Job Descriptions - Bullshit!

Most of  the job descriptions are cliched. Irrespective of the roles, they often run like this:

• Should be passionate about.....
• Should be able to work in a team
• strong communication skills...
• Should be able to take up challenging tasks
• Should deliver high quality output
• Should mentor the junior members of the team....
• Exhibits quick learning and proficiently absorbing new information
• Has a eye for detail and demonstrates ...
• Handles complex responsibilities and assignments.....
• Speaks and writes clearly and articulately without being overly verbose
• and all that blah

What is it about being "passionate"? I love my job, but I limit my passion to the bedroom.

Strong communication skills! How strong? I can yell! I can write a stinker. Do I qualify?

High quality output! Is printer's cartridge new?

Why can't the recruiters/ HR personnel just say that "We have so and so openings.... we look for so many years of experience. Should be experienced with so and so aspects of the role".

Disclaimer

I write. I don't edit.
I don't aim to write a masterpiece. I write what I feel like writing.
I think grammar is for technical writing and for formal communication.
I give a damn for grammar on this blog.
 

Life of decadence

Life of decadence

One can't be a writer without being a decadent. You can be a Jeffrey
Archer or a Ken Follet by meticulous research of a plot and writing it
to the expectant masses. However, it is a different matter being a
Hemingway, Henry Miller, Volatire or Thoreau. They are philosophers
first, and writers next. For most of them writing is not just a mode
of employment. It is a catharsis. Outlet. Self-expression. They cared
a damn for what the readers thought. Isn't it wistful that a writer
doesn't care a wit for their readers?

Those writers have experienced their life in first-hand. They didn't
stand in the bylines and been mute spectators. They loved life. They
accepted themselves. Self-esteem personified. Self-esteem is what a
writer needs.

All these writers made Paris their hub. Why? Why had Paris become a
breeding bed avant-garde artist, reclusive writers and unfathomable
intellectuals? It has been their choice because 1) it is a city with a
great history 2)  It is a city that hated intellectual and artistic
stagnation. 3) Debauchers, sybarites, profligates are not looked down upon.

These three reasons would have made Paris an iconoclast's shrine. How
many times a person is free to enjoy the life the way he wants in his
domicile. Acquaintances, relatives, parents, siblings weigh you down
with their expectations and with their ideas of what a perfect life
is.

Why should a life be always perfect? What is a perfect life? Who
defines what is a perfect life?

An individual's life can be as imperfect as He wants it to be.

For example, the life I lead in Mumbai, was the best phase in my life.
No acquaintance, no relatives - just a soul mate. No need to watch my
back. No paranoia about holding hands. By this I don't mean to say I
lead a life of decadent in Mumbai. I say what it is to be a nonentity.
Left to your devices and no dogmas, no strictures. Just being oneself.
No stale notions of what one should do and what one should be.

A so-called decadent can understand what an another decadent is going
through. Sort of brotherhood. I think Paris was one such communion
for the so-called decadents. How I wish to be in Paris. My notions of
what a writer is can be screwed up. May be not. I am free to be as
screwed up as I can.

You can't be a writer without being a decadent. You can't be a
philosopher without being a sybarite. You can't be a humanist without
be a realist. You cant be an intellectual unless you dare to be a
stupid. You can't be a man unless you can suck it up and smile at your
adversary. #eof

Sent from my iPhone

Bawdy

What happens if a sports writer reports a murder:

Just the kind of finish the cuckolded husband wants. In a battle of wits and muscle, pussy capitulated the cock. Staying true to its carnivorous instincts, Pussy has allured the Cock with juicy nuts. And the rendezvous took place in the cozy interior's of a 5 star hotel. Victim, the cock, who is under prepared and with no prior experience of the turf, jumped into the fray. His regular doubles partner- his wife- who knows his weaknesses outnumbered his strengths tried her best to dissuade the victim. All her warnings went unheeded.

