China Executes Briton Despite Appeals
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/world/asia/30china.html?ref=asia
-------
It's interesting how people all of a sudden start showing clemency to drug dealers when it's about China. Ok, MAYBE a mentally ill drug dealer. Buh who knows? The news implies that neither side has provided solid proof to the suspect's mental state (but the suspect did claim that he and his family have no history of mental illness--ok, this might be all crazy talk, but again, WHO KNOWS?). All the British side said was that the family members claimed him to have a history of mental illness. But ESPECIALLY because this is an international crime, Britain really have to provide more than mere "family members'" talking--otherwise of COURSE the suspect's own words are more believable. And no one is obliged to believe words of professional issue from the mouths of likely biased nonprofessionals.
“The U.K. is completely opposed to the use of the death penalty in all circumstances,” Mr. Miliband said in a statement. “However I also deeply regret the fact that our specific concerns about the individual in this case were not taken into consideration, despite repeated calls by the prime minister, ministerial colleagues and me.”
This quote makes me absolutely angry. First of all, this is another typical example where the self-righteous "democratic" Big Name trying to impose its own values onto another culture. These big names think that they are the only ones on earth who know and exercise human rights the best--and all other "heresies" must change and follow them. In some articles it even said that Britain called for elimination of death penalty in China. But the thing is, THIS IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS! First, China is certainly not the only country that uses death penalty, so does USA. Second, this is obviously an attempt to digress from the main road (is the drug dealer guilty and deserving of punishment) to an irrelevant attack on China. This is a political digression aimed to demonize China subtly. And then the same person says: "I also deeply regret the fact that our specific concerns about the individual in this case were not taken into consideration." WHAT?! To me, Mr. Miliband is implying that his way is the only MORAL way. If you don't follow his way, it's deeply disappointing to human conscience. Really? That sure sounds like some, again, self-righteous commander/leader/demagogue from movies and TVs who think that they are the ones that know what's the best for YOU. Their way is the best way for YOUR survival. ...yes...I am surprised too that these people are actually real.
I think when Britain tries to demand consideration and understanding from China, they should also try to understand others. Ultimately, these are two very different cultures. Like what happened in Avatar, horrible things happen when the strong (although Britain is not necessarily THE Strong anymore) tries to exploit the weak without any real understanding of the weak's culture beyond numbers and data. Yes, China has a very harsh regulation on drug trafficking. China also has a humiliating history of being exploited by European's (yes, BRITAIN) opium trade. Back then China was too weak to defend itself. And European criminals in China are rarely punished. Imperialists and colonists did whatever they want. Certain areas designated for foreigners are exclusively for them, with signs that say "No Chinese and Dogs Allowed" on the very land owned by Chinese. Perhaps we were once the sick men of Asia. But that's not the case anymore. There is no reason that any foreigner should be exempt from punishments for crimes. Things like diplomatic immunity is bullshit. And in this case, it's not just any crime--it's drug dealing. How DARE you come to other people's land trying to indirectly kill more Chinese people? Yes, I might be exaggerating but this is JUST like the Opium Trade. HOW DARE YOU do this again to China and demand clemency just because YOU SAY that the person is delusional and duped to carry to suitcase? Actually, most of the serious offenders of law are somewhat mentally ill.
NY Times is once again pissing me off by posting such biased article. It includes extensive quotes from self-righteous Britons but not one complete quote from Chinese authority (ex. about how Britain has no right to mess around with its own jurisdiction). Just like the Uighurs rebellion, this article is written based on the perception that China is at fault. That is ridiculous. BOTH sides are somewhat at fault. Chinese authority should have done some sort of psych test just to shut the Britain's mouth off. But how can an international but possibly mental drug dealer getting caught and punished in China (Thank God) be completely an immoral action done by the Chinese? Any logic here? Once someone decides to do something illegal in ANOTHER country, a responsible person would definitely prepare for whatever consequences his or her action would bring about. Again, things like diplomatic immunity (although not directly relevant to the current topic) is bullshit. You can't do something harmful and then expect to be exempt from the price that you have to pay just because you're from another country. In fact, you should be punished even more harshly if you're deliberately doing something harmful in another person's country. Knowing that your action is bad, and knowing the consequences that your actions would result in while still committing the action is purely taking advantage of the other country (and that's try to replace another country with your friend, neighbor, etc.)--THAT is IMMORAL.
I think the City on the Hill/manifest destiny needs to end SOMEWHERE. You can't impose your values on everyone else--and then call whoever doesn't follow your value (democracy) evil and THEN assume that whatever bad happen to whoever is whoever's fault and then try to demonize whoever whenever possible just because you don't like whoever.
And this is where mutual understanding comes in--people should go for the "middle way" and try to understand both sides' story. No one is ever absolutely right or absolutely moral--the person who is like that is god, but god does not exist. People should not be accustomed to thinking in that kind of patronizing, I-know-better-than-you attitude to anyone, to kids, teenagers, to followers, to the weak--the kind of attitude so common in adults and the ones who lead. There is value in everyone's opinion. And if other people's value isn't the same as yours--as long as it's not destructive (one may argue that killing a possibly mentally ill drug dealer who is possibly not a drug dealer is destructive--but I think that it's just justice doing its work to save more people from being "destructed" by drug) -- then people should try to live harmoniously alongside these different values. This is my utopia--a world of peace, harmony, and mutual understanding. I really don't think it's THAT hard to come about, but war and conflict still happen.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Two Kinds of Goodness, and the common people in between.
I don't know when this "theory" formed, but, at least at this stage of my life, I believe that there are two extreme kinds of Goodness, whereas most people are in between.
1) Stupid Good
Hold on--let's be more politically correct. How about, "Naive Good"? These people are characterized by sincere, above-the-top optimism and faith in humanity, or at least certain aspects of humanity, and a general above-the-top innocent view of the world around them. These people sometimes are not liked but the “normal people” not because these people are “nonconformists” (a term that could be manipulated to mean something positive) but because their views are so out of touch with reality and so “good” that their character becomes to appear “fake” and “pretentious.” Examples of people who are “stupid good” are: April and Kyu Chul.
Again, April is a “good” person; perhaps a VERY “good” one. But the problem is that she is not inspiring. The world around her is shaped by her “goodness” and even when she’s angry, she still does it in a “good” manner. There is no way to have a deep conversation with her because her thoughts stop at “badness”—she can’t see the “good” behind the “bad”—she can only grasp the superficial level, quite well, actually. I hate to use the kind of words Paul Kim once used to me: she is limited—she is at most a good mediocre person. The failure to go beyond what is normally perceived as “good” almost ensures that April is not going to be an inspiring friend or person. We know the normal “good”—the should’s and should-not’s. To be valued highly you need to go beyond that.
For Kyu—the most problem I have is his faith, of unknown source, in the ability of others. His praises come way too easily. I’m not saying that there are people who worth nothing. But Kyu certainly exaggerates people’s ability all the time. “Oh, He is VERY VERY good at XXX.” Really? No, not really. More often than not what he’s saying is very inaccurate. But he is just so optimistic and supportive all the time—even when the reality isn’t supportive of him.
Another thing not pertaining to “Goodness” is his mentality concerning people and their prospective colleges. It seems that he practically worships elite colleges (Ahem! Not gonna use the phrase Ivy League). He worships these schools to the extent that getting into them somehow makes you superior in everything all of a sudden. Ms. Columbia, Mr. Cornell—seriously? Is this even necessary? Sure, there is a reason that certain people get into elite colleges and certain don’t. But that doesn’t all of a sudden make them gods or goddesses.
Anyway…Kyu is not an inspiring person either. He may be very knowledgeable about the past, but he has never shown me anything completely original or thoughtful. I am awed by the little encyclopedia inside his brain, but I am certainly not inspired by anything he does or say.
