Warning: Long Piece Disclaimer
We were all in Satya's house. It was one of those weekend nights that we had decided to camp out at his place. The 'maal' was there and we all smoked up. Just before coming to Satya's place, Rohit and me had stopped over at Rohit's place, and I picked up a small book of jokes knowing that it would prove to be useful after our 'session'. And I was very right. It did not crack us up with laughter as I had intended but it did pave the way to one of the most immersing intellectual discussions that we as a group have ever had.
We had settled down in Satya's living room after a round of p*t. And I picked up the joke book to read some stupid jokes that would have us all rolling on the floor in incontrollable laughter. Kitty kept on chiding me for the level of planning I had shown by coming armed with a joke book just so we could laugh our asses off after the 'session'. As it were, the jokes were not of the standard that I had expected, and I lost interest in the book after reciting aloud a couple of jokes for the benefit of the audience. I put the book down and Kitty picked it up to see if he could spot an interesting one.
Listen to this, said Kitty:
" In 5th Century B. C., a barber asks his customer, 'How would you like to have your hair cut?' And the customer replies , 'In silence.' "
What a ridiculous joke.
Satya: Yeah I agree. But why in God's name did he have to add the opening phrase 'In 5th Century B. C.'. In what way, did that contribute to the joke or have anything to do with the joke at all?
Me: That, my dear Satya is what they call 'attention to detail'.
Satya: Balls. That was totally unnecessary information. I don't call that attention to detail.
Me: Well, it still is, even if it was unnecessary to the essence of the joke. The joke could have actually happened in 5th Century B.C., I'm not saying it did, but it could have; and the author knowing this fact chose to add it in his narration, in spite of knowing very well that it would not have any effect on the joke itself. Paying attention to the minutiae, is what I call attention to detail.
Satya: I'm not convinced...
Kitty (who was incidentally the only member of the group not under influence):
Let me clarify... In our company we had a session on hospitality as part of our training. During that session, we were told, 'Imagine delegates from Schneider, France were coming to Bangalore for a couple of days. How would you show them around the city and make sure that they had a good time?'
All the groups came up similar stuff and nobody did a bad job. Everyone said they would give some small gifts which they could take back as souvenirs to France. but only my team went one step further and said that we would give them an ivory idol of the Lord Ganesha. And the instructor commended us for our attention to detail.
Me: Now that's a good example. Everybody thought about giving a gift, but Kitty's team actually put their heads together and decided on a specific gift. They paid attention to specifics. That in my opinion is attention to detail. Say you were to take them out for lunch. Thats a given. But if you went ahead and thought of the specific restaurant, decided what you would order for them in advance during the planning stage; that's attention to detail.
Kitty: The fact that we thought of a contextual present, An Ivory Hindu Idol, and not some parker pen shows that we paid attention to the context. We realized that we had to give them something that would remind them of India, not just some gift.
Nikhil: Yeah I hadn't thought of it that way, but your explanation is a greater degree of attention to detail.
Vijay: In a way, I like to think that attention to detail is something that goes to various degrees. The deeper you go, the better the level of detail...
Nikhil: The most important part is the appreciation. When you see attention being paid to detail, you will appreciate it.
Satya: There is nothing to appreciate about attention to detail. If its there, you just notice it and its there, but nothing to be happy about.
Nikhil: No, you will definitely apprecaite it as the observer. I'm talking from the observer's point of view. You are talking from the doer's point of view. A person who is setting up the environment say, in a movie, will pay meticulous attention to detail, not because he expects any appreciation for it, but just because he wants to pay attention to detail.
Me: Yes... Say I'm making a movie that chronicles your life, Satya. When I come to the scene where I show your living room, I would take the pains to make sure every book that you now have in your bookshelf are also in the set that I reproduce; and I also take pains to see that the books are even arranged in exactly the same way that you see them now. Any Tom, Dick or Harry who sees the documentary would not care less for the books in the shelf. But if you were to see the documentary, you would notice the books and appreciate it. Why? I had no need to go into all that trouble to set up the minutiae, knowing it would not make a difference to a majority of the viewers except you, but I still went ahead and did it anyway. Thats attention to detail.
