THE SHADOWS

The Shadows story began when a young singer named Cliff Richard walked into a London “Coffee House” in search of a backing group, and came out with four young men, who in those days called themselves “The Drifters”, and as Cliff developed into one of the World’s top attractions, so the Group rose to fame with him.
In September 1959, owing to confusion between themselves and an American group also called “The Drifters”, the boys elected to change their name to “The Shadows”. Soon they were acclaimed as Stars in their own right and they have released a series of records that have become hits around the World.
(discogs.com)
The Shadows, with singer Cliff Richard, dominated the British popular music scene in the late 1950s and early 1960s in the five years before The Beatles. Although they lost ground in the late sixties, the band enjoyed a second spell of success and interest from the late seventies until the present day.
(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
The Shadows released ‘Move It’ in 1958 which made its way to number two in the British charts. Their first number one chart topping track, ‘Apache’, written by composer Jerry Lordan, was released in July, 1960 and spent twenty-one weeks at the top of the British music charts. The Shadows have enjoyed 34 hits on their own and another 33 through their involvement with Cliff Richard. The Shadows have the distinction of being the only artists to have an album, EP, and a single at the number one position on the charts simultaneously.
The rhythm guitar player, Bruce Welch, was born Bruce Cripps on November 2, 1941 in Bognor Regis, in the South West of England. Welch was an excellent rhythm guitarist and was involved in producing.
The drummer, Brian Bennett, was born in London, England on February 9, 1940.
Bennett was a drummer with Marty Wilde’s Wildcats and Krew Kats before replacing Tony Meehan in The Shadows in October 1961. Bennett’s son, Warren, plays keyboard and has been doing musical arrangements for Hank Marvin’s recent recordings.
Bass guitarists for The Shadows included Jet Harris (who gave the band its name), John Rostill (1942 – 1973), and Brian ‘Liquorice’ Locking.
The lead guitar player of the Shadows (formerly the Drifters), Hank B Marvin, was born Brian Robson Rank on October 28, 1941 in Newcastle, England. Rankin’s name was changed by Deed Poll in the 1950s to Hank Brian Marvin.
Marvin has been the unique sound of The Shadows since the group was first formed in 1958, and was one of the first people in England to use a Fender Statocaster. Marvin has been an inspiration to many musicians, but he says he really doesn’t understand why: “I would never have thought that I’d have any kind of influence on these people. Oh, maybe with Jimmy Page to a degree, but with people like Jeff Beck and Eric Clapton, I would have thought their early influences would have been much more obscure– the kind of blues people that they pattern their playing on. But it’s all very flattering, really.” In 1986 Hank Marvin and his family moved to the suburbs of Perth, Australia and has worked on a solo career of his own releasing the award winning albums, Into The Light and Heartbeat.
(fleetwoodmac.neTt)INSTRUMENTALS HITS BY THE SHADOWS:
Tracks 1958-1959

1. Jean Dorothy (Chesternuts)
2. Jet Black (Harris)
3. Feelin’ Fine (Samwell)
4. Driftin’ (Marvin)
5. Don’t Be A Fool (With Love) (Chester)
6. Chinchilla (Starr/Wolf)
7. Saturday Dance (Chester/Martin)
8. Lonesome Fella (Chester)
9. Be Bop A Lula (live) (Vincent/Davis)
10. Jet Black (live) (Jet Harris)
11. Driftin’ (live) (Marvin)

Tracks 1960

1. Apache (Lordan)
2. Quatermaster’s Stores (Trad. arr. Shepherd)
3. Man Of Mystery (Carr)
4. The Stranger (Crompton/Jones)
5. Bongo Blues (Paramor)

The Shadows 1961

1. Shadoogie (Marvin/Welch/Harris/Meehan)
2. Blue Star (Young/Heyman)
3. Nivram (Welch/Marvin/Harris)
4. Baby My Heart (Curtis)
5. See You In My Drums (Meehan)
6. All My Sorrows (Guard/Shane/Reynolds)
7. Stand Up And Say That! (Marvin)
8. Gonzales (McGlynn)
9. Find Me A Golden Street (Petty)
10. Theme From A Filleted Place (Marvin/Welch/Harris)
11. That’s My Desire (Krease/Loveday)
12. My Resistance Is Low (Carmichael)
13. Sleepwalk (Farina/Farina/Farina/Wolf)
14. Big Boy (Welch/Marvin)

Tracks 1961

1. Mustang (Lordan)
2. Theme From Shane (Young/Mack David)
3. Shotgun (Allen)
4. Theme From Giant (Webster/Tiomkin)
5. Back Home (Goff/Harris/Welch/Marvin)
6. 36-24-36 (Welch/Marvin/Harris/Meehan)
7. F.B.I. (Gormley)
8. Wonderful Land (Lordan)
9. Kon-Tiki (Carr)
10. Midnight (Marvin/Welch)
11. The Frightened City (Paramor)
12. Witch Doctor (Paramor)
13. Shazam (live) (Eddy/Hazlewood)
14. Guitar Boogie (live) (Smith)
15. Sleepwalk (live) (Farina/Farina/Farina/Wolf)
16. F.B.I (live) (Gormley)
17. Gonzales (mono LP version) (McGlynn)
18. Wonderful Land (no strings) (Lordan)
19. Wonderful Land (alt.) (Lordan)
20. F.B.I. (stereo version) (Gormley)
21. F.B.I. (USA version) (Gormley)

Out of The shadows 1962

1. The Rumble (Isaacs)
2. The Bandit (Carr-Kennedy-Nascimmio)
3. Cosy (Shuman-Garson)
4. 1861 (Marvin-Welch-Bennett)
5. Perfidia (Dominguez)
6. Little ‘B’ (Bennett)
7. Bo Diddley (McDaniels)
8. South Of The Border (Kennedy-Carr)
9. Spring Is Nearly Here (Bennett-Welch)
10. Are They All Like You? (Gate)
11. Tales Of A Raggy Tramline (Harris-Bennett)
12. Some Are Lonely (Cliff Richard)
13. Kinda Cool (Marvin-Welch)

Tracks 1962

1. Theme From The Boys (Bennett/Welch/Marvin)
2. The Girls (Welch/Marvin)
3. Sweet Dreams (McGuffie)
4. The Boys (Bennett/Welch/Marvin)
5. Dance On (V. Murtagh/E. Murtagh/Adams/Stellman)
6. All Day (Welch/Marvin/Harris/Meehan)
7. The Breeze And I (Lecuona/Stillman)
8. What A Lovely Tune (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
9. Peace Pipe (Paramor)
10. Stars Fell On Stockton (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
11. The Savage (Paramor)
12. South Of The Border (Kennedy/Carr)
13. Some Are Lonely (french version)
14. Perfidia (alternative version)
15. What A Lovely Tune (unissued stereo version)
16. Theme From ‘The Boys’ (un-dubbed version)
17. Guitar Tango (un-dubbed version)
18. All Day (alternative version)
19. Atlantis (un-dubbed version)
20. It’s Been A Blue Day (alternative un-dubbed version)

Tracks 1963

1. Atlantis (Lordan)
2. I Want You To Want Me (Lordan/Marvin)
3. Foot Tapper (Album Version) (Marvin/Welch)
4. Round And Round (Marvin/Welch/Bennett)
5. Les Girls (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
6. It’s Been A Blue Day (Bennett)
7. Las Tres Carabelas (Three Galleons) (Alguero Jr.)
8. Adios Muchachos (Pablo The Dreamer) (Sanders)
9. Valencia (Padilla)
10. Granada (Lara)
11. Geronimo (Hank Marvin)
12. Shazam (Eddy/Hazlewood)
13. Shindig (Marvin/Welch)
14. Razzmataz (Alt. version) (Marvin/Rostill/Bennett)
11. The Savage (Paramor)
12. South Of The Border (Kennedy/Carr)
13. Some Are Lonely (french version)
14. Perfidia (alternative version)
15. What A Lovely Tune (unissued stereo version)
16. Theme From ‘The Boys’ (un-dubbed version)
17. Guitar Tango (un-dubbed version)
18. All Day (alternative version)
19. Atlantis (un-dubbed version)
20. It’s Been A Blue Day (alternative un-dubbed version)

Dance with The Shadows 1964

1. Chattanooga Choo-Choo (Warren)
2. Blue Shadows (Marvin-Welch-Bennett-Locking)
3. Fandango (Perkins-Bradford)
4. Tonight (from ‘West Side Story’) (Bernstein)
5. That’s The Way It Goes (Welch-Marvin)
6. Big ‘B’ (Bennett)
7. In The Mood (Garland-Razaf)
8. Lonely Bull (El Solo Toro) (Lake)
9. Dakota (Braden)
10. French Dressing (Tiomkin)
11. The High And The Mighty (Marvin-Welch)
12. Don’t It Make You Feel Good (Marvin-Welch)
13. Zambesi (Carstens-De Waal)
14. Temptation (Brown-Freed)

Tracks 1964

1. Rhythm And Greens (Welch/Marvin/Bennett/Rostill)
2. Ranka Chank (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
3. Main Theme (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
4. The Drum Number (Welch/Marvin/Bennett/Rostill)
5. The Lute Number (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
6. Genie With The Light Brown Lamp (Welch/Marvin/Bennett/Rostill)
7. Little Princess (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
8. Me Oh My (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
9. Friends (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
10. Theme For Young Lovers (Welch)
11. Walkin’ (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
12. It’s A Man’s World (Addey/Smith)
13. The Rise And Fall Of Flingel Bunt (Welch/Marvin/Rostill/Bennett)
14. The Miracle (Carr/Paramor)
15. This Hammer (Arr. Locking/Welch/Bennett/Marvin)
16. In The Mood (no rhythm guitar) (Garland/Razaf)