2) Smart Good
This is the type of “Good” that I admire. I think the perfect example is Dr. Wilson from House M.D. Anyone who watches House knows what kind of good person Wilson is. House said that he is so kind that patients thank him for telling them that they are going to die. Wilson married three times simply because he wanted to make those miserable women happy—not because he liked them himself. This is stupid, but it’s not the kind of “stupid good” I talked about. Wilson is a VERY VERY kind-hearted person—BUT! He does not even nearly resemble April or Kyu Chul. Wilson is the paradigm of Smart Good. First of all, he is very intelligent and witty. He can carry on all these quick-witted conversations with House and occasionally spot the little tricks House pull on him here and there. He knows House, a weird and difficult person, extremely well, to the extent that he may sometimes manipulate House. But so can House manipulate him. Wilson is not an idealist. He is not naïve. For god’s sake, he’s forty-something. Wilson is kind because he truly thinks for others and act upon it—not because he believes in something like we all should be good people who never cheat, steal, or curse or that everyone on earth possesses some kind special ability that makes them superior. Wilson’s goodness doesn’t touch upon those subjects because Wilson knows that those are not true. Moreover, Wilson is flawed. He doesn’t pretend that he has no flaws. In fact, he can be pretty wild sometimes. (You gotta be special to be House’s friend) Wilson is bounded by traditional morals and customs but at the same time—he is not a believer of such morals and customs, unlike April. He knows that there are rules that you can break and there are the ones that you can’t. He doesn’t pretend to be perfect (most people do it subconsciously because they don’t want to be perceived by the “normal people” as “abnormal” or simply “rude”. He doesn’t pretend to be god. Wilson’s goodness originates purely from his own heart and he is able to maintain such goodness as well as a sober-minded, realistic view of the world and people around him. That is “Smart Good.”
1) Stupid Good
Hold on--let's be more politically correct. How about, "Naive Good"? These people are characterized by sincere, above-the-top optimism and faith in humanity, or at least certain aspects of humanity, and a general above-the-top innocent view of the world around them. These people sometimes are not liked but the “normal people” not because these people are “nonconformists” (a term that could be manipulated to mean something positive) but because their views are so out of touch with reality and so “good” that their character becomes to appear “fake” and “pretentious.” Examples of people who are “stupid good” are: April and Kyu Chul.
Again, April is a “good” person; perhaps a VERY “good” one. But the problem is that she is not inspiring. The world around her is shaped by her “goodness” and even when she’s angry, she still does it in a “good” manner. There is no way to have a deep conversation with her because her thoughts stop at “badness”—she can’t see the “good” behind the “bad”—she can only grasp the superficial level, quite well, actually. I hate to use the kind of words Paul Kim once used to me: she is limited—she is at most a good mediocre person. The failure to go beyond what is normally perceived as “good” almost ensures that April is not going to be an inspiring friend or person. We know the normal “good”—the should’s and should-not’s. To be valued highly you need to go beyond that.
For Kyu—the most problem I have is his faith, of unknown source, in the ability of others. His praises come way too easily. I’m not saying that there are people who worth nothing. But Kyu certainly exaggerates people’s ability all the time. “Oh, He is VERY VERY good at XXX.” Really? No, not really. More often than not what he’s saying is very inaccurate. But he is just so optimistic and supportive all the time—even when the reality isn’t supportive of him.
Another thing not pertaining to “Goodness” is his mentality concerning people and their prospective colleges. It seems that he practically worships elite colleges (Ahem! Not gonna use the phrase Ivy League). He worships these schools to the extent that getting into them somehow makes you superior in everything all of a sudden. Ms. Columbia, Mr. Cornell—seriously? Is this even necessary? Sure, there is a reason that certain people get into elite colleges and certain don’t. But that doesn’t all of a sudden make them gods or goddesses.
Anyway…Kyu is not an inspiring person either. He may be very knowledgeable about the past, but he has never shown me anything completely original or thoughtful. I am awed by the little encyclopedia inside his brain, but I am certainly not inspired by anything he does or say.
