"Naïve"
"Utopia"
"Victorian"
I learnt the most appropriate meaning and use of these three words yesterday. Although I had used the word "naïve" many a times, I had never used the other two. It only proves how much I am yet to learn to master the language of English L. No wonder I have to open the dictionary several times to read Lissome Lady's posts and even sometimes during Nandita's J
Naïve means having unaffected simplicity of nature or absence of artificiality; having or showing a lack of experience, judgment, or information
Anyone can be naïve at certain stages of life with respect to certain situations. Friends, would you please like to forward your opinion on whether it is acutely inappropriate to be "naïve" in today's world? Before reaching a stage of sophistication, one would pass through the stage of being naïve. What if a person is too simple, straightforward and child-like by nature? Which gets interpreted as being "naïve" by somebody for their convenience! How should s/he cope with the complex world full of hypocrisy, back stabbing and masquerade?
Utopia means any visionary system of political or social perfection.
Is "utopia" any ridiculous state of imagination? Is it wrong to envision utopia? Can envisioning a state of utopia motivate us to work towards such a state and help attain a conducive atmosphere for peaceful/comfortable living?
Victorian means relating to or displaying the standards or ideals of morality regarded as characteristic of the time of Queen Victoria.
After looking at the dictionary meaning, friends, I am a little bit perplexed as to if possessing Victorian qualities is disgracing in any way? A 'Victorian housewife' J of today would uphold strong values and principles, and mostly tend to be just and righteous.
*********************************************************************************
All of you must be wondering as to why I am asking all these stuff today! I am putting lot many smileys today JJ for I am finding it funny putting up this blog. Please take the liberty to laugh at me ..JJJ should you find my action funny at any point while reading this blog. Now I will proceed to take on a comment put up on a slightly older post of mine
Some of you might remember I had put up a series of posts titled "The Fight Against Hypocrisy" which was a story /narration centred around a simple, straightforward and somewhat "naïve" character Vijay and two others namely Arindam ' the poison bearer and Mr. Basu ' the "naïve" boss. I had got a mixed set of comments from many of you with some encouraging Vijay's stand and some suggesting other appropriate techniques to tackle the situation. But one thing made me really happy that all of them complimented my writing style. I have been really elated since. On the 9th of July I, however got this new comment to my said post from one Sarita Singh: (Well friends, now you can certainly understand that this post is primarily to reply back Sarita, which I could also have done on her GB. Instead I chose to post it here)
sarita singh : "vijay is extremely naive…is he looking for utopia at work…god bless him !actually the characterisation itself is poor & 1 sided. Looks like someone is telling his own story from his own point of view without giving the other side any chance to clarify. More like an essay than a story . I would like to tell vijay that its the same tale in every office…like it or lump it…or he could start his own outfit where he is the boss. Blurting , snapping may help once but not always…let him fight it like a man instead of cribbing like a victorian housewife."
A judgement mixed with a lot of sarcasm is slapped on Vijay on the very first sentence. The last two words would be too insulting to a real man (vijay) coming off from a lady (sarita) should the characters be real. And many of my friends have already mentioned its like a leaf taken out from their own lives! I depicted Vijay as a bold straight forward guy, who dares to call the spade a spade. But going by sarita singh's comment I felt, repeat, "felt" as if being naïve is a mental handicap! As if it is a serious faulty personality trait needing pity. Is it really so? sarita, let me tell you that anybody can be naïve at some particular stage of life and gradual experience only makes one sophisticated. As for the 'essay' being one sided, well.. I tried to write a 'story' centering around Vijay, so obviously it had to be from Vijay's point of view only. We do not put Ravana's point of view while writing a story on Rama! Do we? Although Ravana too was a great religious man by himself. And regarding it appearing to be someone's own story being told, which most of my ilander friends have felt too, I take it as a compliment.
Vijay has also nowhere in the course of the incidents let us feel that he is expecting utopia at work. But to enable the employees work and perform I believe every organization needs to offer a conducive work environment that is free from negative vibes and hostility among team members. Nowadays we have a term called "venomous atmosphere". Where does this kind of terms evolve from! What are possible reasons of disgruntlement of employees? According to me it is poor leadership within a team. Lack of experience and maturity in the leader (Naïve leader? J) results in unhealthy competition and conflicts among team members. Add to it the "divide and rule politics" of some inefficient and suspicious boss. And if the problem is not detected and resolved early it takes a dangerous turn with passage of time with the possibility of the so called leader himself falling into deep trouble later. I suggest we take a look at the cover story appearing on last Wednesday's (9th July, same day sarita posted her comment) Times Accent, the supplement with The Times of India on negative vibes at work titled "The Viral Effect" by Yasmin Taj and see what information it forwards. I shall try post it from web if possible in a separate post. I am sure sarita you would analyse the story from a different angle after going through that Time Accent article unless you happen to be in close contact with someone who resembles any of the characters opposite Vijay in my story.
************************************************************************
While writing the story nowhere did I present my direct opinion on any of the characters. But let me forward my personal view now ' I agree with sarita to the extent that Vijay IS naïve. And foolish enough not to understand petty politics happening behind his back. Having stayed with and observed Arindam for such a long period he could have removed the mask of Arindam and driven the latter to leave long back only if he exhibited more boldness earlier. Personally I would always bow before the qualities of simplicity, straightforwardness and transperancy rather than celebrating petty politics. I would derive great pleasure in calling the likes of Arindam as venomous insects. And the actions of Mr. Basu as indicative of sheer lack of self-confidence reflecting an invertebrate leadership. Worst part is when these Mr. Basus keep on going back to the Arindams for help to stage fight against the naïve Vijays LL
Thank you friends.. J for being there and bearing with me through this annexed part of "The Fight Against Hypocrisy" J
wowamazing , the amount of pain u have taken to understand somebody’’s comment and to reply to it in such a way …..deeply impressed by how u take things ……but still ..relax . we are definitly naive so many times in our life ….that is the process of learning if u are not a too much of a perfectionist….and obviously utopia and victorian have been used in a different context by the lady .
:O) so much reaction to one comment…..:)
I personally don”t care about the Arindhams of the world. They are irrelevant. If in an organization such backstabbers are preferred to workers, then the organization will slowly rot away and I wouldn”t want to work for a boss that acts on every heresay. The bottomline is somebody has to do the job (as opposted to politicking) for any organization to survive. I target on doing it; the rest is irrelevant. It is upto the organization to decide who it finds more valuable. I don”t give a damn and I never had to, so far. The organization gets what it deserves as would I, whatever happens. Time is too valuable to waste on scum.
My original comment remains the same, it was not a fight against hypocrisy but against office politics. Adding to that Vijay was naive, not expecting a utopia and as for Victorian, well its in the past, values change as time passes and Victorian qualities might not suit best in a lot of this decade’’s situations…have a smiling weekend D