Reflections_ssh: November 2012

Actually this issue of 'public' has lingered in my mind for a long time. A few events along the way the last few months invoke many more thoughts.

Public is of couse relative. In the smallest context, performance within a community with more than a handful of audience is a kind of 'public' though probably not qualified to be a 'public figure'.
====================================
Public Performance

This year, I had gone for 3 music recitals by invitation, as I know the performers. In all 3 cases, I was impressed with the poise, and the obvious immersion of the musician into their performance. These are amatuers, not professionals. But you can see as they performed, they were in a world of their own. Through their music, they invite the audience into their world. As an audience, I was carried by their music. But in my subconciousness, I was thinking of the performer.

Its easy to watch. But I know full well, that not all musicians can do what they do. There is an additional factor in perfomance that not all have. Its the same with any field of art. One can be very gifted artistically, but not all can be a good artistes. It is more than the gift in the field itself.

Perfomance in itself is another set of talent. It is the conveyance of the musical message through the medium of the performance; the beauty of movements through the elegance of dance; reality portrayed through the dramatists and script. There is a total immersion, and a confidence that can be almost defiant.

Again 'giftedness/talent' in performance spread across a spectrum, from the mildly gifted/talented, to those who transcends nationality and time. These fields would include all aspects of perfoming music, dancing and acting. Literature and art fall within the bounds of public appreciation though they are not a 'performance in confined time'.

I exclude gifts in sciences and mathematics as these are are not performance giftedness. I dont consider competitions like olympiads a performance for audience. That falls under another specturm. The same for sports/games. Though some sports like gymnastics and skating, ice-skating are in the peripheral of artistic performance by virtue of the elegance of their sports.

Public performance brings public approbation and public criticism. This brings the critical turning points. To performers.

These thoughts have since branch to many other realms.....as one follow the lives of some public performers of a high degree of renown...what led to their rise, what led to their fall; why are some able to hold success well, whilst others, fall into tragedies?

Giftedness and Talent comes with a high price to the individual, some more, some less.

======================================
Public and Masses
'Public' is as, I have mentioned earlier, relative. It varies from areas that are relegated to 'enhancement' like the arts, and to 'enterntainment' since it is not a core life needs, one of those aspects that are 'excess' like games and sports ---- to prominence in respective fields, termed 'leaders' and of course to political realms, local, national leaders to leaders on the international platform.

The pendulum of thoughts swings from a small musical recital to the other end, the US Presidential election.

I have always been cautious to touch on two areas, politics and religion. In 2008, I remembered asking 303 casually who they thought would win the US election. As a current affairs issue, that was not inappropriate. Personally, then, I didnt know who I would preferred. From time to time, I acknowledge I do have subjective preference, which is really often based on some form of biasness. At one time, I was a great admirer of the Kennedy family. At other times, I realised I did have misjudgments. Not that it matters. I am, after all, a total nobody.

So when I asked the class then, I just wanted to hear what kids have to say. Actually, I always felt the naivety is sometimes refreshing, though their ignorance is also irksome. Nevertheless, they would be surprised how much I considered their response at that time.

For this topic, the only response I remembered was from Ernest. He said, he wanted Obama to win. Reason? Obama will catch Osama. I was flabbergasted then. What a reason.

So in 2011, when it happened, I wondered if Ernest remembered what he said, or whether anyone else remembered. But I did.

Four years on, the US election took place again. This time, I only asked one person. The person said, she didnt like Obama. Reason? He didnt do anything.

I didnt prod on. Because I know, the response of individuals add up to the masses. And many strange elements lead one to form their views. These individuals that form the masses, exercise 'democracy', translated literally as 'people's power'. I sometimes feel, it is ironic.

=================================
X factor
Let me digress a little. Of someone without the x factor.

In my life, I ran for only one election. Remember, everything is relative. It was a small election,but important to the community i was in then. It was a small community of 189 undergraduates, one of the 2 mixed gender hostel.

That was an election of the JCRC, the student governing body of the hostel. At JC, I nearly ran for executive committee when there were people who asked me to do so, and claimed they would support me. After consideration, I felt I couldnt meet the mark. Nor did I have any agenda to run. So I didnt. I was elected at class level into the student council at JC.

The good thing about running for a post is, it is your initiative. Not because some 'authority' appoint you. There is an aspiration, a belief, a wish to serve community. And student council, or JCRC was open to the student community. Not to selected people whom some powers favoured. In JCRC, the leadership body can range from first year to fourth year undergraduate. I was in second year then.

That was the early 1980s. Ladies were in the minorty, but in hostel then, every year there was an outstanding lady leader. I was not popular. I think lack of looks is always an issue. Not being good in sports. Not sociable. There is a certain kind of image attached to 'popularity'. I dont have that X factor.

I ran because I really wanted to contribute and really believe I could. I had my supporters, those who believed in my dedication and ability. And I guess, those who support me were usually die-hards like me. Actually, I didnt have a strong competitor. My batch was considered a 'weak' intake. and there were only two of us from my batch that ran for this committee, and we were vying for the same post. In terms of ability and commitment, I have the strong edge and track record.

When the result came out, the post I ran turned out to be the most narrow win. I was really taken aback, and disappointed. Its hard when you know you did not get a strong mandate. I also know there was polarity based on religious faction. Though I had then professed to be a christian, I kept away from the main christian body, and of course that was also duly faulted. I never felt religion and secularity should mix. One carries oneself based on one's faith. That is inward. That should not be a polarised factor.

The first thing I learnt about the masses is, well, they are not predictable. The figures itself told me I was played out by some sector. And really, it should not be surprising. From the Scriptures, we learn that. It was the masses, many of whom received good from the Lord, that sought his crucificion. Masses are swayed by emotions. And emotions are swayed by whatever 'facts' they want to believe, even when they know full well these are not facts.

And 'facts' can be so well-disguised. And many took what they 'feel' to be facts. Even highly rational persons.

I was young then. 19/20? And no mentor. Except for a few seniors that I had held in high regard. Whatever it is, I went on to be the only lady holding a main portfolio, Student Welfare, in the committee that year and co-chaired the committee to move the hostel from Dunearn Road to the first Sheares Hall at Nus. Logistics was immense, and at that time, everything was pen and paper. Desktop computers were not in existence at all. Sheares Hall accommodated a much bigger community 350 - 400. So the portfolio became alot bigger.

I learnt alot from that one year stint of public post and that is possibly the foundation of many of my approach to solving issues. At that time, people didnt mince their words. They didnt like you, they tell you to the face. It was a community ran by the house constitution. Any dissatisfaction, the study body can call an EOGM (Extraordinary General Meeting) to question you. Students of all faculties were in the hall, except medicine. Law students seemed to have an edge exercising constitution rights and articulating them forcefully.

I said, seemed to have. I learnt that, for any leader, one must know the parameters very well, and focused on the issues. The advantage of knowing you have the disadvantage of not having that X factor, is, you worked extra hard to serve well. I think, most important of all, my objective was right. It was never a case of proving that you had leadership. It was a case of doing what would benefit the community. And I got most of my facts right. Through thorough checks and research. And in those non-computer days, checks mean physically going down to check on many details, and making enquiries depended alot on high level of resourcefulness. I ran the vending machines for drinks, and duly made profit put to good use.

But it was exceedingly tough especially to overcome biasness. I survived an EOGM called on me because of the quality of hostel food. As that was in my portfolio, I was held responsible for anything the caterers did not do right, like finding a nail in the food. I remembered getting a nasty letter, peppered with vulgarities. But you got to take it if you chose to be a leader. It was very tough.

The issues had to be faced squarely, and there were plenty. Laundronats not working was my problem. Intercom not working was my problem. Frequent blackouts was also my problem. On one occasion, there was a pipe burst, and no water supply for half the day. It was also my problem to arrange for mobile water supply. Students taken ill in the middle of the night was also my problem. I made countless hospital trips. Not enough toilet paper supply also landed on my lap. Singaporeans were already a complaining society then. But it taught me, to solve problems. Not for the moment. But at its root.

