Today I'm taking my first step in quitting smoking. I've said this half-heartedly many times before (including once ceremonially throwing the last cigarette and my lighter into the trash) and none of those efforts lasted very long so this time I'm declaring it to the world. I don't spend all that much money on it (about 20€ a month - about what I get in tips on a good night, or the same as 4 pints of beer) and it doesn't consume my life. On a heavy day I might get through 10 or 12, and it never stops me from doing anything. I never feel the urge to sneak out of the cinema half way to have one. I can get on a long bus ride and not go crazy while I'm inside it. It's just a habit which I don't really need and, while it's not killing me (at least not yet), I remember I used to live quiet happily before I started when I was 21. M has skin problems which she thinks are linked to it so she's trying to slow down too. The final contributing factor is that I forgot my lighter at home this morning and I'm taking that as a sign. I'm not going cold turkey right away and it'll be a gradual process but I want to be smoke free (or at least reduced) by the end of the year.
The problem being that I'm not completely hooked on them and if I can get rid of the habit smokes (e.g. the "getting off the metro" cigarette, the "getting out of work" cigarette and the "waiting for the tram/bus and 10 minutes with nothing to do" cigarette) then I do enjoy having one from time to time. However I've decided to launch this challenge and we'll see how it goes. The main problems I have identified will be that
1) I've just bought a packet of tobacco so I'll probably be getting through that
2) These post-metro, post-work and pre-bus/tram cigs have become such a habit that I sometimes find myself lighting up without even thinking about it
3) The trip to the Balkans will be an enormous test of resolve given that, over there, people probably breathe larger quantities of cigarette smoke than they do of oxygen
4) There really isn't all that much else to do here.
The smoking ban probably helps although since everyone goes outside now you have to machete your way through a cloud of smoke to actually get into any bars. And then there is, of course, the with-beer cigarette which will be a tough one to give up. On the positive side :
1) It'll soon be so cold here that holding a cigarette with oversized gloves will be quite difficult
2) There will be absolutely no motivation to go and smoke on the balcony in -30 degrees
3) My fingers will be too cold to roll them
One little bone I have to pick with the smoking ban though, although it helps me in my task - why do they have to apply it everywhere ? Some places just HAVE to be smoky atmospheres. The bar I used to go to on Friday nights at school was what it was partly because the inside was so misty, and a few days ago I went to a pool hall which felt quite frankly sterile without any cigarette smoke. Even before I started, I recognised the contribution of smoke to the atmosphere of a pool hall and things just aren't the same without it.
Watch this space.
Oct 30, 2008
Oct 24, 2008
Talvi tulee
If I haven't written much recently that is because (as usual) nothing much has happened. Helsinki had degenerated into a closer-to-winter state. It's darker every day when I leave for work, and it's darker every day when I leave to go home. If it wasn't for fag breaks I'd never see full daylight. Yesterday was M's birthday so we went to Manhattan Steak House (I mention the name in case anyone was thinking of going there to have spare ribs - don't bother). I went to the States 10 years ago but if there's one thing that stands out in my mind there it's that, if you go to a restaurant, they make sure that you'll roll out rather than walking. The Americans haven't got absolutely everything right in life but feeding people is certainly something they do very well, and Europe could do well to follow suit. It might even get me eating out a bit more.
This weekend saw the delights of Finland combine to screw things up somewhat. I'd got M a skydive for her birthday, which was promptly cancelled because of crap weather. The restaurant was quite an experience - on the walk there I'd decided that I wasn't expecting much conversation from the others and when I got there and saw I was up the end of the table this suspicion was strengthened. M's friends, I'm assured, have nothing against me and I do like to integrate into the culture I'm in and accept that things are how they are. However when only one of the 7 says hello to me and the same is the only one who says goodbye at the end of it and that only 2 others actually say a word to me at all, I'm struggling to keep myself from thinking that I could have evaporated at some point during the meal and no one would have noticed or really been bothered. There are some things that I'm going to miss when I leave Finland but the social scene and the weather are not among them.
Winter brings with it the threat of illness, of course, and this is something that Finns are very well prepared for. I don't think I've ever come across any nation of people who have so many drugs in their closets or know so much about what every single medicine does - it's a wonder there are any doctors at all in Finland when everyone knows exactly what kind of medical complaint they have, and probably have the cure at home somewhere. When I arrived here, I realised that I had a bad reaction to mosquitos and I was actually given a choice of two antihistamines and asked which one I preferred. People ritually take painkillers whenever they wake up hungover here, of strengths which no one else would even consider touching. When I had mononucleosis, I took 400mg pills to handle the infection and the huge angina that came with it. People swallow 800mg here after too much beer the night before. I'm actually scared of sneezing on the streets here in case I spark of a stampede of people running to offer me part of the first aid kits which they lump around with them in case of a major medical emergency - coughing, having an itch, being splashed by a passing car and so on. With my ex (who I was with for a year and a half or so) I had about 5 MAJOR cancer scares ! It must be horrible to live in a way where you're constantly on death's doorstep but, just like the weather and the difficulties experienced with communication, the Finns have adapted. This combined with their dramatic intake of coffee makes me wonder what the people in this country would be like without any medicines/stimulants (lactose-free of course)/vitamin supplements or anything. I'd imagine they'd all be dead or, alternatively, normal.
This weekend saw the delights of Finland combine to screw things up somewhat. I'd got M a skydive for her birthday, which was promptly cancelled because of crap weather. The restaurant was quite an experience - on the walk there I'd decided that I wasn't expecting much conversation from the others and when I got there and saw I was up the end of the table this suspicion was strengthened. M's friends, I'm assured, have nothing against me and I do like to integrate into the culture I'm in and accept that things are how they are. However when only one of the 7 says hello to me and the same is the only one who says goodbye at the end of it and that only 2 others actually say a word to me at all, I'm struggling to keep myself from thinking that I could have evaporated at some point during the meal and no one would have noticed or really been bothered. There are some things that I'm going to miss when I leave Finland but the social scene and the weather are not among them.
Winter brings with it the threat of illness, of course, and this is something that Finns are very well prepared for. I don't think I've ever come across any nation of people who have so many drugs in their closets or know so much about what every single medicine does - it's a wonder there are any doctors at all in Finland when everyone knows exactly what kind of medical complaint they have, and probably have the cure at home somewhere. When I arrived here, I realised that I had a bad reaction to mosquitos and I was actually given a choice of two antihistamines and asked which one I preferred. People ritually take painkillers whenever they wake up hungover here, of strengths which no one else would even consider touching. When I had mononucleosis, I took 400mg pills to handle the infection and the huge angina that came with it. People swallow 800mg here after too much beer the night before. I'm actually scared of sneezing on the streets here in case I spark of a stampede of people running to offer me part of the first aid kits which they lump around with them in case of a major medical emergency - coughing, having an itch, being splashed by a passing car and so on. With my ex (who I was with for a year and a half or so) I had about 5 MAJOR cancer scares ! It must be horrible to live in a way where you're constantly on death's doorstep but, just like the weather and the difficulties experienced with communication, the Finns have adapted. This combined with their dramatic intake of coffee makes me wonder what the people in this country would be like without any medicines/stimulants (lactose-free of course)/vitamin supplements or anything. I'd imagine they'd all be dead or, alternatively, normal.
Oct 7, 2008
Autumn thoughts
Autumn has arrived in Helsinki. This is usually characterised by one of many things.
