I can’t think of a better way to honour him than to re-circulate one of his articles which sought to shine light upon the showboating of a pope, the hypocrisy of his money-grubbing, brain-washing institution and the dangerous, anti-women, pro-poverty fanaticism of “Mother Teresa of Calcutta”, all of which culminated in the farce of her “beatification”.

If after reading the linked article you want to dismiss it as wrong for logical, definable, reasons, that is your right — in fact, post your proofs in the comments. If your instinct is to dismiss it as wrong before you’ve even read it then at least know, just privately for yourself, that you might be one of the brain-washed and read it to prove that you aren’t. If you really can’t bring yourself to read it because it makes you angry to even think that an article exists that might express the sentiments above, then I hope that being confronted with the fact that you don’t even have the free will to read an article which might question your beliefs will at least niggle at you and, eventually, set you free.

Those of you who read my previous post “What would your air shipment say about you”, or  have moved abroad will know that, often, when you move, you are given an allowance for a small air shipment to transport the things you feel you can’t live without, for the 6+ weeks it takes the Sea Shipment to arrive. The air shipment to Thailand, we were told, takes up to 15 days, depending on processing. 

Today was day 15.

At this point, those of you who have done the moving to Thailand thing will know what’s coming and be laughing, I hope fondly, at my frustration, so I want to say one thing first: when we moved to Japan EVERYONE told us to expect our shipments to be late – and they weren’t. Air was estimated at 7 days and arrived on day 7. Sea was estimated at 4-6 weeks and arrived well before the 6 weeks was up. So, as per usual, Japan had set the bar high.

Back to Thailand:  Being the 15th day, I called Allied Pickfords to see if there was any date we could be expecting our computers and the rest of my project notes, so I can get back to my WIP (I did actually just say “air shipment” but that was what I was thinking.)

Answer: It hasn’t left Sydney yet.

Reaction:  —

Question: Why?

Answer: Superman doesn’t have a long term work permit yet.

Reaction: —

Question: He won’t for another 6 weeks, at least, are you saying you can’t ship them till then?

Answer:  –  Yes.

The thing is, I do actually understand – bureaucracy is bureaucracy – it’s almost always a long, annoying process, whatever country you are dealing with so I wouldn’t have been upset IF someone had mentioned AT ANY POINT BEFORE DAY 15 anything OTHER THAN: "The air shipment will take 15 days." Leaving us expecting to receive goods which will start to make this hotel room a home and not telling us that, in fact, they haven’t even left Australia – THAT is NOT okay, in fact it’s borderline cruel. What is more, that lack of communication has nothing to do with Thai bureaucracy, it’s straight customer service, from either side.

To make sure I’m being fair, considering I’ve mentioned the company’s name (which has been fantastic, so far),it was pointed out that Superman had been asked to supply his short term visa and the long term one when it came – apparently he should have realised from that what the situation was. Well. No. See, he doesn’t spend all day dealing with Thai import law. He’s been a tad busy with a major IT project for a major car company to make himself aware of the subtleties of Thai goods importation. He did make an assumption that the short term one would suffice as the goods were shipped and that the goods might sit on a wharf in Thailand for a while until his long-term visa came through but it would only be a matter of a week or so if the shipping took 6 weeks. What’s really important, though, is that he was only guessing because there was no communication about what was actually happening.

And here’s the kicker: that final “Yes” answer, above, turns out, with some probing, to actually be: “Not necessarily, but it’s for your own good.”

It seems that the hold-up is that importing goods on a long term visa attracts less tax on those goods (yes, your own, second-hand goods which you won’t be selling to anyone) than a short term visa (possibly the long term visa makes you exempt entirely, but I’m not sure – I’ll try to update.) So, Allied Pickfords are trying to do the right thing by us and save us money – and maybe it’s a lot of money, maybe too much money but, I’d have preferred that they offer us the choice.

