Rape Victims are Victims (2)

In a quick follow-up to my previous post, I found this published yesterday in the Jakarta Post:

"The mother of the 14-year-old girl raped by alleged human traffickers that she met on Facebook wants Education and Culture Minister Mohammad Nuh to apologize for his statements on the case.

The mother of the girl, who has only been identified by her initials SAS, said on Tuesday her daughter had suffered a setback after the minister said she may have consented to sex and then claimed rape.

“My daughter was a victim, not an active participant. The family has agonized over this incident, and then the minister’s comment aggravated [our suffering],” the mother said during a press conference at The National Commission for Child Protection (Komnas PA) in Jakarta.

Nuh told reporters last week that cases of teenage rape were sometimes the fault of the victims. “They do it for fun and then the girl alleges that it’s rape.”"
 

 I'm assuming this is another case of rape (another minor, I think), but the fact that the Education and Culture Minister, who is responsible for the education of children and instilling the moral standards of our culture, can say that she wasn't a victim is messed up. Sure, there have been cases where girls have pretended to be raped to frame men, or to gain attention. There have been cases too where minors have claimed rape after what they regarded as consensual sex. But isn't that why we have a minimum age? Isn't that why sex with a minor is illegal anyway, because they're not mentally ready to give their consent? Isn't is considered rape anyway?

For a high-ranking government official to publicly question a rape victim, especially a teenage one, is just a show of how twisted our society is. Rape isn't the fault of the victim, that's why they're called a victim. People, especially girls, treasure their own body more than material things. Then why is a robbery victim not at fault for the robbery that happened to them while a rape victim is at fault? Why is someone who was stupid enough to get scammed through the internet considered a victim, while rape victims are marginalized? 

How can a grown man considered educated and cultured enough to be a minister publicly announce to the press that a young girl, one whose story he probably doesn't even know in detail, is at fault for getting raped? What kind of reaction does he expect from the public? Did he not think it through that she will be marginalized in her community because he implied that she was a slut? 

Men in Indonesia do not know the feeling of being labeled a sexual deviant because it's acceptable for men to be sexually active. They think of women who are sexually active as sluts. And yet this one man can so easily label a young girl a slut, while knowing subconsciously how her society will see her. 

As an Education and Culture Minister, his words are bound to have some weight. His statements are considered credible. But such a thoughtless man, who doesn't even consider the weights of his words, how can we trust him with the education of our country's children?

Rape Victims are Victims

What do people have against rape victims?

A few weeks ago, a middle school girl in Depok was chased out of her school because she was raped. VIVAnews reported that the school announced in the weekly morning assembly that they were unwilling to accept a student who has smeared the school's reputation. Upon entering her class, the girl was chased away by a teacher.

I don't know what can smear a school's reputation further than mistreatment of their students.

I think it's accepted universally that rape victims are VICTIMS. Victims who need counseling, who need protection. They're not criminals. They shouldn't be treated like criminals.

There is an issue with the way people perceive rape in Indonesia. Rape victims are treated like they deserved to be raped, there is a social stigma that generalizes rape victims as sexual deviants. This belief in reinforced by government officials; Jakarta's government publicly implied that a girl who was raped in a public transport had it coming because she was wearing a short skirt. A couple months ago, our Religious Minister also stated that there should be a specific dress-code for women, because skirts above our knees are considered pornographic.

Well, fuck you too.

It's because people assume that scantily dressed women are sexual deviants, it's because people assume that scantily dresses women want sex. Honestly, the definition of scantily-clad-enough-to-get-raped in Indonesia is pretty amazing considering we're supposed to be a democracy. Apparently it's okay for girls to be raped because their hot pants and miniskirts indicate their willingness to commit sexual acts.

Gentlemen, they're clothes. They're not an indication of sexual availability. They're not equal to a fucking neon sign that says "Yes, I am willing to have sex anytime, anywhere, with anyone. This is equal to my signature on a piece of paper, witnessed by a lawyer."

There is no such thing as sending the wrong signal. They could be naked and nobody would have the right to rape them. They could be winking and motioning you to come closer. They could be blowing kisses. But in the end, as long as you don't have their consent, any form of sexual harassment is a crime.

Wait, are we saying that prostitutes and sluts and sexual deviants deserve to be raped? Nobody deserves to be raped. Do you think it's okay to rape a prostitute because she's in the sex industry? Is it okay to rape a stripper, since she makes money using her body anyway?

Nobody deserves to be raped. Rape is defined as the crime of forcing another person to have sexual intercourse against their will or without their consent. Which part of unwilling don't these people understand?

Vice versa, people assume that rape victims are sexual deviants, people assume that they were raped because they sent signals of sexual availability. People assume that these young girls, rape victims, were prostituting themselves or performing equally abnormal behaviors in the eyes of society.

Another rape victim in Aceh committed suicide after a local newspaper published her name. Her case was taken up by human rights watch organizations, who speculated that she committed suicide because rape victims were considered prostitutes in the region. She was still a minor. She suffered from a stupid social stigma that couldn't understand the fact that she was a victim.

Another student lost her opportunity to learn, another little girl lost her world.

The girl in Depok is still alive, she still has a chance to become a normal student once again. The Ministry of Education succeeded in negotiating with the school to allow her return. She still has a chance to go to school, or does she?

Yes, maybe if she moved to a remote part of the country. Who would want to go back to a school that publicly shamed you in front of your friends? How else could a middle school girl react to being banished by her teachers, to losing her friends? Isn't that the same to being rejected by the people you look up to, the people you depend on, when you need them the most?

Shouldn't they be sympathizing with her, instead of condemning her? Shouldn't her teachers be aiding her integration into her learning environment after a traumatic incident, instead of giving her labels that will degrade her in the eyes of society? Shouldn't the school be condemning the incident and slandering the perpetrator, shouldn't they hold an assembly on how to better protect yourself against criminals? Shouldn't they be ensuring that her education resumes unhindered so that she can secure a bright future?

Instead what do these teachers teach?

They teach students to discriminate against rape victims. They teach students that rape victims do not have a right to education.

Despite the many flaws in the actual execution of this law, there is a law that states the guaranteed right to education for all citizens of Indonesia, at least until they finish middle school. That's why the government are working to abolish education costs for public institutions, so that everyone will have a little bit more equality in education. So people can work hard to achieve their dreams based on meritocracy, not based on how much money they inherit.

So why was that little girl denied her rights as a citizen? Because she was raped?

How does being raped justify anything? It's never their fault. Are we so barbaric as a nation that we would ignore the plight of rape victims and instead condemn them to a vicious cycle of being discriminated against?

Despite the fact that she is allowed to resume her educations, news reports said that she has refused to go back to school because she has been publicly humiliated. And if she does go back to school, what will she face? Teachers who feel burdened having to taught her, fellow students who has been taught by teachers to discriminate against her. What kind of educational environment are we putting our country's children in? What mindset are they telling children today to have?

