Week 6 Blog Post: Rupert Murdoch Phone Scandal

Read up on the Rupert Murdoch phone scandal. You can find some links (from TIME online) I posted up in Week 6, as well as read up on the Newsweek coverage of the news. In relation to the news coverage on the scandal, answer the question: "The news media should be blamed for the unhealthy paparazzi culture and going to the extremes for sensational news. How far do you agree?"

I agree to a certain extent that the news media should be blamed for this unhealthy paparazzi culture and going to the extreme for sensational news. Although the news media are the ones who actually collect and distribute the sensational news, everyone is responsible one way or another.

News media want juicy news to create more publicity. Thus, they chase after sensational news such as the private lives of famous people. However, sometimes they cross the line and use underhand methods to obtain these sensational stories, sometimes even compromising their integrity and trust. For example, News of the World, whom Sara Payne trusted, hacked her phone and accessed her voice mails to get sensational news to publish. It was described as the “ultimate betrayal”. News corporations often compete with one another to be the first to get the information, and as such, news corporations become even more desperate, which causes them to use the wrong method of obtaining information.

However, the unhealthy paparazzi culture is not to be blames on the news media entirely. The reason why news corporations publish these sensational news is because of the high demand from the readers. People like hearing about gossips of the rich and the famous. Due to this strong appeal from the public, together with the interest of attracting readers, news media hunt high and low for delicious news.

Another group of people who might also be responsible for this unhealthy paparazzi culture would be the politicians. Before the phone scandal, British politicians would rather build relationships with Rupert Murdoch's empire than policing its reach. Apparently, they were afraid that Rupert Murdoch would publish the scandals of the politicians. The politicians were therefore afraid to intervene the unhealthy paparazzi culture.

Therefore, I believe that the news media, the public and the politicians all have a part to play. Thought it is easy to blame the news corporations, everyone is guilty of being part of the unhealthy paparazzi culture.

Justice and Mercy

By the end of the trial scene, do you think true justice and mercy was achieved? Reflect and write on the following questions:

1.      Is there true justice? Why?

I believe that some form of justice was achieved; however, it might not have been true justice. Shylock was vengeful and had obvious intentions to harm and even kill Antonio, but he disguised it as a form of justice. Shylock wanted to harm another human being and must be punished. He was punished by the Venetian law which results in all of his goods being confiscated. I feel that this is justice for Shylock. However, what about Antonio, what is his punishment for breaking the bond? If a pound of flesh cannot be taken then at least Antonio must give back Shylock’s principal but that was not the case.

2.     Is there true mercy, as expounded by Portia? Why?

I believe that Portia and Antonio did try to offer some form of mercy to Shylock. They allowed Shylock to live, retain half of his property and convert to Christianity which was considered higher rank than the Jews. However, whether this could be considered as true mercy is debatable. Could their so called mercy be a way to humiliate Shylock as a form of revenge? By converting Shylock to Christianity, Shylock would be mocked by the other Jews and Christians. By allowing Shylock to live, they could embarrass Shylock even more. Whether Portia and Antonio really meant mercy we do not know for sure, but at least they tried to show it.

3.     Justice and Law can be manipulated by people in power. Comment on this with reference to the text and other real-life cases and examples.

Justice and law are about fairness. The law is supposed to unmovable and fair to all, however, it can be manipulated by people in power. In Merchant of Venice, we see that the Duke asked Shylock to give mercy to Antonio. However, he did not ask Antonio to give mercy to Shylock in the end. Was the Duke bias? The Duke is supposed to represent the fairness of the law, yet here he is showing his prejudice. Shylock tries to use to law to harm someone when the law actually forbids people from harming one another. Portia uses the law against Shylock by claiming that the law only allows the nothing but the pound of flesh to be claimed without the lost of blood. Obviously, these three people are playing around with the law to their own advantage. In real life, we also see such situations. One such case would be people bribing the judge to be lenient. A man named Odih Juanda, a manager at PT Onamba Indonesia, was found to have bribed the Judge with Rp 200 million (US$23,400) in order to influence the appellate court to reject a lawsuit against the company filed by a trade union over the firm’s decision to fire striking workers. Justice and law obviously can be manipulated by people with power and money. There is a saying: the golden rule is the one with the gold sets the rule.

Letter to Education Minister Mr Heng Swee Keat

Promts:

1. To what extent do you agree with the issues that the student has raised here? Point out some issues of agreement and possible contention.
2. Examine her tone and attitude in this letter. Do you think it’s a well-crafted letter with the appropriate tone?
3. If you should write a letter to Minister of Education, what are some issues you would raise? Remember- your intention is to make the system better for society’s betterment via CONSTRUCTIVE ideas.

