Livin' Life To Its Least

I watch a lot of movies. Recently I was watching a great one, "Absence of Malice," and there was a funeral. Paul Newman's character's best friend committed suicide because Sally Field's character printed a story about her that included the unnecessary detail that she (the best friend) had had an abortion. She worked for a Catholic School so she didn't want that information leaked. Anyhoo, watch the movie, it's a good one. At the funeral the preacher says, "He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal." It's John 12:25 and it is now my favourite verse. It's a dark verse but it kinda gives me hope in the way that so many people always try to do when they say to me, "Well, at least...blah blah blah."

I think that Bible verse is the ultimate "Well at least." Melinda Dillon didn't win the Oscar for her performance in the movie, but at least she got nominated. Teresa, in a memorable scene, sits on the doorstep early in the morning nervously smoking and waiting for the newspaper. When it comes, she reads it and starts collecting all the newspapers in her neighbourhood. The audience can pretty much guess what will happen next and sure enough she got into the tub and cut her wrist with a razor blade. Paul Newman's character, Michael, later comments while roughing up Sally Field's character, Meg, and tearing her blouse, something to the effect of at least she didn't make a mess.

That scene is tough to watch. I can only imagine how tough it is to watch for the Me Too generation of feminists. But hey, at least he didn't rape her.

Do you see? I was asked what I did on the weekend last Monday. I said that I had planned on going for a hike up our local Seolbong mountain but the air was so dirty that day I stayed home. The person I was smalltalking with knew I had lived in China and responded with, "At least the Korean air is better than the air in China." While, yes, that is the case, it somehow didn't make up for the fact that hiking here can now be, on the whole, BAD for a person. In every corner of Korea I have lived I've always found a nice place to hike. It hasn't been difficult because Koreans, at least MY generation of them, absolutely love putting on their long socks, grabbing their TWO shillelaghs and trekking out into the wilderness. Or at least up their local hills with exercise equipment along the trails. To be fair, sometimes the younger generation can be seen on the trails text-hiking. At least they're getting some fresh air. Well, sometimes. Maybe that's what they're all texting about instead of enjoying the natural beauty of Korea.

Speaking of natural beauty in Korea, remember back last summer when President Trump visited North Korea? It could have been the first legitimately good thing he had done as president, so, of course, his supporters were blowing it wildly out of proportion and calling for a Nobel Peace Prize before it even happened. Trump was spouting some political rhetoric too about how he would stop at nothing less than total nuclear disarmament. At least for the North Koreans...

Some of my students were asking if I thought he'd negotiate peace between the Koreas. I said I didn't think so. I said that maybe peace between North and South Korea would be better left to the leaders of North and South Korea. Then, as I recall, the first public statement Trump made during his visit included a comment about how beautiful a country it is. At least, what beauty means to Donald Trump. He said the beaches would be great for condos and hotels. And I think golf courses were mentioned. I've also read that Trump and Kim have talked about casinos. Trump Towers Pyeongyang?

In the end there was no nuclear disarmament at all, but at least the Rocket Man and the Dotard found a new love for each other and they probably did some business negotiation. I find myself saying this an awful lot but why would anyone expect anything else from Trump? There will be another summit next month. Possibly in Viet Nam? I wouldn't hold my breath for any denuclearization, but I hear golf is hot in Viet Nam right now, so at least maybe Trump can get in on some of that action.

How else does this...

turn so quickly into this?

I work here in Korea at SKhynix. Well, not FOR, but at least AT SKhynix. I am actually employed by a company called Carrot. This time of year is Lunar New Year and everybody here gets Monday, Tuesday Wednesday and Thursday off. Well, at least SKhynix workers do. Carrot workers only get three days off. I have one student who is actually getting me to teach him a make-up class, or at least a replacement class ("make-up class" makes me sound like I'll be teaching the fine art of cosmetic application) on the fourth day of the holidays. At least none of the others are.

The SKhynix company had another record year of profits last year and for a Lunar New Year bonus employees were offered 1700% of their monthly pay. That's one year and five months of pay as a bonus! AND THE UNION REJECTED THE OFFER!!! Well at least we don't have a union at Carrot rejecting our Lunar New Year's bonuses. We all got a coffee mug and some coffee.

