Is It Wrong to Dream?

This might seem like a strange question, yet a lot of people in our society (including our friends and relatives) do discourage us from our dreams. For example, when I told my parents I wanted to be a writer, my father was less than enthusiastic. He wanted me to pursue a degree that was more marketable, such as computer science, or even business. And I'm sure some people will laugh if you tell them an incredulous dream, such as perhaps being a billionaire (if you don't already come from a wealthy family that is), or being president of the country. So I ask, is it wrong to dream big? If not, why do people, including our loved ones, often discourage it?

Here's my take on things. Is it wrong to dream big? No, of course not. If people didn't have big aspirations, then the human race wouldn't progress. I mean the reason why we have television sets, cars, airplanes, or even mobile phones is because someone at some time had a big vision. Were they ridiculed? I'm sure they were. And depending on the era, some people might even have been persecuted for their beliefs. Did they succeed? Well, perhaps not at the start. But obviously, we now have the convenience of modern technology, and somebody had to invent them. And it all begins with a dream. Of course having said that, I won't say dreaming big will be easy. In fact, it's painful, and sometimes, even dangerous. The larger your dream the more difficult it will be for you, especially if it's not something that has been accomplished before. I mean a century ago, people would probably believe you more if you said you were going to be president rather than walking on the moon. At the least the former has precedence, and somebody has to be president (although of course, the chances of you being that person was slim). Walking on the moon, on the other hand, is not something that was possible then (but of course, fast forward half a century later and walking on the moon is a feat that can be achieved). Perhaps that's why our friends and family sometimes discourages us from dreaming big. Because obviously, not everyone gets to achieve their dreams. And when you fail, it hurts; the bigger your dream, the more painful the experience. It's like building the Tower of Babel: the higher you ascend, the more devastating the fall. But that's not always the case. What usually drives people to dream big is the similarly big pay-off. More often than not, the bigger the risks you take or the more "impossible" the feat, the greater the reward.

Having said all that, what does it mean to dream? Well, if you don't want to get hurt, don't dream. Settle for less. It's much like courting someone: you can't get rejected if you don't try. Of course similarly, you won't get much excitement either. I don't think our friends and parents don't want us to dream. They just don't want us to dream big dreams, mainly because big dreams entails lots of hardship and suffering. And honestly, who wants hardship and suffering, especially when it happens to someone you care about? It's not that they don't want good things for you. In fact, it's possible to have good things in life by having not-so-big dreams. Sometimes, being average is good enough. Sure, you're not uncovering your full potential, but it also requires less of you. Now I'm not saying this is a bad thing. Being average, is well, safe. People will have different views about you, but in the long run, being average is the least dangerous. For example, take a look at kidnapping. Who do kidnappers kidnap? Usually those who have a high profile, either you're rich or you're famous (since some assume that just because you're famous means you're rich). If you're average, well, there's a good chance you or your family won't get kidnapped. Similarly, people won't pay much attention to you either. I mean who do people pay attention to? The extraordinary people, whether they're a celebrity, a politician, or the president of a company. Big dreams isn't for everyone. But I do believe having dreams (no matter how insignificant it might seem) is vital. It's what drives us to become more human, to be better people.

Of course just because we have dreams does not mean we will achieve them. Perhaps what I see wrong in the world is that people mistake dreams for wishes. We've all heard the statement "I want a family, a house and lot, and a car". Is that a dream or a wish? Well, if you're doing something about it, it's a dream. A dream is a goal, something you try to obtain. If you're not doing anything about it and doing the same old stuff you did before that doesn't bring you closer to it, well, it's a wish. Why a wish? Because it'll never be achieved short of outside interference (such as somebody suddenly bequeathing you his or her wealth, or someone gives you a check of millions of dollars on your birthday). Again, I'm not saying wishing is wrong. We all have wishes. Most of us wishes for world peace or to stop world hunger. Do we expect it to come true? No, of course not. Never mistake a dream for a wish. Dreams are achievable, but only if you exert effort and are dedicated enough to achieve it. To some people, their dreams are their purpose. If you don't have a purpose in life or don't expect to fulfill it, what kind of life are you living?

By now, I think it's fair to say that dreams are goals or can be broken down into several goals. And goals can be planned for if your dream is concrete. I mean if your dream is, for example, to be rich, it would be more helpful if we qualify what "rich" means. If being rich for you means having $1,000,000.00 in the bank, then that's your end goal. Similarly, if your dream is to become president, well, it would be helpful if we became more specific. "I will be president of the Philippines by the year 2020," for example, is a specific goal. Once the goal is set, we know more on how to achieve it. In the case of acquiring $1,000,000 in the bank, well, we must obviously take steps to actualize that. In this case, we can break it down into several, smaller goals. Let's say that in order to achieve the $1,000,000 dollars, we should deposit $1,000 in the bank each month. Assuming no interest is earned, it'll take us 83 years to fulfill that goal. Is that too long? Well, let's say we deposit $2,000 in the bank each month. That'll take us over 42 years to reach our final goal. If working for 42 years is good enough for you, your immediate goal is to deposit $2,000 in the bank every month. I'm not saying that's easy, but it's definitely easier than getting that one million all in one go. If you're dedicated enough in achieving your dream, you have to start somewhere. Depositing $1 in the bank is better than not depositing at all. It's a small step, but a step forward nonetheless. Dreams shouldn't be wishes. We should take steps to actualize it. (On a side note, assuming there's a net interest of 2%, it'll take you 31 years to acquire $1,000,000 depositing $24,000 each year.) For me though, money matters has always been easy to calculate. More often than not, our dreams are difficult to quantify. For example, if your goal is to be a wealthy person, $1,000,000 won't achieve that; that's just a stepping stone and you need other avenues of income, whether it's writing that great novel, having a big business, or owning lots of real estate. Similarly, if your dream is to become president of the Philippines, well, there are several avenues to accomplish that. You could take the normal way of climbing up the political ladder such as running for mayor, senator, vice-president, and eventually the position of president, or perhaps you could take a different route, such as becoming a wealthy individual, or take up a career that gives you a lot of publicity. I'm not saying one method is better than the other, and sometimes, we won't know which is the most effective method until the day arrives to test it, but it's what we can come up with and is the only way we can measure our small successes, at least at this point in time.

Even if everyone breaks down their dreams into small goals, not everyone fulfills their dream. Why? Because it's difficult. No one ever associated dream fulfillment with being easy, at least not initially. There will always be hurdles when you pursue your dream. A lot will be asked from you. The question is, are you up to it? The problem I find with some people is that they think they're entitled to their dreams. A person, for example, might think he's entitled to wealth just because he's worked hard for the past few years. Well, a lot of people have worked hard for decades, and even they aren't rich. Or a writer might think that just because he's had two decades of education that he should get paid a lot for his writing. Well, sometimes even education isn't enough. Personally, I think if you want to fulfill your dreams, you need two things: effort and intelligence. The former is obvious: you'll never accomplish anything unless you exert effort. The latter is perhaps the less obvious one. Millions of people are working hard everyday, yet not all of them are fulfilling their dreams. The difference is not necessarily from their output but in the way they think. The cliche saying is that "there's more than one way to skin a cat". The same is true in attaining our goals. There are several vehicles to accomplish that. Of course not all of them are equal. Some methods are more efficient than others. That's where intelligence comes in, figuring out which is the most efficient method and which is the one appropriate for yourself. Sometimes, intelligence even finds a way to achieve the same results for lesser effort. Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying effort is not needed. Rather, effort alone is insufficient. You need intelligence to back it up. But similarly, intelligence without action is also useless. That's why a combination of hard work and wisdom is the most effective method. But of course, both factors won't come naturally to you. It's something you need to learn, something you need to develop in yourself.

Another thing that irks me is when people assume that they'll attain their dreams without personal growth or sacrifice. Everything has a price. If you want your dream badly enough, you'll pay that price. I have writer friends whose dream is to write that great novel or playwright. Thus they participate in workshops and revisions. Why workshops? Because you get criticism there. Criticism is never easy, especially to sensitive people, but it's a necessary process. Why? Because that's one of the ways you'll discover your mistakes or how your work can be improved. In a way, that's also why there are editors. Editors help writers nurture and develop their work. That involves the occasional criticism or pointing out errors or passages that can be improved upon. Some of my friends loathe criticism. Sometimes, it's not a process they want to undergo. For me, that's folly. At least that's so if they want to fulfill their dream. I don't think there's any writer who didn't receive some sort of criticism at one time or another. Sure, the more successful writers nowadays gain accolades from their peers, but even born geniuses aren't perfect. I'm sure when they were starting, they made mistakes or wrote things that didn't please people. I think the important thing is to keep on going and to keep on improving. Criticism in this case is part of the price you have to pay. Long hours editing your work or making revisions is also part of that price. Continual education, reading other works, and exposing yourself to new ideas and subject matter are also steps a good writer needs to undergo. In whatever you do, there will always be a cost. That leaves us with two kinds of mentalities: either it's "suffer now play later" or "play now suffer later". I can't say which one is better: it's your decision which one it'll be. But I have this word of advice: if you want to remain in your comfort zone and don't want to grow, you'll most likely choose the latter. And when that happens, most likely, you won't achieve a big dream. Dreams can change. You can always make your dream smaller. You can follow the advice of the people who tell you don't dream of doing this or that, or that you can't do it. You can always have easy dreams and do easy work. But if you want big dreams, be ready to pay the price.

