Why I Am Not an Artist - 2nd Evidence

I can remember clearly what got into me when I created this picture: Desperation! Truthfully, I had no idea what objects to put, let alone to understand the meaning of expressionism (this is an assignment about expressionism painting - don't ask me). 

While I painfully, restlessly and desperately writhed on my seat, I saw the person sitting next to me browsing through several skyscraper pictures. Well, I didn't have to look very far for an inspiration. Being left with no option, I  decided to "borrow" his skyscraper concept and used it in my picture. 

The rest of the objects (globe and background landscape) were totally random. If I were to be asked what's the meaning of this picture (and I'm super relieved that the teacher didn't), my jaw would drop. There was absolutely no meaning. Even if you ask the great Michaelangelo to concoct a meaning out of this picture, I doubt he can pull that off. Because who in the world could give meanings to such picture? Or let me rephrase the question: Who the heck would put a globe, skyscraper, and forest in one picture? Well, a knowledgeable artist will not, but a desperate and novice college student, apparently, will.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Briefly, this is a classic before-after retouching attempt. Every time I look at this picture, I can't stand to ridicule myself "Dude, this was supposed to be a retouching picture - to make her looks better - not an opportunity to create an extraterrestrial creature." Oh my, look at her "white" teeth. Her neck. Her skin. Did I mention her teeth?  Oh, what have I done???

Why I Am Not an Artist - 1st Evidence

I always feel that I have an undiscovered talent in art, and covertly believe that I am a prodigal artist yet to be found. After a lifetime full of curiosity, this quarter I decide to give that theory a try. Thus, here I am, taking ArtEdu252 class - an art class that uses Adobe Photoshop to produce imagery - for the purpose of learning Photoshop and confirming my presumption. However, after three weeks of pain and agony, I come to understand that my theory was based on reckless and irrational judgment. Here is why.

Modulating Meaning Assignment: I was supposed to, at least, convey some meanings through all of these images. My grand idea was to compare and contrast human nature: the good and the bad, and incorporated them in the context of environment. Humans have control over the environment, and the environment will react in response to humans treatment. Good human nature will result in nature revealing its utmost beauty while bad human nature usually entails destruction and disaster.

The problem is not about formulating the idea, but visualizing it in the form of pictures. And this is the best piece that I can come up with. My own critiques:

1. I don't know why, but Hitler looks so disproportionately modified. lol. I think I played with him too much.

2. I tried to make Hitler's background a little darker - to elicit a sinister feeling. Apparently, it didn't work.

3. Don't worry if the "monkey and tiger" picture, hanging over a mountain top, happens to bother you. Me too. I just didn't know what to do with it. I spent so much time cutting that picture and I want to make sure it was up there so everybody could appreciate and recognize my painstaking effort.

4. What's with the baby in the beach? No specific reason. I believe the baby, smiling innocently like that, evokes a positive feeling. So, I hope that the image will enhance people's liking or reduce people's annoyance, and hopefully lessen their probability to question the man behind the piece.

5. There were really no sophisticated techniques used in this piece. I just simply dumped all the pictures, moved them to and fro, played with opacity, hue, saturation and rotation. This is not an issue of complacency, but ineptitude.

6. I genuinely like the "evil" face in the polluted water. I think it is so creative of me. =) Not to mention the combination of butterfly with a forest background. Oh, and also the concept of rainbow with prominent figures representing each side. Beautiful? Yes, I think so too.

(to be continued, with more thought-provoking and mind-boggling pictures)

Five Reasons Why I Love Twitter

Hmmm, do we need any more reasons to use twitter? Since the Ashton vs CNN battle on twitter and the enormous coverage that it received, twitter's users have increased at an accelerating rate. And among these relentless influx of followers are celebrities like Oprah and Larry King. It's maybe a little bit too late to declare this, but twitter is the next big thing and now I'm telling you my reasons why I tweet. 

1. It satisfies my curiosity.

I always want to be in the loop, and twitter gives me access to my friends' daily activities - directly from them and (even better) without me having to beg.  It's like reading People magazine, only in real time. 

2. It gives me a glimpse of stardom.

I have 48 followers!! Hei, that counts for something, at least there are 48 "fans" who think that my tweets carry some weights. Well, maybe not to that extent, but at least it leads me to think that there are 48 people out there who care about what I am eating for dinner. And frankly, it feels good. 

