Monday, March 19, 2007
Another post in Stomp
I witnessed the aftermath of a freak accident yesterday. A police car somehow mounted the kerb, went up a grassy slope and slammed into a pillar. A neighbour said that the driver was trying to avoid a dog. Here's the link: http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/viewPost2341.aspx#
Monday, March 12, 2007
Running and Swimming
Ok, this is what I've been up to these couple of days:
On Saturday, I ran 6km in 41min.
On Sunday, I ran 7.2km in 51min.
On Monday, I swam 1.5km in 36.06min.
On Saturday, I ran 6km in 41min.
On Sunday, I ran 7.2km in 51min.
On Monday, I swam 1.5km in 36.06min.
Financing the Future
Wrote this for the above essay competition on the 2007 Singapore Budget. Well, no prizes won, but hey, most of what I posited came to pass in the recent Parliamentary debates. Enjoy it below:
"Executive Summary
The Budget for 2007 should reflect an optimistic outlook on the economy. It should also address the various national concerns that are facing the common populace. It should be positive, wisely constructed, balanced, and enterprising. It should also retain a distinctly Singaporean flavour, and one that invites voter and investor confidence. The budget has to be one that appeals to Singaporeans, though it should not be a panacea for every ill, nor a crutch to the indolent or cheat.
This writer’s proposal for the 2007 Budget examines the way the following could be factored in to make the Budget a meaningful one: Homeland Security, Defence, Welfare, Education, Environment, and Investment. It is an egalitarian vision, one where the common folk, as well as those in power and business can benefit from.
Financing Our Future
Good governance, political, social, and financial, has attracted both bouquets and brickbats from observers and armchair critics alike. Love it or hate it, the fact is that one would be hard put to stay on the fence, when the topic dwells on Singapore. Anecdotal evidence, at least, would suggest that there are many more accolades heaped on the many successes of Singapore.
The above statements, at least to this Singaporean writer, are largely true, albeit from a layman’s perspective. It is also not unattractive to comment that one’s feathers of vanity are smoothed by such glowing compliments, that in this fast-changing world with so much turmoil and instability, Singapore has continued to sail through with mast held up high. This is not to say, however, that there are no challenges worth considering, especially in the light of present and future developments, which could jeopardise the smooth journey.
In this light then, when considering the proposal for the budget for 2007, it would be prudent to acknowledge the various concerns and constraints facing our nation, before committing ourselves to the needs ahead.
Country Survey
The economic future of Singapore is largely dependent on our security for foreign investors. The early efforts of our government to secure the attention and the foreign dollars of multinationals are at stake in this regard. Investors feel and believe, and rightly so too, that Singapore is not only a safe place to do business in; it is also the most viable in this region.
For one, Singapore is secure internally from corruption. There is simply no space for one to indulge in dubious connections, nor is there much of a chance for individuals or organisations to deal through underhanded means. The effort put in by the government to maintain a squeaky clean image is not just mere lip-service. It is very real, and is made even steadier by the fact that the government does not go through frequent upheavals (in fact, none to date), and continuity is maintained through the re-election of the ruling party since Singapore’s independence. It would be prudent to reward the people oiling the mechanism of politics and bureaucracy by apportioning a fragment of the budget to show its appreciation.
Homeland security
Singapore is also an oasis from the security threats plaguing other nations, both developing and developed. To be sure, Singapore is small. Yet, that very perceived disadvantage is our strength, and works to our advantage. The small size of the nation makes the job of governance and surveillance that much easier, and criminals as well as terrorists are painfully aware of that. The long arm of the law is magnified and lengthened as a result. Investors know this strategic fact too.
The truth is that Singapore faces a constant threat, as was evidenced by the nefarious plots by Jemaah Islamiah (JI) to blow up key installations in Singapore a few years back. Earlier challenges included the threat of communist subversion by a group of Singaporeans. Yet, considering the relative absence of corruption, and the solid contribution of the government agencies (including the police force), plus the added benefit of having a small footprint, Singapore is well-set to be among the safest places on earth to do business in. Consider Jurong Island. Its very infrastructure appeared well-planned in advance to prevent attacks on key investors’ operations and investments. It would also be good to maintain or even increase the budget to improve the security and defence mechanisms that are already working so well.
In the light of the above concerns and considerations, it would be prudent to either maintain the rate of spending, or even to up the ante (no pun on the upcoming Integrated Resorts) of the security budget. The Ministry of Home Affairs should not have to worry too much over the upgrading of its facilities (training or prisons), and there should be sufficient cutting-edge equipment for law enforcers. More so than just hardware and logistics, there should be relevant training conducted for all the security agencies and their employees. Security is the last thing that should be compromised in a highly fractious world with its attendant dangers.
Defence
Contrary to detractors who have either pacifist or liberalist leanings, this writer is convinced that to lower defence spending is a potentially lethal move. Defence spending may seem to be a needless squandering of national resources and reserves, yet it may prove to be much more costly in more than monetary terms should defence spending be cut and our security gets compromised.
New weapons systems, new military hardware, improved training and facilities need to be continuously brought in. Not only do our servicemen need to receive constant upgrading of skills and refreshers, the weapons of war do have to be improved without question. With a 3G force in the making, it would mean a leaner fighting force in the future where human warriors are concerned. However, it would be a fallacy to conclude from this that defence spending would be therefore lesser. Nor should it be cut. The military option, with its attendant discouraging effects on would-be aggressors, remains an important one for Singapore. It is not altogether negative, however. A strong nation that keeps on honing its fighting superiority, balanced with good governance and sound principles, attract investors and multinationals. This is a bonus and helps to balance the demands of maintaining a defence budget.
Welfare
This writer suggests that it would be the internal challenges that would be the most pressing, and that could be the cause for destabilising our equilibrium. It was brought up recently in an editorial that the current situation in Singapore risks alienating the middle-class, which makes up a sizeable portion of the literate electorate. This holds crucial meaning to not only the government, and the ruling party, but also holds enough significance for the average Singaporean. Should the middle-class feel that the government is largely unconcerned with its welfare, preoccupations, and aspirations, then it may want to voice out its sentiments via the ballot box. It may not be that those in the middle-class feel any real affinity for the opposition, but rather, just to serve as a powerful voice and expression of its dissatisfaction. The bottom-line remains that the middle-class anywhere can be vocal and certainly very voluble.
The budget would have to take the middle class’ concerns into serious consideration. Since it has already been decided and announced that there would be a hike in the Goods and Services Tax from 5% to 7%, there should be some sort of compensating reduction somewhere to foster goodwill and restore voter confidence. This is not to say that the government is easy to be held hostage, but rather, that the government is fair, magnanimous, and proactive in seeking out the most balanced approach to benefit both citizenry and state alike. A point to note would be that whenever the government dishes out goodies such as the Progress Package and Income Tax cuts in preceding years, critics would be quick to point out (especially in an election year) that these were used to sway the votes in favour of the government. It is also human nature to quickly and conveniently forget such goodies when the following policies in subsequent years include a tax increase or the withholding of budget goodies. Therefore, realism and prudence must be employed in deciding when and how much to give and take. A pragmatic way of doing this would be to dish out goodies in a non-election year, and not to announce a tax increase once elections are over. With this in mind, some alleviation in the form of rebates and concessions would be more than welcome to the common folk.
Linked to the above perceived danger of alienating the middle class, there is an overhang of doubt as to whether the government is sensitive to the people’s doubts and worries, besides concerns that the government may not have the people’s best interests at heart. Central to these concerns is the apparent fact that foreign labour and foreign talent are valued highly in Singapore. The locals are worried that their sources of income would dry up in the face of these twin forces of competition. As much as the government seek to discredit and address these fears, it must be acknowledged that the general populace does find it troubling. Where then does the budget fit in? Money should be spent in further upgrading the locals’ skills through subsidised education leading to recognised degrees, diplomas, and the such. To this end, the present government and relevant agencies has done a commendable job in making substantial providence to address this issue.
