#‘America’ and ‘Americans’ can sometimes be used interchangeably etc
Text
Writing Visible vs Invisible Disabilities
Poll winner! Here goes. I would like to emphasize that my information and knowledge pertains specifically to the USA - I’m going to discuss some legal stuff with accommodations/disability equity that are super specific to America so if you are reading from/writing outside of the USA, you should probably conduct some of your own research on that.
Vocab
Invisible disability, hidden disability, or non-apparent disability are all terms used to describe a disability that is not readily measurable or apparent to sighted individuals. Invisible disability is the most commonly used, but non-apparent is felt to be the most neutral, as “hidden” implies a conscious secrecy and some so-called “invisible” disabilities do become visible or apparent in the right circumstances. Examples may include things like neurological conditions, chronic illnesses, mental illness, or autoimmune diseases.
Personal note: In this post I primarily use invisible disability because to me, it is the most common, and most recognizable. I also use non-apparent, because I think it’s specific and useful. I don’t use hidden because it does seem to carry value judgment, more so than invisible.
Visible disability is a term that describes a disability that is measurable or readily apparent to a sighted individual. Examples might include someone with a partial limb, muscular dystrophy requiring the use of a wheelchair, or a form of dwarfism resulting in a different body shape and size.
Multiple disabilities or multiply disabled refers to a person that has more than one disability.
Cross-disabled or cross-disability is a term that refers to organizations or concerns that apply broadly to people across the spectrum of ability and disability. This is as opposed to organizations or concerns that are specifically tailored or related to a particular disability.
The ADA, or Americans with Disabilities Act, is a piece of cross-disability legislation.
The SMA Foundation (Spinal Muscular Atrophy) is a single disability organization.
Passing is a term sometimes used to describe someone that is not in an identity group but can look or behave as though they do. An example might be a Deaf person using hearing aids to “pass” or be seen as hearing.
Nondisabled is a good neutral term for people that do not have disabilities. Abled or able-bodied is frequently used, but some see it as creating a hierarchy between abled and disabled people. Try to avoid words like “normal” or “healthy.”
Limb difference is a term describing the partial or complete absence, or malformation, of an arm or leg. This can be congenital (from birth) or acquired.
Facial difference is a term that describes anything above the neck that is visibly different from the majority of other people. I have a post about it that goes into much greater detail.
Self-disclosure means sharing something about oneself. In the context of disability, self-disclosure refers to the decision to share one’s disability status or diagnosis. Generally speaking, self-disclosure is a formal term and in my experience is used when referring to disclosing disability status or diagnosis as part of attending school, starting a new job, or otherwise requesting accommodations.
Access needs are something that a person needs to communicate, learn, or take part in an activity.
Support needs are sometimes used interchangeably with access needs, but can also refer to a person’s basic needs in order to live (eating, sleeping, bathrooming, etc.)
Accommodations is a term often used to describe legally mandated services provided to a person who has been diagnosed with a disability. These are most commonly in place at a person’s school or work and help a disabled person effectively complete tasks.
Access needs, support needs, and accommodations are similar in nature and are sometimes used interchangeably, but are not always the same thing. I know this is wildly confusing.
Generally speaking, the word “accommodations” (in regards to access) is used primarily in schools, and sometimes in professional working environments. Access needs are used more often in public or professional environments, and support needs in personal environments.
Some examples: Ramps are an access need. They can also be an accommodation, but an accommodation would more likely be phrased as “wheelchair-accessible classrooms or workspaces,” which could either be accessed through ramps or being on the bottom floor.
Assistance with handling finances is a support need. Extra time on tests is an accommodation.
Visible Disability Considerations
Before we get started: I am not saying these things only apply to those with visible disabilities. They may be more common for people with visible disabilities, but people with invisible disabilities could, and many have, experienced the same or similar things. I am not gatekeeping anything; I am just trying to organize this post.
Harassment in public. Someone who is visibly disabled may be openly stared at or subject to ableist abuse because people can tell that they have a disability. Most of what I have to say here relates to this, but there are some specifics I’m going to get into as well.
Being pitied. “Well-meaning” non-disabled people may try to do something “nice” for someone who they see as “less fortunate.” Assistance with things someone doesn’t need assistance with, comments about being brave or inspiring, or offers to pray for someone all fall under this category - all that and more, in fact.
Assumption of incompetence. Sometimes this means that people assume someone with a visible disability is automatically cognitively disabled. Sometimes it means that people believe a visibly disabled person is not capable of performing simple tasks. This can mean anything from being “helped” in a supermarket to being discriminated against when applying for work.
Ableism and discrimination. Everything listed is ableism and discrimination, but it’s worth saying outright. People with visible disabilities are often subject to ableist abuse, hiring discrimination, housing discrimination, and many other kinds of prejudice because they cannot mask or hide their disability, or pass as non-disabled.
People with invisible disabilities also suffer from ableism and discrimination. This is sometimes more common for people with visible disabilities, but can happen to anyone - even, actually, to non-disabled people who are thought to have a disability.
Inappropriate questions. Just because someone is visibly disabled does not mean that anyone is entitled to further information. Asking a stranger “what happened to them” or “what’s wrong with them” is always inappropriate, and is often inappropriate with coworkers or acquaintances as well. Your characters should know someone decently well and be able to gauge your disabled character’s comfort level before asking this kind of question.
Mobility aid policing. Mobility aids are visible, so users often fall under the visible disability umbrella. Sometimes, even though someone is using a mobility aid, random people in public decide they do not need it, or try to argue with them about faking it. Not being visibly disabled “enough,” or not being believed about being disabled, is still a problem for the visibly disabled.
Service dogs can be mobility aids, or other kinds of disability aids. People interacting with them, or trying to interact with them in public, also falls under this category.
Invisible Disability Considerations
Once again: I am not saying these things only apply to those with invisible disabilities. They may be more common for people with invisible disabilities, but people with visible disabilities could, and many have, experienced the same or similar things. I am not gatekeeping anything; I am just trying to organize this post.
Assumption of ability. Someone with an invisible disability may be assumed to be capable of everything a non-disabled person can do. They may have to repeatedly explain why they cannot do certain things or even why they do do things - like take pills, avoid certain foods, or rest more frequently than non-disabled peers. This ties into our next section -
Not being believed about severity or symptoms. People without visible or measurable disabilities can be disbelieved by strangers about their disability status, but also, very painfully, by friends, family, or medical professionals. Since a non-apparent disability may rely on self-report, other systemic biases may come into play here as well, like not believing someone because they’re a woman, or POC. People may also get comments like “you’re too young to be disabled,” “it’s all in your head,” or “you don’t look disabled.”
Again, this can and does also happen to visibly disabled people as well.
Being accused of lying or faking it. This is obviously the same as not being believed, but is a slightly different manifestation. This is when non-disabled people believe someone is faking having a disability in order to get attention or access to disability resources. Ignoring the fact that that is a completely unrewarding thing to do, this is a combination of disbelief, and suspecting the disabled person in question of intentional malice and selfishness. Again, this can be frustrating and incredibly painful.
Once again. Can and does happen to visibly disabled people.
When to self-disclose. Someone with an invisible disability gets more of a choice in if and when to talk about their disability. This means they have more control over who gets to know, when, how, what, and why, but also comes with problems of its own.
Telling new friends may come with concerns about being viewed or treated differently.
Telling a school or place of work may introduce the risk of scrutiny or discrimination.
Telling anyone risks potential ableism or alienation.
Asking for accommodations. Possibly more so than a visibly disabled person, a person with a non-apparent disability may have to self-disclose and then actively pursue the fulfillment of their support needs, access needs, or accommodations. I know many people who have voluntarily gone without the accommodations that they are legally entitled to, because they wanted to avoid shitty conversations about them and their needs.
Being able to go without one’s accommodations and “pass” for non-disabled can be viewed as a privilege, but going without one’s needed support needs, access needs, or accommodations can also be difficult, painful, and sometimes more impossible than a person realizes.
Resource policing. Some people may not be visibly disabled, but may still need resources like a service dog, an accessible parking pass, or use of the accessible bathroom stall. It is not at all uncommon for random people in public to see someone that they don’t think is disabled making use of a public resource for disabled people, and decide to say something about it.
Cross-Disability Considerations
What are your character’s support needs, access needs, and/or accommodations? If they don’t have any, why not?
How is your character perceived? Is their disability apparent to all, some, or none of the people around them? Under what circumstances might it become apparent?
How comfortable is your character with talking about their disability? Is it something that they take pride in, or something they would rather not be defined by? Does it feel very personal to them, or is it not that big of a deal? In what situations do they explain their diagnosis, and in what situations do they decide not to?
In what ways does ableism manifest, or not manifest, in your character’s life? Is there stigma attached to their diagnosis? Why or why not?
How does the medical establishment of your setting view your character’s disability or disabilities? How does that contrast with other disabilities? What is the reasoning behind this?
How does your character feel about medical interventions or cures? How much time/effort/money are they willing to put into medical interventions and cures, and why might that be?
Is your character part of a community or identity group centered around their disability? Do they know anyone with their same disability, or any disabilities at all? How does this community, or the lack of it, feel to them? How does the representation and kinship, or lack thereof, feel to them?
Rethink
This visibly disabled character has it harder than the invisibly disabled character. Or vice versa. Try not to set up hierarchies of suffering or ability. Non-apparent disabilities can be just as disabling, or more so, than visible disabilities. Setting up these two arbitrary categories in conflict is not really necessary, and is ableist no matter what direction it is in.
This character has accommodations/access needs/support needs but doesn’t use them or seem to truly need them. Why would your character have accommodations/access needs/support needs but not use them? Why might it seem “better” to not have these kinds of needs?
This character goes to great lengths to appear non-disabled. Again - why? Not saying you can’t do this, but think about what messages it sends and be intentional in the way you write this.
This character is visibly disabled, but can function exactly like a non-disabled person in every way. Exact same questions as above. Also - how realistic is this? Why might it be important or valuable to adhere to a non-disabled standard? What might be gained or lost?
Resources
As I have mentioned, I don’t like recommending media I haven’t personally read/watched/listened to, because I like to know what I’m recommending. In reviewing my own stuff, I don’t have much for invisible vs. visible resources. I have two books that are pretty general. If anyone else has media that fits with this post, please feel free to add it on!
Demystifying Disability by Emily Landau is a cross-disability primer on disability basics, etiquette, and disability justice. It’s a quick read that I highly recommend.
Disability Visibility, collected by Alice Wong, is a book of essays written by disabled people about their lives, thoughts, and experiences. It’s super engaging and informative, and I also highly recommend, particularly because these people are talking about their own lives in their own words.
#disability writing guide#invisible disabilities#visible disabilities#writing disabled characters#disability representation#representation matters#writing invisibly disabled characters#writing visibly disabled characters#invisible disabilities vs visible disabilities#disabled characters
144 notes
·
View notes
Text
Not all Native cultures are the same
As a bit of an addition to my last post regarding the ‘Not Deer’ I am gonna talk about another issue that deeply bothers me as a historian who enjoys learning about Native culture: the fact that some native legends are treated as interchangeable.
Let me explain:
Just because something comes from Native folklore does not mean they all come from the same place
The biggest issue I see in the cryptozoology community along with the mythology community, paranormal community, and even the horror community to an extent in regards to native folklore is this: they treat ALL native legends as if they came from the same place and use some stories interchangeably.
Native culture in both North America and South America is EXTREMELY DIVERSE and can vary greatly upon geographic region. If you study native folklore there can be some overlap (especially with cultures that are close to each other geographically) but even with those overlaps present that does not mean those cultures and legends can be used interchangeably.
Example: Wendigos and Skinwalkers (two legends I often see used in place of each other).
Wendigos are from the Algonquin language family which is located in the North Eastern part of the United states and parts of Canada. They were once members of a tribe who had their souls corrupted by their own acts of greed and are then cursed to spend the rest of their lives with an eternal blood lust and inhuman appearance. They are not animal like, and if I had to compare them (physically) to anything they look a lot like the Rake.
Meanwhile Skinwalkers exist in the Western Half of the United States and are from Navajo folklore (and the folklore of surrounding tribes). They are witches who at one point were medicine men/women who abused their powers and thus became Skinwalkers. They DO have the power to transform into animals, but they also maintain their sentience and use this sentience to bring harm to others (sometimes out of personal gain, sometimes out of revenge and greed). They can also change between forms (which a Wendigo cannot do because a wendigo is stuck how it is forever).
In a very superficial way these legends are kinda similar since they both deal with the consequences of ones own actions and both have an element of permanent transformation/soul corruption to them. HOWEVER, the similarities end there since both of these stories mean different things, both of these beings do not function the same (Skinwalkers have sentience, wendigos do not), and both of these beings play vastly different roles in their own respective cultures.
I have also noticed this same homogenizing thing going on not just with legends, but with other aspects of native culture as well.
This is more of a “people just being stupid” sort of problem but I have noticed when non-native people talk about native cultures (IE: cultural practices, foods, dress, dances, and music) they often do not disclose what culture they are talking about. They just kinda say “oh, this is just a native American thing" and that is about it.
Once again, native cultures can be (and often are) vastly different from each other.
If you are going to talk about native culture at least name WHICH NATIVE CULTURE you are talking about. In the USA ALONE there are 574 different tribes that are federally recognized. There is also possibly more that are not federally recognized, and many more that now no longer exist due to genocide. Due to their being 574+ tribes in the US alone specifying which one you are talking about is important since that also means there are 574+ ways of doing things. 574+ versions of stories, cultural traditions, etc.
Not everything is the same, and making everything the same is how cultural erasure happens.
27 notes
·
View notes
Text
A guide for proper terminology for Nicky Hemmick:
Written by me, a Mexican-American.
Latin American: someone from Latin America, this includes Mexico but not Spain. Latin America is multi ethnic, and not just Spanish speaking, the non Spanish speaking countries of Latin America are Brazil, Belize, Suriname, Guyana, French Guiana, and the Falkland Islands.
Latino: decent from Latin America, similar to saying Latin American, but can include people born in America of Latin American decent. People don't really say "Latin American American," they say Latino American. (Latina = woman, and Latine = neutral but not commonly used, often typed Latin@s online for shorthand to include both). Latin American countries are very diverse, some are dominantly black/Afro-Latino.
Afro-Latino: Afro-Latin Americans are dominantly from African decent, some Latin American countries are majorly black/Afro-Latino. when used outside of Latin America it can mean someone who’s mixed black and Latino.
Latinx: "gender neutral" term for Latino, but probably made by white people because .... Spanish words don't end in x, and x isn't pronounced that way in Spanish, for example the name Xitlali (sometimes spelled Zitlali and other variations, but pronounced like an S). Honestly say Latino/Latinos or Latin@s, and in online queer spaces Latine/Latines.
Chicano: Latin American decent but born in America.
Hispanic: related to Spain, colonized by Spain, so this includes Spain but not Brazil, which is a Latin American country.
Mexican: a person from Mexico living in America, for example Nicky's mom, but often also casually used to mean Mexican Americans (or Latino/Chicanos in general).
Mexican American: Latin American decent born into America. Unlike chicano, it is associated more with the idea of assimilation into white America, but not always.
Mexicano: what Mexicans call themselves in Mexico (feminine is Mexicana).
TexMex: people who were living in Mexico, and then America bought/stole the land and said "this is also America now, you can leave or stay" and they stayed. They became Americans, Texas Mexican American culture is different than for example SoCal Mexican American culture because of this, (but still more in common with each other than not).
Anglo: someone who is non Latino, usually in reference to someone who lives in the America's that were colonized by British people and English is the standard spoken language, ex/ North Americans and Canadians who aren't Latino. Usually in reference to white people but not always. If someone is Asian American and constantly purposefully mispronounces my name, instead of being like "🙄white people" I can be like "🙄 Anglos" (or I could say gringo, which is not as nice of a term for anglo). I honestly don’t know if I can call a spaniard anglo, but I assume not, since they're not Anglo-Saxon, which is where the term comes from.
despite what the media represents, not all Latino’s are Mexican! although the two terms are often used interchangeably when they’re really not. there are 32 other countries besides Mexico in Latin America.
Mexican is technically a nationality, but because of colonialism it’s not that simple. Race dynamics work differently in different countries. Most Mexicanos are not connected with their mixed indigenous ancestors, while some still are, like the Maya. It is something that has been taken from us and has evolved into its own thing. Some Mexicanos are lighter than others, sometimes by being more related to the Spanish than the indigenous. Mexico has a huge problem with colorism and class divide as well as overall racial tension.
Mexico is also not only "white/more Spanish" "more brown" and "fully indigenous, culturally and ethnically", there are afro-latinos (like mentioned before), and also Asian latinos, specifically a large amount of Chinese immigrants from when China became communist, middle eastern latinos, etc. Latin America has immigrants too!
I have a friend who is fully Korean but grew up in Guatemala, I have another friend from Brazil who is 100% of polish and Ashkenazi decent, her grandparents having escaped to Brazil during WWII, but she and her parents grew up and spent their whole lives in Brazil, they are Latin Americans.
List of things Nicky's mom Maria is:
Mexican, Mexicana, Latina, Latin American, 'Hispanic' but like.... outdated term and usually when people use this they just mean Latin@.
List of things Nicky is:
Mexican-American, Latino, "Mexican" in the broad sense of the word.