Speaking of price, you don't necessarily have to pay everything. Obviously, there are some things we won't do. I, for example, won't do something I find unethical or immoral. If my goal was to become the president of a company, I won't resort to embezzling money in order to finance myself, nor would I have my rivals assassinated when there's an opening for promotion. I also wouldn't find ways to get my superiors into trouble just to make a vacancy open in the first place. Each of us has standards that we aren't willing to compromise. If that's the case, well, just find another method. In my example, there are other ways of climbing the corporate ladder, such as providing good output, waiting for the promotion, involving yourself in other projects with the company, volunteering your services, etc. Of course don't confuse this with not doing something that's uncomfortable for you. In the said scenario, it might be inconvenient for you to come home late and miss your favorite TV show just to do extra work. Or you might be sent to another country but you don't want to do so because you're unfamiliar with that nation and unwilling to learn the language. That's laziness and staying in your comfort zone. If this is your uncompromising standard, well, you need to reevaluate your dream. Dream something "convenient". If you want to fulfill a good dream, then you must be willing to give it proportionate time and effort as well. Go out of your comfort zone! It's usually in that way do we grow and become better people as well as expanding our skills and capabilities. But be sure to prioritize the things that you value as well be it your code of conduct, your family, or your friends. And do your research as well. Some of the things we don't want to comprise might just be things that we don't want to do. There are also a lot of misconceptions out there. For example, in the Philippines, many people believe that government officials, businessmen, and the police are corrupt and greedy. Not all of them are. Pursuing a career in government, business, or even law enforcement isn't evil. It's what you do with it that dictates what the results will be. You'll be envied, criticized, and ridiculed by other people, but sometimes, that's part of the price you have to pay. What's important is that you know your reasons for doing so and not what other people believe your reasons are.

Is it wrong to dream? Definitely not. But don't expect dreams to fulfill themselves. We need to exert time and effort to fulfill them. Our dreams always come at a price. The question is, are you willing to pay that price? Do you want your dream badly enough? What are you wiling to forego just to attain that goal? What you must do to achieve your dream isn't a question you ask other people, but rather something you must ask deep within yourself.

The Fool

I'm an idiot, an ignorant buffoon. But so are you. Don't get me wrong. We're all knowledgeable and wise in one field or another. But there will always be a subject in which we are unfamiliar with. If there is anything universal, it is ignorance. When we're born, there's a lot we don't know. We don't know that a world exist, we don't really know the pain and discomfort it takes our parents to care for us, and we don't even know who we really are. Yet somehow, as we mature and grow older, we slowly gather more information and we become less ignorant (or at least we think so). The question I want to ask is what drives us to do this? Some might argue that curiosity may be innate yet when I look around, I see people who stop looking for answers, people who think that they know everything there is to know about the world, or people who are simply tired of finding an explanation for things. So, what really motivates people to learn?

I lived under a household that said one thing and did another. When I was a child, my parents praised me for my curiosity. When I asked about this and that, they'd smile and tell all their friends that I was an inquisitive and growing child. Of course when I demanded answers, that's where they faltered. They returned the question to me: "Why are you asking?" or "Why do you want to find out?". Later on, it became apparent to me that the only time they returned the question was when they were unwilling to give me the answers to my question, because they either thought it was too complicated for me to understand (such as when I ask them what the nature of their business was), or they weren't willing to divulge it (like how much they were earning). As to why I was asking the questions, I think the answer is obvious. Because I'm ignorant, and I know it! There's a lot of things I don't know and I was on a search to find out the answers to my questions. Several years later and I still find myself ignorant of such matters. Yet what surprises me (and humiliates me) is why I've stopped asking those questions even when I'm not any more knowledgeable now than I was years before. And this is not a phenomenon that is exclusive to myself but to other people as well. Why do we stop asking questions? One reason (and perhaps not the only one) is because our society discourages asking questions. My philosophy teachers marvel at the curiosity of the child: why is the sky blue? Why is the world round? What is love? It might seem like a ridiculous question to adults, yet it's a question that philosophers ponder on and on. They might never arrive at a definite answer but it's the search that matters, the personal development and insight that arises from such exploration. Yet the questions these philsophers ask are sometimes no different from the questions we as children ask. The former get acclaim for it, yet the latter were merely ridiculed, or worse, ignored. So does it really surprise you that in our society, curiosity may be praised, but deep down, it's not really encouraged (or is out of place in the realm of adults).

School is supposed to be a place of learning. Yet for most of time I was in grade school and high school, me and my fellow students kept asking this question: why am I being taught this? Perhaps the biggest failure of schools is that knowledge is forced on the students. I'm sure a lot of you hate math. Perhaps you would dislike it less if it wasn't something that you feared (which arises from the fear one feels when we hear the words "quizzes" or "exams") or if it wasn't something you were coerced into learning (Math is a subject taught five times a day, whether you wanted it or not). Personally, I more or less liked math, not only because I had a limited proficiency in it, but rather because I saw the practical purpose. I mean I'd be at the mercy of the salesmen and women if I didn't know my arithmetic. Statistics and probability has always aided me in my decisions with the risk vs. rewards argument. And since we were kids at that time, we dared to ask our parents and teachers why needed to learn this or that subject. More often than not, they did not give us answers that satisfied us. Which I think is the root of most of the problems any teacher faces. Students aren't stupid. They just don't have enough motivation to learn a particular subject, especially when you fail to give them an answer that they can grasp, and can fully appreciate.

Of course failing that, perhaps our next natural instict is to ask whether doing this particular activity is fun or not. As I mentioned earlier, doing Math is not something pleasant for most people. It's difficult and requires effort. But so does playing sports and playing video games. Time and effort are exerted into it. Sometimes, it's not even pleasant. What's the difference? For most people, doing math isn't fun (although obviously, there are exceptions and some people find enjoyment in math). Playing sports and video game is the opposite. In fact, we usually associate the word "playing" with sports and video games. When did we last associate "play" with math? Or any other subject we loathed for that matter? Our mental perspective on things plays an integral part as well. Perhaps if we associated "math" with "play" more often (or presented it in such a way that doing math was an enjoyable game), more people would like it.

During high school and sometimes when I meet older people, I get the "I-know-it-all" mentality. Don't get me wrong. These people aren't arrogant (at least outwardly). In fact, they may be meek people who are silent and don't reply unless asked. But these kind of people think that they don't need to do anything else and that they have all the tools and skills necessary to fulfill all their dreams in life. I have classmates who think "whether I pass or fail in this subject doesn't matter since we have a family business and that's where I'll end up no matter what my degree is". Obviously, if you have that kind of mentality, learning stops being a priority, especially when you're asked to go out of your comfort zone. Or I meet people who think that there's nothing else to be learned, especially from the likes of me, someone who's younger and lacks their experience. Any comments or suggestions I have are patronized, but aren't really taken into consideration. Or worse, people with "'I don't understand it'/'I never learned' it so it's probably not important". I'm not saying that kind of scenario is never true but hey, the world is changing and new discoveries and being made every day. How can I say this or that isn't important unless I investigate it? It's like saying this book or that movie is good/bad without seeing it for yourself.

There's also one thing that stops us from finding the answers to our questions. The fact that we might be wrong. And hey, I can sympathize. No one wants to make mistakes. I've humiliated myself several times, all the while thinking that I had the right answer when the truth was that the opposite was true. A perfect example is during oral participation in class. The teacher would ask a question and I'd raise my hand to answer their question. Guess what, my answer was wrong! I may have been disgraced but from then on, I knew what the right answer was (or at least my previous answer was the wrong one). Personally, knowledge and wisdom comes before pride. And let's face it, sometimes, the only times we really learn is when we make mistakes. So my advice is that we shouldn't be afraid to make mistakes. Yes, hate and loathe making mistakes. That'll give you more incentive to search for the right answers harder. But in the end, more often than not, we won't know whether we can do something, whether something is right or not, unless we try. And it's in the trying that we grow, become better people, and learn. We might make mistakes and more often than not, we will make mistakes. No one can guarantee a 100% risk-free experience. And so while we can whine about our failures, or worse, get into a situation where we have regrets and think of what-if scenarios, sometimes, it's best to dive into the thick of things and learn from our errors.

Failure can also wear us down. The reason I stopped asking questions from my parents was because I never got answers. Well, there's nothing I can offer to remedy that. The best advice I can give is to try and try. Be more stubborn than what fate deals you. Right now, I continue to ask my parents questions despite their previous track record. They're more or less consistent with their track record of not giving me answers but from time to time, they do give me insights. Persistence is sometimes the key. If you don't get it right the first time, sometimes, you'll get it at the hundredth time. It's not much for consolation, but hey, it's better than not getting answers at all. The only thing I can guarantee you is that if you don't ask, you'll never get an answer. At least if you do ask, no matter how small that chance is, there's always a chance. And if you studied your probabilities, your chance might be one in a million, but people do win lotteries.

Lastly, there's desperation. Perhaps one of my best example was when I was studying. Normally, the teacher gives you a lot of time to write a term paper. Of course writing term papers usually means research. If you're given half a year, it's a tendency of mine to be relaxed at the first month. I'm not out to get as much information as I can. In fact, when it's offered to me, I sometimes decline. Yet as the months pass by, the deadline looms closer and closer. That's when I start to get desperate. I scramble for information and data, even if it would be inconvenient for me. I have a set goal and I give everything I can just to fulfill that goal. In this case, it's learning and gathering information. But desperation for learning only works if you think the goal is worth it. For example, if you don't think passing or failing a particular subject is important, then you won't be desperate. But if it is something you deem important and your chances seem to be dwindling, you suddenly accept that fact and soak up information like a sponge. If anything was hindering you before, it's less of a hindrance now. Why? Because you have the mentality of the fool, someone who knows that he or she doesn't know anything. And thus one becomes more teachable, one gains the motivation to learn and to grow.

I'm not saying that there aren't brilliant people in the world, or even that you're not talented or wise. But if you are as good as you say you are, then you shouldn't be complacent. Stagnation is the worst enemy of geniuses. There must be continual growth and evolution. And perhaps the only way that can be achieved is by continuing to learn. And by learning, we thus grow and live.

Fool's Fate by Robin Hobb (book review)

Fool's Fate marks the end of Robin Hobb's latest trilogy, The Tawny Man series. It's been my experience that the last novel is usually one of the most integral books, since it can either give a fitting end to an excellent story, or salvage a series that was horrible to begin with. And yet it's also difficult to review since more often than not, there's not much to be said aside from what was originally mentioned in the review of the first book.

