Emotions – Parts Per Billion

A Hindsight For Better Future

Morgan Housel – the famous author of ‘The Psychology of Money’ has another important book called “Same as Ever” which gives insight into things which have never changed over the course of time. Same as Ever drives the motto of objective flexibility and subjective awareness of every event happening around us and with us. It also highlights that our mind is the first and the easiest one to fool, which leads to false sense of superiority over others and creates biases. Once we accept that nothing is perfect, no one is perfect – it injects humility and forgiveness. It also makes us to be grateful for what we possess today. The ability to see every event at the same level is a superpower any one of us can have.

An important book from Morgan Housel called “Same as Ever”

Somebody, make me a time machine

Life would be easy if we had a way to accurately predict the consequences of the events/ actions.

Scenario 1 – what would be your reaction if some random person hands you a $1,000,000 lottery ticket and, in few moments, you realize that you just won that lottery?

Scenario 2 – what would happen if an ambitious project that you worked on tirelessly for many years while sacrificing your other priorities – ends into a big failure because of a seemingly impossible and insignificant event/ error?

For most of us these two scenarios are practically impossible but the odds are still non-zero. They can happen in reality.

How can we be sure that they selectively happen to certain person? Scenario 1 for ourselves and Scenario 2 for our enemies especially… (Just kidding)

If you closely observe the lives we are living right now, you will see that we are always oscillating between such events which demand certainty of outcomes even before the are realized. We have this innate urge to remain ready for such events; it is what we are always striving for.

Now, one question – are we living in a matrix? Is universe a simulation?

If the answer is ‘YES’, then it means that every outcome should be predetermined. If everything is predetermined then why things don’t happen the way we ‘want’? Does that mean that we lack the computational capabilities to precisely calculate the outcome? OR is what is destined to happen different from what we ‘want’?

If the answer is ‘NO’, then everything explodes into meaninglessness. The answers are nihilistic.

Looking at the both outcomes of this question we see that we need a baseline to make our decision making effective. Is there a formula to systematically put all the things happening around? What are somethings in nature whose knowledge will ensure our satisfactory existence. (I am being very optimistic while writing ‘satisfactory’ word here.)

In simple words, what is the formula to live a good life? whether it is predictable or not.

Morgan Housel the famous author of the Psychology of Money wrote one important book called Same as Ever which tries to answer this same question. Same as Ever drives the motto of objective flexibility and subjective awareness of every event happening around us and with us.

This is a deep dive into Morgan Housel’s book “Same as Ever”.

I will try to keep this short. Here are some instructions:

Those who have read this book – each idea in this book is numbered in the sequence Morgan explains in the flow of the book. So, #1 is Hanging by a Thread as mentioned in book and #23 is Wounds heal, Scars last

Those who haven’t read the book – I have given short summary of what Morgan discusses in each of the 23 ideas. That should help you to wrap you head around my distilled down version of this book.

(I apologize for putting that part in the end and spoiling the conclusion/ discussion on this book.)

I would say this book has been one of the most important books I have come across. (I am an average book reader by the way. So, not sure if same would be the case for other people.) While going through each idea, you will realize that something keeps on repeating; and even though it repeats, it brings new perspective into that specific discussion. My attempt to summarize this book focuses on picking what is common but connected to all the facts mentioned in the book and also their connection to the reality we live in.

Discussions

The discussion is in 3 steps, so adjusting our understanding to previous step is key to understand the next step. The illustrative images in each step of the discussion connects the ideas from the book to a common central idea. It will be handy if you read this with the book in your hand or you can jump to the point-to-point summary (the part after conclusion) in a neighboring tab of your web browser.

Step 1 discussion:

Figure 1. Finite and recurring cycle of compounding processes

You will see in the figure 1 that reality is ever changing process of infinite real events. The key to understand what is happening is to see every event containing same potential at first. Keep in mind – same potential – neither good nor bad. Once you assign every event with equal potential you will see that compounding accounts for that single event to build on and create the next event. Sometimes two big events will compound together to create an enormous event.

Now comes the fun part – the enormity of every compounded event will always be in favor of someone and against the favor of the complementary population. This makes that event good or bad for people. Some will suffer some will rejoice.

A person who knows how the world, nature or universe works will not have preferences, favor-ability towards such events. The answer lies in the cyclical nature of such events. Keeping a single event sustained for long duration demands to go many things to work in supporting ways and as every event has same potency in the infinite possibilities, it surely will lead to the downfall of that process. It’s just matter of time.

Talking about matter of time – the game of life is not about winning, rather it is about remaining in the game longer as the compounding pays off and decomposes into new start.

Our limited life span intuitively doesn’t allow us to wait till the compounding pays off. That is exactly where we make mistake. That is exactly why we are devastated by a single seeming insignificant event causing destruction of our favorite things.

Step 2 discussion:

Our urge to predict everything to ensure survival demands perfection in every entity considered for precision and accuracy of prediction. As reality is made up of many real possibilities, this count of possibilities and the errors associated with their measurements require huge resources which render the prediction process impractical for the possible outcomes.

(Keep in mind right now that we are only talking about those variables, events which we can understand; we haven’t even entered into those variables, events we don’t even understand or know in first place.)

The moment we introduce poorly known, immeasurable but significant variable – the whole game of predictability crumbles down.

That is exactly why instead of striving for better predictability, it is a smart choice to be prepared for everything. Knowing that this too shall end soon should comfort us to prepare for such things/ events. The rejection of the urge for perfection, absoluteness and full efficiency will immediately prepare us for everything that reality unfolds.

Step 3 discussion:

Figure 3. In the end, we are only human.

Now that we know how every event is potent and can immediately contribute to a cyclical process of compounding, it is important to understand how we comprehend that compounding. As everything that we do is directly linked to our survival we are by default born with preferences. These preferences get eliminated or amplified based on the life experiences we have. Even though our urge for predictability demands objectivity we often forge the subjective parts of every narrative. The subjectivity is important, because the reasons to survive are different for different people.

Conclusion – Human behavior and laws of nature

Our mind rarely understands anything as a flow of entities. Almost all of the fundamental entities existing in nature are flow – continuum entities. But in order to understand them study them we break them into pieces which makes is practical to quantify and predict. For time as an example – we have past – present – future; we need this separation to comprehend the flow of time. This slight arrangement of separation of events just for the convenience of communication and comprehension for our minds has now become such a second nature of our realities that we could hardly come out of the idea of past and future. Past keeps on haunting and future creates anxiety due to the uncertainty. Nostalgia from past brings us joy and what advancements future will present inspires us to work harder today. We rarely notice that this works both ways.

It is really difficult and impractical for our mind to let go of this past-present-future mentality. This convenience of separation for the sake of improving our decision making and survival has imparted a sense of time being a set of discrete isolated events, independent events. This steals the feature of hyper-connectivity in our understanding of reality.

Once we come out of the discretization of time as past-present-future we will see that every event is equally important and highly interconnected and multidimensional (in the sense that it creates multiple real effects on multiple entities) Our mind being biased for survival and in energy optimization mode, it always focuses on what is required to remain alive. This sense of remaining alive now has evolved into intellectual survival – as in what things we define as our life. So, even though from objective point of view all events remain exactly the same, on our personal level certain events are highly important because they change the things we are attached to in a drastic way – in most cases our life. We are now scared to die intellectually – a mental death – the death of our truths – our identity. And trust me, this happens frequently.

Morgan in this book very beautifully noted down the factual version of the reality we live in; it is beautiful because it shows how our human nature is always affecting the seemingly objective reality of the most of the things.

This is my ultimate distilled down version of the book “Same as Ever” by Morgan Housel.

One point summary of ‘Same as Ever’ by Morgan Housel

It also highlights that our mind is the first and the easiest one to fool, which leads to false sense of superiority over others and creates biases. Once we accept that nothing is perfect, no one is perfect – it injects humility and forgiveness. It also makes us grateful for what we possess today. What else could be more important than this to be justified as a human being?

These points ask for detachment from predictions and end results. A sense of responsibility for the actions could be the best version of any person – this exactly is invoked when we are trying to prepare for the future instead of striving to predict it.

I think we need more ideas like this when we are fighting for survival for such unimportant things where we already know the real, practical answers but have decided to ignore them.

The ability to see every event at the same level is a superpower any one of us can have.

For those who haven’t read the book here is the point-to-point summary of the book “Same as Ever”:

#1. If you know where we’ve been you realize, we have no idea where we’re going.

Here, Morgan gives many real-life events where a single decision led to catastrophic events causing loss of many lives and valuable resources.

When we study history even when we know what exactly happened, it is tricky to pinpoint the trigger for that event. There will be why and how behind every small-small event and when we will reach to its origin it becomes really difficult to wrap your mind around that petty thing which had led to such a big and historic event.

The absurdity of past connections should humble your confidence in predicting future ones.

#2. We are very good at predicting the future, except for the surprises – which tend to be all that matter

In very simple words, Morgan highlights the extents of our imagination and thinking. Even though they are infinite, the nature in which we are existing is equally or rather infinite in bigger and greater sense. That is exactly why even when we think we are prepared for everything, nature will always have something new in its pocket to reveal and not being ready for that exact new thing makes that event overwhelming for us because we were not ready for that exact new reveal.

It’s impossible to plan for what you can’t imagine, and the more you think you’ve imagined everything the more shocked you’ll be when something happens that you hadn’t considered.

This itself should humble us. That is why preparation is more important than forecasting.

Invest in preparedness, not in prediction

#3. The first rule of happiness is low expectations.

The most important observation Morgan puts here is in the ways we gauge our resourcefulness – it is always relative – material or immaterial – objects or emotions. We always have a baseline which is created by comparing ourselves with those around us. That is exactly why we rarely appreciate what we have at our hands.

We always crave for what ‘they’ seem to have instead of appreciating what we already and really have in our hands. Even when we are unsure about whether others actually have those things, still we crave those things for us, which is tragic!

Morgan expresses that almost all of the truly precious things in our life don’t come with a price tag that is why we never care to evaluate their importance – like good health, freedom. Same is the case with expectations.

When Morgan is asking for low expectations, it is not omission of the motivation to improve ourselves. Low expectations ask for realistic expectations. One must always be observant of the gap between what we wanted and what happened in reality.

#4. People who think about the world in unique ways you like also think about the world in unique ways you won’t like.

Here, Morgan talks about the role models, heroes, leaders we consider the best of us all. It is very important to understand that they are the best among us all because they did something in very exceptional manner which made them stand out of the well-defined ‘boring’ and ‘average’ structure of the society. If they would have followed the same paths that other followed, they would have been just like others.

In order to stand out of the masses they did something different.

Now be cautious! This different could be seen as good or bad as per the average crowd level. And keep in mind this specialty in that person is because others don’t have it in them. So, in order to create and develop something special out of the same average crowd one has to overcome a resistance of the masses where a trade-off is done with other aspects of their personality. Sometimes the exceptional conditions create exceptional personalities which many people fail to recognize.

Of course they [successful people] have abnormal characteristics. That’s why they’re successful! And there is no world in which we should assume that all those abnormal characteristics are positive, polite, endearing, or appealing.

Simple words, there is always some trade off to achieve something truly exceptional.

You gotta challenge all the assumptions. If you don’t, what is doctrine on day one becomes dogma forever after

#5. People don’t want accuracy. They want certainty.

A common trait of human behavior is the burning desire for certainty despite living in an uncertain and probabilistic world.

Morgan discusses how we are always trying to alleviate the bad results, pain in all life scenarios. The urge to survive supersedes everything. Our brain always wants a confirmed trigger on whether to fight or flight for given problem. It is always in energy optimization mode and in the uncertain world filled of infinite possibilities it wants something to act on immediately. Otherwise, brain knows that it won’t survive. The urge for certainty – that clarity of whether to fight or flight is the most important information than how precisely we are assessing the reality. It’s like brain takes a shortcut to ensure survival. That is exactly why huge load of information especially numbers overwhelm us.

The core is that people think they want an accurate view of the future but what they really crave is certainty.

#6. Stories are always more powerful than statistics.

If we continue the train of thoughts from previous point, soon we will appreciate how dearly we appreciate stories instead of boring numbers. Even when stories would tell a lie and numbers would tell the real, pure truth we would always choose a fake story over realistic numbers. Our brain doesn’t want to overwork itself to ensure survival.

Good stories tend to do that [evoking emotions and connecting the dots in millions of people’s heads]. They have extraordinary ability to inspire and evoke positive emotions, bringing insights and attention to topics that people tend to ignore when they’ve previously been presented with nothing but facts.

Stories create an emotional, empathic bridge between people which our brain already knows since the childhood. The very first think a baby does to start breathing is crying not counting. (I know the analogy is lame but it works here) we are implicitly trained to actively process emotions first and then numbers. Stories enhance this ability on next level.

That is exactly why emotional-ity will always be preferred over rationality.

We live in a world where people are bored, impatient, emotional, and need complicated things distilled into easy-to grasp scenes.

#7. The world is driven by forces that cannot be measured.

Morgan brings here more clarity on the objective nature of the numbers even when they are showing the truth, the reality. The point that our reality is made up of the infinite possibility itself shows that the sheer limitation of our computation capability will create a partial picture of the bigger reality. This happens because many of the factors which influence our reality are beyond quantification. That is exactly why whenever we are making any decision based on objective and true data (like truest of true numbers) we should bear in mind that these numbers are not accounting for those unmeasured factors which also affect the reality we are trying to understand.

Some things are immeasurably important. They’re either impossible, or too elusive, to quantify. But they can make all the difference in the world, often because their lack of quantification causes people to discount their relevance or even their existence.

In simple words, our story loving brain is driven by intuition and safe/ familiar information which is unquantifiable most of the times.

#8 Crazy doesn’t mean broken. Crazy is normal; beyond the point of crazy is normal.

Morgan is trying to point out how we understand what is means to be at the top. He established that most of the tops we experience in life are to because we have experienced falling down from them and we would have never understood that we were at top unless we have had fall down from them.

The only way to discover the limits of what’s possible is to venture a little way past those limits.

We never appreciate summit of something unless we start climbing from down or fall down from that summit. That is exactly why what made you feel at the top will make you safe and that attachment to safety will lead to your fall, the pain of fall will motivate you to climb new heights and again the cycle will go on.

#9. A good idea on steroids quickly becomes a terrible idea.

Morgan here explains how evolution created the species around us. There was always some trade-off while evolving because of the forces of nature. In nature nothing has absolute competitive advantage otherwise a single species will take over everything that single species alone will lead to its downfall and destruction due to the lack of diversity.

Most things have a natural size and speed and backfire quickly when you push them beyond that.

In simple words, anything that is burns bright, goes out fast. Resources behind every process are limited and even if they would be available in surplus, extent of their utilization affects the outcome and overall integrity of that process.

#10. Stress focuses your attention in ways that good times can’t.

The urge to survive makes our brain to push to its untested limits. These limits are there just for the optimum behavior so that our brain could actually use the reserve energy when it is the question of life and death. When it come down to do or die – people have always delivered in surprising and shocking ways.

