Work

Today I joined in a Skype "conversation" organised by the Singapore Humanist Society titled Skype Party #4 - The Future of Work, hence the title of this post. Although the call was almost 2 hours long, it had been really enlightening and I was humbled by the amount of knowledge that was shared both by the organisers and the audience on the floor.

As COVID-19 has drastically changed the way we work, our susceptibility to technological "prowess" (if I'm permitted to clarify this later on) becomes rather apparent. Technology has become too inevitable for us to do without. Our productivity is at the mercy of how fast our internet works, whether our company's VPN system is stable enough to host everyone; our relevance determined by whether our work can be "telecommuted"; this ultimately converts into how secure our jobs will be. If we're unable to continue contributing as we would during peaceful times, is there then a need for us to be kept around?

Of course, this is on top of all the other factors contributing to a company's decision to lay off its staff as a direct result of COVID-19.On the other hand, on the part of workers, our individual ability to keep up with technology goes without saying, and often determines whether our livelihood is secured against the ever-younger generations who are born into a technological age.

An extremely well-versed participant pointed out that Industry 4.0 is happening at a rate that is many times faster than Industrial Revolution had kicked in to replace human labour—a process that took decades for its effect to be truly felt. COVID-19 is going to accelerate this process in our era, and by many more times.

Perhaps, I'm thinking, in such times of crisis, when sickness and mortality become so prevalent, and our fear shrill and ever-present, human weakness sticks out so blatantly. All these while, thriving on technological advancement and predominantly capitalist economies, we have stopped allowing such primal human weakness to surface. Whenever it does, we suppress or conceal.

In the face of stark contrast, between the technology that never has to be on sick/compassionate leave, and the humans who are subject to frequent toilet breaks and lunch time, who wins? Technology trumps human labour hands-down. 

As some would proudly declare, "I can't afford to take medical leave, my company needs me." Yes, except that when he is truly down, no longer able to contribute or becomes too expensive to maintain, he is—as millions of others, easily dispensible. Such is the working of a capitalist system. For the want of money, there would easily be a replacement and a lower cost one would be greatly preferred.

Last night, I listened to Michele Wucker, who spoke of the "Gray Rhino" effect. She calls Climate Change one of them.

Reflecting after the call, I have been thinking about the extent to which different nations would be hit. Those hardest hit might very well be the ones who have all along been placing higher stakes on technology and banging on smooth-running economies. Hardest hit, in this sense, does not refer solely to monetary losses, but also to human misery.

All these call to mind a certain book which I had been reading some time back, titled Bullshit Jobs: The Rise of Pointless Work and What We Can Do About It by David Graeber.

Some would call this book an anarchist's rant, but the whole COVID-19 situation, through my observation so far, seems to amplify the bullshitness of many (especially corporate) jobs in society. I was not surprised when I read on the newspaper some time back that "human resource managers" and "business analysts" were examples of jobs that were considered non-essential.

Perhaps "non-essential" resonates beyond the need of going to office at all. That fact that how many man-years have been wasted until 2020, commuting between the home and workplace, can so easily be called into question, simply spells the necessity of this whole fiasco.

Of course, one might say that it wasn't until recently that technology has been able to support working from home. However, if the developed world can commit a folly so huge as to send a good proportion of  time (which could've been otherwise dedicated to more constructive human affairs e.g. interpersonal relationships with loved ones etc.) down the drain, what makes one deny that job creation on so many levels can never be an equally major mistake?

Anyway, perhaps this is just scraping the surface for now, until I'm able to go in-depth into this issue at some point. For the bulk of corporate job holders who are working from home in this period, whether admissible or not, the rule of thumb goes like 'How to appear busy whilst doing nothing'.

"Sovereign"

As hilarious as it was when it started out, at least to bystanders (including me), it eventually turned into sympathy and something stuck between laughing and cringing. I think certain beliefs are to certain people very real to them, as the rest of us think them profoundly ridiculous.

This is regarding a local case of a lady refusing to put on a face mask although government regulations have made this mandatory at the moment, as we see COVID-19 cases rise each day in the hundreds. When confronted by members of the public and/or authorities (not only in this case), she remained adamant about her behaviours, claiming she's a "sovereign".

It's a word not commonly used these days, and neither are certain pronouns that the lady wants herself to be referred to (as follows):

There have been news sources such as this which have sought to explain possible influences and/or motivations this lady might have had when behaving the way she did. But while reading briefly these articles which have been shared by my contacts, it piqued my curiosity as to how and whom had initiated these divisive movements which had since evolved into a current state of malady that societies and countries have to battle against.

After all, doesn't "sovereign" sound extremely familiar within certain groups? And I'm talking about something beyond the "sovereign citizen movement" whose origin only traces back to modern history. Don't particular old books anyway tend to use certain (largely obsolete) pronouns extensively?

Besides, characteristics like these below do strike a chord when something else comes to mind, don't they?

