some inconsequential feelings

Here I am, alone in the hotel room in Page, on Christmas night. There is no Christmas carol, but I put Sakamoto's "Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence" on loop in my iphone. The music speaks my melancholy, and of course, the tile is apt for Christmas. There is no Christmas feast, and instead I had Blackberries that I bought from Safeway earlier today. The TV is off, and the book that I brought along on the trip - Jared Diamond's "the World Until Yesterday" is laid open. The chapter is on bilingualism. But I am not reading, in fact, I do not feel like taking in any knowledge this very moment. Rather I want to say something, be heard, in any tongue that I can manage and in any forms of expressions that people can understand. Realize no one is listening, I talk to my heart.

This has been the worst year of my life, I reckon. I drank a lot, the most in my life. I made mistakes in relationships, and I repent for not able to say my feelings. I did not do well in school, but that I have no excuse for. I have been a let-down. I start to think whether I have a problem and if so what is it. Earlier last week, an acquaintance in the past told me he did not want to hear from me anymore after I said it would be better for us to remain friends. The very next day he wrote to me saying what a fool he was, and wanted to fix things. I did not respond and that was that. Looking back, the manner of his leave-taking had begun a constriction which neither of us knew how to arrest. Ties can be cut but harm cannot be undone easily. I was on the other side of things 2 months earlier. I thought I found a kindred spirit but he said it would be more "convenient" that we remained friends. Not wanting to push for anything, I did not object, thinking that this is how mature adults handle rejections. Unable to advance from friendship, I later faded away. Yet, it still comes as a shock when he announces he is now an item with somebody. I realized what was "inconvenient" was me afterall. The idea that he could have been my best friend is proof of some horrifying taint in me.

I value purity and simplicity in life. That relationships are not bounded by expectations and responsibility but a real sense of affection, that social or biological contracts that bind us together as a unit are unnecessary. One of my greatest fear is to call my frail grandmother in HK. It is not because I am scared of dealing with the imminent end of one's life. In fact I always imagine what is it like to die. And I love my grandmother with all my heart. But the call itself was by no means an expression of love. It was a scoring mechanism. I'd call knowing that my watchful relatives keep a "love score" in their head. The presence of this thought marred the purity of the care I want to express. Everytime I call, I would run over what I was about to say in the call in advance and try to make sure I show enough affections in each sentence. And yet after each call, I would breath out a long sigh, as if I have just overcome a huge barrier but not without pain.

Here I am, letting out some of my feelings. They are inconsequential and unworthy of anyone's time. But I thought this might be part of the healing process. I haven't been able to bring them up to anybody in the past. And instead of avoiding them or pretending that they are not there, I decided to come in terms with myself.

Merry Christmas, O.

Demons

don't get too close. it's dark inside.

羽毛

媽打近年常有感生活「浮浮吓」，不知在美國還是香港生根。我情況更甚15歲後沒有在同一地方住超過兩年，選擇似有很多但感覺不踏實。上星期看罷電影Gravity心內暗自感歎，原來自己就是Ryan Stone在太空漫遊，在大氣上看似消遙不屑人間煙火，但其實最期望的還是著陸，被甚麼牽引帶領。這幾年香港政治一團糟，讀到某些新聞時，還是會很抽心很緊張，與環顧自己人與事的輕鬆優閒節拍顯得格格不入。原來，人與地的牽絆比我想像的深很多很多。我還是會為太平洋距離以外小島上的人與事著急。我想就算我像羽毛，能在毛髮完全散落之前在空中浮上一會，到最後還是要輕輕降下，歸土。

我相信

N年無睇港劇既我今天也為香港創意工業痛心。如王維基校友所說：「香港短期內損失的可能只是電視頻道的選擇，長期來說香港輸了公義。」不僅是公義，健全制度，自由我們一併失去。一個我們曾經引以為傲的小島淪落成維穩城市，我黯然。但我相信香港還剩下香港人的底氣﹣我們賴以為生的意志，不會也不可能給政府也丟掉。

我相信香港「不會就此完結」。

王家衛／無力感／離開

One of the most beautiful scenes in "In the mood for love"

In Hong Kong, Wong Kar-wai is a well-known director but his films did not generate a lot of commercial success locally. Shall I say, his artistry simply does not mesh very well with a city that speaks money and efficiency only. And frankly speaking, I have not watched a single movie by him before coming to the States. But as of late, as I desperately seek out for something to resonate with, I found Wong's movies deeply moving - perhaps because i have reached the ripe age to have had a small glimpse on life's irregularities.