Security has been really beefed up around here! We used to have internet in the office and mandatory office hours, but now almost every site has been blocked. The teachers here were informed that we were contracted for 30 hours a week. I have 20 hours of teaching. We were told that during office hours when we're not teaching we still had to go to the office. I start every day but one at 7:30. The end of the office day is 4:30. So that was going to work out to over 40 hours of classroom and office hours for me. And that's before we start our NIGHT classes...

I was a bit worried that I'd have to argue with my supervisor over this. Even if Carrot agreed to only 10 hours of mandatory office hours a week I was going to ask what I was supposed to do in the office with no internet. I can't plan lessons. But they changed the policy! YAY! At least I don't have to waste time trying to look like I'm working in the office. It'll now just be a good old fashioned staff room where we drink coffee, socialize and complain about our students. I have always been more comfortable planning my lessons at home in my gotch drinkin' a beer and listening to a hockey game or some tunes anyway. Can't do any of that in the office. So at least there's that.

And speaking of movies... smooth segue... since I watch a lot of them and since the Academy Awards is coming up in February, I have watched almost all the movies that are up for awards this year. And I will give you my summation right now. I used to be good at predicting the Grammy Awards but have always been crap at predicting the Oscars. At least I'm gonna try.

Best Picture Nominees: “Black Panther” “BlacKkKlansman” “Bohemian Rhapsody” “The Favourite” “Green Book” “Roma” “A Star Is Born” “Vice"

Black Panther: I did not say this, Trevor Noah did, so don't blame me: The academy is so worried about voting for too many white pictures, they chose TWO with "BLACK" in their names! Black Panther won't win for best picture. I'm so tired of superhero movies I may be biased here. When I was young, my first favourite comic hero was Spiderman, but my last favourite was Black Panther. And much like the movie, I liked the comic for its aesthetics. It's not the best story and not the best superhero movie but it'll probably win for cinematography or some category like that.

BlackkKlansman: This had promise. Spike Lee is good at comedy. This had great comic potential! When a black man is calling David Duke and talking with a filthy, racist mouth in the precinct and every other cop goes silent and stares, you are hooked! Then they send a white guy to pose as the black guy, but he's a JEW! And this is all based on a true story? You got yourself academy potential. Then Spike Lee did what he's been doing too much in my opinion: he started preaching. It ruined the movie.

The Green Book: I jump straight to this movie because it sent the identical message of BlackkKlansman by showing, not preaching. A better movie. I can't decide if this is my second or third favourite of the season. Number one is a cinch.

Bohemian Rhapsody: Loved Queen's music growing up and loved this movie. It had inconsistencies and the teeth were distractingly overdone, but neither took away from the great story of Queen. It was not considered academy award material but the acting was. On the strength of that it may have been nominated but I think it's good enough to win. It's the kind of movie I traditionally vote for and some other movie wins.

The Favourite: This looks like the kind of movie that used to get all the Oscars while I was voting for another movie to win. British court scandalously portrayed in all its squalor. Including (gasp) homosexuality, excess, immorality, deceit, swearing, sex and gout. And not even in iambic pentameter. The villainy was good but not even close to the best. We'll get to that.

Roma: I liked this but I would understand anyone who didn't. It was boring for I think about an hour. I almost stopped watching and I like slow burning movies. It didn't help that there was a long scene with a dude's junk flopping around and not a single boob! But I think the boredom was the point of the first half. Then the life of the main character is filled with an onslaught of action that seems by contrast even more dramatic. I'm sure it will win best foreign pic, but not best pic. Now that I've said that....

A Star is Born: I was very impressed by this movie and I don't like romances. The forward nature of the "courting" is something I guess only a fella like Bradley Cooper could get away with. Cringeworthy and stalkerish to us mere mortals. But that was not what I liked about it. It says a lot about this movie that I hated the romance in a romance but still thought this movie was going to win a fistful of Oscars! Until I saw "Vice."

Vice: This movie has everything! Both Christian Bale and Sam Rockwell could win Oscars for this. Well, let me just say the absolute LOCK of this year is Christian Bale as best actor! If he doesn't win I quit watching movies. He became Dick Cheney and is lucky this wasn't live theater or he would have been hated as much as Cheney and maybe even assassinated. I always thought of Cheney as a worthless worm of a war profiteer but this movie actually made me hate him more! Just the idea that there is a man on this planet who said, "I apologize profusely to Dick Cheney for being carelessly shot in the face by him," tells you all you need to know. This movie tells you more! It's juicy! Vice Vice Baby! Best picture of the year almost certainly!

