On DPM Lee’s Harvard Club speech on continued openess in Singapore culture

February 7th, 2004 Uncategorized

Catherine Lim wrote in the local papers on Jan 13 her response to culture of continued openess that Mini Lee*, declared in his Harvard Club speech. (Her written reply can be found on Kelvin Tan’s journal.)

I can’t help but agree with her: as long as the people cannot get the government to align their interest with the people, the only people who will be enriched will be the government. Previously I mentioned that I want the government to be more accountable. Accountability isn’t something fixed, something objective I can measure especially when the objective is open to interpretation and it isn’t some numeric number type objective that we are chasing, but a vague notion of happiness. This creates a problem in defining what exactly I want the government to do to make me happy to be where I am.

Is it creativity? Is it entreprenuerialship? Is it bartop dancing? Is it an iron rice bowl? Is it getting to live in a fun place?

So I don’t know what I want. I want different things at different times. They can point at me and say, well you don’t know what you want, we can tell you what will make you happy and give it to you: a job, a roof, some light entertainment, and a mate. We are going to do all we can, they say, to give you these things but you have no right to tell us what means we use to achieve this.

Everyone wants a mouth of rice, a place to stay, some light hearted fun and a mate to breed offsprings. Can I disagree?

While my need isn’t any different from everyone, I don’t want to give another person a length of rope to hang myself. What if the means are especially cruel or that I am forced into hardship? Delaying gratification requires a guesswork about the future. If my future isn’t bright enough, I would not delay gratification. If my present is horrid, why would I think the future holds a promise?

In my rambling way, what I am trying to say is this: as long as my objectives are socially tolerable, I want to be free from persecution to choose both, my objectives and the means to achieve them. I don’t want to have to leave because a group of people in power have made the place intolerable. I want to hear what the different groups have to offer and the criticisms of their policies, before I give up the rope that leads me to happiness. Because politics is all about the government trying to align its interest with the people, not the other way round.

*Vernon Chan superbly coined the next PM’s nickname.

Sand and A Distant Star

February 2nd, 2004 theatre

“Stan Lai, hailed by Asiaweek as “Asia’s Top Theatre Director” and the unprecedented double winner of Taiwan’s National Arts, is back! Helming Performance Workshop, Taiwan’s leading contemporary theatre group, Lai brings you another modern tale starring Chang Hsiao-yen and Pu Hsueh-liang hosts of Taiwan’s Happy Sunday, Liu Han-ya host of Taiwanese variety show Guess, and Taiwan’s acclaimed actor, playwright and director King Shih-chieh.

Chang plays Ye-ying, a street vendor selling watches whose husband deserted her and her daughter 20 years ago. Since then she has been studying the stars, believing aliens abducted her husband, and that he will soon return. Her daughter’s boyfriend, a small time TV producer senses a reality TV gold mine and plans to stage the return of Ye’s husband on prime time television. In the end, will reality prevail or will imagination conquer all in this moving play of fantasy and fable grounded in familial love?”

–Advertising material on http://www.esplanade.com/

Sand and a Distant Star contained many lovely short moments but there was no time to dwell long on them: there were too many other distractions.

Great lines:

(Ye Ying and daughter Guai Guai quarrelling. Guai Guai is jealous of the Ye Ying’s imaginery daughter.)
YY: