Finally, after almost fifty years of existence on this good earth, I’ve finally taken a trip outside of the borders of my native land. I’m in Singapore right now with Arlene and Mico, spending the next three days (until Wednesday) in the Lion City … and I must say that this is an experience that I never thought I’d have.

We arrived here yesterday (27 December) on the morning flight and are now booked at Parkroyal Hotel on Beach Road.  Arlene had stayed here before (lucky girl, all her foreign trips to attend trade meetings) which she says has been refurbished and upgraded … it’s a great place, in fact: reasonable rates (Arlene and I considered booking at the Hilton and opted out – too much to be spent on accommodation, not enough on shopping as she says), centrally located (it’s just walking distance to Suntec City where we had lunch yesterday) and an easy cab ride to Orchard Road where we spent the rest of the afternoon and evening, just walking, window-shopping and ogling the sights.

Orchard Road is ablaze with lights … something that I used to see in Manila, although not so much in recent years.  Still, there are vast differences between the two.

It’s incredibly clean in Singapore, for one … no hint of garbage spilling out of containers, no apparent street sweepers in colorful uniforms doing their jobs.  I guess it’s a matter of discipline and sufficient garbage cans :)  The discipline I can understand … who of my generation hasn’t heard of Lee Kuan Yu and his (then) draconian measures to ensure that his people were ‘disciplined’.  (I recall a newspaper columnist once complaining that he couldn’t bring in his Playboy magazine as well as his packs of chewing gum then).

The other thing which surprised me (or it shouldn’t have) is the literal size and variety of its ‘retail side’ (or should I say, its shopping districts?  Orchard Road is one damned long road – surprising thing number one is the wide, wide ‘sidewalk’ (which is more properly called a promenade than a sidewalk) and it is literally packed with malls/shops, lights and displays (electronic and otherwise).

Arlene kept asking me if Orchard Road was as long as Ayala Avenue in Makati … my thought is that it is.  Distance wise, that is; the major difference, however, is that while Ayala is mixed business and shopping (with most of the buildings being devoted to office space), Orchard Road appears to be primarily shopping focused. 

Yesterday was Arlene’s ‘day’ – fully devoted to shopping since, as she said, she wants it out of the way.  I tend to agree … better to get her shopping bug out of the way the first day, so she can spend the rest of the time doing the touristy things. 

We’re doing the Sentosa Twilight Tour this afternoon and then going to Jurong Bird Park tomorrow morning … will see if we can include a visit to the botanical gardens and the Museum …

Arlene and Mico are up and ready … time for breakfast and then, let’s see where the day leads. Sentosa this afternoon, of course.

I normally don’t care about local (Philippine) politics – or at least, care enough to write or blog about it.  As with most, however, I try to watch what’s going on but try to keep opinions to myself.  As I have learned over the years, two things never to discuss at the dinner table are religion and politics.  Both are something that can easily lead to blows … since both are, at the end of the day, personal choices – live and let live, I say.

This time, however, I felt the need to put my thoughts out there.

Specifically, President Arroyo declaring martial law in Maguindanao as was reported in the Philippine Daily Inquirer website (See Martial Law Declared in Maguindanao).

As expected, we’re experiencing a tempest in a teacup … walking around, it seems that while ordinary people are talking about it, they cannot really spend much time or emotion over it.  Probably because it is limited in scope and coverage – it’s happening out there in Maguindanao (in Mindanao).  “Malayo sa bituka” (far from the gut) for most Manilenos, except for the politicians, political commentators, journalists and others.

The reasons behind the declaration are already well known.  Since the declaration this morning, I assume that every Filipino (including his brother and sister) will have already written about it … unless, of course, their reaction is the same as mine, “malayo sa bituka.”

So far, the reactions are par for the course.  The administration, of course, is supportive and is trotting out their reasons behind it.  The lapdogs in Congress and other sectors are all supportive, of course; the political opposition and the lawyers (except for those in government) are against it.  Similarly, the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry (PCCI) which is supposedly the ‘voice of Philippine business’ is supportive (because it is “good for business” – rolls eyes) while I anticipate the Makati Business Club (often considered as being in ‘opposition’ to the Arroyos) are against it.

Beyond all the whoopla and saliva that are being expectorated over this declaration, there are a few things which are bothering me (or making me want to pray that I hit the lotto so I can grab the money and get out of this country.

First of all, the “reasons” behind the declaration of martial law.

First of all, there’s the acerbic comment by former President Joseph Estrada who supposedly said, “That’s only one family (of political warlords). I had to deal with the MILF (Mindanao Islamic Liberation Front) and I never declared martial law.”

To which I have to add – it’s one family of warlords that they’re dealing with – and it is the family which is closely allied with the Arroyos or the government.  Why declare martial law on your allies … unless this is a publicity stunt in an effort to distance themselves from the Ampauatans or there is something else going on.

Secondly, there’s Press Secretary Cerge Remonde who, according to the Inquirer report, said, “… the President took the "bold step" in answer to the cries for justice of the victims’ kin” (referring to the 53 people, including some 25 journalists, who were massacred in Maguindanao a few days ago).

Excuse me?  The government has to declare martial law so that they can provide ‘justice’ for the people killed?  I thought there were courts of law for that … policemen and other mechanisms to ensure that justice is served? 

What really bothers me is that those people – including the journalists – are now being used as an excuse by the government (read: President Arroyo) to declare martial law.  I wonder how the relatives of those massacred feel, especially the journalists who were there to do their jobs of covering the news?  Their dead relatives – killed because of circumstances which were actually fostered by the government itself – are now being used by that same government to declare martial law?

Kawawa naman sila … pinatay na nga sa karumaldumal na paraan, gagamitin pa sila para mag-deklara ng martial law.