Here’s where “it’s the little things” comes in – it’s not a reference to the goods at all, but to Choice. It’s not genius to observe that the lack of choice, and therefore control, is the source of so much expat-spouse malaise. Making decisions, however small or inevitable they might seem to others, is all we really have in this life. Our decisions about how to handle whatever comes our way – be it poverty or great fortune – make us who we are. And, yes, I know how lucky we are to live this life, and I am grateful for it everyday, especially considering where I came from, but it’s no “white whine” to observe that when you take away a person’s choices, when you make decisions for them, no matter how well intentioned or well aligned with the choices they would have made, you are taking away their humanity – or, at the very least, signalling to them that you have no respect for it.  For expat spouses, a group of people who have, for the most part, already given up what Western society uses to define a person – work – taking away even the little choices is no small thing.

An interesting idea which the author, unfortunately, simply does not pull off. The internal logic is flawed, as is the logic of his (straw man) detective character. The author’s presentation of philosophy and logic, as well as Plato’s theory of the forms (which he insists on calling ‘the existence of Ideas”) are simplistic, and will annoy anyone who has studied it in any depth, at least as much as the liberties his translator claims are his right to take with the text, will annoy real translators. But none of that is what made it so haaaard for me to force myself through this book (it’s for a book club, so I had to.)

I found it impossible to become in any way absorbed in the story because Somoza constantly distracts the reader with the two parts of the project, which appear to be most interesting/important to him and, which the critics are loving: the translator commenting on the piece (don’t worry, I’m going to avoid spoilers, despite my rating) and the fictional literary device ‘eidesis.’ I’m sure plenty of people will say that this distraction was a deliberate part of the metafiction or, at least, that literary books aren’t supposed to flow, they are supposed to make the reader work. I accept neither of those objections; It is clear in the latter parts of the book that we are supposed to be absorbed, or at least care about these characters (in the main text and footnotes) and I’m afraid I was never given the chance to connect with them, because of these two devices.

First, the eidesis, which at one point is described as ‘subtle’ but is the opposite. The repeated imagery (it’s no spoiler to define “eidesis”) stands out incongruously from page 1 so that a) it just reads like bad writing and then b) once we know what it is, it still jumps out as bad writing but now we’re thinking, “alright already we get the image” and THEN we have to put up with the translator popping in to exclaim about the eidesis he has so cleverly discovered. Which brings me nicely to my second point.

Second, the translator. Any time I had managed to get past the writing (the eidesis wasn’t the only problem,) and just when I was starting to become absorbed in the main story, the translator would appear with his thoughts on the matter. That would be fine if I wanted to know what the translator thought but, unfortunately, he is not only unnamed but un-introduced and simply forces himself upon us. I quickly began thinking of him as “the interrupter” and it stuck. What’s worse, until fairly late in the piece, his comments are rarely anything that isn’t painfully obvious to the reader, already; in fact, on page 263 the translator comes up with a ‘revelation’ that I had wondered about on page 33 – now, an author has every right to reveal their story as they want but being 230 pages behind the reader suggests a need to credit their readers with a touch more intellect.

The sad thing about this book (without giving spoilers) is that there actually is no need for ‘eidesis’ to be invented to achieve what the author (fictional and real world) is attempting to achieve with it and so the language need not have been burdened by it. I know that might sound absurd to those who have read it, but it’s actually not needed – I’m sure plenty of others will have seen what I’m referring to, as obliquely as I can, I don’t think it takes a degree in Philosophy (though it will help!)

The saddest thing about the book, for me, is the portrayal of Plato’s theory of forms as some life-quashing philosophy, because it’s exactly the opposite – but that can be forgiven, after all, it is hard to see it from inside the cave.

View all my reviews

Utterly engrossing, and filled with information we should all know to combat all of the disinformation about Genghis Khan and the Mongolian Empire which still passes for common knowledge. I honestly believe that this book should be a standard text for all high school students, everywhere (at least, in my world where history is required to the end of high school, since it probably requires a 10th or 11th grade reading level.)

My edition was the audiobook and I must say that Davis was truly wonderful (and that’s a professional opinion!) His pacing was perfect and never once, during the 14 odd hours, did he sound as though he was anything but fascinated, which is essential for the listeners’ comprehension. There was the occasional strange edit or technical hiccough but only one or two that a layman would have noticed. All in all a wonderful production so kudos to author, narrator and producer/director!

