Thoughts About Diary

 I.

I'm not gonna tell you anything new.

This thought that I have (at least I'm hoping right now that I'll write it entirely down below) must be such a common thought; probably, this has been told many times in numerous articles before.

(But I'm not going to google it now, or I'll get demotivated yet again and choose not to write it down again because of this OCD like need to be original 110% every effin time.)

(Note to self)
And PLEASE put aside your OCD of being grammatically correct all the time. Man, write it down. Don't fall into the perfectionist trap yet again, like you've always been doing, all the time.

II.

For a long time, I liked the idea of maintaining a personal diary.

But it was something that never came to me naturally, to encounter and note down "dear diary moments." More so because "maintaining a diary is such a girly thing" jaisa idiotic thought stuck in my mind, and I could not get over it for a really long time.

(I know, these are mild versions of actually misogynist thoughts.

These mild versions of "Men are Macho" jaise toxic thoughts are all around us; we can talk about that too, maybe some other time in greater detail.)

I tried making my first-ever diary on a school trip, a "Travel Diary," I can say. It was a School Trip though, accompanying me were my most classmates, including a bully who read my diary and made fun of me publicly for that.

 

(Now when I think of those silly incidences, I think,

Like Really?

His making fun of you for writing a diary pissed you off so much that you quit writing a diary altogether! Before you could even start writing?

That bully was a fool, no doubt. But so were you.! )

Future-me is furious at the past version of me, but a part of me also understands the mental state of the past me. Slightly scared, silent, and primarily introverted is how I would describe the then version of me. Hence, easy to bully, I guess.

 

A few years down the line, and I'm fascinated again by the idea of maintaining diaries. This time, inspired by a lesser-used word, "Journal."

("Journal" isn't a girly word, is it?) (Also, at this point, I believe I'm Wayyy past those thoughts regarding what is man-ly and what is not.)

 

Hence came my first stint of writing down thoughts, ideas, and experiences in hardcopy, "in Journals."

"Maintaining Journals" is, at least for me, still an intriguing phrase. Strikes instant curiosity.

Is it a Travel Journal? Or like a daily planner? Or similar to the traditional sense of "maintaining Diary"? Who knows!

Maybe this Non-Clarity of term Journal to me was the much-needed push I needed in writing direction. (You see what I did there? Right == Write :v ) It gives me the independence to write anything I want, from fiction to experiences, thoughts, or sometimes just praise words for a movie I liked.

 

(And I'm still happy being ignorant about the exact meaning for the word, maybe this is what Journals really mean, or perhaps it's just a synonym for diary and has no particular different purpose. Whatever be the case, this word brought with itself a new freshness which apparently had faded with 'diary')

 

This first stint of writing personal journals coincided with my biennial revisiting of the Harry Potter series. This time though, it was the time for reading HP novels.

No wonder my first Journal had "TOM MARVOLO RIDDLE" written on its back.

 

(sidenote:

I can think of at least one such friend who has not seen/read any of HP, and since I'm going to force all my friends to read this unnecessarily long article thingy, I gotta clear the reference up!

In the HP world, people had this excellent little option of splitting their soul into parts and storing those parts in their beloved objects, and securing these objects at some safe place, essentially means you are making yourself immortal, since a part of your soul would be safe and alive somewhere in the world, despite your body being dead (if at all.)

These soul fractions were called Horcruxes

Also, you need to commit murder to split up your souls, not really a handy option. Only evils did this.

Voldemort a.k.a. Tom Morvolo Riddle did this, villain in HP)

Tom Riddle's diary was the first Horcrux that was destroyed in HP.

 

My Journal saying "Tom Morvolo Riddle" at its back was primarily me-showing-off my love for the Harry Potter franchise, and not an attempt of myself trying to become like him or to resurrect him back into a life form.

 

III.

But I could never understand why we write Diaries.

 Are they meant to be personal? That no one else should ever read them. This always seemed like the most probable answer. After all, diaries often contain our most prized secrets as well, maybe confessions, or maybe crushes.

(But, this all sounds soo not 2010s, when we have Facebook timelines to write on, WhatsApp DMs to share secrets on when nobody really seems like holding back secrets of their life with them. Maybe this is why the Diary concept sounds soo.... 1980s 1990s types, to me, to our generation too maybe)

 

Are diaries meant to be read by other people? (My lazy confused ass finds this pointless, spending time in choosing the right words, being over-conscious about grammar, and expressing thoughts in an essay-like form to be read by others when perhaps I could very well talk about it to people in a more effective manner.)

 

I know I know,

People write their personal experiences and thoughts in diaries. Sometimes it is easier to deal with ideas when we write them down than to ponder over them in our fickling, unclear minds.

I personally find diaries most useful in revisiting past thoughts and past mental states and opinions, and I am amazed every time to see how vastly changes occur over time, changes in our views, our friends and priorities, and our overall general mentality.

 

Maybe this is the best use of Diaries, a peek into past self from future.