Best actor: Rami and Viggo are two names I enjoy and they were both awesome, but they should have made their movies another year. No question - Christian Bale

Best actress: If you get a chance, watch "Can You Ever Forgive Me?" I think Melissa McCarthy is absolutely hilarious but she played a crotchety old bitch spectacularly! She had a couple of funny lines in the movie but was outstandingly detestable otherwise. But I have to give the nod to a spellbinding performance in a sappy remake of a movie I thought I would hate. I am gaga for Lady Gaga in "A Star is Born!" I think she deserves the gold.

Best supporting actor: This is really a three-way tie with a dark horse candidate that could go any way. The closest call of the major categories. I thought Sam Rockwell was almost as believable as Bush as Bale was as Cheney. Sam Elliot was great as the disapproving but loyal brother of a fading hero in "A Star is Born." Because of his role as the Stranger in "Lebowski," I was uncomfortable with him cussin' so durn much, but he gets a pass. Richard E. Grant was a horribly good friend to his fraudulent but talented benefactress. I didn't know whether he was a roguish queen or a pathetic, thieving bum. But I liked him. He's the dark horse since his movie was not nominated for best pic. If Mahershala Ali really did play the piano in his role as Dr. Don Shirley, then I think this Oscar should go to him. Otherwise flip a coin.

Best supporting actress: This one is as much of a slam dunk as best actor, only it's not. It is because the winner will be from "The Favourite," but it's not because it could be either Emma Stone or Rachel Weisz. I dunno… was I happy or not at who Queen Anne eventually chose as her favourite? This one is like an election - who was worse? That'll be the one who wins.

Best Director: I don't know Adam McKay but the way "Vice" was made, the direction of the incredible actors, the style - supoib! I think "Vice" could dominate this year's Oscars. But then again I am usually wrong.

Watch these movies and see if you agree. If you can't watch them, at least you can read this.

Now, I should add that this could be taken as a very dark post. This is not a suicide letter. I'm not depressed. I don't hate my life and look forward to dying. I think the least is something I need to think about more. I think that is a sign of basic human kindness and humility. I said recently I wish just once I could say, "At MOST... blah blah blah." I was being a bit selfish. I am destined to live life to the least and I am just going to have to learn to find joy in it. It's a very Buddhist philosophy to take joy in one's suffering. It's also a Princess Bridist philosophy: "Life IS pain, Highness! Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling something." And, of course, back to the Bible, "As you have done it unto one of the least of these brethren, ye have done it unto me." Those are the words of Jesus.

The same Jesus that Huckasand reckons wanted Trump to be president. Either she is, as always, lying for her boss, or Jesus (technically God) must be very disappointed in His choice! Trump has done two years of presidenting to help himself and the rich of his country who could be called the MOST of these. If Trump ever had his ass in a pew, as his former pastor says he hadn't, shows of godliness and religious fakery notwithstanding, he might have heard of this portion of the good book and what Jesus says to the people, like Trump, who have opportunity to help the "least" and don't. In case you're wondering where to find that Trump absolutely does NOT have the support of the Lord, it's in Matthew 25. At least that's my interpretation.

Money Doesn't Grow on Trees

I apologize to my avid reader (s) but I have been busy writing many thousands of dollars worth of lessons for my employer that probably netted me a grand after all was said and done. And it's kept me busy along with the holiday season from the middle of December till now. So I haven't been able to post.

But now, back to the regular grind and armed with a fresh freelancedness, I am going to blog. But what about? It occurs to me that I have not exhausted the supply of topics I was allotted for the year 2018! So it is with great rejoicing that I unpack the fresh list of stale topics that I will re-varnish for the new year! Today's topic will have a familiar ring of novelty to it, no doubt.

I've recently been reading Aristophanes. No kidding. I read in spurts. I go a few months hardly reading anything, then I suddenly read a book in a couple of days. I re-re-read Slaughterhouse Five, so I will most likely allude to that classic before this post is dead. So it goes...

But back to Aristophanes, this is something I plucked from the pages of a Penguin Classic reprint of stuff he was writing 400 years before Christ for crying out loud:

Oh bee that so often in search of more honey
Alights upon flowers all teeming with money,
I wish that as fast as you suck the cash up
You would puke it all out so the People could sup.