Describing Nicky or his mother as "looking hispanic" doesn't really make sense because he takes after his mother who is described as very dark and therefore less Spanish decent and more indigenous decent, she's from a Spanish speaking country so... its not technically wrong, but Nicky is from and English speaking one and doesn't speak Spanish, so it doesn't really make sense.
He isn't Chicano and neither is she, she wasn't born in America and Nicky doesn't identify as Chicano or in general much with his mothers culture beyond visible features. He is never mentioned to make Mexican food, listen to Latin American music, or other aspects of Latino culture in general. He chose to go to Germany instead of Spain or Latin America, and he talked Aaron out of taking Spanish in exchange for German so Nicky could help him with his homework, (meaning he doesn't know Spanish, which many Mexican Americans don't know).
saying Nicky “looked Mexican” or “looked brown” isn’t a bad thing, Neil in the books says he’s two shades too dark to be considered tan, so... stop tip-toeing around it and call him brown instead of tan. It’s not a bad thing to be brown, and It’s not a bad thing to be Mexican. maybe I’m just from somewhere with a lot of Mexican-Americans, but when I look at people I can tell they’re not Anglos, or I think to myself “oh another Mexican” or at least “brown person” vs when I see a white person I think “white person.” I’m not face blind, I know that different races exist and look different and can see such trends in real people in the same way that when I look at a little girl I go “oh a little girl” not “what sex is this weird hairless animal, what is this alien”.
these concepts are a lot more complicated in practice, I get told often I don’t “look Mexican” but so does one of my cousins who’s afro latino and plays professional basketball in Mexico. Gender is fake but the majority of people we see are still falling into two categories on sight, it’s how we’re socially trained.
I'm also not an encyclopedia, if you think I made a mistake let me know and I'll check it out. A lot of this was just off the top of my head and words I just learned from.... existing, I didn't exactly look them all up in the dictionary.
Also if you’re writing Nicky, don’t be afraid to get a sensitivity reader, @sensitivityreaders is a good resource for this, and so is @writingwithcolor
119 notes
·
View notes
Note
I read your post on how you got started in the translation industry and I was wondering if it is possible to get an entry/basic level translation gigs in Japan with N3-level proficiency or if even those want at least N2 proficiency. Also since you've been living and working in Japan for a long time, what advice would you give those wanting to work in Japan in regards to avoiding black companies?
Finding Translation Work in Japan
Hi there! Thank you for your ask.
To be honest, “translation” is so very broad that I can’t give you a simple “yes” or “no” as an answer. My answer is “Maybe” with the following caveats. For the sake of this post, I’m going to assume that your native language is English, or that you have native-level proficiency, and you plan to do English↔Japanese translation in a Japanese workplace.
Field of Translation
This is perhaps the biggest factor. I understand that in order to translate legal or medical things, there is a particular certification that you must obtain. This requires N1/native level proficiency in both languages. I have thought of attempting to obtain the medical one, but I’m not ready for it. I would need to study a LOT of terminology in both English and Japanese.
As for other fields, I think it really depends on the company and how much they are willing to teach you on the job. Also, depending on the field, many field-specific terminology may be katakana words derived from English, meaning that while they will be new Japanese words for you, they will not be entirely new words.
But if I were to work in, say, the banking industry doing translation, I would certainly have a hard time learning all the words, especially if I didn’t already have some sort of background in banking in English.
For example, I specifically work as a translator for a company that provides services to other very big companies that you have heard of. Technically, I work for an anti-malware software company and the technical support aspect of it. When a product is updated, I will translate internal manuals and things like that. I also translate the Big Wig conversations, which are done in English since the client and our company’s HQs are in America, so that our local guys know what’s going on. I also create/translate/edit/take minutes for presentations given to Big Wigs. I also handle all IT issues in our project, because our IT ticketing system is 100% in English. ANYTHING English-related is funneled to me.
Contractually-speaking, I do not work for any other clients. But since I’m the only translator in our company in Hokkaido capable of interpretation as well, I am often asked to assist under the table. (Translation and interpretation are two entirely different beasts, btw.)
While I don’t have a background in IT or computers or anything like that, since most of the terminology is in katakana and I’m not absolutely clueless about computers, my learning curve wasn’t too sharp. I struggled more with bullshit corporate acronyms and the formalities of Business Japanese (sonkeigo and kenjougo).
A person holding an N2 is considered capable of Business Japanese. Even if you have extensive knowledge in the field of translation, you will have a VERY difficult time adjusting to the Japanese-language workplace if you are not good with Business Japanese. From that standpoint, I cannot recommend someone at N3 to enter a Japanese company to do translation. It will be grueling. I was N1 when I joined the company, and I still had difficulty composing emails and other workplace-related words I hadn’t come across.
Start with Freelance Translation/Proofreading
There was a year or so where I had N1 but was still teaching English. I found freelance English-Japanese translation jobs online. Lots of them were one-shot things, like “translate this brochure about our little tiny town” or “I am a researcher who has written a paper on Persian-French relations during the 16th century, and I need someone to proofread my English.” Lol that one was pretty specific and paid very handsomely. By doing well on a job, I established a relationship with that client and I would get more work either from them or someone they knew. Prices are fixed before translation.
The average price for translation is 3-7 yen per character (if the original text is in Japanese) or per word (if the original text is in English). The price increases depending on the complexity of the material. The brochure about the little town was 4 yen per character, but the research paper was 9 yen word (despite the fact I was only proofreading instead of translating because it was incredibly complex).
Proofreading goes alongside translation. I didn’t really do much of that, but you can see a price range of 1-5 yen per character/word. If you are N3, proofreading is great way to get your feet wet!
NOTE: Do not take on proofreading or translation jobs for a language that is not your native language. No matter how good you think your Japanese is, it will not be good enough to proofread. Even if you have an N1, you will miss things. Even I, as a translator with almost 3 years experience in my field, always have a Japanese coworker proofread everything I translate into Japanese, and 9 times out of 10 they fix at least one thing.
How to Avoid Black Companies
In Japan, some companies are labeled ブラック企業 “black kigyou,” which means that they violate labor laws in some heinous fashion. Denying pay, benefits, or leave, forcing employees to do grueling amounts of overtime that can lead to 過労死 karoushi (death by overwork), etc. These companies will rob you of your sanity at best and your life at worst, and are to be avoided at all costs.
When I was searching for a position teaching English, I googled reviews of each big Eikaiwa school, like AEON or whatever else there is. Many previous teachers air their grievances on places like glassdoor.com. It was easy to learn which schools I should avoid.
Also, I applied online to many different big Eikaiwas. Three of them (sorry, I can’t remember which) immediately emailed me back and said I was hired, without an interview or anything. That should be a HUGE red flag to you right there. Why are they so desperate to hire that they’ll take you without even giving you an interview? And even if they do later say, “Your hiring is dependent upon an interview,” that means that their initial contact email was fraudulent.
Research the company as best you can. See if you can find someone who has worked for them. Beware of smaller, private companies. They tend to fly under the radar and are prone to be even shittier. Then again, there was a woman who died of death by over work a few years ago and she worked for the biggest advertising firm in Japan.
Here’s an article from Business Insider about karoushi and black companies.
A 2016 report examining karoshi cases and their cause of death found that more than 20% of people in a survey of 10,000 Japanese workers said they worked at least 80 hours of overtime a month.
The Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry defines the threshold for karoushi as greater than 80 hours of overtime a month. Since this article was posted in 2018, a new law regarding overtime has been implemented by the Japanese government. Now there is a legal cap on overtime of 100 hours per month (and 720/year) for busier months, with the general upper limit set at 45 hours per month (360 hours/year).
Even if a company isn’t black, be prepared for overtime. My company makes sure that every employee adheres to the 45 hours per month limit...as best they can. If you follow this blog you know that I have done 60 and 70 hours of overtime in certain months, because I am our only translator and when shit hits the fan I’m the only one who can handle it.
However, my company is very good about making sure that I receive all of my overtime pay. Every single minute of overtime I do is properly reimbursed. Sometimes this means that if I work 60 hours one month, I will only report 45 that month, and then report 15 extra hours the next month. Or I will take a couple days off but claim that I worked (with my bosses’ approval, of course).
I can’t speak for other companies for sure, but I fear that when this law was introduced in 2019, many companies did not change their business models and instead forbid employees from reporting overtime that exceeded legal limits, meaning they would be going without compensation.
So be aware that if you are going to work in a Japanese company, you are likely to have overtime. Some people don’t, and congratulations to them! But it is an extremely real possibility. Make sure that you can handle it physically and mentally, and that you are being properly compensated. After my first month of Big Overtime, my boss told me, “I’m surprised that you managed to do all that. I thought that Americans had a poor work ethic compared to Japanese people, but now I see that’s not true.”
kinda racist, but thx
If you have an interview and it goes well and you receive a contract, ask to take the contract and have time to think about it. Then, have a Japanese person you trust read the contract and make sure there is nothing shady hidden in there. Contracts and legalese are difficult enough in my own native language--I don’t trust myself to catch something in Japanese.
If your friend thinks that the contract is fair as well, and if you feel like the company has a good atmosphere, take the job. That is what I did, and I am glad I did.
Translation and Interpretation
A lot of people don’t know the difference between “translation” and “interpretation” and use them interchangeably, but they are actually entirely different tasks that require different skills.
Translation: the conversion of written text from one language to another.
Interpretation: the conversion of spoken word from one language to another.
You will most likely be hired as a translator, because translation is much cheaper than interpretation. However, if your company is like mine, you will have interpretation work to do as well. You may be asked to take part in meetings and facilitate communication between the English-speaking and Japanese-speaking people, or act as a guide to a client from American headquarters, for example.
With translation, you usually have the blessing of time. You can look up a word you don’t know, you can think about the grammar, you can think about tone.
But with interpretation, you need to be:
Listening to Speaker A’s English and mentally summarizing their words
Starting to say Speaker A’s words in Japanese while holding on to the bits that will come later because English and Japanese word order is so different
Continuing to listen to added speech from Speaker A as you concurrently are relaying their previous speech in to Japanese and retaining the parts that you can’t say yet because of word order.
Then do it all for again for Speaker B’s reply, and repeat.
Basically, your mind has to be doing three things at once. Does your head hurt? Mine does. If I have to do simultaneous interpretation like that for more than a couple hours I literally develop a headache.
I will NEVER recommend an N3 person attempt interpretation in a business setting. Nor N2 for that matter. It is hard and you do not have the benefit of time to think and double-check things.
Also, many people don’t understand exactly how difficult it is to do interpretation. I have to sometimes just say “Sorry, pause” to the speaker because my head can’t retain any more, especially if figures and data and dates are referred to. Thankfully my coworkers have come to understand my method and are just happy that I can facilitate communication for them.
If you have any other questions regarding job hunting, please let me know and I’d be more than happy to offer what advice I have! 💖
#Anonymous#work in japan#life in Japan#expat in japan#japanese translation#japanese interpretation#job hunting#job hunting in japan#japan#ask me anything#asks are open
267 notes
·
View notes
Note
Have you seen S2E4 yet?? I'd really love to get your perspective on it as a teacher/from a child-development POV
Since I just did Baby Yoda’s child development in the last ask I’ll do my Thoughts On The Space School for this one because I was SO EXCITED to finally see a school in Star Wars!
The Good: The classroom seems to be pretty well-supplied. Enough desks and materials for everyone (maybe the teacher didn’t even have to buy them). Another shot shows little cubbies for the kiddos to keep their stuff in. There’s certainly enough light and air though the room seems a little cramped/close for all those kids. It was so cool to see all the supplies on the side - lots of globes (although one is straight up Jupiter??? the front most one of that cluster of 3 in the middle of the pic. Did they forget to repaint that one??) The board is definitely visible to everyone and it’s just awesome in general that the importance of education is recognized by a person of leadership, since Greef is clearly pretty proud of what they’ve accomplished on Nevarro.
Also I’m just so excited to see a space school in general. I have my own headcanons of course but it is cool to just actually see a school in Star Wars. Even if, as a teacher, many things grated on my nerves because I know how a school really has to roll. :P (I am about to complain so much, I swear I really did like the space school, it was a cute lil classroom.)
The Bad: Uhh..... why does Greef just drop the baby off here? Isn’t there a class for another, more appropriate age group? There’s honestly not really enough here to even engage elementary school students* - they are listening to a droid drone with nothing but a desk and a tablet-like device, though at least they’re allowed snacks - so a toddler is gonna be bored as hell. And a bored toddler is a destructive toddler. There’s nothing for him to do and presumably no age-appropriate activities for him, since this is an elementary school class and he is a toddler/possibly a preschooler. They are NOT interchangeable.
Also *Peli voice* you can’t just drop a kid off in a class like that!! Even in a drop-off program I would rip Greef a new one for that! 1. Interrupting the class without asking, it’s a miracle those kids didn’t take 10 minutes to be calmed back down. 2. The teacher has NO information on the kid. Allergies, health issues - and I imagine that’s even more important when you live in a galaxy with a billion different species - emergency contact info, etc. 3. YOU DIDN’T EVEN ASK IF YOU CAN LEAVE THE KID THERE. Okay I know it’s because it’s a tv show but BASIC DISRESPECT. 4. Since the teacher had no idea Baby Yoda was coming, do they even have enough materials? How fast did they have to whip up a separate more appropriate version of the day’s activities with differentiation to make it more accessible to his tiny hands? Any teacher would’ve had a couple extras but still.
Also the kids 100% should’ve fuckin’ rioted when Baby Yoda got brought in. He’s new and exciting and weird they would’ve gone apeshit. Pre-COVID anytime a baby sibling got brought in during pickup we all had to see the baby and this would’ve been no different. Hell we gotta stop and look if someone brought in a new Batman backpack or something. Well-behaved quiet class? 0/10 too unrealistic
The Ugly: Oh I see. While canon does sometimes address droid sapience, droids in Star Wars are usually used for menial tasks or tasks “below” an actual person. Including, apparently.....teaching.
You think a fucking droid can do my job? I guarantee you none of those students were learning A DAMN THING. All that droid was doing was droning on boring information with no effort to engage the students. No activity, no music, nothing fun or interesting, just dry boring info while sitting at a desk, so that info is going in one ear and out the other. My students don’t learn because I bleat dry information at them. They learn because even during teacher-led times, I make it interesting and engaging for them. I don’t have them just sit and listen constantly - hell even if they are sitting and listening to a book I’m asking them open-ended questions to engage them and get them thinking + my puppets and read-aloud song to make it fun, and I don’t even do that every day. I also use activities where they are actively participating and involved because that’s how kids learn. Think back to your own school experience - you don’t remember the boring stuff, do you? You remember the fun things, and likely the teacher that engaged you and made you want to learn. A teacher like that is absolutely vital to education and students learn best when they have a connection with an adult they like, trust, and value the knowledge of.
Okay, to be fair, a droid with the right personality for it could probably teach a great lesson. I for one would love to see R2-D2 run a classroom. (Or Chopper. “Hello and welcome to Murder 101.”) But from what I saw? Nah, that’s clearly a droid who’s not supposed to be a teacher but a babysitter. Because this is a show made by Americans and that’s how waaaaaay too many Americans think of their educators. And I’m not a fucking babysitter, I am a professional in my field, and teaching isn’t one of those jobs just anyone can do. Anyone can read a lesson, but it takes training and practice and effort to teach. /rant
*I’m not gonna get into it because my specialty is preschool, not elementary school, but sitting at a desk all day isn’t really developmentally appropriate or the best way to learn despite it being the norm in America. I’ve always headcanoned that in the GFFA they know better and have better schooling, so I’m just gonna pretend Greef dropped Baby Yoda off on substitute day when the regular teacher was out and it was a makeshift lesson and not what they normally do even during teacher-led lesson time.
Anyway Greef hire me for your space school I will set up an awesome preschool class for you, just pay me a living wage and let me teach Baby Yoda and see Cara Dune’s biceps on the regular
#I JUST HAVE VERY STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT TEACHING AND EDUCATION#the mandalorian#the mandalorian spoilers#baby yoda meta#asks#anon
49 notes
·
View notes
Link
“A pandemic has taken the lives of more than 100,000 Americans and put more than 30 million out of work, and to top it off, there has been an almost 30-day, caught-on-tape spree of police and vigilante violence against black people. For some, it may feel like the nation is on the brink of near-biblical levels of chaos.
The responses across the nation, whether you call them riots (and you shouldn’t) or whether you call them protests, uprisings, unrest, or rebellions, are being covered by local and national news and social media. As a journalism professor who has studied and experienced media coverage of protests for years, I have watched repeatedly how poorly these events are conveyed by the media and understood by the public. Here’s what people watching the news must understand in order to get what’s truly going on, and keep your faith in America nominally intact in the process.
First, it’s important to understand the mandate of the news, and that is to get eyeballs on the screen, whether that is your television screen or the one in your hands. Networks focus on spectacle: fires, people crying, and broken windows, instead of the larger story. In most cases (such as with the Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland, protests a few years ago), property damage and fires are limited to a small area, and even during those times many people are just milling about, but shaking camera angles and tight shots want you to believe that every reporter is an extra in Saving Private Ryan and every protest looks like Kanye’s “No Church in the Wild” video.
