I don’t understand it when they start the argument – Art or ethics/discipline? Romanticism or Realism? What should be preferred? What is right?
Do what you want to do. An ideal person, as shown in movies and novels and articles and whatnot, would be analysed having both sides – An artistic side as well as a realistic one. He would be found to be both, a freethinker and, a person with a million restrictions in his life making him disciplined, in a way, to move on with life.
Why should I call a general person him? Let’s go with her.
So, she’s analysed by ‘people’ of having both sides. People would now try to follow her. Why? You know!! Don’t you? Didn’t you try to write an alphabet the way your friend, who had a beautiful handwriting, used to do? You want to be better. It’s a competitive world at the end, and If it does not seem so, life will one day take you to a cliff and you, as a blind romantic would keep walking, only to find yourself hanging from at the end, holding to the cliff, realizing “I should have followed principles, I should have used knife and spoon instead of my hands, I should have been like that…”
Then, when you start learning to hold the cutlery, you know that you’ve wasted enough time walking the wrong road in this competitive world. The question that brings a hope of doubt is, “Was there a moment in her(the ‘ideal’ person) life too when she hung to the cliff cursing herself?”
Let me tell you, that you don’t know the answer. You’d try finding it in here, in this very post, but you should understand it’s a competitive world. Haven’t you still got it? You still hanging up on the cliff? I won’t say maybe!
Because, you’re falling down. Since the very day you started following the idea of having an artistic side and a realistic side, since that very day…..you basically broke up with your romantic side.
Before that, you were on a cliff. Not hanging. And, you were on a cliff!
Comments