Gail Waynand stared at his own reflection, and the hand that held gun against his forehead. His own hand.
He wanted to live on... to try deserving Dominique more than Roark.
He was afraid of death. He pulled the trigger.
[Click]
"Inefficient buggers! Can't produce guns that don't jam."
"Keating! Don't..."
[Dhishkaon]
Who's John Galt?
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
69 comments:
Well-articulated disagreement would be a very good indicator that I was understood, and would be appreciated more than perfunctory agreement or praise. But of course, you could agree and praise...
Important disclaimer: The views expressed in comments by visitors to this blog do not necessarily enjoy my endorsement. Though I believe, practically, the comments' space of this blog belongs entirely to the readers and that I must not regulate it, I might delete comments that are insulting to other people, or if they are of violent nature.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Updates from my new Blog
LinkWithin
Even Rand would have loved it! 'Dhishkaon' was my favourite. Dammmnnnn guddd.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Sai! Was just concerned you might disapprove. But you seemed to like it.
ReplyDeleteYou could also try writing 55-fiction. It's interesting.
TC.
Interesting indeed - and evocative.
ReplyDelete55-fiction eh?
I'm researching that right now.
Don't know anything about it! ( Oh the shame!)
Brilliant stuff. What in the world is 55-fiction? :D
ReplyDeleteStumbled across your blog and mighty glad I did (:
~B
Dr. S,
ReplyDeleteThanks! Hope you liked the concept, and my 55er, though the prerequisite to understanding it completely is having read Ayn Rand's 'The Fountainhead', have you?
You could read about the criteria for 55-fiction in my blog's sidebar.
TC.
Ayn Rand meets Bollywood (a la Dhishkaon)
ReplyDeleteInteresting read indeed.....you make me want to re-read two of my colleg favourites...
Newbie mommy,
ReplyDeleteWelcome to the blog!
Going by the quality of your writing, I'm almost hesitant to accept your compliment. But you're mommy, afterall! Do I have a choice? ;)
So, thanks a lot!
You could find more about 55-fiction here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/55_Fiction
And never mind, I too came to know of the concept of 55-fiction just a few weeks back, though it's quite a phenomenon on the blogosphere.
TC.
Hi SGD!
ReplyDeleteWell parody inspiring you to read the original? Interesting. I do wonder if reading 'The Fountainhead' and 'Atlas Shrugged' so early in life were mistakes. I'm worried if I'll ever enjoy any other piece of fiction as much (sic). And comparisons would be imminent. I hate to be prejudiced enough to think nothing ever would be able to compare.
And by the way, welcome to the blog and thanks for your comments!
Take care.
Whee. Thanks a ton sweetheart :)
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, Im momma. I'm invincible, omnipotent and I'm motherly.
(: Yeeeeesh.
I'm soon on to 55-fiction :)
Best to you :)
~B
And yes, Fountainhead. I discovered it a tad too late, and still bask in it's magic.
ReplyDelete~B
"And yes, I'm momma. I'm invincible, omnipotent, and I'm motherly."
ReplyDelete:( Oh, I thought that was your 55-fiction.
Though, I couldn't get the purpose of your best wishes, but thanks, nevertheless. Afterall, momma knows the best. :)
TC.
Well Newbie Mommy ('NM', hereon--with the hope that you do justice to the invention of this acronym by visiting my blog more frequently),
ReplyDeleteI'd rate 'Atlas Shrugged even higher'.
All the best to you, too!
TC.
Hmm.. I disagree. Still maintain that Fountainhead was the more profound of the two, or at least touched a familiar cord, more than Atlas Shrugged.
ReplyDeleteBUT it's late night, and maybe it's the sleep-deprivation making me incoherent:)
~B
NM,
ReplyDeleteOh, I'm very sorry, didn't know you'd read both of them. In that case, your judgement has to prevail as far as you're concerned. Trying to feel sleepy myself. No mommy or rickshaw-wala to sing lullaby for me :(
GN, allthesame.
Aaaaawww :)
ReplyDeleteSleep tight and may the winds be kind :)
And may the angels watch over (:
~B
Arrey! Nowadays, they're giving two demons free with every angel!
ReplyDeleteShhhhhhhhhhhkkk. :P :P
ReplyDelete~B
Sorry, momma!
ReplyDelete[Finger on the lips]
Ventriloquy: There are other 55ers are also that you could in through.
TC.