This was taken from his play, "The Knights," which is a political satire, which most comedies of the era had to be. So he's not talking about bees. This COULD more accurately be applied to a PEE, (Pee OTIS (the nickname a favourite witticist of mine gave to Trump after the hookers and the peeing and the paying and the glavin...)). A description of the early Greek dribble, trickle, chuckle down effect I suppose. The political "trickle-down effect" was given 2500 years or so to marinate before the US republicans re-subjected the People to it and it shouldn't be long before it is rightfully abandoned, mocked and satirized all over again. Despite the support Trump still manages to get for his efforts to keep it on life support.

It puts me in mind of a book I recently read called Slaughterhouse Five. (ALREADY two references!) Failed sci-fi author of the book, Kilgore Trout, who I wish wasn't fictional, wrote about a money tree to which people flocked and fought to the death in order to harvest it's "leaves." The dead bodies of the unsuccessful proved to be excellent fertilizer for the money tree.

I'm not so sure my work here qualifies as a good example of the trickle-down effect since I write the lessons and I teach them as well. My employer doesn't do much I couldn't easily and in most cases more efficiently do myself but they get almost all the money for it. So maybe I AM the money tree or the money flower. I think I'd choose to be the tree. At least I'd get the nourishing entertainment of seeing the greedy murdered. A few would steal my leaves, but many MANY more would suffer ghastly deaths at my roots. So I'd have that goin' for me.

Not to Trumpishly flog a dying horse like he's been cropping the reverse Robin Hood political strategy, but there was an interesting theory put forward in a book I recently read in two days called Slaughterhouse Five. Let me give a direct quote:

"American inward blame for being poor is a treasure for their rich who do less for their poor than any other ruling class."

Since it was written before the explosion of Chinese capitalism, we can forgive its inaccuracy. The Chinese have left America in the dust in this regard. But could this be the mental anguish, the clinical pathology, the psychosis that leads to such abhorrent behaviour in our world? More to my point today, could social shame heaped so high on the poor (and accolades, respect and reverence so lavished upon the rich) be the impetus (impeti?) behind individual efforts to rise or stay out of poverty even if it requires outlandishly poor life decisions?

Why don't we examine some recent examples of such life decisions?

Maybe the best would be this joker:

Robert Lloyd Schellenberg thought, "I know how to make my fortune - drugs in China!" "Zero drug toleration policy China!"  Now he's getting the death penalty. The illegal drug trade hadn't been working for him in Canada. 11 times convicted and twice incarcerated for drug charges, the Canadian cops were onto him. "In China," he may have thought, "they probably aren't such buzz kills." He might have heard about making meth for thousands in China and selling it for millions in some nearby, first world country like, for instance, Australia. Or maybe he went for some other reason. He didn't seem to have put much thought into the actual transfer of the meth... two hundred and twenty fucking two kilos of it... out of the country and then into another. My understanding is he and some "translator" friends were trying to hide it in tires? Well one of them actually did some translating. He understood that narking on his cohorts translated into NOT getting the death penalty for himself. So they all got busted and Schellenberg was sentenced to 15 years in prison and a $22,000 fine.

Now even if his lawyer was into the Baijiu the night before, he would have recognized that this is about the lightest sentence he could have possibly hoped for. Do the time and shut your mouth would be a wise counsel's advice. But maybe his lawyer was Rudi Giuliani because nobody advised him against appealing. So he did. This was not just a bad life decision, it could end up being a life-ending choice.

Because the daughter of King Huawei the Irritable of China is not subject to the same laws as regular old Bob Schellenberg, China will kill this guy rather than allow Princess Huawei's highly revered and respected (and filthy rich) ass to touch the defendant's chair of any American courtroom.

I am going to ask you something impossible, but do your best: Try to imagine this story from the point of view of the average Chinese person. A Canadian, and I mean ANY Canadian, is considered rich by a huge majority of Chinese people. To give you some idea, I'll share an absolutely hilarious stat that is probably roundly accepted in China: Xi Jin Ping's yearly salary is, coincidentally, $22,000. While that may truthfully be what he declares on his tax forms, ain't no way Emperor for Life Xi is slummin' outside the bills! By "bills" I mean billions. But I bet there are many Chinese who believe he makes 22 grand a year because that's WAY more than they pull down.

Schellenberg had worked in the Alberta oil patch so the 22 grand was probably paid immediately. Plus when you consider how much it would cost, even in China, to produce 222 kilos of meth... not to mention the tires... this dude is outlandishly wealthy to the dollar-a-day workers of China. 2420 yuan a month works out to $11.86 a day folks. That's minimum wage. And the Chinese don't work our luxurious 8-hour days. Like most stats from China, it's hugely exaggerated in favour of China. There are still a lot of people (in the country where you'd be a bad businessman to pay minimum wage) making a dollar a day, not a dollar an hour. China has tons of money, but it's nowhere near a rich country yet.

