Right where I want it! Here I am doing my End-zone Dance.

To put that on record, the phrase “performing your own End-zone dance” means once you have a touch-down, you run to the border(s) of the field to celebrate. Be as exaggerated as you can be because people will remember you for that. Once people remember that standard end-zone dance of yours and you are readily associated with it, your value would have increased because you have now sort of become an icon, your action to be copied by adults and children alike around the world. That’s if you are a famous American footballer.

Applying this to a more familiar context, soccer, the idea isn’t that different, actually. You score a goal and you celebrate. Millions around the world can see you, copy you, adore you now more than every before. Your move becomes a trademark.

Let’s not forget Usain Bolt and his pose. And his Puma shoes.

And my Puma shoes:

 

Dignity in the Coiffure

This happened way before 2009 so I thought everyone would know this bit of Singapore history…

This explains a lot of things… like how I am always stopped at the customs. (And also why I have such an unforgettable mugshot for my driver’s licence!)

Sep 12, 2009
Past in posters (extract)
By Deepika Shetty, Straits Times

A ‘poster boy’ for the impact the posters had on society is musician Jatt Ali, 53. The Long Hair poster with the tag line: Males With Long Hair Will Be Attended To Last, has some hair-raising memories for him.

The authorities at that time associated people with long hair with hippies and drug addicts.

Jatt tells Life!: ‘This is from the 1970s. I had long hair and each time I went to the post office, I was served last. People took these posters seriously.

‘Once I was even picked up during a police ambush in the Peninsula Plaza area and ended up missing the show I was meant to perform at. Together with 20 other long-haired boys my age, I was locked up for 12 hours. My parents made a lot of noise after that and kept asking me to cut my hair, but I never did it.’

Arts impresario Robert Liew, 60, too, recalls the poster. He says: ‘We equated long hair with individualism. The Government equated it with undesirable Western influence, primarily drug consumption.

‘There was a fair amount of consternation, but before things came to head, no pun intended, it was all over, the drug threat abated and the length of one’s hair returned to the domain of fashion.’

Sociologist Paulin Tay Straughan, 46, points out that beyond the obvious and in-your-face messages, these posters tell an important story.

‘My mother was a nurse in the Family Planning Department and I pretty much grew up with the Stop At Two message. Things were so much simpler then. The fact that we have to use fancy effects, new media and phrase our messages cleverly now shows how far we have advanced as a nation.’

She adds: ‘I know some of these posters seem like a real blast from the past and are extremely amusing. But they also show how Singaporeans did not question as much in the early days. Having survived the war, all people wanted was stability. They had full faith in their lawmakers and there was no cynicism.’

No Dignity, No Diggity

(I may be delivering the feedback lecture on the Prelim AQ using materials here, so stay tuned.)

“No diggity”, according to unreliable sources, means “no doubt”. It’s a slang and the title of a song, but this post isn’t about that.

Dignity, the sense of rights entitled to one, is sometimes the thorn in the flesh of some Singaporeans. Freedom of expression (or its limit) is one such right that can make one feel indignant about living in Singapore, although they have less to complain nowadays as it is obvious the rules are slowly being relaxed. Slowly but surely.

Of course, and ironically, the word “indignation” has also taken on a rather negative meaning in Singapore. IndigNation is a gay/lesbian-pride movement in Singapore and some of its activities have usually been barred by the authorities over the years. This community is feeling indignant about their status; to them, the rejection they face removes dignity from them. On the other hand, their existence has also been making some Singaporeans indignant. How dare they feel indignant over our indignation!

Singapore isn’t such a boring place after all.

Besides, we have exciting shows on TV or in cinema (be it indie documentaries or mainstream fare).

Aug 29, 2009
Bride-hunt in Vietnam
A documentary shines the spotlight on Singapore men who go to Vietnam in search of wives
By John Lui (Straits Times) 

Five years ago, Singaporean furniture salesman Ricky Yeow, then 38, went to Ho Chi Minh City in search of a wife.

He was one of thousands who go to Vietnam every year from Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea and the West for this purpose.

But in his case, Singaporean documentary-maker Mirabelle Ang, 32, went along to capture the events. In five days, he had chosen and married 19-year-old Nguyen Thi Nhanh from the village of Dong Thap, four hours west of Ho Chi Minh.