Firstly, the leaves all turn various shades of brown, which is admittedly quite nice and I would probably enjoy it if it didn't signal the imminent arrival of 6 months of freezing my butt off. The Finns have a word, "ruska", which means the brown colour that leaves take on in the autumn. The Finns are well known for being close to nature and, even if it's being lost now as people are staying in the city to pursue activities such as working and going to the pub, there are still many times of year where Helsinki empties out completely and is strangely quiet as everyone disappears off to their cabins in the forest. While I've been here I've done many nature-related things that I haven't done anywhere else - going out looking for flying squirrels, cross-country skiing in the woods, shooting fish with harpoons, and a few weeks back a work trip was organised to a national park to go hiking around the forest in this newly found brown colour. In a bid to discover if the Finns just are close enough to nature to have a word that means "the brown colour that leaves take on in the autumn", I went onto Wikipedia to see what it translates as - the only other languages with one word for this seemed to be Afrikaans (Herfskleure) and Japanese (紅葉). Visually, it's quite a nice time of year. The immense amount of leaves on the ground, though, cause havoc to the half-asleep early morning commuter such as myself due to another factor of this season.
That second factor is the wind, which for some reason arrives in enormous amounts around this time of year. Many Finns in fact have taken holidays to the Caribbean given that they find the lashings of Hurricane Ike et al. quite peaceful compared to the battering they would get walking down a street in Helsinki. Heavy winds plus lots of leaves results in you getting assaulted by various pieces of foliage on your way to work especially if you work in a tree-filled area like I do. Although it's annoying (and let's face it, what isn't at that time of morning ?), it's quite good for waking you up. Another positive aspect of the wind coming at high speeds at this time of year is as a result of the average Finn starting to don headgear due to the dropping temperatures. It's not cold enough for the heavy duty woolly hats of winter but the citizen of Helsinki still likes to protect his head from the cooler air and the baseball cap appears to be the item of choice at the moment. This, of course, leads to crowds of young men running around desperately chasing caps which the wind is carrying off, which is clearly quite amusing. I've noticed that the "wind blowing cap off head routine" usually follows a very rigid pattern.
1) Cap blows off from head
2) Ex-cap wearer notices this but for some reason pats his head anyway, just to verify that it is, in fact, gone
3) Ex-cap wearer looks startled
4) Ex-cap wearer turns around many more times than is necessary in a desperate attempt to locate the cap before it has been blown half way to Turku
5) Ex-cap wearer runs towards the cap and tries to pick it up just as it is blown away by another gust of wind
6) Repeat ad nauseam
7) Ex-cap wearer eventually gets pissed off and jumps onto the cap, having to then brush it off but being thankful to be reunited with it nonetheless.
It's one of those things that shouldn't really be very interesting but it breaks the monotony of everyday life and I'll generally stop to have a good look.
It's probably the fact of finding this entertaining (as well as realising that all I do is work, wash up, do laundry, cook, eat and sit around waiting for something to happen) which make me wonder how people can survive as office monkeys for 40 years before retiring to a beach somewhere to soak up the rays before they die. It's nice to have a couple of jobs and get some money coming in but it's not very fulfilling is it ? More fulfilling than watching Big Brother or Pop Idol, admittedly, but still not immensely so. For once, I'm not going to blame Finland for this - I'd imagine workers the world over have the same syndrome but I suppose most people are also content enough with it to stay in the hamster wheel. M and I are off to the Balkans in December so hopefully I can rekindle the excitement in life a little. Until then, I'll keep working, washing up, eating and watching peoples' caps blow off.
In another bid to spice up life a little, I've recently discovered the Darwin Awards website, which honours people who died in quite frankly ridiculous ways. It's worth a little look, if only to feel slightly better about yourself after reading about the Chinese woman who died after climbing into a volcano to get better pictures, the Italian who perished while trying to protect his car by placing himself between it and an express train, the Polish man who tried to prove his manliness by removing his head with a chainsaw, or the German who allowed himself to be shot dead by his own dog. It's riveting stuff and can be found at www.darwinawards.com/darwin.
Have a good autumn !
Firstly, the leaves all turn various shades of brown, which is admittedly quite nice and I would probably enjoy it if it didn't signal the imminent arrival of 6 months of freezing my butt off. The Finns have a word, "ruska", which means the brown colour that leaves take on in the autumn. The Finns are well known for being close to nature and, even if it's being lost now as people are staying in the city to pursue activities such as working and going to the pub, there are still many times of year where Helsinki empties out completely and is strangely quiet as everyone disappears off to their cabins in the forest. While I've been here I've done many nature-related things that I haven't done anywhere else - going out looking for flying squirrels, cross-country skiing in the woods, shooting fish with harpoons, and a few weeks back a work trip was organised to a national park to go hiking around the forest in this newly found brown colour. In a bid to discover if the Finns just are close enough to nature to have a word that means "the brown colour that leaves take on in the autumn", I went onto Wikipedia to see what it translates as - the only other languages with one word for this seemed to be Afrikaans (Herfskleure) and Japanese (紅葉). Visually, it's quite a nice time of year. The immense amount of leaves on the ground, though, cause havoc to the half-asleep early morning commuter such as myself due to another factor of this season.
That second factor is the wind, which for some reason arrives in enormous amounts around this time of year. Many Finns in fact have taken holidays to the Caribbean given that they find the lashings of Hurricane Ike et al. quite peaceful compared to the battering they would get walking down a street in Helsinki. Heavy winds plus lots of leaves results in you getting assaulted by various pieces of foliage on your way to work especially if you work in a tree-filled area like I do. Although it's annoying (and let's face it, what isn't at that time of morning ?), it's quite good for waking you up. Another positive aspect of the wind coming at high speeds at this time of year is as a result of the average Finn starting to don headgear due to the dropping temperatures. It's not cold enough for the heavy duty woolly hats of winter but the citizen of Helsinki still likes to protect his head from the cooler air and the baseball cap appears to be the item of choice at the moment. This, of course, leads to crowds of young men running around desperately chasing caps which the wind is carrying off, which is clearly quite amusing. I've noticed that the "wind blowing cap off head routine" usually follows a very rigid pattern.
1) Cap blows off from head
2) Ex-cap wearer notices this but for some reason pats his head anyway, just to verify that it is, in fact, gone
3) Ex-cap wearer looks startled
4) Ex-cap wearer turns around many more times than is necessary in a desperate attempt to locate the cap before it has been blown half way to Turku
5) Ex-cap wearer runs towards the cap and tries to pick it up just as it is blown away by another gust of wind
6) Repeat ad nauseam
7) Ex-cap wearer eventually gets pissed off and jumps onto the cap, having to then brush it off but being thankful to be reunited with it nonetheless.
It's one of those things that shouldn't really be very interesting but it breaks the monotony of everyday life and I'll generally stop to have a good look.
It's probably the fact of finding this entertaining (as well as realising that all I do is work, wash up, do laundry, cook, eat and sit around waiting for something to happen) which make me wonder how people can survive as office monkeys for 40 years before retiring to a beach somewhere to soak up the rays before they die. It's nice to have a couple of jobs and get some money coming in but it's not very fulfilling is it ? More fulfilling than watching Big Brother or Pop Idol, admittedly, but still not immensely so. For once, I'm not going to blame Finland for this - I'd imagine workers the world over have the same syndrome but I suppose most people are also content enough with it to stay in the hamster wheel. M and I are off to the Balkans in December so hopefully I can rekindle the excitement in life a little. Until then, I'll keep working, washing up, eating and watching peoples' caps blow off.