Hobb manages her writing consistency in this novel. While the book is quite thick, there's never a dull moment, and a lot is happening even when it's not mentioned in the text. Everything here is pretty much a continuation of the previous book, which in turn was the continuation of the first book in the trilogy. Perhaps my biggest disappointment is the fact that the Liveship Traders, the protagonists in Hobb's second trilogy, at this point sink into the background and play less of an integral role as they did in the first book.

Right now the greatest strength of Hobb is in her characters and in Fool's Fate, they reach their culmination as secrets are revealed and characters are forced to reconcile who they really are. Some writers might be tended to mend all things and make the characters get along, but Hobb specializes in that "gray" area where not everything falls neatly into place. There are happy endings in this book, but they're far from perfect.

The novel has a few twists here and there, but overall, nothing really too overwhelming. New characters are thrown into the mix and old villains pop up but they are quickly resolved, which is probably just as well so as to focus on the main characters introduced in the previous two novels.

The ending wasn't as spectacular as I'd imagined, although a lot of loose ends were cleaned up. If I could compare it to a movie, Fool's Fate is no Return of the King where Peter Jackson outdoes himself but rather this is more of a Back to the Future III where everything gets resolved yet doesn't really do much for us in terms of surprises or new appeal.

If you're expecting something new from this book, you'll be disappointed. But Fool's Fate is a good read, and it does give closure for Hobb's longest running series. If you haven't read Hobb's earlier books (or at least the beginning of the Tawny Man series), I really can't recommend this novel(it'd be like reading Return of the King without reading Fellowship of the Ring). But rest assured, the series has closure, and while we may not necessarily like it, it's time to say farewell to an old friend.

Children of the Rune edited by Sue Weinlein Cook (book review)

There are a lot of novels out there that are based on RPGs. Examples of the more successful ones include Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms. Children of the Rune isn't aiming for something of that scale but rather gives us snippets into the world of the Diamond Throne, a game setting designed by Monte Cook as a variant to the existing Dungeons & Dragons line. The book features thirteen short stories by different writers in the industry, and I'm curious as to how this anthology fares.

The first story is Stone Ghosts by Lucien Soulban. I found Soulban's story interesting and he goes directly into the action. Stone Ghosts is perhaps the best opening of all the stories, since it already gives us the flavor of this anthology: that is heroes discovering something is more than meets the eye, and sacrificing something in the end. Unfortunately, the weakness of this story for me is that while you do feel a sense of loss at the ending, once doesn't realize how significant the loss really is unless they're familiar with the game setting. If you're just someone who thought this was a pop fantasy anthology and decided to read it, the story loses much of its impact.

How it Works by Monte Cook is perhaps the weakest and blandest story. It was stereotypical, cliche, and didn't add anything to the mix. It was even devoid of angst or anything that might have made this story more than the usual. Monte Cook may have been the game designer but for this short story, well, it was probably best left unearthed.

Another story I liked was The Silent Man by Richard Lee Byers. It gives us a different take on the anti-paladin concept, and fits the theme of heroism, loss, and sacrifice. Since this story deals with iconic concepts, prior knowledge of the game world isn't really necessary to appreciate this short story.

Hollows of the Heart by Bruce R. Cordell and Keith Francis Strohm was a mediocre story. It does fit the theme well but inevitably, the plot was predictable, and relies on character sympathy for enjoyment of the story.

The Fallen Star by Ed Greenwood was too conventional for me. It was an interesting read because of the battle scenes, but aside from that, the end was predictable and perhaps too melodramatic for my tastes.

Child of the Street by Will McDermott had that roguish feel to it. I really liked the beginning, although the ending eventually descended into predictability and melodrama. It could have been improved if the envelope was pushed, but unfortunately, this was a story too short.

At first, I thought Clash of Duty by Miranda Horner would be as predictable as the stories that preceded it. But this was a gem since the ending did caught me off-guard and the writer wasn't afraid to jeopardize her characters. Perhaps not the best story in the lot, but it's a good breather from the derivative stories found in the anthology.

The Pebble Before the Avalanche by Mike Mearls was too conventional, but an enjoyable read nonetheless. It's the usual heroes saving a town occupied by bandit-leaders and while there was no twist to this story, it wasn't really pretending to have one.

You know where the story is going to lead you once you read the opening of Name Day by Wolfgang Baur but with this anthology, you're never really sure if it'll have a twist or not. Personally, I liked the story because it fleshed out the mentality of one of the races from the game setting. It gives you insight into the way they think and how they act. Other than that, this is your usual story that doesn't give you anything new.

Singer for the Dead by Jeff Grub returns the twist found in this anthology. It's one of the better tales, and ends with a somber note much like the earlier stories.

I really don't know what to say about Precious Things by Thomas M. Reid. At one point, you could predict where the story was going. But the end has a twist that I find too coincidental. Perhaps the good thing I can say about this story is that it fleshes out one of the classes in the game setting and shows what it means to be one of them.

Skin Deep by Stan! is perhaps as horrible as Monte Cook's first story. The ending could have been predicted from the start, and it's a trope that's been done before.

Monte Cook redeems himself with the last story, Not Without Cost, as not only was it an interesting read but it both gives an interesting twist at the end and gives us insight into the campaign world and what it's like. It's perhaps not the best story in the anthology, but it belongs to my list of better stories in the book.

Overall, Children of the Rune is pretty much like most anthologies: it's a mixed back. On one hand, you have a good number of stories. On the other, some were better left unpublished. It would probably appeal the most to gamers and those familiar with the setting or Dungeons & Dragons at the very least but as for the rest, it's probably best avoided.

Christmas at the Cemetery

Whenever my parents would go out on Christmas, I always declined, thinking that I had better things to do at home, such as sleep or read. This year, I was still deprived of sleep, but when my dad asked me if I wanted to come with him, I said yes.

The destination was my grandfather and grandmother's grave at the Chinese cemetery. Just the other day, before Christmas eve, we went to our grandmother's grave near Makati because it was her death anniversary (she died in mid-December). That wasn't the case now for my grandparents died on different months.

On the way there, my father told me that the South Gate was the one gate that was always open. Not that there was any traffic to contend with that day since people don't usually go out on Christmas mornings, much less visit graveyards. Yet it's been a practice of my father to visit the tombs of his parents on a regular basis.

Upon arriving at my grandparent's grave, I saw that the candles on the graves were lit. My father pointed out to me where he wanted to be buried. He also pointed out the would-be graves of some of my relatives. Apparently, my father was taking charge of the burial plans of his relatives, and was shouldering all the costs. While funerals can be expensive, burial maintenance is perhaps more costly, especially when taken from the long term point of view. It was also then that I learned that my father visited the graves of his clan once a week, usually on Sunday mornings.

Not everyone is celebrating Christmas at their homes. The caretakers of the tomb were present, and when my father asked if they had any "noche buena" (tradition where one has a hearty meal on Christmas eve) last night, they could only shake their head. There were eight security guards on duty and when one of them saw my dad, he called the others and they all gathered around my father. Apparently, my father was well-known in the Chinese cemetery.

My father talked to the security guards, imparting wisdom and talking about the events surrounding the cemetery, such as the policies on rent or the lack of electricity and water. One of the guards had just come from a baptism and my father told him that it was difficult not having enough money yet having too many children to support. "Wala na ngang pera wala pang anak," (It's bad enough I don't have money that I should also be deprived of children) the guard said. My father replied with "Kung walang pera, walang anak" (If there's no money, then there's no children [because you can't support them]). At the end of the conversation, my father gave the guards money to split among themselves and went to his car to give them calendars. They were all grateful for my father's generosity and soon dispersed. When it came to the caretakers, my dad asked if he could pay their normal due the next time he arrived because he was now out of money. He gave them the last remaining bills from his wallet and showed them that he had nothing else to give.

We left afterwards, although I knew that we would be coming back next week on the New Year. For my father, Christmas has always been about family, whether it was fulfilling your duty, taking care of the future of your relatives, or paying respects to the dead.

Second Home: A Tribute to CCHQ

I was never a "home" person. Perhaps the worst days of my life was during Holy Week, when the only option I had was to stay at home and there wasn't even anything good on television. I'm often struck with wanderlust. I need to travel or a change of scenery, even if it's just a place nearby. Since I was once a student, one conclusion some people might think is that my alma matter was my second home. It would probably be right, if it weren't for the fact that I wasn't really accepted by my classmates and batchmates, at least during my grade school and high school years. No, solace was found somewhere else. I may wander around malls and buildings, but in the end, I was grounded to a certain shop.

In my last two years of high school, the place where I could be me and no one would judge me was one shop alone: Comic Alley. Sure, I'd wander around Virra Mall looking for places to go to and sights to see, but in the end, I always went back to Comic Alley. I'd meet up with people there, make new friends, and play a game of Magic: The Gathering. The salesladies were kind to me and I got to know the owners. One of my earliest mentors was probably Teddy Sy, an avid Magic player and anime fan. He took me in, despite my far-from-pleasant personality (at the time of course). Even if I refused to smile to customers, he still hired me. And of course, I got to mix the best of both worlds. Not only was I pursuing my passion in Collectible Card Games (CCGs), but I was also fueling the flames of my love for anime. I got assigned to the anime portion of the shop, and it was there that I learned more about myself as well as providing me with the opportunity to make new friends (although admittedly for less than altruistic reasons). Even when I wasn't working for them anymore, I was nonetheless welcome in their shop, and there were times when I'd sit there for hours doing nothing (and someone who dislikes me even named me "Gargoyle" for doing just that that).