Here's a thought, though,

Don't you also think that however Personal our diaries are, we are Always slightly biased while writing like we are presenting the best form of ourselves to a reader unknown?

Of course, the future self is one of the tentative readers, and maybe close friends and family too sometimes, but I also seem to have this solid but hidden, unacknowledged desire that my diary would be read by other people. Someone I don't know yet but genuinely deserving people. (Not a singular someone, but rather more like "people" someone, can be plural). And I can not present ugly sides of me to them, though, hence all these extra constraints in mind while writing the diary.

 

Is it just me? (awkward then) or everyone (or, let us say, most people) who have ever written diaries have had these thoughts in their minds? I don't know.

 

I know of many diary accounts which went on to become genuinely remarkable in chapters of History. Anne Frank's diary is an example I can not Not mention, though I doubt if she had any idea while making those diary entries, that how profound impact her diary would make after she is gone.

No one knows when they are gonna go. She didn't know either.

But her diary far outlived her. She's still alive among people and memories, through all her accounts that survived and are read and told today.

Anne Frank became immortal through her diary. 

 

IV.

~~Being immortal has been man's desire since times unknown since man has existed himself, he has tried very hard to be immortal~~. This desire for immortality has long been reflected in the works of men. Imagining the existence of an all-powerful God was man's explanation to mysteries beyond his understanding, and a God of all such might must surely be immortal was obvious following reasoning.

And then began Man's desire to be immortal like God.

 

Sure, different cultures treated the concept of God differently; some had too many, some kept confusions away. And most of them try to answer questions like, "what happens afterlife."

I am in no manner ever ready to get into any discussion about their answers to these questions,

what I want to establish, though,

is the ever-present desire of Man

to learn about death,

and Afterlife,

And to outlive the death itself too?

 

Sure, most religious convos just end at the "......learning about death and afterlife". None touch the elephant-in-room desire of being immortal directly. Conversations about Immortality are kind of "frowned upon." Maybe no one had an instant solution of being immortal anyways.

In Fact, I think that concept of the Afterlife came only as an alternative explanation to Immortality, cleverly avoiding the discussion using illustrations of sorts like, "your soul is never dead," "you are born again, there is an Afterlife," "Heaven and Hell" blah-blah.

And I get that.

At the dawn of civilizations, these arguments Did make the best consoling explanation to humankind about the scary truth of death.

But do they still offer that same consolation?

 

The desire for a better afterlife into heaven, or whatever version of the afterlife story they developed in their respective cultures, is what links all the kings of different civilizations across the globe.

Grand tombs and Pyramids were not made back then to win the "UNESCO World Heritage Site" label; instead, they were only attempting to outlive death. Or maybe ensuring grand peaceful deaths, one can say.

 

And perhaps so was the reason for numerous grand statues built by these kings and noblemen.

This may remind you of the poem Ozymandias as it does to me,

Maybe about Easter Islands too, where Polynesian tribes are said to have killed each other and starved themselves to death, perhaps in attempts to build greater and greater statues.

 

Attempts to outlive deaths by asserting presence in seemingly immortal form, that is, stone-carved statues, is a pretty Pre-Historic trend. Yet people want to build taller statues even today, continuing attempts to "outlive" themselves, or to make their gods "immortal," or to make their political leader immortal too. <A twitter generation historian would say, "ya so basic, you still build statues, eww">

(If God really is immortal, why does he need your 100 feet tall approval? No point in discussing this stuff though, there always will remain a difference of opinion between most other people and me)

 

The bottom line is,

No. Statues and grand tombs didn't make those kings immortal.

One day, these statues Will be eroded away. They will be nothing but "trunkless legs of stones standing in the desert," maybe.

V.

Well,

Here's another thought.

Those kings may have really outlived themselves, if even today we are talking about Pharaoh Khufu, for his Great Pyramid. Evidently, Khufu didn't survive himself, but his name has, which might very well survive for many more millenniums like it has through the past five.

Would you consider this as a, maybe 5% success rate?

 

Let's leave old kings aside; let's talk about ancient philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, or Pythagoras. Their lives were concerned with philosophy, reason, ethics, and science. Their knowledge and thoughts have Far outlived them.

Of course, they are not alive today in a conscious, self-aware form, but their name and essentially all their life's work is living even today.

Would you consider this as a better success at outliving death? Maybe at 50%?

 

Let's face it, being immortal in the sense that you really go on to live forever, in a working body, was never really a feasible option. So many stories have been told over hundreds of years about "long but cursed lives" that actually the first imagination my mind paints about living forever is that of me being stuck in an old, crippled body. That is really scary and resembles what an "immortal but cursed life" would look like.

 

With that option off the table, assuming that uploading your consciousness into a computer and practically living forever in a conscious, self-aware form is still very, very far away into the future, what other options do we have with us, which is as close as that of Immortality?

The answer is literally everywhere.

 

Stories told since ages, surviving through generations are immortal,

Discoveries of Archimedes, Newton, and Einstein and all scientists are eternal,

Authors and novelists are immortal in their creations.

