You don't get inspiration sitting in an office all day long.
It is an elusive creature that needs to be sought out
pounces upon you unknowingly when
you're pouring the tea
or watching the
clock.
Monday, February 23, 2009
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
An absolutely beautiful movie exemplifying the transcendental value of Fitzgerald's short story and it's incisive study of life and what it means to grow old - well, in the case of Benjamin, younger. This simple subversion is just so brilliant.
I'm plunged back into an existential crisis.
What the hell am I doing with my life? But what is the point of it all if we're going to die? Why go through all that love and pain? And no I don't the buy the story that we're all here because we're living a life of guilt and that we live in shame so we can go to heaven. If that's the only prerequisite needed to enter a perfect universe, the world as we know it wouldn't exist. The naive sheep don't talk about the other requirements like adherence to certain 'rules' though. Nobody actually follows everything.
Anyway
The movie was slow and painful. Just like life. Love, loss, hope, laughter, and death. Every single moment heart wrenching. Every life fated for something. Every life lived was for something.
And in the end was Death.
I also loved how the movie captured American history in the nutshell - from the post WW1 euphoria right up to the Beetles era, and then ending with Katrina. The centrality of New Orleans exemplifies the timeliness and the importance of context in appreciating the full power of the film. It's something that I'm going to keep thinking about cuz I don't think I really got it yet. Watch out for the clock at the end when the flood comes in though. It was said to have been a requiem to all the deaths during the war, and the desire for the dead to return back to life. for time to go back. maybe it's the same as with hurricance Katrina. absolutely beautiful metaphor.
oh i love the accents as well. There's something so beautifully exotic and distant about it. Something from our recent past, and yet suggestive of so much Black culture and history. Something very seductive.
The frequent recurrence of the storm acted very much like a Wagnerian leitmotif as well. Loved it.
Yet death pervades the entire movie right from the started. Benjamin sees death all around it. People come and go. He meets them at the end of their lives whilst he just begins his. Every moment is painful. Every death, loss. In the end was his, as with his lover.
What is life? love sex loss death pain pleasure happiness melancholy. Shakespeare knew that. So did Fitzgerald.
What am I doing with my life? Every life is one worth living but what for? I need to know.
I need to know.
I keep asking people for the answer and I continually ask myself that as well. But i wish i knew. Or maybe I will only find out in the end, just like in the movies. When I'm on my deathbed.
When that time comes, who will I be with? Who will i remember in those sudden stream of flashbacks? will there be any?
I wonder. And the young don't.
I'm plunged back into an existential crisis.
What the hell am I doing with my life? But what is the point of it all if we're going to die? Why go through all that love and pain? And no I don't the buy the story that we're all here because we're living a life of guilt and that we live in shame so we can go to heaven. If that's the only prerequisite needed to enter a perfect universe, the world as we know it wouldn't exist. The naive sheep don't talk about the other requirements like adherence to certain 'rules' though. Nobody actually follows everything.
Anyway
The movie was slow and painful. Just like life. Love, loss, hope, laughter, and death. Every single moment heart wrenching. Every life fated for something. Every life lived was for something.
And in the end was Death.
I also loved how the movie captured American history in the nutshell - from the post WW1 euphoria right up to the Beetles era, and then ending with Katrina. The centrality of New Orleans exemplifies the timeliness and the importance of context in appreciating the full power of the film. It's something that I'm going to keep thinking about cuz I don't think I really got it yet. Watch out for the clock at the end when the flood comes in though. It was said to have been a requiem to all the deaths during the war, and the desire for the dead to return back to life. for time to go back. maybe it's the same as with hurricance Katrina. absolutely beautiful metaphor.
oh i love the accents as well. There's something so beautifully exotic and distant about it. Something from our recent past, and yet suggestive of so much Black culture and history. Something very seductive.
The frequent recurrence of the storm acted very much like a Wagnerian leitmotif as well. Loved it.
Yet death pervades the entire movie right from the started. Benjamin sees death all around it. People come and go. He meets them at the end of their lives whilst he just begins his. Every moment is painful. Every death, loss. In the end was his, as with his lover.
What is life? love sex loss death pain pleasure happiness melancholy. Shakespeare knew that. So did Fitzgerald.
