Against consumerism

Amazing how many things we need to live. Build bigger malls. Higher. Better. Longer. Wider. More. As if we had not enough. Let it reach the heavens if it will. Ipods fill landfills. The new 'plastic bags'. Black. white. blue. red. How many do we need? Long. Short. Fashionable. Shiny. This shape and that. Varieties. Creativity in abundance. Forget the books and the art. Make them your gods. Deck them everywhere. At home. Outside. In the skies. In the earth. Look pretty. Look good. Get praises. What do you achieve? Walk the malls now. Squeeze in between the crowds. Frantic search for something new, something cool. All scream in one hellish voice. All looking for that one rose. Get it, and be king. The glory is upon you now. Will not to want the same. Forget all these stones. They are nothing. They rot. They excite, but then disappoint. The stairway looks magnificent. But they are full of holes. So demolish these demons. Go back to nature. A hundred years before. Books. Art. Paintings. Varieties minus the abundance.

What I did in camp this week.

DVDs!

1. LoTR: Two Towers. Both J and I keep repeating those lines which we memorised by countless number of times watching the trilogy. It was comical. 'Enough blood has been spilled on his account.' '...into Fangorn Forest.' 'What business has an elf, a man and a dwarf at the Riddlemark?' 'The red sun rises. Blood has been spilled this night. Legolas, what does your elf eye see? The Uruk Hais head northeast; they are taking the Hobbits to Isengard!' 'The Horn of Helm Hammerhand shall sound in the deep...one last time!' They were amazed. There's a reason why I know these lines. Lord of the Rings is that good. [5/5]

2. V for Vendetta. Clearly graphic novels don't appeal much to me. I prefer real life historical films. The part where V introduced himself with a series of 'V' alliterations was brilliant. So J was telling me that the difference between graphic novels and comic books is that GNs have more serious points to make. And V is more or less a point about totalitarian governments. I might be wrong, since I was dozing off like half the time. Blame the heat. Maybe I will call this 'The Natalie Portman Film'. She's the only thing worth remembering. Hurhur :) [3/5]

3. Munich. Very graphic violence, very intense (especially the ending with a very haunting Israeli tune). Film seems not to take sides, but I can't help but feel that it is positively against terrorism of any sorts, retaliation or not. (Or maybe this is just how I want to see this film.) You will feel for Bana's character, Avner, who became increasingly disillusioned and paranoid after each killing. Probably the main theme is that the hatred will never cease. They have to kill forever, and each time they kill, replacements are spawned; it's a never ending war. One interesting dialogue is when Avner asked, 'Do you really love your father's olive tree so much?... the soil?' and also 'I have been taught to be righteous. That's a beautiful thing. That's Jewish.' Personally I feel there are too much things to ponder over, and a one-time viewing doesn't do this great film justice. [4/5]

4. Constantine. Rubbish lah this show. But I just watched for entertainment. Everything about devils and angels and God people learn in popular culture reappears. The devil has equal power with God. God agreed with the devil. Humans do something stupid in hell. What is Rachel Weisz doing in this show? Keanu Reeves I can understand. [1/5]

5. Aeon Flux and Ultraviolet. I went to sleep and refused to watch. [0/5].

What You've Got

They can't deny it
Or sell it
Or buy it.

The Laws of Downloading

I have decided to start downloading again from my hiatus. Reason is because I believe I might previously have taken an extreme stand against downloading. Thus the notion nothing shall be downloaded has now been changed to some things can be downloaded. But rest assured I will never return to that state of lawless and unrestricted downloading anything from anyone. You can say I am justifying, but justifying is better than no justification, which admittedly, was my former state. So I venture to lay down the principles of downloading as closely as possible to the laws of objective truths, and where areas are unfortunately grey, I leave it to my own good conscience. The laws, therefore, are:

i. I will only download things that are shown on television or any other media, which are, by nature or by rights, provided to me free-of-charge in the first place, so that I do not deliberately steal or deny profits of any organizations or persons.

ii. Those things which I have downloaded according to the principles of (i), I shall declare myself of no rights whatsoever to retain it for future or repeated uses, or any other use except that one-time use which I would be entitled to.

iii. In the cases of which things ought to be paid for, or any form of media which is not available in my country or which is not available free-of-charge, I shall not attempt to obtain it through illegal means of downloading.

iv. In the case of (iii), it is just and right to pay for talents, abilities, creativity, gifts, and worksmanship involved, and to 'do unto others what you wish others would do unto you'.

v. Hereby these are written according to my good but flawed conscience, and are by no means to be fixed for eternity. If I shall find any flaws in my reasoning, or if a kind soul shall enlighten me that there is much injury caused by the means of that which I now accept, the principles shall surely be changed to conform more to the standards of objective truth, to which my conscience is eternally bound.


