Monday, December 31, 2012

New Year's Resolution

   To have everything would make us thankful for nothing,
   To have nothing would make us thankful for everything.


There's always pleasure in achieving whatever it is that we have always wanted - or is there? Let's say we resolve to lose some weight this year. Would it really make us happier to have lost some weight by the end of the year? Or would it be more likely that we get the false reassurance that we could probably lose more weight - so that however much weight that has been lost does not count anymore.

It's good to have a new year's resolution, especially healthy ones, like losing weight, working harder, being nicer to others, etc. However, on reflection, I think it may be wiser to resolve on getting nothing - or to lose everything. Let me explain why.

At first, I thought my resolution is to be grateful for everything in the new year - saying thanks every morning, for every meal and every little achievement. Fortunately I quickly realize how futile this effort would be. Not only will I eventually forget to do it, I also imagine myself forgetting why I wanted to do it in the first place.

In other words, saying thanks - or rather, forcing ourselves to say thanks to every little thing - can turn into an empty ritual. This noble practice would eventually become an insincere habit. So, that's why I think I ought to do the opposite.

Instead of reminding myself to be thankful for everything, it's more practical to do whatever that would make a person do it naturally. And that is, by resolving to have nothing. A poor man's penny is worth much more than that of the rich man.

Of course, I don't expect to lose it all this new year. But that is precisely why I resolve to do so - my failure (to lose everything) would make me happier for another year (as I'll have much more than I ever wanted). However, if fate will be unkind to me, at least I can still be happy that I have achieved my new year resolution.

Happy New Year 2013!

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Art as a Mirror



1. The analogy

What makes art? What makes music? 

When we speak, we produce sound waves that can have varying pitch and rhythm, and yet our speech is not considered music. So why do we consider Beethoven's fifth to be a piece of music, when it is also essentially made of sound waves produced by an orchestra? Also, if we can write an essay, or draw a picture, both using pen and paper, why must we distinguish one scribbling from the other?

I think the reason we discriminate speech from music, written passage from drawing, lies in the analogy of the mirror. And the analogy is, that art (which includes music as one of its forms) is anything that can act as a mirror to our soul.  


2. The mirror

A mirror, as we learn at school, works by reflecting light. We can say that it is usually made of two layers. It has a transparent layer made of glass. And behind the glass there is an opaque layer of coating, that can be made of substances such as silver or aluminum.

The glass in itself will not reflect much light, although it can act as a two way mirror if we place it between two rooms with different lighting levels. The glass between the two rooms will reflect images of people in the brighter room, whilst making them visible to those people in the dark room.

Of course, when a glass is coated with an opaque substance, including shiny ones like silver or aluminum, the coating layer acts as a dark room. When we look into this glass mirror, we stand in the brighter room, so to speak, and so we can see our reflection in the mirror.


3. The music

Speech is simply a tool for communication. No one would argue otherwise. But who can tell what is music?

If music is simply an art form, then we can probably test our analogy and compare it to a mirror. Like a mirror, a musical piece must also be composed of two layers. It must have a 'transparent' component, and an 'opaque' layer. 

Its 'transparent' component is made of the features that music share with speech, or the features that make music easily understood. These include the explicit information that a piece of music may carry, such as its mood, and the literal interpretation of the lyrics that may accompany the music. Just like when we listen to somebody speak, we can immediately get the tone of his speech (happy, angry, formal, playful) and the information the speaker is trying to convey to us; so in music, when we listen to a song, we can tell whether it is a happy, or sad song, and what the lyrics may literally mean. (Thus, music can be transparent)

However, by being merely 'transparent', a piece of music can only carry a certain meaning, or rigid interpretation, and so we can no longer appreciate it as an art form. This is how we perceive our national anthem and ringtone, to give some examples. These have a direct and literal meaning to them - a national identity, or a call alert.

Therefore, music must also have a 'deeper layer of opacity', to act as a mirror. This is the incomprehensible, obscured part of music. It can be compared to the dark room on the other side of a two way mirror, or the silver coating of a glass mirror. This is the part of music that makes it a mystery to us, and distinguishes it from speech. To illustrate, imagine you calling a friend and then reading him a paragraph from a news website. Then, you suddenly start singing the next paragraph to him.

At first when you read the news to your friend, he would listen and immediately understand what you are talking about. However, when you start singing to him from the same news website, you will almost certainly confuse him, and he may also begin doubting your sanity. Of course, if you can sing well, that paragraph from the news which was originally only a piece of information, can be turned into music quite easily, by the peculiar way you read it aloud.