Recently, a Secondary four student from Nan Chiau High School wrote a letter to the Education Minister, Mr Heng Swee Keat, and generated a much heated debate about Singapore’s education system. In general, she argued that the education system is not good enough and needs a “transformation the PAP has adopted since the 2011 General Elections”.

She pointed out that the emphasis for factual memorizing is too great in the education system. She believes that children are curious and inquisitive but the education system stifles their inquisitive and curious mind. I agree that the education system does destroy the curiosity of children. Often, in this competitive environment, students have the mentality that as long as you are able to regurgitate out the facts, you can perform well. Students are having the mindset that understanding is not as important as memorizing. Even in an elite school like Hwa Chong, teachers still force students to memorize information, words and phrases. In Chinese, we memorize 4-word phrases. In Mathematics, we memorize theorems. In Science, we memorize facts. In History we memorize dates and in Geography we memorize places. It appears that the entire curriculum revolves around memorizing and anyone capable of cramming information like a computer hard disk will do well.

Secondly, she pointed out that students are taught as a collective whole rather than individuals. She claims that as a result, Singapore lacks talented people. I believe that this is also true. In Singapore we can see that much of our skilled workforce is foreigners. For example, in A*STAR, more than half of the researchers are actually foreigners. The Singapore government claims that this is to make up for the current lack of talent in Singapore, however, why doesn’t the government do something to the education system to produce more people who are capable of research. There is a flaw in the education system that causes people to be somewhat similar to leeches – feed of the knowledge of others but not generating their own. I believe that the education system is creating people who lack creativity and innovation.

Thirdly, the writer pointed out that there is a serious flaw in the character education. She wrote that character education is being taught for the sake of it. She added that character education was not very effective. I too agree but to a certain extent. We have heard a lot of cases especially on websites like STOMP about the bad behavior of students – students not giving up their seats to elderly, students causing a racket, even students engaging in illegal activities such as drug abuse. Why are all of these happening, even in elite schools, despite the fact that we produce top scholars in the world? I believe that there is a mismatch between the academic development and character development.

Next is regarding the writer’s tone. I feel that the writer was being quite critical. She appeared to be quite hard and demanding towards the Education Minister, yet tried to hide it by saying that she might be wrong. She seems to show a sense of frustration and desperation. In her conclusion, she said that she was “fighting for the changes” indicating that she had a strong desire for improvements. There is also a small hint of her showing lack of confidence in the Minister in the last sentence: “I believe that you have the power to make these changes happen, and if not, at least a thorough review of the policies made by your predecessors.”

If I were to write a letter to the Education Minister, I would bring up the issue about independent learning. I believe that the education system emphasized too much about memorizing information and not about how to obtain information. The world is now a globalized and rapidly-changing world and information I constantly getting outdated. In order to be able to keep up and stay ahead of the rest of the world, Singaporeans need to be able to gather updated information.

Money and Marriage

In your opinion, is money important in a relationship? Consider the 'transactional' element observed in the relationships between the couples. Do you think there is an upward trend of relationships and marriages valuing money over other qualities? Provide examples for your responses.

            There is a saying: Money makes the world go round. I believe this statement seems to hold throughout many situations. One of these situations, after reading the Merchant of Venice, is in marriage. Marriage is a long term relationship – in fact it is supposed to last forever – usually between opposite genders who have reached maturity for love and for reproduction. Now, the question is: Since when did money appear in the definition of marriage?

            In the play, the most obvious example of money involved in marriage is the marriage of Bassanio and Portia. In Act 1 Scene I, we see Bassanio describing marrying Portia as “shoot[ing] another arrow that self way which you did shoot the first … to find both [arrows]”. The arrows here refer to money and or more specifically the money borrowed from Antonion. Here we can tell that Bassanio wants to marry Portia in order to get a piece of her wealth, and in turn be able to return Antonio the money he owes. Portia’s wealth appears to attract many suitors as seen in the play. In the casket scenes of her suitors, they choose the gold or the silver caskets which represent wealth. Her suitors are apparently attracted to her wealth. Later in the play, Portia offers to pay the double or triple the bond in other free Bassanio’s dearest friend, Antonio, thus suggesting another transactional element. On the other hand, Portia could have made this decision out of compassion. While there appears that Bassanio married Portia because of her wealth, we cannot entirely sure, but the baseline is that there were some forms of transactions taking place.

            In the real world, money is an important issue in marriage. Getting married is a big decision that has great consequences. One needs to consider very carefully about various factors before getting married and one of them happens to be money. Firstly, couples need to ensure that both of them are financially stable and are able to support the relationship financially. Nowadays, with females entering the workforce, wives also have a share of the money in the marriage. While this makes the total sum of money more, the problem starts when either person starts spending more than his share. Love is supposed – and I emphasise that it is supposed – to be where whatever is mine is yours and whatever that is yours is mine too. However, humans are calculating creatures. The problem gets worse when either person exceeds the limit, probably because of gambling problems or other financial issues. In fact, more often than not we hear of problem gambling as a reason for divorce. From the current trends which we see, money looks like the basis on which relationships are built upon and destroyed.

