Wrap. Print. Party!

A production still from last week's shoot. Here we see Weng briefing his talent about the coffee mug scene. Coffee looks pretty strong in this photo.

At the wrap party tonight, Weng debuted his rough cut for the entire cast and crew. I must say, although the raw footage didn't look like much, after editing and with the inclusion of the mood-setting background music the final product looked very good indeed.

Most importantly, the client was pleased as Punch with it. Said he had plans to air the final copy around the region. He can't wait to see how the regional offices will react to it.

As for my role, I had a single line of dialogue and a shot of my very talented left arm holding the coffee mug. Yes, that one in the picture.

Teachers' Day dinner interruptions

Usually at Teachers' Day dinner, our objective of enjoying our meal counters the MCs' objective of interrupting our enjoyment with silly games and activities to "enliven" the evening. At tonight's dinner, the role of the latter fell to me, Fen, YF and iLine, to deliver a programme based on the theme of the Oscars.

To be honest, we weren't all that prepared for the task even though we'd agreed to it months ago. The scripting mostly comprised a flurry of hasty email back-and-forths based on a rough guideline of the programme and coordinating MC patter in English and Mandarin. We were still scripting lines right up to our sequence run -- I wouldn't call it a rehearsal 'cos we were only running lines and not working out movement, traffic patterns, transitions and technical coordination.

Adding to the nerve-wracking situation were the many dynamic changes in programe, including a formal toast by the VIPs that was not previously scheduled. And although the programme was going faster than expected we were instructed to hurry up even faster. We ended up saying goodbye to everybody before dessert! I think that was win-win for all of us. Heh.

But this is the job of the MC. It's not theatre where there's time to figure things out and plan for contingencies (and even then things still do screw up). For us MCs, we ran lines for the formal bits of programme -- it's the formal bits that are the most scary 'cos it's unseemly to mess up people's names and titles --and here, reading off cuecards became an absolute necessity for me. My runs without cuecards were disastrous.

But rehearsals apart, most of our air-time was ad lib, going with the flow and trying our best to converse coherently between Fen and myself in two separate languages. Oddly enough, I felt more relaxed with the ad libs than the formal bits. It was fun to run the games and introduce the performances 'cos then I could focus on what was necessary rather than fret over not getting it wrong.

Fen and I had a great table to retreat to in between stage appearances. Thanks for keeping food for us, encouraging us with chatter, playing our games, impromptu rehearsing the formal toast with me, and doing some behind-the-scenes running that was necessary to keep the programme flowing smoothly. My on-stage tribute to you guys was sincere, if inadvertently cut short by an over-enthu Fen.

MC'ing for a combined three schools needed more prep time. There were many niggling mechanical problems, gaffed lines, moments of awkward tongue-tiedness, nervous voices cracking, for a functional but unpolished product. Nevertheless, we had excellent tech support in Events Architects who improv'ed effortlessly with us yet were very understated and nearly invisible the whole time. Their presence covered up a lot of sins.

Overall, I think we did ok. Not great, but a serviceable job despite our nerves and inexperience. It helped a lot that the audience was as generous as it was.

And now, I'm going to take a whole weekend off. Zzzzz...

Criminals, all of you!

Whoever designed the survey for Ipos may have arranged it such that our local intellectual property watchdog got only the feedback it wanted to hear. TNP summarises:

"IN THE real world, almost all of the 100 Singaporeans polled by The New Paper believe that stealing goodies from a store is wrong.

But they feel it's okay to illegally download copyrighted material from the Internet. In another survey of 1,011 Singaporeans done by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (Ipos), released this April, about 44 per cent of Singaporeans think that illegal downloads of copyrighted material is not considered theft."

The more people appear to have unlightened views about respecting intellectual property, the more justification Ipos has for continuing its crusade. And the more reason it has to consider punitive measures, like the new 'three strikes' law, against these all these unrepentant criminal scumbags.

But take a look at the two survey questions given to the respondents:

1) Is it wrong to illegally download music, movies and shows?

