book reviews (first half of 2007)

I feel a bit self-conscious posting up my little book reviews, given the amount of debates that have been going on about the value of literary blogs vs. formal publications. But you can never beat a recommendation by a friend. This is by no means an authoritative judgment of the quality of books, but just my little subjective perspective on the world of words. These reviews are also being posted up on Good Reads where I encourage you to befriend me. The premise of the site is great—letting you see what books your friends have read, but the navigation and layout is awful. In any case, I have high hopes that they will improve. I am also using their star rating system:

* didn’t like it
** it was ok
*** liked it
**** really liked it
***** it was amazing

On a side note, I’m also beginning to use the library again. College put me in a mode where I had to buy all my books, but that’s just not financially or physically feasible (I already own way too many books), especially when there’s no need for me to highlight every single word in a book. I love library cards. And library book sales! I purchased DeLillo’s hardcover edition of Underworld for $1!

Fiction

***** The Remains of the Day (Kazuo Ishiguro) ~ This book is the first I’ve read of Kazuo Ishiguro. It’s also the first book that really rejuvenated my delight of reading after months of fumbling through books that just didn’t quite grab my attention. What can I say? This book is really good! A very subtle biography and psychological study. A butler nearing the end of his life reflects upon his life in service and the choices that he has made, and questions whether or not any of it had meaning….

** Blindness (Jose Saramago) ~ I was attracted to this book because of its premise. A blindness plague strikes a nameless city and people become blind one by one and are quarantined. Although Saramago is an excellent writer, the book did not live up to my expectations. Though it was fairly enjoyable to read and certain scenes are narrated incredibly well, the book didn’t leave me feeling satisfied or amazed. Its central message was rather cliché and drilled into the reader rather awkwardly —a humanistic exposition of our capacity for both evil and good, and a reflection on the fragility of life.

**** Name of the Rose (Umberto Eco) ~ Two monks investigate a series of murders that take place in a monastery—a body is found at the foot of a cliff, another body is stuck in gigantic jar of pig’s blood and so forth. The resolution to the mystery is just as much a philosophical pondering as it is an answer to the question “whodunit”. This book was very enjoyable and quite a page turner… once you can get back the first 100 pages and manage to skip over the long sections of medieval history. It also offers quite a bit of food for thought in terms of thinking through modernism, rationalism and sign theory.

* Robinson Crusoe (Daniel Defoe) ~ I think some very important dead white guy said something about this book being one of the greatest ever. I can’t quite say, as an Asian female that is quite alive, that I found the same appeal. If anything, the book is long and boring and took me forever to read, more along the styles of a documentary than a narrative. There are huge sections dedicated to the daily adventures of Robinson Crusoe as he figures out how to survive alone on a desert island and build his little habitation. What perhaps is of greater value are the sections that talk about how he thinks about himself as the master of the island and his remarks about civilizing the barbarian cannibals and his famous servant Friday, which demonstrate the “racist” imperial outlook of that time. (I put racist in quotation marks because back then, it was so engrained in culture that calling someone racist ceases to really have meaning). In any case, I read this book because it has been analyzed, critiqued and parodied by so many colonial and post-colonial writers and academics. I guess aside from adding one more checkbox to the list of books I’ve read from the Western canon, I can’t say I derived that much more enjoyment from this book.

*** Never Let Me Go (Kazuo Ishiguro) ~ As one would expect from Ishiguro, this book is very subtle and understated. It tells the story of a sheltered and idyllic childhood at a boarding school. The only twist is that the kids are clones, raised to have their vital organs harvested in a series of “donations”. Not quite as good as “The Remains of the Day”, this book does present a chilling image of the atrocities we are capable of inflicting upon others for the sake of our comfort and security. And how that system or practices of injustice are so engrained (and not questioned) in society that it’s very hard to imagine anything otherwise. (Sweatshops and the garment industry comes to mind).

**** Bonfire of the Vanities (Tom Wolfe) ~ Sherman McCoy, a hot-shot bond tradesman, living the upper-echelon life of New York City, gets entangled in a messy hit-and-run accident. Wolfe writes cynically about New York society in the eighties, from the rich Upper East Siders (“hemorrhaging” away money) to the Bronx County attorney to the Harlem preacher. This book reveals an excellent snapshot of all the different politics at play in that era. Wolfe has quite the gift of vividly depicting memorable (and despicable) characters. The book also happens to be a pageturner and incredibly funny.

*** Galapagos (Kurt Vonnegut) ~ Oftentimes, we forget that we ourselves have a “culture”, in that the practices we engage in, the underlying assumptions in our value systems, are not universal but rather can appear very strange to someone from a different culture. Vonnegut takes this idea about a million years into the future and writes a novel commenting on human evolution over one million years going forward. In effect, he comically reflects on the strangeness of the complicated way we live our lives today. This book is very funny and enjoyable, and though it offers no groundbreaking insight, it certainly forces you to question and rethink the benefits of being a homo sapien.

*** Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (J.K. Rowling) ~ ***SPOILERS*** Though if by now, you’ve either read the book, or have not read the book but do not care enough if the ending is spoiled for you. In any case, I guess I found the book a little too predictable. Everything that you would expect to happen happened so it lacked the surprising plot twists that made the other volumes of Harry Potter so delightful. And the epilogue was cheesy. I also felt I should have read back a few volumes so I could remember all the characters and past events and objects. That being said, the book was still fun and I always enjoy finding out about new magical objects such as the Deathly Hallows.

Non-fiction

*** Fit to be Tied (Bill & Lynne Hybels) ~ Despite a cheesy cover and a cheesy title, this book on marriages contains some really important and valuable insight. Bill and Lynne, the writers of the book, have had a twenty year marriage that started off with 10 very rocky years. They pass along the lessons they have learned throughout marriage – from understanding personality differences, to communication, to conflict resolution, to forgiveness—there’s a huge focus on the importance of having a spirit of reconciliation. Their advice for deciding who to marry is a little lacking-- it focuses primarily on waiting and waiting and making sure, and fails to delve into the more intangible and difficult to explain matters of calling.

*** Anime from Akira to Howl’s Moving Castle: Experiencing Contemporary Japanese Animation (Susan Napier) ~ This book offers critical analysis of various mainstream anime films and books, such as Spirited Away, Ramna ½, Akira, Ghost in the Shell. It focuses mainly on the mode of different animes (carnival, elegiac, and apocalyptic) and analyzes them in light of identity theory and contemporary Japanese society. It’s enjoyable to skim through and to reflect upon, but like much criticism out there, this book is full of “interesting insight”, but leaves the big questions unanswered. There is no response to the question “so what’s the point of all this?” beyond cocktail and coffee shop conversation.

** Blue like Jazz (Donald Miller) ~ I have to admit, this book didn’t quite live up to the hype, but it may also be do to the fact that I read this several years after it came out. What was very novel and refreshing to read in Christian literature a few years ago is fairly common now, or atleast in the circles I run in, so many of Donald Miller’s ideas now seem cliché. In general though, I feel like Miller was trying too hard to be “cool” and “clever” and “postmodern”. All that being said, he does have a very approachable and easy-going style, and offers a refreshing perspective on Christianity for those who are accustomed to thinking of it as conservative Republicans opposed to dancing and drinking. Miller has an excellent way of illustrating his ideas through anecdotes and offers little well-written nuggets of insight, that though heavy-handed, are usually concise, memorable and true.

**** A History of US: All the People (Joy Hakim) ~ This is one of the last books in a series called “A History of US”, books on American history written for children middle school age or younger. I’m not usually a history fan since I usually can never remember anything and it all ends up being facts and figures. However, this book related the past in terms of how it leads us to where we are today, offering a historical and narrative context to our situation today. In some ways, I felt like I was reading about America today, rather than the past. Hakim also does a great job of appealing to young readers (and old ones like me!) by making different events and historical figures seem really interesting and inviting the reader into imagining themselves into those times. It also poses a lot of critical questions towards our current day assumptions. And it has pictures! My only criticism would be that it tends to jump around episodically quite a bit and does not connect the events together as well.

what little money can buy

I was asking a friend who works at a recent start-up nonprofit in Philadelphia how her organization is funded. I was surprised to discover that… it basically had no funding. Basically, the nonprofit is operating off one small grant that goes towards my friend's salary. However, at this point, she only has about a month and a half of salary left to go, and is facing the prospect of a potential leave of absence. The building where they operate is owned by a board member who does not charge rent. The nonprofit has less than $400 in their bank account and is currently applying for grants and appealing for contributions, though none have been confirmed so far.

Yet, the lack of resources has opened doors for more community involvement. The nonprofit has been blessed with volunteers who are excited to be there and offer their time and commitment. Others have given generously, including donating beautiful plants for a backyard garden. It seems that people in the neighborhood have begun to invest in and take ownership in what the non-profit is doing in the area.

While many nonprofits may have stronger financial footing, they fail to connect with their neighbourhood. With greater resources, they often get perceived as some outsider trying to "save the poor black kids in lower-income neighbourhood". So despite financial difficulties, my friend's organization seems to be doing well in connecting with the neighborhood, by allowing the neighbourhood to help it, instead of always the other way around.

Sometimes, it's better to enter in humility with little to offer, because it allows the community to give (That was Jesus's model). Sometimes, it's better to enter with little money, because there's a lot that it cannot do. In fact, money often brings out the worst in people, while not having it frequently brings out the best. *

*That being said, unless an organization is willing to depend on God's provision daily (which some do do), a financially precarious situation is not desirable for long-term sustainability. So I hope that my friend's nonprofit is able to secure more reliable funding in the future. But while it isn't there, I hope that not having money will be just as valuable as having it.

**The main ideas in this post is built on John McKnight's book "The Careless Society", which I highly recommend.

what dreams are made of

Do you remember the crazy things you dreamed you would become when you were little? The dreams that you leave behind you as you come to grasp the limitations of your circumstances and your abilities. The dreams that get discarded as you realize how foolish and delusional it is to continue trying to reach those castles in the sky.

When I was young, I wanted to be an Olympic figure skater. Then, when I realized that if I couldn't do any double jumps at the age of 12 and my mother was unwilling to spend thousands of dollars a years for training, it just wasn't going to happen. Then I went through all the other usual aspirations: I entertained myself as a famous movie star, a song-writer, a movie director. And now I find myself embarrassed to admit that I wanted to be all these silly things.

And now as I enter adulthood, and find myself flirting with the prospect of settling with a pleasant life—a husband, potentially 2.5 kids, a good job. I feel myself slowly letting go of aspirations to become a writer, a professor, a cultural critic...

