Tyro on the Console

The Month of the Debut

 “Don't touch my hair
When it's the feelings I wear
Don't touch my soul
When it's the rhythm I know
Don't touch my crown
They say the vision I've found
Don't touch what's there
When it's the feelings I wear
Don't touch my pride
They say the glory's all mine
Don't test my mouth
They say the truth is my sound”

After my sporadic journey with music till September, 2018, it was finally time to re-step into the domain with the hope of sticking around for a satisfactory while. Constant emotional prompts following phases of self-improvement and hilarious soliloquies about directing attachment and love towards activities rather than persons led to the initiation of my journey with Disc Jockeying (DJing).

Why DJing?

With the whole solo-fever going on at the time, I wanted something that could be done alone.    

DJing presented the enticing option of a one-member band, independent of pesky requirements concerning overlap between band-members’ schedules.
You can’t get good at playing an instrument if you don’t spend time with it and you can’t spend  productive time with it if you don’t like its feel or vibe. It was “love at first sight” with the console. The knobs looked good, as did the science behind them. There was an inexplicable high in being able to visualize tracks as consolidated layers and playing with them to create pleasant-sounding outputs. “Hit or Miss”
Clubs provide a plethora of opportunities for social experiments (Love them!) : Good performances = successful analysis of audience psyche. Given that humans are more honest about their gestures, intentions and behavior under the influence of alcohol, there’s immense satisfaction in being able to decipher and sway an inebriated audience.
 Art : Every set constructed is a different piece of art for the different patterns of feelings it induces in the audience. Exploring these patterns is an entertaining journey.

In the month of my first performance i.e. December, 2018, I was introduced to performer/producer psychology besides advanced techniques and a million other genres. Overwhelming. The essence of playing for a huge crowd and its expectations became clearer. Bittersweet. This was also the time my brain imbibed the elements/criteria of a good set. Room for analogies to life.

Balance.The volume-level relationship between musical elements
Frequency range.  In a mix, all audible frequencies must be properly represented.
Panorama. Placing a musical element in the soundfield.
Dimension. Adding ambience to a musical element.
Dynamics. Controlling the volume envelope of an individual track or the entire mix.
Interest. Making the mix special.

Just as balance is important in a good mix, a balance between the extent and intensities of different emotions is essential for a good life.
All prominent personal drives must be represented through respective appropriate activities, just like the audible frequencies in a mix.
It’s important to keep in mind the context/breadth/bird’s eye view while focusing on an activity of interest just like the panorama of a musical element. Misfit situations like mismatched patterns of  musical notes are unpleasant.
At the end of the day, one’s got to make his/her life special and unique just like a mix. Having seeds of one’s personality embellishes the mix and gifts it an irreplaceable aura.

As I pave my way to an anonymous goal, all I hope for is musical fulfilment, an enhanced ability to express and a better understanding of the human psyche. There’s few things more exciting than making people feel close to what you feel through music.

Au Revoir.

The Hominid Stimulant

The Hominid Stimulant 

Guide me to Adulthood 

"How could anyone possibly achieve that focus?", I asked myself rhetorically, as I watched him glued to his laptop, immersed in the labyrinthine world of Politics, Opinions and Mathematics. For someone whose primary pastime was being in a brown study, attempting to understand the anatomy of focus, he seemed like an enticing subject. 

"How do you do it?", I asked him. "Do what?", he answered with a smirk. "Forget the world around you when you do something." Never got a satisfactory answer from him but dissecting his responses to the things people said and did, online and in real life, made my understanding of his mental plane more diaphanous. Explicating the roots of focus, as I eventually came to realize, couldn't be an isolated study if it had to be of any worth. So, it made sense to observe his approach to problems, one might consider unrelated to the cynosure, in addition to those that were obvious. 

The subject's existence encased a thought model that balanced mine pretty well, primarily why understanding and deconstructing it made complete sense. Call it a "subconscious project", if you will. 