40% of total said NO which shows how hardcore recalcitrant they are to willfully commit an illegal act.

If it's illegal, then of course it's wrong, hence 60% said YES. But the answer might have been more interesting if the question had been, "Is it wrong to download music, movies and shows?" Chances are, remove the word "illegal" and 100% will say NO. And since they aren't admitting to committing an illegal act, 100% of them won't think they are criminals.

2) Is it wrong to buy pirated CDs, VCDs and DVDs?

Only 26% of total said NO, which means most people DO think buying such stuff is wrong.

Of course buying pirated CDs, VCDs, and DVDs is wrong. Why waste money on pirated goods when you can download the same thing for free (see Q1)? Duh!

Ipos needs better, less confused, less ambiguous data if it really wants to act in the best interests of society. As it is, they see criminals everywhere, though the people don't quite see themselves as such. Getting all litigious isn't the solution. Enforcement doesn't make a law right, not if the people aren't convinced it is in the first place.

The industry's next leap forward

For the week I'm having, I suppose this is a good reminder why. Presenting our industry's new 'mantra' that'll take us into the 2010s: Lead. Care. Inspire. Not sure why the first word refers to a toxic heavy metal, but we'll do our best.

Bolts of intellect

I suggested before that we human beings take pride in the athletic successes of world record breakers like Usain Bolt because we take them as proxies of ourselves and our own achievements. Boris Johnson, writing for the Telegraph, goes a step further suggesting that Bolt's achievements could be an indication that we are continuing to improve: "faster, higher, stronger," and because each successive 'A' Level reaps an ever increasing harvest of 'A' grades, he asks, "why not cleverer," too?

At the heart of this debate is the issue of grade inflation, and the dumbing down of the curriculum which his critics lambast him for. It's not that Johnson ignores this possibility -- he readily admits to it himself -- but he offers a more optimistic position than his critics can stomach.

In exam-crazy Singapore, our 'A' Level curriculum in math and the sciences makes my own head swim. As it is, our primary school math already makes me stare and blink blankly at the questions the little tykes have to work out. The 'A' Level timetable is a marathon sprint event, the kids being swamped with so much of revision, homework, tutorials, remedials, consultations, it's no fun being a JC student any more. Academic rigor we have... almost to the point of mortis, if you ask the kids themselves.

But curriculum and exam results don't impress me. They're a poor indication of intelligence, biased as they are to a particular kind of left-brainedness. If I were taking my 'A's in JC today, I'd probably be curled up in the corner of a darkened room awaiting my next sedative shot by the time I got to my prelims. It's the fact that our kids actually survive the stress we put them through and are still able to move on towards their next step in life that I respect about this generation.

I'd like to think our kids are getting smarter, at least for for the simple reason that more kids than ever are getting access to an education. Sure, they may not all be able to handle a chemistry paper set in the 60's like some of Johnson's respondents were suggesting, but that's because the kids taking their 'A' Levels in the 60's were truly the creme de la creme of their cohort, both intellectually capable as well as being able one way or another to finance their further studies.

Besides, the 60's generation didn't have access to electronic secondary memory systems (Google, Wiki...) they had no option but to store everything they learned within their own biological primary memory. In that capacity, they were limited to only what they had memorised regardless of how much that might have been. So perhaps they might have been smart in that sense but they could only deal with information stored within the realm of their own heads, and only if they kept updating it manually.

Public education made intellectual development available to pretty much everybody. That might have meant a bit of levelling out of the curriculum towards an average, certainly not as high-level as what it might have been before, but a drop from the top meant a raise in the smarts of everyone else.

And where Johnson's critics pooh pooh computing and the 'net, it's because they see these newfangled developments as inert, inanimate objects rather than the living network of streaming information that actually runs under the hood that our kids are tapping into. The only problems we're facing on this front is the immediacy of access due to the clumsiness of our current interface technology, and the literacy skill that we need to develop in our kids so they can navigate it.

