Response Essay: Jane Eyre

The Features of Western Bildungsroman and its Significance to the Western Culture

Bildungsroman can be defined as one of the genres in novel in which the protagonist experiences the development—social, psychological, or spiritual—from youth into maturity through the process of realizing. In this realizing process, there are some features accompanying the protagonists’ development. By doing intertextualization, I will describe those features in Brontë’s Jane Eyre and two Western Bildungsroman protagonists—Holden Caulfield (J.D Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye, 1951); and Hazel Grace (John Green’s The Fault in Our Star, 2012) —regardless the era and time of publication, I find some patterns in the western Bildungsroman and its implications to the western culture.

The first feature accompanying the protagonists’ development implied the importance of novels/books. All of these protagonists are influenced or passionate by novels and/or books. Jane Eyre reads The History of British Bird which then formulates her consciousness about being free; this desire to be free makes her feel insecure and afraid over something that might bind her passion, for example when she rejects to marry St. John. Similarly, Hazel is passionate to The Imperial Affliction from which she learns about life and let the bygone go. She, moreover, refers it as her personal bible (pg. 10); Holden, among all courses, loves English language and literature best for English is the only course he passes, besides, he is personally close to his English teacher, he reads a lot of classical books (pg.10). From this pattern, we can see that reading books or novels is the practice involved in forming protagonists’ consciousness to reach the realizing process.

The second feature that is typical in Bildungsroman’s protagonists is being critical or freethinkers, especially toward society and religion. Jane, from early age, has been thinking of common sense related to social paradigms about being dependent and also the characteristics of being a woman that she thought she will never fit into. She, moreover, thinks about religion and all evangelical movements when she met three characters—Helen, Brocklehurst, and St. John—who have certain perspective about religion, however she rejects all the three kinds of religion types. I consider Hazel as freethinker when she thinks that the universe is insensitive and the world is not a “wish granting factory”, despite of that, she can still get the meaning in the meaningless life; that is what she learns from the novel she reads. Furthermore, Holden criticizes everything about adult world and call them as “phony”. He also says that he is “sort of an atheist” who despises Jesus’ disciples that he considers as useless (p.54).

Western Bildungsroman, to conclude, has some patterns that reflect the development of personality in western culture regarding the importance of reading and then being a freethinker. In these three Bildungsroman novels, the importance of book is prominent from which the protagonists are influenced and then develop their own ideology and belief about the world around them. This is maybe the reason why western countries have a reading-culture. In addition, the western people mostly are atheist and the freethinkers; or it can be that the western Bildungsroman novels are the reflection of the western cultures.

Bibliography:

Brontë, Charlote. (1847). Jane Eyre.New York: The Book League of America.

Green, John. (2012). The Fault in Our Stars.New York: Penguin Young Readers Group.

Salinger, J.D. (1951). The Catcher in the Rye.New York:Little, Brown and Company.

Literary Criticism: Antigone

Panopticism in Antigone

Power relation between human and the God in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex seems to be the recurring theme; similarly it is in the third sequel of his trilogy, Antigone. Speaking of power relation, it is inevitable to not mention Foucault’s writings. In his work entitled The History of Sexuality, Foucault (1978) says that power is characterized as being repressive and it takes the form of a law and demands obedience. Where there is power, however, there is always resistance that balances it. He adds that power does not rely on anyone, which means that it is the entity on its own (impersonality); power always exists in a relationship (relationality); there is no source of it (decentredness); it goes and come from anywhere (multidirectionality); and it can be placed in where it is needed (strategic nature). In this play, I find that both God and Creon use the same way as the means of power to control the people. In this essay, therefore, I am using Foucauldian reading as the framework to make a close observation on how God and Creon exercise their power through several means which are discipline and punishment; also to see whether there is an absolute power or not in this play.

From his work Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison, Foucault (1975) states that discipline is used to create docile people so that the power can be exercised in an unobstructed way; to control those docile people, they must be constantly observed and recorded—or at least they should feel that they are. He adds that this concept to discipline people is similar to Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon—the architectural model for perfect prison which is structured in a way that cells would be open to a central tower. In the model, individuals in the cells do not interact with each other and are constantly confronted by the panoptic tower (pan=all; optic=seeing). They cannot, however, see when there is a person in the tower; they must believe that they could be watched at any moment: "the inmate must never know whether he is being watched at any one moment; but he must be sure that he may always be so" (p.201). In Antigone, both God and Creon use this method of panopticon to discipline the people and to exercise their power. In the case of God, the panopticon is portrayed as the sun which is described by the chorus in the Parodos:

Now the long blade of the sun, lying  

Level east to west, touches with glory

Thebes of the Seven Gates. Open, unlidded

Eye of golden day! O marching light

Across the eddy and rush of Dirce’s stream,

Striking the white shields of the enemy  

Thrown headlong backward from the blaze of morning!  

