Recent Memorable Reads

In an attempt to periodically dust the cobwebs off this corner of my space, I'm recording a few thoughts on some of my recent memorable reads. 

__________________________________________________________________________________

I recently decided to seriously take up meditation and apply it as a consistent practice to my everyday routine. As most people are aware, meditation is one of those practices that is astoundingly simple and complicated at the same time. While everyone expounds on its benefits, very few talk about "how" it is effective in a way that a beginner can attempt to understand. When I saw a book from one of my favorite authors, Robert Wright, I gratefully started reading it. I'm so glad I did, for it is one of the best books (if not the absolute best) book on meditation and Buddhism I've ever come across. Wright is brilliant, lucid, and extremely thorough in tying erudite Buddhist wisdom with recent psychological studies on how our brain/mind works. I finally get "it"! I now understand previously obscure statements like "everything is an illusion", "detach yourself from the self", etc. There were so many "aha" moments in the book, and all of them are conveyed through really simple examples from the author's personal experiences. I really appreciated the book, and dove head first (and deeply) into the subject by reading a few other books by Dan Harris, Sam Harris, and Mark Espstein (who is a psychotherapist, and hence relates Buddhist tenets through established theories of the mind). Dan Harris's book is the most practical of the bunch (it's so much more tangible to want to be slightly more happier), while Sam Harris's treads the spiritual realm with plenty of philosophical reflections. Each book completed one part of the puzzle in my head to assemble the picture on meditation and Buddhism. It is by no means a complete or perfect picture, but good enough and substantive enough to make me meditate every day with realistic expectations. And I can now say, meditation does help; whether it is a placebo or a real effect is up to debate, but it matters little to me. The crux is this - meditation does not solve or eradicate any "unwanted/negative" feeling or thought.  The insight is there is no "negative" feeling... you attribute meaning to everything. You will still feel pain, anxiety, fear, etc. However, you slowly gain the ability to detach yourself from the emotion and see it in a more abstract, objective manner, and ask a fundamental question to yourself, "So what?". Does this make you apathetic? No, quite the contrary! You somehow start seeing the "good" in many things because devoid of the negativity you previously tainted it with, you now start seeing it for just what it is, and sometimes find something to appreciate because of seeing it in a new light.

If you are curious about meditation and have plenty of questions but are wary of wading through Buddhist or spiritual books, I highly recommend Robert Wright's book. It has been pivotal to me. Additionally, both Dan Harris and Sam Harris have helpful meditation apps that can be installed on your phone for guided, disciplined training.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Another book on Mumbai?! No, thank you! This was my first reaction and response when my book buddies suggested this book. But I was pushed to read one chapter, and then the next, and I was forced to change my attitude and resistance. 

Yes, this is yet another book on the shocking disparities between the fortunate and the unfortunate, and people's wild struggle for survival in the merciless jungle that is Mumbai. But the writing captures something that is so elusive and so complicated - the essence of what India is and what defines Indians, regardless of their economic or social status, whether they are from the city or the village, from the north, south, east, or west. This is what makes this book brilliant. It's not just about one city, it is the story of Indians and India through the lens of one city that has so many facets to it. 

I loved the evocative and sensitive writing, the arc the book takes through all the heart-breaking stories of different (and extremely interesting) people and the author's own personal journey. Another thing I appreciated about this book - it doesn't make you feel like you are scavenging on other people's misery, as if this book and the author have fed on tragedy to become famous. There is a point to this book that is beyond enlightening those in developed countries on the unique struggles of people in a complex, developing country. It shows how we are all essentially the same - striving for meaning in life, making the best of the cards we've been dealt, and finding happiness where we can, however we can, even if it is by deluding ourselves or telling stories to ourselves that make our existence bearable and meaningful. Morality has such different connotations in the fight for survival and sanity. It is Life of Pi in the real world. 

______________________________________________________________________________

 

One of my dearest friends gave me these two books as a symbol of our friendship, hoping we will continue to be as close as Lucy Grealy and Ann Patchett. These two books therefore mean something to me. They symbolize the highs and lows of two women who clung to their friendship despite the agonizing differences and frustrations of who they were becoming and how far they were drifting. 

Lucy Grealy's autobiography is bitterly sad. As an adolescent, she was diagnosed with cancer in her jaw and suffered serious facial disfigurement that left her feeling unloved and ugly. She spent her entire life relentlessly chasing behind an elusive vision of normalcy and beauty. Ann Patchett was her friend through all her years of spiraling self doubt, painful reconstructive surgeries, and agonizing obsession towards wanting something that was within her grasp, but failing to realize it. Lucy's devastating and heart breaking experiences revolving around a woman's simple need to feel beautiful, desirable, and loved (in that order) are hard to read. Although every person can relate to her needs, insecurities and self-doubts, most of us have no idea what it is to live through serious disfigurement. Her story is so severe, and such an exception that even if her need turns to unhealthy obsession, I could only sympathize. But that's only me as a reader. 

