Ten years ago, it might be said, my blog was more combative/substantial. My lines of thought remain pretty much the same, but I have modified some views. After all, TEN years!
01 May 2006
My new Saturday coachee, S, is very good. He wrote an essay for me a week ago on the Year 12 Area Study “Imaginative Journeys”. I had made life hard for him by requiring that he wrote it as a feature article “for inclusion in a student magazine”. He did a pretty good job, but I promised to show him how he could move it even further into the required text type.
Check it out. There are two pages: his first draft, and my suggested revision. Perhaps you would like to give us a mark.
And speaking of coachees, I just heard from Ben (2005 HSC): “You may be interested to know that I did my first incision and suture on a cadaver on Friday, as well as various injections (on the cadaver of course).” Comment seems unnecessary really.
17 May 2006
This is not the promised sensible entry on political (in)correctness. But then, maybe it is.
I am PC so far as I try to judge the effect of my words, especially in a place like this which, while a species of vanity publishing, is nonetheless publishing. My hundred or so readers a day come from many places and backgrounds, and I do well to remember that. For example, while I worry at Islam in quite a few entries and am happy to offend bigots of any kind, I do not wish to alienate people of good will or to deliberately misrepresent ideas I may not fully understand or easily empathise with. People of good will are always welcome to correct me, and they do.
It sometimes strikes me that those most strident against political correctness, so-called, actually wish to surrender to their own dark side, and I am not sure that is such a noble aim after all.
I note that the “Chinglish” (or “Spanglish” or “Korlish” or “Franglais”) phenomenon as a source of innocent laughter can be a sensitive issue to some; Antony Shen is actually quite eloquent on that, though I really do think he may be taking it too personally. On the other hand, it seems, reading carefully what he has said, that he has been hurt himself by the reception his English errors — and these days they really are not all that serious — have received in some quarters. If I am working with someone I would never mock their errors to their face, no matter how funny they may seem, but would rather gently correct the error when that is appropriate.
At the same time, humour can save us all. I still recall a class of mainland Chinese I once taught rolling around laughing as one of the class members recounted his embarrassment when his faulty pronunciation of that terrible English sound TH caused him to request a dickshake at McDonalds… And it was real laughter too, not the Chinese cultural phenomenon of laughter to cover shame or anger. We spent the rest of that lesson getting that sound right.
Which brings me to this joke The Poet sent. Good to get a joke from The Poet instead of yet more evidence of the stupidity of Bush and his cronies and proof the world is going to hell in a handbasket.
A man boarded an aircraft at Heathrow and took his seat. As he settled in, he noticed a very beautiful woman boarding the plane.
He realised she was heading straight towards his seat and bingo! She took the seat right beside him. Eager to strike up a conversation, he blurted out, “Business trip or Holiday?”
She turned, smiled enchantingly and said “Business. I’m going to the annual nymphomaniac convention in the United States”.
He swallowed hard… Here was the most gorgeous woman he had ever seen sitting next to him, and she was going to a meeting for nymphomaniacs!
Struggling to maintain his composure, he calmly asked, “What’s your business role at this convention?”
“Lecturer,” she responded. “I use my experience to debunk some of the popular myths about sexuality.”
“Really”, he smiled, “what myths are those?”
“Well,” she explained, “one popular myth is that African American men are the most well endowed when, in fact, it’s the Native American Indian who is most likely to possess that trait. Another popular myth is that French men are the best lovers, when actually it is the men of Greek descent. We have also found that the best potential lovers in all categories are the Irish.”
Suddenly the woman became uncomfortable and quiet… “I’m sorry,” she said, “I really shouldn’t be discussing this with you, I don’t even know your name.”
“Tonto,” the man said… “Tonto Papadopoulos, but my friends call me Paddy.”
Now the word “nymphomaniac” is of course sexist: you knew that, didn’t you? But how seriously can one object to a joke like that without seeming a real prat?
On the other hand, on my Indigenous Perspectives page I quote a gay Aboriginal writer thus:
I continued to be confronted by ignorance and racism, and not just by strangers at dinner parties. ‘What do you call an Aborigine behind the wheel of a brand new car? A thief.’ This so-called joke was told to me by a friend, a girl I worked with. One day she came to me and said she had a joke, an Aboriginal joke; did I want to hear it? I said that I didn’t, explaining that I found Aboriginal ‘jokes’ offensive. But she went ahead anyway, because it was ‘funny’, and we had to be able to laugh at ourselves. I wanted to slap her in the mouth. I was so angry, I imagined strangling her, holding her by the throat with my hands and squeezing, slowly. I imagined playing God and telling her she was unfit to live. I wanted her to know the sadness, the disappointment, the hurt of betrayal.
