Something Happened.
knicq posted in Knicqisms on January 6th, 2007
Catch-22 is one of my all time favorite books. One could be the pain in the wrong place one almost always is and argue that it is convenient, yet immaterial, quite probably hence immaterial, to have an all time favorite book when one has read as few books as one has; but who is listening to one. One is a fool. The point here is that Catch-22 is one of my all time favorite books. There are those in blogistan who have levelled the absurd allegation that it was their all time favorite book first and that I have stolen the idea from them in making it my all time favorite book.
The allegation and its propounder HPN ( One wonders if there is a word like propounder? If there is, can it be employed in the context of an allegation rather than an idea or a theory? One is a fool for wondering.) look all the more absurd when you factor in the fact that quite probably I had read the book before HPN had, and even if I had not, I was born before him, went to school before him, finished school before him, got married before him, became a father before him, have twice the number of kids he has, and half the girth; hence my word carries more weight. If you do not see the logic in this argument, you ought to go read Catch-22.
Catch-22 was Joseph Heller’s first book. It is also widely acknowledged as his very best. His subsequent works include “Closing Time”, which was a sequel to Catch-22 and another one called “Something Happened”. While none of his other works matches Catch-22 in brilliance, “Something Happened” stands out as the one book he could have done without too. It was too boring to finish, and too boring to remember exactly what it was about, but from what I remember it was about this increasingly disfunctional family that was once not so disfunctional, and about how the four members of the family were once model family members and then because “something happened” they started changing for the worse. I am not sure if they figured out what it was that had happened to bring about that unwelcome change, or if the disfunctional family had in fact found a happy ending. I never really did get that far. It was a depressing book.
Something happened, and I think I might just know what it is. One wonders if that changes anything. One is a fool. That changes everything.
January 6th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
despite the rather light-hearted beginning of this entry, it ends on such sadness. Something happened during this blog entry too, and it changed everything.
January 7th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
Maybe something will happen again and change everything back to not-so-disfunctional.
January 7th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Catch-22 is one of my all time favorite books.
Really? I had you down as the Dan Brown type
Waisey, how does word carry more weight than HPN when he has “twice your girth” (your words, not mine!)? Surely weight goes with girth. Hence your renewed attempts at shedding the former by reducing the latter, as evidenced by your persistent (and dare I say, very girlish) refusal to partake in the cookie…
One is a fool. That changes everything.
Bhai maray, yeh baat aap ko pahlay nahi pata thi? You are acting as if abhi abhi koi bahut bara ‘uqda khula hai…!
I think you should stick to Dan Brown. Seriously.
January 8th, 2007 at 12:11 am
Anjum: I guess, pendulum happened…:)
Chotey Bhai: Thats the good thing about them penduli/pendulums… something keeps happening…:)
Ironically, thats also the bad thing.
ME Bhai: You sound perilously close to being a stereo-typing type. Are you one? As for my words, you misquote them. My words mentioned me having half the HPN girth, so technically what you quote are not really my words.
“Surely weight goes with girth“, huzoor-e-wala, a fallacy if there were ever one. Might I quote an example from the shipping industry, a 20′ft container carrying iron often weighs twice as much, sometimes thrice too, as a 40′ft container carrying dry goat skin.
Size and weight are not always directly proportional. I am obviously not implying here that yours truly is a man of steel or that HPN is little more than a heap of dried goatskin, but if I were to imply such I would not be very far from the truth about the former. As for the latter, I refrain from committing gheebat which is all I would do in disclosing the contents and constituents of HPN’s girth. Mercifully, I am blessed with ignorance in this regard. All I do know, and I know, what I know - I know for a fact; and I know from the innumerable occasions on which I have hugged HPN to help him overcome his inhibitions about personal space that he is made of anything but steel. Actually the idea of him stuffed with soft skin is not so far-fetched, but to state that it is dried goat-skin would be a total fallacy borne out of ignorance… at least such a conclusion would amount to little more than conjecture, or in the best case scenario… an informed guess…. if there is such a thing as one…an informed guess that is.
But to answer your query, if you fins it hard to believe that word carries more weight than HPN, you ought to follow the advice already given to the skeptics in the post… read Catch-22. If you have already read it and still cannot see how such a simple development is not only completely possible but also completely natural, you, Sir, must read the book again.
You assume wrongly on three counts in your subsequent statement: “Hence your renewed attempts at shedding the former by reducing the latter, as evidenced by your persistent (and dare I say, very girlish) refusal to partake in the cookie…”
You assume that
- My attempts are renewed.
- My attempts are at shedding “the former”, same being weight.
- My refusal to partake in a gigantic cookie almost immediately after I had had a most filling lunch, complete with double chocolate cookies, had anything to do with attempts at reducing my girth.