           However, is money always the basis of any marriage? Sometimes we marry because of appearances. In other times, we marry because we truly love someone and want to spend the rest of our life with that person. Such marriages are often portrayed as “Hollywood marriages” as they hardly occur in real life but they are also the most stable ones.

          Is money always important in relationships? While it is important for a stable marriage, it should not be the only thing in marriages.

Evolution of War

In your opinion, how has war evolved from the past to present? Please use examples to justify your opinions.

            War is a state of organized, armed and often prolonged conflict carried on between states, nations, or other parties. It is known have extreme aggression and causes high mortality and great damage. War has existed since the beginning of mankind and continues to evolve as humans get smarter and more advance.

            In the prehistoric era, before writing was founded and before the establishment of large social entities, war already existed. Some tribal societies lead lives of great violence, frequently raiding neighbouring groups and seizing territory, women, and goods from others by force. One of their earliest weapons was spears coupled with ambush hunting techniques. These spears were usually made of stone or flint attached to the shaft using gum, resin or leather stripes. The spears had a clear distinction between those meant for throwing and those for hand-to-hand combat. Other weapons used included clubs and sling shorts. One of the reasons for war could be the need for agricultural land. As their farming technology was very limited, only fertile soil which was also limited was fought f0r.

            Next was the Iron Age. During this period great improvements in technology have been seen as humans learn to harness metals such as copper, iron and bronze to be used as weapons. Maces replaced wooden clubs. Swords, metal pike and metal shields were also invented. The importance of iron in the development of ancient warfare lay not in its strength or ability to hold a sharp edge. Iron's importance rested in the fact that unlike bronze, which required the use of relatively rare tin to manufacture, iron was commonly and widely available almost everywhere. As weapons could be produced more cheaply, armies increased in size with a corollary increase in their destructive power, which further produced larger and larger battles resulting in higher and higher casualty rates. The Iron Age was also a time when castles were built.

            Then, in the late 15^th Century, came a breakthrough: the invention of gunpowder. Gunpowder is an explosive which consists of a mixture of sulfur, charcoal and potassium nitrate. The invention gunpowder gave way to many deadlier weapons, for example: the cannon. A cannon was a large barrel capable of propelling a massive object (cannon ball) using the explosive reaction of gunpowder. The stone walls of castles were no match for the power of the cannon, thus the cannon ended the age of castles and marked the start of a new era of warfare.

            Apart from gunpowder, there were other inventions. Naval mines and submarines were developed. Bayonets developed for hand-to-hand combats. The Howitzer, a kind of artillery, was invented and had a far greater range. The rifle was also upgraded in many ways. The bullets, which were originally round, became sharper in design. In the 19^th Century, the machine gun arrived. Torpedoes were created as weapons for and against submarines. The list of improvements is endless.

            Finally, this brings us to modern warfare which we now see today. Modern warfare is an era of high technology warfare. One of the most notable difference in modern warfare was the presence air force. The fact that air can be used as a terrain turned war from 2 dimensional to a complicated 3 dimensional one. Warfare using the air was deadly due to its element of surprise. A plane can easily swoop down and bomb without you realising until it was too late. This was why detection technology such as Radar (RAdio Detection And Ranging) were invented. Another notable difference was the arrival of Weapons of Mass Destruction. These weapons include nuclear, biological and chemical. Nuclear warfare is the use of atomic bombs or radioactive substances to attack. Atomic bombs use the idea of nuclear fission whereby the nucleus of atoms split apart and release huge amounts of energy, often resulting in an enormous fireball the size of cities. Biological and chemical weapons make use of deadly organisms and chemical respectively, causing loss of lives or incapacitation. Biological and chemical weapons are extremely devastating and kill innocent lives. Last but not least, improvements in communications have allowed coordination to be quicker and strategies to be more complex. However, it has also made spying ever more easily. Modern warfare is known for the tables to be turned very quickly. One moment you could be on the verge to victory, the next moment you would be surrendering. For example, the swift bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki over a period of 4 days forced the Japanese to surrender.

            Is this the end of the evolution of war? I doubt so. I believe war will become something far more deadly. For example, after the atomic bomb was invented, the H-bomb arrived and soon, who knows what other bombs would be created. New and more advance technologies such as an EMP (electro-magnetic pulse) which is capable of stopping all electrical devices are being created constantly. Warfare is also being revolutionised with robots able to perform duties which are risky for normal humans. Drones are being designed and built smaller, lighter, and harder to spot. In addition, war might one day be carried out in space. Space satellites once used for observations may become weapons one day. Perhaps, war might become something similar to Star Wars.