Then, it struck me how aptly the films portray the city and its people.

One of the consistent traits of his movies is the powerlessness and passiveness of individuals. To a large extent the characters perceive their lives as beyond what they can control and they do not impose their will with determination. The couple in "In the Mood for Love" who are trapped by self-guilt and consciences that demand them to act within social boundaries; the protagonist in "Days of Being wild" who can't gravitate his life towards anything; In "The Grandmaster" the main female character could not freely pursue the relationship she wanted. The powerlessness is precisely what people in Hong Kong have undergone since the 90s. The Hong Kong-ers did not have any say in the future nor could we affect the bigger political economic environment. I thought this sentiment echoes strangely well with the underlying irony of Hong Kong's prosperity.

Perhaps more subtle than individual powerlessness and passiveness is the repeating idea that people are always  moving to somewhere else. In order to start a new life, the characters move to a new place, leaving everything behind, often without qualm. In "In the mood of Love", the main male character moves to Singapore to escape from the unfulfilling love; In "Days of Being Wild" the two main male characters leave for Philippines with very different purposes but underneath the indifferences they mask themselves, they just want to run off from the unsatisfactory lives in Hong Kong. And in the "Grandmaster", Ip flees to Hong Kong because of the war, leaving his family behind in the mainland. In "Happy Together", the couple was on some journey in Argentina and they go from one place to another, can't seem to find a way back home. As well, people in Hong Kong are always on the move. From the generations of our grandparents who came to Hong Kong to escape communist rule to current Hong Kong-ese whom so eager to secure passports from some Western countries, Hong Kong is perhaps a mere transitory location to many. Why do we move so often? Are we facing problems so difficult and daunting that leaving is the only feasible option? Are we truly so powerless that our fate is beyond our ability to control or influence on?

I wish the movies would say more. But in the end, the character are just simply being. Floating along. In a hopelessly romantic but transient space.

Come sit with me a while

As I re-read my old entry on leaving my first job 3 years ago, I realized that I am experiencing the same emotional distress as I was then. The same self-doubts, frustrations and anger. But this time, there are no shoulders to shed tears on and there is no reassuring encouragement from anyone. I sit alone in my arm chair, eyes getting moisten every now and then, and feeling exhausted even though I have been physically inactive for the last few months. The despair is slowing eating me alive. It is not that I am the loser of this game that draws self-pity but rather, the feeling that your heart gets trampled on when you so eagerly had it laid bare. The stint with my last employer was a simple give-and-take relationship and nothing in the work evoked a deeper calling. By choosing to return to school I made a commitment on my future and sacrificed earning potential. I remember once saying that being able to make a commitment and sacrifice for a cause is a happiness in itself because you have found things in life that are worth giving up pure hedonistic pursuit. So I thought I was content. And yet, much like a romantic relationship, just because you chose it does not mean it would also choose you. I ticked through the long contact list on my phone but there is no one I could call. Maybe, I am not as self-content as I imagined myself to be. 

