Written in Dust: The Keyboard Speaks

“The faintest ink is more powerful than the greatest memory.”

As I was dusting my keyboard yesterday, I noticed a more stubborn type of dust on some of the keys, which I didn’t rub off: it was precious. Why? Because it told a very interesting tale…

Of the keys in the alphabet, Q had a significantly greater covering of the dust than any of the other keys, most of which were clean. TAB was a bit cleaner than the CAPS LOCK key, indicating clearly the usage of these. So I will try to draw inferences out of the patterns now.

Inference 1: I am mostly a cheerful person.
) was cleaner than (, indicating that I’d made the happy face 🙂 more than the long face :(. A little less used symbol was |, which means I’m more often sure of my emotions (I make the 😐 face when I am confused or unsure of what to say).

Inference 2: I am a textbook grammarian.
There was dust on the top part of the ‘ button, which means I press it with SHIFT more than without. That is, I use the ” more than ‘. Also, my SHIFT buttons are very clean indicating my love for the correct case. * was mostly unused.

Inference 3: Though I’ve been in a long-distance relation before as well, it’s from my current girl that I have learned how to kiss on chat.
The dust on * was wearing thin and looked polished. : ?* is how I kiss.

Inference 4: I have a love of the exclaimed!
Of all the numeric keys, 1 was the cleanest. Unsurprisingly, I use the ! mark a lot.

Inference 5: I am an escapist as well.
No, I’m not. I just press the ESC key a lot. Maybe I am, but the key has nothing to do with it, I bet. Or maybe Lacan was right: our unconscious is structured like language.



  1. Rajiv are blog buddies.
    Apropos, Written in the Dust, I think you are putting far too much stock in the “key implications!”

    Yup, writing different things: like blogs, love notes, serious essays, or novel chapters, etc., would all lead to different “dust patterns” on the keys, no?
    Just my $.02 cents worth. Take care, Charlie

    1. I am far from putting too much stock into the “key implications” as you call it. It was just a passing observation, but still one that holds its weight since in the other cases, I would not use the keys I’ve mentioned as much as the keys of the alphabet. But thanks for the critique, it was received with an open ear.

Say something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s