Unfortunately, in 2001, everything changed. Not only did Magic: The Gathering wane in popularity, but Virra Mall itself was changing. Vendors would harass everyone coming into the mall by asking them if they wanted to purchase pornographic videos. Suddenly, traveling to my second home was far from comfortable. And if you thought lightning doesn't strike twice, well, Virra Mall got burned for the second time. And Comic Alley was one of its casualties.

Strangely enough, my second home got reincarnated ten months later. On February of 2002, a new shop was set up opposite of the college I was studying in. It also had the word "comic" on its name. The owners called it CCHQ, an acronym for Central Comic Headquarters, or our in-joke, Cheng Chua headquarters. They sold comics, both Western (including the ever-elusive indie comics) and Japanese (authentic manga!). Perhaps what impressed me the most was the fact that I could go in there and leave without purchasing anything, yet come out a better person. The owners talked to you even if you were just curious and didn't have plans of buying anything from the store. You were accepted for who you are. If I stayed there unnecessarily (i.e. bum around), they never complained. Relatively cheap prices and good products didn't hurt either. But make no mistake, CCHQ was my second home not because of its merchandise or location, but because of the owners who were running it and the people that were attracted to it as well. Some of CCHQ's customers were like me: wandering aimlessly in life, yet the place provided a home for us. A passion for comics or manga might be popular now, but it wasn't always so back then. And perhaps the best thing about CCHQ was the fact that I could be me. I mean even in Comic Alley, I refrained from mentioning other stores, especially when it came to comparing the prices of other shops (on a side note, Comic Alley does have good prices for their merchandise... sometimes it's not always the cheapest place to purchase items, but they were fair prices). That wasn't the case with CCHQ. The owners themselves would recommend customers going to Powerbooks or some other shop if that place had a cheaper price compared to theirs. I immediately knew CCHQ would be a success.

Nearly three years later, CCHQ will now close its doors. I've graduated from Ateneo, but I still visit the place. And I still receive the same amount of warmth, even if there's one less person running it, or if there's fewer people passing by the shop. I did one smart thing in 2002. I befriended the owners. What also makes me happy is that I wrote an interview article about them back then. It's not my best-written work (and all I really did was transcribe their words). But perhaps what makes that interview great was the fact that I didn't have to embellish anything. Sometimes, mentioning something as it is is brilliant. Some of the best advice I've heard in my lifetime came from interviews. One mentioned that failing is not a hindrance but something to learn from; the guy I interviewed told me that he felt more reassured hiring someone who tried and failed rather than someone who has always been successful, because the former learned something from his experience. The other heartfelt advice upon retrospect came from Khristine and Katya, who offered me this during the interview: "Hold on to your dreams. Never give up because there will be times that you will be disheartened and discouraged and the only thing that will sustain you through the bad times would be how deep your dedication is to the things that you love. That's the only thing."

I'm actually surprised when people mourn the loss of CCHQ and tell me "poor them". Yes, the loss of CCHQ is something to lament, but the owners are not to be pitied or somebody to feel sorry for. They succeeded in what they wanted to do. They've satisfied many people along the way and made new friends. True success, after all, isn't about winning or failing. I was listening to this tape a few weeks ago and the speaker's beliefs echoes mine: "I'd rather fail in a business with good people, rather than succeed with bad people." And CCHQ has one of the best people that I personally know. As for their business, it was time to move on. They're not bankrupt (although it would be nice if you patronized their shop one last time before it closes for Christmas) and they owners are actually well off. They have their lives ahead of them. Maybe their dreams have been satisfied. Or it's taken on a new form. Or it'll be emerge again later on. I don't know the future. I can only be sure of what I feel. And it's that I was touched and changed by the quaint shop called CCHQ. It was my second home.

In certain ways, I've moved on. My current haunt is the Comic Quest branch in Mega Mall (and hopefully my curse doesn't cause the shop to collapse by some unforeseen circumstances, hehehe) where I'm with good friends and mentors like Dean and Vin. But CCHQ has been an integral part of my life, and I'm glad I'm immortalizing it in my writing. I'm not as lost as I once was. This time, I'm taking steps to fulfill my dreams. And other people's dreams as well. It's one of the things CCHQ has taught me.

Taho

In Metro Manila, a number of delicacies are being peddled in the streets. There's the infamous balut (an egg with an unborn fetus inside) which has made its appearance in Fear Factor. There's also chicharon (the equivalent is probably pig skin) which is a crunchy, addicting snack, especially when paired with vinegar. Then there's Taho (and I'm saying it with a capital T to represent the entire meal).

I don't think Taho originated in the Philippines (I surmise it's probably from China considering some Chinese restaurants, both here and abroad, serve it as well) but we've certainly incorporated it into our own culture. Taho in itself is a white jelly-like substance. However, there are several variations of this, which is mainly achieved through its sauce.

The Taho which Filipinos have come to know and love is the one being peddled in the streets, sold by a man constantly shouting "taho!", all the while acting as a fulcrum to a stick with two huge steel containers on the opposite ends. One container houses the taho itself; it is kept cool and fresh, and the vendor scrapes off the liquid that accumulates on top whenever he serves it to customers. The other container, while identical to the first, is actually more complex. The container is divided into two sections, one housing the sauce, and the other containing sago (also known as "pearls" thanks to the Zagu fad a few years ago). The sauce is dark, sticky molasses. Sago, on the other hand, is perhaps what can be best described as a spherical gummy bear without the sugar.

When purchasing Taho, the vendor grabs a transparent plastic cup (which hangs on the same stick that holds the steel barrels) and opens the first barrel. He scoops out some taho and fills the cup, and then moves on to the second barrel. He liberally pours sauce on the cup, slowly transforming the white chunks into inky black, making sure that the sauce goes down deep. With a spoon, he sprinkles the sago on top of the cup, and then pours in more syrup just in case.

This combination of taho, sago, and syrup is actually a mixture of opposites. First, you start out with two bland products. I mean no one in his or her right mind would eat taho in itself. In the cooked meal variant, I'd probably douse it in lots of soy sauce. It is soft and easily breaks, but in itself, taho tastes like nothing. Similarly, sago is squishy and chewy, but it is more or less tasteless. It is the syrup that completes this meal, the one that gives taste--taho and sago merely absorb the the sickly sweet (in a very Filipino way) sauce. The syrup and taho are also opposing elements: the former is hot (so much so that sometimes, I have problems holding the cup) while the latter is cold. Yet when the two are combined, you can feel the excitement in your mouth, with the sago as your lukewarm middleground. Sago and taho are opposites too: taho is too fragile, which is why sago is there: to give the meal substance, to make Taho a meal rather than a drink. And then there's the sago and the syrup, two ingredients housed in the same container yet distinctly separated in more ways than one. These unholy triumvirate comprise the Filipino delicacy that is Taho.

Yet the image Taho inspires would not be complete without the peddler, the man carrying it to every street and district of Metro Manila. He is truly the mass-man, the poor, hardworking father who must work every morning, afternoon, and evening, just to provide for his family. He is the man which the two steel barrels are balanced upon, the person who makes P10 ($0.20) for every serving of Taho he sells. And he too is a man of multiple contradictions.

Winds of Change

If there's one attribute the best describes what it means to live, it's probably the ability change. I mean human beings aren't static; we're evolving creatures. And it's not just us that is evolving. Everything around us changes as well, whether it's as simple as the transition from day to night, or the evolution of our surroundings from simple huts to tall, concrete buildings. Yet change is something many of us resist, as if change was our worst nightmare. And sometimes it is, but it too can be our salvation.

Perhaps the most apparent kind of change is that that occurs around us. Situations change. I mean a long time ago, people were using pen and paper to write novels. Now, we have computers. Computers changed a lot of industries. I'm sure for every person that appreciates the change technology has brought, there's another person who resents it. I mean many people lost jobs because of modernization. Some people use it to make malicious programs, while others utilize it as a tool to help achieve their goals. Sometimes, these kinds of changes are out of our hands. A lot of people fear what the next age will bring. And so they cling to their old ideas and beliefs, hoping that it will shelter them in the times ahead even though if it's apparent that new paradigms are needed for a better world. There are also times when we have limited control over how the world around us will change, such as when we elect our public officials. I think one of the reasons many Filipinos voted for Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was because they were subscribing to the mentality "better the devil we know than the devil we don't know". I mean many people were frustrated with GMA's policies but they voted for her this year nonetheless, fearing the kind of change electing a different leader would bring.

The problem I see in clinging to the old is the fact that you're not making it any better for yourself. Taking the presidential-election example, sure, we're not adding new problems in the long run, but we're not solving old ones either. If we chose a different president, we could possibly live better lives. But what stops us is that we think that choosing a different leader would only increase our pain and suffering. I mean history has disappointed us several times in the past that we can't help but think something worse is in store when moments of change occur. We don't want to risk our future but in doing so, we forfeit any chance of changing it for the better.

The other kind of change is the one we undergo ourselves. It's easy to see how people get offended at the merest hint of changing a person. I mean boyfriend/girlfriend relationships suddenly break up because one person wants the other person to be "better", "different", and "more mature". A number of people are frustrated that call-center employees are being trained to speak in a different way and that they have to don a new person while on the job. Or perhaps it's just simple criticism, and we think that the other person has no right to judge us. I think the underlying emotion here is pride and comfort. Pride because we think we're already the best we can be, that there's no one else we should be other than who we already are. To admit that we should change means that there's something inherently wrong in our personality, or that we might have made a mistake. And nobody likes admitting mistakes. And there's also comfort, because we don't dare go further than what we already know. For example, a boyfriend who's asked by his girlfriend to give up drinking refuses to do so, because it's inconvenient for him. It is, after all, easier to live a life of our hold habits and routines. It's not necessarily better but it sure is easier, simply because we've been doing it for so long and don't know what it's like to not do so.