Wow, that was some 55er! So you're catching the bug as well...
ReplyDeleteHi Rakesh!
ReplyDeleteThanks!
Well, this was already my fourth one. Scroll down and you'll find others.
It'd be really nice if you could read 'A moral Brainteaser', and participate in the poll in the sidebar. The thing is I'd like as large sample size for it.
Thanks in advance and TC.
NM,
ReplyDeleteI request you too to participate in the poll after reading 'A moral Brainteaser'.
TC.
You "request" me? :) Did you "request" me to participate?
ReplyDeleteTsk tsk..
Will read the post and let you know ;)
Have a smashin' day :P
~B
Voted, will write the why-s behind my choice, later on.
ReplyDeleteOver and Out! (:
~B
Yes NM, I had to request you. Just like so many other things, authority also flows from higher potential to lower potential, not the other way round. You keep on forgetting, you're the momma ;) I understand you're a newbie at that :) .
ReplyDeleteGood day to you, too!
TC.
Thanks hon. Read through your comments n see no other way to chat with you :(
ReplyDeleteWell, to be honest, the blog is about recounting memories and thoughts to my baby (when it happens, considering i'm not married) but that is the sole intent.
And Ketan, to your comments about people who love their work? You just found one. I love, adore and thrive on the work I do, I would give it up for nothing, and to date, almost two years later, I skip to work cos it fulfills me :)
Ketan :)
B
Skip to work should *not* give u an idea of a skipping rope, but is indicative of the happiness I have in the work I do :)
ReplyDelete*Just* to clear the air (:
~B
NM,
ReplyDeleteGood you love your work, and believe in being sincere to it. By meeting I meant knowing such persons personally amidst whom I'm likely to work. But well, that's (insincerity towards one's work) an unfortunate aspect of life I've to come to terms with more completely than I have by now.
I don't know if you went through my profile, but you're unlikely to be younger than me :) But that's not to mean you can't be momma to people--after all it's about the 'motherliness' you possess.
I'm so bad at idiom and net-slang, that I looked up if 'skip rope' had any idiomatic meaning. And it apparently doesn't have any extraordinary meaning apart from what one does with the ropes ;)
Pity, your baby sure's going to have a lot of learning to do (whenever that be :) )
TC.
Arghhh :) We will stop chatting this way (: I'm rigging your concept of 'well articulated disagreement.'
ReplyDelete:)
Peace
~B
Well, if I were to know chatting like this could be this interesting, I'd have changed the clause of 'tell articulated disagreement' :) But well, I won've do that. I've some important things to attend to in life, which unfortunately don't allow me to interact a lot online.
ReplyDeleteYou could of course comment on my other blogs so that we can articulate our disagreements without your feeling guilty.
TC.
I feel dumb, I'm googling 55 fiction right now.
ReplyDeleteThanks for visiting my blog. You are awesome
LazyKing,
ReplyDeleteWelcome to the blog (though, what I blog about is very different from your blog)!
The criteria for 55-fiction have been laid down in my blog's side panel.
Take care.
NM,
ReplyDeleteWhy do you have to feel reluctant to convey something through the comments' box? My blog is for getting to know others' ideas, thoughts, feelings. Relevance to the blog-post is a nonissue, as far as I'm concerned. We've mutually (and maybe, even otherwise) decided, this is the only way we could communicate, then be it!
Do you understand how unfortunate is it for an idea, thought, word to be remain uncommunicated ONLY for the lack of a superfluous context?
Well, forget it. I might be getting excessively philosophical.
If I've to convey it in simplest possible words, it is this:
I just love hearing from you. Be it anything. You could decide for or against using the comments' box in light of this last statement.
Be at peace. It's easier many times than we think, but sometimes more difficult :)
TC.
NM,
ReplyDeleteI'm usually not wary of the public eye. Though, I understand you won't like to chronicle matters and moods intensely personal to you on someone else's blog.
I completely understand what you're trying to say, and a BIG thank you for that.
One more hard fact of life--the only thing, and the only person we can really afford to hold dear--is OURSELVES. I won't get into all the clauses and subclauses that usually follow the utterance of above statement, but I have reasons to believe, you understand them. Each time we forget this lesson, life makes sure we revise it.
Now, not that I've mastered this lesson. I'm quite trouble myself many times. I see myself forgetting it again and again. I too have yet to truly come to terms with it. Just that stating it dryly is disproportionately simple.