Yet I knew she liked me: we helped each other out with work, lunched together, had long talks, joked and partied together. If she liked me yet could still treat me in this way, did that mean I couldn’t trust any of them? It was life on the razor’s edge–be friendly but cautious, they could turn at any time.
The racism was a burning pain that only alcohol and drugs kept in check. There were times when, without them, I knew I was a walking time bomb. Whoever says that booze and drugs are evil, spit in their eye. Except in my imagination, they’ve prevented me from killing many times. In spite of the volcano that was churning in the pit of my stomach, I remained as cool as a cucumber. I told the girl with her stupid joke that I was in Australia because my people had been here for more than forty thousand years. She, on the other hand, was here because her forbears were convicts. As such, the really funny part of the joke was her referring to Aborigines as thieves.
You must decide for yourself where you stand on such matters.
I have just had to come back to correct a subject-verb agreement error in this post. And then I realised I was correct in the first place! Beware of sentences where parenthetical information separates subject and verb. “Stupid bloody English!” — as M has said more than once. Why can’t we be sensible like the Chinese and have a grammatical system where this is not an issue!
25 May 2006
I suggest the above to myself as much as to you. Take Islam. It should be clear, if you browse this blog under “religion” or “faith and philosophy”, that I would have a problem with the Muslim view of the Qu’ran, given my views on God and revelation in general; but in saying that I am not rejecting root and branch all that followers of that faith might do or say.
Take MyScribbles: Write-ups of an Afghan, which I just encountered through Blog Explosion. This is one remarkable young man, whom I suspect the Taliban would not like all that much. (He’s a mad soccer fan as well.) Read with an open mind his post In Response to a Popular Islam Basher.
Before I delve into the main subject of this post, let me make this clear: I am not a ‘Muslim extremist’. I support freedom of thought and expression and I value constructive criticism. I am writing this post as a critique only…
As far as Quran’s being the absolute word of God is concerned, yes, Quran is the absolute word of God. That’s what the Muslims believe. And I can’t find anything wrong in it. And, of course, no Muslim is supposed to ‘play with it or change it’. I can’t find anything wrong with this either. On the contrary, I think if the Muslims were supposed to change the word of God, the Muslim ‘terrorists’ or ‘extremists’ would most certainly do so to legitimize their actions and hence, gain a wider popular support among ‘devout’ Muslims. Who would want that? Also, to the best of my knowledge, no one in any other religion is allowed to ‘change’ the text of a sacred book or ‘play’ with it in any other form…
…in a Muslim state, politics and religion are intertwined. Nonetheless, almost all of the ‘problems’ seen in Islamic countries have nothing to do with Islam; rather, they are caused by local tribal traditions and cultures confused to be Islamic. Forced marriages, or mandatory circumcision of girls, for example, have nothing to do with Islamic principles. Likewise, torture or rape of women are strictly forbidden in Islam. These phenomena have become characteristic of Islam because they are practiced frequently in Muslim countries…
I wish this Afghan student well. On his point “Also, to the best of my knowledge, no one in any other religion is allowed to ‘change’ the text of a sacred book or ‘play’ with it in any other form…”, I suggest he (and you) search this blog under the word “Bible.” It isn’t as simple as that, you see…
Not to me, anyway.
20 May 2006
That’s me, folks, with all due respect to some of those further to the left on my blogroll. It’s not that the left are not preferable to the right; generally, on just about every issue I can think of, they are. But the hard left, when it becomes dogmatic and doctrinally pure, ends up rooting itself really badly and has historically had a talent for painting itself into corners and defending the indefensible. Consider its past gyrations on matters like the Chinese Cultural Revolution, or Pol Pot, or its current ambivalence about Islamist terrorism.
This occurred to me as I browsed Graham Willett, Living Out Loud: a history of gay and lesbian activism in Australia (Allen & Unwin, 2000) — and even that review is further evidence of the phenomenon. More on that later, maybe, after I renew the loan from Surry Hills Library and look at the book more carefully.
Meanwhile, via The Arts and Letters Daily comes this relevant review in Book Forum (now in my cultural links) of Eric Lott’s The Disappearing Liberal Intellectual (2006) by Robert Boynton…
I guess I am not “real left” and never have been.
But look at the achievements of the right. Just look at them. I hope John Howard has been enjoying his cruise on the Titanic. See, surprise surprise, Bush’s choice for CIA chief blasts Rumsfeld in today’s Sydney Morning Herald.
A SPECIAL intelligence unit set up by the US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, before the invasion of Iraq selectively used intelligence to support the White House’s claim of clear links between Saddam Hussein’s regime and al-Qaeda.
General Michael Hayden, President George Bush’s choice to head the CIA, told the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday the Pentagon’s controversial Office of Special Plans disregarded intelligence that suggested there was no real connection between the Iraqi leader and the terrorist organisation.
Now isn’t that amazing?