What am I doing with my life? Every life is one worth living but what for? I need to know.
I need to know.
I keep asking people for the answer and I continually ask myself that as well. But i wish i knew. Or maybe I will only find out in the end, just like in the movies. When I'm on my deathbed.
When that time comes, who will I be with? Who will i remember in those sudden stream of flashbacks? will there be any?
I wonder. And the young don't.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Of Decisions
It's Sunday and I'm out at Millennia Walk sitting at starbucks with a good hot chocolate typing this article.
This, particularly enraged me yesterday. According to Agence France-Presse, radical cleric Qatada, once labelled Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe by a Spanish judge, was awarded $5400 by the Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights - which will also rule on a final appeal against his deportation from Britain. It was this very court that also ruled against the UK's DNA project, hampering what could possibly have been a major milestone in the development of scientific research in DNA and the history of Man.
This, particularly enraged me yesterday. According to Agence France-Presse, radical cleric Qatada, once labelled Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe by a Spanish judge, was awarded $5400 by the Strasbourg European Court of Human Rights - which will also rule on a final appeal against his deportation from Britain. It was this very court that also ruled against the UK's DNA project, hampering what could possibly have been a major milestone in the development of scientific research in DNA and the history of Man.
The European court noted that the level of compensation was "substantially lower than those which it had made in past cases of unlawful detention", and that it reflected the fact that his detention "was devised in the face of a public emergency" and weighed protecting the public against a duty not to return people to countries where they faced a real risk of ill-treatment. The ruling was of course made a day after the House of Lords ruled that he could be deported to Jordon - where he already has been sentenced to life imprisonment for terror offences - and could possibly face torture.
I am personally against the ruling.
The sentence ruled on the following bases:
1) That it was ultimately an unlawful detention.
2) That the duty not to return peoples to a place where they could face torture outweighs the duty to protect the public.
Simplified as such, the ruling is stupid, idiotic and beyond the claims of common sense. If the sentence is to be believed, it is clear that the Strasbourg Court believes that the right of one outweighs the rights of the people. The logic goes like this:
Fact: Qatada is a convict in Jordan who has been sentenced to life imprisonment for terrorist activities.
Fact: Torture is prevalent in Jordan.
Premise 1: Man has the right to be protected from torture and from dangerous terrorists.
Premise 2: However, Qatada has been detained without clear evidence for terrorism in Britain.
Conclusion: Since his threat to the public is not immediate as such, his right to freedom from unlawful detention supersedes the concerns of the public and their desire for preventive detention, which is in this case deemed unlawful. And, until he is proven guilty otherwise, he shall enjoy the same rights as any other man in Europe, namely the right to protection from torture.
Let us re-examine the case...
Firstly, Qatada is a convicted terrorist, albeit in Jordan. He is therefore a threat - underlying and possibly subversive, though not immediate. There is therefore absolutely no guarantee that society is free from his machinations in the future. There is also absolutely no indication that he 'has turned over a new leaf', or that he has embraced Western culture and values. NYET! NON!
It is a given that every man has the right to certain basic provisions under the rule of law as law-abiding citizens. However, Qatada's status as a 'law-abiding' citizen is at best doubtful. While he may not have committed a crime under European soil as such, there is little doubt that the crimes of which he is convicted of in Jordan would similarly apply in the UK and in Europe. He cannot therefore be given the same status as with any other ordinary citizen. He is not.
Finally, while the judiciary has to be wary and mindful of the 'mob-mentality' so precarious in democracies (note: Atheneins killing Socrates), I find little in this case to support the idea that Qatada should have been COMPENSATED. This sends the wrong signal to the world, and to all terrorists out there who are seeking to undermine the fundamentals of our society - namely, our human rights.
The Court could have ruled against unlawful detention, but need not have compensated him.
That having said, I am against the use of torture on any man. However, as my concern ultimately lies with the safety of the public AND the protection of our value and way of life, and that no immediate conviction can be made in the UK, the only way to safeguard the safety of my citizens is to sentence Qatada to deportation to a country where he has indeed already been convicted of terrorism - the crime which seeks actively to subvert the prevailing order of society - so that he can be safely displaced from society. Qatada is no lamb or scapegoat. HE IS A CONVICTED TERRORIST! HE DESERVES IT! We should NOT in any way kid ourselves to think otherwise! He is NOT INNOCENT ON ANY ACCOUNT AND SHOULD NOT BE TREATED LIKE ONE. He needs to be put away for the sake of the world.
