NO I will not sit and wait while you tell me to listen. While you tell me the arguments which you give and have given again and again: “We must be reasonable, we have jobs to do, responsibilities, duties, people aren’t interested, they don’t care, forget it, you’ll never win, you can’t change anything.”
None of this was ever true.
You sit in your meetings pretending to represent us, pretending to be equals with men who give you half an ear, if you’re lucky. They were there before you, will be there after you – what interest do they have in listening to you? Those who voted for you, where are they? Drinking, studying, passing another day. When do you talk to us and what do you say? Perhaps students are not capable of knowing, they do not think of what they really do and what they have and what they want. And why would they need to? “That's why we were elected. Behind closed doors we fight for what is right, students don't care about the nitty gritty, we do the hard work for them so they don't have to. Don't try and tell me they could ever want anything more , they elected me didn't they? I'll do my job – I work for them. I'm just doing the best by them.” Which is what exactly? When did you ask us? And what do you tell us of what you see , of what you do, of what you think? A little morsel of truth comes out, every now and again, if you're looking closely and listening hard.
So we sit mostly numb, unconscious to all that matters, unaware of what you will never tell us. Numbed by the system which provides us with this brittle cocoon, but it was never so comfortable anyway. You maintain it, our little temporary shelter, or is it a blindfold? The poverty and cruelty of reality seeps in at the edges, but you take little notice. It does not interest you. “We all have a right to education, these days we study to get a job, you knew that when you came here. Why did you come here anyway? It’s money you want isn’t it, or what? Do you have some faded illusion of something better? Ha – you’ll forget that pretty soon. This is the big city, this is where the money is made: we can help you on to the ladder if you’ll only help yourself...”
Help myself, yes I just might. What lies beneath I wonder? Questions rise, slow steady growth of ideas, expanding, spreading until roots and branches stretch in every direction. I think of what I do, my position, situation, history, future – worlds of possibility and reality. Between them many steps lie, but I see them, that first step – questions, leading to thinking, leading to action, leading to change.
Is it so hard? Or is it that you just underestimate us? Of course we can think, they train us in that; how to learn and regurgitate at a later date. But this thinking, probing the lines of our learning itself – this scares you, but you know of it. You know of it and choose to ignore it. “Don't be such a romantic. Nothing would ever come of it any way. These thoughts are the whisper of a dream of a nothing. Grow up, reality is here, it’s not so bad, come on in the water’s...” tepid, at best. “But seriously, give it up, swallow the bitter pill like everybody else, you’ll be saving yourself a lot of trouble.”
A lot of what? Trouble – dreaming isn’t trouble, the trouble is not dreaming - what could be worse? Those changes you say you’re making, will anyone remember in 10 years time, 20, 30? “We adjusted things a little, an inch to the left, an inch to the right, it was an important step on the path to...” What exactly? What was your vision, your keystone, your point of departure, your end destination? “It was just a step on the ladder.” And the top of the ladder? “I’ll tell you when I get there.” When will you get there? “Ask me in 10 years time.” Are you sure it won’t be 20, 30? And then? Will you be satisfied? Will you tell me again not to ask for much or to expect only a little step forward – or is it backwards? Or what direction are we going in at all?
Do we hope? Do we dream, can we go further? What lies beyond, beneath, above, outside? I do not know, but in my search I know I will find a little of what there is not here. But wait, it is here already isn’t it? I see something at the edge of my vision, I turn around, it’s gone. I know I saw something. I catch something, it slides through my fingers a little touch of another object, a different idea, and it’s gone again. It is not lost though, it is always there. If only we look, not with eyes that search for the best and the worst but with eyes that feel, eyes that feel for a deeper meaning, a deeper good which yearns for people. A people who deep down yearn for good.
So when you tell me to listen and be realistic, just who are you speaking for? Me or You? Students or Future Students? Who exactly and why? When you forgot how to dream how did it feel? Without my dreams I am nothing. If we do not hope, if we do not believe, if we do not dream and act on those dreams, however distant they may seem, then where are we?
Nowhere.
Do not tell me we cannot change anything, this was never true.
Dream and we can change everything.
- Sol Gamsu -
Sunday, 25 May 2008
Thursday, 22 May 2008
Gloucester, UK: A conservation manager from the Severnside Project introduces one of 70 captivity-bred water voles into a nature reserve. The vole population has declined by 90%, but it is hoped the new influx will grow into a stable population and spread to nearby areas to replace the ones that died in last summer's floodsPhotograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images
Friday, 9 May 2008
We don't trust ourselves
Having read a lot about Primo Levi in this last week both his books and about his life this week – even if it was for an exam -, this has got me thinking a lot not only about his own aims in his literature but also how far we have come since 1945.
Primo Levi was a Jewish Italian chemist and Holocaust survivor who wrote a number of books about his experience as a survivor of the Holocaust, his literature on his experience of Auschwitz characteristic by its detached prose in a bid to give his readers a historical and factual account of his experiences and not one overridden by emotion and anger. His most important books were Se questo un uomo (If this is a man), La tregua (The Truce) and I sommersi e i salvati (The drowned and the saved).
Levi’s underlying fear that society would forget what happened at Auschwitz and the danger for a similar crime of this proportion to repeat itself was what motivated him as a writer. There has been a lot of speculation surrounding his death – many consider his death in 1987 an act of suicide – as it has been suggested that his ‘Auschwitz demons’ finally got the better of him. However even if the reason behind his death is another issue all together, and one which I am in no position to talk about, Levi has succeeded in getting me thinking about how we as human individuals regard ourselves as a collective unit through these events.
While I understand that anything surrounding the Holocaust or the Second World War maybe a banal topic to discuss at the moment, it is the way we are still dealing with it after more than 60 years that is still fascinating.
Not only is it evident from Levi, but also from the fact that a Holocaust denial law exists implicitly or explicitly in 13 countries, it is clear that as society at large, we simply do not trust ourselves not to repeat the grave errors that have characterised our past. The simple need for such a law, or even the fact that sensitivities still run extremely high whenever the issue is even mentioned, shows clearly our complete mistrust that we are able to guarantee, though this experience of our history, that the atrocities carried out in concentration camps are never repeated.
Saying this, obviously in absolutely no way am I suggesting that I do not understand the fury of many people whose relatives lost their lives or incurred incredible suffering during the Holocaust when people are denying its existence.
However even the fact that right now I feel the need to explain myself in order to state something that should be blatant and implied through the use of common sense, this alone strengthens my point.
I find myself agreeing with Austrian university professor Lothar Hobelt who was quoted saying when British historian David Irving was sentenced to a prison term in February 2006:
"This is a silly law by silly people for silly people. In fact, having a law that says you mustn't question a particular historical instance, if anything, creates doubt about it, because if an argument has to be protected by the force of law, it means it's a weak argument."
While we will never reach a stage where we can say that the events of recent history are able to guide us in the right direction and allow us to safely say that history will never repeat itself, it is disappointing however to see how little confidence there is in society that we are able to learn from our past and be reasonable in the way we view our future without the use of laws or other protective methods.
- NS-
Primo Levi was a Jewish Italian chemist and Holocaust survivor who wrote a number of books about his experience as a survivor of the Holocaust, his literature on his experience of Auschwitz characteristic by its detached prose in a bid to give his readers a historical and factual account of his experiences and not one overridden by emotion and anger. His most important books were Se questo un uomo (If this is a man), La tregua (The Truce) and I sommersi e i salvati (The drowned and the saved).
Levi’s underlying fear that society would forget what happened at Auschwitz and the danger for a similar crime of this proportion to repeat itself was what motivated him as a writer. There has been a lot of speculation surrounding his death – many consider his death in 1987 an act of suicide – as it has been suggested that his ‘Auschwitz demons’ finally got the better of him. However even if the reason behind his death is another issue all together, and one which I am in no position to talk about, Levi has succeeded in getting me thinking about how we as human individuals regard ourselves as a collective unit through these events.
While I understand that anything surrounding the Holocaust or the Second World War maybe a banal topic to discuss at the moment, it is the way we are still dealing with it after more than 60 years that is still fascinating.
Not only is it evident from Levi, but also from the fact that a Holocaust denial law exists implicitly or explicitly in 13 countries, it is clear that as society at large, we simply do not trust ourselves not to repeat the grave errors that have characterised our past. The simple need for such a law, or even the fact that sensitivities still run extremely high whenever the issue is even mentioned, shows clearly our complete mistrust that we are able to guarantee, though this experience of our history, that the atrocities carried out in concentration camps are never repeated.
Saying this, obviously in absolutely no way am I suggesting that I do not understand the fury of many people whose relatives lost their lives or incurred incredible suffering during the Holocaust when people are denying its existence.
However even the fact that right now I feel the need to explain myself in order to state something that should be blatant and implied through the use of common sense, this alone strengthens my point.
I find myself agreeing with Austrian university professor Lothar Hobelt who was quoted saying when British historian David Irving was sentenced to a prison term in February 2006:
"This is a silly law by silly people for silly people. In fact, having a law that says you mustn't question a particular historical instance, if anything, creates doubt about it, because if an argument has to be protected by the force of law, it means it's a weak argument."
While we will never reach a stage where we can say that the events of recent history are able to guide us in the right direction and allow us to safely say that history will never repeat itself, it is disappointing however to see how little confidence there is in society that we are able to learn from our past and be reasonable in the way we view our future without the use of laws or other protective methods.
- NS-
Sunday, 4 May 2008
Friday, 2 May 2008
Where does Labour go from here?
What are the reasons behind what have been declared as Labour’s worst council results in 40 years? Can these results be attributed to the 10p tax debacle of the last two weeks, a reaction to what Gordon Brown has labelled the “difficult economic circumstances” that the UK is experiencing or is it as former Labour Cabinet Minister Tony Benn claimed "verdict on Blairism"?
Or is this simply a protest vote against Labour which does not have a real bearing on the voting patterns for the next general election?
What should Labour do in order to rectify the situation or has the tide in the UK already changed in favour of the Conservatives?
BBC report on the elections – We have collected some extracts from the BBC coverage on the elections, but we are looking for you to comment either directly on this post or write your own piece on what you think about all these questions that Thursday night’s local election results have created.
BBC research suggests Labour won 24% of votes cast in England and Wales, behind the Tories on 44% and Lib Dems on 25%.
In total Labour lost 331 councillors and key councils like Reading. Tory gains include Bury and North Tyneside.
Mr Brown insists his party will learn lessons. David Cameron called it a "big moment" for the Conservative Party.
The margin is similar to the drubbing received by Tory Prime Minister John Major in council elections in 1995, two years before he was ejected from Downing Street by Tony Blair.
Mr Brown told reporters: "It's clear to me that this has been a disappointing night, indeed a bad night for Labour."
He conceded that the government had "lessons to learn", but insisted: "My job is to listen and to lead."
He blamed "difficult economic circumstances" for much of the bad performance, and claimed that measures taken by the government to counter problems would become clear "over the next few months".
Of course local elections are not the same as general elections. People do feel a greater liberty to register a protest vote and some parts of the country have not gone to the polls this time.
Yet more than 100 Labour MPs will now be worrying about their chances of keeping their seats at the next election.
There is no sign of any organised attempt to move against the leader who was given such overwhelming support by his party when Tony Blair stood down. There is no obvious candidate prepared to put up a serious challenge at the moment.
With two years to go before the next election, Gordon Brown does have time to turn around his party's fortunes. But some are now wondering whether he is personally capable of the sort of change that is needed.
Tony Benn comment:
Former Labour cabinet minister Tony Benn says the results are a "verdict on Blairism". "For ten years we've been told 'leave everything to the market. Borrow on the value of your house. You'll be all right. Don't worry, privatisation will solve the problem.' And I think the credit crunch has been a sort of economic 9-11. It's changed everything. And a lot of people are really frightened now ... I think that's really what we ought to understand, because when people are frightened they always move to the right."
Or is this simply a protest vote against Labour which does not have a real bearing on the voting patterns for the next general election?
What should Labour do in order to rectify the situation or has the tide in the UK already changed in favour of the Conservatives?
BBC report on the elections – We have collected some extracts from the BBC coverage on the elections, but we are looking for you to comment either directly on this post or write your own piece on what you think about all these questions that Thursday night’s local election results have created.
BBC research suggests Labour won 24% of votes cast in England and Wales, behind the Tories on 44% and Lib Dems on 25%.
In total Labour lost 331 councillors and key councils like Reading. Tory gains include Bury and North Tyneside.
Mr Brown insists his party will learn lessons. David Cameron called it a "big moment" for the Conservative Party.
The margin is similar to the drubbing received by Tory Prime Minister John Major in council elections in 1995, two years before he was ejected from Downing Street by Tony Blair.
Mr Brown told reporters: "It's clear to me that this has been a disappointing night, indeed a bad night for Labour."
He conceded that the government had "lessons to learn", but insisted: "My job is to listen and to lead."
He blamed "difficult economic circumstances" for much of the bad performance, and claimed that measures taken by the government to counter problems would become clear "over the next few months".
Of course local elections are not the same as general elections. People do feel a greater liberty to register a protest vote and some parts of the country have not gone to the polls this time.
Yet more than 100 Labour MPs will now be worrying about their chances of keeping their seats at the next election.
There is no sign of any organised attempt to move against the leader who was given such overwhelming support by his party when Tony Blair stood down. There is no obvious candidate prepared to put up a serious challenge at the moment.
With two years to go before the next election, Gordon Brown does have time to turn around his party's fortunes. But some are now wondering whether he is personally capable of the sort of change that is needed.
Tony Benn comment:
Former Labour cabinet minister Tony Benn says the results are a "verdict on Blairism". "For ten years we've been told 'leave everything to the market. Borrow on the value of your house. You'll be all right. Don't worry, privatisation will solve the problem.' And I think the credit crunch has been a sort of economic 9-11. It's changed everything. And a lot of people are really frightened now ... I think that's really what we ought to understand, because when people are frightened they always move to the right."
-NS-
Monday, 28 April 2008
Exams are shit
Possibly the reason I have had the inspiration to use such a title for the piece or to even think of writing this piece should obviously be traced right back to the historical context which I find myself in (this possibly was a self-explanatory and unnecessary introduction) which is the never-ending exam period.
While reluctantly recognising their fundamental importance as a necessary method of testing the quality and level of knowledge that a student should attain, I do have to stop myself (unsuccessfully) saying: what a load of shit!
Thankfully not having had to take any form of examination last year except the annual trip to the optician for him to ‘examine’ that I can still see those weird but always fascinating tiny letters on his wall, I happened to forget how dreadful exams are in every way.
Coming to think of it, when one takes a look at how the system of moving on from secondary education into university, especially in this country, people are not really asked to show their potential or their intelligence or abilities, they are simply asked: “How well can you pass an exam?”.
While I am not doubting the obvious proportional relationship between 'intelligent' people or people with great potential with their ability to score high grades in their exams, this is not always the case. Quite a few people do get into exams instead of others simply because of their ability in getting higher grades in a series of exams.
However much we like to underestimate their importance in order to make us feel more relaxed, i.e. I don't remember myself going into an exam saying to myself "Come on, this is make or break, the future course your life will take may depend on this piece of paper right here", there is no doubting how important they are. But just think of how many people missed out on let's say admittance to a leading university on a minor thing or just luck, not whether or not they were academically better than someone else who made the grade.
Yes, I know the dividing line between success or failure is thin in a 21st century post-modern world driven by the internal struggle of competition among individuals and bla bla bla, but sometimes I do think that a better way must exist of testing knowledge, applying skills, intelligence, coping under pressure and all the abilities that an exam is supposed to be testing.
I understand that the ideal end to this piece would be to give my wonderful solution to this issue, but I am afraid it is not happening tonight, I just wanted a good confidence-boosting 3.30 am whinge after having wasted a day of my life trying to no avail to identify whether common and civil law systems in Europe are converging or diverging.
-NS-
While reluctantly recognising their fundamental importance as a necessary method of testing the quality and level of knowledge that a student should attain, I do have to stop myself (unsuccessfully) saying: what a load of shit!
Thankfully not having had to take any form of examination last year except the annual trip to the optician for him to ‘examine’ that I can still see those weird but always fascinating tiny letters on his wall, I happened to forget how dreadful exams are in every way.
Coming to think of it, when one takes a look at how the system of moving on from secondary education into university, especially in this country, people are not really asked to show their potential or their intelligence or abilities, they are simply asked: “How well can you pass an exam?”.
While I am not doubting the obvious proportional relationship between 'intelligent' people or people with great potential with their ability to score high grades in their exams, this is not always the case. Quite a few people do get into exams instead of others simply because of their ability in getting higher grades in a series of exams.
However much we like to underestimate their importance in order to make us feel more relaxed, i.e. I don't remember myself going into an exam saying to myself "Come on, this is make or break, the future course your life will take may depend on this piece of paper right here", there is no doubting how important they are. But just think of how many people missed out on let's say admittance to a leading university on a minor thing or just luck, not whether or not they were academically better than someone else who made the grade.
Yes, I know the dividing line between success or failure is thin in a 21st century post-modern world driven by the internal struggle of competition among individuals and bla bla bla, but sometimes I do think that a better way must exist of testing knowledge, applying skills, intelligence, coping under pressure and all the abilities that an exam is supposed to be testing.
I understand that the ideal end to this piece would be to give my wonderful solution to this issue, but I am afraid it is not happening tonight, I just wanted a good confidence-boosting 3.30 am whinge after having wasted a day of my life trying to no avail to identify whether common and civil law systems in Europe are converging or diverging.
-NS-
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
