Football is Life. So is Literature
Norman Hubbard has written a Soccernet article on poor refereeing spoiling the World Cup. Not to mention some of our investments. Now, I have taken a slightly different perspective on the issue. It is worth bearing in mind that no referee deliberately makes mistakes, unless some Asian betting syndicate has bought him or more realistically he's made an injudicious decision to make up for another error he realized he'd made earlier, to balance the score so to speak. Things happen so quickly, and decisions have to be made on the spot. As such I tend to take a lenient view of judgment errors, unless they're made against Man Utd. Then they are no longer part and parcel of the game, but complete travesties I'll remember for the rest of my life.
What referees can control however, to a certain extent, is how the game flows. For neutrals, as I am, what we hope to see is free-flowing football with minimal stoppages. Besides worsening the quality of play and the spectacle, an excessive number of free kicks and cautions also set the players on edge. There are fouls and there are fouls. I suspect even Sepp Blatter would prefer the game to flow than to be stopped for every little transgression. And cautions are one thing, dismissals are quite another. Eleven playing against ten completely alters the complexion of the game, often to its detriment. I don't see what's so entertaining about a team well capable of open, attacking football having to camp in their own half because they are a man down. Imagine the World Cup Final: Argentina vs. Brazil. We salivate at the prospect of two heavyweights full of skill and flair playing each other in an open game. Then the referee sends Lucio or Heinze off in the first half, and the disadvantaged team starts defending for the rest of the game, hoping to nick a goal or hold on till penalties. Sure, bring out the red for deliberate dangerous play, but I'd like to emphasize the 'deliberate'. And please don't happy happy flash the yellow card for every other foul. A bit pointless, it becomes.
There's this ST Forum letter ('Use literature not just to teach language' by Hilda Thuraisingam) I found quite entertaining on the seemingly never-ending issue on the teaching of literature in Singapore. She deserves a literary award for taking hyperbole to new heights. She writes, "... take away literature and you take away the child's ability to feel. You stunt the emotional and intellectual development of the student. He will in time become a walking zombie, walking and functioning with precision but alas, without a soul." She also claims that literature: allows the student to ask questions and to develop a higher order of thinking skills, brings about a deeper moral understanding. sparks intrapersonal intelligence, allows the child to appreciate nature, teaches the child to be human, helps us to create language and finally, is Life.
You know what? I think she also deserves the highest award for educators for finding the magic bullet. What is MOE waiting for? What's the point of letting students study trigonometry and geography and Newton's Laws when they risk losing their souls without literature? Literature (English, obviously. Chinese literature is the paedagogical equivalent of the brontosaurus.) should be made compulsory for all from Secondary 1 onwards. And there must be literature lessons everyday, just like, or preferably in place of, useless mathematics.
Youth Forum for 'elite' only? Nah
Maybe it's just me, but why do I feel inundated by media coverage of youth-oriented events and programmes? Even the recent launched Stomp can be regarded as one. For I doubt your average heartland uncle and auntie are too interested in a snazzy online package comprising of star bloggers and mainstream media initiated citizen journalism. This could well be a transient phenomenon (cos Youth Day is just round the corner and elections are just over), or more likely, an indication of some shift in governmental emphasis. I mean, there's a reason why Teo Ser Luck has been appointed Parliamentary Secretary for MCYS.
I read yesterday's ST article 'Youth Forum for 'elite' only? Banish that thought' with a weird feeling in my stomach that hasn't totally gone away, akin to nausea but with nothing to vomit (cue Zhang Huimei: Wo xiang tu dan shi tu bu chu lai). Which is why I'm blogging about it, to alleviate psychosomatic symptoms. It's not because the article featured nauseatingly bad writing or logic. Just that it evoked certain unpleasant thoughts in my head, and partly because there's someone I don't like very much in the photo. On a slightly separate note, I would like to point out if a group of youth leaders chosen by means of essays attending seminars and dialogue sessions with government officials cannot be considered elite, I don't know who can. Not that I have cynical misgivings about their intentions for participating. Somebody said that the whole exercise is redolent of people in power grooming their future successors by first letting them take charge of programmes to inculcate responsible voting and rootedness to the country among their peers (so that they won't bring down the government and then flee overseas). Don't look at me, I'm not that somebody.
Somehow I don't feel very enthusiastic about some of these programmes. I had a little exchange with someone who's involved in one of these activities. I sorta said that the approach was misguided even if well-intentioned. He told me to reflect my suggestions to the Feedback Unit. Err.... Then again, maybe they are doing everything right and the problem lies with atypical me. Just because I'm pessimistic about the prevalence of youth apathy (or its distant cousin, excessive enthusiasm for poorly-conceived ideas) doesn't mean that it is indeed the case. What the heck, I am one of those apathetic youths. I'm like a Mafia boss criticizing law enforcement policy. It doesn't mean that my objections are not valid, just that they are a tad biased.
