El-mom

Today's read: The Ecstatic Swoon As Stendhal knew, the reason for art is to make you feel. Do not try to grasp the artwork: allow it to grasp you instead.

Once I enter a museum, I stroll along the galleries, hands clasped behind my back as I scan the walls. When I do stop in front of a painting, I almost always turn to the information plaque next to it before the painting itself, spending more time reading the description than I do gazing at the painting. It is as if I am more intent on framing its place in history than I am on the painting inside the frame. And I look at other visitors as they look at the paintings, wearing ear buds or holding a guidebook, and photographing the works and, just as often, themselves in front of them. Are they, I wonder, more or less serious than I am?

‘When you go to the library, you don’t walk along the shelves looking at the spines of books and on your way out tweet to friends, “I read 100 books today!’’’

‘I am not saying that all passionate people are good painters,’ Beyle wrote. ‘I am instead saying that all great artists have been passionate men.’

‘La beauté n’est que la promesse du bonheur.’

Hmm... I wonder how limited I am just because I haven't gone to the depths of understanding and operating with a language. Like, there is a difference between being fluent and then going further in a language, I wonder how better I'd learn to express myself, how much better I can experience writings and readings, and just, how much richer my life would be if I did that. I also wonder what my choosing English to be my go-to means when it comes to this. Like, how has it shaped my brain in ways I haven't known? Did I reach for ease of expression instead of perhaps taking the harder but more beautiful forms that may, or may not, come with another language? What does me choosing my second language to express myself mean, when I know my brain's primary wiring isn't from it? What have I abandoned by not writing, reading, and pushing myself in my first language? Something to think about, it seems.

Today's read: The people's atheist I'm imagining how life would've been like for 10th grade me if she had found this then. Mann, she'd have had an absolute blast reading everything Meslier, but as it is, I'm pretty sure there are a lot of people here that'd find this interesting. Check it out.

That being said, let me put you on something: Check out aeon.co

☺️

Let's do... not a q&a, but an anon messages thing of sorts. Send me whatever you got. Oh, content you've liked so far/things you miss from this channel could be a start, but anything else too: the good, the bad, the ugly, personal stories, advice (abeg abeg abeg, I'm graduating next year and I'm like ahhhhhhh), have fun :) It will be anon and it won't be posted :)

My Hands Are Tied. My Hippocratic oath is unconditional. The system's compassion is conditional.

I have watched governments speak the language of universal coverage at international podiums while making entirely different calculations at home about which populations qualify for the word universal.

This article scratched an itch deep within my soul. So beautiful. Check it out!

On Contradictions

Thing about growing up, I guess, is that you learn to hold two contradicting truths as they are. You learn that two contradicting things could be true simultaneously. For example, for me, it's the perspective about time. On one hand, I'm like "so little time, so many things to do". There is this tiny bit of pain I feel every time I have to cut things off my checklist for later because I don't have the capacity or the time to entertain them, and in the grander scheme of things, this applies too. Realizing that you can't be a master at everything, explore and do everything you want to do, there's this bittersweet pain that comes with it. On the other hand, I have this contradicting perspective that's like "We have, God willing, decades after this. And what's life worth if not taken slow and time taken well". And this helped when I realized I rushed through everything because I either had a scarcity mindset or because I genuinely felt like I didn't have enough time. I do. I have, God willing, decades after this. And even if I don't, I could say I try to live in such a way that I'm on my way to not regretting if I die. Because when you think about it, if your mindset is anything can happen and you can die anytime anyway, then why not enjoy it. And if your mindset is that of you'll live a long life, again, why not enjoy it, while making sure you're building well towards it. Following up on the last note comes a second set of contradictions I hold. On one hand, life is worth it through the small, painless, content moments you experience. It's in the Sunday mornings in your new favourite t-shirt with the "Elpadre" at the back, your mug of tea, your saved articles on Substack. It's in randomly watching an Amharic movie at a cinema on a random afternoon that's now much better because of who's with you. It's in your sibling telling you about the weird dream she had while you're brushing your teeth, and you're just standing there, listening, fully happy and at peace with the fact that you'd rather not be anywhere else. On the other, life is worth it in the pain you feel when you're on the way to earning something meaningful. It's worth it on the all-nighters you spend moving towards something that gives you a deep sense of purpose, or at least a means to actualize that purpose. It's worth it in the times you get out of the bed when you're exhausted to your bones, because you have to keep a promise you made to yourself. It's worth it, when you go for what's honest and painful than what's a lie and comfortable, because the end result is better. The way I see it, is that the journey makes the destination just as much worth it. And most things in life, the meaningful ones at least, come with a prize. But that's what makes them special, what makes them extraordinary, maybe not for other people, but for you. Both of these contradictions, I think, have taught me that two contradictions don't mean one is wrong, it means they just exist. And I wish I have that nuance more and more as I go, but for now, this will do :)