But then, that’s par for the course for Arroyo – the woman has no shame!  She’s a credit grabber, making use of any and every opportunity and any and everyone to make her ‘look good’ – but does she give a shit for other people?  No way, Jose!  This is the person who declared that she had the ‘tacit approval’ of Pope John Paul II for taking over the government during EDSA II, who routinely blows up ‘meetings on the sidelines’ of summit conferences like APEC and ASEAN into full-fledged ‘conferences’ with US President Bush and other heads of state.

But what really worries me is the TV interview of Commission on Human Rights Chair Lilia de Lima who declared that there is no basis for martial law because the reasons given (i.e., private armies, violence, etc.) are not confined to Maguindanao or Mindanao.  If those reasons are valid, Chairman de Lima said, “they may as well declare martial law over the whole country.”

Anyone want to bet that Arroyo will not pounce on that statement and think, “Look – Chairman de Lima said we should declare martial law over the whole country! Let’s do it!”

The woman has no shame … as Carmen Guerrero Nakpil supposedly said in her biography, Gloria Macapagal Arroryo is a nihilist (one meaning of which is “total rejection of laws and institutions”) in the sense that the only ‘law’ is what she wants.

God save the Philippines.

M

arami naman siguro kaming mababait na tao na dapat isaklolo ng Dios.

 

Was on a break earlier when I saw a feature on CNN , and remembered that yesterday (November 11) in the United States and Europe was Remembrance Day … formerly Memorial Day … originally Armistice Day, coming from the words, “… it was the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month …”

 

It’s a day to remember the Veterans – the soldiers of different countries who fought the wars of the past … World War I, World War II (what someone called ‘the last good war’ probably because it was the last one where the opposing sides were so distinctly and clearly separated – good and evil, black vs. white, Captain America vs. the Red Skull), and the myriad conflicts that followed: the Korean Conflict of the 1950s, Vietnam of the 60s, the 1990s Gulf War of Bush the Elder against Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait and the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions – the latter because of Bin Laden and his role in 9-11 and the former because of whatever reason Bush the Younger had.

 

They said World War I was the ‘war to end all war’ – only to be followed scant decades later with World War II.  The latter was the last conflagration to be truly international, involving almost all countries and lands from east to west … only to be followed by smaller, ‘contained’ conflicts: Korea, Vietnam, the Arab-Israel conflicts, and so many others – some of which continue until now …

 

Watching the CNN feature, they focused on ‘Poppy Day’ in England … which triggered a memory of an animated short – Charlie Brown and friends in France, and Linus van Pelt saying something about the legend of the poppies and something about “Flanders Field” …

 

A quick search of the internet and I found both the poem and the animated film (go to around the middle of the segment, when Linus starts declaiming):

 

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and 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 Flanders fields.

In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,

 

At the end of the poem, Linus turns to Charlie Brown and asks, What have we learned, Charlie Brown?

It was – and is – a powerful question then and now.  The Peanuts gang had been touring France and inadvertently come across the Normandy beaches, especially Omaha Beach and Pont du Hoc (the latter immortalized in all its blood and gore in ‘Saving Private Ryan’) and had wandered into the cemeteries at Ypres which was where ‘In Flanders Fields’ was written in 1915 by a Canadian doctor (Lt. Col. John McCrae) who had witnessed and later presided over the funeral of a friend, Lt. Alexis Helmer, then 22 years old.

What have we learned, Charlie Brown?

 

Maybe not a hell of a lot … as I said, scant decades after the armistice of ‘the war to end all wars,’ they were at it again … and people have been at it ever since, in wars large or small.

 

The thing is … what surprised me was that Linus’ recitation in the above segment was incomplete.  The final lines of the full poem go thus:

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 Flanders fields.

 

There have been criticism of the last lines, as the Wiki article notes, of the stark differences between the ‘…pastoral, sacrificial tone of the first nine lines’ (which Linus had declaimed on) and the ‘recruiting poster rhetoric’ of the last stanza.  The contrast could be seen and felt in the animated short – Linus recounts the ‘sacrificial tone’ of the first lines with all the solemnity it deserves (especially after seeing the different battlefields and the cemeteries to honor the fallen), and caps it all with the question: “What have we learned, Charlie Brown?”

 

As a statement against war and violence, it works.  But in ‘deleting’ or ‘editing’ the final lines, it becomes somewhat disingenuous. The poem is a tribute to heroes and their beliefs; maybe it was suitable for those times when the dividing line between good and evil was stark and clear but that does not mean that we should forget what those who have gone before us believed in and stood for.

 

Which brings me to the reason for this posting …

Trish (Simon's Flower) and Brian McCrary (Fenris Wolf) 

 

The fanfic community lost two of its members this year; it was all the more shocking and painful to me because I had known and interacted with both Trish and Brian through the years.  In fact, Brian had posted a review for my current work in progress and twitted me a bit about a ‘hurl-worthy scene’ (lol) …

 

I remember both Trish and Brian being among the most ardent Harry/Hermione shippers during the most active years of the fandom … Trish always approaching the topic with both grace and humour (and a generous dosage of smuttiness every once in a while) and Brian being very, very ‘ardent’ about his stance in support of the pairing.

 

I cannot help but think, now that they are both on their next great adventures, of the last line of the poem:

If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields

 

I’m not breaking faith with them. 

 

Vaya con Dios, Trish and Brian.

 

 

 

Came across an interesting article in AdAge.com’s "Small Agency Diary" and this thought-provoking statement by blogger Tom Denari:

What was once used to describe thoughtful and novel communications, to describe what we aspire to on a daily basis, the word "creative" has somehow devolved into a pejorative hammer -- a hammer that's often used to beat the life out of an idea into something that's anything but "creative.”

When my agency was a much younger, smaller upstart group, the more established old-guard agencies in our local market would often give us the backhanded, dismissive compliment of being "really creative." It was as if the other end of the spectrum was "really strategic." They would try to paint their straight-forward, sometimes even pedestrian, work as "more strategic." (Ah, "strategic," there's another painfully misused word by marketers. But that's for another day.)

