A Writer’s Life

Image: Racism by Temi00 on Deviant Art

Has anyone seen Lost in Translation? I’ve been catching up on some DVDs recently and I’d forgotten how good it is. I liked it at the movies but I think it plays better on DVD; it feels more intimate somehow. Bill Murray’s performance is wonderful and it’s a beautiful story.

One of the reasons I like it is the feeling of isolation in the film. Murray and Scarlett Johansson play two characters who feel increasingly isolated in Tokyo; surrounded by unfamiliar customs, they become drawn to each other. I wouldn’t say I feel isolated like that but I spent a lot of my childhood moving and the writer in me is always a little distant… I thought the film captured that feeling well, and Tokyo as well.

That’s why I was surprised when I read a past review of it on The Guardian’s website. Kiku Day is part Japanese and criticised the film as racist. She said that anti-Japanese racism formed the backbone of the film, from the jokes to the depiction of Tokyo and Japanese culture. “There is no scene where the Japanese are afforded a shred of dignity. The viewer is sledgehammered into laughing at these small, yellow people and their funny ways, desperately aping the western lifestyle without knowledge of its real meaning.”

Did we watch the same film? Where she saw a film about stereotypes and an exotic backdrop, I saw a film about disconnection; not just the disconnection between the two Americans and Tokyo but also in the direction their lives are taking. What I found interesting was the directorial style; it’s sparse and because the Japanese dialogue isn’t subtitled, it leaves viewers as disoriented as the characters. Perhaps that’s Day’s point as we see what Bob and Charlotte see, not the “real” Japan; but that doesn’t mean it’s stereotypical.

But I’ve never been to Tokyo. It looks like a beautiful city and I’d love to go there one day but obviously Day knows it better than I do. I thought Tokyo was depicted respectfully but perhaps she sees a caricature of Japanese life. I’m still not convinced, though… the film isn’t about Tokyo as much as the friendship between the characters; perhaps because of that it lacks some detail, but I don’t see anything racist in it.

After reading Day’s review I started thinking about the way race is depicted on screen. Some of my favourite actors come to mind like Denzel Washington, Lucy Liu and Zhang Ziyi, films like Crash, Monster’s Ball and To Kill a Mockingbird. But then I wondered about the films and shows I’d seen recently and with the exception of Crash, I can’t think of many which have depicted race well, particularly in Australia. The last Australian film I can remember seeing like that was Australian Rules, and before that Romper Stomper with Russell Crowe. As far as TV goes, the actors are still part of the supporting cast and are rarely very detailed; the way Indigenous Australians are portrayed is particularly troubling. Ideally a cast should be an accurate representation of our culture and it’s sad seeing such a narrow view still represented in the mainstream.

To be honest I thought we’d come further than that. It’s been 40 years since Star Trek had Uhura and Sulu, longer since To Kill a Mockingbird and In the Heat of the Night… shouldn’t we be seeing a more honest depiction of society by now or is that just naive? Perhaps the problem is as much political correctness. Racism has become such a loaded issue that people are overly sensitive to it; most people are respectful but mindful of what they say in case it’s taken the wrong way, and so for most films it makes sense to stick with a familiar cast and not make waves. I think that’s what happened with Lost in Translation. It’s a different kind of film and if you look long enough, you’ll find racism in anything, and Day saw enough to label it such. Really it’s the opposite of that but it does show how much racism is still a part of our society, the feeling it evokes.

I found this short documentary earlier and it’s a perfect example of the impact racism is still having today. It’s filmed by 17 year old Kiri Davis, who examines the importance young African American women place on colour. What stunned me was a scene recreating a 1940s experiment looking at internalised racism, where children were asked to choose between a white and a black doll and the majority chose the white doll. 60 years later it’s still the same. 15 out of 21 children said they preferred the white doll over the black, associating white with “pretty” and black with “ugly”. Worse they saw white as good and black as bad… it’s heartbreaking. No one should feel ashamed of their culture, their heritage, of who they are… but I guess it’s no surprise; how else could you feel, surrounded by such stigmatisation?

What’s so troubling is it leaves you wondering what we can do to change it and to be honest I don’t know. The problem is that racism has changed; it’s become subversive, an ideology permeating the culture that twists noble intentions to its uses. Economics, welfare, gentrification, poverty, all can be used as tools or justification for racism in the wrong hands. How many times have you heard someone say we shouldn’t donate to Africa because the money will be wasted, or that children should be removed from their parents because of poverty? It’s suggestive and almost makes sense, and that’s why it’s so dangerous.

The modern face of racism isn’t a group like the KKK or an individual. The truth is that it doesn’t have a face; it uses imagery and ideas to spread hate and often someone is not even aware of their own racism. There’s a test from Harvard which measures the difference between what we think we’re prejudiced against and what our impulses suggest. The results are very interesting; they suggest that most people have a higher level of unconscious bias than they thought. It doesn’t make someone racist but it does suggest a conditioning, which just shows how much racism surrounds us without our knowing it.

