Spectator Sports

Have you ever just watched someone work?

No, not like group projects where one or two people do the work while the other three sit and gossip.

I mean have you ever watched someone work?

Have you ever watched street performers? You ever catch someone 'vandalizing' concrete, brick and mortar? Have you ever worked behind the scenes and watch the first time actors perform their lines aloud? Have you ever listened to someone practice their voice or piano lessons? Cello lessons? Ever watch someone compose music or write a book? Ever watch someone choreograph a ballet? Ever watch someone direct a movie, high or low budget? Have you ever watched a soccer player kick in the winning goal? Of course you have!

I enjoy watching people make things. I enjoy watching them bring things to life. I enjoy it especially when someone's hard work receives accolades. In fact, forget the accolades! I especially enjoy it when someone finishes their work, and sometimes that's all the accolades he might need. Finishing something feels just as good, if not better, than popular recognition.

Why?

Why what? Why do I enjoy watching people work? Well, I like watching other people enjoy life. I like watching delight grow on people's faces. I like knowing that I don't have to be a part of it because I might just ruin it. I like that other people want to inspire me. Well...not me personally, I mean 'me' like I'm part of the general crowd they want to inspire. We all want to inspire each other, some how, some way...

Even though we're all spectators, we're all invited to participate; we're even given the choice not to participate.

Not that the best work can't be done in private, but if you're given the privilege to watch genius at work I suggest you take it. You'll learn a lot. You don't always need to be doing something.

It's okay to sit, wait, listen and observe. Don't worry. One day people will watch you make stuff. Yeah, you'll inspire people. (You're probably inspiring people now, you just don't know it.)

So yeah!- you stop and smell those roses!

Funny thing about emotions...

So, the funny thing about emotions-. No, wait. The natural thing about emotions: they change. They're supposed to change. People whose emotions don't change are annoying and fake. We don't like annoying and fake. We like honesty and realness. Now the funny thing about honesty and realness is that one can often be too honest and real? You think that's impossible? Well, have you ever verbalized what's really on your mind when you're angry? That's being too honest.

One of the greatest, most precious, consequences of being too honest, however, is discovering who won't hate you for it. Discovering who won't run away from you. Also discovering how much you might need to change in order to deserve the people who won't hate you, or run away from you.

I've been told that change is good. I like change. I don't like big changes toppling after me like dominoes. I like subtle changes. I appreciate subtlety. I like when-the-ocean-beats-against-the-rocks change. I like slow, steady change. Change that must occur day to day, like routines, so that when I turn around to see the hole I've dug, I've actually not dug a hole at all. Really, any holes I might have dug are just exits out of the mound! Ooh, like Edmond Dantès and the Priest digging out a tunnel! Or!- or like Andy Dufresne! Yeah, Andy!- you redeem Shawshank!

But back to emotions naturally changing.

If emotions didn't change I wouldn't know the people I do. If my emotions never changed- well, I- I wouldn't've known such great things as love, longing, friendship and sadness exist beyond my imagination; that these emotions exist as fluidly and abundantly in a stranger's life as in my life. That's a sad existence: to live without others.

No man is an island. Even monks live in community, however solitary.

Even the annoying, fake ones--what's life without them? What if they want to change in order to deserve your friendship? What if they're waiting for someone who's willing to be that person who will hear too much honesty and realness? I don't know. Maybe. It's just a thought I had.

Because sometimes I don't like how my emotions change. Sometimes I wish I didn't have to feel so self-conscious, aware of someone's compliments or insults--what then would my reason over-think if I didn't have these emotions?

Ah, I must be a whole person:

"And all the time--such is the tragi-comedy of our situation--we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible. You can hardly open a periodical without coming across the statement that what our civilization needs is more 'drive', or dynamism, or self-sacrifice, or 'creativity.' In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful." -C.S. Lewis' The Abolition of Man

Yes, this is a little out of context. A lot out of context, but basically!- I become upset with others who treat me poorly--who did not give me my dues--but who've I treated poorly? Who've I disregarded? Who've I walked all over? I probably have done all those things. I'm not better than the person who did so to me.