My World Cup All-Stars
Group stage over, and an opportune time to unveil my Special Select, my All-Stars, my Globetrotters. In case you're wondering, they refer to the same team, not three.
Justo Villar (Paraguay): I had trouble picking a keeper. Villar conceded a goal and picked up an injury in the first 8 mins of the game against England. For sympathy's sake, he's manning the posts for my team.
Hussein Sulimani (Saudi Arabia): A century of caps for his country, and the captain both in name and in deed. Has a cultured left foot (heard it has a Ph.D in Medieval Art), which carries its owner all over the pitch to instigate attacking moves and break up opposition advances.
Dennis Lawrence (Trinidad & Tobago): Scored the goal that took T&T to the World Cup Finals. Taller than Peter Crouch, but considerably less clumsy. Can defend a bit. What more can one ask for?
Loco (Angola): I like his name and haircut.
Bobby Convey (USA): Was the only player to try and make things happen when his team surrendered meekly to the Czechs. Could light up the Premiership next season with Reading.
Sulley Muntari (Ghana): Overshadowed by his more established compatriots Stephen Appiah and Michael Essien, but no less of a battler. I remember him sprinting back twenty metres just to prevent a Czech cross. Wants a move to the Premiership; on these displays, there ought to be a queue for his services.
Didier Zokora (Ivory Coast): This guy is by no means an unknown quantity, but he has really showed his worth at these Finals. He played a Makelele role protecting the back four in the African Nations Cup and rarely ventured forward. But now he has revealed his other side, displaying an explosive turn of pace and eye for a pass in the opposition half. £10 million for Zokora? Could well be the bargain of the season.
Mohammed Noor (Saudi Arabia): Lanky, quick and tricky midfielder, though somewhat lacking in physical presence as do many Saudi players. I haven't seen too many players with the same level of comfort on the ball as he does at this World Cup.
Edison Mendez (Ecuador): It's hard to pick just one outstanding player from the Ecuador team. People are talking about Luis Valencia as a rising star, but I remember Edison Mendez was being touted as the new hope of Ecuadorean football many years ago and now he's shown glimpses of fulfilled promise.
Mohamed Kader (Togo): Adebayor was supposed to be the star of the team, but somehow a Second Division player has outshone the Arsenal striker. Frankly, Kader is rather one-dimensional but at least he's scored Togo's first and only goal at the World Cup Finals.
Carlos Tenorio (Ecuador): I'd never heard of him before. I've checked: he plays his club football in Qatar. I think he deserves to play on a bigger stage.
Reserves:
Richard Kingson (Ghana): Every time you think he'll screw up, he shows a safe pair of hands.
Hatem Trabelsi (Tunisia): One of only three Tunisian players with any verve. He has the most.
Chris Birchall (Trinidad & Tobago): White guy in black team. Outstanding.
Lee Chun Soo (Korea): He deserves another shot at European football.
Ronaldo (Brazil): Fat, lazy and scores goals.
Telling others how to do their jobs
Confucius admonished, "Thou shalt not kaypoh/kaykiang and tell other people how they ought to do their jobs." This he really did say, except he couched it rather more elegantly. I suppose this extends even to people who once held certain positions, and would prefer their successors to do things their way or the highway. If there's something we find hard to tolerate, a candidate has to be other people tinkering with edifices one had so carefully built up over the years.
Of course, we often find ourselves ignoring the wise words of Confucius and insisting that others do things as we would have done if in their positions. This occurs most commonly with regards to issues we care deeply about, namely affairs of the state and football club (not mutually exclusive mind you). We complain about unpopular policies and the inclusion of players we detest the sight of in the first team. Because, rightly or wrongly, we believe the state and football club to be embodiments of the will of the people, we feel a divine right to voice our opinions and demand that these opinions be taken seriously by those in charge.
Now we all know that people in government are elitist and excessively self-important (obviously an overgeneralization, though bear in mind that while overgeneralizations simplify reality, they are not necessarily distortions). And since football is more than a matter of life and death, some managers regard themselves only a notch less powerful than the Almighty. As such, the truth of the matter is there's little to stop politicians, senior civil servants, team managers and club chairmen from running their organizations like personal fiefdoms. If they bother listening to the man in the street at all, it is out of courtesy not consultation. So we should not tell people how to do their jobs not because they are the ones who understand the intricacies of the situation and have to bear consequences of their decisions. Rather, we should not because it makes next to no difference, unless you are in some influential position.