Their money is all concentrated in a few bank accounts, and the people who have Huawei-type money are god-like in the eyes of the average Chinese person. Even Schellenberg is rich! A billion people probably found out about this story and said, "If only I had the resources to cook up 222 kg. of meth, then I'd show society I'm not the mangy dog they think I am!" "Why, by selling 222 kg. of meth I'll kill people and destroy lives but I'll get mad respect like Sabrina Meng Wanzhou. I might even get married and have 20 kids."

Strangely enough, Schellenberg, who is super rich in China, was probably thinking, "By selling the 222 kg. of meth I cooked up I'll kill people and destroy lives, but I'll get mad respect like Sabrina Meng Wanzhou. I might even get laid." Yes, even in Canada there are still a lot of the if-yer-not-rich-yer-not-trying-hard-enough people loads of whom did NOT get rich by trying hard. And for some reason, I think because they're rich, people still give a rat's ass what these patrician shitheads think. So people like Schellenberg get down on themselves, even in Canada, and make insane mistakes because they are desperate to escape the ignominy of poverty or at least what they perceive as such. He should have had me for his lawyer! If there's any place they'd go for the "inward blame" defence, surely it'd be China!

Now just think of how much more intense the depression and desperation of poverty is in really poor countries! And now, imagine the exponentially worse situation in China.

In response to the mysterious arrests of a Canadian diplomat and businessman and this kangaroo court that swiftly (and without even viewing new evidence in the case I've heard) issued the death penalty to Schellenberg, Justin Trudeau issued a travel warning for Canadians in China to beware of their arbitrarily enforced (or not enforced) laws. I can tell you from personal experience that this warning is long overdue. But it appears the arbitrary nature of what laws some corrupt individuals choose to enforce or ignore at their pleasure extends into internationally agreed upon restrictions as well.

Meng Wanzhou was arrested for violating international sanctions against Iran. She lied to some banks. I'm sure she'll get a fine that amounts to chump change for her and be on her way back to China if she ever ends up being tried for her crime. But what about this guy:

Dr. He Jiankui decided that internationally imposed laws against genetic editing, the fact that the process he used, known as CRISPR, is nowhere even close to fully tested, and it's Franken-dangerous, were not reasons enough to stop him from doing what he knew to be unethical and wrong. Now, there may be some who believe his removal of the CCR5 gene, which is a doorway for the HIV virus to find its way into the human genome, could be considered a humanitarian or even moral crime. Considering the father of the twins, Lulu and Nana, had the virus, and the parents gave permission, was this some kind of a genetic mercy killing? ((and very parenthetically, since the killing of a human is homicide, and the killing of a baby is infanticide, then is the killing of the CCR5 gene to be considered genocide?))

I briefly gave that some thought, but then my cynical mind wandered into the astronomical. I calculated how much a parent with any disease, virus or negative trait that is transferable to their child, who wanted a healthy child like all parents do, would pay to the one known man in the WHOLE WORLD who has the ability to ensure their baby's health. CHA CHING! (that will be the name of the OTHER Frankenbaby Dr. He hath wrought)

Now Dr. He is not a poor Chinese, dollar-a-day guy. He's a doctor. And he said his secret work was all personally funded. But he's not super rich and he was, until now, totally unknown in his field. Whether legit or not, he can certainly make a piles of money now! And was his motivation to escape the mediocrity of the unexceptionally rich? He certainly wouldn't be considered poor in China, and surely as a doctor he got respect, but nowhere NEAR the idol worship an underground designer baby business could get you! Not to mention the Niagara Falls of cash that would wipe away any inward blame he might have felt for not measuring up on some scale of wealth.

Anyway, it's getting close to bed time for me so I have to wrap this up abruptly. My final word on the matter is simply, the rich are destroying the world for more and more of the earth's resources that they need the least of anyone. So before anyone dedicates (wastes) his/her life trying to join the ranks of the super rich, hear this: If  people look down on me or you for not being rich, they should know this: it is far better to feel an unwarranted guilt or shame of poverty than the justified guilt and shame of greed. And no amount of money can diminish it. Why do you think so many rich people are miserable and so many poor people aren't?