I can't expect someone to be virtuous, enterprising, beautiful, endearing, encouraging without being so myself? Not that I'm going to walk around showing everyone what it means to be all those things--that's stupid. But to just be those things, right? Am I right?

Ah, I'm probably wrong.

All I know is that I can't be afraid of fickle emotions. I can't be afraid of angry, sad or bitter thoughts for these emotions give way to peace, happiness and contentment.

Have a good night.

An Unofficial 'Star Trek: Into Darkness' Review. And by 'review' I mean 'irrelevant commentary'.

You need to understand this about me: I am not a Trekkie. I am an Airbender with a bit of Ravenclaw; I've even been known to have Hobbit-like qualities, but I am in no way a Trekkie. Nor do I aspire to be one. Maybe my aspirations will change, but IT IS NOT THIS DAY!

With that said, last Friday night my family and I watched Star Trek: Into Darkness. I enjoyed the first installment so I expected to enjoy the second installment. That, and I am crazy about Benedict Cumberbatch. He's just so- so pretty [; Ah, okay, more on that unrealistic crush later because, unfortunately, it does come into play.

In any fandom you will find obsessions with these themes (not that I've done extensive research so this list is in no way exhaustive): love, loyalty, grief, endurance, strength, family, friendship. These fandoms want the real world to be like the things they geek about, well, who wouldn't want to travel in a big blue police box? (No, I'm not a Whovian, not yet, but I do love David Tennant.) Star Trek is no exception. It couldn't not have these themes. Any good story ought to reach the masses--beyond its fandom. Stories for exclusive audiences don't usually last beyond a decade. How do I know? Well, I've never heard of them, and that's not the hipster talking, that's just plain, simple honesty.

There's a reason many people still read Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice and not Ann Radcliffe's The Mysteries of Udolpho. (Unless you do, then I suppose, read by any means.)

Stories for exclusive audiences tend to be preachy and predictable, geared toward a generation intent on outliving future generations...or, at least, hoping to outlive future generations with their insulting literature. We don't like stories like these.

We're geeks and nerds: we like timelessness which is why in 2009, and now in May 2013, we're more than thrilled to add to the fandom that is Star Trek: it's kind of like finding the Apocrypha, what with slightly deviating from the television series' main story line, but most geeks and nerds who aren't initially purist will forgive these faults, if faults they are.

"MORE STORIES ABOUT JESUS? YES!" is akin to "MORE STORIES ABOUT ENTERPRISE! HAND 'EM OVER!"

No, seriously. They're essentially the same thing. Scholars will tell you that the Old Testament and New Testament can be read thousands and thousands of times and still something new will appear, which is phenomenal. Nerds and geeks agree. But nerds and geeks would love it even more if there would surface extra content from which more new stuff would appear! NOW WE CAN KEEP ON NERDING AND GEEKING! Hollaback.

But the problem with such extra-biblical content is that it tends to feed the monster none of us know we harbor.

Our fandoms, and the fantasies of which we are great fans, may give us a better perspective of the world's problems but they're not this world. No, no, no- I would never suggest that all fantasies are analogies like the The Pilgrim's Progress, but you would be an idiot to miss Tolkien's great love of nature (and great dislike of machinery) in his Lord of the Rings; can't you see his warning signs? Geeks and nerds do...or, at least, they say they do. I don't know that I see all the warning signs, but now I can't cut down trees without praying I don't incur the wrath of Treebeard. Not that I cut down trees in my spare time. Or for my career... I have actually never held an ax.




As Into Darkness begins we are reintroduced to Captain Kirk's stubborn, good, rebellious conscience: he has to save a civilization from destruction. Did you except anything less?

But for all his good intentions he still broke the rules therefore he is demoted.

