Man. Since the early days he has believed himself to be the most oderly and disiplined of all the species inhabiting this planet. That's what the word "Job" signifies, right? A role in the social for mutual benefit. A soldier to protect, a king to rule, a minister to think, a vendor to trade...all working together to build a large community. Turned out well. But every society has a menace. A person hell bent on causing trouble. The devil among the angels. The one to cause a disturbance in the order of things. A person who makes life difficult. How to deal with such people? Well I got down to assigning my own designations depending on ways to tackle the wrong doers. We all have people in our lives we want to make peace with. Our competitors, arch nemesis etc...and we have our own way to take care of such people. I've tried categorizing each person's style of action into 3 types upon observations : The monk, The knight and The assassin.
In my books, the monk is the original pure heart. I've seen people reasoning with impossible pricks, trying to convince the other people to make peace. Who wants to battle it out with the same person for their entire career anyways? Well I've seen these people take on everything the sadists throw at them and still stand up going about their business without so much as a swear. If it becomes too much, they try to reason, but will never retaliate. I immensely respect such people. But it boils my blood to see them being used. And it happens quite often. Classrooms, during projects, offices....everywhere.
The next character is the knight. Much like the monk, well that is until you cross the threshold limit. Then he turns into a bad-ass to get back at the menace. But mind you, the knight is still good at heart and will not cause any lasting damage. Maybe he'll tell the person off (loudly) or maybe a little tussle (not advised), but mostly he would not harm the enemy until he's really pissed. I think it's the ideal character. Good in nature but doesn't take crap from people after an extent. A tolerance is present, but being good at heart would not taint the person in question.
The last person on the list and the deadliest of them all. The assassin. He will be out for blood. He will ruin the person for what he has done to him. He would take revenge. The exact opposite of the monk. An evil to fight the evil.Not saying he'd kill literally (God NO!!), but he would do the same to the person who has done him wrong. Tit for tat.
There is only one reason I'm working on this post. Cause I feel there is everyone of these characters in everybody. Each of us has a monk, a knight or a wannabe assassin in him. I say wannabe assassin cause I'm assuming that no person would knowingly want to jeopardize the other person even for revenge. I can't. It happened recently too. My project was messed with. Ruined a thing I was working so hard on. Gone. Believe me. I wanted to rip him apart. You can say I lacked the guts to do that.
On the other hand, I feel that as respected a monk may be, one needs the knight to protect himself. I've seen people bulldozing competition unfairly and may be needed to be taught a lesson. There has to be a tolerance limit.
As for me, guess it just boils down to being the better human being. Good day :)
In my books, the monk is the original pure heart. I've seen people reasoning with impossible pricks, trying to convince the other people to make peace. Who wants to battle it out with the same person for their entire career anyways? Well I've seen these people take on everything the sadists throw at them and still stand up going about their business without so much as a swear. If it becomes too much, they try to reason, but will never retaliate. I immensely respect such people. But it boils my blood to see them being used. And it happens quite often. Classrooms, during projects, offices....everywhere.
The next character is the knight. Much like the monk, well that is until you cross the threshold limit. Then he turns into a bad-ass to get back at the menace. But mind you, the knight is still good at heart and will not cause any lasting damage. Maybe he'll tell the person off (loudly) or maybe a little tussle (not advised), but mostly he would not harm the enemy until he's really pissed. I think it's the ideal character. Good in nature but doesn't take crap from people after an extent. A tolerance is present, but being good at heart would not taint the person in question.
 |
| The Knight |
 |
| The Assassin |
There is only one reason I'm working on this post. Cause I feel there is everyone of these characters in everybody. Each of us has a monk, a knight or a wannabe assassin in him. I say wannabe assassin cause I'm assuming that no person would knowingly want to jeopardize the other person even for revenge. I can't. It happened recently too. My project was messed with. Ruined a thing I was working so hard on. Gone. Believe me. I wanted to rip him apart. You can say I lacked the guts to do that.
On the other hand, I feel that as respected a monk may be, one needs the knight to protect himself. I've seen people bulldozing competition unfairly and may be needed to be taught a lesson. There has to be a tolerance limit.
As for me, guess it just boils down to being the better human being. Good day :)
Lol :P it was good read...
ReplyDeleteThe good bad and ugly style
-Dee..
Glad you liked it :)
ReplyDelete