Other welfare measures include more funds to assist retrenched locals in finding employment, helping overseas Singaporeans reintegrate into the local environment and job emplacement, and providing monetary assistance to victims of untoward circumstances. These measures would require detailed background checks and a certain degree of concerted effort between the various agencies, but they would prove to be welcome not only by the recipients, but would also have a positive cementing effect on the loyalties of the people towards a benevolent nation.
Education
A bigger share of the budget pie should be devoted to education, and to the further expansion of Singapore as an education hub. Education has always been, and will continue to be the bedrock of socialisation, integration, and development of all young Singaporeans. This truth cannot be stressed enough. And human resource being our only key resource, education inevitably commands a much greater investment. It is gratifying to see that the government has placed general emphasis on this, and has already been instrumental in attracting quality educational institutions from abroad, and expanding the types of studies that a student could engage in. This increased freedom of choice, coupled with an increased number of education providers, areas of expertise and research, and alternative routes of advancement can only bode well for both Singaporeans and Singapore.
As an education hub, Singapore can secure her standing in marketing both herself and her people as professionals worthy of hire and repute. The investment pumped into education cannot but reap a harvest many times over, from reputation to increased stature, and making gains from investment and patronage. To this end, the many institutions of repute that have already secured their roots here should be given some breathing space in terms of taxation. The search for more institutions catering to a wider range of interests that fall outside the purview of Science (read Medicine, Biotechnology and the like) should also be stepped up. The government should seek to draw in those reputable in fields such as Social Sciences, Fine Arts, and Hospitality, for instance. With the inclusion of these diverse areas, Singapore would be poised to really be a choice destination for global students wanting to capitalise on a safe environment, excellent infrastructure, and no want of potential employers. For that matter, multinationals may continue to be lured to Singapore for its staple and steady supply of knowledgeable employees.
Environment
The fragile environment around us is a constant cause for concern. The recent freakish weather patterns seen in and around many countries, even neighbouring ones, should indicate at least something worrisome. The fact is that the global environment is breaking down, and that should be a source of consternation. This writer cannot care less for idealists, pacifists, or militant environmental groups preaching their zealous brands of dogma. That said, once this layer of extremism is removed from the discussion, it is necessary that governments at large pay close attention to what is happening to the environment. Singapore has to play its part too, for at the very least, what happens around us would impact us eventually. And given our small territorial space, any change that occurs would affect us almost immediately.
One of the most immediate environmental hazards that has to be addressed is the annual haze from Indonesia that cloaks Singapore. Talks have been held, complaints have been lodged, but to little effect. Perhaps a portion of our budget could be devoted to encourage and finance volunteers and government agencies to nip the problem in the bud, that is, by striking the roots by educating the Indonesian local farmers on better methods of land-clearing. Instead of doing Community Involvement Projects (CIP) with the poor and needy, it would be good to conduct CIP with the ones directly responsible for the annual land-clearing craze. Money should also be spent to explore and work on alternatives that would lessen the effects of the haze.
Other environmental issues include the preservation of our coastline, the reduction of the emission of greenhouse gases, the conservation of natural habitats, and upping citizens’ awareness of the importance of recycling. These require money, yet in a paradoxical sense, the money spent is well worth the cost. Singapore will look the better for it.
Investment
To encourage Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), a slice of the budget could be devoted to giving them more help than what is available now. This measure should drum up fervour from the more entrepreneurial among the locals. The government could act as a Venture Capitalist through its investment arm, or through the Economic Development Board (EDB). Instead of just dishing out grants, new measures could be implemented, that would give credible start-ups a chance to go regional. That would in effect mean that the government would have a share in the business, perhaps for a limited time. Of course, it would require some safeguards, in order to prevent cheats or those out to try their luck from benefiting from it. There exists a big opportunity for the government to not only assist local entrepreneurs and businessmen in this area, but also for the treasury to benefit from direct involvement. Again, of course, proper legal and fiscal safeguards would have to be put in place in order to prevent corruption and misuse of government resources.
