[Book Review] Prophecy by Elizabeth Haydon

Finding its predecessor ho hum, I didn’t have high hopes for Prophecy. Still, it was an enjoyable read nonetheless and Haydon had built on something in the previous book. I was curious as to how the story would develop and whether there would be an improvement in Haydon’s writing style or storytelling.

Suffice to say, Prophecy is fairly consistent with the book that preceded it, Rhapsody. This novel is your standard fare of romance fantasy along with the tropes of an outdated genre, from love at first sight, romance, prophecy, and destiny. It’s not really my cup of tea although I’m sure there’s a market for it.

The story was mediocre. Some thing went as expected, others with a hint of surprise here and there. In the end, Haydon follows the same formula she did for Rhapsody, and there’s really not much deviation in this book. There’s more poetry at the start of the novel though. One thing in which it could have improved upon though was the inclusion of an appendix. Unlike other thick Tor novels, this novel didn’t have an appendix at the end and it would have been helpful to have had one, especially in tracking down the various characters in the story.

Despite all the cons against Haydon, she still does manage to write a compelling narrative. Description is still her strongest point, and while perhaps it’s not as excellent as say George R. R. Martin or Sean Russel, it’s still above the generic fare of fantasy that’s out in the market. Haydon’s descriptive talent is probably along the lines of other Tor-published authors like Robert Jordan and Jacqueline Carey.

While it was a good read, Prophecy isn’t really something I’m keen on. If you like formula in your reading material, then you’ll probably like Haydon. Again, the target market of this book is those who are really into the romance fantasy genre. And despite the premise of three main characters, the book is really about the stubborn heroine, Rhapsody, and the rest behave more like supporting characters. If that’s your thing, be my guest. Just don’t expect anything breathtaking or innovative in this particular fantasy series.

Fight Club by Chuck Palahniuk (book review)

Never saw the movie, but heard the title mentioned over and over again in magazines and websites to the point that Fight Club has become a cult pop icon. When I saw a copy being sold at the local bookstore, I bought myself a copy.

Fight Club can be deceiving. It was a short novel at barely more than 200 pages and the text wasn’t overwhelming. But never confuse thickness and complexity for quality for Fight Club certainly had the latter in spades. While some readers might perceive the novel to be nihilistic and violent in nature, Fight Club is actually cathartic and gives the reader much room for interpretation. Palahniuk successfully writers a modern novel for a modern audience.

The book focuses on two characters, the narrator and the enigmatic persona known as Tyler Durden. Whereas other writers might have focused on the setting and description, Pahalniuk gives us a first-person perspective of things and the way he executes his narration through placement of words and sentences is simply amazing. Language is another of Palahniuk’s strong suits as the two main characters speak frankly and directly, two distinct characters with different perspectives and speech patterns. While Fight Club doesn’t have a huge cast, Palahniuk focuses on the central characters in the novel.

One can never get enough of the human condition and that’s essentially what this book explores. There’s a big twist in the end, but I think readers are prepared for that. Fight Club was never about fighting, but rather the realization of the human soul.

I enjoyed the read, brief as it was, but Palahniuk shows that a lot can be accomplished through simplicity and imagination. There’s a lot of things that is appealing in the book, and you don’t really have to be a fan of fiction or suspense to thoroughly enjoy this piece. It’s short, simple, and brief, so it should retain your attention long enough to get by.

Forgiveness

One of the hallmarks of modern Christianity is forgiveness. Who here hasn’t heard of the parable of the Prodigal Son? (To sum it up, son leaves father, son ends up in trouble, son goes back to father, father accepts his son’s return, no questions asked.) Yet people either misunderstands the concept or misconstrues it to suit their predicament or situation.

Perhaps one of the biggest hindrances to modern Christian belief is the existence and division of the Old Testament and the New Testament. I mean your priest or pastor tells you to read your Bible whenever you go to church. The Bible, unfortunately, is divided into two parts, namely the Old Testament and the New Testament. Of course much like any body of work, the text mentioned should be digested as a whole rather than just the individual parts. I mean I can quote a passage from the Bible but it’s totally worthless (or could possibly even mean the opposite of what the Bible is implying) unless it’s used in the right context. Strangely enough, as much as the Philippines is perhaps one of the dominant Christian countries in Asia (we’re said to have one of the most corrupt governments, by the way, but that’s not my point), Filipinos don’t really read their Bibles. At least not in its entirety (sure, we read verses, chapters, and even entire gospels, but I have yet to meet someone who’s neither a priest nor a pastor who’s read the Bible cover to cover). Okay, so maybe we can attribute that to the country’s illiteracy rate. But how about the literati? How about the educated, the college students, the people who are voracious readers and claim that they’re Christian? I’ve seen people with their reading lists, whether it’s a bunch of fiction novels, romance novels, fantasy, science-fiction, nonfiction, or even fanfics, but when was the last time that I saw the Bible in one of those lists? My point here is that we don’t do book reviews based on just reading a certain passage of a book (we stop reading the book and we complain to our friends about how horrible the writer is, but we don’t really start out writing a book review just based on reading a few pages). And in a way, it’s wrong to pass judgment on something we haven’t experienced in its totality (well, at least we can do so with a book because it has a definite beginning and ending). Unfortunately, much like a lot of things in life, we do just that. In the case of the Bible, we become selective about our interpretation of things. Just a few weeks ago, I got into an argument with my driver because he was cursing the entire time he was driving. I told him that it was wrong, that it was a sin. His excuse was that if he didn’t do so, that if he didn’t show people a piece of his mind, then they’d continue to abuse him. And much like the stereotype we see in movies, he gives me the Biblical passage in the Old Testament about an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth. And of course disregards the rest of the New Testament.

Now I’m not saying that I’m perfect or anything, or that the Bible is wrong, but as I mentioned before, everything must be taken into context. Do the wicked deserve to be punished? Yes. But as Christians, we must also learn to forgive. And from a rational point of view, instant retaliation would only result in destruction. It’s an old and overused statement, but an eye for an eye makes the world go blind. Honestly, we all make mistakes. We’ll inevitably hurt the people around us. Retaliation can’t be our only answer. We’d only get caught in a loop of retaliation to the point that no one will even remember what triggered the initial conflict. Of course I’m not saying (and neither is God saying) that those who harm us should get away with it either. Rather, there are other institutions that mete out those kinds of punishments. There’s the law enforcement agencies and the government, for example. I’m also not saying to always depend on them. I mean there are some conflicts that can be settled peacefully, such as when you or your friend loses their temper and dukes it out one on one. Chances are, the insult can be reconciled (but not necessarily forgotten) and things can be worked out. For those that can’t, appeal to the higher authority, whoever that may be (i.e. the school officials if you’re in school, perhaps your parents in cases of squabbles with relatives, or your boss at work). If you find that the higher authority’s decision is unjust, respect it nonetheless and perhaps some sort of appeal could be made later (and hey, isn’t the Philippines famous for People Power, overthrowing its own dictatorial government in 1986?). I’m also not saying never to retaliate, but more often than not, there are other options available, and while those options could be the more difficult of choices, in the long run it might be the one most beneficial to both parties.

Of course my driver also did bring up an important point. Some people have this perception that the meek and forgiving are weak people to be abused. Well, first off, to those who share this perception, I’d just like to point out that sometimes, it takes greater courage and self-control to restrain yourself. Just because someone doesn’t retaliate doesn’t mean that they can’t. It’s possible that such people are merely being patient with you. Don’t abuse forgiveness. And hey, even the meek have their own way of retaliating. I mean no one really thought Filipinos would rebel against the reigning government in 1986 did they? I’m not saying that People Power was a total success, but it sure made a mess of the plans of the oppressors. Or as Sun Tzu would put it, don’t corner the desperate. The desperate have nothing else to live for, and while they might die, they’ll go down fighting. Of course the other people I’d like to address are the people doing the forgiving themselves. I don’t believe in extremes but more in balance. Honestly, there’s such a thing as being too forgiving. Or rather, just because you forgive doesn’t mean you don’t ask for reparations. I mean if an assassin murders your parents, should you forgive the assassin? Yes, you should. But just because you forgive the assassin doesn’t mean he’s not going to jail. There are consequences for our actions. Some people mistake that forgiving means eluding the consequences. That’s not really the case. If somebody owes you money and doesn’t pay you on time, forgive that person. But that person must still pay you the amount he or she owes you as soon as he or she is capable of doing so. And if you’re going to quote the parable of the Prodigal Son to me, remember that the prodigal son himself didn’t have an inheritance to return to once his father passed away. Sure, he got back into the family and is reunited with his father once again, but any luxuries he might have is at the mercy of his father. Once his father passes away, there’ll be nothing left for him except what the older brother, who inherited the rest of the wealth, deems fit to give him. Forgive, yes, but that doesn’t mean the person doesn’t face the consequences of their actions.

Now let’s turn the tables. Rather than the one doing the forgiving, let me take the point of view of the one being forgiven. I think that many people often overlook one vital component of forgiveness. That’s sincerity. I mean for one thing, God’s willing to forgive, but unless you realized that you did something wrong and ask for forgiveness, God’s generosity doesn’t really do you much. The same goes with asking forgiveness from those we love. I mean our parents or our friends might be willing to forgive us, but unless we realize that what we did was wrong and ask for an apology from them, it’s all worthless. Of course some people act as the better person in some situations. Even though you’re the one who was in error, they’re the ones asking for forgiveness. I think if it reaches that point, you should be ashamed of yourself, swallow your pride, and ask for forgiveness yourself. Nothing makes a reconciliation better than if both parties are sincere in their intentions. But of course one must also remember that this won’t happen all the time. If you know you’re the one who made the mistake, go ask for forgiveness yourself. And if you’re the one in the position to do the forgiving, think of what you would do in the other person’s situation, and if you need to be the better person in that situation, why hesitate?