            War is a complicated conflict between two opposing countries. With the evolution of technology, war becomes even harder to understand. However, technology has not changed the reasons for war. It still remains as mankind’s hunger for territory, power and material. Now, time to watch Star Wars…

The Soldier by Rupert Brooke - Reflection

Every year, we need young men in Singapore to do National Service.

Why do you think national service is compulsory in Singapore and why is this important?

In this poem, the speaker expresses his love for his country, England. Do you have this same spirit of patriotism towards Singapore? Why? Do you still find this same spirit of patriotism in Singapore? Why?

            The soldier by Rupert Brooke is a war poem about a soldier’s patriotism towards his country, England. It reflects how he is willing to die in a war for his country.

            Similarly in Singapore, every year Singaporeans of the age of 18 who are able-bodied are required to go through National Service. I believe that National Service should be compulsory. Firstly, Singapore is a small population and thus does not have enough people to sustain a full-time army. Therefore, Singapore needs to ensure that it maximizes its only resource – its people – by making National Service compulsory for all able-bodied men and in the case of an actual war Singapore can mobilize its able-bodied male population to fight. National Service also instills a sense of loyalty and patriotism in Singaporean males. In addition, it also helps break down social barriers and creates a One Singapore identity the soldiers. When they undergo tough training together, they develop feeling for Singapore as their home and country to defend.

            I still feel the sense of patriotism towards Singapore. I remember last year I went to Macau for the Club Crew World Championship. It was an international dragonboat competition. The training for such a high level competition was tough, and furthermore, I was a Secondary One canoeist with hardly much experience. However, I always thought about how I could contribute to Singapore and how I could make Singapore proud. Thus, despite being physically weak compared to the rest, I was able to pull through. In the end, we clinched first for our category. This year, Hwa Chong would also be participating in another international dragonboating competition – the Penang Pesta. I hope we would be able to accomplish the same feat.

            I can still feel this same sense of patriotism in Singapore. When National Day is around the corner, we can see many residents hang the Singapore flag. Sometimes, the whole HDB flat can be covered in red and white. The flag represents Singapore, and when residents hang it, it shows that they are proud of Singapore.

Digital Fortress is a story about a cryptographer, Susan Fletcher, who worked for an intelligence agency the National Security Agency. Susan was engaged to a David Becker who was a foreign-language specialist. Torn between managing her relationship and cracking codes, Fletcher’s life is extremely busy. Suddenly, one morning, Commander Trevor Strathmore calls Fletcher, saying that there is an emergency in Crypto. An unbreakable code Digital Fortress has appeared out of nowhere and jeopardises U.S. intelligence. NSA’s most powerful computer, TRANSLTR could not break it. Fletcher finds out that Ensei Tankado was behind Digital Fortress. She also learns that Tankado died but has a partner whom he calls NORTH DAKOTA. Now, Susan Fletcher has to find out the real name of NORTH DAKOTA. She suspects it is NSA employee Greg Hale.

Meanwhile, David Becker is asked by Strathmore to find Tankado’s ring, which is suppose to have the pass-key to Digital Fortress. Every person he meets is mysteriously murdered by an assassin, Hulohot.

Things get worse in Crypto when a system-security officer is murdered violently and the cooling system of the TRANSLTR. Greg Hale holds Strathmore and Fletcher hostage to “escape murder”. However, it fail and Hale gets killed. An explosion of the TRANSLTR kills Strathmore. At this juncture, David Becker has to face Hulohot who plans to murder him. Hulohot was eventually killed.

Susan and David are safe, but not the NSA. Digital Fortress turns out to be a worm that threatens to release information to the world by hacking its way through the firewalls. Fletcher eventually stops it by finding out the correct pass-code.

Dan Brown as a Writer:

Dan Brown is the author of The Da vinci Code, one of the most widely read novels of all time, as well as the international bestsellers Angels & Demons, Deception Point, and Digital Fortress. He now lives in New England with his wife.

Book Review - Angel and Demons

Angel and Demons is a fast-pace thriller written by reknown author Dan Brown.

The story starts off in CERN, a nuclear research facility, where a well-respected scientist, Leonardo Vetra, is murdered. His chest was branded with an ambigram of the word “Illuminati”. A symbol. CERN director Maximilian being the first to find out about it, searched on the internet and called Harvard Symbologists to solve the mystery.

