Six Years of Theater-going and Theoretical Game boards : The End of a Golden Era (4th Bottle)

And more pieces that don’t make sense unless you’ve read everything up to this point.

Concerning Paradoxes and Why They Cry (and drawing parallels)

At this point I ask an absurd question that is not so absurd after all, the one unofficially posed by Umineko’s philosophy that has troubled humanity since it forever – what is this concept called living and being happy. Hold whatever thoughts there may be for a bit. Someone who lives isn’t necessarily happy, but someone who is happy can be considered to be living. Living refers to the existing yet it doesn’t denote any type of positive or negative state. Someone in a coma can be considered to be ‘living’ despite being unable to move or think yet that person might be considered to be living because the individual is not dead yet. Someone who has amnesia can be considered to be living despite not remembering who he is. This ideal they call happiness is found while living but it isn’t granted because one lives.

“The paradox of happiness” as they call it. A both simple and impossible blissful state, referred to as one that can’t be obtained by pursuing it, but obtained by not searching for it. People wish to be happy, appreciated, and fulfilled. They like find joy in what they do and are proud of the decisions they make. They rejoice when their actions give them positive results. They become ecstatic when something goes right. The utmost state one wishes to obtain is to find joy and when one does one tries to keep it as long as possible as if it is something that would disappear the moment they look away, like an illusion. Happiness is fleeting and only last for a while for many, while for others they are unable to find it in their lifetime. For the luckiest individuals it last until they decide joy has left them.

Finding happiness is another of the main cores of such stories because everyone mainly lacks it. Not because it is non-existent but they only possesses small bits of it as if their happiness is “incomplete”. But is it not a common case in general? A discontented person who has a good position seeks to get a better promotion because he believes the one he has is “not good enough”, yet this quest never ends, therefore that person is not happy. The person who makes good money regularly complains about any increase of living expenses, therefore that person is not happy. The proud mother who has a good family but worries about her daughter and husband’s financial problems, therefore she is not really happy. The woman who despite having a happy family still holds grudges from her childhood; therefore that person still unhappy and thus she ruins any newfound happiness. Thus no one finds joy.

One cannot force a person to be happy because it is not a quality that can be adopted easily. One can be happy, one can be miserable, and one can also be in the middle. Such states are decided by the said person and these are decided by the events and world that person lived in, and also by how one viewed them. The state of misery is feeling absolute displeasure, while the sensation of moderate unhappiness is a daunting recurring discontentment. Happiness is the state when a person feels fulfilled and content with the world, no matter how small it may be.

The problem presented was of individuals who were ‘living’ but it didn’t mean they were happy. It was also about individuals who tried to find happiness, who failed, and who succeeded, after death even if briefly. If one wishes for bliss then..

Why Thing Don’t Go According to Plan

“Please, tell me my efforts will certainly be rewarded.” (quote)

One cannot expect a big return for little effort, can it? It would not be fair. It would not make sense. “I want this.” “I want that.” “But I don’t want to work for it. It’s too much effort.” Not worth the time unless I have a guarantee that it will happen. In reality, there are no guarantees. Nothing is carved in stone that an event is sure to happen. There is no reward without effort. It was the same for the capricious witch that would ignore vague requests wishing to be famous or influential without any effort from their part.

But if we do something right should we immediately be praised for our efforts? A reward is not always given when a good deed is done. It’s far more common to be quick to only act when there is a mistake but not as often to praise someone for a good action. The world in the story somewhat portrays unconcern and selfishness as common in society. There are numerous problems yet they don’t seem to be solved anytime soon. There is also this “stillness” that makes it appear like they don’t ever be solved.

Maybe in all of this we mean that people are fundamentally on their own. That’s the idea one might occasionally get. Their situations are common yet unique. They are difficult to grasp and understand. “People are worlds” – that is probably the best way I can describe it. The characters are highly individualistic figures that stand out and appear alone, despite relationships, like self-contained figures. They all have pasts they cannot forget about which consequently have shaped them “into who they are now” for better or worse, often for the worse. They all live expecting to change or to make something change while they are still alive. But this is yet to happen. Each problem and situation is represented in their own world as the problem is theirs alone – so they are the only ones that can solve them.

The Gambler’s Wish, Certainty, and other Fallacies

Life is a gamble and not so metaphorically. One where we eagerly expect to obtain winnings after we bet on the decisions we make. When we lose we get frustrated, when we win we rejoice. The best decision maker makes the best possible decisions, the seasoned decision maker makes decision based on past experiences and observation, the poor decision maker continues to be one barely improving so and so on. This process continues over and over again because the procedure does not end – because the future is uncertain.