So yes, one face the issues and explained the obstacles not within one's control. opinions received however diverse were noted (genuinely, not for show) and future plans mapped out to accommodate. Thats what meetings are for. To communicate, to accept differences and to work for the overall good of a community, and do so with grace. (Present day meetings seemed to be dissemination of information, and woe betide, whoever brings out un-endorsed opinions)

By the end of my term, at the AGM, one has to give a report of what had been done to the student community. One's works justify one. There were due appreciation and acknowledgement and I had much more approbation than I expected. A good standard was set.

But that stint made a mark. It was very costly. I failed one math module that year, and did not clear the supplementary either. As a result, I had to repeat the whole year. That was how brutal the system was at that time. My bursary was suspended, and I was left without finances.It was a very cruel blow. Thankfully, having given tuition since young, I had savings to pay for fees that year. But it was a very very bitter experience at that time, and one of the greatest setback of my life. For that reason, I hardly mentioned my uni days. It was very painful.

And that was not the only pain ......but that is another story that would probably remain untold....in many ways, that period was a determining factors of many things in my life.

I told myself I will never take on a leadership position again. Rightly or wrongly, i took on 'backstage' work from thence, all my life. I still believe, X factor is important. For leaders. For performers. I didnt have that. I should not take any leadership track.
======================
What is that X factor? Definition is probably elusive. I remembered chiyin was not awarded the xxx scholarship during her year, when she was the final two persons narrowed down. She was later told by one panelist, the final distinguishing factor was they were looking for someone with X factor. That was sad, because she was clearly the better of the two candidates. Her subsequent worldwide acknowledgement of her journalism proved my judgment was right. But she was disadvantaged then.

So what if you dont have that x factor? Well, hard work, humility and determination and good thinking will get you somewhere. Hard work never fails. But if you are one that seek to be at the pinnacle or constantly need reassurance or recognition, you can be courting a lot of undue misery. Talent/gift in whatever field, is meant to be contributive. Not for self glorification.

How do one define X factor? If it could defined, it wouldnt be called X factor. It defies definition. The closet I can think of is charisma. Likeability.

I suppose how one defines it also depends if you are a thinker, a rationalist, an impressionalist, or a randomist.

I can define a randomist. One that say, Obama will catch Osama.; Obama did nothing. These are randomists.
========================================
Masses
I have to admit, basically, I have no confidence in voting system, or the electorates or masses. Is democracy fairer than dictatorial appointments? I dont know. But I guess, voting for one's leader is probably 'fairer' than appointment that is seemingly based on meritocracy. I abstain from almost all voting these days.

I only know at times, when in any organisation, there is a good leader, however small the organisation, it is a true blessing. And when 'meritocracy' or its disguise or simply by no or poor choice, a bad or inappropriate leader is in place, the immensity of the repercussions are often underplayed. To save face. Especially in the case of appointment.

I do see the role of masses. I was really quite encouraged and intrigued by HK society, and the high level of social awareness and civility. I thought their recent protests not to have National Education and succeeded in doing so speaks volumes of the way the society is run, and the respect the authorities have towards its citizens. I was really impressed. But in the first place, they are a people that have strong identity bond, and they do respect personal rights.

==========================================
Back to the US Presidential election. If anyone is curious if I did have any inclination to any candidate, yes, I have. Actually, i followed this election closely, and visit fivethirtyeight blog regularly. I think again, for those who know me, it wont be difficult to guess who I would have supported.

I like a leader that is 'non-drama', professional, cool, shows integrity, consultative and decisive, and with a consistency through the years. There is no doubt who fits the bill. Actually, of those US presidential elections that I had followed, President Obama is the one with the least 'blemishes' and to me, a highly respectable person, based solely on his personal qualities.

Does he have the X factor? I think he has. And leadership is a gift. He has it I believe.

I have alot of confidence in Nates Silver highly methodological statistical analysis and prediction, so, yes, i expected his win. And really he deserves to win.

=========================================
Public figure or masses. I belong to neither group when it come to politics. Masses give the power, and is the one subjected to the power.

This strange symbiotic relationship that brings about fame and power. Who is the more powerful, who can say?

And of mass media....well, that would be another post. Someday.

