After a recent bereavement in the family, there was a lot that was happening, that made me do a rethink on human relationships.
Though I have written time and again on this ageless topic, on the concept of familial ties, and the resultant agony certain self-appointed judges cause, each time something like this happens in one’s life, we pause to reflect on the utter double standards human society thrives on.
The human society is tied together by threads of social obligations, conventions and norms. To a large extent, it is a very important facet of existence of a civilized society. But to what extent do we take this farce? To the extent that one feels it will help maintain a relationship on a superficial level, to the extent that it is necessary, even mandatory to carry on a relationship on a decent footing. But what does one do, when even basic courtesies are overridden, simply because it does not suit them? Let me explain.
Someone I know lost a relative from her in-laws’ side. The circumstance of the demise was pretty unpleasant, and this lady was hardly able to recover from the shock, when she was accused of hiding the ‘facts’ of the death from the family. They were being treated very shabbily, they felt, simply because it had been relegated to a secret that had taken the proportion of a skeleton in the cupboard. The situation would have been funny, if it had not been so tragic! Here was this lady, trying to hold her wits about her, struggling to form some sense of what was happening in her life, holding her family together in the face of such a tragedy. But there was more to come. One family came visiting, and when questioned as to why they had not been in touch and not even offered a word of solace to the girl stunned by the turn of events, all they had to say was, that they were not used to giving ‘false statements of condolences’. What a lame statement to make covering their inadequacy at ‘social skills’!! She had seen ample evidence of it, their smooth conversational abilities on countless occasions, and it sounded hollow that they would deter from the normal words of comfort to a girl, a part of the family, to whom it would have come as a life saver, given the circumstances of the death. That is what I meant, when I said how subjective the extent of maintenance of social decorum is.
What had sparked off the antagonism was apparently the fact that this lady, a writer by profession had written a piece, which mourned the senseless waste of a life, and the agony it had left behind. This manifestation of her pain on paper did its rounds in the family circles, thanks to another very obliging relative, who happened to chance upon the write-up, and who made sure that all and sundry in the family had a chance to read it. (Her publicity agent ? I wonder!) All hell broke loose; the family did a further postmortem and decided that they had to blacklist her from their family. Reason? There was no need for you to write, they said. Writing had been, and still is her soul. She could not refrain from it, as much as she could not stop breathing. These self-appointed juries decided they had the right to pass a ruling – and did so. But when she came to know about it, it only fired her passion for the pen all the more. And wasn’t it ironical? This very relative was responsible for egging her to take up writing !
Chances are that this piece might also be seen and passed around… chances are there might be vituperative mails or even visits with a longer list of accusations…..
Why this article? Simple. The lady is none other than yours truly!
Mohana Narayanan
Though I have written time and again on this ageless topic, on the concept of familial ties, and the resultant agony certain self-appointed judges cause, each time something like this happens in one’s life, we pause to reflect on the utter double standards human society thrives on.
The human society is tied together by threads of social obligations, conventions and norms. To a large extent, it is a very important facet of existence of a civilized society. But to what extent do we take this farce? To the extent that one feels it will help maintain a relationship on a superficial level, to the extent that it is necessary, even mandatory to carry on a relationship on a decent footing. But what does one do, when even basic courtesies are overridden, simply because it does not suit them? Let me explain.
Someone I know lost a relative from her in-laws’ side. The circumstance of the demise was pretty unpleasant, and this lady was hardly able to recover from the shock, when she was accused of hiding the ‘facts’ of the death from the family. They were being treated very shabbily, they felt, simply because it had been relegated to a secret that had taken the proportion of a skeleton in the cupboard. The situation would have been funny, if it had not been so tragic! Here was this lady, trying to hold her wits about her, struggling to form some sense of what was happening in her life, holding her family together in the face of such a tragedy. But there was more to come. One family came visiting, and when questioned as to why they had not been in touch and not even offered a word of solace to the girl stunned by the turn of events, all they had to say was, that they were not used to giving ‘false statements of condolences’. What a lame statement to make covering their inadequacy at ‘social skills’!! She had seen ample evidence of it, their smooth conversational abilities on countless occasions, and it sounded hollow that they would deter from the normal words of comfort to a girl, a part of the family, to whom it would have come as a life saver, given the circumstances of the death. That is what I meant, when I said how subjective the extent of maintenance of social decorum is.
What had sparked off the antagonism was apparently the fact that this lady, a writer by profession had written a piece, which mourned the senseless waste of a life, and the agony it had left behind. This manifestation of her pain on paper did its rounds in the family circles, thanks to another very obliging relative, who happened to chance upon the write-up, and who made sure that all and sundry in the family had a chance to read it. (Her publicity agent ? I wonder!) All hell broke loose; the family did a further postmortem and decided that they had to blacklist her from their family. Reason? There was no need for you to write, they said. Writing had been, and still is her soul. She could not refrain from it, as much as she could not stop breathing. These self-appointed juries decided they had the right to pass a ruling – and did so. But when she came to know about it, it only fired her passion for the pen all the more. And wasn’t it ironical? This very relative was responsible for egging her to take up writing !
Chances are that this piece might also be seen and passed around… chances are there might be vituperative mails or even visits with a longer list of accusations…..
Why this article? Simple. The lady is none other than yours truly!
Mohana Narayanan
No comments:
Post a Comment