Langdon was shocked by how authentic the ambigram was. The Illuminati was a legendary, ancient secret society that existed a long time ago. Kohler calls Vetra’s adopted daughter Vittoria to the scene, where she finds out that one of the canisters containing anti-matter has been stolen. Anti-matter is highly unstable and very dangerous. When in the wrong hands, it can become a bomb which was what happened in that story.

Langdon and Vittoria flew to Vatican City. The recent Pope had died and the papal conclave has convened to elect the new pontiff. Cardinal Mortati, the eldest cardinal and host of the election, found out that four Preferiti, the preferred choice, were missing. Langdon and Vittoria begin searching for the Preferiti, hoping that they will find the anti-matter at the same time. Along the way, Carmerlango Carlo Ventresca (the late pope’s closest aide) and Commander Olivetti, Captain Rocher, Lieutenant Chartrand and the rest of the Vatican’s Swiss Guard. Langdon tries to follow the “Path of Illumination”, a confusing and elaborate process whereby one has look for clues at various landmarks and find out the meeting place of the Illuminati.

Langdon finds the four Preferiti murdered in a fashion, place and order related to the elements: Earth, Air, Fire, and Water. Cardinal Ebner is suffocated putting dirt and soil into his mouth. He is buried in Santa Maria del Popolo. In the St. Peter’s Square, Cardinal Lamassé is killed by punctures to his lungs causing him to be unable to breath. In the church Santa Maria della Vittoria, Cardinal Guidera is burned alive. Finally, Cardinal Baggia, the favourite to succeed as the new pope, was drowned to death in the Fountain of Four Rivers near the church St Agnes in Agony. In church Santa Maria della Vittoria, Vittoria was captured by the assassin.

Nevertheless, Langdon manages to find out the Path of Illumination and rescues Vittoria, at the same time killing the assassin. The two hurried back to St. Peter Basilica, where they realised that Maximilian Kohler has gone to meet the Camerlengo privately. Afraid that Kohler is “Janus” the mastermind behind all these, and upon hearing the scream of the Camerlengo, the Swiss Guards and they burst into the room. Amongst the confusion, they opened fire and killed Kohler and Captain Rocher. The Camerlengo had been branded with the “Illuminati Diamond”.

With the time in the canister running out, the Swiss Guard evacuates the Basilica. The Camerlengo says that he had received a vision from God of where the canister is. He rushes to the tomb of St. Peter and find it right there. Then, he goes up on a helicopter with Robert Langdon with the anti-matter. He does something that shocks Langdon. Jumping out of the helicopter, the Camerlengo abandons Langdon on the helicopter together with the anti-matter. The Camerlengo survives and becomes a hero. Fortunately, Langdon survives when he jumps out of the helicopter and miraculously survives.

Langdon, Vittoria and the College of Cardinals view Kohler’s tape. They confronted the Camerlengo and the truth is finally revealed. The Camerlengo was the mastermind who wanted to unite Christians and give them faith. As for the election, two popes were selected: Camerlengo Carlo Ventresca and Cardinal Mortati. Unfortunately, Ventresca suicides by lighting himself on fire.

The book closes when Langdon and Vittoria retire to Hotel Bernini, where Langdon is loaned indefinitely the “Illuminati Diamond” brand.

Dan Brown’s Writing Style:

Dan Brown writes his stories by mixing fact and fiction into one exciting story. His novels follow a one-day time frame. Dan Brown starts the story quickly by having the main character in the story receive a call or message telling him/her to go somewhere as there is an emergency. His stories often lead the main character to many places, creating a fast-pace plot. Dan Brown keeps our suspense by keeping the villain anonymous. Often, the true identity of the villain can be quite surprising.

Setting Description – Macritchie Reservior

The water was calm. The lush green forest that surrounded the reservoir was a sign of peace and tranquility, or was it? In the middle of the reservoir, red and white buoys connected by thick nylon ropes formed six lanes of one thousand metres long. That distance was both short and long. Short in the sense that it could be over in less than five minutes; Long in the sense that it required over two hundred hard and powerful strokes just to complete that distance. I pondered for a while and decided that the latter seemed more appropriate – I could hardly see the end from the shore.