Why are children being taught by the media, by the community, by the government that rape victims should be blamed? What kind of sick mindset is that?

The question people ask shouldn't be why was she raped, the question should be how can we help her overcome the trauma of being raped? How can she put the incident aside as to not let it hinder her studies and opportunities in life? How can her friends and family support her? How can this incident make her stronger instead of weaker?

You can't change the past, but you can change the future. Unfortunately, in the hands of a cruel society, lies the future of a little girl.

Take Note, Ye Aspiring Scientist

This post by 9gag user surshallow made my day. Here's to every little girl reading one of those world leaders series comics and dreaming of being the next Marie Curie.

Out in the Inside

As the sunny days decline into the somber, winter weather, I find myself less and less willing to go outside. Instead, staring out at the sidewalk from my window, I find myself questioning the concept of "going outside". Is it the breath of fresh air? The ability to look up at the sky? The ability to walk and explore the landscape, or the cityscape, with no restrictions? Or is it simply the notion of exiting the enclosed shelter we call "home"?

The outside. Literally, the outdoors: the landscape unbound by walls, without a door to enter or to exit. Simultaneously, the concept outside is interchangeable with anything outside our house. Surely, sometime in our childhood, we've played outside. Surely, there was a time when our parents, concerned with the amount of hours we spend in front of our computer in a room with artificial lights, told us to go outside. Even now, when I find my body refusing to leave the folds of my warm blanket, I find my roommate chastising me to go outside, to leave the house, to be productive.

In Happy Valley, I find the notion of going outside synonymous to the idea of leaving an enclosed space: to walk unimpeded by walls, to breathe the cool air, to look up at the sky, to enjoy a walk as an escape from the cramped space I call home. However, back home in Jakarta, I find that the notion of going outside doesn't correspond to entering the outdoors.

When we say we're going outside, where are we really going? We are simply moving from one enclosed space to the other. We exit our house, and even when we exit our often, we often do not walk outside our doors. Our cars are waiting inside our garages. We enter the car and we get driven to the epicenter of city life in Jakarta: malls. One enclosed space to the other, where else would we go?

Where is this outside? For us, there is only an enclosed space to go to outside our house. When did our "outside" become another "inside"?

Here, public space is taken for granted. It is expected for people to be able to freely use the sidewalks, to be able to walk across lawns, to be able to enjoy the public space, unencumbered by fences and walls. After all, isn't it normal for people to be able to enjoy the outside, the outdoors, the earth that we all share equally?

Why have we accepted the notion of another inside as our outside? Why are we stuck within enclosed, capitalized spaces?

Why is there nowhere else to go?

As citizens, do we not have the right to question the lack of public space? Do we not have the right to public space? Do we, as humans, not have the basic right of sharing our landscape, our cityscape?

Why have we been denied the green space, the open space? Why are the streets unfriendly? Why have public gathering been forced into small sidewalks, or the streets?

And for what little green space we have left, why do we let them be? Why are we so insistent on ignoring these spaces, leaving them for the homeless to scavenge? Gardens fenced up with barbed wire, but for what purpose? It doesn't keep the scavengers out as long as the people look the other way.

Why do we degrade our own public space, then complain that we have none? We left them be, preferring to chase after the notion of progress offered by the glittering malls. We accepted the message that as citizens, we had the right to progress, and that progress was embodied within the new capitalistic ventures that we call our malls. It became the center of our city lives, and so our city lives became a mobilization of people between enclosed spaces, but never a mobilization of people in the city.

We do not live in the city. We do not breathe the city. We do not walk in our city. We do no own our city.

We proclaim ourselves citizens, we proclaim ourselves good citizens, we proclaim ourselves citizens who are deprived of our city. For us, our city is just roads that we look at from our vehicles. It isn't a holistic environment. We live in the buildings and center our lives within the buildings. We do not go outside for the sake of going outside, we go to another "inside".

When was the last time you walked outside your house just for the sake of taking a walk? When were you able to enjoy walking down the streets, for the sake of being outside and not just to go to another enclosed space?

Why did we let our city become so hostile to us? When did the city become just roads? We have no space we share, only space we buy. Space that is capitalized, that's where our rights to public space ended.

We tried to fulfill a notion of progress by replacing every empty space with money-making industries. And yet we forget to make our city livable. The concept of a city disappeared and was replaced by an empty shell: a collection of roads and buildings. We live in buildings, live out our lives in buildings.

In our struggle to form the ideal, modern city life, we forgot to include the city in our plan for progress. Now we are stuck in an endless cycle of being inside.

Double-Helix Staircases

I remember spending most of my childhood buried in books; mostly books on dinosaurs, comic biographies and the sort. As a child, I was fascinated by the stories of great scientists who experimented  their whole lives and wrote out the theories that make up the fundamentals of modern day science. As a child, I was blessed enough to have children encyclopedias strewn about the room, ready to tell me more or less how things in the world worked. 

Before my parents started to bring me abroad, I always wanted to go to the local science center. It's a bit sad, but I managed to go there only once as a child. Even as a child, I thought it was fascinating, though it lacked maintenance and displays. Last week I visited the place again. 

I was genuinely surprised at the many gadgets and displays they had and had lots of fun trying out each display. The architecture of the building itself was interesting (and very forward considering its age). I mean, seriously? A double-helix staircase? If that doesn't spell out awesomeness in a science center I don't know what does. Furthermore, the displays were interactive, which made it even better. 

Then, isn't it a waste that such a place isn't maintained very well?

A few of the displays had instructions that were taped, some others had pieces of paper from former events taped to it. The upper floors were largely unused and the library was empty (?). The pool on the first floor was also dry, with pieces of trash here and there. The sunroof needed cleaning, there was sludge filtering most of the light that came in. The disabled access was dark and many parts of it had broken tiles. 

Considering how much fun people can have in there, wouldn't it be great if it were fixed up properly? Can you imagine if the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History had broken tiles and half-empty rooms? 

People marvel at museums. This museum has the capability to impress anyone with its grandly suited architecture and interactive display. I think it's great that a lot of effort was put into creating the display, however, if only certain areas are maintained, then it would be a waste of perfectly good space. With such an awesome building design and a good array of display, why not go all out and revamp the details?

So much potential, so little used. 

The Faithless (Pt 2)

It's so difficult to comment objectively on minority treatment. It has become so ubiquitous that speaking of a particular case would seem hypocritical.

Most newspapers comment about the hurdles and exclusion that Christian communities face in Indonesia, which isn't hard to do considering that they're a minority in most places. Furthermore, high-profile hardliner groups like FPI has become more prominent in many places, while some states and cities with Muslim majorities openly denounce other faiths.

