The Fugitive

The search prolongs,
What was once a hunt,
Now a charade,
Has faltering hope.

The land in scoured;
The vast, antediluvian expanse
Rummaged for the wanted-
The flitting runaway. 

She is gone,
Sardonic and elusive,
Leaving a trail of cryptic
Clues; masked in mirthless laughter.

The shadow lingers, the echo.
Expectant curves, once taut,
Supple and ample;
Rest flaccid- lifeless. Dead.

Adroit and beguiling, even footsteps
Not daring to give her away, she glides coyly.
Serpent-like and taunting; leaving us
Lusting for her presence- Smile.

Tolerance Toward Intolerance

College. Tertiary level of education. Though it has a certain ring of intellectualism to it, college is pretty much the same as school in so many aspects. Same hour long classes, power hungry teachers with control issues who prey sadistically on the innocent and juvenile for vestigial pleasure, a sea of people who try just so hard to get on your nerves AND English classes.

As utterly annoying as I find this particular class, I cannot refute the fact that I do learn a thing or two by sitting through these irksome hours. Most of what I learn is non-textual, it usually has to do with the cohesion of one or two pieces of intriguing jigsaw puzzles that are people which allow such profound insights into how brilliantly narrow-minded we can be. At the end of some classes I cannot stop myself from marveling at the ignorance of people. 

So a typical English class, we're all just sitting there and mindlessly listening to someone delivering their public speech, nodding every now and then when she catches our eye. In due course of time, my turn soon arrived and I went up there, strangely unapprehensive of the dozens of questions my audience would bombard me with when I am done with my speech.

So I started off with my speech, the topic being 'Same-Sex Marriage' by giving a brief preamble of homosexuality, the reasons why such people should be allowed to marry, and concluded without any interruptions only to arrive at the part of time where I was targeted with vicious questions whose sole purpose is to garner a mark for the interrogator when I am not able to answer it satisfyingly. The questions that were asked were so wonderfully biased and prejudiced that they would have been seriously condemned had a homosexual person been there(if there already wasn't, I remain in the dark when it comes to matters of my class).

The questions that my professor asked me were not just shocking but also entirely asinine. "Won't legalizing homosexual marriages decrease the population, if not now then at least in the distant future because everyone would choose to marry someone of the same sex?" "Won't it increase the rate of STDs because it has been proved that these people are the cause of most of these diseases?" "Won't it compromise the sexual morality because these people have multiple partners?"  I was stunned to hear these questions from a well educated, fully functioning member of society who was there to impart knowledge to us fellow students, not because she is conservative(most of us are), but because she was harboring such inanely biased, thoroughly misinformed notions. You can't judge a person's morality by their sexual orientation(hell, who are we to even judge another person?), how can you just assume that gay people have multiple partners? And people can't become gay as if it were a part of evolution.

First, the questions that were asked as part of the public speech routine clearly accused homosexuality as being a choice. And let me clarify, this is not true. Homosexuality is a sexual orientation just like heterosexuality that most of the general population seems to be inclined toward. Simply, homosexuality is the sexual orientation characterized by the tendency of a person to form sexual, romantic and emotional relationships with people of the same sexual identity as themselves. It is NOT a choice and this can be vouched by the fact that homosexuality has been noted in other species of animals as well(which is one of many); clearly indicative of the fact that it is not a disease or a choice. Furthermore, one can not cause another straight person to BECOME homosexual. C'mon, people! Think a little. Homosexuality is not a communicable disease that one can 'catch' from another person by breathing the same air as someone or by platonic physical proximity.

People were offended by the arguments of my speech- which was much anticipated on my part. If marriage is about the union of two people who love each other, then why shouldn't two people of the same gender be allowed to declare their love? It is discriminatory to not allow gay people to marry simply because their internal biology is not the same as the general majority of the population. By saying that, you automatically reduced the sanctitude of marriage by implying that marriage also takes into account the genetic make up of a person.