When we figure out these speedbumps on the highway of digital intelligence, we can do away with our archaic biological memory based exams and set exams that are not just open-book but open-'net. They'll be answering exam questions through the usual Wiki and Google, but also through online forums, chats and other forms of interaction with real people (friends, strangers, idiots and experts alike) interactively and collaboratively. That'll be more realistic to the digital age. After all, what's the equivalent of an "exam condition" in the real world today? A power failure or system crash, I suppose, which doesn't happen too often to be a concern.

What if Bolt runs under 60's conditions, the critics posit? Would he still run 9.58 secs? The answer is, it's not the 1960's any more. Times have changed and we have changed with them. We have created the conditions under which running 100m in 9.58 secs is possible, and that is the story of human progress.

Are our kids smarter today? I don't know if we have got the conditions for intellectual Usain Bolts to exist just yet, but on the whole our kids know more and have access to even more useable information than their parents did and way more than their grandparents ever did. That's a good enough yardstick for me.

Back in the Democratic Republic

It seemed like fun to commit to a few little extra things outside of what I'm normally doing on campus. Ordinarily, I'd be fine with these little things, but why did they all have to coincide on the same week in the calendar? Now I'm back in the DRVBGA. Be so relieved when this week is over.

Corporate video shoot

It began with a call for my "expertise". Not actually having any, I still found myself in the midst of a video shoot in an office unit with a fantastic view of Marina Bay. This would have been the perfect location to view the NDP fireworks, I thought as I prepped for my scene.

The camera, lighting and sound crews were real pros, with Weng calling the shots. The shoot was for a well-known pharmaceutical company that wants some attention paid to a little-known physical condition: Over-active bladder (OAB) syndrome. Stop laughing.

I doubt this shoot would be the one to put my name up in lights and my face on the map. My role was to be a sympathetic buddy to the OAB sufferer and offer him coffee. Of course, that's the last thing he needs and so I get a pained but polite brush off. Throw in a couple of lines of dialogue, and that's my scene. Doubt I even get much face-time 'cos the camera is kinda' over my shoulder or ECU on the mug o' joe in my left hand.

The vid's not exactly for public consumption either, it's more like for a corporate presentation. So, no, not quitting my day job yet.

Overall, the shoot was brief, intense and professional. But it was nice to see Anthony and Wendy, Weng and Gwyn again, even if it was only briefly in the middle of a busy set.

Doctrine of equal misery

My experience with the Service was not a particularly pleasant one. It was arguably the lowest two-year point of my life. In the capacity I served, I had no identity, no autonomy, no society, and I saw myself as mere cannon-fodder and slave to all. My proudest accomplishment was being singled out to exhibit my latrine-cleaning prowess, though my admiring audience left behind a stampede of bootmarks all over my spotless floor while they inspected every pristine surface and nodded their approval.

But it was my Service to my nation, and if it saw fit to deploy me in such a manner, then that was my duty. So I protected what was mine and thus earned my Citizenship with a monkey-wrench in one hand and a toilet-brush in the other. The Service was a humbling experience for me, and I probably still bear some psychological scarring from those days, but unlike my fellow citizens writing in today's Forum pages I see no reason for our new citizens to share that experience with me.

It's with a misplaced sense of fairness and justice that today's letter writers are proposing some kind of equivalent Service for our new citizens. But insisting on equal misery is neither constructive nor effective for the purposes of national security. Military service isn't primarily for the purpose of making people unhappy (although that might be a consequence) but it is for the purpose of keeping our nation safe from the threat of external armed aggression.

Unless we're already under attack, a rational defence force isn't likely to stick a gun into the hands of just any turnip that fell off the turnip truck and give it instructions to guard the nation with its life. From a security standpoint, it isn't wise either to give a newbie citizen access to our sensitive sites and facilities, or give him much opportunity to rise in the ranks such that the top brass could possibly comprise of his fellow first gen newbies. Yet, if we don't give them these opportunities but still conscript them into our military, there'll be cries of discrimination, making everybody defensive and nervous around everyone else. Best wait a generation or two, when they've sunk in their roots deep, then they'll actually consider what's ours theirs too, and therefore worth defending.