In reality, these protests are usually not completely consumed with chaos. Nighttime coverage will seldom show a full city map demonstrating that, two blocks over from a street that looks like a “city engulfed in flames,” there’s a CVS still open for business. The press flocking to dramatic images as a protest metaphor is not a new phenomenon.
Further, much of the property damage attributed to protesters is often the result of police action or inaction in the face of lawful public behavior, something I’ve witnessed from Ferguson to the far-right protests in Charlottesville, Virginia. Tear gas canisters can still burn your hand hours after they’ve been launched by police, flares are thrown by riot response teams with reckless abandon, let alone live munitions and flash grenades.
Sometimes buried at the end of post-protest reports by local authorities is the fact that police munitions often start fires at protests, but this is seldom reported by the press, and there have been surprisingly few protesters arrested for arson relative to the fires that erupted during the unrest. Which is more likely to set row houses ablaze, three teenagers in face masks with “No Justice, No Peace” signs or two smoldering tear gas shells sitting on a pile of dry leaves and newspaper for two hours?
This is not to suggest that some protesters don’t cause violence or property damage, but observers, let alone journalists, should be making distinctions between the various actors that are actually on the scene during civil unrest. You have the aforementioned police who are armed. Then you have chaos agents and anarchists who infiltrate peaceful protests with their own agenda. This isn’t conspiracy theory; in Minneapolis alone, videos have emerged of strangely dressed people just engaging in wanton property destruction. No one knows who they are, but it seems unlikely that they are protesters.
Then you have your run-of-the-mill opportunistic criminals. When the police are so occupied harassing and corralling peaceful protesters and the streets are filled with smoke, it’s pretty easy to break into a Verizon store, a beauty shop, or a grocery store and take what you want. These people are often conflated with actual revolutionaries, who are protesters that target actual structures and symbols of abuse and oppression. For protesters who are angry about violent, unaccountable police in Minneapolis, overtaking and burning down the Third Police Precinct is a specific act of revolt. This is a fundamentally different action than using the chaos from two blocks over to raid a liquor store.
And, of course, none of these actors should be confused with the hundreds of men and women peacefully protesting who are usually subjected to violent reprisals by police. Which is why “they’re burning their own community” narratives are so misleading and dangerous. It’s irresponsible to not distinguish which “they” is being talked about.
Which brings us to perhaps the most important thing to understand about how to watch protests: the context of what kind of protest garners police response. Over the past three months, the 24-hour cable networks have extensively covered mostly white armed men and women threatening police and politicians at state capitols across the nation over coronavirus lockdown policies.
How often have you seen police in riot gear? In fact, police seldom use force or even present in force (protest shields, black helmets, etc.) when conservative or right-wing groups protest. When is the last time you saw a group of anti-abortion activists get tear-gassed? Yet with left-leaning groups, and especially groups of minorities, their protests are often met with shows of force. Right-wing groups spit in the faces of police in regular gear in Michigan, while SWAT teams show up like Storm Troopers for chanting teens in Minneapolis.
This lack of context is even more corrosive when national press coverage chooses one staging area of protest over another. People are marching in Phoenix, Arizona; Columbus, Ohio; and New York City in solidarity with George Floyd, and in Brunswick, Georgia, for Ahmaud Arbery, and in Louisville, Kentucky, for Breonna Taylor. Seven people were shot during the Louisville protests, but 24-hour news coverage is blanketed with images of burning buildings in Minneapolis as if that’s the default of protests instead of the outlier.
So what should be your main takeaway as an American concerned about the future of the country? Protests are not simply stories of “good guys” and “bad guys” no matter where you fall on the political spectrum. There are actors all operating simultaneously, and all too often local and even national reporting only covers the story of the local politicians and police who have a vested interest in presenting themselves as overwhelmed and beleaguered as opposed to negligent and incendiary.
Former Minneapolis officer Derek Chauvin, who pinned George Floyd by placing his knee on the man’s neck for almost nine minutes, has been arrested and charged with murder and manslaughter by local authorities. By all accounts, whether it’s Minneapolis (or Louisville or Brunswick), if the police and vigilantes who committed these acts of violence were consistently arrested and charged, it’s highly likely that these protests would be less volatile.
More importantly, the focus and amplification of property damage over the lost lives that sparked unrest to begin with is a reflection of the press’s ghoulishly misplaced priorities. As a news consumer, you don’t have to feed the beast. You can choose to follow men and women on the ground covering events as concerned citizens. You can sift through the dross of hot-taking, moralizing pundits and pay attention to the data on the ground about what causes protests. (This was all but predicted five years ago.) You can refuse to submit to goodthink and stop using words like riot, protest, and resistance interchangeably.
In other words, you can be a sincere, informed American citizen, and recognize that your fellow Americans are hurting and expressing their pain. It does not have to be filtered and sanitized through the state or the press to be legitimized.”
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
Russian Names
Russian names are honestly so interesting, and Russian naming culture is very different from the rest of the world. So here we are today to break it down:
The Full Name
Russian names are styled similarly to American names, in the sense that they both have a first-middle-last structure. Russian names are styled as: Given Name – Patronymic – Family Name. Now, first let’s break down each of these names before getting into how to call one another.
Given Name
Common Male Names - Mikhail, Dmitri, Daniil, Kiriil, Andrei, Egor, Nikita, Alexei, Ilya, Roman, Yaroslav, Vladimir, Sergei, Nikolai, Petyr, Ivan
Common Female Names - Alexandra, Alina, Alisa, Alyona, Anastasia, Anna, Vera, Veronika, Viktoria, Daria, Evgenia, Ekaterina, Elizaveta, Elena, Inna, Ksenia, Lidia, Lyubov, Maria, Maya, Olga, Polina, Sofia, Svetlana, Tatiana, Yulia
Given names are usually reduced to diminutives. Diminutives are shorter “nicknames” given affectionately. Common ones include: Anastasia --> Nastya, Maria --> Masha, Alexander/dra --> Sasha, Dmitri --> Dima. Can’t see much of a pattern? Well that’s because there kind of isn’t one. A loosely applied rule says to add -sha to the first syllable of a name (Ma[ria] --> Masha, Da[ria] --> Dasha, Mi[khail] --> Misha, Pa[vel] --> Pasha). Some add -a or -ya to a certain part of the name (Vic[toria] --> Vika, Pyot[r]--> Petya). Some names don’t even have diminutives (Vera, Nikita, Maxim). Usually there is a chain of names given to a certain given name, here is an example:
Alexander - Sasha - Sashura - Shura
Here is a list of common names and their diminutives:
- Alexander/Alexandra - Sasha
- Anastasia - Nastasia, Nastya
- Anna - Anya
- Veronika - Nika
- Viktoria - Vika
- Daria - Dasha
- Dmitri - Dima
- Evgenia/Evgeni - Zhenya
- Ekaterina - Katya
- Elizaveta - Liza
- Elena - Lena, Lenok
- Ksenia - Ksusha
- Maria - Masha
- Mikhail - Misha
- Petyr - Petya
- Polina - Polya
- Sofia - Sonya
There are even more affectionate names, given usually by friends or loved ones. For example, Maria could become Mashenka and Nikolai becomes Nikolushka or Nikolenka. These forms are generally derived by adding one of these varrious suffixes - -ochk-, -echk-, -onyk-, -enyk-, -ushk-, -yushk-, -yush-, -yash-, -ul-, -ush-, -un-, -us-, -k-, -ik (etc) - to the given name of diminutive.
Other Notes: Alena and Alyona can be the same name (see: Alena Kostornaia/Alyona Kostornaya), if Alena is spelled Alëna in the cryllic. Alena is the way of spelling in English, but the correct pronunciation is A-li-o-na. I and Y can sometimes be interchangeable. For example, Sonya can also be spelled as Sonia.
Patronymic
Patronymics are sort of like the “middle names” used in America, however, they are derived from the father’s given name. For example in these names – Avdotia Romanovna, Rodion Romanovich - the second name (Romanovna, Romanovich) is the patronymic. Siblings would share a patronymic (with variations between male and female) as they have the same father.
Females add -ovna, -evna or -ichna to their father’s given name and males add -ovich, -evich or -ich to their father’s given name. For the examples shown above, the father’s name is Roman, and the female (Avdotia) adds -ovna making Romanovna, and the male (Rodion) adds -ovich making Romanovich. For a name like Dmitri, the female would be Dmitrievna, and the male would be Dmitrievich. For masculine names ending in a vowel, such as Ilya or Foma, when they are used as a base for patronymic, the corresponding endings are -ich (for men) and -inichna (for women). Patronymics can be further shortened like Andreich instead of Andreevich or Kirilych instead of Kiriilovich. These are typically seen in informal speech.
If the father’s name is not known, then the mother can create the patronymic she wishes to give.
Family Name
Common suffixes for Russian names are -ov, -yev, -sky, and -ko, -uk, -ych, -in.