Allow me to clarify sir that the attempts at reducing the girth are not renewed, but completely new; that my attempts at reducing the girth are in no way meant to help shed weight, I do not consider me over-weight - simply out of proportion; and that my refusal to partake in that gigantic cookie was purely because I had no room for any more cookies, and because I was loving my macchacino!
Rahee baat uqda khulne kee, to huzoor-e-wala, baqaul Yousufi aap baat ki ‘kunh’ ko pohonch to gaye hain, magar qarain se lagta hai ke bazaat-e-khud is haqeeqat se hunooz be-behra hain. Isharatan arz karta chalun ke aap ke uthai huwe sawal ka jawab aap hee ke alfaaz main muzmir hai, balkeh ‘alfaaz’ kehna to beja mubalagha-araai hai, jawab sirf aik hee lafz main pinhaan hai, aur woh lafz hai.. “acting”. Azizum, lafz acting ke lughwi ma’ani jo bhi hun, urf-e-aam main is se muraad adakaari hee lee jaati hai, aur adakaari main qabahat yahi hai keh umooman haqeeqat se is ka ta’alluq nahin hota, go keh kehne wale kehte hain keh adakaari haqeeqat ke akkasi karti hai, magar kehne walun kee baat par dhayan dharna kache kanun wale logon ka wateera hai. Tehqeeq se maloom hota hai, ke adakaari tamtheelkaari ka hissa hai, aur tamtheel tamashe ko haqeeqat jaan lena khiradmandun ka tareeq nahin huwa karta.
… you use stick and Dan Brown in the same sentence but somehow manage to bungle what shouold have been said…:)
January 9th, 2007 at 1:28 am
LOL.
Masha Allah, that was some response. Aap bila mauzou itna mouzoun bol saktay hain, meray ‘ilm main na tha.
January 9th, 2007 at 8:46 am
Huzoor, zarra nawazi ka shukriya. Rahee baat bila mauzoo bolne kee to, to bataur-e-namoona fidwi yeh blog paish karta hai keh jis main mauzoo yaksar na-paid hai, aur jahan is kathrat se bola jaa raha ho, aur qari’een main aap se ahl-e-nazar bhi shaamil hun to wahan kuch sutoor ka mauzoon lag jana kuch aisa achambhey ke baat nahin… keh alfaaz ko ma’aani aksar qari pehnata hai… so jin sutoor par aapko muzoon honey ka shubha hai, qyaas ghalib hai keh un main husn aap kee tab’e mauzoon ka hai na keh kamal-e-keyboard-e-fidwi… apni baabat to bus itna hee arz kar sakta hun keh…bandar kia jaaney adrak ka sawaad… go kehne wale to imla kee islaah kartey huwe yeh bhi farmatey hain keh bandur kia jaaney idraak ka sawab….
khair… yeh aik alehda ghaur talab mauzoo hai…aur choonkeh is pe mauzoo honey ka ilzaam hai…fidwi is bahas se qabl-iz-bahas dust-bardaar hota hai….:)
January 9th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
oh my. i didn’t completely understand your post and even less of your urdu comment. that definetely makes me a fool. i would wait for something to happen to change that, but who’s got that much time?
pendulums rarely get stuck. so no worries. =)
January 10th, 2007 at 1:13 am
Noodlez: The one thing not understanding anything in knicqland does not make you is a fool. As for the change part, I am sure brother M.E will be happiest offering his Urdu tutorials for the lesser mortals like us… there’s always JB of course… he packs in an introduction to Faiz and a lecture on Iqbal for free….:)
As for the pendulums, I am assuming it is pendulums and not penduli, my concern is exactly this..they keep oscillating between the good and the bad…:(
January 11th, 2007 at 10:30 am
As for the change part, I am sure brother M.E will be happiest offering his Urdu tutorials for the lesser mortals like us…
Janab-e-wala, aap ne toh qasr-e-nafsi main koi kasr nahi chori, magar abb hum nacheez punjabi bolnay waaloun ko itna bhi sharminda na karein! Urdu kahan, hum ghareeb kahan.
January 11th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Huzoor-e-wala, qasr-e-nafsi kee aik kahee aap ne. Narcissism ke liye is se ziyada mauzoon istalaah meri fahm-e-narasa main to nahin aati. Rahee baat punjabi bolney walun ke nacheez honey kee, to hazzat Iqbal-o-Faiz ke humzubanun ko aisee baaten zeba nain, iz-rah-e-kasr-e-nafsi bhi nahin.
