Read read read

As with every school vacation, one of the must-dos in my holiday plans is to, well, read. This is different from during the school semester when one reads mainly academic stuff. The problem with me, however, is that I always feel the urge to read every book at once even though this is impractical if not impossible. Inevitably therefore, I always end up having started on various books but taking forever to finish them; in some cases, I never do. But I shall strive for better results this time. (And i must stop going to Kinokuniya or I will end up making more purchases, having more books idling on my shelf and requiring a good couple more years to complete them.)

Books I am reading now:
Jihad Vs McWorld by Benjamin R. Barber
How to breathe underwater by Julie Orringer
The Observer Years: Orwell by George Orwell

Books i've read halfway previously:
The Unbearable lightness of being by Milan Kundera
The Essential Rossueau, trans by Lowell Bain
Can Asians think? by Kishore Mahbubani

Books I've finished reading this holidays so far:
1984 by George Orwell

Books on the to-be-read waiting list:
The Prince and other Writings by Niccolo Machivaelli, trans by Wayne A. Rebhorn

For the record fourth consecutive night, i am going to meet S, like now, at the usual place and we would let the wheels bring us to where we would be going. I am frankly quite tired because for the past few days i've been engaging in one form of sports or another. But I am also most reluctant to turn down my friend. Guess that explains why i am tired and continues to be so. I must say, however, that it is absolutely a blessing to have a good friend who stays somewhere near you; something always can be arranged, some activity can be planned, like meeting for a late night supper or cycling on the desolate roads - you with your pals.

Nineteen Eighty-Four

In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.

- George Orwell, 1984


George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-four deserves to be read and reread because i think its depiction of a totalitarian society provides deep insight into the relationship between government and the governed. Although the Orwellian state is an extreme, it is precisely in its extremity that one sees the chilling consequences of the state's absolute control over its people. That the novel is as relevant today as it was in the past is reflected by the fact that Orwell's portrayal of the political system in the novel finds resonance in many societies today. Whether it is pervasive propaganda or oppressive governmental agencies, the sustenance of a totalitarian regimes rests, above all, on a relentless, self-perpetuating system of maunfactured truths. Therein also lies the instability of such a regime which is susceptible to implosion.

Of course, globalisation has ensured that the multitude of information channels and their availability has made it difficult for governments to withhold information from their people. Orwell's engulfing totalitarian regime may therefore seem a remote prospect today. Yet the rationale and the means of government control over its people in fiction and in reality aren't that far apart. The hallmark of a totalitarian government is not its brutality, but its capacity and the extent to which it is able to control and shape political thought or, more accurately, the human mind.

Someone wrote in to the ST Forum not too long ago and commented that the reason why the PAP is in power undefeated for so many years is because Singaporeans indeed do support the PAP government wholeheartedly. Such an appraisal of the preponderance of the ruling party's hold on power underscores the ignorance of some citizens of the political realities in Singapore. And it is comments from people like the said writer that makes the above quotation from Orwell's 1984 relevant and insightful even today.

Amazing Japan

S, who just came back from backpacking in Tokoyo, was regaling me with stories about the lengendary politeness of the Japanese people: they are unbelievably courteous, and their civic-conscious and responsible nature would put the majority of Singaporeans to shame. In one instance, a sweet-wrapper was blown away from a lady's grasp. At the expense of missing the just arrived train, she stepped out of the queue - yes, the Japanese queue up even to get into the train! - and walked across to the middle of the road to pick up the sweet wrapper - only to, dutifully, keep it inside her pocket (as designated dustbins are not located in the vicinity).

Stories like this have been recounted by tourists all over who never fail to be amazed and impressed by the clinical order of Japanese society. Its people, as a whole, in particular seem to possess traits that other societies are quite incapable of exhibiting. The impossibly immaculate society surely is a product of a unique Japanese culture that has endured in part because Japan is more or less a homogenous society.

S also got F and me a gift that he says is unique - cup noodles specially flown in from Japan. (He swears it's nothing like those miserable made-in-Singapore cup noodles.) When we parted just now, however, F and I forgot to claim from him our presents - we had asked for the cup noodles to be kept inside his large bag. I shall have to wait a few more days before I get the chance to savour thoroughly my unique Japanese gift: hot water shall be filled to its brim, and not a drop shall be wasted! It had better be as good as what S promised.

Myanmar and Asean

I thought the commentary piece by Verghese Matthews (ST 23 May; 21) lends a good deal of insight into some issues concerning Myanmar.


"However, what is sometimes missed out is that the ASEAN divide is more than merely economic or developmental. The Myanmar controversy has highlighted a difference in the mindset within the grouping, leading maybe even to a thin fissure line, with Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam demonstrating a greater empathy for Myanmar than the other member countries.

Here again, this is neither surprising nor can be wished away quickly given the historical baggage of the four countires and the difficulties they have individually encountered in warding of what they perceive to be foreign interference in their internal affairs.