A 48-minute account of that venture, Match Made, will screen at independent cinema Sinema Old School at Mount Sophia from next month.

Ang’s documentary was screened at the Singapore International Film Festival in 2007 and at festivals in Vienna, San Francisco, Budapest and Vietnam.

Sinema Old School programming manager Inez Maria says the theme of matchmaking was selected for next month’s screenings because with increased globalisation, there is a need to ‘understand what makes First World citizens seek soulmates in Third World countries’.

Sinema came into existence in late 2007 and missed the chance to screen the film earlier, she adds.

‘Even though we are a platform to screen local independent films, we do need time to research quality films and it took us a while to find a film as good as this,’ she says.

Ang, a Ngee Ann Polytechnic graduate, says she first got the idea to film the bride-hunt after reading in The Straits Times in 2002 about a matchmaking agency run by businessman Mark Lin.

She spoke to Life! by e-mail and telephone from Los Angeles, where she is now working as a documentary editor.

She says: ‘The article had a photo of a Chinese man with his docile wife, standing in the background in her pyjamas, smiling. I saw a larger issue behind the story and knew that I had to make a documentary about it.’

The then graduate student of the California Institute for the Arts (CalArts) approached Mr Lin, who asked one of his clients, Mr Yeow, if he would take part.

Ang says: ‘Ricky was very kind to agree to participate in the film. �I told him I was a graduate student and that I was interested in learning about the matchmaking process and would like to follow him while he was in Vietnam. He agreed.’

People who saw the film when it screened in Singapore two years ago said the rapid and business-like bride interviewing process was an eye-opener.

Says Ang: ‘After we arrived, we were driven to our hotel and told to meet in 20 minutes at the lobby to drive to another location where Ricky would meet the girls.

‘Two hours later, we were crammed into a dingy hotel room and everything unfolded before us. It all happened very quickly.’

To make the film, her first feature documentary, Ang travelled to Vietnam with Ms Susan Kim, who was a fellow graduate student at the film/video programme at CalArts. Another CalArts graduate, Mr Tuan Nguyen, a Vietnamese-American, helped with translation.

The self-funded project cost about $10,000 to make.

Ang, who graduated from CalArts with a master’s in film and video in 2006, says one of the hardest parts of the job was the language barrier.

‘I wanted to speak to the Vietnamese girls, who were mostly, if not all, younger than me. I wanted to hear their story, away from the watchful eyes of the men and women ‘taking care’ of them while they were in Ho Chi Minh waiting to be matched with potential grooms.’

The documentary includes an interview with Ms Nguyen in her home village and one with Mr Yeow in his four-room HDB flat in Singapore, where he is the oldest son living with ageing parents.

Ang hopes the film will ‘provoke questions’ from the audience about what people will do to obtain a better life and how economic imbalances between countries affect lives.

In such arrangements, the Singapore matchmaking agency is usually paid $8,000 or more, while the bride’s family receives a token amount. The bride hopes to get a husband who will provide her with a better life than the one she would get in her home country.

Ang says Mr Yeow has since refused to speak to her, for reasons which can be gleaned from watching the film, she says.

‘There’s a very delicate line between being a documentary film-maker, and being human and a witness to events. As documentary film-makers, we are constantly negotiating between that fine line,’ she says.

Do documentaries and similar expose risk the dignity of individuals especially in the context of a conservative society? It isn’t so much about the dignity of the objects that is lost but the dignity of the subject: the film(maker). That is the “very delicate line”. Is art supposed to mirror life without giving a definitive face to the image? Can art do that?

If art poses such uncertain terms in life, what about trashy shows that are mindless naturalism? I’m sure everyone has encountered the term “reality TV” many times before. The Truman Show should ring a bell too. (And of course, there is Banksy.)

Sep 5, 2009
Face it, the world is watching you
By Jonathan Holburt (ST)

The future just isn’t what it used to be. In George Orwell’s novel 1984, we thought we saw an accurate depiction: An omniscient dictator whose eyes were on everyone. At a time of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and Franco, it resonated. But now, instead of “Big Brother”, we have lots of little brothers and sisters, mums and dads — in fact, everyone — looking at all of us all the time.