The Sound of The Shadows 1965

1. Brazil (Barroso)
2. The Lost City (Ballard)
3. A Little Bitty Tear (Cochrane)
4. Blue Sky, Blue Sea, Blue Me (Rostill-Welch)
5. Bossa Roo (Rostill-Welch)
6. Five Hundred Miles (West)
7. Cotton Pickin’ (Ford)
8. Deep Purple (De Rose)
9. Santa Ana (Lordan)
10. The Windjammer (Rostill)
11. Dean’s Theme (Marvin-Rostill)
12. Breakthru’ (Taggart)
13. Let It Be Me (Becaud-Curtis-Delanoe)
14. National Provincial Samba (Welch-Rostill)

Tracks 1965

1. Alice In Sunderland (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
2. Stingray (Claus Ogerman)
3. I Wish I Could Shimmy Like My Sister Artur (Rostill)
4. The War Lord (Moross)
5. My Grandfather’s Clock (Arr. Welch/Marvin/Bennett/Rostill)
6. Mary Anne (Jerry Lordan)
7. Don’t Make My Baby Blue (B. Mann/C. Weil)
8. Chu-Chi (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
9. Girl From Ipanema (Jobim/Gimbel/De Marques)
10. Nothing, Folks (Marvin/Welch/Rostill/Bennett)
11. John’s Rocker (Rostill)
12. Don’t Stop Now (Alt. version) (Bennett)
13. Benno-San (Alt. Version)

Shadow Music 1966

1. I Only Want To Be With You (Marvin-Welch-Rostill-Bennett)
2. Fourth Street (Bennett)
3. Magic Doll (Marvin-Welch-Rostill-Bennett)
4. Stay Around (Arnold-Martin-Morrow)
5. Maid Marion’s Theme (Marvin-Welch-Rostill-Bennett)
6. Benno-San (Bennett)
7. Don’t Stop Now (Bennett)
8. In The Past (Cahill)
9. Fly Me To The Moon (Howard)
10. Now That You’re Gone (Hill-Whitworth-Meehan)
11. One Way To Love (Arnold-Martin-Morrow)
12. Razzmataz (Marvin-Rostill-Bennett)
13. A Sigh (Un Sospero) (Liszt, arr. Parramor)
14. March To Drina (Binicki-Stahl)

Tracks 1966

1. Late Night Set (Rostill/Welch/Bennett)
2. I Met A Girl (Marvin)
3. Lady Penelope (Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
4. Thunderbirds Theme (Gray)
5. Zero ‘X’ Theme (Gray)
6. Finders Keepers (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
7. My Way (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
8. Paella (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
9. Fiesta (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
10. My Way (vocal) (Marvin/Welch)
11. Spanish Song (from Finders Keepers movie)
12. Scotch On The Socks (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
13. A Place In The Sun (Paetrina/Lordan)
14. Will You Be There (Marvin/Welch)
15. The Dreams I Dream (Marvin)
16. Finders Keepers – My Way – Fiesta – Paella (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
17. Zero X Theme (stereo remix) (Gray)
18. Thunderbirds Theme (stereo remix) (Gray)
19. Scotch On The Socks (stereo remix) (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)

From Hank, Bruce, Brian and John 1967

1. Snap Crackle & How’s Your Dad (Welch/Bennett)
2. Evening Glow (Kasakawa/Nakamura)
3. A Thing Of Beauty (Harper)
4. Naughty Nippon Nights (Gouldman)
5. The Wild Roses (Ichikawa)
6. San Francisco (Philips)
7. The Letter (Carson)
8. The Tokaido Line (Welch/Marvin/Rostill/Bennett)
9. Holy Cow (Toussaint/Allen)
10. Alentejo (Vince)
11. Last Train To Clarksville (Boyce/Hart)
12. Let Me Take You There (Bennett/Rostill)
13. The Day I Met Marie (Marvin)
14. A Better Man Than I (Marvin)

Jigsaw 1967

1. Jigsaw (Welch/Marvin/Rostill/Bennett)
2. Tennessee Waltz (Stewart/King)
3. Prelude In E Major (Welch/Marvin/Rostill/Bennett)
4. Cathys Clown (D. Everly/P. Everly)
5. Stardust (Carmichael)
6. Semi Detached Suburban Mr. James (Carter/Stephens)
7. Trains And Boats And Planes (Bacharach/David)
8. Friday On My Mind (Young/Vanda)
9. Winchester Cathedral (Stephens)
10. Waiting For Rosie (Rostill)
11. Chelsea Boot (Peter Vince)
12. Maria Elena (Barcelata)
13. With A Hmm-Hmm On My Knee (Cliff Richard)
14. Green Eyes (Menendez)

Tracks 1967

1. Omoide No Nagisa (Torizuka/Kase)
2. Kimi To Itsummademo (Kosaku Dan)
3. Londonderry Air (Arr. Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
4. Gin Iro No Michi (Miyagawa)
5. Autumn (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
6. The Flyder And The Spy (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
7. Bombay Duck (T. Honda)
8. Leave My Woman Alone (Ray Charles)
9. Running Out Of The World (Bogliun/Black)
10. Somewhere (Bernstein)
11. Tennessee Waltz (Alt. version) (Stewart/King)
12. Chicago (live BBC show)

Established 1958

1. Voyage To The Bottom Of The Bath (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
2. Poem (Bennett)
3. The Average Life Of A Daily Man (Marvin)
4. Banana Man (Marvin/Bennett/Welch/Rostill)
5. The Magical Mrs. Clamps (Marvin/Welch/Bennett/Rostill)
6. Here I Go Again Loving You (Marvin/Welch)
7. Maggie’s Samba

Tracks 1968-1969

1. Dear Old Mrs. Bell (Bryant)
2. Trying To Forget The One You Love (Marvin)
3. Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (R. M. Sherman/R. B. Sherman)
4. I Can’t Forget (Korpar/Persiljeva/Black)
5. Maroc 7 (Ferris)
6. Tomorrow’s Cancelled (Marvin/Bennett)
7. Slaughter On Tenth Avenue (Richard Rogers)
8. Slaughter On 10th Avenue (w/orchestra) (Richard Rogers)

Shades of Rock 1970

1. Proud Mary (Fogerty)
2. My Babe (Johnson)
3. Lucille (Collins/Penniman)
4. Johnny B. Goode (Berry)
5. Paperback Writer (Lennon/McCartney)
6. (I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction (Jagger/Richard)
7. Bony Moronie (Williams)
8. Get Back (Lennon/McCartney)
9. Something (Harrison)
10. River Deep Mountain High (Spector/Greenwich/Barry)
11. Memphis (Berry)
12. What I’d Say (Charles)

Rockin’ with Curly Leads 1973

1. Pinball Wizard/See Me Feel Me (P. Townsend)
2. Years Away (Farrar)
3. Humbucker (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)
4. Deep Roots (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)
5. Jungle Jam (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)
6. Gracie (Farrar)
7. Good Vibrations (B. Wilson/M. Love)
8. Turn Around And Touch Me (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)
9. Wide Mouthed Frog (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)
10. Rockin’ With Curly Leads (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)
11. Gutbucket (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)
12. Jumpin’ Jack Input (Farrar/Bennett/Marvin/Welch)

Live at The Paris Olympia 1975

1. Shazam (L.Hazlewood/D. Eddy)
2. Man Of Mystery (M. Carr)
3. Lady Of The Morning (Marvin/Welch/Harris/Farrar)
4. Shadoogie (Marvin/Welch/Harris/Meehan)
5. Guitar Tango (Maine/Liferman)
6. Faithful (Marvin/Welch/Farrar)
7. Tiny Robin (Farrar/Best)
8. Honourable Puff-Puff (Marvin/Richmond)
9. Sleepwalk (Farina/Farina/Farina)
10. Marmaduke (Tarney/Spencer/Mervyn)
11. Foot Tapper (Marvin/Welch)
12. Apache (Lordan)
13. The Rise And Fall Of Flingel Bunt (Marvin/Welch/Rostill/Bennett)
14. Dance On (Murtagh/Murtagh/Adams)
15. Lonesome Mole (Marvin/Welch)
16. Nivram (Marvin/Welch/Harris)
17. Turn Around And Touch Me (Marvin/Welch/Farrar/Bennett)
18. Music Makes My Day (Farrar)
19. The Frightened City (N. Paramor)
20. Little ‘B’ (Bennett)
21. Lucille/Rip It Up/Blue Suede Shoes (Collins/Penniman Blackwell/Marascalco Perkins)
22. Somewhere (Leonard Bernstein)
23. Let Me Be The One (Curtis)
24. Wonderful Land (Lordan)
25. F.B.I. (Gormley)

Specs Appeal 1975

1. God Only Knows (Wilson/Asher)
2. Cool Clear Air (Fletcher/Flett)
3. Rose, Rose (Welch/Rostill)
4. This House Runs On Sunshine (Bennett/Redway)
5. Colorado Songbird (Bennett)
6. No No Nina (Farrar/Best)
7. Honourable Puff-Puff (Marvin/Farrar/Welch/Bennett/Richmond)
8. Don’t Throw It All Away (Benson/Mindell)
9. Spider Juice (Marvin)
10. Let Me Be The One (Curtiss)
11. Like Strangers (Welch/Bennett)
12. Stand Up Like A Man (Findon/Myers)

Tasty 1977

1. Cricket Bat Boogie (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
2. Return To The Alamo (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
3. Goodbye Yellow Brick Road (E. John/B. Taupin)
4. Another Night (Welch/Marvin/Bennett/Tarney)
5. Honky Tonk Woman (Jagger/Richards)
6. Montezuma’s Revenge (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
7. Walk Don’t Run (Smith)
8. Superstar (Russell/Bramlett)
9. Bermuda Triangle (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
10. The Most Beautiful Girl (Sherrill/Wilson/Burke)
11. Creole Nights (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)

Reunion Concert 1978

1. Shadoogie (Marvin/Welch/Harris/Meehan)
2. Atlantis (Lordan)
3. Nivram (Welch/Marvin/Harris)
4. Apache (Lordan)

Tracks 1975-1979

1. Run Billy Run (Curtis)
2. No No Nina (instrumental) (Farrar/Best)
3. God Only Knows (remixed) (Wilson/Asher)
4. It’ll Be Me Babe (Farrar/Marvin)
5. Love De Luxe (Shapiro)
6. Sweet Saturday Night (Marvin/Welch/Bennett)
7. Riders In The Sky (S. Jones)
8. Don’t Cry For Me Argentina (Rice/Lloyd Webber)
9. Don’t Cry For Me Argentina (full studio version)

1980-1982

1. 1980 Black Is Black (Wadey/Hayes/Granger)
2. 1980 Fender Bender (Welch/Bennett/Marvin)
3. 1980 Rusk (Marvin/Welch/Bennett)
4. 1982 The Shady Lady (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)

Live at Abbey Road 1982

1. The Third Man (Karas)
2. Thing-Me-Jig (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
3. Runaway (Shannon/Crook)
4. All I Have To Do Is Dream (Bryant)
5. It Doesn’t Matter Any More (Anka)
6. Johnny ‘B’ Goode (Berry)
7. Over In A Flash (Marvin/Jones/Bennett/Hall)
8. Summer Love ’59 (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)
9. Oh, Boy! (West/Petty/Tilghman)
10. Crying In The Rain (Greenfield/King)
11. Arty’s Party (Welch/Marvin/Bennett)

Moonlight Shadows 1986

1. Every Breath You Take
2. Hello
3. The Power Of Love
4. Hey Jude
5. Against All Odds
6. Memory
7. Dancing In The Dark
8. Whiter Shade of Pale
9. Moonlight Shadow
10. Three Tmes A Lady
11. Sailing
12. I Just Called To Say I Love Yo
13. I Know Him So Well
14. Nights In White Satin
15. Imagine/Woman
16. Walk Of Life

Reflection 1990

1. Eye Of The Tiger
2. Crockett’s Theme (from ‘Miami Vice’)
3. Right Here Waiting
4. Every Little Thing She Does Is Magic
5. Sealed With A Kiss
6. Uptown Girl
7. Strawberry Fields Forever
8. Riders In The Sky ’90
9. Flashdance … What A Feeling
10. Something’s Gotten Hold Of My Heart
11. Love Changes Everything
12. Nothing’s Gonna Stop Us Now
13. Bilitis
14. You’ll Never Walk Alone
15. Shadowmix
16. Always On My Mind

Themes and Dreams 1991

1. Crockett’s Theme
2. Up To Where We Belong
3. Take My Breath Away
4. Theme from The Deerhunter
5. Walking In The Air
6. If You Leave Me Now
7. One Day I’ll Fly Away
8. Africa
9. Every Breath You Take
10. Memory
11. Nights in White Satin
12. Candle in the Wind
13. You Win Again
14. Sailing
15. Just The Way You Are
16. Moonlight Shadow

Dream Time 1994

1. Imagine/Woman
2. Three Times A Lady
3. Just The Way You Are
4. If You Leave Me Now
5. Up Where We Belong
6. Misty
7. Carless Whisper
8. I Guess Thats Why They Call It The Blues
9. I Just Called To Say I Love You
10. Always On My Mind
11. Sealed With A Kiss
12. The Snowman
13. Going Home
14. Skye Boat Song

The Shadows at Abbey Road 1997

1. Wonderful Land (unissued versi
2. Witch Doctor (The Savage) (uni
3. What A Lovely Tune (unissued s
4. The Boys – Theme (un-dubbed ve
5. Guitar Tango (un-dubbed versio
6. All Day (unissued alternate ve
7. Atlantis (un-dubbed version)
8. It’s Been A Blue Day (unissued
9. Razzmataz (unissued alternativ
10. Nothing, Folks (unissued instr
11. John’s Rocker (unissued versio
12. Zero X Theme (stereo re-mix)
13. Thunderbirds Theme (stere re-m
14. Scotch On The Rocks (stereo re
15. Slaughter On 10th Avenue
16. Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (uniss
17. No No Nina unissued instrument
18. Don’t Cry For Me Argentina (un
19. God ONly Knows (unissued re-mi

The Final Tour Live 2004

1. Intro – Apache Medley / Riders In The Sky
2. The Frightened City
3. Theme For Young Lovers
4. Peace Pipe
5. The Savage
6. Let Me Be The One
7. The Stranger / Kon Tiki
8. Going Home (Theme from Local Hero)
9. Dance On
10. Nivram
11. Lady Of The Morning
12. My Home Town
13. Guitar Tango
14. Geronimo
15. Sleepwalk
16. 36-24-36
17. Shazam
18. Don’t Cry For Me Argentina
19. Equinox V
20. Mountains Of The Moon
21. Shadoogie
22. Gonzales
23. Don’t Make My Baby Blue
24. The Rise And Fall Of Flingle Bunt
25. Atlantis
26. Shindig
27. Man Of Mystery
28. Foot Tapper
29. Please Don’t Tease
30. In The Country
31. I Could Easily Fall
32. The Day I Met Marie
33. Gee Whiz It’s You
34. Summer Holiday
35. Bachelor Boy
36. Little B
37. Theme From The Deerhunter
38. Wonderful Land
39. FBI
40. Apache

Alternative Special Edition

1. Granada
2. Brazil
3. The High And The Mighty
4. Memory (From ‘Cats’)
5. I Just Called To Say I Love You
6. Perfidia
7. Every Breath You Take
8. Green Eyes
9. You Don’t Have to Say You Love Me
10. Telstar
11. Stardust
12. All I Ask of You
13. Whiter Shade Of Pale
14. Adios Muchachos
15. Just the way you are
16. Maria Elena

Diamonds

1. Diamonds
2. Image – Woman
3. Theme From Missing
4. You Resque Me
5. Hats Of To Wally
6. Nut Rocker
7. Guardian Angel
8. Up Where We Belong
9. This Ole House
10. Africa
11. Arty’s Party
12. Can’t Play Your Game
13. The Old Romantics
14. Our Albert
15. Cowboy Cafe
16. We Don’t Talk Anymore

Play the Music of Andrew Lloyd Webber & Tim Rice 1997

1. A Whole New World
2. The Phantom Of The Opera
3. Memory
4. Tell Me On A Sunday
5. I Know Him So Well
6. Starlight Express Suite
7. I’d Be Surprisingly Good For You
8. Don’t Cry For Me Argentina
9. Can You Feel The Love Tonight
10. Love Changes Everything
11. Oh What A Circus
12. The Music Of The Night
13. Take That Look Of Your Face
14. All I Ask Of You
15. Another Suitcase In Another Hall
16. One Night In Bangkok – Variations

The First 40 Years

1. Apache
2. The rise and fall of Flingel Bunt
3. Man of mystery
4. Moonlight shadow
5. The theme from the deerhunter
6. The savage
7. Guitar tango
8. The boys
9. Wonderful land
10. Geronimo
11. Memory
12. Genie with the light brown lam
13. Every breath you take
14. The frightened city
15. Kon-tiki
16. Walking in the air
17. Atlantis
18. Shindig
19. The lady in red
20. Dance on
21. Don’t cry for me argentina
22. The stranger
23. Theme for young lovers
24. Foot tapper
25. Fbi
26. Rider in the sky

(Freddie’s Home Page at jukebox.au.nu)

LINKS TO THE SHADOWS CLUBS:

ShadowMusic Club Perth, Australia Dave Dixon’s Shadows Archive, UK The Sydney Shadows Club, Australia John Dyhouse: The Shadows as Songwriters Sydney Shadows Music Gillian Gatland’s Shads Vids, UK
Toronto Shadows Club, Canada Malcolm Campbell’s Site, UK The Danish Shadows Club, Denmark Tony Clout’s TAB Site, UK Official Cliff & Shadows Fan Club, France The Shadows Tribute Band – Atlantis (Munich)
Fans des Shadows, France Fiesta-Red – The “Heidelberg Shadows” Shadowmaniacs, France Fred Bos’ Shadows Site, Holland Cliff & The Shadows Club, Germany International Cliff Richard Movement, Holland
Shadows Music Convention, Germany The Shadows Appreciation Club of Ireland Cliff & The Shadows Club, Holland The Shadows, Japan Shadows Club, Ireland John Campbell’s Penumbra, New Zealand
Cliff & The Shadows Club, Italy Gunnar Angelsen’s Shadows Site, Norway Italian Shadows Community Jan Arne Flatby’s Site, Norway Shadows Players Club of Japan Goran’s Backing Tracks, Sweden
The Shadows Club Of South Africa The Marvingers Web Site, Sweden Shadows Club, Sweden The Blacksun Web Site, Sweden The Swiss Shadows Club, Switzerland Chai’s Thai Twang, Thailand
Chai’s Shadows Club Asia, Thailand Past Masters Music Berkshire Shadows Forum 60+Guitarband The Danish Shads Amanda’s Meazzi echoes site
The Twylight Shadows Phil Mcgarrick’s Web Site Leo’s Den Music and Backing Tracks