2) Smart Good
This is the type of “Good” that I admire. I think the perfect example is Dr. Wilson from House M.D. Anyone who watches House knows what kind of good person Wilson is. House said that he is so kind that patients thank him for telling them that they are going to die. Wilson married three times simply because he wanted to make those miserable women happy—not because he liked them himself. This is stupid, but it’s not the kind of “stupid good” I talked about. Wilson is a VERY VERY kind-hearted person—BUT! He does not even nearly resemble April or Kyu Chul. Wilson is the paradigm of Smart Good. First of all, he is very intelligent and witty. He can carry on all these quick-witted conversations with House and occasionally spot the little tricks House pull on him here and there. He knows House, a weird and difficult person, extremely well, to the extent that he may sometimes manipulate House. But so can House manipulate him. Wilson is not an idealist. He is not naïve. For god’s sake, he’s forty-something. Wilson is kind because he truly thinks for others and act upon it—not because he believes in something like we all should be good people who never cheat, steal, or curse or that everyone on earth possesses some kind special ability that makes them superior. Wilson’s goodness doesn’t touch upon those subjects because Wilson knows that those are not true. Moreover, Wilson is flawed. He doesn’t pretend that he has no flaws. In fact, he can be pretty wild sometimes. (You gotta be special to be House’s friend) Wilson is bounded by traditional morals and customs but at the same time—he is not a believer of such morals and customs, unlike April. He knows that there are rules that you can break and there are the ones that you can’t. He doesn’t pretend to be perfect (most people do it subconsciously because they don’t want to be perceived by the “normal people” as “abnormal” or simply “rude”. He doesn’t pretend to be god. Wilson’s goodness originates purely from his own heart and he is able to maintain such goodness as well as a sober-minded, realistic view of the world and people around him. That is “Smart Good.”
Monday, December 21, 2009
Wait--But when is it ever timely?
When I first proposed the Grand Canyon trip to my mom, she agreed almost too easily.
"We practically have to pay nothing for your college; these couple of hundreds of dollars shouldn't be a problem."
And today, she suddenly questions me: "Why are you so hurried? Your life has just begun. You have more than enough time in the future to explore Grand Canyon. Why do you have to go now?!"
No, she is wrong. I don't have plenty of time in the future. It's not impossible that I simply drop dead tomorrow, get hit by a car, or fall on my head because of the slippery snow. And if that indeed happens, I will die without ever seeing what I considered the grandest natural beauty in the world. I've always dreamed to go to Grand Canyon--since forever--since the first time I saw it on photographs a long long long time ago. For plenty of people in the world, dreaming is all they can do. "I will go to xxx when I have time." "I will go to yyy after I graduate college." "I will do zzz once I get older."
NO. xxx, yyy, and zzz will never happen if all one can think of is "do" but "will do." These will-do's are for sure never going to happen. And these people are for sure going to die without ever doing the will-do's. I don't want that to happen. Now, my parents (or rather, just parent, because I haven't even told my dad yet) are supposedly not too harsh on money because they are exempt from the entire 50,000 dollars cost of college. I have the time right now. I'm done with college. And school can definitely withstand my taking a couple days of vacation during an actual break. Future? Who knows what's going to happen in college--would I really have time by then? I don't know what's going to happen. I might be too involved in the busy life of New Yorkers that I would have to push Grand Canyon year after year. And never get to see it. Again, if I had learned anything from the Japanese dramas that I watched a couple weeks ago--that is to embrace this present moment. Do it. Do what you want while you still can. Live the moment.
The following is a passage from Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail...Although it's not exactly about the same thing that I was discussing...the big ideas are still similar..:
"We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness"--then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience."
"We practically have to pay nothing for your college; these couple of hundreds of dollars shouldn't be a problem."
And today, she suddenly questions me: "Why are you so hurried? Your life has just begun. You have more than enough time in the future to explore Grand Canyon. Why do you have to go now?!"
No, she is wrong. I don't have plenty of time in the future. It's not impossible that I simply drop dead tomorrow, get hit by a car, or fall on my head because of the slippery snow. And if that indeed happens, I will die without ever seeing what I considered the grandest natural beauty in the world. I've always dreamed to go to Grand Canyon--since forever--since the first time I saw it on photographs a long long long time ago. For plenty of people in the world, dreaming is all they can do. "I will go to xxx when I have time." "I will go to yyy after I graduate college." "I will do zzz once I get older."
NO. xxx, yyy, and zzz will never happen if all one can think of is "do" but "will do." These will-do's are for sure never going to happen. And these people are for sure going to die without ever doing the will-do's. I don't want that to happen. Now, my parents (or rather, just parent, because I haven't even told my dad yet) are supposedly not too harsh on money because they are exempt from the entire 50,000 dollars cost of college. I have the time right now. I'm done with college. And school can definitely withstand my taking a couple days of vacation during an actual break. Future? Who knows what's going to happen in college--would I really have time by then? I don't know what's going to happen. I might be too involved in the busy life of New Yorkers that I would have to push Grand Canyon year after year. And never get to see it. Again, if I had learned anything from the Japanese dramas that I watched a couple weeks ago--that is to embrace this present moment. Do it. Do what you want while you still can. Live the moment.