3. It is a way to spread good news

Remember the last time you are so happy that you want the whole world to know? Well, you don't have to look very far now. Twitter allows you to have countless followers (Ashton, at this point, has 1.4millions followers) whom you can share your good news with. Get a raise? Tweet please!

4. It also allows my trivial annoyances / useless rambling to be heard.

Pretending to be smart can takes a toll on me, and often times, my foolish nature comes to materialize in nonsensical rubbishes.  I concede that I need them sometimes, and twitter provides platform to aimlessly tweet anything that comes to mind - and no one would condemn me for saying stupid comments. It's just a tweet anyway, what so big deal?

5. It is the only place where I can "pick n choose" who I wanna follow. 

What an idea! It's no-brainer, why should I? In couple of occasions, some people whom I have no connection with, decided to follow me - and I let them to. But why in the world should I follow them? Twitter (unlike Facebook) is not based on reciprocal connection. Thus, you can follow me even though I refuse to follow you, and I'm not a jerk for doing that. 

I know I only wrote five reasons in the title, but I have an addition of one fundamental reason. Lastly, Twitter helps me to identify my deepest feelings and express them. For a person who is devoid of emotions like me, twitter gives me reasons to rummage through my cabinets of emotions and identify the one that is sitting on the driver's seat. It also helps me to challenge my espoused culture which discourages deluge of feelings. It took me a while to learn that expressing happiness, fear or care is okay, and that letting the world know about them is not unusual. Twitter, in all its simplicities, understands these. 

A Dollar a Day Keeps Happiness Away

I am who I am, not simply because of serendipity, but because of several significant experiences that shaped my belief, attitude and value. This life-changing experience that I am about to describe has helped me to realize that the pursuit of wealth and achievements does not, and never, translate into a deep sense of satisfaction.

During my senior high school (back in 2005), I went for a "live-in" program: a three nights stay in a secluded undeveloped village. The main purpose of the program is to hone our leadership skills by letting our big-city lifestyle rubs with the villagers' frugal lifestyle. There, I discovered this insight:

For sure, those people are less fortunate than most of us in so many ways; fewer money and possession, smaller chances and opportunities to earn big bucks, and lesser abilities and skills to be successful. Ironically, they have one thing that is missing in most of us: happiness.

Isn't that what matter the most? People climb the corporate ladder in hope of finding happiness at the top. People work around the clock to make sure their good performances will earn them a raise. Students work their head off to get into that billions dollar company. People do all such of things in the name of happiness.

Research has shown that the otherwise is correct and my experience confirmed it. Villagers are happier, firstly because they don't have to do things which actually make them unhappy. Isn't it an irony? In the process of pursuing happiness, we sacrifice happiness: family, friends, and health. I've heard many examples revolving around one similar pattern: loving husband putting countless hours to earn more income for his family. Halfway down the road, tension rises, house becomes cold, smiles become artificial, and relationship becomes sour.

Secondly, money never equals to happiness. Even if you manage to get rich without having to work your way up, true happiness is still out of reach. Villagers are happier living in a small house, working in a farm, and eating a meager meal.

Why?

Because they found the key to unlock the door to happiness: deep and meaningful relationships. Family sat together on the asphalt floor to enjoy their dinner. Father and son exchanged stories, mother and daughter laughed cheerfully. The conversation was seasoned with love. The atmosphere was so warm, so close, and so human. Neighbors came over for a late-night conversation over a cup of tea. Thousand stars joined in the conversation silently, and the gentle breeze spread the happiness around. A faint voice whispering inside me, "These uneducated and inconspicuous people have found it!!"

Simply stated, having less actually draws people closer. They are happier because they have less things to focus on: No worry about job security or stock market, no grudge when the discount ends, no temptation to buy new gadget etc. They simply focus on what they have: friends.

It appeals to humans' most basic nature, the need for others. Unfortunately, the pursuit of wealth often times deprives and desensitizes us from that most primal nature. Thus, it is good to strip our materialistic attributes off, and see our humanity in its naked form. Tell me if you see a pathetic and unhappy human. I saw it, thanks to the villagers.

Is Peace in The Middle East Foreseeable?