(shadowmusic.bdme.co.uk)

BAND MEMBERS:
Hank Marvin – lead guitar (1958–1968, 1973–1990, 2004–present)
Bruce Welch – rhythm guitar (1958–1968, 1973–1990, 2004–present)
Mark Griffiths – bass (1989–1990, 2004–present)
Brian Bennett – drums (1961–1968, 1977–1990, 2004–present)
Warren Bennett – keyboards (2004–present)
(torontoshadowsclub.ca)

ON THE ART OF POETRY

Tragedy is essentially an imitation not of persons but of action and life, of happiness and misery. All human happiness or misery takes the form of action; the end for which we live is a certain kind of activity, not a quality. Character gives us qualities, but it is in our actions—what we do—that we are happy or the reverse.
A tragedy is impossible without action, but there may be one without Character. The tragedies of most of the moderns are characterless—a defect common among poets of all kinds. From what we have said it will be seen that the poet’s function is to describe, not the thing that has happened, but a kind of thing that might happen, i.e. what is possible as being probable or necessary. The distinction between historian and poet is not in the one writing prose and the other verse. Hence poetry is something more philosophic and of graver import than history, since its statements are of the nature rather of universals, whereas those of history are singulars.
Tragedy, however, is an imitation not only of a complete action, but also of incidents arousing pity and fear. Such incidents have the very greatest effect on the mind when they occur unexpectedly and at the same time in consequence of one another; there is more of the marvelous in them then than if they happened of themselves or by mere chance. Even matters of chance seem most marvelous if there is an appearance of design as it were in them.
A tragedy has the following parts – Prologue, Episode, Exode, and a choral portion. We assume that, for the finest form of Tragedy, the Plot must be not simple but complex; and further, that it must imitate actions arousing pity and fear, since that is the distinctive function of this kind of imitation. It follows, therefore, that there are three forms of Plot to be avoided:
1. A good man must not be seen passing from happiness to misery, or
2. A bad man from misery to happiness. The first situation is not fear-inspiring or piteous, but simply odious to us. The second is the most untragic that can be; it has no one of the requisites of Tragedy; it does not appeal either to the human feeling in us, or to our pity, or to our fears. Nor, on the other hand, should
3. An extremely bad man be seen falling from happiness into misery. Such a story may arouse the human feeling in us, but it will not move us to either pity or fear; pity is occasioned by undeserved misfortune, and fear by that of one like ourselves; so that there will be nothing either piteous or fear-inspiring in the situation. There remains, then, the intermediate kind of personage, a man not pre-eminently virtuous and just, whose misfortune, however, is brought upon him not by vice and depravity but by some error of judgment, of the number of those in the enjoyment of great reputation and prosperity.
The perfect Plot, accordingly, must have a single, and not (as some tell us) a double issue; the change in the hero’s fortunes must be not from misery to happiness, but on the contrary from happiness to misery; and the cause of it must lie not in any depravity, but in some great error on his part; the man himself being either such as we have described, or better, not worse, than that.
The tragic pleasure is that of pity and fear, and the poet has to produce it by a work of imitation; it is clear, therefore, that the causes should be included in the incidents of his story. Let us see, then, what kinds of incident strike one as horrible, or rather as piteous. In a deed of this description the parties must necessarily be either friends, or enemies, or indifferent to one another.
Now when enemy does it on enemy, there is nothing to move us to pity either in his doing or in his meditating the deed, except so far as the actual pain of the sufferer is concerned; and the same is true when the parties are indifferent to one another. Whenever the tragic deed, however, is done within the family—when murder or the like is done or meditated by brother on brother, by son on father, by mother on son, or son on mother—these are the situations the poet should seek after. In the Characters there are four points to aim at:
First and foremost, that they shall be good. There will be an element of character in the play, if (as has been observed) what a personage says or does reveals a certain moral purpose; and a good element of character, if the purpose so revealed is good. Such goodness is possible in every type of personage, even in a woman or a slave, though the one is perhaps an inferior, and the other a wholly worthless being.
The second point is to make them appropriate. The Character before us may be, say, manly; but it is not appropriate in a female Character to be manly, or clever.
The third is to make them like the reality, which is not the same as their being good and appropriate, in our sense of the term. The fourth is to make them consistent and the same throughout; even if inconsistency be part of the man before one for imitation as presenting that form of character, he should still be consistently inconsistent.
The right thing, however, is in the Characters just as in the incidents of the play to endeavor always after the necessary or the probable; so that whenever such-and-such a personage says or does such-and-such a thing, it shall be the probable or necessary outcome of his character; and whenever this incident follows on that, it shall be either the necessary or the probable consequence of it.
As Tragedy is an imitation of personages better than the ordinary man, we in our way should follow the example of good portrait-painters, who reproduce the distinctive features of a man, and at the same time, without losing the likeness, make him handsomer than he is. The poet in like manner, in portraying men quick or slow to anger, or with similar infirmities of character, must know how to represent them as such, and at the same time as good men. When he is constructing his Plots, and engaged on the Diction in which they are worked out, the poet should remember:
1. To put the actual scenes as far as possible before his eyes. In this way, seeing everything with the vividness of an eye-witness as it were, he will devise what is appropriate, and be least likely to overlook incongruities.
2. As far as may be, too, the poet should even act his story with the very gestures of his personages. Given the same natural qualifications, he who feels the emotions to be described will be the most convincing; distress and anger, for instance, are portrayed most truthfully by one who is feeling them at the moment. Hence it is that poetry demands a man with special gift for it, or else one with a touch of madness in him; the former can easily assume the required mood, and the latter may be actually beside himself with emotion.
3. His story, again, whether already made or of his own making, he should first simplify and reduce to a universal form, before proceeding to lengthen it out by the insertion of episodes. This done, the next thing, after the proper names have been fixed as a basis for the story, is to work in episodes or accessory incidents. One must mind, however, that the episodes are appropriate. In plays, then, the episodes are short; in epic poetry they serve to lengthen out the poem.
4. There is a further point to be borne in mind. Every tragedy is in part Complication and in part Denouement; the incidents before the opening scene, and often certain also of those within the play, forming the Complication; and the rest the Denouement. Complication means all from the beginning of the story to the point just before the change in the hero’s fortunes; by Denouement, all from the beginning of the change to the end.
5. There are four distinct species of Tragedy—that being the number of the constituents also that has been mentioned: first, the complex Tragedy, which is all Peripety and Discovery; second, the Tragedy of suffering, third, the Tragedy of character. The fourth constituent is that of ‘Spectacle’, and in all plays with the scene laid in the nether world. The poet’s aim, then, should be to combine every element of interest, if possible, or else the more important and the major part of them. This is now especially necessary owing to the unfair criticism to which the poet is subjected in these days. Just because there have been poets before him strong in the several species of tragedy, the critics now expect the one man to surpass that which was the strong point of each one of his predecessors.
6. One should also remember what has been said more than once, and not write a tragedy on an epic body of incident (i.e. one with a plurality of stories in it), by attempting to dramatize.
The above having been discussed, it remains to consider the Diction and Thought. As for the Thought, we may assume what is said of it in our Art of Rhetoric, as it belongs more properly to that department of inquiry. The Thought of the personages is shown in everything to be effected by their language—in every effort to prove or disprove, to arouse emotion (pity, fear, anger, and the like), or to maximize or minimize things. It is clear, also, that their mental procedure must be on the same lines in their actions likewise, whenever they wish them to arouse pity or horror, or have a look of importance or probability. The only difference is that with the act the impression has to be made without explanation; whereas with the spoken word it has to be produced by the speaker, and result from his language. What, indeed, would be the good of the speaker, if things appeared in the required light even apart from anything he says?
As for the poetry which merely narrates, or imitates by means of versified language (without action), it is evident that it has several points in common with Tragedy:
1. The construction of its stories should clearly be like that in a drama; they should be based on a single action, one that is a complete whole in itself, with a beginning, middle, and end, so as to enable the work to produce its own proper pleasure with all the organic unity of a living creature. Nor should one suppose that there is anything like them in our usual histories. A history has to deal not with one action, but with one period and all that happened in that to one or more persons, however disconnected the several events may have been. Just as two events may take place at the same time, without converging to the same end, so too of two consecutive events one may sometimes come after the other with no one end as their common issue. Nevertheless most of our epic poets, one may say, ignore the distinction.
2. Besides this, Epic poetry must divide into the same species as Tragedy; it must be simple or complex, a story of character or one of suffering.
There is, however, a difference in the Epic as compared with Tragedy, in its length, and in its meter:
1. As to its length, the limit already suggested will suffice: it must be possible for the beginning and end of the work to be taken in one view—a condition which will be fulfilled if the poem be shorter than the old epics, and about as long as the series of tragedies offered for one hearing. For the extension of its length epic poetry has a special advantage, of which it makes large use. In a play one cannot represent an action with a number of parts going on simultaneously; one is limited to the part on the stage and connected with the actors. Whereas in epic poetry the narrative form makes it possible for one to describe a number of simultaneous incidents; and these, if germane to the subject, increase the body of the poem. This then is a gain to the Epic, tending to give it grandeur, and also variety of interest and room for episodes of diverse kinds. Uniformity of incident by the satiety it soon creates is apt to ruin tragedies on the stage.
2. As for its meter, the heroic has been assigned it from experience; were any one to attempt a narrative poem in some one, or in several, of the other meters, the incongruity of the thing would be apparent. The heroic; in fact is the gravest and weightiest of meters—which is what makes it more tolerant than the rest of strange words and metaphors, that also being a point in which the narrative form of poetry goes beyond all others. The iambic and trochaic, on the other hand, are meters of movement, the one representing that of life and action, the other that of the dance. Still more unnatural would it appear, it one were to write an epic in a medley of meters, as Chaeremon did. Hence it is that no one has ever written a long story in any but heroic verse; nature herself, as we have said, teaches us to select the meter appropriate to such a story.
The marvelous is certainly required in Tragedy. The Epic, however, affords more opening for the improbable, the chief factor in the marvelous, because in it the agents are not visibly before one. The marvelous, however, is a cause of pleasure, as is shown by the fact that we all tell a story with additions, in the belief that we are doing our hearers a pleasure.
A likely impossibility is always preferable to an unconvincing possibility. The story should never be made up of improbable incidents; there should be nothing of the sort in it. If, however, such incidents are unavoidable, they should be outside the piece.
As regards Problems and their Solutions, one may see the number and nature of the assumptions on which they proceed by viewing the matter in the following way:
1. The poet being an imitator just like the painter or other maker of likenesses, he must necessarily in all instances represent things in one or other of three aspects, either as they were or are, or as they are said or thought to be or to have been, or as they ought to be.
2. All this he does in language, with an admixture; it may be, of strange words and metaphors, as also of the various modified forms of words, since the use of these is conceded in poetry.
3. It is to be remembered, too, that there is not the same kind of correctness in poetry as in politics, or indeed any other art. There is, however, within the limits of poetry itself a possibility of two kinds of error, the one directly, the other only accidentally connected with the art. If the poet meant to describe the thing correctly, and failed through lack of power of expression, his art itself is at fault. But if it was through his having meant to describe it in some incorrect way (e.g. to make the horse in movement have both right legs thrown forward) that the technical error (one in a matter of, say, medicine or some other special science), or impossibilities of whatever kind they may be, have got into his description, his error in that case is not in the essentials of the poetic art. These, therefore, must be the premises of the Solutions in answer to the criticisms involved in the Problems.
Speaking generally, one has to justify:
1. The Impossible by reference to the requirements of poetry, or to the better, or to opinion. For the purposes of poetry a convincing impossibility is preferable to an unconvincing possibility; and if men such as Zeuxis depicted be impossible, the answer is that it is better they should be like that, as the artist ought to improve on his model.
2. The Improbable one has to justify either by showing it to be in accordance with opinion, or by urging that at times it is not improbable; for there is a probability of things happening also against probability.
3. The contradictions found in the poet’s language one should first test as one does an opponent’s confutation in a dialectical argument, so as to see whether he means the same thing, in the same relation, and in the same sense, before admitting that he has contradicted either something he has said himself or what a man of sound sense assumes as true. But there is no possible apology for improbability of Plot or depravity of character, when they are not necessary and no use is made of them.
The objections, then, of critics start with faults of five kinds: the allegation is always that something in either:
1. Impossible
2. Improbable
3. Corrupting
4. Contradictory
5. Against technical correctness
The answers to these objections must be sought under one or other of the above-mentioned heads.
(Adapted from The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Poetics, by Aristotle)