Of course, in a country where more than 97% of the population are Muslim, it's not hard to point out the numerous cases just because of the sheer numbers.

But let's look at the other side: in southeastern Indonesian cities such as Kupang, where the majority of the population is Christian, the Muslim population are also facing hurdles.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

How can we fight for equality if we only fight for one side? It's very easy to say that the other party is at fault merely because being a minority gives you the impression that you are being abused exclusively. It's easy to observe Christian advocates and hardliners condemning the Muslim hardliners' actions in banning churches, and who could blame them? It's not as if it isn't true.

However, before preaching for equality in such a way, would it not be wise to advocate for them to advocate for the Muslim communities facing difficulties in building mosques as well? The sheer scale of published cases of churches being banned raises questions as to whether Christian communities banning mosques are being persecuted as well.

It's true that it's unfair for churches to be banned, however, would they have allowed mosques to be built had they been the majority instead of the minority? We cannot simply condemn injustice that we practice ourselves.

It's also true that the communities are completely unrelated (geographically) to each other. The Christian whose churches are being banned in Bogor and Aceh aren't the same Christians who prevented mosques from being built in Kupang. One is a minority and one is the majority. The same way we can say that the Muslims who banned churches aren't the same community of Muslims whose mosques were banned.

Articles advocating their "brothers'" fight against injustice seem so hypocritical just because every majority always practice exclusion of the minority. It is unfair to say that Christians are being treated unfairly when they're treating Muslims unfairly and vice versa.

Brothers of the same faith? Anyone putting that before the good of everyone in their community (objectively) is violating the very principle our nation was built upon. Why bring the name of God into the conflict of men?

Subjectivity is disgusting, as much as it is inevitable. While most major newspapers reported the fact that GKI Yasmin in Bogor had initially received consent to be built (as well as receiving consent from the Supreme Court when its case was taken to court), a Muslim newspaper did not mention this fact at all. On the other hand, they spotlighted the fact that the mayor and his administration was against the church being built and that the church was violating the mayor's rules. They also mentioned that they were concerned that there might be 200 churches built in Bogor while the majority of the population wasn't Christian.

On the case of the mosque being banned in Batuplat, both the Jakarta Post and the VOA Islam mentioned the fact that the mosque had received consent from the local government, however the Jakarta Post raised the argument that the Christian community felt cheated that their opinion was never taken into account before the signing of the consent. Furthermore, they also highlighted an abduction incident and murder threats against a church member.

VOA Islam hailed the mayor of Kupang, a Christian, as a great figure who even gave land for the building of mosques. This comes from the same newspaper who condemned the building of churches consented by the supreme court. I would have to agree with the tolerant mayor, but must we only highlight things that are supportive of our argument? Must we only focus on the violence of others and turn a blind eye towards our own violence?

To each their own plight.

It's very difficult to achieve peace if we keep on portraying each other as invaders and terrorists. It's very difficult if each community insists on being completely partial. Arguably, it may be too much to ask religious writers to be impartial towards their own religion as it seems to defeat their cause. But is not the cause of every man his compassion?

How can we condemn others and save ourselves? How can we protest the banning of our house of worship and hail the banning of other houses of worship? Are we not free to choose our own faith as much as others are free to choose theirs?

Are we not all entitled to our own opinions as long as they do not bring physical harm to others? Are we so insecure of our beliefs that we have come to fear other beliefs?

It's the same as the Lady Gaga case. Are we so weak in our belief that we could be so easily swayed from our faith? Because that's what is implied in the Religious Minister's argument. To be able to claim that Lady Gaga is a "satanists" who will sway the faith of Indonesia's youth simply projects the belief that their fear outweighs their belief.

Not only the religious minister, various churches all over Indonesia also condemn Lady Gaga as a minion of Satan. The bride of Satan or something of the sort. If your faith in your God is so weak that your idea of Satan could overpower it, you are faithless.

Is your faith in kindness and compassion overpowered by your fear of others?

A few months ago I read an article calling Indonesia a fascist country and I couldn't resist the urge to email the journalist involved with the article to point out that we are (and should be) a democracy. (I emailed him partially because I felt his data were too old to base a report on, some of the main issues he argued for have been dealt with and were used only to support his argument.)

A few days ago news reported a book-burning incident incited by protests by the FPI, who claimed that the book, which allegedly called the Prophet Muhammad a pirate, was defacing the name of Islam and was thus against the law. The FPI did not burn the books, the publisher did.

Book-burning. In this day and age. No wonder they call us fascists.

A nun who had written about contemporary interpretations of love and hetero/homosexuality in the bible was also condemned by the Catholic church as misrepresentative of the religion. She contended that her book was not meant to align with the views of the church, but as an alternative view of religion and love.

Has tolerance been limited by didacticism? Has our love of humanity been overshadowed by our fear of differences?

Persecution of minority remains at large today. Protests against a mosque in New York. Protests against Christians in Egypt. For a world who condemns the practices of the medieval ages, we haven't progressed very far.

you wrote me letters in water
and hung them in the sun.
you folded them into paper airplanes
and let the wind carry them to me.
let it transcend,
you say.
between your planet and mine,
the planes burst into flames,
into water.
into dust.

a step ahead, you are always. carefully treading, and ever so carefully it looks almost careless.

like biting into air, I pause and hope for something. 

there is nothing but a careful snap and gritted feelings, 

squirming in my chest, fluttering in my stomach.

a step ahead, you are,

too transparent, hesitant.

you lead me nowhere and beyond,

to letters written in water

on papers that have long dried up.

The Faithless

Recently, it's always one of those days when I get into semi-serious conversations with my friends. It's probably the college-made-me-an-activist mode activated a tad too late into my college career. Either way, these conversations are always enjoyable because for some strange reason none of us (though we all had somewhat similar upbringings) have the same sentiments towards our home country.

The worst part is, none of us seem to have positive, full-of-hope sentiments at all.

One of my friends conjectured that there'll probably be another case of 1998 in the next decade or so. With all the extremist minority threatening other minorities at the moment, it's not exactly impossible. We haven't been so good with minority rights at all. Not even mentioning the decades before 1998 and the fall of the New Order, we've had plenty of aggression towards minorities in the past few years.

Talk about unity in diversity.

For example, army violations of human rights in conflict-ridden regions such as Papua is common. A video of them torching a hostage from the Papuan liberation group went viral a few years ago. In the latest, less-extreme case, religious hardliner groups rallied and cancelled the Lady Gaga concert scheduled for earlier this month WITH the consent and support of the government. In fact, our religion minister (the controversial figure, as always) released a statement to the press claiming that she should be denied entrance because she is a "satanist". Wow. Seriously?

Government support, in fact, seem to be crucial in oppressing minorities. Big supporters of it, in fact. When the government declared a certain Muslim sect illegal, a small scale massacre occurred of members of those sects. When the bystanders were questioned, they merely implied that they had to cleanse their village of dirty things.