In the hope that wishes have a cumulative effect, a good day to you, again.
TC.
And one more minor glitch in what you think about yourself--you're STILL pretty young. Age is about potential to grow, and not how much others have grown in as much time you had. Read the description of my blog under the heading 'Neglected Serendipity', and you'll understand what I mean. Yes, not all lessons that life means to teach us would be pleasant. Quite to the contrary, lessons seem to be coming through more and more undesirable experiences. :( But then I'm a self-proclaimed cynic. Don't take my words too seriously. Irrespective of the lesson I learn, I rejoice in the fact that my view of life, and me myself have changed from yesterday. Change being, not the sole, but essential component of what we call 'growth'.
ReplyDeleteTC.
PS: Though, I can't assure a prompt reply, you could email me if you feel like.
I couldn't get your question clearly.
ReplyDelete1. I hardly hurt anyone.
2. Day-to-day don't events don't hurt me much. I find them irrelevant. Some fundamental facts that I learnt about life and 'people', though REMAIN as chronic hurts within me. If it's someone who I hold important ends up hurting me--then the first question I ask myself is: was it deliberate, subconscious desire to hurt? If not, then, I could overlook the event as unfortunate accident. If it's deliberate, then, do the original premises (honesty, kindness, 'good nature', mutual liking, longstanding compulsive acquaintance) on which the relation was built are still relevant? Has the person changed? Has what we want from a relationship changed? Usually, by answering these questions, one could easily conclude if the other person deserves any significance (and by extension, ability to hurt me) in my life. The only problem is objectivity. The only solution is to try to look at life from third person-view. Shit happens. Today the one to who Shit happened was the person I call 'I'.
I don't know what went wrong in your life, but if any of what I told you, helps you a bit, that'd satisfy me.
TC.
Yes, my closest friends have hurt me in the past, and precisely for that reason, the circle of my friends has kept on shrinking. And I've had to blur the thin line that demarcates acquaintance and friendship.
ReplyDeleteYes, you've the ability to hurt me. It's both a compliment and a responsibility. But still if you hurt me, that'd be your fault, but if I GET hurt, fault would be mine because you never assured me of your friendship. If you assure me of your goodwill, and still hurt me deliberately, it'd be greater fault with you, but I'd be still at fault to take your word for it and not be prepared for the eventuality.
Yes, sometimes I feel tired-happy, and in your context it means your struggle with reality is over. You've accepted the difficult conclusions that you were to draw from your experience, and that you're ready to live life and engage in relations on the revised terms.
The only problem with emailing me is that I've to reply through my cell phone a la-smsing--and that'd explain the delay in my responding :) But once in a while (once or twice a week) I don't mind accessing net from the cyber cafe.
TC.
Oh Oh Oh Ketan dear :) I almost never judge. It would take more than you being an atheist to scare me away.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I need time and quiet before I read and comment to a long post.
Hence, I'm keeping your blog posts for the weekend. That is the only thing my self inflicted timetable of 14 hours at office allows me :)
Peace Ketan, and gasp, you found out my name (:
~B
Well, you might be not interested in much science at this stage, but endorphins are released upon experiencing any sustained stress, and they make you feel good.
ReplyDeleteYes, so that partly explains why you feel good being tired.
But the other reason that not many people would tell you is that before artificial lighting was invented, humans used to sleep for 16 hours a day! So, when you're tired your body tells you it's time to do what you were meant to do ;) zzz...
TC.
#$%$^^T*^W$!#@!@ :) (Yawn) Funny how reading about sleep suddenly made me realize the tiredness that is threatening to overpower (:
ReplyDeleteKetan dear :)
~B
Feel no obligation to reply to my blogs or comments here. Do you think I say without burning my hands that fire is can burn :)?
ReplyDeleteYou see, blind trust or lack thereof has implications in life? I'm an atheist, you presumably are not. If you inspect your feelings more closely, you'll realize what we call 'blind faith' is actually EXPECTATION (of God as well as friends). Expectation that they'll always do what's best for us. Expectation that those we hold dear behave a certain way in certain situations. What's our basis for that expectation?:
That we've been good to them?
People can be or turn ungrateful when it suits them.
That they assured us of their goodwill?
People can lie, can forget their promised word.
Their past behavior?
It can change. Or more commonly, we overlook the uneasy glimpses of undesirable tendencies that their conduct provides because WE are not prepared for the truth.