Individuality aside, is everyone different from one another because of their position or status? The powerful CEO still has to make decisions that will decide in what direction the company will go. And every now and then in a bad economy that decision might cost him his own company and be forced to become an ordinary salary man. Is the powerful CEO so different from the regular person who invested his life earnings but failed miserably? Granted, they both led different life-styles but when it came to making those decisions and facing the consequences they met similar fates. The decisions they both made led to a result.

One cannot rely on uncertainties and assume that courage and recklessness are the same. One can’t assume that luck will eventually be on one’s side all the time either. Same as the man who digs himself into an early grave as the few wins he obtains can’t match all the losses. He loses, he comes back, he loses again, and comes back again. The man cannot stay away because he stubbornly believes he can gain back what he lost. “Double or nothing”, he says. The individual who falls into the gambler’s fallacy expecting a “mystical force”, random deity, or some natural balance to help him out in his predicament, thinking the next time will be different, unaware that there is no rule that warrants a win after an X number of losses.

By the same principle that because after 99 consecutive coins flips tails isn’t guaranteed after miraculously getting nothing but heads up to that point. In actuality, the result would still be 50/50 between heads and tails by the 100th coin flip. There is no such thing as absolute certainty.

Nothing is guaranteed, not even compensation for one’s best efforts. Similar to the coin flipped by a theoretical gambler that it can go either way, even promised guarantees that were meant to be kept aren’t. Especially once things get out of control. It goes beyond human control. Also even for those supposed to be impartial to outside elements such what one would expect as surefire. Surely, no one expects it. Such thing that is impossible to predict that would require nothing short of divination. Such thing is called “uncertainty”. If so, in front of such overwhelming vagueness – does one still try? Or does one gives up?

The Theory of the 9-Digit Padlock

Uncertainty. Answers. Actually obtaining the right solutions is quite something. An “answer” can be a working combination of variables, a set of numbers or words that “only work when put together in a certain way”, which placed in any other order, give us an error message. There are numerous problems with straightforward and simple solutions everywhere, same as there are simple problems with difficult executions.

I recall several years ago the first time I tried to open a padlock. I was certain I had the right combination number but the execution was wrong. I spent several minutes trying, trying to make it work but was repetitively unsuccessful until someone came over and opened it for me. I was surprised how easy it seemed yet how strangely challenging it was to make the device work like it was intended. This made me think how something so simple could also be difficult.

Let’s imagine a 2 digit [?][?] combination with possible numbers 1-9 for each. The correct combination possibly won’t be achieved on our first, second or third try but surely, surely with enough attempts one can manage to get the right combination by trying every possible combination starting with [1][x] until [9][x].

With time and exhausting every possibility one can obtain the right “combination”, thus “the correct solution.”

This assumes that there is time and the combination is relatively straightforward. In the case where there is not enough time and the possibilities are not limited to 2 digits like the simple padlock example the situation is quite different. What if the padlock in question has a 3 digit [][][] combination instead? What do you do in this case? Even by adding “one more” digit our chances of getting the right solution like we did before significantly decreases. Then what do you do when dealing with a “9-digit padlock?” In this case guessing the solution becomes virtually impossible.

There is no meaning or point in attempting it unless one has the right combination in the first place. One has to come up with the actual solution to get the right combination. Or at least correctly figure out [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][?] the first eight out of the nine digits to be close to a solution.

This is also a metaphor for what I mean. Here, the “padlock”, the “numbers” and the “correct answer” have more than one meaning. Suppose one is dealing with a real life situation of uncertainty, a theoretical 9-digit padlock. Getting the right combination is not reasoning. It has nothing to do with obtaining a solution based on information. In this way no matter how gifted the thinker is, he won’t be able to obtain the right combination because the combination is a straight set of random numbers. Random guessing becomes senseless when one is past dealing with limited variables such as in our first examples with few digits when it was possible to exhaust the possibilities.

There are solutions that exist yet are near impossible to guess, aren’t there? They are similar to the 9-digit padlock which combination is nothing but random numbers in which guessing hardly makes a difference. Nevertheless, aren’t these “combinations” actually similar to something else? A “lock” that is opened when certain numbers are inserted or the “right” combination is applied. They are like the decisions and actions. That only work when certain actions are executed in certain ways. If they are executed correctly they open. If they are done incorrectly, they never do.

