Up until this point, the bonds within our batch were marked by effortless camaraderie, characterized by pure interactions without hidden motives or personal agendas.
But during our second year, a subtle transformation began to take hold as we entered adolescence, a transitional phase toward adulthood. It was during this time that a shift, initially imperceptible, gradually became clear. Fault lines began to emerge among students in our batch, creating a nuanced social divide.
In the past, our batch had a carefree approach to their relationships with each other. They engaged in activities like playing ball, going to the grocery store, sharing meals, doing laundry, or simply chatting without any ulterior motives or personal gain.
However, in Form 2, a change started to become apparent. With the onset of adolescence, some students began to be more selective about their social circles, while others maintained a stance of impartiality, avoiding factional alliances.
As an observer, I noticed this shift, but it didn't personally affect me as I had a close group of friends, particularly among my schoolmates. However, it was unsettling for those caught within this transformation. I saw their unwavering loyalty to their chosen cliques, waiting for all members to gather before initiating any activity.
Their unity extended to every aspect of their lives, from sharing meals in the dining hall to waiting for the bus, playing games, going on excursions, grocery shopping, or just chatting. This loyalty was on full display for everyone to see, and it seemed unusual to those on the outside.
The easy-going nature of inter-student relationships began to fade, replaced by a tendency to spend most of one's time exclusively with their chosen group, regardless of the circumstances. As a result, interactions with other batchmates outside of their immediate circle became infrequent, and the camaraderie that had once thrived began to wither.
Inside the Asrama, tensions became palpable as the once mutual respect between students diminished. The more vulnerable individuals became collateral damage in the struggle for social networks.
As a neutral observer, my narrative often uses 'they.' I remained unaffected by this phenomenon, with no inclination to form, name, or brand a group. It simply wasn't my inclination. I navigated relationships with my peers smoothly, not through ceaseless interactions but by avoiding causing discomfort to anyone. My path remained clear, and life within the Asrama was already complex enough.
Others found themselves entangled in the web of indecision, pressured by 'peer pressure' to gravitate toward specific cliques, enticed by the allure of being 'in.' It was a disheartening and somewhat comical sight to behold.
I had no interest in group affiliations. I preferred independent thought and avoided tethering myself to any collective identity or individual when charting my life's course. Social boundaries allowed me to form relationships with individuals from various circles. I remained independent in perspective and resolute in my avoidance of group dynamics, guided solely by my own principles.
No comments:
Post a Comment