What the UK govt can do is to solicit a guarantee from the Jordanian govt for his freedom of torture. This compromise is arguably the lesser evil than releasing him back into the arms of the society of which he seeks actively to destroy. In fact, he hell shouldn't even have been granted asylum in the UK in the first place. What is wrong with these people????
---
On another note,
I found a Lonely Planet Guide on AFGHANISTAN yesterday and I just had to buy it. It's not as thick as the usual guides, 80% of the book is peppered with security warnings, that I have absolutely no idea how those guides even got round Afghanistan in the first place. It's quite cool really, with awesome pictures. Anyway, here's a picture of the Shah-e Doh Shamshira Mosque, which i got from http://flickr.com/photos/56905260@N00/2551848509/
I would still like the opportunity to work in some third world country for a period of time. Maybe not Afghanistan or any 'hot' war zone at the current moment. Somewhere relatively stable preferably. I'll like to make a real contribution, where politiking often fails. It's something I'll like to do soon. At least once in my life and not when I'm 60.
It is something so Singaporean to lament about the horrible state of affairs in the world whilst reading the newspaper, but forgetting it as soon as you close it because 'it doesn't directly concern you'. These are also the people who profess religions and morals. They fawn over people who actually do volunteer work, but when asked, shy away for 'personal reasons'.
I think double-standards governs every aspect of our lives, and that is should be the 8th deadly sin.
One of the first things you notice when growing up are your parent's double-standards. I should know. I had intimate encounters with them. So would you. However as time goes by, you lose that childish curiosity and the natural inclination to question, accepting things as the way they are and becoming immune to them. Many begin to adopt similar positions. When pressed further, they shut you out by means of linguistic or authoritative turns - as with what their parents once did.
There are also those who survive and become a better person.
Many however still bandy about postmodernist lingo like how 'there's nothing certain the world', or that 'no one is right or wrong', and adopt these positions for expediency to support a particularly whim at a particular moment in time.
Mommy, why does the maid not eat at the table with us?
Because she's the maid.
But why?
Shut up and eat your food. and it's because I say so.
.. and we should all strive to save paper in this office for the sake of the environment!
OH and secretaries, pls make sure that you print all documents with font size 14 only, and pls don't put 2 pages into one sheet as it will spoil my pretty eyes. remember! single-side for extremely classified documents...
double-standards. we all burn in hell.
BECAUSE I SAY SO.
Friday, February 20, 2009
On Human Rights and Politics
I reserve the right to digress.
It's really not healthy lying on your tummy (or really chiseled and hard pecs) on your bed with your laptop/Apple and think the proverb really went 'an Apple a day keeps le medecin away!'
En Contraire...
anyway
Human rights cannot be divorced from politics.
Politics is the vehicle by which we futher human rights. Political action leads to legislation, which in turn serves the larger human rights cause by either protection or enforcement.
Activists are what they are because they are attempting to influence the public, and are hoping that enough public pressure would spur politicians on to adopt their positions and translate them into policy. It's therefore really hilarious when a human rights activist tells you he 'hates politics and politicians'. No 'human right' can be enforced without politicians, but politicans, definitely, can do without human rights activists. That is the nature of relations between the two.
Human Rights are a human invention and creation. Nothing is self-evident about it.
Rights can be understood in various levels and degrees. Underneath the culture of every society lies certain very very broad commonalities. Every culture has an idea of 'good', 'bad', 'the moral', what should be protected, what should be treasured, so on and so forth. Go up higher those levels, and the differences become more stark and evident. Thererein lies the problem of enforcing a 'universal' standard of Rights.
The embodiment of Rights in legal documents itself raises a set of legal, linguistic, and historical problems. Legal documents are open to interpretation. The Common Law system is premised upon the continual building-upon on a tradition - particularly with reference to past judgments, and the creation of new norms with new cases. The use of law to protect or enforce rights therefore engenders change and evolution. The interpretation of those rights therefore can change.
