The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion
The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion |
| Going beyond the manufactured harmony Posted: 18 Mar 2013 04:40 PM PDT
MARCH 19 — My return to Malaysia after a short trip abroad is greeted by a cultural dance at the airport — an exhibition of the rich explosion of sights and sounds that make our country so culturally diverse. This is a land known as one of the economic poster children of the future, an engine of growth within an increasingly connected world, a menagerie of hedonists enraptured with pleasures such as teh tarik and roti canai 24/7. This is Malaysia, this is my home. The pictures in the tourist brochures are all real; the numerous cultural celebrations (and frequent public holidays!), and the ability to stuff ourselves silly at any hour of the day! Yet, each time I look at a tourist brochure, I witness the dichotomy between the unity on paper juxtaposed against the backdrop of mutual discrimination that lies beneath the surface. I witness racism within my own home during Chinese New Year dinners, and within conversations with others, whether implied or explicit. For all our talk about diversity and acceptance, there is a sinister undercurrent in our national conversation. We play acceptance theatrics in public — simply because it is politically convenient and culturally expedient in polite company. The racist conversations I've overheard are those that I've listened in on covertly. From National Service alone, there were the Malay boys calling the Indians derogatory names, the Chinese degrading the Malays as "lazy" and "unmeritocratic", and the Indian boy who incessantly complained about racial affirmative action as the reason he didn't get a scholarship. Granted, these perceptions hinge on my experiences. I can't conclude that Malaysians are all racists based on these few incidents, which could happen anywhere in the world. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that dinner conversations about members of other races often focus on and ultimately enforce the "us vs them" mentality. Within the mish-mash of cultures, there exists an unseen discord that's not seen in tourism brochures. It is only within the deep undertones of unheard conversations, cemented by vague policies that promise swift retribution to conquer "disruptions towards national harmony." It is easy to believe that we live in an advanced society where issues of racism are issues of the past. We call it "1 Malaysia", understanding it as little more than a nebulous concept where diversity is designated as an end in itself, rather than a by-product of collaboration and a simple consequence of attempting to build society together. I use the simple analogy of make-up. Like foundation, lipstick and mascara, 1 Malaysia creates "harmony"... it attempts to cover up the fissures and fault lines of years of mutual mistrust. Make-up can cover and enhance, but it cannot fundamentally change one's facial features. From the years of colonial rule to the dark times of May 13, and to the present time of perceived economic injustices as a simple consequence of Bumiputera-centric affirmative action, Malaysia is not the by-product of a simple problem. It therefore can't be fixed with a single plaster. There are systemic reasons for this mutual distrust — factors that require a deep examination of our heritage, fault-lines created by cultural collisions, political intrigue and economic injustice. Nonetheless, as we shape meaningful lives for ourselves, we do so not on principles of indifference but of collaboration. We are a generation of the educated, the capable, the open-minded and the forward-looking. Our divides are bridged with dialogue and discussions, as education convinces us that we are one in humanity. This unity transcends boundaries of cultural and religious differences, to create understandings that embolden our efforts to fight for social justice for all. I look at the fault-lines and see them erased as years pass. I see more trust. I see my generation taking up the banner and standing against all of these things, united in our vision of a Malaysia that operates on genuine cultural acceptance, not merely on notions of tokenism. I see members of my generation acknowledging the past and marching towards a new reality, where we can say with honesty and conviction that we love one another as ourselves. * This is the personal opinion of the columnist. | |
| Motor racing, not motor sports Posted: 18 Mar 2013 04:33 PM PDT
MARCH 19 — The new Formula One motor racing season got under way this season, I believe, and will be turning up in Kuala Lumpur next weekend. That much I know. For any more information, though, you'll have to go elsewhere because I'm afraid any form of engine-based racing just does not interest me in the slightest. In fact, I'd go far enough to say that I don't think we should even class Formula One, rally driving, speedway and so on as sports. They and their brethren can be classified as motor racing, motor games... no problem with that. But they are not sports. I should acknowledge at this stage that I am unusual among the male of the species in having no interest whatsoever in cars. I currently drive a Suzuki Splash and could tell you nothing about it, other than it's black and small. Previously I drove a Ford but I can't remember which model — not because it was a long time ago, but because I never really paid it any attention. As far as I'm concerned, cars are just something you use to get from one place to another. So I'm arguing from a fairly narrow viewpoint, but I still believe the question of whether Lewis Hamilton (is he still doing it?) and Co are sportsmen is a valid one. My objections range from the frivolous (how can something be a sport when it involves nothing more strenuous than sitting down?) to the serious (sport should be about physical endeavour rather than the use of engines) and after lengthy discussions (in the pub) I've come up with a list of criteria which I believe activities must fulfil in order to be classified as "sport": 1. Competitive, either team or individual 2. Sustained physical and mental effort 3. Clear objective outcome 4. Self-propelled motion Number one is the most straightforward and undisputable point: sports contain winners and losers. No controversy here. The second criteria, though, might seem fairly obvious at first sight but would actually rule out a number of "sports" if applied meticulously. Motor racing escapes this one because, although contestants are sitting down, I happily accept that it's reasonably gruelling from a physical perspective and extremely mentally taxing, requiring hours of constant deep concentration. However, there are many other casualties: chess, snooker and pool, darts, shooting and archery all fail to meet the mark. Apologies to all of them (especially snooker: I was once Newbury Snooker Club's under-15 Easter tournament champion, don't you know?), but unless an activity requires a reasonable amount of physical effort, I don't think it should be classified as a sport. Golf just about gets away with this one. Although it doesn't involve any exertions that will leave you breathless and lazy amateurs can get away with using motorised carts to move from shot to shot, golfers do actually cover quite a lot of ground over the course of 18 holes — typically between four and five miles. The golf swing, in addition, is a physically demanding act — if you're looking to propel a small ball more than 300 yards with a fine degree of accuracy, you need to put a fair amount of power into it. The requirement for physical effort might not be as intense as in nearly every other sport, but a physically fit golfer will generally beat an unfit player of equal ability. So golf is waved through. My third criterion also discards a few contenders. A clear and objective outcome — by which I mean a result that is easy to assess and can be unanimously agreed upon. Faster, stronger, higher, more accurate... sports should contain a specific aim or "goal". Synchronised swimming, diving and gymnastics are among the victims here. They are highly skilled activities whose proponents are worthy of great admiration, but they cannot be regarded as pure sportsmen or women when the outcome of their event hinges on the personal and often biased perception of a judge or group of judges. Finally — and this is where we get rid of motor racing — sport must contain self-propelled motion. Like Formula One, sports such as rowing, canoeing and kayaking all involve sitting down throughout the duration of the contest; unlike motorised racing, though, the craft requires pure physical effort rather than a simple foot on an accelerator to be put into motion. Anything with an engine does not count as sport — speedboat racing, for example, also has to go. Racing in itself is probably the purest form of sport: me against you, let's see who's faster. But when the assistance of a mechanical external agent is required, it crosses the line into technology-led gaming... not sport. Horse racing narrowly survives the cut; although the principle body in motion is a horse rather than a human being, the animal is at least a living being and requires a great deal of physically demanding manoeuvring before it agrees to move in the necessary direction. So there we have it. Motor racing, snooker, gymnastics and diving... none of them are sports, in my book. Not that it really matters — they are still perfectly valid activities and wouldn't be any poorer if they weren't routinely regarded as "sports", but I guess you won't find me writing about them in a sports column. * This is the personal opinion of the columnist. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan