2004-11-05 - 5:50 p.m.

got him, yes!

Commentator 1: The pitch is bad, but is it dangerous?
Commentator 2: It depends (…) whether you consider the death of Test cricket as we know it to be something ‘dangerous’…

This reminded me of a spirited and long discussion I was involved in on a web forum with several people from Britain (who for some strange reason identified with the Indian team) who believed that there is nothing wrong with a curator taking instructions from a home cricket board about how to produce a cricket pitch designed to give a tactical advantage to a particular team in a Test match. Nor did it say anything to them the fact that this phenomenon occurs uniquely on the Indian subcontinent.

A similar bewilderment seems to affect many of my fellow bloggers while trying to explain the result of the American election. How can this be happening? Scrambling to explain the inexplicable like a school kid blushing and squirming while having to admit that the sun does rise in the East. Particularly humourous was the diary which cited the successive record high values of world stock exchange indices as evidence against Bush.

I really shouldn’t be making any more out of this than the time of light-hearted entertainment that it is. For I too am disappointed with at least one element of the result – that so many Americans believed the lie that it be best to vote for the candidate that seems to have the “greatest chance of doing the greatest amount of good,” searing their consciences and cowering to a system that does not allow voters to indicate their preferences.

Not that it affects me, of course. I have my own battles which occupy enough time on their own. The counselor saw me as a perfectionist and told me not to be so hard on myself. I have begun steps to get back into the workforce if I chose to. I’m on the right track.

previous entry - following entry

gewerq.diaryland.com - an online diary. All original content © gewerq 2003-2005. All rights reserved.