And as I let go of these little bundles of dreams, or atleast, hold them a little less tightly, I wonder… to what degree have I come to an acceptance of my limitations? To what degree have I begun to realize the superficiality and banality of the things I aspire to be and the selfishness that motivates me in achieving them? To what degree, has letting go of these dreams allowed me to appreciate and understand the true joys of life in marriage, friendship and children? And to what degree have I given up on striving for something truly meaningful (something that God has intended for me to do) and resigned myself for something safe and comfortable?

everyone else is doing it

I’ve been reading a children’s book on American history and was struck by how recent the civil rights movement in the United States was. For some reason, the days of MLK and Rosa Parks seem far and distant to me, but they happened only a generation away.

When segregation ended in school, black students were taunted, mocked, and physically abused as they entered into formerly white schools. During the bus boycotts in Montgomery, houses were burned, churches were bombed and blacks were arrested en masse and put into jail. It wasn’t just a few stray individuals, but large portions of the society, many of whom were culturally Christian, that inflicted such violence. Attitudes and action that are so clearly “wrong” for us were completely acceptable then. They were the pattern of their world.

“Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.”

I think that verse of scripture is often used nowadays to refer to excessive drinking and drugs and promiscuous sex. But I think “the pattern of the world” runs much deeper than a set of external behaviors. What accepted actions of our society today will be judged harshly in the future? What assumptions and attitudes do we hold today that will be deemed completely wrong tomorrow?

If we as Christians are to be salt and light to the earth, we are to live with critical minds, minds that test and question what we see and hear, from both society at large and the church. We must refuse to say that anything is acceptable simply because everyone else is doing it. If we are to bring God’s kingdom of justice and love down onto earth, then we must be wary of this world.

what money can't buy

Raising kids well is hard work. In fact, it’s probably one of the hardest things that we can ever do. We want them to become attractive, well-adjusted, intelligent and successful adults.

In recent years, parents have flocked to buy various electronic toys for their children in hopes of boosting their intelligence and ultimately improving their chances of success. However, evidence begins to suggest that all these gadgets and toys are more likely to be damaging to a child’s development.

“But two recent studies suggest that the oft-touted educational benefits of such toys are illusory, and child development experts caution that kiddie electronics, even those bought purely for entertainment, can have negative side effects such as inhibiting creativity and promoting short attention spans… Electronic toys remove social interaction and in many respects may inhibit creativity. The toy provides the fantasy and removes the opportunity for a child to mentally produce something hypothetical or imagined.”*

In the end of the day, what kids need, is not the newest and latest educational toy featuring Curious George and Thomas the Tank Engine. They need a childhood where they can be free, with grass, bugs and dirt, maybe a few simple toys, and the wonders of their imagination. Less is more. Because when we’re not consumed by objects and waiting to be entertained, we’re given the opportunity to make our own fun.**

* From "Sucker-Me-Elmo" by Christine Rosen on The New Atlantis

**On a side note, I was browsing a book called Buy, Buy Baby: How Consumer Culture Manipulates Parents and Harms Young Minds, which mentions a whole “princess cult” surrounding Disney movies (Ariel, Jasmine, Belle etc…), where little girls aspire and want to be princesses. Cinderella is by far the most popular. Ironically, little girls forget all about Cinderella’s qualities that made her worthy to be a princess (her humility and her hard work), and instead end up cranky and spoiled, whining after the latest Disney merchandise, a character disposition more akin to the stepsisters.

***My family was fairly poor when I was little. I was more than happy with my library books, my backyard, my old and used toys. It was only when I saw more commercials and kids with toys cooler than mine that discontent began to stir.

the simple way: petition for green space

dear all,

some of you may have heard on the news that a large fire burned down an abandoned factory and a surrounding 8 or 9 houses in the kensington area in philadelphia.

my friend (and perhaps your friend too) has been involved with the simple way, a grassroots christian nonprofit in the area. (some of you may know the founder of the organization shane claiborne, author of "the irresistible revolution"). the "staff" of this nonprofit work part-time jobs elsewhere and spend rest of their time devoted to the neighborhood, doing stuff like after school programs and community gardens. (one of their two houses was actually burned down in the fire).

the simple way, along with the neighborhood is currently petitioning the government to turn the area where the factory once stood into a park for the neighbourhood. there is no green space in the area for kids to play in.

please consider signing it!

their petition as well as additional information and links to philadelphia inquirer news articles are available at their website.

regards,
your friendly neighborhood blogger

i like this website

Houtlust is a blog that regular posts nonprofit advertising and social campaigning ads that are particularly outstanding.

A recent favourite: Basics for a New Home, a spoof series on Louis (or is it Luis?) Vuitton handbag ads.

p.s.

oh by the way, I also got engaged.
several months ago in fact.

a liberal helping of change

Thus, the people who are the public voice of American liberalism rarely have any real connection to the ordinary working people whose interests they putatively champion. They tend instead to be well-off, college-educated yuppies from California or the East Coast, and hard as they try to worry about food stamps or veterans’ rights or securing federal assistance for heating oil bills, they invariably gravitate instead to things that actually matter to them – like the slick Al Gore documentary on global warming.

...

“Unfortunately, today, when you talk about the ‘American left,’” he says, “as often as not you’re talking about wealthy folks who are concerned about the environment (which is enormously important) who are concerned about women’s rights (which are enormously important) and who are concerned about gay rights (which are enormously important).