In another bid to spice up life a little, I've recently discovered the Darwin Awards website, which honours people who died in quite frankly ridiculous ways. It's worth a little look, if only to feel slightly better about yourself after reading about the Chinese woman who died after climbing into a volcano to get better pictures, the Italian who perished while trying to protect his car by placing himself between it and an express train, the Polish man who tried to prove his manliness by removing his head with a chainsaw, or the German who allowed himself to be shot dead by his own dog. It's riveting stuff and can be found at www.darwinawards.com/darwin.
Have a good autumn !
Sep 22, 2008
2-week-interval input
It's been 2 weeks. I haven't really got anything to say. I've been working 6 days a week, sleeping 1 day a week, and I'm now writing my thesis in any spare time in between these other priorities. I've not noticed any new comical quirks about the Finns, and having been buried in American foreign politics here at the library all evening I'm not very much inclined to write about that either.
However, here are my two rather uninteresting news items from the past couple of weeks.
M and I are planning to go to Bosnia for the new year, which effectively means that we'll plan it, be on the verge of buying tickets and then something will come up to scupper the plans. We'll then probably end up in a crappy bar in Helsinki drinking crappy beer while listening to crappy music and paying far too much money for the pleasure.
Cultural event of the week in Helsinki at the moment is "Love and Anarchy" a film festival which throws up some quite interesting movies and a good change from the usual Hollywood flags-and-tears and happy ending stuff that is normally shoved down our throats. I think the last time I went to the cinema was last year during this same festival, and yesterday I went to watch an Israel movie called "Lemon Tree", starring a bunch of actors with Hebrew names, none of which I can remember right now. It's quite impressive that someone has managed to make a full leangth feature movie about a plot of lemon trees, but there you go. They managed it. And if you can find it somewhere, it's worth watching.
Thank you, and see you next time.
However, here are my two rather uninteresting news items from the past couple of weeks.
M and I are planning to go to Bosnia for the new year, which effectively means that we'll plan it, be on the verge of buying tickets and then something will come up to scupper the plans. We'll then probably end up in a crappy bar in Helsinki drinking crappy beer while listening to crappy music and paying far too much money for the pleasure.
Cultural event of the week in Helsinki at the moment is "Love and Anarchy" a film festival which throws up some quite interesting movies and a good change from the usual Hollywood flags-and-tears and happy ending stuff that is normally shoved down our throats. I think the last time I went to the cinema was last year during this same festival, and yesterday I went to watch an Israel movie called "Lemon Tree", starring a bunch of actors with Hebrew names, none of which I can remember right now. It's quite impressive that someone has managed to make a full leangth feature movie about a plot of lemon trees, but there you go. They managed it. And if you can find it somewhere, it's worth watching.
Thank you, and see you next time.
Sep 8, 2008
Evil : An Analysis
If there's one word I've grown tired of hearing recently, it's the word "evil". Every story about US relations with countries which don't agree with its point of view on how the world should run will feature the word "evil" at some point. It seems to have recently replaced "terrorism" as the main word to be bandied around. I don't think it's the frequency of its use as such that gets to me, but rather the feeling I have of it being a word that's more suited to playgrounds in schools and sci-fi movies which is used cheaply to get into voters' minds to instil fear and therefore support for the "evil" designs of the Bush administration on the world in general. A sort of easy linguistic propaganda, if you will. The "Axis of Evil" speech, for instance, put the word into the public conscience and suddenly, Iran, Iraq and North Korea were metamorphosed from troublesome states into cackling bad guys from horror movies.
Bush's declaration of war on terrorism after September 11th included a passage pledging that America's "responsibility to history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil." A bold statement indeed. Whereas this may seem a noble quest to those who really wish to believe it, what does it actually mean ? The declaration of war against evil came after three days of floundering desperately for a target for American civil rage. No one knew who really did it, and a response was needed. In order to launch a response, an enemy was needed. This new enemy was evil. The problem with evil is that it is such a vague concept, but this problem seems to be part of the solution for the Bush administration. If he was to declare war against Osama bin Laden, he would have had to come up with an entirely new war to invade Iraq. If he wanted to declare war against Islamic fundamentalism, that would put him in a difficult situation relative to Cuba, for example. Evil is a fabulous catch-all concept which can be applied to just about anything.
Bush's stand on evil is that it is "real, and it must be opposed". His views on Osama bin Laden are few and decisive - "The only thing I know certain about him is that he's evil. And I don't know what to believe about him, except that he wants to hurt Americans." Very clear. This would suggest that the definition of evil is wanting to hurt Americans. Unless such a line is some kind of political marketing gimmick. Besides, doesn't the death penalty, which Bush heartily endorsed as governor of Texas, hurt Americans ? Moreover, "I think there is one universal law, and that's terrorism is evil, and all of us must work to reject evil. Murder is evil, and we must reject murder." A more general assessment - killing people is evil. Once again, the millions killed in Iraq and Afghanistan were only "collateral damage" and therefore the acts in themselves were not evil. But wait - there's an explanation ! "None of us would ever wish the evil that has been done to our country, yet we have learned that out of evil can come great good." Aha. There's the explanation then.
"We don't share the point of view that evil is religious. We don't appreciate the fact that somebody has tried to hijack a religion in order to justify terror activities." It's great isn't it ? This is the same man who, not long after, claimed that "'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did." Terror is of course, much like evil, defined by the speaker. The majority of Iraqis may have been living in terror for several years but, well, it would appear that that's rather irrelevant. "The evil one who hides [Osama himself] thinks in ways that we can't possibly think in America -- so destructive, such a low regard for human life". I could go on and on.
But onto other things. The Republican running for senator in Illinois in 2004, Alan Keyes considered that terrorism and abortion were the "same evil". So we're now fighting a war against abortion as well ?
One thing that I've found vaguely amusing is that both of the Presidential candidates have been asked for their definitions of evil. Obama gave a general response including Darfur, American city streets, abusive parents, the fact that the act of confronting evil sometimes entails evil in itself, which could have been an oblique reference to the Iraq fiasco, once again. McCain gave a bold, Bushesque answer - Radical Islam, terrorists in Iraq, al-Qaeda, bin Laden (who McCain will apparently "follow to the gates of hell" in order to bring him to justice). Whereas Bush would probably agree with McCain's analysis, Obama's is probably closer to what Bush would himself want to say - a vague, indefinable concept which leaves the moral door open for attack just about anyone or anything.
But please Mr. Bush, for my sanity, can we just drop the word "evil" and actually point out what we're aiming at here ? It would make life a lot easier for the both of us. Thanks.
Bush's declaration of war on terrorism after September 11th included a passage pledging that America's "responsibility to history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil." A bold statement indeed. Whereas this may seem a noble quest to those who really wish to believe it, what does it actually mean ? The declaration of war against evil came after three days of floundering desperately for a target for American civil rage. No one knew who really did it, and a response was needed. In order to launch a response, an enemy was needed. This new enemy was evil. The problem with evil is that it is such a vague concept, but this problem seems to be part of the solution for the Bush administration. If he was to declare war against Osama bin Laden, he would have had to come up with an entirely new war to invade Iraq. If he wanted to declare war against Islamic fundamentalism, that would put him in a difficult situation relative to Cuba, for example. Evil is a fabulous catch-all concept which can be applied to just about anything.
Bush's stand on evil is that it is "real, and it must be opposed". His views on Osama bin Laden are few and decisive - "The only thing I know certain about him is that he's evil. And I don't know what to believe about him, except that he wants to hurt Americans." Very clear. This would suggest that the definition of evil is wanting to hurt Americans. Unless such a line is some kind of political marketing gimmick. Besides, doesn't the death penalty, which Bush heartily endorsed as governor of Texas, hurt Americans ? Moreover, "I think there is one universal law, and that's terrorism is evil, and all of us must work to reject evil. Murder is evil, and we must reject murder." A more general assessment - killing people is evil. Once again, the millions killed in Iraq and Afghanistan were only "collateral damage" and therefore the acts in themselves were not evil. But wait - there's an explanation ! "None of us would ever wish the evil that has been done to our country, yet we have learned that out of evil can come great good." Aha. There's the explanation then.
"We don't share the point of view that evil is religious. We don't appreciate the fact that somebody has tried to hijack a religion in order to justify terror activities." It's great isn't it ? This is the same man who, not long after, claimed that "'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did." Terror is of course, much like evil, defined by the speaker. The majority of Iraqis may have been living in terror for several years but, well, it would appear that that's rather irrelevant. "The evil one who hides [Osama himself] thinks in ways that we can't possibly think in America -- so destructive, such a low regard for human life". I could go on and on.
But onto other things. The Republican running for senator in Illinois in 2004, Alan Keyes considered that terrorism and abortion were the "same evil". So we're now fighting a war against abortion as well ?
One thing that I've found vaguely amusing is that both of the Presidential candidates have been asked for their definitions of evil. Obama gave a general response including Darfur, American city streets, abusive parents, the fact that the act of confronting evil sometimes entails evil in itself, which could have been an oblique reference to the Iraq fiasco, once again. McCain gave a bold, Bushesque answer - Radical Islam, terrorists in Iraq, al-Qaeda, bin Laden (who McCain will apparently "follow to the gates of hell" in order to bring him to justice). Whereas Bush would probably agree with McCain's analysis, Obama's is probably closer to what Bush would himself want to say - a vague, indefinable concept which leaves the moral door open for attack just about anyone or anything.
But please Mr. Bush, for my sanity, can we just drop the word "evil" and actually point out what we're aiming at here ? It would make life a lot easier for the both of us. Thanks.
Life IS Hard
On Friday, something interesting happened in Helsinki ! Around Töölönlahti, one of many lakes dotted around the city (which is not much of a city at all outside the centre, more of a collection of suburbs dotted around with forests, parks and lakes, which would be very pleasant if the architecture wasn't so reminiscent of the Soviet era) a massive crowd gathered for the all-Finland firework display contest. In it, five teams competed to launch massive amounts of money into the air in a show of noise and light that was impressive to even the most cynical viewer. London's firework display to announce the arrival of 2008, for instance, cost £1,3million. That half hour of light and noise in one city (and it can be safely assumed that the major cities of most of the world's countries have at least 2 large-scale displays a year - for new year and for the national day) cost the same as a year of anti-retroviral drugs for over 6000 people. Multiply this by the amount of countries in the world and the amount of cities in those countries which would have fireworks displays and you start to get an idea of how much money is fired into the air which could be put to slightly better use - third world debt relief, AIDS and malaria treatment and so on. It's unfair to pin the blame squarely on fireworks though, and the profligacy of authorities the world over can be pointed at. But I digress.
As in most cases of something happening in this city, the majority of the city swooped on the park, vodka and beer bottles in hands. Those looking upwards could see fireworks, and those looking in any other direction could see kids getting drunk not actually looking at the fireworks. I remember being drunk in my final years of school during fireworks displays and even though I was slightly underage by a year or two like these wasters, I didn't turn my eyes away from the pyrotechnics. This is when, aged 25, I lament the youth of today and how they don't appreciate anything. Actually this may have something to do with (and prepare yourself for another psychoanalysis of the Finnish population here) the state of things I came to realise quite early here.
Alcohol abuse by kids around here is explained away by M as a reflection that it's "difficult growing up in Finland". I've never grown up here so I can't really comment from an objective point of view. It does seem like quite a bold statement though. On first view, the Finns are a tough, resilient bunch - they live in a country whose climate is fairly harsh, to say the least, have come through 40 years of forced friendship with the Soviet Union and a large economic depression in the 1990s. They are, on the whole, people who like to live at one with nature. The majority can sort themselves out very well in terms of survival skills out in the elements and all men above the age of 18 go on between 6 and 12 months of what seems to be a quite rigorous stint of military service. However, for some reason, the national sport here is complaining about absolutely everything that doesn't work perfectly. Something that the average resident of a relatively dysfunctional country like Belgium would shrug off with an "ah well, shit happens" is treated as a large (and possibly distressing) inconvenience here. It is a country where social security throws money at absolutely everyone. I get 480€ a month of absolutely free money just for being a student here - kids start getting this in high school and just about anyone is eligible for free money of some sort - including the large population of alcoholics and those who just can't be bothered to work (one man I shared a hospital room with claimed to have not done any work for 15 years because he didn't like working - he had been supported by the state every step of the way. They were also paying entirely for his operation whereas I had to shell out for mine). I have never been perplexed at peoples' distress as much as I have here where people have a tendency to have a total nervous breakdown over something very trivial. Consequently, I'd hazard a guess that if kids growing up in this situation don't have entertainment and money right on their doorsteps, they'll just go and drink and smoke with other kids. Where they get the money to buy cider and cigarettes, I would imagine, is quite obvious. Life is hard indeed - I'm sure the children of Angola and Afghanistan are thanking their lucky stars that they were born in their respective social paradises !
This situation of excessive teenage angst leads to a bifurcation of the population of Helsinki, for example - half of it will hit the bottle, live on the number 6 and 8 trams and get battered every day on cheap vodka, berating passers-by and falling asleep in bus stops by mid-morning. Others will kick the habit, get jobs, and complain about how things don't run quite as well as they should. Before I moved over here, my ex described Finland as a country where "when a bus is 2 minutes late, the president hears about it". I laughed at the notion then but I'm getting more and more convinced of the reality of it.
As in most cases of something happening in this city, the majority of the city swooped on the park, vodka and beer bottles in hands. Those looking upwards could see fireworks, and those looking in any other direction could see kids getting drunk not actually looking at the fireworks. I remember being drunk in my final years of school during fireworks displays and even though I was slightly underage by a year or two like these wasters, I didn't turn my eyes away from the pyrotechnics. This is when, aged 25, I lament the youth of today and how they don't appreciate anything. Actually this may have something to do with (and prepare yourself for another psychoanalysis of the Finnish population here) the state of things I came to realise quite early here.
Alcohol abuse by kids around here is explained away by M as a reflection that it's "difficult growing up in Finland". I've never grown up here so I can't really comment from an objective point of view. It does seem like quite a bold statement though. On first view, the Finns are a tough, resilient bunch - they live in a country whose climate is fairly harsh, to say the least, have come through 40 years of forced friendship with the Soviet Union and a large economic depression in the 1990s. They are, on the whole, people who like to live at one with nature. The majority can sort themselves out very well in terms of survival skills out in the elements and all men above the age of 18 go on between 6 and 12 months of what seems to be a quite rigorous stint of military service. However, for some reason, the national sport here is complaining about absolutely everything that doesn't work perfectly. Something that the average resident of a relatively dysfunctional country like Belgium would shrug off with an "ah well, shit happens" is treated as a large (and possibly distressing) inconvenience here. It is a country where social security throws money at absolutely everyone. I get 480€ a month of absolutely free money just for being a student here - kids start getting this in high school and just about anyone is eligible for free money of some sort - including the large population of alcoholics and those who just can't be bothered to work (one man I shared a hospital room with claimed to have not done any work for 15 years because he didn't like working - he had been supported by the state every step of the way. They were also paying entirely for his operation whereas I had to shell out for mine). I have never been perplexed at peoples' distress as much as I have here where people have a tendency to have a total nervous breakdown over something very trivial. Consequently, I'd hazard a guess that if kids growing up in this situation don't have entertainment and money right on their doorsteps, they'll just go and drink and smoke with other kids. Where they get the money to buy cider and cigarettes, I would imagine, is quite obvious. Life is hard indeed - I'm sure the children of Angola and Afghanistan are thanking their lucky stars that they were born in their respective social paradises !
