Insomniacic* Ramblings

One Question: Are we just prolonging the inevitable collapse of our economic system? Passing the buck to the Next (my) generation? 

Unfortunately, I do believe that we are just prolonging the inevitable depression that will come. There is a need to revolutionize our economy- and politics. Our economy has followed the path of endless accumulation for too long- endless accumulation without real fiscal assets to back it up. We trade in credit and debt. All we need now is China to call us on our debt.

What I would not give to sit in the public gallery when Congress is in session, and harangue our lawmakers for their petty childishness: "STOP BLAMING EACH OTHER- YOU ARE BOTH TO BLAME!!! And then be arrested for not maintaining decorum. At least I would have a clear conscience. And of course, the alternative is to write a letter to my senator/rep- but I know how that will end up- opened by an intern, read, and filed, with a standard return: "The Senator appreciates your letter of concern..." This is OUR democracy, excuse me, Republic- paying lip service to make you FEEL as if your voice/opinion can make a difference or change. But what should I have expected- our Founding Fathers created this political system to prevent the tyranny of the majority- aka the unlanded masses- to favor the (tyranny) of the minority- wealthy, landed gentry. 

So as you can tell- I'm frustrated- the economic situation we are in now has had its symptoms since 1999- what we did not learn is that you cannot base value and worth upon intangible items/goods/consumables/commodities- dot.coms (in that case), credit (today).

Screw this, I'm moving to Canada.

On another note- if he can't be president, can we at least make Ron Paul some kind of economic advisor?? (Yeah, I know its from Fox News, but Ron Paul wasn't really interviewed by too many people) 

And here Ron Paul schools Bernanke- now I can't say I agree with Austrian Economics- well, maybe in Domestic affairs, but it is a system that requires COMPLETE free markets- which, as seen from history, is not possible.

*Yes, I did make up my own word- ha.

The God of Small Things

More and more, I read people's facebook or blog or orkut that say one of their favorite books is The God of Small Things. And some of the people I know who have this book listed as their favorites I know hardly understand the nuances Arundhati Roy includes in this novel or fully grasp what exactly she is writing between the covers. Amazon's review states:

"In her first novel, award-winning Indian screenwriter Arundhati Roy conjures a whoosh of wordplay that rises from the pages like a brilliant jazz improvisation. The God of Small Things is nominally the story of young twins Rahel and Estha and the rest of their family, but the book feels like a million stories spinning out indefinitely; it is the product of a genius child-mind that takes everything in and transforms it in an alchemy of poetry. The God of Small Things is at once exotic and familiar to the Western reader, written in an English that's completely new and invigorated by the Asian Indian influences of culture and language."

What this fails to mention, however, is that Roy, herself, has been a prolific writer, mostly on issues of societal, cultural, and political concern. Some of these concerns are alluded to throughout the course of the novel. Environmental concerns are addressed in the manner in which she describes the pollution in the river, caused by pesticides bought with loans from the World Bank (also, in this addressing the impact of globalization on the environment), but also in the means of how she juxtaposes the life of the family with that of Velutha's- which is arguably more attuned with and at one with, nature.

The obvious "point" that people pull from this novel is the discussion of caste and the separation of people, whom love each other, because of this system. However, it is not so simplistic. It also concerns not only a division on caste, but also class, and societal affiliations. Velutha, an untouchable, laborer, with affiliations to the Communist Party, does not seem to mix with the idea of what the "respectable" Christian, middle class wants. It is not, then, just a caste issue. Overall, Roy is utilizing this family to critique the Christian community in Kerala, not just as a reiteration of what so many other writers have commented on in the past. To simplify her points to only being about caste neglects the complexity of the novel and the complexity of Roy's arguments on the positions she takes in real life.

The Amazon review states that this would be a great read and not hard to understand for English readers (read: Western readers) however, I would also argue that so much of the context and points of the story are lost because of the failure to fully understand and take into consideration the rich social fabric Arundhati Roy composes in this novel.

Perhaps, this can shed a little more light on who Arundhati Roy is and some of the issues she addresses within God of Small Things, in a way that weaves into a stirring story. In her own words, it is about power and power relations and her way of seeing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ2as-l_LSk&feature=related

The Pursuit of Knowledge, or the Varied Political Games We Play in Academia

Let's get real. As much as we who are involved with academia want to believe that there is a free-flow of thought and ideas in academia, we are kidding ourselves. It is not about reaching out and increasing the knowledge base for society as a whole, it is about competition. Who can come up with the "hot" new theory, and who will be the first to jump on that trend. Who can publish the most in the top most journals and win prestigious awards. Making contributions for the betterment of the world, and as a citizen of the world, has taken a back seat to personal glory and prestige. Chuck Palahniuk summed it up best (using an analogy with music): "This isn't about music, it's about winning. You stomp the competition with the bass line. You rattle windows. You drop the melody line and shout the lyrics. You put the foul language and come down hard on each cussword. You dominate. This is really about power."

And yes, that is essentially what it comes down to: the ability to control the direction of academic thought, legitimize certain areas of thought, and "other" those that are not mainstream or subscribe to alternate theories, despite sound evidence and data. And it isn't just that- it's also about WHO and WHERE. Want to go and study under a professor with your interests, at a "lesser" school- forget about getting a good job after your PhD. A pecking order exsists- if you are are an Ivy League, you are set. If you are a school with a alternate, interdisciplinary program- forget it.

What really made me think, and become frustrated with this aspect of academia, is my current search for that elusive fit of a PhD program. My professor told me frankly- I may want to forget a program in Germany or India if I want to get a job in the U.S.- there is a pecking order and I would be fighting an uphill battle, because let's face it- it's also about the funding. I could be a poor scholar my whole life.....or go to a more "mainstream" program, that isn't making innovation or new contributions, but rather, reaffirming knowledge that is taken for granted and not challenged or expanded upon.

Well, I better suck it up. Because wherever you end up with a career in life, there are going to be politics.....


Song for the Day: "F.C.P.R.E.M.I.X" by The Fall of Troy
Slow down this is slippin' through my mind,
this conversation has run out of time.
Honey I know you know what I mean,
and that's the one thing that you soon will find.
I know that you really wanna go,
my mind is runnin' outta gas just relax,
and recap, and relapse.