“But you’re not really referring to millions of workers who have lost their jobs because of disastrous trade agreements,” he says. “You’re not talking about waitresses who are working for four bucks an hour.” As often as not, he says, you’re talking about “sophisticated people who have money.”

...

A hell of a lot of what the left does these days is tediously lecture middle America about how wrong it is, loudly snorting at a stubbornly unchanging litany of Republican villains. There’s a weirdly indulgent tone to all of this Bush-bashing that goes on in lefty media, a tone that’s not only annoyingly predictable in its pervasiveness, but a turnoff to people who might have tuned in to that channel in search of something else.

...

Rich liberals protesting the establishment is absurd because they are the establishment; they’re just too embarrassed to admit it. When they start embracing their position of privilege and taking responsibility for the power they already have – striving to be the leaders of society they actually are, instead of playing at being aggrieved subjects – they’ll come across as wise and patriotic citizens, not like the terminally adolescent buffoons trapped in a corny sixties daydream they often seem to be now.

~ excerpts from the article The American Left's Silly Victim Complex by Matt Taibbi on Adbusters

~

This articles touches upon alot of what annoys me about "liberals" in contemporary American culture. It's quite cool and trendy to be liberal, and sometimes I'm tempted to call myself one. But I try to remind myself, that at the end of the day, regardless what I call myself, I am in a position of amazing privilege in this world. I am part of the establishment. I am part of the problem as much as I can potentially be part of the solution.

~

When we were done, I started wondering if we had accomplished anything. I started wondering whether we could actually change the world. I mean, of course we could -- we could change our buying habits, elect socially conscious representatives and that sort of thing, but I honestly don't believe we will be solving the greater human conflict with our efforts. The problem is not a certain type of legislation or even a certain politician; the problem is the same that it has always been.

I am the problem.

I think every conscious person, every person who is awake to the functioning principles within his reality, has a moment where he stops blaming the problems in the world on group think, on humanity and authority, and starts to face himself. The problem is not out there; the problem is the needy beast of a thing that lives in my chest.

The thing I realized on the day we protested, was that it did me no good to protest America's responsibility in global poverty when I wasn't even giving money to my church, which has a terrific homeless ministry.

I tried to get my head around this idea, this idea that the problem of the universe lives within me. I can't think of anything more progressive than the embrace of this fundamental idea.

~ Donald Miller on leaving a protest against a World Bank meeting in Blue like Jazz

A man on a park bench in Rittenhouse Square spoke to me in a soft gentle voice today. He mentioned something about wanting to buy something at WaWa. I wasn't listening very closely. I don't like giving money. I don't like changing my plans for others. So I walked away, without hearing the rest of what he had to say. Heart hardened. No, not even hardened, just dead.

making money matter more

(RED)

Because of some reading I was doing today on the (RED) campaign, I stumbled across Gap Inc.'s social responsibility page, which is full of fancy smooth language about their efforts in improving factory conditions. I'm wondering what to make of it, since most of the language is so vague I'm suspecting it's full of crap. (Check out what's written about the Gap at Responsible Shopper: http://www.coopamerica.org/programs/rs/profile.cfm?id=229)

There's a website/non-profit called Buy Less Crap that criticizes the (RED) campaign, which if I'm not mistaken, designates certain consumer items with RED, indicating that proceeds from the purchase of that item will be donated towards combating AIDS in Africa and other causes. Various news sources have highlighted the fact that more money was spent on these advertising campaigns than actually donated. However, other bloggers have indicated that there are residual effects from this campaign that are positive-- raising awareness of AIDS in Africa and increasing the connection between sales and corporate social responsibility.

So who knows whether Gap Inc. is honestly pursuing social responsibility or whether it's a slick cover-up of a really despairing truth or whether it's just another corporate strategy to sell more stuff? I don't think Dov Charney of American Apparel actually cares very much about social responsibility. I think he just found a good way to distinguish his line of clothing and make money. And philanthropy is an industry that sells moral feel-good and social status, but in the end, it funnels money to a variety of good causes. Perhaps in this broken world, we can't avoid broken ways altogether.*

If being socially responsible really means greater profits, then corporations will pursue that route and perhaps there will be some benefits to our society. So to some degree, I appreciate the fact that Gap Inc. is atleast trying to be vaguely "socially responsible" (let's be honest though-- minimum wage in Thailand isn't much), even if it may be more publicity than truth. It's a step in the right direction. *

But for us as consumers, we have to be careful that we don't just believe what the marketers say. We have to investigate deeper than some company's social responsibility website. And for us as individuals with agency, to remember Buy (Less) Crap's open invitation "Join us in rejecting the ti(RED) notion that shopping is a reasonable response to human suffering". Believe it or not, it's more effective to give money to a good cause directly than it is to give it indirectly via (RED).

*Though how do we go forward acknowledging the good that broken ways achieve, while still striving for better ways to do more good?


