Take a classic Doors song.Take the sound of monsoon rain. You have before you a very potent mix. Now, play both, sit back and relax. Of course, speakers make a world of difference.
When I learnt about this website which had a very simple offering: that of the sound of 'gentle rain', I was curious to experiment it with some of my favorite songs and somehow the first song that came to mind was the Doors' classic-Riders on the storm. The original actually begins with the sound of the storm and probably that's why.
It didn't stop with that. I went ahead, a change of genre this time, a husky voiced cat power song and I was excited. The combination of rainy weather and some good music can really do wonders as the rainymood website suggests.
Well then, if you ve had a rough week, a bad fight or something of that sort, this is therapy. Actually, its better with a calm mind.
Here is my 30-minute playlist (Link here):
1. Riders on the storm- The Doors
2. Love and Communication- Cat Power
3. Nutshell- Alice in Chains
4. Long gone day- Mad Season
5*. If you were my guitar - Soulmate (goes out to Ra and CJ)
6. Come here - Kath Bloom
7. Space Oddity - David Bowie
Enjoy! Time to make your own playlist.
Sunday, May 09, 2010
Thursday, March 04, 2010
When friends leave and others return
It is not hard to explain how one feels when friends--dear or not so dear--leave. There is a certain social experiance we get used to that is a little sad to let go of. Sooner than later one is bound to get used to a different social setting--minus the departing friend--alright; however, as cliched it might sound, memories remain.
One such friend is leaving us soon and a train of thoughts led me to ask myself: What is it that I will recall first at the mention of this friend. There is some part of oneself that you associate people with, innit? Its as though that small part of you has lost a play companion of sorts.
This particular friend was quite an opinionated person; mostly about politics and world affairs. That's too broad a description. To put it simply, if one asked him what he felt about the India-Pakistan scenario, instead of the more common Pakistan is villian view, he would argue from a more academically balanced standpoint. He knew his history books quite well.
It was he who inspired me partly to take to historical reading; mostly penned by academicians:political scientists and historians alike. It is this part of me I discovered during interactions with him. I will miss those long discussions debating about popular view on things of interest! Putting things in perspective history was definitely not a favorite subject during my schooling. The subject was such a bore because of teachers torturing us with the exact dates of events and all.
I nearly forgot! About the same time this friend will move another long-lost friend of mine is coming hither. This friend brings memories of whiling time in discussions on issues from a cultural standpoint. The chap being a culture-vulture of sorts has an eye for perspectives of people from daily life most would miss. Like the time he was speaking in high regard about the Dutch for being so simple and straight-forward in their lifestyle.
I wish the two meet. It will be interesting to observe a mix of strategic world affairs and their cultural underpinnings!
One such friend is leaving us soon and a train of thoughts led me to ask myself: What is it that I will recall first at the mention of this friend. There is some part of oneself that you associate people with, innit? Its as though that small part of you has lost a play companion of sorts.
This particular friend was quite an opinionated person; mostly about politics and world affairs. That's too broad a description. To put it simply, if one asked him what he felt about the India-Pakistan scenario, instead of the more common Pakistan is villian view, he would argue from a more academically balanced standpoint. He knew his history books quite well.
It was he who inspired me partly to take to historical reading; mostly penned by academicians:political scientists and historians alike. It is this part of me I discovered during interactions with him. I will miss those long discussions debating about popular view on things of interest! Putting things in perspective history was definitely not a favorite subject during my schooling. The subject was such a bore because of teachers torturing us with the exact dates of events and all.
I nearly forgot! About the same time this friend will move another long-lost friend of mine is coming hither. This friend brings memories of whiling time in discussions on issues from a cultural standpoint. The chap being a culture-vulture of sorts has an eye for perspectives of people from daily life most would miss. Like the time he was speaking in high regard about the Dutch for being so simple and straight-forward in their lifestyle.
I wish the two meet. It will be interesting to observe a mix of strategic world affairs and their cultural underpinnings!