Take Jade Goody. The British TV star of reality show Big Brother died of cervical cancer earlier this year. She broadcast her dying days for everyone to see, making that most private and tragic of acts a public spectacle. “I’ve lived my whole life in front of the cameras,” she said. “And maybe I’ll die in front of them.”

But this new transparent world isn’t just for prurient types. China, for example, realises you can no longer control information by just controlling the press. The press, nowadays, is the people. Anyone with a camera phone is a journalist.

Protesters at riots in Shishou city in Hubei province took videos on their camera phones and put them online. Dr Yu Jianrong from the Chinese Academy of Social Science said of the June event that “it was like a live telecast”. This fact is not lost on media outlets like CNN, which often solicit images from people on the spot.

The case of Neda Agha Soltan, the Iranian student whose death was captured on camera phone, gave the Iranian election protesters a martyr to rally around.

The Chinese government’s response to all this has been multifaceted : a failed attempt to put web-filtering “Green Dam” software on all PCs, jamming mobile phone signals during moments of unrest and, on occasion, even disrupting the Internet.

But with some 750 million mobile phone users and now 322 million online users, it won’t work. In the never-ending battle between the sword and the shield — the sword being information, the shield being control of it — the sword always wins.The cheapest mobile prepaid is giving away free minutes. 
The future wasn’t always supposed to be this way. For example, in the science fiction film series The Matrix, what humans perceive as reality was actually a simulated world, created by machines to pacify and suppress human beings. It was an opaque universe where nothing was as it appeared to be. And based on what is happening today, that really was fiction.

Because now, more than ever, everything is visible to everyone. From Bloomberg to Twitter, Facebook, Linkedin and other social networking sites that tell you more about a person than you care to know, to Google Maps and geo-location devices that can pinpoint where you are at any time, you can’t escape being visible to all — at all times. What’s driving this change? Technology, plus politics, plus the universal desire of human beings to know more about more things.

When Jemaah Islamiah terrorist Mas Selamat Kastari escaped from custody in Singapore, his face was sent to 5.5 million cellphones as part of the manhunt to find him. The most wanted poster is now no longer stapled to a wall — it’s in your pocket.

New companies such as ReputationHAWK and ReputationDefender will help protect or blunt Internet attacks against ordinary people, especially as everyone who looks for a job nowadays is the subject of a Google search. Apparently, these companies do it by creating positive data about you, which crowd out the negative.

In his 1969 book, The Human Zoo, zoologist Desmond Morris articulated a vision of humanity suffering from unnatural relationships in civilised environments. What would he have written about the world today? Are we really in a new age of totalitarianism — let’s call it multitarianism — with 1984’s Big Brother morphing virus-like into curious stares from everyone?

There’s a saying, “people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”. In this transparent age, the entire world is a glass house. And certainly that moderates behaviour — from countries to companies. Pariah-hood is more easily achieved today.

In 1928, public relations guru Edward Bernays, wrote: “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society.” In the near past, countries and companies controlled how their reputations and brands were received and perceived through carefully crafted communication. It was one-way communication: Companies spoke; consumers listened. Countries spoke; citizens obeyed.

Now, it’s two-way communication, even a dialogue, with people responding via the town halls and public squares of today: social networking and blog sites.

Which comes back to the way to thrive in this new world. Since it really is the age of transparency, everyone, including officials and managers, will have to truly understand the new rules: Whatever you do will potentially be watched and analysed by everyone.

The big world has become a small village again, where we are all watching our neighbours. As Allen Funk said on his long-running show: “Smile, you’re on Candid Camera.”

Now we all are. Literally, all of us.

Dignity is also lost, some argue, with media piracy. You lose the sense of self-worth as it is expeected of you to respect the works of others.

Aug 29, 2009
Law to block Net pirates unlikely
By Andy Ho (ST)

SINGAPOREANS make 350,000 illegal movie downloads a month. On a per capita basis, we notch up some of the largest numbers of infringements in the region.

Thus, content owners are hoping for a new law to get Internet service providers (ISPs) to deny habitual infringers Web access. But Parliament is unlikely to pass such a law.

If the United States Congress passed such a law, Singapore would be obliged by its free trade agreement (FTA) to put in place reciprocal legal arrangements to protect US creations. (Some 80 per cent of our Internet traffic access US websites.)