Ann Patchett, her closest friend who had to support and live through the pain of her friend's breakdowns, writes how her sympathy sometimes ran out. Her autobiography (written after Lucy's passing away) is an honest narration and reflection of a friend's love and frustration on witnessing the repeated failed attempts to help her dear friend. Ann is by equal turns loving, sympathetic, bitter and resentful. While I understand her resentment and frustrations, and I appreciate the honesty of the book, I still have mixed feelings on the book because it makes it seem like Ann was the unconditionally loving, sensible and responsible person in the friendship while Lucy was just obsessive, irresponsible and less of a good friend. Ann's book does not seem like a tribute to a dear friend with a difficult life, nor is it a tribute to friendships. It is her honest reflection of how she dealt with a difficult friendship, and in that sense I don't see the purpose it serves beyond portraying herself as a great friend despite being caught in the travails of a difficult friend. More than anything, it has given me some insight into what sort of a friend I am, and how I view friendships. Is it worth being friends with someone when you start seeing yourself as the better person in the relationship? Is there a fine line between being unconditionally supportive and being an enabler of bad habits?

_________________________________________________________________________________

 

After 18 years (and a very early onset of midlife crisis), I revisited "Gone with the Wind". I'm fascinated by how the same book strikes different notes in me depending on when I read it. I'm amazed I read this as a teenager and got something meaningful out of it. With no life experiences, whatever did I understand or pretend to understand? :).  I don't think I liked Scarlett and never really considered her as the heroine or central character... I was waiting for her retribution and interpreted the book as a sad love story. This time around, I truly marveled at Mitchell's supreme and ingenious talent in crafting a realistic, fallible woman as the central character, showing her growth (both positive and not so positive) in ways that made her relatable and even endearing. Mitchell was truly ahead of her times by leaps and bounds to  realistically portray a woman who craved to be independent, and who had the uncanny resources to be entrepreneurial during a fraught time in history. I enjoyed Scarlett and her nuanced, multifaceted characterization. I heard the feminist roar through Scarlett's story, and I loved it!

In the genre of historical romance, I recently discovered a very talented author - LaVyrle Spencer. Her most popular book, Morning Glory, deserves its praise and glory! The story is secondary to the beautiful writing, and the fantastic characterization of two lost people trying to trust themselves and each other. I loved how Spencer shows the natural progression of how a relationship slowly blossoms between two people. This was the best part of the book for me... it takes real mastery of the craft to put words to something so subtle and beautiful. Glad to stumble upon this author!

___________________________________________________________________________________

 How can I be a colored woman living in the U.S., and not read this book? It seems blasphemous :). My takeaway message is - one needs to feel like they matter, that they are of value to themselves and to others to garner the motivation to make something of their lives. The necessity and value of self-worth is well understood in theory, but its significance often evades us, especially in the grind of everyday living. Little things that seem trivial add up, and they snowball very quickly to undermine us, and our worth as women. So, within the recent context of vociferous and militant feminism, this book brings calm reason as to why sometimes the little battles are also worth fighting before they are ignored or taken as the norm.  Michelle Obama writes beautifully and powerfully. Her childhood experiences are relatable and poignant. Her later life is more of a carefully constructed narrative, both on paper, as well as the public image of what we know. In that sense, she transitions from a relatable person to an intimidatingly smart and competent person who always does the right things, because perfection is not an ideal, but an achievable reality, if one chooses it. 

It became a bit too political, and a bit too supportive of her husband's tenure, a bit too vocal of her amazing work as the first lady, and far too idealistic of complex issues. She's inspiring and intelligent and highly motivating no doubt, but in the quest to shatter stereotypes and glass ceilings and be a unique role model, she makes herself seem too perfect, and therefore unachievable and untouchable in some sense. A goddess to revere, but how can one hope to emulate?

Melting Pots and Salad Bowls

The pulse of the current times is laced with different forms of outrage. Everywhere I look and hear, everyone I know and don't know are being louder and more distraught, more vociferous to express their views, and far more distressed that they would not be heard, if only because their view is not the popular one, the liberal one, the "right" one, or because their voice was always ignored.

I was born and raised in a country where I'm considered to be part of the privileged class, the section of upper crust that has soiled history with its poor treatment of other sections of society. As much as I reaped some benefits of my "privilege", I was always made to feel equal measures of pride and guilt on behalf of my tribe, and experienced the demoralizing effect of the fierce uphill battle to compete for good education mostly reserved for those from less privileged classes of society. How is the discrimination of another class and compromised quality equate to all the noble goals  of uplifting the under-privileged, I asked amongst the thousands. "Under privileged" is heavily loaded of course, its definition far more nuanced than the law makers recognize. In any case, that was my narrative in one country; a country that regarded my birth caste as a boon, but my gender as female somehow neutralized the boon with its unfortunate prejudices and perceived limitations.