Oh, and the perpetrators got a teeny few months in jail. On that note, a child who stole a pair of sandals from a police officer was threatened with 5 years in jail.

Bravo. Catching petty criminals and denouncing satanists by their wardrobe choice seem to be a more pressing issue in our country.

Some municipalities are even openly denouncing minority religions, refusing a court order that demanded them to allow church constructions. Said municipality also banned churches from streets with Muslim names.

Arguably, I'm attacking the other side too much. Violence perpetrated by minorities also occur, however, they are less often, considering the lack in numbers and authority. In truth, minorities probably react just as hardly towards majorities and other minorities. Government support, I tell you.

I mean, what kind of government would openly agree with a controversial, hardliner group? Our government, apparently.

Of course, we could argue that many of my friends are minorities, including the friend who mentioned the possibility of another riot. However, another friend, who was the epitome of the majority, also said that our country is hopeless.

In fact, he said we were doomed from the start. Let's not even get to minority oppression, oppression and fights also occur between sub-groups within the majority. Why force together a country with so many different ethnicities and beliefs?

Religion and ethnicity is never to blame. I believe that every civilization teaches love and compassion. It's the people who are to blame.

Of course, it's too wide a generalization for me to antagonize the majority. Not all of them are like that. Perhaps it could even be said that the perpetrators are a minority within the majority.

It's just scary that they're getting away with it. I've heard stories of people being herded into warehouses and burnt. I've heard various stories about people being forced into cars doused in gasoline then burnt. I've heard stories of people being beheaded and put on display.

It's just like the Rape of Nanking. The Holocaust. The Crusades. Another piece of history. These atrocities, however, are never admitted in government records. In fact, no statement has been publicly made admitting the riots. Of course, the anti-fascist demonstrations that happened in the same week was recorded so fervently, but none was written about the massacre, the rapes.

My mom listened to the radio, hearing people calling for help. Hearing people scream. She said the worst part was listening to the silence that ensued.

There shouldn't be a best part to these riots. But where there is cruelty, there is always kindness. There is always humanity.

I heard many stories about people being saved and hidden, passed off as a member of the ethnic majority. I've heard stories of victims being kindly offered refuge. Kindness is universal. There will always be those who will put themselves in danger in order to save.

And those are the people we should put our faith in. Not in things that make us fear, but things that make us believe in the power of kindness. There are still those who believe inherently that there is unity in diversity.

In times of trouble, there is always room to believe in altruism.

Where I Want To Be In 10 Years

via ArchDaily

Dirty Dancing

All the drafts I wanted to post in the beginning of April sort of piled up and made their way to mid-June, so in another edition of my old-news-update, I just wanted to draw attention to the current fad of turning waste into power (and money). 


We can all agree this is a universally-beneficial idea. Nobody likes waste, we want them gone. Now whether them being gone benefits someone else monetarily is another thing, but we all agree that if waste itself could be annihilated by putting them to good use, everyone's happy, yes?


I don't imagine a lot of people complaining, "hey, you're making money off my poo!" and being honestly offended by the idea that he's not being compensated for the loss of his poo. I mean, it would be great (maybe) if we had a market for human waste, but I think it's good enough that we're able to reprocess them.


Either way, I wanted to discuss these two articles, the first which was published on National Geographic early april, and the second, which was published sometimes mid-May on CNN. 


The first article talked about the possibility of using bacteria (thriving off agglomeration wastes) as a microbial fuel cell to generate electricity while simultaneously ridding the water of these bacteria. While such a prototype has been experimented with for a while, scientists claim that this prototype is more efficient and cost-minimizing in the process, making its commercialization viable. The drawback is that the current model can only reduce 97% of harmful bacteria from the water, while the requirement for drinkable water is 99.99%. That said, wouldn't it be revolutionary if we could generate electricity off something we have in abundance and would love to get rid of? 


For instance, that means we'll have clean rivers. Furthermore, any more waste thrown in the river will be processed into electricity! The very picture of an ideal world. 


Imagine getting rid of all that (unregulated, lol) industrial waste. Imagine being able to bathe and wash your clothes in clean water, without having to worry about how many people have relieved themselves upstream?


On second thought, that pooping business is still a problem. In less-developed nations, slums don't have proper toilets. If you can't even build a house, how do you expect running water and waste-management infrastructure? A lot steal electricity off other people's lines (apparently someone ended up with a monstrous bill and found out that an entire community was leeching off him after the electricity company launched an investigation) and a lot tap water by drilling holes into established pipes. 


However, how does one construct a toilet with nowhere to go? 


Well, they don't. They poo and pee and bathe and wash in the nearest flowing water source. Some even go au natural and dig a hole. And worst, some do not. Port-a-pottys are also uncommon due to the difficulty in managing them. Who wants to clean after a whole shantytown? 


That's where the second article comes in. The second article talks about the slums in Nairobi, where there are (apparently) two options to relieve yourself: perch perilously on a pit above a river (which is a common sight all over the world) or the "flying toilet". Now when I saw the headline I had to ponder upon the meaning of flying toilet. 


Apparently it meant relieving yourself in a plastic bag and "throwing the offending item on the street." 


MAJOR EW FACTOR. I thought the days of emptying chamberpots out the window were over.


Well here's our solution. A company plans to make our chamberpot into a pot of gold. They're planning to  "collect human waste in a series of custom-built toilets before transforming it into compost and fertilizer products that can be sold to the local agriculture industry."Hence, everyone gets toilets and they get a product!


That is, assuming that there is a market for products deriving from human waste. It's a lot more common for animal waste to be processed and turned into fertilizers and whatnot, but the thought of treading on human waste is usually a bit more disturbing for most of us. But for the long run, if the product is accepted by the market, then it would provide toilets to solve the sanitation problems while providing economic opportunities for both local entrepreneurs and the managing company.


Lovely thought. The company also plans to use the waste to generate electricity once the project is widely applied. 


They said that they'll be looking to do it next year. Or sometime soon like that.


A toast to humanity, ladies and gentlemen. To the power of people and mutual symbiosis.

Perspective

The challenge of democracy is providing enough benefit to ordinary citizens to make its preservation a matter of urgency to themselves, said Harold Laski.

For all the twelve years of schooling I had back home, I don't think that anyone's really ever explained the meaning of democracy to me. We vote, yes we do, but what for? What is the purpose in voting?

To avoid another dictatorship, I guess. I feel like I've been taking the right to vote for granted, as if it's always been there, as if it's negligible. Because I feel that the results do not really affect me.

But do they? Do they affect the millions of people who voted out there? Will it change anything?

What is the benefit? Where is the reform? Effects are often so insubstantial and isolated from our daily lives. But maybe it's just me and my ignorance.