Okay. If we take away the formal terms, basically means... I can download Lost. I can download Prison Break because they are shown on TV, free of charge to a Singapore citizen. I would be unlikely to catch every episode on TV, but if I can watch it through downloading I think it is alright. But just as the show is delivered once for all, so also I do not have the right to retain it (as if I own the DVD, which I do not). The entire process should resemble my rights as closely as possible. Thus the ends is the same, but the means is different. At this moment, I do not think the means of obtaining media is wrong, but I might possibly be. I still stick to my stand that I ought not to download any music, or videos, or any other forms of media which is not available to me, and recognise that there is much intellect, creativity, and talents in the works of people, and these should be recognised by paying for it.

What Is Going Through My Head.

I. On Icky Thump

Went into HMV today. They were broadcasting a very distinct yet familiar voice... Took me 0.5s to know that it was the voice of Jack White.

Fear. The new White Stripes album is here. I had to buy it. 'If you are in a rock band, and you are not the White Stripes, it sucks to be you.' - Rolling Stones. One of the funniest (and how true!) quote I have seen.

Interestingly, out of the 4 albums I own, none of their albums or any of their songs actually strike you as catchy the first time (except maybe Seven Nation Army). But their songs gradually grows on you, until well, they become your favourite, and you can't stop listening.

You don't know what love is
You just do as you're told
Just as a child of ten may act
But you're far too old
You're not hopless
or helpless
And I hate to sound cold...
But you don't know what love is
You just do as you're told


II. On Myself - The Anti-Social

Apparently even my bunkmates think that I am an anti-social person. Because I like to sit by myself on the corner of the bunk and read my books and write notes, and refusing to join them in senseless Dead or Alive: Ultimate video games, which they play the entire day, no kidding. Well, maybe they are right.

III. On The Eye Disease.

My company kenna'ed a bad case of conjunctivitis. I think its spelled like that, if I remember correctly. Red eyes, fluid in eyes, eyes glued shut. One of them woke up, shouting, 'Help! I can't see anything!' We were on the lookout on people who are like that. I commented to my friend that we resemble those people in B-grade zombie movies, trying to figure out if 'one of us' had turned zombie. Think Dawn of the Dead. Around 8 people kenna'ed. But I escaped. Hehhehe...

IV. On A Hard Day's Night DVD

Bought it so that my Dad and I could watch. Think he should like it very much.. a movie on the Beatles. See Paul McCartney, John Lennon, George Harrison and Ringo Starr in their younger and successful days.

V. Death Proof

I should be very interested to watch this. But I don't think I can find anyone to go with. Directed by Quentin Tarantino. Part of the reason is that I want to find out if these kind of shows are acceptable. Is there such a thing as 'aestheticization of violence'? Can violence be legitimately used to portray style? Is it legitimate to honour exploitation films in a so-called 'stylistic way'? Do I, as a Christian, reject totally this kind of shows, or could I possible give some credit to it?

Headache. Headache. The grey areas.

Lost Season 3 Has Ended

And I need to watch it!

I miss John Locke.
I miss Jack Shepherd.
I miss Kate Austen.
I miss Claire.
I miss Sun and Jin.
I miss Michael and Waltz.
I miss James 'Sawyer' Ford.
I miss Mr. Eko.
I miss Sayid.
I miss Danielle Rousseau.
I miss Desmond Hume.
I miss Charlie.

BUY ME THE DVD PLEASE!

Third Pan's Labyrinth Viewing

Still has not lost its intensity and power of imagination... I notice one thing I was doing during the last 10 minutes of the film.

I was frowning, and staring.

200 Pound Beauty : Culture on Culture



This show was amazingly good! Watched this show in bunk this week. Humorous and with a very good message to boot (though plot is cliched, sitll nevertheless enjoyable.). My first impression is that it is another show going to glorify physical beauty, turns out the other way. Interestingly, the director uses pop culture to make a statement on that pop culture, namely S. Korea's obsession with plastic surgery. I love the song too. Story is about this girl, Hanna, who is fat and ugly, and was a backup singer to a popstar. Because of her appearance, nobody gives her a chance to be in love. She attempted to commit suicide, but when she failed, she decided to give herself a new lease of life - plastic surgery. Enter the beautiful, now plastic Jenny, played by Kim Ah Joong. In the way to popularity, she found herself deserting her own father, her best friend, and herself.

One very good style the director used was to focus the camera only on the female fans, and show only their reaction when they realized that Jenny had undergone surgery. This is probably to make the point that a female popstar is usually the idol and example of the female fans. This film urges the people to focus more on inner beauty rather than the outside.

Maria.... Ave Maria...

Falsetto

Recommended by James :)
Grace Kelly - Mika

American Beauty - a Christian's perspective

I say 'a Christian's perspective' and not 'a Christian perspective'. Which means I allow that I be wrong. This is about the film American Beauty. First, the film is known for its great technical filmaking, with a highly acclaimed script and score. Most people would agree with that. What divides people is a moral problem - whether the film makes any positive moral judgements. I have read a Christian website in which some Christians gave very extremely opposite views of this film. Some were offended by it, believing it to be 'anti-Christian' and 'utterly garbage':

"a movie that exhibits a year-in-the-life of two extremely disturbed families which glorify homosexuality, adultery, lies, profanity, murder, hate, nudity, etc..."

While another camp defends the show saying that it tells much of the truth of the American culture. Which means that if we find this film depraved and lost, it is because in reality the culture is. Many of Martin Scorsese's films are very violent - and very real at the same time. A film that shows an American culture where the characters uttered no profanities, were involved in no homosexuality, administered no violence, took no drugs and do not abuse sexuality would hardly be true. It can argued that the film no more approves of the sins anymore than the Bible approves of David's adultery. It is therefore rather pleasantly surprising that I came across a comment which reflects the very first thought that I had after watching the film:

"While many audience members will never be able to see past the film's content, there is an incredible core to the film's message - though it isn't found until the film's final scenes and, even then, the director doesn't beat you over the head with it. He trusts that his audience is smart enough to understand. He trusts that his audience knows that the film isn't approving of lustful infatuation Lester feels for Angela. He trusts that his audience isn't going to approve of the immorality that is very prevalent in these characters' lives. He trusts that his audience is going to see the answer to the question he puts forth in the film's opening. How can we move past the emotional deadness of our lives and restore the joy we once had? By learning to stop living a "me" centered life and start living a life of care and concern for others. The characters in this film are searching so hard for beauty and love and meaning in their lives, and all they seem to find is emptiness..."

The bolded portions are exactly what I thought. So one camp says it is rubbish. The other camp managed to infer the theme of Solomon's Ecclesiastes (which is what I got too when I finished the film). There can only be two possibilities for the latter view: One, it is the intended effect of the film. (I will explain later.) Second, I and many others have grossly over-interpreted and given undue significance to a piece of garbage. One important thing to note about the film is that it is morally ambiguous, yet I believe anyone who watched this film should easily detect the moral depravity so prevalent in this film (and the correct response is to feel disgusted, and reflect on the culture which we live in.) Mendes does not mention God. He does not mention Christ. He offers us no solution to the meaninglessness the characters felt. (Then again, how many movies actually do this? They might give an answer, but only one that makes the moviegoer satisfied with a happy ending, and give the moralist a temporary satisfactory answer. Mendes instead gave the audience room to think. I believe the freedom of reflective contemplation is a good thing.) But he managed to show the depravity of the culture, and of men. If Mendes wanted to glorify all things ugly, he wouldn't have done it in such an obvious way. I do not think that is the intention of the film.

What I felt was the main theme of this movie is Lester's belief that freedom is the answer to his meaningless life. He quits his job and feels excited about it (not the job, but the newfound freedom). He decides to pursue an infatuation. He wants nothing to do with his wife. He decides to work out his body. He decides to smoke pot. He buys a brand new Firebird car. There is no one to stop him doing anything he likes! No authority, complete freedom. Mendes does not go flat out and say 'This is wrong.' He leaves it to us, and my guess is that the audience already knows.
So is American Beauty a good film? It is a very hard film to judge, mainly because it is rather ambiguous. I would have to say this film is good in the sense that it portrays life in realism. The moral aspect of this film is still debatable but one thing I disagree is that it has no value in it. It portrays much truth about American culture and the meaninglessness of that culture. And I would not recommend this show to immature people because of its offensiveness - particularly coarse language and nudity. I would also not disagree if a Christian felt that this film does not glorify God. But if I could find someone who interpreted the film in about the same way as I did, I would gladly enter into a discussion about it.

