Tuesday, 21 May 2013
Today at school, a strange question popped into my mind as I watched my classmates.
Everybody clearly looked ecstatic to be awake at that time of day and obliged to take in some information about volcanoes or whatever. In fear of forgetting the unexpected and odd thought - for some reason - I scrawled it down on the back of my notebook:
"Do people in TV shows from the 60s - 90s see colors differently?"
School was definitely not fascinating or a place where I can ponder on how intriguing little details are - I sort of realized that by now - but tv shows and their vintage feel have given me unrealistic expectations for high school. And life!
And I don't just mean the actual experience, I mean..everything looks intriguing on those shows. The dim lighting with the slight orange tint; the way nothing was ever fully illuminated and super HD.
I love it.
This may border on sounding a little ridiculous and ignorant at the same time, but I just can't help feeling some sort of attachment and obsession - if you will - with the entire atmosphere depicted on those shows.
It's like magic. My life should take notes.
To be honest, I'm still unsure as to what the conclusive message of this post is, but I thought keeping something I wrote at 2:26 in the morning would definitely be worth reading in the morning.
Thursday, 16 May 2013
I want to go home to
tangerine sunrise and blueberry skies
to pomegranate sunset
I want to go home to
sitting on the roof,
cold lemonade in tall glasses
as we talked about books
and the universe
I want to go home to
playing your mix tapes long through the night
and falling asleep,
with nothing but the constellations for a quilt
You said we'd go places
Whispered warm descriptions as I closed my eyes
to believe that this would one day be my reality
I'm sure you've forgotten that.
Along with the scarlet flower crown
and the fireflies
and the photographs
and the secrets
I want to go home to
but I know that by now
you have outgrown the confines of your imagination,
clung on to the stories
packed a bag of fresh dreams
and began searching for the words
to write the story you have always craved to say
You always kept your promises
Monday, 6 May 2013
The world right now is trying to find a way to educate children to take the adults' place in the economies of the 21st century but here's what they're doing wrong. They're trying to face the feature with techniques that have long gone rusty.
In an attempt to succeed in the modern world they are alienating millions of children who don't see a purpose in going to school because the good old reason "If you study well, you get a degree and if you get a degree then you will get a job" is also quite pathetic and absolutely false in today's age. Of course, you're better off with a degree than not but it is most definitely not a guarantee of a job. Especially not if the route to getting that particular job is marginalizing what you believe is important.
The current system was conceived in the intellectual culture of the enlightenment and made for the economic circumstances of the Industrial Revolution. Schools are still modeled on the interest of industrialism and the image of it. They are made up of separate facilities, specialized into separate subjects and educate children in batches.
Who thought it was a revelation to categorize children in a way that implies the only thing they have in common is their age. Since when was their date of production the most important factor of their education?
Children are humans - in case the majority of the education board forgot that - and children function differently in different disciplines. Some work better than others of the same age group, some are most efficient during different times of the day or in groups of different sizes. We need to stop basing everything on a production line mentality. Children are not produce, they happen to be the future.
Recently, the rates of diagnoses of ADHD have increased rapidly. Wether you think ADHD is a legitimate condition or not is still quite debatable but the point is these children that assumably have ADHD are getting medicated routinely. They happen to have been brought into this world into the most intensely stimulating period in the history of the Earth; in the midst of computers, phones, adverts and 100s of tv channels. They are then later penalized for being distracted from the "boring stuff" by all that. So, let's punish them for being normal human beings?
This mentality is fueled by the celebration of conformity and standardized testing, which could lead brilliant people into thinking they're not because they happen to not excel or find their forte in Mathematics or Sciences. I'm focusing on those particular subjects because the arts happen to be the victims of this mentality because they focus on the aesthetic experience; the idea of all the senses operating at their peak. Resonating with this thing that you're experiencing. And these children that apparently suffer from ADHD are given anesthetics; which basically shut their senses off. How could you do that to a learning and exploring mind?
Now we have become divided into the academic (the smart) and the non-academic (the non-smart). This categorization is what puts a limit to divergent thinking. Divergent thinking is essentially:
- The ability to see more than one interpretation to a single question.
- and the ability to see more than one answer for a specific question.
- This is called Lateral Thinking, according to Ed De Bono
This proves that 1. We all have this capacity but it mostly deteriorates as we get "educated". Why? Because we're doing it all wrong. Yes. Shocker, isn't it? You spend 10 years at school being taught that there is only one answer. And it's in the back of the book, but don't look, because that's cheating. Even though in the real world that's called collaboration..but hey, I'll turn a blind eye on that one.
Moral of all this is that we need to think differently about the human capacity and get over the categorizing of things; academic, abstract, theoretical. It's all a bunch of pointless and very much outdated theories that don't even benefit us in moving forward.
P.S: This was all inspired and based on the lecture by Sir Ken Robinson, that you can watch right here. Thank you for wording all my thoughts and enlightening me, properly for once.
Saturday, 4 May 2013
As most of you know, this is an event organized by the UN - that celebrates it's 20th anniversary today - held to give the world an opportunity to:
- "Celebrate the fundamental principles of press freedom;
- Assess the state of press freedom throughout the world;
- Defend the media from attacks on their independence;
- Pay tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the line of duty."
2013's theme is: Safe to Speak: Securing Freedom of Expression in All Media
I'm aware that it's not the best mind frame or attitude to say that something could never be achieved or that it's too farfetched, but if I say the obvious I wouldn't be the first to say it. And to be honest, even by saying what I'm about to say, I wouldn't be the first either. But still. I feel like it has to be said. I'd rather participate than be a full-time mindless consumer.
I found a color-coded diagram right here on The Guardian that is trying to show the situation of freedom of the press worldwide. Looking at it quite briefly and generally I'd say that it's roughly accurate.
But here's my thing with this whole freedom of the press thing. That diagram could never be fully white. It could never even be fully orange or yellow. It's just not possible. By protesting to improve situations in most places, we are proposing to improve the countries that are currently yellow, because that would be possible, but taking China as an example, or even some arab and western countries, you could never completely free the press, because there's something going on in hindsight and that's the actual politics, relations and attitudes of different countries towards each other.
By freeing the press you are giving the people a free platform to communicate and share ideas with the rest of the country's citizens and on a larger scale; the world. Therefore you are now in a position of power. You are capable of changing an entire population's mindset if you sound like you know what you're talking about (and of course even when you actually know what you're talking about). But where does that put the government? Where is that privilege and control the government has over the people. By controlling the media and news outlets you are essentially controlling and monitoring what your country's finding out about itself and the world around it. And that is a very risky move from the government's perspective.
But on the other hand, if people are given permission to share their thoughts freely, what's more likely; that they'll rave and cause nothing but havoc and chaos or just be content to know that they're being heard?
I don't consider myself an expert on this, so I'm simply sharing thoughts..but yeah..that has always been very interesting to me.