For me sincerity is a vital component in forgiveness. Why? Because without it, there’s a huge potential for abuse. I mean many Christians are abusing it at this very moment. I mean I’ve heard people and some friends urge their own friends to do things that they won’t normally do. These aren’t exactly wholesome things but rather vices or actions that people know on some level is wrong. And what’s the ultimate excuse they give? God will forgive you anyway. And you know what, God will. But what’s the use of asking for forgiveness if you’re not sincere about it, if you’re going to do the same action again and again when given the opportunity to do so? My driver also uses that argument to avoid self-improvement. I’m only human he says. I’ll make mistakes either way. Why bother changing when God will forgive you anyway? I’ll be Kantian about this and well, the fact is, if we all used that as an excuse, no one would become a better person. Why bother with Christianity altogether if things are just going to stay the same? Christianity is not just about being saved, it’s not just about having God in your life, it’s about living your life the way God wanted it to be. I mean we all want the good things in life, we all want fairness and justice in the world, but we all know that’s not going to happen. But we can come close to that. I mean I’m sure there are places you find more comfortable than others, friends you find more agreeable than others. That’s the same with finding paradise, with finding our own personal heaven. And the only way we can achieve that is by living our lives the way we want the world to work. If I want to meet good and honest and forgiving people, I should start by being one myself. I can’t perpetually justify my errors by saying God will forgive me or this or that person will forgive me. For example, our parents provide for us but that doesn’t mean we should abuse their generosity. Just because it’s there doesn’t mean you utilize it given the chance. There’s a time and place for everything and I’m just glad that I have parents to go back to when I’m faced in such a situation, or that God will forgive me if I sin. But that’s definitely no excuse to go into debt and have your parents pay off your debt, or go commit every carnal desire you want and in the end go back to God and tell him he’ll forgive you anyway.

Can forgiveness be abused? Yes, of course! That’s why we should be responsible about it, both in giving forgiveness and asking for it. And rather than be selective about how we perceive forgiveness, we should look at the bigger picture and empathize with other people when placed in a similar situation. The spirit of the Good News isn’t in the literal text itself, but in the spirit and how it’s interpreted. In the end, anything can be misconstrued, which is why it’s important to know where you are and how you fit in the scheme of things, not just for the sake of others but for your own sake as well.

The Best of the Best: 20 Years of the Year's Best Science Fiction edited by Gardner Dozois (book review)

Year’s Best Science Fiction is perhaps one of the most-awaited science-fiction anthology every year. Like most anthologies, one doesn’t really expect to like all the stories in an anthology, but there’s a good number of gems in the anthologies compiled by Gardner Dozois. Then Best of the Best comes out, and it’s perhaps one of the most ambitious undertakings of Dozois.

The way I go through anthologies is by taking note of the stories I really liked and those that I really disliked. Perhaps midway through the anthology, I stopped taking note of the former. Because it was too many. Despite spanning two decades of fiction, Best of the Best is really just that: good science-fiction short stories. While there are a couple of the stories that I wasn’t impressed, that’s more due to personal taste than an actual weakness in writing style or technique. This anthology is a good representation of what we can expect from the science-fiction community.

Of course having said that, the strongest point of Best of the Best is its range and is actually represents the various sub-genres or styles of science-fiction. I mean on one end of the spectrum, you get stories that make you go “that was science-fiction?” On the other, you also get hard-science stories that is littered with jargon and crosses the boundary of theoretical science. If you’re a fan of a particular niche in science-fiction, you might want to pass on this anthology if you’re looking for bang for your buck. There’s three dozen short stories present and each one tries to be a representative of its time and writer’s style. No particular sub-genre really dominates the anthology, but that doesn’t mean the stories aren’t good. They’re great, in fact, but obviously, some stories won’t appeal as much to you since they’re not necessarily the type that you’re looking for or are used to.

The only thing that surprised me was the length of the anthology. It was nearly 700 pages and that didn’t seem enough. It could have been longer. But I guess along with expanding your content would be the question who else to include. Perhaps another “weakness” of Best of the Best is the fact that each writer is only allowed one story. So rather than a real hierarchy of which stories are really on top, the anthology is more of a “Best of Science-Fiction Writers” featuring a sample work of each individual author. Not that I’m complaining about that.

Was the anthology worth it? Considering I’m not really a person who’s collected Dozois’s anthology for the past 20 years, Best of the Best is a steal. But if you’ve been following the science-fiction field for more than a decade, the anthology might not be exactly the most optimum choice for you. Rather, Best of the Best is a good chance for other people to be enthralled in the body of work science-fiction manages to encompass. Or if you’re a new science-fiction fan, it’s simply a great anthology.

Ravings of an Anime Dinosaur part 2: The Sub vs Dub War

In the 90’s, one of the most heated (and unconcluded) debates among anime fans was the issue of subtitled or dubbed anime. This mainly arose from the fact that the 1990s was a transition period for anime fans. A decade before, you got anime in one of two formats: it was either in raw Japanese, or adapted into your native language. And for all the possible errors the latter might have, no one really cared; people consumed the show without complaint (or if they did, it wasn’t necessarily because of the dubbing). But ten years later, there was more awareness (which I partly attribute to globalization) and the trend of subtitles caught on for anime. Since then, anime fans have been arguing which is better: subtitled or dubbed anime. Yet at the start of the new millennium, this conflict was cut short with the advent of DVDs, which gave both dubbed and subtitled anime in one neat little package. Yet perhaps it’s still too early to throw in the towel for technology hasn’t really caught up yet with a fan’s vision of an utopian anime culture.

While watching a show other than in the vernacular might be surprising to some people, I will explain how the subtitles vs. dubbing conflict developed, and why it’s become such an important matter to anime fans. For the Japanese, it’s not really much of a problem since anime were intended for a Japanese audience and so the language used was understandable. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for the rest of the world. A lot of anime imported to other countries such as the US were dubbed and adapted for that audience. And while it produced a lot of cultural icons such as Speed Racer, Gigantor, and Astroboy, it also spawned a number of heavily edited and bastardized shows like Battle of the Planets (costumed heroes who uses science to defend the Earth against alien invaders became costumed heroes hopping from planet to planet to defeat the evil alien overlord… and get a robot sidekick to boot), Warriors of the Wind (a two-hour feature film by acclaimed Hayao Miyazaki loses half an hour of content and is transformed into an action/adventure story), and Robotech (three unrelated robot shows are combined to form one congruent cosmology). Of the latter three, perhaps it’s only Robotech that is perceived as redeemable (and some say superior to the original series it was based on) by anime fans. With the advent of the Internet and perhaps the breakthrough of certain cultural barriers, anime fans soon became aware of the inconsistencies between the anime they were watching locally and the anime that was being aired in Japan. While the commercial entities imported the shows and dubbed them before releasing them to the public, some anime fans decided to translate anime themselves and unleashed it to fan community. Except of course the latter didn’t have huge budgets and had to make do with what they had. Simply put, while subtitles were a good method of translation (hey, it works for foreign films), I think part of the reason why the fan community originally utilized subtitles was because it was way cheaper than dubbing the show itself (you only needed a translator, a timer, and an encoder to subtitle an anime).

The subtitling trend proved to be popular among the fans (who did it for free) and such projects would then be called fansubs. Unfortunately, fansubs were more or less a hit or miss. Some fansubbing groups were competent and produced good translations. Others, however, weren’t so fortunate (i.e. unreadable subtitles, terrible spelling and grammar, horrible translations, or simply bad timing). Meanwhile, on the commercial end, I think it’s safe to say that there were only few (if any) subtitled anime shown on local TV (mind you, local TV, since cable companies did offer subtitled anime sometimes). However, anime would make the transition from being available for free to a huge industry in itself. Companies started selling (and loaning via retail stores like Blockbuster Video) anime in video (at least in the US). While for the most part a big chunk of this market was comprised of dubbed anime, some companies listened to the fans and started releasing subtitled anime themselves. Unfortunately, the companies (whose businesses depended on being able to sell their product) soon realized that the anime fans who preferred subtitles weren’t necessarily the most profitable market. To make a long story short, dubbed anime was cheaper than their subtitle counterparts, even though it’s more expensive to produce the former (all of which is made possible by the law of supply and demand). It perhaps wouldn’t have been so bad if it weren’t for the existence of fansubbers, who made subtitled anime available in the market for free. Soon, anime fans belonged to one of two camps: those who supported subtitled anime, and those who didn’t.

While the advantages and disadvantages of each can be proven, neither camp has really given ground to the other. For example, dubbed anime has honestly had a bigger audience. Dubbed anime is the mass man’s main source of entertainment. Television, because of its sights and sounds, is a passive act. A person just needs to turn on the boob tube and everything passes by him whether he cooperates or not. Unfortunately, the same can’t be said for subtitled anime, because you have to actually read in order to understand what’s happening. Simply put, the masses don’t really want to get into that situation; television has often been a means to relax your brain cells, not to strain them (if I wanted to read, I’d get a book). And if you’re suffering from dyslexia or an eye disease, it’s not in your best interest to struggle just to understand your favorite show. Did I mention the fact that with dubbed anime, you get to appreciate everything else better, such as the art, the music, and everything else modern TV has to offer?