I now inhabit a country where after having lapped up its academic opportunities, I pursue a quiet but fulfilling profession. Here, I am a woman of color, a minority, someone, who I am constantly told, deserves a push, a helping hand, for my journey is assumed to be harder. My workplace wants 50% of the workforce to be women very soon, pushing recruiters to seek people like me to help them in their quest to reach out to candidates. This was a naive revelation to me who comes from the other side, who had always been taken for granted because of my privileged caste and non-worthy gender. Was I hired because my candidacy checked boxes other than my talent or skill? Is that why my Imposter Syndrome still shows up during important meetings? What irony that I'm apparently favored by a set of policies in one country that mirror those that I resented in another country. What do I stand for now?

The role reversal makes me dizzy sometimes. When I shift from work to home and back to work, the dizziness intensifies. One place celebrates me as a woman, encourages me to speak louder and be more assertive, while one place wants to "put me in my place" for being just a woman, for my newfound audacity; I find myself in gatherings and music concerts receiving flak for their elitism, their lack of inclusiveness, and then the next day I fully realize the loneliness and the subtle exclusivity around me when I try to find my voice in a room full of middle-aged white men. I get both sides of the argument, the pain, the confusion, the difficult to articulate nuances, because my existence oscillates between both sides - a supposed elitism and a struggle to assimilate. Am I being part of a community that wants to possessively retain certain aspects of its art and culture to the point of being exclusive, while I selfishly want inclusivity in other environments and communities? 

This complicated mountain of race/caste, feminism, and identity is piling up with voices and movements, teetering to a sharp and steep precipice. We are on the edge of something - both within my native country, and my inhabiting country. True to the spirit of Occam's Razor, the clarity among this chaos is alarmingly straightforward and simple - everyone just wants to belong.  All through this ruckus and polarizing march, everyone is asking the questions - Who am I without the definitions of my race/caste/religion? Do I belong?  The muted question is: Am I good enough to belong?

It's straightforward for me to favor the country and policies that support and celebrate me, but that doesn't mean my viewpoint is therefore "right", or objective. However, I reconciled that despite the loopholes and numerous execution flaws, the reservation policies in my native country that limited my own opportunities made sense for the bigger purpose. While I'm convinced that inclusiveness everywhere is the universal way to live and lead our lives, I realize that as with anything in life, it comes at a cost. I never stopped to consider the latent cost of inclusiveness that goes beyond thwarted opportunities; in some cases, the cost is somebody else's sense of self and identity. The kernel of fear and panic threading through the seeming diatribes from the opposition throbs with these questions:

"Who am I without the definitions of my race/caste/religion? Where do I then belong?" This is a heavier threat, and so much more difficult to express and measure than lost opportunities or falling standards of quality.

I also didn't realize there are different ways to include, different steps to take on a non-linear path. The goal of inclusion does not automatically make the strategies right. One cannot find their voice without having a healthy sense of self. One develops their sense of self, painstakingly, through their own stories, their own flawed but genuine narratives that they believe to be valuable. Privilege also plays a role in the stories we construct - privilege that has nothing to do with race or caste, and everything to do with the fates and furies of our randomly churning lives and circumstances. No one can judge anybody else's story or the narrative they have stitched together. We can only judge the consequences of that narrative on other people's lives. So, if somebody's identity comes from their race/caste or religion, there is no moral or meaningful way to repudiate that or even change that, other than suggesting a complete revamping of their beliefs, and a slow process of re-evolving their identity. How does one do that? It's not a matter of beseeching them to see the light from darkness on a few beliefs. It is as improbable as asking someone to pick up a sledgehammer and knock down every pillar and wall of their carefully constructed home, and rebuild a new one in a new place. We seem to suggest that's the only choice they have, nothing in between. 

Viewed from that perspective, it does seem quite drastic and unrealistic, and not very liberal. Isn't there a middle ground? Do we need to melt and stir everyone and everything together in a melting pot all the time? Can't some aspects exist as distinct flavors and ingredients that do not mix but that co-exist on a salad bowl? Perhaps there is more harmony and beauty in the integrity of the independent structures and textures; uniqueness is also valued. Inclusiveness does not always mean complete integration to the point of disintegrating every wholesome thing to fuse and meld into a bubbling melting pot of external homogeneity that swallows diversity and allows only the most nuanced expert to pick up the individual components. I have come to realize that the deepest agony for many people is this - seeing parts of their identity and belonging being melted into a formless puddle for the sake of integration... be it a form of music or language or something else that gives them a solid sense of belonging and pride. All that these people see is ruthless annihilation, not inclusiveness. Many of them are not being elitists or racists; they are mostly desolate at the prospect of losing something that gives them meaning.

And this is what I predominantly hear as the middle ground - live and let live; let me be who I am, let me preserve what matters to me, let me keep some fences and boundaries while I respect yours and will not interfere with what matters to you. Seems fair and reasonable, but I am also well aware that my analogies of a melting fondue pot and a salad breakdown when applied to several of the issues. If only things could be categorized so neatly. 

But, to me at least, the analogies bear remembering while sorting through the reasoning and intense emotions radiating from these debates. Are we suggesting something that is adversely affecting a whole swath of people's sense of self because all they see is disintegration? If so, the bigger picture only grows murkier if the noble objective of embracing everyone leaves another set of people feeling kicked out. Is there a way to alleviate or mitigate these feelings of threat in our proposals for inclusion - reassure that things are not being melted and dissolved but only augmented without losing its core? This is a whole philosophical debate in itself - at what point does something change its inherent attribute?

