Dominatio Per Malum

Channelnewsasia

SINGAPORE: Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said his insistence on bilingualism in the early years of education policy was “wrong”. Instead it caused generations of students to be put off the Chinese language.

He said: “We started the wrong way. We insisted on ting xie (listening), mo xie (dictation) - madness! We had teachers who were teaching in completely-Chinese schools. And they did not want to use any English to teach English-speaking children Chinese and that turned them off completely.”

New York Times

The questions before the judges in Courtroom No. 1 of Britain’s Supreme Court were as ancient and as complex as Judaism itself.

The case rested on whether the school’s test of Jewishness was based on religion, which would be legal, or on race or ethnicity, which would not. The court ruled that it was an ethnic test because it concerned the status of M’s mother rather than whether M considered himself Jewish and practiced Judaism.

I am Blue/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey’s Personality Test Generator.

The Iron Curtain
Marie Howe

And the nun asked us– were we seven?–what we would do if the
Communists
stormed our houses and bound our parents and threatened to kill
them. Would you
renounce Jesus in order to save your mother from being murdered?
We knew what the true answer was–
and what was the right one.

My mother stood, cooking a dozen pork chops in the two big frying
pans, when I told her
that I’d said that I’d let her die before
I turned my back on Jesus.
And my mother said that that was all right; she understood.

When the wall came down I was distracted. By what? A man I loved
and longed for?
A self integrating so slowly most days I hardly knew who I was?

Brick by brick. Some men pushed it with what looked like
long pillars.
Some kids sat on top, waving.

We’d been told families had been divided–crossing the city to work or
shop–
caught on the wrong side when the wall went up. And that was that.
People
lived and died, and married.

How strange to see them walking, on TV, through the empty air–
what had been solid–stupefied, astonished…

How they touched the faces of their loved ones
and ran their hands over their heads and hair.

The New York Times has an excellent retrospective on the fall of the Berlin Wall, some 20 years ago to this day. It was a moment of historical purport, made all so fascinating because it was partly caused by Bureaucratic confusion over travel regulations. It marked a watershed moment in history and changed forever the dynamics of international power balance. Now 20 years later, that euphoric moment where freedom triumph over repression is captured beguilingly by the first person anecdotes, pictorial juxtaposition and nostalgic accounts of a time where, to borrow the lyrics of Scorpions, we were all “Listening to the wind of change.”

In particular, i liked the collection of poetry commemorating this date.

I follow the Moskva
Down to Gorky Park
Listening to the wind of change
An August summer night
Soldiers passing by
Listening to the wind of change

The world closing in
Did you ever think
That we could be so close,like brothers
The future’s in the air
I can feel it everywhere
Blowing with the wind of change
–”The Wind of Change”, by The Scorpions

So, i recently watched 2 classic Chow Yun Fat movies. They don’t make movies like they used to.

City on Fire (1987) 6/10

Long before Infernal Affairs, Chow Yun Fat played the conflicted undercover agent with his charismatic comedic wit. Although the film feels dated and the plotline is fairly predictable, with cartoonish villians, it is still a guilty pleasure. Notable for the “brotherhood” bond between good guy Chow Yun Fat and bad guy Danny Lee, which would be reversed in The Killer, where Danny Lee plays the good cop trying to capture Chow Yun Fat the assasin.

The Killer (1989) 7/10

Chow Yun Fat as the assassin with the kind heart, Danny Lee as the good guy catching the bad guy and Sally Yeh as token female flower vase? All these and more, replete with gratuitous shots of white pigeons that has been the trademark of John Woo. Its predictable and a tad tacky, but the bromantic film is classic 80s HK and a whole lot of fun. This was back when John Woo was actually a good director.

TIME

Modern Homo sapiens is still evolving. Despite the long-held view that natural selection has ceased to affect humans because almost everybody now lives long enough to have children, a new study of a contemporary Massachusetts population offers evidence of evolution still in action.