Conclusion
The budget for 2007 should be an optimistic one. It should reflect confidence in the future of the Republic. It should also be positive, and such self-esteem should translate itself into investor confidence in our nation, and in our people. The citizens should look upon it as being balanced, and that the government, above all, is fair, magnanimous, and prudent. There should also be an element of calculated risk, in that enterprise be encouraged and actively promoted. There is no better way of doing this than in putting money where one’s mouth is. The budget should be wisely crafted, and money should be spent wisely. It would be a fitting tribute to the many successes that Singapore has enjoyed and in anticipation for future successes that are yet to come.
THE END"
"Executive Summary
The Budget for 2007 should reflect an optimistic outlook on the economy. It should also address the various national concerns that are facing the common populace. It should be positive, wisely constructed, balanced, and enterprising. It should also retain a distinctly Singaporean flavour, and one that invites voter and investor confidence. The budget has to be one that appeals to Singaporeans, though it should not be a panacea for every ill, nor a crutch to the indolent or cheat.
This writer’s proposal for the 2007 Budget examines the way the following could be factored in to make the Budget a meaningful one: Homeland Security, Defence, Welfare, Education, Environment, and Investment. It is an egalitarian vision, one where the common folk, as well as those in power and business can benefit from.
Financing Our Future
Good governance, political, social, and financial, has attracted both bouquets and brickbats from observers and armchair critics alike. Love it or hate it, the fact is that one would be hard put to stay on the fence, when the topic dwells on Singapore. Anecdotal evidence, at least, would suggest that there are many more accolades heaped on the many successes of Singapore.
The above statements, at least to this Singaporean writer, are largely true, albeit from a layman’s perspective. It is also not unattractive to comment that one’s feathers of vanity are smoothed by such glowing compliments, that in this fast-changing world with so much turmoil and instability, Singapore has continued to sail through with mast held up high. This is not to say, however, that there are no challenges worth considering, especially in the light of present and future developments, which could jeopardise the smooth journey.
In this light then, when considering the proposal for the budget for 2007, it would be prudent to acknowledge the various concerns and constraints facing our nation, before committing ourselves to the needs ahead.
Country Survey
The economic future of Singapore is largely dependent on our security for foreign investors. The early efforts of our government to secure the attention and the foreign dollars of multinationals are at stake in this regard. Investors feel and believe, and rightly so too, that Singapore is not only a safe place to do business in; it is also the most viable in this region.
For one, Singapore is secure internally from corruption. There is simply no space for one to indulge in dubious connections, nor is there much of a chance for individuals or organisations to deal through underhanded means. The effort put in by the government to maintain a squeaky clean image is not just mere lip-service. It is very real, and is made even steadier by the fact that the government does not go through frequent upheavals (in fact, none to date), and continuity is maintained through the re-election of the ruling party since Singapore’s independence. It would be prudent to reward the people oiling the mechanism of politics and bureaucracy by apportioning a fragment of the budget to show its appreciation.
Homeland security
Singapore is also an oasis from the security threats plaguing other nations, both developing and developed. To be sure, Singapore is small. Yet, that very perceived disadvantage is our strength, and works to our advantage. The small size of the nation makes the job of governance and surveillance that much easier, and criminals as well as terrorists are painfully aware of that. The long arm of the law is magnified and lengthened as a result. Investors know this strategic fact too.
The truth is that Singapore faces a constant threat, as was evidenced by the nefarious plots by Jemaah Islamiah (JI) to blow up key installations in Singapore a few years back. Earlier challenges included the threat of communist subversion by a group of Singaporeans. Yet, considering the relative absence of corruption, and the solid contribution of the government agencies (including the police force), plus the added benefit of having a small footprint, Singapore is well-set to be among the safest places on earth to do business in. Consider Jurong Island. Its very infrastructure appeared well-planned in advance to prevent attacks on key investors’ operations and investments. It would also be good to maintain or even increase the budget to improve the security and defence mechanisms that are already working so well.
In the light of the above concerns and considerations, it would be prudent to either maintain the rate of spending, or even to up the ante (no pun on the upcoming Integrated Resorts) of the security budget. The Ministry of Home Affairs should not have to worry too much over the upgrading of its facilities (training or prisons), and there should be sufficient cutting-edge equipment for law enforcers. More so than just hardware and logistics, there should be relevant training conducted for all the security agencies and their employees. Security is the last thing that should be compromised in a highly fractious world with its attendant dangers.
Defence
Contrary to detractors who have either pacifist or liberalist leanings, this writer is convinced that to lower defence spending is a potentially lethal move. Defence spending may seem to be a needless squandering of national resources and reserves, yet it may prove to be much more costly in more than monetary terms should defence spending be cut and our security gets compromised.
New weapons systems, new military hardware, improved training and facilities need to be continuously brought in. Not only do our servicemen need to receive constant upgrading of skills and refreshers, the weapons of war do have to be improved without question. With a 3G force in the making, it would mean a leaner fighting force in the future where human warriors are concerned. However, it would be a fallacy to conclude from this that defence spending would be therefore lesser. Nor should it be cut. The military option, with its attendant discouraging effects on would-be aggressors, remains an important one for Singapore. It is not altogether negative, however. A strong nation that keeps on honing its fighting superiority, balanced with good governance and sound principles, attract investors and multinationals. This is a bonus and helps to balance the demands of maintaining a defence budget.
Welfare
This writer suggests that it would be the internal challenges that would be the most pressing, and that could be the cause for destabilising our equilibrium. It was brought up recently in an editorial that the current situation in Singapore risks alienating the middle-class, which makes up a sizeable portion of the literate electorate. This holds crucial meaning to not only the government, and the ruling party, but also holds enough significance for the average Singaporean. Should the middle-class feel that the government is largely unconcerned with its welfare, preoccupations, and aspirations, then it may want to voice out its sentiments via the ballot box. It may not be that those in the middle-class feel any real affinity for the opposition, but rather, just to serve as a powerful voice and expression of its dissatisfaction. The bottom-line remains that the middle-class anywhere can be vocal and certainly very voluble.
The budget would have to take the middle class’ concerns into serious consideration. Since it has already been decided and announced that there would be a hike in the Goods and Services Tax from 5% to 7%, there should be some sort of compensating reduction somewhere to foster goodwill and restore voter confidence. This is not to say that the government is easy to be held hostage, but rather, that the government is fair, magnanimous, and proactive in seeking out the most balanced approach to benefit both citizenry and state alike. A point to note would be that whenever the government dishes out goodies such as the Progress Package and Income Tax cuts in preceding years, critics would be quick to point out (especially in an election year) that these were used to sway the votes in favour of the government. It is also human nature to quickly and conveniently forget such goodies when the following policies in subsequent years include a tax increase or the withholding of budget goodies. Therefore, realism and prudence must be employed in deciding when and how much to give and take. A pragmatic way of doing this would be to dish out goodies in a non-election year, and not to announce a tax increase once elections are over. With this in mind, some alleviation in the form of rebates and concessions would be more than welcome to the common folk.
Linked to the above perceived danger of alienating the middle class, there is an overhang of doubt as to whether the government is sensitive to the people’s doubts and worries, besides concerns that the government may not have the people’s best interests at heart. Central to these concerns is the apparent fact that foreign labour and foreign talent are valued highly in Singapore. The locals are worried that their sources of income would dry up in the face of these twin forces of competition. As much as the government seek to discredit and address these fears, it must be acknowledged that the general populace does find it troubling. Where then does the budget fit in? Money should be spent in further upgrading the locals’ skills through subsidised education leading to recognised degrees, diplomas, and the such. To this end, the present government and relevant agencies has done a commendable job in making substantial providence to address this issue.