Perhaps this is all idealism, and everything is a see-saw in life, or would be a see-saw for a transient period where compromises need to be made by certain people hoping that equilibrium will be eventually reached... at least for a brief time, before someone or something upends the delicate balance all over again. In the meanwhile, I am content to be in a salad bowl some days, and happily meld into a melting pot on other days, or other occasions. Context, and the varied stories and faiths of people around me matter as much as my own. It's a good perspective to hold onto when I sometimes feel isolated in my corner of the bowl or when I feel utterly lost in a pool of too many flavors. 

Reflections: 4321

The experience of reading 4321 was one of the best parts of 2017, and the disappointment I felt when it didn't win the Booker Prize was one of the low points of the year. To be fair, I haven't yet read Lincoln in the Bardo (the winner), so maybe I over reacted just a bit. 

In any case, after many years and several excellent books, Paul Auster has given me a precious gift through this book. I mentally lived several lives (that of the protagonist and imagined deviations of my own life), and understood myself better. 

All of us wonder about the extent of determinism vs. free will in our lives. We all wonder if our lives could have taken drastically different journeys if only we had taken a certain fork in the road, or if only a random event had not happened or happened at a different point in time. So many what-ifs, so many parallel universes that materialize in our heads as we indulge in wishful thinking and conjuring. 

Would we be the same person we are today if we lived in a parallel plane of time and space where we took a different route? Would we be happier, more fulfilled, or less so? If only, if only, if only we knew!

So, Auster imagines and writes  four different lives - four deviations and what-ifs for his protagonist - the sensitive and good natured Archie Fergusson. And through his compelling, exhilarating, and brilliant writing, the fog is lifted, the nagging voice of what-ifs quiets down. 

You are who you are, no matter the external journey! Your internal journey is what counts. Yes, depending on your circumstances, there will be detours, changes, adaptations etc., You will either change for the better or for worse, but certain fundamental things about you - your natural proclivities, what brings you happiness and fulfillment, the things you always seek - will remain the same. In that sense, it doesn't matter what turns you took or did not take, what unfortunate or fortunate circumstances befell you, everything neutralizes in the bigger picture. 

This is hard to articulate, but I will try, if only for better clarity for myself. Considering my current life to be the neutral average baseline, I'll consider a few drastic alternatives, one of which is living on the streets out of poverty. This seems the most drastic of all, but if I walkthrough the scenarios (despite the caveat of living in your mind vs. facing the reality of it), I realize that no scenario will give me more sorrow or more happiness or more fulfillment than the other. They all neutralize with their different kinds of peaks and lows. Yes, living on the streets seems more harrowing, but if that's all I know, and am surrounded by, my measure of happiness would be different anyway! The types of choices I make will be similar, my inclinations will be similar, leading me down similar paths, thus living a life that will vary in its specifics, but in a broader perspective, everything adds up to the same equation within you.

I'm not denying that I'm more luckier or blessed than someone on the streets. I'm not saying I might as well live on the streets. I'm not in any way trivializing poverty. Definitely not. I am indeed blessed in so many ways, but in everyday life, we all get habituated to our individual blessings (as well as miseries) and revert to some internal equilibrium that is more or less the same regardless of the specifics of your life.

We keep thinking that the extent of one's happiness or fulfillment is tied primarily to circumstances and getting/receiving things - material and otherwise. So, we are prone to wondering how the journey of our life could have been idealized, re-lived, and re-traced to ensure maximum fulfillment. What a realization that it doesn't matter a whit! Such an ideal journey cannot exist either! It's always up to you - no matter where you are - to realize yourself and attribute meaning/happiness. 

Here's another illustration through a story from the Panchatrantra (Indian fables) that I've been reminded of so much lately. 

A learned sage and his wife are desperately seeking to have a child. The sage immerses himself in a long and powerful prayer to God. Having finished his prayer in the Ganges, he flings out his arms in entreaty, and a mouse, slipping from the talons of an eagle flying overhead, neatly lands in his hands. The sage treats the mouse as God's blessing, and using his ascetic powers transforms it into a beautiful baby girl. 

The couple are ecstatic with the child, and raise her with much love. Soon, it's time for the girl to get married. The doting father wants only the best bridegroom for his daughter. He introduces her to some of the most powerful forces and lords of nature - the Sun God, the Wind God, and the God of Oceans. The girl is not impressed with any of them and refuses to marry. The sage than takes her to the powerful, majestic God of Mountains. The girl is unmoved by his magnificence and is walking away, when she spots a mouse scurrying from the mountain. She instantly falls in love and wants to marry the mouse!

The sage resigns and accepts the nature of reality, and transforms her back to her true self - a mouse. 

We each have our own inner trajectory independent of the nature of circumstances! Call it biological determinism or destiny or anything else - but hopefully the realization frees you to appreciate and make the best of your present.