The extremities of our thought models went through an enervating cycle of clashing and settling, one point-of-contention (POC) after another. The incentive to proceed was binary, ergo, strong. When the intellectual incentives failed as fuels, emotions provided the skeleton. It was probably the dissimilitude in our styles of communication rather than ideological differences that made the project pesky, more often than not. Middling compromise and patience, being two important means to the end, assuaged communication issues. Not all contretemps added value. Some were pure noise ; some, cases of two people with different childhoods and upbringing, flabbergasted seeing the bizarreness of each other's ways of life, letting off steam (mind you, lots of it). Maturity helped pick out arguments that held weightage. We had a latent system of mutual conditioning. I was conditioned to be, say, more rational; he, more empathetic. 

Equilibrium post contretemps was the prize. POCs that were treated with sound reasoning, logic and rationality resulted in stronger equilibrium; the issue was never brought up again. Both parties, he and I, put forth our views on the matter, hoping for them to sound rational, sustainable, logical and practical, in a style of communication that was mutually acceptable. An impulsive or aggressive argument would automatically be rejected (the receiving end would naturally become less receptive to alternate opinions). The final agreement was based on future good. The practice, initially, very high maintenance, became instinctive and easier over time. I was conditioned to not say things that were based on my assumption of something rather than what they factually were. It felt like I'd started to think differently. (Success!)

A major part of this project was to "un-learn" the thought models I grew up on and was conditioned to blindly follow because externalities appeared to allow easy room for them. These thought models were mostly fallacious because they were inflexible. Un-learning had side-effects. Agitation being one of them. For a while after I started to feel the effects of un-learning, I was agitated because answers to why and how I fell for entirely irrational (extreme) models (/theories/arguments) in the first place (earlier, in life) made little or no sense. They were attached with questionable biases. (Questionable biases, fed to us by social constructs or extremely religious people.)

Thanks to the abovementioned subject, now, every time I'm asked for opinions on matters that elicit extreme emotion, I ask myself,

"Why am I so passionately against or for it?"

"Why is anyone so passionately against or for it?"

I question the matter using the model I was conditioned to use and sometimes use against the subject himself. It's become a tool to know when to trust his or anyone else's opinions and when to not. Also a tool to beat his argument using a construct he understands best (the only one he follows). 

The new thought model endowed my brain with not just rationality but a good sense of what matters, what doesn't, what's worth lending ears to and what isn't, as a consequence of it, which brings us to the initial theme of the post. Focus. ("The Attic Theory of the Brain", How to *pick* matters that deserve only simplistic treatment. )

Thanks, A. 

What Edward De Bono Taught Me

Sanity Lost, Sanity Gained, Peace
Alpha-Beta Testing the New Self

Centering : "If I loiter in an environment governed by rules, ideals and morals customized to (what I think would) suit the accomplishment of my goals/priorities/happiness (based on my knowledge of myself), I'd get back on the right path with more experience, without much effort"

In people-centric scenarios, extremes generally occur in pairs. If you've seen one extreme with a person(s), you can experience the other extreme only with that person(s). You can't hate a person you haven't ever loved.

"I hate Trump". No, you don't. You hate his system of governance. Why can't you hate him unless Ivanka tells you to? (assuming she knows him on a personal level (#FamilialPerksFTW), better than you do and you believe her.) Because hate based on non-personal and solely external information is disagreement or disapproval. True hate needs figurative penetration. Unless you have your own definition of hate or you've planted cameras and microphones in Trump's den(s). 

I was living with false definitions of sanity and stability in my head until New Year's Eve, 2015.
2016 showed me what instability truly felt like, subsequently, convinced me that I wasn't a stable person. I wouldn't have known stability and sanity had I not known their extreme opposites.

 In that one dead year, I involuntarily attempted to tackle problems that were deep-rooted. More of a situational "I'm messed up, I need to get myself out of the gutter right now", than a, "the future will demand so and so personal changes, let me start working on them now" kind of issue. Life didn't need external changes, it needed mental restructuring. Funny, but that wasn't the most challenging bit. The need to change was prompted by the positive and negative gestures of a human agent (X), a very special friend, also, the only I'd had in a while. (Value, in inverse proportion with number (kept low, intentionally)) The side-effects of the transition process weren't going to be felt by just me but all parties involved, primarily, X. What was the most challenging part? Psychologically convincing X of the mutual long term benefits of my decisions that couldn't be directly communicated, to prevent predicted short-lived hate that I was most afraid of. X, at least visibly, wasn't on the same page as mine. Bringing him to it needed rashness on my part.