I completely understand why people would think gay people are different, after all they are a minority and anything that does not fit into the same category as the majority is almost always seen as abnormal or different, but it is no reason for us to hate them, isolate them and subject them to verbal abuse and inhumane treatment. Still, it is completely unfair to deny a person of the same right you are entitled to. You can't say marriage should be between a man and a women only just because it has been happening between a man and a women so far. This line of reasoning can be further expanded and it is sort of like saying that things should remain the same just because they have been the same way for a while now. This prevents any shred of progress from ever being made in any aspect.


Also, it becomes awfully lopsided to deny the right to marry just because its love between two men or two women. It is not false. It is not a lie. You can't say people are incapable of loving someone of the same gender as themselves. No matter what form love takes it is still the same, homosexual love is no more different from the love that exists between a heterosexual couple.

Another argument against same-sex marriage is that they should not be allowed to marry because they are incapable of having and raising children their own. If this really is the reason why same-sex marriage is not allowed, then what of the thousands of people who get married everyday despite the fact that they are infertile or impotent, AND people who voluntarily decide that they don't want children? These people are incapable of having their own children as well, in line of the same argument they should not be allowed to marry either. After all, they can't have children too. This argument also proves to be flimsy as it identifies marriages solely as an institution for child rearing purposes. Marriage is not just about procreation, it is a sacred covenant that declares love and celebrates union.

Research as proved that same sex couples are just as efficient as a heterosexual couple when it comes to child rearing. There is no consistent difference between between homosexual and heterosexual parents in terms of emotional health or parenting skills and attitude, and children of same sex couples are no more likely to be confused about their own sexual identity as children of heterosexual couples. So you can't just say this is why they shouldn't be allowed to marry, who are WE to deny someone else' fair right?

Finally, this argument can be given an award for its triteness- religion. According to most, the Book of Genesis says that same sex marriage is a sin(at least this is what one of my friends from class told me after my speech) and I am sure this is the case in almost every other religion, be it Hinduism, Islam or Buddhism. WHY are we letting an antediluvian book dictate our evey belief, attitude, decision and ultimately our way of life? So we are going to abuse and discriminate against another person just because we believe in some external supernatural force that governs all our lives(I mean, how paranoid is it to believe that your life, right from its start to its end, is determined by some unknown force)? We are going to deny a fellow human being of the same happiness that we are entitled to just because we claim some book someone wrote says that its wrong or sinful? For all we know, the Bible, the Kuran, the gazillion Hindu texts and every other sacred text could have been written by paranoid, yet awfully whimsical homeless people when they was not in a drug induced stupor! If religion demands social equality, unity and compassion; then doesn't what we are doing defeat the entire purpose of religion itself?

Shifting back, marriage in itself is NOT a religious affair. It is a purely objective covenant that has merely been co-opted by religion as simply a means to declare love. If marriage really were a religious institution then atheists and agnostics shouldn't be allowed to marry either, don't you think?

So at the end of it all, it really isn't about being incapable of having children or being bad parents- it is our close-minded, intolerable attitudes toward anything that is remotely different from ourselves that occludes us from seeing homosexuality as a natural phenomenon. It is time we grew oblivious to all out innate and societal biases and accept people for who they are. It is time for us to GROW UP and stop being such obstinate, egocentric beings. It is time we shed our tolerance toward intolerance. It is time for us to change and accept change.

Such A Conundrum

The Big Bang theory(no, not the sitcom about 4 brilliant scientists who eat take out all the time), is a theory stating that the universe was created by a big explosion, thus giving rise to all things known and unknown. The understanding of the universe has puzzled us since the beginning of time and will most probably continue to do so for a LONG time.

Okay, so what existed before the universe was created? Where was the universe birthed? How long did it take? Why did it happen? What caused it to happen? These are but a paltry number of questions that have been raised.

So what had caused the Big Bang or the nebulous explosion? Surely, there must have been something that caused it, right? How can an explosion of that magnitude happen without a causal agent?
Perhaps it was a hypothetical causeless cause? Something that had caused the explosion to happen despite the fact that THIS primary cause wasn't caused by anything else. It just 'happened'. On its own. Without a cause. I'm just wondering.