(on a Manchester United forum)
A: WE MUST SIGN XXX XXXX!!!!!!
B: Don't worry, I've just called SAF (Sir Alex Ferguson). He's now working on it.
Watching World Cup, and nothing else
The first round of matches in the World Cup group stage has been completed, and my sister and I have been diligently watching every game. Now in my humble opinion it is imperative to watch every single team play before making risky decisions involving money. I caused my friend to lose quite a bit of money with a piece of crappy analysis four years back, and I'm not about to make the same mistake. Sure, I might still make wayward predictions, but at least informed predictions are that little bit better than guesses based on murky impressions. If recent form and performance during qualifying provided that much insight, nobody would ever lose money in the long run. Then there are punters who hand itchy just like to put some money on a match to enhance its entertainment value. Last World Cup there was an uncle who asked me what colour jersey his team was wearing ten minutes into the match.
Judging the quality of a team is always tricky. Teams playing at 3pm local time suffer because of the sweltering heat. Which is why I propose to have noon kickoffs whenever Singapore play competitive matches at home against opposition more accustomed to cooler temperatures. I remember our boys restricting Japan to a solitary goal victory in a qualifer. Even though the game was played in the evening, the Japanese were guzzling water at every opportunity. If we had played the game at noon, maybe we could have had a three-goal blitz in the last six minutes to register a stunning upset. I'm saying all this because I usually play my football during the hottest period of the day and I feel kinda superior.
Not everyone is as free (and slack) as I am to be able to watch every game. Hence the need for selective viewing. People seem to be under the impression that only matches involving top teams are worth watching. Now, that's true to a certain extent in terms of quality. But then again the very best teams can be reduced to pumping long balls at one another under trying conditions. The two most exciting games in the first round were Sweden vs. Trindad & Tobago and Tunisia vs. Saudi Arabia, which I suspect were the least watched. But if we look closely there was no reason to expect the latter to be a boring match. Both teams would have gone for the win, since Ukraine had already lost. For both the heat wouldn't have been a major factor. And both teams had several pacy players who could beat their man. Since there's no telling which games are gonna be good, the best option for the real footy fan is to watch as many games as possible. Don't worry, the Boss won't sack you. Just say I say one.
Gao kao
China is gripped by
gao kao (the national university entrance exams) fever. Thousands of bright young students face just about the sternest test of their lives- the methodically, and ruthlessly, harsh competition for limited university places. Ironically, the imperial examination system was abolished a hundred years ago, only for the Chinese to come full circle. Many of the most capable candidates hope to enter the civil service upon graduation. So in effect,
gao kao is little different from the imperial system instituted almost 1500 years ago. Except nowadays there are a lot more things to do besides being a civil servant under an authoritarian regime.
I took my equivalent of gao kao, the 'A' Levels, a few years ago. During my second year in JC, I read (but sadly never completed)
Ru Lin Wai Shi, or commonly translated as
The Scholars. The similarities between the behaviour of certain characters in the novel and some of my schoolmates were too glaring to miss. I suppose some things never change. That said, it is not fair to blame people for wanting the best for themselves.
As I see it, part of the problem (whatever you think it is) stems from the obdurate insistence of seeing only two paths through the dense forest when in fact many exist. Su Shi read
Zhuang Zi in his youth and greatly admired the other-worldly ethic espoused within. Yet he was unable to extricate himself from all-too-mundane political struggles and found himself wandering all over the empire as a repeatedly-demoted official. This in spite of the higher sentiment expressed in his poetry. And Su Shi has plenty of illustrious company in that respect. If only two paths appear available and one of them involves the near-impossible (for self-professed intellectuals at least) task of withdrawing from society, then one must endure the hardships involved in propping oneself onto the biggest stage and putting on a good show without offending the other performers. Many people want to display their talents and change the world, but not everyone in the world likes it changed in unfamiliar ways. Men like Su Shi are vastly outnumbered by those who traverse the path in anticipation of a pot of gold at the end.
Of course nowadays times have changed and circumstances are different. People are not so constrained as to see only two intellectually consistent positions for persons of talent to take, i.e. to either change the world in whichever way they can or withdraw from it and let nature take its course. A third alternative, I would propose, is hedonism, though not necessarily of the sensual kind. It's a little defeatist, but probably no more than withdrawal I think.
Reading is useless
World Book Fair ended on Sunday. I went to the Book Fair. I bought something. I think I bought something only because I thought it would be strange to attend a book fair and not buy anything. There was also a PC fair. There were more people at the PC fair. I think there were more people at the PC fair because PCs and their peripherals are more useful than books. Serious.