The following is a passage from Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail...Although it's not exactly about the same thing that I was discussing...the big ideas are still similar..:
"We have waited for more than 340 years for our constitutional and God given rights. The nations of Asia and Africa are moving with jetlike speed toward gaining political independence, but we still creep at horse and buggy pace toward gaining a cup of coffee at a lunch counter. Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, "Wait." But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"; when you take a cross county drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading "white" and "colored"; when your first name becomes "nigger," your middle name becomes "boy" (however old you are) and your last name becomes "John," and your wife and mother are never given the respected title "Mrs."; when you are harried by day and haunted by night by the fact that you are a Negro, living constantly at tiptoe stance, never quite knowing what to expect next, and are plagued with inner fears and outer resentments; when you are forever fighting a degenerating sense of "nobodiness"--then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over, and men are no longer willing to be plunged into the abyss of despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience."
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
An Inspirational Quote from Jin, the drama
There's one quote in Jin that the producer intentionally emphasized:
God does not give you obstacles that cannot be overcome.
I don't believe in God. And I am not optimistic to the point that I believe nothing is impossible. I believe there ARE things that some people just cannot accomplish. But I tried to use doublethink to look at this quote from Jin. And it evokes some kind of special power in me. It doesn't matter that I don't believe in God. It doesn't matter that I knew there are difficulties that cannot be overcome. What matters is that these words give me HOPE at the MOMENT that I am in the obstacle. I think when you encounter something truly difficult, you need the kind of force that this quote gives to keep you moving. At that moment of hardship, I believe in God. And I believe in hope. Because I know that if I don't, I would have no hope, and what is waiting ahead of me will be 100% a dead-end. There is no point of life at dead-ends. Moving on--trying--is all we can do. So at the moment of difficulty, I choose to believe that "God does not give you obstacles that cannot be overcome."
God does not give you obstacles that cannot be overcome.
I don't believe in God. And I am not optimistic to the point that I believe nothing is impossible. I believe there ARE things that some people just cannot accomplish. But I tried to use doublethink to look at this quote from Jin. And it evokes some kind of special power in me. It doesn't matter that I don't believe in God. It doesn't matter that I knew there are difficulties that cannot be overcome. What matters is that these words give me HOPE at the MOMENT that I am in the obstacle. I think when you encounter something truly difficult, you need the kind of force that this quote gives to keep you moving. At that moment of hardship, I believe in God. And I believe in hope. Because I know that if I don't, I would have no hope, and what is waiting ahead of me will be 100% a dead-end. There is no point of life at dead-ends. Moving on--trying--is all we can do. So at the moment of difficulty, I choose to believe that "God does not give you obstacles that cannot be overcome."
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Quotes: about GTO and 蜗居
Jackie has a Word document saved in her USB containing all her favorite quotes. I'm planning to do the same. I've read some very fine, thoughtful pieces of writing. There are things from these writings that I do not want to forget. That I want to "tener en cuenta" for the rest of life. So in addition to a Word file on my USB, I would like to keep them here, supposedly a blog about my thoughts...
……我最喜欢的一位老师说过，外表越辉煌的东西总隐藏着越多看不到的肮脏，就算GH楼那么大，它的阴影也很多，很黑。毕业的时候，班上一个同学说，感谢FD，我遇到许多导师，但他们导得对不对，我还不知道。我越来越不喜欢仰头看楼了，更愿意低下头看自己的路。越来越不在乎别人对自己的看法，因为开始懂得，对自己的期许很重要。
……
小时候，每个孩子都不想成为肮脏的大人。每一个肮脏的大人都是孩子变成的。沉沦的借口是永远可以找到的，更很容易理所应当的将它归诸别人，为了家人为了生存为了名誉……为什么不能为自己活得干净一些？每个人的干净成就干净的世界，只能是理想国？“有这么难吗？”我真想问一句，但这话，王家芝已经问过易先生。
孩子是最有是非观念的群体，眼里容不进一粒沙子。每一双眼睛最初来到世上时都水样清澈，尘世的污浊一点点看过，最后全都变得浑浊。我现在想起以前的老师，已能心生慈悲，因为惭惭理解的缘故，又或者，我的眼睛也已不复清澈。
大人者，有赤子之心。想说让我们一起做干净的大人吧，可实在很难，不忘初心清如水，庶几可矣。
- icancu，“大人者,不失其赤子之心”（GTO 剧评，豆瓣网）
I can't help but be touched by icancu's writing and thoughts. He spoke my mind. He expressed what I could not express eloquently in words. This quote is long but it's great. I even used some of the ideas in one of my self-discovery essay that I would post up here once I finish editing.