The abuse of interpretation is however not always avoidable, given the problems of linguistics - semantics, in particular. Meaning changes with context. The problems of a 'universal' definition triple-fold.
Then there's the issue of 'freedom to' and 'freedom from'.
IS freedom necessarily about positives? The freedom to have sex with animals or the freedom to live a frigid and virginal life?
We give 'things' which are unable to speak for themselves 'rights' too. We say that children have the right to be protected. But why shouldn't children be given the right to choose their own parents or their own school? why should the forest have a 'right' from destruction and us humans the right to use its resources at our will?
Who told us that we 'know better' and that we therefore have the right to decide about the fate and lives of others?
Should the parent in a polygamist sect have the right to make her 14 yr old daughter marry a 40 yr old man?
Given the myriad of opinions and views, we need politics. Political parties advocate positions and sort out the mess. They simplify things, giving us debatable but generally discernible principles and policies. Otherwise nothing would be decided.
WE need activists to remind politicians not to get too presumptious. A govt should be scared of its people, not the other way round. But activists nevertheless do not make for a good govt.
balance balance balance.
It's really not healthy lying on your tummy (or really chiseled and hard pecs) on your bed with your laptop/Apple and think the proverb really went 'an Apple a day keeps le medecin away!'
En Contraire...
anyway
Human rights cannot be divorced from politics.
Politics is the vehicle by which we futher human rights. Political action leads to legislation, which in turn serves the larger human rights cause by either protection or enforcement.
Activists are what they are because they are attempting to influence the public, and are hoping that enough public pressure would spur politicians on to adopt their positions and translate them into policy. It's therefore really hilarious when a human rights activist tells you he 'hates politics and politicians'. No 'human right' can be enforced without politicians, but politicans, definitely, can do without human rights activists. That is the nature of relations between the two.
Human Rights are a human invention and creation. Nothing is self-evident about it.
Rights can be understood in various levels and degrees. Underneath the culture of every society lies certain very very broad commonalities. Every culture has an idea of 'good', 'bad', 'the moral', what should be protected, what should be treasured, so on and so forth. Go up higher those levels, and the differences become more stark and evident. Thererein lies the problem of enforcing a 'universal' standard of Rights.
The embodiment of Rights in legal documents itself raises a set of legal, linguistic, and historical problems. Legal documents are open to interpretation. The Common Law system is premised upon the continual building-upon on a tradition - particularly with reference to past judgments, and the creation of new norms with new cases. The use of law to protect or enforce rights therefore engenders change and evolution. The interpretation of those rights therefore can change.
The abuse of interpretation is however not always avoidable, given the problems of linguistics - semantics, in particular. Meaning changes with context. The problems of a 'universal' definition triple-fold.
Then there's the issue of 'freedom to' and 'freedom from'.
IS freedom necessarily about positives? The freedom to have sex with animals or the freedom to live a frigid and virginal life?
We give 'things' which are unable to speak for themselves 'rights' too. We say that children have the right to be protected. But why shouldn't children be given the right to choose their own parents or their own school? why should the forest have a 'right' from destruction and us humans the right to use its resources at our will?
Who told us that we 'know better' and that we therefore have the right to decide about the fate and lives of others?
Should the parent in a polygamist sect have the right to make her 14 yr old daughter marry a 40 yr old man?
Given the myriad of opinions and views, we need politics. Political parties advocate positions and sort out the mess. They simplify things, giving us debatable but generally discernible principles and policies. Otherwise nothing would be decided.
WE need activists to remind politicians not to get too presumptious. A govt should be scared of its people, not the other way round. But activists nevertheless do not make for a good govt.
balance balance balance.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Valentine's Day!
You know its Valentine's Day when you find moi at a Starbucks by the bay blogging.
Je suis fatigue. For some strange reason I am. Though I think it's due to the general lack of excitement or apprehension of anything. Just relaxing. Just floating.
I found this photo on IHT:
A historic moment alright, taken at the White house in 1979 after the Egypt-Israeli peace treaty. Sadat, Carter, Begin.
The cameras, the flashes, the smiles. The smiles that lasted only as long as the reception, receding like the tide at the end of the day. The carpets kept and the crumpets swept away. Peace remains ever elusive.
Do I think the conflict can ever be solved?