Besides, the military isn't the only line of defence we have. Our defensive doctrine relies on five pillars working together: military, civil, economic, social and psychological defence, so in reality everyone contributes to our overall national defensive strategy. I'd rather let every citizen serve where they can contribute best. For the newbies, that's in the pillars of economic, social and psychological defence, maybe civil too. But to serve in the military we'd have to build some trust over a couple of generations before we let them wear the green No. 4.

And to the letter writers, you may yourselves have worn the green as your Service via military defence. But going public with your stinky attitudes is actually undermining at least two key but undervalued pillars: social and psychological defence by your petty, unfriendly, jealous, shortsighted, us vs them mentality. Sure, you've served the military, but your Service counts for nothing if you do a Disservice to our overall defence strategy.

Steamy surprise

In commemoration of a certain special event that took place, oh, quite a few years ago, June and I had a little celebration at Jumbo@Dempsey. And this bad girl was the very highlight of the evening.

It would have been a sacrilege to sully her pristine purity with any kind of sauce: black pepper, chilli, or otherwise. Served plain, she's been steamed to perfection with just a dash of rice wine for flavour, on a bed of silky smooth steamed egg. She's Marilyn Monroe wearing her favourite nightwear, Chanel No 5. Gorgeousness, indeed.

Lookit the size of the claws on this magnificent crustacean! The claws were so big, they weren't cooked all the way through. The meat at the pointy tips were gelatinous and faintly translucent. Biting into them released the saltiness of brine that shocked the tongue. But I tell you, the texture of the meat was so smooth and tender that it was all down my gullet before I realised I was eating unintentional crab sashimi.

I may have had a couple of runs to the bathroom since then. Coincidence? Probably not, but even if it was, for a crab like this, it was certainly worth it.

Must also sincerely appreciate the good folk on campus, Amy, B-lo, HP, Jojo and Wayne for the most excellent surprise gift of... yummy options that I know exactly what to do with -- before the year is over. Why so long? There's a matter of appeasing my conscience first before I act, and that could take a little while. Meantime, many thanks, my friends, for commemorating the occasion with me too!

Converting the heathen

Considering my own religious background, I really shouldn't be discussing this. There's been quite some unhappiness over the enthusiasm of my fellow believers in making converts out of the heathen. Up to a point, even I get uneasy about this practice because it just comes across as hard-sell. And it's easy to see how that enthusiasm can rub people the wrong way, living as we are in a society that values religious plurality.

If we don't proselytise, we're told we're not doing our part in the great harvest that our supreme authority wants us to bring in while we still can. So being able to proselytize is an integral part of the belief we have the freedom to enshrine in this society. But I also believe that my freedom to swing my arms ends where your nose begins. And this is the balance we have to accept, living in this society of ours, where everyone else's beliefs are equally accepted and respected.

Because of our religious freedom in this society, no one is about to curtail our freedom to express our beliefs, even the ones entailing making converts. But no one asked us to be obnoxious and offensive in exercising those rights either. Perhaps it may be beyond my limited wisdom that there is indeed a place among us for our full-time walking religious billboards with their fervent deathbed-stalking-fanaticism (they do have the best of intentions, really), but I don't think we need to pursue proselytising so aggressively. All the time.

If we truly lived up to the ideals espoused by our beliefs, people will see in us something of the divinity that we purport to represent. When we walk the walk, people with the, um... more existential questions will have the confidence that we can also talk the talk, so we don't have to accost random people, they'll come to us instead. I may be being somewhat judgemental, but that's how real, effective proselytisation takes place.

Sure, easy to say. Have I done anything of the sort yet? Er, as far as I can tell, no. Then again, what do you expect from the family's black sheep? Baaa...!