Telephone Conversation by Wole Soyinka

            The price seemed reasonable, location
            Indifferent. The landlady swore she lived
            Off premises. Nothing remained
            But self-confession. “Madam,” I warned,
5         “I hate a wasted journey—I am African.”
            Silence. Silenced transmission of
            Pressurized good-breeding. Voice, when it came,
            Lipstick coated, long gold-rolled
            Cigarette-holder pipped. Caught I was, foully. 
10         “HOW DARK?” . . . I had not misheard . . . “ARE YOU LIGHT
            OR VERY DARK?” Button B. Button A. Stench
            Of rancid breath of public hide-and-speak.
            Red booth. Red pillar-box. Red double-tiered
            Omnibus squelching tar. It was real! Shamed
15         By ill-mannered silence, surrender
            Pushed dumbfoundment to beg simplification.
            Considerate she was, varying the emphasis— 
            “ARE YOU DARK? OR VERY LIGHT?” Revelation came.
            “You mean—like plain or milk chocolate?”
20         Her assent was clinical, crushing in its light
            Impersonality. Rapidly, wavelength adjusted,
            I chose. “West African sepia”—and as an afterthought,
            “Down in my passport.” Silence for spectroscopic
            Flight of fancy, till truthfulness clanged her accent
25         Hard on the mouthpiece. “WHAT’S THAT?” conceding,
            “DON’T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.” “Like brunette.” 
            “THAT’S DARK, ISN’T IT?” “Not altogether.
            Facially, I am brunette, but madam, you should see
            The rest of me. Palm of my hand, soles of my feet
30         Are a peroxide blonde. Friction, caused—
            Foolishly, madam—by sitting down, has turned
            My bottom raven black—One moment madam!”—sensing
            Her receiver rearing on the thunderclap
            About my ears—“Madam,” I pleaded, “wouldn’t you rather
35         See for yourself?”

1.      This poem is full of colours not just that of skin, what do you think these colours signify?

Telephone Conversation by Wole Soyinka is a poem about discrimination of the African-Americans. This poem is full of colours which signify different things. Colours are used to express and show the characteristic of a person in the poem.

Colours are used to indicate the skin colour of the man talking to the landlady. The landlady uses words like “dark”, “light or very dark” and “dark or very light” to describe the skin colour of the man. The man in an attempt to describe his own skin colour uses words like “West African sepia” and “raven black”. The man also tries to persuade the landlady to make an exception and rent him a house by referring to the palms of his hand and the soles of his feet as “peroxide blonde”. These clearly show that the skin colours play a vital role throughout the conversation.

Colours are used to signify the anger of the African-American man when he was being discriminated due to his skin colour and was asked to rate his skin colour. Words such as “red booth”, “red pillar-box”, “red double tiered omnibus squelching tar” exhibited his anger. Normally, the persona would not have noticed a “red booth”, “red pillar-box” or a “red double tiered omnibus squelching tar”; however, the anger in him has caused him to notice the red items. The repetition of “red” is also used to emphasize the anger of the persona.

Colours are also used to show the elegance and wealth of the landlady. “Lipstick coated, long gold-rolled cigarette pipped” shows that the landlady is a supposedly respectable person, as lipstick and gold represent elegance and wealth respectively. This could both portray her as a person of dignity despite her racist words with the persona, or it could be used to portray her as a rich person who is ignorant of the rest. The formal is used to show the irony with the harsh words used by the landlady.

In conclusion, colours were used in for a variety reasons which are skin colour, anger, and the elegance and wealth of the landlady. The use of colours in this poem was to allow the reader to visualise these qualities.

2.     What does the dialogue in this poem reveal about these two characters?

Telephone Conversation by Wole Soyinka is a poem about discrimination of the African-Americans. It resembles a telephone conversation brings out the characteristics of the two characters.

The landlady is apparently an extremely racist preson. Not only does she reject the African-American man because of his skin colour, but she also tried to tease him about his skin colour. She asked “how dark” to the man when she finds out that he is a black. Despite knowing that the man has a dark skin already when he confessed “I am African”, she pestered the man to describe his own skin colour vividly.   The landlady also replied “What’s that? … Don’t know what that is” even after the man specifically said that he was “West African sepia”. She is also rather sarcastic and straightforward when she said “That’s dark, isn’t it?”.

The African-American man on the other hand is clever and witty. He was able to analyse the questions and words posed by the landlady. When the landlady asked, “How dark? … Are you light of very dark?”, he was able to see the question as a “Button B. Button A.”  Despite being agitated by the landlady, the man was able to stay calm and describe his skin colour with something neutral like “West African sepia.” He also used words to confuse the landlady by saying that “facially, he is brunette” and his “soles are a peroxide blonde” and his bottom “is raven black”. These words also hinted to the landlady that she was being too racist by focusing on skin colour in a conversation about house rental. The persona also acted dumb to show that the landlady is extremely foolish.

The landlady is outright racist with her direct and sarcastic remarks. On the contrary, the man was witty and countered her sarcasm with his own sarcasm.

3.     The poet dramatises a battle, who wins finally and why?

Telephone Conversation by Wole Soyinka is a poem about discrimination of the African-Americans. The poet dramatises a simple telephone conversation into a battle to show the extent of racism. It is hard to say who has won. Although the African-American man did not manage to meet his objective of renting a house, he did manage to end the conversation with the last laugh.