And at the same time, one can also use the idea of a [combination] to refer to an “answer” or to a “solution” of a theoretical puzzle that can be deduced by the presented pieces.

The strict concept remains – “the answer is only right when the result is the correct one”, however, as opposed to the padlock where the combination must be executed turning left or right, reasoning doesn’t necessarily have to follow a certain procedure to obtain the correct solution. The procedure varies but as long the combination is right and regardless of order, when all the pieces are put in the right places, the theoretical box opens.

Then does one know the combination in the first place? Or does one not know the combination to begin with?

As to Why Miracles are Beautiful because They Hardly Happen and Other Impossibilities

– and a miracle may happen

A miracle is a miracle because it always never happens, doesn’t it? What state would the world if everyone got what they wish for. Everyone would be rich, esthetically perfect, and globally popular. Miracles are something of “exceptions to the rules” because they shouldn’t happen. If they would normally occur then they wouldn’t be called miracles they’d be natural occurrences instead, so calling them miracles would be impossible. So for a majority of people miracles won’t be granted and they won’t witness miracles in their life time either.

Would a person believe in miracles in real life even though they’ve never seen or experience one? Isn’t there something fundamentally irrational about the matter?

I do not know of the veracity of miracles because they have never happened to me. Nothing considered a miracle has been granted. They are alien concepts from fiction, created by others. No, “to me it is like miracles don’t exist and don’t see why they would in the first place.” The idea is quite irrational. But the thought is intriguing, isn’t it? It’s as if something supernatural gives people “these chances”, these “second chances” to right a wrong or to do-over what it shouldn’t, in bizarrely rare occasions.

Isn’t also interesting being neutral to the existence of luck is considered ok, yet “bad luck” is considered superstitious? A person may not believe he has ‘good luck’ yet he can be overly conscious when he walks past a ladder or encounters a black cat. Yet he believes in these rituals after whatever initially troubled him goes away, thinking that charm probably did the trick – ignoring that it sure wasn’t that he acted with more caution the following weeks what solved the problem.

We rejoiced when something good happens to us and praise our good luck and whoever it was responsible for it. However, when the result is negative we are quick to deny these assumed “positive forces” were involved in whatever brought us bad luck. Vigorously making the clear difference between who or what we thank when the outcome is positive and when the outcomes is negative.

I pose the following, could it be that some events just happen because they do? And there is no real reason? Neither positive nor negative? “Miracles are near impossible positive events.” So the question is – would a negative event which has .1 out of 100000000 chances not be considered a miracle?

It wouldn’t, would it? No one would be overjoyed to find out that out of the millions he was one of the least fortunate. That person would not consider himself or herself lucky. A miracle is considered something impossibly good, a level that is above any positive adjective, one who is ultimately fortunate. It would be impossible for the individual to consider that the most unlikely tragedy, “the antithesis of miracles”, had been granted to them because that is not the definition of a miracle. After all, we are talking about a miracle and a miracle can *only* be positive in nature.

In effect, miracles are only miracles when they do us good. That is why people seek it when they are the only one which can solve problems with no solutions. A miracle is, roughly speaking, supposed to be able “solve an unsolvable problem”, problems that have no solution at the given time.

A miracle from anyone’s perspective is the culmination of the best outcome possibly conceivable. In a few words, miracles are beautiful because they are solutions to impossible problems and because they hardly happen.

An Old Forgotten Recollection of Fragments

Let’s get a bit more metaphysical. Suppose that someone in their very early years just barely knowing how the world functioned wondered how the sun worked. Thinking there was a starting point for something like the sun somewhere, no matter how far away it seemed, did a test on one those odd days when the sky is orange. After moving a fair distant, which in theory wasn’t much, realizes that such feat was impossible after all so stops and heads back.

You know what is one interesting detail yet very evident about this early experiment? When that person looked back the sun was still in the /same position/ as if one had not walked a single step. Naturally, this is logical, after all. The sun is not on earth, it is a star, so in actuality it is impossible to actually reach it no matter the distance or years one walks. From the sun’s perspective one would walking in circles, from that person’s perspective it looked like walking towards it. Do you see the immense difference? No matter how fast a person runs, reaching the star on the horizon is virtually impossible. But there was no way one could comprehended this right away when such elementary concept wasn’t fully introduced, neither was the concept of impossibility.