Noone wants to see the back of a pickup

I'm not exactly sure why it is but private car drivers will absolutely avoid driving behind a pickup carrying a cargo load of people. It doesn't matter how many passengers there are, even a lone rider is enough to put a wide buffer between the back of the pickup and the car directly behind it.

I've seen cars frantically signalling (if they're polite) then switching lanes as quickly as humanly possible just to clear the rear of such offending vehicles. That's pretty dangerous road behaviour, and I don't quite understand the rationale behind this traffical bizarreness. But monkey see, monkey do, I've picked up this habit too and dance the ol' lane-change switcheroo as safely as I can. I can only speculate on the following possible reasons:

1) Pickups have a speed limit -- slow -- and no one wants to get stuck behind one of those things for long because we all have places to see, things to go and people to do. Three minutes ago.

2) The passengers are not secure in their seats, and at any time can get flung out back, denting the car immediately following.

3) No one wants to make eye contact with a hoarde of tough-looking manual workers 'cos no one wants to see them for the people they are, but are happier to just let them work behind the scenes, out of sight, out of mind.

There's nothing we can do about 1) and 3), but at least for 2) there are going to be new safety regulations regarding their personal security being transported in pickups, so no more fling-dings to worry about any longer.

Oh, wait. There IS something we can do about 1) and 3)! The Traffic Act should make it compulsory that the only passengers allowed to be transported by pickup are babes in bikinis. That way, every male driver will absolutely want to plant himself behind a pickup, and that might bring the overall highway speed down to safer levels.

Over the mountain, not over the hill

A couple of the ladies from our local Everest climbing team, Joanne and Yi Hui, dropped by on campus to deliver a motivational talk. It was an easy going session with a pair of very ordinary gals-next-door who have done some very extraordinary things.

Their message is typical of many Singaporean success stories. Dream big; learn from the best; plan everything knowing that sh*t happens anyway; take small progressive steps training like mad; be persistent in asking for financial and moral support; be open about the scary stuff; go it alone but as a team; set realistic goals; get the job done; be humble about the accomplishment; give motivational talks and write a book about the adventure. More or less in that order.

Nice girls with a story to tell their grandchildren.

Back to God

Attended my first burial service. It was a plot at CCK Lawn Cemetery on which there is no room to stand around, other than on top of the plots of the other previously depated. A couple of hymns, a short message by the Pastor -- just long enough to allow the mechanical excavator to complete filling up the hole -- and a prayer of blessing for the family.

We lingered just a little longer for a little chitchat and for the immediate family to shoot some commemorative pix. Then as a group, we turned to walk towards our cars, leaving one of our own behind, beneath the peaceful, sombre, silent lawn, returning the body back into the hands of God.

The bravest of us

Yesterday, a kid in tutorial asked me if I had to choose between brain and body, what would my choice be? I shot back quite arrogantly that I already had both so I didn't have to make the choice. Well, it was an impertinent question meant to disrupt the session, and sometimes my mouth shoots off faster than I can control it.

Not too long after, Dad texted me about the passing of my eldest cousin. Tshoong was indeed someone who didn't have the choice between brain and body. At some point earlier in life, he developed a condition that atrophied his muscles so badly that he lost all motor-control over his whole body. Whatever was happening in his brain was firing off all the wrong impulses through his nerves, causing him to become a mass of twitches and tics that never abated.

I can imagine how frustrating that must have been for him. There was a perfectly good mind trapped in a ruined body. Even the simplest normal human function that we take for granted, for him he had to depend on other people for assistance.

It wasn't this condition that killed him in the end. He'd lived this way for many years already, anyway. The docs signed off that it was a heart condition with a diabetic complication that eventually took him.

Thinking back on the question if I would choose mind or body, I don't know if I would have the courage as Tshoong had to maintain his mind and intellectual faculties for as long as he did, even when he didn't have the body to carry it around in. And it's only now that he's still... and at peace at last.

This is my Facebook status update for today, preserved here because I wrote it with him in mind:

[Xmac...]

gathers with the clan. Black umbrellas and the rain.