Technically, the persona did not win because the landlady hung up the phone and the deal of renting a house could not be closed. In fact, right from the moment the man told the landlady that he was black, he had already lost the deal to racism. Although the landlady seemed not to understand what the persona was trying to convey to her, she was aware of the fact that the persona is a black and that she did not want to rent her house to him. The man had failed to convince her that he was not completely black. Racism was so rampant that even the man’s witty words such as “palm of my hand, soles of my feet are peroxide blonde” could not convince her. In the end, she hung up the phone and so he could not argue back. The man was fighting a losing battle all along.

On the other hand, the persona had won the conversation despite not having rent a house. He had had last laugh by saying “Madam … wouldn’t you rather see for yourself?” The poem ended here and the conversation probably did too. The landlady probably found herself speechless and hung up the phone.

In conclusion, while the persona has lost the renting of the house, the landlady did not gain anything for herself except being portrayed as a racist person. With respect to who actually won the conversation about skin colour, the African-American probably won as the landlady was speechless in the end.

Singapore Short Story: World DragonBoat Racing Championships 2009

            In front of me lay the battlefield. It was a freshwater lake. The water was calm but my heart was not. It was churning with a whirlpool of emotions. A gust of wind swept past me, sending shivers down my spine. Ironically, it was summer – the hottest days of summer. Empty dragonboats lined the pontoon. They were meant to be filled with people who dreamed of becoming champions and bringing pride and glory to their country. I hoped that we were capable of doing so. I hoped that those months of training were worthwhile.

            In the year 2009, I joined Hwa Chong Junior College as a junior college freshman. I took up dragonboating as a CCA (co-curriculum activity). On my first training, I met our coach Mr Tan. He welcomed us freshmen and said that come August that year, we would all be participating in the prestigious World DragonBoat Racing Championships (WDBRC). He declared that we had only one goal – for Singapore to emerge as the dragonboating champion.

            At first I thought that Mr Tan was out of his mind. How could a country so small that it appeared as a tiny dot on the globe compete with giants such as China? For every one team we sent in, China could easily send in a hundred teams that were probably of the same standard or better. Winning was as impossible as finding a needle in a haystack or worse – finding a strand of hay in a stack of needles since the process was quite painful.

            Training started off with a 2.4km run at an unbelievable pace. It felt like I was doing 24 sets of 100m sprints continuously. If anyone tried to idle, Mr Tan would holler at him at the top of his voice. By the end of the run, I was panting for breath. I looked around and saw some of my teammates coughing hysterically. One of them nearly vomited. Mr Tan was furious with our poor fitness and punished us with one thousand push-ups … in perfect form.

            “In order to become champions, our training must be perfection. There cannot be any slacking nor can there be any sign of weakness.” That was Mr Tan’s speech about perfection.

            Next exercise was chin-ups. Mr Tan said that we had to do thirty chin-ups easily in perfect form. Again he reiterated his speech about perfection.

            Before we even did any dragonboating, I was dead tired from all those exercises. For our first dragonboating training, Mr tan taught us the strokes. He demanded perfection once again, “Even if the paddle is slanted by one degree or not completely in the water, the stroke becomes useless. Dragonboaters in China have perfect strokes and a much faster stroke rate. How are you supposed to win if you are not even up to their standard?”

            That was one day’s worth of training. This continued for months, training almost every day of the week. There were times when I felt that I could not endure the pain and could not make the sacrifices in order for Singapore to win.

            As the day drew near, Mr Tan announced that we would be travelling to Czech Republic from 30 July to 8 August for WDBRC. We would return to Singapore with the golden trophy as Singapore’s birthday present. After all, the next day would be National Day.

            Finally, we flew to Czech Republic on the 30^th July. The first race was 2000m race. It was just one race – no heats, no semi-finals – it was just the finals and whether you win or lose. We started off on high spirit and broke away from the rest. We counted loudly and following the beat of the drummer who sat at the front of the dragonboat. I could feel the power and the unity of the entire dragonboat. I could feel the unity and power of the entire dragonboat. Every time we pulled our paddles firmly through the water. Our boat would surge forward like a motorboat, causing water to splash form its sides violently. Mr Tan stood at the back of the dragonboat and controlled its direction using a rudder. At the same time, he shouted motivational phrases to make us paddle harder. Eventually, after sheer determination and mental strength, we crossed the finish line, gasping for breath, and emerging as the winner of that race. I did not expect to even get top three, needless to say first place. This definitely boosted our morale.

            However, we became over complacent in the next race, a 1000m race. The 1000m race was a straight-finals, meaning one chance only. We lost badly and China overtook us by 3 points. Mr Tan chided us, “I had actually expected you to lose this race. After yesterday’s race, you were busy celebrating. You became over-confident and as a result you lost.”