The circumstances that tend to produce the biggest innovations are those that cause people to be worried, scared, and eager to move quickly because their future depends on it.

Morgan points out here that this stress should be healthy because there is always a natural size of everything as explained in point #9.

There is a delicate balance between helpful stress and crippling disaster.

#11. Good news comes from compounding, which always takes time, but bad news comes from a loss in confidence or a catastrophic error that can occur in a blink of an eye.

Growth always fights against competition that slows its rise.

Morgan here shows how things that exist today as our reality have gone through multiple iterations. They have already failed many times and started again long ago; its just that the compounding imparted grandeur and power to fight against the adversities of the life which made their realisation possible here in front of us. There will again be some simple, seemingly insignificant event which will destroy this creation and things will start again.

To enjoy peace, we need almost everyone to make good choices. By contrast, a poor choice by just one side can lead to war.

#12. When little things compound into extraordinary things.

Here Morgan points out from the examples of history how in order to avoid a big calamity people ignored some small incidents which led to even bigger calamities. It is ingrained in our mind to overlook big events because the smaller events which lead to their realization are “small and insignificant”.

Small risks weren’t the alternative to big risks; they were the trigger.

#13. Progress requires optimism and pessimism to coexist.

Morgan here talks about how our preferences for each and everything have stolen away the realism in our lives. Instead of favoring one side, life is more about appreciation of the spectrum. It was never about who wins or who loses because both are short lived. It is always about who survived and stayed in the game longer. (Simon Sinek calls it the infinite game as explained in Game theory.)

The trick in any field – from finance to careers to relationships – is being able to survive the short-run problems so you can stick around long enough to enjoy the long-term growth.

Whoever lives to see the end wins but that victory is just over those who couldn’t survive. There will always be some room at the top because conditions never remain the same.

#14. There is a huge advantage to being a little imperfect.

The more perfect you try to become, the more vulnerable you generally are

The idea of perfection immediately steals the flexibility from any given system. Because of the perfection the system is bound to certain thriving conditions and exactly when you expose this system to the reality of infinite possibilities there will always be some ‘seemingly’ trivial event which will take down that whole system.

A little imperfection makes the system to bend thereby giving place to perform in unimagined conditions and as we have already learnt that the reality is full of unimaginable but real events.

Morgan beautifully explains the ways in which natural evolution has worked out.

A species that evolves to become very good at one thing tends to become vulnerable at another.

…species rarely evolve to become perfect at anything, because perfecting one skill comes at the expense of another skill that will eventually be critical to survival.

Nature’s answer is a lot of good enough, below-potential traits across all species.

#15. Everything worth pursuing comes with a little pain. The trick is not minding that it hurts.

The really important and actually valuable things in life don’t come with a price tag and that is exactly why we are not ready to pay any price. This makes our minds to wish for such things because of the false sense of entitlement. This same entitlement blinds us from the real actions which can lead us to this achievement and we keep on whining about not achieving these things. A wishful thinking!

A unique skill, an underrated skill, is identifying the optimal amount of hassle and nonsense you should put up with to get ahead while getting along.

#16. Most competitive advantages eventually die.

A we have now already understood that even a small event can lead to collapse of any grand creation and how easy it is to undermine any event we must now accept that nothing big will stay as it is now. Same goes for any competitive advantage. As things keep changing the advantages which made their impact big will become irrelevant with the changing things. One has to keep on reinventing in order to remain relevant and effective with the changing times.

Evolution is ruthless and unforgiving – it doesn’t teach by showing you what works but by destroying what doesn’t.

#17. It always feels like we’re falling behind, and it’s easy to discount the potential of new technology.

Morgan highlights how the innovations which we consider ground-breaking, world-changing were result of multiple small-small events creating synergy to coexist.

It’s so easy to underestimate how two small things can compound into an enormous thing.

#18. The grass is greener on the side that’s fertilized with bullshit.

You never know what struggles people are hiding.

As we have already seen our urge to compare our conditions with the conditions of others and always consider ours to be the worst most of the times, it is evident that we are experts in judging everything in its entirety based on very little information. Our biases and basic mentality feed this tendency furthermore. But reality is always like the iceberg.

Most of the things are harder than they look and not as fun as they seem.

#19. When the incentives are crazy, the behavior is crazy. People can be led to justify and defend nearly anything.

Morgan here shows that beyond envy people are driven by incentives. You can make people do almost anything, make them believe them in almost any thing if their interests are aligned in that. This is strong when people are helpless and when it is about their survival.

One of the strongest pulls of incentives is the desire for the people to hear only what they want to hear and see only what they want to see.

The beauty that Morgan points out is that this can also be used to bring good out of people.

It’s easy to underestimate how much good people can do, how talented they can become, and what they can accomplish when they operate in a world where their incentives are aligned towards progress.

#20. Nothing is more persuasive than what you’ve experienced first-hand.

As we have emotional beings and we have already seen that we will always prefer emotional clarity of falsehood over the numerical, arithmetic truth it shows that every part of our understanding of life is tied to our own individual experiences. We rarely appreciate the foretold truth. But we will appreciate all those things which we experience on our own.

That is also why there are certain truths which very few people have experienced but are not generally accepted by the masses because there is no part to connect personally. We can only connect personally only when we have passed through those experiences.

That is exactly why it is difficult to convince people of something really exceptional and extraordinary personal experience, that also why it is also easy to fool people.

The next generation never learns anything from the previous one until it’s brought home with a hammer… I’ve wondered why the nest generation can’t profit from the generation before, but they never do until they get knocked in the head by experience.

#21. Saying “I’m in it for the long run” is a bit like standing at the base of Mount Everest, pointing to the top, and saying, “That’s where I’m heading.” Well, that’s nice. Now comes the test.

In simple words, Morgan shows us that we rarely will ever know what we have signed up for. Most of the times our simulative experiences and thoughts will be broken down by the unimaginable possibilities of the reality. Instead of craving for that summit one must try to stand strong while they have started this journey and remain faithful to this step they are taking ahead. This attitude has to be kept with every step which very few people maintain.

Long term is less about time horizon and more about flexibility.

#22. There are no points awarded for difficulty.

Almost all of the times people appreciate certain things, certain people because they couldn’t not have or become like them. This crates a mysticism. We are always attracted to mystical things because the urge to know better (to improve chances of survival against unknown) is our hidden trait.

Complexity creates this mysticism instantly. That is why we most of the time reject truths which are so obvious and in front of our eyes and accept that intellectually stimulating complicated lie. The complexity makes our brain to actively engage in that thing which creates an attachment just because our brain was invested in it.

Complexity gives a comforting impression of control while simplicity is hard to distinguish from cluelessness.

#23. What have you experienced that I haven’t that makes you believe what you do? And would I think about the world like you do if I experienced what you have?

Morgan points out that our lives even though we have common experiences, we associate ourselves to certain groups, certain ideologies on deeper levels and at core we are totally different and individual.

Many debates are not actual disagreements; they’re people with different experiences talking over each other.

References:

Morgan Housel’s book “Same a s Ever”.
Morgan Housel

The Free Spirit – Beyond Good and Evil

The journey to the freedom demands solitude thereby making man responsible, accountable for the consequences of his every thought and action. Friedrich Nietzsche in his book Beyond Good and Evil paved a way for future philosophers to establish their own new perspectives about the truth where there are no two sides – good-bad, sad-happy, moral-immoral, beautiful-ugly, calm-disturbing but a revised and better version of the older truth. Nietzsche in this book focused on the refinement of our perspectives, our versions of truths for the real freedom because immediately surrendering to already established versions of ideologies is the worst imprisonment any man can have. Nietzsche showed how badly our ignorance creates an illusion of freedom and how to come out of it. This is to remember Friedrich Nietzsche on his death anniversary.

Remembering Friedrich Nietzsche on his death anniversary

Friedrich Nietzsche is one of the most impactful philosophers we as a humanity have ever seen. Reading Nietzsche is a task in itself. But the moment you start getting hold of the things that Nietzsche is trying point to, you will literally undergo transformation. The path that Nietzsche paved inspired many modern philosophers, thinkers, writers. To not mention Nietzsche is to do injustice with our understanding of ourselves as the human beings. This is one attempt to revisit Nietzsche’s ideas in his famous book called “Beyond Good and Evil”, especially his ideas on free Spirit.

Nietzsche in his special style clarified what it means to be really free and how we develop our perceptions, philosophies about the world around us and ourselves.

This is me remembering Nietzsche on his death anniversary. His ideas will keep on living forever.

Oversimplification kills the nuances thereby changing the big picture

Nietzsche strikes powerfully on the idea of understanding the life as simple and easy. It’s a humorous way in which he tried to convey how we consider living life as way to goodness, happiness, pleasure and freedom. The sentences that Nietzsche used to put his ideas about life are built in such a way that you will start questioning the happy nature of the life we desire. You will realize that during the process of understanding life as a pleasurable, happy experience we have submitted our thought process only to the side of pleasure, happiness, and truth. This presumption about life always deviates our search for the truth – “the happiness” that we lookout for as a biased pursuit. Here Nietzsche is not saying that if ‘this’ which you are trying to justify life with is true then it’s opposite is wrong; he is trying to point us towards the idea that as we have attributed life to a happy and pleasurable experience, this attribution has oversimplified what life actually is. Oversimplification has happened because not everyone can understand complex ideas on equal level. It’s not because people are dumb, it is because we have our own ways of interpreting the world around us and the ways through which we interpret the world are totally subjective. Thus, the truth if it exists, it will never be absolute but based on perspectives one has.

“We have contrived to retain our ignorance in order to enjoy an almost inconceivable freedom, thoughtlessness, imprudence, heartiness, and gaiety – in order to enjoy life!”

In order to make everyone appreciate given idea of life on same level we have oversimplified what life is and such oversimplified foundation has led to building even more oversimplified versions of so-called truth. In the pursuit of clarity and ease of interpretation and communication our lives have become false!

That is why Nietzsche here tried to attack the very fundamental way in which we try to break down the things we come across when we live through them. See it in this way, if life by default was supposed to be simple then it is implied that we would have grip on every aspect of life and existence. We know that’s is not the reality. So, if it is not simple then it must be complicated is our next thought. Thus, if life is complicated in reality then oversimplification eliminates certain aspects of life which we keep on missing in the search of truth.

You know what, Nietzsche further explains that when we are denying that life is not simple and happy that also should not invite it being opposite of what was earlier thought i.e., sad and complicated. Nietzsche rejects the idea of polar opposite to portray the lives we live. He calls life, knowledge as the process of “refinement”.

It’s not duality of any aspect of the philosophy, good and bad side of life but the ways and times they have refined themselves which should be the parameter of their worth.

The Death of Philosopher

Nietzsche had his way to express verbal anguish. The sentences are so dense that the prose feels literally repulsive. I think it was intentional. His writings were never meant to be read while sipping coffee or to romanticize the philosophy or the idea of life. They will make sense to those who really want to understand what he is trying to say. Nietzsche in his next idea talks about how every philosopher is trying to find the meaning of life and thereby his/her truth of life. He despises the idea of life or philosophy being explained with a single idea. That is why he sarcastically calls philosophers as the protectors of truth, the thing which itself doesn’t need protection in first place!

Nietzsche thus calls out to the philosopher to get ready accept the martyrdom, the death of their idea of philosophy. The philosopher can only carry his point forward for further refinement but he/she must not – cannot define the life in whole with that simple idea. That idea has to die in the process so that newer refined ideas can be built out of its broken pieces.

In order for philosophy to exist it has to end, it has to kill its older version – that is what is the tragedy of philosophy is as Nietzsche goes.

The Freedom Paradox

When Nietzsche is trying to initiate treatise on freedom, he starts with what it means to be free for any person. One important observation he puts in front is how we get freedom on personal level. On surface it feels if the person is free on personal level, then it is easy to be free in society as a whole. But Nietzsche shows that these ideas of freedom are paradoxical! Man goes inward for the freedom because he/she knows that there is no one else to tie, bound him/her inside his privacy. The man seeking freedom when interacts with the crowd soon realizes that his experiences of life are bound to how crowd handles him, reacts to him, treats him, shapes him. That is unsettling, the burden is difficult to carry for single person hence the man again resorts to privacy, in order to do that he has to let go of certain truths and create his own little lies so that the external crowd won’t disturb his “freedom”.

“(the man) he was not made, he was not predestined for knowledge”

The point Nietzsche is trying to make here is that the taste of freedom comes with the unsettling feeling of existence. But as a man we are not seeking that freedom for us; freedom is some citadel, a happy place where we expect to have control over course of things. The real freedom as Nietzsche explains will be gained by being in touch with crowd (which sounds paradoxical again) It’s like saying you will understand what you real singular identity is when you start mixing yourselves with the crowd!

Nietzsche further advises philosophers of the future to not turn away from the unsettling ideas about philosophy. He takes support of cynicism to make his point. Cynicism bases itself on the idea that people are selfish, self-interested (so in simple words if anything doesn’t go the way a cynic wants, they would whine and create reasons to justify it.) Nietzsche expects the future philosophers to understand the difference between ill-speaker and bad speaker. The lovers of knowledge should also be able to understand what is unsettling, maybe their lies the next opportunity for better version of their philosophy.

The Freedom of Expression

Nietzsche had already explained how things lose their essence in oversimplification. In same fashion it becomes difficult to interpret what a fast thinker is thinking and then explain it to the relatively slow thinkers and make them appreciate the same idea on same level. Even in our thinking we are not free. You can create an explanation for others to understand what you are thinking but they themselves have to climb up (or climb down sometimes) to your level to appreciate what you are thinking, you may succeed in expression but interpretation, comprehension and its appreciation gets limited by the levels on which others are thinking. (My question, if this is the case then even if you are a free thinker, are you truly a free thinker? I know Nietzsche is paradoxical most of the times)

“What is most difficult to render from one language into another is the tempo of its style, which has its basis in the character of the race, or to speak more physiologically, in the average tempo of the assimilation of its nutriment.”

Nietzsche further builds this “so called” freedom of expression using the limitations of the language. Language is the culmination and mirror of the culture it originated from. So, naturally each language has its own style, flow, breaks, rules and ways to highlight certain aspects of narration. When such languages is used to express an individual’s ideas, the speaker has to let go of the nuances of his culture, his primary way of life so that others having another culture, another way of life can appreciate and understand what he is trying to convey, but what if the nuances were the only thing which made that idea influential? Then the influence of the idea would be lost because of the translation. (This is Nietzsche’s way saying lost in translation!)

The Tragedy of Independence

Another way to become free is to become independent. The very few lines Nietzsche uses to explain independence are equivalent of an atomic bomb! (trust me it is still not an overstatement!!!)