View all my reviews

About a decade ago, I witnessed an Australian cognitive scientist declare with utter conviction that a person’s capacity for happiness was genetically pre-determined and then refuse to be drawn into any discussion of environmental factors for the rest of the seminar. When asked if he was happy himself he responded "As happy as I am capable of being" and gave a smug, self-satisfied, lips-only smile – a happiness of sorts, I suppose. In contrast, Nancy Etcoff tells us that cognitive scientists have now discovered that, while they do their share, genes are only about 50% responsible for our level of happiness, the rest is a combination of chasing natural beauty, social activity and other such pleasure inducing experiences while avoiding misery inducing ones and the judicious satisfaction of desires (which may or may not be pleasure or misery inducing themselves).

Contrary to the idea Plato’s Socrates gives us, that happiness exists only in as much as we experience the absence of its opposite, our emotional well-being is not a continuum from happy to sad but, rather, a balance of parallel emotional systems. Making ourselves less miserable does not automatically result in a move towards happiness, it acts solely to make us more able to enjoy whatever happiness we find without the chemical fog of depression. Similarly, pursuing what we feel an urgent desire to attain, whether it a material possession, or the love of a person, satisfies only our dopamine-based, "need" system, which is at the heart of addiction; we won’t feel as bad as we do when we are yearning for that thing, but getting it will not necessarily raise the happiness level of the equation unless what is gained is something which also gives us pleasure, rather than merely the absence of yearning.

To be truly happy, if I have understood Etcoff correctly, one must address not only misery and it’s avoidance but our, separate,  desire system and the pursuit of its satisfaction, while also indulging in experiences that give us pleasure (yet another system again). Like an audio engineer finding the perfect mix, we must adjust all three sliders to find the sweet spot, which is likely to be slightly different for everyone.

As a writer, this insight is exciting; I can see how this will be a tool for tweaking characters: which one of the sliders is the character more influenced by, which does he have the emotional skills to manipulate better?

Etcoff is a great presenter, too. Enjoy!

Each week from 7-10pm Sunday GMT (5am Monday, Japan time) there is a Tweetchat under the hashtag #writechat for which I often make sure I am awake. This week’s conversation quickly moved to the idea that, in some way, stories write themselves – that writers know we are “in the zone” when it seems we are not fully in control of the story we’re writing. When in this zone our characters talk to us, they do things which surprise (shock, delight, horrify) us and will even refuse to do something which we know might propel the story in a certain direction but would not be authentic to who they are (and thus prove to be better storycrafters than those of us trying to push a character into an inauthentic action!)

This is not something we writers will easily discuss in mixed company because we know it sounds a little mad (meaning ‘insane’ for the Americans reading) but, for the most part, #writechat is a “safe space” and it became one of the most lively and open discussions since I’ve been participating. It was clear that some of the writers were admitting this for the first time and that they were feeling the joy and relief that always accompanies that “it’s not just me” moment.  I hope that some of them are reading this and will watch Elizabeth Gilbert’s talk and feel even more vindicated/appreciated/confident.

A couple of individuals did suggest that we sounded mad and even declared that the notion that “the story writes itself” was simply wrong – the writer writes the story. For the most part, we ignored these comments, for one thing they were from people who we know don’t write, nor particularly respect those who do write, fiction (fiction was the topic, in honor of nanowrimo) and because we have heard these views before, from our non-writer friends and family, and know that it comes from a lack of understanding rather than any desire to be nasty. Perhaps we hoped that they might come to understand by simply listening to the conversation but it was probably a little unfair to expect that when we were talking on a level that assumed that understanding. It is possibly more honest to say that we ignored them because few of us wanted to jump out of the general conversation to explain what we meant to just one or two people, so let me attempt to remedy that a little myself and then I will introduce Elizabeth Gilbert who brings the process to life most beautifully in her talk (and also writes memoir and non-fiction – so it’s not just fiction writers who go through this).

The “you’re mad/insane” reaction comes most often when we say things like “the characters speak to me” or “do things which surprise me.”

The characters-speaking-to-us thing is really not that hard to understand. Let me ask those of you who think you don’t understand to think back to any time when you have had an humiliating experience and, on the way home, what you “should” have said “came to you.” Did you not hear yourself saying it in your head? Did you not ‘see’ and ‘hear’ the reactions that you would have preferred your audience give you? In that moment of regret – you have become a creator. The ‘you’ in your fantasy is not really you but a character based on you (because you weren’t that awesome in the actual moment, were you?) nor is the audience that reacts to your better comeback real (because it didn’t really happen and you don’t know for sure that they would even react the way you think/hope they would), again, you have created some characters. I would bet that you don’t actually think to yourself “and then Milly would say ‘wow you’re awesome’ and Chris would applaud” – you’re a pretty odd person if you don’t simply see the scene in your mind’s eye, like a film (over and over as you try different comebacks lol). This is all we mean by our characters speaking to us, that the scenes unfold to us, the diaogue ‘comes to us’. It all happens in our ‘mind’s eye’ – we don’t actually see them standing in our room in front of us (we hear them as though they are standing behind us sometimes but we know they aren’t lol.)

I have to grant that the “characters do things that surprise me” is a little harder to explain and/or accept. First of all, of course, when I say they “do things that surprise me” I mean that my own fingers type out their ‘doings’ onto my page and that I am not consciously aware of what I am typing until I read it off the page a millisecond afterwards. I am not fully aware that I am typing at all, in the same way that, when I read, I become unaware that I am reading, unaware of my surroundings and the book in my hands and aware only of the story unfolding like a film, assuming it’s written well enough (I know not everyone has this experience when they read but I’m sure enough do to understand this).  When I write, when it is flowing, I am in a limbo space between the visualization of the story and the page – I experience what the character, whose POV I am writing from, experiences while at the same time recording it in this other, real, world. It is a split-brain kind of thing but it’s not multiple personality!

This is why our loved ones come home to find us out of breath or in tears or grinning like an idiot at our monitors after we’ve written a particularly emotional scene (and they should all have plenty of emotion!)  It’s also why I can’t write with my back to a door because I will NOT hear anything going on around me in the real world and will be shocked out of my tree if anyone appears behind me! I have been known not to realise Superman is calling me to dinner until my characters start talking out of context: “Dinner’s ready! Do you want juice or water?” Huh? Oh. Ahem.

The less mystical or just cynical of you can argue all you like about whether I “really” don’t know what’s going to happen but what I definitely know is that, in those moments, I have gasped out loud, had tears come suddenly to my eyes or had fear shoot through me as surely as someone had appeared in my doorway holding a gun. I also know, from experience, that it is when I don’t allow myself to sink into this limbo space that the writing stops flowing. When, usually out of fear of failure, I try to bring the ‘craft’ into the first draft writing (and this is ALL about first draft writing – again, we were discussing nanowrimo) I get stuck, nothing comes.  I have been known to describe this as the muse withdrawing because I don’t trust her anymore – and it would be picky and defensively-skeptical to attack the idea of “a muse” rather than focusing on the concept that I feel I have stifled my own creativity by “thinking too much”.

Of course, we must do our best to provide our brains with as much information about the world into which we want to go and about human nature so that our characters are believable – that we cannot write what we don’t know at some level, is true – but I don’t believe it’s possible for the human brain to consciously juggle all the elements required to make a story, a world, a character real in the moment of creation.  We must trust our brain, our muse, or whatever we believe is responsible, to perform the subconscious alchemy that is creativity AND (and here’s the big assertion) we must not pursue conscious understanding of how it works – not if we want to be artists, anyway.  Why not, you might well ask? Shouldn’t everyone who wants to be an artist be hunting down what is going on there? If you knew how it worked wouldn’t you be able to ‘master’ it?

For that I would point you to Elizabeth Gilbert’s talk.

If, after listening to Elizabeth’s talk (and listening again if need be) you still insist on being so very, pragmatic and asking the above questions then I would say this: I believe understanding the neuro-physiology of creativity will, at best, help us to create as much as understanding the physiology of breathing helps us to breathe. We know it’s important to keep our air clean and our blood vessels healthy but thinking about the thousands of complex processes which make it happen does not help us to perform the act in any way whatsoever. In fact, to even attempt to consider those processes in real time is not only impracticable but would take up so much brain power as to render any other thought impossible – let alone creativity.