THE MAJESTY OF CALMNESS

Nature keeps her books admirably; she puts down every item, she closes all accounts finally, but she does not always balance them at the end of the month. To the man who is calm, revenge is so far beneath him that he cannot reach it, even by stooping. When injured, he does not retaliate; he wraps around him the royal robes of Calmness, and he goes quietly on his way.
When the tongue of malice and slander, the persecution of inferiority, tempts you for just a moment to retaliate, when for an instant you forget yourself so far as to hunger for revenge, be calm. When the grey heron is pursued by its enemy, the eagle, it does not run to escape; it remains calm, takes a dignified stand, and waits quietly, facing the enemy unmoved. With the terrific force with which the eagle makes its attack, the boasted king of birds is often impaled and run through on the quiet, lance-like bill of the heron. The means that man takes to kill another’s character becomes suicide of his own.
The most subtle of all temptations is the seeming success of the wicked. It requires moral courage to see, without flinching, material prosperity coming to men who are dishonest; to see politicians rise into prominence, power and wealth by trickery and corruption; to see virtue in rags and vice in velvets; to see ignorance at a premium, and knowledge at a discount. To the man who is really calm these puzzles of life do not appeal. He is living his life as best he can; he is not worrying about the problems of justice, whose solution must be left to Omniscience to solve.
In the race for wealth men often sacrifice time, energy, health, home, happiness and honor, everything that money cannot buy, the very things that money can never bring back. Hurry is a phantom of paradoxes. Hurry always pays the highest price for everything, and, usually the goods are not delivered.
Business men, in their desire to provide for the future happiness of their family, often sacrifice the present happiness of wife and children on the altar of Hurry. They forget that their place in the home should be something greater than being merely “the man that pays the bills;” they expect consideration and thoughtfulness that they are not giving.
We hear too much of a wife’s duties to a husband and too little of the other side of the question. “The wife,” they tell us, “should meet her husband with a smile and a kiss, should tactfully watch his moods and be ever sweetness and sunshine.” Why this continual swinging of the censer of devotion to the man of business? Why should a woman have to look up with timid glance at the face of her husband, to “size up his mood”? Has not her day, too, been one of care, and responsibility, and watchfulness? Has not mother-love been working over perplexing problems and worries of home and of the training of the children that wifely love may make her seek to solve in secret? Is man, then, the weaker sex that he must be pampered and treated as tenderly as a boil trying to keep from contact with the world? In their hurry to attain some ambition, to gratify the dream of a life, men often throw honor, truth, and generosity to the winds.
Politicians dare to stand by and see a city poisoned with foul water until they “see where they come in” on a water-works appropriation. If it be necessary to poison an army, that, too, is but an incident in the hurry for wealth.
Into the hands of every individual is given a marvelous power for good or for evil, the silent, unconscious, unseen influence of his life. This is simply the constant radiation of what a man really is, not what he pretends to be. Every man, by his mere living, is radiating sympathy, or sorrow, or morbidness, or cynicism, or happiness, or hope, or any of a hundred other qualities.
Life is a state of constant radiation and absorption; to exist is to radiate; to exist is to be the recipient of radiations. There are men and women whose presence seems to radiate sunshine, cheer and optimism. You feel calmed and rested and restored in a moment to a new and stronger faith in humanity. There are others who focus in an instant all your latent distrust, morbidness and rebellion against life. Without knowing why, you chafe and fret in their presence. You lose your bearings on life and its problems. Your moral compass is disturbed and unsatisfactory. It is made untrue in an instant, as the magnetic needle of a ship is deflected when it passes near great mountains of iron ore.
There are men who float down the stream of life like icebergs, cold, reserved, unapproachable and self-contained. In their presence you involuntarily draw your wraps closer around you, as you wonder who left the door open. These refrigerated human beings have a most depressing influence on all those who fall under the spell of their radiated chilliness. But there are other natures, warm, helpful, genial, who are like the Gulf Stream, following their own course, flowing undaunted and undismayed in the ocean of colder waters. Their presence brings warmth and life and the glow of sunshine, the joyous, stimulating breath of spring.
There are men who are like malarious swamps, poisonous, depressing and weakening by their very presence. They make heavy, oppressive and gloomy the atmosphere of their own homes; the sound of the children’s play is stilled, the ripples of laughter are frozen by their presence. They go through life as if each day was a new big funeral, and they were always chief mourners.
There are other men who seem like the ocean; they are constantly bracing, stimulating, giving new draughts of tonic life and strength by their very presence.
There are men who are insincere in heart, and that insincerity is radiated by their presence. They have a wondrous interest in your welfare, when they need you. They put on a “property” smile so suddenly, when it serves their purpose, that it seems the smile must be connected with some electric button concealed in their clothes. Their voice has a simulated cordiality that long training may have made almost natural. But they never play their part absolutely true, the mask will slip down sometimes; their cleverness cannot teach their eyes the look of sterling honesty; they may deceive some people, but they cannot deceive all. There is a subtle power of revelation which makes us say: “Well, I cannot explain how it is, but I know that man is not honest.”
Man cannot escape for one moment from this radiation of his character, this constantly weakening or strengthening of others. He cannot evade the responsibility by saying it is an unconscious influence. He can select the qualities that he will permit to be radiated. He can cultivate sweetness, calmness, trust, generosity, truth, justice, loyalty, nobility, make them vitally active in his character, and by these qualities he will constantly affect the world.
Man is the only animal that can be really happy. To the rest of the creation belong only weak imitations of the understudies. Happiness represents a peaceful attunement of a life with a standard of living. It can never be made by the individual, by himself, for himself. It is one of the incidental by-products of an unselfish life. No man can make his own happiness the one object of his life and attain it, any more than he can jump on the far end of his shadow. If you would hit the bull’s-eye of happiness on the target of life, aim above it. Place other things higher than your own happiness and it will surely come to you.
You can buy pleasure, you can acquire content, you can become satisfied, but Nature never put real happiness on the bargain-counter. It is the undetachable accompaniment of true living. It is calm and peaceful; it never lives in an atmosphere of worry or of hopeless struggle.
(Adapted from Project Gutenberg’s The Majesty of Calmness, by William George Jordan)