On the side of subtitled anime, well, while any sort of translation is really a deviation (no matter how insignificant it might seem) from the original, a good subtitled anime is more faithful to the original than a good dub. And in a certain sense, translation isn’t compromised just to make sure the dialogue matches the movement of the character’s mouths. One also gets to appreciate the original voice actors and actresses (although for most people, they won’t understand half of what’s being said). To cut a long story short, my friend Dean said it best: it’s like watching your favorite art or foreign film (such as Amelie) dubbed. A lot is lost in the dubbing, not just because of the translation, but because the dub is the vision of a different director or actor/actress (although that’s not always true).

While all these are valid, there are some points I’d like to elaborate on. The first is the translation part. Let’s face it, whether it’s going to be subtitles or dubs, there will always be something lost in the translation. If you want a complete and accurate translation of the anime you’re watching, no amount of subtitles or dubbing will solve that. The only real way to do so would be to immerse yourself in Japanese culture and familiarize yourself with the language (much like any body of work, that’s not even a guarantee because the creator might have a different perspective from the society he or she is living in). There are also instances when some words, terms, or idioms can’t be explained quickly. It could come in the form of a joke, for example. The solution a subtitle provides is through the usage of footnotes, but footnotes detracts the experience. Where do you place it? If you place it during the gag, it takes too long to digest. If you place it at the start of the episode, you’re giving some spoilers. If you place it at the credits, it’s too late to appreciate the moment. A dub would tackle it in a different manner, such as altering the joke to suit the cultural taste of its audience. Is it a deviation from the original text? Yes. But that’s not really the issue. The issue is whether the altered segment carries on the spirit of the show. Whether it is or is not depends on the skill of the translator (and the voice actors/actresses and how they execute it). While there is a chance this could be the downfall of a dub, it is also an opportunity to be a strong point. When doing translations, we must remember that there is the possibility of improving the work of the previous product.

Another hotly-debated point is that of voice acting. More often than not, the zealous anime fan will claim that the original voice actors/actress’s voice is superior to that of the dub. Which isn’t necessarily true. I mean some Japanese voice actors/actress can’t sing (or at least not too well) for example. And there’s too many instances when female characters have high, squeaky voices when a lower, rougher voice would have suited the role better. Dubbing sometimes provides an opportunity to improve the original, and portray it in a manner that the local audience (i.e. the lingua franca) can understand. Either one is not necessarily better than the other, but simply different. The same can be extended to altered songs (hey, some of your favorite music artists have done their own versions of another artist’s songs… whether you like it or not depends on taste, but just because you redo another artist’s song doesn’t mean that your version is inferior or trashy).

Ultimately, I think the subtitled vs. dubbed debate is a flawed argument. Instead of asking whether a particular show is subtitled or dubbed, the question one should be asking is who’s doing the translations? I mean if you have a horrible translator, it won’t really matter if it’s subtitled or dubbed. The former just has better damage control because ignorant fans won’t really know if the translator screwed up or not unless they can actually understand Japanese (in which case, they didn’t need the subtitles to begin with). Or similarly, a bad company might release a show with horrible subtitles or timing. That makes watching the show just as annoying as a bad dub, and perhaps even less comprehensible. I remember watching Record of the Lodoss War DVD except the copy I borrowed was one of those bootleg copies from Hong Kong. The subtitles were probably done in Hong Kong as well since the English text was just plain horrible. I switched to the English dub, which was copied from the commercial company that released it in the US. While I tend to prefer subtitles to dub, in this case, I opted for the latter, simply because the latter was more comprehensible. A bad subtitle can ruin the anime experience just as much as a bad dub can. And like my scenario watching the bootleg DVD, you only get what you pay for.

So while the masses favors dubbed anime, the elite (and perhaps more knowledgeable) fan favors subtitles, but unfortunately technology hasn’t really caught up yet to reconcile the two. I mean while DVDs are indeed capable of storing good dubs and good subtitles, it’s still no guarantee that the company releasing the anime will do both (or would even provide the option to toggle between subs and dubs). The same goes for cable channels and local stations that could possibly offer the same benefits if the viewer had the right equipment, but it’s simply not being done (because it hasn’t reached the point where doing so would be that profitable). Right now, the demand for dubs overwhelms the demand for subtitles, not just due to their physical quantities but because of purchasing power as well. I mean those who favor subtitles would probably obtain their anime for fansubbers, which in turn don’t really financially compensate themselves or the creators of the work they just translated. And so the status quo is preserved, each side continuing the silent battle between subs and dubs, the former fighting with complaints, the latter with their wallets.

So which is better, subtitled or dubbed anime? Much like a lot of things, there’s no real universal answer. Just because you prefer dubs doesn’t make you less of an anime fan; it just means there’s a difference in preference. And as I said earlier, whether it’s subtitled or dubbed isn’t as important as who’s doing the translating if it’s authenticity you’re after. Of course for the purists out there who persists, all I can do is merely quote the words of Scott Frazier, an American who used to work for renowned animation company Production I.G.: “Learn Japanese, buy the original and ignore the English releases.”

Beyond Anime

In any subculture hobby, the masses will often have a different perspective of things. In the past, for example, anime fans have been thought of as geeks or adults who are still fascinated with cartoons. In the present, anime has perhaps been passively accepted as part of the norm, a product of the current generation.

Reach Out Otaku (ROO), an organization comprised of anime fans, is a good example that beneath all the glitz and the glamour, that anime enthusiasts can be socially responsible and still participate in their hobby. Formed in July 17, 2001, ROO began by visiting street children in Kanlungan, Erma and held some workshops for them. A year and a half later, it would also tie up with the Musmos organization based in Ateneo and would hold “Krismusmos”, a Christmas party for the street children in Katipunan. I interviewed them back in 2002, a few months after their successful Christmas party, but several months before they would host Krismusmos.

Gem, founder of ROO, was initially inspired by watching some street kids play Dragonball Z. “Parang they were imitating the anime character. So why not help, street kids sila eh. Kahit street kids sila, na-aapreciate nila yung anime. So at least natutulungan ko sila.” (“They were like imitating the anime character. So why not help since they are street kids. Even though they are street children, they apprecite anime. At least this way, we are able to help them.”) But it would only be after an anime convention that Gem would make formal plans for the organization. “Basically the idea started after Cosplay Manila. So parang, napag-isip ako, for the December party iyon, at since maraming kids nag-enenjoy seeing people cosplaying their favorite anime characters in costume, why not incorporate it with charity work? Since ‘yun nga, maraming pa lang tao na involved sa outreach programs, para at least magamit natin yung interest in anime, our hobby, as a medium to help other people. So bali iyon yung pinaka idea ko kung bakit na setup yung Reach Out Otaku.” (“Basically the idea started after Cosplay Manila. It got me thinking that for the December party, since a lot of kids were enjoying seeing people cosplaying their favorite anime characters, why not incorporate it with charity work? Apparently, a lot of people were involved in outreach programs and this way, we could at least utilize interest in anime, our hobby, as a medium to help other people. That was the fundamental idea behind setting up Reach Out Otaku.”)

This was far from a solo project though. Gem would depend on Vinnie to choose and coordinate for their venue in Kanlungan considering he had contacts with NGOs. “Ako naman since I’ve been doing that kind of volunteer work before and I have the experience, and then joining up with this group is a good thing to do for me also para maging enlightened din in a way. And to help others din, to guide other people din.” (“For me it was natural since I’ve been doing this kind of volunteer work before and I have the experience, and then joining up with this group is a good thing to do for me to becoming enlightened in a way. And to help and guide other people as well.”)

The activities of ROO wasn’t a one-shot event and Vinnie shares with us his plans back in 2002. “Since nagstart na kami sa Kanlungan para magkaroon ng activity volunteer-type with them, which is naenjoy naming before so we decided ituloy na naming, magkaroon kami ng series of visits na makakatulong din sa kanila for their learning kasi most of the kids there are not going to school for now, kaya ganun. Like recently, some of the available na members ng Reach Out, nagtambak sila ng workshops on fixing, illustrations, animation by using anime as a medium para gawin iyon. And then so far, nafullfil yung expectation na the kids grew interest sa mga recent na visits naming. They’re looking forward to the next visits na magkaroon kami ng activity ulit.” (“Since we started in the Kanlungan area so that we could have a volunteer-type activity with them, we decided to push through with the series of visits since we’re having fun and it aids in their learning considering most of the kids are not going to school. Recently, some of the available members of Reach Out held a bunch of workshops on fixing, illustrations and animation, using anime as a medium to perform just that. And so far, our expectations were fulfilled since the interest of kids grew with our recent visits. They’re looking forward to the next visits, hoping for other activities.)

Despite its popularity, ROO didn’t always start out that way. It began with a small mailing list comprised of cosplayers who then branched out and sought additional members from other anime-related mailing lists. It boasted not only anime fans, but people who are just plainly interested in outreach projects. Even winners of previous cosplay competitions participated in ROO. Not that everything was picture perfect. Coordination proved to be a big hurdle since most of the members were students and had difficulty finding a common time. Finances were another probem but Joy, Gem’s successor after she left for the US, shares this anecdote with us. “The December 15 party, that was one of the craziest and funniest thing to have happened. It was so interesting. We weren’t going to be excited but a lot of things happened, most of them we didn’t expect. And sometimes, we were worried, some of us were crying over the lack of sponsors, the lack of materials and then when the day came, we had too much food on our hands, we had too much food on our hands. And then you realize, oh, we were able to get pala so much stuff. I guess it was really cool because we didn’t expect them to happen. We were medyo discouraged to go on na and it’s already like something happened out of the blue. People started helping each other out, they volunteered themselves, like we had a lot of nonmembers with us and said kami na ang bahala rito. It was very interesting, very different.” (“The December 15 party… And then you realize, oh, we were apparently able to get so much stuff. I guess it was really cool because we didn’t expect them to happen. We were a bit discouraged to go on and it’s like something happened out of the blue. People started helping each other out, they volunteered themselves, and we had a lot of nonmembers with us and said we’re take care of this. It was very interesting, very different.”)

Gem shares with us the goals of ROO: “Our goal is to open the eyes of the people that there’s more to the world than anime. If we can use anime as a medium of helping other people out, of reaching out to the world, so that’s why we’re a bunch of otakus, we rave over the latest anime, we rave over Yue. (laughs) Or some bishonen. But basically we’re still human, we’re still ready to help people out. One of our main goals is to open the eyes of the people into helping each other.” Joy adds to that by saying “Kasi people have this thing na parang they think na, those anime people, wala naman silang ginagawa. They spend all their money, wasting their money on cartoons, and comic books and stuff like that. I guess connected with Ate Gem, we’re out to change that. Sure, we like all the cartoons, the comic books but our lives does not begin and end with them. We want to help other people also. And out to show that we’re otakus with hearts.” (“Because people have this thing, thinking that those anime people, they don’t do anything…”)

Not that outreach doesn’t have its own rewards. “Like when we were like, at the December 15 party, all these children were enjoying themselves. Seeing all the people that we got to help us out that they were enjoying themselves also. It’s really very encouraging because you kinda feel na there are people who are still into this sort of thing, who are still into helping other people,” Gem shares. “After the December party, there was these nonmembers, cosplayers during the EB, they approached me. Ate Gem, sabi nila, naalala ko yung pangalan ng partner ko. Sabi ko buti ka pa, naalala mo yung pangalan niya. Honestly, sa dami nila, I don’t even remember their names, yung mga volunteers, but they remember the names ng partners nila. Yung mga kids na partners nila.” (“After the December party, there was these nonmembers, cosplayers during the EB, they approached me. Ate Gem, they say, we remember the names of our partners. I reply good for you because I don’t remember their names. Honestly, with all their numbers, I don’t even remember their names, but the volunteers, they remember the names of their partners. The kids are their partners.”)

Perhaps one of the basic questions that must be asked from a social organization is whether they’re succeeding in helping their intended audience. “Well sa reaction ng mga bata, I think so. Not in a really big scale pero in the little things, makikita mo rin ang satisfaction nila. Sa workshop naming, makikita mo yung satisfaction nila by showing their talent and actually being recognized. Doon yung nakakatouch, I think, kasi most of these kids were victims of abuse so in their own little ways na-heheal. Wow, may kaya pala akong gawin!” (“Well based on the reactions of the children, I think so. Not in areally big scale but in the little things, you can see their satisfaction. In our workshops, you can see their satisfaction in showing their talent and actually being recognized. That’s what touches me the most, I think, because most of these kids were victims of abuse so in their own little way, they are healed. Wow, there’s actually something that I can do!”)

While ROO never made it to the newspapers, never made it to the limelights, each of its members know that they helped change someone’s life. I think that’s what reaching out is really about: it’s not about the rewards, either financial or social, but more of realizing that there’s something one can do to help those around us. And while anime fans will still probably be perceived as something unproductive by society, ROO will be an example of how any hobby, not just anime, can be made into something socially productive. In the end, it doesn’t matter what other people say, but rather what you believe in.

The Lost Mark Book 1: Marked for Death by Matt Forbeck (book review)

It’s not often than one gets to witness the birth of a new series. Wizards of the Coast, publisher of Dragonlance and Forgotten Realms novels, just released a new novel line set in their new RPG setting, Eberron. Marked for Death is the first taste we’ll have of the series, and it’s pivotal whether this will be a new Dragonlance Chronicles, or merely another piece of crap set in a generic setting.

Forbeck gives little exposition and enters into the fray. Despite Eberron being a new world, Forbeck gives little background on it. Which is just as well since the important parts are explained in the narrative, and there’s a small glossary at the back (which is actually helpful since it has a comprehensive list of the people, places, and terms used in the novel). Don’t fret about the glossary though: it’s short and quick. This isn’t an epic fantasy and more often than not, you won’t really need to check the glossary often.

There’s also an attempt at describing things but it’s standard at best: it’s not as flowery as some writers, but it’s not like the description is sparse either. The language is just plain and nothing striking.

The plot is mediocre. It’s your typical party going solving one dilemma only to enter another. In fact, the whole novel is basically just that: action and adventure from one place to another. There’s an over-aching story but for the most part, the book could have been several short stories featuring the same cast of characters. As an RPG novel though, it’s great since readers get to see the new creatures of the setting (i.e. the Warforged, sentient constructs, the Shifters, which are descended from lycanthropes, and Changelings, a feebler race of doppelgangers), and we get to see famous places and personalities.

Having said that, was does the typical reader end up with, aside from the links to the RPG? Perhaps Marked for Death is a breakthrough when it comes to D&D novels simply because of the angst and the three-dimensional characters. I mean good guys and bad guys both have redeeming as well as dislikable traits, and there always seems to be conflict, even among allies. I mean Dungeons & Dragons has been known for is alignment system, namely that of good and evil, law and chaos. That’s not so present in this book, or at least it’s not that apparent. Good and evil, law and chaos are still pervasive, but the lines aren’t as clear-cut. Each character has their own agenda in the book, and employ various logic to justify their actions.

While the book ain’t no Dragonlance Chronicles (and it can’t be since the Eberron novels shouldn’t have world-changing effects), it’s a decent enough novel. As a fantasy novel, it’s okay: nothing really outstanding, and nothing really horrifying. As an RPG novel, it fares better than most of its ilk simply because it gives life to the setting in which it was based on, and doesn’t interfere too much with the game (unlike Dragonlance wherein we endure one cataclysm after another). Again, this isn’t intellectual material. But if you like a fantasy atmosphere where morality is grey, and where your heroes aren’t overpowered, this is probably the book for you. If you’re a fan of the Eberron game, it might score some additional points for you. But aside from that, if you really want bang for your buck, there are probably other fantasy novels out there for you.

Understanding Gamers: Console Gamers

There are essentially two kinds of gamers. There are those who play games once in a while perhaps as leisure or a break from their daily routine, and those that eat, breathe, and sleep with gaming. What I’m going to talk about is the latter. They’re the subculture in society that non-gamers don’t understand. This series of articles will try to explain gaming from a gamer’s perspective.

Ironically, while the gaming console is perhaps the most mainstream of games, some people might not know what a console system is. I mean everyone knows what a PC is, but when you mention a game console, you might get a “huh?” Perhaps you might be more familiar with gaming consoles if I mention the specific brands, such as the Xbox and the Playstation 2. Essentially, gaming consoles are computers you play at home that are dedicated to gaming. They’re already pre-assembled as it is and no major tweaking is involved.

I mentioned that gaming consoles are the most mainstream of gaming systems. Why? Well, the masses are the main target of gaming consoles. You don’t need to be tech-savvy to play a Playstation 2 or an Xbox. Before Microsoft coined the term “plug and play”, that’s essentially what a gaming console did: you plugged the unit into your television, insert the cartridge or CD, and viola! No need to check for system requirements, install the program, or bother about hardware and software compatibility. A game for the Xbox will work on the Xbox, no questions asked. The same goes for the controller: I don’t need to configure my hotkeys, figure out if this button will work or not, etc. And in the case of peripheral accessories (such as mice, joysticks, guns, or dance pads), I just need to plug it in. I don’t really need to figure out which plug goes into which socket. A gaming console is built to work with itself with the least of hassles.

Of course while it’s easy to get into console gaming, talking about the topic isn’t as easy. Because honestly, console games have been around for the longest time and it’s surrounded by lots of genres, from sports to action/adventure to strategy. Each one has its own style of gamers and subculture. However, there are some notable trends when it comes to console gaming.

The first trend is that console games are played with two or less players. Sure, some games allow several players to participate (thanks to some peripherals like a modem or a multitap) but most console games involve the participation of one or two players. Right now, while there is movement towards online gaming, gaming consoles haven’t really reached that point yet. For two-player games, the interactivity between human beings is either you’re allied with the other player (as can be witnessed in some action/adventure games), or you’re playing against the other player (like some sports games). However, for the most part, I think that console games tend to revolve around solo play. I mean whereas a PC gamer would spend hours in his room by himself yet talking to several people around the world, a console gamer will probably spend hours alone in his room, playing against one opponent: the computer. And perhaps this is the biggest asset of gaming consoles. Gaming consoles were designed to be played at home and when you’re at home, and that usually means you don’t have a lot of company. There’s just you and the computer. Strategy games and RPG games fall under this category, where players pit themselves not against a live opponent but against the computer. When you’re bored and have no one to play with, a console game is perhaps a good alternative.

Another trend is that a gaming console isn’t peripheral-heavy. I mean sure, there are rifles, dance pads, and steering wheels, but for the most part, they aren’t part of the basic set-up of a gaming console. Those peripherals only come into play when a gaming console is trying to simulate the arcade experience (which itself is diverse since an arcade machine is designed to excel in one thing, while a gaming console has to support a lot of needs) and is keyed to specific games (i.e. a dance pad is only useful for games like Dance Dance Revolution, while a rifle is only supported by certain shoot-em-up games). The beauty of the basic controller is that one becomes familiar with it yet playable across multiple games. Of course since you don’t need to be upgrading your gaming console with new parts every six months, the good thing about console games is that the playing field is more or less equal. That’s perhaps why players spend lots of time playing video games, because the only thing that you can really nurture in console games are your skill.

The third trend is the ability to save games. I mean two decades ago, the only games that had a save feature were strategy games and RPGs. Now, nearly every game has a save feature, whether it’s a sports game, an action/adventure one, or first-person perspective games. You might be asking why this sudden development. Well, first, the earlier games were really quick and short. If you were good at it, a game could be finished in less than a day. Those games that took longer than that had a primitive save feature called passwords (and 80s gamers know how much of a hassle it was to jot down passwords and remember them). The second development is that games now are geared towards customization. I mean in sports games, your personal stats can now be recorded and ported over to someone else’s gaming console. The same can be said for your customized car for racing games, or your customized character for action/adventure games. The third important development is that of replayability. Unlike PC games where the same game can be played over and over again, thanks to competition from other human beings, the same can’t be said for console games. For the most part, it’s you against the computer. In time, that gets too repetitive. That’s why game designers nowadays try to insert additional features into their games, whether it’s finding secret items, multiple-endings, or recruiting special characters. Even RPGs, which are lengthy games in themselves, now have mini-games in them just to retain the attention of the console gamer. And to take advantage of that, you need some sort of way to track your progress. The save game feature rewards players who invest their time and effort playing those games.

The fourth trend is that console games are built with the latest hardware and possess state-of-the-art graphics. As much as gameplay is important, console gamers look for the whole package, such as good graphics, good sounds, good controls, and having a really fun game. I mean haven’t you noticed that most console games are now in 3D? As much as an important factor gameplay is, some video game companies are hesitant to promote certain games by that factor alone. It needs the other aspects as well, especially considering gaming consoles are nearly as powerful as your PC.

Having said all that, what does that leave us with? Well, console gamers spend lots of time playing video games, because it provides quick and easy entertainment (i.e. you can play alone with it), you improve your skills by playing often, and one gets to keep track of their progress thanks to the ability to save games. But as impressive as console games are, it has less replayability than other games. I mean whereas you could keep on playing the same PC game for the next six months (at least those with multiplayer capabilities), the same can’t be said for console games. A console game is only good until you unlock all its secrets (whether that takes you a week or a year, depending on how frequent you play it). Once you reach that point, unless you’re playing against another human opponent, it’s time to buy a new game and move on (although it’s refreshing to come back to an old game once in a while).

Console gamers favor variety. Instead of just playing the same game on and on for several months, a console gamer is more likely to breeze through a plethora of games. And console systems find it more convenient to adapt various genres of games, offering a more diverse selection.

Understanding Gamers: PC Gamers

There are essentially two kinds of gamers. There are those who play games once in a while perhaps as leisure or a break from their daily routine, and those that eat, breathe, and sleep with gaming. What I’m going to talk about is the latter. They’re the subculture in society that non-gamers don’t understand. This series of articles will try to explain gaming from a gamer’s perspective.

Before I start with PC games, I’d first like to point out two trends in the industry. One is the prominence of multiplayer games, or games that can be played over a network (whether that means your local computer café or online via the Internet). Let’s face it, PC games aren’t as anti-social as they used to be. You may be facing a computer screen but there’s probably someone on the other end. And of all the other gaming mediums, PC games are probably the most prevalent when it comes to using the Internet. Another trend is real-time playability. Most games now, whether they’re RPGs, strategy, or action/adventure are played in real-time. That means every second that passes in real life is also one second gone in gaming time. Take note of these two trends for they will play a significant role in the modern gamer’s psychology.

One thing about PC gamers is that they’re competitive. It’s not just me versus the computer anymore. Nowadays, it’s evolved to me versus everyone else. I have a living, breathing, thinking opponent on the other end. And both of us keeps score (whether that’s your current ranking in the community, the number of kills you’ve made, your winning streak, or simply your character level). Having said that, the focus of nearly every serious PC gamer is to win. And winners will try to gain every possible advantage as possible.

Perhaps the most important commodity in a gamer’s arsenal is speed. Since games are played in real time, reaction time becomes a crucial factor. Perhaps the biggest factor that can drastically change a person’s gaming speed is their equipment. Okay, if I have the latest video card, not only does it enable me to play the latest games, the graphics are also smoother. Having lots of memory can speed up games, and having a broadband connection is a necessity. I mean it’s one thing to lose a game due to negligence. It’s another to lose a game because your Internet connection was too slow, or your computer didn’t process your commands on time. That’s why most serious gamers shell out money to buy state-of-the-art technology (or at least make it their goal not only to buy the latest games but try to get the best equipment). It’s also why gamers would prefer to go into an Internet café with better equipment than a place with inferior equipment.

Since gamers are constantly looking for that extra edge, controls are another important factor. A gamer’s best friend is his keyboard and mouse. The former gives you access to hotkeys, or shortcut commands that enable the player to do something that would otherwise take several commands to perform. Normally, this wouldn’t be too much of a problem. I mean when using Microsoft Word, I can save my document by pressing Ctrl + S or Alt + F then press S. Ctrl + S saves me time but there’s nothing wrong with opting for the latter. In PC gaming, the lost time means everything. It could mean switching from your sniper rifle to your knife, or drinking that potion before your hit points hit zero. The mouse is just as important as the keyboard. While the keyboard gives you access to supplementary actions, the mouse is the most basic method of how your character navigates in the game. Without the mouse, you’re a sitting duck. A faulty mouse results in flawed movement. A gun shot to the head might miss and draw the attention of your opponent. Or it might mean heading straight into the jaws of danger when you were trying to flee from battle. Precision is key to winning a game and that’s how important a mouse is. A true gamer either owns an optical mouse, or spends lots of time cleaning his mouse ball (or uses a trackball). Some mice also have shortcuts built into them, such as the right mouse button, or the scroll button.

Of course you can have the best stuff that money can buy but in the end, it’ll come down to skill and knowledge. The former can be gained by experience and playing the game repetitively. Hey, parents also wanted their kids to study so that they can get high grades. The same goes for gamers. We play, play, and play some more in order to become good at what we do. We’re also racking up prestige along the way, whether it’s because we’re increasing our ranks or gaining levels. Of course sometimes, skill alone is not enough. You need knowledge to back it up. That’s why gamers often participate in message boards, mailing lists, and surf gaming-related websites. Tips, tactics, and strategies always helps the PC gamer, which is why we try to update ourselves on the latest news and patch releases. When you combine both factors, you end up with a pretty impressive player.

Not that the PC gamer is merely an aggressive, competitive person. PC gamers are social persons too. They fraternize within their gaming groups, and gaming rivals become good friends and vice versa. Some gamers group together, and can take the form of guilds, teams, or clans. Heck, gamers from a particular city or country can unite against a common foe (usually another city or country). Some of the most popular games even involve teamwork. I mean Counterstrike must be played in teams (you’re either the terrorist or the anti-terrorists), real-time strategy games can host as much as a dozen players at any one time (at the time of this writing), and RPGs encourage the building of parties. While gamers are competitive, they’re also cooperative. Along with bringing in sentient adversaries, multiplayer gaming also brings in intelligent allies.

The Importance of Jargon

As a writer, I try to keep things as simple as possible, at least when it comes to words and explanations. I mean a good rule of thumb has always been to treat your readers as if they knew nothing (that’s not the same as talking down though). Unfortunately, one can’t do this all the time. And sometimes, you have to use jargon, whether that means a foreign language, a technical term, or just a rarely used word.

Some people have a misconception that just because you use complex (or hard to pronounce words), you’re shrouding your intellect through incomprehensible vocabulary. That’s not necessary the case. I mean if people use jargon, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s because they want to complicate things. I think as writer (or as a speaker), it’s important to know who your audience is. The more educated they are (or rather, the more aware they are of your topic of discussion), the more tools you have available. Take, for example, this essay. If I knew my readers could only understand English, then I’d stick to English. But if I know a bulk of my readers are also aware of the other languages I’m familiar with, such as Filipino, Chinese, or Japanese, then that would be a helpful thing to know and gives me more flexibility in my essay since I could use words from those languages. Take anime for example. If I knew my readers were familiar with Japanese, instead of saying “anime fan”, I’d use “otaku” (with all the nuances that go along with it). Because while “anime fan” and “otaku” have similar meanings, the latter has some connotations that the former doesn’t have (such as the fact that “otaku” can be interpreted as being obsessive over something rather than just being a fan, or even avoid the whole topic of anime). And while I could certainly define “otaku” in English, it would take too long (as evidenced by my use of parenthesis).

Which brings me to the other advantage of jargon. It helps me be more precise and accurate without spending too much time explaining something. I mean if I were around people familiar with computer terms, instead of using the word “memory”, I’d use RAM or HD. I mean both RAM and HD refer to memory, but if the other reader was uninitiated, I’d have to explain what the differences between the two were. But if the other person is more or less familiar with computer terms, I’d just say RAM when I mean RAM, and HD when I mean HD, especially considering both can be considered “memory” yet performs two entirely different tasks. Not only does it saves me and the reader time, it also saves me space. Honestly, longer is not always better. If I can save time and space, I’d do it. I mean why bother describing that the person is jumping all over the place to get to his destination when I can use the word “hop” or “skip” to describe his or her movement?

Perhaps the third use of jargon is for the complete opposite of the second: we want to prolong our narrative. Unfortunately, it gets boring when we keep on using the same words over and over again. That’s why sometimes, we use complicated words or words not often utilized. I mean there are several ways to describe a person walking fast: briskly, quickly, suddenly, hurriedly, vigorously, rapidly. If I were to write an entire paragraph describing the same running motion, the reader would get tired if I just keep on using “fast”. And let’s face it, jargon can add color to the text. I mean the words “paradigm shift” certainly sounds more intellectual than saying “the person had a change in beliefs”. Or perhaps the movie Arachnophobia wouldn’t be as horrifying if its title was named “Fear of Spiders” instead.

Jargon, in the long run, is just another tool. I mean I certainly wouldn’t use jargon to the uninitiated. But if I know my audience (or at least most of them) will be able to understand the jargon I’m going to use, then it’s nice to have the option to do so, since it gives me more flexibility. That’s not to say I should use jargon every opportunity that I get, nor does it mean I totally avoid using jargon at all, but rather there’s a time and place for each.

Seduced by Moonlight by Laurell K. Hamilton (book review)

The third book in Hamilton’s Merry Gentry series, I was interested in seeing if Hamilton would be able to pull off what she did in the first novel. The sequel lacked a certain oomph and I was hoping this book would remedy that.

Perhaps the biggest difference between Merry and Hamilton’s other character, Anita Blake, is the fact that the former is more open about sex. Seduced by Moonlight perhaps goes the extra mile by adding more men (and complications) to the protagonist’s life. And again, Hamilton executes this by delivering conflicted characters, powerful people yet with their own sets of strengths and weaknesses.

Despite being barely four hundred pages long, a lot of things happen in this book (and even a lot more is hinted). There’s been some good build up, although the end is definitely far, far away. While perhaps not as erotic as the first book, Seduced by Moonlight has its own share of good scenes (at least there isn’t any goblin sex in this book).

The plot remains surprising with the twists and turns the story takes. But what’s admirable about Hamilton is that her characters still retain their personalities, although I find it too coincidental for everything to center around our lovely protagonist (but then again, this is probably the equivalent of a romance fantasy, so that’s forgivable). Description remains another of Hamilton’s stronger points and she does get to exercise it a lot in this book.

Much like her Anita Blake novels, read Seduced by Moonlight because it’s fun, not because it’s the greatest piece of literature ever written. And while the Merry Gentry series is not even half as long (so far) as Hamilton’s Anita Blake books, in several ways, it’s superior to the latter, in terms of writing, storytelling, and execution. Hamilton also shows you how to tell a good stand-alone story that also leaves you wanting for more.

Whining About Whining

The biggest gripe I have about whining is the fact that, well, aside from letting off steam, it serves no purpose. In fact, it can even be detrimental at times.

First and foremost, we must realize that it's so easy to complain. I can complain about the weather, about the government, about my teachers, about my coworkers or classmates, and in the end, it'll serve no purpose. Whatever problems I have will still be there once everything's said and done. What did I gain? Absolutely nothing. In fact, I just wasted my breath instead of doing something more productive, such as taking steps to solve the problem. Whining is pretty much like masturbation: it's pleasurable initially, but in the long run, it's not practical and you're diminishing something within you.

Second, whining is actually detrimental. I mean when we whine, more often than not, we're criticizing someone other than ourselves. If that's the case, we're badmouthing someone else. It's well and good if the other party never gets to hear it. But more often than not, our past comes back to bite us in the ass. Whining publicly is just inviting that danger. Heck, whining publicly and keeping a record of it (such as blogging) is tempting fate. I mean thieves know that they must cover their tracks in order to avoid detection. Whining is like screaming "here I am, come after me!"

Okay, maybe you're not criticizing someone else. Maybe you're criticizing yourself. You might be saying I should have done this or that. Or telling yourself how much an idiot you are. Aside from wasting your breath, what does that do? You might be saying it's not hurting anyone. Wrong! You're hurting yourself. You're hurting your self-esteem, your self-confidence. Now occasional doubt and accepting your mistakes is good. But doubt and accountability is different from berating yourself. With the latter, you're tearing up your own persona, reducing your accomplishments to insignificance. Let's put it this way, you're not only hurting yourself, but you're also broadcasting it to other people. If you're fishing for compliments or looking for comfort from your friends, that's one thing. But if you honestly think that you're the scum of the earth, well, your friends will eventually start believing in that if you don't change soon.

Third, there's also this idea in economics called opportunity costs. The premise is simple: I give up one thing to gain another. When you whine, you just gave up something in order to rant. Take blogging for example. What did I expend in whining? There's bandwidth, memory, Internet fees, and time. Honestly, rather than spending the last 20 minutes bitching about my day, it could have been spent doing something else productive (like downloading mp3s… not that I condone that, just using it as an example). And let's face it, no one really thinks that whining is good. When you whine, it's like you're paying someone to kill you slowly by slowly (well, we do that by smoking and excessive drinking but you don't really need to add another vice to the list). There are probably cheaper poisons in the world.

Fourth, whining is contagious. When I start whining, other people start whining as well. As I said earlier, nothing is easier than to criticize. It doesn't take intelligence, it doesn't take creativity, and it certainly doesn't take empathy. Whining is like gossip: once you start it, other people start sharing their own gossip as well and it spreads. I mean the proverbial story is that some guys go out and have a drink so that they can free themselves from their woes. What they end up doing is spilling out their guts to each other, each one trying to best the other person's hardships in life. Honestly, that's not really uplifting. And the best-case scenario is that you realize that while you're not at the bottom heap, you're still considered trash. Don't drag other people into it. It's bad enough when you go about it solo.

Fifth, whining doesn't do much for your social life. You'll most likely turn off a lot of people and those that you do attract are either whiners themselves or people who pity you. While being pitied is disgraceful, at least those kinds of people will try to change you. But if you're stuck with whiners, well, don't expect your life to take a drastic change anytime soon. Whiners aren't winners for a reason: instead of spending their energy getting back up, all they do is complain.

If I'm against whining so much, why am I whining? Because this serves a purpose. This is a message that's to be publicized. Hey, if you whine less because of this, I've already done my job. If you still whine and whine, well, at least you can't whine about ignorance. Take it from a professional whiner: do yourself a favor and get your act together. Instead of whining, all that frustration could have been channeled to something more productive.

It's Always About Politics

At one point or another, we've all probably blamed politics as the cause of a problem. I mean how many times have you heard people claiming that they quit because of office politics? Or perhaps blaming certain authority figures for being too political? Or simply sick and tired of how in a certain social group, you have to be careful of what you say for fear of being socially ostracized? It all boils down to politics, and I for one hate it.

Yet as much as I dislike being political, I'm guilty of it at times. I think in the end, acting "political" can't be avoided. In fact, it's a part of life. No matter what you do, no matter what you say, it'll certainly be interpreted in the wrong way by someone. I mean just the other day, I was just giving a counter-argument to a certain idea when the discussion blew up in my face and the other person got angry at me. I certainly wasn't intending that to happen but let's face it, some people take things personally. And since we each have our own unique preferences, whether it's likes, dislikes, or preferences, somebody somewhere will always be offensive to us.

Actually if you want to remove politics in any equation, then you'll have to remove a person's individuality, their personality. I mean computers and robots don't have political problems. Then again, they don't have emotions (at least at this point in time) or egos. They simply exist and do their job. As much as we wish people to simply to do their job, whatever that may be, they'll always be doing something else. It may be daydreaming while the teacher is lecturing, or as complex as gossiping while you're on the opposite end of the cash register. Whatever the case, we're human, and we'll almost never act mechanically. Heck, I was in a call center before and despite the heavy multitasking involved, some employees manage to do something else on the job, whether it's nibbling a snack or surfing unnecessary websites.

So what's the solution other than "get used to it". I mean isn't there anything we can do to reduce politics? While it's perhaps impossible to remove the politics and intrigue that arises in a situation, its adverse effects can be controlled. I mean some politics exists because we want to appease too many people (and more often than not end up pleasing none). I think it should begin there: we can't please everyone. Accept that fact. Someone, somewhere in the world, will always find your opinion objectionable. If you can't deal with rejection, this is the time to learn it. If you're too cautious around people, afraid of showing your true self, you might end up being a non-entity. I mean the world will like and dislike people who have strong opinions, but they tend to forget those with average dispositions. I don't know but honestly, there are worse things than being disliked. Like being ignored.

Perhaps the second lesson there is that it's not personal. I mean someone will always be disliking someone else. At different points in time, it'll be you. It's not because you're you that they dislike you, but rather their own sentiments about you. Of course if you happen to dislike that other person as well, conflict will soon arise. But if that's not the case, then there's nothing you should fret about. Don't take it personally. And perhaps that's also the third most important lesson: don't take things as a personal attack on you. I mean what's the difference when an African-American calls another African-American nigger from a Caucasian American calling a dark-skinned American nigger during a pre-civil war America? In the end, it boils down to intent. The former certainly doesn't mean to insult the other person (or perhaps merely in a jesting manner rather than a wholehearted attempt to degrade the other person). Here in the Philippines, we Chinese are called Instik. It was intended as a derogatory name initially but nowadays, I don't really mind people calling me Instik. I mean if I wanted to act politically correct, I'd tell them to call me Filipino-Chinese (because that's who I am). But even my friends call me Instik and they don't mean anything derogatory about it, so it's fine with me. That's one step of not taking things personally; I'm judging the intent rather than the inherent meaning of the word (and in the end, we decide what a word really means). One of the reasons why political maneuvering is necessary is because people take things personally. As much as I love to live in a world where people can freely debate ideas and philosophies, that's not always possible because people tend to act in an irrational manner. Emotions such as jealousy, anger, denial, and pride enter the picture, and you get results like people shooting each other over a silly argument, or even losing friendships. No one wants to get shot or lose friends, and so we practice the art of politics as a barrier to prevent outward hostility (and the other side retaliates with similar political tactics). Does it work? Well, at least enemies who meet each other in public don't always result in cat-fights. There's an insult or two, a thinly veiled criticism, and then they move on. While that's not exactly an optimistic view of things, at least while there's life, there's hope.