In contrast, when you think about it every cause is also a consequence. Each cause, in a way, functions as a consequence, or rather becomes one, for the factor that brought about its occurrence in the first place. This contributes to the continuance of an incessant cycle though its origin cannot be traced and prospected. Yet, this contradicts the explosions happening on its own, after all, it is part of a perpetual cycle. I'm just saying, think about it. Okay, let us set this aside and give ourselves good time to mull over this later, possibly.

So more significantly, what existed before the universe was created? There is likely to be a precursor. Something?  Or nothing?

The presence of nothing or absence of anything does seem like a logical hypothesis. After all, there has to be a whole lot of nothing for something to surface, right? This whole lot of nothing could have facilitated or rather, allowed the formation of the universe.  But then again, when you think about it, something is a part of everything and everything is similarly part of something. Likewise, anything can also be an integral component of everything and something. So where is everything? Is the nothing WE know part of something we don't know?

Yeesh. Such a conundrum. I shouldn't have pursued this avenue of the topic.

To summarize and conclude, even though there is nothing much to arrive at really, I think it is pretty clear from this otiose write-up that this topic is exceedingly perplexing and raises as many questions as it may (erroneously) answer, as it evidently requires more research coupled with a better understanding of all things cosmic that stretch beyond our pedestrian ken(or possibly just mine).

Nothing

An intriguing void of nothingness
Warped inside a chasm of ignorance,
Is all that remains to survive.
Begins and ends, everything.
It is the beginning of nothing,
Coronating the end of something;
Marking this affair, the chasm
widens- as if on cue
the void expands
Taking in everything of the nothing
-annihilating all.

                 -x-

Unaware. Oblivious,
They walk about; shuffling and
Scurrying in a quest for that
Which is unsung.

                  -x-

Cumbersome and unsettling,
It riddles its ominous glaze-
Ravenous demeanor- ambushing to engulf.
But, in the midst of the chasm
All that is, is the remnants of nothing
Almost as if nothing had happened.

Anecdote #1

                                  
Blood. Casting a carmine glow. Spread over the tar road. All that was visible from the distance was the glistening fluid which formed a carpet. It shimmered in the midday sunlight as if it were an iridescent diamond under the moonlight sky. But, with the lapse of every second, the pool of red got blanketed under debris and dust due to the mild, yet noticeably hot afternoon breeze.

Once you break your gaze from the rug of blood and  muck, you'd soon see two whimpering men next to a tattered Yamaha bike on the road. The younger one was sitting up, crying in what seemed to be excruciating pain and shock, helpless and afraid. The other man lay there on the road in an awkward supine position, with his appendages flailed about in different directions.

Upon closer examination, it is clear that this man is as damaged as a hand-me-down rag doll. Scratches and gashes line every inch of visible skin, each profusely spilling blood at a rather vigorous pace. The atmosphere is imbued with the acrid and dispelling smell of blood, the salineness of sweat and grim. As you trace the length of the injured  man's body, you'd soon stop and gape in horror at his left leg. His pants shredded, a chunk of flesh and sinew meet the eye. About three inches of yellowish bone protrude from the lump of muscle and flesh, defying its natural position inside the knee socket. The man seemed to be aware of just the pain and not the gory snag as he was too weak to even prop his head up to take a look at the rest of his body.  

As if this scene wasn't hopeless enough, the place of this accident added to the desperate feel of the situation.  Either sides of the road had nothing more than open fields with patches of wild, brown grass and weeds. It was resemblant of a parched moor that was too ominous to sustain any form of life. The road was empty except for ourselves and logic dictated that it would remain so for a good while until some vehicle passes by. Another 5 kilometers down the road would take you to the suburbs of Tambaram.

Having gathered enough, my mother got out of the car telling me to stay inside- which she had parked along the periphery of the narrow lane- with horrified haste and approached the abject victims. The view from inside the car was enough to surmise the essentials of the situation- two wounded men in the middle of nowhere who had succumbed to an accident we hadn't witnessed and no cell phone to call for help. As if on cue, two bikes appeared on the road and halted to a stop in front of the car, about 5 yards away from the scene just as my mother propped up the wounded man's head and told him that everything was going to be alright.