How Does One Teach Aesthetics?

That is not a question. It is a lament. The appreciation of beauty is something which I cannot explain. When I see something, I know it is beautiful. Or not. It is something innate. Sometimes I could find within myself some reasons for explaining why I think something is beautiful, and I think I am slowly training myself in that. But some other things, I know they are just beautiful, but I find it hard to put into words or find exact reasons for it. Here arises a question: Can beauty exist apart from reason? I mentioned it is innate. But then what is innate can also be sinful and warped. What appears as beauty to me could be perversion, because to a fallen being, perversion could be beautiful. Nevertheless I believe there ought to be some guidelines in appreciating beauty. I believe there is both an objective and subjective in beauty. Objective, as in something like, the exhibition of truth and ethics in a beautiful thing i.e. there should be something about beauty that applies as a universal law for all rational beings. I postulated truth and ethics. I do not think that beauty is purely subjective at this moment. Subjective, as in our degree of appreciation in different aspects of culture, be it the arts, literature, music etc which differs from one individual to another such that there is truly such a thing as freedom of aesthetics. Thus the objective facts of beauty allows all rational beings to recognise that beauty and yet at the same time beauty admits of degrees in appreciation in all its myriads of manifestations by different individuals living in different cultures and eras.

And I am killing my brain cells to find out how exactly to teach aesthetics, if it is possible to do so. The Bible seems to say nothing, and yet say a lot of things on aesthetics.

I wish things were much simpler. Be an escapist again. For example, I can explain beauty simply as:

"Beauty is this...." And then proceed to show them a picture of Miss Song....



If only things were so simple.

A Mistake

It is truly amazing that even after the second viewing I have apparently interpreted Pan's Labyrinth quite differently as the director did. Apparently, to Del Toro, the fantasies Ofelia experienced are real, although he said that it is possible to interpret it the other way (what he calls the Rocschach test). I admit I have interpreted the show with a logical mind, but apparently it is supposed to be an actual fairy tale, rather than a fairy tale existing in a real world - a slight difference there. Del Toro also mentioned that Ofelia is the only character in the film who refused to use violence or cause death (which even the doctor did), and in this she did not lose her immortality. (Yay, at least got this right.)

But how did the show still seem so consistent to me even when I took a radically opposite interpretation? Amazing. I think this makes the film more intriguing though. Even with an opposite interpretation, the idea of escapism still stands. Only difference now is Ofelia has truly escaped, rather than simply 'in her mind'. So if one had interpreted as Del Toro did, it was a happy ending. If one interpreted like I did, it was tragic. Doesn't matter. My guess is that you would have felt both emotions anyway: the escapist in you would be happy for Ofelia (whether or not you believe she escaped in reality), while the realist in you feel much sadness for her death. That's why I said it is still consistent at the end.

Three of the Greatest Rock Songs

A good way to spend 20 minutes in a boring afternoon.

Bohemian Rhapsody - Queen



Imagine - John Lennon



Stairway to heaven - Led Zeppelin

Books I Want To Read Before 21

Christian Books
1. The Cost of Discipleship - Dietrich Bonhoeffer
2. A Body of Divinity - Thomas Watson
3. Basic Christianity - John Stott

Secular Books
4. History of Western Philosophy - Bertrand Russell
5. Finding Darwin's God - Kenneth Miller

Ambitious isn't it? Will require lots of discipline. Problem is, currently I only own one of the five books :(

A review of Pan's Labyrinth



Some spoilers here. Read only if you have watched it already.

My second viewing of Pan's Labyrinth, turned out to be even more enjoyable than my first. Got some new insights too. For those who have not watched it, it is strongly recommended. I praise it for its originality and simplicity. Watch it once. And then watch it again. And again. Roger Ebert calls it 'a fairy tale for adults' and I cannot agree more with him. Pan's Labyrinth is a story about a girl's (Ofelia) imagination of the underworld realm which she used in her escapism from the violent and hostile world which she lives in. I will not call the film a fantasy show however, because though it had mystical elements in it, it is essentially also a comment on the real world we live in. And it is commented through the innocence of a 11 year old girl. The film soundtrack is based on a lullaby which will haunt you even after you finish the show. I was caught humming the tune right after the show. Let's just call it, one of the most beautiful films I have ever seen, and the best foreign language film I have seen so far, and the best film of 2006. The Lord of the Rings is beautiful because it is of epic proportions. Pan's Labyrinth is beautiful for its simplicity and great imagination.

