I would like to elaborate on
the actual meaning of ‘brevity’.
While everyone agrees that
moderation is the sign of sanity but context is the deciding factor in vicinity
and visibility.
Wise political strategy
requires venting of natural mass emotions and also moderating it with voices of
moderation from higher authorities.
When we ‘quote’ something it
conveys what we want much better /effectively than what we may have to struggle
to come out with an articulation of our own.
But the problem with quotes
is that when they are used to convey the hidden intentions the covering up becomes
conspicuous at least in contours [perhaps like the hidden anatomy of heroines
in rain drenched transparent cloths of Bollywood films].
Even Shakespeare made it very
clear that ‘Brevity is the soul of wit’ please note he meant only ‘soul of wit’
and not in anything else.
Perhaps we may add brevity in
emergency situations or for reasons of diplomatic wheedling where the recipients
are made to get embroiled in multiple interpretations.
But definitely brevity is not
meant for any detailed and planned military operations or the resultant expressions
of spontaneous eruption of emotions [joy or sorrow], more so, when they manifest
as mass euphoria or mass frenzy due to the much awaited paradigm shift in
attitude of often ending up in a situation where each one of us say
desperately or out of indifference say, as very well conveyed in this quote, ‘I don't have a solution but I admire the
problem’. The function of genius is not to give new answers, but to pose new
questions - which time and mediocrity can solve.-Hugh Trevor-Roper - Men and
Event
Basically human beings are
animalistic by instinct and impulse but use or expected to use or obliged to
use the sixth sense when they want to become or be or behave like a social
beings.
There has been initially some
over dosage of war and victory in the whole of history.
Then slowly the intellectual
giants injected through epics and myths wisdom and values as justifications to ensure
that humanity accepted wisdom and values as inevitable dosage of medicines in
order to evolve as better social beings to lead life together with all other
species with some ethics and rules.
This, I feel was perhaps the larger
intention and subtle message of all epics, and not prowess in archery or skill
in using all sorts of crude weapons for gruesome results or for cinematic
effects.
It is all well known that
whenever there is a victory or success in any field of activity people go gaga
over it and also resort to all sorts of claims.
It happens when any country
wins a game of football or cricket and it is nothing but a manifestation of
jubilation.
To my knowledge Shakespeare
himself, had he been brief in debating over the dead body of Julius Caesar the
world would have lost one of the most inspiring speeches by Mark Antony and the
others and also lost a marvelous piece
of literature and multiple templates for logical and emotional justifications.
What about Shakespeare’s
famous soliloquies and sermonizing speeches of his characters.
If brevity alone has been
insisted as in SMS or Twitter, then, perhaps, only didactic sermons would have
survived and all literature buried; only poetry would have survived and not
music and songs; only bed rooms would have existed and not wedding celebrations;
only dictates of powerful leaders and not political speeches and debates; only
barter system and not the complicated economic structures and so on.
We need to remember over
simplifying, over generalizing and over homogenization are all against natural
evolution.
Brevity in many contexts is
like raw vegetables and plants, one cannot eat them as they are; they need
elaborate cooking and attractive dressing combined with the aroma of enticing
spices.
Shakespeare whose ‘brevity is
the soul of wit’ is often quoted out of context.
Shakespeare himself knew that his spontaneity of expression and
elaborate exhibition of emotions of his characters needed lot of elaboration
and realized that even the existing vocabulary of the language was inadequate that he ended up coining at least 1700
new words and expressions and introduced them into the English language which
ultimately enriched both the language and literature.
It was good that he never
misunderstood the meaning of brevity out of context.
Can anyone define the
‘brevity’ or at least recommend it in all contexts.
Had Lord Krishna chosen to be
brief, in fact that is the expected line of activity in crisis, and instructed
Arjuna to just go and plunder the enemy with arrows the world would not have
got the Bhagawat Geetha running into several chapters of great philosophy.
The world would have been
deprived of great rational and
philosophical lecture on professional integrity if the architect in Ayn Rand’s
Fountain head just said he wanted to do this or that ,instead of elaborating the reasons.
Elaboration is both excellent
and inevitable [1]
Even abbreviated attire is
recommended for swimming [gender neutral] not while strolling in chill weather.
On what basis can one decide brevity?
I can furnish single
sentences, meaningful ones, not the unpunctuated ones like mine, which run to
pages.
So, can someone produce one
such sentence and claim that he has been brief as he has used only one
sentence. [2]
The level of enthusiasm and
exaggeration varies from individual to individual and from context to context
when it comes to expressing and communicating.
Stories of revenge and
restoring relatively better option through all means, sometimes involving
violence as a means, fills the pages of history of humanity and is
also the main plot in many epics be it Ramayana or Mahabhratha.
In all such episodes in
history and epics there has always been celebration of victory and condemnation
of defeat.
Both are wrong and everyone
who can pitch in either in main stream media or social media have their right
to express their opinion in their own way, of course, with the rider, to ensure
that whatever they say does not ignite further trouble or foment more violent
reaction and escalate animosity.
But then in success and
victory always as a rule covers all blunders. When India wins a match no one question
about shot selection of a number 10 batsman.
So, we need to debate and define
‘brevity’ with context specific meaning. [3]
No comments:
Post a Comment