A team of scientists led by Yale University evolutionary biologist Stephen Stearns suggests that if the natural selection of fitter traits is no longer driven by survival, perhaps it owes to differences in women’s fertility. “Variations in reproductive success still exist among humans, and therefore some traits related to fertility continue to be shaped by natural selection,” Stearns says. That is, women who have more children are more likely to pass on certain traits to their progeny.

New York Times

All the students at Luolang Elementary School, a yellow-and-orange concrete structure off a winding mountain road in southern China, know the key rules: Do not run in the halls. Take your seat before the bell rings. Raise your hand to ask a question.

Education officials promoted the saluting edict to reduce traffic accidents and teach children courtesy. Critics, who have posted thousands of negative comments about the policy on China’s electronic bulletin boards, beg to differ. “This is just pitiful,” wrote one in a post last year. Only inept officials would burden children with such a requirement rather than install speed bumps, others insisted.

Los Angeles Times

The idea of witchcraft is hardly new, but it has taken on new life recently partly because of a rapid growth in evangelical Christianity. Campaigners against the practice say around 15,000 children have been accused in two of Nigeria’s 36 states over the past decade and around 1,000 have been murdered. In the past month alone, three Nigerian children accused of witchcraft were killed and another three were set on fire.

It’s hard for churches to carve out a congregation with so much competition. So some pastors establish their credentials by accusing children of witchcraft.

WTF! It appalls me that this is still happening in 2009!!!

Antichrist (2009) 3/10

Antichrist will polarize audiences. You either love it or hate it. In my case, i hated it. It was a dull, pretentious and needlessly graphic film which made the film experience as enjoyable as a lobotomy. But it one respect it did succeed marvelously in that it managed to evoke despair in the hearts of the audience. Antichrist is bookended by moments of brilliance. The prologue opens in a hauntingly gorgeous black and white sequence while the epilogue finishes with a mind-scratching sequence. But the core of the film is relentlessly bleak, starting out as an exercise in psychological spooks before degenerating into mindless gratuitous torture. This is one film that i won’t watch again. While i am a fan of how director Lars Von Triers pushes the envelope of cinema, this is one film i would classify as a provocative failure. The film plays out like a lucid, psychotic nightmare and the allusions it draws about the fundamental essence of human nature is as haunting as it is repulsive. The leads, Charlotte Gainsbourg and Willem Dafoe are fearless in their performance but the limited and unfathomable script lets them down.

“A fever dream of the twisted, depraved and unnerving, it’s quite unlike anything you’ve seen before. And quite unlike anything the right-minded may want to see again.”- David Edwards

“I rarely find a serious film by a major director to be this disturbing. Its images are a fork in the eye. Its cruelty is unrelenting. Its despair is profound. Von Trier has a way of affecting his viewers like that.”- Roger Ebert

New York Times Editorial

The First Amendment protects even disturbing speech, a point the Supreme Court should keep in mind on Tuesday when it hears arguments in the case of a man convicted of selling videos of dogfighting and other animal cruelty. A federal appeals court reversed his conviction, ruling that the federal law under which he was prosecuted is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court should uphold that well-reasoned decision. Robert Stevens, who ran a business called “Dogs of Velvet and Steel,” sold videos of pit bulls engaging in dogfights and attacking other animals. He did not participate in the attacks personally, but he was charged under a federal law that makes it illegal to sell depictions of acts of animal cruelty that are themselves illegal in the state where the depiction is sold.