So what does this all mean? Well, one is that as long as there is human emotion, there will always be politics. If you bitch about it, you're only digging your own grave. No matter where you go (short of finding yourself a deserted island), it'll always be there. The second is that we can control it. Politics is a product of our emotions and if we can control that, well, we can minimize the tension and conflict we might receive from such experiences. No one's promising a turmoil-free life but at least this way, one feels more confident about one's self, and we can realize who we truly are rather than keep on wearing a façade just because we're afraid of offending someone.

Cerulean Sins by Laurell K. Hamilton (book review)

As mediocre as the first book in the Anita Blake series was, Hamilton has managed to turn her Anita Blake stories into a successful franchise. While perhaps it won’t win any Nebula or World Fantasy Award, Hamilton’s series has always been fun and even insightful at times. I think the big question for her latest novel, Cerulean Sins is whether Hamilton will take her series to a new level, or merely stall to cash in on her fame.

Hamilton is more or less consistent in her writing. She still excels in what she does best, which is down-and-dirty, no nonsense characterization. Her characters, for all their strengths, continue to be conflicted characters with their own sets of flaws and short-sightedness. And of course, there’s the sex.

Perhaps what intrigues me is that for a main character who doesn’t want to have sex, she gets a lot of it from a harem of beautiful men (be it vampires, werewolves, werehyenas, and uh, more vampires). Compare that to her Merry Gentry series where the main character is more open about sexual intercourse, and doesn’t really mind having a legion of would-be lovers. But of course, I’m sure this is what appeals to many of her readers, as well as the fact that it’s a fantasy of many women.

For me Hamilton steps up in this book by hinting at something larger. The vampire council has made a few appearances in the previous books but this novel gives us clues to something larger. While it’s not resolved in this novel, the potential is there and hopefully Hamilton resolves it in the next few books.

Perhaps one weakness I found in the current book is the plot. What I thought would be the sub-plot turned out to be the main plot (which is a break from her typical writing style for the series since more often than not, the investigation is usually the priority) while the episodic plot for this novel was short and brief. Perhaps it’s a sign of things to come (in terms of story) that Anita’s otherworldly exploits take center stage rather than her day job. Still, it surprised me that Anita’s detective work was given less attention and detail, more so than the book that preceded this. But this is just a perspective complaint more than a criticism of Hamilton’s writing style.

Much like my previous Hamilton reviews, the book can be recommended to people who’re looking for one of the following: fun and guilty entertainment, romance, and conflicted characters. Aside from that, don’t expect Hamilton’s writing style to change for her to churn out something like Lord of the Rings. Anita Blake’s cool because she’s blunt, direct, and will kick your sorry ass if you piss her off.

Fan Fic Musings

Over the past few years that I’ve been logging on to the Internet, one thing that seems to keep on growing is the fan fiction community. While I don’t see fan fic as something new (I think every person has had an urge to write their own take on a particular story at one point in time or another), its dominance its perhaps rooted with the popularity of the Internet. Perhaps the greatest asset of the Internet is that anyone can use it (and even remain anonymous), and best of all, publishing is free (more or less, although perhaps a century from now, there will be no “free web space” and web hosts will start charging for virtual rent). A writer a hundred years ago could perhaps write their own take on Sherlock Holmes, for example, but the manuscript would be lying in a desk somewhere, never to be read by anyone else. Nowadays though, once the idea pops into your head, you can easily jot down your ideas, upload it to a website somewhere, and immediately have millions of potential readers (and of course, immediate feedback is also a boon to some people).

Some people might be asking what went wrong there. Zealous fan fic writers, on the other hand, might get excited at that very question and immediately claim that there’s nothing wrong, that fan fiction is literary, and that it’s a valid art form. So what’s the real issue here?

Several teachers of my writing class (themselves accomplished writers) claim that there’s no real true story to tell, that everything is merely revamping or dressing up old stories. To a certain extent, that’s true (and it certainly is harder to come up with an “original” story nowadays than it was a thousand years ago not because our minds are less imaginative or refined, but perhaps due to the fact that modern publishing has disseminated more information [and that means more works and stories] than was previously available). But that’s not to say that every thing you read, every piece of work you see, is merely a copy of another. There is some skill, there is some creativity, and there is some talent involved in creating a good story (irregardless if it’s an original work or fan fiction). I mean I just need to look at the bookstore’s fantasy section and certainly not all the novels there are derivatives or clones of Tolkien (author of Lord of the Rings).

I think the real issue is in defining the borders. I mean if I write a story based on Greek mythology, for example, does it automatically mean it’s a fan fic? Or perhaps I write a vampire story, what line do I cross that determines what I’m writing is a homage to Bram Stoker and not just a fan’s take on the existing story? My take on it is that the two (Greek myth and Dracula) are first and foremost public domain, which is why writers have more or less a free hand in incorporating the characters present in those texts into their story. But even then, if your story is more or less parallel to the original, it’ll be classified as a fan fic (if it’s not published), or just a badly written derivative (if it gets published in print [but we may have to change our standards considering the rise of Internet “publishing”]). Perhaps a good example I can give are the Arthurian fantasies. I mean the King Arthur story, for the most part, is based on Sir Thomas Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur (which in turn is based on Celtic myth and Christianity). But what separates novels like Mists of Avalon and Once and Future King from the original Malory story is its take on it; I mean both books can easily be classified as a fan fic considering it has the same set of characters and perhaps follows the same timeline. But there is certainly something in their writing that makes them “cross the border”, to move from fan drabble to something original. I think the same goes for Neil Gaiman, who bases a lot of his stories from existing myths. There’s a line that he crosses that makes his work similar yet different from the original. In a certain sense, a writer might begin with fan fic, but end up with something different in the end.

Okay, that may be the case for public domains, but what about works with licenses? A number of writers do make it into the canon by asking permission from the holders of the copyright. I mean many writers in comics have immortalized themselves in giving their own take to Batman, for example. And while fans certainly have their own ideas for this iconic superhero, what differentiates the official writers from the fans is that the official writers have the right (as decreed by law) to do so. And it’s an accepted part of the canon from that point on (sometimes to the chagrin of future writers). Falling short of that, it’s going to be a messy, legal issue. My take on it though is that it’s okay to write a fan fic for personal use (as it is a good way to exercise your writing talents). I think the real problem arises in conjunction with the Internet, where free publishing is available, and uploading a fan fic isn’t personal use anymore (since the public gains access to it). I’m not saying it’s evil to do so, but sometimes, the original author loses something in the deal (but on the other hand, it can also boost the author’s popularity or sales by feeding the flames of fandom) because his or her work is being used without permission. I think everyone agrees that fan fic for profit is unethical (since you’re earning from pirating someone else’s work), but some fans might claim, to their defense, that they’re not earning anything from writing fan fics. But as Terry Pratchett (author of the Discworld series) put it in an interview, copyrights and trademarks are there for a reason. Whether it’s because the fan fic is not faithful to the author’s vision or depriving him or her of a potential source of income, in the end you’re depriving something from the original author (Pratchett in the same interview even told an anecdote of a fan telling Prachett “I wrote some fan fiction and you must have seen it because the plot [of one of Pratchett’s books] uses one of my ideas. I think we should have a conversation about this” despite the fact that Pratchett’s original manuscript was made months before the fan published it on the Internet). That may be an extreme example but it is a possibility (and has actually happened in Pratchett’s case).

As for the act of writing fan fic itself, a good fan fic (since there are bad fan fics, and is perhaps the trade-off of having access to free publishing) does entail some creativity, skill, and talent. No one denies that and some great writers do start out with fan fics (just as some artists begin with mimicking another artist’s style and eventually developing their own). But for the long haul, if one wants to take their writing seriously, they must venture out and write something original, or at least something not based on someone else’s work. I mean in business, purchasing a franchise is perhaps the safest thing to do because they provide you with all the things you need in order to have a successful business (assuming the franchise is itself successful). In a way, that’s like the art of fan fic writing, since a lot of the essential elements are already present and you just need to revamp and rehash it. Starting up a successful business on your own from scratch, on the other hand, is perhaps infinitely more difficult: one has to experiment, one has to take risks, one has discover a winning formula. The same goes with writing something original.

Not that writing fan fic doesn’t have its own challenges. I mean I’ve had experience in editing and sometimes, a work is too convoluted that it’s better to start over rather than fix an existing document. While that’s potentially true for fan fic, where a writer breathes in new life to a failing title, that’s seldom the case (since a good number of fan fics are based on successful and popular works rather than unpopular ones). But honestly, if a fan fic writer tells me that writing a fan fic is on par (or superior) to writing an original piece, the only reply I can give that person is for them to write a good original piece of fiction. Because honestly, if writing pieces of good fiction was that easy, people would do it (although there aren’t any shortages of people who do try to come up with good fiction). Perhaps the charm of writing a fan fic is that it already has structure, it already has form; one merely needs to tweak the details to suit one’s writing style or desire. Creating a wholly original piece of work, on the other hand, is more difficult.

When I was still studying, one of the easiest times I could write was when I was given a topic: I knew what to write about and I knew what the limits were. I found writing more difficult when I was given free reign, when there wasn’t an assigned topic or theme. One could write about anything, and the options seemed endless. I think the former is more akin to fan fic writing: it requires skill as well, but one knows the limits or the direction one needs to go. With the latter, it’s perhaps more difficult because you start with nothing and expect to come out with something mind-blowing. Now this might not be the same experience for everyone, but this is the way I see it. In the end, everyone is entitled to their own opinion after all.

Duality of Life and Faith

There are some things which we can't separate from our personal lives. Some people say "I mix business with pleasure" while others claim that "it's not personal", whether it's related to business, faith, or whatsayyou. Now I'm not here to debate whether you can indeed mix business with pleasure, or whether you should take everything personally (or not, depending on how you see things). But I do believe that your faith is integral to your life, whether you're Christian, a Buddhist, or whatever your religion may be.