But I’m sure none of you will ask those questions after viewing her talk Enjoy.

I don’t really believe in piggy-backing of other people’s content for my own but I love it when someone I read points me to something inspirational and TED’s tagline: “Ideas Worth Spreading” and their copyright permissions (for those who were wondering) ask us to do so. To do my part in my little part of the blogosphere, I thought I’d start a series embedding TED talks from over the years that particularly appeal to me and, in doing so, hopefully spread a little inspiration. If you are inspired to hear more from TED, you can find more talks than you throw a failed iPod battery at here.

I’m going to start with Ken Robinson’s talk on taking creativity as seriously as we do literacy, lest we educate creativity out of society. Serious subject but hugely entertaining speaker so grab a cuppa when you can afford to take a 19min 20 sec break and enjoy and absorb.

From Tony’s post, I clicked on the link to the official Ghibli Museum site and was presented with Miyazaki Hayao’s philosophy for building the museum. Most of it was positive and about what he wanted the museum to be and certainly each was a reason to visit. The last paragraph, though, was a list of what he did not want the museum to be like and it struck me that it was something that every film director should have framed on a wall, or tattooed somewhere on their person where they can read it daily – except replace the word “museum” with “film”!

“This is the kind of museum I don’t want to make!
A pretentious museum
An arrogant museum
A museum that treats its contents as if they were more important than people
A museum that displays uninteresting works as if they were significant”

- Miyazaki Hayao “A few words from Executive Director Miyazai Hayao” on the Ghibli Museum website.

There are probably any number of words which could replace “museum” here to create an excellent philosophy to live by!

Alex at Bad at Japan shared his self realization about the way he works

and gives us an insight about how he plays with others!

Jason focused his Random Thoughts on both the physical and psychological changes he has undergone because of his big move to Japan.

Liv who eats her pigeons gave us a wonderful interpretation of the culture shock process as growing up all over again

Over at The Soul of Japan, Tony  warns us never to take anything for granted in Japan but reminds us that this also includes the good things – take time to stop and smell the onsen salts!

Nick’s entry at The Long Countdown had him looking back at England (at risking his mother’s wrath!)

Shane at The Nihon Sun has found that she has learned to live a more simple and less frantic life with an increased awareness of everyday beauty – something we could all learn to do.

Sheena at Girlish/Sheena in Japan shares what she learned about being American in the wake of Obama’s election and the reactions of some the Japanese around her.

My apologies for the tardiness of this post, I’ve been unavoidably off the grid for the last week or so and will probably continue to be so for a little while after this post is up.

One of the things I am really enjoying about living in Japan is re-discovering my love of and respect for the seasons, which had faltered somewhat due to various stressors and, frankly, living in Sydney which doesn’t really have them. The seasons are celebrated here with gusto! Throughout the year there are various religious festivals (matsuris) both national and local, usually based at a particular shrine or temple where the Kami in question is reverenced. Seasonal festivals, like Natsu (Summer) Matsuri which we celebrated in Gifu, are some of the biggest.

The map featured, from Japan Guide.com, forecasts the turning of the leaves all over Japan and are available at websites for the Japanese not just for western tourists looking for views. People will plan holidays or onsen weekends around soaking in the beauty of the turning of the leaves or man’s attempts at controlling the snow and communities around the country will celebrate their local (usually rice) harvest.  Similar maps are available in Spring for the Hanami or cherry blossom viewing which is a HUGE celebration.

Melbourne, where I grew up, has its seasons but they are pretty much ignored beyond whether to bring a brolly or a coat (and boy do we know how to read a forecast).  The joke, of course, is four seasons in one day but it’s really only true if you consider that getting a little cool and a little rain on a Summer day constitutes winter-like. As I understand it, the local indigenous population consider that Melbourne has six seasons and I can kind of see that (and wish I could find out more but it’s really, really hard.) The only hint of seasonal celebrations that come to the general awareness of the Australian populous are Easter and Yule though, of course, in their Christian form and they are actually at the time of Harvest and mid-Summer in the Sthn Hemisphere anyway. (Yes, I know that the non-Christian elements are still hugely strong within those festivals but that doesn’t mean those of us who are Caucasian and not “of the book” can celebrate openly – calling it Yule, for example, is only acceptable if it’s assumed I’m using the German term lol.)