The NY Times editorial argues that, despite the ethical problems of videos depicting animal cruelty, it should nevertheless be legal as a form of freedom of expression. It argues that like other forms of speech which are vile, such as racism, these animal cruelty videos should nevertheless be a legitimate form of expression. This is one of those times that I am going to disagree with the NYT editorial. I believe that freedom of speech should offer no protection for videos which clearly depict animal cruelty for exploitation. There are clear barriers when it comes to freedom of speech. Child pornography or films depicting people being killed, for example would qualify as clear examples where freedom of speech cannot be used as a protective shield. Whilst animal cruelty seems to belong to that grey area, I think that it should be clear that such videos should not be tolerated. Naturally this will create some difficult grey areas. For example, if Discovery Channel were to show a video of a Lion mauling its prey, would that count as animal cruelty? Or if some animals were killed in the production of a film, would that suffice? That is the dangers of outright banning such videos and there may well be a grey area involved. However, there are clear-cut videos of animal cruelty and in the obvious cases, we should have no qualms about taking a strong stance against it.

Hello Schoolgirl (2008) 8/10

Based on a comic book, Hello Schoolgirl is a surprisingly well crafted tale that engages because of excellent lead performances. Notwithstanding its comic book roots, director Ryoo Jang-Ha creates a believable spring autumn romance that is layered and compelling. Special mention goes to Yoo Ji-Tae, played a middle aged bachelor falling in love with Lee Yeon-Hee, played the schoolgirl. What would have been semi-creepy a premise turns out to be a hardwarming and compelling love story, made possible only because of the outstanding performances of both leads. Now that is the “A” plot. Unfortunately, the “B” plot follows the only occasionally interesting romantic overtures between another spring autumn romance. This time a younger male played by Kang In pursues an older woman played by Chae Jeong-An which fails because it lacks the palpable chemistry which the “A” plot has. Thus the main value of the weaker “B” plot is similar as a foil to the main story. Luckily the main plotline holds up very well and single handedly makes Hello Schoolgirl a compelling experience.

Entre Les Murs [The Class] (2008) 8/10

I had expected a typical film about an inspiring teacher who changes his pupils. You know, the sort of predictable plotline that films like the Choir follow. But this was quite a different experience. Filmed in a faux documentary style, the Class offers no final redemption, no inspirational teacher defying the odds. What amazes me is the realism of the film and how it offers a peek into the racially diverse world of French schools. The characters that inhabit the film are as achingly real as they are flawed. One of the best films ever made which was nominated for the 2009 Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film and won the Golden Palm in the 2008 Cannes Film Festival.

“The Class confirms and extends Cantet’s status as one of the masters of European social cinema. It’s a hugely important film that shows how the real frontlines of class and race in this continent don’t involve riot shields or rock-hurling marchers, but are played out every day in our city schools as a series of sometimes attritional encounters.”- Sukhdev Sandhu

Roman Polanski raped a child.

Kate Harding starts her article with this important and powerful reminder of what Polanski has done. It is an impassioned and lucidly argued piece on why no one should be above the law, not least Polanski. Rape is rape. There is no issue of consent, because the child’s age makes it statutory rape. In any case, consent had not been given.

But Polanski has his supporters. Patrick Goldstein asks if “at a time when California is shredding the safety net that protects the poor and the unemployed, not to mention the budget of the public school system, you’d hope that L.A. County prosecutors had better things to do than cause an international furor by hounding a film director for a 32-year-old sex crime, especially one that Polanski’s victim wants to put behind her.” In so doing he evokes a most compelling allegory, describing Polanski as a modern day Jean Valjean from the classic “Les Miserables” by Victor Hugo about an ex-convict trying desperately to be a good man but perpetually haunted by tenacious constable. I am not entirely convinced by the Les Mis analogy, not least because Valjean’s crimes were far less disturbing than Polanski’s.

Still, Polanski’s capture has triggered much debate, with the NYT’s Room For Debate Post highlighting the different perspectives. Now, just as there is no doubt as to Polanski’s guilt, let it be said too that there is also no doubt as to Polanski’s brilliance. The Pianist(2002), his powerful, wrenching tale for which Polanski a won Best Director Oscar is a testament to his craft. My personal favourite however, is his “Death and the Maiden” which is one of the most brilliant psychological thrillers i have ever had the chance to watch.