Help was soon summoned using one of the biker's mobile phone, information was gathered from the less wounded man who was able to string no more than three or four words together due to pain and his shock induced stutter. In the next ten minutes, a dozen people had gathered to offer help; all purposefully shouting at each other to call for help- a few more vehicles started snowballing in, most of which bore curious passengers who did nothing more than gasp and gape for a couple of minutes before driving away.

However, relief soon settled as the wailing siren of an ambulance greeted the ears of the many who had gathered. The meagre mob soon dissipated with the exception of my mother who was busy tiring to scrub off the blood from not just her hands but also her clothes only to give up and walk toward me, get the engine started and drive off home.

Megalomaniac

I man
The regal Sun,
It is always I.

I dictate
The iridescent sky,
It is always I.

I command
The requisite air,
It is always I.

I rule
The emerald sea,
It is always I.

I marshal
The ethereal wind,
It is always I.

I dominate
The resolute mountains,
It is always I.

I manipulate
The infernal fire,
It is always I.

I govern
The celestial Moon,
It is always I.

I master
Life and Death,
It is always I.





So, I decided to leave a postscript on this one. Here goes it:
I decided to try something new this time and this was the product. I decided to make this one fairly technical which is something I have never really tired before. As you probably already know, a megalomaniac is someone who has a grandiose sense of self-importance and power. He, or she(equality people, equality) is truly the epitome of a pathological egotist. It is always the 'I' that is so intricately tied to power and importance. I've used 'I' at the start and the end of every stanza to reiterate this sentiment. Since, 'I' is the 9th alphabet, the structure holds 9 stanzas, each stanza in turn having no more than 9 words. It also goes a full cycle, starting with the day and ending with the night.

Why Some People Seem Nicer When They Text

The title of this post is pretty self-explanatory, so I am going to jump right into this one. We all spend most of our precious time staring intently at our computers or our phones. We spend most of our time writing, reading and sending text messages to our friends. Once, I came to notice that a few of my friends were somehow nicer and friendlier when they texted than when we talk in person. Also, we have to consider the importance of different standpoints, just as you think one of your friends seems nicer in texts someone else may think the same about you. So I shared this observation with a few friends of mine and they agreed with me.

I am writing this one to explore the various reasons why one would be or appear to be nicer when they texted.

#1. No eye contact to gauge our partner for either positive or negative signs: Texting requires no eye contact apart from the continual staring at the luminescent screen. Primarily, your eyes convey a wide range of the emotions from anger to joy to dejection. Without that cue, we are not only left to our own devices to gauge another persons state of mind but also their facial expression while they were typing that text, so most of it is left to our imagination. When  this is the case, we take it for granted that our partner in conversation is friendly to us and NOT mean. This is the manifestation of the phenomenon called optimistic bias, which is our tendency to think that we are less likely to be subject to negativity or negative events. Most of us would like to think that people like us and that they’d have no reason to be mean.


#2.  A sequence of words by themselves do not convey tone: When you are conversing with a person, you perceive a statement as a compliment or a threat or neutral statement mostly because of the tone they use. Without the tone of voice even a statement as simple as "Nice outfit!" can be interpreted as an honest compliment or may be misconstrued as a taunt. Once again, we can attribute our perception of such a comment via text as a compliment to optimistic bias. After all, how can a sequence of words convey tone?


#3. The privacy to be who you really are:  Texting is a one-on-one conversation which gives you the freedom to be who we really are without feeling conscious. You are free from the preying eyes of your friends and significant others who might tease, taunt or simply pull your leg for being a little different or for being honest. I mean, don't you feel more comfortable complimenting someone on their new outfit or their hair when you are alone rather than when you are surrounded by an ocean of people?

#4. You are at the liberty to be positioned the way you want: You are free to assume just any posture you want while you are texting as opposed to a personal conversation where you have to maintain  an aesthetic and appropriate posture depending on the person you are conversing with. This is not the case when it comes to talking to someone over the phone; people sit and text, stand and text, even lie down and text. You can even squat and text if you want! A comfortable posture puts you at ease and changes your overall mood at any given time.

#5. It's easier to be honest when you don't have to face the immediate consequences of your statements: How many of us have picked a fight with a close friend through texts? Expressed real concern about a friend? Confessed our true feelings to our crushes? It's always a whole lot easier to be honest when you don't have to witness the reaction of a person firsthand. We are more comfortable responding to an excised and delayed, less fervent reaction than an immediate one, partly because we are at the liberty to take time to ponder and reply; we are not required  to think on your feet.


#6. The munificent and whimsical use of emoticons: Well, this statement stands for itself. While texting, we make sure that texts are flooded with emoticons misguidedly fearing that the other person may take offense to what we are saying. The first time I chatted with a couple of friends, both of them later reported to me that they assumed that I was mean and arrogant simply because I hadn't used emoticons. Conversely, some of us use emoticons simply because they look cute.


#7. Ill-conceive perception: Personally, I strongly favor this premise. What if it is our faulty perception that is mocking us by making innocent and neutral texts seem nicer? The person texting may just be stating or/and sharing objective thoughts but our egocentric minds inevitably perceives it in a different light.

Well, these are MY premises explaining why someone would be friendlier or appear to be friendlier while they text. You are free to agree with this list or razz and chuck rotten tomatoes at it(My words may seem indifferent, but I secretly hope you agree with me!).

Purple Insight: Tyrian Purple

Known by a number of variants such as Royal Purple and Imperial Purple, Tyrian Purple remains the most expensive paint since the beginning of time. This paint has enticed historians and artists for generations together with its vibrant history.

Mentioned in texts dated about 1600 BC, Tyrian Purple originated in the ancient city of Trye of the Ancient Phoenician civilization along the Mediterranean coastline. Named after its site of origin, it is aptly called Tyrian Purple. The oldest archaeological evidence was found during excavations in the island of Santorini, Greece, which revealed wall paintings; that on analysis suggested that an organic dye similar to the organic composition of Tyrian Purple was used almost 3600 years ago.

Tyrian Purple is made from a Mediterranean sea mollusk. The hypochondrial glands of this mollusk called Murex Brandaris and Murex Trunculus, produced a pale white or yellow discharge that turns blue and consequently purple when exposed to sunlight.

Sea mollusk Murex.

'Pliny The Elder', a Roman historian described the production of this paint in his Natural History. First, vats were lowered into the sea to catch these sea snails using frog and mussels as bait. Second, the vein containing the discharge was severed and the liquid was collected and salted in in huge vats. This was then fermented for about 10 days after a steady boil. Finally, the dye produced was harvested. The fermentation process produces a sick, unbearable odour due to the breakdown of the organic substances. It was believed that 12,000 of these sea snails were required to make a mere 1.4 grams of this paint.

Historian Theopompus said "Purple for dyes fetched its weight in silver." Emperors of Byzantium formulated laws that restricted the use of clothes that were dyed with Tyrian Purple to royalty and anyone who transgressed was punished with death. As a result, purple clothes made from this dye became a status symbol and were worn only by noblemen and kings, marking it the colour of supremacy. This gave birth to the expression "Born in the purple." Research also suggests that usage of this paint was present even during the time of Caesar and Cleopatra.

A Roman painting of Pompeii showing women clad in clothes dyed with Tyrian Purple.

As time progressed, the exact process and formation of this exquisite dye was lost. The advent of cheaper synthetic dyes such as Lichen Purple and Madder in the 1800s marked its decline as well. Contradicting popular premises, the use of this paint declined with the fall of the Roman Empire and not due to overfishing. However, in 1909, Paul Friedlander was able to discover the chemical structure of this dye. Inge Boesken Kanold, French artist with special interest in ancient and forgotten colours, along with retired engineer John Edmonds rediscovered a structurally similar dye in 2003. Inge Kanold comments "My fascination with purple has to do with the mystery of its past, with its provident transformation entirely linked to air and sunlight....."

