Monthly Archives: December 2010
Someone can get used to lose something. Something that is fabricated. Things are getting easier and easier to get and so we even think to lose something that might not be available anymore. Things that aren’t fabricated and replaceable, things that unique by nature, things that are valuable are being destroyed. Industrialization has made the perception that things are less valuable than our ego. The less valuable things are, the more incentives to think we can do it all. Sometimes we might even dare to lose for challenging ourself out of boredom or just for curiosity. Sometimes we lose something to get a bigger bail or to move forward. Sounds like gambling but the losing score keeps incrementing. The score which become painful debt that will burst anytime.
And so we tend to push down uncertainty by making things more available, either by creating, producing, replicating or accepting the common thing. Subtracting the meaning of things and then making the meaning more valuable than the thing itself is regarded as a way out to produce the irreplaceable thing. The meaning is easier to be fabricated, it’s only a concept, a state of mind that holds no secrets. That is tricky but not eliminating the essence that human has limitation. Those aren’t reproducible are still aren’t reproducible. Many of them. Human is simply not the Creator of all things. As we lose something that we’re not able to produce, we’re not in the winning game. Where’s the balance then?
People say that when we lost something or someone, we’ll find a better one. That sounds very optimistic to me since not always that will be the case. Not only we have no capability to predict the future but also things are unique by nature. In this industrialized world uniqueness sometimes manufactured. Replication is an act to accommodate the easiness to replace something or should I say to lessen the pain of loosing. So, even when they say it is unique there could always be a new one. To what extend people willing to fabricate this uniqueness depends on each person easiness to share the perception of life. The more he/she share the same perception to any stranger human being the more broaden he/she willing to except anythings in common. The more things are less valuable. This is why replication is always be connected with easiness.
Even sometimes people manufactured their experiences just like in an amusement park where you can experience a roller coaster over and over again. Or when you experiencing a packaged travel tour, anyone can experience it right? Anyone who is offered and saying yes. Shouldn’t there be something special? Shouldn’t you value it instead rather than degrading it?
Experiencing is not the same as practicing, although both alter the condition on each repetition, practicing has less unpredictable consequences. Experience that is in my opinion is more personal and so could alter someone life unprecedentedly. Be careful to not interfere with someone experiences or even overtake someone experiences. I think this is the case when you couldn’t say “make it simple”. I think we all should learn about consequences along the way before saying yes to something, especially something that is being fabricated cause nature will find its unique way to score the game.
Well, things are often irreplaceable, if not then any value is always be meaningless. Which then can make you think twice to lost it again. This is why there should always be a room for uniqueness. But how can you provide uniqueness when there is no freedom to defined it? How much more you willing to lose?
Losing is not winning.
Just a flashback shall we?
Note: No appearance of CC due to imperfect light(n)ing condition during photo session.