            In the next race, a 500m race, we won China hand downs. Unfortunately, China was still ahead of us by one point. Thankfully, we still had one more race to go. If we won it, we could take back the golden trophy for Singapore and Singapore will be declared as the dragonboating champion. Otherwise, we would have to settle for silver.

             “We will emerge as champions. We will not settle for second place, because to be second is to be last as we would have lost.” That was what Mr Tan said the night before the final race.

            The final race was the shortest distance: 200m. However, that meant that we could not afford to make any mistake. Unfortunately, the beginning of the race was not to our advantage. We missed the starting call and started off a precious one second late. As a result, China overtook us by one boat length. Our morale dropped rapidly as China continued its ferocious charge. Winning felt impossible.

            “What are you doing! Don’t lose hope! Come on, charge!” Mr Tan shouted at the top of his lungs. At that juncture, we felt a sense of injustice. Even if China won, we would not let them win easily. We would put up a fight – a fight to the finish. Then, suddenly and miraculously, our dragonboat burst forth and chased after China.

            “Come on! Keep this up! That’s the way!” Mr Tan continued to cheer us on. Two metres more … one metre more … and before we knew it we crossed the finish line with China neck-to-neck beside us. It was clearly a photo-finish but who won?

            Minutes later, the results were announced. We had won! By the whisker of the dragon head in the front of our boat. I immediately jumped up in feeling jubilant and a sense of pride. Tears of joy rolled down my cheeks. Months of effort had finally paid off.

 On the 8^th of August, 8am, our plane touched down on Changi Airport. As we walked out of the plane, Mr Tan held up the golden trophy, which glistened beautifully under the morning sun, and said, “For Singapore!”

            “For Singapore!” we echoed.

Notes form the author:

WDBRC is an actual dragonboat race. It is held biannually in odd-numbered years. In 2009, Singapore sent a youth team to compete in WDBRC. They won the championship title for Singapore. However, all characters in this story are fictitious and much of the story is fictitious too. This year, Singapore is also going to send a youth team to compete in WDBRC.

The American Civil War

a.      Identify the southern states.

The southern states are South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina. There are a total of 11 of them.

b.      Who was the US president who proclaimed war against the South?

Abraham Lincoln campaigned against the expansion of slavery beyond the states in which it already existed. However, the slave states rebelled and attacked a U.S. military installation at Fort Sumter in South Carolina on April 12, 1861. Lincoln responded by calling for a volunteer army from each state to recapture federal property.

c.       Why was the Civil War fought?

The Southern side wanted to preserve slavery and the Northern side to preserve the Union and then later, to end slavery and free the African-American men.

d.      When was this war fought?

The Civil War was fought between 1861 and 1665.

e.      What was the outcome of this war?

The Union (north) won the war and slavery was abolished



Slavery

a.      When and how did slavery begin in the Southern States?

Slavery in the southern state first began in 1619. The Southern States traded rum and mollasses with Africa in exchange for slaves it was called the triangle trade.

b.      Which country were the slaves brought from?

Most of the slaves came from Africa although a small number were Europeans, mostly English but also Scottish and Germans, who were brought over in as indentured servants.

c.       Who traditionally bought and owned the slaves?

Slaves were traditionally owned by plantation owners who needed labour. The land in the south was richer and better for plantations, thus slavery was found mainly in the south.

d.      Were there laws/rules that the slaves had to abide by? If yes, what were they?

Slaves had to abide by certain slave codes. Slaves were allowed to be punished by the plantation owner or master, his wife, children (white males), and most often by the overseer or driver. Punishments include whipping, being placed in chains and shackles, or in various contraptions such as metal collars, being hanged, or being forced to walk a treadmill. Slaves could be punished for a variety of reasons, most of the time it was for working too slow, breaking a law such as running away, leaving the plantation without permission, or not following orders given to them.

e.      How does the notions of slavery relate to the novel? Does the study help you understand the novel better?

Understanding slavery in the Southern States allows me to understand the racial discrimination between the Whites and the African-Americans which is the main theme of ‘To Kill A Mockingbird’.

Forms of Discrimination

1.       Race

2.      Religion

3.      Age

Person A: 27 years old

Person B: 50 years old, more experienced than Person A

An employer who discriminates by age might hire Person A instead of Person B even though Person B has more experience. Such an employer thinks that old-age hinders someone’s ability.

4.      Nationality

5.      Gender

In some schools, girls are not allowed to take up certain courses such as carpentry.

6.      Sexual orientation

7.      Education

8.      Reverse discrimination (discrimination against discrimination)

9.      Employment

10.   Appearance

A nerdy-looking student may be teased by his peers.

11.    Intelligence

12.   Perception

13.   Medical problems

14.   Marital status

15.   Background

16.   Economic status

17.   Political view