Vimoh IRL

So, largely, there are going to be two kinds of people in your life—in anyone's life, really. These are going to be people who are good to you and people who are bad to you. People who you get along with and people who you don't get along with. People who care about you and people who don't care about you or actively dislike you.

The mistake a lot of us make is that, like, let's visually imagine them as two different folders: people who are good to you and people who are not good to you. People who are mean and nasty to you, people who are actively working towards your detriment, and people who care about you, people who want you to do better, people who want to help you, and people who do help you. Right? These are the two broad categories.

The mistake a lot of us make is that we want to live in a world where everyone is in this folder, where everyone is our friend and cares for us and wants to help us. We want these people—the ones who don't care about us—to be in the folder containing people who do want to help us. This is a mistake because it is never going to happen. You are never, ever going to live in a world where everyone likes you, cares for you, and wants to help you.

I call it a mistake because I find a lot of people trying to turn these people into these people. They want to spend time making sure that the people who dislike you become people who like you. I'm not saying it is impossible to do so. I'm just saying that the inordinate amount of time many of us spend doing that is mostly wasted time because you are never going to become absolutely successful at it. And even if you are a little bit successful at it, you will want to be more successful at it. And you're not going to be—it’s not going to be, I put in one effort and I got two result. Therefore, I will put five effort and get 10 result. There is an upper limit to it. Some people are never going to become part of this folder.

Ideally, in a sane world, you would spend more time with these people, right? You would care about the people who care about you. You would want to help them. You would want to do things for them. You would want to understand them better and try to do things that make them happy. But because you're fixated on turning these people into these people, you don't do that. Most of your time is spent on the people who don't like you.

The people who care about you deserve more of your attention. I think we can all agree on this. The people who care about you deserve to spend more time with you. The people who care about you deserve more of your attention and more of your love and more of your care. And yet, because you're fixated on the people who don't like you—people who you are looking to bring into this folder—you don't do that. You take for granted the people who do care about you, and you spend your time on the people who don't care about you.

Taking your loved ones for granted is never a good idea because they don't deserve that. They deserve the best of you. They deserve your time, your effort, and your understanding. But your time, your effort, and your understanding is going in the wrong direction. It is going in the direction of the people who don't really care about all that.

Another side effect of it is that, with every action you take, you are sending a message out into the universe. I don't mean this in a woo kind of way. I'm literally saying that if you are a public personality, or even if you are not a public personality and you simply have a great, large social circle, an extended family, or friend circle, then everything you do that is visible to the people around you sends a message out.

And this message is something you should pay attention to because this is not something you're saying, and yet it is something you're conveying with your actions. So what is the message you send out when you do this thing? You tell the people who want your attention that the best way to get your attention is to be mean and nasty to you, because those are the people who you are spending time on. You're literally telling the world that if you want something from me, you shouldn't be good to me because if you are good to me, I will take you for granted. The best way to get my attention is to be mean and nasty to me because those are the people I will spend time and effort on.

We all do this. I myself have done this. But if one thing that age has taught me—I'm 41 years old, in case anyone here on this channel did not know about it—if there is one thing that age has taught me, it’s that there is only so much you can achieve by focusing on all that is going wrong with your life.

There are things that are right with your life. If you focus on those things, if you spend time with the people who are everything that is going right with your life, you might find that the amount of control that the dark forces have on you is reducing. Or, at the very least, that yo...

Hello everyone, and welcome to another episode of the podcast.

And today I want to talk about followers, especially I, as you may already have seen in the title to this episode, I want to talk about losing followers.

And when I say how to lose followers, it might seem like I'm trying to warn you about what not to do. Like I'm being ironical somehow. I'm being sarcastic. I'm telling you by saying how to lose followers. What I want you to think is that you shouldn't lose followers. But I'm actually being serious and sincere. I really am going to tell you how to lose followers.

Because believe it or not, sometimes... that is a good thing. We all create in social media and we are given to understand that having a lot of followers or having a huge platform is a good thing. And that's not entirely incorrect. But while a lot of us create content and talk and write, etc. online, thinking that we are giving people something, that we are bringing change in people's lives, what we remain unaware of is the fact that our followers also change us. And this happens more and more as time passes.

So let me explain to you what I mean by that first. What I mean is that your name is Raju and you start a YouTube channel. You start putting out videos about what you think is good with the world, what you believe in, what you enjoy, et cetera. You talk about your passions and your interests. And you convey information and ideas about the things that you think are important.

And then time passes and you begin to get an audience which is interested in the kind of thing that you're talking about. Some more time passes and you reach a wall. You hit a wall where the number of people who are likely to be interested in the kind of thing that you're talking about is limited. And therefore, you kind of got into where you can be. If you're talking about your interests and not some generic topic that is trending, then you will eventually hit a wall of some sort unless you diversify.

So in order to change things, in order to make sure that your audience, your rate of growth does not plateau, you diversify. You start talking about other things. You start talking about a thing that happened once and got you a lot of views. So you come to the conclusion that if I talk about this more... then more people will come and watch and it works. So you keep doing that. You keep diversifying, you keep changing, you keep making new things, you keep getting more followers.

With time, you eventually get to a point where you are no longer talking about the thing that you wanted to talk about when you started your channel. You're no longer talking about the thing that you are passionate about, and you're now talking about things that people want to hear from you. You got followers because that is what you aimed for. You got more followers than you needed. And that is why you can no longer break free from the cycle that requires you to continuously feed that follower machine.

Not all your followers are the same follower. They're not all good for you. Some of your followers are actually good for you. They want to follow you for the reasons that you want to be followed. But some others will follow you because they want you to do what they want. And that's not necessarily something hard to understand. That is how the online ecosystem works. That is how the algorithm works.

I recently wrote an essay in which I gave the rather insensitive example of someone's family member dying. Suppose your name is Kaju and a family member dies and you make a video about it and that video gets a lot of traffic. Now, conventional wisdom will have you thinking, hmm, this is what people like. Maybe I should do more of it. How will you do more of it? How will you make more videos about the death of your family member without looking cheap, without looking like a sellout, without looking like someone who's fleecing the algorithm for all it's worth by making money using a personal tragedy? You can't. Unless you're shameless. In which case, congratulations!

And the weirdest thing about all this is that these days followers don't even matter that much. Followers, subscribers, whatever you want to call them on social media, they don't really matter much. There are channels with millions of subscribers who get 10 people watching when they live stream. There are channels with small subscriber bases, which are much more loyal and much more regularly viewing their content. There are Instagram accounts with millions of followers. And you'll find that the only people who comment on their posts are those 10 people who followed them since the beginning or worse bots.

These days when you log on to your social media feed, the thing that you see is what the algorithm has decided you should see. It is not based on who you follow, who you subscribe to, etc. The algorithm is now feeding you what it thinks you will watch. And it is...

Hello friends.

After a long time, there is a writing-related video. I thought I would occasionally make a video about writing because, you know, I am writing. This channel is a channel by a writer, so there should at least be some writing-related content on it.

I put out a post in my posts tab—it used to be called a community tab, and things are confusing now. In the posts tab, you will find a post where I have asked people to send me their writing-related doubts, and I will do my best to answer them. I should warn you beforehand that a lot of what I'm about to say is how I do things. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to anything in life, and therefore you should take all of this with a pinch of salt. This is how I do things. This is what I think. This is not a universal, "do this and you will get X result" kind of thing.

So, having gotten that out of the way, let's look at the first question that I'm going to address. The topic of this video is a question from Johnny Walker, one, two, three, four. And it goes like this:

Some say the only way to learn writing is to just write. Others say it's a proper craft to be learned. So how do you learn writing? Or rather, I think what they want to ask is how to go about writing. How much attention should you pay to people who say the only way to learn writing is to learn writing, or that the only way to learn writing is to just write?

First of all, you should be slightly suspicious of anyone who starts any piece of advice by saying "the only way," because it's probably the only way they have used, and it worked for them. I'm happy for them. But people should not give advice by saying, "This is the only way to do X," because life is a little more complicated than that. Art definitely is a lot more complicated than that.

So let us focus on the two elements of this question. One is craft—the craft of learning how to write—and then there is just writing. Obviously, you have to do both of these things. You have to learn the craft of writing, and you have to just write the way a writer does. But perhaps it would be good if I started with the difference between art and craft.

What is more important for you as a writer to focus on? Should you focus on the craft of writing, or should you focus on your art? Before I start, let me put it this way. If you announce that your intention is to go to Bhagalpur and you are going to do this on a bicycle, and you tell people, "Look here, I'm about to pick up this bicycle and go all the way to Bhagalpur," then people will come and check you out. People will come and see if you can do it.

Craft is the ability to ride the bicycle. Art is making the journey and getting to Bhagalpur. If you pick up the bicycle and you pedal, and they see you go at least a few meters, then they know that you can get to Bhagalpur. They know that you have the ability to get to Bhagalpur. They know that you have the skills required to get all the way to Bhagalpur. If you pick up the bicycle and you cannot pedal and you fall down, it doesn't matter if you have the map to Bhagalpur. It doesn't matter if you know how to get to Bhagalpur. It doesn't matter if you have the strength to get to Bhagalpur. You are not going to get to Bhagalpur because you can't cycle.

Craft is the first step. Art is the rest of the journey. So when someone says that you need to know the craft to create your art, they're not wrong. You do need to know how to ride a bicycle in order to get to Bhagalpur. But getting to Bhagalpur is going to require much more than simply cycling because everyone can get to Bhagalpur.

There are other people who will walk to Bhagalpur, there are people who will take the bus—and by bus, I mean AI writing, that infernal thing that is going around right now. And some people are naturally, you know, they live in Bhagalpur. They don't have to cycle to Bhagalpur. So when someone says that the craft of writing is important, what they're really telling you is that the ability to frame your art using the traditions of writing is important, and they're not wrong.

But when they say that the only way to write is by being a good craftsman, then they're probably not right because there have been many great writers who were not great craftsmen, and they have still left great works of art. They created their own craft. There have been writers who created their own ways of writing, who created their own genres. There are writers whose work cannot be classified into a genre. There have been writers who have deliberately broken the rules of craft. There have been writers who have invented new ways of exercising the craft. That’s all possible.

But for the most part, if you're a professional writer and you want to send your manuscript to a publisher, one of the first things the publisher will look at is if you know the craft. When your manuscript gets to a publisher, the editor picks it up, reads t...

Hello everyone, and welcome to another episode of the podcast.

I wanted to talk about importance—about how we know something is important and how we know something is not important—and how that method of measuring importance has been somewhat impaired in our information superhighway age.

I wanted to talk about letters because that is exactly what I found myself talking to my father and mother about some weeks ago. I was inundated with messages, and I asked them how many messages they had to deal with back in the days before even telephones existed. Back when the primary methods of entertainment and information were radio, and people used to send letters to each other in order to communicate because there was no electronic method of doing so.

My mother said she had a lot of friends who were really, you know, avid letter writers, so she used to get multiple letters every week—like maybe four or five. My father said maybe twice a week, and on really uneventful months, maybe a few—like four or five a month. And it varied, of course, depending on how many people one was in contact with and how much information people wanted to share.

But I got to thinking about the process of letters, how they're composed, how they're sent, how much time they take to reach the person for whom they're intended. And I quickly realized that time plays a huge role in it, doesn't it?

It takes time to live life. It takes time to think about, “Okay, I have lived life for a month, and now these are the things that stand out.” And then it takes time to compose the letter because you're curating your life. You'll mention only the things that you think are important, and you leave out most of it because there is a limited amount of space in the letter. And also because, you know, not everything is worth mentioning.

Then you write the letter; you take time to write the letter in a very proper way because readability matters. And then you send it, and then you wait for the letter to get to the person you have sent it to. That person gets the letter a few days later, by which time, if there was something urgent in it, it is probably already outdated. And if there wasn’t anything urgent in it, then they read the letter and absorb it because it is a valuable thing. It stands out from the mundane reality of their life.

They were doing work, they were living life, they were doing other things, and then the letter comes. They take time out of their life to read that letter, to absorb it, to appreciate it, and to think about the person who sent the letter. Then they preserve the letter because they can. It doesn't take much space, and they preserve the letter so that they may perhaps read it at a later point in time.

In all of this, time played a huge role. Time was the limiting factor. Time and space got in the way of the letter. And almost miraculously, they made the experience important because we measure things—we measure how important something is based on how much time and how much space they occupy.

I mean, in our times, practically 90% of the value of a luxury item is its price. And if a thing does not cost that much, then it must have less value. We measure the value of things in our life using how much they cost.

I got to thinking about our messaging systems, about the systems that we use to contact each other. How easy it is to contact anyone—even with a video call. And as far as text messaging goes, that's even easier and faster. I mean, faster doesn't even come into it. It's instantaneous. And in fact, the thing that gets in the way of getting to a message that has been sent to you and reading it and appreciating it is, again, time—but it is a lack of time.

People can send you whatever they want, whenever they want, and it will get to you instantaneously. Whether or not you are able to get to it, read it, and reply depends on how much time you have. And quite possibly, the reason you don't have time is because you are reading other messages. Forget getting four messages a week. You're getting orders of magnitude higher as far as the number of messages is concerned. On an hourly basis, your message boxes are full.

People are sending you random stuff—a link, a video, maybe a single word or a single emoji. Sometimes people are not writing longer messages. Letter writing is a forgotten art almost. People talk about it. And the result of all this has been that there has been a great flattening as far as meaning and importance are concerned. In the life of someone who lived before the time of telephones, a letter stood out. It was important because you could tell that it took time, space, and effort to produce it and to bring it to you.

Now, we don’t get letters. We don’t get messages that are of vital importance. We get much more by way of messaging, and all of it has the same value—which is zero. If, in your messaging landscape right now, you were to look...

I have loved Star Trek my entire life. So this is not me taking a piss at it. I am simply sharing some things about the nature of my favourite franchise that come close to bothering me occasionally. The legacy of colonialism leaves deep scars and often, these scars extend into parts of us that sem to have little to do with “politics”.

• anirao
• Maulik Thakkar
• Tilottama Biswas
• Gaurab Sundar Dutta
• OneOfMany
• Aliasour
• Samir Raut
• Suchi Mohan
• Anchal Bangar
• Pradeep Chandran
• Darshana Malusare
• Rohit Saxena
• Onika S
• Nishant Panda
• Manushya
• Aniruddha Chakraborty
• Anand
• Milind Sonone
• For the Love of Comics
• Animesh Topno
• Devika Salunke
• Ritika Rai
• Meena Ravi
• Venky V Ranjan
• Sandip Bhattacharya
• Lalit Patnaik