Bilaakhir Urdu har Pakistani kee qaumi zubaan hai, so “ghareeb” kahin bhi ho Urdu to wahan ho gee hee sahee…hatta ke hum potohari juhala bhi is haseen zubaan ke faiz se mustafeed hotey rehte hain…
So kasr-e-nafsi ko qasr-e-nafsi main balai taaq rakhiye… aur humen zanoo-e-talamuzz teh karne kee ijazat murhamat farmaiye…
Khuda lagti kahen, hum is ijazat kee darkhast to kiya, taqaza bhi pehle peer-o-murshid Jalali Baba
hee se karte, magar woh qasr-e-nafsi kee un manazil ko pohonch chuke hain jahan se huma shuma ko daikhne ke liye shaheen kee nazar ya japani saakht kee doorbeen darkaar hai, aur qasr-e-nafsi main har-do napaid hain; keh qasr-e-nafsi main ma-siwai nafs aur nafsa nafsi ke aur kuch le jaana is qasr ke makeenun ka shewa nahin.
January 11th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
abay apkay walidain ap dono ko bachpan main lughat ghol k pilatay rahay hian kia? zulm ki inteha hai! hum bachon per rehm khain, aur ghar-parlimani guftagu se perhaiz kerain!
January 11th, 2007 at 9:51 pm
yeah, exactly as hemlock said. How the heck do ya know this kinda urdu?
January 12th, 2007 at 1:27 am
Hemmie: Parlimani guftugu main jin mughlizaat ka istimaal rawa hai, un se ijtinaab shurafa pe laazim hai…is ke ba’ad sirf ghair parlimani guftugu hee ke jaa sakti hai…
Tariq: Its the Martians… they are injecting people with that kinda urdu…:)
January 12th, 2007 at 1:50 am
qasr / kasr…
Masha Allah aap ne aik chotay se “typo” per achi khaasi sair-haasil guftagoo kar daali. Agar koi qabil-e-zikar ghalti sarzad ho jay toh na ma’aloom, poora deewan chaap dein!
January 12th, 2007 at 7:37 am
SubhanAllah, subhanAllah! Aik taveel arsay ke ba’ad iss darja faseeh-o-baleegh Urdu se faizyaab honay ka mauqa naseeb hua hai…
Jaari rakhiyay!
January 12th, 2007 at 11:22 am
Biradaram M.E: Aap ka husn-e-zzan nacheez ko baija kanton main khainchta hai. Wazahat karta chalun ke yahan muraad “zoi” wale “zzan” se hai na keh “ze” wali zan se - mubada aap apne ta’een kisi ghalat fahmi ka shikaar ho jain, aur nazr-e-khud-been-o-khud-araa ke dhokey main aa kar apni tawajjoh mardana wajahat ke bajai baqaul-shakhse apni “niswani johat” kee taraf mabzool kar baithen.
Mukarrami, woh typo tha? Ab isey hamari kum-aqali pe mehmool farmaiye ya fil waqt hamare paas saani-uzzikr ke waafir miqdaar main ghair zuroori taur par maujood honey ke daleel keh hum awwalan hum ne usey typo samjha nahin (fuqdaan-e-aqal ke ilawa is kee aur kia taujeeh ho sakti hai - yeh amr to azhar min asshams tha) aur saniyan us “sair-haasil” guftagoo ke murtakib huwe jo waqt kee farawani pe daal hai.
Rahee baat qabil-e-zikr ghalatiyun kee to woh ghalati hee kiya jo qaabil-e-zikr na ho….
Magar tabaa’at ka aise ghalatiyun se kia ta’alluq?
Chotey bhai: Fasahat-o-blaghat se istifaada kartey kartey hum ne mumlikat ganwa dee thee. Aqalman ko ishara kaafi…:)
January 14th, 2007 at 12:13 am
Ji hazrat baja irshad, goh aap kai is saqeel kalam sai hum ikhtalaf kar bhi kaisay saktay hain, mahaz iss ko samajhnay main achi khaasi aqal saraf ho jaati hai, ikhtalaf keh liye shayed hi kuch bach’ti ho.
Aap ki ma’mla fahmi keh toh hum hamesha sai hi qadardan thai, magar aap ki mardam shinasi koh lagta hai kisi dushman ki nazar lag gai, joh aap hum jaisay bad zouq se itna ‘aalimana mukalama kar rahay hain
Itnay bad zouq keh hum zabaan ki oonch neech sai hi na balad hain, shai’r kah wazan ko toh aik taraf rakhiye.
Waisey itna zaroor kahain gai keh husn-e-zan (zay walay) se hamain kia sarokar…khair yeh toh mubalgha arai hai, kehna toh youn chahiye keh bawajood justajoo aur mahnat ke, husn-e-zan ko hum se kia sarokar!