苦瓜

共你乾杯再舉箸 突然間相看莞爾 盤中透着那味兒

大概今生有些事 是提早都不可以 明白其妙處

就像你當日痛心她回絕一番美意

怎發現你從情劫亦能學懂開解與寬恕

也像我很糾結的公事 此際回頭看 原來並沒有事

真想不到當初我們也討厭吃苦瓜

今天竟吃得出那睿智愈來愈記掛

開始時捱一些苦 栽種絕處的花
幸得艱辛的引路甜蜜不致太寡

青春的快餐只要求快不理哪一家

哪有玩味的空檔來欣賞細緻淡雅

到大悟大徹將虎嚥的昇華 等消化學沏茶
至共你覺得苦也不太差

下半生竟再開學 入迷的終於醒覺 移走最後的死角

用痛苦烘托歡樂 讓餘甘彰顯險惡 如藝壇傑作

就像我一直聽香夭從未沾濕眼角

仔細地看神壇裡木紋甚麼精巧也不覺

卻在某蕭瑟晚秋深夜 忽爾明瞭了 而黃葉便碎落

真想不到當初我們也討厭吃苦瓜

今天竟吃得出那睿智愈來愈記掛

開始時捱一些苦 栽種絕處的花

幸得艱辛的引路甜蜜不致太寡

青春的快餐只要求快不理哪一家

哪有玩味的空檔來欣賞細緻淡雅

到大悟大徹將虎嚥的昇華 等消化學沏茶

至共你覺得苦也不太差

做人沒有苦澀可以嗎

真想不到當初我們也討厭吃苦瓜

當睇清世間所有定理又何用再怕

珍惜淡定的心境 苦過後更加清

萬般過去亦無味但有領會留下

今天先記得聽過人說這叫半生瓜

那意味着它的美年輕不會洞察嗎

到大悟大徹將一切都昇華 這一秒坐擁晚霞

我共你覺得苦也不太差

出世

出世，in Japanese , means to be successful in life, often in a materialistic worldly way. 中国語には出世というのは俗世を超越することだ。I always find it fascinating how words with the same kanji end up with different meaning, and in this case, they have completely opposite interpretations. 這兩種截然不同，互相矛盾的解釋卻並存於我的生活態度內。我嚮往的是充滿知性的生活亦在乎旁人的目光。所以我知道自己離開大道也不可能走得太遠，頂多只是走些有指示牌的小徑然後為自己的「冒険」而感覺良好。Therefore I admire people who seem to have transcended the rules of the society, and create paths of their own.

子供らしいけれども、私世の中の体制が嫌いだ。成功するためいい大学行くはずとか。Despite this disdain, in my mind you are not qualified to scorn the rules of the game if you can't beat it. 所以一路以來我都是為了出世而入世，為了證明自己有離開的能力而留下，永遠都離不開太遠。だから、私が「出世」するのは出来ない、日本語の意味と中国語の意味どちでも。

Bullying

Few weeks back when sensei was in town, he and I briefly talked about bullying in schools in Japan and he stated the main culprit was the demographic and cultural homogeneity in Japan. It then got me wondering why in Hong Kong, the phenomenon was not as widespread despite also being a highly homogenous society. When I was growing up, there was always a fear of not being popular in school and that lunch break would be spent eating alone. So there was definitely a pressure to fit in. But outright bullying was rare. We all seemed to be too busy doing our own things: going to cram school,  learning some musical instruments, practicing some sports, taking extra language class...etc, and did not have time to go out of our way to bully specific classmate. It probably has something to do with the culture: Hong Kong has less emphasis on team success and instead, getting ahead of each other is important. So being different (in a good way) arouses jealousy but jealousy does not translate so much into resentment. It just adds to the competitive pressure in school. There are many reasons that can attribute to the differences in culture and one of them might have been that Hong Kongese are always highly insecure about our own livelihood. With an de-facto non-existent social net and a Darwinian like economy, there is simply not much we can fall back on. And that culture is transmitted into schools. So i guess in that sense,  the culture curbs bullying at school because school's purpose is reduced to simply helping students prepare for exams, but not so much a place for students to socialize.

Exit, Voice and Loyalty: A Reflection

One of the questions that I have been thinking a lot is why hasn't a revolution broke out in China yet. Why do people choose to suffer in silence instead of voicing out the unjust? Why do so many people defend and embrace a deteriorating leadership with zest despite all the wrongdoings that it has committed? And after a few words with Prof Sobel on the topic, he suggested me to read "Exit, Voice and Loyalty" to acquire an intellectual framework in thinking about these issues. It is a little book of mere 126 pages but has in it burst of insightful and interesting ideas that intersect economics with politics.  Some of the ideas seem counter-intuitive to economists but are nevertheless extremely relevant in understanding today's political economy.