Perhaps racism is something we’ll never be completely rid of but I think the only way to start is by realising that we need to change the way we look at it. Racism has changed but we’re still approaching it like we did forty years ago; it’s not just a political issue but a personal one and unless people are willing to change the way they look at racism and themselves, nothing will ever change.

That’s why I’m still stunned by the review. Lost in Translation is a film about making connections and you’d think it’s a film that would create greater awareness of Japanese culture, not damage it… I guess Day sees it differently.

Anyway, what do you think? Do you think racism has changed? Have you ever experienced racism? If you’re interested in the IAT test there’s more about it here; I took it and it’s very interesting if you have time to check it out. And sorry for the long post! If you got this far I’ll owe you a coffee or something.

If there’s one thing I’ll never get used to it’s the weather. Sometimes it has a mind of its own. The last few weeks have seen some bizarre weather conditions across Australia; it was pleasant in Sydney over Christmas, but the other cities sweltered in 45°C heat and for the last week or so we’ve had wild storms sweep across the eastern coast.

The rain’s been intermittent but annoying; it’ll stop quickly, but you’ll get soaked if you’re caught in it. What’s been amazing, though, is watching the gigantic waves crashing against the beaches. I’m not sure how well the picture shows it; some of the waves are up to four metres high. Most of the beaches have been closed for the last week, but they’re still attracting people to watch.

Even stranger has been this sea foam that’s washed up on a couple of the beaches. I’ve seen it once before and apparently it’s a lather of crushed up plankton and seaweed; it almost looks like yeast. A few people tried swimming in it; not sure I’d want to, but it’s amazing to look at. This guy looks like he’s had the bath from hell.

The weather’s caused a lot of damage but it’s still strangely beautiful. Just reminds me that with everything we can create, there’s nothing more beautiful than nature’s fury.

So it’s 7AM and the celebrations have just finished around Sydney Harbour, ringing in the new year. The fireworks were dazzling, and loud as usual; I’m about forty minutes outside of the CBD and could still hear them going off. Normally I don’t get carried away with the fireworks but they were impressive this year, although I’m still not sure what the graphic in the middle of the bridge was supposed to be… I thought it turned into Bart Simpson for a moment!

I still can’t believe it’s 2008 already. 2007’s gone so fast, much faster than I remember with previous years. For some reason I don’t feel like I’ve achieved as much this past year. Strange because I’ve probably achieved more than I have in other years. But I feel like I have more to be thankful for as well - family, friends -, so I’m quite happy with that.

I was thinking earlier about everything that’s happened in 2007… usually events seem to blur together as the year goes on, but there are a few things that stick out. The blood-red eclipse we had back in August was spectacular and something I’ll never forget; it was clear and you could see the whole sphere of the moon against the night. Seeing players like Warne, Langer and McGrath retire at the SCG and Roger Federer continuing to dominate tennis is something I doubt I’ll see again in my lifetime. One of my favourite words, w00t, was crowned word of the year by Merriam-Webster. And there was a funny story about Stephen King making a visit to Australia and stopping off in a bookshop to sign copies of his books - only to be mistaken for a vandal.

What I’ll remember more than anything, though, were the scenes out of Burma as the monks and students protested. The violence that followed was appalling; I’ll never forget the blood on the streets, the chaos as the police attacked with batons and bullets and tear gas. It seems to have been forgotten or pushed aside now, but I’ll never forget it. Matchbox Twenty’s How Far We’ve Come came out right at that time; whenever I hear that song, I think of Yangon.

As far as 2008 goes, I don’t have many resolutions, just some thoughts about myself to stay true to. I want to be more thankful for the things I have; to not regret my mistakes but learn from them; to not wonder what people think of me but be content with who I am; to accept when something isn’t in my control and trust it; and to write, damn it, write!

I haven’t written as much as I’d have liked over the last six months and I want to get back into the flow again, to tell stories. But one thing I’ve found is that this blog has helped to fill the void while I haven’t been writing. I’m exploring similar ideas in a different way and it’s a wonderful outlet, much more so than I realised at the beginning. A big part of that is knowing I have readers, and I’m grateful to everyone for your support and the discussions we share around the community.

So Happy New Year! May 2008 be a bright and peaceful year for you, and here’s to the journey ahead.

I’ve been listening to Crowded House’s Woodface again for the last few days. I like doing that, balancing some of the classics with the new releases. And Woodface stands up so well from 1991; it’s that kind of beautiful lament that just makes me think of Paul Hester whenever I hear it. And there’s a lyric in Fall At Your Feet that gets to me every time I hear it.