A lady wrote in to the Zaobao forum. She lamented that Singaporeans do not read enough and lack cultural refinement. Community centres should set up book clubs, she urged. Not long ago Chua Beng Huat suggested in an ST article that Singapore is not a reading nation. Indranee Rajah then wrote in to the ST Forum lambasting him for discrediting his countrymen. Lucky now not election period.
Indranee Rajah had pointed out in her letter that public response to NLB reading campaigns have generally been favourable. If I'm not mistaken, we're in the midst of one right now. Or else why suddenly got newspaper article about hairdressers reading short stories? One of the hairdressers said that reading fiction gives him an insight into the human condition. Okay, I kinda paraphrased that but rest assured that this was pretty close to what he said. Cynical me suspects that someone coached him to say that. Not because hairdressers are incapable of pronouncing such statements, just that it sounded all-too familiar. Personally if I wanted to gain a fresh perspective into human motivations and interactions I would watch more drama serials. But that's just me.
Some smart guy had this to say about book clubs in his blog:
"Joining a book club... is the mediocre mind's way of circumventing the essential loneliness and inactivity of reading. By sharing one's opinions with others, reading becomes reified as social activity, but a feeble and debased activity. Nothing new is created, no value beyond social gratification and mutual congratulation. This is reading not for it's own sake, but as a lifestyle accessory stemming from the desire to be known as the sort of person who reads serious books."
Of course he sounds just like the sort of person who wants to be known for reading serious books. Lots of them. Liddat a bit of a no-win situation leh: don't read or read trashy material people say you ignorant, read simple-simple books people say you no standard, read serious books people say you hao lian.
Another also very clever person had this to say:
"Typically, reading has been encouraged by means of myths like the following:
1. Reading makes one a better person, more intelligent, more human, less prejudiced, etc.
2. Those that don't read are ignorants or brutes.
3. Reading per se is good, ergo, reading more and more is even better. There is no bad book.
4. There is a repertoire of works that everyone should read.
In reality, people that read a lot are not necessarily any better than those that do not read much or at all. There are many intelligent and sensible non-readers as there are many conceited readers with few virtues that furthermore despise those less literate. They have fallen into a disease of "eruditis"."
So what's the conclusion? As usual, there isn't one. But I would just like to say that if people don't want to read, or read the type of books you want them to, then no need to hard-hard come. You can lead the horse to water but you can't make it drink. You can tell the horse that drinking water is good, but don't say until like by drinking a lot it can cover a thousand li a day. Afterall, some horses drink a lot but only end up accumulating a bladder full of piss. Okay, I think I've flogged this analogy to death.
Duan Wu, or The fish ate who?
Nearly forgot Duan Wu Festival was yesterday, but I don't like bazhangs anyway. Now that the South Korean city of Gangneung has successfully applied to UNESCO to have its Dragon Boat Festival listed as an intangible cultural property, suddenly there is lot of media attention transfixed upon this increasingly-neglected festival in China. My impression is that the majority of Chinese are taking this opportunity to do some soul-searching into the failure (or not) of inter-generational cultural transmission, rather than blaming the Koreans for hijacking their festival in retaliation for China claiming the Goguryeo sites as their own. On the other hand, many Chinese are pissed off that the Koreans are claiming to have invented acupuncture, at least according to the show Da Chang Jin.
The argument that because Duan Wu is linked to Qu Yuan the festival must necessarily be Chinese should be doomed. Most likely, there has been some sort of riverine celebration on that day even prior to Qu Yuan. The Koreans probably adopted the festival for reasons other than to celebrate the memory of a suicidal poet, i.e. the original ones whatever these might be. Interestingly, Suzhou is sort of claiming Duan Wu for themselves in competition with Hunan/Hubei, a throwback to the Wu/Chu rivalry. The claim is that the festival was meant to commemorate Wu Zixu, who killed himself in a fit of pique after failing to convince the Wu king to annihilate Yue once and for all. In gratitude, the king stuffed his body in a bag and threw it into the river to improve the food supply of the fishes. Since Wu Zixu preceeded Qu Yuan historically, maybe there's something to be said here.
Personally I don't really care which statesman the fish fed on, except as trivia, and which country is claiming the festival so long as somebody is celebrating it. If there's one lesson we ought to draw from Duan Wu, it's that subordinates should not kill themselves just because their bosses don't listen to them. No less an authority than Sima Qian has voiced this sentiment (though somewhat obliquely), so don't think that I'm joking. Also, I was just wondering why out of the thousands of traditional festivals Chinese civilization has had over the years this rather trivial one has stood the test of time as well as it did. Maybe it has something to do with food.