I'd like to clear that I'm a Christian so I'll take it from the perspective of my faith. I think one thing I notice is that many Christians suffer from "Sunday Christianity", or acting religious only on Sundays (or whenever you go to mass). Since I grew up in a Catholic school, I also see other extensions of this, such as me and my classmates behaving right after a recollection or retreat, but no longer than the immediate duration (which ranges from several hours to a few days). First of all, I don't think any religion asks you to be "part-time" in your faith. It's a 24-hour, 7 days a week ritual. Sure, there are specific times when you're required to worship (such as Sunday mass) but faith is not about those particular times. Faith isn't just about duties; it's about living your life in a particular kind of way. It's like saying you're vegetarian when you only eat vegetables once a week and eat meat the rest of the week. To be a real vegetarian, it has to be part of your regiment, an integral factor in your daily existence. The same goes for your religion. You don't really get to choose your time to be a practitioner of your faith; as long as you live and breathe, you're devoted to your faith (even if your belief is, say, atheism, the same principle applies).

Perhaps another good reason why your life and faith can't be really separated is the fact that your personality determines your faith. Let's face it, our personality shapes our religious preference and those who are truly zealous in their faith sometimes alters their personality to suit their religion. In the bigger picture, we chose a particular religion because we think it's the best one for us. And to a certain extent, the reason why we want to spread our faith is because people in general want to share a good thing. For example, if your friend was living an unhealthy lifestyle, wouldn't you want him or her to eat good and healthy food? The same goes for our faith; we offer something which we think is good. Of course in the end, it's up to the person to either accept it or reject it. I personally don't think religion is something we can force on other people, but we can provide them with the necessary information to make an educated judgment call and perhaps nudge them in the right direction (people seldom change for the sake of doing so; it usually requires another motivation, such as a guy practicing good grooming habits because he's meeting his crush or behaving in front of a teacher who you're infatuated with).

Many students complain that they don't get to practice what they learned in school. But strangely enough, when it comes to faith, I see many people doing the opposite. I mean it's in real life that we get to apply our belief, the tenets of our religion. Yet when the opportunity arises, many of us shy away from such circumstances. We become "undercover" practitioners. My advice to you is that there's no such thing. I live in a Catholic-dominant country and perhaps the biggest problem with that is that one assumes everyone else is a Christian even though not everyone acts like one. In a crowded bus or street, I really can't identify if the other person is a Chrisian or not. If, on the other hand, there was a devout Muslim (probably because of their attire) or perhaps a Buddhist (buddha beads and shaved heads fad aside), I'm sure I can identify them in a crowd of undercover Christians. I think what's essential here is to stand out and perhaps the only way to do that is to practice what you preach. I don't mean preaching literally, by the way, but it can be seen in your behavior, in the way you talk, in the way you act towards other people. And perhaps in a country that's dominantly Christian, that's difficult to do so because we take Christianity for granted, something that has reached the status of mundanity. Missionaries smuggling Bibles into China probably get more excitement and adrenaline rushes, but it's no less important than living out a life of piety in a country where your religion is already prevalent.

I personally follow the rule of multiple agendas. I mean when I meet a person, I intend to be their friend. But along with intending to be their friend, I also want them to share in my faith if that's possible. That doesn't mean I get preachy to people the first time I meet them but given the right opportunity, I'd probably take the time to share my faith (which is also why I have this essay in the first place). When we meet people, faith has to be a priority, but it's not necessarily a priority we act on immediately. And sometimes, we also have to learn to let go. As I said before, we can only provide the opportunity, but it's up to the other person whether to accept it or not. Intruding on their right of choice might jeopardize the friendship, for example, and friendship is a top priority of mine as well.

Rather than seeing faith as a separate part of living, I see it as an essential element, just as our personality or emotions are part of who we are. Many people have a misconception that they can separate it from who they are but what's actually happening is that they're not really being true to their religion, or to who they are for that matter.

Shadow Game by Christine Feehand (book review)

I honestly purchased this book by mistake so I was now stuck with this romance novel with a sci-fi twist. Despite the indicators on the cover that it would be otherwise, I hoped against hope that this would be a good read. After all, Feehand did some vampire romance books.

To be honest, Shadow Game was indeed a mistake. It’s shallow and filled with all the tropes and clichés of a romance book, from the insecure heroine who thinks she’s not attractive to the overprotective male who desperate wants the girl. Oh, did I mention that the villains are two-dimensional, and even the sci-fi twist which involves psychics was shallow?

Honestly, it’s not my first time to read a romance novel but this novel is just too formulaic. Even the sex scenes aren’t as enticing as they should be, and there’s not really much else to expense from the novel. Everything is just so predictable and expected, which I think is really the biggest downfall of the book.

In the end, Shadow Game is just your off-the-shelf romance novel with a big name author attached to it. Honestly, it’s not even that good a romance book. But well, if you want formula and prefer to stick to predictable material, this is probably it.

Exclusivity

One of the thing that surprises me is that even today, in a world where we have access to more options than in the past, people still think in terms of opposites: either you’re one or the other. We still cling to the idea of exclusivity, that there’s only one stance you can take (or that you can only be good at one thing).

I attribute this theory of exclusivity to two things. The first is that it provides a simple answer. Things are either black or white, good or bad, positive or negative, right or wrong. Let’s face it, people love simple concepts: it’s easy to understand and provides us with quick solutions. I’m not saying that we should always look for complexity in our lives, but while the statement “the simplest solutions are often the best” is true, not all problems can be solved by simple solutions. If a simple solution exists, then well and good. If not, forcing a simple solution to a complicated problem might not always produce optimum results. And I think we all know that life, if anything, is far from simple.

The second reason I think exclusivity is popular is due to the fact that it’s easy and appeals to our pessimistic view of ourselves. I mean life is already difficult as it is. We want to cling to something simple. And when we “specialize” or choose one particular vocation, it seems like we finally have an answer to all our problems. And no matter how optimistic a person you are, people will always have doubts about themselves. Sticking to one particular thing seems more believable to us compared to being good in several things, especially coming from ourselves. My undergraduate degree was in Creative Writing and my class needed money to fund our projects. Of course that meant starting up a business but many of my classmates were hesitant or lacked the will to do so. Why? Their excuse was that they were “creative” and that they were “artists”, hence they wouldn’t do well in business. That’s not necessarily true. I mean a lot of creative and artistic people are engaged in business (and are successful in it), and people with good business sense explore their creative and artistic side as well. I think we cling to the idea of exclusivity because it provides us with a simple answer to life, that as long as we stick to what we’re good at, we can ignore the rest and enjoy success.

For me, what’s sad is the fact that the latter can be prevented. I mean we cling to exclusivity because we think it is true, we think that we’re only capable of so much. I think the reason why we’re more susceptible to learning at a younger age is because we don’t think we have limits yet. As children, we think that we can do anything, that nothing is impossible. It’s adults that tell us you can’t do this or can’t do that. Sometimes, the advice of adults remain true. Sometimes, they’re refuted. I mean in the past, people told us that men wouldn’t be able to fly, that we would never walk on the moon, that it would be impossible to communicate with people around the world in an instant. Yet one has only to look around to notice that things that were once deemed impossible is now a reality. I’m sure some of you have heard that statement that you can’t teach someone who doesn’t want to learn. I think the disease of exclusivity is linked to that. I mean some of my writer friends think that they can’t do well in Math or Science because they’re good in English. And they tell this to me even before the lesson starts. For me, they’re already providing a hurdle to their learning by their sheer disbelief in their own abilities.

My parents often fight. When I was a child, they’d compete for my affection and whenever one got into a conflict with the other, they ask us children who we sided with. Of course they also practiced the exclusivity rule, which is you’re either with one or the other. I often try to look at it from both sides, and when I criticized one, they immediately exclaimed that I was on the side of the other. Which wasn’t true, since I was neither or both on their sides, depending on how you see it, since I criticized and praised both of them. And strangely enough, this is a prevalent way of viewing things. I mean lately, we have a series of conflicts locally and some of the Muslims threaten the lives of innocent Filipinos. I think it again boils down to exclusivity. They think that just because some Filipinos aren’t with them that they are against them. And similarly, some people immediately think that just because some Muslims are attacking innocent civilians, that all Muslims are evil. Now that’s just a big misconception that will only give birth to larger conflict. People are complex and you can’t really “box them” or demonize them. Sometimes though, the “boxing in” isn’t done by other people but by us, especially when we think that we’re limited to this set of capabilities and the like.

In my previous line of work, I was supposed to be able to multitask. I was working in a call center and I had to do a lot of things, all the while talking to the person on the other line and keeping them happy. Was it impossible to do so? No, of course not. Was it difficult, yes. But it was also at that time that I discovered that I was capable of a lot of things, some of which might seem initially unrelated. The bottom line is that as human beings, we all have potential to do what we want, no matter how many they are. What limits that potential is usually our lack of confidence in our own abilities, especially when we heed what other people have to say about what we can and cannot do. The fact of the matter is, we can do lots of things, excel at many different aspects. I mean as a human person, we don’t have “just one personality” and in fact show different faces of who we are to different people at different times. The same goes for our attitudes, beliefs, and set of skills.

Now I’m not saying that exclusivity is bad or that it doesn’t apply to everything. Some things in our lives need to be exclusive, such as our faith, or our relationship with our significant other (i.e. monogamy), or even where our ultimate loyalties lie. But while there are things that need to remain exclusive, there’s also a lot of things that need not be so. I think the keyword here is potential, and we all have it. When we actualize our potential though, most of us stick to one thing and think that it’s enough. But my answer to that is why settle for less when we’re capable of more?