He was the stable one, I was paranoid (the result of being able to foresee events precisely, most times). X hid/lied, while I expressed. The gradient between the amount X hid/lied and the amount I expressed kept increasing. Contemplating the reasons behind X's compulsive lying made me blame myself to a point that wasn't harm-free. Academic stress coupled with emotional baggage kept reducing the effectiveness of all hope-keeping activities I'd gotten myself into for sanity's sake. My mind, quite naturally, started looking for shortcuts and backdoor solutions. Failed, horribly so. The troubled state and my urge to get out of it, forced me to do, what then felt like the dirty work. 

Deep emotions rob the most logical of their logic sometimes, and that's what happened, as predicted. I felt vicarious pain in addition to my own.

The best part about pain is that it follows a bell curve. It needs to reach a peak magnitude to be felt less eventually.

With time, unanswered questions receive answers. "Whys" turn into "Ahhs". The puzzle becomes less complicated.  You make peace, then some more. You change.
It's a beautiful process.
My recent experiences demonstrated the magic of Centering. Centering, in my book says that, if I loiter in an environment governed by rules, ideals and morals customized  to suit the accomplishment of my goals/priorities/happiness, I'd get back on the right path with more experience, without much effort. 
When things go wrong, remind yourself that a night is always followed by a day.

 P.S. :  I was lucky to have X intentionally or unintentionally show me my faults than cover them to protect the thinning stability of our equation then. I only wish the best for him.

Zaijian.

Chameleon Culture

Analysis Paralysis, The Disillusionment Maze

The abstract touch-me-not layer. Bitter Filter, Fibrosa, Vasculosa, Nervosa, Perspective.
Ante Script : If my theories hurt your pseudo-stable thought-set, I'll know they aren't entirely untrue. Alter my view while I alter yours. #ConversationalRecursion

 Multiple options, offline and online communication forums, endless social opportunities, social media,  CommTech in general are biphasic w.r.t. usage. Excuse my love for fancy self-made terms (chose to not see the alternatives, hah), but I call all of the above 'inconveniento-conveniences' (ICs). The extent of a person's vulnerability to/usage of ICs hints at his/her degree of fickleness. Most of us are getting altered psychologically by ICs and the trends they've given birth to, in a way that is hampering our relationships, simplifying the process of leaving one for another with little or no guilt, introducing dangerous thoughts, creating unnecessary debate in easy situations, making us raise redundant life-related questions, giving birth to an unneeded identity crisis(specific to the person), over-governing our process of fixing priorities. Sad part?  We don't know what we really want, because the wants keep changing, howsoever desperate they may be in the moment. 

 What's responsible? Primarily, ICs.

Most expressed wants/desires in equations, these days especially, are either impractically ambitious, entirely mood-based, lacking long-term pragmatism, selfishly considerate (oxymorons are good food for thought) or emotionally unviable.  Popular relationship philosophy : No room for repeated mistakes in the equation? The fun's gone? Replace the person in it with someone who accepts and tolerates those repeated mistakes every time rather than improvement or elimination of weaknesses that led to those repeated mistakes. Why? Because the ego hurts lesser in replacement than in improvement. Adventure has become a relationship priority while stability comes way later. Surprising. 

Need an ego-boost? Generate it internally and independently not externally. It'll probably last longer. 

How do I build an ego tunnel that's sustainable in a century owned by "Le Fickle-Minded"? Fool myself, maybe convince my brain of false reality, given that my own perception is entirely true? Yes. (The default state is all pessimistic, saves trouble.) Just so all the externally generated negativity doesn't taint my compressed innocence. 

How do I feed my desire to be unselfishly nice in a world that lets the manipulative flourish faster  than the genuine can? Prompt people to fake the niceness through my gestures for a bit, so I can treat them the way I would've, had I known they were genuinely nice, for as long as my emotions and self-protecting tendencies let me. 

Why take the complicated route? To prevent robotic behavior, trust and intimacy issues that result from disillusionment. To kill expectations. Creating a temporary false reality is analogous to adding steps at, say, positions 3,5 and 7 in a 1-10 emotional ladder. The pain's way lesser when you fall from 1 to 3, 1 to 5 or even 1 to 7. Gradient 9 situations can be emotionally taxing. 

Why do equation-templates exist? "We're family, ergo, we must do this". "We're dating, so we must say 'I love you' even when we don't feel like it." Isn't customizing an equation to suit the emotional needs of  the involved parties a better idea? 

                                                                                     Zaijian.

Pubs, Toilets and Entrepreneurship

                                                   : I ideate on the Pot :

It was October '14. TechSparks had just ended and our whole diverse neo-gang of entrepreneurs and passionate thinkers, decided to get a few after-event mojitos at one of those popular pubs, Bangaloreans get smashed in, on Saturday Night. Intense conversations on ideas, world issues, the Indian political structure and the state of entrepreneurship in the country followed, until the alcohol started to kick in.  Being the only sober kid in the group, my conscience generated this innate you-should-really-fuck-off-now signal triggered by the EDM that played in the background while slowly killing the aesthete that I thought I was.  The group insisted that I stayed a little longer, pestered, eventually convinced me to stay for another half an hour. I decided to waste those 30 minutes in the washroom, being the headstrong person that I was and headed there with a grin I'd wear exclusively on proud occasions. The toilet welcomed me with a sight, far from pretty. A woman, twenty something, pretty drunk, leaned on the wash-basin eagerly waiting for her tummy to give her a break. Prompted by sympathy, I rushed back and returned with two glasses of water, that, luckily, were enough to give the woman the relief she'd been longing for, for quite some time. I waited for her outside the loo as she puked, wondering why her face seemed familiar. The loo door finally opened. She stepped out with an embarrassed smile. The following conversation happened, while the both of us were still in the washroom :

Tara : Sorry for all the trouble. Didn't know, the situation would get so out of hand.

Me : Haha, alcohol can make or break an evening. It must've been one of those unlucky days for you. Happens to the best of us and it's alright!

Tara : Thanks for understanding. I'm Tara (name changed), what's your name? 

Me : It's Avisha. Why do you look familiar?

Tara : Haha, well, I may have come in Bangalore Mirror a few times for my work in education-centric entrepreneurship and blogging.

Me : Oh my, are you the founder of GoalRun (name changed)?! 

Tara : Yes, haha. Have you read my blog?

Me : Of course I have. I've been following it for quite some time. Your approach to the whole problem looked way more viable than all I've come across in the field till date. Where do you plan to take this? 

45 minutes passed, we didn't stop. The exchange of information was magical. Both of us were on the same page, as far as escaping the crowd and the EDM were concerned. Common interests may have been catalysts, but the bond or open-ness to sharing information, all the knowledge, even more important for valuable connection than professional background, was formed because of the scenario we were in. The "In-Soup" scenario. 

That was probably the first time I questioned the whole idea of "Networking Events". Hundreds of startup founders and software professionals, desperately hunting for resourceful people like hungry wolves, eye-signalling and gesticulating an eagerness to talk to anyone their eyes found startup-active and amiable. How much could sharing business cards and sending a few emails later even assure? Say, you even find a CEO worth networking with and being a total smartass, you manage to generate an incentive for him to listen to you (assuming the two of you differ in your levels of badassery, his being higher than yours). Would he tell you the *deeper* things? Things you wouldn't find on the net even after hours of loafing? Hard, unless you're some psychoanalysis guru who goes around, smoothly extracting information important to you from anyone. 

My aim isn't to downplay the significance of these events. They certainly make exposure to ideas and startups fun and easy. This is only a friendly-taunting attack on people who equate entrepreneurship and networking to exchanging business cards, emails and pseudo-intellectual talk. It's great that you're meeting venture enthusiasts professionally, or rather, pushing yourself to meet them so they'd collaborate or help you expand, all that jazz and who knows, that may even work in the near future. But expectations can employ dangerous filters. The whole rigorous pre-event agenda making activity may sound great, definitely like something any ambitious founder would indulge in, without thinking twice. Does it always make the event more productive for him/her? I'd say, no. 

This may have infuriated a few of you for how shallow, naive (on my part) or untrue you think it is but hey, shedding some light on another perspective won't hurt, would it?  

Going with focus works better than going with an entire plan. Pictorially, 'focus' for me looks like a set of concentric circles. It places a blanket-like restriction, giving the mind a subtle, permitted boundary to loiter within. Each subsequent circle, moving inwards, represents a narrower radius of thought, important to obtain a definite or a near-definite conclusion in the end. 'Focused wandering' is something our system needs to embrace. The concept may sound oxymoronic to those who haven't used it in their lives or realised it could even exist yet, but the benefits, both theoretically and practically, in any arena, be it networking, education or even casual brainstorming, are too many. 