It is that good.

As mentioned, the essence of the film is about the girl's escape from this hostile world. We have no reason to suppose Ofelia witnessed many of the violent and immoral incidents which the movie audience is exposed to. We have no reason to suppose she witnessed, for example, Captain Vidal's killing of 2 innocent people, or his torture of Pedro. What we do know, though, is that whatever little this innocent girl has witnessed in the era of the Spanish civil war, is already unbearable enough for her. The most touching scene (for me) in the show seems to convey this. Ofelia was talking to her yet unborn brother, telling him that he must not 'hurt his mother' because she is 'very pretty'. We have reason to suppose that she knows how hurt her mother is. She might not know about the violence of the civil war, but she knows her mother is hurt. She then promised her brother that if he obeys, she will grant him a position as prince in her imagined kingdom. The innocence of Ofelia worked very well here.

Some people have suggested that the kingdom is not really her imagination, but a real thing, but I utterly reject that notion. The movie only makes sense in the light that Ofelia imgained everything, from the Mandrake root to the Faun himself. Everything, in an attempt to convince herself she could leave this hostile world. What happens next is what I call a 'three-fold anguish' when Ofelia learns that she cannot really escape. She must face the cold, harsh reality when she grows up.

First, because she has 'broken the rules', the Faun returns and tells her she has failed her second task, and no longer has the right to return to the kingdom. Notice how distraught she became! Many have been puzzled about why she had failed her task just because she disobeyed and ate the cherries. I have two possibilities: One, is that it is very reminiscent of the fairies tales which we read. Disobedience results in punishment. This will then have little to do with the plot, but more plausibly: Second, it is used to finally culminate in this particular scene where the Faun tells her she had failed, and ultimately, as we will see in her final task, that she must choose to do the correct things with her own free will. She is not to be bound to her promise to the Faun to 'obey him'. But with this free will she also has the power to disobey. The point of all the tasks, the Faun tells her, is to prove and ensure her 'essence is intact'. Ofelia was told that she is not 'born of man', but when she disobeyed, she had exhibited an essence of humankind (disobedience) and thus made her unfit for the kingdom of the underworld realm. There is some comparison to the Genesis story here, but I choose not to over-interpret this film. Del Toro (director) has mentioned that there are several Catholic images in the film, such as the use of 'sacrifice by blood', but I don't think every single thing needs to be interpreted in such a way.

Second, the anguish is further shown when Ofelia's mother discovered the mandrake root. Although Ofelia believed the mandrake root was real as shown by its influence in the mother being well again, and then going into miscarriage, her mother would later tell her that 'magic does not exist' and that she must learn that 'the world is a cruel place' as she grows up. This destroys her notion of escaping from this world, though she continues to believe in it. After the death of her mother, she begs Mercedes to take her away from the place she is in.

Third, and the last anguish is the scene of the final task. She learns that there is a cost: she must sacrifice her own brother in order to enter the kingdom. She refused, and the consequence is that she cannot enter it.

The audience will also experience this sort of anguish. After the scene where Ofelia was reunited with her parents in the underground realm, the scene immediately returns to cold reality: a dying Ofelia who is imagining all these things. We had known that her imagination does not exist based on the experiences of Captain Vidal who discovered the mandrake root and complained about 'all the junk she read', and also her mother, who tells her magic does not exist. But the final scene stamps on all of us the coldness of reality which stares at you: she has not escaped in reality. There is no escape.

I almost cried. On my second viewing.

Pan's Labyrinth thus seems to have two stories weaved into one. One, is the story told through the real world, the story which involves the guerillas and the soldiers, which is not witnessed by Ofelia, and second, through the imaginations of Ofelia. The film moves between these two persepectives. Yet this is one story, coherently and wonderfully told. Apart from the story itself, Pan's Labyrinth has also won the Academy awards for Cinematography and Art Direction. You will know why when you watch it. Watch, and enjoy how the director sets up the scenes. It is a visual feast, whether you like fiction or not. It is fiction at its most potent. It is fiction with a point to make, and a beautiful one at that. My only regret is that the show is rated NC-16 for violence (which arguably is justified), and this prevents the younger generation from appreciating it.

I am going to watch it for the third time. I'm confident I will enjoy it even more.