This situation of excessive teenage angst leads to a bifurcation of the population of Helsinki, for example - half of it will hit the bottle, live on the number 6 and 8 trams and get battered every day on cheap vodka, berating passers-by and falling asleep in bus stops by mid-morning. Others will kick the habit, get jobs, and complain about how things don't run quite as well as they should. Before I moved over here, my ex described Finland as a country where "when a bus is 2 minutes late, the president hears about it". I laughed at the notion then but I'm getting more and more convinced of the reality of it.
Aug 27, 2008
How To Halve Your I.Q. In 1 Hour
This afternoon I wrote about George Bush Jr., meaning that my blogging today couldn't sink to a lower level of intellect, right ?
WRONG !!!!
As I was eating my rice and various other things tonight, the Finnish version of Big Brother started on TV. I don't think there is anything in popular culture (including R 'n B music and even celebrity gossip magazines) that makes my jaw drop at the sheer idiocy and pointlessness of it all. I think the difference between Big Brother and the celebrity gossip magazines (because after all, they are both forms of escape from normal life to live someone else's life vicariously for people with no imagination to do anything else) is that, while people will religiously buy their gossip magazines every month and read them from cover to cover, that's all they do. It's quite sad, granted, but there's a limit to it. I have found the following interesting facts on the readership of Hello! magazine which, I would imagine, is typically representative of this type of magazine.
Hello! readers are 71% more likely than the average female to choose a car mainly on looks.
Only 4% of Hello! readers buy tomatoes, as of February 2003.
Hello! readers are also 64% more likely to vote for an electoral candidate based on his or her hairstyle rather than policies
I've found them unreferenced on Wikipedia and as such I'm not sure if these facts are actually true or not, but it's quite funny anyway and I'd say it's quite representative even if it is satyrical. There's a song by French singer Jean-Jacques Goldman which describes the desperation of the life of a woman who lives her life through the celebrities in these magazines.
Big Brother, however, is a different affair entirely. It is the ultimate in mental escapism yet, unlike watching travel programmes or documentaries, offers absolutely no interest of any sort, as far as I can see. Psychology PhD students aside, who seriously takes anything useful from Big Brother ? And what's more, it's not one nation's stupidity - from its inception in Holland in 1999, it has spread to nearly 70 countries (that's seventy countries where people sit on their sofas, watching other people sitting on sofas) as diverse as Montenegro (where it's called Veliki Brat), the Philippines (Pinoy Big Brother), Nigeria, Somalia and the Middle East (where it's known as Al-Rais), Albania and Colombia (where, predictably, it's called Gran Hermano). Not content with watching the "most interesting" parts on TV, some (and I know someone who does this) even pay money to access the cameras 24/7 via the internet !! It's quite amazing to my mind that people should pay money to sit on the internet at 2am in order to watch people they don't know sleeping. There are many things I don't like or I can see are brainless - hard rock, teen movies, Greek party islands - which I would never enjoy myself, but can see in a way how other people enjoy it. Watching Big Brother's 24/7 camera is something I just cannot understand.
From what I saw of the Finnish episode it's similar to shows I've had the misfortune of allowing my eyes to see in other countries - people sit around discussing brainless topics before doing some idiotic task, occasionally having a nervous breakdown and occasionally having sex (probably on the orders of the networks after even the most die hard airhead fan is considering switching off). At the end of this, someone wins a large amount of money and becomes an instant celebrity for having done precisely nothing of use.
Now, "people are stupid" is a line that I do like to repeat from time to time and (even though it's a massive generalisation) I do feel that there is some kind of pattern - the human population as a whole (or rather the "developed" Western population, living in places where life is so outstandingly boring that we sink to immense depths to "entertain" ourselves) comprises largely of sheep who follow trends and fashions for no other reason than "others are doing it". This leads me to one of the small problems I've been thinking about for a while. Namely the following :
Why is it that I, as someone who reads the news every morning, can access information on Jane Goody's personal life far more easily than I can on the war in Darfur, the development of cures against AIDS or the looming environmental threats which are poised to start destroying us all ?
Two facts are obvious to anyone who reads the news on any regular website - people read more about irrelevant celebrities' lives than they do about the battle against AIDS, and there are more frequent stories about irrelevant celebrities' lives than there are about the battle against AIDS. One of these two facts has engendered the other, although I'm not sure which. In either case, it's quite sad that life has reduced people to this. As I write this another reality show has just begun and I've realised that if I write everything I feel about the overly-emotional made-for-TV-spectacle tear-jerking reality shows I would probably overload the blogger.com servers. So with this in mind, it's probably about time to stop. I'm off to read a book.
WRONG !!!!
As I was eating my rice and various other things tonight, the Finnish version of Big Brother started on TV. I don't think there is anything in popular culture (including R 'n B music and even celebrity gossip magazines) that makes my jaw drop at the sheer idiocy and pointlessness of it all. I think the difference between Big Brother and the celebrity gossip magazines (because after all, they are both forms of escape from normal life to live someone else's life vicariously for people with no imagination to do anything else) is that, while people will religiously buy their gossip magazines every month and read them from cover to cover, that's all they do. It's quite sad, granted, but there's a limit to it. I have found the following interesting facts on the readership of Hello! magazine which, I would imagine, is typically representative of this type of magazine.
Hello! readers are 71% more likely than the average female to choose a car mainly on looks.
Only 4% of Hello! readers buy tomatoes, as of February 2003.
Hello! readers are also 64% more likely to vote for an electoral candidate based on his or her hairstyle rather than policies
I've found them unreferenced on Wikipedia and as such I'm not sure if these facts are actually true or not, but it's quite funny anyway and I'd say it's quite representative even if it is satyrical. There's a song by French singer Jean-Jacques Goldman which describes the desperation of the life of a woman who lives her life through the celebrities in these magazines.
Big Brother, however, is a different affair entirely. It is the ultimate in mental escapism yet, unlike watching travel programmes or documentaries, offers absolutely no interest of any sort, as far as I can see. Psychology PhD students aside, who seriously takes anything useful from Big Brother ? And what's more, it's not one nation's stupidity - from its inception in Holland in 1999, it has spread to nearly 70 countries (that's seventy countries where people sit on their sofas, watching other people sitting on sofas) as diverse as Montenegro (where it's called Veliki Brat), the Philippines (Pinoy Big Brother), Nigeria, Somalia and the Middle East (where it's known as Al-Rais), Albania and Colombia (where, predictably, it's called Gran Hermano). Not content with watching the "most interesting" parts on TV, some (and I know someone who does this) even pay money to access the cameras 24/7 via the internet !! It's quite amazing to my mind that people should pay money to sit on the internet at 2am in order to watch people they don't know sleeping. There are many things I don't like or I can see are brainless - hard rock, teen movies, Greek party islands - which I would never enjoy myself, but can see in a way how other people enjoy it. Watching Big Brother's 24/7 camera is something I just cannot understand.
From what I saw of the Finnish episode it's similar to shows I've had the misfortune of allowing my eyes to see in other countries - people sit around discussing brainless topics before doing some idiotic task, occasionally having a nervous breakdown and occasionally having sex (probably on the orders of the networks after even the most die hard airhead fan is considering switching off). At the end of this, someone wins a large amount of money and becomes an instant celebrity for having done precisely nothing of use.
Now, "people are stupid" is a line that I do like to repeat from time to time and (even though it's a massive generalisation) I do feel that there is some kind of pattern - the human population as a whole (or rather the "developed" Western population, living in places where life is so outstandingly boring that we sink to immense depths to "entertain" ourselves) comprises largely of sheep who follow trends and fashions for no other reason than "others are doing it". This leads me to one of the small problems I've been thinking about for a while. Namely the following :
Why is it that I, as someone who reads the news every morning, can access information on Jane Goody's personal life far more easily than I can on the war in Darfur, the development of cures against AIDS or the looming environmental threats which are poised to start destroying us all ?
Two facts are obvious to anyone who reads the news on any regular website - people read more about irrelevant celebrities' lives than they do about the battle against AIDS, and there are more frequent stories about irrelevant celebrities' lives than there are about the battle against AIDS. One of these two facts has engendered the other, although I'm not sure which. In either case, it's quite sad that life has reduced people to this. As I write this another reality show has just begun and I've realised that if I write everything I feel about the overly-emotional made-for-TV-spectacle tear-jerking reality shows I would probably overload the blogger.com servers. So with this in mind, it's probably about time to stop. I'm off to read a book.
"Iraq fair game, Georgia certainly not", say politicians
As a student of Political Science, I often get comments such as "ah, politicians are all rotten anyway" or "it's just a big pile of corruption" and "I don't trust politics". People then look at me expecting me to defend myself. Often, I disappoint them by pointing out that politicians are even more rotten than they think.
A lot has been made of Russia's invasion of Georgia recently. For some it's shocking. For some it's a scary return to the days of the Cold War. For me, it's quite funny - a stage where "the West" can once again show how wonderfully hypocritical it is with some quite brilliant soundbites. Firstly, presidential hopefully John McCain showed that he has the credentials to become a great leader of the free world in following in Bush II's footsteps by claiming something ridiculous.
George Bush II, always keep to make his mark on international events, pointed out that "Russia has sought to integrate into the diplomatic, political, economic and security structures of the 21st century. Now Russia is putting its aspirations at risk by taking actions in Georgia that are inconsistent with the principles of those institutions." The fact that the majority of Ossetians are Russian citizens and were being targeted by the Georgian army seems to be rather irrelevant here - the US was protecting American civilians by attacking Iraq, which was incidentally barely able to threaten its neighbours. Just because a bunch of people with Russian passports were being charged on by the Georgian army doesn't mean Russia was actually acting legitimately defending them. Far from it, apparently - this kind of thing is just not allowed !
"In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations !" claimed John McCain to back up this accusation. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find out whether Iraq and Afghanistan were considered nations by the US or not, but in any case this seems to be a rather bizarre claim to make. A suggestion that Russia be barred from the G8 while its army is still in Georgia was also floated. Interestingly, McCain has stated that if he becomes president, he will aim for American troops to remain in Iraq until 2013.
Condoleezza Rice, not wanting to miss out on the action, came up with this little pearl : "This is not 1968 and the invasion of Czechoslovakia, where Russia can threaten its neighbours, occupy a capital, overthrow a government and get away with it. Things have changed !". Indeed, this is 2008 - it is not 2001 or 2003 either. Admittedly, the US did not invade neighbours, occupy their capitals, overthrow their governments and get away with it in 2001 and 2003 - it did actually make the effort to get the troops out to Asia in order to do all of these things. Which, I suppose, makes it acceptable.
Eventually, someone stopped playing the game. Zalmay Khalilzad, US ambassador to various places in recent times, decided to say "hey ! we're not being hypocritical, we're just being selective in who people are allowed to invade !". "The days of overthrowing leaders by military means in Europe -- those days are gone !" he said, skillfully avoiding the Iraqi/Afghan question. Unfortunately, in a slight oversight, he forgot to mention McCain and Rice's specific comments on timing, and therefore the US-led NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 would fall foul of this statement. If I was being really pedantic, I could say that, Georgia lying south of the main peaks of the Caucasus, it's technically in Asia itself. But I digress.
In addition to its military action in Georgia, Russia has done something even more disgusting - it has recognised the independence of South Ossetia AND Abkhazia !
The US has positioned itself as a champion of international law and in this arena the UN Charter gives the organisation's purpose as one "to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples". Self determination of peoples would mean that Ossetians would get their own state, as would the Abkhaz, both of which speak their own language and have their own cultures and customs. Russian intention to recognise two regions that have been in conflict but are clearly within the internationally recognised borders of Georgia... is regrettable" claims Condoleezza Rice.
Where the Americans tread, of course, the British will surely follow. Foreign Secretary David Milliband claimed that the crisis provided a "rude awakening" and that Russia's "unilateral attempt to redraw the map marks a moment of real significance". Also, "We fully support Georgia's independence and territorial integrity, which cannot be changed by decree from Moscow." Would this be the same Britain and America who dismantled Serbia and pushed Kosovo into independence on the basis of national self-determination ? What a strange world this is.
DISCLAIMER : I would also like to explain this before anyone thinks "Oh here we go, someone who wants to slate Britain and the US for everything". I don't see any particularly easy solution for this situation, nor do I think Russia's aggression can be condoned. Nor do I think that the US and Britain are the only ones involved in blowing the trumpet of Western double-edged morality either - many others have recognised Kosovo which was declared as an independent state completely against international law and are jumping onto the anti-Russian bandwagon as well. I'm just presenting a certain side of things which crop up again and again in any crisis situation relevant to the West across the globe.
A lot has been made of Russia's invasion of Georgia recently. For some it's shocking. For some it's a scary return to the days of the Cold War. For me, it's quite funny - a stage where "the West" can once again show how wonderfully hypocritical it is with some quite brilliant soundbites. Firstly, presidential hopefully John McCain showed that he has the credentials to become a great leader of the free world in following in Bush II's footsteps by claiming something ridiculous.
George Bush II, always keep to make his mark on international events, pointed out that "Russia has sought to integrate into the diplomatic, political, economic and security structures of the 21st century. Now Russia is putting its aspirations at risk by taking actions in Georgia that are inconsistent with the principles of those institutions." The fact that the majority of Ossetians are Russian citizens and were being targeted by the Georgian army seems to be rather irrelevant here - the US was protecting American civilians by attacking Iraq, which was incidentally barely able to threaten its neighbours. Just because a bunch of people with Russian passports were being charged on by the Georgian army doesn't mean Russia was actually acting legitimately defending them. Far from it, apparently - this kind of thing is just not allowed !
"In the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations !" claimed John McCain to back up this accusation. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find out whether Iraq and Afghanistan were considered nations by the US or not, but in any case this seems to be a rather bizarre claim to make. A suggestion that Russia be barred from the G8 while its army is still in Georgia was also floated. Interestingly, McCain has stated that if he becomes president, he will aim for American troops to remain in Iraq until 2013.
Condoleezza Rice, not wanting to miss out on the action, came up with this little pearl : "This is not 1968 and the invasion of Czechoslovakia, where Russia can threaten its neighbours, occupy a capital, overthrow a government and get away with it. Things have changed !". Indeed, this is 2008 - it is not 2001 or 2003 either. Admittedly, the US did not invade neighbours, occupy their capitals, overthrow their governments and get away with it in 2001 and 2003 - it did actually make the effort to get the troops out to Asia in order to do all of these things. Which, I suppose, makes it acceptable.
Eventually, someone stopped playing the game. Zalmay Khalilzad, US ambassador to various places in recent times, decided to say "hey ! we're not being hypocritical, we're just being selective in who people are allowed to invade !". "The days of overthrowing leaders by military means in Europe -- those days are gone !" he said, skillfully avoiding the Iraqi/Afghan question. Unfortunately, in a slight oversight, he forgot to mention McCain and Rice's specific comments on timing, and therefore the US-led NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999 would fall foul of this statement. If I was being really pedantic, I could say that, Georgia lying south of the main peaks of the Caucasus, it's technically in Asia itself. But I digress.
In addition to its military action in Georgia, Russia has done something even more disgusting - it has recognised the independence of South Ossetia AND Abkhazia !
The US has positioned itself as a champion of international law and in this arena the UN Charter gives the organisation's purpose as one "to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples". Self determination of peoples would mean that Ossetians would get their own state, as would the Abkhaz, both of which speak their own language and have their own cultures and customs. Russian intention to recognise two regions that have been in conflict but are clearly within the internationally recognised borders of Georgia... is regrettable" claims Condoleezza Rice.
Where the Americans tread, of course, the British will surely follow. Foreign Secretary David Milliband claimed that the crisis provided a "rude awakening" and that Russia's "unilateral attempt to redraw the map marks a moment of real significance". Also, "We fully support Georgia's independence and territorial integrity, which cannot be changed by decree from Moscow." Would this be the same Britain and America who dismantled Serbia and pushed Kosovo into independence on the basis of national self-determination ? What a strange world this is.
DISCLAIMER : I would also like to explain this before anyone thinks "Oh here we go, someone who wants to slate Britain and the US for everything". I don't see any particularly easy solution for this situation, nor do I think Russia's aggression can be condoned. Nor do I think that the US and Britain are the only ones involved in blowing the trumpet of Western double-edged morality either - many others have recognised Kosovo which was declared as an independent state completely against international law and are jumping onto the anti-Russian bandwagon as well. I'm just presenting a certain side of things which crop up again and again in any crisis situation relevant to the West across the globe.
Aug 8, 2008
Can we leave the Chinese alone for a bit ?
Seriously - they've organised the Olympics, they're putting a show on for the rest of the world. Politics is politics, sport is sport. If we didn't give the task of organising big games to countries without a poor human rights record, the Olympics, World Cup and European championships of just about everything would simply alternate between Finland and Sweden, the two most innocent and incorruptible nations in the world. We've all got blood on our hands, let's face it. So what's the big deal with the Chinese ? Why is everyone saying we should boycott watching the games ? Why were heads of state threatening to not go to Beijing ? I've heard it's because China is currently illegally occupying Tibet. I've heard that athletes themselves are signing petitions ordering the Chinese to move out of Tibet, give it an independent state and to behave themselves properly with regard to human rights. I've heard they also want the Chinese to withdraw their investments in Sudan because of the Darfur situation. This is, quite honestly speaking, ridiculous.
There hasn't been a boycott of the Olympics since 1984 when the Soviets and much of the Eastern Bloc boycotted the Games in the US after a similar action by the West during the Moscow games in 1980. Since then the games have been held in South Korea, Spain, the USA, Australia, and Athens. I don't recall widespread criticism of the Games being awarded to the United States for its support of right wing death squads in Latin America, nor do I recall Australia being singled out for its treatment of Aborigines and refugees from war zones. Similarly, the London Games of 2012 don't seem to be criticised for British action over the world. Are the athletes going to sign a "Free Iraq and Afghanistan" petition in 4 years ? Or how about a "Stop investing in Nigeria because of its human rights record" petition ? Assuming that Paris had been awarded the 2012 Games, would we have stood on our pedestals and started criticising France's support of countless African dictators ? How about an "Apologise for propping up Jean-Bedel Bokassa/Mobutu Sese Seko/Hissène Habré/Idriss Déby" petition ? Or maybe France should be forced to apologise for Napoleon's invasion of Russia before it is awarded any global celebration of sport again ?
Sportsmen are not politicians, let's not treat them as such. China isn't a shining light of human rights, but nor are most countries. Just because they're going to be richer than us in 50 years doesn't mean we should piss on their bonfire this month. So leave them alone !
There hasn't been a boycott of the Olympics since 1984 when the Soviets and much of the Eastern Bloc boycotted the Games in the US after a similar action by the West during the Moscow games in 1980. Since then the games have been held in South Korea, Spain, the USA, Australia, and Athens. I don't recall widespread criticism of the Games being awarded to the United States for its support of right wing death squads in Latin America, nor do I recall Australia being singled out for its treatment of Aborigines and refugees from war zones. Similarly, the London Games of 2012 don't seem to be criticised for British action over the world. Are the athletes going to sign a "Free Iraq and Afghanistan" petition in 4 years ? Or how about a "Stop investing in Nigeria because of its human rights record" petition ? Assuming that Paris had been awarded the 2012 Games, would we have stood on our pedestals and started criticising France's support of countless African dictators ? How about an "Apologise for propping up Jean-Bedel Bokassa/Mobutu Sese Seko/Hissène Habré/Idriss Déby" petition ? Or maybe France should be forced to apologise for Napoleon's invasion of Russia before it is awarded any global celebration of sport again ?
Sportsmen are not politicians, let's not treat them as such. China isn't a shining light of human rights, but nor are most countries. Just because they're going to be richer than us in 50 years doesn't mean we should piss on their bonfire this month. So leave them alone !
A Discussion of the Human Condition
Yesterday morning my letterbox made a sound and I found my Bradt guide to the Congos. which I'd ordered at the beginning of the week. I ploughed straight into it. It looks like a great part of the world to visit (which we're saving up to do next year) and, despite the differences between it and the parts of Africa that I know, it brought memories flooding back. One of the biggest differences between Africa and northern Europe is the social interaction, the possibility of just talking to anyone for hours on end about nothing at all without it seeming like space filler. It's just fun. This evening rather contrasted with this book and these memories.
I went to a bar tonight. Firstly, it was Friday. Secondly, there were birthday drinks. Thirdly, it was something to do. And last of all, I like places where other people are. It gives me a chance to be social outside of a computer geek setting, and to people watch. Generally, people watching is limited to looking at girls and to observing people doing weird things and being critical of this in a very cynical kind of way. It does have other uses too, though. Having lived in 3 countries and visited many others (and having visited bars in most of these places), it's easy to pick up on local habits, notice trends among people from different places, and then sometimes see them everywhere and get annoyed by them. Going to a Finnish bar is an intriguing experience in terms of people watching; it is, at once, and a good place to get to know the Finnish psyche and a bad place to get to know it. It's a bad place because people do tend to go out to get plastered here, which naturally unleashes the inner self which never exposes itself in times of sobriety. It's a good place, however, because in the same bar you can see a cross-section of society to a far wider degree than I've noticed anywhere else. A frequenter of a Finnish bar will conclude that practically the entire Finnish nation consists of 4 types of people:
- People who have dyed their hair black, usually have tattoos of bats or incomprehensible Chinese characters, and wear t-shirts bearing slogans like "DEATH", pictures of skulls, and so on. Such people will almost always be dressed in black and red. Optional extras include black fishnet tights over red leggings (for women) and a shaved head and large goatee beard, or long hair tied into a pony tail (for men).
- Middle aged women sitting drinking gin long-drinks accompanied by other middle aged women, looking somewhat uncomfortable. I'm tempted to say that they are possibly looking for male company to replace the husband who has ditched them but, given that I'm not qualified as a psychiatrist and have no knowledge of telepathy, it's outside my mandate to guess such things.
- Geeky looking guys, almost always wearing square glasses, with blonde hair tentatively gelled up into spikes, also looking uncomfortable. I'm tempted to say that they are possibly looking for female company, and that they are probably hoping that this company doesn't come along until they've had a couple more beers. While having no knowledge of telepathy, I'm confident of being fairly accurate with this suggestion.
- "Past it" old guys, with 3-day stubble revealing their 3-straight-days drinking habits, usually with faded tattoos, sleeveless vests (preferably leather) and glazed expressions. Nevertheless, these people (if they have been admitted to the bar in the first place) are quite animated, and will talk loudly and at length with whoever cares to listen.
If one has lots of money and the patience to go to a overhyped club which is just as crappy as the others but loved by the masses from the rich suburbs for some reason, you will discover a 5th type - the young professional who probably drives a sports car, does not own any clothes which cost less than 50€ (including socks), and will generally sit around talking about sports cars and expensive clothes (possibly not including socks).
In any case, today I noticed several things which I've decided to share with you all. Now, I know I have been quite negative about Finns on several occasions in this blog and I've explained the reasons for this. They happen to be a people that I have a lot of time for - they are honest to a fault, very friendly once you actually get to know them and, once they get pissed enough, quite chatty and open and curious about us foreigners. Sober, they're quite quiet - this bugged me at the beginning but I've understood now that silence is not awkward here and nothing to shy away from. Hard for me to understand, but that's just the way it is. However, there are a few things which I've noticed here enough to write down.
Tonight, for instance, there were 5 of us at a bar - me, and 4 of M's friends. On sitting at the table, 3 of them started speaking in Finnish to each other (which is completely understandable - even if maybe not from a linguistic point of view) and one of them got a newspaper out and started doing a crossword. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't this slightly strange ? If I went to the bar with a group of friends and one got a beer and pulled out a crossword, I'd take that as quite a blatant social "fuck you" and wonder if this person wouldn't be happier at home. As it happened, the other three didn't bat an eyelid at this and continued their conversation. I stared into space and drank my pint. To me, this fits into the same category as the girl and guy at a bar both writing text messages which I've seen here and there, and the people who walk along with someone else and pull out an MP3 player and start listening to it. The silence-as-a-conversational-tactic thing is something I've got used to even if I don't really enjoy it - outwardly giving signs of turning away from social company in a "sorry you're too boring for me" is something I just don't get. Again, it seems to be something which is taken as unproblematic here and, again, this is not an essentially Finnish disease - I've seen it in various places. It does seem to be quite rampant here though, leading to my conclusion that it's generally accepted as OK. It's also quite a complicated social fabric to work out given that people seem to go very hot-and-cold on the whole issue (e.g. if I'm out with a group and manage to corner one or two of them, they're absolutely open and chatty and lovely people to be with, and I fade to the background again when we reintegrate the herd). I plan to continue the research.
I went to a bar tonight. Firstly, it was Friday. Secondly, there were birthday drinks. Thirdly, it was something to do. And last of all, I like places where other people are. It gives me a chance to be social outside of a computer geek setting, and to people watch. Generally, people watching is limited to looking at girls and to observing people doing weird things and being critical of this in a very cynical kind of way. It does have other uses too, though. Having lived in 3 countries and visited many others (and having visited bars in most of these places), it's easy to pick up on local habits, notice trends among people from different places, and then sometimes see them everywhere and get annoyed by them. Going to a Finnish bar is an intriguing experience in terms of people watching; it is, at once, and a good place to get to know the Finnish psyche and a bad place to get to know it. It's a bad place because people do tend to go out to get plastered here, which naturally unleashes the inner self which never exposes itself in times of sobriety. It's a good place, however, because in the same bar you can see a cross-section of society to a far wider degree than I've noticed anywhere else. A frequenter of a Finnish bar will conclude that practically the entire Finnish nation consists of 4 types of people:
- People who have dyed their hair black, usually have tattoos of bats or incomprehensible Chinese characters, and wear t-shirts bearing slogans like "DEATH", pictures of skulls, and so on. Such people will almost always be dressed in black and red. Optional extras include black fishnet tights over red leggings (for women) and a shaved head and large goatee beard, or long hair tied into a pony tail (for men).
- Middle aged women sitting drinking gin long-drinks accompanied by other middle aged women, looking somewhat uncomfortable. I'm tempted to say that they are possibly looking for male company to replace the husband who has ditched them but, given that I'm not qualified as a psychiatrist and have no knowledge of telepathy, it's outside my mandate to guess such things.
- Geeky looking guys, almost always wearing square glasses, with blonde hair tentatively gelled up into spikes, also looking uncomfortable. I'm tempted to say that they are possibly looking for female company, and that they are probably hoping that this company doesn't come along until they've had a couple more beers. While having no knowledge of telepathy, I'm confident of being fairly accurate with this suggestion.
- "Past it" old guys, with 3-day stubble revealing their 3-straight-days drinking habits, usually with faded tattoos, sleeveless vests (preferably leather) and glazed expressions. Nevertheless, these people (if they have been admitted to the bar in the first place) are quite animated, and will talk loudly and at length with whoever cares to listen.
If one has lots of money and the patience to go to a overhyped club which is just as crappy as the others but loved by the masses from the rich suburbs for some reason, you will discover a 5th type - the young professional who probably drives a sports car, does not own any clothes which cost less than 50€ (including socks), and will generally sit around talking about sports cars and expensive clothes (possibly not including socks).
In any case, today I noticed several things which I've decided to share with you all. Now, I know I have been quite negative about Finns on several occasions in this blog and I've explained the reasons for this. They happen to be a people that I have a lot of time for - they are honest to a fault, very friendly once you actually get to know them and, once they get pissed enough, quite chatty and open and curious about us foreigners. Sober, they're quite quiet - this bugged me at the beginning but I've understood now that silence is not awkward here and nothing to shy away from. Hard for me to understand, but that's just the way it is. However, there are a few things which I've noticed here enough to write down.
Tonight, for instance, there were 5 of us at a bar - me, and 4 of M's friends. On sitting at the table, 3 of them started speaking in Finnish to each other (which is completely understandable - even if maybe not from a linguistic point of view) and one of them got a newspaper out and started doing a crossword. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't this slightly strange ? If I went to the bar with a group of friends and one got a beer and pulled out a crossword, I'd take that as quite a blatant social "fuck you" and wonder if this person wouldn't be happier at home. As it happened, the other three didn't bat an eyelid at this and continued their conversation. I stared into space and drank my pint. To me, this fits into the same category as the girl and guy at a bar both writing text messages which I've seen here and there, and the people who walk along with someone else and pull out an MP3 player and start listening to it. The silence-as-a-conversational-tactic thing is something I've got used to even if I don't really enjoy it - outwardly giving signs of turning away from social company in a "sorry you're too boring for me" is something I just don't get. Again, it seems to be something which is taken as unproblematic here and, again, this is not an essentially Finnish disease - I've seen it in various places. It does seem to be quite rampant here though, leading to my conclusion that it's generally accepted as OK. It's also quite a complicated social fabric to work out given that people seem to go very hot-and-cold on the whole issue (e.g. if I'm out with a group and manage to corner one or two of them, they're absolutely open and chatty and lovely people to be with, and I fade to the background again when we reintegrate the herd). I plan to continue the research.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.JPG)