January 30, 2004

Carmanomics

If you look at it, every relationship is not only what you feel towards another person, but also what you think the other person feels towards you. So, in every relationship we have a minimum of four streams of feelings. And if we consider even that staggering number as a known benchmark, it is a miracle of enormous proportions that so many people find love on this planet and so many different types too. "What type is your love? Oh! Type 32? Lovely! I know at least four others who belong to Type 32."

The worst type of relationships to be in are ones where there is no quid pro quo. You are in it for reasons that you cannot list. Yes, it is that 'feeling' again. And any attempt to verify it by predictable, sane or impartial behaviour is, I should warn you, destined to meet with certain failure. And no sir, this shop does not take back broken goods. Which is why it is hard to reclaim it. After all, there is only a 'feeling' that is involved. That gone, there is nothing to fall back on. And that is why it hurts the way it does. C'mon, the emperor did not get a refund after he realised he was strutting around in the buff, so why should you?

On the other hand, ones where there is a quid pro quo is a situation of bliss like one of those Japanese cars. As long as you fill it with petrol, give it the regular service shop run, it will run all day, every day. "Give me fuel, I give you reliability" (Insert drum roll and trumpet call here). Tell you what, from that perspective, growing up and 'maturing' in life must be something like giving up on dreams of owning a Ferrari without having to take care of the bills. Dumb it down, stop hopping down stairs, stop sliding down the hand rails. Look ma, I grew up finally!

You might say, though, that we should not judge an outcome before it actually arrives, all it requires is for you to persist with the intent. But intent does not quite sanitise the outcome. Case I) X kills Y in self-defence ; Case II) X kills Y with an intent to kill. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, regardless of the intent, the outcome is murder in both cases. And away from murderous intentions, it is often possible to factor in probable outcomes and once that is in place, the futility of the intent becomes all too apparent, as I have been finding in the past days.

Sometimes, when you search frantically for that elusive thread that would give you at least one count of validation, what gets lost is the fact that it amounts to nothing. It takes a while before it sinks in that your numbers were wrong, even worse when you know that you always knew it was wrong. And the most ridiculous bit is that you were a willing accessory to your own murder, with complete knowledge of the intent. Regardless, the seasons change, birds get back to making out once the flu goes away that is, the strokes deliver babies again and in general, life goes on.

You know, we spend so much time on communicating or at least trying to achieve that as an end. Still, so much of that time is spent either on telling precisely what another person wants to hear. The amount of predictable reactions is simply amazing. Give out a smile, two greetings and three good words in a row and we can all live in a perfect world. But it can't be all that complicated, right? We do not need to have all this mumbo jumbo about numbers, validation and crap. Yeah right, like you ever get to own Ferraris without the bills. Is it any wonder that the Japs rule the car market these days?

P.S: Congrats to the crew there. Pretty nice bit of work for a first issue with the budget and other constraints.