More Writing!

People are always looking for acceptance and love; almost every human on this planet wants to be loved by somebody, and wants to be accepted by the public. Because of this desire, people always strive to do what's popular, and what's right. Since these are things people often aim at, they are easily confused with each other. But they're the same thing, right? Isn't the public always right? No, sometimes what's popular might not be right, and what's right might not be popular. Sometimes, even the president makes some mistakes, like what Lyndon B. Johnson said: "A President's hardest task is not to do what is right, but to know what is right." The fact is, even the president might not know what's right; he obviously wants to do what's best for his country (most of the time), and he acts on what he thinks is right. But he might make a mistake; after all, he's human, too. In fact, Howard Cosell once said, "What's right isn't always popular. What's popular isn't always right." So if these two aren't the same things, which one should rank above the other? Many scholars have debated this over the centuries, and the solutions is that doing what's right is important, even if it might offend the public. It's how all important historical figures came to be: trusting their own opinions, and acting strongly on their opinions. The book Next, by Michael Crichton, is a fine example of doing what's right over doing what's popular. In the book, BioTech, a genetic engineering company, finds out that Frank and his family's cells are especially valuable, as they have special adaptations to recover from diseases quicker. Having their cells being owned by that company, what's popular obviously would be to give in, and let them take the cells. But in their hearts, they knew that this was unfair; as a result, they did what's right, and ran away. This is how many great historical events started. A strong force, having lasted hundreds of thousands of years, has become corrupt and unjust. Although many people know that it's unfair, it takes one person to truly stand up to the force. For example, the Revolutionary War was started when people became brave enough to stand up to the all powerful British. This kind of courage spread through the States, and this is the reason why the United States of America stands today. Much is similar with the French Revolution. Poor peasants have been miserably treated, and it took one peasant to stand up to the aristocrats, and one peasant to lead a revolution that would change history forever. So do what's right, not what's popular, for often times, it's your opinion that is right, and not the so called "popular" opinion.

The game of chess is truly an interesting topic... it's a sport for those not very fit, a gymnasium for the mind, and a game that teaches patience among other things. Because of all the qualities chess teaches, many people have connected this to a man's life. "Chess is life," Bobby Fischer once said. There are so many similarities. In a game of chess, the objective is to capture the enemy's king, and there are so many ways to do so; whereas in life, the objective is to achieve a goal one has, and as in chess, there are many ways to achieve the goal. In chess, one has to have a foresight, like when Charles Buxton says, "In life, as in chess, forethought wins." Also similar to life is the fact that chess teaches of patience and unexpected turns, which leads to the ultimate lesson: keeping the big picture in mind. How many times has one got caught up in small battles, like trying to save one's queen, when the enemy exposes his king? The patience is vital to anticipating and waiting for the enemy to make a mistake. The unexpected turns teaches one that in a world where change is the only constant, one can expect turns in the game; as Ron Livingston says, "Life is always like chess. Just because you have the king surrounded, don't think he is not capable of hurting you." All of these lessons are vital for life, and in the book Next, by Michael Crichton, these lessons are again emphasized through the character of Watson. Watson was the VP of BioGen in the beginning of the book, and his goal was to seize complete control of BioGen; however, he lacked most (or all) of the vital skills chess teaches one, so he goes about it all wrong. First of all, is the lesson that one should be mindful of the rules. In chess, following the rules is vital; one illegal move, and one is disqualified. Same goes for life; one broken rule (law), and one is disqualified for an undefined period (jail). Obviously not knowing this, Watson foolishly goes around hiring bounty hunters and others to get rid of Rick Diehl. Next is the fact that chess players must have control over one's emotions, as in life. When a chess player takes out an important piece in the game, the other player must not let their emotions control them and act rashly, causing future harm, just like in life, when one agitates another, one cannot act rashly and according to one's emotions. This will lead to future trouble, which nobody wants. But Watson doesn't mind this trait, and lets his anger and rage dictate his actions, which lands him in a lot of legal trouble. The third trait to be mindful of is patience; everybody's heard of the quote, "Good things come to those who wait." Acting immediately may be helpful in some scenarios, but in others, they're a sign of weakness. Act immediately when needing to, but patience is a virtue. Jack Watson is a man of power, so he wants his actions immediately. Only later does he realize that if he had struck later, he might not have ended up where he is right now. Last but certainly not least, is the big picture. Everybody has heard of the big picture before, but what exactly is the big picture? It's life, and your individual goals. In chess, the big picture is to capture the king. All actions in the game are in the big picture. But sometimes one gets a little too caught up in specific little things that one forgets the big picture. Straying too far off the track is unnecessary, and most of the time, unhelpful. it doesn't matter if one looses one's queen, but still gets the king. But forgetting the big picture and saving your queen but letting one's king get caught is bad. Jack Watson, as usual, forgets the big picture. He's so caught up with getting the spot in BioGen that he forgets everything else, including his health, which later causes him to die a premature death. Like my mom always says, if one receives as score for how well one lived their life, the first digit would be health. If health is a 0, then the whole number would be pointless. So don't be a Jack Watson, and keep priorities. Life's a big chess match, so keep in mind the qualities one must have in life, and one will do pretty well. But forget these guidelines, and one just might end up like Jack Watson.