"The Koreans... are vigorous and expressive."

What does it mean by the Koreans are "expressive"? I remember Jo used to say that she dislikes the Korean language, the way it is hierarchical in addresses and structure, and the way it is spoken. How it could be spoken in a destestable manner I didn't understand then, until I realised that they speak in the same way as they would in a Korean drama.

For midland Chinese, the dialects spoken by people on the Southern shores are somewhat "frown-inducing", just because of their dis-similarities to the official language, their strange-sounding-ness. They adopt the role of languages that are crude, harsh-sounding, spoken by less scholarly folks, in comparison with mandarin, which had better be fluently spoken by those who want to become officials. In fact, however, Cantonese retained a lot of semantics of ancient texts; and in the reign of Kangxi, a guy from Fujian was appointed an "Upper Study Room" official--one that's able to enter the "upper study room" and discuss politics directly with Mr. Emperor--despite his Hokkien accent.

But how I digress. Korean has its own dialects, and people who speak accented dialogues in dramas are spotted with embarrassed mirth by the audience. Just like Chinese make jokes out of county/village-leaders who speak with heavy local accents. Jo does that, but she has problems with a more fundamental property of the language, that it's spoken naturally in such an expressive manner. I myself have a problem with the expressiveness of pretty Singaporean newscasters, but out of self-defense I must say it's because of the need to balance the quality of news between impartial and entertaining (if this argument is lame or incomprehensible, I still maintain my dislike of newscasters who regard loss of cool, lots of emphases in speech, emphases on wrong words as being stylistically "natural", natural as people's desire to learn news is).

However, the vigor and expressiveness in the Korean language brings on a different sort of discomfort. It's not hard to imagine, in the course of speaking one line, an actress widening her eyes and pursing her lips several times, especially when she's been speech-tricked by a guy and becomes wordless with frustration or shock. Do real Koreans speak like that? The intonation is definitely wavy with a large peak-to-peak difference. But Koreans aren't pretentious. They have a naturally dramatic personality. Being lost in drama brings on increased heartbeat, heightened self-confidence, warmth towards everybody, righteous anger towards the baddies and both setting of unrealistic goals and an onset of incredible energy to achieve those goals--there's vigor before expressiveness right there. And all of these sound like... whom? Jo herself. But what the hell? Jo's a Korean!

孔夫子如何修身而后齐家? Oh yes, I forgot his ideal of self-cultivation includes taking care of the happiness of the parents; and the family that he puts in order includes folks on whom he is able to exercise the dignity previously consumed by the parents.

Yesterday I had felt like a useful, substantial, even charismatic person. All thanks to caffeine, even though I read as much then as I did today. It's strange how the world can come crashing down, and the safest way out is to admit that I'm the most insignificant lifeform and huddle and hide. Or maybe it's not so strange. It's all due to overwhelming self-absorption into the present moment. The more you want to retain youth and inscribe every trickle of the present as if it's a millenium capsule, the more you panic for not having lived these very moments in the best possible way. And panic for not being able to put forth the best despite all the focus you've spent. So it's just like Stanford or Berkeley; wherever I go, does it matter? If I forget about living, I should live better.

The thing is, writing about this doesn't help much. I don't dare to call my mum even "the woman next door who gave me life". Not just for the reason that it's cheesily rhetoric; not just because I really don't have the ability, like Confucius does, to make a practical connection between parent and the significance of a life-giving gesture; more because I'm scared of her. And I can't call her "the woman". Because she's not "the woman". I can't call her that in her face. That's how scared of her I am. Imagine, 22 years old, going on 23, failed in some non-minor ways and succeeded in some other, and still scared of my mum like a girl of 16. I nipped my rebellion in the bud when I went away. Now every word spoken is laden with inertia. It's almost like speaking with Jo - not that scary because it used to be a mode of speech that I'm used to. You can call the problem the degression of the Chinese language faculty (ironically, I could only think of the word degression in Chinese at this moment, and had to check up for it) if you want. The moment of dread is verified and it becomes less scary - I can't live with my mum. How can I when I'm so absorbed in myself? My interactions, behaviour, relationships, sadness. Until I tell it to mum, I can't blame her for judging. Until she stops judging, I can't tell her. Which comes first? Before time runs out.

Until I grow older, when my strive for independence becomes less obssessive in nature, when I lose impetus, when I start to really miss home. Until then I'm an unfilial daughter.

Of Horoscopes

http://www.6park.com/gz3/messages/34680.html - the link to a detailed description of the sign Virgo. I must say it's stunningly accurate; nevertheless it is but a rational rendering of the psychology of a character type. Such kinds of explanation are not rooted in Eastern philosophy. Does it indicate that the Westerners know better how to console themselves? After all they have a catch-all way out, since they have the option of not taking the bumps in their conscience for their own.

Horoscope is about the struggle between conformism and individualism, just like western philosophy. After I celebrate over having found an accurate description of myself, do I shudder with the empathy with the people out there who are of similar temperament, or do I suppress the despair at having been forcefully exposed to the world, and that I'm not unique? (Then again, maybe only a Virgo will ponder over such a question ~_~)

Western philosophy emphasizes differences. It likes to create an "-ism" for every nuance of human nature systematically studied for the first time. Ironically, however, it's acceptable, or at least comprehensible to general intellectual standards, to render the collective term "western philosophy". While Eastern schools of philosophies are more diversified, it might just be because of its concise and introverted nature that much of it is up to interpretation, but not explanation. If explanations can be made, just like what people are trying to do now, overlaps in the different schools are found. Both Eastern and Western philosophies, should really be from the same origin (ok, hopelessly confused as I am, I'm almost starting to look into Middle Eastern history). So the differences should be fundamentally superficial - but still complicated. Long before you can put things in order, lifetimes are over.

Italy is a welfare state. A welfare state is one where most expenses necessary for the well-being of the public are taken care of by the state. Examples of such expenses are health, education, pension, etc. A prominent characteristics of a welfare state is the lack of distinct differences between the manifestations by the rich and the poor people, of their living standards on spiritual and basic material levels. Average workers can afford a decent living space, car, and quality education. A rich kid may live in a villa while a poorer kid in a flat, but they wear clothes with about the same degree of presentability and afford the average expenses of social activities, and therefore socialise with the same confidence. The state derives these expenses from heavy taxation from the public itself. But it's worth it, if you think of it in a way that your taxes are supporting yourself. That is, you surrender half of your salary at present to pay off the education you had had, andto pay in future for your pension and healthcare. This social condition, of which "-ism" I cannot name, might be the most equilibriated form that communism is capable of achieving.

Italy's welfare social system arose from ferocious postwar "communist" opposition. At that time, as Italy industrialised, workers were poor. But "communists", who are more like labour unions, were responsible for setting up this new social phenomenon - strikes - that enabled workers to effectively claim their rights. This history, of which I have yet to learn much, must have been different from actions taken by Korean labour unions, which give the impression of having been ineffectual due to over-riding emotional considerations.

However, Italy's equilibriated social condition is showing disagreeable signs of desire for individual over public benefits. The amassment of enormous amounts of wealth by the Prime Minister, signs showing that he might change laws regarding state school funding, packs and contracts made between unions and corporates, and, as a more specific and recent issue, the conversion tricks played by businessmen on the euro that enormously decreased people's power to buy. As for the last point, how the public could have not recognised a simple conversion factor error baffles me. I regret to say it further entrenches my impression of the foggy-headedness and challenged ability to perform logical tasks of the Italians.