It resonates that he is willing to take the risk and genuinely do care about the singer. Though the song says that the singer would no longer hurt him by swaying, and she also mentions that they are been just friends, all we can conclude is that might not be fair on the subject of the song. For instance, the singer can think on the perspective of the subject once and understand his concerns and intentions. Perhaps I might be wrong, but I think if he was there for her when there was no one else to stitch her up and make her whole again, we can assume he's willing to do that again. So as of time when the singer realizes this, she will understand his commitment and would genuinely stop swaying. 

The concept of platonic love can be defined as following.

Platonic Love is a strong type of love that is essentially non-sexual.

The earliest mention of platonic love comes from the Plato's dialog called Symposium. It has been a general discussion that has happened in 416 BCE. It was hosted by the poet Agathon to celebrate his first victory of a dramatic competition. The discussion has since become famous and plato has documented it in a narrative format of the respective philosophers who were present. Following is a fresco that was found showing the Symposium.


The origin of platonic love comes from the speech given by Socrates. The conversation in brief is as follows.

"Then, may I ask Agathon a few questions?"
"Certainly."
"Is Love love of something, or of nothing? A father is father of his child. A brother is brother of his brother and sister. Is Love in like manner love of something?"
"Certainly."
"It desires that of which it is the love, not possessing it?"
"Yes.""When it no longer lacks, it no longer desires?"
"I suppose not."
"Well, then, Love is of something that it lacks. But you would have it that Love loves beauty; therefore it lacks beauty; therefore it is not beautiful. And the same argument applies to goodness as to beauty! However, let me tell you what the prophetess Diotima told me, for I have borrowed my argument from her, since I was arguing with her very much as Agathon has been doing just now.

 This is actually a conversation that is abstract yet carries a brilliant intellectuality. Love is of something that it lacks, thus when love loves beauty, that means love lacks beauty. But the fact that love lacks beauty does not mean that love is ugly! The argument Socrates states is as follows. He also states that he has burrowed the argument from prophetess Diotima of Mantinea who seems to be the mother of the concept.

What is not beautiful or good, need not, therefore, be ugly or bad, just as there is a state of mind which is neither knowledge nor ignorance, but correct opinion. So Love is not a mortal, nor a god, since we have seen that he does not possess all beauty and goodness and happiness, which we must acknowledge the gods to possess, but is something intermediate, a daemon, interpreting between the divine and the human. Love is one of many such intermediaries. As to his birth, Plenty was his sire and Poverty his mother; he partakes of the nature of each. As the gods do not seek wisdom, since they imagine that they have it, but only the philosophers, who are neither of these; so Love is of necessity a philosopher, thirsting for wisdom as for all forms of beauty. Your mistake was in taking Love to be not the lover, but the beloved.

This gives rise to a concept that can be applied to almost anything. The existence of a genetic intermediary, a middle layer between any two abstractions is explained rather clearly by Plato's examples. The concept itself is rather subtle, what is not beautiful doesn't need to be either ugly or bad, how true can that be in even the present context ? We as human beings always try to discriminate something to be either good or bad, but what happens to what's in between? The fact that we are in a digital world doesn't mean our choices are limited to been digital as well. This argument would lay a real light upon people who think our decisions should be of digital nature and there can be nothing in between.
Turning back to the concept of platonic love, Socrates further states the following.

LOVE, you say, desires the possession of beautiful things. What will he possess? The happy are happy in the possession of good things. Everyone desires to possess good things. But we do not admit that everyone loves, because we have selected a specific form of love, and chosen to apply to the species the name of a universal; just as every maker is properly a poet, but we have appropriated the name to a particular species of makers. Love, in reality is of every good, not of the missing half of oneself; desire that it should be ever present with it. It acts as the desire of generation in the beautiful, in relation both to body and soul, a something immortal in mortality as it were; not of the beautiful; but of immortality, necessarily, without which nothing can be ever present.

As he correctly puts it, we are limiting ourself to a specific form of something, and neglect the fact that it can be polymorphic, that it can evolve and change, that it can have different forms in different contexts. He then makes his point on platonic love. 

As for the phenomena of Love permeating all the living creation, they express the mortal nature seeking to become deathless by the one possible process of generation. For the mortal achieves immortality by the constant replacing of that which perishes, not by its separate continuity. So this Love is a tendency towards eternity and great deeds done for the immortality they bring. Sexual love is the expression of this craving for immortality in the physical organism; the work of all creative art is its intellectual issue, and especially of that political wisdom which we call moderation and justice. In whatsoever field this desire of immortality by propagation moves us, we must be attracted by the beautiful, and by beauty of soul more divinely than by beauty of form. But the children of the intellect are more desirable than the children of the body; for the former may bring the reward even of divine honours, but not the latter.

 He righteously points out that sexual love as the expression of the craving of physical immortality of the physical organism by continuation of a successor, not by the continuation of itself. And so he gives rise to the idea of a love that would make us immortal beyond physical means, a love is attracted to the beautiful, but to the beauty of the soul more divinely than the beauty of the physical form. Thus he emphasize that unlike children of body, the children of intellectuality achieves immortality and results in divine honors.