Over time, the industry has fed this notion by too often producing undisciplined work that has tainted what it means to be "creative." The meaningless way we discuss creativity in the media and the boardroom has poisoned marketers' perceptions of how to engage consumers. We are continually overusing and misusing the term "creative," stretching it to represent everything from the remarkable campaigns to the soulless advertising that gets by on being visually interesting to the self-indulgent and baseless advertising created only for creative accolades and personal portfolios.

And how many times are we going to have to read stories about whether "Creativity and Effectiveness Can Coexist?" These stories simply fuel the misperception and definition of what creativity should mean to both agencies and clients.

The crux of the issue is not whether there is tension between creativity and effectiveness. In fact, it would save a lot of trouble if we simply eliminated the word "creative" from our lexicon. If we did, the discussion would shift to a more productive discussion, focusing on engagement and effectiveness.

For instance, instead of the client asking, "Do we really need to be so creative on this one?" he would be forced to say, "Do we really need to engage the consumer on this one?"

Ridiculous? Maybe.

The cadre of marketers that don't think the message needs to be "creative" assume that the target audience is keenly attentive to whatever they have to say next. They argue the more direct the better. Unfortunately, we all know that's just not the case. Consumers are bombarded with thousands of messages daily that ask for their attention and their disposable income. The brands that find a way to break through, engage and connect with their audiences are the ones that have the opportunity to affect their behavior.

Instead of debating whether the work is "creative," clients need to start asking:

• "Is the message surprising?"
• "Does it play upon consumers' life experience?"
• "Is it relevant?"
• "Is it consistent with the brand's voice?"
• "Is it believable?"
• "Does it differentiate the brand?"

If we all can begin to look at how an agency's work will (or won't) engage a consumer, and focus less on whether its work is "creative," my guess is that the advertising will end up being more effective. And likely more "creative."

As an advertising practitioner for close to two decades, I have to agree with the sentiment … and grin a bit at Tom Denari’s comment about being “more strategic” as the opposite of being “really creative.”

Simply because I’ve been a strategic planner or strategist for most of those years – and have been at the forefront of the ‘battles’ (meaning arguments) between a campaign or a material being “creative” or “strategic.”

As a former colleague put it: “Gil will present the ‘boring’ side of the campaign (the consumer insights and strategies) while I (the creative director) will present the ‘fun side’ of our pitch.” 

The crux of the matter, however, is that there is too much emphasis being placed (in today’s advertising world) on the word ‘creative’ – as if being ‘creative’ (whatever that means!) is the end-all and be-all of an advertising campaign.  I still hear it being thrown about in my workplace – often as a challenge: “Is that creative enough?”

The problem is that for many advertising people (or those on the agency side) the challenge tends to overlook the core issue which, as Mr. Denari and others have pointed out, is this:  is the campaign or the material enough to engage the target consumer?

It is something which appears to have been forgotten or overlooked – at least within the walls of ‘conventional’ or traditional agencies (those engaged in the tri-media effort of print, radio and television ads).  “Engagement” – as in getting the consumer to become involved with the client’s products by buying it – is the ultimate goal of any advertising or marketing campaign.

The problem, I think, is that the concept of ‘engagement’ is associated more with the current generation of internet users – those who blog on a regular basis, make use of Facebook, Twitter or Friendster, surf the net not only for information but also for new and interesting commentaries – rather than my generation for whom personal interaction meant face to face with a living, breathing human being.

Don’t get me wrong – I do appreciate the fact that I can keep tabs and update on my friends through LJs and the other social media ‘channels of communication.’  And I remember fondly the times I had a chance to chat with online friends, especially Ann (GillianHalliwell) and others.

But it often feels somewhat ‘detached’ to me …

Reading about my friends’ lives was interesting, amusing, enjoyable; interacting with them through their LJs and the forums on FAP and portkey was stimulating; online chats were something to look forward to … but it sometimes lacked the ‘feel’ of seeing the other person, ‘touching’ the other person and hearing their voices and trying to discern meaning behind their vocal tonalities, facial expressions and body language.

Which may be why I have a tendency to drop out of sight for months or years at a time … I still feel ‘detached’ from this cyber world where sharing thoughts, dreams and ideas is but a click away.  I know that at the other end of this line are living, breathing human beings with hearts of gold and shining souls … but ‘knowing’ is different from ‘feeling.’

Maybe this is where the whole issue of ‘creativity’ or of being ‘creative’ in today’s world is coming from.

Being ‘creative’ in my world (or during my time) meant standing out from the rest – wearing different clothes, acting in a different manner, ‘projecting’ a different image from the buttoned-down, serious-faced ‘account executive.’ Being creative then meant interacting closely with your ‘peers’ – all of them creative people from yours and other agencies – and every once in a while deigning to interact with the consumers: through infrequent focused group discussions (where you sat behind a one-way mirror observing what was going on), or ‘talking’ to people.

In other words, being creative ‘then’ meant that you had to be an observer of life.  If you had to ‘participate,’ it was either with your own social group (other creatives or at the very least, other advertising people) or you do it on your own – as in doing your own product testing in the comfort of your own home.

Which is a whole world away from today’s social-media driven environment where ‘connecting’ with people is – technically – as easy as having a computer with an internet connection and then ‘engaging’ them in conversation.

The problem is that we (or should I say ‘I’?) have never been that comfortable with that kind of conversation.  As I said, I ‘prefer’ having face-to-face talks with people; ‘conversations’ via computer screens and keyboards will – after some time – become something I’m uncomfortable with.  Maybe because at some point I realized that I cannot be the ‘detached observer’ that I used to be … I have to become a participant in the whole scene.

And maybe that’s where the problem lies.

It may simply be that I am not willing or prepared to become a ‘participant’ rather than an observer.