There is a somewhat positive unique quality to this story. Because such are the originally strange (now inconceivable) experiences are only goes through when one hasn’t yet learned how the world works before one grows older and learns about the world and these former “mysteries” become common knowledge and dull trivia to the point of possibly making this short story even more absurd than it is.

Nevertheless, let me remind you that this is only absurd today as the sun was a mystical figure from someone’s perspective who barely understood it in the past. Such was the case for older civilizations which considered it a god. Now everybody knows that it is the star of this solar system that provides us with light and life, one which seems like rises from one point and disappears in another but in reality it is just the earth rotating. But back then it must have seemed like pure magic.

The point of this story is that everybody has experienced such things in some way or another – from mistaking shadows for monsters, random sounds for creatures or spirits, or believing old stories and legends to be real. At one point in their lives, these misconceptions of what exists and what doesn’t, walked a very fine line. Then at some point, everyone realizes the “reality” they live in and accept it.

One would associate this notion to the “rabbits on the Moon” on terms of irrationality and impossibilities. What seems irrational right now may not have been in the past. It’s not true to say it isn’t so other than because of strong pride. People learn as they go bit by bit. Only when they /gain/ certain knowledge one starts to deny these notions, thus consider them absurd because none of them can be or could have been real at any time. This is what it means to stop believing in the existence of the unlikely or “impossible elements” because they can’t be and couldn’t have been true.

Concerning Reality Which is Both What is in Front of us and Not

No one, no creature, is already all-knowing and wise in the ways of the world the moment they are born, they learn about the world, then later form an idea, is a long process. It is years later that you get your answer about why the sky happens to be blue. It’s later that you realize that there is something like the sea and how they were formed. It’s only later that you learn in actuality how phones or electricity work instead of thinking “that’s how just they work”.

Such events, what seemed like magic, surprise us because we didn’t imagine that those things worked differently than we originally thought.

I repeat that it’s not possible to reach a star on the horizon by walking, same as it is a safe bet that there are no rabbits on the moon as any logical and informed person knows. These are not debatable. Nonetheless, the point is not that there can’t be rather the idea of discarding one’s notions because of others, making one acknowledge what is true and false, even those that don’t always need to or those which actually are not.

While, many early notions may be born from misguided conclusions and proved false, some of them might still be true despite overwhelming odds saying otherwise. Denying its existence is what makes them untrue in the person’s eyes, therefore they become completely false as result. They transform into “absolute truths” because everyone believe them.

One can’t shake the feeling that something seems to be lost while this process happens. On one hand, there is updating one’s notions, on the other there is discarding part of oneself while doing so. Is it actually better? Is necessary? Is it progress? Just the way it is intended? One of them might be it. So who cares about past irrational convenient delusions, anyhow? Wouldn’t it be better to stomp these deluded notions once and for all? Why not step in and do everyone a favor and “kill the magic?” If you can, why shouldn’t you? If not, encourage it? Or take the disinterested route and leave them to their personal illusions?

In not so many words, “Illusions to Illusions”

Like the rhetorical questions above this one has real answer – but isn’t it still an illusion? Perhaps I can’t answer this very well. Very well, then. I agree that I am one of those blobs of anti-magic toxic unable to see what isn’t in front of themselves like many. Nevertheless, I disagree on the options above. Maybe because of a disposition to neutrality that neither seeks senseless conflict nor supports notions I don’t truly believe in. But I will say that after everything is said and done there *is* something wrong when a part is discarded to gain something else, especially when that part was once important. There is an uncomfortable sensation that something could be been prevented or whether or not it was necessary to begin with.

And this..*this* something that appeared several times in these years while reading – the idea of losing part of oneself as one makes sense of the world and as one tries to find a place in the world. Not a lost naivety but a once unique way to look at things with clear, fascinated, and unbiased eyes before the flat rationality sets in. When everything was once possible, a sort of limitless idea of the universe where, even if temporary, at some point they might have existed – even if still fictional nonetheless.

If such thing could exist, then one could call that “magic.”

The End of a Golden Era (and Who Killed the Detective in the Room)

The question was what is truth? Is it something that can be acquired? Something that exists? Do you buy it at a store, with money? It is then obtained from others? Something that is final?

The tormented last survivor who hasn’t moved on with her life because it is impossible for her, comes back as a girl to a theoretical reality where she finds her truth. What is the truth? The reality she wishes to accept based on her progress up to that point. Both positive and negative experiences are measured against the other and combined resulting in a final decision. What she accepts, what she refuses to accept. That is her world. A personal decision. Lastly, the evil witch who commends her to damnation, a result where her goal is death and an innumerable number of starved goats devour the world..