女孩要富养，性格才能高贵，这是一条硬道理，郭妈妈明白这个理。但她不明白，富养有时和钱没有多大关系，而是在于你是否给予你的女儿足够的关注。女孩在成长时是要比男孩精细很多的，如果你不能令她感到受宠，她很容易敏感自卑，潜伏下自轻自贱的性格。
- 魔法灰姑娘, “《蜗居》：如何将高贵、忠诚的价值理念给予下一代？”（豆瓣网）
I would like my dad to read and understand this, although I don't expect him to do so. Dads are supposed to be daughters' McDreamy, but unfortunately neither of my dads is my McDreamy. They are failures. And the faults of the one that I'm currently living with are just so glaring that I don't know what to say anymore. Dads are supposed to be models. My dads are models. What-not-to-be models.
……我最喜欢的一位老师说过，外表越辉煌的东西总隐藏着越多看不到的肮脏，就算GH楼那么大，它的阴影也很多，很黑。毕业的时候，班上一个同学说，感谢FD，我遇到许多导师，但他们导得对不对，我还不知道。我越来越不喜欢仰头看楼了，更愿意低下头看自己的路。越来越不在乎别人对自己的看法，因为开始懂得，对自己的期许很重要。
……
小时候，每个孩子都不想成为肮脏的大人。每一个肮脏的大人都是孩子变成的。沉沦的借口是永远可以找到的，更很容易理所应当的将它归诸别人，为了家人为了生存为了名誉……为什么不能为自己活得干净一些？每个人的干净成就干净的世界，只能是理想国？“有这么难吗？”我真想问一句，但这话，王家芝已经问过易先生。
孩子是最有是非观念的群体，眼里容不进一粒沙子。每一双眼睛最初来到世上时都水样清澈，尘世的污浊一点点看过，最后全都变得浑浊。我现在想起以前的老师，已能心生慈悲，因为惭惭理解的缘故，又或者，我的眼睛也已不复清澈。
大人者，有赤子之心。想说让我们一起做干净的大人吧，可实在很难，不忘初心清如水，庶几可矣。
- icancu，“大人者,不失其赤子之心”（GTO 剧评，豆瓣网）
I can't help but be touched by icancu's writing and thoughts. He spoke my mind. He expressed what I could not express eloquently in words. This quote is long but it's great. I even used some of the ideas in one of my self-discovery essay that I would post up here once I finish editing.
女孩要富养，性格才能高贵，这是一条硬道理，郭妈妈明白这个理。但她不明白，富养有时和钱没有多大关系，而是在于你是否给予你的女儿足够的关注。女孩在成长时是要比男孩精细很多的，如果你不能令她感到受宠，她很容易敏感自卑，潜伏下自轻自贱的性格。
- 魔法灰姑娘, “《蜗居》：如何将高贵、忠诚的价值理念给予下一代？”（豆瓣网）
I would like my dad to read and understand this, although I don't expect him to do so. Dads are supposed to be daughters' McDreamy, but unfortunately neither of my dads is my McDreamy. They are failures. And the faults of the one that I'm currently living with are just so glaring that I don't know what to say anymore. Dads are supposed to be models. My dads are models. What-not-to-be models.
So they say.
Today, Sue asked me why I applied early decision to Barnard and not Columbia or other schools. Many others have asked me the same question, and I never gave them a complete answer. To them, Barnard is an "inferior" school in one sense or another. And Sue said, Columbia students look down on Barnard students. Ok, this is not the first time I heard this. The last time was in College Confidential. And according to Sue and supposedly Beata's campus-visiting experience, "everyone" in Columbia "looks down" on Barnard. I don't know why. But "everyone" does. I mean, I understand that Barnard women on average are not as book-smart as the students from elite colleges. But that is not the reason one should be "looking down" on any college. Nothing is more elitist then this. And if anyone who attends a top university truly thinks that people are somehow less than he or she is just because they attend a college whose students' median SAT scores are not as high as theirs, then he or she truly does not deserve any respect at all. I mean, I'm all for the looking down of individuals. If someone speaks and behaves like a retard then for all means look down on him. But how can you make judgments about an entire student population of certain school based on merely numbers and what other people's subjective opinions.