Some thing to think about.

It’s been over a week since Typhoon Ketsana (Philippine name: “Ondoy”) came and inundated large parts of Metro Manila.  I assume that most people around the world already know the statistics: close to 300 people dead in the Philippines (I understand that there are at least over a hundred more dead in Laos and Vietnam after Ketsana left these shores and headed over there), thousands still in evacuation centers and homeless, losses to properties (from homes and cars which went underwater due to the flashfloods caused by the rains) in the millions or probably billions of pesos by now.

The reason I haven’t posted anything much is that nothing happened to me or my family.  We are safe, dry and with our property intact.  We were living in a state of blissful ignorance that day and that night (September 26 to 27) – it was, truth to tell, an “ordinary day” as far as we were concerned, except for the fact of heavy rains much of the day and night, and power outage which occurred at around 4 in the afternoon of September 26 and lasted until around 2 pm the following day.

The only ‘inconvenience’ we had was that our LPG tank ran out the day before and – with the power out – we had to fall back on sandwiches, boiled saging na saba (Philippine cooking bananas; the closest apparently is plantains) which we had bought earlier and cooked before the lights went out, and biscuits, crackers and chips.  Illumination was by candles – again, a lucky thing since my wife was so fond of decorating with candles – and since the wind was brisk and cool, all we had to do was keep the windows open and it was quite, quite comfortable.  The only thing was that our cell phones had run out of their battery charge; again, the lack of electricity meant we were out of touch.

Until the next day (Sunday, 27 September) when necessity forced us out of our comfortable cocoons.  Still no electricity so even boiling water for the morning coffee was out of the question (luckily, our next door neighbors who were my uncle and aunt had a gas-fired oven so we were able to ‘borrow’ the water) and man, woman and boy cannot live on bread, crackers and chips for long.

The phone to the LPG company was out so I felt we had no choice but to go out place an order for delivery of our normal 50-kilo tank. It wasn’t raining as hard anymore so my wife and I thought, “Why not?  Joy ride … may as well go out and buy some groceries and the like).

So … out we went.  First stop was the LPG store which was a few blocks away.  They were open and willing to have a tank of LPG delivered and installed in an hour or so.  Great!  And off we went to the nearby Mercury Drugstore – a combination pharmacy and grocery/convenience store (the branch along Retiro Street in QC is 24 hours) – where my son and I picked a few cans of sausages, sardines and other things … and realized that the line to the cashiers was long, looonngg, so very, very long.  (I think there were some 50 or so people waiting in line, and all of them were packed to the gills with the items they were buying – everything from noodles to canned goods to candles and soap and rubbing alcohol bottles).

I told my son (Mico) and wife (Arlene) to put the items back; rather than wait it out, may be better to go to another convenience store nearby where there wouldn’t be that much of a line.

So off we went …

And started noticing a few things.

For one, when we got to the grocery store (around a kilometer away from the house), it was “closed.”  Or rather, the doors were open because the staff were inside trying to assess the damage – the whole ground floor of the establishment got flooded and foodstuffs, canned goods and everything else were scattered all around.

One thing about that grocery store – they were in a flood-prone area so their building was somewhat ‘elevated’ – the ground floor was around three to four feet above street level.  So how the hell could flood waters get in?  Unless … it meant that the floods were that high …

All right, I said – next stop.  Another convenience store – Save and More, part of the SM supermarket chain – was only a few minutes away, at the corner of Araneta Avenue (sometimes called the C-3 highway) and Del Monte Avenue.  Same story – store closed because flood waters had entered the building.  Where to next? We decided to drive around the neighborhood for a bit to work out what to do next …

As we were driving, my son (who was riding shotgun) asked - “Pa, what’s that?”

I didn’t realize what it was until my son pointed it out – all along the street, plastic bags and other garbage were festooning the trees.  Passing by some houses, I realized that I was seeing plastic bags and garbage (styropor boxes, leaves and other trash) sticking to second floor windows and walls.  Along one street where the houses had 10 feet high concrete fences topped by another five feet of barbed wire fence were literally covered with the same plastic bags and garbage sticking all the way from the ground to the top strand of barbed wire.

There was only one thought on our minds: WTF HAPPENED HERE?

For all that garbage to reach that high meant that the floods were that high – at least 10-15 feet.  I’ve been living in the area for years and know it gets flooded but the worst it ever got was waist deep – this was at least four times higher than that!  What the hell was happening here?

It was only later when the electricity came back on and we were able to communicate again (cable TV news, internet was on) that we realized the extent of the devastation that happened.

One video on YouTube put up a few days ago shows this better than words would:

 

This is a car repair shop around a kilometer or so from where we live – and close to the above-mentioned Araneta Avenue which is flood-prone but (as I said) it only goes waist deep as far as I can remember.  This is much, much worse – as you can see, the cars were all lifted up but it still went to their roofs.  All in the space of one afternoon … and this is only one such place in the metropolis.

Looking back on it all now, I can only shake my head … and thank my lucky stars and my grandparents for choosing our home so many decades ago.  I had never really thought about it but our home is situated on an upwardly sloping location.  Terrain wise, I think our portion of Quezon City has small, rolling hills – which was why, as the rains kept falling down, we were all snug and dry and totally oblivious to what was happening around us.  The only inconveniences we went through was having no LPG for cooking, no electricity (which meant no TV, internet or other entertainment and no communications with all cell phones conking out) … and total, blissful isolation.

With the lights back and communications restored, I started checking around on friends and family members … but there were very few responses. My first thought was that they had gone through the same thing – no lights, no battery charging, no communications.  Nothing I can do, I thought, except gather the old clothes, put together some things and be ready to bring them over to relief centers if needed.

It was only starting Monday when I went to the office that things began to get clear.  Luckily, none of my officemates and colleagues suffered casualties among their families. Property damage, on the other hand …i several had floodwaters entering their homes; several had to go to the rooftops and wait for the waters to subside; another had water starting to enter the second floor of their home; others reported only waist deep or knee deep water.  Most, however, were quite safe and did not experience too much trouble or inconvenience …

I don’t know how I should feel right now.  Grateful, yes … happy that we weren’t affected too much, definitely.  But I cannot push myself to feel a deep sense of loss or sympathy for many people right now.

Maybe because there were no casualties among my family, friends and colleagues.  Sure they lost property – several had their cars underwater for several hours which will necessitate repairs; others had appliances and furnishings inundated and unrepairable; others lost mementoes, family heirlooms and clothes.

But they are alive – and more than grateful for the fact.

I stand around and listen and am struck by one thing – everyone comments on how swiftly and how high the floodwaters went.  Also, for many of them, floods like this are a distant memory – it may have happened when they were kids, decades ago but it never went this bad.  They all had to agree that they were caught unprepared – but then again, who can prepare for a disaster such as this?

Many have the same comment - “there were never any floods in our area!  Over there, yes, but here?”  Or those few who experience flooding on a more or less regular basis – “the water never went *that* high!”  Like the Tireboy owners (above) – they knew the area was prone to flooding so they build some elevation to their location; at the same time, they had contingency plans in place: if the place starts flooding, jack the cars up and get everyone to the second floor of the building.  There was no way they could have expected or planned for the water to reach *that* high!

They can only be grateful that there were no casualties among families and friends – the attitude seems  to be that property can be restored, appliances replaced and mementoes or memories (in albums, photos,and keepsakes) will be replaced with new and better memories.  “Things” can be replaced – lives lost are gone with only memories left and even these will fade with time.

As for me?

I’m grateful I didn’t have to go through all that the others did except to spend a few hours worrying about them until the word came down that they were safe.  Battered and wet, in some cases, but alive and well.

In the end, I have a little bit more to be grateful for.

And that would be enough.

After a couple of years of silence, here I go again, trying to update my blog.

Why?

Partly because, as someone pointed out to me, I’ve gotten upgrades on the equipment that surround my life.  I finally bought a new desktop as well as a new laptop, loaded with all the latest gizmos (most of which I don’t use and for the life of me won’t even be bothered to understand), new software – including the Windows Live package which includes a “Writer” program for blogging, and so on.

As my friends point out – you’ve got all *that* at your fingertips and you don’t use them?

Errr … no?

Maybe I’m just pathetic about technology.

Let’s see … I use MS Office 2007 but don’t know thing one about Photoshop.

I’ve got a Livejournal account (set up for me years ago by my dear friends Nicole and Sarah) and have been off-again on-again using it.

I don’t have a Facebook, don’t do Tweets, know about Flickr and have consciously avoided Friendster.

I do read blogs but mostly those of political and other commentaries about the Philippine scene – I don’t remember the last time I took a look at what’s going on with the friends I made so long ago.

I write and post Harry Potter fanfiction; read and download a lot of this, post reviews whenever I could … but remain technically anti-social in a social media world.

Pathetic.

But then again, that’s me.

I’m an old dog trying to learn new tricks and – being an old dog – sometimes, learning the ‘new tricks’ is hard to do.

Especially in a world where technology seems to be moving so fast; blink and something new has popped up which you have to try and catch up on and learn to use.

I remember one afternoon at the office, me and my boss talking with several of the new graduates who’d joined the company … and we got to talking about the changes in our lives.  Or how different things are now from then.

My boss and I were remembering (with some fondness) the ‘good old days’ when television meant three or four channels which would air programs starting at 12 noon and ending at 10 or 11 in the evening; when radio meant AM stations with the attendant ‘noise’; ‘going out’ meant going to the park at the Luneta and a walk along the bayside; ‘movies’ meant a trip to Avenida (now Rizal Avenue beneath the LRT tracks) or New Frontier in Cubao and the biggest thing then was watching “Ten Commandments” starring Charlton Heston in Cinemascope.

Entertainment in those days was what you can come up with on your own – I remember nights under a full moon when we’d play hide and seek around the house (luckily, we had a rather large lot, enough for four apartment units and garage space for several cars as well as a pocket garden), or a get together with the neighborhood children to play tag and patintero, again under the light of the full moon – simply because there was nothing to watch on the telly.

And now … I can spend hours reading fanfiction on my laptop while my son spends hours online playing games on my desktop and my wife literally gets her eyes baggy watching cable television – switching from fashion to cooking shows, ‘touring’ gardens around the world or her choice of action, drama, horror or suspense … all at the flick of a button.

The young people were saying, ‘wasn’t life boring then?’  Maybe it was … I do remember thinking that I seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time sleeping or napping then, simply because there wasn’t much to do especially during the summers.  Not until I learned to read and became exposed to the home library and my mother’s collection of romances, as well as the second hand book stalls along Recto Avenue.  Still, there are moments that stand out … catching butterflies, dragonflies and praying mantises; climbing fruit trees to ‘harvest’ mangoes, caimito or star apple and macopa (wax apples or ‘Syzygium samarangense’ according to Wikipedia) which were some of the trees in and around our house; going to the wet market to buy squid and learning how to cook these …

Ah welll …

As I said, “testing … testing …” the Live Writer program.  It *is* convenient and easy to use … maybe I’ll try to revive that old resolution and try setting aside an hour or so to writing …

And testing some things … like adding a photo to this blog.

The picture is Mayon Volcano, an active volcano in the province of Albay in the Bicol region, which is visible from my wife’s hometown and childhood home. I took the picture the last time we went home – in June this year – when we had to go home because her aunt had passed on.

Will be writing some more on this soon.

This story just below the fold of the Philippine Daily Inquirer got my attention: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/topstories/topstories/view_article.php?article_id=99479

To say that it's depressing is putting it mildly.

A twelve year old commiting suicide?

But then, from one angle, it may be ... understandable. As the article indicates, young Mariannet felt that there was no way for her family to get out of the poverty trap they were in. Her father was unemployed and had been for some time; able to get employment but only for minimum wage, manual labor and with no permanence or security of tenure. Her mother works by repacking noodles in a factory for P50 a day, plus doing laundry for P100/ day.

The family lived in a small house with no electricity or water ... young Mariannet had already skipped several days of school because her parents could not give her "baon" (allowance) - and she was already feeling depressed about this. And then - what appears to be the final straw - she had asked her father for one hundred pesos for a school project whose deadline was November 5 - and her father had nothing to give her.

I guess she felt that was the end of her life ... that she had no more hope to look forward to.

But ... my God! Can one lose hope at the age of twelve?

I think what got my goat was the headline in the same newspaper: "Senate probes cash gifts ... a story which broke out a few weeks ago, where various Congressmen and provincial governors admitted that they were given cash gifts ranging from 200 to 500 thousand pesos in brown paper bags as they were leaving a meeting in Malacanang Palace (the local equivalent of the White House or 10 Downing Street).

I cannot help but wonder if that was part of the reason behind Mariannet's decision to leave the earthly plane ... imagine, congressmen and provincial officials being given cold, hard cash with no clear reason for the purpose or intent for such money? Why should they be receiving such amounts of money? They're already being paid by the people for whatever it is they are doing ... aside from their regular salaries, they're getting allowances plus whatever they can generate by way of kickbacks, favors, 'gifts' and what not ...

And here is poor Mariannet - not even able to get a measly one hundred pesos for a school project.

I think it was Stalin who said, "One death is a tragedy ... a million is a statistic."

Unfortunately, I think young Mariannet will become a statistic.

Before that happens, may I ask for a moment of silence, not just for Mariannet but for everyone else out there who has to live in this sometimes insane, corrupt world?

Thank you.

First of all, to those who are being affected by the fires in SoCal, my prayers go out to you. I wish to do more, I want to do more but ... :shrug: Distance and time still can't be circumvented.

My family's prayers for tonight will be for all of you. I'll also pass by the chapel and light a candle.

All right. :)

On other things ... especially the "Dumbledore is gay" thingy. annearchy and infinitegraces both have links to the same article in Salon ... which, it seems, would be only the latest in the feeding frenzy that followed Rowling's announcement at Carnegie Hall.

We've gotten a whole range of reactions, from the "Ho Hum" (my own initial reaction) to the 'usual' Hosannas and paens to the almighty JKR (especially from The Leaky Cauldron) ... and the thoughtful reactions such as this. It would seem that Rowling has, again, created quite a stir ... maybe not as emotional in nature as her "interview" of two years ago but this time, probably with much more impact.

Melissa Anelli's reaction is, to my mind, the same as a lot of people around the world: "“Jo Rowling calling any Harry Potter character gay would make wonderful strides in tolerance toward homosexuality.”

Maybe.

My first reaction when I saw Ms. Anelli's comment was - again, "Ho Hum." Typical fangirl gushing, I thought.

But then, thinking about it ... I find myself questioning the statement.

For one thing, as snowweisz points out in her LJ, this would have had more impact if Rowling had said so years ago rather than now, which is the same comment as some gay and human rights activists around the world. This however is a counterpoint to an observation made by someone on my f-list that the matter of Dumbeldore's sexuality is not such a big deal within the context of the books; that revealing it in the text would not 'move the plot forward' and may - in fact - even detract from the narrative.

True.

But I think they miss the point.

Hoisting Dumbledore up as the next gay icon will be, in my mind, a counterproductive endeavor - simply because Dumbledore as a character has not made that much of an impact within the context of the books. Or, perhaps more precisely, Dumbledore as he was finally revealed in the last two books does not come across as an iconic, heroic, worthy-to-be-looked-up-to character. Placed within the context of the books, he turns out to be a maninpulative, weak and somewhat dithering individual ... true, he may have been the 'Great Leader of the Light" but he has exhibited major human flaws and failings.

And it is against those major human flaws and failings where, I believe, his worth as a character and as an 'icon' for gay or even het people will rise or fall.

In my judgement, he will fall.

One reason why I went 'Ho Hum" with Rowling's 'revelation' is that the 'hints' were out there, blatant and clear ... anvil-sized, to use her favorite expression. The problem with these hints is that, to my mind, they were too obviously "hints" ... in the sense that they fall within the stereotypical images most people have of the (pardon the expression) 'screaming faggots' who are the objects of derision. In the Philippines, for example, the typical perception of gays are either the 'parlorista' - the gay hairdresser or dressmaker - and the 't-bird' or the masculine female.

These are black and white stereotypes which have done nothing to enhance or improve people's perception of homosexuals and in fact, have contributed to society's studied indifference or outright hostility towards them.

And Rowling's portrayal of Dumbledore, in DH, falls within those same parameters: from the first 'anvil-sized hint' with the obituary written by Elphias Doge whre he describes his meeting with Dumbledore as a 'mutual attraction' ... and then goes on with Skeeter's biography and comments about his 'unhealthy' relationship with Harry which, as Rebecca Traister of Salon points out, "[Rowling is] aping the leering, speculative tone of news stories about gay priests, Cub Scout leaders, and teachers accused of inappropriate relationships with their charges."

To my mind, Rowling's revelation about Dumbledore's sexuality falls within the same context - rather than helping lift the character up, this revelation only pulls him down ...

Within the context of the books (or 'canon') as we are so fond of calling them, the above revelations are seen as character assassination by Rita Skeeter - and Elphias Doge's hint (*wink* *wink*) can be called unrequited passion on his part towards a true iconic figure. In a way, Skeeter's assault on Dumbledore's character only enhances the old man's image - it makes you overlook his flaws, makes him more human than he already is.

But Rowling's 'revelation' blows that out of the water.

Were Dumbledore's flaws due to the fact that he is - or was - human or because ... he is Gay?

Que horror! Que barbaridad!

I can imagine what will happen, down the road, when some child reads through the books and asks his parents - "Why did Dumbledore do that? Why didn't he help Harry out with the Philosopher's Stone? Why didn't he help Harry in the Chamber of Secrets? He could have gone with Fawkes ... done something to help? Same with Sirius in Prisoner of Azkaban ... why drop hints to Hermione ... why didn't he join them?" And so on and so forth ...

And the parents, who may be busy with their own concerns, will answer with the easiest response that will come to mind: "Oh, it's because Dumbledore is gay."

Melissa Anelli supposedly said to Associated Press (continuing the remarks quoted above) that, "By dubbing someone so respected, so talented and so kind, as someone who just happens to be also homosexual, she's reinforcing the idea that a person's gayness is not something of which they should be ashamed."

As i said, typical fan girl gushing ...

At the same time, this "perception" is in contradiction to Rowling's own words:

""Neither Dumbledore nor Grindelwald ever seems to have referred to this brief boyhood friendship in later life,"' Rowling writes. "However, there can be no doubt that Dumbledore delayed, for some five years of turmoil, fatalities, and disappearances, his attack upon Gellert Grindelwald. Was it lingering affection for the man or fear of exposure as his once best friend that caused Dumbledore to hesitate?"

Is Rowling saying that the reason why Dumbledore hesitated to go after Grindelwald - hesitated for "five years of turmoil, fatalities, and disappearances" because he refused to face the fact that he did not want to be found out - and revealed as gay?

I'll admit that Dumbledore's reasons for hesitating are all too human flaws - everyone is afflicted by them, het, bi-, gay or lesbian. The problem is, in today's world, it is all too easy (especially for the dumbasses and intolerant bigots) to lay the blame for these all too human flaws on a person's sexual orientation. Dumbledore's mistakes and errors can no longer be 'passed off' as that all too human fear of being seen as a hero with feet of clay - but because he is 'gay.'

And therein lies, for me, the critical flaw in Rowling's now-revealed 'vision'.

I've always wanted the fiction I read to be uplifting, to be a revelation to me about how the world should be ... that heroes should be heroes - flawed yes, but able to overcome those flaws by doing, as Dumbledore once said, "what is right over what is easy" ... by overcoming their human fears and limitations, by rising above the things that hold them down. And if, in doing what is right, the hero goes through so many headaches, heartaches plus a few bruises and wounds along the way ... what of it?

That's the way of life, right?

Unfortunately, it seems that Dumbledore took the 'harder path' but not necessarily the right one. His actions and inactions - which, in context, may be seen as a form of atonement for his sins, comes across as nothing more than self-flagellation. He never really overcame his flaws, he never rose above his petty fears and selfish interests to do what should have been done ... he allowed others to do it for him - and he even manipulated them to doing it for him.

Machiavellian, maybe ... but whoever said that Machiavelli was someone to be admired or worse, emulated?

This is where Rowling's series ultimately fails, for me. The seeds for greatness were there by OotP - the last two books could have been a straightforward narration of the battle of good versus evil, where the characters were beset by their own all-too-human failings but rose above these to win ... but they became, instead, cardboard cutouts that are as two-dimensional as the cartoon figures we watch on TV or read in the funny papers. Harry's courage and bravery, Hermione's loyalty and brilliance ... all became merely cardboard figures of what they could have been, performing their actions by rote without the depth and capability they had shown before.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I think Rowling simply became bored with Harry Potter ... either that or she became too lazy to move forward and blaze a different path than that which she had planned for all along. That there was potential for thrills and spills, for glorious battles and major bloodshed, is evident by the many novel-length fanfiction covering the last two years of the series ... madscientist's "Lions of Gryffindor" series or bobmin's "Sunset/Sunrise Over Britain" novels. But she didn't take the 'right' road ... she took the 'easy' one of going back to what she had written before, 'updated' it a bit ... and then threw it to the world to slobber all over.

Well ... why not? There are always the fanboys and fangirls who will swoon all over whatever she regurgitates, without applying critical thinking or thought to it.

Which brings me back to the subject heading of this rant ...

It was something one of my mentors told me, a long time ago. Although it was said in a different context, it expresses exactly what I feel right now about the "revelation."

My mentor told me (while trying to affect a Yoda-like demeanor): "It matters not what lies between your legs. What matters most is what lies between your ears - and what you do with it.

And in this context, both Dumbledore and Rowling failed.

Some 'icons'.

Quick updates ...

My car burned.

Literally.

I just had it fixed for what was supposedly a troublesome radiator fan, picked it up from the garage which has been handling its repairs for years ... drove off to pick up Arlene and then ...

It stopped. Literally, in the middle of a busy street a block or so from Arlene's office (and just across from her former office) ... I shut it down, tried to turn it on ... and security guards from a restaurant and Arlene's office were shouting at me to get out. I stepped out of the car, figuring to ask them to help me push the car - and only then noticed smoke literally coming out from the hood. I had enough time to pull out my knapsack (containing my laptop) and move off ...

The guards tried extinguishing it with their fire extinguishers, but they couldn't ... plus, it took the fire department quite a few minutes to get to the scene since it was on Jupiter street, close to Makati Avenue on a Friday at six p.m. ... which meant heavy traffic in the area.

They were able to put it out, but the car's motor was a total loss.

What was rather surprising is that it was only the front part of the car which burned ... luckily, the flames didn't hit the gas tank or there'd be all hell to pay - especially as, earlier that same afternoon, Glorietta (a major mall located in Makati) had something blow up, killing ten and injuring oer a hundred people.