However, the US is not likely to do so. Congress has, indeed, extended the term of copyright protection twice. In 1976, it was raised from a total of 56 years under an old law to the life of the author plus 50 years. Then, in 1998, it was increased to life plus 70 years. If an author lives for 50 years after he creates a work, he would have 120 years of copyright. (An inventor’s patent rights last for only 20 years.)

Thus, Congress has been increasingly protective of copyrights. Still, it is unlikely to pass a law to compel ISPs to deny habitual pirates access to the Internet.

Here’s why.

In the US, anyone may lobby Congress to pass legislation that serves his interests. But it is interest groups with the most resources that tend to have success. Hence, a firm like Disney would lobby hard for, say, an extension of copyright protection. Indeed, Disney actively lobbied for the 1998 extension and got it.

In that case, it was the classic situation that experts describe as ‘concentrated benefits, diffuse costs’. That is, small groups which have not simply the incentive but also the wherewithal to organise and lobby US lawmakers to pass legislation that benefits them will do so.

They tend to succeed where the costs which such a law imposes on others are borne by the public at large. This is because each individual will bear only a small part of the costs, so no one has the incentive to organise to fight the lobbying efforts of such corporations.

The 1998 extension would benefit a few large corporations – content owners like Disney – but the costs would fall on all consumers worldwide. In 1998, content holders got what they wanted with little ado because the congressmen arrayed on their side were fortuitously able to cast the proposed extension as harmonisation with European Union (EU) law.

Under EU law, which then offered longer copyright protection of life plus 70 years to European creations, foreign (read: US) works which had lost copyright protection under their own (read: US) laws – even if they were under life plus 70 – would not be protected in Europe.

A US film-maker stood to gain an extra 20 years of copyright protection if it used, say, a British director or a German composer. Given this, US jobs would go to Europeans. To prevent such job losses, it was argued, the extension was needed. Because the costs of the extension to individual consumers – in the US and the rest of the world – would be small, there was little organised opposition to it.

Notice, however, the law was passed before the Internet really took off. At the time, there was not really widespread distribution of copyrighted content by anonymous Internet users yet. Now there is.

To fight this piracy, content owners have tried consumer education. They have also hauled some infringers to court to make examples of them. Then they have tried to convince users that the genuine product (which comes with electronic locks) is of higher quality. However, users seem quite contented with the quality of music and movies they can illegally get for free on the Internet.

Because all these strategies have failed, content owners would like legislation to require electronic equipment makers to incorporate technology that identifies and tracks users. But hardware makers oppose this as it would increase their production costs, which cannot be passed on to consumers. People would not pay higher prices for a technology they do not like.

The problem here is that there are concentrated benefits to content owners but also concentrated costs to equipment makers. This scenario has interest groups with huge resources but opposing interests pitched against one another. In such cases, Congress is not likely to act.

In fact, a law proposed in 2002 (called Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act) was precisely this sort of legislation which failed to pass in Congress. The movie studios and music labels wanted equipment makers to build into their widgets copy-protection and user-tracking technologies. The manufacturers opposed the Bill, which just died.

Now content owners are considering another approach, the one being bandied around in Singapore. This is to get ISPs to police copyright infringement. Currently, under both US and Singapore law, ISPs do not bear any liability for any copyright infringements by their subscribers.

To track file sharing by their subscribers, ISPs would have to use a technology that places a unique tag on every file every time it gets transferred. Here again there are concentrated benefits to content owners but concentrated costs to ISPs. Given privacy concerns, this would enrage their subscribers as well.

In this instance, the lobbying power of the content owners is matched by that of the ISPs and also equipment makers. Hence, Congress is very unlikely to pass any Bill that puts the onus on one side to benefit the other. This being so, Singapore is unlikely to pass an analogous law under its FTA obligations any time soon. Indeed, the authorities here say now that no such law is being actively considered.

Seems like consumerism and capitalism have created problems: while consumerism affects the dignity of oneself–how low can you stoop?–capitalism ensures companies remain profit-driven at the expense of the dignity of individuals (illegal downloaders and even loyal customers). Here we see how piracy cuts both ways, dignity diced.