The finger of blame has turned upon itself
And I’m more than willing to offer myself
Do you want my presence or need my help
Who knows where that might lead

A lot of people think Fall At Your Feet is a love song, and it is, but it’s more than that as well. I’ve always thought of it as a song of hurt and rejection. It’s about a man who wants to be there for the woman he loves, but she won’t let him in and he’s not sure how to deal with it. I’ve always related to that. I remember when Crowded House gave their farewell performance at the Opera House, hearing Fall At Your Feet was just mesmerising and it was one of the first times I’d heard it (and heard it properly) in years. That’s just like me, right, to become a fan just when the band breaks up? But it meant a lot to me because 1996 was a difficult year. I wasn’t well for a lot of that year and I was school prefect as well, and a few of my friendships fell apart. Fall At Your Feet just seemed to connect in a way that few songs ever have for me.

I think one of the reasons was that this idea of love wasn’t the glossy version that everyone else seemed fascinated with. I’ve never bought into this idea of “The One” or that you’re meant to be with someone; I can see why people like that idea, but to me it’s like you’re focusing on this idea of a person that might never become real. Love doesn’t work that way; you might truly love someone, but just because you do doesn’t mean it will be returned. And you might miss someone you’re more compatible with because you’re not looking.

I don’t like getting too personal with this blog, but I’ve said before that I think I’ve only ever been in love once. There’s no dramatic story, no awful ending. We were just there at the wrong times; like two ships sailing in the opposite directions, never in harbour at the same time. I don’t know if I’ll meet someone else like that again and I’m not too bothered if I don’t; it’d be nice, but I don’t define myself by who I’m with. I know that doesn’t sound romantic but I don’t get caught up in infatuations. I don’t think I love too much.

Some people do. I think some people fall in love so hard, love someone so much that it blinds them to everything else. They don’t see when things start to go wrong; they don’t see when they aren’t compatible, or when they’re following the same doomed pattern; they don’t see (or want to believe) that it can be better to be apart than to continue living a lie. I think that’s one of the reasons the divorce rate is so high and why people get hurt.

JK Rowling seems to agree with me as well. Her revelation that Dumbledore is gay is still causing all kinds of debate (which is still ridiculous), but the part I found interesting was this. “…do we say it excused Dumbledore a little more because falling in love can blind us to an extent? But, he met someone as brilliant as he was, and rather like Bellatrix he was very drawn to this brilliant person, and horribly, terribly let down by him. Yeah, that’s how I always saw Dumbledore.” I still think what Rowling has done with Dumbledore is brilliant; to quote Mark Harris, she’s turned Dumbledore purple, demystified it, and in the process made Dumbledore and our favourite uncle and our next-door neighbour just as normal as everyone else. But even more so, she’s made him a tragic figure. Love blinded him; he couldn’t see what Grindelwald really was. And I think that applies just as much to all of us.

How often do we wonder how history might have been different had something changed? If JFK hadn’t died? If Israel and Palestine had agreed to peace a decade ago? And the king of them all - what if Adolf Hitler hadn’t existed? Would WWII still have happened? Most likely; it would have been a different war, but what must it have been like to have known Hitler, maybe to have liked him or even loved him as a child? Probably not that different to how it is for people now; in some cases love just blinds everything else.

That’s Rowling’s point, and that’s mine here as well. We’ve built up this idea of what love should be; that we should be swept off our feet, that we should feel a certain way, look a certain way, and not have doubts. We have to love a person completely and devote ourselves to them, and it’s a lovely notion but I can almost guarantee you it won’t work like that. For some people it might, possibly, but for most of us it’ll only be a let down. And while we still cling to this idea of “The One” and pop music and movies (fun as they might be!) continue to perpetuate it, we’ll only continue to be broken-hearted.

So that’s why I’m enjoying rediscovering Woodface again. Listening to it now it’s almost a lament for what we’ve lost. But it’s also hopeful; it celebrates the beauty of love, and love is a truly beautiful thing: two hearts, two souls, two minds, side by side. If you know what it is and you’re lucky enough to have it - the love of a lover, or a child, or a friend - then love is amazing. If you have time, maybe you could look up Woodface, or at least Fall At Your Feet. Who knows, if you’re falling in love, it might be your song.

One of my favourite novels is George R. Stewart’s Earth Abides. It’s one of the most beautiful, haunting novels I’ve ever read and it holds up amazingly well when you think it was published in 1949. Earth Abides is a post apocalyptic novel but it’s really more than that. It’s a lament for civilisation; human history unravels, devolves. But even as humans shrink, nature reclaims what it’s lost. There’s a wonderful scene at the end of the novel where Ish looks at the hills and knows that soon he shall return to the hills and the earth, and so shall his children, and the world they leave will be nothing like the one he knew. But life will go on; earth abides.