#TheBlogSeries

On Individual Completeness and Healthy Marriages - a somewhat biased yap

The concept above, the one that says "women are born into this world to wait for their counterparts", is something I struggled to see the relevance of. This largely comes from the way I grew up, I've never had to separate the concept of a strong, independent woman from the idea of marriage. In fact, I think, subconsciously, I learned the opposite. The idea I have is that you need to be a strong, full, independent woman to get INTO a fulfilling marriage, which runs so against the common rhetoric that it landed as not a full whiplash per se, but a small bit of shock. But think about it, I'm not saying you necessarily need to be an extremely ambitious, all-independent woman to be a healthy partner or wife, but you do need to be a full human being. By a full human being, I mean someone with her own full life, a life constructed by herself, for herself, without the male gaze as the main driver. This applies to the man in the relationship as well, but that's conventionally expected, interestingly enough. Tying this to my worldview, I don't think two halves, or one half and one whole, make a healthy, fulfilling, lasting partnership. I think both people need to be full human beings who can hold their own independently, coming together because they choose to. I'm not saying there's no room for roles or complementary strengths in raising a family, I'm saying even that only holds healthily if each person is already able to stand on their own before they walk into it. The marital puzzle, as I see it, isn't strong because the pieces need each other to survive. It's strong because each piece was already complete on its own, and chose to interlock anyway, for the better. What I'm saying is this, incompleteness at the individual level leads to unhealthy, unfulfilled individuals, which in turn leads to unhealthy partnerships. I don't buy the idea that you find your purpose, become whole, once you get into a relationship or get married. I don't think that exists anywhere outside the fairy tales. Which is to say, the alternative rhetoric, the one that tells women they come into this world to search for marriage to complete them, doesn't logically make sense to me, genuinely. I know this is built from my personal experience and may not reflect every marriage that has ever worked. So if anyone can make the opposing case well enough to convince me, I'm actually open to it, especially considering I've never once heard it argued in a way that was logically and ethically sound enough to beat. Make of this what you will.

#TheBlogSeries

On "intellectual" short-form content - a yap

I don't know if this is a hot take, but reels/vids like "I read so you don't have to", "Let me summarize this piece of info so you don't have to"... bug me. Well.. ok, not all of them. I'd understand where it comes from if the piece being summarized is, say, updates about the stock market, but it really really bugs me when this is about historical texts, entire books, entire subjects. On one hand, I get why they exist. Besides the "justified" dopamine rush people will get from engaging in something intellectual on platforms known to make you feel guilty, it also serves to make this knowledge "accessible" for the general public, considering people "don't have" the time to engage deeply in these topics and actually educate themselves. On the other, I feel like the issue is with how it's framed rather than the content itself. I think, if it was framed so that you could get an intro to a topic or a book and you're encouraged for you to go check that, then that, I could see the point of. As it stands though, contents like ones I mentioned above, I feel them making me feel dumb even more than empowering me or teaching me something new. So here's the thing that actually bugs me, I think, it's acting like a substitution for the actual thinking people have to go through. Sure, I could summarize an entire book and impart some form of knowledge in you - which, by the way, is my interpretation to start with which, say... if it's a piece you want to critically engage with, I'm already blocking your way. But why? Essentially, wouldn't that be a degradation of your own intelligence? Think of it this way, I feel like this is somewhat an elevated version of the practice vs theory dilemma, in the sense that you feel like you know something well (and, in theory, you do) but you don't actually know it. Sure, you now understand what you want to know in a bite-sized, palatable format, but are you really growing because of that? I think, to truly improve your thinking, to truly understand and improve your life, you need to engage, contemplate, understand the intricacies of, and debate with a material to the point that it challenges you, and I feel like that coming in a short-form palatable manner blocks you away from that. Make of this what you will.