SUPERFICIAL LIFE

Is there a deeper kind of life than the one you are currently living? Is there more to life than acquiring all the material things you could possibly get your hands on?
The truth is, when things are going well in our lives, we don’t give it any thought. We seldom stop to think about life’s meaning when things are great.
Society has taught us to live in a world of fantasy; therefore, we find ourselves living in a superficial world without any substance and without any love for ourselves and others.
If you only find happiness by having instead of being, you may want to look at your life and consider shifting your focus. Instead of focusing on finding fulfillment through external things, try to focus on the happiness that comes from within.
Feeling the need to accumulate things in life in order to feel loved and satisfied will only leave you craving for more, because when the excitement wears off, you will likely find yourself empty and dissatisfied. It’s like being thirsty and drinking only soda or coffee to quench your thirst. Nothing can quench your thirst better than water. You cannot rely on soda or other liquids to do an adequate job, because you will always be thirsty.
(Dr Alex ledgister at dralexledgister.com)
Superficial means being fairly shallow in character and attitude. It means focusing on the surface reality and not what lies beneath. It means that there is not much substance. It means that you are only concerned with seeing the obvious without exploring any underlying issues and circumstances. It means that you are only appearing to be real, but you are not truly being real.
(Jedha Dening at EzineArticles.com)
CB contributed the following poem at associatedcontent.com (a poem to emphasize that there is more to a person than just looks):
“I write this because like many of you, I too am tired of reading messages from strangers talking about my looks, Oh you look good? Can we be friends?’- Both from men and women. LOL. To those strangers – I am privileged that you feel so and thank you for those compliments. But when I get these messages, all I think is – You don’t even know me! I just wished people stopped being superficial.”

THE BEGINNING…..
O’ Stop being Superficial
Stop being so Tri-vial.
Just because I look so hot
Does not mean I have no brains
Just because I’m NO model
Does not mean you can call me names

I may be blond and dumb
I may be blond and wise
How do you really know?
That I won’t take you by surprise?

I may not look too exquisite
I may not be a model
I may still be the sweetest person
You encounter in this life

O’ Stop being Superficial
Stop being so Tri-vial
Learn to see beyond the layer
Only then will you be smarter
I hope when you look at me
A wonderful human is what you see

Most of us have at least heard the saying “It’s not what’s in the outside that matters, but what’s in the inside is what matters“, at least once in our life. This saying may be true, but our society has made us believe that the outside matters a lot.
Many girls read magazines and see that beautiful air brushed models, they want to become that dream girl…that doesn’t exist, and some will take drastic measures…to become that size zero girl, even if it means becoming anorexic.
Our media is full of beautiful, size zero girls, but they fail to realize that most regular teenage girls don’t look like that. In our society the first impression is what matters. They judge us by our exterior, forcing some young girls to feel self-conscience about them.
Girl self-esteem is one of the easiest things to break, they are already judging themselves too harshly, and the media doesn’t help them at all, seeing perfect models, only makes them wish they looked like that. We have to emphasize to teenage girls that beauty comes in all shapes and sizes; you don’t have to be a size zero to be beautiful. Beauty comes from within, but the media and our society don’t help the cause, they are creating the “perfect girl” that doesn’t exist. Now days, we are judged too harshly on just our physical appearance. Some people don’t even take our personality in consideration, which is sad and unfortunate. We cannot stop the media from putting out airbrushed pictures of perfect models, but we can stop being so influenced by them, and realizing that we are beautiful in our own way.
(princess6 at teenink.com)
Are you surrounded by shallow people? Are you in an intimate relationship with a superficial individual? You like that person, but the superficial nature of that person is a barrier to any genuine relationship. This situation is a case where actions speak louder than words. Why is this case? Well, you see them saying the right words and attempting to do the right things. However, sooner or later, their superficial disposition comes out, and you can’t believe they are that way. If you were honest with yourself, you knew that person was pretty hollow in the beginning, but you didn’t want to accept it. Let’s analyze this situation closer.
First, there are no physical characteristics that can identify a superficial person. Clearly, shallow people come in all shapes and sizes. They have varying backgrounds. They live in every community. However, these people all have a common characteristic; they are externally-driven.
In the frantic pace of modern living, many people are in the pursuit of the wrong possessions. The media bombards us with the notion that “We deserve it all.” When this philosophy is believed, it creates a generation of inwardly focused people. We become a “Me” generation. Because this person feels he is entitled to be happy, he focuses on what can make him happy now. Obviously, it is far easier to pursuit things (money, power, right clique, etc.) in terms of happiness because they are tangible to the eyes. However, this short path is not a road to fortune but perhaps a highway to destruction. If you are in relationships with outward-focused people, you can be assured that your intimacy will lack depth. Your relationship may feel like the real thing but over time the truth usually will reveal itself.
Sadly, some people do not have this deepness of character. They exist on the shallow end of the spectrum; they rarely make serious relationships. Why is this factor the case? These people are more concerned with what’s on the outside of an individual than what is on the inside.
(Daryl Green at articleslash.net)
Human personality is like an onion. It consists of multiple layers that become denser as you go deeper within. Manners are a thin veneer on the surface, a set of formalized patterns of action and response demanded of each of us by the society we live in, regardless of how we actually feel inside, which is often very different from the outward manners we exhibit.
Though manners are superficial, perfect conduct even at this level is extremely difficult. We may exhibit good manners on important occasions or with important people, but few are capable of maintaining perfect conduct all the waking hours with close friends, intimate family members, work colleagues, casual acquaintances, servants, etc. The world worships appearances and gives utmost value to good manners, even when they conceal the very opposite inner disposition. Self-restraint, soft speech, humble considerate behavior towards all, thoughtful gestures are extremely difficult to maintain as unvarying conduct. One who is a perfect master of good manners can by virtue of that endowment alone secure international fame and recognition.
Manners are on the surface. Behavior is on the depth of the surface. Whereas manners reflect conduct that the world expects or demands of us, behavior is conduct expressive of our inner attitudes and beliefs. What the society demands as manners develops into genuine behavior in the individual. Friendly manners may disguise inner anger or anguish because society frowns on their expression, whereas cheerful, warm behavior expresses genuine happy, positive attitudes towards oneself and others.
(Garry Jacobs at mssresearch.org)

A ‘PROUD CONTEMPT OF OTHERS’