** All that being said, even if Gap Inc. were producing their clothing ethically, I don't particularly feel the urge to rush back into those store doors and start shopping. It's relieving to have an easy reason to say no to a store. My sweatshop-free year (it's almost been a year) may not have freed many indentured servants laboring in garment factories, but it's certainly helped free me a bit from the constant desire of wanting more, and is teaching me how to be content with what I have.
*** In the meantime, I've recently found a few garments in Zara produced in Cambodia, so their entire "stream-lined in Spain" doesn't seem to hold true. I'm disappointed.

touchy subject

Being a financial analyst by occupation and a writer/reader at heart, I usually work with the substances that cannot be touched. Abstract numbers, thoughts and ideas, shuttling back and forth from computer screen to paper to words. It is work that I have to continuously interpret to others, with more words, in order to explain its value. Sometimes, it's just so refreshing to just be able to hold something in my hands and not feel obliged to say anything at all.

Tom Wolfe, in his novel The Bonfire of the Vanities, illustrates the simplicity and the intrinsic value of working with the tangible. Sherman McCoy is a hotshot bond salesman at one of the top investment banks in New York, but struggles to tell his daughter Campbell exactly what he does*:

"Daddy... what do you do?"
What did he do?
"Do? What do you mean, sweetheart?"
"Well, MacKenzie's daddy makes books, and he has eighty people working for him."
"Oh ho! Eighty people!" said Sherman's father, in the voice he used for small children. "My, my, my!"
Sherman could imagine what the Lion (his father) thought of Garland Reed. Garland had inherited his father's printing business and for ten years had done nothing with it but keep it alive. The "books" he "made" were printing jobs given him by the actual publishers and the products were as likely to be manuals, club rosters, corporate contracts, and annual reports as anything remotely literary. As for the eighty people-- eighty ink-stained wretches was more like it, typesetters, pressmen, and so forth. At the height of his career the Lion had had two hundred Wall Street lawyers under his whip, most of them Ivy League.
"But what do you do?" asked Campbell, now growing impatient. She wanted to get back to MacKenzie to give her report, and something impressive was clearly called for.
"Well, I deal in bonds, sweetheart. I buy them, I sell them, I --"
"What are bonds? What is deal?"
Now his mother began laughing. "You've got to do better than that, Sherman!"
"Well, honey, bonds are -- a bond is -- well, let me see, what's the best way to explain it to you."
"Explain it to me, too, Sherman," said his father. "I must have done 5000 leveraged purchase contracts, and I always fell asleep before I could figure out why anyone wanted the bonds."
"Your grandfather's only joking, honey." He shot his father a sharp look. "A bond is a way of loaning people money. Let's say you want to build a road, and it's not a little road but a big highway, like the highway we took up to Maine last summer. Or you want to build a big hospital. Well, that requires a lot of money, more money than you could ever get by just going to a bank. So what you do is, you issue what are called bonds."
"You build roads and hospitals, Daddy? That's what you do?"
Now both his father and mother started laughing. He gave them openly reproachful looks, which only made them merrier. His wife was smiling with what appeared to be a sympathetic twinkle.
"No, I don't actually build them, sweetheart. I handle the bonds, and the bonds are what make it possible-- "
"You help build them?"
"Well, in a way."
"Which ones?"
"Which ones?"
"You said roads and hospitals."
"Well, not any one specifically."
"The road to Maine?"

Later on, Sherman speaks to his wife who is an interior decorator for rich people.
"Well... atleast you're able to point to something you've done, something tangible, something clear-cut-- Even if it's for people who are shallow and vain, it's something real, something describable, something contributing to simple human satisfaction, no matter how meretricious and temporary, something you can at least explain to your children. I mean, at my company, what on earth do you tell each other you do every day?"

*This a cut excerpt from the novel. A lot of the detail has been eliminated. This is an excellent book by the way- page turner yet also an incredibly incisive social critique of New York in the eighties.
** Another notable quotable from the book: "She was thinking about the way men are in New York. Every time you go out with one, you have to sit there and listen to two or three hours of My Career first."
*** Perhaps these pictures are evidence of my only real achievements during my own New York sojourn.

lost in television

Yesterday, Matt and I finally finished watching three seasons of Lost. We started watching early March, and have been watching through some sixty or so episodes in the last three months.

Though part of me longs to watch more and find out more about the show, the rest of me is relieved that this too is over. I have felt chained to the television for the last three months. It was fun and entertaining at first, an enjoyable activity that Matt and I could share with each other. But soon it became an all too easy and comfortable answer to the question "What should we do together?" And though we would spend hours together, we would feel like we had not spent any quality time together at all, since we had spent those hours staring passively at a television screen.

It was easy to get used to being entertained and letting the hours pass, instead of finding creative ways to spend meaningful time together. It was easy to slip into a mode where television controlled us and not the other way around.

Recently, Ray Bradbury clarified that his novel, Fahrenheit 451, which describes an authoritarian society where books are burned, is not about government censorship, but about the dulling effects of television. The government does not use televisions as a medium of control, but rather the people choose it as an easy opiate. The fireman in the novel says "We give them what they want".

Books require too much work, too much active engagement. Television is an easy answer to all the difficult questions we may have, because it allows us to forget about them and escape into the world of special effects and good-looking actors. And so the books burn.*

I am looking forward to life without a television and without Lost. No longer can I cope with my boredom or loneliness with a flip of a remote control, letting the colours and sounds wash over me. No longer can I forget about my fears and problems by distracting myself with some mediocore tv program. Instead, I might actually be able to find some real solutions.