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Dear insanity
After being hammered from inside and out, I set out to cycle back home. The hundred odd bucks I owed to Lausanne Roule came to mind and buried stupid impulses. Burning the hand makes sure one learns the lesson. I set out walking with a lot of frustration and anger at having let it be. A perspective change was needed for the moment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Libido is sometimes hard to explain I say!' opined an aged headmaster. 'That Freud was so obsessed with its contribution to human behavior that he used it to explain everything. What he did not was reason for libido itself.'
'Saar, I'll tell you full story, matinee balcony ticket, weekday leave from office, shady siddeshwara tent, rats under seat, premature... whistles I mean. It is the simple story saar. Hero meet heroine; ding-dong happen; heroine slap hero; hero impressed and bp raise; ding-dong happen again; heroine slap again but stopped by big muscular hands of hero; heroine knees week and girly voice of anger; kaput!'
The lady agreed although headmaster was furious. I was rejoicing with the triumph of fine oratory over intellect. Or so I thought...
'Although you are right,' began the lady 'there is a slight predisposition in your argument to make the whole thing somewhat male chauvanist. It is true that women like it that way and thats exactly why they let it be. Its a way of letting you be the boss when they know who is in control; a designation or a lack of it doesn't hurt them you see.'
'wowowow!! From where you went where maydam! I was talking of picture in siddeshwara tent. Its like that only, once I buy ticket and we go. But don't worry maydam, I keep porki fellows out. They one nuisance they are!'
'Ok maadesha. We will do that but first, where is the tea I asked for? And won't you ask what headmaster ji would like?'
'oooo...sorry maydam! Saar, what you want?'
'hihihi...whatever maydam has!'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
A perspective change had happened and I was back to the usual grind. Listen to voices in your head. It helps to!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Libido is sometimes hard to explain I say!' opined an aged headmaster. 'That Freud was so obsessed with its contribution to human behavior that he used it to explain everything. What he did not was reason for libido itself.'
'Saar, I'll tell you full story, matinee balcony ticket, weekday leave from office, shady siddeshwara tent, rats under seat, premature... whistles I mean. It is the simple story saar. Hero meet heroine; ding-dong happen; heroine slap hero; hero impressed and bp raise; ding-dong happen again; heroine slap again but stopped by big muscular hands of hero; heroine knees week and girly voice of anger; kaput!'
The lady agreed although headmaster was furious. I was rejoicing with the triumph of fine oratory over intellect. Or so I thought...
'Although you are right,' began the lady 'there is a slight predisposition in your argument to make the whole thing somewhat male chauvanist. It is true that women like it that way and thats exactly why they let it be. Its a way of letting you be the boss when they know who is in control; a designation or a lack of it doesn't hurt them you see.'
'wowowow!! From where you went where maydam! I was talking of picture in siddeshwara tent. Its like that only, once I buy ticket and we go. But don't worry maydam, I keep porki fellows out. They one nuisance they are!'
'Ok maadesha. We will do that but first, where is the tea I asked for? And won't you ask what headmaster ji would like?'
'oooo...sorry maydam! Saar, what you want?'
'hihihi...whatever maydam has!'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
A perspective change had happened and I was back to the usual grind. Listen to voices in your head. It helps to!
Monday, January 11, 2010
Fact sheet
I was going through Divsy's factsheet and found some questions raised therein worth pondering over. It is the content of this post.
Summarising a case study on a San-Francisco-based pharmacy company that promised monetary rewards to locals for preserving certain medicinal trees in tropical rain forests of South America (notably in Equador and Brazil), the following question was asked:
I would go further to ask:
My understanding native medicine wrt the case study is limited. But I would first want to find out if this is a specific instance of commercialisation favoring nature conservation. It is not hard to see that the Pharmacy company can continue to do business provided they have continued access to those trees used in making the medicine. It follows then that the forests in which these trees grow need to be conserved. But, does commercialisation always favor conservation where ever nature is harvested for commercial use? I would not believe so for the simple reason that there are continuing protests world-wide where commercialisation and conservation are at loggerheads.
The study goes to show that there are instances where the two are not in conflict. But, are there more instances like the pharmacy company?
It is a different matter if the compensation promised to the locals was indeed handed out? It turns out it wasn't as good as promised because the drugs failed to make profit.