I fell in love with Auster, his writing, Archie, and every aspect of this book that relentlessly propels you to chase the words, to want to ravenously consume all the thoughts, to wrap yourself with the emotions, to inhale and to live, to submerge and drown, to lose yourself within the alternate worlds. 

Recent Memorable Literary Reads

I read my way through the 2017 Man Booker Prize finalists, except for the one that ended up winning (Lincoln in the Bardo). Of the ones I read, one book shot up to be my most favorite of all time (will write about it soon), and the remaining four made an impact on me. I think they are all worth reading. In the order of my preference, recording some of my thoughts on these books:

Exist West might seem like yet another book on the woes and complexities of immigration. But it's different from the ones I have read so far, in that it's not a narrative that follows just one main perspective - that of the protagonists'. The book's narrative structure is the most interesting aspect. Written in third person, it's style is part documentary, part essay, with just a little bit of traditional story telling. I think it works! This type of narrative is devoid of explicit or too much emotion, and I think it's a deliberate choice to be as detached and objective as possible while Hamid points to the multiple tentacles that wrap and distort the issue of immigration. Through vignettes of different people's stories, he showcases how each person is affected by the issue, and how when viewed through their lens, their reactions and fears are understandable. Immigration is complicated because the stories of people are so varied, their motivations to move (even metaphorically speaking) are so different. Trying to put them all in a couple of buckets is a gross simplification. 

Can a world without borders truly exist? What does it mean for immigrants to assimilate and settle into a new country? Everyone wants to feel connected, to belong, including the native population. Driven by the need to associate oneself with their "home" and cultural identity, if immigrants keep holding themselves apart from the new country, isolating themselves, setting up their own mini-borders and communities, aren't they perpetuating the differences and the divides? Open borders do not mean human beings will open their minds and hearts to the borders they create within themselves. It's a subtle and nuanced discussion in the book.  I am a fan of Mohsin Hamid for many reasons, but primarily for his writing - he knows how to use minimal words to convey much - my polar opposite! 

History of Wolves is an emotionally difficult read, but a powerful and thought-provoking one on the role of faith (especially religious faith) in our lives. It explores the deep murky waters of morality and spirituality. Our decisions have a ripple effect on other lives, and sometimes the consequences veer out of our control regardless of how pure our intentions and motivations are. Through two stories, the author presents the classic question at the apex of morality - in the end, do intentions/belief matter or the actions/consequences? "Both" is a non-answer, and "circumstantial" is an easy answer, because articulating the underlying definition of good and bad is still convoluted. What if we believe something, and then act in a different way? Our thoughts and actions need to ideally align and resonate with each other for us to live true to ourselves. But what is its implication on morality?

It's scary and disturbing how much of an illusion we cocoon ourselves into in the name of faith. Everything gets rationalized, is attributed to higher purpose and meaning, when the reality is our choice to be ignorant and disillusioned. In this case, it's more straightforward to see the biases and illusions of blind faith or misguided thoughts. But we all live and operate under so many biases and illusions, and often we don't even realize them because they are not as stark or obvious as religious faith. 

Although I liked the book for its themes, I did not like the writing. Everything is cast in gloom, every description focuses on the unflattering, uglier side of things. The author makes her point about not glossing over the dirt that is underneath superficial beauty, but the prose became off-putting after a while. I also wish there was a deeper discussion of religious faith from a different lens, not the one that is clearly clouded.

Elmet is another disturbing, but powerfully written book. It's the heartbreaking story of one oppressed family that is struggling to survive amidst social and power conflicts. It is reminiscent of several stories and movies of ruthless landlords crushing the underdogs. What was impressive to me (and hence biased me) was the excellent writing and characertizations. This is the author's debut novel, mostly written during her commute to work! 

Autumn deals with the impact of changes - changes to our land, our country, our home, our family, and to ourselves. Change to the macro does seep into the micro. It's a poetic but mostly abstract narration on how bigger changes to society (Brexit in this case) slowly trickle down to our individual journey. This book is less about the story, and more about the characters and the writing. It was brilliant in places, but quite obscure in other places. This is part of a series of 4 books, so I'm guessing the things that were vague will have threads of continuity in the other books. It is worth reading for those pages and paragraphs that leap out with brilliance and insight and leave you with a mental punch.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Hate You Give is an unapologetically forceful and masterful book on racial discrimination and police brutality in the United States. Closely following the shocking real-life stories that have dominated the news, the author alternates between righteous indignation and clear-eyed objectivity in analyzing the stereotypes that are so entrenched in our psyches that people don't even realize the extent of rash judgments they provoke. 

What I really liked about this book was the way the author brings out the slippery slope of logic and rationality. Anything, if worded and meticulously arranged a certain way, can be made to seem perfectly logical, reasonable, and rational. This is the real danger, the terrifying threat that's facing us today - discrimination is reduced to one tiny aspect of its elemental state; it is coldly rationalized without compassion. The radical solutions are propagated as practical, sensible, and even fair-minded. We are not as rational as we want to believe; our feelings and emotions bias our perceptions and construct seemingly cohesive narratives of "logic" that are riddled with holes! 

I think it's the belief that one is right because one is logical and rational, that results in a breeding ground of twisted fundamentalism and extremism that is almost impossible to logically argue against. The only way out is openness to dialogue, openness to understand different experiences by  weaving in empathy and compassion along with logic.

 A very relevant and poignant read. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Finally, despite all the depressing and disappointing state of affairs around the world, there is always hope, goodness, and the prevalence of our better nature to overcome the darkness.

All The Light We Cannot See is a beautiful, heart-wrenching book on the purity of thought and actions amidst a scenario as vile as possible - the second world war. The book grew on me gradually, and I appreciated it more as the echoes of the story and characters washed over me long after I finished the book. We all hold the power to directly and indirectly make a difference in people's lives - even a complete stranger. It's a sobering and uplifting realization to motivate us to always do the best that we can, to always resurrect our better nature, even during dire situations of life and death. Such goodness is often not visible, it is not glaring in its gloat, for it demands no grandeur or pomposity. It comes in quiet, subtle ways, and leaves a lasting impression that can only be felt and realized. 

News of the World is another simple story of goodness and compassion. It's the story of a dutiful military man and an orphaned girl struggling to find her footing in an ever changing, unsettling landscape. Sometimes, the struggle is realizing and recognizing when and in what ways we have the opportunity to positively impact someone's life. And most often, goodness is symbiotic, and is not a one-way street.

So much of our world is now focussed on the visual and loud nature of things - everything needs to be seen, to be loudly beautified in its representation and glorification to be believed and internalized as "good". But there are so many gestures of everyday living that have the potential to add to up to something significant; something that can't be measured or captured in a tangible form. The very hope, the trajectory of our existence, rests on such goodness and light that cannot be seen, but does live around us and within us.

Memorable Reads: On the Complexities of Marriage

Some thoughts on my recent reads dealing with the complexities of marriage in all its messiness and beauty.
_____________________________________________________________________________

"Never before have our expectations of marriage taken on such epic proportions. We still want everything the traditional family was meant to provide - security, children, property, and respectability - but now we also want our partner to love us, desire us, to be interested in us. We should be best friends, trusted confidants, and passionate lovers to boot. The human imagination has conjured up a new Olympus: that love will remain unconditional, intimacy enthralling, and sex oh-so exciting, for the long haul, with one person. And the long haul keeps getting longer.", Esther Perel

What marriage means to us has indeed ballooned into an idealized version of the old and the new, the fairy-tale and the mundane. The endless demands and entitlement towards happiness, acceptance, and romantic love have creeped into our implicit ways of thinking and living. It's now easier to feel dissatisfied and want more - the flip side of healthy self-worth. Everyone is worthy of the type of love that unconditionally and unfailingly fulfills them through decades, right? Why settle? It's becoming increasingly common for us to understand someone when they say - "I love my spouse, but I'm no longer in love".  Ah, the problems plaguing the first world!

It's an interesting state of affairs, indeed. 

Esther Perel is a renowned marriage counselor. Her recent book, The State of Affairs is a deep dive into infidelity - the various types, causes, the motivations, the perspectives of all the different people involved, its impacts (both positive and negative), and what all of this means for the future of the institution of marriage / monogamy. I loved the book - most specifically, Perel's open-minded, empathetic, judgment-free discussion. It might seem like a depressing book with its numerous case studies of infidelity (and their frequency/prevalence in marriages these days), but the surprising aspect is how the treatment of the topic doesn't weigh down the reader. My takeaways were hope and optimism. Infidelity need not be the end of the world (or a marriage). As with everything in life, it is what you make of it. We have perhaps attributed too much significance to it as  the most important pillar to bolster a marriage. Detaching the moral and social conditioning/connotations, Perel urges us to reevaluate our expectations towards marriage, and some ways to handle the underlying issues that result in infidelity. The institution of marriage has always evolved - its relevance, the roles of the people, the expectations/values, structure etc. Now it's perhaps teetering at another turning point - burdened with too much idealism and expectations. Something has to give, and it's up to the individuals involved to prioritize and collaborate on the revision. It fosters great food for thought and meaningful discussions. 

A quote that spoke to me - "Collaborate in transgression, rather than transgressing against each other". The book requires an open mind to consider aspects of human nature that are difficult digest, but that only worsen if ignored and brushed under the metaphorical rug.

Her older book, Mating in Captivity, starts to address the strains of marriage that eventually lead people to drift apart and loose their "eros" - the erotic vitality - the spark that purportedly keeps marriages alive. Perel has an expanded definition of this vital energy. It is the zest for life, the feeling of "aliveness" and excitement that individuals cultivate (yes, one needs to keep nurturing it), and that is then shared by the couple. It's a very interesting discussion. This book, as with all her books and speeches, does not have a list of techniques or strategies. It is a discussion of the many circumstances and the reasons why the vital energy drops. It's up to the individual to figure out where they fall, and how to address the issue. 