Say, we take one point on each concentric circle shown below. A plan, in my view, is a sequence of these points. There's no scope of wandering. The unexposed, pre-event mind fixes the positioning of these thought-dots using its power(?) of prediction. Can the power of prediction be trusted? It can't. When the plan of action (the sequence of points, mentioned above) is found irrelevant at the event, the mind loses interest and refuses to engage at a level it ideally should, impacting the enthusiasm of its maker. Amicability, approachability, focus and content are prerequisites for any event. 

  Focus : The Blanket Approach

I'd trust an entrepreneur and his approach if he told me, he got his big idea while taking a shit or showering, more than I'd trust someone who planned, structured, restructured, moulded and remoulded his idea for months, after relentless trying and retrying. Forced ideas and carved passion provide short-term results. Post this term, when founders start pitching these forced ideas to bigger investors and VCs(who, usually are psychoanalytically adept), their fake passion shows. 

The foundation of a startup is a founder's belief in his idea and its originality factor. When this belief is lost, commitment is lost. Forced ideas come through borrowed thought, restriction and past records (not always trustworthy) ergo, the foundation is lost anyway.

There's a visible similarity in the best ideas I've gotten till date. All of them came to me when I was chilling and not when I dedicatedly tried to search for them (in pubs, getting coffee or drinks with friends, while cooking brunch on a Sunday, cleaning my room, while lazily rolling in my bed in the morning before starting the day etc). The same similarity held for all my existing, valuable professional equations. These equations started with personal bonding not a contract or a deal. The attitude was non-expecting and casual. 

Concluding, I'd say, build bonds before business partnerships. Subtly hope, don't expect. Be optimistic, not desperate. 

Au revoir. 

"She's Such a Slut"

       

"She's Such a Slut"(......because she's talented and I have an inferiority complex)

[ CAUTION : MIND EXCRETA AHEAD ]

I was a nerdy, moustached seventh grader when I was called a slut for the first time by a bunch of girls, after winning the Class President elections in 2007. It didn't matter then because, the meaning of the word was nebulous in my 12 year old brain. 

Five years later, a guy spat the squalid term on me, which was ironic, in view of the fact that he'd been going around, ridiculously flaunting his fondness for me a day before he saw me working on a project with one of his guy-friends. It hurt. A lot. You'd obviously expect a 17 year old to understand the depth of the word "slut", its areas of usage and associated negativity. Wish, I didn't. It exacerbated the pain, while I incessantly thought about all the assumptions, society would make about me, with the slut filter on.  

I went back home with a bitter mood, locked myself in a room, cried for hours together. Funny, because I'd actually started to view myself as a slut after the incident, despite my oblivion to basic sex-related knowledge, 12th graders typically have.

Months passed, college happened, innocence remained unscathed. I got busier and busier, subsequently drifted away from college-mates. Conversations with people got pithier and crisper. Life got better, professionally but deteriorated, socially. People mistook my seriousness for attitude and arrogance. A classmate, also a trustworthy friend, who was in touch with them more than I was, described to me how I was taken for one of those mean girls by the guys and a slut, by the girls given my interest in fashion besides other things. Dirty, disappointing canards propagated through college, which, to be honest, surprised me more than anything I, ideally, should've felt. Asinine, baseless remarks on my character were made by people who'd never talked to me before, who hardly knew me. The same old slut shaming, absolute balderdash. There was, quite naturally, a feeling of irritation, easy to get over this time. Maturity had finally embraced me. 

While all these rumours happened, I discovered a bunch of genuine supporters and friends, who made  recovery a short phase. 

Interning at Koovs and Klozee, two fashion based, companies(/startups) this semester, turned out to be particularly conducive to the efforts I'd been making to become immune to context-less, piercing hogwash people barfed, as defense to their insecurities. I met some multi-talented, like minded girls who shared their own stories that sounded like different versions of what I'd been through. As comforting as that was, it also aggravated my existing disillusionment with the scenario. 