* More on his website and in an article in the LA Times:.
** And by the way, I actually like Lost alot. I think it's a great show. I just didn't like how it semi-dominated all my free time for three whole months. :P

money matters

Donors frequently exercise great concern when giving money away to nonprofits. They want to ensure that their dollars will be used well, and not whittled away in seemingly useless administrative activities, fundraising efforts and excessively high executive salaries. Perhaps for the peace of mind, donors often restrict their dollars for specific programs or projects (e.g. chairs for a classroom, the theatre program for lower-income children)*.

We seemed to be very concerned about where our nonprofit dollars go, not just because the lack of receiving something explicit in exchange leads us to cling psychologically to our donation, but also because to some degree, what we give our money to, defines us, shows us what we care for.

Yet we do not seem to even bother to think where the money we pay for other goods and services ends up. Somehow, when we purchase that good or service, we dissociate from having an interest in where that dollar goes. Do we care if it goes towards the mortgage on the $10 MM property purchased by some CEO enjoying the benefits of workers paid less than a dollar a day? Do we care if the company uses it to pay the penalties as a result of a civil action lawsuit, because of unethical marketing practices? Probably not. The money has left our hands. It’s no longer ours. We are no longer responsible. Money, the facilitator, the medium of exchange, accomplishes its goal. It has reduced us to individual consumers, who go home happy with our new shirts and gadgets, and the wonderful high of owning something new. Without even thinking, we relinquish our ability to be agents of change and to be people who care.

Remember, the way you spend your money will show what you care about, or, what you don’t care about it. Where your money is, so is your heart.

* People seem to do this to ensure that organizations use their money efficiently. Actually, restricting the money that you donate more often than not, reduces efficiency. But more on that in another day….

here's to philadelphia

One week before formally moving back to Philadelphia, I was riding a car through the "rough" streets of Philadelphia. Suddenly, the sense of place flooded back to me. I remembered spending my summer here. Walking past old men and women sitting on their porches in the scorching sunlight. Walking past the kids laughing with delight at the cold, refreshing water from the open fire hydrant. Walking past a group of young overweight mothers playing a game of cards. And sensing beneath that deceiving appearance of idyllic calm (What gave it away? Was it the broken glass on the streets? The metal bars on the windows?), the hopelessness that lives in those streets.

Every city is has a different dark spirit hovering over it. New York is dominated by greed, Washington DC oppressed by power, and Philadelphia sinks slowly under despair. "Soul-stirring desolation" writes Jonathan Franzen.

Yet as I ride the train and watch the changing and growing skyline of Philadelphia, I can’t help but smile. I walk past the Schuylkill river, meander through Penn campus, eat lunch with a building maintenance man in Rittenhouse square and walk to 30th street station in a cool summer evening. Coming back to Philadelphia feels like slipping back into a comfortable winter coat, one that will hopefully warm me from the biting cold.

Here's to a city for which I can care, rejoice and mourn.
Here's to a city for which I can hope.

(A feeling of place. A feeling of home. It's good to be living back in Philadelphia.)

end of a season

Yesterday was my last day as a financial services strategy consultant.*

No more lucrative year end bonuses. No more free museum passes and theatre discounts. No more fancy four course dinners. No more platinum status at 5 star hotels with marble countertops. No more $3000 monthly rent apartments in the ritziest part of town. No more racking up crazy amounts of airline miles. No more dimmed window, white glove driver, black car services. No more living on company expenses. No more guaranteed top business school admission.

I have decided to leave the fast-track to success and financial stability.
I feel free.*

Two years and I could have paid off all my debt. Three years and I could have saved up enough money to go to graduate school. Four years and maybe I could even be fairly well off and probably able to get a good lucrative job in management at any financial services firm.

It would have been good. But what good would that have done me?

So I am cutting myself off from that which does not give me life, before I am wined and dined to death.

* I reiterate: often times the best choices in life are the ones you are most afraid are taking. I have the privilege of choice. (I was not born into poverty nor slavery. I was born into a loving and well-educated family). That choice is not be whittled away on choosing security over joy.

when words lose their meaning (3.5)

work/life balance

a snazzy catch phrase used by corporations to indicate that their employees are expected to work a lot. if the standard hours were 9 to 5, there would be no need to mention "work/life balance"

work - a word often confused with 'career'. work means exerting effort to accomplish something. but what? people talk about wanting to "accomplish something in their lives", to look back at their careers and note their milestones and achievements. but what do we accomplish in work? aside from using it as a means to an ends (a comfortable lifestyle, lining our nests and earning us prestige). aside from a game where money and goods get shifted around from one white glove to another. aside from perpetuating a system that sustains our status in the current hierarchy of privilege. (we're organization kids. we don't question authority).

life - in new york, life means some mindless form of consumption. an endless proliferation of restaurants, clubs, shows and events (accompanied by the frequent complaint of things not being good enough). it also means taking cabs to where you need to go. nice apartment. life means the frequent gathering of a diverse group of people, meaning an ethnically diverse group of upper middle class young professionals. life means taking a dance class, or picking up a hobby, such as a cooking (oddly enough, wasn't it once a neccessity?). maybe life means getting married and having kids and moving to the suburbs. what does it mean to live well?

a slash divides work from life - as though life begins when work ends. as though work can never be considered integrally as part of our lives. as though work is something we discard and leave behind us as soon as we leave the office. as though we're free not to question what we do at work, and the rest of our values, because work is something separate, divided, forever locked in a compartment away from life. (and yet we still seek fulfillment in work? instead of life? is achievement confined only to the sphere of career?)