Exit and Voice are the two main approaches that customers-members of organization can adopt in response to lapse in quality of the service/products that the organizations produce. In the traditional competitive market model the exit of the customers is hailed as the "Invisible Hand" at work, that is, market responses inflict pressure on management to improve quality of the products so only the best firms survive. In this sense the more elastic demand is the better it is for the functioning of the economic system. The exit option, however, is not usually available in political systems, leaving voice the only feedback mechanism. Moreover in totalitarian states neither voice nor exit is possible, which opens up scope for the discussion on loyalty.

One of the interesting observations that comes out from this discussion is the relation between a stable democracy and the political activism of the people governed. It is usually assumed that the proper functioning of a democracy requires an active and alert population but empirical studies on voting patterns have demonstrated considerable apathy of the public. But since democracy has fared well in apathy, it suggests that the relationship is more intrigued - to the extent that apathy is present, the leadership has time to respond to demand for better governing from the more vocal group in the population. Putting it in economics terminology, if the demand for better governing is completely elastic, a slight drop in services provided will translate to a total withdrawal of the support for the government,  render any recuperation attempt by the government useless.

Another insight that is a clear blow to economic thinking is that sometimes monopoly serves the public better than when competition is present. How is that so? When the presence of competing firms creates the illusion that a better product is available, consumers will try to seek a non-existent alternative in the market instead of effectively using either Voice or Exit whereas under monopoly, consumers can focus their energy in improving existing circumstances. The main idea is that collusive behavior among competitors may result in wasteful resources and this is not far from describing competitive political system. In this context existence of competition creates an excuse for leadership to bring forth more fundamental changes that would have been desired in the absence of competitions.

So the foregoing paragraphs are more like summaries instead of a reflection and there are much more interesting notes that I have made to myself while reading the book, but I will skip the those here and instead incorporate questions that I have in the discussions follow.

First comment. The study of organizational stability comes in two dimension: Vertical hierarchy and horizontal linkage. The leader and the member are nodes in a gigantic network, each made up of cluster of agents interacting with each other. So if the quality of service deteriorates, members of a highly integrated network would find it more difficult to use Exit instead of Voice. This can be used to the advantage of the leadership as the cost of exit is now much higher to its members.

Secondly, even in the absence of any feedback mechanism, if upward mobility is fluid in the network, the prospect of improvement in one's relative social standing will dampen the frustrations of its members. In the book, the author argues that strong upward mobility strengthens the voice options because "everyone has a strong motivation to defend the quality of his life at his station". This inference assumes that the deterioration of services affects everyone uniformly and has neglected how one will try to improve his situation in the status quo before even considering using either Voice or Exit. So if the channels of upward mobility becomes rigid and deprives members of the bottom class access to a better life, Voice or Exit now become much more attractive compared to before.

Third comment on self-deception. I find the discussion on unconscious loyalty and self-deception particularly illuminating. In more abstract terms, the member's sense of self is internalized in the system. The more the members invest to acquire a stake in the system, the more the system sucks out his/her consciousness. When there are enough number of people invest greatly into the system, for example, when corruption is prevalent, the system now takes on a life of its own.

離開。

爺爺嫲嫲的健康狀況每況愈下也不是這一兩年的事。從以往自己上街市買餸買報紙到只能到樓下公園乘涼，再到後期點每天待在家裡沒有人在身旁都不踏出家門，至這近半年連自理應力也喪失，歲月的痕跡在他們的身軀上愈劃愈深，看在眼聽在耳除了是無力痛心外只有不知所措。雖說衰老的過程就像是逐步回到嬰兒時期，但歲月拿走的不只是青春麼更將他們生活的樂趣以至尊嚴逐一撕掉。