Is this method not exactly the same one used by errant "leaders" of communities (addressed in the previous post) to mobilise hoards of [fill noun here] into disregarding their civic responsibilities? I'm not asserting that my observation is perfect, and will leave this work to the reader's common sense.

Not assuming anything at this point, some further reading was required. The curiosity was not satisfied. If anything, it had been roused rather rudely.

Hence, the first discovered source—Wikipedia (yes, I get it. When does one rely fully on such sources, isn't it?). But this is what I found: 

Perhaps the reader demands something from a more legit source. Here goes a slightly lengthier one, taken from University of Chicago's Divinity School (I'm sure the School's contributors are not out to debunk the whole idea that underpins the institution's existence): 

If we could look at the current state of matters through the lens of humanism (and common sense that nature has blessed most of us with), it does gradually become apparent that religions and their daughter communities are extremely prone to forming splinter groups across generations. 

It is perfectly fine if these groups move on to contribute towards a greater good and stop at that. Yet, what we see today are a contrary to anything near being a benefit (if not a benign constituent) to humanity.

These groups deviate from civility and more often than not, preach separate sets of "legal" systems entirely up to the discretion of lesser-known "leaders" evangelising diverse packs who are willing to listen, and subsequently believe. While not exhaustively so, subjectivity on what is acceptable/unacceptable is an intrisic property of many religions and form a fundamental framework for those who want to exploit it, in the process coercing others into this sordid affair.

Just Google, and the Internet will offer a good variety of "sovereign" notoriety (from actual happenings in this world!), from civil disobedience to outright violence against representatives of the civic community (read: public servants). 

Recently, when speaking to one of my contacts who is a devout Catholic, I expressed the problem with thanking "god" whenever something fortunate happens to us or someone dear to us. The following ensued (I'll try to re-enact it as accurately as possible): 

Me: How does "god" explain the rest of the world's population that's suffering without access to the resources that we're so used to? Even clean water is a luxury to some people.

Him: God does not explain the bad things in the world because He [I'm capitalising this only out of respect for said individual] didn't create them. He is only reponsible for the good ones.

Really? So now are believers supposed to believe in two separate divine beings each reponsible for opposing poles of the moral spectrum? Then, questions like: But what's moral differs from culture to culture, nation to nation etc. Perhaps then the number of divine entities is almost as big as Earth's human population to account for this diversity? Who knows, but the mystery only grows. 

Another relevant observation occurred as I was watching cute panda videos on Youtube (major activity that one does during COVID-19 lockdown). The highest-rated comment was something along the lines of: "God blessed the world with such beautiful creature". Of course, the Youtube comment section is like a dumping ground of the Internet. 

Yet, I couldn't help but wonder where these religious commenters invoking their various gods are, when there's a video about maybe a drowning child in a tsunami, or some other massive human suffering. Surely though, one cannot help being embarrassed, or avoid getting lambasted for something like: "[The victim(s)] must have incurred the wrath of god." Even if not framed this way, there is almost no other way to conceive of god as the cause in the comment section of such negative videos, without being reprimanded by others who are empathetic and rational. So, why involve god so selectively, if at all?

This is not to say that humanity should form a homogeneous whole and be united on all fronts. But...

Should people need to be divided in some way, is it then not more constructive to be divided along constructive rather than destructive lines? Constructive divisions result in medical specialisations, novel art movements, new innovations in technology filling the gaps of human limitations and mitigating suffering, startup social enterprises, for example. The possibilities are endless.

Is there then a place for destructive (or, at least, non-constructive) divisions in today's world when there's already an overwhelming lot for us to deal with—think COVID-19, maybe? 

We should in fact pose this question to said lady who thinks she's a "sovereign", yet unabashedly receives government and fellow citizens' support even in the form of the very wet market that makes food so accessible and affordable for her. Or perhaps, I can also ask this Catholic contact of mine who no doubt, is rather law-abiding in the civic sense.  

Side note: There is a point in news agencies not diving a hell lot deeper than what is currently written about the source of "sovereign", for fear of sparking animosity among certain groups, threatening readership and/or running the risk of total boycott. For one thing is certain: the often unwavering, unquestioning sense of community among such groups. 

Common Denominator

It's been an extremely long while since I'd last written something here. When "life" takes over, it often throws one off their (desired) course. Of course, I concede that much has to be attributed to laziness and not external factors. I'd like to attempt making writing a habit. Certain research found that forming a habit takes 180 days of consistency. So in due time, we shall see if this attempt takes root and lingers.

The main point of this post is one that has bugged many in my contact list. Or rather, one that I had continuously bugged people with. It's tempting to dissociate negative behaviours from oneself and shift the burden onto made-up factors, as we shall see.
 
What Am I Fighting?

If only Christopher Hitchens were around to see the current state of life, he would've caught on very much sooner than I did. If only Richard Dawkins would contribute his two cents (if not more).