Yes. No conflict is unsolvable. All it takes is a little political resolve. That will not come, however, with a new right-wing Likud govt under Netanyahu who doesn't favour a 2-state solution. The problem with Israeli politicians is that they are still stuck in Camp David. Americans, in 1967. A 2-state solution is no longer sufficient to keep the peace. New problems have cropped up. The world has changed and the dynamics of international relations - the balance of power in the region has been shifting slowly, and in fact it seems particularly unstable at this moment in history with a new American president and the biggest global economic slump since the great depression.
Hamas has to be part of the solution, but peace will not come until they resolve to recognise Israel. That, or destruction. Or continued persecution and turmoil to the citizens of Gaza, as per.
The Israelis and Americans have to stop living the past. Things aren't just going to be 'OKAY' just because everyone suddenly agrees to abide by the pre-1967 boundaries. Israeli settlements are not going to be reversed overnight. Political boundaries and sovereignty are just the beginning. The Palestinian Authority requires substantial aid in order for it to commence vital infrastructural projects, essential to the Palestinians, and especially so in order for the PA to regain it's credibility and authority. All we need is for America and its people, like George Soros, to stop pouring money into the deep end in Moscow, stop babying the Israelis, and say 'enough is enough, time to help the Palestinians, directly'.
Another problem hence, is the Israeli lobby in the US. That is an endemic problem, but they also have to realise that they are NOT the persecuted Jews of the past. Nukes, Iran may have, but any nuclear warfare in the region automatically puts the entire region at risk. Israelis don't like it, but I'm sure that their Arab neighbours feel pretty much the same as well.
As such, Iran is not just an American or Israeli problem. Stop victimising yourself and start doing proactive diplomacy with your neighbours. If there's anything needed to counter the threat posed by Iran, it's the entire Middle East working hand in hand. This means that it's time to stop 'divide and rule'.
Ultimately, to prevent a return of Bush energy policies and their vested interests in Middle East Oil, substantial funding MUST go into the usage of alternative energy sources in the US. This is the only way to break the oil spell. Oil Oligarchs should be ignored, their pet projects and peeves broken - and for this to happen, the current US administration needs to introduce harsh legislation. if this doesn't happen now during this crisis, it never will. It's time for it to stop being an endemic feature of US politics.
As for the Palestinian problem - stop looking back to history. Deal with the present. Acknowledge present realities and work with the current situation. Truth and Reconciliation is possible, but we got to start somewhere.
--
And down in the outback...
I got this off the BBC at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7887561.stm. It's really tragic. Over a 100 ppl have died for nothing. Bushfires are common in Australia and yet it is only now that they are promising to remove bureaucratic hurdles that have prevented the creation of a nationwide fire alert system???? This is absolutely crazy. How can anybody live with that? It is irresponsibility at it's max.
Somebody has also been arrested for arson, but that does little to reveal the inadequate measures that they have against a foe which they have been all but too familiar with. I'll like to call it Australia's Day of Infamy.
These kind of things should not be happening in a First World country. Maybe we just have inflated ideals about the 'first world'. Or maybe it's because we as human beings deserve so much more.
---
And tomorrow will mark the 20th anniversary of the Soviet Union pulling out of Afghanistan. Read more about it on the BBC!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/15/newsid_4160000/4160827.stm
and
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7888566.stm?lss
particularly the 2nd link...
Interestingly enough, tml also marks the day which Singapore is forced to surrender to the Japanese. Now, a day marked only as a footnote in sec2 history textbooks. The BBC notes that 'The British capitulation comes one week after Japanese forces invaded Singapore and only two weeks since their onslaught on the Malay Peninsula forced the British troops' withdrawal to the island.'
That is also the premise on which most of Singapore's state history is founded. The old tale which basically argues that self-reliance is therefore necessary because we cannot rely on any one else to defend our sovereignty.
They however forget to mention that we were nothing but a vassal. An important trading post rather, which only gained significance because we were the 'final frontier' against the Japanese.
Blame it on the British, not. Even that is taken forgranted in the national narrative today. The country has moved on from WW2 and the generation which lived through it is all but a step away from their graves. Nobody remembers. Nobody wants to. It doesn't concern them. The narrative is now about constant and steady progress. Slow and conservative, but nevertheless progressive. The past remains the past and the future is the now. The twain shall never meet.
