The Critique of Pure Compassion

On Nietzsche, Darwin and Bill Gates

Compassion : Sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it.

In a world in which Darwinism theory of "Survival of the Fittest" is enacted in all walks of life, compassion, as a concept, is almost antithetical. It is almost like an oasis in a desert. Why is compassion an emotion experienced by humans then? Lets try to get a historical perspective.

Circa early 19th Century. The glory and democracy of French revolution has given way to an anarchy, which only the obstinate optimists will term as a success. Over the period of next few decades, Napoleon would, in a way exploit, this chaos to establish his supremacy over France. Needless to say, this seminal event changed Europe and the World, not only politically, but also in the way people started thinking. This is as brief a premise as i could possibly give.

Circa late 19th century. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (October 15, 1844 – August 25, 1900) was a Prussian-born philosopher, who though was largely overlooked by the contemporaries of his time, came to be regarded as a highly significant and influential figure in modern philosophy. Much of Nietzsche's philosophy has a critical flavor to it; two concepts associated with a more constructive project are the Übermensch (variously translated as superman, superhuman, or overman) and the eternal return (or eternal recurrence), though in this context, its the former we are interested in primarily. The former is posited as a goal that humanity can set for itself, or that an individual can set for his- or herself; Nietzsche basically was of the opinion that society's and mankind's only role should be in the development of a Man who is perfection personified. And consequently, he rubbished democracy. The anarchy that followed French Revolution and the "heroic" role played by Napoleon thereafter, seems to have contributed to Nietzsche's philosophy, as did Schopenhauer's "The World as Will and Idea". Contentiously, though, Nietzsche never clearly outlined the role this Superman was to play in such a hypothetical society.

Circa 2006. The world is a lot different place. The new weapon is money, but strife, as a part of life, is one of the few constant factors. In this increasingly complex world, some acts just shock you by their sheer audacity and surprise quotient. The world's richest man, Bill Gates, decides to not just donate most of his wealth close to $50 b, but actively involve himself in philanthropy. And helping him in this endeavor is another of the world's richest men, Warren Buffet who gives most of his wealth to Gates for this purpose. And all this happening in the intensely competitive Corporate society. Gates, in a lot of ways, is the modern Übermensch visualized by Nietzsche. He is a product of his society, achieving success not by inheritance, but by sheer talent and diligence. The implication here is not that he is perfect (ok, there are plenty of Gates detractors), but if there's anyone who fits the bill in this world, its him. And such a man, when in his prime devotes himself to such a cause as philanthropy and compassion, the world takes notice.

Maybe after centuries of power struggles and strife, humans have finally started realising that strife, though necessary, has only worstened human plight in this control-less way and mindless wars. And maybe its people like Gates, who consciously or unconsciously are realising the fact that its not always survival of the fittest which leads to an evolved species, but survival of the weakest which strengthens the pyramid of our societies and our species as a whole. And the most remarkable and striking of all things is that, this time the agent of change is not the Aristocrat, or the Nation state but one of the finest products of a society , where strife is relatively controlled.

And although inequity is still ubiquitous, we still fight over things as inane as land and religion and future appears unstable, but maybe Compassion and humanity is the new mantra in evolution, pioneered by Gates-like-Übermensch.

Nietzsche take a bow.

My Fair Ladies

There are two things that interest me a lot : Cinema and any "Top 10" lists (eg. the top 10 ways not to tear off your hair in desperation in a Karan Johar movie ; of which atleast two would be a) not to watch it and b) be bald). And so the idea for this blog ; although i would limit myself to "top 5" as 10 would be too much of a strain on my mental faculties and to English movies only. So without further ado, my favourite five female characters in English movies :

1) Clementine Kruckzynski (Kate Winslet) ; Eternal Sunshine of the spotless mind : Everything about her is different (rather eccentric?) . She colours her hair Orange (and blue). Her name is Clementine Kruckzynski (whoa!). She has that crazy spunk in her which makes her talk to complete strangers. She likes going to the frozen lake, on a freezing night, to watch the frozen stars. And...she listens to hindi songs (she does!). And it is this arbitrary craziness about her which makes her so likeable. Its the likeability of the uncertainty (and chaos) in her. And the amazing chemistry with Jim Carrey only makes the contrast in their personalities all the more stark. O my darling, O my darling, O my darling Clementine....

2)Sally Albright (Meg Ryan) ; When Harry Met Sally : The quintessential "Girl next door" with a difference.The sometimes confused, sometimes finicky , yet always likeable girl with a penchant of placing food orders in an excruciating detail. What makes you like the character is also the fact that you see her over a period of 12 years , in all her transitional glory. But truly speaking, its Meg Ryan that makes it really memorable. She makes it believably real. Sally is the "Girl next door" we all wish we had.






3)Princess Ann (Audrey Hepburn) ; Roman Holiday : Audrey Hepburn. A princess. That about sums it up i guess. But its that innocence, purity and grace of the character played superbly by Hepburn that makes it stand apart. Its rare to find such portrayals now. And its impossible to find Audrey Hepburns in this age of publicity beauties. I guess i have mixed up the character and the actress ; but its rather difficult to speak of them in different terms, isnt it? To me, they are the same







4)Celine (Julie Delpy) ; Before Sunrise/Sunset : The French accent does make me biased. But jokes apart, she is the woman who is intelligent, has a sense of humour and is beautiful too. Now that defies the whole beauty*brains=constant logic (feminists, have a sense of humour or a bad memory atleast :D). And again, you see such contrasting dimensions of her personalities in the two movies; the young hopeful one and the older pragmatic and cynic one, that the dual traits of strength and vulnerability make this character appear really feminine. And of course, the song sung by Julie Delpy : " Let me sing you a waltz....."




5) Beatrix Kiddo/The Bride/Black Mamba (Uma Thurman) ; Kill Bill : For the record, I never really liked the movies that much. So , its a revenge saga, done in style, with a twist, but nothing really great. But Uma Thurman makes it worthwhile. She is a gangster, bride and a revenge seeking woman in the same movie. She rides bikes, knows kung-fu and ruthlessly kills legions of enemy single handedly. And all with great style. She is the suave ruthless chic with an agenda of vengeance. Beatrix Kiddo rocks!
P.S. My personal fav? O my darling..... la la la la... can you beat blue hair? :)