The cynical (or those offended by the fact that I’ve just revealed I don’t hold Judeo-Christian views ) will remind me how commercial the festivals seem – Hanami particularly with companies competing for the best spots and it being very much “the thing” to do rather than being focused on which Kami is being celebrated. They will point out that the change of the seasons for most people just means new flavours of drinks and snacks in the konbini or changing wardrobes. Well to that I say: Shenanigans!

First of all, if they know that Summer is being celebrated then they know which Kami is being celebrated and frankly it’s kinda hard to miss. Secondly, those new flavours are seasonal flavours (watermelon kitkat in Summer and apple breath mints in Autumn, how much more harvesty can you get than apples!) being aware of the earth in your every day life is an acknowledgement of the Kami (however you want to define them, I find the similarities to Platonic Forms extraordinary) that effect it. Changing your clothes to warmer ones because its cold is a reverence to the seasons at the most basic level and possibly more so when there’s little need to change clothes beyond your coat with heating available indoors.  But that’s me getting all kitchen-witchy on you so from a more traditionally western “religious” oogity-boogity framework I say: look at the excitement on the faces of the people in their Yukatas on the way to the fireworks. Listen to the laughter and awed “Sugoi!” at the art form that is man’s attempt at mastery over fire. The smile elicited by the sheer beauty of a cherry blossom or the colour of a leaf. That is real emotion, whatever the affectations of the day to please your boss or your boyfriend, and that is the essence of all this – opening yourself to the rhythms of the earth. Even if they only do it once a season, they come together and allow themselves to be effected by the extraordinary beauty and power of this planet which, no matter how much we learn, can still shake us off its back with a good earthquake.

Whether the Japanese population flocking (and boy do they flock) to the many matsuris and enjoying the food and carnival atmosphere are intellectually cognizant of exactly what is being celebrated doesn’t really matter to me (though frankly I think most of them are).  It does a heathen girl good to be able to look ahead to at least a whole year in which she can celebrate by simply joining in with an entire nation!

Afterwards, head over to read Dennis’ post and watch the other just as serious but less funny video he has embedded… it’s getting ridiculous over there.

During investigations for a report entitled “CHILDREN IN STATE CARE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY: ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE AND DEATH FROM CRIMINAL CONDUCT” which was delivered last week , Australians…

“when asked to place in order the matters in society that concerned them most, rising petrol prices came first and child sexual abuse came 14th out of 15″

Do please follow this link and read Sen. Bartlett’s post.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that people care so little about helping children who are not their own, given my own history, and yet that shocks me, it truly does.

We are not complete new-comers to Japanese, as fans of anime we are certainly used to it’s sounds and rythms and we even studied it for a few months in 2004 – just before we decided to take the plunge and allow me to give up work to write and had to tighten our belts – so we knew what to expect. Being presented with hiragana was not an issue as we had already learned that it is actually far easier to learn in kana than in romaji/roman characters because it is phonetic. What I didn’t expect, though, was that learning Japanese would effect my rusty school-girl French and my approach to language in general.

I have long heard the theory that it is easier to learn a third language after learning a second and easier still a fourth and so on… I have always assumed that this referred to having learned a second language to fluency but my French is far from fluent (even given that Superman is right that I have always underestimated how good it is) and yet I am finding a profound effect. Of course there is the obvious issue of being familiar with the general concepts of language learning but something more fundamental seems to be happening to my brain. As I learn new words I’m finding that the French for the same word or phrase will come to mind totally unbidden and that my entire world is becoming more abstract. Objects and actions are less tied to the words which name them – in a fundamental way. It’s difficult to describe, and when I do it sounds silly and basic but I’ll try anyway.