balance - this firm has good work/life balance - you wake up at 5am to catch a 6:30am flight. you groggily walk into client site at 8:30am and continue working, eating lunch at your desk, until 8:30pm where you then catch a cab to some ritzy hotel where you then may order overpriced room service and eat like a queen while you watch images flash on a flatscreen tv. thus your week continues with a similar pattern, perhaps interspersed with dinner at a fancy restaurant then thursday rolls around and you fly out on a 5:30pm or 6:30pm flight on Thursday to arrive home at 8pm or 9pm. if you're lucky, it's earlier than when you'd arrive at the hotel normally. then on fridays you work in the office so you get to see all your colleagues who have been packed off to the four corners of the world, and by the end of the day if your work is done, you head over to happy hour. and yes, because you went to happy hour, you are happy. though you work like a donkey during the week, the alcohol makes you forget all about it. good work/life balance. is it not all relative? what does work/life balance mean?

*Note: This entry is not meant to be a bitter, personal lash-out against my experience at my firm. Compared to what is expected at the firm and what hours are like at other investment banks or consulting firms, my hours have been very good, and my job managers and colleagues have treated me well. The last part of this entry comes as an expression of disillusionment with the general industry expectation that a 55 hour work week + travel is normal and acceptable and allows for plenty of time to engage in other "life" activities (and that in some cases, it's okay to make your employees work 100 hour weeks). It is the general "spirit" of the industry, not the individuals (though individuals inevitably subscribe to and participate in this spirit) that I have found difficult. That and my persistent idealist confused questioning of "what does this all amount to?"

**Some say that by creating new products to meet customer needs, or by freeing up money in capital marketes, we're allowing for increased standard of living. But are we assuming that people are simple-minded consumers, that will be happier and more fulfilled the more they buy? Others say that increased business and competition will mean better prices and products for consumers. Do we just say these things to make ourselves feel better? I don't know. If you have real answers, please find me.

when words do not have enough meaning

perhaps we have a moment of silence in memory of victims because words are not enough.

yet whenever something like this happens, we seem to crave more words, more images, more video feeds, more opinions, more interviews, more information-- until our sudden consciousness of the brevity of life can be stored away as last week's news.


* for the Virginia Tech shootings that took place today
** i am shocked. i am sad. i feel helpless. i wish i had something more than words, because i know they bring no comfort to those who lost loved ones today.

when words lose their meaning (4)

I'm sick of postmodernism*

I don't want to sit around having discourse on hegemony, disapora, mimesis, hybridity, fragmentation, semiotics, dialectics and identity construction. I don't want to keep asking questions that do not have answers. I don't want to keep asking questions for the sake of asking questions.

I don't just want to talk about justice, love, truth, wholeness and life. (I don't just want to talk about justice as an equality of potential contingent upon cultural and historical positioning, or love as a consummation of libidinal impulses, or truth as a negotiation and production of reality through texts, or the definition of a lifestyle of wholeness as a totalizing normalization of certain codes of behaviour that creates the category of the deviant, or life as the perpetuation of social practices, simultaneously constituted by and acting upon the biological form as a medium of transmission.)

I want Justice, Love, Truth, Wholeness and Life.

I'm sick of postmodernism.
Disguising itself as the champion of the oppressed, the vindicator of critical thought and the herald of intellectual honesty, it quickly disintegrates into complacent consumerism and words that don't mean anything anymore.

It is a poor substitute for Justice, Love, and other things that I desire.**



*Thoughts and brief academic catchphrases inspired by The Rise and Fall of Literature.
**That is, when I'm not too busy desiring other things such as a nice haircut, a comfortable apartment with hardwood floors, a new pair of shoes, and a plasma screen TV.

(When everything is said and done, nothing is really said, and nothing has been done that has not been undone).

real choices: stop before you shop

20 hour workdays. regular beatings. child labour. indentured servitude. rape.

Details
The children are forced to work 12-14 hours a day, with some shifts going 20-hours. In all of September, these child laborers got just one day off. For the grueling long shifts, they are allowed only about four hours of sleep on the factory floor before being awakened and put back on the machines, sometimes collapsing from exhaustion. Their wages are as low as six cents an hour. They are routinely slapped or beaten if they don't meet their production goals, make mistakes, or even take too long in the bathroom. - "At the Western garment factory, which made fleece jackets for Walmart, there were 14 or 15-year-old kids working 18 or 20 hour shifts," he said. "They worked from 8:00 in the morning until midnight or until 4:00 a.m. And they did this seven days a week. They did not get paid for first four months of 2006, they did not receive one cent in wages. They were working as slave labor. When they passed out they were struck by rulers to wake them up. There were four girls who were raped by management." - "You're supposed to say that this factory is closed on Fridays and that no one works here at night. If anyone tells the buyer otherwise, then the company will fire them.” - He admits factory workers sometimes do have to put in extra long hours, for instance when deadlines are looming and fabric deliveries are late. They have little choice, he says, meet the deadline or American companies could take their business elsewhere. - "We used to start at 8 in the morning, and we'd work until midnight, 1 or 2 a.m., seven days a week. When we were in Bangladesh they promised us we would receive $120 a month, but in the five months I was there I only got one month's salary and that was just $50." - Hazrat Ali, 25, who worked from September 2004 to March 2005 at the Al Shahaed factory, said he sometimes worked 48 hours in a row and received no pay for the six months. - "If we asked for money, they hit us," he said.