Another important question that the fact sheet poses in the context of action taken for environmental conservation in developing countries, is:
To gain insight into this question, I would like to know to what period in modern history of the world could any concrete action in environmental conservation be dated? Lets take the instance of the insistence of World bank in the 1940s and 50s to build dams on rivers. The case for conservation being damage due to submersion of surround land areas (damage to human settlements and bio-diversity in the vicinity). I would like to know what the U.S did in containing reported environmental damage[1] due to the construction of Hoover Dam in 1936. For example, how does it contrast with the Narmada dam project in India in this regard? The reasoning is that India today could be more fairly compared with America in the past and not in the present due to delayed development (because of reasons this post is not concerned with). It is a question of fairness really. Did the U.S (first world) have the moral authority to hold India (third world) responsible for its present day actions? Or Is this a fair question to ask at all?
In the view of true-blue environmentalists, it pays to conserve and not quibble about moral obligations or the lack of it? In other words, India (third world) cannot hold a lack of action wrt conservation on the part of U.S (first world) if any against it. The argument that 'You did not conserve then, so I won't now' although a morally correct argument cannot be an actually correct one,for, both are mis-using nature. The problem with this line of thought is the economic implication of conservation. Noting instances where economic development (commercialisation) is the antithesis of conservation, is it fair to ask India (third world) to compromise economic prosperity for a greater duty to conserve? Please note that the need and importance of conservation is not being questioned here? What is being questioned is the fairness in weighing all in the same scale.
Honey, I have some questions for you! :)
P.S: Sweetheart, I really enjoyed reading the document. Keep 'em coming :*
Summarising a case study on a San-Francisco-based pharmacy company that promised monetary rewards to locals for preserving certain medicinal trees in tropical rain forests of South America (notably in Equador and Brazil), the following question was asked:
Should we use the means of market economy to implement nature conservation?
I would go further to ask:
How often can we use the means of market economy to implement nature conservation?
My understanding native medicine wrt the case study is limited. But I would first want to find out if this is a specific instance of commercialisation favoring nature conservation. It is not hard to see that the Pharmacy company can continue to do business provided they have continued access to those trees used in making the medicine. It follows then that the forests in which these trees grow need to be conserved. But, does commercialisation always favor conservation where ever nature is harvested for commercial use? I would not believe so for the simple reason that there are continuing protests world-wide where commercialisation and conservation are at loggerheads.
The study goes to show that there are instances where the two are not in conflict. But, are there more instances like the pharmacy company?
It is a different matter if the compensation promised to the locals was indeed handed out? It turns out it wasn't as good as promised because the drugs failed to make profit.
Another important question that the fact sheet poses in the context of action taken for environmental conservation in developing countries, is:
Is it really a ‘first world luxury’?
To gain insight into this question, I would like to know to what period in modern history of the world could any concrete action in environmental conservation be dated? Lets take the instance of the insistence of World bank in the 1940s and 50s to build dams on rivers. The case for conservation being damage due to submersion of surround land areas (damage to human settlements and bio-diversity in the vicinity). I would like to know what the U.S did in containing reported environmental damage[1] due to the construction of Hoover Dam in 1936. For example, how does it contrast with the Narmada dam project in India in this regard? The reasoning is that India today could be more fairly compared with America in the past and not in the present due to delayed development (because of reasons this post is not concerned with). It is a question of fairness really. Did the U.S (first world) have the moral authority to hold India (third world) responsible for its present day actions? Or Is this a fair question to ask at all?
In the view of true-blue environmentalists, it pays to conserve and not quibble about moral obligations or the lack of it? In other words, India (third world) cannot hold a lack of action wrt conservation on the part of U.S (first world) if any against it. The argument that 'You did not conserve then, so I won't now' although a morally correct argument cannot be an actually correct one,for, both are mis-using nature. The problem with this line of thought is the economic implication of conservation. Noting instances where economic development (commercialisation) is the antithesis of conservation, is it fair to ask India (third world) to compromise economic prosperity for a greater duty to conserve? Please note that the need and importance of conservation is not being questioned here? What is being questioned is the fairness in weighing all in the same scale.
Honey, I have some questions for you! :)
P.S: Sweetheart, I really enjoyed reading the document. Keep 'em coming :*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