I get hurt, most definitely. But when I do, I try to remember, what would have I done had I not met that friend in the first place? Search something on Wikipedia. Enjoy articles on Uncyclopedia (for instance, a few good ones in my sidebar), think about life, blog, read blogs and well most important (for me at least for the time being)... STUDY!
Good to know my mere reminding of sleep is as good as a lullaby. Or maybe my comments are that boring. But don't, worry however much you try to convince me otherwise, I'll over cease to believe that my comments are best thing that could ever happen to the blogosphere.
TC. And don't watch the angels watching you over, simply count sheep ;)
Ketan :) I wouldn't refute what you said, only that I'd love you to place more faith in the goodness of man. And risk being vulnerable.
ReplyDeleteAnd be pleasantly surprised or rudely have your point re-enforced.
And you aren't boring, Ketan. Not by any stretch, you are very stimulating.
But (isn't there always a but? :)) I must be off in 10 mins, to sleep for in exactly five hours I must wake up :D
(Shrrriiiieeeekkkkkk :P)
B
And you manage to reveal a lot in response to the posts I've written, and I guess I feel at home with you, for your honesty. It is refreshing as well as soothing.
ReplyDeleteDear Ketan :)
~B
Sleep, sleep, sleep...That's an order now. :)
ReplyDeleteNo, don't worry, even in my first year, I used to detest going to the dissection table (Table mates were not exactly enticing). Well, examination table is a different thing :)
ReplyDeleteIt's not that I've stopped trusting people entirely. Nor that I've become too suspicious. Just that when I see any signs of predilection or lack of reluctance to inflict hurt--which VERY SIGNIFICANTLY involves how the said person behaves with OTHERS (especially weaker persons), I just lose trust in that person, and subconsciously, I'd know that the person doesn't deserve the power to hurt me (I develop contempt) that I only can bestow by expecting them to be ALWAYS good to me.
ReplyDeleteThere are two almost mutually exclusive set of entities that give pleasure--first, those that involve other human beings and their emotional involvement (sorry, I know how ruthlessly technical I might sound), and second, those that don't involve humans--thinking, writing, drawing, listening to music, etc.
The latter, if one gets too involved with, would have them qualify as a loner. Tsk tsk. Not good.
I've faced this crisis of suddenly losing almost all friends (because I realized by considering them my friends I was empowering so many undeserving and likely-to-hurt-people to hurt me) and being left thinking who to trust and on what bases. My solution, which could have me qualify as a lunatic--but I reveal it here, nevertheless--Fantasy--how I'd have revealed the feeling I'm brimming with had I got a very good friend/life partner (distinction is absolutely unimportant as far as such fantasy is concerned). How would've that friend responded? How we'd have ended with high-fives. How we'd have winked at each other. I know this might be the sombermost description I could be giving of my life, almost akin to somebody's death. And though it's not very different from that, this fantasization becomes quite sufficient after some time. True, I do feel occasional intense urge to find some true friends, but then I remind myself that in the longer run, accepting people in our proximity for what they're is infinitely less painful than deluding ourselves into believing what we want to believe about them. Anticipation helps a lot. If you know one of your friends is given to losing temper--then, you're not going to take seriously their ever so frequent outbursts. If you know someone given to jealousy, you anticipate needless venomous rejoinders from them, and also that they might cause you trouble and not help when in need...
...One mistake I'd made was to think that since I was nice to people, people would be nice to me. I know one could point out "but what about friends?" Read this statement carefully: "certain person should be good to us ONLY BECAUSE we like them and we want them to like us back, and by extension, should always base their decisions on our welfare". This assertion is flawed. Sorry, but it is. You could be like that, but 'people' are not like that.
ReplyDeleteYou know, one day (and probably the last day 'cuz I learnt my lesson) when I was really disillusioned with humanity, what I thought? I'm too good for people. I'd left no margin for people to catch up to the standards of morality that I followed. Just because I'm the fastest runner (which I'm anything but ;) ), I can't expect everyone to run as fast as me.
Yes, morality is a matter of choice, but it still remains to be determined, what makes us make particular choices :) When your thoughts will get this complex (they already might be just that you'll have to give yourself the opportunity to concretize them), counterintuitively, your life will become simple. You'll love betting to yourself what a person you know will say, do in a given situation ;) You'll enjoy it when you'll win more and more bets. Can you imagine how sweet winning a bet could be if you don't put anything at stake in the first place? The problem is not that most of the people are incompetent (yes, that's the word) in matters of morality, but that you're too good. Which of the two facts do you or should you wish to change? None, I believe--you can't change others--only anticipate and adjust. You'll kill your'self', if you try to change.
