The slightly insidious side to being a Director

I am extremely grateful to NUS Stage for giving me the opportunity to direct a dramatised reading. As the week winds down to the last performance held today, I can't help but think that this process has been surreal.

Directing has been something that I thought I wouldn't be able to do. It's akin to watching an Olympic gymnast and telling yourself that it's impossible you'll be that person on TV. Being a very technical person, someone who thinks in terms of cues, markings and timing, artistic direction has alluded my sphere of experience. Yet this opportunity has sparked something that had been dormant.

I used to write fiction - letting my mind wander to alternate realities. Almost all the stories I write are based in reality, because stories are just more convincing when you can imagine them to be real. This experience escaped me after 21 Dec 2008, when I brutally learnt that reality can be more painful and more fantastical than fiction. When you really can only write about pain when you have felt it. Ever since, my senses deaden because it is simply easier not to feel especially when all you feel is just pain. I shut the doors of my imagination.

Directing has most leisurely drawn that side back. Well firstly, Shiv said something that I've been grappling to put words to: Directors act the most. We act in front of our actors. Taking criticisms and molding into alluring encouragements that will prod the actors to perform in a certain way. I find myself  crafting "pathways", creating illusions of choice to seduce my cast into coming to their own conclusions when it's really my own. It is seditious, scheming. Being this director, I transform into a  mastermind of story-tellers. We have to tell a story to our cast, and through them, to reach out to our audience. It's slightly insidious and no wonder "the Scottish play" is not spoken during performance night. With so much yarns of lies, tales and Machiavellian plots running afoot - the web is ready to spring upon the audience and actors to create the intended atmosphere.

"Politicians lie to hide the truth, artists tell lies to reveal it"

- V from V for Vendetta

The Issue with Whining and Ranting

Firstly, I have no qualms about people complaining. It is after all a healthy outlet for what may be a temporary problem, or perhaps it is a way to gather up energy for the overcoming a small obstacle. However, I do have people who whine about their work and rant about how difficult it is to write a literature review, or how fantastically tedious this term paper is etc.

It is not a measure of arrogance when I denounce such "whinery". I draw from my personal experience and offer warning and caution to those who dramatise their private problems to a public audience. This may offend most people's sensibilities, but think about it: What you say reveals more about you, than the thing you are whining about. 

Allow me to illustrate.

You have this really difficult term paper, or group project. Your professor or lecturer has given nothing for you to go on. Heck, you don't even know what Baye's Rule is or how to go about finding obscure LDC maps of coastal regions without being a member of some elite academic society. You complain on Facebook, then you rant to your whatsapp group of friends and complete the experience by pounding your head on the table. Everyone knows about your problems, offers you consolation (or what it seems to be consolation) and you feel better about yourself that someone has sympathies or curses the lecturer along with you. 

In short, you feel the need that you're not alone in this. Yet the issue is not about camaraderie. Take a step back and consider perhaps the purpose of the assignment is precisely to suss out between those that give up and hand in superficial projects, and those that take the initiative to make consultation appointments to clarify the finer points of the paper. I have personally met with professors who give us the most obscure of assignments to have them give me the knowing smile when I asked the right questions and take the initiative to approach them. It is naive to assume that everyone marks your paper based on what is in the paper. In their shoes, would you not be tired of seeing the same answers and responses year in year out, the struggle to award credit to students who truly have a thrist for knowledge and learning instead of the grade? It is part of the learning process and it is part of what makes me a more independent learner. How can one rant about that?

This is a personal affront. This is also a personal experience. I used to have a colleague who whines/rants/complains about my boss and all the difficult work and changeability of the environment. I was influenced by his attitude, thinking that this was the "culture" and it would be a badge of honour to bitch about the work and show others how much work you are putting in. However, all it ever achieved was to highlight your own personal incompetencies. For one, you never know who's listening to your complaints and whining undermines your position in the company. Secondly, my boss came to ask me personally why I cannot tell him straight in the face that the work he delegated to me was too much for me to bear for a young executive. Thirdly, he then questioned my aptitude AND attitude for spreading the melodrama around to other colleagues. He then pointed out another colleague who was silently bearing tasks that far surpass mine and not only just excelling, but also doing it without bringing "others down" with her. It was a lesson I will never forget.  It almost cost me my job and the damage done took months to repair.

Ranting about small problems like term papers is a habit that will lead to other larger actions which can severely cripple your career prospects. It is one thing to sound out to a close friend, and another to do so in front of a public audience - who may one day be your boss or a valuable associate. The worst part is that you might not even know you had miss opportunities because people simply avoid working with you on what might be lucrative projects due to your seemingly innocuous rants.

It's only a small task, and the one who gave you the task of all people, actually knows how it's like to be in your shoes. When we whine, we give a signal that we cannot cope with larger tasks and you'll soon find yourself devoid of opportunities because people judge you incapable. No one asks that you suffer in silence as well, there is an avenue and time to bring issues to the right people. Whining/Ranting breeds more negativity and instead of sympathy, it feeds a self-pitying and self-entitled mindset. How is that positive to what might already be a dire predicament? 

Hiatus

These couple of days I've been recuperating from a cough, a fever, menses as well as jet lag. It explains the lack of posts and I do hope to keep on writing at least for the next couple of weeks.

I'm actually easing back into action. Besides sleeping, which occupies the major part of my day, I took time (grudgingly), to direct this chamber reading (a play with script). It's called I LOVE GOD BUT I DESIRE MARRIAGE. From a writer's point of view, I have a lot of issues with the script, but I am attracted to the thematic matter as well as some of the dialogue.

It brings to mind about the confluence of religion and personal motivations, as well as the illogicality of desire and human frailty. It's not dramatic like Hamlet, but I hope in some small ways the story it tells will resonate my audience as it does in me.

I promise to write soon, especially when this wreck of a body has resumed some of it's equilibrium. MAYBE, I need to write TO restore equilibrium. For now, I'm content to be curled up with a copy of the Dresden Files, hoping to go to sleep before insanity strikes me.

Tourists, Travellers and Wanderers.

This trip has been most invigorating, in some ways, because I haven't always been able to do what I want to do. Personally, I thrive in being the most uncomfortable situations, mostly slightly toeing the line (like not paying for bus rides in both Florence and Rome*). I would very much prefer to engage in this whole romanticism, of telling my audience that I had inspiration while sitting at cafe, or gazing by the Seine. Alas, the inspiration for this post is really quite mediocre.  I was actually eating berry Tiramisu at Chez Propsper on Place de la Nation when this idea hit. The culmination of almost 16 days of traveling 3 cities perhaps formulated the real insight to this "typology", rather than informed (or "informed") academic texts.

The Tourist

Tourism is a huge economy, some cities like Florence almost entirely depend on it. Florence reminds me of the Phuket of the West - glitzy without any soul. In the same fashion, the Tourist sees what is on the map, simply going to the major galleries, taking pictures with David because one is supposed to do so, not understanding the significance of the work. One that pays big bucks for small meals, and have small hearts with big pockets. As one can already discern, such people repulse me because one goes there simply for the hype, the bang, the flash, so that they can make themselves look good when they return home. These people queue to go into the Lourve, trample all over others, talk loudly and make the worse stereotypes of their nationalities. They dislike others like them, and yet they are twins. The compare their homes to 2 effects: one to denounce their present destination, the other to glorify it. Both reactions yield an understanding that is made from the narrow world-view of their homes. Travelling to more places will not expand their minds, simply because they will always see the same thing, merely a comparison...The Tourist's journey is a trophy, one that can be encapsulated in the numerous souvenirs in their bags, the pompous fake venetian masks and the made-in-china keychains.

The Traveller

Often on a budget, off time and possibly not much funds available. The traveller is often quite well-informed and well-researched. The stereotypical image of a traveller includes well-used maps that have annotations all over, the ardent fan of "Tripadvisor" and "Lonely Planet" for restaurant recommendations and last but not least, the well-used backpack. The traveller can also be a tourist, hunting down the famous spots and do what can be called, "city-hopping". Staying long enough to savour the essentials before moving on. Going to Giolitti for Gelare in Rome, to London's famous roast duck at 4 seasons. They thrive on recommendations from forums, magazies and forums of other travellers. They might take pictures of the architecture of Notre Dame, but not necessarily join the queue to go in. There is no time, off to the next place, off to the next hideout and cafe. We must try the Macarons at Pierre Hereme and then shop at Rue Raspail....

The Wanderer

Tranistra, Bergen City, Singapore Changi Village. The off-the-beaten track, with no itinerary, often armed with a blank map and a keen eye, the wanderer seeks not to explore or to discover but simply to be. The aim is complete the moment the plane lands. The Wanderer laughs in the face of danger and bathes in the delight of the unknown. They simply want to live the moment as it comes, talk to people as approached. They could almost pass off as locals, simply walking the streets, and sitting in front of cafes smoking. They don't have a fixed must-see place simply, because they have already been, or have simply no interest to go. They seek out what makes the city alive and what makes it simultaneously mundane and exciting. They combine both the visual sense of the traveller's anticipations, and the profanity of the dweller. They do not expect and can be often surprised. Tourists ask them for directions on the streets, to which the Wanderer smiles and shrugs. There are moments that only exist in certain places, amongst certain company, with certain variables that forms a unique composition...

*My logic is really simple: If I can get away with it, the system probably deserves to fail by allowing me to get off scott free for 13 consecutive days of traveling for free by bus.

When travel is not about anticipation

There is a difference between travel and holiday. The former seeks to explore, to consciously put oneself in an uncomfortable position and aims to be inspired by "being in the moment". The latter is about a getaway, the escape from the banal realities of life, when we can eat, drink and be merry.

This December for me, is to a holiday but a travel experience. I have never been put in a position where I have to make all the ticket bookings, the accommodation arrangements, and on top of that, still plan the intinerary. So far, I have been asked by a strange for sex, almost got knocked down by cars on the tiny italian streets, and tasted weird and strange foods that turn out to be surprisingly good. I am proud to say that I've trodden in the Florentino rain for an hour, ate like a pig for breakfast, lunch and dinner, as well as moved like a sloth when the mood suits me.