While I hadn't deliberately sought out trouble with this invisible enemy, it kept coming at me and would not go away. Almost everyday, in different countries battling COVID-19, healthcare systems are taxed to their limits, healthcare workers are putting their lives on the line, decision-makers are cracking their heads to contain this pesky infection. Societies have come to a standstill in many parts of the world, of which consequences will definitely and eventually persist long beyond the epidemic.

It started in early-Feb 2020, when I alerted an elderly relative (an octogenarian) to avoid attending church. It started as a neutral, mild-mannered appeal. "__, why not avoid going to the church during this period?" It was a concern stemming from certain studies which found that the virus can remain on surfaces for extended periods of time, that hand sanitisers are not fool-proof, that public washrooms are a good virus breeding ground, that church is inherently a public space and most importantly, that said relative belongs to an at-risk group (health- and age-wise). 

The reply from said relative? Don't worry, God will bless us all.

Only several days later (mid-February), true enough, the first few locally-transmitted (Singapore) cases had been detected among churchgoers. The subsequent days and weeks saw more church clusters forming the bulk of COVID-19 cases.

"Social distancing", at that point, was encouraged but not banned. While school assemblies and other secular gatherings came to a halt, the authorities had carefully chosen to sidestep religious gatherings for reasons known, but not pointedly stated. Of course, much has to be said of living in a "multi-racial", "multi-religious" society. Such topics are like a glass vial of mercury, to be handled with utmost care and sensitivity, and often disproportionately so when weighed against tangible risks.

Building A Case

4 February 2020: Coronavirus: Assemblies, large group activities in Singapore schools to be suspended. This seemed to have been a much easier and decisive move, even though young children and youths are known to be less susceptible to the Coronavirus compared to many of the older parishioners/worshippers attending masses/prayers at religious establishments/events.

Yet, religions, as many like Dawkins have observed, often expect to be treated with extreme delicacy and exclusivity. Think snowflakes. The slightest mishandling would result in public retort (even violence) and invoking of constitutional protection in the name of democracy. Hence the loss of precious time to distance the most vulnerable group—the seniors, from exposure to the virus.

Some time elapsed. Several positive cases were detected in the community, including those from churches, but not exclusively so. The rest were work-related and also those involving direct contact with tourists from other affected countries like China.  

14 February 2020: Coronavirus: Singapore reports 8 more cases - all with links to known clusters. 5 of these 8 cases were linked to a church. That isn't all to this article. One of these 5 cases was a family member of a bank staff whose office of 300 employees had been evacuated, because he was found to have been infected on 12 February 2020. It was on Valentine's day that church services would finally commence suspension until further notice.

16 February 2020: Singapore confirms 5 new cases, all with known links. Of these 5, 3 were from a church. 

17 February 2020: Regionally, 'It is our nation's right to rely on the Almighty': Minister justifies calling for prayers in coronavirus battle. Weeks later, the same minister (along with the backing of the country's vice president who doubles as a religious cleric), as Indonesia's COVID-19 situation grew more dire, attributed the lack of cases before March 2 to the country's prayers and consequent divine intervention. One would wonder why Indonesia eventually fell out of divine favour and incurred the petty wrath of the said supreme order.

It is both absurdly easy and hellishly dangerous to blame human failings on the mythical, thereby allowing those in power to shirk their due responsibilities despite the extent to which they are benefiting from public resources—both in the public and private sphere. And, religion appears to be an inordinately well-paved outlet for such gross abuse of authority and shameless justification.

19 February 2020: Four more infected, with 3 linked to church cluster. The headline gives the gist of it.

20 February 2020: Moving beyond the local scene, Coronavirus fears create ghost town in South Korea after church 'super-spreader', in Daegu. A week later, a sound analysis was published here which explains the spread of the sect (and consequently the Coronavirus).

25 February 2020: Grace Assembly coronavirus mystery solved: Antibody tests linked mega cluster to 2 Wuhan tourists via Chinese New Year party and Life Church cluster.

12 March 2020: The Singapore Ministry of Health attempted to identify 95 Singaporeans who attended the religious gathering in Malaysia, after confirmed COVID-19 cases. The religious gathering was held between February 27 and March 1, and the first Malaysian infected victim died on March 17. 16,000 people had attended, of which 1,500 were foreigners who were subsequently allowed to scatter back to their respective countries untracked, untested.
 
14 March 2020: On this day, back in Singapore, the Catholic authorities decided to extend suspension of church services in light of the rising number of cases among church clusters.

17 March 2020: A detailed look here: How mass pilgrimage at Malaysia mosque became COVID-19 hotspot. This would be the hallmark event that threw Malaysia into an immediate lockdown, disrupting countless lives as the number of infected (and deaths) resulting from direct and indirect exposure to the virus swelled.

On the other end of the spectrum, a religious teacher cited that reluctance of certain attendees to come forward and be tested for Coronavirus stems from their preference for divine protection.