我從來只認識爺爺嫲嫲高高在上的一面，尢其是嫲嫲雖不懂寫字讀書但言行間總有一種豪邁氣度，家裡的人已至爺爺都對她尊重有加。反之爺爺總是安靜的坐在一旁，只會間中在大顆兒的談話內加插一兩句。在電話裡他也是一句起兩句止，總是將電話交回給嫲嫲推說自己不懂說話。爺爺走前三個星期，在療養院內的他骨瘦如柴，凹陷的雙頰讓我也差點認不了他。雙目的神彩早已點滴不剩， 瘦小的身軀被綁在輪椅上，神智大多時都很糢糊。我探望他的那天他好像認得我， 縱然他已忘掉怎樣說廣東話，他伸手輕輕捉緊我手，手冷冷的，但在我記憶裡這還是我懂事以來頭一次，我也緊緊的握著他的手回應著，嘗試告訴他我回來了。

想到老人家，歉疚就一直纏擾著我們在外地生活的子孫，回到香港也沒法讓心情放輕不能釋然。我不是容易跟別人親近的人，爺爺嫲嫲大概也跟我一樣吧。其實心裡拼命想打開話匣子，傳達心中的關愛，但每每流於坐在電視機前，讓無聊劇集的聲浪淹蓋我們不自然的沉默。沉默讓空氣變得沉重，坐在同一梳化上咫尺卻天涯，人生最遠的距離大概如此。他們都懂嗎？我說不出口的關心。



 爺爺，再會了，您不用牽掛，我們都會好好過生活。在另一個空間裡，我會再牽牽您的手。

Love test

In discord with its surrounding. Kowloon City, Hong Kong

Last Saturday I hopped on the plane, knowing that I'd miss 3 upcoming midterm exams but was oblivious that a bigger test awaited in Hong Kong.

It shakes me everytime I return to Hong Kong. This time the visit was brief and unplanned for and yet, the shock was much more fundamental than my previous visits. In a span of 4 days, the fear and sadness that a family member might part was displaced by a sort of mental exhaustion. I love my family dearly but it hurts me that we are measured against each other on the depth of our love every second. And it haunts me that love, when pressurized, is distorted and manifested in the form of self-righteous acts. I never for a second doubt our hearts and our love, but why in times like this do we turn into some big brother agents: watching each other as if we are waiting for an opportunity to turn others into the Villian. We worry that we are being outdone, that our love is ingeniune, muddled by wrongs committed and favors received in the past so we go extra miles to prove to ourselves that our sacrifice is for the right cause. And we set high bars for each other, comply to it, and let our vigor sucked off along the way.

All in claims of love.

But if this is truly all for love, why don't we get a bit of satisfaction out of it and instead, be reminded (by ourselves and the surroundings) that we are not doing enough? Alas, I have learned long ago such is the nature of all tests.

----

Few days back I learned that a classmate, a fellow first-year PhD student, is dealing with a much more severe familial situation. His father back in his home country is diagnosed with terminal cancer and has only few months left in life. I don't know how much internal struggles he has to go through everyday but this really speaks quite a lot of his will and determination to complete a PhD here. I have nothing but admiration and respect for him.

假放假

School of Engineering, UCSD

讀研究院的最大好處是老細不會站在你背後督促你做野，尤其是我這類社會科學的"院生", 返學放學時間基本自由，因為受薪的關係除了自己當TA的Office Hour要準時待在office外其餘時間身在哪根本沒人理會。針無兩頭利，太自由固然令自我約束力低的人把時間徒然，但於我等積極上進又勤奮的好學生（咳）來說也其實甚為不利。院生沒有真正放假的日子，外人常說學校的假又多又長但雖說放假其實心思都不能離開書本太遠，不是不想放縱但無意識地總怕玩樂得太過忘形便愧對自己當初選擇這科目時的熱情，再說，我認識的那些科學家，學者都總是廢寢忘食心思都放在研究上。所以我等普通人稍息，內疚感便油然而生。話須如此在放假時拿起書也只是做樣子以已過目便忘，沒有死線效率便立即陪降。到頭來假又放得唔安樂書卻讀不入腦，兩頭唔到岸。結論是假還是不要放得太長好。orz