People who become independent are few as Nietzsche says and those who are strong can easily achieve it. This independence is also one way to be free. When a man becomes independent, he is on his own, there is no one like him – he is alone. Nothing is anything alike him – he is alone. Thus the whole world becomes a puzzle for him as he is on his own. Any direction becomes new path for him. As he is the only one like himself, there is no one who would reach to his level and match his thinking. And in such case if he needs sympathy, people cannot even sympathize with him because they are not on his level. What a tragedy! The sadness he has in his heart, mind is rendered useless because others around him are not able to comprehend it – sympathizing gets ruled out automatically.

This is Nietzsche’s way of saying what Hemingway said. (I mean both meant the same although Hemingway came later, but you get the point) You must understand that happiness is not the real pursuit of life, then you won’t feel tragic about what Hemingway is trying to convey here, same is what Nietzsche trying to convey here. Freedom by independence can be a tragedy for the person who was expecting glory out of it.

Foolishness Hides Chances For New Insights

Nietzsche here is trying to remove the lines between what is good and what is bad, what is allowed and what is forbidden.

“That which serves the higher class of men for nourishment or refreshment, must be almost poison to an entirely different and lower order of human beings”

In modern crude sense, Nietzsche says “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure”!

Same idea, same act will have different perception of morality, scale of right and wrong. A rebel thinker in common poor public could be attributed to a philosopher amongst the riches. A murderer who killed an evil landlord could become a saint among the people who were victims of this landlord’s oppression.

So, Nietzsche’s attribution of foolishness is a way to point out the exceptional, outlier acts, prohibited acts, crimes to find the better truths. That will make you freer than others.

The Freedom of Youth

The stage of youth feels like the freest stage of all the stages of life and it is so because it has let go of the nuances. It also feels free because the youth in the stage of exploration never submits to right or wrong, yes or no to the life as Nietzsche says. But as the time passes when the youth is exposed to disillusions, broken expectations they try to modify themselves in a way that will get things done the way they wanted – the compromise starts to enter. The moment this happens the same youth tries to punish themselves as Nietzsche says. The freedom exists no more, so is the youth.

The Freedom of Actions

(Again, this a hydrogen bomb on morality!!!)

How can we say that the given action is right or wrong?

Nietzsche has very interesting thought process on this question. In the starting times the action was right or wrong based on what it led to – its consequences – the effect. The problem with this thinking is that one has to wait to let the action happen to decide its rightness or wrongness. If the stakes are high, such attribution of right or wrong can be devastating.

So, Nietzsche takes support of Chinese idea where the parents are responsible for the betterment of their child. Meaning that the origin of the thought which led to that action should be the decider of whether the action is right or wrong. Nietzsche called this pre-moral period of mankind. And sarcastically he points out that we have made a total turn around the idea of right or wrong action. Earlier it was what happened after the action i.e., consequences; now it is what led to that action, meaning what was happening before that action i.e., the origin which is the decider of right and wrong of any action!

This is where the origin of action gets named as ‘moral’ which is generated from self- knowledge. Later these morals evolved into “intentions”. As Nietzsche says, intentions serve as the origin of any action.

“people were agreed in the belief that the value of an action lay in the value of its intention. The intention as the sole origin and antecedent history of an action: under the influence of this prejudice moral praise and blame have been bestowed, and men have judged and even philosophized almost up to the present day”

Nietzsche then drops another bomb called – unintentional actions. We are clear that whether action is right or wrong can be decided by the intent. But what if there was no intent or there are no other ways to pinpoint the intent behind certain actions? There is a possibility that the intent may get mistranslated, misinterpreted during the unfolding of events, then how would you decide the attribution of given action.

In such case we would again go to the effect- the consequences of that action!!! You see what is happening here? We might have to resort to that older measuring system of action based on their consequences.

This is Nietzsche’s style to question how we think of morality in general and also on deeper level.

(I can’t resist praising Nietzsche lesser but deep down I know he would question his own worship too!)

The next attack Nietzsche does by using morality is the sentiment of sacrifice. The basis of his thought process is that you should question everything that gives you pleasure at least once. Here, he shows how fake the feeling of sacrifice for others, surrender could be if it is intended to display how moral and virtuous you are!

“There is far too much witchery and sugar in the sentiments “for others” and “not for myself””

In simple words, you are saying that I like to help others because it makes me happy. So, in order to help others you have to become selfless, but if becoming selfless to help others makes you happy, doesn’t that make you selfish? You are selfless because you are selfish!!! (Disclaimer: Nietzsche is paradoxical.) The paradox is resolved when you accept that you are just taking support of morality to display you higher value. Being selfless is just a better excuse to display your high morality. It there was any cruel way to display your high morality no wonder you would have gone for that!!!

In modern ways, it’s fox’s way to say the grapes are sour or I am a virgin because I am waiting for someone special (In reality fox cannot reach the grapes and the person is not able to appreciate other person or people rejected that person continuously – please note that I am not blaming someone’s character – it’s the limitation of language that prevents me from expressing what I am thinking for oversimplification. As Nietzsche has already shown that oversimplification kills the nuances. You get the point!)

The Immoral Philosopher – The Free Philosopher

Building upon the ideas of nuances lost in translation, right and wrong in morality Nietzsche calls the future philosophers to go beyond the dichotomy of philosophy and also distrust the morality in the development of new philosophy, new truth.

“In all seriousness the innocence of thinkers has something touching and respect-inspiring in it, which even nowadays permits them to wait upon the consciousness with the request that it will give them honest answers”

This is Nietzsche’s way to show that in order to find the new truth new philosophy, new philosophers have submitted themselves childishly and blindly to the principles of morality hoping that morality will give them new answers. But it is the same tinted glass of morality that prevents them from getting new perspectives. Hence, he calls them naïve here. They must let go of this childishness.

“The belief in “immediate certainties” is a moral naivete which does honor to us philosophers; but – we have now to cease being “merely moral” men!”

This is Nietzsche’s way of saying it’s good to be bad!

For Nietzsche, morality shows only two sides of reality- right or wrong, this works fine if reality is really dichotomized. But we know there is no such thing as right or wrong for every real-life scenario. So, in order to find the real truth, you have to let go of morality, then you will see that reality has its spectrum and people residing on different biases of such reality have their own attribution of right and wrong for the same action. Morality is the subset of newer truth, not the other way around.

‘il ne cherche le vrai que pour faire le bien‘

(he who searches truth to do good) – I wager he finds nothing!

Nietzsche make his point by him being the first bad-philosopher!!! (This is why I am loving him more and more. It’s like a brainiac with full grown muscles if you want to picture him thematically!)

The Freedom From Passions and Reality – Will to Power

Nietzsche makes an attempt to show that the reality could also be made up of something totally different that we can even comprehend. What if the world is more real than what we can experience? And if such reality exists, our senses will limit us from experiencing it. So, in order to be free in such reality we have to rise above our senses. That would be the new freedom. Our senses are bound to desires and passions whose interactions – impulses are creating thoughts.

So, building on these impulses Nietzsche says that many emotions, processes are created in “our reality”. What would make any of such impulses, process free from others? He introduces the idea of causality to show the flow and root of everything. If cause leads to an effect and further that effect becomes cause to newer effect then it is possible that the root cause of all would make us really free. Nietzsche further explains that it can also be one of the processes which would overpower others to become free and not the root one. (For example, the first unicellular organisms would be the most powerful organisms on earth today, that is not the case.)

Here Nietzsche introduces the concept of Will to Power. Whatever overpowers the other processes has the potential to remain in the big game and thus has real chance to be free. Will to power in any process allows it to gain more freedom.

This is Nietzsche’s Darwinian theory of evolution – the survival of the fittest. (I know it is a bastardized translation, but again I summon the loss of nuances during translation.)

Then Nietzsche puts the idea that by this way of thinking the originator does not necessarily be the most powerful one, thereby questioning the existence of the God! Because if the God was the originator, then then he/she would exist only if he/she has the highest Will to Power. That also does not mean that if God does not exist then devil exists or has the highest Will to Power. It could be anything! We are not sure for now. (typical philosophical answer!)

Using causality, Nietzsche also questions the morality of French revolution. If for the locals the royalty was cruel that is why the revolution happened then why didn’t the remotely located people who considered them noble in first place considered them cruel too? In the eyes of remotely located people the French royalty had a noble past. (The question is intended to think on it not to find the right and wrong. It shows how flawed our thinking becomes when we stick to morality blindly.) Whoever came in power overthrew the less powerful. That is one way to explain Nietzsche’s Will to Power. According to Nietzsche, if Napoleon would have been continuously invested in the morality of his actions he wouldn’t have become the great emperor.

Freedom From Truth

Here Nietzsche starts with the very obvious and common fact that some truths are unsettling. Not every truth ensures happiness. Only an idealist, as Nietzsche says would submit the idea of truth that brings joy, happiness, and beauty.

Here comes Nietzsche’s biggest drop-

“the strength of a mind might be measured by the amount of “truth” it could endure – or to speak more plainly, by the extent to which it required truth attenuated, veiled, sweetened, damped, and falsified”

This is self-explanatory. It is just our unsettlement that we need to take care of while looking for the truth. We are thinking animals and thinking is a result of our impulses, desires, and passions. So, not every truth is destined to bring us peace. ‘We would die if we eat poison’ – is a truth which unsettles everyone but that is not how we react to such truths, we prepare for such bad events, that is the wisdom what Nietzsche is talking about in a crude way here.

“There is no doubt that for the discovery of certain portions of truth the wicked and unfortunate are more favorably situated and have greater likelihood of success; not to speak wicked of who are happy- a species about whom moralist are silent. Perhaps severity and craft are more favorable conditions for the development of strong, independent spirits and philosophers than gentle, refined, yielding good-nature, and habit of taking things easily, which are prized, and rightly prized in a learned man.”

Nietzsche prefers learned man more than the moralistic or the virtuous one. A learned man knows the consequences of learning new truth, or sometimes even unaware of it but he does not pivot his happiness on the discovery of new truth. What else could you make freer when you are ready to accept the truth in its crude and real form! This freedom will bring clarity, new perspective and not happiness or sadness or chaos or calmness.

Truth will not decide how and what you are. You just will have added new tinted glass in your collection of perspectives towards life and reality and the philosophy behind all of them. If your Will to Power is good your truth may become the truth for all others.

Freedom From Identity

The profoundness demands the rejection of submission to any side of existence. If one promotes certain ideology the people around him/ her will try to comprehend that person using the tags they have in their own minds for that idea. The mask thus brings in that ambiguity where people are not associating, tagging you to one definite truth. Even your mind can start creating bias if you let it. That is why Nietzsche focuses on mask in profoundness.

“A man who has depths in his shame meets his destiny and his delicate decisions upon paths which few ever reach, and with regard to the existence of which his nearest and most intimate friends may be ignorant; his mortal danger conceals itself from their eyes, and equally so his regained security.”

The mask frees you from attribution thereby biases and even the socio-economical influences. You will never let honor or shame, right or wrong, good or bad, happy or sad justify the events in your life. You will never ever flinch to enter an unsettling adventure which guarantees your growth personally. Embarrassment, failure will just be another emotional response for you (please note that this does not mean that you will be emotionless, it means that you will be able to recognize your emotions and let them pass.)

This is exactly why I would force everyone to understand Nietzsche on their own level!!!

“Every profound spirit needs a mask; nay, more, around every profound spirit there continually grows a mask, owing to the constantly false, that is to say, superficial interpretation of every word he utters, every step he takes, every sign of life he manifests”

This could also be one reason why some the greatest personality humanity has ever seen had a layer of controversial ambiguity around them.

From the idea of mask, Nietzsche moves to the idea of its conservation. The conservation is meant to define the philosophy of containing who you are rather that you submitting to some ideology. Whatever you have collected as an individual, whatever you are on philosophical level personally, how you have upgraded – refined your philosophy you must conserve that instead of giving to some ideology. The mask helps to conserve who you are.

“One must know how to conserve oneself – the best test of independence”

(this could be the reason why superheroes wear masks!!! Joke aside but it is one powerful thought)

Further Nietzsche warns new future philosophers to not be people pleaser or submitter to temptations. That will steal them of their judgement and independence.

Freedom From Your Version of Truth

The ways in which Nietzsche is trying to close his arguments are really beautiful. He knows that when the future philosophers will have discovered their new truths in their journey of blood, sweat and tears, it is natural that they will get attached to it. Such is the human tendency. He wants us to get rid of the obsession with this new truth. This truth even if it’s the newer one will create boundaries in your perception, you won’t be free anymore! Nietzsche wants to let the future philosophers let go of the dogma.

“In the end things must be as they are and have always been – the great things remain for the great, the abysses for the profound, the delicacies and thrills for the refined, and, to sum up shortly, everything rare for the rare”

Freedom From Illusion of Freedom

On closing notes Nietzsche has advised new philosophers to be careful of the “freedom” they are being offered under new socio-political ideas. Nietzsche focuses here on the ways new philosophers are embarking on the journey to new truths. He tells that having fluency in speech and effective grip on written communication will not define you as the new philosophers, even though they are one aspect of it. But the systems having higher Will to Power will use same tools to control new philosophers and change the course to their versions of truth.

New philosophers will be misled with words like “Equality of Rights”, “Sympathy with All Sufferers”, “Modern Ideas” but they should be careful about them. They should be aware that the moment they create a thought process the people on different levels with different Will to Power will interpret these same ideas for their own benefit especially the ideas which are polar opposites of your ideas. Once such separation happens nobody, not even you cannot get the real freedom.

Nietzsche offers the rule of solitude while embarking on such journey. Only you can free yourself.

The Boy and the Heron (君たちはどう生きるか) – Bittersweet Reality of the Artistic Legacy

Studio Ghibli’s masterpiece The Boy and the Heron (君たちはどう生きるか, How do you live?) tries to answer one complicated question on artistic legacy. On surface, it is a story of boy coming out of the melancholy of his mother’s death and his new beginnings. Deep down it is a love letter from a creative father on his creative legacy to his son who wants to go on his own journey. It shows how difficult it is to make others appreciate a personal piece of creation, emotion and how to leave a truly influential legacy behind.

A creative father’s love-letter on his legacy to his beloved son

We are always in a pursuit of creation of something to ensure better coming days. Survival is one aspect of it but as the time moved on, we have comfortably brought ourselves to ensure our sustenance. Most of us can live a basic life and rarely worry about what to eat tomorrow. Once such stage is achieved, you will see that our efforts to create and accumulate still have never stopped. Now we are creating and accumulating for even better days than other, once this is achieved, we continue creating and accumulating so that our new generation will see better days. This act of creating a legacy is not just a matter of survival, it is also matter of preserving some part of ourselves even when we won’t physically exist in this world.

It is easy to see what happens to the materialistic legacy like wealth, but it becomes very tricky to handover the moralistic, value based, character-based legacy to the next generation because of the differences in the ways to live and understand the life. The passage of time alters some truths to the new generations thereby changing their mindsets and moral compasses. Even though our animal drives, emotions are exactly the same the motivations behind them change over time.

Now, imagine that you created such precious legacy which is close to you, which defines you, people appreciate it adore it but your next generation is unable to carry it forward. How do you handle such rejections? what is the resolution? Is it good? Is it bad? Is there any way around? As you love your legacy, should you force them to see the value in your legacy? And if you truly love them, should you force them in the first place to carry that legacy?

Studio Ghibli’s recent movie The Boy and the Heron (君たちはどう生きるか, How do you live?) is an attempt to answer one such complicated question on artistic legacy. Hayao Miyazaki-san has again given a masterstroke by creating a very personal yet relatable artistic narrative.

I have tried to explain the overall purpose of the narrative in this movie and will try to uncover what was the real core of movie based on the events in the life of Hayao Miyazaki-san.

The story and the meanings behind it

You will find megatons of explanations on the symbolism, personal connection of Hayao Miyazaki-san, his life, his childhood, his parents, and his colleagues from Studio Ghibli in this movie. There are many theories and cross references between the previous Ghibli movies too. I will not go into those details. I will focus on what the narrative stands as a whole.

It is obvious that it is a story of a boy who lost his mother and his journey of getting over that melancholia of her loss and acceptance of his new mother. You will also notice in the end credits that the creators have thanked a book called “The book of lost things” by John Conolly. Once you check out what this book is all about, I think you will get new perspective beyond the symbolism and references in the movie. Miyasaki leveraged the narrative of this book to create the structure of his narrative. The book also draws inspiration from Genzaburo Yoshino’s book “How Do You Live?” (君たちはどう生きるか, Kimi-tachi wa Dō Ikiru ka)

Two books which inspired ‘The Boy and The Heron’

This is the story of the all emotions that are invoked when a person loses their loved ones. The first question that comes in mind when such loss happens is “How Do You Live?”

This is how the story is built –

The tower created around the rock is a portal where you can physically access your emotions. Just like in Interstellar how Astronaut Cooper was able to physically access the dimension of time.

Birds are representation of the free flying feelings, emotions we have.

The book that the great granduncle left unread is the same book Mahito’s mother read and then it got handed over to Mahito, which is the book called “How do you live?” The book is about the conversations of a boy who lost his father and the boy’s uncle.

The great granduncle already knew that the rock from space can allow him to create the world of his dreams. That is exactly why he built a tower around it for protection. Upon going through the loss of loved person in his life, he saw himself in the role of the person who will lead and help his descendants to handle their own pain of loss. But as the great grand uncle was always into books and had his own internal dreamy world, he used the powers of the rock from space to create his own world.

The act of leaving the book unread to disappearing into something is pointing towards that intense moment when you have to act on things because the author said exactly what you believe in. You feel this urge to act and create that thing because the author, the person who you don’t even know feels exactly the same. You feel an unexplained deep connection.

So, the rock from space and tower built around it is a portal where things can enter and exit in space, time. The moment when Himi lost her mother, she accessed the portal, confronted her emotions but also met her future son Mahito.

She realized that even though she lost her beloved mother, she will have an opportunity to have her own son who will love her deeply. Even when she will not be there with Mahito, her sister will love him equally. This gives her peace. That is exactly why when grannies are telling the story from Himiko’s childhood to Shoichi (Himiko’s husband and Mahito’s father) they say that she was grinning to ears – happy like anything when she came out of the mysterious tower.

The great grand uncle can call anyone to enter the tower. That is why grannies are scared if Mahito gets taken by the tower in the start of the story.

Kiriko has also accessed the portal in the search for young Himi before, that is why her younger version is available in this dreamy world and knows the ways of this world. Her older version entering into the portal along with Mahito closes the loop of time paradox if you think it through.

Natsuko is called into the portal to make young Himi aware that her future son will have a caretaker and lover when she will not be there for him. This helps young Himi to get over her own loss of mother. It’s that feeling of love you create for your people when you realize how deeply you loved the person you lost. You realize that your people also deserve to get the love that you received from your lost loved ones. That brings the person out of the melancholy of the loss of loved ones.

Natsuko is called into the portal to make up her mind that Mahito is also her son. She is also called into the portal to make Mahito accept that his step mother also deserves the same love that he has for his own mother. The great grand uncle is the orchestrater of all these events.

The grey heron is Mahito’s mind personified, his conscience. Heron is always guiding, helping Mahito. Mahito has this feeling that his mother is alive somewhere because he never saw her dead body. Heron attracts, teases Mahito using same understanding. Somewhere in a hidden corner of Mahito’s mind he thinks that there is still a chance to save his mother and bring her back. He is just looking out for an opportunity. Heron teases this opportunity to Mahito.

Heron like every person’s mind is paradoxical in nature. Heron is equivalent of Jiminy Cricket from the story of Pinocchio.

Most of the events between Mahito and the grey heron are Mahito’s dreams until he personally enters the tower where all his emotions can be accessed physically. That is where he is able to get the hold of the Heron, that is where the power of the seventh feather is functional, because Mahito has heightened awareness and access to his emotions.

The illusion of his mother in bed is a reminder to Mahito that she only exists in his dreams not in reality.

The starving Pelicans are the feeling one gets when they realize that they won’t be loved in the ways and to levels they used to before because of the loss of loved ones. These feeling to be loved, the huger to be loved by that person pushes the person to meet his loved one in afterlife. You will see the pelicans pushing Mahito in graveyard so that he can meet his mother. Pelicans are his feelings from the void of love which are pushing him to die to meet his mother in afterlife.

Kiriko saves Mahito from his urge to die, maybe she has done same to Himi in past too. The mark left on Kiriko’s head by swamp thrasher is intentional creation to make Mahito comfortable. The fact that they both share some common pain brings comfort to Mahito. The thrasher bird is a symbol of self-reflection, it is like upon getting settled and being calm Mahito realizes that dying is not the solution to meet his mother – Himi.

Warawara and the phantoms are the attempts of great grand uncle to show everyone entering this world that life and death are part of existence. The person must accept and will have to support both, feed both to ensure that the reality remains ‘real’.

The event of giving proper burial to the dead severely injured pelican is Mahito’s acceptance to detach himself from the urge to be loved by his dead mother. This is him making amends with death and urge of being loved.

The moment Mahito accepts the weird and paradoxical nature of heron is the moment when he gets a clear direction to meet Natsuko. He literally repairs his conscience to get the clarity.

The Parakeets are the defense system of mind. They are the logical emotions, feelings that we use to defend from the sad feelings, they make sure that the system of our mind remains intact. Parakeets are the indicators of love and colors in life, when we are deeply saddened these emotions of love and colors become intense, defensive to save our mind. Here in the extreme case, they have become so strong, disciplined, and militarized that they are ready to consume their own host – Mahito. Parakeets show life, colors, happiness, anti-sad emotions, and the defense mechanism to create good for everything. That is why they have rules, moral values – the indication of what is allowed and what is not for the betterment of the host. They make sure that the person remains sane by choosing what is best for him instead of getting overwhelmed by all other emotions.

Parakeet king is the ultimate personification of such defense mechanism, he just wants to make sure that the world inside the host’s mind remains intact otherwise the host will go mad, this world will collapse.

The important conflict Mahito must resolve is to find his mother. Where the great grand uncle gives him the test. You should appreciate the role of great grand uncle in this whole narrative. The very first time when Mahito is inside the tower with Kiriko, the great grand uncle could have immediately met him and resolved everything in his mind.

But he makes Mahito to go through whole journey because you cannot force any emotion on the person just by telling the truth. His/ her defense mechanism will strongly and willfully reject that truth. Only when that person will go through personal experience, then only he/ she can appreciate the value of truth. Uncle thus gives Mahito this final test of truth once he overcomes the obstacles in his mind.

Mahito is given the taste of truth by showing him that even though he could not save his mother Himi he can now save another mother Natsuko. This is the Natsuko who enters the portal with a feeling if she would ever truly be able to love Mahito while having her own baby. This is conflict resolution for Natsuko too. She develops true love for Mahito when Mahito lets go of his attachment to mother Himi to save Natsuko because he doesn’t want that to happen again. And Natsuko also realizes that it’s her loving sister’s son in the end who deserves the same love like her coming baby deserves.

Only upon the resolution of this conflict when Mahito gets the access to the portal to meet the great grand uncle. 13 grave stones are the 13 movies created by Hayao Miyazaki-san. Which arranged in many styles create different world. They create an escape to different reality where people can manifest and physically live their dreams. For uncle these 13 gravestones are the purpose of his life, they define who he is and are his legacy. Great grand uncle asking Mahito to arrange these 13 gravestones is Miyazaki-san’s way to order his son Goro-san to carry his legacy in the exact ways Miyazaki-san intended. Mahito noticing the difference between wooden blocks and the gravestones is an indication that his life interests do not lie there, wood here as a part of tree – the life against the gravestones show that this is not how Mahito would live his life.

As a punishment uncle sends Mahito to parakeets. Parakeets are the structured constructs, rule, laws which ensure that the world has order even though the person may hate them. Goro Miyazaki-san chose the career of an architect because he wanted to do something different from his father. Hayao Miyazaki-san asked Goro-san to create artistic movies exactly in his “Ghibli” style but Goro-san’s artistic creations never matched the Hayao Miyazaki-san’s Ghibli vibes. It’s like his creative powers were restricted due to the parakeet like strict construct, high expectations and extreme criticism of Hayao Miyazaki-san. The great grand uncle had some hope that Mahito will accept what he wants him to appreciate.

Mahito’s own conscience – the Heron comes to rescue him in the end. Grand uncle asks Himi to leave this world and also tells that Mahito should also leave with her. He is hoping that there is one more chance to convince Mahito to take care of what he had created. When Mahito and Himi meet the great grand uncle to bid goodbye the uncle presents Mahito some stone without malice. It is uncle’s attempt to show Mahito that even though his creations have their challenges, rules, restrictions Mahito still has freedom to do anything with these new stones free from Malice. It’s uncle’s attempt to convince Mahito to not lose the grip on the legacy. It is Hayao Miyazaki-san’s desperate way to reconvince his son Goro-san that he just needs to create for the studio Ghibli by using some new things – new experiments but just keep studio Ghibli alive. He wants Goro-san to create so that the world of Ghibli will bring bounty, peace and beauty into people’s lives. It’s not just a selfish request for continuing the legacy. It is a request to maintain the core of his legacy – Miyazaki-san’s legacy.

Mahito responds to great grand uncle by saying that he has his own challenges, his own malice, his own limitations which make it difficult to carry this legacy. Mahito wants to return to his own real world even when it has some darkness, bad things. When uncle asks him that Mahito’s reality is a chaotic world full of murderers and thieves Mahito responds by showing that he has good, caring, and loving people along with the heron – his conscience to support him there.

This is also important moment for Himi where she is relieved that even when her son will lose her, Mahito will have enough support system to take care of him. This is one more reason for young Himi to return happy to her reality.

Uncle then ordering Mahito to just stack the stones for last time would be equivalent of the discussion happened between Hayao Miyazaki-san and Goro-san on the creation of one last project for Miyazaki-san’s peace of mind. Maybe Miyazaki-san just like the great grand uncle wanted to play a trick on Mahito – Goro-san to convince him to continue the legacy.

Finally, the Parakeet king trying to arrange the blocks by himself is the futile attempts of the admirer of great grand uncle’s creation to ensure their own survival. But as there is no personal connect between them, the Parakeet king doesn’t know the ‘art’ of arranging the stones. When the attempt fails and the world collapses as the great grand uncle had already expected, he instructs everyone to leave the tower and return to their respective reality.

You must appreciate that there would have been a proper intimate discussion between Hayao Miyazaki-san and Goro-san on how to take over this legacy and continue the future of studio Ghibli. Rearrangement of 13 blocks shows advice to use the styles and ideas of Hayao Miyazaki-san’s movies to create further new stories.

The resolution of Mahito returning to reality is Hayao Miyazaki-san’s way to show that the path has already been chosen and good thing is that it is more real than anything possible. It could be ugly, full of malice, murderers, death, grief and detachment but is far better than dreamy and perfect world. Looks like Goro-san successfully convinced his father Hayao Miyazaki-san that his father’s reality of Studio Ghibli is not the only reality, only legacy which deserves to exist. Hayao Miyazaki-san also realized that if he truly loves his son, he would let him go on his own path, to create his own art. Just because he is too attached to his creation does not entitle his son to carry it forward, especially as a burden.

It’s poignant to come to this fact but it is what it is. That also doesn’t stop either Hayao or Goro-san to create the world they want. (there is a rumor that Miyazaki-san is working on his next film.)

The Curse of the Intangible Value of an Artistic Creation

For any true artist, it is the expression through creation which matters him/ her the most. The art they create is exactly who they are, it is a part of who they are. For such artist who has realized that they will have to leave all this creation behind in the end, search for the true successor who can appreciate their creation is crucial.

And the problem with artistic creation is that they are very intimately connected to the person who created them – the artist. It’s like the bond of a mother and child – she has carried that child for 9 months in her belly, it’s a piece of her body and soul. In similar sense, that art held its root in the artist’s mind and the artist kindled it in his mind to finally bring it into the reality. The fundamental problem with emotions is that you have to pass through those feelings to appreciate them in true sense. You can intellectualize other person’s emotions, write about them, create narratives/ stories out of them. You can make philosophies about how and why people have certain emotions, why they feel sad, happy, melancholic. You can also simulate pain to induce the feelings of emotions in a person, you can simulate happiness by triggering certain chemicals and suppressing others. But, you must accept that unless and until you yourself don’t pass through that real-life emotional experience, you will never be able to appreciate and understand how others felt when they had similar feelings. You can be highly empathetic, sympathetic but they too are bound by the limitations of you own mind. You can be a highly intellectual person who has already figured out what action would lead to what emotion, what is good for your mind, what is bad for you, you may create a whole internal defense system to handle the anticipated emotional responses but the experience you will have when you pass through that emotion will be very personal and the art created after the passage through such emotions cannot be attributed to any tangible value.

Now think of handing over such a creative legacy to you descendants. You are confident about this handover to your children because they are your immediate physical extension and if you are lucky then maybe your immediate mental extension too. But, as I already clarified in previous paragraph about the curse of intangibility, the intangible subjectivity of any artistic creation, there is no guaranty that you descendants will resonate with what you believed that art to represent.

It feels cruel to realize this fact but believe me it is the reality. Others, especially the people you call yours are not entitled to appreciate the things exactly to the levels you appreciate. I agree that they should at least not disrespect it but you can never force other people to appreciate ‘your’ valuable things at your exact same level. This journey has to be made solely by themselves which will never be in your control. You may force them, influence them, punish them- abuse them mentally, physically but you cannot force others to generate the same respect, same value for the things you love. It’s purely an internal and voluntary journey.