The weakness of this mentality is that there's never any growth, at least not consciously. A stubborn person will continue to be a stubborn person, while a liar will remain a liar. What we fail to see is that we're not perfect; there's always room for improvement. Change, while it can admittedly make us worse people (such as when your friend tries to pass on their bad habits to you), gives us the chance to become better. Many people fear this because they think it's losing their identity. If our identity could be lost so easily, then we've already lost it. Because the you now is definitely different from the you that came out of your mother's womb. With the latter, you didn't even know how to speak, much less know what can hurt other people and what can brighten up their day. With the former, we've grown and possess more knowledge and hopefully more wisdom since then. Even our physiology is different. But does that mean we lost our identity? Perhaps the only time we truly lose our identity in change is when we fight it all the way, when it's something that's forced upon us rather than something we choose for ourselves. Take, for example, when somebody orders us to do something, such as smoke a cigarette. If it's something we resent yet is forced upon us (whether through coercion, peer pressure, or physical force) and we give in to it, then in a way, we lose our identity and become merely the shadow of someone else's will. But if smoking a cigarette was something we were willing to try (even if you haven't smoked a cigarette before), then even if doing so ends up killing us, we will smoke a cigarette, and with pleasure. In both instances, the person has changed. But it's only the former who lost his identity, while the latter retained it. His identity merely took on a new form.

I think one of the problems many people have is that they take it as a personal affront at the merest hint of changing their personality. It's not. We could always be better people. And we won't achieve that by remaining who we are now. To do that, we must be willing to change. It's part of growing, of maturing, of becoming a better person. And unlike changes that involves circumstances and events, personal change is something we have control over. No one knows whether the change tomorrow brings will be a good thing or a bad thing, but when we take steps to change for the better, we do know that good will come out of it. It definitely won't be easy and it'll surely be painful, but hey, it's only by suffering and making mistakes that we learn.

Change is a two-ways street. Both good things and bad things can result from it. But change is also the key to salvation. Poor people might become rich someday, while the sick might get healed. If you're already rich or healthy, there's always the possiblity that you might become richer or more healthy. If you fear change, then you're insecure about yourself. If you were able to do it once, then you'll be able to do it again. Unless, of course, that accomplishment was just a fluke. And as for our future, well, if you want to gain control over it, you have to risk it. The unknown is only scary if you let it scare you; the only way to conquer fear of the uncertain is to familiarize yourself with it.

Messianic Complexes

Messianic Complexes are usually attributed to people who think that it's their duty to save everyone else. It is said that Spain and America came to the Philippines because of "White Man's Burden", thinking that Filipinos were savages and should be taught to be civilized and Christianized. But that's not the kind of Messianic Complex that I want to talk about. I'm talking about the recipients of that. It's about people who expect someone else to solve their problems, as if everything was out of their hands. Here are some of the common complaints that I hear:

Government: Everywhere around the world, citizens blame their public officials for all their problems. To a certain extent, it is the government's fault. I mean some of them are corrupt, inefficient, or just plain stupid. But the responsibility is not entirely theirs. I mean for one thing, we voted for them. For another, not all government officials are incompetent, and some of them just happen to suffer from either 1) bad luck (i.e. unforeseen events such as Mt. Pinatubo exploding or SARS), 2) bad history (such as the accumulated debts the Philippines incurred over the past few decades), or 3) scapegoats (and Filipinos love to have scapegoats, especially in light of our Messianic Complex). One of the more recent complaints is the rise of the prices of gas. As much as we want the government to reduce prices, in all honesty, they can't. I mean ever since we switched to a market economy (that is the economic forces dictate the price of products), the prices of products are not under the control of the government anymore. If they retain the prices, then the country will go further in debt as there'll be a miscalculation in our budget. The government, after all, can only subsidize so much. And with all the corruption and tax evasion going around, budget is not something they have an abundance of. Do you really think the government wants to raise oil prices? Or want to see the peso depreciate even further? Even corrupt officials will find it advantageous to have the millions of pesos they've hoarded become up to par with international currency such as American dollars or Euro-dollars.

The Rich: Not all rich people are corrupt. Some of them even worked hard for it. I mean at one point in time or another, some of the now-wealthy people were once poor. But they found ways to generate income and invest their money. Henry Sy, for example, was once living a very humble life. As for those who inherited their wealth, if they were idiots, they'd lose their wealth very quickly. If they manage to hold on to it, they must have a certain level of competence at the very least. And mind you, the rich are the ones funding your churches, your charities, and providing jobs. Sure, they're doing that to either make a profit or to get tax exemptions, but still, you can't deny that they're helping a lot of people nonetheless. The wealthy will always be the target of hatred and jealousy. It's not impossible to uplift yourself from whatever economic status you're in right now to eventually becoming rich. It just takes time, hard work, and intelligence (not necessarily an education). And soon, you'll find yourself the target of jealousy and hatred as well. It's easy to blame the rich. It's more difficult to change one's self and learn new things and make sacrifices. Do you really think that if we eliminated all the rich people from the Philippines that the economy will suddenly become okay, and that everyone will enjoy prosperity?

Teachers: When I was still studying in grade school and high school, one of the biggest complaints I hear from my fellow classmates when they get low grades is that their teachers are incompetent. Or boring. Or that the teacher is out to get them. Look, teachers are in a classroom for one reason: to teach. Learning, on the other, is up to the student. It's not the teacher's job to be entertaining (although I'd appreciate such a teacher). And they certainly have a level of competency if the school actually employed them (and I'd like to think that high schools still maintain certain standards). And even if they didn't, you have other tools of learning: you have textbooks, the library, the Internet. I mean I have classmates who go through a whole school year without reading their textbook, expecting the teacher to teach everything that's inside. Well, my only advice is that if the teacher isn't up to your standards of education, start teaching yourself by researching and reading your books. As for teachers out to get you, well, the only thing I can say is that the teacher dislike you as much as you dislike them. It's in their best interest for you to pass. Because if you fail and get stuck, they're the ones who has to stick it out with you, whether it's enduring summer class with you, or enduring another school year with you. Believe me, it's in the best interest of teachers for students they dislike to pass and move on. Teachers get paid regardless whether you actually learn or not. It's only a headache for them if they have to stay for overtime just to lecture you, discipline you, or give you extension classes.

Parents: Some kids grow up thinking that their parents will take care of them forever. I'm one of those people, which is why I was complacent from grade school to college. I didn't have savings, and I didn't have a plan for my life. That was being irresponsible. It's my life, after all, so the only person who should be accountable is myself. If I don't like where I am right now, I only have myself to blame. To depend on my parents, expecting either allowance or an inheritance, is like depending on the government to solve my problems: they try their best, but it's no guarantee. It's not even something we're always entitled to. I know some people who blame their parents for the current situation they're in right now. Or worse yet, use their parents as an excuse not to move on and change. I mean I know people who've come to me and asked my advice on certain subject matters. The person is already willing to do it but in the end, they don't go through with it because they use their parents as an excuse (regardless of whether it's actually valid or not). "My parents don't agree" or "My parents won't allow me". The only advice I have is that you don't own your life if you say those kinds of words. Your parents own your life. You don't have a life. I'm not saying you should disobey your parents. There's a big difference between filial piety and filial slavery. The former is something your parents say, and you agree to do it. The latter is something your parents say, and you don't even think about what's good for yourself: you simply do it because they said so. That's leaving all responsibilty and accountability in the hands of someone else.

Crushes: Perhaps the most popular complaint I hear from people of both genders is when they complain that their crushes don't ask them out. You're leaving your fate in the hands of someone that possibly doesn't even know you. If you're intent on meeting the guy/girl of your dreams, make the first move. I don't mean you immediately ask them out on a date. Take baby steps. Introduce yourself or find a reason to do so. Then the next time, find a reason to talk to them. And then the next time after that, find a reason to get their phone number. If they reject you, at least you did something. They're rejecting you anyway if you never get to actually meet them. Some girls I know even complain that they already know the other person except they want the other person to ask them out on a date. Well, that's being selfish. Why should it always be the guy asking the other person out? Female equality also means equal responsibility. Why are you leaving your fate in the hands of the guy? Go out of your comfort zone! Overcome your fears! If you don't have the courage to ask the other person out (and this goes for guys as well), then you were never meant for each other. Rejection might be painful, but agonizing whether he'll ask you out or not is just as painful, and lasts longer too. There won't be a perfect moment. Make the most out of the moment. You might regret it in the future. There are only two possible situations when your crush isn't asking you out. One is that both of you are shy. And guess what, it's more difficult to change the other person than it is to change yourself! If your crush is shy, then what makes you thing he'll overcome his shyness and ask you out? And if he's as shy as you think he is, then he'll have no reason to reject you. I mean if opportunity comes knocking his way, even if you're not exactly the most beautiful person in the world, having a girlfriend beats being single, at least in the eyes of a shy person. The other possibility is that you're shy, and the other person isn't; he's just not interested in you. If that's the case, well, at least now you know. Welcome to life! It won't be the last time you'll get rejected, but at least it's the first time you've conquered your fears.

Faith

After more than twenty two years of living, I know that life is difficult. Not that I'm itching to kill myself and be done with it all (although it is tempting), but adversity is part and parcel of living a full life. Let's face it, even choosing to live is a difficult choice.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not being nihilistic nor pessimistic. Sure, we do have great moments in our lives. We actually have lots of memorable moments, experiences that we treasure. But if we carefully examine those memories, we'll remember that more often than not, those memories were memorable because of the problems we faced. Perhaps the most common would be our memories of school, for example. We were students once, and nearly every student hates exams. Who doesn't? I'm sure each and every one of us has a memory of a certain exam. Perhaps we failed it. Perhaps we overcame it. The latter would probably be a joyful moment tinged with pain as we remember the nights that we had to study for that exam (or perhaps how lucky we were and how fate has been kind to us). So difficulty is actually ever-present, and as long as we continue on living, we will face problems.

Choosing to live is a difficult choice. It means we're asking to continue with our responsibilities, continue with our burdens, and perhaps more importantly, continue with our hopes and dreams. And nothing breaks a person more than being unable to find the fulfillment they want in their life. I don't think I need to explain when this emotion comes around. It might be whenever we encounter failure or disappointment. Or perhaps it's what some people call a mid-life crisis. Or perhaps it's when we're disgruntled by our jobs, or have conflict with the people we live with. It's a common occurence. For some people, it doesn't stay that way. They overcome it. For others, they cope with it or else it might drive them mad. I'm one of the latter people. I'm taking steps to overcome it, but sometimes, it's simply not working. It seems as if the entire world is working against me. Why oh why must it happen to me?

It's really too much to bear for one person. Yet somehow, we survive. We make it to the next day, the day after that, and the day following that day. We all have coping strategies of our own. For me, one of them is having faith. It's faith in God, faith in my parents, faith in my friends, faith in humanity in general. Without faith, I'd probably end my life now, with this entry as my suicide note.

I look at myself and I'm a boy who has an undergraduate degree yet can't find a job. There are bills to pay. It's not just a problem of the now. It's also a problem of the future. I don't intend on being dependent on my parents until the day they die. They deserve better. I deserve better. I'm willing to work hard. I'm wiling to learn. Yet why is all this happening to me?

In the end, it doesn't matter what I'm disgruntled with. It might be school, it might be work, it might be relationships, whatever. As long as I choose to live, those kinds of emotions are inevitable. It's part of living life, it's part of how we grow. How else will I become a better person? How else will I be able to help myself? How else will I be able to help other people?

Marx would probably call me a fool. I have nothing to base my faith on. Even philosophers have waged the never-ending dispute whether a God exists or not. And humanity, for all the good that it's done in the past, has a long history of wars, betrayal, and self-destruction. Yet I still believe. Not because I have no choice to believe in anything else, but rather because I choose to believe. Just as I choose to live.

Failure

One of the things people don't like to talk about is failure. I mean sure, we encounter adversity in life. People do conquer their problems. But let's face it, that's not always the case. Along with success comes the opposite: failure. Perhaps everyone I've met has encountered failure at least once in his or her life (and if you're actually someone who's never failed in anything, well, you've failed in failing). And of course, that's far from the most convenient of experiences. Which is why I want to talk about it.

I don't think anyone initially wants to fail. Failure is something that happens, sometimes no matter how hard you try, othertimes because you didn't exert enough effort. Failure, and its opposite, is sometimes a numbers game: for example, when it comes to exams, as long as you get a passing grade, you're not a failure. You're allowed to make a certain amount of mistakes. When it comes to most sports, it usually entails winning more than you lose. Sometimes though, it's not necessarily something that is measured in quantity. I mean during my stint in a call center, one good caller could make my day; it doesn't matter how many displeasing calls I got before that. Or when it comes to working on your relationship with other people (be it your family, friends, or significant other), it's not a matter of keeping count. But the one thing failure has in common is the fact that we experience it.

Now people react different to failure (and to people who fail). Some avoid it like the plague. Others learn from it and move on. Perhaps one of the most brilliant statements I've heard was from the editor-in-chief of a now-defunct online magazine. He mentioned that he was more interested in hiring someone who had failed than someone who was new and succeeded in everything that they did. Why? Because the former had experience, and they theoretically knew what worked and what didn't. Of course this assumes that the person who failed is the type of person who learns from their mistakes. I mean I know some people who are paralyzed by their fear of failing that they don't go out of their comfort zone because of the risks involved. One of the things I was told during my training as a call center agent was that my first day of calls will be the worst time of my life. And it was. But that's okay. I learned from it. And more importantly, I got back up. One of the overused but true statement during my stay there was "before you can get back up and run, you must fall down first". Sure, it was an unpleasant experience. But how else do I learn? How else do I grow? And while I try to avoid failure as much as possible, once I experience it, it becomes a memorable moment. And with memory comes remembrance, and from remembrance learning.

In any endeavor one pursues, one will encounter difficulties. If you're fortunate, you'll overcome it just like that. However, a more common result is failure. And to me, failure is good. It's a testament to your dedication, the true test of wills. If you failed and quit, then you probably don't want it badly enough. True courage means getting back up and keeping at it until you succeed. I mean we all make mistakes. But just because we make mistakes isn't an excuse to give up. If we did that, we'd learn nothing. I mean we surely fell down once in our life. Yet we managed to stand up, walk, and even run. Personally, I almost drowned learning how to swim. But that didn't stop me. Nor did it stop other people who were also learning how to swim. And when it comes to religion, many people complain to their god why them when they encounter tragedy. The philosopher Hume even asks if God was such a benevolent being, why does he allow suffering? I have a different answer to those questions, but when you think about it, it's because of these trials that true faith emerges. I mean how else will I know how dedicated I am to a particular belief or cause? It's by the trials we undergo, by our will to strive and continue, even against the harshest conditions.

Failure is only a real failure if we allow it to be one. I have a goal, I have a dream. I'll eventually fail in achieving that dream. Does that mean I give up? If I do, then that goal will never get accomplished. If I try again, then it's only a matter of time before I'll achieve that goal. Sure, it might cost me an arm and a leg. Or it might even take a long time. Let's be realistic here, after all. Not all problems can be solved just like that. It takes time and effort. It even means failing from time to time. Trial and error, after all, has perhaps been the oldest (although not necessarily the most efficient) way of learning things.

And in the end, because I'm a failure (not in the permanent sense), I shouldn't judge others too harshly as well. We're not perfect, after all. People make mistakes. People fall down. I should know, I'm one of them. Perhaps the best thing we can do for other people is to be there to support them as they get back up, and give a helping hand. I know I'd appreciate it if I were in that position.

Minimalist Best Effort

To a lot of people, that statement might seem like a contradiction. I mean minimalism has always been viewed as a negative trait. If you do less, you earn less. Best effort, on the other hand, is something often encouraged by institutions like schools. Teachers, and sometimes our parents, tell us that in whatever we do, we should give it all we've got. "Never give anything short of 100%" is what they might say. And of course, the current paradigm is that you're either one or the other. You're either minimal, or you're exerting your best. There is no middle ground, no gray area for both to coexist. We often generalize that people who are minimalist are lazy, while those who exert their best effort as hard working. If you're somewhere in between, you're normal. But for both kinds of traits to exist in one person at the same time, well, that's what some people might call a paradox.

To me, that's not necessarily the case. Minimalism and best effort aren't necessarily two faces of the same coin. Sometimes, they're two separate coins, and thus able to coexist. And as strange as that may sound, it's also something all of us practice.

For example, you're working on a paper, whether it's your homework, your thesis, or a report you have to file in the next day. You approximately have 12 hours before the deadline so you cram. You forego sleep and work 11 hours straight just to finish that paper and use that last hour to submit it. Did you not exert your best effort there? In those 11 hours, were you not utilizing 100% of your abilities? So best effort is established. What about the minimalist aspect? Well, let's say you the paper you passed was satisfactory. If it could be graded immediately, it was a B+. Perhaps if you were given more time (either you did the paper earlier or the deadline was moved to a later date, or perhaps a later time, even if it was just an hour or two), you could have improved on it. If you had the extra hour or so, you could have proofread it more and edited the work, meriting you an A instead of a B+. And let's say you are capable of such a thing, provided you had the additional time. Isn't the A paper your best effort as well? But wait! The A paper and B+ paper can't both be your best effort! In actuality, it is possible that both papers are you best effort. The only difference is the time constraint. And this time constraint is what I call minimalism. I mean we didn't work on the initial paper for 13 hours because we only had 11 hours to do it. Theoretically I could have done that A paper but it would mean not passing it on time. That doesn't mean I wasn't working at my best during the first 11 hours but rather in order for me to churn out the best, I need more than 11 hours. In fact, since there's always room for improvement, perhaps the perfect paper would involve working on it day and night, revising it endlessly. But alas, we're not immortal. We're only human, and we have these constraints called deadlines. And that is what I call minimalism because we have to limit ourselves. We have to limit our working hours to the set deadline, so that we can actually submit it. I mean as a writer, if I constantly revise and revise my work, it'll never get published!

The constraints we face doesn't necessarily involve time. Another example I have showing minimalist best effort is when you're acting host to a party. Let's say you invite five friends. As a host, it's your responsibility to keep them entertained. But since you're only one person and there are five of them, you cannot each give them 100% of your concentration. Usually you'll chat with all five of them and introduce them to each other, and then perhaps share a conversation or two with half of them before moving on to the next pair. And obviously, when we're talking to more than one person, we're not necessarily addressing everybody's needs. It's physically impossible to do so since we only have one body. That doesn't mean that as a host, you're not giving it your best effort, but rather you're limiting yourself so that everyone can have a better overall experience rather than giving one person 100% of your attention and neglecting the rest.

Minimalist best effort is also a prevalent mentality a lot of us have, but we just don't recognize it. Let's say you earn P20,000 a month. And let's say you work 8 hours a day, five times a week to earn that income. If you were given the opportunity to work for 4 hours a day, three days a week for the same amount of income, doing the same thing, which would you choose? Of course we'd choose the latter! We want to avoid suffering (assuming that work is actually "work" and not something we really enjoy) unless it's absolutely necessary. We want to reap the best reward for the least amount of exertion. That's minimalist best effort! And it's a great mentality; that's why we've developed the concept of machines, whether it's a simple lever or the computer that you're using right now. We want to make things easier, yet at the same time come up at the very least with the same amount of output (if not more). That's not to say we shouldn't work at optimum efficiency or that we should be lax in our jobs, but rather we look for ways to be more "efficient" since it benefits everyone.

Of course smart people epitomize the concept of minimalist best effort. I mean the owner of McDonalds, for example, is earning income right now from his fast food chains. Is he physically working? No! Is he earning income? Yes! Why? Because he came up with a great idea, and the beauty of his idea is not only is it effective, but also allows him to earn with the least amount of exertion. And similarly, business-minded people are looking for ways to earn the highest possible income with the least amount of investment. People are being both minimalist and exerting their best effort at it! It's not baffling but logical.

In itself, giving something your best effort is good. But what would perhaps even be better would be the minimalist-best effort mentality. Minimalism isn't necessarily a bad thing. I mean the greatest irony about wanting to be a lazy person is that in order to be able to afford such a lifestyle, you have to exert your best effort to achieve it.

Metamorphosis of the Mundane to the Mythical

Anyone can write about a spectacular event. That's why certain subject matter eventually become cliche or worse, boring. One just needs to look a few years back to see an example of this. The tragedy of 9/11 is perhaps one of the most overused material in the past two years (no offense to those affected by the tragedy or those who wrote about it). The mark of a skilled writer is when he or she can transform something so common, so ordinary that it is something many people often overlook, into an interesting read.

When writing such a piece, one actually has a treasure trove that merely needs to be dug up. Your advantage as a writer is the fact that you're constantly exposed to it, making you familiar with the subject matter. There are two beliefs when it comes to writing and one of them is "write what you know". You not only have your own experience but other people's experiences to draw upon when writing about a mundane object, person, place, or event. Your other advantage is that readers are too acquainted with the subject matter that they fall prey to the disease of familiarity--it has lost its mystique due to the fact that they are constantly exposed to it. Your job as a writer is to rekindle that mystique and make it as memorable as the first time you cried yourself to sleep, the first time you humiliated yourself in public, or even the first thing you bought when you got your first paycheck.

But in this endeavor, we must also remember the basics of writing. While we may want to mystify our subject matter, it must at the same time remain familiar to the reader. One mistake we could easily fall prey to would be to exoticize the object so much so that it is totally unrecognizable to the reader. There's a difference, for example, from choosing the right words and jargon. We might also be tempted to delve too much into the technical side of our subject matter that readers quickly lose interest. Or we could simply be using the wrong tone. Just because we want to add glamour does not mean we transform our subject matter into something totally alien. In the end, we must remember that our subject matter has character, and the subject matter must retain that character when we write our piece.

Yes, our subject matter has character. Character is what makes it distinct and unique, setting it apart from the rest. Character is what catches the reader's attention and makes the piece an interesting read. Without character, we have nothing. When we write, we must always keep in mind the reasons for writing and why we chose that particular subject. What is our agenda? What makes it special? What is its history, and how does it affect the present? We must have focus and not waste the reader's time by showing off our esoteric knowledge of the subject matter. That is not the point of writing. It's never about you. It's always about the subject. And then and only then does the subject inform your reader who you are.

Trust Issues

The high school prom was something many of my classmates were eager to attend. But since I did come from a semi-conservative Jesuit school, many steps were taken to “educate” us in the proper way of behaving in such an event. One of them was attending an orientation, and one of the speakers was a father. He told us that he wanted us to go home on time and bring home our dates on the agreed upon time. “It’s not that we don’t trust you. It’s the sons-of-bitches out there that we don’t trust.” At the time, it made perfect sense: our parents were worried about us and there are many random factors out there in the world that could present a danger to us. However, after hearing that line several times over the years, used in different contexts, that statement is flawed at best, and at worst, an outright lie.

The statement above could be paraphrased as such: “It’s not you but rather everyone else that I don’t trust.” It’s been used by people concerned about us: our parents, our significant other, sometimes even our friends. For the sake of argument, I’ll tackle first the situation where the people saying that statement actually believe it.

Obviously, we shouldn’t trust everyone. A lot of people are capable of deceiving and hurting other people, after all; that’s why we have thieves, con artists, robbers, rapists, murderers, etc. However, the opposite isn’t true as well. We cannot distrust everything and everyone. People with that kind of behavior are called paranoid. If everyone didn’t offer some level of trust, no one would be friends with each other, since each one is expecting the other to make a show of trust without offering it themselves. To some extent, we trust other people; we trust our cook not to poison our food, we trust our teachers to educate, we trust our accountants to manage our finances, etc. We cannot go on living our lives thinking that everyone else will be hostile to us, except in really dire situations (i.e. war, a recent catastrophe, etc.). And even then, as social beings, we need some level of trust to coexist with other people. Without that, I can’t “live”. I mean if I truly believed that the world is hostile, I wouldn’t come out of my house. Or if I did, I’d come out wearing a bullet-proof vest, a space-suit to ward off biological weapons, and carry a machine gun to shoot anyone I see. But we don’t do that. Rather, we come out of our houses dressed in plain clothes (sometimes even less) and carry our expensive accessories (i.e. jewelry, mobile phones, watches, etc.). But as reality would prove it, not everyone gets mugged everyday. Sure, there are incidents of theft and murder, but it’s not a regular occurrence to any particular person. I’m not saying that we don’t take precautions against it, but rather that we really don’t expect it to happen to us every single day. As much as we trust the people we know, we also do extend a certain amount of trust to the people we don’t know and they in turn extend it to us as well. That’s how we managed to coexist with others.

Should we be worried about our children, significant other, and friends? Of course! But we can’t cradle them nor treat them like fragile glass. Life is difficult and in the end, we can’t always be there to watch over them. Everyone needs to learn to be independent, at least to a certain extent. Yes, it is entire possible they will get into trouble. And sometimes, they do get into trouble. But people truly lose themselves when they allow traumatic events to conquer them. We can recover. Don’t let an incident or two ruin your whole life; it won’t happen everyday. We only breed distrust which leads only to further distrust when we use the excuse “we don’t trust other people” as an excuse. The eventual outcome to that would be the recipient asking the dictator “why should we trust you?”

Of course the other scenario we have is that people merely use that statement as an excuse rather than genuinely believing it. And why not, it’s the easiest thing to say, isn’t it? I’m not putting blame to the person I’m talking to yet I have a valid excuse to restrict the person. What they fail to see is that when they use this statement, it’s not a statement they believe in: they’re lying, whether to themselves or to the other person. The only person they don’t trust is either the person they’re talking to or themselves. This is usually the case with worried parents who don’t think that their children will behave appropriately when not supervised, or by jealous lovers who think that their significant other will leave them for a more “worthy” lover.

Again, to impose such a thing is flawed. We are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. We cannot know everything that the other person will do. There will come a time when we are not watching. When that happens, there’s not much we can do to make a demand from them. All we can do is to trust that the other person won’t disappoint us. And in the end, that’s all we can do. I mean if a child is really rebellious or if a lover is really unfaithful, we can’t really change that (we can attempt to do so and it might work temporarily but in the long run, they will do what they will). The moment they’re free of us, they will do as their will dictates.

Perhaps what’s worse is that we show a lack of faith and trust in the other person, even if it’s not warranted. I mean a son or daughter doesn’t really want to disappoint his or her parents. If they’ve behaved well so far, what reason do they have to rebel? Or if they do, then there’s probably a good reason why they did it. People, after all, don’t change overnight. Similarly, those with significant others have the same kind of problem. If they’ve made a commitment with you, then it’s most likely they’ll stick to it, unless they have a previous record of not doing so. In the bigger picture, the lack of faith here is not at the other person but towards the self. People with low self-esteem usually make this kind of mistake. They think that they’re not worthy of the other person or that everything’s working out too well that something must go wrong, and it’ll probably come from the other person. What they fail to see that it is this kind of mentality that brings them to ruin, and probably what drives off other people.

To trust is a delicate issue. Sometimes, it’s not merely a matter of trusting the other person or not. We often forget that the person we should trust also includes ourselves. If I didn’t trust myself, I wouldn’t be writing this entire essay. And if I didn’t trust my readers, I’d be committing social suicide by publishing this.

All I Need to Know I Learned from Magic: The Gathering

Even though it's been four years since I last played (well, played extremely competitively that is) Magic: The Gathering (although I've learned and played nearly a dozen other CCGs in between), there's a number of things that I learned from the game that is still very applicable to my daily life. Here they are:

1) Play with the hand you're dealt with: much like playing Poker and other conventional card games, the only options worth considering are those in front of you--namely what you drew. It's really useless to think of what-ifs and other possibilities when in reality, the only actions you can really take are those that involve the cards that you have. Similarly, in real life, it's useless to bitch about how you could have been more fortunate or luckier. Deal with it and make the most out of it. Sure, I may have a terrible hand, but that doesn't mean I can never win the game. It all depends on how I plan my next moves, which brings me to my next point.

2) Plan ahead and familiarize yourself with your deck: your deck determines what you can do, and whether you can win the game or not. If you don't know your deck, then you can't really plan for the future since you don't know what to expect from your own cards (it's already bad enough that you don't know what you're opponent is going to play next but being unable to plan your succeeding moves is just plain stupid). Similarly, know your own strengths and weaknesses as a person, and plan ahead using that as a starting point. If you don't know what you're capable of, then you can't make a good plan. For example, someone who knows he is horrible at math will either avoid occassions (such as taking a course that involves statistics) that involve higher math or will do some intensive studying in order to cope. If you don't know what you're capable of, you might find yourself way out of your league, and end up embarassing yourself to say the least.

3) Do your research: no matter what kind of game you're playing, it pays to do research. Some of the best Magic: The Gathering players are people who do research, whether it's the rules of the game, the meta-game environment (i.e. the popular decks people use in a certain area), or the spoiler list for the upcoming prerelease tournament. Similarly, if you plan to excel in whatever venture you plan to do, do your homework! While it's possible to succeed with sheer talent and luck, your chances of succeeding are better when you know what you're up against. It also gives you more info to formulate a better plan or strategy.

4) Synergy is good: certain cards work well when combined with other cards. When building a deck, keeping in mind your end goals makes it more efficient and useful. A counterspell deck, for example, has lots of counterspell cards. Certain cards also make great combos (i.e. a "Channel" card, which gives you mana, and "Fireball", a spell that is powered by your available mana, is a deadly combination). Similarly, some of the actions we take are better suited than others when we look at it from a larger perspective. Enrolling in a writing class, for example, is good if we want to improve our writing skills, but what would make it even better would be spending our weekends joining a workshop or two, and writing something everyday just to make it a habit. Dieting is also a good example: eating less in one particular meal is less effective than a diet planned out for the entire week, which involves not only eating the right foods but proper exercise and healthy habits as well.