(Sophocles, 441B.C. Parodos. 85-91)

In this excerpt, the sun is associated with the open and unlidded eye that sees all what happen beneath it and watch those who break the God’s law. In the play, Creon conspicuously breaks the law by stating that nobody shall neither burry nor pray for Polyneices; in short, Creon breaks the law by abandoning the dead under the God’s ‘surveillance’ undisguisedly for he does it in the day; under the sun. In the same way, Creon also uses this panoptic means to demand people’s obedience by putting his ‘surveillance’ to observe those who break his law. Creon’s ‘all seeing eye’ is the Sentry as it is portrayed in the scene 2 of the play when the Sentry says:

I saw her with my own eyes…

So we sat on a hill to windward and kept guard….

…And then we looked, and there was Antigone!

I have seen…

…And then she brought more dust

And sprinkled wine three times for her brother’s ghost.

.

(Sophocles, 441B.C. 2. 320-341)

This excerpt clearly depicts the Sentry as Creon’s ‘surveillance’ because the Sentry guards and observes what happens beneath him before he reports all what he sees to Creon. Both the sun and Sentry function as the embodiment of God’s and Creon’s eyes as the means of their power to discipline the people so that they will not break the law. Interestingly, those who breaks the law—Creon and Antigone—do it conspicuously under the ‘surveillance’ of the ‘all-seeing eye’ for Creon do it before the sun and Antigone do it before the Sentry, both of them do it in the day.

The second means of power is punishment, which according to Foucault (1975) is a certain mechanism of power that is unhesitant to exert itself directly on people and strengthened by its visible manifestations as means of maintaining order. In Antigone, punishment is used by both God and Creon to give the sense of repentant and deterrent effect for those who break the law as well as to warn other people. In the case of Creon, he punishes Polyneices by abandoning his dead body unburied. He, moreover, punishes Antigone who breaks his law by incarcerating her in the stone chamber. All of his efforts are meant to maintain his power and discipline the people he is ruling. Similarly, God punishes Creon by crushing him the tragic fate that his son and wife dead. Likewise, the reasons are to maintain his power and discipline the people.

After all, God’s and Creon’s means of power are the same that they both exert discipline and punishment to maintain their order. However, there are differences between their power in term of the panopticon and punishment system. In Creon’s panoptic system, the Sentry is not consistent and omnisentient; it is described in scene 1 when the Sentry reports that someone has partially buried the dead body:

I did not it. I did not see who did it. You must not punish me for what someone else has done.

…A dreadful thing… I don’t know how to put it––

(Sophocles, 441B.C. 1. 200-208)

This excerpt shows that Creon’s panoptic system is imperfect because it fails to see what happen to the dead body at the first time Antigone pours the sands and wine as the ceremony to properly burry Polyneices. However, the God’s panopticon never fails because it sees all what happen beneath it. Moreover, in term of the punishment, the God’s and Creon’s perseverance is totally different. In the case of Creon, he finally withdraws his own law after Teiresias remind him about the God’s will and power. The withdrawal is described in scene 5 after Teiresias left; Creon talks to Choragos that he will withdraw his edict:

It is hard to deny the heart! But I will do it: I will not fight with destiny…

…I will go.    ––Bring axes, servants: Come with me to the tomb. I buried him, I  Will set her free… / …Oh quickly!  My mind misgives––

The laws of the Gods are mighty, and a man must serve them to the last day of his life!

(Sophocles, 441B.C. 5. 874-880)

This excerpt shows that Creon finally surrenders to the God and takes back his words. Conversely, God do not; although Creon has redeemed and compensated for his sin, the God is persistent to what He says that tragic fate will befall those who break his law.