Nikhil: As you can see, both the doer and the observer have to be there and know the details individually for attention to detail to have any meaning.
Me: I would disagree. Take Sanjay Leela Bhansali. He creates such elaborate sets in his movies. Thats because he is a perfectionist. But thats who he is. And as an audience, you appreciate his sets. But Sanjay would have done it anyway. Not for the audience but for himself. And he would have done it even if the set 's details did not in anyway enhance the story telling. i continue to stress the point that attention to detail does not have to be contextual. It can just be there. Its just attention to detail.
Nikhil: Hmm... Its amazing how we all had so many different points of view about 'attention to detail'. And its difficult to contest anybody's point of view here. Everybodys explanation makes perfect sense if you think about it carefully.
Rohit: Yeah, wow this was a great conversation. And to think it all started from the phrase 'In 5th century B.C.' ...
Kitty: Imagine... If the author had actually imagined a group of people like us would spot this tiny attention to detail and had intentionally put it there, so that he could spark this discussion among us.
Footnote: I don't know how many people will appreciate this piece, but the guys who were there will definitely smile when they come across this piece. And guys, I hope I have done justice to the conversation and given attention to detail for your benefit... ;)
We were all in Satya's house. It was one of those weekend nights that we had decided to camp out at his place. The 'maal' was there and we all smoked up. Just before coming to Satya's place, Rohit and me had stopped over at Rohit's place, and I picked up a small book of jokes knowing that it would prove to be useful after our 'session'. And I was very right. It did not crack us up with laughter as I had intended but it did pave the way to one of the most immersing intellectual discussions that we as a group have ever had.
We had settled down in Satya's living room after a round of p*t. And I picked up the joke book to read some stupid jokes that would have us all rolling on the floor in incontrollable laughter. Kitty kept on chiding me for the level of planning I had shown by coming armed with a joke book just so we could laugh our asses off after the 'session'. As it were, the jokes were not of the standard that I had expected, and I lost interest in the book after reciting aloud a couple of jokes for the benefit of the audience. I put the book down and Kitty picked it up to see if he could spot an interesting one.
Listen to this, said Kitty:
" In 5th Century B. C., a barber asks his customer, 'How would you like to have your hair cut?' And the customer replies , 'In silence.' "
What a ridiculous joke.
Satya: Yeah I agree. But why in God's name did he have to add the opening phrase 'In 5th Century B. C.'. In what way, did that contribute to the joke or have anything to do with the joke at all?
Me: That, my dear Satya is what they call 'attention to detail'.
Satya: Balls. That was totally unnecessary information. I don't call that attention to detail.
Me: Well, it still is, even if it was unnecessary to the essence of the joke. The joke could have actually happened in 5th Century B.C., I'm not saying it did, but it could have; and the author knowing this fact chose to add it in his narration, in spite of knowing very well that it would not have any effect on the joke itself. Paying attention to the minutiae, is what I call attention to detail.
Satya: I'm not convinced...
Kitty (who was incidentally the only member of the group not under influence):
Let me clarify... In our company we had a session on hospitality as part of our training. During that session, we were told, 'Imagine delegates from Schneider, France were coming to Bangalore for a couple of days. How would you show them around the city and make sure that they had a good time?'
All the groups came up similar stuff and nobody did a bad job. Everyone said they would give some small gifts which they could take back as souvenirs to France. but only my team went one step further and said that we would give them an ivory idol of the Lord Ganesha. And the instructor commended us for our attention to detail.
Me: Now that's a good example. Everybody thought about giving a gift, but Kitty's team actually put their heads together and decided on a specific gift. They paid attention to specifics. That in my opinion is attention to detail. Say you were to take them out for lunch. Thats a given. But if you went ahead and thought of the specific restaurant, decided what you would order for them in advance during the planning stage; that's attention to detail.
Kitty: The fact that we thought of a contextual present, An Ivory Hindu Idol, and not some parker pen shows that we paid attention to the context. We realized that we had to give them something that would remind them of India, not just some gift.
Nikhil: Yeah I hadn't thought of it that way, but your explanation is a greater degree of attention to detail.
Vijay: In a way, I like to think that attention to detail is something that goes to various degrees. The deeper you go, the better the level of detail...
Nikhil: The most important part is the appreciation. When you see attention being paid to detail, you will appreciate it.
Satya: There is nothing to appreciate about attention to detail. If its there, you just notice it and its there, but nothing to be happy about.
Nikhil: No, you will definitely apprecaite it as the observer. I'm talking from the observer's point of view. You are talking from the doer's point of view. A person who is setting up the environment say, in a movie, will pay meticulous attention to detail, not because he expects any appreciation for it, but just because he wants to pay attention to detail.
Me: Yes... Say I'm making a movie that chronicles your life, Satya. When I come to the scene where I show your living room, I would take the pains to make sure every book that you now have in your bookshelf are also in the set that I reproduce; and I also take pains to see that the books are even arranged in exactly the same way that you see them now. Any Tom, Dick or Harry who sees the documentary would not care less for the books in the shelf. But if you were to see the documentary, you would notice the books and appreciate it. Why? I had no need to go into all that trouble to set up the minutiae, knowing it would not make a difference to a majority of the viewers except you, but I still went ahead and did it anyway. Thats attention to detail.
Nikhil: As you can see, both the doer and the observer have to be there and know the details individually for attention to detail to have any meaning.
Me: I would disagree. Take Sanjay Leela Bhansali. He creates such elaborate sets in his movies. Thats because he is a perfectionist. But thats who he is. And as an audience, you appreciate his sets. But Sanjay would have done it anyway. Not for the audience but for himself. And he would have done it even if the set 's details did not in anyway enhance the story telling. i continue to stress the point that attention to detail does not have to be contextual. It can just be there. Its just attention to detail.
Nikhil: Hmm... Its amazing how we all had so many different points of view about 'attention to detail'. And its difficult to contest anybody's point of view here. Everybodys explanation makes perfect sense if you think about it carefully.
Rohit: Yeah, wow this was a great conversation. And to think it all started from the phrase 'In 5th century B.C.' ...
Kitty: Imagine... If the author had actually imagined a group of people like us would spot this tiny attention to detail and had intentionally put it there, so that he could spark this discussion among us.
Footnote: I don't know how many people will appreciate this piece, but the guys who were there will definitely smile when they come across this piece. And guys, I hope I have done justice to the conversation and given attention to detail for your benefit... ;)
10 comments:
Kudos to you for bringing out such a detailed and active projection of that conversation. The truth is that the conversation could last through eternity due it's in depth in meaning.. Most importantly, it brought out the significance of perspective vision. The true meaning of "attention to detail" could be understood when all these fragments are integrated into one..
I tried my hand at writing about this, but left it.. there's too much to write about. while i was typing, i couldn't find the patience to epitomize it to fit into one blog article. The sheer magnitude of depth of the conversation is overwhelming.
My aim was to make the reader really understand the monstrosity of it all. Until i can do that, I'd consider my self a failure because it's just a lame ,un decipherable grouping of words.. but thats my opinion :D
@loocious
By Gawd, you do use a lot of flowery language when you write don't you. I haven't seen you use such language in Spoken English.
@ sprinter
Thats because standing around the bakery and speaking like salman rushdie would look silly..
:D
@ loocious
Now you are giving yourself too much credit by comparing yourself to Salman Rushdie. :P
Shit man.... oye RS.... this is the net man... Aren't you slightly worried to post all this online? Your blogs are crawled by google's bots and they index your blog posts as search results.... Now your profile isnt anonymous.... In fact Vijay Raja Satish is displayed in the first line... How would you like you lead or director to read this post.... ? Their Platform architect is on POT....
@mojo rising
Little chance of that...
And i hadnt mentioned the word anywhere in the blog until thanks to you
so i finally read ur blog......its almost exactly what we spoke that day except that most of what i said u have put it down as what nikhil quoted... ha ha ha well i dont hold it against you as i know u were on medication ;-)
Post a Comment