Ask yourself some difficult questions.
Why do I want certain people (friends) to be good (not bad) to you?
Because that'd assure that they like me.
Why do I want them to like me?
Because that'd assure me that I'm worthy of 'something'.
What's that something?
Approval.
Why do I need that approval?
So that I know my life's serving some purpose.
Is it important that my life should've a purpose?
Not necessarily. But my vanity won't allow me to conclude that the life, one in which I'm so engrossed and caught up, doesn't have an external purpose. The fact (in my humble opinion) is I'm addicted to life, and then try to impart meaning to my life--depending upon how I've allowed it to shape up. But giving up on life never occurs to me--I'm just hooked to it!...
...Is it wrong to seek others' approval in matters of morality?
ReplyDeleteNo. Approval gives me pleasure without harming anyone--so nothing wrong with it. But who I seek that approval from is extremely important. Ayn Rand can't ask the kid who's just read Panchatantra to rate 'The Fountainhead'. The kid might nod its head even without understanding a single word, or might call it plain crap. Likewise, I can't expect people less adept at practice of morality than me to approve of me (by liking me and being good to me). They might end up liking me, but without completely understanding what I stand for. Look around--different people like different things about Rand's novels. Some like them for punchlines; some for the plot--without ever realizing there's something more to them. But those who understand them for the sociological, philosophical, and spiritual (intensely personal issues like morality, love, professionalism, purpose and way to lead life, etc.) reasons the novels stand for, are the ones who understand them most completely...and such people are much fewer. No doubt, Fountainhead was rejected by 12 publishers. Can you allow those mediocre, secondhanders to decide fates of one Fountainhead, and one Ayn Rand? Can you allow those not worthy of your friendship to decide your worth by rejecting you?
How do I know I'm being partial to certain people and that they're not worthy of my friendship?
If an act by someone I like evokes different response from me as compared to the same act by a total stranger, I'm being biased. I need to, as Rand would've said "check my premises"--the primary reasons for liking those I like.
I'm not implying you don't know all this, just trying to verbalize everything for you. I don't know about others, but I'm able to face difficulties much better if I know the reason for why something went wrong. Hope for this sole reason, what all I type here helps you.
Maybe, that's why I blog. And though, the precise words have remained unsaid, I'd earned one particular friend in a matter of few comments and exchange of one email. Simply knowing that someone that good exists 'somewhere' had made me see this world as much more beautiful.
Fortunately/unfortunately, the intense competition I'm to face and the immediate pressure to get myself a PG seat, have kept me from thinking too much on these issues...
...You might not realize, but whatever I've written above contains more than 30% of what I've learnt about myself, the world, and the people in it. Phew! I'm a real slow learner... And I used think "I know enough about life". How conceited! :p
ReplyDeleteExcuse the grammatical errors and break in flow of thoughts, but typing from my cell was a real pain in the thumb :)
If you'll think of all the consequences of what I've written in my blogs--'Futuristic!' and 'Free will', maybe owing to your ensuing understanding of life, you'll be able to better accept it.
TC.
If you are by any chance confused why I've stressed so much on morality, then I'd just like to point out that it's one's system of morality that determines what kind of parent, friend, teacher, professional and citizen of the society and the world would they be. TC.
ReplyDeleteHey sweets: Just found a moment to check your blog: Felt much better after chatting (?) with you yesterday. What was to be a night of tears shed alone got converted to a continuous refresh of your comments page (:
ReplyDeleteAnd for just being there, I'm not forgetting you in a hurry.
Tis but a busy day today n' I will reply at leisure when I can.
Thank you. I am of a breed that says these words more than required, but immediately as I feel them. For I have lost a few good friends, to death, to others, to marriages. I hardly revel in the words unspoken. I'd rather just say it. When I mean it.
Thank you sweets :) Have a good good day ye :)
B
Oh, never mind. I use my 'thank you's' exactly the way you do.
ReplyDeletePleased that something I did helped you feel better.
To take off from you, have a smashin' day or if that doesn't work, just smash it ;)
TC.
Odd to be in a position where I am on the receiving end of 'do something for someone who can do absolutely nothing for you in return.'
ReplyDeleteBe well, Ketan.
