Superstition, Science, Chinese Medicine, etc.

Old Chinese medical chart on acupuncture meridians (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Chinese medicine is mostly experience, and experience is part of science, so those who fight against Chinese medicine under the name of "science", do not really understand science.

Of course, much of Chinese medicine indeed is superstition. However, modern medicine is also not 100% "scientific". Many modern medicine treatments are not suitable for humans, but they are still in practice nonetheless because of our blind belief in science.

I don't think superstition belongs to a specific knowledge, tradition or custom. Nor do I think it's a privilege of religion. I think it is a human attitude exhibits in all intellectual fields. I think superstition in a sense can be understood as a blind belief in our imagined super power, or "absolute", derived from our despair over human condition. So as long as human race exists, superstition will always play its rule.

Dance Into Sorrow - Julia Lipnitskaia's Free Skate Program "Schindler's List"

I knew nothing about Julia Linpnitskaia and her European Championship program Schindler's List, but when I watched this program during Olympics team competition, I was completely mesmerized.

Probably this program is by far my personal favorite figure skating program. Not only because it's beautifully choreographed and performed, but also because it expresses a deep and complicate feeling I personally hold for life, that life is a co-existence of sorrow and joy. The music is a "gentle" reminder a the greatest tragedy of human race, and a 15 year-old girl, so beautiful and innocent, danced so effortlessly, yet so expressively, making such a strong contrast with the mood of the music. Perhaps, this contrast alone, is already mesmerizing.

The choreograph of this program is extremely unique. I usually see free skating programs begin with slow motion, and at certain point they would changed into fast speed, but this program is quite different. From the beginning to the end, movements are all in a fluent and medium speed, seamlessly match the music's melancholy tone. The design of movements are not at all routine or "cliche", rather, they are creative and expressive, even symbolic, embody the deepest emotions of human kind: struggle, sorrow, hope, wonder, strength, passion and grace.
I think it's worth to mention the choreographer of this program Illia Averbukh, a Russian ice dancer. Without his genius work, this masterpiece would not be in existence.

Julia Lipnitskaia's performance was almost perfect. How could a 15 year-old so meticulously convey such complicated emotion? I have no clue. I am simply amazed.

 

P.S. I was "struggling" to find "right" words to describe how I feel about this program, however, all the words I found seem to paled comparing with a comment I found in youtube: "I need to punch the wall to be manly again"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8dvRTftmwk

"Is Selfishness Always Bad?"

The Virtue of Selfishness (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

My previous post "Is Suicide A Selfish Act" triggered a deeper question by a facebook friend of mine (Dale Cooper): "Is selfishness always bad?" To answer this question, I think we first can look at the definition of "selfishness":

By Wikipedia: Selfishness is placing concern with oneself or one's own interests above the well-being of others.
Dictionary.com: (selfish is) devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

It seems, according to these definitions, suicide is indeed a "selfish act". So the real question is: is selfishness always bad? (Since I don't mean to get into the discussion about fundamental questions of morality, "good" or "bad" in this post simply mean their general use based on common moral standard.)

My answer are both "yes" and "no". I think we have to put selfishness in context. First of all, if a selfish act did not bring harm to others, I think it is not a bad thing at all. We all have right, and should, to treat ourselves kindly, do our best to live a happy life. Secondly, in case that a selfish act did cause others' pain, we still need to examine the circumstance: if the act were motivated by greed, by "entertainment", it is bad, if the act were caused by pain, by suffering, it is not. Of course, there are many more layers between these two conditions, but for me, this differentiation can temporarily serve as "benchmark".

I think in our daily use of this term - "selfishness", we usually mean the kind that brings harm to others, and is motivated by negative reasons, such as greed. That's how this term usually bears a negative "countenance" in most people's eyes. And because of this general use, we tend to ignore some exceptions, some more subtle layers in between, or some extreme conditions, such as suicide.

So here we go again: relativity. I believe most of time we cannot judge things by look at them alone. Because things do not stand alone, instead, they exist as parts of a whole. As parts, things tangle with each other, so we better look at them in context, in comparison, to see how they relate to other parts. So many time I found people (myself included) easily jump into judgement by certain notions, with simple "black and white" thinking style. Certainly "black and white" is a pattern easy to understand, an formula easy to follow, but unfortunately, reality is so much more complicated than just black and white.

