Veritas vos liberabit?

With this recent eruption of international diplomatic scandal, WikiLeaks.org has demonstrated the awesome and awful power of free speech. Though little has been revealed that can be deemed truly shocking, the reports on Admiral Qhadafi’s or Silvio Berlusconi’s sexual escapades from the pens of American diplomats are enough to shake the brittle frameworks of international diplomacy.

While ordinary citizens might shake their heads at the mostly harmless nature of these documents, and comment that the leaks are only stating the obvious in most cases, it is the case with good diplomacy as it is with any good marriage; the more smiles that are faked, the better. These documents, along with the recent surveillance scandals in Europe, are likely to cause a diplomatic crisis for America, the likes, perhaps, of which we have not seen since the Cold War.

This should be cause for celebration. However, the western media (with the Rupert Murdoch battleship at the forefront) have painted a clear, yet distorted, picture; that of the alleged sex-offender Julian Assange on the run from Lady Justice and the disturbed, fanatical homo Bradley Manning, with his hubris and contempt for national security. While the right-wing media extremists are calling for capital punishment for the hackers and administrators, Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck going as far as accusing multi-millionaire George Soros of aiding and abetting these” traitors”, the left-wing does not applaud Assange and co.’s efforts either.

The whole situation is in reality a reminder of what happens to the naïve and careless idealist; if he raises his hand he is in danger of seeing it chopped off. It is a reminder that those who expose the truth will be hunted and painted black by those who conceal and distort it.

Advice to fellow students!

New research by Professor Paul Kirschner from a Dutch university has apparently discovered that being logged on to Facebook will affect your test results in a negative way. That is, there is a 0.76 grade difference between the averages of those who don't use social-networking and those who do.

Now, what came first:

Professor Kirschner assumes that poor test results are a result of social networking. But as far as I can tell from the conduct of his research, and you can read the same article I did here, there is nothing that suggests it could not be the other way around. Could it not be that less-disciplined, less-motivated or even less-skilled students are more inclined to hang out online while studying than the disciplined, intelligent and dutiful ones? Maybe they scored lower because they don't work as hard or understand the subject as easily?

I don't really doubt Kirschner's conclusion, but I am exasperated by how he has arrived at it. My fellow students, beware of the biased researcher who declare his opinions fact in the name of science.

Erin Brockovich

There was something about this film that intrigued me for quite some time after I first saw it. It wasn't the rags to riches plot, or the political subtext. It wasn't the realistic toned-down color palette, or the acting. It certainly wasn't Julia Roberts, who I've never felt was more than a mediocre actress.

It hit me after some time that it was the character. Erin Brockovich as she was written in the script, is absolutely perfect. And the reason she's perfect is that she isn't.

Women in film, whether they take the lead or follow, can usually be divided into archetypes. There's The Wife, typically seen with the main character's children, most of her dialogue dedicated to expressing concern for the male lead, occasionally crying because he has no time for her or something of that nature. There's The Lover, who says a lot of passionate things to the male lead and then they kiss in the rain. The Mother, often eccentric and wise, but never interesting. The Femme Fatale, sexy, dangerous and often ambiguous. Then there's The Strong Woman, who, perhaps both as a result of increasing demands for equality between the sexes and the influence of this film, has seen a renaissance over the past few years, in films like North Country and Walk the Line. The Strong Woman is often in conflict with powerful men. She doesn't conform to expectations and pursues her goal with persistence and passion.

Erin fits the characteristics of this latter archetype, yet she is not a flat or generic character. Her perfection is her imperfection; her lack of an education, her pride and unwarranted aggression, her ambition. She is in no way a bad mother, but she becomes so engulfed in her work that her children come second-place. She displays herself in a feminine and sexual manner, because she knows that this has helped her gain advantages in the past, and because she feels comfortable in even the least tasteful outfits. Ed Masry, her boss and mentor, has to restrain her at times, often convincing her to calm down and study the nuances or complications. Her inability to do this, her quite masculine black-and-white worldview, guided by a fierce sense of morality, is the flaw that makes me appreciate her as a convincing character. She occupies everyone's attention in the film, we the audience, Masry, her enemies and children. Interestingly, The Wife also makes an appearance, but he is a hairy biker this time around, set to watching Erin's children while she is out fighting Big Business.

Erin isn't believable because we all know someone like that. I certainly don't. That's how archetypes work, and Erin isn't an archetype. She's a personality, with a healthy mix of strengths and weaknesses, and I would go far as to say that she's the biggest feminist victory in Western cinematic history since Scarlett O'Hara; not because she beats the men at their own game, but because she refuses to behave like women are supposed to onscreen.

First post

After two periods of International English, we've watched both a short documentary and a lecture on the topic of IT-resources and their place in education. Although these clips, or rather the men who appear in them, deserve due respect for emphasizing scholarly independence, their arguments are far from flawless. I'll list some drawbacks or problems:

1. Criticism is dismissed as "myths" and critics as "conservatives".
2. If IT-tools were to be used as extensively as their champions seemingly desire, the time wasted on set up of equipment, installation of software or simply learning the tool would be pointless if an easier, manual solution is possible. For example, downloading and learning how to use a brainstorming program seems like a sad waste when compared to the far simpler pen-and-paper or chalk-and-blackboard alternatives. Or using internet chat rooms or forums for schoolwork instead of, or in addition to, verbal discussion.
3. Despite the assurance of these supporters, I strongly believe that students will be tempted by sudden access to multimedia information and entertainment, unless blessed with a competent and charismatic teacher in combination with subject matter that each individual student finds compelling.

Another passion expressed, at least by the second supporter, is the need for a global curriculum built on the use of IT-resources. However well-intended, I don't think the idea is feasible, and, furthermore, I see that as a good thing:

1. Despite increased globalization (much of it a result of the growth of the internet), the nature of the labor required in each country varies. However, for richer students who do not choose trade-specific courses of education, there is certainly a growing, universal demand for IT-competence.
2. The same challenge presented to foreign nationals seeking international employment who do not come from English-speaking countries, will be presented to those who graduate from schools or universities where IT-resources aren't taught, utilized or emphasized because of a lack in funding. This increases inequity between, as always, primarily MEDC's and LEDC's, as focus will be put on one student or worker's ability to present or express his or her work, rather than another's competence or overall skill in the field in question. It is undesirable to create a situation where skilled workers are delegated to meaner tasks because they cannot communicate with flashy modern tools, just like immigrants with doctorates in Western Europe who drive taxis because they can't speak the native language.

The bottom line is, I suppose, that teaching and utilizing IT-resources raises questions of efficiency and international and inter-class equality versus progress, while the idea of a global curriculum faces the problem of variations in needs, demands and culture.