But then is unfortunately promoted because his mentor, Pike, who had graciously reinstated Kirk as his First Officer, dies. Well, okay, not dies- Pike is assassinated by John Harrison who becomes everyone's Achilles' Heel. Well. Harrison doesn't become everyone's Achilles' Heel- he is everyone's Achilles' Heel. He drags everyone into darkness (pun intended) because however justified Kirk's vengeance is he still sinks to Harrison's level. Sure Kirk won't kill Harrison on the spot, but that certainly doesn't stop him from trying to knock Harrison's jaw off his face.

To research for this movie, Cumberbatch didn't go back into the televised version of Star Trek, if anything, he avoided them. No, to research, to prepare for this role he researched dictators. Lovely, yes, yes. So, when I found my happiness at the bottom of the barrel underneath the cold corpses and fading childhood memories, I saw that John Harrison is the real deal.

He just convinced a Starfleeter to be a suicide-bomber in exchange for his daughter's welfare. Harrison held no hostages. Harrison just knew what chords to play in the happy, innocent, weaker heart of a man who has lost all hope.

Hmm, how kind, and yes, how real!-

Real enough to the point when we half-witness him crushing a person's skull with his bare hands; but just an hour ago he empathized with Captain Kirk: "Is there anything you wouldn't do for your family?" Kirk just saved Spock from from an active volcano--I think it's safe to say Kirk will do anything for his family. Harrison certainly does.

So. What's the difference between Harrison's vengeance and Kirk's vengeance?

From a third-person perspective it is very easy to see the difference, but I unfortunately cannot articulate the easy-to-spot difference because I know that fantasy makes the bad guy/good guy line pretty thick and clear. Not so in real life.

Thousands of Americans think Obama's the Anti-Christ. I think I can safely say that I am not alone in my inability to discern the good guys from the bad guys.

I can be an Airbender, a Trekkie, a Whovian- a whatever- but I will never actually be a part of that world. Yes, knowing and loving these worlds may enhance my own, even C. S. Lewis would say so.

"Literary experience heals the wounds, without undermining the privilege, of individuality. There are mass emotions which heal the wound; but they destroy the privilege. In them our separate selves are pooled and we sink back into sub-individuality. But in reading great literature I become a thousand men and yet remain myself. Like the night sky in the Greek poem, I see with a myriad eyes, but it is still I who see. Here, as in worship, in love, in moral action, and in knowing, I transcend myself; and I am never more myself than when I do." -An Experiment in Criticism

"...I am never more myself than when I do" because I am still me. As much as I want to believe I'd be Katara to Aang, or Ron to Harry, or Spock to Kirk, how do I know I won't be a hater? How do I know that I'd be a part of the team? How do I know I won't be a part of the the Capitol?

I don't know. I only think I know because of what I'm reading. I'm not actually in the events. What if I'm not even Azula, or Khan? What if I'm just a bystander? (We'll talk about the importance of 'extras' at another time.)

Reading enhances my life, yes, but I can't allow it to replace my life.

"Yes, I can bend air. Thank you for asking."

"Why yes!- I trek the stars all the time!"

"...what about second breakfast?"

And enter unrealistic crush on Benedict Cumberbatch, stage right!

Come at me, bro!

Last summer, my family and I were vacationing in Disney World, Florida. Yay. Good times. We were in our suite, someone was making dinner, and I was channel surfing, when I stumble upon what I think is a cool commercial for a cell phone, but it's a long commercial so I keep watching, when this guy (who I now know is Moriarty) spray paints

Oh, I have stumbled upon a gem!

Yes, I watched the last episode first. Shoot me. How could none of you have seen his death coming? Conan Doyle did it first! But I digress.

I'm now sucked in. Fast forward a few months and I've borrowed the first and second seasons from the library--I have to watch the series properly now! So, I do. At first I am all about the story. Honestly. Scout's honor. I love this story.

But then I get to this scene:

in which Sherlock is moderately bored, but then the cabbie calls Sherlock 'just a man' and what does Sherlock do? What does Cumberbatch's interpretation of Sherlock do?! Sherlock moves his upper lip and I am immediately aware that Sherlock has gone from moderately bored to livid.

