The Theory Of Concentric Circles
A Structure Of Friendship

It is to be noted by the reader that the structure explained in this theory may not be a universal structure. The theory is still under study and is being improved as new evidence and observations come to light.

• The Theory of concentric circles states that each element in the group of friends is essentially a part of a circle and remains in it unless an external or internal force brings in a drastic change

• All the elements in the structure are bound by the illusion/need of friendship to remain in the structure irrespective of their position.

• It usually takes at least 5 yrs and a minimum of 15 to 20 elements for a clear and observable structure to be formed. The longer the time spend, the clearer the structure becomes.

• The size of the circle is independent of the number of elements present in it.

• If the distance between the 1^st and 3^rd circle is considered to be x and that between the 2^nd and 3^rd circle is considered to be y, then it has been observed that with respect to the 3^rd circle

x – y = negligible ~ 0
Thereby, x ~ y

• This makes it particularly difficult for the elements to recognize the structure in which they function and thus the number circles contained in them is always unconfirmed. It is also speculated that the inner circles has few elements which indulge in their own personal circles in the absence of other elements. There is, however, very little evidence in support of this assertion.

• Ideally all the elements have a tendency to focus towards the center therefore the elements in the inner circles are the usually the most popular/observed.

• As long as their circle or the circle(s) inside them are full, elements acknowledging the presence of an outer circle is highly unlikely but not impossible. The formation of this theory in itself is a testimony to that.

• As a result of the above two statements, it can never be known for sure how many circles in total exist in this particular structure.

• Many circles also have elements attached to their circles called “Conditional Elements”. These are basically elements that have a strong bonding with one particular element in the circle and therefore become a part of the circle as long as that particular element is present. Many times the presence of the conditional element is not appreciated by other elements but is tolerated nonetheless. The conditional elements usually have no fixed circle of their own and thereby their popularity and strength of bond varies drastically with each individual element irrespective of his/her circle.

• The aforementioned “Conditional elements” are always found to be facing towards the outer circle rather than the internal one. This way they have a greater chance of acceptance by other elements thus increasing there life span in the structure. This isn’t always the case since many conditional elements already have a reserved circle for them to go in the absence of the element with which they share their strong bond.

• There are certain elements in this structure which fit into more than one circle and hence should not be confused with conditional attachments. They are called “Adaptive elements” since the degree of adapting in them is much higher than other elements. In some extremely rare cases, an adaptive element makes a strong bond with the conditional element creating a rather awkward situation for the entire structure.

• The nature of bonds between the elements also depends on the circle. However the strength of the bonds should not confused with the size of the circle. The elements in the inner circles take very little time in making bonds but the durability of the bonds remains in question. The elements in the outer circle, on the other hand, take a long time in making bonds but have longer durability. There are few exceptions off course.

• The entry of new elements into this structure always takes place through the inner circles since outer circles are easily accepting despite taking a long time to form bonds.To many of us, the fact that the friendship structure is concentric in nature may seem disturbing or negative considering the amount of gap between the circles. But in actually, it is these very gaps that help sustain the structure for the elements are vast in number and have variable properties. These gaps ensure that no conflict of interest causes the entire structure to break away.

• On few occasions efforts are made by the elements to reduce the gap of the circles and bring the elements closer. This attempt of reunion, although appearing noble on the surface, is usually caused by necessity of situation or the need to fulfill a desire which requires large participation. This effort usually does more harm than good for the sustainability of the structure by bringing up more conflict and change in perceptions in between elements of different circles.

Below is the structure of friendship that has been observed over the years. The elements in yellow are adaptive elements.

Please note that corrections, certain elements and their places, etc are still to be figured out.

The Good Bully

I found this picture in an online journal of an independent filmmaker whose caption read “I don’t know who gets credit for it, but it says so much”. How very true. The beauty of a good work of art, acc to me at least, is that it gives its audience their own space to connect the dots, to understand the work in their own way. Be it a painting, a song, a movie or whatever. A good work of art is always open for interpretation. This blog entry is my interpretation of the highly criticized movie “No Smoking”. This isn’t a review though, so please read on even if u hated the movie.

The movie is about a rich good-looking cigarette addict who goes by the name “K”. K has a wife who hates his smoking and threatens to leave him if he doesn’t mend his way. So unwillingly K visits the “Prayogshala”, a rehab institute run by Baba Bangali. Baba Bangali is a man who wont take no for an answer and threatens K that if he doesn’t stop smoking there will dire consequences.

Now what I found of great interest in the movie was that I ,as an audience ,can never make up mind as to who is the bad guy. When the movie begins u hate K for his arrogance, rudeness and utter lack of concern for others. But midway start sympathizing with him knowing Baba Bangali has threatened to kill off his brother and wife if he dares smoke again. Baba’s intention might be good but blackmailing isn’t the way to go. Its wrong to force someone to do something even if it is for his own good
.....or is it?
Think about this last line for a minute.

Even K’s wife, who loves him so much, has taken the same route since nothing else worked. She had no options left except emotional blackmail. So who is the bad guy here? Who’s wrong?

Imagine your friend is a chain smoker like K. But he knows about its ill-effects as well as you do and still wants to continue. You have tried to talk him out of it many times but nothing has worked. What do u do now? Let him live his life his way or stop him from harming himself by forcing him to stop? How much is too much?

This is the underlying theme for the movie, I think. At the time anurag made this movie, he too was feeling the way. Anurag here is K and the people around him are Baba Bangali telling him what’s wrong and what’s not. Telling him what kind of movies should be made instead of letting him do his own thing. K’s wife , in this case, are the well-wishers around him asking him “Why don’t u just do wat these people are saying? Why do u have to be so stubborn?” These people dont mean any harm but as causing it nonetheless cause they don’t understand why anurag wants to make the films his own way. They just want him to be successful and happy not realizing that their idea of success isn’t the same as his.

The picture above captures that very idea, the very essence, of “No Smoking”. The angel, a symbol of good, doesn’t mean to cause harm but is in fact the root of the problem.If only the angel would let the man live his life his own way. If only the angel would just let go.....