18 March 2020: Unsurprisingly, Vietnam reports new case of COVID-19 linked to Malaysia mosque event.

19 March 2020: 1,500 Indonesian Catholics go ahead with mass despite pleas to cancel. On the same continent, Coronavirus: Bangladesh mass prayer event prompts alarm, where 25,000 people gathered to form a splendid, colourful spectacle in different versions of the iconic cover photo marking this ocassion on numerous international news channels.

21 March 2020: One of the first two patients to have died of COVID-19 in Singapore belonged to one of the church clusters mentioned earlier.

22 March 2020: 4,000 religious event attendees in KL still untested for Covid-19: M'sian authorities implore them to 'come forward'. Whether or not the secular authorities were successful, depended on the attendees' individual tastes: Should the trust in divinity give in to the allure of carnal woes? Perhaps a theologian should be entreated to resolve this conundrum. 

31 March 2020: Florida megachurch pastor arrested for breaching Covid-19 health order. Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne cited "discrimination against religion" and claimed "Suddenly we are demonised because we believe God heals, that the Lord sets people free, and they make us out to be some sort of kooks." While he might have been charged for his crime against humanity, it is unlikely that a character as such would be remorseful for his acts. Rather, he would likely be feeling that an injustice had been dealt against his perceived righteousness.

31 March 2020: Coronavirus: Search for hundreds of people after Delhi prayer meeting. On a larger scale on a separate continent, a religion puts further strain on national resources through social irresponsibility.

Social distancing aside, on 2 April 2020, Malaysia reported a quirky piece of news titled at length: Now in the name of Islam, COVID-19 can be caught and put in a bottle (like a jinn!), when a congregation led by a religious practitioner performs a ritual that apparently "catches" the Coronavirus from potential patients and "confines" it into a bottle.

5 April 2020: COVID-19: 20,000 quarantined in Pakistan after gathering organised by the Tablighi Jamaat between March 10 and 12. With an escalating number of infections and deaths at that point, more than 100,000 turned up for the meet despite the government's call to cancel it.

6 April 2020: Malaysia identifies 2 new COVID-19 clusters resulting from mass gathering events, where one of the two has to be of religious nature. On the same day, on the opposite pole of the globe, Louisiana church holds service, defying coronavirus stay-at-home order.On a separate note, US was simultaneously preparing itself for a gruelling week ahead battling the virus on the frontline.

12 April 2020: COVID-19: Good Friday prayer gets out of hand in locked down Italy took place in San Marco, Lamis, amidst one of the highest national death tolls in the world.

14 April 2020: Pastor Who Defied Social Distancing Dies After Contracting Covid-19, Church Says. It has been reported that during a sermon on 22 March, the pastor said "I firmly believe that God is larger than this dreaded virus."

16 April 2020: India charges Muslim leader with culpable homicide for coronavirus surge. While the charge had been brought forth only at this time, the social distancing breach happened in mid-March.

18 April 2020: Christian pastor who defied Myanmar law positive for Coronavirus. On the same day, in another part of the developing world, tens of thousands defy Bangladesh lockdown for imam's funeral. Note that the latter was published in a predominantly "neutral" news agency, for I have received certain replies regarding Al Jazeera's alleged slant in their reporting (although I highly believe otherwise).

23 April 2020: Pakistan's decision to allow mass prayers during Ramadan raises COVID-19 fears. While it is easy to condemn Pakistani authorities for making supposed "poor" decisions, it is crucial to take into consideration the potential backlash that might face law enforcement personnel and socio-political stability at large if the majority religious population (certainly a force to be reckoned with) not be pacified.

30 April 2020: COVID-19: Mass prayers still held in parts of Indonesia despite guidance issued by central government. Despite the apparent incapacity of the country to deal with an epidemic (e.g. the low testing rates and consequently unreported deaths), the religious seems to be undeterred in their routine religious endeavours. In the process, also putting other parties who are not involved in these affairs (e.g. those providing essential services like supermarkets, healthcare etc.), with whom they are likely to inadvertantly come into contact, at risk. The inconsideration of such cases is at best appalling and grotesque. 

Fundamentally Wrong

"When people are gathered together in one place of one accord, worshipping together, the atmosphere, God's presence in that room is different and more powerful than people tend to experience online," says Pastor James Buntrock, associate pastor of the Glorious Way Church, Houston, Texas, in justifying (as ridiculous as it sounds) why churches should remain open and worshippers encouraged to attend masses against the backdrop of a pandemic.

Granted that parishioners who indeed complied with the above were to be spaced six feet apart, reality is proving that only actual distancing measures in a more narrow sense of the word can ensure that citizens (especially vulnerable segments of the society) do not eventually end up six feet under.

Many religious leaders who propound continuance of religious gatherings would echo the claim made by Pastor Buntrock, that: the digital being a lesser form of worship as compared to praying in person. A similar rhetoric can also be observed: That people should be allowed religious freedom and hence should be permitted to carry out their religious duties to the utmost of their abilities.

Besides the unwillingness to cooperate with authorities to avoid gathering (as illustrated), in a significant number of cases, religious worshippers refused to be tested despite overwhelming evidence of possible contact with positive cases and/or showing symptoms of the infection. This is not exclusive to followers of "unorthodox" sects like those of Shincheonji Church of Jesus in South Korea, but also those of major organised religions such as those listed above, citing divine protection and immunity.

One must understand that exposure to the virus as a result of religion-related negligence is completely avoidable.

Tracking the news over the course of three months, certain religions seem to resurface time and again. However, the point here does not run as deep as to single out particular religion(s), as I do not have sufficient statistical data to prove anything other than reading pockets of news arbitrarily from around the world. Yet, an undeniable common denominator sticks out like a sore thumb: Religion.

It seems extremely easy for followers of (certain) religions to fall prey to herd mentality within their individual communities, hence overwriting civic responsibilities with religious beliefs, or what has been propagated by their respective religious leaders.

While it is simple to point the finger at misguidance and/or poor leadership of these individual leaders, it is however also essential to highlight a common characteristic of religions in incapacitating followers to think in a more worldly (and less other-worldly) sense, and independently. After all, we need two hands to clap. Followers are not hauled to religious gatherings under restraint.

I shall not delve into the history of major religions—histories that are often fraud with mind control amidst power struggle. It is not uncommon, hence, to witness stark imbalances within the power dynamics between leaders (as "messengers" of supreme beings) and followers of organised religions. Yet, in this piece today, the urgency lies in a modern history built on this extremely flawed and outdated foundation of religions.

The detrimental effects of religions, in the era of COVID-19, can be felt on a very substantial (more concrete than any professed gods) level. When principle concerns are to compound merits for the afterlife and/or to venerate sublime entities (neither visible nor verifiable), terrestrial diseases and suffering naturally get relegated to the posterior. On this note, it is somewhat safe to say that religion has become a threat, and a contrary to progress (and virus containment). 

It's Not Only A Wrong Message

Of course, any well-informed person can throw back at me instances of sensible decisions carried out by religious authorities around the world—those that advocate a general message on the "sanctity of human life". A very heartening example would be something like this, at least at the start.

However, what makes Mustafa Akyol's article interesting is that it precisely highlights the point of my wanting to write this article. Yes—some religious authorities have heeded health advisory to encourage prayers/worship from home. Yes—other defiant ones should practice reason instead of blind faith, emulating their more sensible counterparts as much as possible.

Then it comes to the point where I would like to divert from Akyol's perspective. No—One does not need to ask Prophet Muhammad if he should tie his camel or not. Instead, one should have been posed the question in return: Does it appeal more to common sense to tie her, or to not tie her? In other words, there is no room for religion to come into the picture as it only serves to cloud the view of believers (while they exist). 

Common sense, I believe, is intrinsic in majority (if not all) of humanity capable of tying their shoelaces or buying a bag of nachos at the corner store. 'Common sense' is termed this way for a reason.

In a health emergency, health authorities should be the rightful ones to release information and advice, not religious leaders.

Condoning supposed "slippages" in religion, "It is the kind of blind faith that prominent atheists such as Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris have long been criticizing," says Akyol. No—Richard Dawkins' views on religion did not end at "blind faith". In fact, the following should give a rough idea of Dawkins' take on "moderate" forms of religion and their proclaimed compatibility (and/or mutual exclusivity) with science/reason:

"But does Gould [Stephen Jay Gould] really want to cede to religion the right to tell us what is good and what is bad? The fact that it has nothing else to contribute to human wisdom is no reason to hand religion a free licence to tell us what to do. Which religion, anyway? The one in which we happen to have been brought up? [...] And if we have independent criteria for choosing among religious moralities, why not cut out the middle man and go straight for the moral choice without the religion?"

This was taken from Dawkins' The God Delusion, from a sub-chapter titled 'NOMA' (non-overlapping magisteria), which I found to be exceptionally relevant in substantiating the point of the current writing.

Clearly, if as Akyol claims, there exists such a vast threshold for "subjective interpretation of faith", is religion then not an awfully precarious ground to be on? 

Conclusion

On a closing note, I would like to pinpoint (without euphemising) religion's capacity to maim a person's ability to reason. Instructions coming from beyond the religious circle are often perceived as threats to a believer's reality and hence, are deliberately blocked out or defiantly flouted. In the devastating climate of COVID-19, religion is no longer relevant and cannot be consulted to thwart secular efforts in regaining normality.

In any case, religion has proven itself in the COVID-19 example (and numerous others which will not be addressed here) to provide an excessively generous leeway to be out of touch with reality, making it easily susceptible to manipulation and the whims of unscrupulous/deranged individuals. Besides, the very essence of organised religions is designed for such exploits. 
 