When I move my lip I'm probably eating something, not switching emotions. I mean, HOLY CRAP!

I've been told that this is what actors have to do, but maybe I've just been watching too much bad television and movies but I'd never witnessed emotion portrayed so well and so simply. Talent doesn't always need bright lights and bold costumes. Whatever happened to the unpainted human face? Thank you, Cumberbatch, for bringing it back.

"Justine, what's this got to do with 'Star Trek'?!"

Well, other than the face that Cumberbatch was cast as Harrison, nothing. This isn't immediately relevant. It isn't relevant until after the movie is over and I've had time to mull over things. So, it comes to this: celebrity gives a false sense of intimacy.

During The Lord of the Rings' first publication Tolkien gained popularity. He wasn't expecting it to do well. He just wanted to write England its own, decent mythology. As his fandom grew he would receive letters from readers, or would read newspaper articles which contained fans marrying his characters. He was displeased by this because he can distance himself from his fantasy writings.

You don't marry Aragorn because (1) you're not Arwen and (2) Aragorn's not real! Don't you know that fantasy is just a lens through which we can view our world? Fantasy is a mirror to help its readers see--"I see with a myriad eyes, but it is still I who see."

You know, I can Google all the information I need to know about Mr. Cumberbatch, but that doesn't mean I know him.

Just because someone knows the year I was born, my favorite color, my opinions; that doesn't mean that someone knows me, anymore than I really understand what's going on in math class. Knowing about someone is very different from knowing someone.I haven't had tea yet with Mr. Cumberbatch. I've had tea with people who've become my best friends--them!- I know my best friends. I don't know Mr. Cumberbatch.

As impressed as I am with Cumberbatch, and I do blush a little when I hear his voice (this is so embarrassing) I don't actually know him. I'm not saying that I don't want to know him, I think that'd be great. It'd be like me being able to meet Rizal. It'd be like meeting my great-grandmother. It'd be like David McCullough meeting John Adams. But McCullough knows he can't meet John Adams. He can separate himself from his extensive knowledge of John Adams; he knows that there is much more to John Adams than what research could ever tell. Historians know the difference between admiration and stalking, and it's not that historians mostly admire dead people who can't be stalked anyway...

Just as Star Trek and The Lord of the Rings and The Wheel of Time and American Gods will outlive its initial publication... There can be as many extra-biblical texts as each series can harbor but that will never fully encapsulate any geek's, nerd's, fangirl's love for the series. It might encapsulate the obsession. (Obsessions are akin to exclusive literature: see paragraphs 3-5.) 

So, though I enjoyed Into Darkness for its own sake, I had a hard time separating that from my fangirlish 'feelings' for Cumberbatch. I had to consciously remind myself that actors are still just people--they aren't their characters. (No, I know. It hurts. Not even Ian McKellen is really Gandalf. I know. I know. It hurts.) Fantastical characters are still fictional and I am only a fangirl. Not that I disagree with John Green:

"The sixth way to get boys to like you[, Katie]: consider different boys. Katie, I have two words for you: nerd boys. Katie, I know that nerd boys don't sparkle in the sunshine but they're sensitive, they're caring, they're sweet, they'll do nice stuff for you. They're a little bit needy, I will grant you that they're a little bit needy. / Oh, and lastly, let me explain something briefly to boys: Gentleman, nerd girls are the world's greatest underutilized romantic resource. And guys, do not tell me that nerd girls aren't hot because that shows a Paris Hilton-esque failure to understand hotness."

Now, I told you at the beginning of this blog entry that this was going to be an 'irrelevant commentary' it's even in the title, but do ya see what I'm saying? 

Fantasies aren't an escape, and to use them as such is to disregard their greater power in your life, which is to be a part of your life. Even lovers are not one another. Narcissus, anyone? In order to love, or to be a part of something greater, you must understand that it is not you, nor something that you can fully understand. 

In order to fully appreciate Star Trek, you need not live in that world. Cumberbatch didn't, and look at how many have joined his Collective. 

