Romanticism versus pragmatism, can a middle-ground be possible? One definition for romanticism is impractical romantic ideals and attitudes. Of late I have been tossed in a mind tussle between romanticism and pragmatism. A typical situation takes place last week. Last week is exam week in the primary schools and I see less students. So, I made use of the time to call up/email parents and teachers to get feedback about the emotional well being and behaviour of the students under my care.
It is rather strange that you can read about disasters, tragedies and struggles of people in the newspaper and not be affected; as if these people are aliens or of a different animal specie. It is quite a different reaction when you learn more about the struggles your students have to endure, especially hearing from the emotionally emaciated guardians. In a brief affected state of compassion, I will despair about the circumstances that engulf them. I then go on to romanticise the comfort no matter how small I can bring them. On that same vein of thoughts and mood, watching a documentary about Van Gogh's letters, his remarks like " The fishermen know that the sea is dangerous and the storm terrible, but they have never found these dangers sufficient reason for remaining ashore " move me. I then think about whether I want to pursue my vocation further, a degree in child pyschology perhaps.
On another evening however, I accompanied my husband to attend a bank customer event. The presenter shared his optimism of a market recovery taking place towards the last quarter of this year. He gave pointers to watch that may signal strong recovery and signs that the worst is over. In addition he discussed the golden rule to look for value. All these talk makes you feel guilty and idle for not actively and diligently looking after your financial investments.
So what seems to be the tussle? On the one hand I feel I need to be more committed to pursue both goals, making my money work and developing more skills in counselling. On the other hand I think it is rather difficult to swing from the subject of $ to the study of the intricate working of the mind concurrently. Thus I need to decide on which area to concentrate. If I am good with the former I will feel more secured financially and can derive more fun from travelling etc. Disparately, if I am good at helping others, I will feel more fulfilled and happy with myself. Alterrnatively, I can pursue both in a mediocre manner and derive small doses of joy occasionally from both fields (together with the pain of course). That is what I meant when I ask: Can a middle ground be possible or as the word suggests, will I end up feeling I am in the middle of no where; not forgetting that procastination is still a threat :)
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Poor Bernanke
Poor Bernanke! Yesterday I read a remark by him that money can't buy happiness in his speech to graduating students at South Carolina. "Having a larger income is exciting at first, but as you get used to your new standard of living and as you associate with other people in your new income bracket, the thrill quickly wears off," he said.
I googled and found that he earned only about US$200,000 in 2009. I read somewhere he had to sell his house at a loss to move to Washington when he took on the Fed Chairman role. His job requires him to meet with and regulate those sinfully paid bank CEOs who used to earn hundreds of million in bonuses. I guess he has to convince himself that money is not everything to check himself from being envious hahaha. One can not help but feel the injustice. Think about those speculators/dealers who are trying to make a killing by attacking the Eurodollar and the European bonds out of the current Greek crisis. They can probably earn ten times his annual salary in a day if they are successful; and what is their contribution? Further hardship on the poor in Greece. Pensioners in Greece who get about US$1250 per month will see their pension reduced by 20%. Likewise government servants will suffer pay cut too etc. Sometimes I wonder what does such excessive money mean to these speculators/dealer? Such people and those masters of universe who direct their creativity to devise intricate financial derivatives/structures and who produce nothing concrete or provide any useful service are well remunerated.
Hahaha I think I am becoming a socialist, an armchair one probably. I share the sentiment of one US blogger who commented about Bernanke's remark that money can't buy happiness. He said Bernanke "has probably never been poor before".
I googled and found that he earned only about US$200,000 in 2009. I read somewhere he had to sell his house at a loss to move to Washington when he took on the Fed Chairman role. His job requires him to meet with and regulate those sinfully paid bank CEOs who used to earn hundreds of million in bonuses. I guess he has to convince himself that money is not everything to check himself from being envious hahaha. One can not help but feel the injustice. Think about those speculators/dealers who are trying to make a killing by attacking the Eurodollar and the European bonds out of the current Greek crisis. They can probably earn ten times his annual salary in a day if they are successful; and what is their contribution? Further hardship on the poor in Greece. Pensioners in Greece who get about US$1250 per month will see their pension reduced by 20%. Likewise government servants will suffer pay cut too etc. Sometimes I wonder what does such excessive money mean to these speculators/dealer? Such people and those masters of universe who direct their creativity to devise intricate financial derivatives/structures and who produce nothing concrete or provide any useful service are well remunerated.
Hahaha I think I am becoming a socialist, an armchair one probably. I share the sentiment of one US blogger who commented about Bernanke's remark that money can't buy happiness. He said Bernanke "has probably never been poor before".
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Unconditional love
My husband and ALL his siblings have an unflagging love for my mother-in-law. If mum loves to eat a special type of pineapple, coconut sweet or Malaysian made nooddles, the family will be on a look out for such produce and may even travel the extra mile to get it. If mum needs to go for a medical appointment, there are many volunteers to accompany her.
My mother-in-law is really one of a kind in a very positive sense. I have never heard her scold anyone before, other than her grandchildren when they were mischievious. Neither has she spoken disapprovingly of any of her children. The only important decision she probably made in her life was when she was asked to decide between a Taoist or Buddhist funeral ceremony when my father in law passed away. There was a bit of dispute amongst her children but they respected her final decision.
Sometimes at family gatherings, I will quietly observe how she laughs heartily when the children humour her. As she is illiterate her children will also patiently explain to her news or storyline of dramas when she watches TV.
I have been mulling over the root of such filial trait in this family. I do not think it arises from steep moral education at home or special emphasis of such value. To me it is almost inherent in the children; a natural reaction perhaps to the way she treats them. She demands nothing of them. Even the more liberated amongst us mothers would expect something, even if minimally, from our children; failing which we feel let down. Even if we don't show it, our children know certain standards is expected of them academically or career wise. My husband and his siblings are free of such embedded demands and are grateful. I think they truly appreciate mum's unconditional love and reciprocate naturally.
My mother-in-law is really one of a kind in a very positive sense. I have never heard her scold anyone before, other than her grandchildren when they were mischievious. Neither has she spoken disapprovingly of any of her children. The only important decision she probably made in her life was when she was asked to decide between a Taoist or Buddhist funeral ceremony when my father in law passed away. There was a bit of dispute amongst her children but they respected her final decision.
Sometimes at family gatherings, I will quietly observe how she laughs heartily when the children humour her. As she is illiterate her children will also patiently explain to her news or storyline of dramas when she watches TV.
I have been mulling over the root of such filial trait in this family. I do not think it arises from steep moral education at home or special emphasis of such value. To me it is almost inherent in the children; a natural reaction perhaps to the way she treats them. She demands nothing of them. Even the more liberated amongst us mothers would expect something, even if minimally, from our children; failing which we feel let down. Even if we don't show it, our children know certain standards is expected of them academically or career wise. My husband and his siblings are free of such embedded demands and are grateful. I think they truly appreciate mum's unconditional love and reciprocate naturally.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
The Obama Analogy
Apparently Obama has been an inspirational figure for many a Afro Americans and kids of minority races in the US. In him they see potentials in themselves which can be realised if they try hard enough.
Well, I use him too. An intelligent boy who is smart but behaves in a defiant manner, often poking fun at teachers and belittling classmates, is with me for counselling. He comes from a divorced single family and lives with his mum. At last week's session I wondered aloud to him whether his disrespect for others arose out of disdain and a feeling of being better than others. "How can I ever be better than others," he retorted. I asked why not. " I can never be better than others because I come from a imperfect family," he said. With that, I went along with the usual rhetoric about how a person is judged and respected by the person's behaviour and thoughts and not by the family background he comes from bla bla. Various examples were pulled out and Obama's complex family was of course inclusive. That seems to leave a bit of impression on him because he stayed still awhile and listened intently.
Upon reflection of the case, I sometimes wonder how long such practical intervention like Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (basically reframing), Choice therapy, Solution Focused therapy stays effective. Deep psychological imprints may not be so easily resolved especially when it relates to the subconscious mind. I reflect on what the boy said "I can never be better than others because I came from a imperfect family". Although the sentence can be easily disputed upon, this instinctive remark does have its roots. Freud believes that a child identifies himself with his parents. Identification is taking into your own personality characteristics of someone else, because doing so helps solve some emotional difficulty. For example, a child when left alone may try to become "mom" and "dad" in order to lessen his or her fears. It is usually believed that a child identifies most with the parent of the same sex. In the boy's case where the father is absent, he may over identify with his mum. The brute mannerism may then be a symptom of subsconscious "compensatory masculine acting-out" (applying Freud's theory). In this sense being imperfect may be a feeling originating from the child's subconsciousness.
For Freud, catharsis is through awareness of the subconscious, often from hours and hours of self expression which may not be too practical. With a child especially, Obama's "Yes, We Can" may sometimes seem a better choice.
Well, I use him too. An intelligent boy who is smart but behaves in a defiant manner, often poking fun at teachers and belittling classmates, is with me for counselling. He comes from a divorced single family and lives with his mum. At last week's session I wondered aloud to him whether his disrespect for others arose out of disdain and a feeling of being better than others. "How can I ever be better than others," he retorted. I asked why not. " I can never be better than others because I come from a imperfect family," he said. With that, I went along with the usual rhetoric about how a person is judged and respected by the person's behaviour and thoughts and not by the family background he comes from bla bla. Various examples were pulled out and Obama's complex family was of course inclusive. That seems to leave a bit of impression on him because he stayed still awhile and listened intently.
Upon reflection of the case, I sometimes wonder how long such practical intervention like Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (basically reframing), Choice therapy, Solution Focused therapy stays effective. Deep psychological imprints may not be so easily resolved especially when it relates to the subconscious mind. I reflect on what the boy said "I can never be better than others because I came from a imperfect family". Although the sentence can be easily disputed upon, this instinctive remark does have its roots. Freud believes that a child identifies himself with his parents. Identification is taking into your own personality characteristics of someone else, because doing so helps solve some emotional difficulty. For example, a child when left alone may try to become "mom" and "dad" in order to lessen his or her fears. It is usually believed that a child identifies most with the parent of the same sex. In the boy's case where the father is absent, he may over identify with his mum. The brute mannerism may then be a symptom of subsconscious "compensatory masculine acting-out" (applying Freud's theory). In this sense being imperfect may be a feeling originating from the child's subconsciousness.
For Freud, catharsis is through awareness of the subconscious, often from hours and hours of self expression which may not be too practical. With a child especially, Obama's "Yes, We Can" may sometimes seem a better choice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
