Deleting your words.?
In the start they said, there was a single word: “logos”, which later on proliferated into several multifarious entities, stances, thoughts, and beliefs. If there were no words, there would have no thoughts. The fraternity of words, today, has so much developed that they can’t keep themselves together, so they are going apart, to different ways, with different intents. Which one is correct? And which is fallible? It’s a mere perception that would decide the fates involved.
Lately, I read an awesome novel, ‘1984’ by George Orwell, where a regime controlled its people mere by controlling their words. The regime had compiled a dictionary of words allowed to be used and forced to be taught. By culmination of words, they culminated the whole human race. They were called the ‘newspeak’ words. For example: sex and all the related words were grouped under two roofs – ‘sexcrime’ and ‘goodsex’. Sexcrime, sexual immorality, covered all sexual misdeeds whatever. It covered fornication, adultery, homosexuality and other perversion, and in addition normal penetration practiced for one’s own sake. Goodsex, chastity, was to say a normal intercourse between man and wife, for the sole purpose of begetting children, and without any physical pleasure on the part of man or woman. So all the misdeeds of sex came under one word, and left no room for further debate. Each was as sinful as the other – the death penalty. Further, several words were immured into a confinement of single meaning. A person in this regime would never know that ‘equals’ once stood for ‘politically equal’ too; that ‘free’ once meant ‘intellectually free’ too. There would have been many crimes and errors which he would never committed; simply because he could never think of them, because they were nameless and therefore unimaginable. The more rigid were the meanings, the smaller were the choices, and thence the smaller were the temptations to take thoughts. Simply, by ceasing the language they ceased the humanity, and thought schools in particular.
This book taught me a great deal of things – especially the importance of words, languages and the necessity of their free existence. Words are not simply words; they are the protocols that define the world. Conceiving a thought doesn’t need any word – true! I agree – but to understand the thought thoroughly, and then in its actuation, one does need words. Thoughts for which no specific words exist, would only be described in broad and vague terms, and hence would – in most of the cases – be misunderstood.
Free words are absolutely necessary for a free world. And words would only be free when they would be given a free flow. A free and rational environment – a free channel.
There is a lot of brouhaha nowadays on freedom of speech and uproarious contempt over protests and trials of personal freedom trespassing. For instance, take the recent Khushboo case, or read about Sania Mirja’s comments on safe sex/premarital-sexual-encounters. Isn’t she free to let her thoughts go out in public? She is, indeed! But others too are free as well, in showing their protests.
Let the public decide what is right, and what is wrong. Let the people choose their morality. Let the debate go on. Sania or Khushboo, none of them retreated back from their stand. They stood against the whole. Such was their belief, their faith. Such was the fairness of society. And its people.
I felt a major breach in fairness yesterday. One of my colleagues ran a post on his blog, where he opined on the (his self-deemed) behavior of men who take their wives to official parties, and leave them alone. He talked at length on their ideal behaviors and prescribed a code of conduct for them, and put himself forth as the finest quintessential possible.
Ok! Whatever he said – that hardly is of any concern or of consequence – was his own opinion. Similarly, others had their own. And their views clashed. Result? My friend withdrew. He removed the post all together from his blog.
This was a failure. A real failure. What a man is, if he has no faith, no judgment, no self-proud, no self-respect? Remember Gaurav Sabnis who resigned from his job, once IIPM threatened him (by dint of his write ups) and his employer IBM for student protests and legal actions.
Where do you stand in front of them?
Once it is said, it is said for all. You can’t erase it. Deleting your words wouldn’t delete the impact they already have made. Perhaps, the impact would only grow more vigor.
If you believe, then you must fight. Your words are your identities. Don’t give up on them.