An unusual aspect of this paint is that it is blue in solution and purple in amorphous form. Unlike normal paint which fades when exposed to sunlight, Tyrian Purple becomes darker. This paint comes in a vibrant shade of purple- as the name suggests- but some texts also describe it as 'scarlet' or 'maroon'.

Tyrian Purple in amorphous form.

 John Edmonds says "...This is the most prestigious dye in the world in fact...." and not unlike its past, this continues to be highly expensive- a mere 1 gram is valued at 3900 US dollars and that would roughly equate to 2,13,000 Indian rupees. Owing to its exorbitant price, natural Tyrian Purple is used only to restore art work. These days, an alternative form of this paint is synthesized from sea slugs that also produce a purple discharge. This discharge is harvested without causing harm to the animal, which is then released into the ocean.

Alternative form of sea slug that also produces a purple discharge.

Murex, the sea snail from which this paint is produced from, is pretty hard to come by but, it is not completely impossible to chance upon one if you were to scuba dive along the Mediterranean and Atlantic Coast of Europe and Africa!

The Wolf Who Could Fly

He walked all day and all night
Crossing barren plains and lush green forests.
He would spend some time looking up at the starry sky
He was the wolf who could fly.

He ventured deeper into undiscovered ground,
Looking for something of value.
When disappointment struck, he did issue an outcry
He was the wolf who could fly.

He had abandoned his bittersweet home
As he was all alone.
The thought made tears fill his eye;
He was the wolf who could fly.

He broke his journey at a green copse
For he heard familiar howls.
He hid and turned a vigilant spy
He was the wolf who could fly.

Perfectly blended in with his background,
He saw a pack of unknown capering comrades
But, was too dangerously shy;
He was the wolf that could fly.

Their beaming howls appeared strange and distant,
He was overcome by doubt and confusion.
He slowly retreated issuing a mournful sigh
He was the wolf who could fly.

His furry paws took him to the edge of land
And there he was greeted by a glinting emerald sea.
His lonely soul was no longer dry
He was the wolf who would fly.

He tread the cool, soothing water
And pondered about his life;
His past seemed cold and wry-
He was the wolf who could fly.

Everything was a vivid, taunting blur,
Every sight, every feeling, every smell.
He ruminated, wondering if he had been living a lie;
He was the wolf who could fly.

Overcome by a roaring epiphany
Which marshaled him toward the light;
He dispensed of his old ways and did comply-
He was the wolf who could fly.

Slowly and tenderly, happiness imbued his soul
Cleansing his anguished substance.
He prepared to soar the nebulous sky,
He was the wolf who could fly.

The glacial and celestial wind
Made him feel divine.
Alas, he had found what he yearned for and reality did he defy,
For he was the wolf who did fly.

An Epidemic Case Of 'Self Love' Which I Cannot Seem To Explain

Social networking websites(Facebook, that's the first thing that comes to my mind; sorry fellow Twitterers and the archaic Orkuters). We all know what they are, hell! some of us practically LIVE in it during the wee hours of some days(kudos to you, fellow idler!). They keep our heart pumping and our brain's juices and blood flowing into all the right nooks and crannies. For some of us it probably does even more, who knows(No, no no. I am not hinting at any aberrant activity one might engage in at their leisure time here. That's not my intention, not at all).

So, social networking websites. Before the celebrated arrival of  Facebook, friends of friends were strangers, relatives of friends were strangers and strangers were strangers. But times change and so has the function of social networking websites.

They do just so much for us all. We keep in touch with that one distant friend who is constantly belittling everyone else while rating his or her own popularity based on asinine internet polls , we do the same with that distant relative who we don't really care about but keep in touch because we never really took them off our friend list.  With the advent of these well developed websites, family ties and friendships have becomes more closely knit in some cases while the exact opposite has occurred in others. Conversely, a negligible portion has becomes famous while another sizable portion has embroiled itself into some particularly deep shit but, let's not go into that(excuse the language; sometimes the censorship button in my brain turns off).

Yes, now to my point(which is gradually taking a detectable form): Facebook has somehow triggered our narcissistic trait, and has accordingly introduced us to our own narcissistic side- that has so far been masked by a humble facade- which just loves to revel in recognition and appreciation. Taking photos has managed to accomplish this.