Based on this understanding (relativity), I would even go farther, that not only "selfishness" is not always "bad", but altruism is not always "good". However, I better save this topic for some other time.

Is Suicide A Selfish Act?

English: Suicide Point, Kodaikanal (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I often heard people say that suicide is a selfish act. I wonder why. I can only partially agree with this statement if the persons who committed suicide left their underage children behind, but in most other cases, I think it's not.

A most often mentioned reason for why suicide can be selfish seems to be the fact that people who killed themselves made their loved ones to grief. In other words, they caused others' pain. But, I would argue, that can we really compare our grief (of losing loved ones) to the suffering of those persons who killed themselves? I think no, because to shed some tears is not at all the same kind of suffering as those people who killed themselves suffered, unless grief is severe enough to lead suicide. So, believing that just for the purpose of avoiding live ones' grief, those dead ones should continue their suffering, instead of ending it by committing suicide, this logic, by my understand, is what real "selfishness" is.

Suffering is one of greatest subjects (maybe simply the greatest) of human affair. We who never thought of killing ourselves can never know how it feels like to those suicidal people. And the reasons we never think of killing ourselves not really is because we are selfless, but because we are stronger, weaker, or, our challenges are less serious. No matter what, personally, I think we are just luckier than those who took their own lives.

I believe life, especially a conscious life (namely "human") by default is not a subject to pure happiness, but to both happiness and misery, depend on conditions. And generally speaking, the latter (suffering) is greater than former. For this reason, I believe we are all free to handle our own lives, suicide, endure, enjoy, or whatever else.

Love = Courage? My Thought On Valentine's Day

D. H. Lawrence, world famed author (1906) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Snow stopped, road cleared, my new "valentine" - newspaper came finally (Two days delayed though). A small article caught my attention: What is love? And the quote of D.H. Lawrence provoke the thought below:

D.H. Lawrence said that love is "having courage of your tenderness." How? How this tenderest act of humans can be interpreted as "courage"? In a cultural tradition that was built upon the absence of love, namely Chinese, love is one of the most coward traits of humans. Coldness, even cruelty are the showcase of "courage". Oh, I feel so sorry for this culture!

But still, why showing our tenderness is a courageous thing to do? Because, tenderness, represents a fully acceptance of another individual, an individual with consciousness, with a whole inner world that could be totally different from our own, yet so identical in a way. It is not another "person" we are afraid, it is another universe, an unknown entity that we are afraid of. It seems, that since human developed consciousness, nothing has been more frightening than "unknown". Death is frightening because it is "unknown", another culture can be frightening, because of unknown. And individual, the most complicated entity, with a whole different "soul", no doubt can be the most frightening subject. Thus, showing our tenderness to another person, to embrace this another "universe" unreservedly, is indeed a courageous act.

Yes, I have to agree with D.H.Lawrence on this, that the true heroes are those who dare to LOVE!

Happy Valentine's Day!

Who Are The Real Tough Ones? Does It Really Matter? My View On Heroism, Truth, Etc.

Heroism & Sacrifice 4 (Photo credit: Universal Pops)

If a person were always healthy but suddenly got sick for 2 days, and kept whining for 2 full days, it's likely that not only his/her whining would be well accepted by friends or loved ones, but he/she would also receive tons of compassion from others. However, if a person who were chronic sick, only whined 30 days out of 300 days, not only he/she would not receive much compassion, but also would be taken as "weak", "annoying", whining only for attention, etc.

