Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Irony or what you will....

What poured from the heavens were what he thought would come to pass, and they had, but now they returned with the sadness of a drop sliding down his French window. He watched it glisten and find support in other laments as it stretched itself towards that which held the heavens themselves. He heard the threnody of many voices call to him to be merciful and that drop found reflection in his eye. While he rocked on his chair, he questioned the base rock of all his relationships with people, especially women and when he thought of them, the heavens thundered and poured baleful on his window, for what was gone and past could never touch him, but would never leave his world... the sighs, the heartaches, the whispered nothings, his untold promises, his unquestionable love, his extended hand which was never within reach. He walked to the window and the mist of familiarity held itself in a hazy circle between his face and the drops. He wiped that mist and let the moistness stay in his palm.
"I love you and I always will. It is sad that when I gave you love, all you took was pain."
He turned and strolled towards the inner recesses of his world. The heavens threatened him with lightening and bursty rain but he kept ambling on.
"Coward!" they cried, "Why love when you couldn't let us keep you?"
His smile was pulled by the thorny hooks of irony and wasted relationships...

9 comments:

  1. name of the rose10:42 AM

    "...his extended hand which was never within reach."

    I have read this a number of times now and each time, find myself asking what part of the writer do these words reflect...so I read it again, asking what love(s) does he most lament?

    Instead, I search the photo, the tone within your words, the near-and-far in both, the mere hint of a city skyline in the distance, like his past, his geography: all that binds him to himself.

    and the aptly chosen title ... it is the "or what you will" of it that one wants to unlock...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anu4:24 PM

    It is one of those instances where the right words and a beautiful picture (aptly named rainntears) speak up for something strongly felt. And with all that it conveys, it is a pointer to an interesting, different line of thought and belief that he possesses.

    But this line just made me wonder.."It is sad that when I gave you love, all you took was pain." How could he be so sure?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Eroteme5:37 PM

    Dear NotR,
    You really pick lines whihc were close to me too... :-)
    "what part of the writer do these words reflect" Well, I would say it is a significant part. In a world where everything is driven with a motive, a simple gesture, a simple connection without intention might seem impractical and unacceptable at time. A hand extended without letting itself be possessed might be a clinical gesture although it really isn't... :-)

    Dear A,
    Sure is. He isn't sure, but when people return with a sad heart one tends to wonder why people don't rejoice in the love that was given but cringe in the void of an absentee relationship. It always amazed me how people would rather not get into a relationship which has no future. Worthiness, meaning, purpose etc. seem to make me stop and wonder: Are they really that important?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Krish10:42 AM

    The Line "I love you and I always will. It is sad that when I gave you love, all you took was pain." and your explanation to Anupama is what made me take up to comment on this:
    First: The sentence...Is it that, he is agonised over her choice or his helplessness on that choice?..either ways, it doesnt matter coz, the choice was her's...so is there any need to be agonised?
    Second: On the Purpose..I think there can be no action without a purpose...It would be sad, if the actor doesn't know the purpose...coz, then he is acting not on his volition but on some undefined force...which I think is preposterous for a Human.
    Whatever choice is made, that choice would have a purpose..right? What if the purpose is not agreeable to everyone...does that change the basic reality that, there was a purpose?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Eroteme11:13 AM

    Dear Krish,
    You really make me stretch my brain!! :-(
    If you reflect over the outcry of the many drops (water drops were chosen to reflect the coolness and essential moisture that relationships bring to a person as well as their natural tendency to stick on) you would note that they call him a coward for not going the distance and realising a relationship with them. Is there a need to be agonised? No. But isn't that what happens more often than not?

    Action with/out purpose is a very raggled debate. I hold that certain actions demand a purpose (like investing in stocks) and certain actions do not (like petting a dog or walking down a road). To say "to enjoy the breeze" is a purpose we must realise that we have different definitions of "purpose".
    Why should a purpose be agreeable to anyone when the choice is individual? I am not talk about anti-social choices and purposes!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Krish1:25 PM

    <<To say "to enjoy the breeze" is a purpose we must realise that we have different definitions of "purpose".>>
    Well...this is the exact point that I was driving upon...But to think of it, as the choice is individual, there is no need for the acceptance by others..as u said, purpose n it's definitions are individualistic and would be better of they remain so...n yeah..I am not taking the anti-social purpose into consideration for this discussion :)

    Now stertching this same line of thought to the previous point of that of the agony-pain-love[in that order:-)], I find that even if "her" choice was pain, it would have had purpose...now, even though the choice was individualistic, effect was certainly not restricted to that individual alone and to find out the purpose of that choice, and if that purpose was not agreeable to "him", then what?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Krish1:26 PM

    BTW, sorry for stercthing your brain ;-)..well as again, that was your choice and it had a purpose!...Just kiddin.

    ReplyDelete
  8. name of the rose6:15 PM

    To dismantle love
    so as to finally understand it...

    But I still wonder...What was it that he wanted more?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous5:57 PM

    So do I, so do I - I too wonder what it was that he wanted more?

    Maybe he doesn't believe in a love that has a future; maybe he thinks that the beauty and freshness of love as love might jade and pall eventually, with time, with familiarity..

    Obviously he has a lot to learn about love in all its depths, that passeth all understanding, that stands victorious against the travails of time, not by putting in too great efforts therefor, but naturally, gently and spontaneously.

    Methinks he is quite immature in his attitude towards love. He seems to think the girls are out for his blood; nothing that scary surely?

    2."...his extended hand which was never within reach."

    Again it shows a lack of total courage in him, a kindness in him that enables him to be there for her when she needs him. She doesn't need a pretence of support, that is more irritating than no help at all, a hand extended or close to oneself is totally destructive if it were never within reach.

    This guy has to grow up a lot, learn a lot, mainly learn / know rishthey nibhaanaa kaisaa kiyaa jaataa hai...

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)