When we are children and we are told what something is called we are not literally told “that is named ‘a book’,” we are told “that IS a book.” Perhaps we take on a metaphysical belief about the essence of ‘book’ so that when we are taught other languages we simply learn by rote that “un livre” is another name for what is actually, fundamentally ‘a book.’ I wonder if the words of the mother tongue continue to be the fundamental basis not just of all language but of reality itself unless something is done to breakdown that metaphysical conditioning.

Those who become fluent in a language know the importance of the moment when you start to ‘think in

‘ When you are no longer translating, even at extreme speed, then you are genuinely fluent but this is not what I am referring to. When I was still studying French and even now when I am watching a French movie or le Journal in the mornings I have those moments (not for terribly long when it comes to le Journal I’m afraid). I know exactly what is going on, I laugh at the jokes when it’s appropriate for the French rather than the English subtitles and it will take me a jarring moment to switch back to thinking in English if someone speaks to me or asks me to translate precisely for them. But this new thing isn’t just ‘thinking’ in another language – I certainly don’t know enough Japanese to come close to doing that – it’s thinking outside language, observing beyond language to the core of things without need to impose a name or even a description until there is a requirement to communicate … everything simply IS.Hmm sounds fairly zen, really, doesn’t it?

I wonder if children raised with multiple languages from birth have a completely different metaphysical outlook?

After we arrive in Japan, we will continue to be given language lessons for the duration of our stay so there is a real possibility of achieving more than a survival level of fluency. Perhaps I will even be able to make a rudimentary translation of Shadowkeeper for pitching to the Japanese anime production houses which have inspired and influenced my writing since I was a child. At the very least I should be able to collaborate intelligently with a translator. Standby for posts in kana!

“To get our aussie team to the Special Olympics in Beijing” was the reply.

“Oh!” I heard myself exclaim with an unexpected passion. “No! Noone should be going. Not the able-bodied either. Do you know what’s going on over there, let alone because of the Olympics?”

The boy looked at me dumbfounded, the girl recovered faster and said quickly “Sport has nothing to do with that stuff.”

I didn’t want to pick an argument with them so I refused and apologised again but suggested they do some research into it and shuffled inside before I could be overwhelmed by the shame of my deed. You see, many Australians, I’d even venture to say the vast majority of Australians, would consider that behaviour to have been that most terrible of things: unAustralian – not because I said no to some poor disabled kiddies but because I said no to SPORTSPEOPLE. Worse, I suggested that sportspeople should not pursue their sport with a single-minded obliviousness to the world in which they live.

At the time that I committed my deed the issue hadn’t been discussed in the media since the small flicker of psuedo-concern for a week or so after games had been awarded to China. Now, as the games approach, with the Europeans taking the lead the issue is being bounced around again and the usual “debate” is occurring. Those who believe the games should not be boycotted make statements such as “Sport is above politics” they are nodded at slowly as though they have said something wise and proper, as though they have ACTUALLY OUTLINED ANY KIND OF ARGUMENT AT ALL and the issue is considered dealt with. Those on the other side, who dare to possibly consider that maybe the politics of the situation should perhaps be taken into account, are attacked and even intelligent, usually courageous, political journalists will touch on it only briefly and carefully leave it up to the conscience of the viewer as they do when discussing religion or abortion rights.
“Ok,” I can hear some of you saying, “so what’s your argument FOR a boycott?”

Fair question and it is better answered by Chinese activists who are closer to the situation than I. Sen. Andrew Bartlett, whose blog is a great one to read to keep the faith alive that there are politicians who apply both intelligence and conscience to their work rather than PR, provides this link to the article “THE REAL SITUATION IN PRE-OLYMPICS CHINA” by Teng Biao and Hu Jia (who was arrested and sentenced to 3 and a half yrs jail in China this week for writing such things.) It is a good article for those with sport tunnel vision because it addresses Olympic-specific related abuses – and not just human rights abuses but sportsman’s rights abuses too. For example, the Chinese government is barring their top sportspeople from competing if their political views are suspect, or (as in the case of their national disabled discus champion who received his disabling injury at the Tienanmen Massacre) if their injuries remind people of the truth.