Cock, in his over enthusiasm, to lock his horn in the vestibule of Mrs pussy didn't care to plan his exit pattern. and it should be noted that this death match is played with no referee.

As the match progressed, puSsy slowly but steadily established her dominance. Cock by then tired, and enervated couldn't match stroke for her thrust. His stiffness wavered and his nervousness got the better of him.

She lost no time to turn over and ride Mr.C and Mr.c, like a flagged blind horse head to obey the command of rider before he succumbed. When it is thought the game is over, in an extraordinary display of cockiness, Mr.Cock delivered a couple of killer blows. The complacent Mrs.P wasn't prepared for this. And her roguish smirk was wiped off. And Mr.C went down fighting. Only people who is smiling in the entire fiasco is Mr.Pussy's husband. And Mrs.C has gone in search for a new stopper. #End

Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone

Despondency

The need to write
The urge to communicate
The desire to be appreciated
Sometimes can be despondency

Sent from my iPod

Blog as a journal

I have always been a journal keeper. It all started way back in the school. I'm not too fastidious about it. Nevertheless, I always confessed everything in my journals.


Journals do serve a cathartic purpose. They never give you away, as the best friends sometimes do. Of late, I think web is the best place to maintain a journal. After all, BLOG is Web + LOG. I find following reasons in favor of using blog as a journal:

1. With Internet being ubiquitous, the journal is accessible every where.

2. One way of going green. Can get rid off expensive diaries and notebooks.

3. With mobile connectivity, journal entries can be posted from the comforts of bed, bath room, bus, for that matter from anywhere.

4. Need not worry about the privacy, if the account is password protected.

5. Like papers, the blogs don't get yellowed or dog-ears.

6.It is searchable.

However, I'm given to doodling, which I can't do on blogs. Of course, there are Apps for that too.

I will explore the options to make doodling net friendly.

On the flip side there could be a concern of security lapse. But I trust Google. They are equipped to keep the blogs safe.


Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone

On Reviews and Ratings

We all claim to be original. Original in our reading, our writing, our dressing etc,. There isn't an aspect which we don't claim to be original. So be it! Then why do we read reviews of books?
Reading a book based on a review is the most unoriginal act. Review is somebody's opinion. Why should we buy/ not buy a book based on somebody's opinion.
When we pick(ed) books in the Pre-Internet era, we were to read the blurb and get a feel of what the book is all about. It is called publisher's blurb, because the publisher wants us to get a scoop of what the book is all about. After the advent of online book stores like Amazon and Flipkart, reviews started to influence our book buying/reading desicions.
The readers/buyers are all on an auto-pilot mode. We look for (star) ratings and then scroll down to the reviews. We would think of buying a book only when it atleast has 3-star rating. How original is this process? Somebody likes the book, I buy it. Somebody opines the book is bad, I drop it. Originality?
Before we judge a book on its ratings. It would be wise to check out the number of people who have rated the book. Generally, rating is an average of all the individual members' ratings. For example if a book is rated 1 star, and there is only one person who has rated it. Is it wise on our part to judge the book as bad? May be the ratings would improve given some time. May be!
The Shadow of Wind by Carlos Ruiz Zafon, is the case in point. I stumbled upon the book by sheer chance. And that's one of the best book I have ever read. When I checked the internet for like-minded readers, I realized most of the reviews ranged between 'Bad' and 'fairly good'. I thanked my STARS for not reading the reviews. Had I read a review, I would have missed out on a wonderful book.
I think people tend to read reviews as means to insure their money and time. But then don't call yourself original. Of all don't call yourself Original Thinker or a Original Reader.
Where lies the freedom of expression there lies the chance of propaganda too. What's guarantee that some reviewers are influenced by publishers themselves to up the sale. Worst still, too bring down the competitor!
If you want to have sense of adventure, try to pick a book from its cover and blurb. Go ahead. It is a retro fashion. Back to the ages with no internet.