Other welfare measures include more funds to assist retrenched locals in finding employment, helping overseas Singaporeans reintegrate into the local environment and job emplacement, and providing monetary assistance to victims of untoward circumstances. These measures would require detailed background checks and a certain degree of concerted effort between the various agencies, but they would prove to be welcome not only by the recipients, but would also have a positive cementing effect on the loyalties of the people towards a benevolent nation.
Education
A bigger share of the budget pie should be devoted to education, and to the further expansion of Singapore as an education hub. Education has always been, and will continue to be the bedrock of socialisation, integration, and development of all young Singaporeans. This truth cannot be stressed enough. And human resource being our only key resource, education inevitably commands a much greater investment. It is gratifying to see that the government has placed general emphasis on this, and has already been instrumental in attracting quality educational institutions from abroad, and expanding the types of studies that a student could engage in. This increased freedom of choice, coupled with an increased number of education providers, areas of expertise and research, and alternative routes of advancement can only bode well for both Singaporeans and Singapore.
As an education hub, Singapore can secure her standing in marketing both herself and her people as professionals worthy of hire and repute. The investment pumped into education cannot but reap a harvest many times over, from reputation to increased stature, and making gains from investment and patronage. To this end, the many institutions of repute that have already secured their roots here should be given some breathing space in terms of taxation. The search for more institutions catering to a wider range of interests that fall outside the purview of Science (read Medicine, Biotechnology and the like) should also be stepped up. The government should seek to draw in those reputable in fields such as Social Sciences, Fine Arts, and Hospitality, for instance. With the inclusion of these diverse areas, Singapore would be poised to really be a choice destination for global students wanting to capitalise on a safe environment, excellent infrastructure, and no want of potential employers. For that matter, multinationals may continue to be lured to Singapore for its staple and steady supply of knowledgeable employees.
Environment
The fragile environment around us is a constant cause for concern. The recent freakish weather patterns seen in and around many countries, even neighbouring ones, should indicate at least something worrisome. The fact is that the global environment is breaking down, and that should be a source of consternation. This writer cannot care less for idealists, pacifists, or militant environmental groups preaching their zealous brands of dogma. That said, once this layer of extremism is removed from the discussion, it is necessary that governments at large pay close attention to what is happening to the environment. Singapore has to play its part too, for at the very least, what happens around us would impact us eventually. And given our small territorial space, any change that occurs would affect us almost immediately.
One of the most immediate environmental hazards that has to be addressed is the annual haze from Indonesia that cloaks Singapore. Talks have been held, complaints have been lodged, but to little effect. Perhaps a portion of our budget could be devoted to encourage and finance volunteers and government agencies to nip the problem in the bud, that is, by striking the roots by educating the Indonesian local farmers on better methods of land-clearing. Instead of doing Community Involvement Projects (CIP) with the poor and needy, it would be good to conduct CIP with the ones directly responsible for the annual land-clearing craze. Money should also be spent to explore and work on alternatives that would lessen the effects of the haze.
Other environmental issues include the preservation of our coastline, the reduction of the emission of greenhouse gases, the conservation of natural habitats, and upping citizens’ awareness of the importance of recycling. These require money, yet in a paradoxical sense, the money spent is well worth the cost. Singapore will look the better for it.
Investment
To encourage Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), a slice of the budget could be devoted to giving them more help than what is available now. This measure should drum up fervour from the more entrepreneurial among the locals. The government could act as a Venture Capitalist through its investment arm, or through the Economic Development Board (EDB). Instead of just dishing out grants, new measures could be implemented, that would give credible start-ups a chance to go regional. That would in effect mean that the government would have a share in the business, perhaps for a limited time. Of course, it would require some safeguards, in order to prevent cheats or those out to try their luck from benefiting from it. There exists a big opportunity for the government to not only assist local entrepreneurs and businessmen in this area, but also for the treasury to benefit from direct involvement. Again, of course, proper legal and fiscal safeguards would have to be put in place in order to prevent corruption and misuse of government resources.
Conclusion
The budget for 2007 should be an optimistic one. It should reflect confidence in the future of the Republic. It should also be positive, and such self-esteem should translate itself into investor confidence in our nation, and in our people. The citizens should look upon it as being balanced, and that the government, above all, is fair, magnanimous, and prudent. There should also be an element of calculated risk, in that enterprise be encouraged and actively promoted. There is no better way of doing this than in putting money where one’s mouth is. The budget should be wisely crafted, and money should be spent wisely. It would be a fitting tribute to the many successes that Singapore has enjoyed and in anticipation for future successes that are yet to come.
THE END"
Monday, March 5, 2007
veni, vidi, vici
Ever wondered what Caesar actually meant when he uttered the portentous words "veni, vidi, vici"?
This is how eminent deconstructionist Elijah Chai (circa AD 2007) reads it:
"vidi, vici, veni"
The joke's on you, Cleo!
This is how eminent deconstructionist Elijah Chai (circa AD 2007) reads it:
"vidi, vici, veni"
The joke's on you, Cleo!
Macbeth Essay
This is the beginning of an essay that I was attempting, and here it is in embryonic form.
Macbeth has been described as “a play in which fear is the dominant emotion.” With close reference to the text, how far do you agree with this view?
Upon a reading of the play, it is evident that there is a pervasive sense of fear permeating the entire experience, for both the characters as well as the reader. The presence of fear is deliberate, and it is apparent that it increases in intensity, till it rides the wave of a crescendo, culminating in a horrific apocalyptic finale. The way fear is portrayed and how it is accentuated and accelerated in the play is through the palpable darkness shrouding the characters both in a physical sense as well as the witches’, Lady Macbeth’s, then Macbeth’s diabolical plans and acts of treachery. The murders, and gory descriptions further add to the bizarre goings-on, and this in many ways is not unlike the witches’ casting of the gross elements into the boiling cauldron.
In many respects, the play is a telling portrayal of man’s greatest fears. Fear of the supernatural, of disease, of moral darkness, of impropriety, of lack of recognition, of unrealised ambition, of the unknown (and greater still, of the known) all impinge upon the consciousness of the reader or spectator. Conscious or unconscious, the layered texturing of the play addresses our concerns and our awareness of our lack of security and guarantee. Religion and faith is not portrayed as being of any earthly good. In fact, its very lack of mention in the play is a sign that it is not a very helpful source of refuge and guidance when untold horrors and inconstancy beset the characters. The crown, far from being a representation of the divine, is a magnet for evil, seen in Duncan’s brutal murder, as well as the ascendancy and manifestation of both Thanes of Cawdor’s “vaulting ambition.” The audience is suitably left with nary a choice of refuge, and are thrust into an ever-widening chasm of unbridled evil.
Macbeth has been described as “a play in which fear is the dominant emotion.” With close reference to the text, how far do you agree with this view?
Upon a reading of the play, it is evident that there is a pervasive sense of fear permeating the entire experience, for both the characters as well as the reader. The presence of fear is deliberate, and it is apparent that it increases in intensity, till it rides the wave of a crescendo, culminating in a horrific apocalyptic finale. The way fear is portrayed and how it is accentuated and accelerated in the play is through the palpable darkness shrouding the characters both in a physical sense as well as the witches’, Lady Macbeth’s, then Macbeth’s diabolical plans and acts of treachery. The murders, and gory descriptions further add to the bizarre goings-on, and this in many ways is not unlike the witches’ casting of the gross elements into the boiling cauldron.