Until this point, it seems that God has the absolute power for He strikes those who break his laws. Nevertheless, Foucault (1978) will disagree with this assumption because—as it is mentioned in the first paragraph—he states that power is decentered, multidirectional, and strategic. For these reason there is no source of power since it comes from and goes anywhere depend on where it is needed. The power of God in this play is contested by Polyneices as it is described in Scene 1 when Creon says that Polyneices “broke his exile to come back with fire and sword against his native city and the shrines of his fathers’ gods” (Antigone, 441B.C. 1. 165-166). This excerpt shows resistance from Polyneices toward God. Polyneices consciously excerts his power to resist God by striking with fire and sword against the shrines of the Gods as well as Thebes; the feature of power exerted by Polyneices is the strategic one for it is placed in where it is needed. Similarly, as it is seen in whole the play, Creon—to some extent—resists God by averting from His rules. From the analysis, the spread/ division/ source of power in this play is random because there are exertion and resistance toward power. I analogized the spread/ division/ source of power in this play with the child’s game Rock-Paper-Scissors. Rock beats scissors, scissors cuts paper, and paper beats rocks—but in term of power in Antigone, the source and direction is not that neat, instead, it is way too random to be analogized with anything. There is, therefore, no such thing as absolute power in the play since the power is always balanced by the presence of resistance.

Both the God and Creon are the hierarchically high figures in Antigone who exert their power through discipline and punishment. In term of discipline they both have panoptic system to observe all that happen in their territory. Moreover, in term of punishment, they both punish those who break the law to maintain their order as well as to give the sense of repentant and deterrent effect to the people. However, there are also differences in term of the discipline and punishment applied by Creon and the God; when Creon’s is respectively limited and dynamic, the God’s is omnipresent and static. The God’s power, however, is not absolute for there are resistances that balance it is like when Polyneices strikes the God’s shrines and when Creon averts from God’s rules. Therefore, the spread/ division/ source of power in this play are random because there are exertion and resistance of power.

References

Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of The Prison. (Alan Sheridan, Trans.). New York: Vintage Book.

Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality. New York: Pantheon Books.

Sophocles. (441B.C). Antigone. (Dudley Fitts and Robert Fitzgerald, Trans.). Literature: Reading Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Ed. Robert Di Yanni. (6th ed.) Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Literary Criticism: Oedipus Rex

Who is to blame?

Sophocles’ “Oedipus Rex” is a play about the tragedy of a man—Oedipus—who is prophesied to kill his father and marry his mother. Throughout the play, Sophocles seems to structure the story through key themes that are also binary oppositions: old/young, sight/sightless, men/women, fatalism/existentialism, powerful/powerless, etc; but I am going to focus on fatalism/existentialism and powerful/powerless binaries only. Of these binaries, there is actually one overarching and controlling binary that functions as an umbrella that structures this drama i.e. the opposition between God/human. In this essay, I am going to demystify the theme of God/human that is manifested by the binary opposition of fatalism/existentialism and powerful/powerless to find out whom is to blame in the commission of the greatest sin in the play.

The first theme of the play rooted from fatalism/existentialism binary that centers on the figure of God vs. Oedipus. Fatalism—according to Baron d’Holbach (1868)—is a philosophical belief stating that all events that occur in the universe are caused by the antecedent event. In short, all events in the natural universe are caused by determinate process so that human’s actions are never absolutely free for there is always divine force that drives them. Conversely, existentialism—according to Jean Paul Sartre (1965)—is a philosophical belief stating that existence comes before essence; a human is the one who define him/ herself; and human is what he/she wants to be. Thus, one is responsible for what one does and what one opts because he/she is the creator of his/her own destiny. In this play, Sophocles seems to opt existentialism philosophical belief for Oedipus seems to have many options in his life, but—consciously or unconsciously— he actually privileges the philosophy of fatalism over existentialism. There have been actually ubiquitous notions with respect to the idea of fatalism in this play that centered on how the prophecy unfolds as time goes by; I—however—will only talk about small detail in the play which I think has a broader meaning than its literal one which is the three highways where Oedipus met and killed his father. That is supposedly the symbol of the existentialism because ‘ways’ or ‘roads’ in literary works often symbolize option; for instance in Robert Frost’s poem “The Road Not Taken”, as in the last three lines in the poem: “Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—/ I took the one less traveled by,/ And that has made all the difference” (Frost, 1916, lines 18-20). Those lines prove that the two roads signify the choices. The traveler (I) is the one who chooses which road to go for what makes one different to another is the choice he/she made. Thus, the road in literary works is the symbol of choice that automatically is the epitome of existentialism philosophical belief. Nevertheless, In “Oedipus Rex”, the road—that is seemed to be a choice—is depicted as a fate which is also the symbol of fatalism. Oedipus who finds out that he is prophesied to kill his father, fears that terrible fate and then decides to leave his— unknowingly foster—parents and walk out for his self-alienation; however, exactly at the three highways he met and killed his father. It is showed in scene two when he confides to Iocaste about his past and why he is restless:

I heard all this and fled…as I wandered farther and farther on my way to a land where I should never see the evil sung by the oracle…there were three highway coming together at a place I passed…a chariot with a man such as you describe seated in it… the groom force me off the roads…I struck him on my rage… I killed him. I killed them all. (Sophocles, 430B.C. lines 270-290)

From this excerpt Oedipus met and killed his father right at the three highways, before he even has the chance choose which way out of the three ways he will take. It signifies that he does not have a control in his life for everything has been fated by the God. Furthermore after he killed his father Laïos, Oedipus—out of the three highways—chose to take the one that took him straight to Iocaste. Statistically speaking, the probability is only 33 percent for him to fulfill all the prophecy; so it is either fate or coincidence. From the recurring and overall theme in this play, it is quite hard to state that it is a coincidence. Even if we are insistently compelling that it is not a fate by stating another reason which might be coincidence or his choice, it is indeed the ‘coincidence’ or ‘his choice’ that lead into his fate; so it is all about fate. The existentialist may opposed my argument in this paper by stating that Oedipus has a free will that is depicted in the scene four when he deliberately blinded his eyes:

Apollo. Apollo. Dear
Children, the god was Apollo.
He brought my sick, sick fate upon me.
But the blinding hand was my own!
How could I bear to see
When all my sight was horror everywhere? (Sophocles, 430B.C. lines 110-115)

This excerpt seems to depict the existential philosophical belief that the event when Oedipus blinds his eyes is purely his own choice, yet, it is still debatable whether he does it in his own free will or it is out of his control, this idea is most likely to be objected by d’Holbech’s (1868) argument about fatalism; he explains about whether a man is the master of throwing himself out of the window or not; he argues that when a man jump from the window, it cannot justify that his desire can become a motive sufficiently powerful to state that he acted freely; “the violence of his temperament which spurred him on to this folly. Madness is a state that depends upon the heat of the blood, not upon the will.” (p. 106).

By bringing the context into Oedipus’ action to blind his eyes, it cannot be said that he does it as his free will for his motive uncontrollably comes from precipitate action that is derived from his feeling and temperament which he has no control over. For that reason, Oedipus’ action of blinding his eyes is a determined action that is the result of prior causes and also his depression due to the overwhelming state of the unbearably glaring truth he had just known that leads to his distressed psychological state.

The second major theme in the play stems from the powerful/powerless binary which centers on the figure of god vs. Oedipus and Iocaste. Sophocles—again—seems to state that human are nothing before god. The theme of the powerfulness of god and the powerlessness of human predominates this play for all human’s effort to elude them from the tragic fate from the god will be futile. After knowing the prophecy, Iocaste’s effort to elude her family from the tragic fate by asking a shepherd to abandon Oedipus when he was a baby makes things worse instead of getting better for she loses the control to educate her baby—both morally and spiritually—not to kill his father and marry his mother. Furthermore, Oedipus’ effort to escape the prophecy by leaving his foster parents brings him closer to fulfilling it instead. It is obvious that every conscious decision that they made in their life is made wrong by the powerful forces of divination.

In summation, the theme of this play is structured by the overarching theme God/Human that is manifested by the two major binaries fatalism/existentialism and powerful/powerless. In this play, the human seem to have choices in their life which—based on the analysis—actually are not more than merely pseudo-choices because human are nothing but the puppet played by the unseen hands of the god. Finally, to find out who is to blame in the commission of this greatest sin in this play—whether it is the human or the god—based on the analysis, it can be said that the human have attempted to do their best to evade the tragic prophecy but they are not powerful enough to escape the fate. In short, a quote from Thomas A. Kempis (1418) will answer this question “Homo proponit, sed Deus disponit” which in English means “Man proposes, God disposes”.

References:

D’Holbach, Baron. (1868). The System of Nature. (Robinson, D.,H., Trans.). Kitchener; Batoche Book.

Kempis, Thomas, A. (1418). Imitation of Christ. Ed. William Benham. Retrieved on November 22, 2014, from: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1653

Robert, Frost. (1920). “The Road Not Taken”. In Mountain Interval. Charlestone: CreateSpace.

Sartre, Jean, Paul. (1965). Essay in Existentialist. New Jersey: The Citadel Press.

Sophocles. (430B.C). Oedipus Rex. (Dudley Fitts and Robert Fitzgerald, Trans.). Literature: Reading Fiction, Poetry, and Drama. Ed. Robert Di Yanni. (6th ed.) Boston: McGraw-Hill.

BERSAMA POLANTAS, PECAHKAN KEMACETAN LALU LINTAS

Kemacetan adalah suatu permasalahan kompleks yang merupakan dampak dari peningkatan jumlah kendaraan bermotor yang tidak sebanding dengan ketersedian sarana dan prasarana, serta peralatan lalu lintas. Di Ibu kota sendiri, kemacetan sudah menjadi fenomena keseharian layaknya membaca koran di pagi hari. Karena kompleksitas dari dampak kemacetan, perlu diadakan upaya-upaya pemecahannya. Sebenarnya, ada banyak variabel lain yang bertalian erat dengan kemacetan, seperti pengguna jalan, peraturan lalu lintas, jalan raya, dsb.; namun, artikel ini berfokus pada peran polisi lalu lintas (polantas) agar dapat memecah kemacetan melalui upaya preventif dan represif.

Berdasarkan observasi penulis, tak banyak pengguna jalan yang mengetahui berlakunya UU Lalu Lintas Nomor 22 Tahun 2009 yang menggantikan UU Nomor 14 Tahun 1992, sehingga ketidaktahuan itu dijadikan sebagai alasan oleh para pelanggar. Padahal, pelanggaran atas peraturan lalu lintas berbanding lurus dengan tingkat kecelakaan dan kemacetan lalu lintas. Oleh karena itu, polantas sebaiknya mencegah hal tersebut dengan menggencarkan penyuluhan UU baru dan membina pengguna jalan secara langsung ataupun melalui media lainnya agar mereka melék hukum.

Selain itu, perlu dilakukan juga upaya penegakan hukum yang lebih tegas oleh polantas terhadap pelanggar, khususnya yang menyebabkan kemacetan, seperti supir angkot yang ngetem di sembarang tempat, kendaraan yang parkir ‘liar’, ataupun pedagang kaki lima yang menyebabkan penyempitan jalan.

Walaupun semuanya kembali lagi ke pribadi masing-masing pengguna jalan, polantas memiliki peran yang sangat penting dalam pemecahan kemacetan. Peran tersebut dapat dimaksimalkan dengan melakukan upaya preventif melalui sosialisasi, agar pengguna jalan lebih memahami peraturan lalu lintas; dan dengan upaya represif, yakni melalui penindakan secara tegas dan langsung terhadap pelanggar yang menyebabkan macet. Apabila polantas dapat mengefektifkan upaya-upaya tersebut, kemacetan pasti akan dapat dipecah—atau setidaknya dikurangi.

New Phase: Working (2)

It is quite really hard to find the apt job for me. It has been three weeks since I applied here and there to some companies. Within that period, I was called four times for interview. Jocularly, nothing’s work! Two companies actually offered me a job, but I did not feel like signing the contracts. It not solely because of the salary, it was either the crazy working-hours or location. I did not come to the other two interviews since: 1) I was too late to realize that the invitation email was spammed for almost two weeks and 2) I found out that the job offering was fictitious and they are just looking for some gullible and desperate people generous enough to spend their real money on crap products as the requirement to get the aforementioned fictitious job.

I realize that the problem, however, is not entirely in the jobs, though; it has always been in me. I suffer from acute anxiety that I will be trapped in a perennial contract with unhappiness and daily exhaustion that will continually suck the life and humane out of me. The thing that I fear more than being a slave of routine—which is inevitable—is being a soulless machine. I am aware that I will be a mere screw in a gigantic machine of capitalism; and that the choice that I make is influential in what my future career—or life—will most likely be. 

It is not that I am unaware of a metaphor that I will not make any step if I was just wondering, predicting, and researching what the upcoming road will be; I am just thinking whether I choose the nature of the work I will do all day or the quality of dinner I will have at night.

New Phase: Working

I remember one day my mom said to me that when people were young, they sacrifice their health searching for money, and when they are old, they sacrifice their money for their health.

Now, I have finally arrived at the finish line of my study at the university level. My responsibility, therefore, changed from studying to working—or earning money. In my whole life, I have been thinking that job is what defines a person. I have seen a lot of people change as they got a new job. Also, I have seen my friends change as they changed their jobs.

That is why I have not decided to apply for any permanent job yet. What I do for a living is just doing some freelance jobs like translating and tour-guiding. 