Another question is, why did I apply to Barnard specifically instead of any other school. I've put considerable amount of time into this question. And I did not make my decision lightly. Ideally I would like to apply to a college with a good academic atmosphere (including programs offered, campus, surroundings, etc.); and the most important thing to me would be having interesting professors--perhaps like Arod. But how would I know where the professor(s) who would leave life-long impressions in me are? Plus, I assume that there should be memorable professors in all colleges, elite or not. Although I cannot accept the fact that Curtis is applying to schools not for himself but for another person, I have to agree with him that at this point, we rarely know which school's academic atmosphere is better than another other than information we solicit from rankings, numbers, stats--that I do not trust at all. To me, the Ivies and other elite colleges are the same to me. Who can really say which is "better"? It's obviously ridiculous to say that the entire University of Pennsylvannia is "better" than Columbia just because it's above Columbia on the ranking list provided by US News. We really don't know enough to determine which one is better. So the point is, the ideal method of determining which college is "better" (by looking at their academic program) is not going to work well. I don't want to go to a college only because of its location--something that we can decide if it's good for us--and financial aid package. I want to go somewhere because of something more. And that's why I resort to the idea/ideology of a college.
Frankly speaking, nothing about the Ivies or other elite colleges inspire me. Truly, nothing. I'm sure once I start attending these school I will find a lot of good things about them. But during the college searching process, I find nothing particularly attractive about any of these schools. They don't inspire me. They are no more than "good colleges." But Barnard is different. I like the fact that it stresses the value of women. The importance of being an independent and thinking woman. Choosing an all-women's college is not an easy decision. Our womenly instincts want men. We want boys and we want to flirt with them. But at the same time, we shouldn't forget that we are us. What's more important is the self-improvement of our selves and not whatever we gain from the depending on others. Going to Barnard is almost like making the statement that I understand this principle and I am there because I want to be a strong woman. I take pride in my identity and I want to be able to stand firmly in the real world as not just another person (in the ideal sexism-free world) but as who we truly are--women. I'm not saying that other women attending other schools do not have such willpower and sense of independence; I'm only saying that this independence and determination is the foundation of Barnard education. I'm assuming that all girls who chose Barnard have thought it through and have this idea in mind. This is their "core," their unique common value.
Still anxiously waiting for the decision to come...
Another question is, why did I apply to Barnard specifically instead of any other school. I've put considerable amount of time into this question. And I did not make my decision lightly. Ideally I would like to apply to a college with a good academic atmosphere (including programs offered, campus, surroundings, etc.); and the most important thing to me would be having interesting professors--perhaps like Arod. But how would I know where the professor(s) who would leave life-long impressions in me are? Plus, I assume that there should be memorable professors in all colleges, elite or not. Although I cannot accept the fact that Curtis is applying to schools not for himself but for another person, I have to agree with him that at this point, we rarely know which school's academic atmosphere is better than another other than information we solicit from rankings, numbers, stats--that I do not trust at all. To me, the Ivies and other elite colleges are the same to me. Who can really say which is "better"? It's obviously ridiculous to say that the entire University of Pennsylvannia is "better" than Columbia just because it's above Columbia on the ranking list provided by US News. We really don't know enough to determine which one is better. So the point is, the ideal method of determining which college is "better" (by looking at their academic program) is not going to work well. I don't want to go to a college only because of its location--something that we can decide if it's good for us--and financial aid package. I want to go somewhere because of something more. And that's why I resort to the idea/ideology of a college.