#lookatEldadactinglowkeygeriatric #TheBlogSeries

On "intellectual" short-form content - a yap

I don't know if this is a hot take, but reels/vids like "I read so you don't have to", "Let me summarize this piece of info so you don't have to"... bug me. Well.. ok, not all of them. I'd understand where it comes from if the piece being summarized is, say, updates about the stock market, but it really really bugs me when this is about historical texts, entire books, entire subjects. On one hand, I get why they exist. Besides the "justified" dopamine rush people will get from engaging in something intellectual on platforms known to make you feel guilty, it also serves to make this knowledge "accessible" for the general public, considering people "don't have" the time to engage deeply in these topics and actually educate themselves. On the other, I feel like the issue is with how it's framed rather than the content itself. I think, if it was framed so that you could get an intro to a topic or a book and you're encouraged for you to go check that, then that, I could see the point of. As it stands though, contents like ones I mentioned above, I feel them make me feel dumb even more than empowering me or teaching me something new. So here's the thing that actually bugs me, I think, it's acting like a substitution for the actual thinking people have to go through. Sure, I could summarize an entire book and impart some form of knowledge in you - which, by the way, is my interpretation to start with which, say... if it's a piece you want to critically engage with, I'm already blocking your way. But why? Essentially, wouldn't that be a degradation of your own intelligence? Think of it this way, I feel like this is somewhat an elevated version of the practice vs theory dilemma, in the sense that you feel like you know something well (and, in theory, you do) but you don't actually know it. Sure, you now understand what you want to know in a bite-sized, palatable format, but are you really growing because of that? I think, to truly improve your thinking, to truly understand and improve your life, you need to engage, contemplate, understand the intricacies of, and debate with a material to the point that it challenges you, and I feel like that coming in a short-form palatable manner blocks you away from that. Make of this what you will.

#lookatEldadactinglowkeygeriatric #TheBlogSeries

:))))

Opportunity for young people 👋 Are you between 18 and 30 years old and looking to develop your leadership skills, strengthen your project, and join a community of committed young leaders across Africa? The New Leaders LAB is open to young people aged 18 to 30 residing in the following countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Ethiopia, Guinea, Kenya, Malawi, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Uganda, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, and Zambia. 🚀 The New Leaders Lab is for you! Funded by Fully funded by the European Union, this free programme offers you the opportunity to develop your leadership skills, expand your network, and advance your impact-driven project. 📌 Apply now: https://ee-eu.kobotoolbox.org/x/iDhzani1 📅 Application deadline: 19 July 2026 📲 Feel free to share this opportunity with your friends, colleagues, and networks! 🎯 More information: https://urls.fr/JPXy1r #NewLeadersLab #AEYA #YouthLeadership

Peak!

One can only wonder 🙂

The writer who shuts himself up in a room and first goes on a journey inside himself will, over the years, discover literature’s eternal rule: he must have the artistry to tell his own stories as if they were other people’s stories, and to tell other people’s stories as if they were his own, for this is what literature is.

A writer talks of things that everyone knows but does not know they know.

I write because I have an innate need to write! I write because I can’t do normal work like other people. I write because I want to read books like the ones I write. I write because I am angry at all of you, angry at everyone. I write because I love sitting in a room all day writing. I write because I can only partake in real life by changing it. I write because I want others, all of us, the whole world, to know what sort of life we lived, and continue to live, in Istanbul, in Turkey. I write because I love the smell of paper, pen, and ink. I write because I believe in literature, in the art of the novel, more than I believe in anything else. I write because it is a habit, a passion. I write because I am afraid of being forgotten. I write because I like the glory and interest that writing brings. I write to be alone. Perhaps I write because I hope to understand why I am so very, very angry at all of you, so very, very angry at everyone. I write because I like to be read. I write because once I have begun a novel, an essay, a page, I want to finish it. I write because everyone expects me to write. I write because I have a  childish belief in the immortality of libraries, and in the way my books sit on the shelf. I write because it is exciting to turn all of life’s beauties and riches into words. I write not  to tell a story, but to compose a story. I write because I wish to escape from the foreboding that there is a place I must go but – just as in a dream – I can’t quite get there. I write because I have never managed to be happy. I write to be happy.

Beautiful!