In many respects, the play is a telling portrayal of man’s greatest fears. Fear of the supernatural, of disease, of moral darkness, of impropriety, of lack of recognition, of unrealised ambition, of the unknown (and greater still, of the known) all impinge upon the consciousness of the reader or spectator. Conscious or unconscious, the layered texturing of the play addresses our concerns and our awareness of our lack of security and guarantee. Religion and faith is not portrayed as being of any earthly good. In fact, its very lack of mention in the play is a sign that it is not a very helpful source of refuge and guidance when untold horrors and inconstancy beset the characters. The crown, far from being a representation of the divine, is a magnet for evil, seen in Duncan’s brutal murder, as well as the ascendancy and manifestation of both Thanes of Cawdor’s “vaulting ambition.” The audience is suitably left with nary a choice of refuge, and are thrust into an ever-widening chasm of unbridled evil.
Singaporean Forum
I wrote this with the intention of sending it in to the Forum. But, things cropped up, and I didn't. Here's a sample of the text:
"Dear Editor,
I was bemused when I read the recent article on the Post-65 MPs commenting on Singaporeans’ whinging and whining (ST /11/06). Their castigation of the populace at large need to be tempered. It is telling that it is this cadre of newbie politicians who are complaining about their generation, whereas the old guard are apparently more tolerant.
May I attempt to bring this strange development into perspective:
1) Almost every employed Singaporean, especially males who have dutifully served their National Service, would have come into contact with quality improvement and service excellence through such instruments as Work Improvement Teams (WITs), and the submission of individual submissions. Civil servants would also be very well-versed with this, what with WITS, ESSS, Quality Circles (QCs), and the PS21 initiative to up service excellence. In the corporate world, business and industrial quality manifests itself through the ISO standards of quality processes. I daresay that it is a fixture on almost every Singaporean’s mind that they demand such excellence in quality in standards and service when they are on the receiving end;
2) Ironically, it is a testament of the government’s good governance of the people that Singaporeans have come to expect only the highest standards of living and provision.
In a world that has embraced a culture of excellent service standards, especially in a country that celebrates meritocracy and excellence in everything we do, Singapore has created a demanding citizenry that is quick to spot a lack of service and quality excellence in many areas of public and private concerns. True, Singaporeans are demanding, critical, and perhaps whiny. It is also inevitable that some ugly Singaporeans may choose to display their unhappiness in inappropriate ways. However, it should be borne in mind why this is so. Simply denouncing them en masse is not dandy."
"Dear Editor,
I was bemused when I read the recent article on the Post-65 MPs commenting on Singaporeans’ whinging and whining (ST /11/06). Their castigation of the populace at large need to be tempered. It is telling that it is this cadre of newbie politicians who are complaining about their generation, whereas the old guard are apparently more tolerant.
May I attempt to bring this strange development into perspective:
1) Almost every employed Singaporean, especially males who have dutifully served their National Service, would have come into contact with quality improvement and service excellence through such instruments as Work Improvement Teams (WITs), and the submission of individual submissions. Civil servants would also be very well-versed with this, what with WITS, ESSS, Quality Circles (QCs), and the PS21 initiative to up service excellence. In the corporate world, business and industrial quality manifests itself through the ISO standards of quality processes. I daresay that it is a fixture on almost every Singaporean’s mind that they demand such excellence in quality in standards and service when they are on the receiving end;
2) Ironically, it is a testament of the government’s good governance of the people that Singaporeans have come to expect only the highest standards of living and provision.
In a world that has embraced a culture of excellent service standards, especially in a country that celebrates meritocracy and excellence in everything we do, Singapore has created a demanding citizenry that is quick to spot a lack of service and quality excellence in many areas of public and private concerns. True, Singaporeans are demanding, critical, and perhaps whiny. It is also inevitable that some ugly Singaporeans may choose to display their unhappiness in inappropriate ways. However, it should be borne in mind why this is so. Simply denouncing them en masse is not dandy."
Haha, I am so thrilled.
I am on STOMP!
My post worked!!
I am a budding reporter!!!
Of sorts.
View this post:
http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/viewPost2086.aspx
I am on STOMP!
My post worked!!
I am a budding reporter!!!
Of sorts.
View this post:
http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/viewPost2086.aspx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
web.jpg)