More last words on 02092009

Q&A for LT3 Lecture on 27 Aug 2009

1) Why can we use almost the whole of passage B paragraph 8 as text reference? How does this link to common man’s reduced access to, and hence control of, real information?
Those lines I highlighted are potential line references and they don’t mean you have to use them all. It all depends on what the point you are using and talking about. Some good ones may not even be relevant. For Passage B, I am looking particularly at the point that talks about how media channels rely on advertisements and other corporate tie-ups and the information they present to viewers are sometimes not objective. My specific example is on Channel Newsasia, who don’t have access to Barclays Premier League and the information they presented may not be as “real” as it should be (“real information” in the form of raw footage vis-s-vis spoken or written information which have, on some occasions, led to mispronunciation or wrong information). The whole idea is on consumerism: you pay what you get. CNA is a free-to-air channel, unlike Football Channel, and the tie-ups with corporations lead to one main issue. Common man’s access to real information is restricted if he does not have the money to afford it. You can also talk about how advertorials on lifestyle shows affect real information, and you don’t have control of it because it is all presented to you. You can’t choose after a fair comparison with the rest of similar products and services. (I think I have a post on my blog about a speaker who used the analogy of “buffet” vs “set-meal” when describing the situation.)

Is the text reference used from passage B, l46-49?

I used just the reference “code for giving the public no choice” (B l.49). You can use B l.46-9 to answer R2, but I used the l.49 phrase to answer R1.

2) From the sample paragraph which address R2:
   – Although shows catering to “prurient interests” are still rare due to societal values and the closest you can get is S-factor.
   – Which shows that people has the control (otherwise profit-driven companies will many of such shows since sex sells)
   – Which is somewhat unlike what is described: “poverty of the majority of humanity” (B, l27)
   I don’t understand how does these answer R2.

R2 is about media objectivity in Singapore. I am using Passage B against itself. My stand is that the local media authority has done well so far in balancing the interest of corporations and viewers and the country, and they should continue to do so. The media here is still rather objective, considering this need for balance. We don’t have channels like the Naked News, which are present in Europe and even Korea. This is because besides the government, people in society are also against such prurient materials. (I’ve also cited the local authority’s stand on my blog a few weeks ago and from his presentation, we are assured that the MDA takes feedback from the public very seriously.) Thus “poverty of the majority of humanity” doesn’t apply to the Singapore context. We are not morally poor, and the authority has done well to listen to the public’s voice and they must continue to do so while balancing the requirements of the three stakeholders.

Is morally poor referring to us having a choice of what to watch?

Being morally poor means to choose to watch programmes that are amoral or programmes that are full of half truths or lies. Remember that the phrase in B l.27 also refers to the literal meaning of “poor”: no money, no power.

***

Do note that the topic sentence of the passage paragraph may not be the topic sentence of your AQ response paragraph, like the case in (2). That only means your own topic sentence must be clear to the readers.

Blockbuster Thursday: AQ

This is the blockbuster everyone’s been waiting for (not). It is a blockbuster because a lot of money is spent on it. Time is money. Whether or not it rakes in the sales to truly make it blockbuster remains to be seen.

First, an absolutely nonsensical trailer:

http://absolutefacts.blogspot.com/2007/07/vr-man.html

And now, onto the show, AQ. Directed by Mr K. Actors: Mr K, and Xinyi, Nicole, Lina, Lalida & Huimin of 2208.

 

Being a small country which lacks natural resources, Singapore has to rely heavily on other countries to drive our economy. Influences and interactions will be inevitable due to our openness. In this situation, it is best we learn to accept and adapt those external influences that may benefit us and resist those that may be harmful to us. This will then allow us to survive in a gobalised world.

I agree with Nye that “vibrant cultures are constantly changing and borrowing from other cultures—and that borrowing is not always from the US” (Passage A l.25-6). From our colonial past we inherited the British legal system. This borrowing is a matter of convenience, but we have also once heavily curbed freedom of expression in particular that of public protests, very much authoritarian indeed. However, we have recently accepted that we need a good degree of freedom of speech following a more liberal Western ideology (particularly the US). The government has increased the number of feedback avenues for residents to air our views. We now have STOMP, an online portal that encourages active citizenry and is popular among the younger generation. We also have the Speaker’s Corner at Hong Lim Park, modelled after Hyde Park in London. Although we have these “borrowings”, we have not legalised demonstrations and strikes for the benefit of Singapore. This is because a small country like Singapore with multi-racial residents will suffer when strikes and riots instil fear and distrust in us, as was seen in the 60s. Without a harmonious society and in a state of unrest, Singapore’s economic growth would be hindered as foreign investors would not be attracted to Singapore. We borrowed and we adapted what is good for us for our survival, very much like how “local cultures modernize in their own ways.” (Passage A l.8-9) Hence to ensure we survive in a globalised world, Singapore should continue to ignore calls to grant residents full freedom of speech.