This is a topic that I came to care about not until recently - with no specific reason. Maybe the long and complex history of animosity between both nations have galvanized a sense of uneasiness within me - the cost of profound hatred, paid with the lives of millions, to defend and regain back identity as a human and nation, as promised by the Most High. 

Taking the risk of oversimplifying the complexity of this conflict, I highly doubt that both sides will ever coexist peacefully side by side in the disputed territories - Gaza & the West Bank. Although everybody know that a simple withdrawal from Israel back to its 1967 borders will solve the conflict, everybody know that it is unlikely to happen - if not impossible, at least for the last 60 years.

It's impossible because an inviolable divine mandate - traced back to 5,000 years ago - is the basic foundation for Israel to justify their invasion to the territories. Unfortunately, Palestinians will never submit to that condition as well. Hamas, whose goal is Islam sovereignty, will never stop using virulent attacks to force its agenda. Fatah, whose goal is a Palestinian state, will also never forget the pain and humiliation of Palestinians, banished from their own house. Fifteen years of peace initiatives also failed to neutralize - if not aggravated -  the conflict.

I'm neither proposing a second holocaust as a solution nor condemning diplomatic engagement as an approach, what I'm saying is the search for a two-state solution may not reach an end. It is an either-or problem, either Israelis or Palestinians settlement, and unless the diplomatic engagement stretch to that extent, hope is still our best virtue. A hope that, someday, no more rockets sounds are to be heard, no more terror on children, and no more blood need to be shed. A hope that, someday, peace is no more a hope but a true reality. 

Facebook Craze - One of Them?

- Gerry Joeng is writing an entry about Facebook. Check it out guys -

That kind of status update in social-networking website like Facebook is now the second most important headline to be heeded after, of course, the real headline news. Not all people have that tendency of course, but certainly it is for great deal of people - high school and college students, white-collar workers, housewives, the unemployed and what have you.  

Considerable amount of time are spent towards this share-all know-all craze, and those who still insist on not making a Facebook profile (despite numerous friends invitations) are frowned upon - what the fans condemned as late adapter.

Really? 

I think the other way around is true. People who automatically and readily open Facebook once the browser is set and those who continuously check their Facebook every 30 minutes in their fancy cell phone, are what the society should be frowned upon. 

In this light, Facebook shares one distinct characteristic with cigarette: it's addicting. So far, the most agreeable way out to control addiction is to avoid it - the less is better. As fun as it is to check out pictures, share updates and learn gossips, unaffordable times are wasted into drainless gutter. For you with high level of activities, you know that you cannot afford to throw your time into something so trivial. (caveat: of course not everything in Facebook is trivial, but you know what I mean)

Let's get more reflective in terms of time-effectiveness. At the end of your day, which one would bring you more satisfaction: the mere knowledge of your long-lost friend eating a pancake or real conversation with your long-lost friend over a real lunch. 

The difference is in your choice. Again, the issue is not yin and yang or black and white. Moderation is the key. For me, checking Facebook ten minutes in the morning, five minutes over lunch break, and fifteen minutes at night work just fine. What about you?

Charity

To save the best for the last, I have directly copied and pasted an augmented version of a chapter from one of C.S. Lewis' masterpiece, Mere Christianity. Running along the line with my Valentines day post, this chapter talks about how Christians should behave in the area of love. If you fail to read my post, you have my pardon. But please take time to read this, it is an excellent effort of putting a practical concept of love into words. 

Charity

First, as to the meaning of the word. 'Charity' now means simply what used to be called 'alms' - that is, giving to the poor. Originally it had a much wider meaning.Charity means 'Love, in the Christian sense'. But love, in the Christian sense, does not mean an emotion. It is a state not of the feelings but of the will; that state of the will which we have naturally about ourselves, and must learn to have about other people.

Christian Love (or Charity) for our neighbours is quite a different thing from liking or affection. We 'like' or are 'fond of' some people, and not of others. It is important to understand that this natural 'liking' is neither a sin nor a virtue, any more than your likes and dislikes in food are a sin or a virtue. It is just a fact. But, of course, what we do about it is either sinful or virtuous.