But should brilliance, however great absolve one of wrongdoing? And what of judicial misconduct? Should the fact that the then trial judge intended not to honor the plea bargain reached between Polanski and the Prosecutor be a redeeming factor? And should the victim’s subsequent forgiveness count for anything?

Having recently watched Michael Sandel’s thought provoking classes on ethics in http://justiceharvard.org/, this episode actually pits two competing school of thoughts, that of Consequentialism, which derives its ideas from utilitarianism. The idea is to look at the welfare of society as a whole and decide if it is beneficial. As Robert Harris, someone who does know Polanski questions in this NYT editorial questions:

“He is no threat to the public. The original judicial procedure was undeniably murky. So cui bono, as the Romans used to say — who benefits?”

In short, what is the point of jailing an old man for a crime committed 30 plus years ago when that man can better contribute to society as a director?

In contrast a Deontological approach takes a view that the ends do not justify the means. Again, back to Kate Harding who reminds us that:

“It works on behalf of the people, in fact — the people whose laws in every state make it clear that both child rape and fleeing prosecution are serious crimes. The point is not to keep 76-year-old Polanski off the streets or help his victim feel safe. The point is that drugging and raping a child, then leaving the country before you can be sentenced for it, is behavior our society should not — and at least in theory, does not — tolerate, no matter how famous, wealthy or well-connected you are, no matter how old you were when you finally got caught, no matter what your victim says about it now, no matter how mature she looked at 13, no matter how pushy her mother was, and no matter how many really swell movies you’ve made.”

And so, we are back to a grey area where whether Polanski should be extradited depends really on whether you follow a consequential reasoning or a deontological reasoning. For my part, i do believe that Polanski should be punished for his crimes, but the fact that there was judicial misconduct in the proceedings and the time lag should thereby entitle him to significant reduction in sentence because it is a strong mitigating factor. The victim’s forgiveness is a relevant point to be taken into consideration.

The reason why i believe that judicial misconduct and the failures of due process should either entitle a guilty accused to be acquitted or have his sentence discounted is because the rule of law is itself dependant on the justice system following the rules which it has set. Because of the seriousness of Polanski’s crime, it would be unwise to give a full acquittal, but the lack of due process should entitle him to a discount in sentence. As Justice Louis Brandeis opines in one of the most famous dissents in OLMSTEAD v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438 (1928) :

“Will this court, by sustaining the judgment below, sanction such conduct on the part of the executive? The governing principle has long been settled. It is that a court will not redress a wrong when he who invokes its aid has unclean hands. 16 The maxim of unclean hands comes [277 U.S. 438, 484] from courts of equity. 17 But the principle prevails also in courts of law. Its common application is in civil actions between private parties. Where the government is the actor, the reasons for applying it are even more persuasive. Where the remedies invoked are those of the criminal law, the reasons are compelling.

…

Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means-to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal-would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face. “

Tokyo Godfathers (2003) 5/10

In Tokyo Godfathers, director Satoshi Kon creates over the top characters and situations within a realistic world and the end result is a jarring pastiche that never feels quite right. Whereas his previous films like the excellent Millennium Actress (2001) used animation to give realistic portrait of life and Paprika (2006) allowed his imagination to run wild, Tokyo Godfathers does not seem to know whether to be realistic or exaggerated and the result is a film that tries to aim for pathos even as it becomes increasingly over the top. The main characters are a trio of bums who happen to come across an abandoned baby. In their quest to return the child to its rightful parent, various hijinks occur, many of which feels utterly ridiculous and not particularly realistic. The film does not have particularly likeable characters, and its exaggerated tone makes it all the more difficult to identify with its characters who seem more like caricatures. This is difficult when the film obviously wants to make us sympathetic to for example the young girl estranged from her father but sabotages the attempt at pathos with over the top hijinks. The end result is a disjointed film that neither achieves slapstick comedy nor emotional connection. The film itself is still competently crafted and direction, but lacks soul.