Ignorance is, indeed, bliss.

We were raised without concern of political stances or race, we were raised to be indiscriminate, as a minority where everyone else is a minority. I didn't even know of race until my pre-teen years. Those who do not know others will fear, and indeed I did not grow to fear others.

It is difficult to condemn people you know. And it is difficult to understand why people condemn those they don't know.

In an ideal world, we would all be united under a cause, not separated under political parties. Our allegiance would be to a united front for all races and ethnicities to be in equal standing, whether that concerns minority rights or economical opportunities. We all be universally concerned about improving infant healthcare and pensions and infrastructure and whatnot.

In the midst of the bickering between political parties, it seems that in their deals and compromises to please each other, the population have been isolated. I simply don't understand why we are divided into race, and in those race and beliefs, each party hold their own.

Yes, an equal representation. Of what? Of race? Of religion? Should we not have an equal representation of causes devoted to communal good? Should we not benefit all members of the population equally and focus on these benefits instead of how each party can benefit their own little following?

Of course, without these incentives, who would support their own parties? But if each party were devoted to a singular cause that everyone else shares, then what is the reason of our bickering and argument?

If each party is devoted to their own manner of problem solving and is devoted to improving the country, why must they affiliate parties with religion and race? Will being a Christian make you do a better job in feeding the hungry? Will being a Muslim make you do a better job in improving minority rights?

Of course they all have their own agendas, but shouldn't the agendas be to everyone's benefit? Ideally, we should have a set of universal causes. Causes that provide equal benefits to all to make the preservation of the current government structure a critical issue.

Who, after all, would live under a government that placed them at a disadvantage? Especially when their political ideology supports the idea of the self-governing, informed citizenry.

It is a scary idea to think that there are those bent on extreme ideologies. It is scary to think that we would sacrifice the common good in order to satisfy the differences.

It is scary to think that we are different when we are not.

i hate how terrible my procrastination is. not just schoolwork but blogging too.

why oh why, maybe i'll figure it out...tomorrow.

ehe.

Won Sul

My new favorite tragic character. More posts on Shin Angyo Onshi to come maybe.

Won Sul <3

This Makes Me Sad

Via Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal

Good News for the Average College Student

To all the budding alcoholics out there (not me, I swear), here is your chance to (as ThinkGeek so adeptly said) "ferment your own happiness."

I hear there's finally a decent DIY somerandomdrink-to-alcohol kit out there. The DIY Juice to Alcohol kit!

Of course you'll have to certify that you're over 21 to buy this (see, not me), and at $13 a piece, it doesn't seem much of a price improvement over regular store-bought booze, but isn't the idea of making your own alcohol just marvelous? Just think of all the amazing chemistry you're doing all in the comfort of your own humble abode!

Actually, it might be a good way to save, because each kit turns SIX 64oz juice bottle to booze, though it doesn't actually specify how strong the booze is. I was thinking something along the line of beer and Smirnoff ice, perhaps? Of course, even then, 64 oz could feed a round of Kings Cup. Plenty to go around.

Again, I must stress that I doubt I'll be able to try this (legally) for a couple years here, but maybe if they ship to Indonesia? Booze taxes are insane back home.

I hear it goes awesome with cranberry juice, hit ThinkGeek to finally have that cost-saving house party you've always dreamed of throwing.

VaVaVoom

Admittedly, this isn't my most passionate post ever, but hey, SOMEONE BUILT A FUNCTIONAL TRICORDER. Engineering student Peter Jensen went ahead (and roused up the geek in all of us) and built the first fully functional tricorder.

Now most of us remember the tricorder as that funky thingamabob in Star Trek that we wish our smart phones would resemble in terms of function. Here's a shot of Jensen's finished machine.

I wish I was half that productive when I was an engineering student. Or half that cool, as a matter of fact.

Here's an excerpt of what the magical object can do, via dvice:

The Tricorder Mark 1 is, for all practical purposes, nearly identical to the device that we see in Star Trek, with the possible exception of being unable to reliably distinguish a Klingon from a Romulan. It's a self-contained, portable sensor system that can measure ambient temperature, humidity, air pressure, magnetic fields, surface temperatures, colors, ambient light level, ambient polarization, acceleration, direction, distance (ultrasonically), and of course it has a GPS receiver.

Sounds pretty handy for any scientist/adventurer/researcher on field. Or for Spock.

Lovely news, ladies and gentleman. Live long and prosper.

An Hour a Day Keeps the Melting Away, Supposedly

As we've all heard, today is Earth Hour day, where we all shut down our non-essential lights for an hour to raise awareness about the need to take action on climate change.

Of course, at 8:30 PM tonight, I will promptly turn off all the lights in my puny dorm room. With a room that small, there is no non-essential light.

But for the people in houses, I hear that many are planning to sit out the hour in total darkness. Way to go, guys! I expect that a lot of people will do the same, especially with all the hype and excitement I saw in twitter earlier today. It's always good to know that my friends back home are trying to be somewhat environmentally friendly, I think it's something they do to make up for the horrendous energy consumption every christmas. (Honestly, maybe they should do earth hour in the middle of christmas season to cut back on all that energy wasted on those giant, shiny Santa on the front yard)

Earth Hour began in 2007, when 2.2 residents in Sydney turned off non-essential lights for an hour. According to the statistics released by EnergyAustralia, the electricity consumption in Sydney for that one hour was 10.2% lower. The newspaper The Herald Sun compared this to taking around 43,000 cars off the road for an hour. Sound good for my lungs.

Of course, in the past few years, Earth Hour has grown to be a global movement. Last year, it was estimated that 1.8 billion people participated. This year, the numbers are expected to still grow. And not only from individuals, many renowned TV channels have been known to suspend broadcast during Earth Hour, encouraging people to turn off more of their utilities. Famous landmarks also turn off their lights for Earth Hour.

Earth Hour launched the campaign I Will If You Will this year. They described it in their website as a "simple promise and a challenge" where you can "dare anyone (your Facebook friends, co-workers, celebrity crushes) to accept your challenge and help protect the Earth or accept the challenge of someone else." You accept a challenge in exchange for people's participation in another program, if I'm not mistaken. The stuff people have promised to do sounds pretty cheeky, like doing the polar bear swim (what the hell is that?). My favorite has to be the one where some guy promises a 2.5% reduction in global CO2 emission if all countries join the UN En.Lighten initiative. Smart man.

Either way, Earth Hour is probably one of the bandwagons everyone actually should jump on. Here's the pledge, which everyone should totally sign.

We'll take an hour of darkness for the promise of a brighter sky.

Sadder Childhoods (and Happier Moms)

Who doesn't remember wanting to push the shopping cart in the supermarket for the first time? And sitting on the special seats they had at the back of the cart?