Are the readers so different from those starved goats who would wish for a tragedy to continue instead of letting it finish? To let it continue means for the murders to continue with no end and the characters to become both culprits and victims for all eternity as well as the destruction of the original game board. They’ll act the same but in reality they’ll be no different than your chess set purchased at a local store, plastic, soulless. So we could have something that never reaches an end? I admit I once considered that before the final chapter because I was more than already accustomed to the game. Dawn made a statement. Requiem made it clear – the game could not go on any further. By the time EP8 appeared the game had run its course and it was past overdue. The tale had to end. All one had to do was accept it. No matter how one felt about it, there are things that are good because they end and this was the end.

When looking for truth one found there were more out there who didn’t want or cared for answers even those who initially were interested in it. Instead used rhetoric and other explanations to stop looking for answers, the game then became stagnant. Finally, even the story and the author were against it. At one point, it was no longer what it was since the original idea was to have a real showdown with the author.

When the other player no longer plays to win, there is no reason to continue a game. Without a problem to solve, there is no longer a need for someone to solve it. At some point, the theorist grows tired. Truth is, that the theorist has become exhausted for a good while. Same was for me, I’ve spent many hours composing these entries more than I can count. I’ve given this much thought to these last entries, equally so, more than I wish to mention.

As anyone can see this section is for all countless armchair detectives out there who tackled this problem because they found something interesting. Though, concerning true solutions are by now a moot point this part still must be mentioned.

The Solution According to Fiction

And a final answer? And that, that would means providing a definite answer to a problem with unknown solution, wouldn’t it?

Perhaps the lesson is something one is not often accustomed to – to not obtain an answer for everything. Although, the problems found in books, trivia, and the puzzles solved by logic can have strange answers, they are still within one’s grasp. A poignant reminder, that no matter the amount of knowledge one accumulates, there are still many mysteries that eludes us. Many of them will forever remain that way.
Then perhaps there is some beauty in not knowing at all, so that in doing so the charm of it is never lost in such a way that it walks a fine line between “what it is” and “what it could be”.

So also it is the case for many parts of life where one chooses to either do or not to. Think so or not. Such as the white lie that provides comfort, or the bliss of not knowing. Then.. then perhaps there is some forgotten beauty in the intangible magic that everything and everyone carries. The simplest acts that would otherwise be ignored or given little credit.

It was not neither magic nor the uncooperative players nor the audience who failed the detective but its own limit to see beyond himself. To consider what only wanted to and and only see what it wanted to see. To prove only what she wanted to prove and so falls into circular reasoning and the like. And that while deduction and logic are powerful and effective in their own right, they are not absolute. And that at times they can amount to almost zero. It was not who killed the detective in the room as much as it was “what” this faceless figure forgot, lacked, was unable to understand, and moreover see. Realizing it has not been about who but “what” killed magic in the first place. It was that the detective is incomplete.

The late realization of neither logical nor complex problems but of common facts. That something that has no real known solutions and without solid proof and confirmation everything is no more than conjecture. Because plenty of situations are like that and not as conveniently designed as theoretical puzzles. And so inside one’s theoretical box the answer is whichever one prefers – because at the end of the day, isn’t that what matters. The moment magic, not the supernatural force, but intangible driving forces behind everything, die – is the moment they end. They then become mere fiction.

On that note, after having written this much I don’t think of myself a devoted reader and my interest in the mystery genre doesn’t run too deeply. After having read my fair share, by far not enough by extremely versed mystery fans’ standards I concluded this as well. Not for the lack of appeal by far as it provides immense ground for theory making but because the realm of problem solving is too broad to be contained in a single field. My interest in mystery novels was not entirely in the genre itself but the field it covers that is dearly what we have been using and talking about all along – problem solving and possibilities.

Because few of the fictional characters feel realistic, few of the culprits were memorable, and there was no real reason to solve the puzzle more than for the satisfaction of doing so. This was true as it concerns me as they were more logical problems for the mind to solve more than complete works. This is far from taking away from the genre as it may sound, but to categorically emphasize the realization I would have missed had I not read any of them and engaged in these detective novels Because it is only after going through this golden era of fictional stories that it becomes evident a lack of essence in them.

Perhaps this is all philosophical drivel, nonsense, but there is also the same chance that this might also make ample sense. Reading this far in – might be evidence that it does in some way. Only you, whoever reads this, can know that.

