Just to let everyone know, I'll be coming back to Singapore on the 6th of July, and leaving for Montreal on the 30th of August. I'll be home for about 8 weeks, and I'll give everyone a call and/or e-mail when I get back.
And check out this ad for the NUS Business School. It's so absurd it's hilarious.
Saturday, May 27, 2006
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
The Da Vinci Code
I sometimes go to church at the Newman Centre at McGill University, and I'm on their mailing list just so that I know when mass times are every weekend. Someone on that mailing list decided to send the following e-mail to all of us a while back:
I completely disagree with the e-mail, and what was said on the Christianity Today site. I'm Catholic, I've read the book, and I've watched the movie. I cannot comprehend what drives people to take a work of fiction so seriously. I don't have the book with me right now, but I remember that right at the beginning, Dan Brown actually lists the facts which he uses in writing the book. If I recall correctly, and I'm sure I have most of it down, the facts are that the Priory of Sion existed, and some famous people like Leonardo Da Vinci and Sir Isacc Newton were members, and the Opus Dei is a real Catholic organisation. I'm don't know the Priory part, but I do know for a fact that Opus Dei does exist.
So I don't understand people who claim that the book " wears its heresy and blasphemy as a badge of honor" as claimed in the above-mentioned website. Erm... Ok, except that it is a work of FICTION. You know, the stuff of one's imagination. It doesn't claim to give a historically accurate account of things, and asking for disclaimers at the beginning of the film is just plain ridiculous. If you go to the movies and expect to watch a movie that depicts reality accurately, then you're on the wrong planet.
This whole "othercotting" business is also, in my opinion, crap. If you believe the movie to be sacrilegious, and don't want to watch it, then don't. Don't a) come up with some stupid idea of watching another movie instead in hopes of making a statement, and don't b) e-mail everyone on the mailing list seeking support for your dim-witted idea.
Quoting parts of the webpage that deal with this whole idea of an "alternative boycott":
"Some are suggesting a protest. But the problem with this option is that it doesn't work. Any publicity is good publicity. Protests not only fuel the box office, they make all Christians look like idiots."
Of course they make you look like idiots. How can you expect NOT to look like one when you obviously CAN'T DIFFERENTIATE REALITY FROM FICTION.
"Some suggest that we simply ignore the movie. But the problem with this option is that the box office is a ballot box. The only people whose votes are counted are those who buy tickets; if you stay home, you have thrown your vote away, and you do nothing to shape the Hollywood decision-making process regarding what movies will make it to the big screen."
Erm.. Ok, extrapolating from this one movie and saying that movie studios will now make more movies partially based on facts regarding religions just on the basis of the success of The Da Vinci Code is quite a stretch, but even if I accept that, how on earth does watching another movie change anything?
The box office is NOT a ballot box. It isn't a one man - one vote system, and Hollywood is not a democracy. People are free to watch as many movies as they want, as many times as they want. What was it that she said about looking like an idiot again?
And now, addressing points in the e-mail itself:
"First of all, if we love Jesus, it should hurt and anger us to see Him misrepresented."
Except that the book makes no such claim. And if you think about it, parts of the Bible, when taken out of context, can also be said to "misrepresent" God. Look at the Old Testament, and notice that God is portrayed as vengeful and vindictive, and that his people prayed to him to vanquish their enemies, and contrast that to the New Testament, which contains the story of how Jesus Christ was sent to Earth to save God's people - God is portrayed as loving and forgiving.
"Secondly, and I know this is unbelievable, but a lot of people WILL believe that this movie is telling the truth. For their sake, we cannot simply ignore this and allow people to be led into error."
I doubt that a lot of people will take this to be the truth, and secondly, "othercotting" the movie and refusing to discuss it with people IS ignoring it. If you are really so concerned about people being led into error and taking the movie/book as fact, how does watching another movie address that?
"Thirdly, people cannot use art (and/or freedom of the press, as we've seen in recent days) as an excuse to smear or misrepresent religion - ANY religion."
Ok, but as I said above, it makes no claims on accurate representation.
And I hardly see how "othercotting" the show actually addresses the problems that she identifies with dialogue and/or with boycotting the film.
Anyway, I've watched the movie, and it's disappointing. Some parts relating to Da Vinci's paintings and all have been left out, which makes it feel like the plot is somewhat incomplete, and the on-screen chemistry between Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou is terrible. The book is way more engrossing. That being said, if you've read the book, you know that it is pretty visual, and the movie does a decent job of depciting the places that the book is set in. Other than that, the movie is largely forgettable. In fact, even though I read the book over a year ago, I remember it better than the movie, which I watched ust last week.
Dear Friends,
I'm sending along a copy of an email I just sent to Bishop Mancini here in Montreal, re: DVC. I've included some of you tentatively, as I'm not sure what you're reaction will be, but I feel not only is a response warranted, but that we must take great care with it. We should not become anxious or uncharitible, but nor should we, for a number of reasons, remain indifferent. First of all, if we love Jesus, it should hurt and anger us to see Him misrepresented. Secondly, and I know this is unbelievable, but a lot of people WILL believe that this movie is telling the truth. For their sake, we cannot simply ignore this and allow people to be led into error. Thirdly, people cannot use art (and/or freedom of the press, as we've seen in recent days) as an excuse to smear or misrepresent religion - ANY religion.
I think the strategy suggested below is a great one - it's not my idea, but Barbara Nicolosi's. Check out her blog at http://churchofthemasses.blogspot.com.
Blessings,
(name deleted)
Dear Bishop Anthony,
Hello! (name deleted) here, one of the "gang" from the Newman Monday night gatherings. This is slightly last minute, but I was wondering if you would be willing to ask the parishes in the diocese of Montreal, and also our Protestant brothers and sisters, to make the following suggestion in their bulletins, announcements, etc.
As you're probably aware, The Da Vinci Code movie is coming out on May 19th. There have been several conflicting responses from the Christian community as to how we should respond. Some are saying we must see the movie in order to be able to "dialogue" or even to evangelize. Some are saying the movie should be boycotted.
Each of these responses has its respective problems. Dialogue does not seem to be what those pushing the movie are after, and even if it is so, it should certainly not happen on their terms alone. There is also the danger of some of the faithful being led into error by the half truths that are presented. As for boycotting the film, this will only help the film by increasing visibility and publicity, thus driving up the box office revenue. And the only "votes" that count in Hollywood are those cast at the box office. If we stay home, we don't get counted.
A solution being proposed by Barbara Nicolosi, a faithful Catholic film critic, screenwriting professor and the founding Director of Act One, Inc, a non-profit training and formation program for Hollywood writers and executives is following: othercotting. We should all go to the movies on the opening weekend of DVC. But we should all see another movie; her suggestion being the new Dreamworks film, Over the Hedge. (You can see a full commentary from her on this topic online at http://www.christianitytoday.com/channels/movies/commen
taries/othercott.html. She also has a wonderful blog online called http://churchofthemasses.blogspot.com/ where she writes often about faith and culture, particularly the film industry.)
This is, I think, a wonderful idea. We will not come across as angry or close minded. We will not be wasting energy on a media who does not want to listen to what we're really saying. Best of all, we will not be supporting lies about our Lord with money or our presence, but rather telling Hollywood in the only language they listen to/understand (cash), the types of movies we do want to see. We also have a responsibility as Christians to contribute to the redemption of art and culture and those who create it.
I will be organizing a group of people (I will likely be making the arrangements on May 17th to try to get a group rate) to go that weekend to the AMC, the time is yet to be determined, as they don't have the schedule posted yet. If anyone is interested in coming, please feel free to give them my email:and I'd be happy to have them join us. I would also encourage other parish groups to do the same. They can call the AMC at 904-1274 and speak to Natalie re: group rates.
Blessings in Him,
(name deleted)
So I don't understand people who claim that the book "
This whole "othercotting" business is also, in my opinion, crap. If you believe the movie to be sacrilegious, and don't want to watch it, then don't. Don't a) come up with some stupid idea of watching another movie instead in hopes of making a statement, and don't b) e-mail everyone on the mailing list seeking support for your dim-witted idea.