That is why having people who resonate with how you appreciate certain common objects and common emotions is a blessing. This also does not mean that people who perceive something different for the same objects are bad. There can be cases where they perceive something even better than what you perceive and where they do not even care but that’s not your fault. In order to find clarity in these cases you have to accept that emotions are double edged sword. It will cut both ways. Even when you have anticipated, planned, intellectualized them, you cannot escape your emotional responses. What you can do is to observe them sincerely and let them pass. You are not your selective emotions; you are above them. Emotions are not your creator rather you are the creator of your emotions. The moment you accept this you will see the truth that not everyone, not even your own blood is bound to experience the life around you in the exact ways you want them to. The moment you will appreciate what I am trying to put down in words, I think you will feel liberated. Please understand that this is not just about any artistic creation, it is about everything you call your life – mental, physical, tangible, intangible. To live a life with this intensity could be a blessing (on personal level if this intensity is not anticipated well in advance or not controlled then it is one cruel curse to carry.)

I think this is exactly what Hayao Miyazaki-san was struggling with. But as the movie resolves I think there is still hope for him, for the studio and in the end for all of us rooting for his next movies. It definitely is not a sad ending and even if it is a sad one we know what great things they made us feel about ourselves, how they gave us better perspectives towards life. I think that his true legacy is all his admirer, we people altogether whose lives he changed through his creation. Even though his movies won’t be there, what they have made us feel – that legacy of having a perspective towards life will keep on affecting new generation through us.

To be honest, for me it’s a love letter of a father to his son who doesn’t want to follow his father’s legacy and wishes to go on his own journey.

The Father Son – Hayao Miyazaki and Goro Miyazaki

All movie scenes from Studio Ghibli – Hayao Miyazaki’s movie The Boy and the Heron

Anxiety – Ugly (But Precious) Gift From Evolution

Anxiety serves to prepare a person for threats. Anxiety just like pain is one uncomfortable but effective way to cope up with the adversities in life, that’s how we build strength, resistance and deeper understanding of the surrounding for better and more precisely predictable future.
The remarkable concepts like smoke detector principal and optimal threshold in signal detection theory developed by modern psychologists/ psychiatrists help us to draw a line between a healthy anxiety (adaptive function) and unhealthy anxiety (pathology) and show ways to handle/treat them effectively.

Anxiety’s like a rocking chair. It gives you something to do, but it doesn’t get you very far
Jodi Picoult

Survival, Fear, and Anxiety

Every living thing if not have any goal in their lifetime would at least have sole goal of existing, surviving. Nobody wants to die and all of us always yearn to live forever but we know our limitations and hence are always on the quest of justifying the finite existence granted to us. Even if we are certain of the end closing in, our instincts are evolved in such way that many of the times, we bear the ability to cheat death. Humans have further extended cheating the death using science and technology. Technology augmented our lives, reduced the risks of death, created a safe environment to grow, increased our chances of survival.

The fear of death and uncertainty of future is the key driver in our improved survival instincts and excessive use of technology to achieve it. We plan for things in advance, create backup plans if something would go wrong, have risk assessments before the execution, understand and decide according to the cost benefit analysis. That is what makes us humans and also separates from other species (although rest of the surviving species are also smart in their own ways to increase their chances of survival like viruses – but hopefully humans have other ways to overcome them)

So, fear in a way triggers the actions to ensure survival. Anxiety – a sophisticated form of fear which prepares us in advance even before the fear causing scenario is supposed to happen. Simply put anxiety is an anticipatory type of fear to increase the chances of survival.

I am talking about fear and anxiety because they are bugging my mind for many days. Recently I watched Inside Out 2 movie and the it really delivers. The narrative has successfully presented how all emotions play a vital role in creating our personality in whole. Anxiety was new and important emotion presented in this movie. Every moment where anxiety came in focus it was fully relatable to me. Once I was done crying in the end the anxiety never left me (figuratively!), I felt a strong urge to understand the anxiety on deeper levels and what the domain experts have to say about anxiety.

The discussion heron is not a movie review rather I have made some attempt to summarize what the real-world scientists have to say about anxiety. I won’t be giving you the tricks, counseling and recommending any medicines to cure anxiety disorders. (Trained professional, experts are the best people to do that – “I AM NO EXPERT”)

My focus of the discussion is to question why anxiety exists in first place when we have an emotion called fear, another question is how to interpret the anxious emotions and what leads to anxiety disorder, where does the root of anxiety lie and is anxiety a bad or negative emotion? If it is so then why? and if not – then why?

While posing such questions and researching articles I came across some beautiful ideas, experiments and theories established by professionals in the field. I will throw light on these ideas in the coming discussion.

The fear is real! – is it? – Defining anxiety

As I already mentioned that fear of death, the unknown and urge to live long are always fighting with each other. Humans rather every species existing today in nature mastered this battle to some extent and have ridden on chariots of evolution to augment – change themselves to adapt with the surroundings and improve the chances of survival.

A deer completely aware of its surrounding, grazing in the open grass fields can distinguish the rusting of leaves due to winds and rustling due to sudden movements of an apex predator like tiger. When the exams are on top of tomorrow, we are ready to sacrifice the night sleep to crack them (engineers would resonate more with this!) We know that the pain of failing, fear of failing is worse than painfully covering syllabus overnight! The fear is there and the anticipatory response is also there, only the level of sophistication is different.

Why I say sophistication? It is because due to the advancements in our lifestyles humans are rarely exposed to the real life-threatening scenarios like animal do (still today). Our fears are now more anticipatory. I would say most of our fears are now classified as anxiety.

Wikipedia goes like this for anxiety –

“Anxiety is an emotion which is characterized by an unpleasant state of inner turmoil and includes feelings of dread over anticipated events.”

So, the key differentiating aspect between fear and anxiety is the anticipation. Anxiety is a prospective emotion and a forward-looking emotion. Whereas fear is the emotional response to current threat. Fear makes us act immediately; anxiety keeps us ready for future threats. Fear will immediately decide fight or flight whereas anxiety will create plans, strategies for both and also calculate which one is more probable. (now you can appreciate why anxiety is more intense in over-thinkers, the analysis paralysis is one mild example of this.)

Anxiety is also an emotion important from evolutionary perspective as it has helped the current existing species to remain existent. The ability to anticipate future and preparing for it in advance gives competitive edge in survival.

Why Is Anxiety Good?

While reading about anxiety I came across a very good paper by Dr. Randolph M. Nesse.

Randolph M. Nesse is a Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Psychology in University of Michigan. The ideas and theory he created to understand and identify anxiety and its intensity are very important and interesting.

Dr. Ness developed the smoke detector principle to control and quantify the medication used to fight with anxiety disorder. (He poses very simple but important question the opening of the paper that “Is he medicating his patients too much? is he harming them?”) The fundamental doubt Dr. Ness had was if the anxiety is evolved during evolution to improve our chances of survival, then why are we forced to reduce its symptoms and effects? Why are we using medications, therapies to reduce these symptoms, effects of anxiety. What if the patient is too anxious for given thing and that thing is too real to happen but the doctor dumbed that emotion down? (Dr. Ness calls it down-regulating the mechanisms causing anxiety)

The core of his thinking is that if we keep on “down-regulating” our anxiety which is an evolutionary gift to us, we might never be able to gauge the future in better way and prepare for it in advance to improve our chances of survival. (this is an exaggeration of the scenario but it proves a point)

This calls for the quantification of anxiety. Which Dr. Ness did through the smoke detector principle.

The Smoke Detector Principle – How Much Anxiety Is Too Much?

Dr. Ness in another paper talks about the mechanism which is a feed-back system between the animal and its surroundings, which selects the emotional response to improve the chances of survival. The emotions we have today are the result of such evolution to maintain “homeostasis” – the balance among our bodily system to survive and function properly.

According to his ideas, anxiety works like a smoke detector.

The anxiety response is always trying to maximize the chances of survival and escape from a life-threatening situation. When we set a smoke detector it will go off even when the fire is not that extreme or if there is just some smoke which can be a controllable one. The smoke detector is designed to never miss a single fire causing situation. This ensures complete confidence in smoke detector that it will save people from every life taking fire scenario. But, it’s the same mechanism of smoke detector which forces people to evacuate frequently even when the fire or smoke where controllable or life threatening.

The frequent emergency evacuation even when it is not required is the same problem with the extreme intensity cases of anxiety. Always having armor ready for combat may sometimes make the soldier to lose the agility.

The patients with anxiety disorder have lowered sense of real threat. Their system triggers too many false alarms.

Dr. Ness established various techniques to quantify the levels of anxiety. The responses from anxiety include increased heart rate, rise in certain bodily chemicals – stress hormone secretion which can be easily measured as signals using instruments. Thus, the smoke detector principal paved a way to quantify the anxiety and understand what triggers the anxiety disorders in patients. It helps to understand how and why a level of anxiety is healthy in normal person and what level of anxiety is unhealthy and needs drug administration, therapy, how it can be administered by altering the setting within and around the person.

The core reasons why we need not to be intensely anxious about common life threats are as follows as Dr. Ness explains in his papers:

Regulatory mechanisms have tendency to make errors and be extra defensive about situations
We do not need to always be extra defensive to avoid given threat. (A machine gun in a bulletproof enclosure is not required to kill a mosquito.)
Our body and surroundings have multiple layers of defense for almost all common threats. We are evolved and have survived in that way.
Our environment is much safer than it was at the time we evolved

Types of Anxiety Disorders

Now that we have understood what is the nature of anxiety and what is its mechanism. Here are some important anxiety disorders to outline. Huge amount of information is available in literature, internet websites on these:

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) – too much worrying about ordinary things, problems like money, work, health, relations, family, and anything possible or imaginable, it may not exist in reality.
Hypochondriasis – People suffering from this often worry about the health condition when nothing is wrong with their body. The word comes from feeling of stomach pain the person experiences even when everything is alright.
Specific phobia – fear of anything but specific without any reason. It’s the fear for certain thing even when it does not pose threat.
Social anxiety disorder (SAD) – In this scenario people intensely fear the public situations, humiliations, embarrassments, criticisms.
Separation anxiety disorder (SepAD) – People in this case intensely fear the loss of person or a place
Agoraphobia – it is fear of being in situation where there is no exit door, or escape strategy. Fear of using public transportation, being in large crowds are some examples.
Panic disorder – these are outburst of all the collective or intensive fears, they come quickly and last for short time.
Selective mutism (SM) – in this case the person is extremely fearful of initiating a conversation, does not speak to specific people or in specific situations or conditions even when they are forced to talk by humiliation or mocking.

Post traumatic syndrome disorder (PTSD) and Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) were once classified under anxiety disorders (now not under anxiety disorder in DSM – Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders)

Signal Detection Theory For Interpreting ‘Anxiety Like Responses’

One good paper in the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry by Bateson et al. shows how the smoke detector principal can be used to decide the boundaries of different levels of “anxiety like-responses”. This paper talks about signal detection theory and optimal threshold. The beauty of this paper for me is the mathematical model it establishes to explain psychological events. A single formula will help you understand the difference between normal anxiety and anxiety disorder.

With the smoke detector principal, we can now appreciate that not every common threat needs full armored protection. The signal detection theory in this paper shows where a person draws line when they overestimate or underestimate anxiety.

It talks about “optimal threshold” to show a threat response in given situation. Optimal threshold is a mathematical parameter which is function of probability of the occurrence real event and vulnerability of the individual.

The signal detection theory says that the superposition of response signals for given background noise and response signal from real threat give us the quantified judgement of how intensely the anxiety is triggered compared to the practicality of the threat – this quantified judgement is called optimal threshold (λ). Lower the threshold more intensely the anxiety will be triggered for given disturbance – background noise.

Figure 1 : Signal detection problem, how the optimal threshold can be calculated. (Credit: Anxiety: An Evolutionary Approach, 2011, Bateson et al., Canadian Journal of Psychiatry)

Equation 1: optimum threshold (Credit: Anxiety: An Evolutionary Approach, 2011, Bateson et al.,Canadian Journal of Psychiatry)

Here,

λ = optimal threshold

p_nt= probability that there is no threat

p_t= probability that there is real threat

w_fa= cost of false alarm

w_miss = cost of a miss

Once this equation comes in focus the discussion becomes interesting. The ratio of p_nt to p_t mathematically quantifies how practical the threat is. The ratio of w_fa to w_miss mathematically quantifies what will be the cost if the anxiety trigger is accepted or rejected – will the subject live or die. This ratio shows how we trigger anxiety response. If the cost of responding is nothing for even a simple threat scenario, we will choose to trigger that response, same would happen if the cost of losing is ultimately the loss of life, we would trigger any possible anxiety response to avoid it. The authors call this ratio as individual’s vulnerability.

The ratio (p_nt/p_t) can be seen like this. If the surrounding really is hostile and consists of events which cause many life altering events than the safety ensuring events then the p_t (probability of threat) will be way higher than p_nt (probability of no threat and safer environment). In war situation where multiple bombings, gun firings are happening around you the probability of threat happening (p_t) is way high than it not happening (p_nt). The optimal threshold will drop immediately and anxiety triggered will be very high.

The ratio (w_fa / w_miss) can be seen like this. If the person is way stronger to handle given threat, then the person will need no effort, investment or cost to trigger any reaction alarm to even a false threat. Consider the example where you are about to be bit by mosquito, you know the efforts to slap many times until the mosquito dies are not worthless, you will try many times to kill it even when you know it will swiftly escape, you are less vulnerable in this scenario. But now when you are about to be killed by John Wick (!?) you know for sure that even a pencil will do the job for him, any environment is hostile for you, you are vulnerable here, the value of losing life (w_miss)is way high than the cost of attempts to save it (w_fa). Your optimal threshold will immediately drop down thus triggering intense anxiety.

Once you generate enough data for such optimal frequencies you can easily distinguish the healthy anxiety responses and anxiety disorders. I loved how these two factors (probability of threat and vulnerability of an individual) can predict the levels of anxiety in a person. This equation explains and can also quantify why pregnant women have heightened awareness of their surroundings, why people get insomniac after constant mental stress, why restless people are always in the mode of action and fight, why reclusive people hesitate to visit foreign, unknown places.

Your Surroundings and Mindset Matter!

Figure 2 : Three levels of vulnerability, here optimal threshold and probability of event can be correlated for difference in the anxiety responses (Credit: Anxiety: An Evolutionary Approach, 2011, Bateson et al., Canadian Journal of Psychiatry)

It is really interesting what the authors have achieved and established in this research. They compared three different levels of vulnerability and explained them using given plot. The thing to highlight here for anxiety disorders is that they emerge from the environments which always keep on presenting high probabilistic practically threatening scenarios. The anxiety disorders also emerge when the individual feels more vulnerable.

Higher the vulnerability lower will be the optimal threshold and intense will be the anxiety response.

As shown in research, in the uncertain times of Covid-19 people who were locked in their home had no disorders, were not exposed to the virus also felt anxious and faced some anxiety disorders because of the environment they were in.

If the person feels less vulnerable and stronger then even for given strong life-threatening events the optimal threshold will be higher thus the anxiety triggered will be lower.

Are you noticing where this is going?

This is a mathematical model which shows how a healthy, supportive, and safe environment and also a strong mindset and better judgment of reality is important for handling challenging situations.

For a person suffering from anxiety disorder, it becomes very important to make sure that they know that they are in a safer environment and are cared for. It is very important to make them feel safe and understood. Creating a system of critical thinking and reasoning can also help the person to have a sense of strength and high resistance to vulnerability, this also goes for physical strength. The vulnerability is not only mental it is also physical when it comes to reality.

You will now appreciate why teenagers and trauma patients are more exposed to anxiety disorders. Mostly and generally in teenagers it is due to the uncertainty of many new things happening with them simultaneously and in trauma patients it’s the constant bombardment of life-threatening events in hostile environments.

Conclusion

Anxiety serves to prepare a person for threats. The emotion called anxiety is an evolutionary gift to ensure long survival of our species but as it is also related to our primitive instincts, we mostly let anxiety overpower other emotions in seemingly safer scenarios. Strategy and anticipation are the gifts of anxiety but if overused they will end up in imparting unnecessary caution and overprotective attitude which inhibits adaptation to changes there by slowing evolution of our species. Anxiety just like pain is one uncomfortable but effective way to cope up with the adversities in life, that’s how we build strength, resistance and deeper understanding of the surrounding for better and more precisely predictable future.

The remarkable concepts like smoke detector principal and optimal threshold in signal detection theory developed by modern psychologists/ psychiatrists help us to draw a line between a healthy anxiety (adaptive function) and unhealthy anxiety (pathology) and ways to handle/ treat them effectively.

These theories show how we can quantify seemingly intangible emotions like anxiety and way to handle them. If you can measure something effectively you can control and predict it effectively. All credit goes to such brilliant minds!

References, Image sources and further reading:

The Model Millionaire – Attributes of True Wealth

Oscar Wilde’s short story “The Model Millionaire” is a story depicting the boomerang of kindness. It also tries to fuse the importance of tangible assets like money and intangible/ non-physical assets like kindness/ love/ art in our lives. It shows how the balance between these separate attributes can create a true rich life.

Oscar Wilde’s short story called “The Model Millionaire”

Fiction is the lie through which we tell the truth.
Albert Camus

Stories we cherish – especially short stories which tickle our brains have huge impact on our personality. The shortness of tightly woven multiple events inherently brings out the simplicity and invite intrigue in readers. All of us have such favorite stories which we would love to remember forever for the lessons they provide, the happiness they create. Most of such stories we love belong to the chapters in our textbooks, school books. There are many short stories which fall into exactly similar category of being a textbook chapters as if they are not that deep enough and simply convey what is to be conveyed. They get the job done within few pages thereby giving readers a worthy payoff.

It is a cakewalk for readers to enjoy such short stories and interpret the message which author/ writer is trying to convey. Sometimes there is nothing to learn or any hidden message to covey through the story, the intent is to invoke certain emotion in readers. It is a joy to appreciate such stories from readers’ perspective.

It is also crucial and highly underrated to understand what was going in the writers’ mind when they penned down such stories, especially for the of case short stories. This happens frequently in terms of short stories due to their simple, short presentation. You read, get entertained and move on to the next one.

It is very important to understand the simplicity of such stories and so called- “entertaining” word-play. The writers of such stories make every conscious effort to simplify the narrative and convey the meaning. The simplicity is not inherent rather it is intentional and full of efforts – the hidden tediousness. If you are reading an interesting story, it’s not because writer just wrote what came to his mind showcasing his brilliance; it is interesting because writer had created multiple perspectives, personalities – I would say pseudo- readers to establish the narrative and remove the confusion from the story. Writers just wear this mask of the characters from their stories to fearlessly express what they feel about the reality.

Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
Oscar Wilde

We will see one such simple, high school textbook-worthy yet an interesting short story written by Oscar Wilde called “The Model Millionaire”. The story is flawless in such a way that the plot can be explained in 10-15 lines. The real beauty lies in how Oscar Wilde saw the world and expressed it through the characters in this story.

Plot

Hughie Erskin is a young, good looking but incompetent (according to the mainstream social standards) – a kind of below average man. As he has not proven his worth, has no money he is struggling to find the rhythm of life and marry his love of life – Laura Merton. One day he finds his painter friend – Alan Trevor – painting a life size beggar-man. Hughie feels very sad about how the beggar has to go through this sitting session where he won’t get just few shillings whereas the painter would earn in thousands by selling this painting. Feeling pity for the beggar-man Hughie gives him most of the money he has – to take care of the matters. Later, Hughie founds out that this beggar-man was actually an exceedingly rich “Baron”, an important person capable of influencing a continent. Hughie feels ashamed of his deeds because he thinks he has insulted the Baron by handing some petty alms.

In the climax, when Hughie feels the moment of confrontation, he prepares to apologize the Baron for what he did. Turns out that all that money, all that power had not polluted the Baron and rewards Hughie for his good deed by offering enough money to get married with Laura. The millionaire who earlier was a portrait model also proves his humble personality as a “model” millionaire.

Opening – Your love and charm will not fill your belly

“Unless one is really wealthy there is no use in being a charming fellow. Romance is the privilege of the rich, not the profession of the unemployed. The poor should be practical and prosaic. It is better to have a permanent income than to be fascinating.”

Oscar is trying to establish some pragmatic thoughts to intensify how big a failure his character is in real life. He uses this established foundation to create a contrasting climax of the story in the end

Oscar Wilde in first few lines depicts the contrast between the attitude of Hughie and how the world around him is constructed. As if Hughie was never meant to live in this world. In the opening of the story Oscar makes every effort to show Hughie’s futile attempts in making a pragmatic living. In every sense Hughie is a failure. Every venture, business (Stock Exchange, trading Tea and Dry Sherry) he tried ended in failure. The legacy of his ancestors (his father’s cavalry sword and 15 volumes of the History of the Peninsular War) is worthless in those modern times. (Even luck is not on his side!)

“Ultimately, he became nothing, a delightful, ineffectual young man with a perfect profile and no profession”

Oscar Wilde is trying to portray a very practical picture of life. One must understand that things are exactly the same today in 21^st century.

When one has not established themselves at least as an average earning independent man then every new luxury, wish is burden. Love is a luxury for a man who hasn’t established himself in society (at least financially).

“To make matters worse, he was in love”

Hughie’s lover’s (Laura’s) father – Retired Colonel Merton likes Hughie but is not ready to hand over his daughter to Hughie for the same practical reasons – Hughie cannot offer Laura a stable life.

“Come to me boy, my boy, when you have got ten thousand pounds of your own, and we will see about it”

Oscar Wilde is trying to show the brutal nature of reality which is extra brutal for daydreaming people like Hughie. (Please keep in mind that the opening is mere single dimension of Hughie’s character, more things about who he is at the core unfold in the later part of the story)

Post opening – Intangible things like art must surrender to physical/tangible media in order to remain relevant in practical world

Hughie has an artist friend called Alan Trevor who paints for living. Oscar shows us that Alan truly is a gifted artist and he earns well through his painting profession. He befriended Hughie (a real-life failure) because he liked his generous and reckless spirit. Being an artist Alan appreciates a kind-hearted and good-looking people irrespective of their social and practical status.

“The only people a painter should know are the people who are bête and beautiful, people who are an artistic pleasure to look at and an intellectual repose to talk to. Men who are dandies and who are darlings rule the world, at least they should do so.”

Whatever Alan thinks, we all know what the reality is.

Middle – An act of kindness

Hughie meets Alan in a session where he is painting a beggar. Hughie feels sad for the beggar for how life is treating him. He somewhere feels that the beggar is more helpless than himself. At least he is in a better condition than the beggar who is modelling for Alan’s painting. He argues with Alan that he should pay the beggar in percentage as Alan will earn a big chunk of money through selling this painting for thousands. The beggar deserves more. Alan argues that he definitely has to put more efforts to paint the beggar than the beggar by just standing still there.

“…there are moments when Art almost attains to the dignity of manual labor…”

This expression by Alan shows that the art may just invoke intangible, non-real things in a person but the process of creation an art is very difficult as it tries to express things which know no bounds/limits through the physical media which have inherent real-life limitations.

Realizing the correctness of Alan’s opinion and at the same time feeling pity for the beggar Hughie gives whatever money he had to the beggar.

This shows another side of Hughie where he is sensitive, he is not just a naïve person who cannot handle the practicality of brutal real life thereby getting labelled as a failure as per the social norms.

Climax – Kindness is a boomerang

Hughie through his friend Alan realizes that the beggar to whom he donated the money was actually a crazy rich person called Baron Hausberg. A rich person who holds potential, is powerful enough to change the course of every possible thing in society. Now Hughie feels ashamed of his act. Even though his intent was pure it may get projected as an act of disrespect to Baron Hausberg.

But turns out that Baron Hausberg is a down to earth personality and he returns Hughie’s act of kindness by offering him 10000 pounds required to marry his love of life.

Closing – Artistic, Emotional and Materialistic wealth all can coexist; it narrows down to what kind of human being you are.

Alan expresses that despite having loads of money, Baron Hausberg understands the difference between “having lots of money/ power” and “being wealthy”. That is why this millionaire who was a model for a portrait was also an ideal millionaire – a rare “model millionaire”.

Baron Hausberg is not the only “Model Millionaire” in this story

This might be my overthinking or over-analysis of the story but bear with me.

Oscar Wild through his cheeky narration and the expressions from his character tries to create a picture of a pragmatic life we human beings live. One must earn money to live in the society. But that is not the only thing which will define him as a model man as an ideal human being.

Baron Hausberg while having loads of money is rich in morals too. He appreciates Hughie’s act of kindness and returns that kindness with the same spirit. The materialistic wealth does not pollute his mindset. That is what makes him the “model” one. Baron Hausberg is the obvious model millionaire of the story, but you must appreciate that the word “millionaire” frees itself from its association with only money. That is exactly what the wordplay between “millionaire model” and “millionaire model” conveys. Being rich was never only associated with having loads of money and possessions.

That is why Hughie is also a “model millionaire” thereby “a model rich” person. Hughie’s intent to help the helpless people even in the case of not possessing any basic wealth shows his richness in humanistic values. It is just that our mind is not ready to define Hughie as a rich person because the concept of being rich is mostly bound by the quantification of materialistic possessions. Emotional awareness, intellectual awareness, and proficiency in communicating the intangible things are also another versions of wealth.

Talking about the proficiency in communicating the intangibles – Alan is also another “model millionaire” of the story. He is rich in life. He knows how to identify a high spirited yet worthless (by societal definition) person like Alan and befriends him. He can also capitalize his intangible art through painting venture. He respects the labor he has to endure to translate intangible aspects of life into physical reality. (Imagine the reaction of an average art connoisseur when he/she sees a painting of beggar and finds out that the model was crazy rich person! At least from the description, that painting seems a masterpiece with an interesting backstory.) Even the last wordplay between “model” and “millionaire” portrays the artistic wealth that Alan carries.

Baron Hausberg despite being rich can only appreciate the art and is cannot create it (he can ask an artist to create it). Hughie too appreciates the worth of art but cannot create it. That is why I think Alan becomes the most balanced “model millionaire” of the story.

An “Aesthetic” Proof By Contradiction – Love, Kindness And Art Are As Important As Money.

Oscar Wilde in the writing of this short story’s opening establishes very practical aspects of life and the necessity to have enough materialistic possessions. In the beginning, Oscar makes it clear that intangible things like love, affection or good looks cannot solely help a person to meet the ends in this society. Hughie is a complete failure even though he is good looking and kind-hearted. Hughie has found true love and is ready to commit but that is not enough and practical for his future father-in-law. He knows that until and unless he does not get the hold of sufficient money, he will lose his love. Hughie also has two antiques as a legacy from his father but they are described as useless and non-liquid-able assets.

When we read through the event of Alan’s painting session with the beggar model, it is pretty much confirmed that even a seasoned artist like Alan (a person who is much closer to the art and similar intangible things than average masses) understands how important it is to sell the paintings to sustain his artistic profession. Oscar adds Hughie’s point of view in this scene to show that the sufferings of the beggar which brought him to this condition, his efforts to stand still for the painting despite being weak and old are as important as Alan’s painting skills, that is exactly why Hughie demands percentage share for the beggar model.

Alan is successful because he can translate his intangible skill of painting by selling paintings thereby into real money. It’s not because he is artistic or appreciates art. Hughie can appreciate a good art, knows what goes into the laborious process of its creation but doesn’t hold the skill that Alan has.

Hughie also receives scolding for his extravagant charity from his love Laura. This also shows that pragmatism mostly prevails over intangible emotions.

And to comment on Baron Hausberg, he is the only person in the story who knows the importance of capital possessions, is capable of compounding them for the influence and power – I mean he is filthy rich and respects money. Otherwise, why would he commission a painting of himself as a beggar? He understands what he would become if he doesn’t have that money. If he truly wanted to mock the poverty and beggars, he would have paid some model for the painting assignment. He would not have wasted his valuable time in this assignment.

Can you see it now?

Oscar Wilde first puts the mind of readers in the practical aspects of living a life. He establishes that emotions, art, love will not put food in your plate at the end of the day, you must go out and do something practical to earn money.

And then Oscar starts showing you the other side of the same people, same events which are fully in contradiction with what he had established as “practical and tangible”.

You will see Hughie getting rewarded for his emotions, kindness and act of charity. Only a fool who is poor will give all he has to another poor person but that does not happen here. Hughie knows what it means to be poor and helpless. It is Hughie’s empathy which makes him rich – a millionaire at heart. Oscar through Hughie’s character shows his readers that love and kindness are also the attributes of a true rich person. Hughie is wealthy by his character. (Hughie could have turned to some malpractices to get the money but Oscar does not inject this intent into the character of Hughie)

Alan Trevor is a kind of bridge in this story. Oscar Wilde developed Alan’s character in such way that he is a double-edged sword in this proof that there are other important things than only capital possessions. Alan can not only appreciate art but also create it and capitalize it. If we are to rank the millionaires by the balance between the possession of tangibles and intangibles in life, then Alan Trevor is the richest of them all. He also knows to identify and befriend kind people like Hughie. Alan has enough money, a skill in hands and company of good people like Hughie and Baron – the ideal and balanced wealth. (There are no ways in which Alan’s character would have become polluted – that is also why his character is the most balanced character of all- he knows ends of the both sides of the society)

Baron Hausberg intends to see himself as a beggar not because he is mocking the poor people, it is his attitude of attributing importance to things which are not money. Oscar Wilde attributes the wish of ‘a rich man to see himself as a beggar’ in a very conscious and artistic way. Baron wishing to picture himself as a beggar through a piece of art shows how much he values art when he is crazy rich. Again, the choice of modelling himself instead of some paid model is his artistic interest. He knows his reality and the depiction in painting will elevate the artistic value of the piece. Also, Baron doesn’t consider the Alan’s act of charity as an insult to his wealth which shows that monetary wealth has not touched his soul. (Baron Hausberg could have been an arrogant filthy rich old man, but Oscar did not projected him in that way)

It is funny how the story turns out in the end. The Model Millionaire is not just about how a good-hearted but helpless person like Hughie got rewarded for his act of kindness by a filthy rich person like Baron Hausberg. It also shows how different non-physical attributes like kindness, love and art equally contribute the a truly wealthy life.

That is where aestheticism come in picture and Oscar Wilde is hailed as ‘the Father of Aestheticism’.

The dictionary definition of aestheticism goes like this:

“A late 19th-century European arts movement which centered on the doctrine that art exists for the sake of its beauty alone, and that it need serve no political, didactic, or other purpose.”

There is this famous quote by Oscar Wilde

“All art is useless”
Oscar Wilde

I think it is an antiphrasis (the rhetorical device of saying the opposite of what is actually meant in such a way that it is obvious what the true intention is)

It’s not just art but its also about intangible things which the art tries to convey i.e., emotions of all sorts. You will realize that when we remove these art-like non-physical attributes from our lives even when we are materialistically filthy rich, that riches would be worthless. I think that is why he creates these contradictions in his story “The Model Millionaire” to show that the balance of tangible and intangible assets makes the person a truly wealthy person. Oscar Wilde fuses the importance of tangible assets like money and intangible assets like kindness/ love/ art through this story.

Oscar also makes a conscious effort to show this fusion through Alan Trevor’s comment on art and manual labor.

In simple words,

What good is being nice if the man has no money to achieve what he desires?

What good is money if the man is not nice?

An extremely emotional poor and an extremely insensitive rich person both are the wrong ends of the reality.

I mean, if Oscar really meant that art is useless then it is literally useless of him to contribute to the prosaic artistry through his writings. He was just messing with our head to prove the importance of the given thing by showing the effect after its absence. It is indeed one smart trick!

Lifelong freedom for an hour

The societal construct, the men and even the women in society have created certain conditions where other women receive false freedom. This false freedom facilitates women to deliver benefits to society but somehow the society is not liable to return the favor back to these women. That is exactly where feminism becomes important. Kate Chopin’s short story called “The Story of an Hour” gives us a glimpse into what sacrifice and freedom means for a woman. This short story is summoned to be one of the important and earliest pieces of the feminist literature.

The ideas of feminism from Kate Chopin’s short story “The Story of an Hour”

Inception of feminism

Kate Chopin’s short story called “The Story of an Hour” gives us a glimpse into what sacrifice and freedom means for a woman. This short story is called as one of the most influential and early parts of feminist literature. It shows how women in those times sacrificed their freedom under the influence of the society just to maintain and continue the system as it was. People (still today) say that ‘it is very difficult to gauge what is going on in a woman’s head’ or ‘it is very difficult to know what a woman is thinking’. Kate Chopin’s ‘The Story of an Hour’ gives us a peek into a woman’s mind when she is allowed to think what she wants to think. Physical freedom is one part of freedom but mental freedom is the truest form of the freedom, I would say.

The story of an hour was first published titled ‘the Dream of an Hour’ in Vogue magazine on 1894 later it was republished as ‘the Story of an Hour’ in 1895. We will see why and how this short story represents feminism in its truest form and possibly in the most misunderstood (compared to the modern interpretations of feminism) ways.

Summary

We come to know that Mrs. Mallard is a heart patient who is about to be informed about the news of the death of her husband in a railroad accident. Her sister Josephine and Mr. Mallard’s close friend share this news with her. Mrs. Mallard is obviously sad hearing the news of the demise of her beloved husband. She then teams with some moments of solitude to handle this sorrow. Where she suddenly realizes that she could be free now as she won’t be under any obligations from society and her husband. She feels her rebirth and onset of new life with absolute freedom approaching towards her. She wants to cherish this realization of freedom in her room alone for some moments but suddenly she notices that some person has arrived on door. Upon the request of her sister, Mrs. Mallard goes to see the person at the door and founds that the person is Mr. Mallard – unharmed and alive. She dies in the shock. Doctors diagnose her death due to the heart attack from extreme joy.

Life of the author – Kate Chopin

Kate Chopin was born on 8 February 1850. When she was just five years old, her father died in a rail accident. Her mother was the second wife of her father. In 1870, she got married and had six children in the period of 1871 to 1879. Her husband died in 1882 from malaria and left a huge debt on her head equivalent to $1.27 million in today’s valuation. She worked her ways out to bring the business back to life which she sold after two years. Her mother died in 1885.

Kate became depressed with sudden loss of her husband followed by her mother. Her friend Dr. Kolbenheyer suggested her to use writing as a therapy, a way to vent out and express her emotions and as a way to sustain income.

The most important novel published in 1899 by Kate called “the Awakening” was very controversial and scandalous to those times due to unacceptable feminine point of views.

As her writings were considered controversial, Kate much more resorted to short story writing. She died on 22^nd August 1904 due to stroke.

Realistic fiction

The genre of Kate’s writing is a realistic fiction. Where the setting of the story is intended to feel realistic. The characters have all human limitations, practical interactions and nothing is stretched out of imagination to feel unreal, inorganic or magical. You will see Kate’s own life is reflected in her writings. People say that one can trace out her whole biography through her writings.

Now let us understand the Story of an Hour.

A woman’s whole world – her husband (?…)

Mr. Mallard’s death in railroad accident is drawn from the death of Kate’s father who exactly died in rail accident. She starts the events in this story from the point of view of her mother in a way. Kate was one of five children her father had and she too had six children. In a way, she resonated with her mother who was responsible for taking care of children. That is why she starts the story with the death of the husband in a rail accident to establish the connect between how her mother would have felt when she heard the death about her husband – Kate’s father.

She thus considers her mother as one powerful woman. Please note that after her father’s death Kate spent her days with her widowed mother, widowed grand mother and also widowed great grandmother who never remarried. Her use of the father’s death in rail accident is actually a setup used to link the emotions of her mother in this story.

“She did not hear the story as many women have heard the same, with a paralyzed inability to accept its significance.”

One will only appreciate the depth of this sentence when they are told about the situation of three generational widows Kate grew up with. The ability of Mrs. Mallard to accept the consequences of the death of her husband is thus the reflection of how her maternal side handled the consequences of the death of the man of their house.

A woman feeling helpless after the death of her husband is the most acceptable reaction even today but Kate’s protagonist not reacting in that way was the first shock to the society of those times. It’s not like she went paranoid and numb due to shock from the news of her husband’s death. Kate’s choice of words in this sentence hence is very deliberate.

Please understand that there is no way to indicate that she hated her husband throughout the story.

So, the initial setup and reactions of the protagonist are Kate’s ways to show that a woman’s life was never only limited to her husband. You should also understand that after her own husband’s death, Kate was burdened with huge death incurred from him. Getting out of such death surely might have made her more practical and objective. That is also an important reason which shows how her protagonist reacts to such news in a practical way. She understands that it’s huge loss but she also knows that her remaining life is standing in front of her.

Painting the scenery of freedom

The elements used in the early setting of the story ensure the successful impact Kate leaves on the minds of the readers. She gives just enough information about the weak heart condition of Mrs. Mallard and surety of sources for Mr. Mallard’s death in the rail accident.

Then the story solely focuses on the protagonist of the story – Mrs. Mallard.

Mrs. Mallard now submits to solitude in her room. Each and every description of events and objects used hereon by Kate are very deliberate to reflect how the mind of Mrs. Mallard is reacting to the realization of the loss of her husband. She is yet to understand the freedom she is about to enjoy but how she come to that realization of freedom is one such “brain-candy” for the readers. They are not given direct explanation on how the protagonist is feeling rather they are made to feel the exact emotions of the protagonist. That is the beauty of Kate’s writing. She creates a portrait of a scene which readers enjoy interpreting.

So, here goes the scene, every sentence in this story hereon is one hidden urge of every normal human being but especially a woman here:

“She would have no one to follow her”

– indicates a person’s longing to leave life on their terms and without the judgments and prejudices of the society.

“- trees (in the open square) that were all aquiver with the new spring life”

– indicates a new beginning full of hope, a restart to living life without restrictions

“- the delicious breath of rain was in the air”

– indicates that even air was seeming tasty and ready to sow new beginnings. It is that extreme joy which was buried deep down which got the chance to come out which is making even the air “delicious”.

Please understand that this joy is not the effect of the death of her husband and many readers always connect wrongly. It is innocent joy of the upcoming realization of freedom – just realization -the real freedom has not achieved yet. Just its realization is joyous, imagine what would real freedom would do to our protagonist!

“a peddler was crying his wares”

– indicates high importance given to general and normal phenomenon.

What does a street seller do? He screams, calls out the items he sells. There nothing exciting in it.

But when you are full of joy and excitement, even a mundane, normal thing feels like a happy, jolly event.

Mrs. Mallard noticing such normal activity out of all the beautiful things is the indication of what it really means for her to realize freedom. Kate would have dropped the moment of Mrs. Mallard noticing the peddler but she injects the realism in the fantastical, fanciful feeling of freedom for a woman. (Kate would have made unicorns dance on the streets for Mrs. Mallard but that totally destroys the realism and sincerity and thereby seriousness of the emotions of the woman. That is Kate Chopin for you! It is cinematic – feeling-wise but completely real from observational POV)

Mrs. Mallard noticing a distant, faint son with twitter of sparrow shows how she is now receptive to even a small joyous event. You should understand that when a person is sad especially depressed even the happiest thing in the world can’t make them happy easily and reverse is also true. When you are truly happy your brain will notice even the minuscule events of joy around you.

“The clouds piling up in the sky” is used to show the readers that the emotions Mrs. Mallard had seemed like her life itself had become a beautiful scene nature has painted itself.

The objects and emotions used to express emotions of the protagonist in this scene by Kate Chopin actually show the innocent nature of freedom the woman was longing for. The happiness is not due to the death of her husband. Only a fool will assign this happiness of Mrs. Mallard to a devilish attribute as the protagonist had no hatred towards her husband. Just for a moment the woman has detached herself from the definitions of the society, she got to experience this moment only when the news of Mr. Mallard actually detached her from the obligations of the society.

The readers will clearly appreciate this in the next moments of the story.

Repression and Sacrifice

Kate Chopin very carefully presents the emotions of her protagonist. She has made every attempt to clarify the feelings of freedom Mrs. Mallard are not devilish. She justifies feelings of happiness for the freedom and the feelings of regaining the control over the course her life for a woman in a pretty convincing and real way. The efforts made are sincere and pious.

“-as a child who has cried itself to sleep continues to sob in its dreams”

It shows that the sorrow has impacted Mrs. Mallard very deeply. She is surrounded by various types of feelings. It is this turmoil of different emotions and you are confused about how to label certain type of emotion you are trying to feel out of it.

What happens next is – I would say – the core of every woman’s multifaceted feeling. The beauty of Kate’s writing here is the ways in which she tries to portray the innocent longing of a woman for her freedom. The readers should think with clear intent with no prejudices to judge the feelings of Mrs. Mallard here.

“There was something coming to her and she was waiting for it, fearfully. What was it? She did not know; it was too subtle and elusive to name. But she felt it, creeping out of the sky, reaching toward her through the sounds, the scents, the color that filled the air.”

The cautious use of words here is phenomenal! She describes the feeling approaching the protagonist. Its like it was not born from inside, its like the protagonists didn’t intend to “feel” that feeling. The sounds, scents and the colors portrayed in the painting of happiness that Mrs. Mallard was experiencing were just the surface. Something different was hidden behind, buried deep down in that happiness. The sounds, scents and colors were just the mediators of these emotions she intentionally didn’t want to feel. The sentences presented here by Kate to the readers are meant to show the feelings intentionally buried deep by her protagonist.

The protagonist had killed her ambitions wishes so deep that now these feelings were completely strange for her. She had denied these feelings initially just for the sake of the betterment of her family and society. What society considered as wrong, she silently accepted it as wrong even though it may compromise her ambitions and wishes. This is a subtle reference to how a woman suppresses her emotions for the betterment of her loved ones.

“She was beginning to recognize this thing that was approaching to possess her and she was striving to beat it back with her will – as powerless as her two white slender hands would have been.”

The feeling approaching Mrs. Mallard is explained in a way as if some devil is trying to conjure her. It is very important decision taken by Kate Chopin to indicate that how even the fundamental feeling of freedom for a woman of that time was considered as a sin. She tries to reject the freedom for the betterment of the society, she sacrifices, kills her growth, aspirations and toils for the success of the others on such an extreme devotion so that it becomes her second nature. That is why when she thinks for her well-being, society labels it as a crime. Then she also accepts that reality and remaining powerless she succumbs to this monstrous way of the society.

The third person characterization of the feeling of freedom in the form of devil is intentionally used to show how the society has devalued even the fundamental emotion of freedom for a normal woman to rock bottom.

Today this will not seem like a big deal, but the time when this story was published Kate Chopin made an attempt for women to feel free from the deep rooted traditional patriarchal setup. It makes others understand how women were forced to suppress their wills and wishes, how the societal structures undervalued them and at the same times it makes the women realize that what feeling they are having are in no way bad, there is no way to suppress such feelings of freedom.

“free, free, free!”

Kate points directly to what a woman actually misses when she has lost her true identity. She misses her freedom. Freedom to decide the course of their own lives is the fundamental right of every person. Its not just about women, but Kate’s attempt here is to make others understand how women were more exploited due to the societal setup of that times. As she herself had gone through such experiences she was successful to pen down these feelings to her readers.

“She knew that she would weep again when she saw the kind, tender hands folded in death; the face that had never looked save with love upon her, fixed and grey and dead. But she saw beyond that bitter moment a long procession of years to come that would belong to her absolutely. And she opened and spread her arms out to them in welcome.”

Kate wants readers to understand the purity and innocence of the emotions her protagonist has. It’s not like she longed for freedom because her husband treated her badly or tortured her. Rather Mr. Mallard is shown as a kind and loving husband here. His own wife thinks so; what other proof do you need?

Mrs. Mallard was sad for the loss of her loved husband. But at the same time, it was the societal construct which restricted her from deciding the course of her own life. Death of her husband exposed this flaw in front of everyone. That is exactly why she misses her husband but also understand that this is the how she can be truly free – the pressure from society is released through the death of her husband. It’s not like she despised her husband but his death definitely exposed the cruel construct of the society created to limit the feminine potential.

It is human nature, we always need a pivot to judge something, understand something. When we are shown a picture as a good, we love to interpret exactly opposite of this picture as the bad one. It is basic flaw in our general thinking to attribute opposites two separate parts, good and bad. In alignment of same thought, if a woman desires to become free general thought goes like this: if she wants freedom then she would not need support of others, she can do things on her own, it is just the society that is suppressing her, she can do all things just like men do. This is the moment where the modern feminism starts losing its core – the tender yet powerful feminine emotions. There are countless examples in modern feminism where women are trying to prove the point by doing exactly what men do. This is the part from where the feminism starts losing its real meaning.

Kate made a successful attempt to define what is the meaning of freedom for a woman. Giving woman her freedom will surely not make her not care for her loved ones – especially the male loved ones. In the end, women are more capable to nurture love and affection. Freedom to do anything in their ways will not steal the femininity from women – that is where their real advantage lies. That is the core of feminism lies I would say. It is not about doing what exactly men do to prove the point. It is about equal exposure of both men and women to everything the nature, the life has to offer. Feminism was never about competition to catch up with the privileged masculine gender. It is about the freedom to decide and preserve one’s identity especially women.