Time to rest now, cuz.

Among his generation, he was the bravest of us all.

Yo, Joe: the technological arguments

Good stories often reflect philosophical debates. By that proposition, "GI Joe: ROC" has a decent story to tell. Here we have two antagonists, both equally well-armed with highly advanced technology. Both are out to establish order in the world: the Joes by maintaining the status quo, MARS (it's a pre-COBRA universe, hence the title) by changing the balance of power through force, intimidation and deceit. We know who the good guys are already.

ROC contemplates the use of technology:

MARS' tactical philosophy is to place technology within the individual soldier, effectively making each one a super-soldier but simultaneously eradicating morality and independent thought, and placing the army's total control in the hands of a single Commander. MARS troops are dedicated, dependable, unquestioningly loyal, but ultimately dispensible. They're basically no fun.

The Joes apply technology to the outside of the soldier, encasing him in an Iron-Man like armoured suit that also effectively turns him into a super-soldier, but with a crucial difference. The soldier can take off the suit and become human again. The Joes' humanity comes through in situations requiring moral decisions (apart from the ones that involve consideration for trash-the-place, make-things-go-boom 'cos that's the default option); but also in the expression of emotion (a small issue for Scarlett); and in being committed to a cause by volunteering rather than coercion -- even if it means countermanding direct orders from Authority and/or risking personal sacrifice.

Despite ROC being quite the Saturday morning cartoon-inspired CGI thrill-fest, I got a better story our if it than I had expected (I have very little hope left in this Summer's releases). ROC clung tenaciously to one consistent through-line: the application of technology can only solve the immediate problem at hand, so can we put technology aside in order to make the really human decisions that count for the longer term?

Pickin' my brain

Been spending the past few weeks since term began living inside my own head. It was a necessary condition in order for me to deconstruct my thought processes and bare the dissected bits of my mind for all the kids to see.

Partially that's because Amy, Sha and I are responsible for the GP lectures this term and we're using our air time to fine-tune the kids' abilities in approaching essay questions with intelligence, scope and logic. It's also because Liz, Jojo and I are organizing the 'enrichment' programme this term that I felt we really needed to examine our own fundamental literacy skills, breaking them down into tiny sequential bite-size pieces so that the kids can see an order and a process at work when they think through possible approaches to their essays and comprehension papers.

I've been examining my own hare-brain as a model for identifying the system I use to improvise answers to essay questions. It's something I do that I take for granted as instinctive, but I've been quite surprised to realise that I do actually have a systematic approach after all. It's just never been articulated and spelled out so precisely before.

Likewise, in terms of the comprehension paper -- which I think is quite an archaic artifact from the Dark Ages -- I discovered (again from improvising in class) that there is some sense to it after all. The main lesson to learn from the compre exercise is not how to answer the questions per se, but rather to ask the right questions as a means of accessing inaccessible texts and thinking critically through them.

I know I haven't been specific at all about what I've discovered about my processes, and what I've been instructing the kids in based on my findings. I'd like to divulge more details but I should observe the kids' performance over the next couple of weeks first to see if using my newly developed methods will really help them improve. It could be disappointing to count my chix before they're hatched, so I won't just yet.

But what I have observed lately has been encouraging. I had some good discussions with some very interested kids today, and there's some demand for me to further elaborate on what I've developed so far too. That tells me the kids see some potential in it, and perhaps some hope as well.

Well, hope it does them some good, and I'll share more if it does.

Need help sleeping?

"You'll be amazed" got repeated a number of times by a speaker who couldn't stop being amazed at today's industry conference on the New Media. I'd already attended a presentation by the classification guys in their HQ a couple of months back, so his information about how we classify the media here isn't exactly new.

What amazed me was that the people in the audience kept harping on issues relating to the quality of our local media content (which they felt was basically trash) whereas the topic of discussion was more like media regulation. It became a complaints session rather than the enlightened discussion that I was hoping for. Then again, an engaging dialogue no matter how trivial is always more entertaining than blinking in silence, and it was fun to watch our speaker squirm at the unexpected turn of our questions.