The best way to deal with an arrogant person is to understand why he is being arrogant. This may sound odd, but the truth is, as soon as you know the reason behind his arrogance you will pity him.
Arrogant people think that they are always right, they think that they know the best answers to all life problems and they think that they are better than most of the ordinary people. Arrogance is no more than a shield that covers inner emptiness and sometimes an inferiority complex.
(Dealing With Arrogant People, Written by M.Farouk Radwan, MSc. at 2knowmyself.com)
Those to whom much has been given sometimes suffer from arrogance; or rather the people around them suffer. Arrogance is doubly a pity, because the talents of the arrogant serve primarily themselves. The arrogant assumes his views and opinions are The Truth. In arrogance, natural confidence goes sadly awry. Rather than the self-assurance born of knowing his own strengths and limitations, arrogance admits no limits. The arrogant brooks no weakness in himself and may even secretly rejoice to find flaws in others. But imperfections are inherent in being human, so the arrogant, like everyone else, always has feet of clay, however well hidden they may be. Fearing exposure, haughtiness forms a hard shell masking inner emptiness.
(Inner Frontier at innerfrontier.org)
Arrogance is a defense mechanism used by the subconscious mind in order to prevent further criticism. If someone had a terrible childhood and if he was hurt by others he may develop arrogance in order to prevent further criticism from hurting him, the trick usually works, because if someone criticized him he can simply devalue him and assume that he is worthless.
Arrogant behavior can be a result of feeling neglected. If someone felt that he is not getting all the attention he deserves, he may unconsciously become arrogant just to attract some of the lost attention.
Arrogant people are single minded, they either think that they are superior to others or inferior to them. This arrogant person who is intimidating you feels inferior to someone else because this is how his mind works, this arrogance may be nothing more than a way to cover this feelings of inferiority he experiences when dealing with someone else.
(Dealing With Arrogant People, Written by M.Farouk Radwan, MSc. at 2knowmyself.com)
Be arrogant if you wish. Look down on others and treat them poorly, if you wish. But realize that if you do so, you’re only allowing your own inner weaknesses to shine through, and you’re not fooling anyone. Not the people around you, who hold you in disdain, not God who made you and loves you and knows all about you, and not yourself.
And for those who must deal with arrogance on a regular basis, please keep in mind that arrogant people treat you poorly only because they’re needier than you, and they haven’t yet admitted to themselves that they are needy. They need and deserve your compassion, not your anger.
(livinglifefully.com)
They stride among us. Their eyes wary, their armor buckled, their words pre-sharpened. They hold themselves superior. They are haughty, imperious, and disdainful. There is one notion they hold dear: They are better than you.
“Arrogance,” Webster tells us, is “that species of pride which extols the worth or importance of one’s self to an undue degree.” This is not healthy self esteem. This is not brimming confidence. This is a “proud contempt of others.”
People build their arrogance from different foundations. Some start with money, others with intellect, education, lineage, job status, good looks, and athleticism. Some allow their arrogance to sprout from even the most obscure hobbies or traits. Arrogance can be based on real qualities or possessions: a genius IQ, a staggering bank account. It can just as easily be based on illusion: a ‘brilliant’ strategist who gleans every last idea from others, a ‘millionaire’ who owns nothing more than a generous line of credit.
Many people bristle at arrogance, quickly asserting themselves or rejecting the speaker. Others must suffer quietly as the arrogant person is in a position of power. Some take a person’s arrogance as a signal of importance. “She must be somebody to act like that.” Fans can be willing to excuse the arrogance of someone whose achievements or skills they admire. “When you play the horn like he does, you’re allowed to be a jerk.”
(Human Solutions Humaines at wilsonbanwell.com)
There are three kinds of arrogance. There is the most surface sort of arrogance that seeks to justify sin. Often this will take the form of saying to ourselves, “But no one was hurt.”
If the sin is against another, this arrogance blames the other, or a third party. We see this in the seven year old boy who isn’t watching where he is going, and rams into a wall and loudly proclaims, “I didn’t do it!”
The third form of arrogance is the most interior. It deposits itself just a few layers from our soul when we first commit any act of arrogance. This arrogance afflicts the entirety of humanity – all who has not sought it out in themselves and cut it out, and have remained watchful for its return. This is an arrogance that deceives us into thinking we know best. It is held up and supported by pride. It is this arrogance that makes us an easy mark for any temptation that may present itself to us.
(On Sin, Arrogance, and Peeling an Onion, By Steven Clark at ancient-future.net)
Some people become arrogant because they are afraid of losing their power. They are in good standing right now and they don’t want to come down. Arrogance gives them a certain distance. These powerful people can find that arrogant behavior gives them an air of invulnerability, renders them slightly untouchable. “Others may be less likely to challenge me if what I have seems out of reach.” It is easier for powerful people to cast an arrogant eye on others. They do, after all, have some tangible ‘evidence’ of their positions. Psychologists Steven Spencer and Susan Fiske find that people in positions of power tend to stereotype more. This is because they often don’t consider personal, distinguishing details about others and they need to defend their decisions.
(Human Solutions Humaines at wilsonbanwell.com)
“Arrogance” looks awfully much the same. The person is aware of his skills and talents in an area and assumes leadership in that area. The only difference is that those around him or her are bothered by it. For some reason, that control feels pushy and out of place. The observer is inclined to think, “Who does he think he is?” There seems to be a divide between the individual’s self-assessment and that of onlookers.
That runs us right into the next question: Who’s responsible for that — the person or the spectators? After all, if beauty is in the eye of the beholder, wouldn’t that also be true for another person’s talents and management? Perhaps, when there is a difference of opinions, the arrogance lies not with the person in charge but with the viewers. Perhaps it is the viewers who have misplaced arrogance rather than the presumptive leader. How are we to tell?
Here’s one clue: A person who knows his (or her) strengths, also knows his weaknesses. You’ll frequently find a person who is proud and takes leadership roles in one domain, deferring to others in different domains of activity. The arrogant person won’t do that. The arrogant person seems to know everything about everything and won’t give up a stronghold on anything. Thus, in judging who the arrogant person really is, ask yourself: Which one of these two people thinks he or she knows everything about everything? Which one has all the answers on all subjects? That’s one clue.
(Which Is It: Pride or Arrogance? By Dr. Debby Schwarz Hirschhorn at jewishworldreview.com)

THE MAN WHO GAVE CHE TO THE WORLD

Alberto Díaz Gutiérrez, better known as Alberto Korda or simply Korda (September 14, 1928 in Havana, Cuba – May 25, 2001 in Paris, France) was a Cuban photographer, remembered for his famous image Guerrillero Heroico of Argentine Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara.
The relationship between Fidel Castro and Korda could not be defined by one label or title. For Castro, Korda was more than an official photographer, a friend or personal photographer. They never discussed the salary or the title, their relationship wasn’t boss and worker. Thus, Korda was very relaxed, and interested in everything and everyone. Every photo he took was a symbol of the revolution, instead of a documentary of the events of the revolution. The Cuban Revolution was the turning point in Korda’s career. His career plans were completely changed with the success of the revolutionaries. In 1959 the newly established newspaper offered the largest space for photographers to display their photographs, and Korda became part of the revolutionary cause. Korda Says, “Nearing 30, I was heading toward a frivolous life when an exceptional event transformed my life: The Cuban Revolution. It was at this time that I took this photo of a little girl, who was clutching a piece of wood for a doll. I came to understand that it was worth dedicating my work to a revolution which aimed to remove these inequalities.” He got caught up in the ideals of the revolution and began photographing its leaders.
(en.wikipedia.org)
The revolution turned Alberto Korda’s career in a completely different direction. Korda said he “fell in love with the Revolution and its heroes”. He photographed Fidel Castro’s entrance into Havana in January 1959, with Camillo Cienfuegos, another notable Cuban revolutionary, by his side. Although Korda was not a photojournalist then, he took this picture to ‘Revolucion’, the newspaper of the Cuban revolutionaries, which published it. Four months later, ‘Revolucion’ asked Korda to accompany Fidel on his first trip abroad after the revolution, to Venezuela. Commenting on his relationship with Fidel, Korda said it was “distant at first, but I was very happy to photograph what I loved — and still love — the Revolution and Fidel”.
(Seeing with the heart, V. SRIDHAR, Frontline at hinduonnet.com)
As Revolution photographer Korda always worked at his own photographic tempo. He wasn’t pushed by the press or by any other requests. Where ever the revolution took Castro Korda followed. One of Korda’s most recognizable images was of Castro’s visit to the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. in April 1959. Castro’s travels took Korda all around Cuba, overseas, and the Soviet Union. In 1963, photos of Fidel and Nikita Khrushchev, taken by Korda, illustrated the differences in both men that were evident in their respective politics.
(en.wikipedia.org)
In 1969 Fidel went back to the Sierra Maestra, the remote mountain region, where the revolutionary army began its attacks on the army of the Fulgencio Batista regime. Korda’s style was to move to the front of whatever group Fidel was leading in order to get the shots he wanted. When Korda comes back to his home, his daughter couldn’t recognize him. His hair and beard were long and hadn’t showered for months. Korda took many pictures for the newspaper and called the series “Fidel Returns to the Sierra.” Fidel always liked Korda’s photos and never stopped him when he attempted to take his picture. He worked freely without thinking about political consequences, in order to get what he wanted in his photos.
(en.wikipedia.org)

Che Guevera

Che guevera
(Ernesto Guevara)
Guerrillero Heroico
Taken by Alberto Korda on March 5, 1960
The La Coubre memorial service
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Che Guevara stepped onto the podium and scanned the crowd. Korda snapped two quick shots, including the legendary one of the revolutionary with his beret, gazing like a prophet into the distance. Korda recognised its greatness and kept the photo tacked to his wall for seven years, until an Italian journalist saw it.
(news.bbc.co.uk)
It is this photograph that adorns student bedsits across the world. The famed black and white portrait of Ernesto “Che” Guevara perfectly captured his intense stare and brooding good looks, helping establish his myth.
The fact that the photograph, taken with a Leica camera on 4 March 1960 at a political rally in Havana attended by Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir, came to international prominence owes as much to luck as Korda’s skill. “It was not planned, it was intuitive,” said Korda, who worked for the ‘Revolucion’ newspaper. He told one interviewer that Guevara had shown such an intense gaze that he had been briefly taken aback and only managed to fire off two quick shots, one vertical, one horizontal.
It was at the same rally that Cuban leader Fidel Castro delivered his famous “Homeland or Death” slogan in front of thousands of people. But the photograph of Guevara, which Korda later called “Heroic Guerrilla”, did not make the next day’s paper and only emerged after Guevara’s death in Bolivia seven years later.
(Row rages over iconic image of Che Guevara, Jamie Doward, The Observer, Sunday 7 March 2010 at guardian.co.uk)
No other image — apart from the one of Marilyn Monroe standing at a subway grid — has been reproduced as many times in history. That photograph of Che, with his long hair flowing from underneath his beret with a star affixed to it, his eyes gazing into the distance, can be found on posters, subway walls and countless consumer articles such as T-shirts, mugs, key chains, wallets and cigarette lighters all over the world. It also adorns walls across Cuba where Che is loved for the part he played in the cause of the revolution. However, the man who took that photograph, Alberto Diaz Gutierrez, known to the world as Alberto Korda, never made anything for himself from the image he gave the world.
Wherever Korda went, at photographic exhibitions or while talking to youth about photography, he would invariably be asked about that famous image of Che and how he created it. This is how he described it to Pacifica: “This photograph is not the product of knowledge or technique. It was really coincidence, pure luck.” Korda was one among the 20 to 30 photographers below the grandstand that day and Che made a brief appearance at the front of the stage, for barely a minute. Korda managed to take just two shots of Che – one horizontal and one vertical. He rejected the vertical shot because a head covered Che’s shoulder; he cropped the horizontal shot and gave it to ‘Revolucion’. French writers Jean Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir were among those present at the memorial service for 136 people killed in an explosion that destroyed a vessel loaded with weapons for the Cuban government. Ironically, ‘Revolucion’ did not use Korda’s pictures of Che; it carried his other pictures, of Castro and Sartre and Beauvoir. The Che pictures remained forgotten until after his death in Bolivia.
(Seeing with the heart, V. SRIDHAR, Frontline at hinduonnet.com)
The picture was still hanging on the wall in 1967, by now tobacco-tinted though, when a man knocked on the door. The person did not present himself, but handed over a letter of introduction from a high-ranking member of the Cuban administration. The letter asked Korda to help this person in his search for a good Che picture. Korda pointed at the wall saying: “This is my best Che picture”. The visitor agreed and asked for 2 copies of the print. Korda told him to return the next day, which he did. When asked the price of the prints, Korda replied, that since the visitor was a friend of the revolution, he didn’t have to pay.
What Korda didn’t know, was that the visitor was the famous Italian publisher Giangiacomo Feltrinelli. Well known in Europe for smuggling the “Dr. Zivago” manuscript out of The Soviet Union. Feltrinelli came to Cuba directly from Bolivia, where he had been negotiating the release of Regis Debray. Having learnt from Debray, that Che Guevara was the guerrilla-leader in Bolivia and that the end might be near, Feltrinelli saw a business opportunity in the possible assassination of Che.
(Michael Harder Photography 2001 at pix.dk)
The corpse of Che Guevara was hardly cold in Bolivia, before you could buy big posters, all around the world, with the Korda-image of Che. Copyright Feltrinelli it said, down in the corner. In half a year, Feltrinelli sold 2,000,000 posters. Later on the image has been transformed, transplanted, transmitted and transfigured all over the world.
Korda never received a penny. For one reason only – Cuba had not signed the Berne Convention. Fidel Castro described the protection of intellectual property as imperialistic “bullshit”.
(Michael Harder Photography 2001 at pix.dk)
By 1969 Korda had quit covering politics, turning instead to underwater photography. Now semiretired, he supports himself with freelance advertising jobs and by selling photos of Castro and Che for $500 apiece.
When not at work, the four-time divorce and father of five nurtures his other great passion: women. He and his 21-year-old companion, Zaeli Miranda, share a modest two-bedroom apartment with her sister and a friend in Havana’s Miramar district. “He’s friendly and loving,” Miranda says of Korda. “I’ll ask him to take out the garbage, and he does it happily.”
Korda, took the photo when Che was 31, yet never tried to protect his copyright. That is, until Smirnoff appropriated the image for a 1998-99 U.K. vodka ad campaign. “Hundreds of companies used my photo, but none have been as offensive,” says Korda, 72. “Che wasn’t a drinking man. He was a revolutionary killed defending his ideals.” Outraged, the Havana-based photographer slapped a lawsuit on a London advertising firm and a photo agency for trivializing Che’s image. A hearing was set. The ad agency, Lowe Lintas, denies “infringement of any copyright or moral rights.”
Korda says no matter how his lawsuit turns out, his lifestyle won’t change, and any proceeds will buy medicine for Cuban children. “I don’t care about money. I like being a poor man,” he says. “I went after Smirnoff because of their degenerate ad. It’s the principle of the thing.”
(The Way of Che By Joanne Fowler, September 25, 2000 at storage.people.com)