Labels: Me, Miscellaneous Reflections

Saw the title of this article in ST whilst at sk's place, and took back the papers to read this article. For two main reasons:

Firstly, I have a high regard for Prof Lim Chong Yah, whom I remembered as being the one who was instrumental in steering our economy through the NWC. Honestly, as a teacher, whose pay was really so low in the 1980s, I always looked forward to the NWC recommendations. It also included paycuts, payfreeze in the difficult days of 1986-1987. But I respected their proposals.

Economics has always been my favourite subject, which I majored in Uni. Prof Lim's textbook guided us through A levels. I have the utmost respect for him. Because things were turbulent in the 1970s-1980s, nothing was taken for granted. There was trouble in practically every neigbouring country and things were unrestful, and economy far from being stable then. I was acutely aware because whether I could continue education depended on economy and stability.

It had been a very long time (to me) since I heard about Prof Lim since he retired from NWC. When he put forth his 'shock therapy' earlier this year, honestly, I didnt know how to react to it, nor to the responses that came from different quarters. I noted that it was not well received. Recently, in observing what i had over the course of the year, I thought of his proposal again....

I also have the highest regard for Prof Tommy Koh. It took me by surprise that he would publicly support Prof Lim's proposal which did not seem to be taken favourably.

I highly recommend every thinking Singaporean to read this defence. Whether you agree or not, we all need to consider our role in community. Not just what you have, or do not have.

I quote his final two paragraphs:

"In conclusion, I wish to thank Prof Lim for being our moral conscience. He has reminded us that our mission is to achieve growth with equity. Our ambition is to build a fair an prosperous Singapore. What we have achieved so far is a prosperous and unfair society.

Prof Lim has warned us that we have deviated from our original path and that we are dangerously close to a point when our inequality could adversely affect our cohesion and harmony."
=====================================

I think the words speak for itself. Reading the article, I decided to post the notes I had made (below) a few days ago, that I had kept as a draft......pondering
======================================

Communal and Individual

i thought of the very wide gap between the academic able, and less able, both within a school, and across the nation. What would that translate into a few years down the road?

i realised that whilst idealist may advocate teaching to learners' ability and readiness, this itself will most likely lead to widening the gap. i also realised that no single panacea can address disparities.

If i have to suggest a panacea, it is that those with more must be willing to sacrifice and those with less need to be given support and they must be willing to go the extra mile to work harder. This will help to ease the inequality somewhat. i half wonder if this is not a shadow of Prof Lee CY's shock therapy for the economy. I respect him. But how to work that out?

In a way, i now understand how communism could have come about, to attempt to address the gap. But, in doing so, individualism is lost. How to balance the two requires alot more than 'national conversation'. Communal care is not 'organised' conversations. It is a delicate balance that can only be achieved if there is a commonality. That is, if one in the first place, truly embrace communality.

Communalism is however not communism. Enforcing equality slays individuality and is in itself an unfairness. Everyone is responsible for themselves ultimately. If you have less, live with less. Communalism however does require those with more, not to clamour for more; to make sacrifices to wait a little for the less to catch up. Community work is not communalism.

The inequality gap is widening at such an increasing, almost alarming rate. At the lunch with buddies a couple of weeks ago, when we exchanged views, I did raise what i observe of the widening disparity, that begins with 'education' and the societal discord that will inevitably result....i really dont wish to see that in my lifetime....

National Examination

Seriously, without a national examination setting a common standard, where would the standard be? Just like competitions, it does provide the impetus to get the kids to be really be serious. One sees most effort toward the end.... there is this goalpost that help spur them on....

And in national examinations, teachers are the mentors of students, guiding them toward the goal post. There is an objectivity, a common learning goal. Here teachers are not the examiners. There is alot of difference in this.

But that said, the process must be valued more than the product. But what is the process that one would want to reach the final goalpost? Sometimes, I wonder what went wrong.... .

Yet, I somehow feel, at the end of the day, it is the lack of vision that run down the line.....

Labels: Education, Thoughts on Values

Reflections_ssh

Saturday, November 10, 2012

自困

how high is high...

Friday, November 9, 2012

Of Public figure, x factor and the Masses

Sunday, November 4, 2012

Thoughts on "In Defence of Lim Chong Yah"

Previous Posts

Archives

About Me