In the recent years, Singapore has accepted and adapted well to external influences. With globalisation, more people are heading to the West for higher levels of education. Nye mentions that the Japanese have sent “its young people to the West for education” (Passage A l.14-5). However, “it is possible to adapt while preserving a unique culture” (Passage A l.18-9) as the Japanese are still very much rooted and loyal to their country after a century or so. Perhaps not so similarly in the Singapore context, professionals or students we have abroad may have the urge to uproot, or ‘quit’ the country, which led to the discussion on “stayers” versus “quitters” many years ago. The Singaporean authorities, worried about the brain-drain, rolled out programmes, and nuanced pleas were also made over National Day Rallies to resist such an impact caused by globalisation. “Singapore Day” is held annually abroad (like in Melbourne and London) and the venue of celebration would be dressed up like a part of Singapore. Singaporean chefs are flown in to prepare local dishes for these Singaporeans, perhaps to ensure that their “cultural identities have not been submerged by McDonald’s and Kentucky Fried Chicken” (Passage B l.8-9) especially when the “market economy has modified and commodified” char kway teow (a type of stir-fried noodle in soy sauce and clams) such that it costs $25 a plate in the foreign lands (thus unauthentic and expensive) while the golden arc and KFC become staple food. Although some may just be homesick, this event would also help to bring pride to those potential quitters by trying to connect them again with cultural artefacts familiar to them. With this scheme in place, Singapore will be better poised to survive in the global village where citizens are free to drop the red Singaporean passport when they found the grass to be really greener on the other side.

Besides those who are abroad, the Singapore government should also carry on instilling in the citizens within the borders a sense of identity and national pride. In this way, people will not “diminish their own capacity to find significant cultural satisfactions in their own deeds and achievements” (Passage B l.28-9). Besides rewarding the people through meritocracy as we have been doing over the decades, emphasis can be placed on cultural diversity and racial harmony as something unique: within a small country, the harmony that we have is something to be proud of as people are tolerant of all the practices from different culture, race and religion. It is a model that should make other countries envious. Our local television has frequently been importing programmes from the USA; it is time local productions increase their prominence (and quality) and bank on their creativity to bring us captivating and meaningful television programmes or films, like Singapore Dreaming or 881. These are films about life in Singapore from historical, societal and cultural lenses. Why wait and let our kids (Passage B para.5) feed on foreign milk when we can nurture them with our own for them to grow up to be staunch goats of Singapore? Of course all this sounds propagandistic, but people in authority in the country would deem it necessary given the threat posed by globalisation. Thus to survive in the globalised world, Singapore should respond by continuing the production of more Made-in Singapore films or television programmes even though some may bomb (like Masters of the Sea): nothing ventured, nothing gained.

The need to discover our own unique identity amidst the normalcy of change is crucial to our survival in the global world, especially when we are at the same time encouraging a profusion of foreigners to stay. This uniqueness in our identity may well come from all parts of the world, making Singapore a hotpot of cultures that appeal to foreigners as well as locals. Singapore is an open economy and we embrace foreign talents when our population itself is not self-sustainable due to the low birth rate. Like the USA, immigrants “enriches and changes” (Passage A l.32) our culture. This could enrich the local culture here. There is an increase in the number of diverse ethnic communities in Singapore over the years; now, we have more Japanese and Germans who work and live in Singapore, just to name a few. Some have even felt encouraged to stay on and take up Permanent Residency. We now have specialist stores that tailor to the needs of these residents, like the Japanese-oriented Liang Court. Oktoberfest is also now a common annual fixture in the Singapore calendar and locals and Germans celebrate this as one. Such additions indeed add colour and vibrancy to cosmopolitan Singapore. Cultures change to survive (Passage A, l.25) and Singapore needs immigrants who can add value to the country in different economic sectors. We thus change to appeal to all. These frills might serve as attractions to make them want to come to Singapore and call it home. Conversely, Singaporeans might also feel attracted to stay on and enjoy such an international melting pot. Singapore thus needs to carry on progressively allowing avenues for such festivities and businesses to bloom in order to survive in a global world.