It's often cliche, how writers and artists find inspiration when they are are 'away'. There is a sense of mystery and intrigue when one is away, because you're a tourist, a visitor (that in some places, can be unwanted). You have the benefit of insight from the outside. You are in the moment, yet you are not. It is the dialectic of being in the place, and yet not quite being IN it.

It is also about learning what we always take for granted, the public transport system, the way people order coffee at one of the many small caffes in Rome for instance. In a city, it's amazing how much we already know,  and how much cities are similar in their rhythm and pattern. We automatically know what do in a train stataion (the yellow line seems pretty universal so far) and we instinctively reach out for the red button to call for a stop at the street.

So traveling is about meeting new people, but not  always nice ones. It can be about transgressing the familiar, the known, and find out after all, you have escaped not from a place, but from yourself. We can be who we want to be in a land of strangers, knowing you have no strings attached to this place and absolutely no obligation to go back there. It is a fantasy, and yet also reality - you can be who you are without substantially being judged. Traveling is not about anticipation, it is about revelations.

Writing Anxieties

I wanted to blog about something else entirely, one that is about being critical at Critical. However, after collecting my first extended paper, the guts that spurred my motivations for the previous article deflated.

My paper was on citizenship, and call for geographers to interrogate the assumptions of their writing, and how their criticisms are "nothing new" because it falls into the pit of dualisms, making the mistake they were criticising others of making. I have longed been impatient with geography as a discipline. For one that stresses links between social facts (see Durkheim and Suicide), it fails to draw links between disciplines on a fundamental level where we take a step back and really see where our logical arguments lead us. We are content with being critical, without actually analysing what does the geist of critic really is. For me, it presents a fundamental shift, the debunking of base assumptions - the challenge for others to accept the implications of their conclusions.

The comments of the paper were fair. First and foremost, I have problems in English expressions. Secondly, I did not justify why I used certain theories (because there were too apparent to me, some times I forget to lay it out plainly to people). Thirdly, my limited language is inhibiting the full extent of my ideas.

There are a couple of things I have learnt from this paper. It is not my ideas that are problematic, it is the way it is presented. I should count myself lucky because many people with higher linguistical ability would have to work on the conception. Language is something that comes with practice and continuous editing, and with that, I hope that I can be a better writer.

Someone recently started reading this blog and was taken by how I write. I am truly flattered, and humbled at the same time that people liked to hear more of my ideas. Due to this affirmation and consequent critical response from my supervisor, I wish to improve so that I do not disappoint myself - my ideas are worth much more than the limited language abilities I am right now.

“Writing is a form of thinking. If that’s true, the advice often given to writers—first get your thought clear, and only then try to state it clearly—is wrong.”

Howard Becker Writing for Social Scientists

Often times, I do not know what to think until I start writing. I become anxious because there was this pressure to want the "perfect" idea, and ever since I found that book, it became clearer that writing itself is a continous process that does not end when the letters enter .docx. It is simply the beginning of a very long journey of discovery. I think when I write, and write to think.

I am bummed at my paper because there was pride involved. I was used to being "good" and became too comfortable at my knowledge, that I didn't think about working at my abilities. This semester, I visited the writing centre and didn't receive very constructive feedbacks - it simply affirmed what I wanted to hear. In some sick fashion, I was yearning for criticism, but on my own terms. When it was finally dished out, it hurt. I guess at this point, I comprehend now that criticism is not looking for what you already know what is wrong with yourself, but to accept that there are many other blind spots that only people who have experience can point them for you. That is why we all have supervisors to "keep us in check". Yet, I am also afraid, that I won't make it in time. Having said, that is beyond my control because if I never try, I'll never know.

Now...I guess I have to visit those Primary School English section of Popular Bookshops to refresh my grammar somewhat.

Citizenship: the ties that bind

Citizenship are not abstract “civic ties” between people but rather, are intimate relationships between people such as friendship and romantic relationships. Therefore, these relationships socialise people into members of society. It is what ties the micro to the macro – and gives us the connection to other “strangers” in society. Indeed there are no real strangers in society, and we are either friends, or indifferent parties. Even as enemies we are able still find a connection. Hence, we are made citizens because of the ties we have here rather than over-arching political discourses. The implications is therefore twofold. One one hand we do not have to rely on passports and state policies to define who we are and the efforts are limited insofar as creating the enduring ties that a friendship has. Secondly, people may physically hold different passport and sworn different allegiances, however the interpersonal ties will hold them as part of this society.

Hence friendship cannot be ignored in terms of cultivating citizenship amongst individuals. It is the creation not of civic value, but rather the value of friendship and intimacy. So the reasons why youths are excluded from the civic society is owed to the claim that their allegiances are fluid because their life is "changing" and only become “full” members when their interpersonal networks are solidified – only and only then, can their stake in society be counted as legitimate. Although adults can face changes in their lives as well, but often the lifecourse perspective see that adults often achieve a stage of relative stability or maintenance where huge changes are unlikely to occur within their interpersonal networks. If anything, adults gain and expand networks, which further integrate them further into society - legitimating their status as committed members and hence garnering the rights to vote for the community.