(Smash it, I got into a fit of giggles, and generally feel much better. You're the best-est :))
~B
It's silly but I wonder since I haven't heard from you. Hope all is well and your day is the best-est!
ReplyDeleteBe good :)
~B
Am into a lecture.
ReplyDeleteNice blog.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Gigi, and welcome to the blog!
ReplyDeletehahahahahhaa
ReplyDelete[DISHKAON]
now ur talkin...
Thanks Alpes!
ReplyDeleteGlad you liked it.
TC.
Quality work :)Engaging and interesting!
ReplyDeleteHi perception!
ReplyDeleteWelcome to the blog, and thanks! Though I believe, you could call this piece engaging only because I wrapped it up within 55 words, otherwise there's another piece of fiction that's 200 times that length ;)
Take care.
Your parody is inspiring me to re-read the original...read them all a long long time ago!
ReplyDeleteHave you read her play "Night of January 16th"...an awesome piece of work! And not long like AS & FH
Regarding wanting to ever read other stuff....You will, you will ..
There will come a time you'll grow out of the humanitarian Vs egoism phase of Ayn Rand....take it from me ... ;)))
Hi SGD!
ReplyDeleteI'd understood that you've read those two novels, as they were college-time favorites.
Have you by any chance read 'The Acts of Faith' by Eric Segal? If you've, how did you find it?
I somehow don't look at Ayn Rand's two novels only as egoism v/s altruism. She'd also expounded al least one another intricate concept--why we love who we love. Ayn Rand's novel have hardly had any influence on my life! I used to think quite like that even before reading them. Just that she helped me clarify those concepts in my mind, the bases behind them.
As I told you, I more than liking her philosophy was already in agreement with her. What I liked about her novels was the writing style, the absolute lack of anything merely cosmetic and superfluous in terms of narration. Amazing lines! Amazing characters--my favorite being Francisco d' Anconia and Gail Waynand--though I don't think I'll ever be able to be like them. That's one discomforting thing about her novels, though. The characters keep on reminding me how far from perfect am I. I don't subscribe to her views. I'd do a post on that one of these days.
I hardly find time to read nowadays. Will definitely try to read her play, and some other things, too. Can I look upto you for recommendations?
TC.
*I don't subscribe to all her views. Sorry for that typo :)
ReplyDeleteok Mr. Popular.. i have downloaded the link you gaveof 'Atlas Shrugged',and started reading... not done yet.. will let you know as soon as i finish.
ReplyDelete'Dhishkaon' :-)
Oorja,
ReplyDelete'Mr. Popular'? Now what was that? That was an even bigger 'Dhishkaon' than the one you actually typed out. If that was in reference to the number of comments, then most of them are by me and way off mark.
This 55er. though takes inspiration from 'The Fountainhead' and not 'Atlas Shrugged'! :(
TC.
Lol! Wynand can't commit suicide because of incompetent gun makers! Good plot!
ReplyDeleteThat could be (I think this is what you are hinting at) because they were like Keating, not Roark!
But again it could mean it was made by Roarkish person forced to make 'standard gun', but that fellow decided to experiment, or maybe hated the mundane routine so much that could not concentrate!
Or maybe it was a genuine modern 'Suicide Gun' made by a very competent and intelligent gun maker. The specialty of suicide gun is that it actually shoots only when you pull the trigger nth time. Bit like those olden day 'extra secure' locks that open completely only after you rotate the key 10-15 times. This gives the person n chances to intensely reflect whether suicide is really the only resort (hey wow! resort! sounds like fun! bad joke). In fact the intensity would be at its peaks right when pulling the trigger! So the thought process would be the most correct, most essential.
But then, wouldn't Wynand know? It was he who knowingly bought or ordered his special 'suicide gun' right?
The secret is this: The genius who invented 'suicide gun' also marketed it very wisely, so that the purpose of 'Suicide Gun' is actually served. If the person knows that gun kills only the fifth time, the intensity of thought when pulling trigger would not be that high or sincere first 4 times. (Although the very action of pulling the trigger, the associated time-stop silence, and the sinister click afterwards, would definitely make it more intense than regular armchair thought intensity). And the thought when pulling trigger 5th time, though most intense, would be too late if the thought is 'Don't!', just after doing.