Some may see this as a commodification of cultures; however, in order to survive, a balance has to be struck between allowing for changes and restricting changes. It is not as if Chinese New Years and Hari Rayas have become a costly affair packaged for foreigners. It is probably extravagant in some years and “fortunes are indeed made” (Passage B l.38) by “outsiders”—as well as locals, but the significance of such celebrations is still present. The essence is unchanged. Even the roti prata (pancake bread) was changed when it came to Singapore from India and Pakistan. Likewise, Singapore will do well to not resist changes but adapt those we borrowed like what we have been doing in order to survive in a global world.

Taboo-inspired research

This is a quick link to a quick research inspired by today’s episode of Taboo. It is unfortunate that I can’t get a copy of the series from okto; I guess acquiring it from Australia is going to be too expensive.

http://www.faqs.org/childhood/Th-W/Wet-Nursing.html

That’s something I didn’t know, but France and Japan have been fascinating me recently.

AQ Feedback on Mock Exam (aka Timed Practice) 2007

Here’s some of the things which I might have said in class:

1) This question does not require a stand. Moral of the story: read the question and instructions carefully. Be ready for surprises! Don’t try to predict what the question or topic will be.

2) Here’s a sample of a cited point that will score for {R}:

As mentioned in Passage A, “[advertisement] teaches us to be consumers, to value material possession above all else.” (Line13-14)

This is the way to cite the point (of course you can say “Para” instead of “Line”). Do not leave out important words when you cite, otherwise your quote will not make sense! If you copy the exact phrase from the passage, make sure you indicate it with the inverted commas, or else it can be treated as Lifting. Non-attempt at citing will affect your Language score.

3) Foreign examples are only used to support local ones.

4) Handwriting: I can’t imagine how “youngsters” can become “gangsters”; “criminals”, “animals”.

5) Seriously, are there advertisements in Singapore that advertise for cigarette companies? Seriously! Don’t “smoke” me, I tell you!

6) I thought Weiting, Timothy and Yanxian faired well for this AQ. Here’s a good Evaluation from Gerald, although it’s just one line, but I’ll like to show it to all to let you know that {Ev} is possible to be done and you can do it!

This caused much unhappiness in them [the women]. It is important to Singapore as women’s work are not acknowledge [sic].

This is on the point of “feather-brained”. Those words in brackets are for clarification. (“Sic” means there’s a typographic error in the original.)

7) Here’s a sample I did in class with 13/07 and 19/07; originally didn’t intend to post it up, but 26/07 had not seen it yet (although I thought they are supposed to see me on Thu; turns out that only Glen, Wan Chin and Cheryl Yeo turned up; and I think I turned down Keng Huang, Samuel and Jeremy on another day as I was too busy.)

In passage A, the author mentioned that “[advertisement] teaches us to be consumers, to value material possession above all else.” (Line 13-14) This tells us that advertisements can influence people to believe that money can allow you to easily attain bliss, just like any commodity. This phenomenon is observed everywhere in the world of the 21st century. Be it China or Canada, people splurge on festive goodies. Christmas is now seen as a commercialised festival where presents are purchased en masse to satisfy the craving wants of children and adults alike. We see various advertisements on toys and electronic gadgets gaining more air-time on television channels weeks before winter kicks in. Major firms like Apple and Hasbro reported more than two-fold increase in revenue over this period of the year, noting also that they contribute much to the advertisement space on the mass media. This is similarly observed in Singapore during the same festive season: advertisements proclaiming “sale” on all sorts of goods and brand, be it Harvey Norman electronics or a Toys ‘R Us catalogue. They can all be found in the Straits Times. This promotional measure taken by companies and advertisers ingrain in us the importance of consumerism–that it is a necessity in contemporary times. We need to buy to show we are part of the celebration, to feel happy, or to make others happy. This is unhealthy as it is against the fundament of morality. Thus the negative effect of advertising can be seen to affect Singapore.