5) There's no such thing as a perfect deck: not all decks or cards are equal. Some do better against particular cards, while others are optimized towards a different goal. The same goes with real life. That doesn't mean that you're inferior to a particular person: merely that he or she is optimized for certain situations. Accepting that painful fact helps you recognize your own strengths and weaknesses, and lets you know when to adjust your strategy.

6) Know when to give up: sometimes, you'll be put in a situation where you can't win the current game. Sometimes, it's best to concede (so that you don't reveal the rest of your strategy to the opponent), while at other times, it's best to fight on (whether it's because you still have an actual chance of winning or whether you want your opponent to reveal more of his strategy and cards). The same goes with real life. There are moments when we need to move on, while there are times when struggling on helps us reach our goal eventually. Knowing the difference is pivotal and sometimes it's pretty difficult to differentiate between the two, which is why research and planning is important.

7) You don't need to have all the cards to build a good deck, just know where to get them: no one has infinite resources so trading becomes an essential tool for any CCG player. Finding the best deals, whether it's purchasing cards at single prices, trading for them, or buying booster packs in bulk, becomes a key element. Similarly, I don't need to have "everything" before I start any venture. Knowing how to maximize my existing resources, exchange it for other services, or plainly knowing how to avail of other options, is an essential element. For example, if I want to be a scientist, I don't need to memorize everything in the text book. All I need to know is not how to learn all the information but rather how to find and discover specific information that I will need.

8) Be friendly and courteous to other people: CCGs are social games--you need someone else to play with, and you're most likely getting your supply of cards from a living being. Giving the other person respect and courtesy is essential. The same goes with life, since you can hardly excel if anything if you make too many enemies. I'm not saying you should be a wallflower and let everyone push you around, but that unless provoked, it's suitable to be on your best behavior. You also might get the best deals because of that.

9) Learn to bluff: knowing what the other person is thinking is a decisive factor in games. In order to catch your opponent off-guard, you sometimes have to bluff. This usually means thinking of doing something with your cards even if they're all useless, or pretending to do a stupid move because you have a surprise in store for the opponent. In life, this usually means saying things not necessarily untruthfully, but with confidence. For example, when making a presentation in front of other people, say it with conviction, even if you're unsure of half of what you said. This might also mean not revealing all your options to other people, merely mentioning the obvious ones.

10) Work hard, feel confident, and just do it: you may be the best player in the world but unless you join tournaments or events, you won't be recognized. Life's like that as well: we're "theoretically" good at something, but unless we exert effort at it, feel that we can actually do it, and actually perform it, all will be for naught. In the end, it's our actions that count. All the planning in the world will come to no end if don't manage to execute it effectively.

Reserved

When people look at me, what they see is… blandness. Let’s face it, I appear to be boring. I’m not the type of person you expect excitement, laughter, or even anger. I’m a modern day ad for stoicism. Not that doing so doesn’t have its benefits. I mean I’m the last person you expect to be angry, for example. Yet how did this all happen? Was I born a reserved person?

For me, perhaps the strongest emotion that incites people is probably anger. Anyone can feign a smile. Pretending to be angry, on the other hand, is more difficult. As a child, I was quite angry with a lot of people. Unfortunately, my enemies were everywhere: my parents, my siblings, my relatives, my classmates, even my neighbors. To reveal my anger would get me bruises all over my body, and I considered verbal abuse getting off easy.

My mother loved to spank. Of course she’s not the person I see most of the day. It’s usually the other people, such as the maid who takes care of me and finds it too much of a hassle so she punishes me. There’s also the driver who pulls my ear and shouts all the time. My older brother is easily irritable, and has been known to publicly humiliate and injure his teachers because they annoy him; guess what more he does to his little brother? And there will always be a long line of bullies at school. When you’re a small, skinny boy, you’re a target for a lot of people.

It probably would have been okay if things got resolved. Unfortunately, they didn’t. The maids and my brother continued to abuse me despite my complaints to my parents, and the bullies continued to bully even if you stood up to them. Worse, sometimes other people even blamed you for the incident. So in order to survive my childhood, one of the first things I learned was to curb my anger.

When you don’t have anger as an emotional weapon, what else is left to you? I discovered that pity was an involuntary response, although it did save me once in awhile. I was a crybaby, despite my vehement denials of it at the time. It’s difficult to be taken seriously when there’s tears leaking out of your eyes and snot out of your nose, and you keep on saying that everything’s fine and that you’re not crying. That didn’t stop the teasing by kids my age, but it did draw attention to me. During our frequent trips abroad, my first resort when getting lost was to cry. Aloud. That would draw in my family, or a helpful stranger at the very least.

Unfortunately, I live in the Philippines where machismo rules, and crying was seen as weakness. If I was able to control my anger, I was easily able to control my tears. However, that didn’t stop other people from hurting me, such as the bullies at school, or the less-than-friendly people at home. Since we’re going for masochism, I might as well ignore the pain, or at least appear to ignore the pain. Chairs in grade school were made of metal and wood, and I really wish they were made out of the plastic ones which are light and easy to carry. I even wish they’re the type that gets used on TV wrestling. At least those chairs were small and foldable. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. But when you’re able to take a hit at the back and immediately recover, people start respecting you. Suddenly, I had dreams of becoming a stuntman. I mean when you’re constantly getting hit by things made of wood and metal, receiving punches and kicks didn’t look threatening anymore.

I was also buck-toothed when I was a kid, due to a certain accident that involves me landing on the ground with my mouth open. My smile was far from perfect, and my classmates loved to point that out. I think you pretty much get the picture I’m driving at. If I appear to lack a certain range when it comes to facial expressions, it’s not because of a lack of learning.

Stoicism has its benefits though. I mean bullies remain bullies because of the pain they inflict on others. When they stop seeing you suffer, they grow bored. The same goes for the teasing. When the subject of your taunts doesn’t looked annoyed, what’s the point in continuing? In the end, the whole experience also taught me two important things: one is to listen, because when you stop dwelling on your pitiful life, you realize that others have something to teach you, even if they’re unaware of it. The bully, for example, reveals his insecurities by his taunts. The other thing I learned was sympathy. When you’re usually at the receiving end of most injuries, you realize how other people feel as well. One becomes sensitive to pain, not just of one’s self, but of other’s as well. I know what it feels like to be the underdog, to be the scapegoat of society. But because of that, I also know how to comfort, how to aid others.

I didn’t come out unscathed from the whole experience. The fact that I am who I am now shows that events in my childhood have changed me. However, I did learn wisdom from the entire ordeal, and for me, that’s a worthy tradeoff (at least I still have my eye, unlike a certain Norse deity).

Vampire Orchid

Eating is a social act as much as it is a biological act. While it is possible to eat alone, people usually prefer eating with company. It is usually during this time that people bond with each other. That’s why there are usually family dinners. Or why students share a table at the school cafeteria. Or even why coworkers invite you to eat out with them. Not joining them usually ostracizes you from the group. I’m speaking from personal experience. Because I’m a deviant, and people usually don’t see me eat, at least not in public.

That’s not to say that I don’t eat at all. That would be impossible. I’m not an orchid that directly converts light to energy. Nor am I a vampire that doesn’t feel physical hunger. I am, however, a person with a small body, and I do need less quantities of food than the average person. I have proven in the past that gorging myself in food would only lead me to involuntarily vomit it. So pacing myself is quite important.

That only partially answers why people don’t see me eat, however. One good motivation for me not to eat out is that it costs money. Given that I am working with a finite budget, I try to save money as possible for those other tangible stuff that’s still there once you’re done using it (food, while it is tangible, is gone once you’ve eaten it… the only proof that you ate is either the food that you vomit, or whatever you shit). Since I don’t want to spend money, I usually eat at home, where my parents spend for the food. And because one third of my life is spent at home at the very least, I do make it a point to eat at home rather than eat outside. And since I have control over my appetites, I can schedule my eating habits so that I eat before I leave the house, and eat again once I return.

Food is important. And while we can’t live without food, skipping a meal won’t kill us (skipping several meals will do though). This is usually the discipline I invoke when I’m at a restaurant. Because restaurants are really expensive, and I have to ask myself whether I can afford to spend now or not. If it’s the latter, I can always eat at home. All I have to do is wait for everyone else to finish their food, and then I can go home and actually eat.

Another hindrance for me to eat in public is the fact that I have braces. Food do get stuck between my teeth, and getting rid of them involves more than toothpicks. And it really is a bit of a hassle to go to the bathroom every once in awhile just to clean your teeth. So I avoid all of that by simply eating at home, where I can go to my bathroom at leisure and perform all my sanitary precautions there.

Having said all that, I am aware that this is my habit and not everyone else’s. So I do accompany my friends when they eat out. I just don’t eat, and usually stare at them (because I’ll look like a hungry person if I stare at their food). I’ll even treat people out for lunch or dinner, because as I said, they don’t necessarily follow my diet (and while I don’t have a budget for feeding myself, I do have a budget for treating my friends out, and I’m capable of doing so in the first place because I save a lot of money by not eating).

Since it also comes down to a money problem, I’ll usually eat if somebody treats me out. Of course I don’t want to take advantage of people, so I’ll usually decline at first. And if the person is the type that treats people out often, then I’ll surely decline, because I don’t want to perpetually benefit from another person’s constant expenditure (and as someone who treats other people out, I do know how the bills eventually pile up).

Am I a normal person? No, I’m a weird, underweight kid. Do I eat? I’m still human and alive aren’t I? And besides, time spent not chewing food is time spent to listening what other people have to say, especially at the dinner table.