Okay. I'm done. I think I've said all the needs to be said about how I really feel about Star Trek, or fandoms in general. Maybe more next time. 

Flameo, Hotman! 

Vatican cameos!  

Onto New Places!

http://www.lifequotescollection.com/tag/dalai-lama/

It's not all that hard to go someplace you've never been before (sic). I've lived in and near New York City for most of my twenty two years and I was, what, fourteen (?), the first time I went to visit The Statue of Liberty. And the only reason why I went then was that my relatives from Canada were visiting. I live twenty minutes and a short boat ride away from The Statue of Liberty and it took me fourteen years to see it up close and personal?

Maybe it's just me, but I've also never been inside my neighbor's home. I've never given them reason to invite me over for dinner; hell, I never invite them over for dinner. There are so many places I haven't been that are within walking distance, it's not really that hard to go someplace I've never been every day. I suppose that once a year I could go to distant lands (I've never been there before) but come on!

Is the world so small that 'someplace I've never been' can only include a different country? A different state even? There are even parts of my backyard I haven't explored!

A couple weeks ago was the first time I walked along the main street in my town and I've lived in my town for, like, nine years! (Side note: oh, gosh, I'm getting old.)

Some place I've never been, huh, Dalai Lama? I can do that. Thanks for the advice.

When it rains,

I have a feeling that I'm today is not going to be productive. It can't be, what with the heavens crying!- they need my sympathy. I need to hear their every little moan. I need to make sure the thunder giants don't step so heavily on them (although, I am all about thunder and lightning, so, thunder giants, stomp as loudly as you want).

There's the lightning.





Do you hear that, earth?
The heavens try to speak to you.
Earth, have you nothing to say? But listen to all these complaints and questions and statements and joys!
Say something in return!
Oh, I can't speak for you.
I don't know how to!
But these heavy downpours water your parched ground.
Perhaps, earth, your thank yous are whispers
like wind which toss clouds to and fro.
Your thank yous might be plants eating from the sun.

My thanks you?
I think my admiration might suffice.
But if I stare for too long, you let me know.
Let me know when I've fallen asleep to the sound of your conversations.
I don't mean to be rude,
but I don't understand you.
Make a clap of thunder!
Splatter me with water!
I will awake, I promise you.
I'll thank you for waking me.

Do you hear that, heavens?
I can understand how it rains.
Maybe even why it rains.
But I'll never know how or why what's beyond your clouds.

Yes, I am small.
Thanks for reminding me,
but thanks for including me.

Phoenixes

My last blog post was depressing, I'll give you that, but from it's depressing ashes I have planted, grown and am now tending to a new experiment! I am finally going to start a youTube channel. Took me long enough! All because of the question: Why not? Yeah. Yeah, why not? If it fails, it fails- then at least I'll know I'm not good with the visual arts and maybe practice to get better at it! 

The topic for my first video will be 'death'. I know, again, depressing, but I promise you it will end happily. Not fairy-tale-happy-ending, but happily. It'll be like the phoenix...like Dumbledore's phoenix, Fawkes. Seriously: I'm totally brushing off the ashes.

My first video won't be a blockbuster.

People may not even watch it, but I don't like being watched anyway. 

I just want to know what it means to communicate through different medias: portraying something like 'death' in a book is very different from portraying 'death' in a movie. Not that I've mastered writing (barely a yellow belt) but can I act it? Can I find something, record it, and have you know it's 'death' without my saying so, without a billboard that reads 'This! This is what Death looks like!' 

Subtle. Subtle.

Blind Spot: I'm a Coward.

I have this horrible fear of being greatly disliked by people I admire: celebrity or non-celebrity; friend or enemy, I am probably terrified of disappointing you. 

We've talked and talked and talked, getting to know each other pretty well, when suddenly we come to a slight disagreement, or a hot topic, or a minor offense and I will probably back down faster than a squirrel underneath a car wheel. Unless the disagreement/topic/offense concerns anything literary, I'll probably go down fighting you, but morally or politically, I am pretty wishy-washy. 