WE ARE OUR OWN WORST ENEMY

Almost all human beings do have something to ask for from Almighty. Some have a craving for some lawful worldly objects, some have to ask for solutions of their problems, some longing for remedy of illness and getting good health, while some have the far-sight of asking favors of the next world. Thus everyone has something to ask from his/her own angle of view.
(boltwolf.tripod.com)
Imagine for a moment that you find yourself with a flashlight in your hand in a room that is totally dark. You turn on the flashlight and see a beautiful painting hanging on the wall. You might think, “Sure, this is a wonderful work of art, but is this all there is?” Then, all at once, the room becomes illuminated from above. You look around and see that you are in an art museum, with hundreds of paintings on the walls around you, each more beautiful than the last. As these possibilities stand revealed to you, you realize you have a lifetime of art to study and love. You are no longer constrained to view just one painting lit by the weak glow of your flashlight.
(Excerpted from The Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire by Deepak Chopra. Copyright © 2003 by Deepak Chopra at deepakchopra.wwwhubs.com)
Can anything be classed as real when our perceptions differ greatly on so many things? Just because we see something a particular way does not make it so. We can be so insistent sometimes that our way of seeing something is more right than someone else’s way.
Let’s take the example of war. There are some people who believe that war is necessary sometimes to get peace and then in order to keep the peace. There are other people who will believe that war is evil and should never be entered into no matter what. Who is right? Is war right or wrong? That’s just an example…..
What you see as real is only defined by your belief structure. Your version of what is real is only your perception of it; not what is so.
Here’s another example: Let’s say an event occurs in your life. You have the choice about how you respond to it. Let’s say you have a death in the family. You can choose to see that event as something terrible and tragic to which you will respond accordingly. Or, you can choose to see that event and something that inspires you to make something more of your life; living every day as if it was the last, so to speak.
From that example you can see that you may or may not have control over the events in your life but you can certainly take control of how to respond to them. That part of life will always be within your power. This is where life gets interesting because you shape your own reality through your beliefs.
Your belief structure determines your perception which then ultimately determines how you respond to events. Going by that sequence you can then see that there is another place to start. You can choose to examine your beliefs and then choose to change them.
(Adaptted fron Perception vs Reality by Amit Sodha on March 22, 2006 at unlimitedchoice.org)
We have a very narrow view of things. Naturally, the imperfect existence cannot be the source of perfect consciousness. The imperfect perspective of the human mind cannot be expected to give a complete picture of things in their true state of affairs.
There is a habit of the mind by which it looks at things in a linear fashion, in a line or a straight vision, as it were, as a series of objects, a line in space and time, and this is what may be succinctly called the three-dimensional perspective or the individualistic perception of the human mind – to look at things as bodies, as isolated existences, with the feeling that you and I are different, that things are isolated from one another in such a manner that there cannot be intrinsic or organic connections among them. This is perhaps the historical way of things. There is no organic connection between events in history. They are mathematically or causally related, so that one follows the other.
(An Analysis of Our Perception of Historical Personalities by Swami Krishnananda at swami-krishnananda.org)
The ultimate source of our problems is in thought. Our thinking determines our actions and our actions determine the quality of our relationship with each other. Society is the result of relationships. Problems arising out of human relationship appear to be intractable. There is conflict at all levels of human relationship. There is conflict between husband and wife, between parent and child, between one group and another, between nations, religions and within the same political and religious organizations. There is enormous confusion, violence, brutalities, the wars, terrorism and endless division of religion and nationality. Roots of disorder lie in the state of human mind.
Unfortunately we use the same thinking ability to find solutions to the numerous complex and intricate problems that thought has created. Past history clearly demonstrates that despite all the knowledge and experience accumulated through centuries, man has not been able to produce a harmonious and healthy society. We do make some improvements here and there but the overall situation remains grim. The momentum at which the problems are being created is quite overwhelming. It is obvious that there must be a serious flaw in the way we think.
It is amazing that two distinct systems of thought operate within the framework of human consciousness, one that creates the problem and the other that tries to find solution to the problem. Both arise out of the same source. That source is self-centeredness. Thinking arising out of self-interest, self-concern creates numerous problems. Problems like greed, jealousy, anxiety, anger, hate and violence arise out of the conditioned state of mind. Any problem that arises in the mind poses a challenge and there is an automatic response to meet the challenge. This response generates thought process that has no clue as to how the problem got created.
It is extremely important that we should understand the nature of the self because most of our actions spring from this center. Our perceptions and responses to the challenges of life and our basic urges, desires and demands are determined by the nature of the self. Human relationship is based on the operation of thought that is self-centered. Only a profound understanding of the nature of the self can bring about inward revolution.
(Adapted from Clarity of Perception by SardarSingh, September 17, 2009 at lifeisrelationship.com)
One of the things people are quickly becoming aware of is the media’s nonstop repetition of the same old themes and always trying to keep us scared and manipulated, whether it be who to vote for in an upcoming election or the suppression and total disregard of information which paints things in a different picture to the one that they are trying to impose on us. Another is how democracy is just two sides of the same coin so to speak, they offer us choice but that choice is limited inside of their choices.
Freedom is more than a word. It is everything and the only thing that is in our way of obtaining it is our own perception. What we perceive is what believe. Consider this, if we were walking along and spotted a house and someone said that it was a nice house and you disagreed, and then which one of you is right? The thing about perception is that more often than not it is not even your own perception; it was manipulated from the day you were born and constantly conditioned by outside forces, from parents to school and work. We are being bombarded with influence and the problem with that is we don’t realize it until we become someone else’s perception altogether and we cry out inside to ourselves.
If someone said the words planet earth most people would immediately conjure up visions of the earth from space as we know it, a giant sphere covered in ocean, dotted with land and surrounded with clouds. But what if you could see ultraviolet light, or x-ray or even gamma rays? Than earth would look incredibly different to you and would therefore provoke different thoughts and feelings, you see everything is symbolic and just because you see something does not mean you see all aspects of something; you just have an idea of how it is and this is one of the biggest problems in the world today as Governments, Media, religion and society in general are constantly trying to take other peoples freedom to see things from many angles and points of view and limit them to only the ones they want them to see. Parents are some of the worst offenders for this.
Everything expresses itself in many shapes and forms and your perception is the only thing that holds it in that myopic and preconceived view you have. You must open yourself up to possibility and when you do that you can let the information flow freely and make an informed judgment. But that is not the world we live in now; the world we live in now is the same world that burnt people alive at the stake for ideas just a few hundred years ago, and although we may not be as physically brutal anymore, fear of changing the way we look at things is still alive and kicking in today’s social structure.
(Adapted from How Everything is a Symbolic Representation of Your Perception, by AndrewCalvisi Mar 2nd, 2010 at bukisa.com)