(Police claim it was a terrorist attack, but I'm holding off on my opinions ... there are other things at play here in the Philippines which may have implications on the 'bombing')

You can imagine what people were thinking ... was this another terrorist attack? And it didn't help to see the 'driver' of the vehicle standing there in a t-shirt and slacks, sandals on his feet, unshaven chin and with a knapsack ... typical Al-Quaeda or JI terrorist, right? Good thing the security guards at my wife's former office all knew me ... there was no problem in 'identifying' me as the innocent driver of the car who was to be pitied more than to cast a suspicious eye on.

But the car's a write off, I think ... the motor's burned, wiring gone, front suspension weakened ... and the radiator's gone. I had to leave the car overnight in the MAPSA impounding lot ... when I showed up Saturday morning with a tow truck, the radiator had apparently been stolen. Of course, the people in the area knew nothing about it ... :rollseyes:

I wanted to post something that night (Friday) but Arlene was leaving for Singapore the following day, so we had to sleep early. I wanted to write about it yesterday but between informing the insurance people, the garage where I had the car repaired, getting the tow truck and hauling it off ... too many things happening.

:sigh:

In other news ...

The Glorietta Bombing

Having your car burn can take your mind off other things ... as I mentioned above, Glorietta shopping mall was bombed, with ten people dead and over a hundred injured. I find myself in a difficult bind ... wanting to *feel* something for those hurt and who lost loved ones in the bombing but I can't. Not only because of the personal impact of the car burning (after all, as a lot of people have told me, I'm still alive, walking - and was able to rescue my laptop. *That* is the most important thing - as I've said before, my laptop is the extension of my brain ... lose it and I may be worse off than an amnesiac because of everything contained in this.

But then again ... thanks to electronic media, someone has been able to articulate my feelings right now.

Patricia Evngelista's column in the Inquirer

And Finally ...

JK Rowling "outs" Dumbledore ...

Ho hum. The fandom has been speculating on that for a long time ... as amanuensis1 points out, Dumbledore-Grindelwald ships have been coming out since DH. But innermurk's comments mirror my own.

Especially this part:

( Read more... )

Of course, I may not have felt exactly that way a few years ago (specifically before HBP and the interview) but time has a way of changing one's perspectives.

Anyway ... back to the music.

Sitting here at home, waiting while my car is being repaired ... again. Shouldn't be that surprised; it is a ten year old car and, no matter the care and maintenance that is given, there are some things which just simply have to give.

Anyway, started surfing the net and saw the latest in the 'saga' of Ellen and Iggy ... apparently, Ellen has cancelled taping for the weekend and they will resume on Tuesday. According to a spokesperson, "It's been a long week and a tough week and we decided to take a long weekend and be back on Tuesday." (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019/ap_on_en_tv/people_degeneres;_ylt=AtahpT7ug0CdJkwYpizdGK0VkmwF)

It also seems that Ellen has vowed not to make any more pleas until "Iggy is back with her hairdresser."

I wasn't really aware of what happened here; we do get Ellen here in the Philippines but I'm not sure if it's current or somewhat delayed. Still, the issue seems to have picked up quite a bit of interest (I think) if one were to judge by news coverage. Most especially the claim of the animal rescue people that they've been receiving threats, death threats and more which has (as I recall yesterday's news items) is causing them a bit of 'emotional anguish' and so on ...

Why do I suddenly have a vision of a horde of lawyers making a beeline for the animal shelter? The weirdest thing is that what I see are lawyers in grey suits, loping along as if they were coyotes or jackals ... too much Animal Planet for me, perhaps. Or does the words "threats, death threats and emotional anguish" seem like waving slices of raw meat in the air ... sort of an incentive for the heat-seeking lawyers to home in on?

:sigh: Maybe I'm biased about lawyers. :whistling: Still, my advice to the women - ladies? - who run that animal rescue thingy ... do what a Philippine lady senator said: "I eat death threats for breakfast."

Nice soundbite ... the problem was, everyone was asking "Who made the death threats in the first place?"

Anyway ... honestly, I like Ellen. She comes across as credible, someone nice to know ... a concerned human being. While the animal rescue people ... well, take a look at the subject heading.

Maybe I'm biased and jumping into things without hearing both sides; well, I haven't seen Ellen's 'emotional' on-air appeals but - based on news reports - the thing seems straightforward.

Ellen adopts dog; signs contract to "care, protect and defend the mutt." After some time, the mutt doesn't get along with Ellen's cats ... so she passes the mutt on to her hairdresser who has two kids who (if Ellen's stories are true) absolutely adore the mutt. However, rescue people find out and - waving their contracts - 'remove' the dog from the loving home. And, from what Ellen supposedly said, with not even a 'hello, we'd like to check if the dog is in a good home' kind of thing ...

They (the rescue people) apparently came in and 'busted' the mutt out of his adoptive home.

Legally, they may have every right to do so ... as they said (and Ellen admits it), they have a contract signed which spells out the things that are supposed to be done. What apparently irked Ellen was the way they went about 'correcting' her mistake - as it sounds, they may have even dragged a SWAT team along to rescue the poor mutt from a traumatic hostage situation ... the mutt was being held hostage by two pre-teens!

What really surprises me is the reaction of the 'rescue' people - "we will not be bullied by Ellen Degeneris! This is causing us mental and emotional anguish!"

Who did the bullying in the first place, I wonder?

I don't think Ellen would have gone on nationwide TV to make her 'appeal' unless she herself was shocked and dismayed by what happened. I mean, come on ... this is not something life or death, or even something mahor in the total scheme of things. But for Ellen to have gone on air over something like this ... something must have pushed her to do something drastic.

I can't really be sympathetic to the 'rescue' people. Their reactions are so ... "we have a contract! she violated the contract! we won't be bullied! emotional distress!"

I'm just waiting for the next step ... "settlement!"

What was it that Shakespeare said? "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"?

I won't include Sarah in that, however.

'Nuff said.

Ranting off.