Oscar for the MDA?

Ever heard of the theatre group Wild Rice? They have numerous plays under their belt and I've been blessed to watch a couple of their plays before, just to name one is "Aladdin". They narrate in a very unique way and is suitable for both the young and old. I feel that it is rather enriching and a fresh and unique perspective of approaching such well known stories. One of their latest production is about the classic love story, The Importance of Being Earnest. I was reading the papers on febuary 25th when I saw news about how the Media Development Autority (MDA) has given an advisory of "16 years and above" rating. This is so because Wild Rice used an all-male cast in this re-interpretation of the story. Though MDA says that it is not a mandatory rating, I agree with how director, Glen Goei, views this rating. He states that they are "perplexed and disappointed" as this is a very popular classic play which is "studied in schools and staged in theatres worldwide". Some of the male casts will be playing female roles but they will not be clad in dresses. This satirical romantic comedy displays affection between the couples. Goei comments that "he wanted to stage Earnest with an all-male cast because he felt that it would stay true to the message of the play, which is to be true to oneself. He also wanted to reflect the play-wright's liberal views about his sexuality as a gay man, adding that he stands by his directional decision." I agree whole-heartedly with Goei as I've did literature books on Oscar Wilde and it involves alot of homosexuality and the finding of oneself. This was taught to me in Secondary School. It just makes me wonder why Singapore has to protect their younger growing teens to such an extent by sheltering them from the liberal views of the world. By doing so, these media gatekeepers (MDA) will tend to create a society with a brain-washed mindset of homosexuality. This close-minded mindset is exactly what singapore needs to do away with as the world is evolving, if we are to shut ourselves from such changes, we will be only but a "frog in the well".
Wild Rice have thought about it and given schools special discounted prices so as to encourage pupils and literature teachers to watch the play. I personally believe that by watching the play, it will allow pupils to be aware of such situations and teachers or parents will then have to play their part by explaining to them the meaning of such actions. This should be the right way of upbringing, in my opinion. In this way, MDA will not need to worry about those "who may not be familiar with the original play" and thus "likely to be confused about its content and underlying messages".
Everybody has their own opinions. this is mine. so what's yours?

Back(to the)street Boys

Anybody still remember who are the Backstreet Boys?

Its amazing how far these boys achieved in their road to success. Those who knew this boy band would realise their personalities are really different and it is portrayed in their looks. There's the 'Cute' one, the 'Cool' one, the 'Suave' one, the 'boy-next-door' one and the 'rebellious' one. The truth is that, these boys are not really like what they are labelled, but for marketing purposes, it is easier for the fans to have some sort of connection when such labels are enforced. Let's put it this way, I believe the boys are to a certain extent like what they are known for, be it cute or suave, but they have to actually dress, act, talk and evoke their 'perceived' status. It is a group think to want to have a sell out concert or have a 9 week top bill board song. These boys tweak and emerge themselves in playing the role which they are given in order to strive unanimously for a common goal; best boy band.

Let's use another band for example, the Spice Girls.
(Clockwise from the bottom: Ginger Spice, Posh Spice, Sporty Spice, Scary Spice, Baby Spice)

This was during the first few years of their stardom. These girls are the epitome of individuals coming together to form a group. The girls are being labelled Posh Spice, Baby Spice, Scary Spice, Sporty Spice and Ginger Spice. Each a label of their own and each having to conform to it. Together, they are a group who is suppose to ooze personality of their own and group love. In this case, a very prominent group pressure is evident as these girls grew up and realised that living according to how their fans want them to was way too tedious to handle. Let's just take Baby Spice for example, she is known for her cuteness and childlike innocence. This seems perfectly possible for someone in her early teens but as she grows up into a fully matured women, forcing her to be immature, childlike and cute doesn't seem very fair. It is an unwritten norm to behave like how the crowd or in this case, fans, want you to be. For such bands, fans are the one thing that will make or break their success. But conforming to such ways will soon wear out and true personalities will evolve.

Let's take a look at a photo which is from their most recent tour.

(from left: Scary Spice, Posh spice, ginger spice, sporty spice, baby spice)

Realise how they've evolved. Baby ain't so baby-like anymore, Scary spice looks way too sultry to be scary. This transformation is inevitable. I guess, as much as group pressure will be perpetually evident, being true to your own character is key. Many bands disband only to pursue a career of their own due to how difficult it is to maintain an image to please the crowd and to suppress your true character. I believe still that such labelling of individuals in a band is essential to spark and catalyst a band's stardom and familiarity with the fans, but it will fade after some time and only good music will stay.

Ink my thoughts down

There are many ways in which people view tattoos. It has been a very long time that tattoos are looked upon as a form of rebellion. Why so? Is it because of how the Yakuza's were clad from top to toe huge coloured and non-coloured ink marks? Or is it because the singaporean gangsters have them as a form of identity? It is true that a tattoo is significant and it gives you a form of identity. It seperates you from others. People from the same group would probably have the same tattoo to signify brotherhood, just like the Yakuzas. Have you ever felt that it may be a shout out for attention? Or perhaps, just a form of Art?
Tattoos are deemed as a social mis-fit and are so because of the minority in numbers. But if we were to be brought up in a society where tattoos are a norm, or if our parents had them, would our mindsets be the same? Cultural and social information moulds our thoughts and it is a very strong form of persuasion. Our mind tends to feel comforted when we succumb to the norm. But when we realise that the unusual may not be as weird as it seems, our psycological thoughts get the better of us and we change our perspectives.









If we knew that this tattoo actually meant the search for happiness for a person because she was being abused from young, would it have been looked at in a different manner? What if we knew that it is also an ambigram, which means that when looked upside down, it spells the same thing? Would it be more artistic? There are mostly deep dark or memorable stories behind each tattoo. If we take an effort to actually not perceive or let the social and cultural information get the better of us, our psychological thoughts may make it easier for us to accept issues. We should remember to not let out surroundings mould us, but instead, we make our own thoughts, be expressive and not be confined to society's well.

Mr Mime

I always wondered how a mute person would be able to live. I always pondered about which would be worst, to lose one's sight or speech. Until I was old enough to venture the world, only then did I realize about the world of miming. Mime is an expression of actions, to an extent whereby NO WORDS are said throughout the act. I was truly impressed at how people who are able to talk be so expressive. Every moment was expressed by an action. Here's an example of an awesome piece of Mime:



Do you notice how every minute of silence is compensated by an action. It brings us to how verbal and non verbal communication can get along hand in hand with no qualms. I realize that he suppressed every moment of silence with an action and that made the audience attentive and not uncomfortable. It shows how humans are so used to hearing sounds, such that silence evokes some sort of uncomfortable feeling and awkwardness. From this we can observe that non verbal communication is only but another form of communication which humans rarely acknowledge. Shrugs, nods, frowns, winks, etc. are all day to day non verbal communications that are embedded into our verbal communication. Thus, when someone just doesn't talk at all, but does not show enough actions to portray his thoughts, we feel uneasy and are unsure about what they are feelings or are trying to say. We need to know that silence is also a form of communication. Like the only saying, Actions speak louder than Words.