Those underlined are {Ev} components. (I had another example on anti-consumerism which I did not use because it is based in the USA, but I would still use it if I have time to spare. There is this “Buy Nothing Day” which believers will not buy anything on that particular day as a show of dissent against consumerism. Although this is irony, because after this day people will still go back to the good old consumerism, it can still serve a point, as a proof, that this world has been turned into a consumer society.)

My amended take on RJC AQ CT2007

Possible points (not exahustive):

 – Singaporean television lacks the richness/depth of political debate that Johnson claims helps us discern political character and aptitude.   

– The Singaporean political arena is largely dominated by the PAP, and we do not get the exposure to various views / political candidates.  

– It is often said that Singapore media only show the positive views/aspects of government officials, and that, as a consequence, the television screen is by and large politically monochromatic and vacuous.  

– Yet television, even Singaporean, does give us a unique viewer perspective. It allows us to see public figures up close, and even if always in a positive light, we get a vantage point of our leaders that helps us discern their intentions and character.

– For a critical observer, such vantage point is useful as s/he will be able to weigh the arguments & tone of the political speaker on air.  

– Cable television, now widely available and used in Singapore, opens up a different landscape.  News from around the world gives us a personalized, first-hand view of global issues, public figures, and political /ideological structures and processes in and among other countries.

Eg. War in Iraq, Elections in US, political processes in Taiwan or S. Korea, the Middle-East conflict, Iran, N. Korea, problems in Africa, political exchanges of Malaysian leaders, Indonesian leaders’ expression of gratitude for Tsunami aid, Indonesian leaders’ expression of spite when they ban sand/granite export (One potential problem here might be that television organizations filter the information that we receive on the basis of popularity, thus we may get a potentially narrow and perhaps biased selection of what constitutes “news”)

 – While it may be true that we watch too much TV, Sigman tends to exaggerate the situation.  His view is somewhat one-sided, and doesn’t acknowledge the breadth of information we are able to obtain from today’s media.   

– Sigman says people tend to cover up the negative effects of watching TV. It is true that some people are not comfortable with the fact that the media is blamed for all social ills – in fact, they claim the media are made a scapegoat.

Eg. We are discerning viewers here in Singapore. Political leaders in Singapore are beginning to realise this and are slowly relaxing the regulations on public channels.

Important announcements to all three classes

(The information here will also be emailed to your G.Preps. In the event that they do not inform you about it, please help to disseminate the information to one another because (a) I may not see you in class, which is why I am posting this here at this time, (b) I may forget [I’m growing old!])

1. Timed Practice on Monday 3 Sep 2007, 8am – 3pm

(i) Do be seated by 7.50am

(ii) Bring your own writing material & stapler

(iii) Your venues are listed on the board at the foyer; check it out, check it up!

2. RJC Common Test 2007 Paper

(i) 26/07, let me know if you can avail yourselves for an extra lesson on Friday (for a lesson on The Way to AQ), which is tomorrow, after 2pm. You do have a choice. If you are not able to make it for the extra class, and I don’t need everyone to be present, hand in your AQ part of the answers to me on Friday before you go home. I will mark them & retun them to you on Monday 7am.

For 13/07 & 19/07, as I have lessons with you on Friday,

(ii) Show me all your answers on Friday in exchange for the answer scheme (which is without the AQ answer)

(iii) We will go through The Way to AQ on Friday

(iv) All three classes to hand in your full answers on Monday 12pm (after your Mock Exam).

3. Reminder: Reading File

All three classes to submit all your Reading File latest 6pm on Monday. Put them neatly in empty boxes, labelled.

I will collect your Written Work File some time after the ‘holiday’.

4. Clarification

Drop by the page called The Unknowns some time, there may be surprises!

The e-learning task on Friday as mentioned in an earlier post is supposed to be the task for next Friday (of the ‘holiday’). Any trauma caused is strictly unintended.

5. Consultation

As I have not received any appointments from you folks, I may consider not turning up on Friday 7 Sep 2007 after all. Let me know before the end of this term if you intend to turn up on Friday. However, I will still be in school on Monday & Wednesday of the ‘holiday’.

– End of transmission –

GP weekend homework

CAM ‘04 (GT p7)
Brainstorming: questions you ask in your head

Due: Tue 28 Aug 2007

Bring your Comprehension Package on Tue 28 Aug 2007 as well. We’ll have a ‘live’ demo of How to Answer the AQ.