I think a lot of us could relate to running down supermarket hallways pushing shopping carts, but if this fad catches on, we might all say goodbye to shopping carts. Not that the idea of walking around unburdened in a supermarket isn't attractive, of course.

Welcome to the future, ladies and gentlemen, where ladies (and the occasional men) can shop simply by pressing pictures of products while they commute to work and have the desired products packed and shipped to their homes the next day.

Tesco homeplus supermarket had this display, resembling fully-stocked supermarket shelves, installed in a subway station in Korea, allowing customers to shop via their smartphone on their way to work/school/whatever and having the products shipped to their customer's address.

I have to say, amazing doesn't even begin to cut it. Imagine how much time it would save, especially since we all spend a couple minutes waiting for the subway anyway. What if we get rid of physical supermarkets altogether and just shop semi-online like this? Then we won't entirely violate the Cave Man Principle where we need to be physically able to touch things because technically we'll still be using our kinesthetics to shop, but it's just a lot easier without putting them in a cart and carrying them home.

I'm sure a lot of husbands/boyfriends would be relieved knowing that they won't have to accompany their respective ladies grocery shopping anymore. Ha.

I think I'd certainly miss being able to check off things from my shopping list by seeing what's in my cart, but what if we can sync our list with the online shopping list and have the system remind us if we're missing anything?

Well of course, this is practically online shopping, but the display and the feeling of actually shopping and picking things out probably gives much more satisfaction. For one, we don't sit around our computer and get fat, though we miss out on the chance to weight training by not carrying the items home ourselves.

Makes me wish I live in Korea just so I can try this out! No chances it will be set up in the NY/Philly/DC subway system?

Of course, it can always come to Indonesia...in a couple decades. We're suckers for trends though, it'd be a lovely change. I don't know if it'd impact the job market if we replace physical supermarkets with this though, I don't think the cashiers will be too pleased to be replaced by a computerized system altogether. I suppose the packing/shipping/customer service/personal shopper industry created by the new system could make up for it. Thoughts?

Via designboom

The Happy Bookworm

Jorge Luis Borges once said that he "[had] always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."

I was doing my usual stalking of articles in ArchDaily when I stumbled upon an article discussing the new library of the University of Indonesia, and I must say, I was quite impressed.

Not only was it unusual for any building in Indonesia to be publicized on a major architecture site, it was even more unusual that this building was part of a university campus. I felt really behind on the new buildings back home when I realized that the building had been operating since May of 2011, though.


The structure was designed by architecture firm Denton Corker Marshall and was selected through an open design competition. Here's an excerpt describing the structure from ArchDaily:

"The circular landform is eroded on the lakeside opening up an amphitheatre with mature mahogany trees overlooking the lake. As well as identifying the main entry, this erosion allows light into the interior volume. The mound houses book stacks within five storeys, located on the outer edge of the circular plan. Beneath an insulating soil cover and concrete roof, rare manuscripts, books and research/reference materials are stored in a stable ambient temperature away from direct sunlight. Solid stone cladding and narrow bands of glazing further reduce heat gain, reducing the air conditioning load."

The building collects rainwater on site, recycles waste water and minimizes energy consumption by using the natural light and natural insulation provided by soil and stone, hence dealing with water scarcity and heating/cooling issues in the library complex. The greeneries also boast the maintenance of existing plants and vegetations, some of which are types that require minimum maintenance, hence reducing the need for watering, etc.

Compared to a lot of building standards back home, this sounds like a revolution.

Here are some more pictures from Kaskus user mikoo:

The interior boasts ceiling-high racks and ramps for vertical access.

The back of the building, showing the soil insulation and light holes for natural lighting.

I hear there's an ATM and a coffee shop in the building; how convenient. I don't dig how the atm sign completely does not fit in the design. Neon lights, seriously?

Maybe I should've followed my mom's advice to find a college nearer to home. This kind of beats our Pattee library on design, I mean, the stacks are creepy to sit around in alone at night. But hey, our reading rooms are hella comfy.

Vincent Says

This cracked me up in the middle of the night. Via Geeks are Sexy

Treasure Planet

I think most people would have heard by now, but this National Geographic article got me super excited last week. This news totally had my national pride/geek nerves tingling, if that made sense.

As little as I actually know about outer space, I have to admit that outer space has fascinated me for as long as I remember. You could tell, if you saw how badly ripped my Children's Encyclopedia on the Solar System was. Then that year when I was eight, when NASA had the rocket to mars will carry your name initiative and everyone signed up on the website (especially because internet had just become big among us kids that year, it was so fascinating). Then even now, every time I go to the smithsonian, I always stop by the Albert Einstein planetarium at the Air and Space Museum to watch a show.

Pretty things in space.

Personally, I've always been curious about the theory of the big bang and dark matter and whatnot. That, and about the battle between the Sith and the Jedi, and how the Millenium Falcon flies. Oh, and the Death Star.

You get it, fascination of space, of sci-fi and stuff. Distant planets, aliens, etc, etc.

Back to the NatGeo article, it said that a team of scientists in the Max-Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, Germany had found what was thought to be the oldest planet in the universe, formed less than a billion years after the Big Bang at what was considered the dawn of the universe. By then, our Milky Way galaxy hasn't even been completely formed yet.

Artist's rendering of the two oldest planets orbiting their star.

There's honestly a lot more info about the planets' lifespan and all that in the article, which I do believe will explain much better than I can about the issue.

Fascinating, really, to think of the existence of planets and stars beyond our realm of sight. More fascinating to think of how old they are and what seems to be eternity. Makes you believe even less in superstitious things like 2012 and the rapture and stuff. Of course, damnation by natural destruction led by human activities seem plausible, yet.

It is said that it is unlikely that these two planets will survive another 13 billion year, which I unfortunately will not live to see. Planets and stars are so incredible, they make you feel so small and insignificant. Even the span of 75 years is considered a long time, and yet stars live for billions of years. You would think you're relatively big in the equation of everything, but we don't even know the span of everything yet.

The biggest question, as always, is if the universe is endless. If one day you could really hit a point where you can't travel anymore, and realize that we're stuck in a sphere. Or we're actually part of an online game for some supernatural superpower or the sort, and the map just ended (they need to update with a new patch, please).

This is making me feel smaller than ever.

But back to the article. One of the things that amazed me the most was the fact that the team leader (this was, I swear, discussed in the NatGeo Indonesia article) was Indonesian. So for once, a rarity, this blogpost is a tribute to a fellow Indonesian, Dr. Johny Setiawan.

I creepily googled the guy and found his legit personal website. You think I only do that with K-Pop stars? Ha, think again. On that note, I haven't been able to locate tour schedules for BIGBANG's 2012 world tour. 

Of course the rest of the team is awesome as well, it's just that my nationalistic blood gets pumping every time I hear a major, world-changing achievement by an Indonesian scientist.