We often put the words such as "heroism" to those who are strong, those who can endure "unendurable", on the other hand, we put the label like "chicken" to those physically fragile individuals who could not resist a gust of wind. Why? because we adore "toughness" and despise the "weakness". But by my understanding, one cannot really endure unendurable. We were born with different genetic conditions and we all do our best to survive, to strive to success (of course the definitions of "success" can be different depends on persons). A person who climb a huge mountain because his physical condition allows him to do so, and a sick person who cannot climb a few flights of stairs because his/her condition doesn't permit him to accomplish such "achievement". But still, people applaud for those who climb mountain high even though they did it without much difficulty, pay no attention to those who finished the final step of stairway with tremendous perseverance. They call the former "heroes", "tough ones", call the latter "loser", "mentally weak". But by my view, I sincerely believe that very often the "weak ones" are tougher than the "strong ones".

However, I did not mean to say that those chronic sick or weak ones are always mentally tougher than those who climb up mountains. I only mean, that the toughness, the courage, are all relative terms, need to be measured according to ones given conditions. Like I once put: "It takes much more courage to a person who has vertigo standing on the second floor balcony than to a healthy person climbing a thousand foot high cliff."

But, is this distinction really important? I think not. Because through history, it is those "heroes" or "tough ones" who lead humans survived from rough conditions. They were survivors and victors. Wick or sick ones died through time. We venerate those who had "superior" physical or mental power, designate honorable words for them, such as "tough", "mentally strong", not necessarily because they were so, but because they made great contribution to human race. Those who really suffered great deal, no matter how hard they fought, died without merits. Their genes also vanished away.

Yes, this world belong to "strongs", who inherited "superior" genes, who can conquer difficult situations with "ease". And the weaker ones, who inherited "inferior" kind of genes, endured so much more with incredible toughness, but if they could not make their way out, they can only be forgotten. 

The point I've been trying to make is, truth is not always important to human beings. Our whole belief system is not built on truth, but "good", which (I think) means what's best for our lives. So we call those "heroes" "tough", not necessarily because they were truly tough, but because they are "tough" in our eyes, and they embody the ideal attributes of our race.

So again, what is true is not always good, what's good is not always true. Truth, in most cases is useless, only important to some playful minds.

"Some Friends Failed In A Crisis"

Friendship Village (Photo credit: NYC-MetroCard)

The newspaper I received daily is "News & Observer", a local publication, in which there is a column called "Tell me about it", where people ask a therapist Carolyn Hax for help with their personal affairs. The one I read yesterday was called "Some friends failed in a crisis". The person who asks for help was in cancer treatment during which she/he found that suddenly most of her/his "best friends" failed to show up to offer support, which she/he certainly expected. Carolyn's response is wonderful. First she congratulates the person for her/his not holding grudge, then she suggests that she/he better to express her feeling openly, in case she/he is with those friends again. This is the beginning paragraph of Carolyn's response:
"Welcome to the weirdness of crisis, where your besties can vanish while casual pals surprise and sustain you."

This case certainly rings a bell to me. During the past several years (5 or 6), when my physical condition stayed desperate and chronic, when my financial situation and other aspects of my life seemed to collapse, I found I was left alone by almost all my several friends who had been hitherto keeping close relation with me. They all estranged away by different reasons. It was one of the hardest things in my life for me to ponder. However, after carefully "examining" those friendships, I believe I found answers, at least for my case.

I was an extremely popular personal during my teenage years and my 20s. I never intentionally chose friends because I was always surrounded by "friends". I think the reason for this was that I was an extremely agreeable person, and always put others' needs before my own. I was also a person who was fun to be with. I made people laugh all the time. It's a good thing, I suppose. But now I realized the negative side of it, that is, I was very passive in "choosing" my own friends. I simply let people choose me. I trusted everyone, I believe they treated me kindly, so they must be my friends. Upon the time I was ready to come abroad, there were a few people who made me their best friend. The consequence of this situation is, that after all these years, gradually, as our personalities and intelligence develop, I found I did not have much in common with most of my "besties". No doubt, as time went by, there was less and less for us to share. Plus my extremely health condition, which was hard for anybody to comprehend. So eventually, they chose to drop me off.

Humans are conscious animals. We better do things with consciousness, or so called "conscious choice". If we let others decide for us, we give others the power to judge us, to control us, or, to "trash" us. Of course, we should not judge others (By writing this post, I also do not mean to judge my old friends. As contrary, I respect their choice), but we do have right, and we should, make conscious choice to who we would remain contact with, or stay close. So this is the lesson I learned.  I will certainly try to do better in future.

