A Babbling Buffoon
What can mere words achieve? The aphorisms, the adages, the humorous witty paradoxical epigrams filled with irony. What mind likes those? Are they, as all art is, useless and beautiful?
But were it not the eloquent cogent speeches that have influenced the world, won votes, kindled coups, and who knows, decided battles.
The more pragmatic philistine audience would dismiss it without wandering about any other thought(as they usually do). But those who have experienced its strength or are in mere love with it would find it hard to object.
The pragmatic philistines and the romantic eccentrics - this dichotomy pops up in several independent thoughts. When we categorize a group (I hope the few who read this won't mind a disjunctive article ) into two, there generally creeps up a third kind, usually being one in heart and mind and the other in their soul. Their minds are influenced and hearts tainted. As Dostoevsky explains his character Ganya in the Idiot, an ordinary person who wants to be unique. They are in an illusion that they are unique, they imitate the eccentrics, they do what eccentrics do, disregarding the reason of the eccentric's act.
Nothing leads them to rebel the commonplace, for their motive is to only rebel. Nothing leads them to the gaunt roads for they measure the number of trodden steps and choose the less chosen one.
I was reading 1984 by George Orwell, and how eloquently he had put his thoughts, how beautifully he connects with his reader. I wish I could write like him. I think I am not honest enough, I circumlocute my real thoughts. Nothing should be written to impress the reader. Or to impress yourself. It should be a true thought.
But were it not the eloquent cogent speeches that have influenced the world, won votes, kindled coups, and who knows, decided battles.
The more pragmatic philistine audience would dismiss it without wandering about any other thought(as they usually do). But those who have experienced its strength or are in mere love with it would find it hard to object.
The pragmatic philistines and the romantic eccentrics - this dichotomy pops up in several independent thoughts. When we categorize a group (I hope the few who read this won't mind a disjunctive article ) into two, there generally creeps up a third kind, usually being one in heart and mind and the other in their soul. Their minds are influenced and hearts tainted. As Dostoevsky explains his character Ganya in the Idiot, an ordinary person who wants to be unique. They are in an illusion that they are unique, they imitate the eccentrics, they do what eccentrics do, disregarding the reason of the eccentric's act.
Nothing leads them to rebel the commonplace, for their motive is to only rebel. Nothing leads them to the gaunt roads for they measure the number of trodden steps and choose the less chosen one.
I was reading 1984 by George Orwell, and how eloquently he had put his thoughts, how beautifully he connects with his reader. I wish I could write like him. I think I am not honest enough, I circumlocute my real thoughts. Nothing should be written to impress the reader. Or to impress yourself. It should be a true thought.
Comments
Post a Comment