What else is amazing is this NYT report that people with insomnia are seeking help online, such as through the imaginatively named SHUTi 9-week programme, and other sleep restriction methods. There's even online "cognitive behaviourial therapy", and some programmes might cost US$20-30 when they become commercialized.

Psst, I offer a very similar online service to all insomniacs -- for free with instant results. Just read my blog.

Saving the world

I wonder if there's any merit to this OSU study regarding the impact human populations have on the environment? It seems like a no-brainer, but if we accept that mass human activity is the primary cause of climate change, it should stand to reason that the human population has exceeded the planet's capacity to provide resources to sustain all of us.

Solution: reduce the number of people back to a more manageable level and the planet would be able to start healing itself again.

Of course, it would be rather impractical to just machine-gun down all the unnecessary people in the world. That would be an environmental disaster all by itself, 'cos, like how are we going to dispose of so many bodies responsibly? Burial on that scale is sure to cause further deforestation 'cos nobody wants a mass grave in their backyard; cremation is out of the question 'cos we're trying to reduce our carbon footprint, not create a whole new cloud of CO2 and soot to choke up our atmosphere any more than we have already.

So, fine, we have to let everyone who's alive right now continue to live, but have fewer babies. The study projects that "in the United States, the carbon legacy and greenhouse gas impact of an extra child is almost 20 times more important than some of the other environmentally sensitive practices people might employ their entire lives – things like driving a high mileage car, recycling, or using energy-efficient appliances and light bulbs."

By this reasoning, I could defend my right to not have kids, live like a pig and still feel good that I'm saving the world, one carbon atom at a time. Yes.

The Parade that tried too hard

I guess I had to be there at the Parade to appreciate the spectacle, but watching it over TV (even in HD) wasn't quite as stirring. Cringeworthy, a couple of bits were even.

Some very sheltered people may have had their objections to the couple of girls dancing on poles during the Parade but for all the bluster, this storm in a B-cup only got two seconds worth of air-time overall. I thought the entertainment prior to the President's arrival was in far worse taste.

I don't know if anyone else felt the same, but I was especially put off by the Mark Lee and Suhaimi skit for the schoolboy standard of narrative in their retelling of the apocryphal Sang Nila Utama legend. Fine. "Heartland" humour if you want to call it that, but if our neighbours immediately South of us want to kick up a fuss, they can legitimately do so for the "insensitive" and "insulting" remarks the two clowns made about them. Lighten the mood, by all means, but try not to start a diplomatic incident at the same time. Please. They might send more haze over here in retaliation.

Immediately following was another eyeball-rolling narration, this time thumbing our noses with impunity at the very real threat of terrorism. They made it look so easy: snip a wire (think it was the red one) to defuse a "bomb", then chase around some hooded assassins on boats until they run out of fuel and give up. That's how we deal with terrorism over here. Right. On the one hand, it was purely national propaganda, on the other we're "just asking for it", tempting fate like that.

The remainder of the Parade went on as it does every year without much further hoop-la. National songs and formation dancing shoehorned into some theme or other, climaxing in a shower of fireworks that always mitigates the direness that had gone on before.

I like a birthday party as much as any other little kid, but hiring Bozo the Clown to provide the entertainment doesn't always work. Sometimes he just gets abused and kicked in the groin for his efforts. And maybe I'm being a party-pooper 'cos I didn't get my invite this year. Boo.

Up for a breath of fresh air

Disney-Pixar's "Up" has shot straight to the top of my list of fave movies for Summer 2009. It was funny, it moved me to tears, it was fantastic dreams and painful reality, all sensitively packaged together with absolutely spot-on timing, along with a palatte of colours that so aptly matched the different moods depicted in this animated treasure.

To say any more would be spoiling it for anyone who hasn't watched it yet. Just go and get the high of the season. :)