We all like taking pictures of ourselves(and occasionally others in our company) and secretly relish the fact that others see them however, no one likes to admit it. We can't help it now, can we? After all the option only exists FOR this purpose. So, we take pictures, subject it to a multitude of editing that morphs its humble, original content into something that resembles grandiosity in our heads. Then we upload it and wait for the mundane, yet arduously expected banality to begin. I am not going to restrict this act to just young girls, no; gender is almost immaterial in this case. Boys are just as indulgent in this in every bit.

 I am not saying this is wrong, I am not saying it's a crime and I am not accusing anyone of anything because if I did I'd be a 'dissembler' who reeks of sardonicism. Why be a 'dissembler' who reeks of sardonicism when I can be a relatively normal person(well, as normal one can BE in this heterogeneous world) who reeks of sardonicism?

So, narcissism. Now I am not going to go all Freud on you and quote the scientifically accepted 'definition' of that word because, let us face, you are going to get bored and use it as an excuse to stop reading this and I will end up looking like a prude(IF I haven't already). Instead, I am going to give you less fervent synonyms that don't make it sound like we have some serious medical condition: vanity, conceitedness, self-love. So, WHY is there is this sudden wave of narcissism, nay forgive me, 'self-love' that is manifesting itself in this manner? Why do we even have this side?

Well, I honestly don't know. I'll get back to you when I do.

A misanthropist is a self-loathing cynic.

Crimson Dreams

White smoke rises
In a sundry of shapes and sizes.
Th ascent ends only as soon as it had begun;
A musty, acrid smell is all that hung.
Below the wisps of white,
Shades of red and yellow come to sight.
The flames are but fluid in nature
Marking their foreboding departure.
The crimson inferno sardonically dances about,
All we can do is lament and shout.
Our stomachs churn
As they torridly burn.
Oh! how do we save them?
Can we not live up to them?
What does this mean?
Who brought forth this fiendish blaze?
We break our journey to stop and stare at
The vermillion display that resembles our darkest nightmare.
Our dreams are on fire;
The future seems abject and dire.
They burn not with passion
For  they have been stolen and put to decimation.

Rabbit Hole

A rabbit hole.

With our deplorable birth
We are delivered,
Not into a wonderful world,
But into a treacherous hole.

One that is filled with enticing
Illusions and maudlin affairs,
That are nothing more than mere
Bear traps waiting to pull us further down.

We are not pushed UP to reach
The glorious sky. No.
We are thrust DOWN.
The very beginning
 Of life marks our sequential descent into
 A deceptive and wonderfully vivid rabbit hole.

Alas, if only we knew!

The Sound Of A Silent Night

Moving swiftly
Among the shadows,
I sauntered deeper 
Into the still woods.

The taut, low slung 
Moon, spilled
A silvery hue that
Accentuated the dark
Evergreen form of every tree. 

I proceeded with forgone
Conclusion, hoping that
The indefinite melody of
The night would guide me.

I walked on, leaving behind
Colossal tree after tree, stepping
On wild grass and
Unevenly eroded pebbles.

Lost in anticipation,
I yearned to hear something.
Anything.
But my hope was for aught.

For all I could hear
Was my own racing heart
And the incessant sound
Of a silent night.

Torchbearer.

This one was something I wrote for a painting that I did a while back that portrays an elephant blowing out fire from its elevated trunk. I couldn't post the painting because honestly, the idea of it in my head was very well conceptualized and the actual work of art turned out to be not what I had visualized(I hate when that happens). So here is just the caption for the painting, which is actually a poem titled 'Torchbearer':

Torchbearer

His grey trunk quivered
As yellow flames winnowed,
Engulfing the seeping
Darkness that ruled.

He stood by and watched
The transcendent facade
With resolute diligence.

For, he was the
Regal ruler of Light.
The torchbearer.
He who exiled all things dark.

Marked by surreality,
The line between
Darkness and light,
Happiness and grief,
Sanity and insanity,
Peace and violence
Life and death,
Isn't so concrete sometimes.