Yet, it is also in times of human vulnerability and constant reinforcement of mortality, that a vacuum is created—a gaping loophole for organised religions (and newfound sects initiated by opportunistic, charismatic individuals with a hunger for power) to seize upon, to act as a bulwark for their troubled herd. Often, this is done with the freewill of countless (otherwise thinking) individuals as a trade-off. 

Note: Sources have been diversified to minimise bias.  
Note 2: The following is reality. 

Last stop: Plymouth

This was my journey on 20170507 - long overdue, on the way from London to Plymouth. On the bus it did not feel the same as all the other bus journeys so far. It felt like goodbye, yet the blues and the greens beckoned a smile. And what followed was just a blur of sunlight and more stunning pastoral scenes. I think I could redo this many times over. 

It seems as though to cheer me up. Not the usual grey and gloom as I lugged my hefty backpack and a broken luggage, instead Plymouth chose to greet me with a best first impression. After about almost two weeks here, it chose not to live up to my expectations. Still rather whimsical, but bearably pleasant at times. Being a passer-by seems to aggravate something that had been lying dormant inside, something that even the glare does not cure. 

The attic was to be my home for a while. I wonder if I would miss the musty afternoon silence when I leave this place. It's amazing how memories collect this way when you change surroundings too quickly, too frequently. The mechanism is somewhat the same when the eyes are unable to adjust to the lights after prolonged darkness. Somehow you'd be thankful to see the light, yet some part of your just yearn to remain with the status quo. 

It is the first time, and probably the last, that I would ever have to climb two flights of stairs to reach the ground - and one being a rather creaky one. Each time I pass through this gateway (below), I experience the fear of tumbling and breaking my neck. So far nothing major has happened yet. A few days left and I hope I make it to the end alive. 

The first evening through the attic window, I was greeted by this (below) solo seagull perched on a chimney against the glow of the setting sun. How gracious, how pensive. The seagull stood there for quite some time, as if he/she knew I had the obsession of attempting to perfect a shot - as a welcome gift. It was a limited view, but I guess that was rather sufficient for the first day of landing in a new place.   

My last port in the temperate, before I greet the tropics again. It's melancholy. Yet I'm unsure as to feeling absolutely repulsed by the prospect of a new chapter. A foothold in the familiar, and the next step toward stability. It was a harrowing experience in part, yet oh-so-educational. If I had to choose again I might've done little differently, yet the little had been enough to etch some deep scars and souvenirs. 

A note to self. As much as the pursuit to happiness lies in stability, there seems to be something more to be tapped upon by utilising creativity - talent, if you'd call it that. Just to free oneself from the shackles of rigidity, oppression and routine. I've come across one of Charles Bukowski's letters to John Martin, who hired him for Black Sparrow Press as a writer at the advanced age of forty-nine fifteen years prior. Here it goes:

December 8, 1986

Hello John:

Thanks for the good letter. I don’t think it hurts, sometimes, to remember where you came from. You know the places where I came from. Even the people who try to write about that or make films about it, they don’t get it right.

They call it “9 to 5.” It’s never 9 to 5, there’s no free lunch break at those places, in fact, at many of them in order to keep your job you don’t take lunch. Then there’s OVERTIME and the books never seem to get the overtime right and if you complain about that, there’s another sucker to take your place. You know my old saying, “Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the colors.”

And what hurts is the steadily diminishing humanity of those fighting to hold jobs they don’t want but fear the alternative worse. People simply empty out. They are bodies with fearful and obedient minds. The color leaves the eye. The voice becomes ugly. And the body. The hair. The fingernails. The shoes. Everything does.

As a young man I could not believe that people could give their lives over to those conditions. As an old man, I still can’t believe it. What do they do it for? Sex? TV? An automobile on monthly payments? Or children? Children who are just going to do the same things that they did?

Early on, when I was quite young and going from job to job I was foolish enough to sometimes speak to my fellow workers: “Hey, the boss can come in here at any moment and lay all of us off, just like that, don’t you realize that?”

They would just look at me. I was posing something that they didn’t want to enter their minds.
Now in industry, there are vast layoffs (steel mills dead, technical changes in other factors of the work place). They are layed off by the hundreds of thousands and their faces are stunned:

“I put in 35 years…”

“It ain’t right…”

“I don’t know what to do…”

They never pay the slaves enough so they can get free, just enough so they can stay alive and come back to work. I could see all this. Why couldn’t they? I figured the park bench was just as good or being a barfly was just as good. Why not get there first before they put me there? Why wait?

I just wrote in disgust against it all, it was a relief to get the shit out of my system. And now that I’m here, a so-called professional writer, after giving the first 50 years away, I’ve found out that there are other disgusts beyond the system.

I remember once, working as a packer in this lighting fixture company, one of the packers suddenly said: “I’ll never be free!”

One of the bosses was walking by (his name was Morrie) and he let out this delicious cackle of a laugh, enjoying the fact that this fellow was trapped for life.

So, the luck I finally had in getting out of those places, no matter how long it took, has given me a kind of joy, the jolly joy of the miracle. I now write from an old mind and an old body, long beyond the time when most men would ever think of continuing such a thing, but since I started so late I owe it to myself to continue, and when the words begin to falter and I must be helped up stairways and I can no longer tell a bluebird from a paperclip, I still feel that something in me is going to remember (no matter how far I’m gone) how I’ve come through the murder and the mess and the moil, to at least a generous way to die.

To not to have entirely wasted one’s life seems to be a worthy accomplishment, if only for myself.
Your boy,
Hank

Not surprisingly as I was reading John Cacioppo's quotation of the Whitehall Study of civil servants' ranks as correlated to health conditions, the stratification only seems to bolster Bukowski's denouncement of life's quality as a blue-collared worker. Perhaps also going up the social hierarchy, subtle improvement might be observed, yet who's to say that the bulk of us who do not qualify on the blue-collar rung can escape what Bukowski has so jadedly condemned?

Care worker in London

It is not a glamourous job that I would share with my friends, much less something I would brag about. I've recently spoken with a colleague, a high-flyer in his academic career wanting to "gain work experience" relevant to the medical field which he is in. He unabashedly said he would leave this place after some months. This job is a stepping stone, or plainly, a livelihood. I was asked recently if I am doing this for money, or if I like the job. I clearly stumbled upon that question, I do not know. 

I started out being enthusiastic about the new people whom I got to meet often on a daily basis, investing personal time and effort into running errands, providing company, and mostly, just listening to the lonely with genuine empathy and interest. Note that I do not get paid for these. Much like a social worker, I found myself spending a good part of my life here with many who live alone (sometimes forgotten), many with glorious pasts and stories to tell, but have since "fallen from grace". With bodies and minds no longer working as they used to, the photos on their walls reflect a distant past that they now stare blankly through. Those smiling faces around them no longer visit. 

Then comes the worst part of this job, the dirty work. Yes, literally. So primal, so human. Little things that I take for granted in being able to do for myself until now. The bodily functions which I never thought would mess up this badly until reality splats right in my face, as I wipe up fresh excrement that terrorizes my nostrils and makes me cringe no matter how many times I encounter it. Perhaps this is where the notoriety of being a care worker arises. I would go to any extent to get myself this meagerly paid. 

While I have always admired healthcare professionals for their forgiving demeanour, I never thought I would start cultivating the temper of a saint (though I have not met one before). And it also began in dealing with some of the nastiest disposition on top of a confused mind. I've since learnt to combat personal insults with a smile and an apology. I am not sure if it's a healthy habit to adopt, but I do it anyhow. Mostly because such hostility does not stem from intention, yet I cannot deny that the perpetrators are the reason that I get paid. I just hope this matter-of-fact apologetic tendency does not become my second nature. 

Now, I often find myself approaching these living beings with increasing apathy (although I am unsure if it had been accidental, intentional, or merely a natural course of desensitization). While I used to hesitate cutting someone off in the middle of a wistful reminiscence, I can increasingly detach myself, mindful of my tight schedule and the other dozen I have to visit. When I make a conscious effort to conduct a conscience check, the result becomes emotionally draining. 

Sometimes I tell a white lie to a confused individual, that perhaps a relation is coming to visit. For a split second I detect a flitting melancholy, a knowing disagreement in their eyes. I hadn't mean to lie. I only did so because... Because they would brighten up and take some care of themselves for a little? The utter dejection that I find escalating not only with these daily scenes, but also within myself as I stay on this job. On many occasions, I think maybe they know more than I do. Perhaps they know that I only came here for the money, not for them. Perhaps they know me better than I do myself. 

Pedant.

Saw a friend tagged in stranger's Facebook post about a gathering they had. Fine. But the caption read "revendous" instead of what clearly was meant to be "rendezvous", that's NOT fine. Who, beyond the age of 8 says "revendous" anyway? It was a post from yesterday, and I'm still fussing in my head whether or not to point that out. Feels as though my entire being is ravaged with unease from this very trivial(?) matter. 

*SHUDDERS at every thought of "REVENDOUS"* 

Ever met people who cannot handle their spelling/vocabulary yet try their very best to make language breakthroughs? Sometimes I must plead with the general population to stay away from complexity if they're incapable of handling it. It's alright if it was meant to be a clever play of words, but an utter fail like the one above simply serves to negate any remnants of positive impression no matter how dignified the attached photograph may appear. 

Can't resist the temptation of using complex words? http://dictionary.reference.com/ is 5 seconds away from uncertainty. Thesaurus is available to up the ante. If they can afford the time to upload a bunch of inconsequential selfies at 3am, surely they can look up words in the dictionary which would likely prove beneficial on a less temporal basis than Facebook 'likes'. 