I think that it is of the greatest ironies that success at peace breeds complacency and a general disbelief at the possibility of war. fantasy becomes reality and no one really understands war apart from what they see in the movies. Man spends so much of its time and effort PREVENTING war and devising ways and means of creating enduring peace. And yet in this tiny country, this speck in time, where peace has endured virtually since independence, a certain element of pomposity and complacency is bred.
Singapore is unreal.
Somalia is.
Sure. A particular mode of governance seems to have 'worked' in ensuring peace. Yet in a world where peace is the exception and not the norm, how long can it ensue? I can only wonder.
Food for thought.
Je suis fatigue. For some strange reason I am. Though I think it's due to the general lack of excitement or apprehension of anything. Just relaxing. Just floating.
I found this photo on IHT:
A historic moment alright, taken at the White house in 1979 after the Egypt-Israeli peace treaty. Sadat, Carter, Begin.The cameras, the flashes, the smiles. The smiles that lasted only as long as the reception, receding like the tide at the end of the day. The carpets kept and the crumpets swept away. Peace remains ever elusive.
Do I think the conflict can ever be solved?
Yes. No conflict is unsolvable. All it takes is a little political resolve. That will not come, however, with a new right-wing Likud govt under Netanyahu who doesn't favour a 2-state solution. The problem with Israeli politicians is that they are still stuck in Camp David. Americans, in 1967. A 2-state solution is no longer sufficient to keep the peace. New problems have cropped up. The world has changed and the dynamics of international relations - the balance of power in the region has been shifting slowly, and in fact it seems particularly unstable at this moment in history with a new American president and the biggest global economic slump since the great depression.
Hamas has to be part of the solution, but peace will not come until they resolve to recognise Israel. That, or destruction. Or continued persecution and turmoil to the citizens of Gaza, as per.
The Israelis and Americans have to stop living the past. Things aren't just going to be 'OKAY' just because everyone suddenly agrees to abide by the pre-1967 boundaries. Israeli settlements are not going to be reversed overnight. Political boundaries and sovereignty are just the beginning. The Palestinian Authority requires substantial aid in order for it to commence vital infrastructural projects, essential to the Palestinians, and especially so in order for the PA to regain it's credibility and authority. All we need is for America and its people, like George Soros, to stop pouring money into the deep end in Moscow, stop babying the Israelis, and say 'enough is enough, time to help the Palestinians, directly'.
Another problem hence, is the Israeli lobby in the US. That is an endemic problem, but they also have to realise that they are NOT the persecuted Jews of the past. Nukes, Iran may have, but any nuclear warfare in the region automatically puts the entire region at risk. Israelis don't like it, but I'm sure that their Arab neighbours feel pretty much the same as well.
As such, Iran is not just an American or Israeli problem. Stop victimising yourself and start doing proactive diplomacy with your neighbours. If there's anything needed to counter the threat posed by Iran, it's the entire Middle East working hand in hand. This means that it's time to stop 'divide and rule'.
Ultimately, to prevent a return of Bush energy policies and their vested interests in Middle East Oil, substantial funding MUST go into the usage of alternative energy sources in the US. This is the only way to break the oil spell. Oil Oligarchs should be ignored, their pet projects and peeves broken - and for this to happen, the current US administration needs to introduce harsh legislation. if this doesn't happen now during this crisis, it never will. It's time for it to stop being an endemic feature of US politics.
As for the Palestinian problem - stop looking back to history. Deal with the present. Acknowledge present realities and work with the current situation. Truth and Reconciliation is possible, but we got to start somewhere.
--
And down in the outback...
I got this off the BBC at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7887561.stm. It's really tragic. Over a 100 ppl have died for nothing. Bushfires are common in Australia and yet it is only now that they are promising to remove bureaucratic hurdles that have prevented the creation of a nationwide fire alert system???? This is absolutely crazy. How can anybody live with that? It is irresponsibility at it's max.Somebody has also been arrested for arson, but that does little to reveal the inadequate measures that they have against a foe which they have been all but too familiar with. I'll like to call it Australia's Day of Infamy.