AFTERWORD : The Why-Dunnit

This has been all very fascinating, but are we done? Yes, we are, and this very long discourse ends here today, October 6th. This has also been written in a bit of a general and cryptic way so whatever is here can be understood in more than one way because it isn’t exactly about anything in particular. I prefer to keep it that way.

There is often a reason for what happens though not always apparent and these are mine. The project hash been many things but it’s been two in particular. One, an exercise in logic. Two, to find something new and interesting.

As supernatural as it was the problems posed were notoriously down to earth. As I kept reading I found elements in the story that were related to these questions so I grew even more interested in a different way than expected. I thought to myself – “I want to see what type of answer the creator of this story can provide.” I want to read what interpretation the author can provide of these problems. Was it any character in particular? No one in particular but a combination of many of them. To be precise, it was a concept. If I have to say it, I’d say there was two in particular. Did I get an answer? I obtained my answer. I corroborated the one I had, at the same time I also revised past ones. I was satisfied and I was dissatisfied. I was surprised and vacant. Was discontent and overjoyed. In the end, it was trivial but of great importance. That is the type of answer. You could account much of all this writing to those two. Also problem solving is really fun, you know? Let’s not forget about that.

I do actually want to write more about problem solving and theories but after a while one realizes that this problem puzzle solving/mysteries genre is the niche of the niche. There aren’t many of them to start with that can provide that many theories and content. However, they do exist, so it’s always a possibility. Maybe somewhere else at some other time. That is unknown.

That’s also something I’m proud of, to be one of the rare places that wrote about theories and problem solving at large. I’d like someone do the same and try to solve the most complex problems. Whether they get it right or not. To openly show their thoughts and theories. It doesn’t matter. It’s more of a matter of thoroughly thinking, what counts.

I would really like a read a site like that. As of this writing there’s no evidence to the contrary and likely there won’t be one. That’s the only real concern here.

After the span of many years which in actually are longer than this that there’s been plenty of changes. I’m still a rather serious person and part of the natural coldness has dissipated. There are quite a lot of things that can be best seen and others only viewed from different angles. Everything comes with ups and downs. While something is lost, something else is gained. And while there was also dissatisfaction from the conclusion, there was value in it. In the end that’s what is important.

And if I had to pick a musical piece to encapsulate everything it’d be Sirabe. That sounds about right. Something important happened and something clicked back then too. In your case, you might know what that is.  Normally, I wouldn’t write any of this or this much, but I think that for anyone who has taken the time to read this far, this seems quite pertinent. I’m glad that this all happened.

After writing for a good while I am exhausted. If these pieces are overdue is because I wanted to put together all my thoughts of what I thought about everything relevant. Not only that, but the abstract concepts it evoked which was important. Writing this extensively was something I had to do for my own reasons. In few words, I wanted to see what I actually thought about all of these years. I suppose I never expected anyone in particular to read this far, especially since it has taken this long. If you have made it this far then I am here to express my congratulations and show my intrigue, for I am sure that there was something here of great value and interest that drew you to this place. In reality, I doubt I’ll ever be able to write everything on my mind but this is the closest I’ll get to right now. I could write a couple thousands more words but this about covers my thoughts. These were long years but I enjoyed them including the negative and positive experiences. Those long hours of writing, and the thrill of solving problems again, the conferences, the sound of rain, the sound of the clock, and those theoretical tea parties.

Maybe I’ll come back years from now and re-read these long pieces and remind myself what it was done many years from now. I’l bet it’ll be interesting to read what I wrote. Or if someone else does and let me know what they think. I bet they’ll look puzzled when they do, “What was that all about?” – I might think. “How about that author from back then huh?”, they’ll say.

What will I do..? The bliss of peacefulness and simplicity aren’t so bad.  Spending the days painting, writing, and reading books in the afternoon for a while would be nice. That would be splendid. Maybe I’ll take up painting again, finish a novel, pick up an instrument again, completely fill a sketchbook full with portraits, continue reading the several books of any interesting topics I come across. Reading is very important after all. There is still plenty to learn and I’m sure there are still wonderful problems out there to solve. Not all necessarily in book form, but wouldn’t mind them if they were. Occasionally, sitting down on a comfortable chair on a quite afternoon looking outside a window solving theoretical problems. Enjoying the cool freeze, seeing the falling autumn leaves, while sipping some tea and occasionally having some impromptu arrangements.

One more thing, stay hungry.

– I am sure something interesting will happen again.

The End

Advertisements