I was having a whale of a time today at Borders, Parkway Parade. I went to the crime/thriller section to look at the books. That was the second time I checked them out in detail ever since I started on them in Kinokuniya, Bangkok.
A flow of thoughts assailed my mind as I did that. I wondered how I got started on crime fiction and realised that it had been implanted in me when I discovered Famous Five and Secret Seven books as a child. Then I went on to Nancy Drew and Hardy Boys mysteries, which I still do read :) Those earlier fiction preferences have influenced my present ones.
I have discovered so many gems in the section of those two bookshops. There are crime cases chronicled in the setting of food outlets or craft shops, amongst others. Other cases are based on the protaganist's job, for example, an antique collector or a food writer. Even literary writers have been 'misused' to be admired anew as detectives. There are books portraying Oscar Wilde and Jane Austen as mystery solvers. It would be an experience reading their logical musings, despite the fact that the thoughts are fictional in nature, instead of solely their literary thoughts.
I could not resist buying a book with Pride and Prejudice's signature couple, the Darcys, as its main characters. The plot does not exclude their strong love for each other and even includes characters from Austen's other novels. It goes on to make the mystery paranormal by having an element of the supernatural within it.
I then toyed with the idea of writing my own crime series. I started thinking of possible settings to place my cases in. What about a singles' or a book club? The daunting aspects came into my mind too. The length of a novella is too long for me and so I thought of short stories within a novel, similar to Arthur Conan Doyle's books on Sherlock Holmes.
My mind then recalled the personal ambition I have: to publish a book of poetry by the age of 40. I had decided to give it up a few years back due to the fact that I felt that some of the poems were too personal and I could not include them. With this, the remaining poems would be too few. With this catalyst from the crime fiction I read, I now feel that it would be a waste to give up on this dream. If I feel a certain topic is too personal, I can expand my horizons to include others in my range of poetry. After all, anything around us can spark off creative musings. Therefore, I think I will focus more on my poetry than on this new idea.
I ended off my stream-of-consciousness with the desire to leave a legacy of such formalized literary output for people when I have gone back to my true home. It is not to show off my creativity but to share it with them. I am aware that this is probably uttered by the existing authors in the market and so there is an element of being cliched within it. However, I will leave it to my readers to judge the degree of sincerity it entails. Through it all, the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. There are so many things to do in life. I do hope I can fulfill this desire...
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Monday, February 8, 2010
Local viewers' unfair grouses
Some television viewers are simply ludicrous in their perspectives towards two variety shows focusing on loving help and generosity towards the needy. Suffice it to say that I love watching Life Transformers, but some of them are simply devoid of understanding towards the underlying objective of the show.
An episode evoked some viewers' disgruntlement towards the production team's choice of family on the list of needy recipients. The living conditions were noticeably in need of an improvement for the sake of the children, and yet these viewers chose to dwell on how the husband's parents treated his wife. They have no sensible reasons to protest against the help anyway, since the neighbours of the family shared the same view as the team. It is ironic how the show maintains very high ratings despite such nonsensical rantings. Perhaps these very viewers watch it to continue noting trivial areas for them to complain about?
Other viewers question the lower value of given furniture as compared to that of another show. They obviously based it on the superficial appearance since the cost of the furniture is not stated. Thank goodness both shows have the same executive producer and she clarified things.
I am impressed by the reply given to the two senders who had expressed their concerns over the episode about the hearing-impaired couple. It addressed their concerns and clarified them so completely, without any tinge of unhappiness or arrogance. This goes to show the importance of diction and how it can assure its readers. The senders should let their case rest after reading the reply.
An episode evoked some viewers' disgruntlement towards the production team's choice of family on the list of needy recipients. The living conditions were noticeably in need of an improvement for the sake of the children, and yet these viewers chose to dwell on how the husband's parents treated his wife. They have no sensible reasons to protest against the help anyway, since the neighbours of the family shared the same view as the team. It is ironic how the show maintains very high ratings despite such nonsensical rantings. Perhaps these very viewers watch it to continue noting trivial areas for them to complain about?
Other viewers question the lower value of given furniture as compared to that of another show. They obviously based it on the superficial appearance since the cost of the furniture is not stated. Thank goodness both shows have the same executive producer and she clarified things.
I am impressed by the reply given to the two senders who had expressed their concerns over the episode about the hearing-impaired couple. It addressed their concerns and clarified them so completely, without any tinge of unhappiness or arrogance. This goes to show the importance of diction and how it can assure its readers. The senders should let their case rest after reading the reply.
Friday, January 8, 2010
Subjective font colour in headline for emphasis
An article on the flaws of online shopping has had its headline presented in a subjective manner, I feel. Instead of highlighting words to do with this topic, it highlighted the physical disability of the customer who was dissatisfied with the website. This shows how subjective editing can cause misconception.
The condition of the customer has nothing to do with the topic and this highlighting seems to shower unwanted attention on her condition, on the contrary. It does make things worse for her already miserable state of mind, if any, over her condition.