My main takeaway was the importance of maintaining your sense of self, your identity and individual interests within a marriage. Merging into one entity is not the goal. This has always intuitively made sense to me. It's easy to fall into a co-dependent relationship where you want to share everything with each other, do everything with each other, spend as much time as possible with each other, and keep closing the gap between the two until there is this fairy-tale merging of souls or whatever. As paradoxical as it sounds, this is sometimes the issue. We are innately attracted to mystery; we are drawn towards that which we don't know enough of, that which sustains our interests and keeps beckoning to learn more. Once the mystery is solved, the interest begins to wane. There is nothing morally wrong about this - this is just the way we are built. 

When you maintain your identity and keep exploring yourself, investing in your interests, and taking care of some of your varied needs independent of your spouse, you empower yourself, gain confidence and awareness of yourself (recognize what you want vs. don't want), and thus nurture your vital "eros". You might even find yourself "evolving" into a newer version of yourself. There is always something more to you than just your role in the marriage. Most importantly, do not depend on your spouse for every one of your emotional needs. Expand your horizons and your community - we have friends, family, colleagues, and neighbors for a reason. 

The old saying, "A hedge between keeps friendship green" applies to all relationships. We are often fearful that this is contrary to the objective of marriage and paves the way for people to drift apart. I guess it's all about the balance. It's not about neglecting your spouse or their needs, but about relieving some expectations and burdens off them so you both have room to breathe and grow.

Casual conversations with happily married couples who've been together for decades despite rough storms have the same words of wisdom - "Spend time away from each other! Give space, so when you come together, you appreciate each other much more."

_________________________________________________________________________________

Do not judge a book by its cover. Do not judge a marriage by its external appearance either. No marriage/relationship is as it appears on the outside. The tangled webs are often not even visible to the people in the relationship. You can spend decades with a person and still not know them well enough. And what an irony that many successful marriages owe more to the buried secrets than honest revelations.

In this absorbing book, Groff writes about a marriage - successful by all external standards - from the dual perspectives of the husband, and then the wife. It's natural for each of us to have different perspectives of the same thing, but what is interesting is how our perception of ourselves shapes the choices and perceptions of our reality. This was most interesting to me. 

If you believe your are good, if people around you love and admire you, your immense self-worth shades how you view your life, the choices, and outcomes. If you believe you are "bad", that you are undeserving and of little worth, everything is accordingly colored. But looking from an objective standpoint (as the reader), the illusions on both sides are brought to focus, and the notions of "good" and "bad" cease to apply. The bad seems to be the good, and vice versa. The full story emerges, and Groff forces us to recognize the common misapprehensions and illusions within our own lives. 

I liked the book for its writing, the layered themes, and characters. Many reviews find this book negative or depressing, but I felt it was "uplifting" because of its insights. 

Memorable Reads: Flavors of Love and Romance

Some thoughts on recent memorable books on love and romance. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Who doesn't remember their first crush or infatuation? Is that heady, confusing feeling really love? Could such a feeling sustain itself as people grow, mature, and turn into different versions of themselves in their adulthood? I'm ever optimistic that some bonds last in one way or the other because of the impact they had on our lives, if only for a few moments in the swiftly changing sands of time. 

One the one hand is Rowell's beautiful illustration of an innocent wholesome version of first love tempered by friendship and understanding. Each person finds acceptance in the other, and despite the uncertainties of growing up and facing the future, there is recognition of something deep and lasting, even if it's only a kernel. The pangs of this first "love" will echo throughout one's life as a fond memory of what-ifs. With succinct writing, Rowell brings so much to this simple story.

And on the other hand is Murakami's take on the turbulence of grief, loneliness, lust, and friendship on a young person's coming of age journey. Love seems too elusive when there is a gaping void seeking comfort and numbness. The attachments and relationships are clouded by insecurities and vulnerabilities, and everything is slippery to hold onto, because too many things have happened too fast to someone too young.  This is the sort of first "love" that is confusing and angsty - the kind that sets people on the impossible hunt for the "perfect" feeling that both encompasses and surpasses the tangle from their past. The memories turn into haunting ghosts that are difficult to let go, and burying them seems inadequate. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

And then, as we enter adulthood and wade through the complexities and realities of life and relationships, we start to know ourselves better. Unlikely bonds blossom unbeknownst to us, maturing from grief, disappointments, and self-awareness. Jojo Moyes is excellent at writing such stories of messy lives and "flawed" people. Nothing is straightforward, there always seems too much baggage (who doesn't have them?), but people still come together out of a shared journey, and a recongition of how they complement and complete each other despite (or because of) their imperfections. There are no happily-ever-afters but always a possibility for making the best of your circumstances, if you are willing to give it a chance. 

After You is the sequel to Me Before You, a tragic love story. In the sequel, the protagonist deals with her crippling grief and guilt. She gradually learns how to move on, and recognizes that love comes and lives in so many different forms. There even could be multiple soul mates, if we choose to believe. And then is her other book, One Plus One, where the unlikeliest of people are thrown together by circumstances. We often don't even realize how much we need something, even if it is a crazy teenager, until we are open to the experience of receiving. Moyes's characters are unique and complex, her writing funny and insightful. I enjoyed both books, but particularly After You.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Ah, then there is the idealized love - of lightning and passion; the purity of feeling and simplicity of the intense feeling; the happily-ever-after. This kind transcends social barriers, the pettiness of practicality and probability, and triumphs. It's the kind meant for a book or a movie. And so is Flowers from the Storm. It's one of the best written books I have ever read. Laura Kinsale is a brilliant writer, and a treasured find. One thing that I am always fascinated is the process, the trajectory of falling in love with someone. Kinsale excels at chasing and capturing this elusive shift in feeling. In this case, it is all the more fascinating to me as I see the protagonist shift from codependence to something more deeper, more abiding because of the nature of acceptance, the essence of the woman who gives without wanting. I am also biased by the affliction faced by the protagonist - a stroke leaves a brilliant man void of speech and conventional ways to communicate. He gets cruelly labeled as mentally ill and insane, and is understood by only one woman. Kinsale's portrayal of this is brilliant and nuanced. It tore my heart. I will come back to this book many times. 

Reflections: Quiet

The Myers & Briggs Personality Test (MBTI metric) classified me as 99% introverted 10 years ago. I agreed with it. Several wondered how I managed to escape the elusive 1% in the metric. This was not good news to people at work and family. I was always advised to change, to "better" myself. It was non-negotiable. Such an introverted personality (no matter what other traits they possess) is essentially perceived as a liability to oneself and to people around them. 

And so, I tried to change. I remember a conversation with my dearest friend, a fellow introvert who figured out the key strategies for self-adjustment. She would walk me through potential social scenarios and brainstorm ways in which I could participate in conversations, things I could say, how I could voice the statements etc. etc. Feels pathetic, doesn't it? But I needed it. I always did well 1-1, but in a group, I wanted to disappear and remain invisible. Why add to all the noise? But, that's how the world works - visibility and noise matter a lot.

Fast forward to the present. Increasingly over the past couple of years, people have been calling me "extroverted" and "bubbly" - terms that have never been associated with me. When I correct them, they vehemently disagree (much to my secret pleasure), my family senses "a change" in me, some friends were confused by my apparent dual personality, some old friends were pleasantly shocked, some even took offense when I wanted to shut out and be myself when I'd been "bubbly" just an hour ago, and the one person who has seen and lived through this journey with me finally commented - "you have brought out the better version of yourself".

So, the researcher in me, wanted evidence I could understand more objectively. I retook the MBTI test, and now I am 61% introverted. Still an introvert, but close enough to straddle and switch between personalities when needed. I recognize it as a survival necessity.

In my personal journey of self-improvement and awareness, this is significant for me. It took 10 years of painful reflection and constant calibrations, walking the fine line between being genuine and mustering some "fake" enthusiasm in light of the bigger goal, negotiations with family and friends over the frequency of socializations vs. solitude, and most importantly, recognizing and accepting the core of who I am, the things about me that will never change and that I do not want to change. There are still days when I hear people "pleasantly" cursing my introversion, telling me that I "don't seem like I even exist" (the existential questions that such statements trigger!), and there are days when I want to curl up and give up. 

And then I read this book that was recommended to me by several. I wish I had read it sooner. I wish I could just hand this over to people who refer to introverts with a negative inflection, who perpetuate the belief that extroverts are the "right type" of personality, the more lovable, "normal" people. 

Well researched and written with clarity, insight, deep empathy and understanding (for the author is an introvert herself), this is a comprehensive book for anyone curious about the personality differences and misconceptions surrounding introverts and extroverts. Every type of personality has intrinsic strengths and values. They are suited to specific types of jobs or environments, but are in no ways incapable of going beyond their sphere of "suitability". It requires some flexing of their personality "muscles" to fake and adopt some traits/skills to get to where they want to be. Many times, it is their uniqueness and how they apply their skills uniquely that matters. If networking is important to your career, you need to suck it up and do it. How often you do it, how you go about preparing for it, etc. is where you strategize, given your personality type. I appreciate this pragmatic and practical approach. Brimming with research from multiple cultures, this book is full of interesting case studies of famous and ordinary people, and their strategies. I found the book extremely useful. And those who are in relationships with introverts (professional or personal) will find this useful as well. 

It is terrible to feel like an anomaly, to feel flawed and guilty for just being who you are. Even now, when I am complimented for having "improved" myself for the better, I feel some resentment and frustration. But, I remind myself that there will always be two versions of yourself - one that is shaped by how you see yourself (your self-awareness), and the second is how others perceive you. You have no control over the latter, and for the most part, that's just the superficial aspect of you. How others perceive you matters in a practical sense to get through day-to-day things that build equity over time. Do not let it cloud your own self-awareness as much as possible. All the changes, self-improvements, and calibrations you make within yourself need not be (and will not be) apparent to others. In that sense, validation and acceptance needs to come from within you. Easier said than done, but that's the journey we all take. 

PS: Another book on Introversion I recommend is this one I read almost 8 years back (it is a lighter and quicker read).