(I also have thoughts on why I was such a passive person in terms of relationship, but that would be another day's work.)

One Of The Most Irrational Conversation I've Ever Heard

Cover of Пётр Ильич Чайковский

A: Do you know that Tchaikovsky was gay? He was.
B: What?
A: You heard what I said, right?
B: Yes, but...
A: But what?
B: But... I can't believe it.
A: Can't believe that he was homosexual?
B: No, I can't believe that a person did so much for mankind, people can still say such thing to him.
A: What thing?
B: The "thing" you just mentioned.
A: "Homosexual".
B: ... Right.
A: So you think homosexual is bad thing? Should stay hidden forever?
B: No. I don't mean that.
A: So...
B: Please just don't say it.
A: ....

Newspaper Clipping - My Brand New Hobby

I never was a newspaper reader. Just a little while ago, local newspapers started to show up on my front lawn automatically, I began to read them. Surprisingly, I found them interesting and informative, much better than those Chinese newspapers I once read back in China.

As I receive them daily,  they began to accumulate and I have to throw lots of them away. However I wanted to keep desperately those articles interest me particularly. So I started to wonder how and at the same time a word that I never bothered to get into details jumped in my mind: "newspaper clipping". But how to preserve all those fragile pieces? Easy, I "asked" google, and immediately got idea. An album that was used to collect prints of my art works seemed to be perfectly for this purpose. I found the album at the bottom of my bookcase, took all prints out, cut those articles off from newspaper carefully, inserted each of them into perfectly transparent sleeves. The pleasure was immediate and long lasting.

I used to collect stamps. Now this newspaper clipping seems to bring me the same kind of joy. Plus, it will improve my English reading, no doubt.

Do We Judge People?

We don't judge people by what they do to themselves, but what they do to others.

"Starry Night" - A Thanksgiving Note to Van Gogh

 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I had an evening class the day before Thanksgiving day. One 10 year-old girl was painting acrylic, another three younger ones (about 7 year-old) were doing collages by using construction paper. One boy got tired of collage, so I just let him do whatever he felt like. He said without thinking: "I am going to draw 'Starry Night'". He looked at me.
"'Starry Night?'"
"Yes." He said.
"Yes, " another girl Rachel Liu immediately responded, "I love that picture!"
"Are you guys talking about Van Gogh's painting?"
"YES!" 3 of them "yelled" at me at the same time. Then they told me they had school projects that were based on this painting and they all enjoyed them very much.
I was "amused" by how they liked such a "profound" masterpiece, considering how many adults don't even "understand" it. So I asked Rachel: "Do you really like that picture?"
"Yes, I like it!" She answered without hesitation.
"Why?"
"???... eh..." She thought a little moment, "I don't know." She said with a little shyness.
"But you do like it. I mean, you LOVE it, right?"
"Yes." She looked at me, nodded her little head determinedly.
The boy was anxiously waiting for the conversation to end. He asked me: "I want to drawing 'Starry Night', do you have it?"
I immediately checked my Van Gogh books but found it was not there. So I rushed to my computer and printed it from online. When I brought the picture to classroom, they all cheered up loudly: "That's the one!"

The boy's recreating "Starry Night" did not succeed, because there was not enough time. Before he left class, I asked him if he wanted the print of "Starry Night", he looked at me surprisingly: "really? I can have it?"
"Yes, of course!"
He grabbed the print with great joy and thanked me.

That night, the night before thanksgiving, I found myself keeping thinking of Van Gogh. I realized, despite the fact that Van Gogh was not accepted at his time, and he was still not "understood" by millions adults now and then, he nonetheless touched these children's hearts. And from these children's eyes, I know it was joy they received from his painting.

Thanks Vincent! How I wish there's a way to let you know about this.

Who Are The Real Danger To The World Peace?

The ones that jeopardize the world peace are those who smite others' right cheeks, not the ones who don't turn to them the other cheeks.

An Open Letter To UNICEF Regarding Family Child Abuse In China

(This letter has been edited by Madilyn Leonard Benrubi, a blogger friend of mine. A big THANKS to her!)

This letter has been sent to:
UNICEF(The United Nations Children's Fund, http://unicef.org/) ;
ISPCAN (International Society For Prevention Of Child Abuse and Neglect, http://www.ispcan.org/) ;
IICRD (The International Institute for Child Rights and Development , http://www.iicrd.org/);


(Caution! The case examples are extremely disturbing!)

Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing this letter to call your attention to the family child abuse situation in China.
Family child abuse in China has been a serious social problem and it has never been confronted by Chinese society and government. During the recent couple of decades, while China enjoys its economy rising, its spiritual side seems to be more corrupted than ever. Children, the most vulnerable group among the Chinese population, become the worst victims of this moral degeneration.
Here are several severe case examples:

 Case 1: 1993, Xining, Qinghai province. Li Su, a 5 year-old tortured to death by her biological mother. 

A photo of Li Su sitting in a hospital

bed when she was alive.

1993, in Xining (西宁市), Qinghai province (青海省) of China, a 5- year-old girl was tortured to death by her biological mother. Her name was Li Su (苏丽). During her short life, Li had suffered all kinds of mental and physical abuses, including verbal abuse, savage beatings, and starving. More horrendously, more than once, Li's mouth was sewn together with needle and thread. One day when Li was five-years-old, due to tremendous hunger, she begged for food, but what her “mother” did was feed her with hot boiling cooking oil. After this astonishing torture, the “mother” did not send her daughter to the hospital; instead, she continued physically abusing her for several days, until Li finally died of unimaginable pain.
Li Su's mother, Zhiyun Yan, served only 7 years in prison. Now she is a free woman. She destroyed her daughter's tomb after she got out of jail.
http://pilosopogyno.tumblr.com/post/49071586334

 Case 2: 2013, Nanjing, Jiangsu province. Two baby girls were left in a locked home for over 100 days and staved to death.
June 2013, in the city of Nanjing (南京市), Jiangsu province (江苏省) of China, two girls, ages one and three years old, were left alone at home for over 100 days and starved to death, due to completely incapable and irresponsible mothering. The case is still being investigated.
http://roll.sohu.com/20130628/n380124741.shtml

Case 3: 2013, Jinsha county, Guizhou province. A young girl has been brutally tortured by her biological father for over five years.  

"Little Li"'s head was scalded by boiling 

water. She was held upside down by 

her father while her head was put inside

boiling water. Father claimed that he was
only trying to wash her hair.

 July 2013, in Jinsha county (金沙县), Guizhou province (贵州) of China, a man was arrested for brutally torturing his 11-year-old daughter “Little Li” for 5 years, including pouring boiling water over her head, sewing her mouth together, using needles to prick her fingers, etc. The girl suffers tremendous physical and mental trauma.
http://news.sina.com.cn/s/p/2013-05-12/175827099753.shtml

All fingers were pricked by needles.

Case 4: 2013, Shuicheng county, Guizhou province. A 12-year-old girl was tortured by her parents for years. She escaped after being branded with a red-hot iron rod all over her body (including genital area) by her mother, but was sent back to her parents by police.

Xiaoyan in hospital. 

In 2013, in Shuicheng county (水城县), Guizhou province (贵州省) of China, a 12- year-old girl “Xiao Yan” (晓燕）escaped from “home” after her body was branded literally all over with a red-hot fire rod by her parents – mostly her mother. Several days later she ended up at a local police department. After Xiao Yan's father handed a “letter of repentance” to police, Xiao Yan was sent back to her parents. Soon she escaped again due to her parents' continuing physical tortures. This time her parents were arrested and Xiao Yan is allegedly under hospital care.
http://learning.sohu.com/20130126/n364688803.shtml

Branding wounds all over Xiao Yans' body. 

The wounds on her legs. Some of them are 

deep enough to show the bones.

Case 5: 2012, Bijie, Guizhou province. A 6 year-old girl was tortured by her parents with various brutal methods. 
2012, in Bijie (毕节), Guizhou province (贵州省) of China, a 6-year-old girl, Ting Ting (婷婷）was found astonishingly abused by her parents, torture methods included kneeling on a nailboard, slashing with iron wire, branding with a hot iron rod, etc.
http://tieba.baidu.com/p/2002957291?see_lz=1

Branding wounds on Ting Ting's body.

The stove used to prepare hot rod that 

were used to brand Ting Ting. 

Case 6: 2013, Nanjing, Jiangsu province. A group of young girls was forced to beg naked on the street. 

2013, in Nanjing (南京), Jiangsu province (江苏省) of China, images of a group of young girls naked and begging on the streets stirred some attention online and soon, one of the girls was found by police. She was forced by her parents to go on the street begging naked to “earn” more money.
http://news.sina.com.cn/s/p/2013-07-04/173127578392.shtml



These are just a few samples that have been already exposed. We can reasonably imagine that there are many more similar crimes still hidden and ongoing. The real horror behind these astonishing crimes is not only how brutal they were, but also the fact that they were not committed underground. All these sample cases were more or less known to neighborhoods, condemned by some people even in the media, yet they were still not stopped. The first case (Li Su, 1993) was reported in newspapers several times, but Li Su was nonetheless left alone until she paid the ultimate price. All these examples reveal a fact, that child abuse, especially family child abuse in China is not well recognized by society and not effectively supervised and punished by the law. Children in China who suffer from family abuse are not properly protected, and we could even say, based on the cases above, those children were not protected at all.

Besides these types of extreme crimes, the relatively milder child abuse in China is much more “visible” and can be seen almost everywhere. Here are some statistics created in a research paper: Child abuse in China: a yet-to-be-acknowledged “social problem” in the Chinese Mainland, created in 2004, by D.P.Qiao and Y.C.Chan from Capital University of Economics and Business and Hong Kong Polytechnic University: http://www.acad.polyu.edu.hk/~ssycchan/Child%20Abuse%20in%20China%201.pdf

 “There are at present no national statistics on child abuse in China, but some survey data will throw light on the problem. In 2001, a national survey of 3543 married people conducted by the China Law Society showed that 71.9% of the interviewees reported to have had the experience of being beaten by their parents during their childhood (Liu & Zhang 2002). In Beijing, it has been found that 6 in 10 students had experienced physical punishment and disguised physical punishment from their teachers (Hao 1999). In a parallel study on primary students in China and Korea between 1998 and 1999, 70.6% of the Chines children had experienced family violence in the year preceding the study and the rates of corporal punishment by teachers were 51.1%.”

The seriousness of Child abuse in China has been ignored, covered, or disguised by both government and society, consciously or unconsciously, due to many complicated reasons, such as cultural tradition, nationalistic sentiment, politics, etc., and it certainly cannot be changed overnight. However, in this 21st century, I believe Chinese children need to be watched by all people in the world who are concerned about human rights, because a significant number of Chinese children are being treated as less than human beings (even less than animals), living in a dire situation that causes them unimaginable suffering. I sincerely hope that the international organization of UNICEF can make some effort in regard to this serious matter. 

Thank you!

Sincerely,

Yun Yi
An ordinary Chinese American and a humanist

Some Beautiful Spring Photos of Chinese Conntryside

These are the kind of landscape in China I miss very much, though I have not seen one place as this pretty. 

Photos by 行者戴歌 （an interesting user name, which means a "singing traveler"） 

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_46ca50e60102e9e6.html

The Opening Paragraph of "Strangers On A Train"

"The train tore along with an angry, irregular rhythm. It was having to stop at smaller, more frequent stations, where it would wait impatiently for a moment, then attack prairie again. The process was imperceptible. The prairie only undulated. like a vast, pink-tan blanket being casually shaken. The faster the train went, the more buoyant and taunting the undulations."
--- Strangers On A Train, Patricia Highsmith

"Why Done It" - A Short Review Of "A Judgement Of Stone" By Ruth Rendell

Ruth Rendell, writer (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

"Eunice Parchman Killed Coverdole family because she could not read or write." This is the first line of the mystery fiction A Judgement Of Stone, by Ruth Rendell. So there is no mystery. But really, I read on with great interest, because what would be a greater mystery than "who done it", is "why done it".

Eurince Parchman is a illiterate by chance, or by misfortune. This "handicap" brings her discomfort, humiliation, and ultimately: fear. To avoid this fear, she is incredibly ingenious in handling "dangerous" situations. But how much she can do to avoid nightmares created by herself? How could such a simple problem not being solved through the course of her 48 years life? We would have clues after we read the book.

Not only this book displays a stunning darkness of human nature and how it was shaped, but also it reflects an unfortunate fact: there really is a limit of what our kindness can do. Sometime, our good will could be extremely fragile when facing some twisted personality that has been gone too far, too stubborn that it is impossible to be mended. It becomes a "stone", not anymore a human being.

This is the first book of Ruth Rendell I read, already I am impressed by her genius insight of humanity. I am excited to read more of her masterpieces. Thanks Ruth Rendell for rendering such a profound insight into a brilliant art work!

Apathy Or "Joyousness"? - A Thought Over The Darkness of Human Nature

Empathy (Photo credit: TonZ)

In recently days I had some emotional disturbance over a small casual "social" encounter. This small social event again, demonstrated some dark image of human nature to me, that is the lack of empathy. Actually "lack of empathy" is an underestimation. What I really saw is a kind of mental state which I would name it as "an unconcealable joy upon others' suffering".

Yes, lack of empathy is far from the worst. I just finished reading a mystery novel "A Judgement In Stone", written by Ruth Rendell, in which she brilliantly demonstrates what is "lack of empathy" (This book is a real classic!). Lack of empathy is just apathy, which would not motivate people to do harm to others, unless their lives are threatened. No, what I refered here is much worse. it is a kind of "joyousness" brought by others' suffering. Yes, this kind of feeling does exist in plenty of people's minds, and when facing others misery, they feel so "happy" that they could hardly disguise their emotion as anything else.

Sadly, I witness this fact through my ordinary daily life, now and then, more or less. Am I too sensitive? Or am I exaggerating facts?

It is one thing to kill for survive, another to kill for pleasure. I always wonder why during those historical disasters so many people were capable of committing stunning atrocities, wonder why those serial killers, torture or death executioners could go through all those gruesome "procedures". The answer is "pleasure". They "enjoyed" what they did.

I am not saying those people I interacted with are exactly this kind of "evils", but they do remind me this mindset. I believe this mindset truly is the "champion" of the darkness of human nature, and it is responsible for many unnecessary man-made miseries, and it exists widely, more or less, consciously or unconsciously, in many people's minds. And when time is "right", it will do great damage, just as we witnessed before in the course of human history, again and again. Like Hu Ping (a contemporary Chinese philosopher) said: "People always put the word "kind" to all the weak individuals, but what they do not know is, the reason some of these individuals appear to be "kind" is only because they do not have chance to be evil."

It will be a much more serious topic to think of why people act like this. By studying history I have some clues, but it would be too immature for me to explain in this short post. All I must point out here is, that the people who possess this "evil" mindset are not "evils" by nature, they are normal people, even "kind" or "nice" people in many people's eyes. Truly, if we look at human society from evolutionary perspective, there is really no "good" and "evil" exist, only "mechanism". That is, what drive people to "good" or "bad" sides are not "God" or "Satan", but natural elements, include the genes, natural or social environments, experience, etc. So by this view, we would understand better why people act like this way. (Really, if you read "A Judgement of Stone", you may really understand why Eunice Parchman kills Coverdale family with cold blood.)

However, isn't this view harder for our human to swallow than the religious view, which we could put responsibility to "God" and "Satan" for all our “deeds”? Do we not to feel more lost, more helpless if we know that all these tragedies were driven by natural causes? My answer is "yes". But to know is better than not to know, because only if we understand darkness better, could we do better to avoid it happens.

Religion And Morality

Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
--- Steven Weinberg, physicist.