No, I don't sleep around or go around murdering people, but I will think so hard about what my opinion should be that I won't allow myself to make one.

I tinker. I don't complete.

Last night I discovered how self-conscious I am about the ideas I entertain. I don't really like sharing them because, frankly, ideas/beliefs, really shouldn't be as fickle as this: a young woman's heart. I have no problem sharing my emotions--everyone knows those are pretty fickle, due to a liberal amount of hormones--but ideas!- ideas are supposed to be stronger! Ideas are supposed to be solid! Ideas are supposed to be firmer; supposed to uphold the fickle emotions, which would explain why I often qualify any verbalized belief with: "Not that I've really this through-. This is an undeveloped opinion but..."

Strike you as confident, because it doesn't strike me as confident.

Sometimes I'm so afraid to be right. When am I right? The people I admire would even admit that they aren't right all the time, so how could I ever say that I'm right?! I'm sure behind every 'right' statement is a blind spot. I must be missing something I have yet to think through. I'll have to take a few more days to develop my ideas. My beliefs.

But then I never get around to developing them.

I'm spineless. I'm afraid to have an opinion. 

I blog; have Facebook and am afraid to have an opinion. 

I'm not looking for the perfect idea. In fact, I get frustrated when someone's a know-it-all. Besides, who likes know-it-alls?! No one, that's who.

But, I guess, kind of like walking, I got'a crawl and trip a few times before I can really keep a steady pace. I might have to jog, might have to run, might have to stop altogether; but really. It's all about developing. Really, it's all about wanting to continue developing. 

Ah, I can't be afraid to share my ideas/beliefs with you.

God did not make me to be a coward! 

Maybe not always Live. Laugh. Love. but sometimes Bolder. Kinder.

It takes guts to be bold and kind. Anyone can be bold. Pray that I might also be kind.

thin fabrics.

look at how quickly we've torn apart.
it's like we were never together.
as if our colors never matched in the first place.
as if we never shared secrets nor ever cried upon each other's shoulders.

torn so easily.
i must learn to sew better.

I can speak five languages!

Actually. I can't speak five languages. I can say 'no' in five languages!

Tagalog: No.

Spanish: No

English: No

Portuguese: Não.

German: Nein.

See. I'm good at this language stuff. 

Okay, I'm not, but what I am good at is understanding someone who is trying to speak English. You don't think that's a talent? Well, a talent like this certainly won't get me scholarships, or land me jobs translating famous Latin texts into mediocre English (Oh! I can say 'no' in Latin too: Non) but, really, I think this 'talent' of mine helps me empathize better. Because I'm an Asian-American I can tell Asian ESL students what Americans are looking for (in job interviews; in conversation) but can also tell Americans how Asians generally perceive the American culture. 

Lately, I've been doing some volunteer work: tutoring in its loosest form. More like glorified conversation. And, while I am 'teaching'- while I am helping my students, I am really envious. ESL is so popular but I almost wish there were KSL or CSL or RSL or TSL that would teach me. (Respectively: Korean, Chinese, Russian, Tagalog.) 

I'm told over and over again that English is difficult to learn, but I keep meeting and teaching people who can speak it as well as their native tongue; even read it as well! 

Perhaps it's not as hard as I imagine it to be. Perhaps it's easy to switch from one alphabet to another. 

Why can't I do that?

Is it because my learning another language isn't a necessity? I already know English- it's everyone else that needs/wants to know English. 

I should've been an ESL student. I should've been born and raised in a different country for it seems all the rest of the world is destined for bilingualism, while I am cursed with mono-lingualism.

Okay, I'm totally being dramatic. Of course I can learn another language if I really want to. 

An elderly Russian couple has come into work lately, and we recognize each other enough where I can ask, "How do I say 'thank you' in Russian?"

"спасибо."

"Spa-cee-bua. Spa-cee-bua."

"Yes. Good. You're good."

"Oh, well, thank you. спасибо."