Natural liking or affection for people makes it easier to be 'charitable' towards them. It is, therefore, normally a duty to encourage our affections - to 'like' people as much as we can (just as it is often our duty to encourage our liking for exercise or wholesome food) -not because this liking is itself the virtue of charity, but because it is a help to it. On the other hand, it is also necessary to keep a very sharp look-out for fear our liking for some one person makes us uncharitable, or even unfair, to someone else. There are even cases where our liking conflicts with our charity towards the person we like. For example, a doting mother may be tempted by natural affection to 'spoil' her child; that is, to gratify her own affectionate impulses at the expense of the child's real happiness later on.

But though natural likings should normally be encouraged, it would be quite wrong to think that the way to become charitable is to sit trying to manufacture affectionate feelings. Some people are 'cold' by temperament; that may be a misfortune for them, but it is no more a sin than having a bad digestion is a sin; and it does not cut them out from the chance, or excuse them from the duty, of learning charity. The rule for all of us is perfectly simple. Do not waste time bothering whether you 'love' your neighbour; act as if you did. As soon as we do this we find one of the great secrets. When you are behaving as if you loved someone, you will presently come to love him. If you injure someone you dislike, you will find yourself disliking him more. If you do him a good turn, you will find yourself disliking him less. There is, indeed, one exception. If you do him a good turn, not to please God and obey the law of charity, but to show him what a fine forgiving chap you are, and to put him in your debt, and then sit down to wait for his 'gratitude', you will probably be disappointed. (People are not fools: they have a very quick eye for anything like showing off, or patronage.) But whenever we do good to another self, just because it is a self, made (like us) by God, and desiring its own happiness as we desire ours, we shall have learned to love it a little more or, at least, to dislike it less.

Consequently, though Christian charity sounds a very cold thing to people whose heads are full of sentimentality, and though it is quite distinct from affection, yet it leads to affection. The difference between a Christian and a worldly man is not that the worldly man has only affections or 'likings' and the Christian has only 'charity'. The worldly man treats certain people kindly because he 'likes' them: the Christian, trying to treat every one kindly, finds himself liking more and more people as he goes on - including people he could not even have imagined himself liking at the beginning.

This same spiritual law works terribly in the opposite direction. The Germans, perhaps, at first ill-treated the Jews because they hated them: afterwards they hated them much more because they had ill-treated them. The more cruel you are, the more you will hate; and the more you hate, the more cruel you will become - and so on in a vicious circle for ever.

Good and evil both increase at compound interest. That is why the little decisions you and I make every day are of such infinite importance. The smallest good act today is the capture of a strategic point from which, a few months later, you may be able to go on to victories you never dreamed of. An apparently trivial indulgence in lust or anger today is the loss of a ridge or railway line or bridgehead from which the enemy may launch an attack otherwise impossible.

Some writers use the word charity to describe not only Christian love between human beings, but also God's love for man and man's love for God. About the second of these two, people are often worried. They are told they ought to love God. They cannot find any such feeling in themselves. What are they to do? The answer is the same as before. Act as if you did. Do not sit trying to manufacture feelings. Ask yourself, 'If I were sure that I loved God, what would I do?' When you have found the answer, go and do it.

On the whole, God's love for us is a much safer subject to think about than our love for Him. Nobody can always have devout feelings: and even if we could, feelings are not what God principally cares about. Christian Love, either towards God or towards man, is an affair of the will. If we are trying to do His will we are obeying the commandment, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God.' He will give us feelings of love if He pleases. We cannot create them for ourselves, and we must not demand them as a right. But the great thing to remember is that, though our feelings come and go, His love for us does not. It is not wearied by our sins, or our indifference; and, therefore, it is quite relentless in its determination that we shall be cured of those sins, at whatever cost to us, at whatever cost to Him.

Teriakan Sebutir Salju

Ah, dihujanilah aku dengan butiran salju

kadang hati bertanya

apakah hidup sefana putih dan lembutnya salju

sedetik saja bisa ku memegangnya, lalu hilang begitu saja

Teman, apalah artinya indah salju itu

kalau hanya dinginnya yang kurasakan

andai saja putihnya bisa kugenggam

dan kutebarkan ke relung hatiku

Terdiam ku merenung

tertegun ku mengingat

kala sinar surya masih menyengat panas

tetapi hati terasa sejuk

tempat dimana kumengenal arti manis dan indah

tempat dimana kisah teruntai

Apalah artinya indah ini?

apalah artinya putih ini?

apalah artinya kelembutan ini?

jika ternyata, kisah manis itu tak dapat kuulangi lagi?