“There would be no one to live for during those coming years; she would live for herself. There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature.”

“She would love for herself” is not just a simple set of word to describe the value of freedom for a woman. It also shows how many sacrifices women make to let others around them grow. Please note that it’s not only the men who keep on impose their own will to suppress women, there are other women too who try to force their wishes on such women. That is exactly why Kate has both men and women for the down fall of such women. So, it’s not fully about patriarchy only, it is about whole societal construct. There are many good examples where women themselves were responsible for the suppression another woman. Kate consciously, deliberately wrote these sentences along with the concept of “a private will” to show that only men are not to blame. Many people especially highly celebrated feminists miss this point. But there is still hope given that this clarity was already there when the concept of feminism was in its inception which is somewhat comforting for humanity. Kate is not pointing towards certain gender for the downfall of a woman, she is suggesting a reform in the mentality of both men and women thereby whole society.

“And yet she had loved him – sometimes. Often she had not. What did it matter! What could love, the unsolved mystery count for in the face of the possession of self-assertion which she suddenly recognized as the strongest impulse of her being!”

“Free! Body and soul free!” she kept whispering.

This is the most important part of the Kate Chopin’s story. It is the moment when her protagonist understands what she gave up when she loved her husband. She gave up her true identity, her freedom. It’s not like she received something in return for such sacrifice of her identity. That is why the gain of fundamental right to freedom becomes more important to a woman rather every human being. Kate thus also establishes that the real love will not demand the challenge the fundamental nature/ identity of a person, rather it should elevate such aspects. That is why the freedom after her husband’s death becomes heavier than the love she had for him, because she lost her identity in that process. Please understand that it’s not limited to women, men may also go through similar emotions. It is just that women are more exploited in such emotions.

The tragedy

After going through all these feelings of freedom, Kate decided that she will trick her readers into a tragic end for her protagonist Mrs. Louise Mallard. The confidence she built in reader of this story in the early part of the story is revealed to be a misinformation. Mr. Mallard knocks on the door unhurt, showing no sign of going through a deadly accident. In that shock Mrs. Mallard dies from the heart attack (a heart attack due to an uncontrollable joy as the doctors in the story diagnose)

It is the magic of Kate’s story telling which shows what she actually thinks for the women in society especially women of her generation. She has very less hope for the empowerment of women, women like her to be very specific. That is why she has inserted this tragedy in her story. This tragedy is a metaphor for her low hopes for society to change to grant women their fundamental right to freedom. (Luckily that is not the reality today)

The death of Louise is in a way the indication that if society denies the freedom for a woman, then the only way she can have her freedom is by embracing death. Death is better that such societal imprisonment and repression. This is very serious but goes unnoticed many times in this story because there is no way everyone will understand and appreciate the seriousness of this tragedy. One has to either go through or closely observe such instances. For the times of Kate death was the true freedom for women.

Whether Louise died from happiness or not is also the most misinterpreted part of this short story. There is no medical evidence to prove whether a person’s heart attack was a result of extreme joy or sadness. At least there wasn’t any at that time. The doctors in the story might have guessed joy as the reason for heart attack due to the happiness Louise was experiencing when she realized her freedom. The joy was so certain and long lasting for her that she had no time to react to the shock of the news of Mr. Mallard being alive. It shows how feminine emotions, ambitions will always remain misunderstood to the mainstream society. That is the real tragedy of the story.

Feminism – Freedom and respect for everyone in the end

Man is born free. Freedom and human being are two inseparable concepts. Many great people in history have sacrificed their lives, spent their precious lives to make others free. Freedom both physical and mental is one important aspect of every person’s identity. Freedom enables a person to have their own way of living the life, nobody can force others to live their life in certain way.

So, when we define freedom as the ability of people to do anything they want in the ways they want, we end up in a peculiar dilemma – a paradox. If a person is ‘influenced’ by his surroundings to make a choice in certain ways, will it be called as the true freedom? On surface you will see that the person him/herself is the one making decisions and taking actions in their own ways; So, it seems to represent the freedom. But when you understand that so called ‘free’ person was influenced by his/her surrounding to take certain course of action in a certain way the word ‘freedom’ feels like a misnomer. Even though the person was free to take any action, the action he/she took was under an influence rendering the meaning behind “to take any action” useless.

When such freedom to take actions is unknowingly influencing the subject, it can be called as a false-freedom but when the person knowingly takes the same action even when they know that they are taken due to the influence of the society then it becomes a sacrifice, the person undergoes repression. This is a conscious sacrifice made by the person to maintain the order in the system. A sacrifice made by this person of his/her own freedom. When this sacrifice is fully voluntary decision, it is rarely accounted to be valuable because very few people truly understand what it means to be free. The more indirect the influence the more people feel free.

That is exactly where feminism becomes important. The societal construct, the men and even the women in society created certain conditions where other women receive false freedom. This false freedom facilitates women to deliver benefits to society but somehow the society is not liable to return the favor back to these women. This exactly what is wrong with the conventional societal construct. This renders the sacrifices made by women useless. No wonder why modern feminism sometimes focuses on doing exactly what men do to prove the point. That is why the ideas, emotions presented by Kate Chopin through her short story ‘The Story of an Hour’ are very important.

Nostalgia- The romantics of past

Remember the video game that you used to play in your childhood? The game cassette claimed 999999 in 1 but it was few games just repeated may times and you still enjoyed playing with them. The times were simple, we used to trade the Pokémon cards, WWF trump cards. Speaking of WWF- every boy in the school knew the story of rivalry between the Kane and the Undertaker still being brothers, how many times the Undertaker had reborn. We had that red-blue eraser which could supposedly erase both the pen and pencil writings. Everyone had played that pocket brick game bought from the local fair at least once. Tom and Jerry, Popeye, Looney Tuns, Beyblade- these were some of the favorite cartoons and who could forget the Power Rangers- they were the Avengers of our times. Spiderman was present on every possible school stationary that you could have- starting from the school bags, water bottles to the pencil boxes and textbook stickers. Those were the days! These days bring back all those fun we had, reminding us that even though they cannot be brought back, which is sad but still we are happy that we were able to experience them.

Nostalgia- The ride down the memory lane…

The concept of nostalgia has traces 3000 years back when it was related to a mental disease closer to depression or melancholy. Nostalgia is made up of Greek word νόστος (nóstos), meaning “homecoming”, and ἄλγος (álgos), meaning “pain”. The later stages when the psychology became more experimental the Nostalgia was less of a disease and more of a complex emotion.

The feeling of nostalgia is closely related the reminiscence of memories evoked by the stimulation of our senses. You smelled- tasted something good, listened to that catchy tune and suddenly remembered the days you used to enjoy the same feelings in the past. The memories we remember are the main media-vehicles for the nostalgia. You have this flood of emotion when you suddenly remember ‘the good old days’, ‘the fun you had’, ‘the pranks you pulled on each other’ on the last day of the college graduation.

The pop culture- Memes (90% of the meme empire is built on the nostalgia), Movie reboots (Star Wars, Spider-verse), Spin-offs (Again Star Wars!), Music industry (that catchy song present in every Instagram reel), Social Media, Advertisements are the best example of high intensity of engagement created using the Nostalgia.

Nostalgia is all about the memories you reminisce and recalling the good experiences you had. But it is proven by research that when we are remembering something from the past, we are not actually recalling the exact events which ‘happened then’ rather we are remembering how we felt, the emotions we went through, our reactions to the events. Meaning, one common event may create different feelings of nostalgia in different people because these experiences/ reactions are very personal. Hence, we can say that Nostalgia is relative. Roughly Nostalgia has been classified as Personal and Historical. Personal nostalgia we are all clearly aware of- these are highly connected to your own experiences. Historical nostalgia is one beautiful thing. It is the yearning for the past, times in history that you haven’t actually lived through. These are the times in history you are exposed to through reading, by listening to the stories from the people who lived through it- like your stories from the times of your grandparents, the media you consumed (the 80’s songs, Classic movies, Classic novels). There is a word for this called ‘Anemoia’ meaning nostalgia for a time you’ve never known. This clearly shows that nostalgia is not about the moments happened in your life it is about how you felt through them.

Nostalgia most of the time is observed to be a positive emotion but it can sometimes make you sad too (which was the backstory behind naming the emotion as ‘nostalgia’) Being a highly social emotion nostalgia is a double-edged sword, a boon and a curse. When you are with the group of people who shared common experiences- the nostalgia becomes the glue which will hold the group the together, strengthen the bond between your group. But if you do not share the experiences in a group then the nostalgia brings in the hostility and feeling of alienation. If you sat down with the group of seniors who went to this great adventure tour and you were not with them. When they will discuss the fun they had, you will instantly feel out of the zone and alienated. Because you hadn’t shared the experience with them. Here nostalgia creates a negative influence. These type of negative influence of nostalgia can be easily erased by involving the other- new person into the similar type of experiences, by asking her/him about same emotions they have experienced thereby creating a bridge between their experiences and your experiences, their nostalgia and your nostalgia.

Some nostalgia may wake the feelings of distaste, hatred within you. This is how most of the political campaigns are carried out. Remember the times the inflation, fuel prices were ‘this’ much high, remember the times ‘these’ inhumane acts happened. Most of the nostalgia brings back the feeling of good times this is how popular culture creates revenue. Those movie call backs, the ‘Easter eggs’ which can keep your conversations on and on are here to be mentioned.

Researchers indicate that the current times of social media have intensified the effects of nostalgia. Though the social media, internet has brought the world closer, we are always lacking the physical interactions between the world and the emotions generated by them. These very personal responses/emotions are the foundation, the seed of nostalgia. Hence the reason you can say why people are so much engrossed in the alternate realities, virtual experiences, virtual worlds. That is the reason people want to run away from the real world. Millennials are the best examples of this. So much that we have Thursdays (TBTs) assigned especially for the thing!

Does that mean we as a human enjoy dwelling in the past? Is Nostalgia a positive feeling or a negative feeling? The answer is both Yes and No.

We humans love patterns, repetitions. Patterns indicate familiarity, safety, predictability. The predictability gives us the feeling that we have control over things thereby comforting us, giving us the feeling of safety, which was an important aspect of our primitive brain considering the survival aspect. The change invites unpredictability, loss of control over things thereby invoking the restlessness, indecisiveness which consistently eats us. Here the role of Nostalgia becomes important. Because we are constantly changing, the feeling of nostalgia takes us back to our past and makes us realize who we were yesterday, who we are today and who we will become tomorrow. Nostalgia is that calibration our brain performs to somewhat adapt to the change happened and make us ready for the upcoming change. Remember the moment you achieved something and you go through all those hardships and fun you had- you are happy remembering them and you now know what they have made you and the things that will follow after this moment.

Nostalgia is that bittersweet emotion as researchers call it. It is the amalgamation of our past, present and future. It makes us aware of how far we have traveled and what the future will bring, which in some sense is the part of life where change is the only thing which is constant. Nostalgia is the emotion which easily creates a common ground for bringing people together, strengthening the feeling of trust.

An important book from Morgan Housel called “Same as Ever”

Somebody, make me a time machine

Discussions

Step 1 discussion:

Step 2 discussion:

Step 3 discussion:

Conclusion – Human behavior and laws of nature

For those who haven’t read the book here is the point-to-point summary of the book “Same as Ever”:

#1. If you know where we’ve been you realize, we have no idea where we’re going.

#2. We are very good at predicting the future, except for the surprises – which tend to be all that matter

#3. The first rule of happiness is low expectations.

#4. People who think about the world in unique ways you like also think about the world in unique ways you won’t like.

#5. People don’t want accuracy. They want certainty.

#6. Stories are always more powerful than statistics.

#7. The world is driven by forces that cannot be measured.

#8 Crazy doesn’t mean broken. Crazy is normal; beyond the point of crazy is normal.

#9. A good idea on steroids quickly becomes a terrible idea.

#10. Stress focuses your attention in ways that good times can’t.

#11. Good news comes from compounding, which always takes time, but bad news comes from a loss in confidence or a catastrophic error that can occur in a blink of an eye.

#12. When little things compound into extraordinary things.

#13. Progress requires optimism and pessimism to coexist.

#14. There is a huge advantage to being a little imperfect.

#15. Everything worth pursuing comes with a little pain. The trick is not minding that it hurts.

#16. Most competitive advantages eventually die.

#17. It always feels like we’re falling behind, and it’s easy to discount the potential of new technology.

#18. The grass is greener on the side that’s fertilized with bullshit.

#19. When the incentives are crazy, the behavior is crazy. People can be led to justify and defend nearly anything.

#20. Nothing is more persuasive than what you’ve experienced first-hand.

#21. Saying “I’m in it for the long run” is a bit like standing at the base of Mount Everest, pointing to the top, and saying, “That’s where I’m heading.” Well, that’s nice. Now comes the test.

#22. There are no points awarded for difficulty.

#23. What have you experienced that I haven’t that makes you believe what you do? And would I think about the world like you do if I experienced what you have?

You can share this:

Remembering Friedrich Nietzsche on his death anniversary

Oversimplification kills the nuances thereby changing the big picture

The Death of Philosopher

The Freedom Paradox

The Freedom of Expression

The Tragedy of Independence

Foolishness Hides Chances For New Insights

The Freedom of Youth

The Freedom of Actions

The Immoral Philosopher – The Free Philosopher

The Freedom From Passions and Reality – Will to Power

Freedom From Truth

Freedom From Identity

Freedom From Your Version of Truth

Freedom From Illusion of Freedom

You can share this:

A creative father’s love-letter on his legacy to his beloved son

The story and the meanings behind it

The Curse of the Intangible Value of an Artistic Creation

You can share this:

Survival, Fear, and Anxiety

The fear is real! – is it? – Defining anxiety

Why Is Anxiety Good?

The Smoke Detector Principle – How Much Anxiety Is Too Much?

Types of Anxiety Disorders

Signal Detection Theory For Interpreting ‘Anxiety Like Responses’

Your Surroundings and Mindset Matter!

Conclusion

You can share this:

Oscar Wilde’s short story called “The Model Millionaire”

Plot

Opening – Your love and charm will not fill your belly

Post opening – Intangible things like art must surrender to physical/tangible media in order to remain relevant in practical world

Middle – An act of kindness

Climax – Kindness is a boomerang

Closing – Artistic, Emotional and Materialistic wealth all can coexist; it narrows down to what kind of human being you are.

Baron Hausberg is not the only “Model Millionaire” in this story

An “Aesthetic” Proof By Contradiction – Love, Kindness And Art Are As Important As Money.

You can share this:

The ideas of feminism from Kate Chopin’s short story “The Story of an Hour”

Inception of feminism

Summary

Life of the author – Kate Chopin

Realistic fiction

A woman’s whole world – her husband (?…)

Painting the scenery of freedom

Repression and Sacrifice

The tragedy