Give Up

Writing prose can sometimes stifle.
Ideas are dust in the wind, and
I miss. You must hold on for a moment:
I have to finish the sentence.
Wait still, for now
The paragraph needs completion.
I am trying.

Poems demand less.

Grab and place those ideas down

Now.

Hide meaning between the lines.

Free your mind.

And I try.

Society holds me back

There are restrictions.

Blogs conflict freedom.

Poems are thus difficult

And still, haven't I tried?

Yet, I write only to criticism

People are sceptics.

Infer my meaning,

Is that not poetry?

I tried.

Prose does not work.

It is too tedious

And painful.

It is too long, and no one reads.

What else have I to try?

Maybe I should give up the blog.

Change

Change is constant. This is the framework of society. Except that change is constant, Japan would have never gained commercial recognition. Except that change is present, societies like ours will never have had the drive to pursue Japan's achievements. On a personal level, it further reminds one of the Scout motto -- Be prepared. Change teaches alertness and makes us adaptive beings, reigning over all other Darwinist creatures. It thus appears to be the case that change is for the better. Yet, with such compelling examples, it remains that change has brought damage.

Change destroys the concept of continuity. "Destroys" here is used bluntly because there had never existed a constant. Still, the idea being proposed is that friends do not stay as friends forever. There would one day come a loss, an emotional detachment. There would be new friends just as the old ones fade into memories. This is inevitable. Couples will part, whether by death or other external factors

Note: Vows and contracts are legal restrictions that do not change unless fulfilled. Yet, even within these, there are inconsistencies. Thus, in dealing with change, we must come from the perspective of the individual.

Next, change is out of human control. What this implies is that it is much feared by mankind. As such, the only way of overcoming it would be to speed up its process, to take the power of the rate of change out of the person and to transfer it to the state. When people become caught up in this tide of change that society creates, factors of variables are reduced, and uncertainties are then minimised. This then leads to willing enslavery to the system.

Perhaps, the issue of human rights may then be brought in to question this point. My response then is: Is the choice made due to desperation considered proper and right?

Thus, in summary, change then indeed provides benefits for the society as a macro-entity. On the other hand, it harms the individual person, the micro-entity.

Love

Love is possibly one of the strangest phenomena of human life. Yet, it is the only phenomena still worth mentioning. Although destroyed by humanity, traces of its purity still survive. Despite alternate embodiments, love still remains as a force that is incalculable by the formulas of physics -- its mass is intangible and its acceleration randomly varies. In this, it is easily discerned that love improves health. Thus, it defies physics, and can only explained via its glorification into Cupid. Throughout the media, this concept is very rapidly stained in ways that confuse the physical pleasure of sex with the emotional satisfaction of a life companion.

Firstly, the media propagandas the idea that love is passion. The divorces and re-marriages of celebrities are clear signals of such miscalculations. The loss of passion becomes the loss of love and ultimately, a valid reason for divorce. Although I disprove greatly of such light treatment of marriage vows, as with all vows, there is a lesson even within this -- long periods of being together cause boredom and dissatisfaction as the initial fire eventually diminishes into nothing. Passion will die, but love can continue in existance. What then is love? The sole purpose of marriage is the legal permission for reproduction. Thus, love cannot be marriage. Instead, it is something more.

Love is post-passion. What happens when the flames die out, leaving glowing ashes? Is it to be abandoned to start another fire? In fact, glowing ashes is the better heat source for it does not threaten and peacefully pulsates as it gently goes to sleep. It is a long-term satisfaction. Unlike like the blazing fire, which burns out quickly. It is after the initial passion that the couple sees each other in their true form. It is only then that love can occur. Only then will flaws surface as passion blinds no longer. Only then can the couple grow closer. For this reason, as a side mention, I propose that divorce should be made illegal except in the case of adultery.

The ease in attaining a divorce these days encourage people to desire and only go after momentary passions. It teaches them that endurance is no longer required. It inculcates the spirit of curiosity. It killed the cat, and will disintegrate the structure of society. When people lose perserverance, chasing after novel occurences, they lose their productivity. Society then incurs greater costs. Obviously, the lax standards imposed upon divorce is in oblivious rebellion to societal ideals. Despite my grievances towards such values, I still must question the allowance and assert that it should not exist.

Love is constant, but is quickly being overtaken by its immature sibling, passion. In love, there is no fear, and only concern exists. In love, there is no "I". This loss of self is, perhaps, the only way people can learn about themselves. In love, there is a confidante to relieve the pressure that society these days ruthlessly pile on us. In love, there is music. In love, there is freedom. In love, humans differentiate themselves from beasts. With love, there is hope for humanity. In love, there is no war. There is no hatred and betrayal. There is only trust and joy.

Why then is it not encouraged? Perhaps, it is because love is not economically profitable. Thus, if it does not profit economically, it must be bad by society's standards. Today, love is fast diminishing. All because people desire growth.

In parting, a word of advice: Trust humans with nothing. Whatever they hold, they think they control. Whatever they receive, they twist to fit their agenda of development. Trust us with nothing that you hold precious.

Restricting Rhymes

People don't rhyme
They don't have the time
Plus, it's treated like a crime.

Unless you are Seuss
Or the son of King Zeus,
Rhymes will not win you a cruise.

"That was tit-for-tat,
The 9/11 attack"
Now, what's your take about that?

So rhymes spoil the mood.
And ignore it we should.
We must go back to our book.

The say: mix serious with fun
(Work while you dance).
Clearly, that cannot be done.

For we learnt not the skill
And knew not the "feel".
Yet, in life, we always kill.

For rhymes were never taught,
It would all have gone to naught.
Now, who would have thought

To go against this?

They who are his
Who was but never is,
And who lived in relative bliss.

It refers to the past,
Where people used to ask:
How else can we do this task?

They believed in themselves,
Not like ourselves --
For small injuries needing salves.

So much meaning
Gone into hiding
Because they started rhyming.

Thus, we underestimate rhymes.
Making everything mime.
Just stick with sucking on limes.