I have been a translator for about two years English-Indonesia and vice versa. The money is agreeable, but I have to work more than 9 hours a day. I do not know if it is OCD or what, but I cannot take any rest knowing that my assignment is still unfinished. That is one of the reasons why I can finish my skripsi (final research paper) on time.

Another job from which I get money is by tour-guiding. The salary is not really satisfactory, though. I was paid 150.000 IDR a day by the office, but it does not include tips from outlets and the tourists. So, it is the least that I can get in a day. In fact, the last time I did the tour-guiding, I earned 500.000 IDR a day; that was the sweet part. The bitter one was when I forced myself to do the tour-guiding when I was sick—and fasting. About a week ago, I got fever and a laryngitis—a very badly inflamed throat. I was far from home and did not have any money left, so I had no choice but to work. To pay the doctor, then, I did the tour-guiding with all the pain. I walked and explained the places to them painfully. I sacrificed my health to pay the doctor for my health. 

That is life.

I was offered some jobs in Bandung though; from the place where I had my internship program, a multinational company where my high school friend works, to working in a language center with a promising prospect of getting a scholarship and asked to be a lecturer. I, however, have not said a word to any of them for I am not staying in this city. 

I know that these offering might be the best opportunity that I blew; I know that I might the stupidest person to ignore the offering; and I know I might be regretful later.

But… 

I know one thing. What happened is what should happen. Besides, I like it when my life is unpredictable; not knowing what will happen tomorrow. I might sleep with a full or starved stomach.

I am sure that I will not be like this forever. Even an idealist will have to change to be a realist. Yet, for now, I like being what I am.

Random Spectrum

Four years has passed and now he was at the end of his time being in that university. It feels like he has just registered a few months ago. His life could have been boring and flat if he were rich, clever, and a bit more extroverted—the adjectives that he always wished for. He now realizes that even the worst things conspire to color every moment in his life. It is neither black nor white, but it is a random spectrum that he—or even anybody else—cannot explain.

***

Finding out that the tuition was too expensive, he went home thinking, ‘who need college? I can find a job and help my parents instead’. At midday, he got into his home, threw his bag, and said to his parents that he preferred to work than study.

“Do you know what you are doing? Thousands of people out there desperately want to go to college and you just blew out your chance”, his dad said.

With a sigh, he explain, “well, we currently do not have ten million, right?”

After a long debate, he went to his room, threw himself to the bed,  and checked his phone. One of his high school friends texted him, ‘have you registered yet?’

‘No. I cannot pay the tuition. I will look for a job instead’, he replied.

She wrote, ‘do not give up man! Here, call this number’, then she gave him a phone number of an academic directorate in the university he was registering.

After calling the number, he rushed to the university. At 3 p.m. he got into the university and met the directorate.

With a smile on his face, he went home and told his parents that he was a university student. Little did he know that meeting and knowing the directorate would be one the best things that could ever happen to him.

Later, he would be grateful that he was not rich.

***

In the first days on college, he felt so little and desperate finding out that he was surrounded by clever people. Moreover, he was so clumsy and shocked for the different customs, cultures, and mannerism that he had never known before.

His thought of being inferior materialized into his reality. He was both shallow and non-exist in his own mind and [probably] in campus life. Miracle, however, came; that was when strange things happened. His friends started saying that he was clever. That was quite a motivation to him. If he were really clever, he could have thought, ‘yes I am’, and then drown into the sea of pride. However, he was not clever, that was why he felt the pressure when his friends said so.

Being said ‘clever’ produced a grand responsible for him.

Later, he would be grateful that he was not clever.

***

He did not have many friends. Most of the time, he was seen to be alone, waiting in the gap of classes for hours. Unlike people who could easily get along with others, he was weird and somehow unsociable.

However, he was never found weeping. In fact, he enjoyed it. He thought, ‘I am what I am; and I will be what I must be. I will not be people pleaser’. He was a nonchalant and thus, he was sure that whoever wanted to be his friend, was his real friend. That was quite easy. Being a weirdo, moreover, made him really sensitive so that he could understand other weirdoes.

Later, he would be grateful that he could graduate because of his weirdness.

***

If he were rich, clever, and more extroverted; everything would have been too easy. He knew that good stories are those that have conflicts, ups and downs, turning point, or whatever the term is. He started having a really weird thought—quite an obsessive madness, perhaps—that when bad thing happened to him, and even when he looked so depressed; deep down inside him, there is always a roaring joy.

It is like in a hospital, as long as there are ups and downs, you are surely alive; but when it is a straight line, you are dead.