Always excited to spread good news like this. Yes, we are a fully evolved, non-primitive race who value intellect. And no, I do not ride elephants to school.

It's always so much more preferable to read these kinds of articles instead of reading articles discussing how inept development in our country is, which isn't entirely true, methinks. 

Unimpaired

Today the fashion industry is ever so brimming with new ideas, new concepts and new designers. There's always a new trend on the way, and everyone is constantly thinking of what's in season and out of season.

Here's a brilliant design idea by fashion label Xeni: Xeni Collection, a label that caters couture-quality attire for people with physical impairments. Their label offers garment specially made for wheelchair users and for those who find zips and buttons difficult to use.

Designer Ann Oliver is a former architect suffering from multiple sclerosis, which caused her to lose mobility in her hands as well as confined her to a wheelchair. Realizing that many others are in her position, she set out to help women who have troubles with conventional clothing. “I want to engage with my customers to design fashionable garments that provide solutions for as yet unrecognized requirements,” she says.

For example, for wheelchair users, the garments are cut at the rear to make putting it on/off while sitting down easier.

The Marianna dress from Xeni Collection being worn and the back view, clearly showing the cut-out.

And for the users who find buttons and zips difficult, Xeni Collection have equipped their attires with magnets to latch close their clothes easily. For example in their Jacobite Jacket, the buttons have been replaced with magnets, as seen in the pictures below.

I love how the Xeni Collection makes no sacrifices in style to accommodate the different consumers, in fact, they look as chic and classy as ever. While managing to adapt it to those who have trouble dressing themselves, Xeni manages to maintain the aesthetics of their pieces.

Truly fashion for the unconventional.

Via Ecouterre

Unemployed

This is an old image from toonhole that I just had to post because it always gets a giggle out of me. At least until I realized that I'll be graduating next year, and I've got no job lined up.

I surely hope that won't be me in ten years. That would suck.

Cleaning Out My Closet

So, it's been a week since the news got out and the hype spread and whatnot, and I know it's pretty late, but this post has been sitting at the back of my pile of blogpost drafts and I just thought it should go out to see the light of day...sometime soon.

But, as many of you have probably heard, Indonesia's Ministry of Religion have been on an anti-porn spree recently. I think it started with our infamous Minister of Communications or whatever his proper title is (see, I never get their proper titles translated properly), who went on his own anti-porn spree, allegedly having threatened RIM to ban BlackBerries if they don't make any effort to ban porn on their device.

Cheeky, cheeky.

But as the story goes, they're been trying to get porn banned from the net in Indonesia. Just like they've banned social networking sites in China (I hear). (Pity about those proxies, really.)

Campaigning against pornography isn't anything new, really, a lot of people do it for religious reasons. I just was hoping that our country hasn't fallen too far off the democratic scale to be weighing religion as the basis of our laws/constitution. Also, I just think it'd be rather pointless when I'm sure they'll come up with a way around it within a day or two. Really.

Of course, I do think that pornography is often demeaning and related to sex-crimes, etc, etc. We can go through the list, naming prostitution rings and girls being kidnapped from their hometown as modern day slaves, but there are a lot of (somewhat) respectable people working out of their own will and wants too. And that truly is a large crowd they cater to, imagine, half of the world population is male!

Besides, as much as I'd prefer my prospective lovers to not be enamored by porno stars, pornography is so common that you don't really think much of it anymore. I mean, it's kind of gross and off-putting personally to be watching other people going at it, but it's hard to find anyone who's never seen a porno.

Then of course there's the issue of it being some sort of a sinful act. It gets a bit worrisome when the government tries to make sure you don't go to hell for a minor misdemeanor, yes? I mean, it's one thing when your parents/school counsellor/religious preacher does it, it's just a bit of an overkill when the government tries to do it.

Anyway, enough about the anti-porno thing. It's not something I'm entirely against, anyway. See, what had me worried is the next move by the Religious Minister. He said something that sounded primevally misogynistic for 21st century (democratic) standard.

Here, direct quote via The Jakarta Globe:

“We think that there should be general criteria [on how women should dress], for example women’s skirts should pass their knees,” [Religious Affairs Minister Suryadharma Ali] said.

Well there's a hint for me to start cleaning out my closet. Off with ye' short skirts and hot pants.

I place dress codes in high regards, really, I do believe that clothes must suit the occasion, and that, yes, short skirts/shorts must not be worn anywhere formal/scared. Like to prayers and weddings. And the office.

But banning them altogether seems to be too much. I think there should be freedom to dress (appropriately). Of course, some short skirts are inappropriate for a lot of occasions, but banning them? Surely the women of my country knows how to dress properly most of the time.

Then again, a couple months ago, when a girl was raped on a public transportation, our city Governor made a remark about her wearing short skirts, which made her a target. I'm sure everyone's worried about safety and whatnot, but I don't think anyone who was raped deserved to be told that she/he was at fault. As a matter of fact, I don't think "she dressed provocatively" is a defense to anything.

I mean, what kind of shithole teaches its women to be carefully not to be raped instead of teaching its men NOT to rape?

"Girls, dress appropriately, otherwise it's your fault if men rape you."

Oh wow, I thought we got over that medieval mindset a good couple decades ago.

Really, you see girls lounging around in skimpy bikinis in broad daylight in front of the student HUB and it's not like someone comes up to them all of a sudden and tries to jump them for wearing such skimpy clothes.

The next time someone tells me "Oh, but our culture is different." to justify scantily clad women being raped, I'd love to punch them in the face. True, we have different standards of "scantily clad" and "public", but what kind of culture is OK with justifying rape? Rape is never justified.

Of course, the way some girls wear their skirts even at school these days are inappropriate. For the moral, self-respecting reason that you probably shouldn't let anyone see your knickers. But just because you could see their thighs, it doesn't mean you suddenly have a justified reason to lose all human sense and turn into some hormone-driven, nymphomaniac animal on mating season.

In fact, they could be in their birthday suits and no one, NO ONE would have the right to rape them.

I really do think dresses should be appropriate for the occasion, but there's no need to make us look like nuns because you can't keep your men well-educated enough to stay in line. By all mean, sir, do continue your quest to embed the moral ethics into our daily lives, but it'd be better if you choose your targets properly.

You could, perhaps, start by teaching the men basic moral obligations to protect women and not treat them like household goods. As far as I know, you shouldn't be able to trade us for goats/cows anymore. We might be a democracy, but beneath that glittering metropolitan that is Jakarta, the suffragettes have plenty of reason to come back fighting on the streets.

To end this post with a slightly less depressing take on sexism and gender-equality, here's one of my favorite comics from Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal:

C-c-ch-chaos

It's really sad how I'm stealing this post from 9gag, but here it is. I heard a couple rumors on twitter about the demonstration yesterday, I guess they really did one. It is really pathetic how I found these pictures on a gag site instead of on the news, I guess information travels fast in the web these days. That, and I haven't read the news today. On the other hand, these are some nicely taken photos. This must be one of the rare days when I'm glad not to be home..

UPDATE: I called home an hour ago and heard mixed responses about the demonstration. Apparently a lot of people were stuck in traffic for a few hours more than they usually are, but my dad told me the main roads were emptier than usual. Not quite sure what's happening, but definitely not a 30% rise on fuel prices. Tsk, gossip travels fast...

Fantastic Baby

This is a very late post. End of February this year, the K-Pop band BIGBANG released their newest album, Alive. Of course, being the fangirl that I am, I bought their album off iTunes almost immediately.

TOP. The only asian guy who can probably pull off blue hair and still look like that gorgeous.

My first thought was that their sound had changed a bit, maybe got too synthetic for my liking, and much more like Western Pop than before. Then I started to wonder how TOP could maintain a straight face while singing boom shakalaka in Fantastic Baby. Of course, when you're that good-looking, a lot of things are forgivable.

In the end, after listening to the album a few times, I found the songs more likeable than I had initially found them to be. In fact, despite me wincing at the translation of the lyrics, I've been hooked on their Bad Boy for a few days now. Probably partially out of regret for not being able to go to NYC to stalk their shooting of their videoclip, no thanks to the three exams I had impending the following week...

I liked the suited-up approach to their last album, Tonight, a lot better than the crazy costumes for the Fantastic Baby MV, but I guess the craziness must be part of the entire futuristic theme. Too much like LMFAO costumes for me to like though, I much preferred the classier GD & TOP MVs from their debut album.

BigBang performing a song from the album Alive in Inkigayo.

GD & TOP in their debut album in 2010.

Not that that's stopped me from stalking all their new MVs and live performances, as well as random behind the scene videos. Especially ones of SeungRi teaching a bit of the dance moves from each performance: any girl would swoon. I like their live performances more than their MVs though, they looked cooler to me, especially the ones they did in Inkigayo. As performers, both in the vocals and the dancing, Big Bang gets better year after year. And all their songs are always fun to dance to, so if you happen to live near my residence hall, be warned. That crazy chick dancing near the window on the third floor, that's probably me.

Paranoiaaaaargh

As an aspiring writer, I feel like this meme explains how I feel most of the time when I'm writing something. Dun dun dun.

With a Bang and a Flash.

So another friend of mine introduced me to one of his favorite photographers. I'm happy to say he has officially become one of my favorite photographers too.

Maybe it's a tinge of nationalism, because we're both Indonesian. I must say though, his work stood out a lot compared to the many of the works I've seen back home. I stopped subscribing to magazines back home a few years ago and I stopped reading them completely when I left to go to the States in 2010. I don't remember the fashion photo montages to be anything special, so imagine the shock I received when I opened this blog and here was this fabulous photographer snapping fashion shoots back in Indonesia.

Makes me want to go home and send fanmail to this guy.

Here are some of his recent works, posted on his blog. Ladies and gentlemen, the works of Mr. Arseto Adiputra.

I love how he really sets the tone of his works by manipulating the contrast and the colors, like how the shoot with the suits had more subtle, dark tones while the shoot at the beach had bright, contrasting colors that really stood out against the gorgeous blue sky. Pretty, pretty colors. Somewhat mesmerizing to stare at. I'd say his works are revolutionary in comparison to the photoshoots I've seen in the magazines a couple years ago, but I might just be behind on the current art scene back home.

Lovely works, really, applaud him I must.

Of Monsters and Men

Recently, I've had the song Love Love Love by the the Indie Folk band Of Monsters and Men on replay. But the monsters and men I was talking about in my title is of an entirely different nature.

Recently I've read Terry Pratchett's Night Watch. Again, this is a friend's recommendation. I wasn't so sure what to expect when he said it was sci-fi/fantasy. I was thinking Star Wars meet Lord of the Rings, but the Night Watch didn't prove to be that epic. It was a lovely read nevertheless: slightly dark, but mostly comical.

I love how Duke Sam Vines always cringes when watching his younger self. And Pratchett successfully made me want to strangle Carcer. When I read the synopsis, I was afraid it was just going to be another cheesy, standard time travel story about love (and maybe some dragons versus cellphones gag) and heroism, but I'm glad I read this book. I feel like I've been converted into a comic fantasy fan, they sure are lovely to read.

Pratchett invites us to the Discworld, a world where law-enforcing officers are merely keeping safe appearances and where the single ruler is corrupt (and hegemony still exists). There, Sam Vines is part of the Night Watch, what he labels as decent men (too visually unappealing for the Day Watch) trying to make a living. Some want to join the infantry but can't. Some enjoy the free benefit of leeching off citizens for free meals. Some act like a gangster mob and demand payment for protection. And, miraculously, some genuinely want to protect the people.

Sounds familiar? These problems are pretty much ubiquitous in our own world.

The Night Watch makes us think, it criticizes the corruption that we ourselves face, but it also criticizes how most people in Ankh-Morpork (like those in our own countries), does nothing about it. Of course, a revolution occurs at the end of the book, though the revolution is more of a staged farce, with people like Reg Shoe claiming a Socialist stance but ending up with a Ruler who isn't must different from the fallen Lord Winder. Of course, this is what happens a lot of the times in our own countries as well.

Egypt, for example, practically ends up back in military hands even after a so-called democratic election is held after the fall of Mubarak. Funny how the world works.

Pratchett makes us cringe at the situation in Ankh-Morpork and makes us cringe at ourselves. He makes us laugh at the disorientation that the people of Ankh-Morpork face in their crisis, then makes us laugh at ourselves.

Lots of gags and comical scenes in Night Watch. In fact, you tend to read them in a serious tone, because the characters are facing trouble after trouble, but then you realize (a second to late), how funny the scenes are.

Duke Sam Vines is presented as the noble, near-incorruptible hero of Ankh-Morpork. After being thrown back in time, he leads his old Night Watch squad by replacing his former mentor, John Keel, who was murdered by a criminal that came to the past along with Vines. We watch as he takes control of the crowd, orders his man around and ultimately lead the revolution. See, those who know history are not bound to repeat it, and that's what Vines want to (and at the same time, doesn't want to) do.

The readers are whisked off to the fire of revolution, then to the incessant (slightly foolish) banter of the nobles, then to Sybil's intense childbirth, then to Carcer's murderous intents, to the Night Watch mourning their dead, to the cavalry deserters getting taunted by their grandmothers. The Night Watch is a melting pot of everything.

Definitely a book I'd recommend to anyone. Meanwhile, I'll be on the hunt for more Terry Pratchett books from now on.

See you soon, Discworld.