“Sure that’s bad, really awful,” some will continue to argue “but it’s not the individual athlete’s job to make political statements”

First of all this is just a politically correct way of asking: why the hell should an athlete give a damn about another human being? and, frankly if I have to answer that one for you then get the hell away from my blog. No, seriously.

But lets assume that it is arguable that the athlete’s shouldn’t have to care that they will be performing in stadia built by the forcible removal of people from their homes some of whom are in prison or re-education labor camps for objecting. The sheer fact is that there is no way round a political statement in this case. There is a choice which must be made here: to go or not to go, there is no default position, a statement WILL be made one way or the other. If you go you support the Chinese government AND the olympic committee’s choice to award the games to China, if you don’t go then you care about human rights. There is NO ESCAPING a statement. SPORT IS NOT ABOVE HUMANITY. The olympic committee has put every athlete into this position – not China, not political philosophers or activists – by awarding the games to China in the first place.
I am not suggesting that any individual athlete should have to bare the weight of a boycott on their own, I am suggesting that every single athlete should refuse to be used by the olympic organisation and China. Look at that phrase: “every single” or “every one” – it takes each individual for it to happen, each person who says they won’t do it because others won’t do it is guilty of stopping it from happening AND is either a supporter of China and the olympic committee’s choice to award the games to China, or, quite simply, a selfish coward.

“But what do you say to an athlete who doesn’t want to give up the opportunity to achieve what they have spent so much of their life working towards?”

A) It’s bloody horrible and the olympic committee should not have put you in this situation but frankly the olympics doesn’t deserve to be the focus of anyone’s life ambitions if it is this kind of an organisation. If you really care about being the fastest, strongest, highest, get your sports union to organise alternate meets where you can do your best times and prove you’re all about the sport and not the fanfare which feeds the corrupt olympic movement… or are you wanting to jump on that gravy-train yourself?

B) Sit down for two seconds at a computer, google torture and get some damn perspective. It’s not that I don’t support and admire anyone who strives to be the best at anything they do – nor that I am oblivious to the important role that sport plays in western countries inspiring technological and medical breakthroughs or allowing people to channel tribal emotions safely into the love of their team instead of into violence (not always successfully.) But sport is a pastime, an entertainment just like any other pastime and equal to them: despite the Australian worship of sport the truth is that a brilliant runner has no moral superiority over a brilliant chess player and in fact both are morally inferior to a doctor or a charity worker or a human being living under an oppressed regime who has the courage to become an activist. If you are really honestly willing to actively support the pageantry of the Chinese government and the olympic committee which was willing to be bought by them for the sake of a few minutes of your life which, experience tells us you will spend the rest of your days struggling to get over and move on from, then you need a serious adjustment. If you make a stand for humanity, you’ll still be wheeled out every four years to wax nostalgic about your olympic experience but yours will have made more of a difference and lasted longer than it took for your record to be broken – and it won’t just be on sports shows either.

“Why not go and say something on the podium about human rights?”

Because this stand isn’t just about China, it’s about standing up to the olympic committee for giving it to China in the first place. The committee’s protestations that the focus on China would help were disingenuous at best. Sport simply does not matter enough for it to make any positive change for China – OFCOURSE this was going to be negative for Chinese citizens, OFCOURSE it would be taken as/spun as support for the Chinese government. And the olympic committee did not care. We all know how corrupt the olympic committee has been for decades, who knows what China offered them but it was enough even to overlook the very suspect drug-use if not at least child-abuse practices of Chinese sporting associations let alone the wider political abuses. Going to the games and saying “I support human rights” while wearing your medal will be a thoroughly empty, hypocritical PR gesture – because you have allowed the games to occur and the olympic committee remains immune. Make your human rights statement at a press conference the night you make the team and say how you lament the posiiton you’ve been put in by the olympic committee but that you will not be going – that AND empty stadia will make an actual impact – not easily editable too-late-now statements. Don’t allow yourselves to be used by an organisation which has shown itself to care about nothing but that its members may continue to live the lives to which they have become accustomed… where’s the sport in that? And where’s your dignity?