In other words, singing starts when we cannot be sure why the singer speaks in a certain way. Ironically, even though we could not fully 'understand' his song, we can still very well enjoy it. This is only because music, like a mirror, can show us our reflection. 


4. The reflection

Even after comparing it to a mirror, we may still wonder how music can produce our reflection. The answer lies in how we try to make sense of the peculiarities of music. This is similar to the way we try to make sense of the strangeness and obscurity of other forms of art, including painting, poetry or sculpture.

What we may not have realized is that our interpretation, or the way we make sense of the strangeness of a piece of art is unique to each of us. This is not just about how we differ in our preference of one art over another. In fact, just like how a good mirror can show us a clear reflection, a good piece of art will reveal our reflection clearly.

As mentioned before, our reflection is produced in art when we attempt at an interpretation. This is because our interpretation is inextricably linked to our past experience, knowledge and personality - all of which are unique to each of us. For example, Beethoven's fifth symphony may sound the same to all our ears, but we inevitably will all perceive it differently. Some may say, "It's the sound of Fate". While others may agree with a Youtube commenter who thought, "Star Wars sounds like this". 





By showing us our reflection, art can be a useful way for us to find out more about ourselves. But we must also be careful, as our obsession with art, like an obsession with looking at mirrors, can only be a further proof of our vanity (read: narcissism).

***

The top image is that of Narcissus, by Caravaggio (source: Wikipedia)

Saturday, December 15, 2012

Saturday, December 8, 2012

The Presenter

1. A better world without them?

Talk show and reality TV hosts, newscasters, radio DJs, museum and art gallery educators, all share a common role: to present to us certain interesting persons, topics or objects.

Can we imagine a world without TV and radio presenters? Yes, but we often get it wrong. We may think this imaginary world without hosts would be a better place than where we are now. After all, aren't most TV or radio hosts plain annoying? Even the good ones just keep us away from understanding the real deal, as we may be mislead by their interpretation of the subject anyway. Would it really be better for a show to run without a host? Maybe not.

In fact, a programme without a presenter won't be as good as a hosted one. It would be boring. And this is not necessarily because presenters are entertaining by themselves. What makes a programme so much better when it's hosted is all to do with our natural indolence (read: laziness).  We just cannot afford (or just too lazy) to do everything by ourselves, so these presenters are there to help us get to know a certain subject. But why are they so good at this? Let me explain.


2. Greek chorus

The ancient Greek used to stage plays in theatres, some of which are still standing, although now in ruins. From what we understand through records and traditions, these plays were not only popular in their time, but they also had some features that may at first puzzle us today. One of their features was to have a small group of people, called the chorus, who would stand in a place between the stage and the audience, essentially to host the drama enacted on the stage.

The chorus would narrate the story, and at times, even interrupt the actors on the stage with their commentaries. They would even have some dialogues with those actors. Their explanation may help the audience to understand the story, and this might have been done through singing. (This may be the origin of choral speaking and why it may also involve some singing..)

When I first learned about the Greek chorus I thought it was absurd. Wouldn't it disrupt the play on the stage? After all, we certainly don't see people standing between us and the stage who would talk to actors during the show and singing away the plot in modern theatres . But I was wrong. The chorus have climbed the stage and finally joined the actors in the spotlight. They are now called extras, or background actors.


3. Youtube comments and fake laughs

What's more satisfying than to watch a good Youtube video? To read the viewers' comments, of course. But have we ever wondered why?

Well, Zizek might have the answer. Slavoj Zizek is a modern day philosopher and I enjoy watching his videos on Youtube for his wacky comments on mundane things. In fact, my previous post on Diet Coke and decaff coffee was inspired by his talk.

Anyway, Zizek once described why comedy shows on TV would use fake recorded audience laughs and what makes them so effective in making us enjoy these shows. It's not simply a trick that tries to make us, the viewers at home, laugh, everytime we hear those fake laughs in a scene.

In fact, those fake laughs allow us to enjoy these programmes even without us laughing. Zizek thinks that this is because the recording has already laughed for us. So we only need to sit back and relax in front of the screen, and without even forcing a laugh we can feel good after watching the comedy programme.

Back to Youtube video comments, we find reading them actually gives us more pleasure than watching the video. Well, why not? Other viewers have already shared their thoughts on the video, and so we really don't even have to bother judging the video anymore. Just read the comment section and you could still enjoy Youtube without even watching the videos.


4. Film and reality

So why do we prefer hosted TV shows and radio programmes? Well first off they can do something which we'd like to do but can't be bothered to - talk to famous people, ask embarrassing questions and gossip about others, choose the right songs to play, etc. Of course we don't always agree with the host on her conversation with the celebrity, or her taste in music.

But to have someone do something for us is always convenient, and so unsurprisingly, Greek chorus, Youtube commenters, fake audience, along with museum educators, DJs and TV hosts can entertain us with their presence. By explaining to us the story in the play, judging a video, laughing on a funny scene, telling us the history of an art work, making a song playlist and talking to famous people, these presenters have allowed us to effortlessly enjoy these things. Isn't that amazing?

What's more amazing is to realize how 'presenters' can also play a role in films. Think of any famous films, there's always a character that narrates the whole plot for us, or explain the significance of events in the story. (Avatar: Jack's video blog, Titanic: Rose's interview). Without a narrator, audience can easily get confused - like what happened at the end of Inception.

Even a film with practically one character, like Castaway, needed a narration. Otherwise, we just don't see the point of the film - or rather, we can't be bothered to find out for ourselves why Tom Hank's character had to suffer from his isolation. 




Talking about isolation, we can easily imagine why it can hurt so much. When you live alone, you need to do everything on your own. Everything. Every little thing that you used to take for granted, when they are crucial for your survival, you'd have to work hard to keep it. And do this without any help from others. That's not easy.

In other words, the miserable experience of isolation can make us realize how dependent we are on others. Try not to watch any hosted TV programmes, stop listening to the radio, don't read the comments on Youtube, watch standups with no audience, and watch Castaway without that scene above.

Of course, it's not easy to get to know famous people, discover new music, watch the whole length of Youtube videos, laugh at comedy and putting together the plot - all by ourselves. So thank goodness we have each other!

Thursday, December 6, 2012

Our Bucket of Memory

1. The container

If we were to put all the things that we remember into a bucket, we would call that container our memory. The word memory can mean both: the things we remember, and the faculty of remembering itself. This faculty of remembering things can be compared to a bucket of water.

Of course this imaginary bucket can only hold a certain amount of content, and this depends on its size. If we pour too much into a small bucket, the content will overflow.

Like a bucket, our memory is also limited by its capacity . The things we forget are like the overflowing content of an overfilled bucket. Forgetfulness, like an overfilled bucket, can either be due to things being put in too quickly, or worse, having a small bucket.



2. The content

Now let's talk about the content: the stuff of memory, or what actually fill up this imaginary bucket. What do we remember?


Here, we can assume there to be two types of content: (1) facts, and (2) understanding. Although both facts and understanding are stored in the memory, they can have different effects on the container.

Facts will only fill up the space in the bucket, whereas understanding can also expand the capacity of the bucket. So if we only fill our bucket with facts, it will get overfilled very quickly. Fortunately, we also fill our bucket with some understanding, which will increase its capacity, and so our bucket will not overflow too easily.


3. The capacity

So why do we need a big bucket of memory? Surely we can survive with retaining very little bits of information in our memory - only those vital ones such as where to find food and shelter. Would there be any advantage to a bigger store of memory?

I think there is. A bigger bucket can hold a greater amount of content. This greater amount of stored memory will allow a richer experience of life overall, and this would naturally bring us greater joy and pleasure. For instance, we can compare newborns, who have very little store of memory, with older children - and we can imagine how their life experiences would differ.

Of course we see babies smile and laugh with every good feed and stimulation, and so they appear to enjoy their lives. Their enjoyment, however, is small compared to, say, an older child's joy of celebrating his birthday. And in turn, this boy's joy of his birthday celebration is actually insignificant, when compared to the experience of love in adulthood.

It's not difficult to imagine the richness of experience giving us more pleasure, and so it is why we strive to increase our 'memory capacity' even further with technology.


4. Technology and Civilization

Thankfully we have developed tools that can help us store information - like a simple pen and paper; or a more sophisticated machinery such as the computer. However, technology has also overloaded us with information, thanks to fast connections and high processing speed. It's simply mind-boggling how much information is thrown at us everyday, that there are a lot of trivial facts that must be forgotten (otherwise they will overfill our bucket).

But let's also not overlook the gift of language that we humans are endowed with. It is such a useful tool that allows us to share our 'memory capacity' with each other, hence enriching our life experiences. Language can do this by allowing information to be transferred efficiently between its users, whether it is spoken or written.

So if you have reached this paragraph and have begun to understand what I am blabbering about here, I hope you will also share my joy of being understood. We can both rejoice that my understanding has now been transferred to you, which means that we have effectively increased the size of our buckets!

Sunday, December 2, 2012

About Me

My photo
Medical practitioner. Amateur philosopher, pianist and composer.