Reading all the posts about Blog Action Day has reminded me of Earth Abides. We seem to be at something of a crossroads right now about the environment ourselves. 20,000 blogs were involved in Blog Action Day and people are angry, worried about what world we’re leaving to our children. I’m concerned as well but I don’t think we’re at the final tipping point just yet; we have to accept our role in the problem, change our policies and the impact we have on the environment, but I still think if given the chance nature will reclaim what its lost. That’s evolution, the way of life; earth abides.

But having said that, responsibility is key. We need to understand that we all have an impact on the world we live in and accept the responsibility to make changes in our lives. If we all put off the changes, say someone else will do it, then the effect is negated. Likewise we need governments to be responsible for making changes, for making industries to adopt more environmentally friendly policies. And the only way politicians are motivated to make changes is if they know it’s a community issue, something they can’t ignore. That’s why Blog Action Day was a great initiative; it got us talking about the environment in ways that matter to us, and hopefully we’ll keep talking about it.

Blog Action Day also got me thinking about something else: Beauty. It was MusEdition’s great post which started it; she described her surroundings and it sounded so beautiful, to turn and look out the window at mountains and birds. Then I read Sulz’s entry and I knew just what she meant about walking through the woods or a park as the sun rises; one of my favourite pastimes is to walk along the beach, see the tide and the sun reflecting off the ocean. It’s something I take for granted sometimes and I shouldn’t; I’m going to try not to from now on.

But then I looked out my window. I don’t really know how to describe it; I live in one of the nicer residential parts of Sydney but I’m surrounded by cakeboxes. The street is filled with blocks of flats and the occasional house; I live near one of the largest parks in Sydney but I can’t see it from here and I’m high up in the flats. In fact, I can’t see trees at all; it’s just a concrete and brick jungle. Well, there is this one scrawny thing opposite that looks like it should be put out of its misery, but I don’t know whether that counts or not.

I live in one of the world’s most beautiful cities (and I do mean that) but today it just struck me how manufactured a lot of it is. And how manufactured our society is. We seem to have this idea of beauty that nothing can really live up to; a person has to look a certain way to be beautiful, our clothes are in fashion one minute and ugly the next, our homes have to have the latest trends, our gadgets have to be new and shiny. If something doesn’t match our standards, we don’t just get it fixed, we remake it in our image; cosmetic surgery, makeup, renovations, there’s always something which can make us or our possessions more “beautiful”.

I’ve never been someone who buys into the whole idea of image; I’m not going to say I don’t care how a person looks, but that’s not everything. I care more about personality and if the person is interesting than their looks or if they’ve got the latest iPod. I think at heart most people would say the same thing. But we still cling to this modern ideal of beauty just the same. And I’m wondering if this is spreading to how we think about the environment as well. When was the last time you saw a natural feature that made you stop and appreciate it? Not something you planned for, but just saw by accident? I know the last time for me: it was a sunset that caught my imagination just the right way. I took a picture of it. But before that I’d gone weeks, maybe months without even thinking about it, without even noticing what was around me. I think that’s true for a lot of people living in large cities.

It’s so much easier to turn a blind eye to the environment when you feel like it’s just your surroundings; when you’re so busy with your daily routine that you barely notice anything outside of it. That’s apathy and that’s the biggest danger of all, that we just exist and don’t care. We don’t see it so we don’t care that cities are taking over more and more land to cover growing populations; we don’t see that animals are being displaced from their homes by bulldozers for a new shopping mall to go up.

That’s why Blog Action Day was a good initiative and hopefully will continue to be; it’s got people thinking about it, noticing again. And as I said, I believe that if we play our role, nature will recover, and that’s why having a message of hope is a good balance. But something which concerns me is the thought that we might save the environment but replace the beauty that surrounds us in the process, and we might not even know what we’ve lost.

One of the biggest problems we’re facing now is overpopulation and crowding. How do you deal with it? With an ageing population and a steady birthrate, how do you extend a city and manage resources without impacting the environment? You can’t spread out further; you can’t take over new sites. The only viable option is to build up and make better use of the space we have; for more apartment blocks to be built, taller and with more vacancies, and for more people to live together, sharing costs. I think that’s the only way we can do it… but it means knocking down more houses, replacing them with flats. It means in 30 years that cities would become much more uniform, dominated by cakeboxes and dull towers, and what beauty we do have around us would be even less noticeable. I find that a very sad thought.

Perhaps it won’t be like that; perhaps I’ve simply used my imagination too much and envisioned something more like Blade Runner than a realistic future. But with the way we value our own ideal of beauty and the trends that come with it, it seems like something that might happen; that we’d place even less value on real beauty, artistry and design. That’s probably a worthy trade, but I find it sad just the same.

Still, life goes on. And earth abides; that’s the whole point, isn’t it? That’s what Blog Action Day was all about, spreading the message and making people think. It’s certainly made me think and I was proud to have played a small part in the day. Congrats to everyone.