part of what i love about twitter is that it’s like a box of chocolates — you never know what you’re going to get.
this morning, i woke up to CMilianOfficial ‘s (Christina Milian’s — some singer apparently?) tweet — “True love isn’t always about finding the perfect person.. Sometimes its about finding an imperfect person and understanding them perfectly”
i know i’m a sucker for cliched and hackneyed adages but there is a truth to cliches that make them so commonplace and trite in the first place. it’s a principle that extends beyond interpersonal relationships as well, in understanding, accepting, and sometimes, even embracing the imperfections in less than ideal situations. i know that i’ve been chided for some of the choices i’ve made in the past but some times, it’s that moment of clarity in seeing that which no one else can see.
following through and unfailingly continuing, however, is another story altogether.
as always, when i have something pressing to do, i come across new things that distract me and send my mental neurons in all sorts of directions. today, that new thing would be the awesome foundation (and with a name like that, how could it be anything but). each month, the foundation awards grants of $1,000 to individuals and organizations looking to achieve something – no strings attached. combining the drivers behind microfinance and entrepreneurship, it embraces the spirit of innovation and imagination, providing the extra financial nudge that many individuals or groups may need.
that got me to thinking about the way we think about money too. too often, we think about it in terms of how large our bank account is, what house we’re going to buy, etc., mainly for the sake of growing that net worth figure. but really, what would we do with it?
so i guess the question is – if a stranger came up to you today and gave you $100 – that you had to spend – what would you do with it?
*warning – semi-spoiler alert for inception! don’t read on if you haven’t seen the film*
Escher - Perception is reality
after hearing all the hype about “inception,” i decided to go watch it for myself and walked away feeling like i had just sat through a two and a half hour visualization of escher’s paintings — with no real start, and really, no real end. perhaps it was the infinite stairways, or the unfolding of parisian roads and architecture in 3d, but everywhere you turned, there seemed to be traces of the dutch artist famous for his reality benders.
and really, escher is such a perfect analogy and platform to tell nolan’s tale of relative reality. where to draw the line between reality and dreaming, and to say that the entire film was not just an elaborate exploration of dom cobb’s (played by leonardo di caprio) multi-levels of subconscious? where to say where this dream began and where it really ends?
i’m glad that this wasn’t a book first — or if it was, i’m glad i haven’t read it yet. i’m sure that as a book, with all the nuances and the implications the mind on it own makes from words, it would be even more of a mental exercise. but then, part of what i’ve always loved about escher – and what i enjoyed about “inception” – are the visual labyrinths you are led down. and what i love about nolan and what he has done with this film, is adding that very human mental labyrinth and emotional element of guilt, regret, and desire to escape. guilt becomes cobb’s personal infinite staircase as he tries to escape his past in order to move towards the future. or perhaps, this guilt has manifested itself from the very start of the movie – on a beach, in a place where you are not sure how exactly that dream began.
and does the top ever stop spinning – if people are projections of your subconscious, could your totems too be a reflection as such – of what you seek to believe rather than what is.