Frankly speaking, nothing about the Ivies or other elite colleges inspire me. Truly, nothing. I'm sure once I start attending these school I will find a lot of good things about them. But during the college searching process, I find nothing particularly attractive about any of these schools. They don't inspire me. They are no more than "good colleges." But Barnard is different. I like the fact that it stresses the value of women. The importance of being an independent and thinking woman. Choosing an all-women's college is not an easy decision. Our womenly instincts want men. We want boys and we want to flirt with them. But at the same time, we shouldn't forget that we are us. What's more important is the self-improvement of our selves and not whatever we gain from the depending on others. Going to Barnard is almost like making the statement that I understand this principle and I am there because I want to be a strong woman. I take pride in my identity and I want to be able to stand firmly in the real world as not just another person (in the ideal sexism-free world) but as who we truly are--women. I'm not saying that other women attending other schools do not have such willpower and sense of independence; I'm only saying that this independence and determination is the foundation of Barnard education. I'm assuming that all girls who chose Barnard have thought it through and have this idea in mind. This is their "core," their unique common value.
Still anxiously waiting for the decision to come...
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Pre-Notification Darkness
This is a time when all kinds of thoughts flood my mind. Kind of like the Angelo y Diablo thing we did for Señora Metcalfe’s test this morning. The Angelo tells me that these thoughts are way too negative and filthy, and the Diablo tells me that there is nothing wrong with thinking this way--because what I think is true. I can't take it anymore. I need to throw them out. I need to be more positive, more tolerant. Otherwise, feel like I would be too unworthy for any college to accept me.
I told my mom that I am prepared mentally for my application to Barnard. Why am I expressing doubt? Because Barnard is definitely not a reach for me; it’s not my “dream” school—U Chicago and Georgetown are. I have to admit that it was probably somewhat of a mistake applying Barnard early; I should have just applied regular. But I am prepared. I’m not regretting it. I tried really hard to convince myself that this is not that bad. And I am convinced. I am prepared.
But this is not the problem. The problem is that I am having these dark and twisted thoughts originated from what Alejandro calls "competitive instinct." I realized that deep down part of me does not want dothers to get into my “dream schools” just because, in case I get into Barnard, I will not be able to do so myself. When I hear people getting into certain prestigious school, I feel bad; when I hear people getting rejected or deferred by certain prestigious school, I get this perverted feeling of joy. When I congratulated others, I was being a 100% hypocrite. I was not happy for them. I was secretly upset.
I am horrible. And I feel inferior. I feel Sick.
It's true that one's greatest enemy is oneself. There is a great battle going on right now.
I told my mom that I am prepared mentally for my application to Barnard. Why am I expressing doubt? Because Barnard is definitely not a reach for me; it’s not my “dream” school—U Chicago and Georgetown are. I have to admit that it was probably somewhat of a mistake applying Barnard early; I should have just applied regular. But I am prepared. I’m not regretting it. I tried really hard to convince myself that this is not that bad. And I am convinced. I am prepared.
But this is not the problem. The problem is that I am having these dark and twisted thoughts originated from what Alejandro calls "competitive instinct." I realized that deep down part of me does not want dothers to get into my “dream schools” just because, in case I get into Barnard, I will not be able to do so myself. When I hear people getting into certain prestigious school, I feel bad; when I hear people getting rejected or deferred by certain prestigious school, I get this perverted feeling of joy. When I congratulated others, I was being a 100% hypocrite. I was not happy for them. I was secretly upset.
I am horrible. And I feel inferior. I feel Sick.
It's true that one's greatest enemy is oneself. There is a great battle going on right now.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Britney Spears - Still fierce!
Britney Spears is the first American artist that I know. When I was in elementary school, my dad has several Britney Spears's CDs. In the car if he doesn't play Enigma's songs he would play Britney Spears'. I absolutely fell in love with both of them: Enigma and Britney Spears. Ten years later, she is still the fierce and sexy singer that I know. I wish she would just keep on singing and singing and singing forever. She probably will. For some reason a couple of years ago when people ask me which singer do I love the most, and I answer Britney Spears, people would respond with "EWWW." I mean, I get it, she's a messed up mom. She does retarded things. She probably IS retarded. Who cares. Look at now, almost every single of hers is super popular. I mean what is important to a singer to is his/her songs right? Who cares about these celebrities' personal life. I gotta admit that I would be interested. But their personal lives shouldn't be a judgmental factor. As long as their songs are good who cares about whether they are good or bad. Britney Spears and others are celebrities--they are not supposed to be any kind of role model. If people actually look upon them as role models, then THESE PEOPLE are sad. Not the celebrities themselves.
Ok I digressed.
Yeah.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)