"Can I Paint Background Black?" --- A Question That Challenge My Patience

#10 (1952) by Mark Rothko (Photo credit: wordherder)

Quite often, I heard some of my students asking me "Can I do this?' or "Can I do that?" I repeatedly told them, that in this class, they have 100% freedom to do whatever they want to do with their projects. The question that "bugs" me even more is "Can I paint background black" or "yellow" or "orange", some of them even asked me with a expression of ridiculousness, implied that there must be something you just CANNOT DO. Of course, my answers would always be: of course you can, if YOU REALLY LIKE IT!

Seemingly these are questions long for freedom, but somehow I saw just the opposite: they are asking for permission, asking for demand. These students really wished me to give them a certain rule to follow so they could be successful with every single projects. I often see this attitude among those whose parents have the highest expectations, those who also have high expectation on their teachers (in this case it's me). And these students would be  frustrated or discouraged, even stressed if they could not reach their goal in very short period of time.

Since the beginning of my art classes (2009), I was clear with what I could and could not do with my teaching. What I could do is teaching students some basic techniques and giving them opportunities to discover themselves; what I could not do is giving them inspiration, making them "talented". I told my students that I do not teach "how to paint a tree", "water", "mountain", or any specific subject, rather, I only teach "how to paint". In other words, I teach basic rules (such as perspective, shading, color principles, etc.), and let students use these basic rules to deal with subjects by themselves. Most of students (especially those self-motivated) could understand this idea quickly, put themselves in "experiment" and have fun with it, but some students couldn't seem to understand, only feeling lost when there are no certainties to rely on.

Averagely, I found younger students seemed to welcome this teaching method more than older ones. Also same students could change through time. i.e., one girl was very creative when she just came to my studio a few years ago, now she is over 10, she seemed to try very hard to find some rules to follow, and confused when I refused to give her specifics.

Sometime I would feel impatient when facing such kind of questions too often, especially when I saw the mental laziness or complete dependence (on me) in their attitudes. But sometime I would remind myself that they are still too young and could be very confused by all different kinds of influences surround them. So I took a deep breath, be patient again next time.

Freedom is a good thing, is the soul of art, soul of joyful life. Unfortunately, it is not always comfortable. I knew this when I first read Erich Fromm's Escape From Freedom (and later my life experience seems to prove his point). Now, teaching young kids, I realized, that even at this early ages, freedom is not welcome to everyone.

It's Not About Art, But "Who I Am"

Out-of-print books may be found at libraries or specialty book stores. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

An old friend just called, informed me that she knew a gallery in New York, which collects print-makings, which she thought I would be interested. After thanking her for her good intention, I told her that I was not interested. I do not have any print-making works on hands. "Why not make some?" she asked. I said I could not make "some" just by demand. If I do any, it has to be by inspiration, which I don't get very often, and which means I am not qualified to be a professional artist. She mentioned that reason I had problem with art was that because I didn't value art as "high" as it actually is, and she thought that I did not appreciate myself enough. NO, I said firmly, I know how valuable art is, but it's just not WHO I AM.

I got this comment very often through my life. So many people looked me in a way they looked at a master, mainly because my skill and my background. For many people, choosing a career is a matter of its "social value", which means how others value the things we do, not the value how much they enjoy doing them by themselves. Art seems to be something revered by most people in this world, that's why many people often told me that it is a shame if I don't continue doing art. Especially, considering that I had already spent so much time of my life on this career. But deep inside, I knew if I forced myself doing what people think I should do, I would feel miserable all my life, no matter how many compliments I receive everyday. I still remember long time ago, when I was found "hiding in home" studying math for one whole month, one of friends stared at me with remark: "Are you out of your mind?" The truth is, I had most fun in that one month.

Well, it is true that I had spent 30 some years in art career, and 30 some years I struggled trying to get rid of it as a profession, which imposed on me since I was too young by my parents. Now I did, by teaching kids art, I could spend most of my spare time without doing any art works. I just cannot imagine anything better than that.

Yes, life is short. We all have right to be happy. Now a cup of tea in hand, a book in another, I am simply in heaven. Of course, if my readers and I think I hate art, will not do any in the rest of my life, I must say, we are all wrong. I never know what I want to do tomorrow morning, even next minute after this moment. Isn't this a fun mystery to play with? Yes, life is a mystery.