No doubt, like the rest of Asean, the CLMV countries recognised the dilemma faced if Myanmar assumes the chairmanship next year: It will not be helpful for Asean.

At the same time, if Myanmar is forced out of the chairmanship against its will, it would also not be a desired outcome and would be a "bad precedent".

However, despite these practical considerations, the CLMV countries are particularly outraged by external pressure (read Western governments) now disingenuously using the back door of Asean's rotating chairmanship to pursue an objective in Myanmar.

What hitherto could not be achieved by external pressure against an individual member country would now appear possible because of a weak spot in Asean's organisational structure.

It was, therefore, not at all surprising that the well-honed survival instincts of Cambodia, Wietnam adn Laos immediately detected areas of concern and threats for themselves in what was happening to Myanmar."

- ST 23 May, "Don't push Myanmar into a corner", 21



The CLMV countries have much in common not least because they joined Asean later than the core 6, but that they have remained as authoritarian regimes to this day. Myanmar's military junta is infamously known over the world because the country has an Aung San Su Kyi who is an internationalised political figure. Western countries are not hesistant to impose punitive sanctions in part because Myanmar does not bear any immediate importance in their strategic calculations. The other perhaps equally brutal regimes, however, receive less international attention because they do not have the equivalent of an Aung San Su Kyi to magnify their undemocratic rule. Clearly cognizant of how Asean's handling of the problem of Myanmar's impending chairmanship would have significant political implications for their regimes, these countries are not surprisingly sympathetic towards Myanmar. If they sense that the rest of Asean members are quick to impose their wishes on Myanmar to achieve a political objective, they would surely reconsider the utility of the organisation. This is perhaps why the other Asean coutnries such as Malaysia expressed unhappiness initially at the lack of democratic progress by the military junta in Myanmar, but later appeared to change tack by stating that the chairmanship problem is for Myanamr to resolve. This is perhaps an explicit attempt to demonstrate that they still adhere to the non-interference principle upheld by member states in Asean. Inasmuch as the non-CLMV Asean countries want Myanmar's chairmanship not to be a stubborn hindrance in Asean's relations with the Western powers, they have to tread cautiously to ensure that the problem would not lead to internal division and paralysis.

Why restrict political films?

The ST (Sat May 21, 2005: S9) published some of the responses to their Insight article which looked at restrictions on party political films under the Films Act. What brought about the original article was the banning of Martyn See's film on Chee Soon Juan from the Singapore International Film Festival. Interestingly, the 5 responses, which represented 'a sampling', were in one way or another in agreement that restrictions ought to be eased. Short of censuring the government over its policies pertaining to political films, the respondents gave reasons that explain why exposing Singaporeans to political films is acceptable and should not raise alarms.

One suggested that 'most Singaporeans are now well-educated, more open and discerning'. Another mentioned that 'giving electoral speeches is already a form of advertising', and hence restrictions on political films to prevent Singapore politics from degenerating into an advertising slugfest do not hold water. Yet another offers that 'if the PAP truly has the support of the people, why worry?'

I think they each have valid arguments against the 'government's anachronic prohibition of political films', but some of the comments nonetheless reflect a certain political naivety on their part. For instance, while one reader pointed out correctly that 'giving electoral speeches is already a form of advertising', yet this is hardly a factor for consideration on Government's censorship on political films. Fact is, regardless if the citizenry is deemed mature or that the PAP has strong support of the electorate, it is in the prevailing government's interest to stifle the flow of political information that is possibly inimical to its rule. If tomorrow the rules are relaxed, various political films are being made and the general public consequently has access to them, less palatable political realities may come to light and many might indeed readjust their political views. If politics is an art of persuasion, political films may just be a powerful medium that can be relied upon to galvanise the masses and affect political thought. Therein lies the reason why the PAP government is hardly likely to relent on restrictions on political films.

mrt ride at night

Thursday night, i took the train to get down to Peranakan Place to meet a couple of friends for some drinks. That was when i realised that taking a train ride at night is a much pleasanter experience than in the day: empty seats abound, plenty of standing room, and the quiet feeling of a less hurried pace of life - all this give one pause to observe the general surroundings and people and to engage in some reflective thoughts. In the day when hordes of people in the train only serve to keep you preoccupied with preserving your whatever little standing space, you are highly irritable and irritated to think of anything else.

Over at acid bar where the sole vocalist, who spots a luxurious beard (to which my friend claims 'he's so hairy' in the way a blushful teenage girl does), sang some great songs, the music and soft lighting lend an ambience that was suitably conducive for conversation. When we quickly finished our drinks, the waitresses kept coming to us to ask if we would like more drinks, a not-so-subtle hint that we should either buy more drinks or leave the place.

The night ended with my failing to take the last bus available that would send me back home, while my friends continue to play pool at i-cant-remember-its-name-place. Why do my friends who drive always stay on the other side of the island?!

This is a poem by Dr. John MacRae [1872-1918]. It can be found here

In flander fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place: high in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below

We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
loved, and were loved, and now we lie,
In flander fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch: be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In flander fields.