No news is good news

I am not the first person who FELT(take note I am not saying this is a fact) this way.

Good news here do not mean "positive" news. eg. Economic boom, tax cut. Good news here means news that are not up to standard in terms of quality.

Any news, from the newspaper, TV, radio, should always be taken with a pinch of salt.

In fact, all medias. magazines, documentaries, advertisements, etc etc

People have been too lazy to "find out" what is really happening, most people prefer people to "feed" them with news. Some people even "look" for news that they "want" to believe in.

Good and Bad.

"Ignorance is Bliss" was what a veteran news editor from usa told me as his words of wisedom heading a news paper in the states.

A few years back, I would be surprised to hear these words coming out from a man who should champion the journalism spirit advocated in academics sessions. However, having worked in the media industry(news, advertising) myself, i cannot but empathized with his opinions.

Most of the time, whoever is funding the media, gets the decision of what is to be printed. Anything can be "twisted"(i said can be, i did not say it is the truth), from the first man who land on moon, economic informations, to social psychology.

For a period of time, I thought "news is ugly". During my uni days,I read on books about journalism myself (i am a business major) as I stumbled into it when I was learning photography. The ideal in journalism was spirit lifting when I first got to know it. But now, I understand why it remains as an ideal.

Paying the journalists needs money, printing needs money, film and camera needs money, PERMITS need money. And sad enough, like i mentioned before, most audience are not interested in the truth either. I actually think its perfectly fine. Nowadays, I seldom read the newspaper, watch news programs, listen to radio news.

But if i do, I will try my best to understand why certain news is selected to be printed(no news paper can print what is happening in a day), why is the story angled in such a way, and what the the real objective facts I can "bring home" with me.

You probably, while reading this, are thinking i am sprouting rubbish already. that's fine with me, as long as you think it over what I said.

Yes, think it over, whatever you read, see, listened, from this world of media bombardment. from the smallest news about a fishmonger who can scale a fish in 10 seconds to big news like the Iraq war.

It is going to take a longer time, less convenience and maybe tiring to do so, but it is always better to disbelieve first untill you are convinced by facts.(or good lies)

What is a good photograph?

It's only after 4 years since my first click on a SLR camera do I start to think about this question seriously.

That is after I learnt the basics of camera operations, print some black and white pictures on my own, shot for Straits Times, worked as a copywriter with a senior art director in a 4A ad agency, got sacked by a local publishing firm as a marketing executive, assisting other photographers, start shooting commercially, heard some people saying good things about my shitty works, and others trashing my favourite works, dropped my 8KG camera in the middle of a shoot with my client beside me, etc etc

I cannot remember how many times people asked me this question before. Many assumed that being a passionate photographer and making a living with it, I should have a "this is it, once and for all" answer.

Seriously, I don't. (how sad)

But i can share what I have learnt from my experience and maybe the audience can find a definition for themselves.

During my NS days, i came across one of the first few exhibition of Ken Seet, a very established black and white photographer in singapore. His works then was one of the reasons that started me in photography.

So after a few years of fooling around with the camera and inhaling chemicals in the darkroom, I must show my works to him and hear what he says about them. He was very receptive to meet me even though he had never meet me before.

He went through all the 40 8x10 prints i brought, and selected a few and commented.

"I like these lot, I don't like these lot"

He explained what he would have done in the darkroom given the same negatives, but throughout the process, he did not use the two words I was expecting. "Good" and "Bad"

"What do you think are good about those that you like?" I asked.

His eyebrows tighten a little, and told me a theory that I still remember till now

"If something is best expressed in words, then use words, don't use photography. Likewise, if you chose photography to be the medium, then do it such that no other medium can express it better than photography"

It reminds me of a saying in buddism.

"The words in the scriptures are like your finger, and enlightment is the moon. The finger can point out where the moon is, but the finger is not the moon"

The senior art director in the 4A agency has a different view.

He has many photo books in the small cupboard beside his desk.

Richard Averdon, Irvin Penn, Henri Cartier Bresson, and many other big names.

But, he also has a lot of "crap" photos lying around, and from the look of it, they are suppose to serve the same purpose as those big names' books.

How can I miss the oppotunity of showing my works to a art director in a 4A ad agency?

Weird enough, he used the same words. "like" and "don't like". and no "good" or "bad"

"Photography is an mean to an end. End is not the photo that is made, end is what is going on in the viewer's mind"

During my first year in shanghai, there is a illegal hawker from AnHui selling fried noodles after 9pm every night.

Beside where he put his salt, vinegar and the frying wok, is an oily and dirty photo of him and his wife (who is selling the same thing in the next traffic light junction)

I told him that putting the photo near a high temperature environment will make the colour fade faster.

"It's ok, as long as the face can be seen, it's ok"

So every night, I went down to buy his fried noodles (he is a damn good cook), I see his photo losing color saturation a little by little, and then he will print a new one, with the right colors, and let it fade again.

Every night, while waiting for him cook the noodles, I will be waiting for 3 mins beside him. and it's hard not to notice that photo because i commented on it to him.

After 6 months, that photo looks like a TV frame, showing an art film to me. desaturate slowly, regain full colour, and desaturate again.

maybe i was too lonely then in shanghai, but it was actually quite an experience, almost as good as a well curated exhibition.

What is a good photograph?