The condition of the customer has nothing to do with the topic and this highlighting seems to shower unwanted attention on her condition, on the contrary. It does make things worse for her already miserable state of mind, if any, over her condition.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
World's Strictest Parents Show
A Singaporean family took up the challenge of housing two wayward Australian teenagers for a week, and to attempt to change the teenagers. The teenagers stayed with the family and participated in the family's activities. They had to adhere to the rules followed by the children and go to school with the children too.
The reality programme shown on Australian TV chronicles the struggles faced by the teenagers and the family. The teenagers found it very difficult to follow the rules while the family had to rein them in when they showed disobedience.
The irony is that after the project was over, it was the boy who made a change for the better. The girl became worse. People make the stereotypical assumption that the girl would respond positively instead, and it is such a pitiful disgrace to note the contrary result. It is heartening to note that the boy has expressed his filial love for his mother and has changed his bad habit of waking up late. Also, respectfulness was ingrained in both of them during the show. :)
A debate has ensued over this show as to the level of strictness parents should employ. I am glad that some youths actually agree that parents should be strict with their children so as to make them morally upright individuals. Indeed, children in the West are brought up too liberally and thus some become delinquents. I do acknowledge that some of the rules enforced in the programme are a little uncalled for, such as the banning of sleepovers. If they merely consist of girls, as initiated by the daughter for her friends to participate in, then such sleepovers are not wrong. Rules specifically for the sleepovers can still be imposed, such as no alcohol intake.
The rule about computers being installed in the living room for the parents to monitor their children's internet activities, is not unreasonable. If the children are allowed to have computers in their own bedrooms, then the parents will not be aware should they unintentionally visit adult-only websites, and the parents will not have the opportunity to explain the unhealthy nature of such websites to their children.
At the same time, R is not wrong in his opinion of the unnecessarily high level of strictness which may cause rebellion from children towards their parents in the later years. Sometimes, parents need to let their children fall down, learn what causes that fall and then climb back up with the knowledge that they should avoid that catalyst that had caused them to fall. In other words, they learn life's lessons in the hard way. It is heartbreaking for parents but the children learn the lessons better in this way.
I am also glad to note that some youths understand the difficulty of being parents, as they are unable to discern when to be strict or otherwise. They are human too and sometimes tough love can instill the fear of losing their children's love, in them as a result. All I can say is that they yearn to keep us safe in what they do, even if it borders on protectiveness.
Mr Daniel Koh puts it best when he expresses the fact that some parents are strict only towards their children's studies but not towards their moral upbringing, which is really far more important in helping them lead good lives. He cited physical punishment as a taboo however. This is something I beg to differ.Without such methods my parents used on me as a child, I would not have turned out to be who I am.
The reality programme shown on Australian TV chronicles the struggles faced by the teenagers and the family. The teenagers found it very difficult to follow the rules while the family had to rein them in when they showed disobedience.
The irony is that after the project was over, it was the boy who made a change for the better. The girl became worse. People make the stereotypical assumption that the girl would respond positively instead, and it is such a pitiful disgrace to note the contrary result. It is heartening to note that the boy has expressed his filial love for his mother and has changed his bad habit of waking up late. Also, respectfulness was ingrained in both of them during the show. :)
A debate has ensued over this show as to the level of strictness parents should employ. I am glad that some youths actually agree that parents should be strict with their children so as to make them morally upright individuals. Indeed, children in the West are brought up too liberally and thus some become delinquents. I do acknowledge that some of the rules enforced in the programme are a little uncalled for, such as the banning of sleepovers. If they merely consist of girls, as initiated by the daughter for her friends to participate in, then such sleepovers are not wrong. Rules specifically for the sleepovers can still be imposed, such as no alcohol intake.
The rule about computers being installed in the living room for the parents to monitor their children's internet activities, is not unreasonable. If the children are allowed to have computers in their own bedrooms, then the parents will not be aware should they unintentionally visit adult-only websites, and the parents will not have the opportunity to explain the unhealthy nature of such websites to their children.
At the same time, R is not wrong in his opinion of the unnecessarily high level of strictness which may cause rebellion from children towards their parents in the later years. Sometimes, parents need to let their children fall down, learn what causes that fall and then climb back up with the knowledge that they should avoid that catalyst that had caused them to fall. In other words, they learn life's lessons in the hard way. It is heartbreaking for parents but the children learn the lessons better in this way.
I am also glad to note that some youths understand the difficulty of being parents, as they are unable to discern when to be strict or otherwise. They are human too and sometimes tough love can instill the fear of losing their children's love, in them as a result. All I can say is that they yearn to keep us safe in what they do, even if it borders on protectiveness.
Mr Daniel Koh puts it best when he expresses the fact that some parents are strict only towards their children's studies but not towards their moral upbringing, which is really far more important in helping them lead good lives. He cited physical punishment as a taboo however. This is something I beg to differ.Without such methods my parents used on me as a child, I would not have turned out to be who I am.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Pop singers' appalling performance "stunts"
The most shocking one was Adam Lambert pushing his male dancer's face at his crotch area. That may have been due to the rush of adrenalin as he was performing and it may have been done for entertainment's sake, but it was a badly chosen act of showmanship.
He was also infamous for initiating a French kiss on his band member who is married. His claims that he just wanted to have a good time onstage, that it was time to take more risks and how it is too bad that people were too scared, are presumptuous, I feel. He may be on the road to fame but the failure to spare a thought for the feelings of others is inexcusable.
He is not the only one who has ruffled my feathers though. Carrie Underwood, who has always been known as a saccharine-sweet; goody-two-shoes country singer, wore a pants-less outfit for her performance. I feel that she was trying to fit into the trend of being raunchy as a singer in the pop music industry. I am rather dismayed by her choice of outfit in line with this intention. To give in to such peer pressure is a foolish decision, I feel. Her usually decent performances make her stand out from the usual cohort.
Rihanna made eyes pop when she wore a bandage-style catsuit. It was really daring and seriously, it would not have made much of a difference if she had not worn anything at all. The bandages were tightly wound around her body and made her breasts flat as a result. They just covered the nipples. I mention these two facts because the breasts could be seen! Her private area below the breasts was merely covered by a strip of bandage.
Two inferences strike me as I look at it. She was definitely not going through her menstruation and she was trying to gain attention in a different way from the attention which was a result of the problems she had with Chris Brown. Well, she did gain lots of attention from this outfit,and whether it is positive or negative, it will depend on the perspective each one has.
Lady Gaga's "stunt" with the piano baffles me. I do not see any logic behind it. It is really a senseless antic.
He was also infamous for initiating a French kiss on his band member who is married. His claims that he just wanted to have a good time onstage, that it was time to take more risks and how it is too bad that people were too scared, are presumptuous, I feel. He may be on the road to fame but the failure to spare a thought for the feelings of others is inexcusable.
He is not the only one who has ruffled my feathers though. Carrie Underwood, who has always been known as a saccharine-sweet; goody-two-shoes country singer, wore a pants-less outfit for her performance. I feel that she was trying to fit into the trend of being raunchy as a singer in the pop music industry. I am rather dismayed by her choice of outfit in line with this intention. To give in to such peer pressure is a foolish decision, I feel. Her usually decent performances make her stand out from the usual cohort.
Rihanna made eyes pop when she wore a bandage-style catsuit. It was really daring and seriously, it would not have made much of a difference if she had not worn anything at all. The bandages were tightly wound around her body and made her breasts flat as a result. They just covered the nipples. I mention these two facts because the breasts could be seen! Her private area below the breasts was merely covered by a strip of bandage.
Two inferences strike me as I look at it. She was definitely not going through her menstruation and she was trying to gain attention in a different way from the attention which was a result of the problems she had with Chris Brown. Well, she did gain lots of attention from this outfit,and whether it is positive or negative, it will depend on the perspective each one has.
Lady Gaga's "stunt" with the piano baffles me. I do not see any logic behind it. It is really a senseless antic.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Celebrities prejudiced against
Belinda Lee recounted how she was insulted by an expatriate family while filming. Granted, they felt that the television cast and crew was disrupting their peace, but that does not entitle them to the act of insulting the crew, what more a celebrity. Belinda is good in her spoken English and they were probably too shallow in assuming that the uncouth/unrefined character she may have been playing was her real self. They could have politely asked the group to be less noisy, or something to that effect. Perhaps they had lost their tongue and could not phrase a simple request in their native language.
Threatening to call the police even after seeing that it was a filming event, with all the television cameras in the background, makes them uncouth, uncultured, uncivilized, unrefined and callous in my eyes. I am glad they eventually gave way and let the filming continue. I am even happier upon reading that they moved out too. After all, Mediacorp legitimately rented the houses for its drama series and was not committing any illegal activity in them. It goes to show that the family was like a frog in a wall, ignorant of the existence of Mediacorp and its outdoor shooting activities. No, I am not xenophobic.
Threatening to call the police even after seeing that it was a filming event, with all the television cameras in the background, makes them uncouth, uncultured, uncivilized, unrefined and callous in my eyes. I am glad they eventually gave way and let the filming continue. I am even happier upon reading that they moved out too. After all, Mediacorp legitimately rented the houses for its drama series and was not committing any illegal activity in them. It goes to show that the family was like a frog in a wall, ignorant of the existence of Mediacorp and its outdoor shooting activities. No, I am not xenophobic.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Body Worlds exhibition
Corpses are stripped of their skin for this exhibition. It may be for an artistic purpose but I wouldn't let my mum's body be mutilated in this way. I feel it is a form of disrespect to the dead. Even though her body is a shell for her soul and it is cremated after death, cremation is a natural method of the death process. The body was the physical form of the person I love. This form of art degrades the journey of life and death, I feel.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)