Why In The Long Run, Those People Doesnt Matter Anymore
Life this month has certainly been enlightening. I didnt know that meditation would bring about this sense of inner knowing about myself and other people. I’ve also began to realise that there are certain trends that people exhibit and there’s usually a pattern in how they behave. But yeah, there’s a bunch of illusions about myself and friends that I’ve released and I think I finally realise what I wanna do in life, what I want for myself and sorta have a little glimpse who my true authentic self is. There’s no hurry in learning who I am and what I want, I just got to keep working at it.
Sigh… Talking with Meiyi if taught me anything, it’s that life isnt about winning or grabbing awards (even though those are always fun.) And this is where I truly think we neighbourhood kids have it better than the elites. In ten years down the road, no one’s going to care what school you come from or how many As you scored. We have tasted the bitterness of falling down, being stepped on, abused, laughed at with our faces walloped in mud. And then there’s that sourness of relationships gone wrong and the occasional bout of sweetness when something finally went right. We are able to talk to cleaners, plumbers, gangsters and realise that they had some of the strongest, noblest heroes we had ever met. We may not be executives, lawyers or politicians when we grow up, but damn we are a lot more happier than many of them.
Dun ever let them tell you are not as smart, intelligent or anything less than you are. We have learnt that life is not about how many times we achieve, but rather how many times we pick ourselves up. Life is not about having as many friends as you can, but rather having friends that allow you to be who you truly want to be. When everything crumbles in ashes right before your eyes, we are able to stand proud and declare that we are going to build our lives again, somehow. That’s because we’re not bred for success, we’re bred for greatness. And hence we laugh at the hollowness of the petty paper chase, the insecure elitism that plagued so many that stepped on us.
A Response To “Poetry, Politics and PhDs”
This article is in response to the Gilbert Koh’s blog post titled “Poetry, Politics and PhDs” posted on mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com. Basically, his post was a self-congratulatory pat on the back that one of his poem has found it’s way into a PhD thesis, culminating into a condescending attack on NUS students and their inability to appreciate poetry. No wait, actually just his poetry.
Upon reading the comments section, it is apparent that the accusation was directed at one Nicholas Liu who wrote an unfavourable article on his latest (and only) poetry anthology, 2 Baby Hands. Nicholas in his review[1] noted a formulaic, cookie-cutter writing style similar to “Alvin Pang” and “Ng Yi-Sheng”. , Nicholas also raised the Koh’s tendency to patronise his readers with a simplistic, ‘in-your-face’ writing style among other jargonistic points raised.
Koh raises several rebuttals in response: [2]
“Firstly, he thinks that my intention, as the poet, was to get the reader to “sigh and leave wiser, reconsidering what it means to write”.
Secondly, he thinks that the poem is a “poem about poetry”.
Thirdly he thinks that there is some “formula” to be applied to writing such a poem, and he goes on to elaborate why I didn’t apply the “formula” well. To illustrate where I’ve misapplied the “formula”, he writes: “”if sentimentality could kill, the image of a child burbling and raising his/her hands to the clouds would surely be a WMD” ….. the situation is not at all improved by Koh’s choice of shorthand for the phenomenal world: birds, rain, clouds, the sky. A longer poem might well have added sunsets, rivers, and adorable kittens. Need I add that for Koh, declaration must be solemn and freshness sweet?”
Nick got nothing right. If Nick were a student writing an essay on my poem, I’d have to fail him, for completely misreading it. Whether he likes the poem or not is a separate question – but he has to be failed, for misreading it…
Nick thought that I’m applying a “formula”. And that I have applied it badly.
I find his remark rather distasteful, not because of the “badly” part, but because in the first place, I do not believe in using any “formula” for writing poetry. I find the suggestion quite insulting actually.”
Sigh… What do I think of this whole fiesta? Well, I find Liu’s article to be a tad too acerbic for my taste; a certain Perez Hiltonesque bitchiness pervades the article. But I thought the points he raised were valid and succinct. Do we penalise the critic because his analysis misread the poet’s intentions expressed the poem? No, unless critic in question failed to provide substiantial evidence for his arguments. We have all seen essays, not just literary in nature that has accused Hitler of being homosexual and Conrad as a white supremacist. Whether one agrees that Koh is employing a formulaic recipe for churning “sub rosa poem(s)-about-poetry” is a different matter altogether but it is totally disrespectful to claim that “Nick got nothing right” because there is no right or wrong to any literary essays. There’s only well-written/ substiantiated essays and essays which are not. Hence, we have to grateful that Koh is not any of our professors because he is not qualified to mark our essays in the first place.
So what do I think about Koh’s poetry? I do agree with Liu in the fact that there is a constant bombardment of cliches in Koh’s work, noted constantly by other critics as well. [3] “Toy soldiers” in National Day Parade to reflect conformity in the army. The choice of a sea setting in My Father Takes My Son For A Walk to create a contemplative atmosphere. Anyone in CAP could do better than that.
Furthermore, I find the poetic structures of Koh’s works vulgar. His poetry seems like broken-up prose masquarading as one. For instance in National Day Parade, it reads almost as well as it is in a linear prose form:
“I had a small part in a big show of a great little nation. My uniformed mates and I were to march out, swing left, turn twice, and get off the grounds in twenty seconds flat. Meanwhile the music boomed, the lasers splashed and the darkened crowds hit. A new high of pre-planned, programmed excitement. ” (truncated, mine.)
There is a disregard for rhythm, rhyme and structure that produces a unique musicality which distinguishes poetry from prose. But then again, my literary sensibilities (and other NUS lit students that Koh is so disapproving from) stems from Shakespeare, Tennyson, Plath and Swinsburne. Koh will say I’m outdated and doesn’t get modern poetry. And I will say most modern poetry are all bs anyways.
[1]http://www.qlrs.com/critique.asp?id=730 (Liu’s review)
[2]https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4405345292513335071&postID=8990124072091597090 (Koh’s rebuttals)
[3] http://www.qlrs.com/acid.asp?id=493 (Another unfavourable review on Koh’s poetry)
[4]http://www.votefortheworst.com/20091014/adam_lambert_writes_awful_poetry (Lambert’s poem)
EDITTED: A friend just reminded me that there are many 21st literary heavyweights whom I adore such as e.e. cummings and Atwood. Their poems are classics but I’m referring to another class of modern poets who lack artistic taste and sensibilities. Many arrange their ramblings into funny shapes (because poetry isn’t poetry without interesting structures), throw in several ambiguous words because they can (Not Koh, though Adam Lambert’s latest attempts at poetry is a good example. [4]) and accuse you of being dense/stupid/snobbish if you don’t get their poetry. Writer friend Perihan Magden once told me that most “postmodern works are rubbish” because of the lax standards of publishing and all the formulaic plots and styles spurn off by 100 dollars creative writing courses. But if you truly think about it, when was the last time someone could write poetry like Shakespeare, Tennyson, Plath, or Eliot? Who could portray human psychology as well as Dostoevsky or Kafka or Nabokov? These literary icons did not undertake any creative writing classes or took whatever Mentor Access Programme. They are the world’s greatest writers because they are the world’s greatest writers. It’s a talent that most people can only try to emulate (See how many people tried to emulate Hemingway but failed?) by paying lots of money without any tangible results.
Singapore Writers Festival; What Works and What Doesnt.
This is one of the few posts that I’ll be publishing in the public domain. I’ve went to most of the panel talks and discussions, had a pyjama party in the national library and observed the crazy fan-girls hoo-haing over neil gaiman in a red jumpsuit so I can tell you what works, and what doesnt from my point of view if you plan to go for future writers fests. (Especially the upcoming one in two years time.)
1) Be selective when attending talks.
What astounds me was the varied quality of the discussions throughout the writers fest. There seems to be some fervent attempt to fill up the festival with as much clamour and chatter and panel discussions as they possibly could. Some discussions were on topics that few cared about, (The Singapore Literature Prize has made me so much confident as a writer…) awkward questions were asked by moderators, (So do you have fan mail? No. Okay, next question….) and of course, many writers arn’t neccessary good speakers at all.
Go for the ones that are interesting, such as the portrayal of women and scorn by the indomitable Australian poet, Maree Dawes. Horror novelist John Adjveist was absolutely hilarious but my absolute favourite would have to be Turkish writer Perihan Magden. Think of a witty Catherine Lim who actually critiques without political correctness.
2) Volunteers
I was pleasantly surprised at the friendliness and hospitality displayed by the SWF volunteers and the BooksActually cashiers. They were extremely accomodating and helpful in guiding the participants around. Some of them lingered around the stairs where we bitched about Adam Lambert’s new album cover and discussed Neil Gaiman’s schedule.
3)International Writers
The SWF committee has done a great job in inviting international writers, both obscure and well-known. Panel discussions on Turkish and Australian writings are extremely liberating(and witty) especially when placed in juxtaposition with the Spore writer panel discussions. Go for the talks by obscure writers; they usually are interesting.
4)Yay, Neil Gaiman.
I didn’t go for Neil Gaiman talks though I saw him signing autographs for 2 hours or so. I’m not a fan girl so I’ll give my ticket to someone who desperately wanna meet him more than I do. I thought that SWF has been extremely accomodating in increasing the audience size from a few hundred to 700 members by finding an alternate venue. It’s amazing that they invited Neil Gaiman; more literary heavyweights please. (Daniel Handler, Ian McEwan perhaps? Not Salman Rushdie of course.)
5)Most events are free. Please continue to keep it free.
6) Supper Club hosted by NLB.
I possess mixed feelings about this. There were some highlights such as the mp3 night walk trail and the emotive crayon drawings that puts the experiential elements in the into the literature symposium. There’s still a number of lecturing components present though, which demoralises quite a number of us. I doubt half of us can remember Ng Yi-Sheng’s historical musings on Bras Basah or even his name. I love bonding with all the RI, AC and HCI boys though. And the aunties who invited me to join a spontaneous writing club. More bonding with strangers, less talking.
7)Proleteriat Poetry Factory.
Was my first time churning out doggerel for random passer-bys and it was a blast. What we do is, you give us a word for inspiration and we churn out personalised poetry for you on the spot. Payment is on a donation basis. Earned 10 bucks which was great considering I wrote about 10 poems. This is one memorable poem that I wrote:
Word: Beauty
Walt Disney should suck a really big dick.
It’s always the beauty who reveals the beauty within the beast.
For once I’ll like to see the beast reveals
the beast
Within the beauty.
So in conclusion, do I think the Writers Fest is well-organised? From an outsider’s point of view, yes it is. Great hospitality and lively international writers saved the festival from becoming a literary disaster. Singaporean writers should stop being so stiff though.
Personal Note: Why do people keep thinking I’m from HCI? Is my face all that transparent? It’s not a bad thing now that i think about it but somehow it irritates me how Singaporeans tend to judge you based on the school you come from.
Protected: Who’s Afraid of The Big Bad Wolf?
Permalink Enter your password to view comments.
Protected: The Obligatory National Day Post
Permalink Enter your password to view comments.
On NYU’s Fiesta
With reference to: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/education/23nyu.html
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/07/08/nyu
http://abovethelaw.com/2009/07/breaking_dr_thio_might_not_com.php
Poor Thio Li-Ann. First she was issued death threats for 377A. Now, not even NYU students wanna attend her lessons. (An enrolment of 5 students for one of her seminars.) Now, Thio Li-Ann can say all she wants on how she “object to … the colouring of (her) principled moral opposition to homosexuality as ‘bigoted’ and ignorance or ‘hatred’.” and how she’s just disapproves of the idea of sodomy and gay marriage.
But the thing is, none of us will believe her. You see, just because you disapproves of gay marriage or sex or adoptions doesnt mean that one is discriminatory towards gays. Miss Carrie Prejean for instance, is one of them. Yet the thing is, she has crossed the bar of being a passive opposer to gay rights to a bigoted homophobic individual through her words:
“…Sexual minorities’ and ‘sexual orientation’ are vague terms – covering anything from homosexuality, bestiality, incest, paedophilia – do all these minority sexual practices merit protection?…S377A serves public morality; the argument from community reminds us we share a way of life which gives legal expression to the moral repugnancy of homosexuality…“
And of course, there’s that classic comparison to anal sex as “sticking a straw up your nose.”
Even if you’re not a debater, you would understand that her grounds of arguments are subjective, especially when you’re invoking terms such as “morality” and “decency” as the backbone of your case. There is nothing objective about her speech; and can be, and has been interpreted by many to be a form of hate speech.
Still, reeling back to the backlash that she receives over her NYU teaching stint, it begs the question: Just how much academic freedom should be allowed in the campus; to allow a professor to speak on human rights in Asia when she vehemently protested against a fundemental human right for homosexuals. Personally, I feel that academic freedom dictates that you are allowed to learn and teach, in other words pursue intellectual longings regardless of race, religion or your beliefs. However, I do believe that it is self defeating for someone to step and teach into an institution which goes against their primary beliefs. Thio Li-Ann’s teaching stint may very well throw NYU’s stake holdings and student enrollment into jeopardy due to an issue of double-standards. Furthermore, it’s likely to be dangerous to be surrounded by people who hates your guts and your beliefs, especially since we all know in America, they carry guns.
Personally, I respect Prof Thio even though I don’t agree with her views. I admire her respect for the liberty to choose our philososphies and belief systems. She doesnt attack homosexuality as an issue to be inherently condemned. She doesnt request for a law for homosexuality to be a crime in Singapore. Rather, she is merely voicing out her opinions on homosexual sex and it is unfortunate that her choice of expression is deparaging to say the least. And she’s paying for the price of it.