Damn! I wish I know.

Why marry?

There's a period of time after my graduation and before I finally decided on what the f@#k i wanted to do with my life, I was very very very free.

During that time, I got not much money, so the library is a place I like to go to because it's cheap(free actually), there are a good collection of photography books, the second hand camera shops are nearby, and there are always pretty girls going to the library to do homework.

I was particular interested about marriage during that period of time. Not wanting to get married, but something always make me wonder. Who is the smart ass that comes up with the concept of marriage in the human history?

Surprisingly, I could not find that information in the library's sea of books, but in that process of finding more about that person, reading social journals, researches, I made up my mind about something.

There is no point in marriage.

Many people marry for security, you sign on a legal binding document to love a particular person forever, and technically, he or she is the only person you are legally allowed to have sex with after the document takes effect. This is a clause that many females welcomed. Her hubby WILL/CAN ONLY/MUST/IS LEGALLY BOUND to love her only, just like in the movies, the hero promised the beauty "I will love you forever".

How romantic...not really.

If a guy really loves a girl, the document is not needed to ENSURE/MAKE SURE/LEGALLY THREATEN him to do so. Similarly, if he do not love his wife anymore, he will make 10 divorces to get rid of her if they married 10 times in 10 different countries.

And what kind of security are we talking about here when we allow divorce?

if divorce is not allowed and classified as a criminal crime liable to death sentence, then yes, i fully agree that he will at the very least provide for you till death, either natural, accident or death sentence, do you guys apart.

"The document at least safeguard the financial interest of the girl if the guy decides to leave her "

Then, I would say "Hey, you are marrying for the wrong reason. You should marry your parents"

A promise to love someone is very very hard to keep. Biologically, men are designed to spread our wild oats as much as possible. this is designed/drilled/encoded/ into our system since living things start to propogate through sexual reproduction. That will give the human race a higher probabily of an offspring stronger/fitter than its parents. Nature's selection will ensure the fittest survive, therefore, if human race reproduce and create a identical offspring, without any chances of a stronger offspring, we will eventually die off.

So, asking a man or a woman to "love" someone forever is technically not possible. A better word for it would be "controlled to love" you forever. Is that the spirit of marriage that we know? "I will only love you, although I also love X, Y but maybe just not as much"

"Humans are not animals, we are one up because we are more civilized than animals and we know when to do and not to do certain things"

Please...get off your moral high horse. Human are animals, and in certain ways, more desirable than any other living things in the animal kingdom.(Pollution, extinction of other races, wasting earth's resources like its yours etc etc)

Anyway, we will talk more about civilized life now. Loving someone forever is an ideal, but most of the time not practical. In today's urban city lifestyle, people changes, lifestyles changes, habbits changes, your handphone changes, your diet changes, even your career paths changes, let alone what attracts you. And i always believe we need a different kind of boyfriend/girlfriend in different stages of our lifes. in rough age segments, as below

1) 16-22 we need a playmate. guys need a gal that he can chase, gals need guys that chase.
2) 23-29 we need a playmate but also someone to talk to about the new worklife, new friends and new environment
3) 30-35 we need someone who knows what they want in life, companion, career, lifestyle etc
4) 36 onwards...i am too young to guess, because my group of friends do not include those yet. but that should be a good age to marry if you chose to follow the flow.

anyway, i am sure you get my point. someone SUITABLE for you in the twenties need not be the same one in your thirties. you change, so does he/her. if he/her do not change according to who you need, you guys have to go seperate ways. most of the time, this can be a no bad blood break up. i have seen many such examples before. still friends

If you think about it, you do not gain much after marriage beside a paper document. Nowadays, I think it is not a good idea to marry before cohabiting. because marriage is about living together, not just dating anymore. that includes knowing your partners' most undesirable information like shitting, wearing home clothes, living patterns, ugly sides. but then again, if cohabiting already works fine and couples are happy already, then what's the point of marriage ?

"Cohabiting is a disgrace to your families, and not allowed in some societies. you guys will be seen as loose people"

if that's one of the reason/factor/motivation to marry, i am sure it wont last, at least not as happy as can be. Love is between two people, not two families and the society. who you decide to be with is really not your parents' business. they can give advice, but they SHOULD NOT deter your decisions. after all, you are the one staying with the person, not your parents.

Marriage is a concept for uneducated men a few thousand years ago. at least, it was invented then in many forms. 1 hubby many wives, 1 wife many hubbies, big brother marrying sister in law if small brother dies, etc etc etc. in fact, there are suggestions from researchers that marriage is a concept developed for economics purposes, with units of workforce(or families) easier to identify with. which is why a brother can married a widowed sister-in-law, so the workforce unit is complete with a male.

but now, as we get more civilized, educated, and thinking, marriage is not neccsary anymore. we will stay with one person forever if he/she is the right one without marriage, and we will leave someone if he/she is not the right one after marriage. there are living examples from both sides that i personally know.

Global divorce rate is 48% (figures from a journal i read in 2002), and that does not include couples who are not happy together but chose not to divorce due to financial commitments, housing commitments and many other reasons not pertaining directly to the relationship itself. so that means, every couple have a close to 50/50 chance to of a divorce...ouch!

However, if you are getting married, I still wish you a very happy marriage life...........................and good luck...you will need it.