To those who have never had role models, this will not make much sense. To those who have or have had the habit of cultivating role models, this shall come as a moment of solemn reflection. To those who consider themselves to be someone’s role model, this shall come across as a realization.
This shall also come across, to all, as a product of unemployed neurons on one sloth of an afternoon.
An intelligible man once commented upon the habit of putting disclaimers upfront. I have been editing them out of my previous blog entries but today I let it in. This, he implied, brings into light your fear of not being accepted. Insecurity some call it. Right probably, but after typing out this shit you are already too tired to go back and cut it out. We shall not tear through the article, neither shall we look over our shoulders to double check. We shall trudge along at a leisurely amateur typing speed, careful not to leave our role models very far behind.
Speaking of which, I implore you to think for a while about this entity- Role Model. This is the person you emulated during the vital growing years of your life. I mean emulate in its complete sense. Not just when-in-Rome-do-as-romans-do routine, but proper walk-talk-rock like him/her thing. In the long run even this is practically the Rome routine but that is beside the point. Point being, what has become of them now?
As I dig up people I used to dig (clever, huh?), I am surprised, and not very pleasantly. Some are still around and probably will be for years to come. Some I am barely in touch with due to lack of time. Some I am not in touch with and time has got nothing to do with it.Also, some I forget, which in itself says a lot.
I am not sorry for them, or maybe I am, wrongfully so, but I have a theory to explain this. At this rate I shall have a theory of/for everything very soon.
Let’s set down a few postulates to explain the same.
1) Role model is at a value higher than that of emulator on the tangent of emulator’s growth/change.
2) Rate of growth/change of emulator is generally greater than that of role model on the tangent on which emulator is grows/changes.
3) The role model and the emulator need not grow/change on the same tangent but to gain a perspective on their relative growth/change we observe the reflection of one’s growth/change on the tangent of other. This is generally the case where even if there is not much difference in their rate of growth/change we observe that due to disparity in the tangent of growth/change, the emulator is able to catch up and eventually overtake the role model.
Also in this case we grow to respect our role models nonetheless for we know that they grow on some other tangent.
4) Psychological state of a person can be completely defined by its position in space and time.
5) There is no absolute frame of reference, no maximums and zeroes, only average Joes and weirdoes.
6) Growth/change of one as a reflection on the other is given by the absolute change multiplied by the cosine of the angle between the tangents of the two. This angle, therefore, is the measure of disparity between the 2 tangents.
There arises, at times, if only to test our characters methinks, an eventuality when a person’s growth/change is in direction opposite to ours, and we conveniently presume our direction to be positive and the person’s negative. Since there are no zeroes and maximums, there arise no chances of it being positive or negative. Just because we have eyes only in the front does not mean we do not have the capacity to look around. Strange how we are always moving ahead and people are either digressing or downright opposing.
While we judge people by their position on our tangent, or worse still their rate of growth/change on our tangent, shouldn’t we be judging people, if at all, by their absolute rate of growth/change?
Truly, a sloth of an afternoon, huh?
P.S. About the disclaimer thingy, I don’t think I suffer from the fear of not being accepted. Of not being understood? Probably. Of being misunderstood? Definitely.