Family names can differ by gender. Females usually add -a to their family name (Karenin à Karenina, Pavlov à Pavlova) or -aya (Oblonsky à Oblonskaya, Shcherbatsky à Shcherbatskaya). Only family names with neutral grammatical gender stay the same (such as -ko, Elizaveta Shilenko). Once married, females usually adopt the family name of their husband. (Anna Oblonskaya becomes Anna Karenina once marrying Karenin).
Common last names in Russia are: Ivanov, Smirnov, Kuznetsov, Popov, Vasiliev, Petrov, Dmitriev, Kuzmin, Alexandrov. As seen, commonly, last names in Russian end in -ov.
Forms of Address
The three-name format is typically only used in legal documents. If the three-name is spoken aloud, typically the family name comes first (Raskolnikov Rodion Romanovich).
The formal format is the Given Name - Patronymic format. This is used by students to teachers and is the official way to communicate. Using this form may convey the speaker’s respect for the recipient. Teachers may call their students by just their family name, though otherwise, it is used very rarely.
In informal communication, typically only the first name, and/or diminutive is used. In rural areas, people may use just the patronymic amongst themselves.
Notes: In competition and when referring to them in other parts of the world, typically we only acknowledge the given name and family name. (Alina Zagitova, no care for the patronymic [Ilnazovna]).
Citations - Wikipedia (Eastern Slavic naming customs, Russian given name), War and Peace (translated by Pevear and Volokhonsky) introduction of principal characters. Crime and Punishment (Signet Classics) Translator’s Note Goldenskate forums. (No this is not a joke, these are my actual citations)
370 notes
·
View notes
Text
MarcusVerse!
(The players in the Kung Fookery campaign I am running are going to the home world of one NPC, who needed to write up information for it so they wouldn’t be unduly confused... given how long the text ended, I did NOT go with my original plan to add random recipes in with it :))
Sometimes the hardest part about being at Kung Fookery isn’t the classes or the Assignments, but just how different everyone’s home dimensions are. I’m only good at writing recipes, so this is difficult to do. Especially when you have to confront things you’d rather avoid. But the Muffin Man needs to be limited, and the school needs the supplies my world can provide. The school might want this information supplied to other students, depending on how this goes down.
Hello. My name is Marcus Badger; I’m a second-year student at Kung Fookery, in the cooking side of things. Students at Kung Fookery are drawn from dimensions that are roughly the same: they use the same ingredients (continents, nations etc.) in general, but the specific recipes are often wildly varied. Sometimes that helps us understand our own home dimensions better, though sometimes this is less better overall.
My earth is not like yours, most likely. Here, cooking matters. Being a Chef is being someone of importance by default. Being the executive chef of a restaurant is being a local celebrity and general all rolled into one. We don’t have wars like other worlds do, mostly. Our French Revolution happened, but it was a dispute over Russian and French service that got out of hand. (This is what I was taught in school; I imagine there is more regarding class and social mobility I never learned at the time as part of it, but that was one of the core reasons for it.) The world has not had any world wars and the most powerful political force is the European Cuisine, currently with President Ramsay in charge.
As of this writing, President Boyardee is the president of the United States of America, though United Colonies is used interchangeably. The Boyardee line have been presidents off and on for a good hundred years, much like how the Appert family in France took over from Napoleon (a very poof chef who couldn’t cook rabbit) and the family of Nicolas Appert retains a lot of influence over his invention of canning food.
Unlike many other worlds, the USA here stops at the Mississippi; there was no massacre of the native americans intended, and when it was realized early on what was going on, every attempt was made to stop the spread of diseases. I don’t write this to impress: the focus on food meant we knew more about diseases and cleanliness and how things spread via food. Travelling to other countries was always about getting new recipes and meeting new chefs, rather than directly conquering anyone. The Aztecs are still around, and their mastery of chocolate is second to none. This is not to say that some crops and animals haven’t been eaten and used to extinction, but attempts have been made to prevent this over the centuries.
Politically the world is based around chefs. If you want to get into politics, you have to be a chef. This means running and/or owning a restaurant can get you into local politics, a franchise gets one into state politics and a cooking show/empire is the only path to being president or prime minister. The power of the agricultural supply lobby and the TV networks cannot be overestimated in this; you need connections and alliances for fresh food, talk show appearances and the like so it is very nuanced and complicated. Attempts to elevate certain dishes or lesson the impact of another cuisine or steal recipes are not that uncommon. Most news is via the FoodNet (an internet in other worlds) and most newspapers are put out by the major fish and chip chains mostly for wrapping up their goods than producing proper news.
Lastly, social standing influences many things. If you’re born into a wealthy family, it’s simply expected you WILL have your own restaurant, and your schooling and teaching lead toward that. Almost no one in the middle class gets above a sous-chef, many being dishwashers, busboys or front-end staff. Supplying restaurants with good and services is a different mobility, which can lead to wealth but not to genuine political influence. To be lower class is to not be involved in the restaurant business and often just a consumer of the TV shows. Much of this is generational and difficult to break out of.
Important notes:
Children are Important. Everyone is expected to have children, because that is considered a very important Recipe, and how your children turns out says a lot about you both as a chef and as a person. Wealthier families tend to have more children because they can all be fed properly – and lead to more options for alliances with other families. If you love someone, you make them your Best Meal to express it and the only magic in the world is entirely based around food, with marriage itself having to do with compatible cooking skills as much as anything else, at least among the wealthy.
Further to that, being larger is a sign of wealth and status. (There is no fast food, so it’s about the quality of food eaten.) Some of this is because a chef is expected to taste and enjoy their own food, or they are not trusted. This expectation diminishes for those who get franchises and go into politics, as stress is known to cause weight loss and is the price of a cooking show and fame.
Not being a chef and being rather chubby means you are definitely a Supplier of note, and highly respected as a result. (Trying to fake such things with protein powders and the like is illegal and punishable by jail time.) Despite the importance places on chefs politically, the people behind the scenes are likely far more important overall.
People live longer overall; we have cultivated foods for this, and diseases that exist in other worlds don’t in this world. Most people live at least seventy years without issue even in the lower classes and a wealthy family can see people live upwards of two centuries without issue. We have a lot of food that is likely magical, though never called that.
10 notes
·
View notes
Note
I don't know if this is a thing in Canada or not so ignore me if it's not relevant, but can you explain the difference between college and university? I feel like I read them separately sometimes (usually on UK/European based things) but in America I think of them as the same thing...? (Please excuse the stupid American)
That’s totally a legit question! I know that in the states, the terms “college” and “university” can be used somewhat interchangeably. But in Canada they mean different things. I am no expert and am probably oversimplifying or missing something but basically:
College:
grants diplomas
it is more career based (you go into a program to obtain a specific certification/license you need to get a specific job) - very practical
e.g. you enter a program to obtain your Paralegal license (that’s what I am currently doing)
University:
grants degrees
typically a 4 year undergraduate program that is less career based and more abstract (at least in my experience).
universities are the only institutions that can grant Bachelor Degrees, Masters degrees, doctorates, or any other PhDs, MDs, JDs etc.
e.g. I have my bachelor’s degree in Psychology and English.... but so far, it hasn’t opened up many doors to employment.... hence why I have gone back to college.
I could be wrong... I barely did much fact checking before I posted this. But this is my understanding of the difference. Hope this helps. xoxox
8 notes
·
View notes
Link
There are so many bad opinions crammed into this single Wall Street Journal op-ed by Yale professor David Gelernter that I cannot hope to address them within the finite period of a human lifespan. Primarily, Gelernter argues that hatred of Donald Trump is hatred of America. Here is a large chunk of the op-ed for you to read and enjoy with me:
Every big U.S. election is interesting, but the coming midterms are fascinating for a reason most commentators forget to mention: The Democrats have no issues. The economy is booming and America’s international position is strong. In foreign affairs, the U.S. has remembered in the nick of time what Machiavelli advised princes five centuries ago: Don’t seek to be loved, seek to be feared. The contrast with the Obama years must be painful for any honest leftist. For future generations, the Kavanaugh fight will stand as a marker of the Democratic Party’s intellectual bankruptcy, the flashing red light on the dashboard that says “Empty.” The left is beaten. For now, though, the left’s only issue is “We hate Trump.” This is an instructive hatred, because what the left hates about Donald Trump is precisely what it hates about America. The implications are important, and painful. Not that every leftist hates America. But the leftists I know do hate Mr. Trump’s vulgarity, his unwillingness to walk away from a fight, his bluntness, his certainty that America is exceptional, his mistrust of intellectuals, his love of simple ideas that work, and his refusal to believe that men and women are interchangeable. Worst of all, he has no ideology except getting the job done. The difference between citizens who hate Mr. Trump and those who can live with him—whether they love or merely tolerate him—comes down to their views of the typical American: the farmer, factory hand, auto mechanic, machinist, teamster, shop owner, clerk, software engineer, infantryman, truck driver, housewife. The leftist intellectuals I know say they dislike such people insofar as they tend to be conservative Republicans. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama know their real sins. They know how appalling such people are, with their stupid guns and loathsome churches. They have no money or permanent grievances to make them interesting and no Twitter followers to speak of… In truth they are dumb as sheep. Mr. Trump reminds us who the average American really is… He might be realigning the political map: plain average Americans of every type vs. fancy ones. [T]he Trump-hater truly does hate the average American—male or female, black or white. Often he hates America, too.