And so on.

<Even our surnames or family names seem like an attempt to immortalize the titles of ancestors>

This definition of Immortality is possible only if we allow for some flexibility to what constitutes the mortal us. Rene Descartes said, "I think therefore I am," I can think; therefore I exist; it's this ability to judge which makes us what we actually are.

A fun side fact is that our body replaces almost every molecule and cell with a new one in around seven years. I am Not who I was when I was in 9th standard, It is absurd to think for once, but can it be technically accurate if I am to believe this 'scientific Fact'? By that logic, shouldn't the survival of our minds alone qualify for Immortality? 

 

Now

Suppose it's the consciousness that constitutes what "me" is right now, and there is no perfect way for my consciousness to survive beyond an age limit. Would survival of my thoughts and ideas only qualify for being termed as Immortality?

I guess not really, not in the strict sense.

But that is our best bet so far, and that is what we have been doing so far.

Surviving as our ideas.

 

 

VI.

Nowadays, it's not just diaries.

Our thoughts, ideas, words, voices, Pictures, and Videos everything can be so quickly recorded.

Modern-day Horcruxes are easy-made; thankfully, we don't have to commit murders to make these pseudo-Horcruxes.

Pseudo? Because none of these mediums of surviving our identity can resurrect us back into our original forms, into who we actually were.

Until that time really comes when we would be able to make real-life Horcruxes using DNA cloning technology perhaps, we are good with these makeshift pseudo-Horcruxes for now.

 

(I call dibs on this idea, I will make a startup which will offer people the choice to create their Horcruxes and protect them in our highly sophisticated secured lockers, at a generous price of $99,999 only)

 

(I'm Kidding,

It offers immortality, man! Prices will be even higher.)

 

 

 

VII.

Anne Frank has become immortal. Her diary has far outlived her short stay on earth of mere 15 years. But there was another diary too, that of Anne's elder sister, Margot Frank. But her diary was never found after her family was sent to concentration camps. Only Anne's diary could make its way back to her father and the rest of the public.

 

Merely writing a diary account is not enough for your ideas to survive if no one reads them. (And there would be no mean for you to know if your thoughts are read by people or not, long after you are dead)

 

"I think therefore I am" now becomes "People observe me hence I was." Sounds very fun, honestly.

 

Countless people did leave an impact on the course of our history but sadly have left no written or oral accounts of their presence to upcoming generations

And there were countless people who left No impact on our History too

we recall none of them,

they all were genuinely mortal beings.

 

But not the philosophers of Greece, Kings of Rome, Artists of the Renaissance era. They all survive in the remarkable works they did, for stories to be told for many more generations to come.

 

However

It may very well happen that none of their works survive the end of the 21st century.

Maybe another world war would throw us all back into the stone age,

with Louvre Museum gone,

And Humanity facing far more grave challenges to face and tackle,

Than, to worry about paintings made centuries back.

 

Maybe none of this really matters.

Who is to know that homo-sapiens are at the dawn of a million-year-long era and have barely scratched through the surface, among the vastness that lies ahead to be discovered.

Or who is to know that humankind has already lived its Golden era, and fate is bringing us closer to oblivion as each day passes.

 

The desire to outlive one's mortal life seems futile once you start considering cosmic scales of times.

There may very well be a time when humankind would go extinct; after all, it is common for species to come into existence, mutate, and become extinct or evolve. Whatcha immortal ass gonna do when there's no other human to observe you. (Again reminds me of those immortal but cursed lives.)

 

VIII.

The extinction of humankind is still ages away (hopefully); I doubt if our uncountable pictures saved in phones and Google Drives will hold any value even 100 years down the line. They are generally only as good as our own memories.

Our personal memoirs outlive us only if we do something remarkable in our lives; otherwise, Humanity finds itself in TLDR (too long didn't read) type situation for records of insignificant people, who are eventually forgotten.

 

But what is "remarkable" enough to make you memorable for centuries is pretty subjective.

We remember Ram and Ravan both, Jesus and Hitler both. Of course, Hitler and Ravan are both remembered in a rather distasteful manner. Hitler caused more deaths until he took his own life, and perhaps none after he was long gone. What surprises me, though, is more deaths and murders are committed in the memories of the other two good men in enforcing their associated ideas. I'm sure Marx didn't intend to cause millions of deaths in his name when he tried to imagine a utopian society. 

 

What good are you gonna do in surviving as memory among people, as ideas in books?

There seems to be no perfect way to know how good or bad an impact my presence and my thoughts will make, if any, after I'm long gone. 

Whether in softcopy or hard, the diaries I write may sure outlive me, as a reflection of a part of my consciousness, of what my ideas looked like once upon a time.

TOM MARVOLO RIDDLE written at the back of my Journal signifies this. This Journal is my Horcrux, waiting to be revisited by a future Harry Potter 50 years later. I can only hope my Horcruxwon'tt open the chamber of secrets and unleash terror, as it did the last time in Hogwarts.