My wrath arises from the emotional harm people knowingly or unknowingly cause to put their targets down, due to their own inability :

1. To achieve goals their targets could achieve

2. To get the attention of their targets through sincere effort or straight means 

Defamation for revenge is an utterly loser scheme vis a vis dealing with personal trauma or inferiority complex. Pardon me for being didactic without your consent but working hard, building your own skills and getting inspired is the way to go. You'd probably love your targets, if you put yourself in their shoes. 

To all the girls who've been called sluts at least once in their lives, I'd say, feel flattered. Take it as an indicator of progress. You're doing things right, if your intentions are pure, ambition is legit and approach is right. Adopt a 'switch off' strategy that usually involves reading, writing or picking up a new, less time consuming hobby. It's okay to be an occasional recluse. 

As an end note, I'd apologise for the number of 'I's' and 'me's' I've used in the post, to this line and if you found this rant-y or whine-y. But I guess, that what my personal blog is all about. 

Ping me, if you have a story to share or need help dealing with an issue in school, college or elsewhere.

Toodles!

Desultory Misanthropophilia

The Curious Phase of Misanthropophilia

Why do people drift away only when I'm sad? Does a subtle request for a little more empathy really get them mad? 

If only I'd known how to express my desire, for a gingerbread dose of their advice, that I'd hold up and admire 

All this commotion, this blanket of despair, of apathy, it weighs my lion down, in frail moments and misery