These kind of things should not be happening in a First World country. Maybe we just have inflated ideals about the 'first world'. Or maybe it's because we as human beings deserve so much more.
---
And tomorrow will mark the 20th anniversary of the Soviet Union pulling out of Afghanistan. Read more about it on the BBC!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/15/newsid_4160000/4160827.stm
and
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7888566.stm?lss
particularly the 2nd link...
Interestingly enough, tml also marks the day which Singapore is forced to surrender to the Japanese. Now, a day marked only as a footnote in sec2 history textbooks. The BBC notes that 'The British capitulation comes one week after Japanese forces invaded Singapore and only two weeks since their onslaught on the Malay Peninsula forced the British troops' withdrawal to the island.'
That is also the premise on which most of Singapore's state history is founded. The old tale which basically argues that self-reliance is therefore necessary because we cannot rely on any one else to defend our sovereignty.
They however forget to mention that we were nothing but a vassal. An important trading post rather, which only gained significance because we were the 'final frontier' against the Japanese.
Blame it on the British, not. Even that is taken forgranted in the national narrative today. The country has moved on from WW2 and the generation which lived through it is all but a step away from their graves. Nobody remembers. Nobody wants to. It doesn't concern them. The narrative is now about constant and steady progress. Slow and conservative, but nevertheless progressive. The past remains the past and the future is the now. The twain shall never meet.
I think that it is of the greatest ironies that success at peace breeds complacency and a general disbelief at the possibility of war. fantasy becomes reality and no one really understands war apart from what they see in the movies. Man spends so much of its time and effort PREVENTING war and devising ways and means of creating enduring peace. And yet in this tiny country, this speck in time, where peace has endured virtually since independence, a certain element of pomposity and complacency is bred.
Singapore is unreal.
Somalia is.
Sure. A particular mode of governance seems to have 'worked' in ensuring peace. Yet in a world where peace is the exception and not the norm, how long can it ensue? I can only wonder.
Food for thought.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
WED
What's scarier?
Feeling, or realising that you don't, anymore?
Is that what they meant by 'growing up'?
Feeling, or realising that you don't, anymore?
Is that what they meant by 'growing up'?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Weekend
I had a rather eventful weekend. Not the most exciting, but at least it was packed.
3 notable mentions.
1) What the Butler Saw
It was really funny! I liked it. It was 'transcribed' and 'indigenized' from the original play by Joe Orton - which would explain the quintessentially British plots; the twists and turns. the ironies.
The play was also blatantly subversive. I'll leave it there. The audience lapped everything up like dogs, relishing every single minute of it. It did border somewhat dangerously on almost being a 'tragedy' though, and its extreme oscillations between comedy, tragedy and farce dampened my spirits somewhat and made it far less convincing than what it should have been.
Nevertheless, $30 well spent i guess. I'm too tired to go into details about the play, though i guess one can definitely google it online.
--
2) Jie Chen Piano Recital
I loved her interpretation of Bach-Busoni's Chaconne from Partita in D minor. Intense and emotional, it totally encapsulated the term 'sturm und drang'. Absolutely fascinating stuff. I teared.
Her ballads are less impressive though. After the intensity of the Busoni right before the interval, it seems almost inevitable that the general mood had to go down before picking up again - approximately around the 3rd ballade though. Her Ballade no 1 was crap. She got the interpretation wrong. didnt grasp the mood and tone of the piece properly and made various stark and i dare say careless note mistakes. the 2nd was slightly better. overall i thought she went really fast with all 4 ballades with kind of got me irked a little here and there, as though she was rushing through them.
i found the chinese pieces (liu yang river and bai nian chao feng [hundred birds paying respect to the phoenix] - yes chinese titles dont make sense in english) refreshing, but otherwise severely lacking in the logic encapsulated in her opening hayden and the busoni that followed them. im ok with guzheng-like imitations of the effect, but not when its the climax of the piece and seems to go on forever! it's absolutely percussive, non-harmonic and really really superfluous. i hate it. otherwise, the pieces were actually rather cute.
oh and i made it a point to give her my compliments after the concert during the autograph session. as a musician myself i feel compelled and somewhat obligated to do so.
lets put a smile on that face.
