Ramanujan Redux

“This guy’s walking down the street when he falls in a hole. The walls are so steep he can’t get out. ”

A doctor passes by and the guy shouts up, ‘Hey you. Can you help me out?’ The doctor writes a prescription, throws it down in the hole and moves on.

“Then a priest comes along and the guy shouts up, ‘Father, I’m down in this hole can you help me out?’ The priest writes out a prayer, throws it down in the hole and moves on.

“Then a friend walks by, ‘Hey, Joe, it’s me can you help me out?’ And the friend jumps in the hole. Our guy says, ‘Are you stupid? Now we’re both down here.’ The friend says, ‘Yeah, but I’ve been down here before and I know the way out.’”

Leo McGarry, The West Wing.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War illustrates many an interesting point, but there was one thing that comes to mind—the easy path never looks like the right one. When attacking, the easy thing to do is attack head-on—it’s also the easiest way to get lit up like a Christmas tree. When defending, the easiest thing is to hunker down, don’t move—but eventually you’ll be overrun, overwhelmed, and someone else will take the place in the bunker. What is it about taking the hard path that makes it the right way to survive the longest? And why do many of us decide to choose the easy path even if we know what would make us happy?

“Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances.” Again, the easy thing is to repeat is what is successful right? But what is successful today will not necessarily be successful tomorrow. One must retool, reorient himself to his surroundings, and adapt to the situation in the proper way. This is hard. But it’s necessary.

“According as circumstances are favorable, one should modify one’s plans. “ Again, not easy to change in the moment, especially if one is set in their ways. We can think of this in business with the Entrenched Player’s Dilemma. How does one leave what they know works for them right now? Isn’t it difficult to sever ties with someone you know very well, even if this person adds nothing to your life? Nevertheless, the right choice remains there for us to accept–that our time and effort is too valuable to be spent on petty squabbles. Think of the big picture. There will be more people to meet and connect with. The time you lose in the meaningless battles you fight you will never get back.

Fight smart. Don’t just fight hard.

What are your own thoughts and elucidations on these quotes?

I ate a bag of tortilla chips today. A whole family bag of tortilla chips. This was a very bad idea. The product was inevitable–awesome nausea the rest of the night.

Logical fallacies dominated my reasoning in these cases.

–”If no one else eats these, it’ll just be a waste!” Sunk cost fallacy in full action there.

–”Because I’m going on a high protein/low carb diet. I should eat these chips now so I can go on the diet sooner.” I think that’s an affirmative conclusion from a negative premise. More likely it’s just me being a moron.

Then I go and order salty soup with noodles and bread today for lunch. I never get tired of learning the hard way.

Shoot ‘Em Up does something I never thought possible–obliterate Charles Bronson’s Death Wish body count in ninety tight minutes.

Normally I find something inspirational, observational, or whimsical about the films that I watch. However, there are certain types of films that lack plot, character development, storyline, morals, etc. I put these films in the Triple-B category (Blood, Breasts, and Believability) and rate accordingly.

Blood: Let’s just say Clive Owen kills more agents with carrots than James Bond does with his Walther PPK. Example:

Bodies fly quickly. Speed death, if you will. A for dynamics, C for contemplation.

Breasts: Monica Bellucci. There should be rules against that kind of hotness. Perfection.

Believability: Let’s just say the Mythbusters crew would blast through…well, ALL of these stunts. So I’m going to go out on a limb and say it’s not believable at all. Which is just the way I like my action movies. All adrenaline and balls baby.

Did you know that if you’re deaf and dumb, you too can reach glory at the highest sporting levels? This can certainly happen in a country like India, where big muscles will never predominate. You’ll never see someone use steroids in this sport, unless they want to pound the ball into the ground.

Iqbal is pretty much your standard cliche sports hero movie, except this time there’s a disability involved. Also touched upon are the sociological ramifications of cricket and its complete paralyzing of the Indian economy (I’d assume Europe/South America is similar with its soccer leagues), but I know little about these things. I’ d probably just blather on about the diversity of sport in America keeping us ahead of the pack instead of orally fixated on one team, all year.

I have a more interesting question: Why do these type of films appeal to us?

Certainly, being a sports hero has appealed to most of us at an early age. I know it has to me. I always wanted to be Scottie Pippen or Penny Hardaway, using suffocating defense on one end and being the unassuming sidekick to a bigger star (I knew I’d never have the talent to be anything more than unassuming), but genetics constrained me to a pitifully average 5′5″ figure by the age of 20, and I just couldn’t keep up with the faster stars. So I’d have to confine myself to the pickup courts and find passions in another.

So while I think Iqbal is a celebration of one star finding his dreams, we should also realize that our dreams are right in front of us. Ask yourself: What is it that you want to do? What is it that you enjoy doing more than anything else? Would you be willing to do anything to realize those dreams like Iqbal? Or will you be a spectator and let the Iqbals around you fulfill what’s in front of them?

Movies like this make me realize how far I must go. I have a lot to do.

Why do you enjoy about the inspirational sports film? (Think Hoosiers, The Mighty Ducks, etc.)

One other note: There is an interesting use of strategy in this movie I noticed after reading 33 Strategies of War–lull the enemy into a false sense of security, let him think that he has the advantage over you, and then pounce. It’s at the climax of the film, and it’s pretty badass. Highly enjoyable film.

Beat Chasm. You should too.

Won a game of Scrabble, lost $20 in poker. Then nausea and the Super Bowl took over. OH well.

I believe we call this underachieving.