He who would love rightly must from the beginning seek to hold intercourse with beautiful forms, and love one, wherein he would generate intellectual beauty. But the beauty in all forms is one, and his love of beauty in form would be divided among many forms; whereas beauty in the soul being more excellent, one beautiful soul would suffice him even though the beauty of the form withered. Thus he would be led up to the contemplation of universal beauty, and the one science thereof. The beauty thus revealed is eternal, without beginning at all times, and utterly, and to all. This is that to which they attain who advance by these steps from the contemplation of beauty in particulars to the revelation of the supreme beauty. Such a one is at last in contact not with shadows but with the ultimate reality, and if immortality be at all given to human beings, he is thereby become immortal.

The final piece of the conversation clears any doubts that the other philosophers had at the symposium. It is intended to emphasize the fact, in short, one loves to be immortal and thus it is appreciated to gain eternal immortality by bearing an intellectual child rather than the mere continuation of children of body. But at the same time, the platonic love for one's soul emerges from the argument. One beautiful soul would suffice oneself even the beauty of the form withers. Thus is it intended to lead one to contemplation of universal beauty.


This been a brief description about the origin of platonic love, let us move in to the context of existence of platonic love in present context. 


It is often understood as relationship that is deep, non-sexual friendship between two heterosexual people of the opposite sexes. But this in turn challenges the ideology of platonic love, which from its origin was that of a chaste but passionate love, based not on uninterest but virtuous restraint of sexual desire. So it seems that the ideology of Platonic love doesn't exist in it's original form, but rather some variants of it exists.

I am god's child,

When you develop an infatuation for someone, you always find a reason to believe that this is exactly the person for you. It doesn't need to be a good reason, taking photographs of the night sky for example, now in the long run, that's just the kind of dumb irritating habit that would cause you to split up. But in the haze of infatuation, it's just what you've been searching for all these years.

This is quoted from Leonardo Di Caprio in the movie casted in 2000 called the beach. I wouldn't go into explaining about the movie, but if you guys need an explanation or the outline of the movie, you can check it out here. As much as I want to think this as a simple conversation in a movie, this has it's roots deep down to the way the human minds work.






As the quote suggests, an infatuation for someone is just like a cloud covering a crystal clear sky. Sometimes it covers somethings that are too obvious if one did not have an infatuation on someone. But with this cloud covering your vision of rationality and logical reasoning of the brain, it will be simply impossible to understand the risks we have to face in pursuing the ultimate Elysium.


This is the origin of the so called soul mates or perfect match or whatever that has been called over the time. In the haze of an infatuation, one simply finds enough and more reasons to defend your infatuation on the certain someone you think who is a perfect match for you. As the quote suggests, it need not to be a strong reason, it doesn't even have to be rational or logical because the way your vision is covered, it simply wouldn't matter at all. The reason stated in the quote is quite circumstantial, but it does point out a good example.


Thus it seems that one can conclude the pseudo reality of perfect match is built up upon an infatuation you have on someone. In turn, these infatuation are caused by various factors starting from looks to initial impressions you get. But what one doesn't realize initially is that impressions are not permanent. They evolve when you gain experience and more exposure on the certain someone. And when they evolve and the infatuation seems no longer valid, sometimes your way past the turning point and can never go back. Frankly, that seems to be the origin of bad relationships.


I know I am challenging the very existence of a platonic love, but I think in turn it can exist as well. Because, an infatuation growing into a gradual dislike is one scenario in the picture, whereas an infatuation can also grow into a passion, something great, where one cares beyond the physical means and is and will be happy for the other someone even if they are not with you.


I am simply not making any conclusions here, but instead just stating the facts I think are related on this matter. So in my point of view, even in the haze of infatuation, one can find some reasons good enough to hang on to somebody and in turn, those reasons may well lead to a state of platonic love even if that isn't presumed to exist anymore. So even if you feel that 'it's all you have been searching for all these years', there is a god possibility that it might be true, whether or not the other would feel the same that is. And for all I can say, even in the haze infatuation, your instincts should work because human is after all an animal, and animals are primarily creatures driven by instincts, instincts to be safe and not to get hurt. Where all the logical reasoning would fail, let your reflexes to guide you and let your instincts to take over.

Let me not to the marriage of true minds	Let me not declare any reasons why two
Admit impediments. Love is not love	True-minded people should not be married. Love is       not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,	Which changes when it finds a change in     circumstances,
Or bends with the remover to remove:	Or bends from its firm stand even when a lover is     unfaithful:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark	Oh no! it is a lighthouse
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;	That sees storms but it never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,	Love is the guiding north star to every lost ship,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.	Whose value cannot be calculated, although its     altitude can be measured.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks	Love is not at the mercy of Time, though physical     beauty
Within his bending sickle's compass come:	Comes within the compass of his sickle.
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,	Love does not alter with hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.	But, rather, it endures until the last day of life.
If this be error and upon me proved,	If I am proved wrong about these thoughts on love
I never writ, nor no man ever loved. This is one of my favorite sonnet's of Shakespeare! It touches you in such ways that is too subtle to explain.	Then I recant all that I have written, and no man has     ever [truly] loved.

Perspective 1: Illusion

when you feel all alone....
when even the moon is turning it's back on you...
you can rely on one...n one....
but not the one you believe in....
but one, 
and when the one you want is all along your way....
yeah, he's the one...
and,
it's just an disposable asset now.....

Perspective 2: Distortion

a background process....
executed when things are...
in an idleness....
no process, nobody, but emptyness....
it utilise the resources....
to the max,
and when a process...
seems tto emerge,
it just fades away....
into something....
it thinks a blissful idleness...

Perspective 3: Outbound Logistics

a background process,
an illusion,
a sweet coated....
disaster....