This isn't a phase, it's a calamity, for it didn't just touch, it hit my sanity

~~~

My misanthropic phases used to creep in once in a while , but they've become a part of life now. I wouldn't say, I begin to feel extreme hate against people, just this squalid inability to find reason in engaging in social interaction. 

Equations last when inputs trail from both sides, and at this point, I feel like I'd jeopardise all of mine by even attempting to enter discussions, because I'm incapable of contributing. My life gets dictated by apathy, once in while. I'd be lying if I say, it's tolerable. The surroundings are to blame for the lackadaisicalness. Not entirely. Mostly. It's like osmosis. When you're a swollen raisin (happy individual) in a dry environment, the latter tends to suck the juice out of you, like it's some sort of  hypertonic medium, just so that it can gain its liveliness back, at the cost of yours. Sprouting from the analogy made, it may be fair to stay away from people when you feel anti-social rather than forcing yourself to chip into a confab just because you've been smacked by monotony. Why? Because, people can be the root of boredom. They can play a hyper, instead of the hypotonic medium (conducive for maintaining your aplomb), aggravating your status quo. Ephemeral introversion isn't bad. Nothing, besides self-destruction, is bad if it helps you get back to a shade of yourself you feel stable and happy in. If the consideration of societal perception of your activities, is delaying whatever it is that you have in mind, then, remember that our society also made a figure like Radhe Maa, seem legit at one point in time. Try and love yourself so you're able to value your opinions. And if you can't, ask yourself why. This case would usually arise when you don't trust your own learnings in life. 

People, some close to you and the others, plain acquaintances, make false assumptions at times. Fallacious assumptions related to you are even more exasperating. When the frequency of these false assumptions increases, you start doubting the need for the relationship you have with them in life, simply because it disturbs your equanimity. There's no point, investing time into explaining your position to them because they'd make filthier assumptions as matters get deeper. The carrot, the enigma in the relationship is lost. Any equation that gets demanding beyond the mark, loses its value eventually. It's low maintenance equations that last and make good memories. I was watching Clio Cresswell's TEDx talk only yesterday when she started talking about the connection between the period of sustenance of the equation and compromises made to make it work. As it turns out (heh), the two are inversely proportional. 

Anti-social phases make me analyse human relationships, besides making me feel an instant need to introspect.

Lately, I've been trying to understand why, when and how we get close to people. The conclusions as of now, have been, expectedly, very scientific. I mean to say,  that every event in a relationship can be described near-accurately, by making analogies to scientific phenomena or even general science. Let me explain through a case. The case could be, understanding interactions in misanthropic phases. 

In misanthropic phases, when your urge for company is at a trough, the human tendency to connect with people persists, but, with certain modifications. The phaseal misanthropist (unknowingly) places stronger filters to how she chooses company. The company chosen is an exclusive bunch of people she opens up to, so she can reduce her discomfort. Who are these people? They're people who match her frequency. (Note : The meaning of frequency here, should not be interpreted as the rate of occurrence but as an indicator of the state of a person). Pardon me for making this look like a subject you study at school, but let's just assume, I'm a fan of structure and this is the easiest way I can get my point across. To be a little more specific, the frequency of a person, in this context is a cumulative index of his/her mood(changes one or a few times in a day), phase (lasts longer, could be a few days, weeks or months), workload, company and environment.The recurring combination of the type/degrees of each of these in a person is assumed to be his or her personality. 

Past experiences and recent musings, made me realise, that, 'the personality' is fragmented. Irrespective of the person's internal and external atmospheres, she's bound to feel emotions and enter moods, that are commonly felt by every human being in addition to her idiosyncratic ones. Let's assume that the personality's various fragments are titled A, B,C, D, E, F... so on. The 'A' tag could predominantly represent amicability, 'B' could be aggressively ambitious, 'C' may be workaholism, et cetera. These tags aren't definite and may involve a combination of emotions, moods or phases. The emotion associated with each tag is based on what the primary feeling in the entire phase is. Which personality tag we expose to the world is quite obviously, dependent on our state and the scenario we're in, at a point. Say, your best friend Amy has the A-personality tag exposed, you have the B tag on, and Amy's friend (not your acquaintance) has B too. In this locus, your frequency would match Amy's friend and not hers, which means, you'd prefer a chat with Amy's friend over a chat with her, given the chance to communicate with the former. This takes place, irrespective of whatever relationship you share with either. That's where bonding initiates. When matching of frequencies takes place in either a downcast phase or a phase that has lower chances of occurring, usually unstable, the bonds formed are stronger. To put this simply, real bonds are made in tougher phases, as, not many people are willing to take hogwash from you or handle your upsetting vibe. You'd automatically drift towards those few who understand you, the ones whose frequencies compliment yours. Matching nullifies questions like where these people come from, where they're headed, what influence they might have on you in the long run, so on. They can bridge the gap between you and them, unlike most people and that's all that matters. 

I'd call someone a close friend, if we're mutually comfortable changing our anchor frequencies to one that is needed to get either one of us out of static mode (usually the result of a bad phase), for the sake of the other's peace and love for natural, non-negative communication. Can this get problematic? Of course it can. As a matter of fact, any form of compromise can get extremely problematic, if taken for granted. When static mode becomes an everyday thing. There's a limit to the amount of balderdash anyone can take. The difference lies in where that limit exists for different people. If they've seen your negative side, they better see your positive one unless you want to be called Devdas. 

All of this seems pretty convenient. But hey, when has life been convenient for very long?

Everything is great, till this ugly human phenomena called attachment happens (I'm bitter). You depend on these angels for solace everytime you're sad. Entering disconsolate phases becomes a hobby, no matter how low they make you feel. Since, your equation with these *solace-givers* sees its most entertaining side when you're dejected, you feel like experiencing dejection, more often, just to find an incentive/excuse to talk to them even more. It isn't easy to bid these people adieu, for they've seen a real side of you, not many people get to see. You start feeling comfortable in their presence. 

Why complicate problems that can be tackled without drama? Idea is, to stay away from extreme emotion. 

Relationships end when frequency matching becomes rare or null. Deadlocks occur, if frequencies of all involved parties lie close to or on the misanthropic side. There's not much you can do to avoid situations like these, besides becoming more adjusting and considerate. 

Also, before you question my need to make all these musings technical, I'd like to say that associating the idea of human frequencies with the process of understanding relationships makes it easy for me to grasp all these bizarre patterns linking the two. Humans have their own, different ways to approach problems and find answers. The approaches may, seemingly, be distinct, when what they're all getting at, is essentially the same. What may be Music for Bach is Math for Godel and Art, for Escher. The musician may say that the C scale on the piano consists of 13 keys from C to C, eight white keys and five black keys, with black keys arranged in groups of three and two, while the mathematician would feel happier calling the same, the Fibonacci sequence.

My mind wanders way too much. 

I'm going to end this passage with a question(?) that's been floating in my head for a while now. 

Is it an independent mind that I need? Or a sharp mind that'd suit every deal? Maybe, an emotional mind that makes me empathetic? I think it's a free mind that'd do great deeds. 

Sayonara.