The woes of a pedant. 

Cycling in London #2

A one-day belated post: 

Yesterday (4th Feb 2016): Stupidly tied a bundle of groceries to my bike's handlebar, which caused the front light to detach and go flying onto a road of oncoming vehicles. Couldn't stop near enough to retrieve it due to heavy traffic. When I did stop some distance away, looked back to see cars almost run over it. Then that epic moment when a guy from across the road ran (literally) out onto the road to pick it up and came over to pass it to me, and proceeded to cross back onto the other side of the 2-way 4-lane road.

Today (5th Feb 2016): Back light failing as I left school around midnight. Past midnight and about 6 miles left on journey, back light fails. Stopped at overnight convenience store to have batteries replaced (it's illegal and dangerous to ride without lights, especially the back one). It turned out that the light had decided to self-destruct completely - not battery issue. As I knelt there meddling with the light for some time hoping badly that it'd work, someone asked "Still not working?" Guy had come out of a closed shop, said "Have this. It's cold, better get going." Handed me this.

Many times it's so cold, yet it's possible to feel warm somehow. Thank you, wonderful strangers.

PS. Every so often, anonymous people would come by to remind you that the world is not dreadful and grey, like the little bokeh that dots a darkened scene. It's glaringly beautiful. 

Graphic Violence | Benjamin Dix

I've read some of the comics before, but never knew the man behind this project. Yesterday I was blessed enough to have a chance to hear him speak in person. It made my day so much warmer (in this wintry cold) simply to know that people like him exist in this world. He's inspiring, to say the least. The audience was silent and in awe when he spoke, and when he presented his work. Several of them exclaimed how nicely done the session was. And I cannot disagree. I know there are many people who strive to make a difference out there, but from the creative standpoint, his work resonates so beautifully. I found his passion and sincerity most captivating. It sounds corny, but it's true.

Here I share the work he and his team have put together for humanity at large and I hope that whoever chances upon this will drop by: http://positivenegatives.org/

P.S. Maybe I should stop viewing my graphite pencils so condescendingly, because people deal with the world in different ways.  

Cycling in London

So I recently got into an accident because of a maliciously close pass that drove me onto the curb face first, resulting in the following outburst:

Firstly, this is not meant to be an attention-seeking post written to gain sympathy for myself, so save any you might think I need/want. Neither is this an armchair rant. I was tempted not to go into an irate tirade (lol), but couldn't help writing this from real sightings/experiences.

To Obnoxious drivers (especially taxi ones) who think you can save a few seconds of your inconsequential time at the expense of others' safety, kindly reflect on how you would feel if it happened to someone close to you, or you. Sudden overtaking at a 2-inch distance and then pulling up/slowing down (especially on the bike lane) is not nice. In case you were under the impression that 'inertia' is the protagonist from a fantasy novel, I'm telling you it is NOT.

What more are NOT nice: driving/parking on the bike lane, accelerating when you see cyclists trying to join the main traffic, speeding past with some 2-inch gap between your vehicle and my shoulder, especially on puddle-laden rainy days, tailgating, late signaling (especially after you're way past a turn). It's not even a matter of extreme kindness now. Just basic courtesy - which I wishfully presume most sober, civilized adults in "developed" cities to some degree possess.

On the same day in the same city I acquired this exquisite scab-tattooed face and metallic tasting luscious lips (image) from the first of the above instances, this guy could've well been the one under that car as mangled as that bike:

Cycle courier's furious foul-mouthed rant after his bike goes under the wheels of a taxi has to be heard to be believed

Being "foul-mouthed" is under-reaction. Although rationally it doesn't quite help with the situation, I would've possibly fared worse. Does negligence need to result in serious injury/fatality in order to be taken seriously?

Dear Obnoxious drivers, your metal armour will not save you from your conscience (if you have one to start with) eventually. Assuming you do not care about annoying cyclists who exist only to hold you up, kindly contemplate the inconveniences of the bureaucratic lawsuit that might ensue from your self-directed misadventures. In that case you waste more of YOUR time, money and potentially other aspects of life. Applying the CVP analysis beyond monetary terms might help you weigh the worthiness of such obnoxious acts. This is reality, not GTA. So seriously, wake up and think.

P.S. This was written with regards to the few nasty ones, though I'm still mindful of the fact that majority of the drivers are considerate and patient. (I commute 8 miles each way between residence and campus 4 to 5 days per week, for almost half a year now. Sometimes on more busy London routes as well. Most days have been pleasant) As an addition, this video attached is precisely the reason why you should leave substantial room between parked cars and your cycle path, despite the fact that some drivers might get impatient about you "hoarding" the left lane.

This is why #Cyclists DO NOT ride on the door zone. LOOK OUT for #Cyclists before you open your door. #GiveCyclistsRoom via +TAXI @AllLondonBoy
Posted by Dr. Morocho on Wednesday, August 5, 2015