So the inventor markets it with one number less than actual! If it kills at the fifth time, he says it kills at fourth. If it kills at fourth, he says it kills at third and so on. So at the last pull (as marketed), the user would be really really thinking death is gonna happen, and will get a most honest perspective whether its wanted or not. If just microseconds after pulling trigger person wishes to live, it will be granted! Of course if the person really wants to die, will pull trigger once again without bothering of the count!
Now, Wynand being Wynand, decided to make the usual mockery of this great inventor too. What other horrible things he did, we do not know. But what we do know is that he started by ordering a custom made 'suicide gun' that 'kills at first attempt', thus defeating the whole purpose (or so he thought) (no standard 'kill at first' model was available, as you can understand. But as we all know now, a 'suicide gun' that officially 'kills at first attempt' actually kills at the second! So the joke was on Wynand!
And yes, we all would expect the old Keating (Keating of older age, not Keating of older times. Have you ever wondered at such confusion? :) ) wanting to kill Toohey and/or Wynand. So thats understandable in the story.
Lekin yeh John Galt kahan se aaya beech mein? I mean end mein?
(I know he is character of other famous Ayn Rand book. Would I understand the context if I read it?) Or probably you said it just for some slightly jocular effect (which it did have, for me!)? I know 'Who is John Galt?" could be some standard phrase of the book I am still not reading, with a shrug. One blogger has even named her blog 'Who is John Galt'. Or is it no standard sentence of the book and you took it from that person's blog? (you blog hop(ped) a lot I guess?)
I guess I will put up something based on my comment above on my blog. Its an interesting invention then, 'suicide gun'!
ReplyDeleteBTW there were too many comments above. Didn't read after first 10 or so. Did I miss out anything significant?
Stupidosaur,
ReplyDeleteWell, you're right about the first part. The gun was indeed made by someone like Keating. But, an efficient gun need not require someone as passionate about their work as Roark!
Well, if you remember the plot correctly, Waynand had stood before the mirror, thinking of commiting suicide, but when he realized, he didn't fear death, he decided against dying. For he considered such a death as tame one. He probably didn't fear dying because he did not want anything extra from his life. All this was before he'd met Dominique.
I've carried the plot forward from thereon. He loses Dominique as well as Roark, and realizes he'd badly loved her. So now he has a purpose to life, and his original predicament of commiting suicide is no more valid! (I know what a foolish paradox, but I was parodysing Ayn Rand! :P)
Rest all you anyway did understand.
I liked your idea of suicide-gun. And you know your description of how a person would think most clearly pressing the trigger the criticalth time was really spine-chilling.
If I do open once, I might name my resort--'Suicide'. Imagine the ironic truth of its plain sounding caption--"The best resort for resting your tired soul!"
Okay, I know this piece of humor is sounding forced, but I enjoyed typing it! ;)
Your trigger analogy also reminded me of the Muslim concept of talaaq, talaaq, talaaq! What I'd come to know is that the husband is supposed to 'give' one talaaq each per month, and in between actually try to resolve the issues and make out if he definitely needs complete divorce. But then, he might say that in quick succession as well, just like pulling the trigger in quick succession.
That line of John Galt is from Atlas Shrugged (as you know). It's difficult to determine it's exact meaning. But my rough interpretation was that, the line was spoken when people felt helpless and wondered how their situation was becoming worse and they were clueless of the causes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Galt#.22Who_is_John_Galt.3F.22
I'd liked Atlas Shrugged more than FH; you too may read it. Though, at times, it feels like she'd inundated the story with too many superheroes--like justice league or fantastic four....
...But of course, the novel is too big. I think more than twice the size of FH.
ReplyDeleteYes, one of the blogs I follow is also named after that line. But I don't enjoy that blog. That blogger (according to me), is another of those readers who couldn't understand the essence of Ayn Rand's writings. Ironically, I feel, very few people's interpretations of her novel coincide with mine (the correct one! ;) ). I'd have liked to remove many blogs from my list, but unfortunately, I can't do that through my cell phone. :(
Most of the above comments are a part of conversation I had with another blogger--Newbie Mommy (also on my favorite bloggers' list)--not very different from your forum.
But I've deleted many of her comments on her request, as they partly dealt with personal issues of her life. In one of the comments I've stated that these contain around 30 percent of what I know about myself, world and people. So, I'd like you to read them, and maybe, you can take your sweet revenge by eavesdropping on my comments. But no guarantee, they'd be as interesting as your forum!
You may do the post on suicide gun, but it won't be in keeping with the nonviolent nature of your posts on the whole.
TC.