---
3) Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited
and I'm starting to write like Sebastian in Brideshead. Oh dear. in any case, my writing is no where comparable to Evelyn Waugh. His writing in BH is lush, evocative and compelling. i love it. its a slow and painful process of seduction.
Brideshead leaves many questions unanswered. ENIGMA. all the characters are, in someway. a very intense psychological study.
in many ways i also identify with the predicament of some. no, not all and certainly not everything. im neither of their position, predicament or period to begin with. the events dont tally and match up. nevertheless i find myself seduced by this novel with the sole identification with the loneliness and incomprehension that pervades throughout the story and the characters. those, on top of distance and indifference. many things pointed out in the story, i have come across somewhat, sometime in my life before, though it's just the beginning of mine.
i also find myself rediscovering the wonderful world of literature.
I'm only halfway through Brideshead, but i already feel as disturbed as i have been whilst watching the movie.
--
and I'm listening to the Walton Viola concerto on youtube now. wistful.
3 notable mentions.
1) What the Butler Saw
It was really funny! I liked it. It was 'transcribed' and 'indigenized' from the original play by Joe Orton - which would explain the quintessentially British plots; the twists and turns. the ironies.
The play was also blatantly subversive. I'll leave it there. The audience lapped everything up like dogs, relishing every single minute of it. It did border somewhat dangerously on almost being a 'tragedy' though, and its extreme oscillations between comedy, tragedy and farce dampened my spirits somewhat and made it far less convincing than what it should have been.
Nevertheless, $30 well spent i guess. I'm too tired to go into details about the play, though i guess one can definitely google it online.
--
2) Jie Chen Piano Recital
I loved her interpretation of Bach-Busoni's Chaconne from Partita in D minor. Intense and emotional, it totally encapsulated the term 'sturm und drang'. Absolutely fascinating stuff. I teared.
Her ballads are less impressive though. After the intensity of the Busoni right before the interval, it seems almost inevitable that the general mood had to go down before picking up again - approximately around the 3rd ballade though. Her Ballade no 1 was crap. She got the interpretation wrong. didnt grasp the mood and tone of the piece properly and made various stark and i dare say careless note mistakes. the 2nd was slightly better. overall i thought she went really fast with all 4 ballades with kind of got me irked a little here and there, as though she was rushing through them.
i found the chinese pieces (liu yang river and bai nian chao feng [hundred birds paying respect to the phoenix] - yes chinese titles dont make sense in english) refreshing, but otherwise severely lacking in the logic encapsulated in her opening hayden and the busoni that followed them. im ok with guzheng-like imitations of the effect, but not when its the climax of the piece and seems to go on forever! it's absolutely percussive, non-harmonic and really really superfluous. i hate it. otherwise, the pieces were actually rather cute.
oh and i made it a point to give her my compliments after the concert during the autograph session. as a musician myself i feel compelled and somewhat obligated to do so.
lets put a smile on that face.
---
3) Evelyn Waugh's Brideshead Revisited
and I'm starting to write like Sebastian in Brideshead. Oh dear. in any case, my writing is no where comparable to Evelyn Waugh. His writing in BH is lush, evocative and compelling. i love it. its a slow and painful process of seduction.
Brideshead leaves many questions unanswered. ENIGMA. all the characters are, in someway. a very intense psychological study.
in many ways i also identify with the predicament of some. no, not all and certainly not everything. im neither of their position, predicament or period to begin with. the events dont tally and match up. nevertheless i find myself seduced by this novel with the sole identification with the loneliness and incomprehension that pervades throughout the story and the characters. those, on top of distance and indifference. many things pointed out in the story, i have come across somewhat, sometime in my life before, though it's just the beginning of mine.
i also find myself rediscovering the wonderful world of literature.
I'm only halfway through Brideshead, but i already feel as disturbed as i have been whilst watching the movie.
--
and I'm listening to the Walton Viola concerto on youtube now. wistful.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
I love this article!
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/03/why-americans-need-to-know-more-about-canada/
we sld really have more of this!
many thanks to the AC360 team. i love you guys!
we sld really have more of this!
many thanks to the AC360 team. i love you guys!
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Thanks.
Many thanks to you guys for coming to my dad's CNY dinner thingy. Wouldn't have been so fun if it weren't for all of you. Thanks! :D
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