My God! Where does one start? I suppose it’s futile to insist that despite writing a book on what a loathsome person Donald Trump is, I do not, in fact, hate America. Or to point out that there are many people who dislike Trump and go to church. Or to show that there’s no such thing as having your “only ideology” be “getting the job done,” because everything depends on which job you choose to do. Or to note that there are many extremely valid reasons to be horrified by Trump, like his intentionally malicious immigration policies and his deadly and irresponsible rejection of climate science. Or to deconstruct this idea of the “average American,” who always seems to be a goddamn farmer. (Besides, there are countless farmers, machinists, and factory hands who also think the president is a cruel and stupid man.) Perhaps I might note that I like vulgarity and bluntness, mistrust intellectuals, and enjoy Simple Ideas That Work. (Though I do find “American Exceptionalism” to be a downright silly notion. The only respect in which America is exceptional is that it is exceptionally convinced of its own exceptionalism.)
The whole assumption here, that there is a thing called “the left” and it is associated with Hillary Clinton, is just remarkably off-base. Gelernter does make one accurate observation, which is that the Democratic Party has lost touch with working-class people. But you know who else makes that extremely common observation over and over? The left! Bernie Sanders! Thomas Frank wrote a whole book about how this happened! Conservatives frequently conflate “the left” and “the leaders of the national Democratic Party,” which is false. It’s true that those Democrats have “no issues.” But here in New Orleans, there are DSA activists campaigning constantly for Medicare for All, serious immigration reform, a comprehensive climate policy, debt-free college tuition, etc. No issues? Are you serious? Have you read the full Black Lives Matter policy platform? Have you seen what Larry Krasner is doing? The left cares about a ton of really important things! (In an amusing twist, I actually think it’s Gelernter the Yale Professor who is out of touch with the reality of the country.)
But look: I spend a lot of time pointing out that bad conservative arguments are bad. So much so that people sometimes accuse me of shooting fish in a barrel. (Although fish are not entitled to clemency merely because they happen to inhabit a barrel.) This is the Wall Street Journal op-ed page, what do you expect?
I’m kind of alarmed, though, by just how far apart Gelernter and my worldviews are. I do not buy the idea that “too much partisanship” is the problem with American politics. But it is strange that this guy can see as completely self-evident something that to me seems completely absurd. Readers know that here at Current Affairs, we are all about dialogue and debate. But sometimes it really does feel as if we are living on completely different planets. To me, Donald Trump is obviously a corrupt and greedy sociopath. To Gelernter, he’s the spirit of America. (Though in one sense I do notnecessarily dispute that.)
For the most part, my leftist friends do not take Wall Street Journal subscriptions, because they think it’s not worth reading. I disagree, because the WSJ is actually the most Marxist publication in the country (in that it believes wealth, rather than ideas, rules the world) and it’s a good way of tracking what the capitalists are up to. I understand why you’d write off the op-ed page completely. But part of me is still incredulous that an article this delusional can appear in the pages of a major newspaper.
(Continue Reading)
32 notes
·
View notes
Text
On whether Only “Chinese/Chinese-American” actors should play “Chinese” characters
I see this discussion come up very often in the casting stage for shows, such as the debate of the father role in ABC's Fresh Off the Boat being played by a Korean American Randall Park, and how Jamie Chung wanted to audition for Crazy Rich Asians but was turned down because she wasn’t Chinese.
So first of all, unless a segment in the show/movie requires the actor to speak Mandarin/Canto to his family, and the actor utterly fucking failed at the task and broke immersion for the viewers who speak Mandarin/Canto, the fact that he "looks not Chinese" would not fucking even matter.
I’m only speaking for the Chinese “ethnicity/identity” here so don’t take this as me justifying Chinese actors taking Japanese roles if Japanese people have a problem with it. (Even though usually it’s because Japanese ppl looks down on Chinese and think we are unworthy of playing a Japanese person, but let’s not touch that for now)
It is possible to be ethnically “Korean” or a myriad of other things (such as Russian) and be Chinese.
In the instance of the father in Fresh off the Boat, 朝���族 (Korean Ethnicity) is one of the 56 ethnicities officially recognized by the Chinese government, and there's almost 2 million of them in China (mostly in the northeast, but people migrate to Tier1/2 cities all the time).
They've been living in China since the fucking Qing dynasty (and possibly earlier) and identify as "Chinese".
“But the family in the show is Taiwanese not Mainland Chinese!!” you say?
Well, guess what, there's been this thing in the 40s called the Chinese Civil War. Like a bunch of people escaped to Taiwan with the KMT because the commies won and pretty much it's the entire fucking reason Taiwan and China are separate entities. People of all ethnicities were in the KMT army dudes. Do you know Qi Yu and her brother Qi Qin? If you are Taiwanese, ask your parents who they are, they probably know. They are both ethnic Manchus. If there are Manchu people in Taiwan (who may or may not have--but most likely have--immigrated there with the KMT because the ancestral land for the Manchu people are way up north... in fact, there’s a border dispute between South Korea and China because the Korean “holy mountain” and the Manchu “holy mountain” is the same thing) then there's no reason why the father in the show couldn't be ethnic Korean. (Even if during the war, most ethnic Koreans sided with the Communists... according to the Communists. lol.)
Plus, it is completely possible for a Taiwanese person of Northern Chinese descent to have Korean blood in them and still be unaware of it and identify as Han or Man.
由于地缘和中国与朝鲜半岛历史上的紧密关系，朝鲜族长期在中国东北地区或聚居或与其他民族杂居。早期到来的朝鲜人多汉化或者旗化，归化为汉族或满族。中国现代朝鲜族大多是19世纪后迁入中国的朝鲜族人的后裔。
Due to proximity in geography and the close history between China and the Korean Peninsula, Korean people has been living in the Chinese Northeast in self-segregated and integrated communities for a long time. The earliest arrivals had mostly assimilated with the Han or Manchu, and identify as ethnic Han or Manchu. The contemporary "Ethnic Koreans" are often descendants of the immigrants that came after the 19th century.
(x)
This is not a case of "all Asians are interchangeable", that's equivalent to, like, casting a Han Chinese person to play an Indian person (or a Malaysian or Filipino, but that gets messy because there are actually people of Han Chinese descent living in those countries) or casting a Korean person to play a Thai character (also can get messy because there are a good number of pale Thai people... but you get the gist). A korean person playing a Chinese character is no different from a British person being cast to play a German, or a Swede being cast to play French--or some other generic "white" nationality.
It's different than casting an Indian actor to play Han/Han-resembling Chinese... which would be like casting a fucking ginger to play someone from the Mediterranean.
Let's not pretend Koreans aren't already playing people of Han Chinese descent in CHINESE dramas. There's 蔡琳, who actually changed her name from 朴蔡琳 (Park Chae-rim) so that her name would sound more "Chinese" to get her career to take off in China. And I really dunno why she chose to do that because Park Hae-jin did plenty well (he was in a couple of Chinese dramas in 2011, before he did My Love From The Star) without changing his name. Then there's Choo Ja-hyun and many more lesser-known Koreans working in the Chinese entertainment industry.
On the reverse, there are also tons of ethnic Han Chinese actors working in Korea, like Song Xi and Han Geng.
So the precedent has already been set and it wasn't set by white people.
Chinese people don't all look like what the Han ethnic look like. China is a civilization-state made up of 56, again, 56 different ethnicities. Someone can appear middle-eastern and be Chinese. Someone can appear Persian and be Chinese. Someone can appear white and be Chinese.
See this person?
She doesn't look "Chinese" does she? Well she is. She is a Tajik living in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, and before you say "Xinjing is not part of China"... if she doesn't identify as Chinese, then why the fuck is she working in the Chinese police department (anti-terrorism division)? It's perfectly normal for someone to be Tajik or Uyghur and self-identify as Chinese, just like its normal for someone to be ethnic Han and believe in Uyghur/Tibetan Independence. (Though the Xinjiang situation is WAY messier because there are many more ethnic minorities in that region, not just Uyghurs, and the Uyghurs are laying claims to certain lands inhabited by the Kazakhs and Tajiks, plus some Uyghur identify as Chinese (for example, the capital Ürümqi is divided between two sides, the south side is inhabited mostly of Uyghur with separatist sentiments while the North is inhabited by people who believe in unity with China.))