Culprits
Sears. Walmart. Kohl's. Fila. Victoria's Secret. Express. Ralph Lauren. DKNY. Calvin Klein. Banana Republic. The list goes on.

Hope?
This is the garment industry and how most of your clothing is made. I'm not one for sensational accounts, but the injustices involved in making our clothing has angered me a great deal.

When we buy without questioning from stores that outsource to sweatshops, we are participating in these injustices. The ignorance and complacency of the elite (because by the fact that we have computers and are literate, are the elite), is causing the suffering of the masses.

Plenty argue that sweatshops are a necessary step towards development in third world countries. Or that without these factories, these workers would be worst off. But how much worse can you get than this? These workers' lives could be substantially different with a hardly perceptible impact on cost. I am seriously angry! It's times like these when I can begin to understand why God's anger burns against the violence on the earth. There is no excuse for these abominations. Workers can be paid more without actually cutting into profits. There are better ways to "globalize". American retailers (especially the large ones) need to put more pressure and oversight to ensure good working conditions in sweatshops. And as the end customers to these products, we're in a unique position of power to pressure retailers to action.

A few thoughts:
"If the American retailers paid only 25 cents more per garment, the total in Bangladesh would be $898 million- more than eight times current US aid."
Or as Dov Charney, head of American Apparel, a garment company that pays its workers double minimum wage + benefits, once mentioned: "My labour cost in LA is about 60 cents a T-shirt. In a prison in China it's zero cents. But when you're selling T-shirts for £18, what is 60 cents? It's nothing."

On the bright side, there has been some news of progress, though abuses continue. If anything, this shouldn't excuse us from forgetting about it, but should rather give us more hope that there are huge improvements in this generation that can be made, and that our actions are all the more important. It may not happen overnight, and it may require a long, patient effort, but changes can be made.

Action (please consider it!)
Any or all of these will be of help (You may not do any of it perfectly but it's better to have 10,000 people who are imperfectly committed and vocal than none at all):
1. Don't shop at places that use sweatshop labour. There are a list of reputable retailers at the bottom of this entry that I will eventually add to my sidebar. (On a personal note, Mariya and I have been commiting and trying our best to not buy sweatshop made clothing. If you'd like to join us, in encouraging one another and giving each other ideas about cool places to shop, please post a comment or email me :) ).
2. Spread the word. Raise awareness. Post this on your blog. Write more blog entries.
3. Write letters. Call customer service lines...especially to the larger retailers that have more bargaining power. Get involved with activism groups.
4. Buy Fair Trade or union made clothing. That way you can actually support third world development.
5. If you're a college student or lacking in funds, and can't always afford the slightly higher prices that these stores offer, try Goodwill or the Salvation Army. Great prices, always good finds. And even better: they employ people who were formerly in prison, or are disabled, giving them an opportunity to work and earn money.

Places to shop
American Apparel
Zara (Here's a cnn article on their business model)
Moo Shoes (Vegan and sweatshop free!)
Goodwill
Salvation Army

More articles on the topic
Dateline NBC: Human cost behind bargain shopping
JORDAN: An Ugly Side of Free Trade - Sweatshops
Children Found Sewing Clothing For Wal-Mart, Hanes & Other U.S. & European Companies
A quick overview of different companies and their ethical practices
More articles found here at the National Labor Committee:
http://www.nlcnet.org/news_room.php


*Note: This is not to say that I'm some super ethical shopper. I have my ignorant and complacent moments too. I walk into the store and see something that looks pretty and feels good and I forget about the lives, or the loss of lives that went into the making of that garment. Or, I find myself desperately in need of underwear, and feel like I can't bite the budget to pay more. My attempt to not buy anything made in sweatshops has been recent (the past year), and it's been and still is a process. Though one thing that I have found encouraging, is the longer I do it, the easier it seems to become, and I am looking to get involved with more letter writing/activism.
**Something else to consider, though please don't use it as an excuse for buying from places that use sweatshop labour. (If enough of us do it, then they will have to change. The question is -- will enough of us care enough to change our habits?): "One misconception is that the sweatshop problem can be avoided by not buying from a few major brands. As Hearson notes: 'It's not about the big bad guys any more. Now it's more about moving the entire industry. The difficulties are structural.' Instead of trying to achieve a level of purity in their personal purchases, he argues that consumers need to pressure companies they patronize and large buyers like universities to make more concerted efforts to raise standards--for example by participating in initiatives such as the Ethical Trading Initiative in the UK and the Workers' Rights Consortium in the US. As one important aspect of this, corporations must make a commitment to help employees improve substandard factories, rather than 'cutting and running' when abuses are reported. 'We have to recognize that a company that is doing well on the issue is not necessarily sweatshop-free,' Hearson says. 'It is one that is acknowledging the problem and engaging with worker groups and other stakeholders. If we want improvements across the industry, it's not going to happen overnight.'" from http://www.democracyuprising.com/articles/2006/fair_trade_sweatshops.php

when words lose their meaning (3)*

It's funny how sometimes investment bankers or consultants talk about being afraid of "getting used to their lifestyle" and not being able to change jobs later.

What kind of life is there when you work 80 hours a week?**

*to be continued
**And what does all this work amount to? Some company's stock price may go up by 3/4 of a cent. A lot of rich men might be happy.