Quoting parts of the webpage that deal with this whole idea of an "alternative boycott":
"Some are suggesting a protest. But the problem with this option is that it doesn't work. Any publicity is good publicity. Protests not only fuel the box office, they make all Christians look like idiots."
Of course they make you look like idiots. How can you expect NOT to look like one when you obviously CAN'T DIFFERENTIATE REALITY FROM FICTION.
"Some suggest that we simply ignore the movie. But the problem with this option is that the box office is a ballot box. The only people whose votes are counted are those who buy tickets; if you stay home, you have thrown your vote away, and you do nothing to shape the Hollywood decision-making process regarding what movies will make it to the big screen."
Erm.. Ok, extrapolating from this one movie and saying that movie studios will now make more movies partially based on facts regarding religions just on the basis of the success of The Da Vinci Code is quite a stretch, but even if I accept that, how on earth does watching another movie change anything?
The box office is NOT a ballot box. It isn't a one man - one vote system, and Hollywood is not a democracy. People are free to watch as many movies as they want, as many times as they want. What was it that she said about looking like an idiot again?
And now, addressing points in the e-mail itself:
"First of all, if we love Jesus, it should hurt and anger us to see Him misrepresented."
Except that the book makes no such claim. And if you think about it, parts of the Bible, when taken out of context, can also be said to "misrepresent" God. Look at the Old Testament, and notice that God is portrayed as vengeful and vindictive, and that his people prayed to him to vanquish their enemies, and contrast that to the New Testament, which contains the story of how Jesus Christ was sent to Earth to save God's people - God is portrayed as loving and forgiving.
"Secondly, and I know this is unbelievable, but a lot of people WILL believe that this movie is telling the truth. For their sake, we cannot simply ignore this and allow people to be led into error."
I doubt that a lot of people will take this to be the truth, and secondly, "othercotting" the movie and refusing to discuss it with people IS ignoring it. If you are really so concerned about people being led into error and taking the movie/book as fact, how does watching another movie address that?
"Thirdly, people cannot use art (and/or freedom of the press, as we've seen in recent days) as an excuse to smear or misrepresent religion - ANY religion."
Ok, but as I said above, it makes no claims on accurate representation.
And I hardly see how "othercotting" the show actually addresses the problems that she identifies with dialogue and/or with boycotting the film.
Anyway, I've watched the movie, and it's disappointing. Some parts relating to Da Vinci's paintings and all have been left out, which makes it feel like the plot is somewhat incomplete, and the on-screen chemistry between Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou is terrible. The book is way more engrossing. That being said, if you've read the book, you know that it is pretty visual, and the movie does a decent job of depciting the places that the book is set in. Other than that, the movie is largely forgettable. In fact, even though I read the book over a year ago, I remember it better than the movie, which I watched ust last week.
Saturday, May 13, 2006
Updates
It’s been a month, and this post is long overdue. Exams are over, results are in, and summer school has started. So much has happened, but I’ve been so caught up in work for exams, and so tired after, that I just did not feel like blogging.
So, right where I left off then, the rest of my exams went by without incident, and I managed to pull through ok. I was told that in the Electrical Engineering programme in McGill you get to go through all the toughest courses on offer at McGill. The first proof of that was my introductory course to Java. Even after curving, the class average was a C+, and 25% of the class failed. Yes, that’s right. A quarter of the students got less than 50% overall. And for us engineering students, a pass isn’t sufficient – you need at least 55% or higher. I just can’t wait for what lies ahead.
But that’s over with, and I had 10 days before summer school started, so I spent most of my time packing up my room, and looking for a new apartment for next year. In all, I looked at almost 10 places, and I’ve managed to find one that I’m really happy with. I’ve decided to live alone because I’ve had enough of the community-living business, and also because I’ve never really had a room of my own, except for the 6 months after I completed NS. The lease begins in June, after summer school, and I’ll have to furnish the place on my own, which sounds like fun.
Right now, summer school takes up the first half of the day, four days a week. It’s effectively condensing 4 months of work into 4 weeks, but since I have only one course, it seems manageable so far. Midterms are next week, and finals are at the end of the month.
Back home, Singapore recently held it General Elections, and for the first time, overseas voting was allowed. There were a grand total of 8 overseas polling stations in 6 countries worldwide, and overseas votes were only counted AFTER election results were announced. While I understand that because of the number of votes and the margin of victory for the PAP, overseas votes wouldn’t affect the outcome of the elections, I believe that only including them in the total vote tally after the elections serves only to undermine their value. It’s more about the principle behind it than anything.
There’s been lots of election commentary available online, and I do believe that these elections have only served to highlight how slanted the ST’s coverage of local politics can be. An insider’s view is available here. Cherian George has some really good stuff on his blog, and so does Yawning Bread, Mr Wang and SG Rally, to name but a few. The elections seemed pretty exciting this time round, and I wish I was back in Singapore, just so that I could attend some rallies even though my GRC was not contested.
Meanwhile, there is quite a significant challenge in Canada regarding the independence and impartiality of our judicial system which could have significant ramifications. The issue is well covered at by Yawning Bread here, and by Mr Wang here. There is also an article in the IHT which I feel is pretty balanced here.
I have yet to get my ticket back home, which I should be doing in the next week. Looking forward to all the food when I get back, and to meeting up with my friends and seeing my family again. I guess I’ll end here, because I don’t really have much else to say, but I should be blogging more often now that I have the time.
So, right where I left off then, the rest of my exams went by without incident, and I managed to pull through ok. I was told that in the Electrical Engineering programme in McGill you get to go through all the toughest courses on offer at McGill. The first proof of that was my introductory course to Java. Even after curving, the class average was a C+, and 25% of the class failed. Yes, that’s right. A quarter of the students got less than 50% overall. And for us engineering students, a pass isn’t sufficient – you need at least 55% or higher. I just can’t wait for what lies ahead.
But that’s over with, and I had 10 days before summer school started, so I spent most of my time packing up my room, and looking for a new apartment for next year. In all, I looked at almost 10 places, and I’ve managed to find one that I’m really happy with. I’ve decided to live alone because I’ve had enough of the community-living business, and also because I’ve never really had a room of my own, except for the 6 months after I completed NS. The lease begins in June, after summer school, and I’ll have to furnish the place on my own, which sounds like fun.
Right now, summer school takes up the first half of the day, four days a week. It’s effectively condensing 4 months of work into 4 weeks, but since I have only one course, it seems manageable so far. Midterms are next week, and finals are at the end of the month.
Back home, Singapore recently held it General Elections, and for the first time, overseas voting was allowed. There were a grand total of 8 overseas polling stations in 6 countries worldwide, and overseas votes were only counted AFTER election results were announced. While I understand that because of the number of votes and the margin of victory for the PAP, overseas votes wouldn’t affect the outcome of the elections, I believe that only including them in the total vote tally after the elections serves only to undermine their value. It’s more about the principle behind it than anything.
There’s been lots of election commentary available online, and I do believe that these elections have only served to highlight how slanted the ST’s coverage of local politics can be. An insider’s view is available here. Cherian George has some really good stuff on his blog, and so does Yawning Bread, Mr Wang and SG Rally, to name but a few. The elections seemed pretty exciting this time round, and I wish I was back in Singapore, just so that I could attend some rallies even though my GRC was not contested.
Meanwhile, there is quite a significant challenge in Canada regarding the independence and impartiality of our judicial system which could have significant ramifications. The issue is well covered at by Yawning Bread here, and by Mr Wang here. There is also an article in the IHT which I feel is pretty balanced here.
I have yet to get my ticket back home, which I should be doing in the next week. Looking forward to all the food when I get back, and to meeting up with my friends and seeing my family again. I guess I’ll end here, because I don’t really have much else to say, but I should be blogging more often now that I have the time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)