The tajik people look like this:
More photos from an English source here, and their histories here.
If you are Han Chinese, they probably look nothing like you, but they are not LESS Chinese than you. Their ancestors have been living in the land that's been under the rule of Tang, Yuan, Ming, Qing, and People's Republic of China.
In fact, the Tajiks are actually famous for being extremely patriotic since the Tang dynasty. They were autonomous but was akin to a vassal state and kept their sworn oath to the Emperor of "China" during many foreign invasions.
Speaking of Russians... It's also possible to be ethnic Russian and be Chinese. Guess what, "Russian" is one of the 56 ethnic groups! They live in northern China and mostly Northeastern China, however, there are groups of them in the Xinjiang region.
(look at dat Haier brothers sticker on their cabinet XD dat is so 90s Chinese...)
The ethnic Russians first came to China in the 18th century, and more of them came in the 19th century due to turmoil in their homeland. Some of them married with Han or Mongol and became more mixed, while some of them still looks... Russian.
The Tartars are also an ethnic group living in Western China.
So if a show was about a girl from the far north or northwestern China and they hired a Russian girl, if she could speak fluent Chinese (with Dongbei accent =w= ), it’s not AS problematic as, say... Emma Stone playing a white-passing hapa in Hawaii.
What about South-east Asians playing “Chinese”?
These are the Wa people of southern China. Who looks like this:
(more on google image)
A southeast Asian actor could probably play a Wa Chinese (who would be from southern China), because there are Wa people in Thailand and Vietnam and Myanmar/Burma.
For certain ethnic groups, sometimes they identify with their ethnicity first. So say a Wa person moves to America, he or she might identify with other Southeast Asians of the same descent and simply say she's "wa" instead of "Chinese", while some will say they are Chinese. I've seen Hakka Chinese from Fujian identify as Hakka first when asked, instead of Chinese, even though the Hakka people are often regarded as the "purest/oldest" Han-Chinese lineage in China (because northerners mixed with the Xianbei people before Tang and Mongol/Manchu people after Song and Ming).
Using "Chinese" as a racial signifier to mean "Han and Han-passing ethnic groups" when you are Han Chinese is as messed up as a white person saying his "race" is "American". "Chinese" indicates where you come from and it's an indication of culture sphere/assumption of lineage (again, it is the ASSUMPTION of lineage. It's like picking out a dude in a crowd and using "he" pronouns for him because cis people account for like over 90% of the population). It is NOT the end-all be-all of one's outward appearance and ethnicity.
The actual Chinese word for "people of Chinese descent" is 华裔. It comes from the world 中华, which is derived from 华夏. "华" started as Han-exclusive, and it was meant to contrast against all other groups of people who were given derogatory names (such as 蛮夷, 鞑子, etc) because they were considered barbaric and uncivilized. (i.e 服章之美谓之华,有礼节之大故称夏)
This word hasn't been Han-exclusive since Han people started assimilating other ethnic groups (we were doing white people shit before American white people did white people shit) during their expansion or when Han people are conquered. (For example, a group of Xianbei people conquered the Han people but their leader commanded his people to learn the Han language and culture and pretty much assimilated his people with the Han, the same group of people went on to become the Sui and Tang dynasties.)
“华人”一词最初指汉族，但随着华夏文明扩展到全国各地，“华人”的概念渐由当初单指华夏族，扩展到受中华文明影响的周边少数民族身上。并成为了全体中华民族之人的代称，其下包括了“中国人”以及海外“华侨”。
"Hua ren" at first meant the Han ethnic, but as Chinese (Huaxia) culture spreads, the definition of "Huaren" became inclusive to the minority ethnic groups that were influenced by/assimilated into the culture, it became an identifier for all who identify as Zhong Hua Min Zu (Chinese National or of Chinese National Origins).
Like literally the meaning of “Chinese” in the Chinese sense is super blurry and made even blurrier in English because there just isn’t the vocabulary for it. In the Spring and Autumn Annals (春秋), the definition of being “Chinese” is literally: ”夷狄用諸夏禮則諸夏之“ (If a barbarian uses the etiquette of the Chinese nation, he is Chinese) So like, according to this definition, if a white person who follows Chinese customs in life can self-identify as Chinese. I know some people must have an aneurysm with this but like, I didn’t make the rules.
Words like "Chinese American" "Chinese Singaporean" and "Chinese Indonesian" indicate where one's ancestors came from. One can be Miao (note here for Hmong readers) and "Chinese Singaporean", one can be Buyi and "Chinese Indonesian".
If you use "Chinese" to signify something specifically Han, and especially in a context regarding one's appearance, even if you don't mean to be racist (because remember, the original Han-exclusive definition of "hua" automatically assumes superiority over other ethnic groups, and the whole reason Hmong people outside of China would like to be referred to as Hmong instead of "Miao" has to do with this exact issue) and exclusionary, it can be racist and exclusionary. Either you use "Chinese" to mean all people who identify as Chinese and are recognized by the Chinese government as Chinese, or you say "Han Chinese" or "Hakka Chinese" or "Hmong/Miao Chinese" instead of using simply "Chinese" when you mean han + han-passing.
It's exactly like saying "Asian" when you just mean "just East Asian, not the brown people", like... just don't.
#chinese culture#chinese media#chinese ethnicity#whitewashing#diversity in media#randall park#jamie chung#representation in media
93 notes
·
View notes
Text
LESSON 3
IMAGING AND DESIGN FOR THE ONLINE ENVIRONMENT
PRINCIPLES OF GRAPHICS AND DESIGN
Balance in design is similar to balance in physics. A large shape close to the center can be balanced by a small shape close to the edge. Balance provides stability and structure to a design. It’s the weight distributed in the design by the placement of your elements.
Movement principle in graphic design refers on how the human eye interact with your design, and the most important element in your design must be the first thing people see, and after seeing it your design needs to lead viewer to the next most important element.
Unity the sense of oneness of the elements that creates balance and harmony
The principle of repetition simply means the reusing of the same or similar elements throughout your design. Repetition of certain design elements in a design will bring a clear sense of unity, consistency, and cohesiveness. REPETITION can be regular or irregular and even or uneven.
proximity is a principle of design that refers to the spatial relationship between the elements of the design. The rules of proximity are pretty simple: things that are related should be nearer to each other, and things that are unrelated should be placed further from each other.
principle of art, contrast refers to the arrangement of opposite elements and effects. For example, light and dark colors, smooth and rough textures, large and small shapes. Contrast can be used to create variety, visual interest, and drama in an artwork.
White space is the area between design elements. It is also the space within individual design elements, including the space between typography glyphs (readable characters). Despite its name, white space does not need to be white. It can be any color, texture, pattern, or even a background image.
infographic visualises the six guiding principles of Unity/Harmony, Balance, Hierarchy, Scale/Proportion, Dominance/Emphasis, Similarity & Contrast. ... The footer should include the URL directly to the infographic landing page to make it easier for readers to find the original.
THESIS/STORY isthe subject and the main idea of your infographic must be clear.
Data must be well- organized and supports the main idea.
Simplicity Style must be able to attract your readers so as not to make your infographic full of text
Sources-You must cite your resources so as to give credibility to your data.
Branding/Shareability -Your infographic must be creative and innovative
IMAGE FILE FORMATS
JPEG stands for “Joint Photographic Experts Group”. It's a standard image format for containing lossy and compressed image data. Despite the huge reduction in file size JPEG images maintain reasonable image quality.
The Graphics Interchange Format (GIF; /dʒɪf/ JIF or /ɡɪf/ GHIF) is a bitmap image format that was developed by a team at the online services provider CompuServe led by American computer scientist Steve Wilhite on 15 June 1987.
The BMP file format, also known as bitmap image file, device independent bitmap (DIB) file format and bitmap, is a raster graphics image file format used to store bitmap digital images, independently of the display device (such as a graphics adapter), especially on Microsoft Windows and OS/2 operating systems.
TIFF - IS A FILE FORMAT CREATED ORIGINALLY BY ALDUS CORPORATION FOR DESKTOP PUBLISHING.CONSIDERED AS A HIGH QUALITY IMAGE FORMAT
Portable Network Graphics and is another raster image type. The main difference between a PNG and a JPG is that a PNG file can have a transparent background and is generally larger and of higher quality. PNGs are great for interactive documents such as web pages but are not suitable for print.
PRINCIPLES AND BASIC TECHNIQUE IN IMAGE MANIPULATION
Cropping is the removal of unwanted outer areas from a photographic or illustrated image. ... Depending on the application, this can be performed on a physical photograph, artwork, or film footage, or it can be achieved digitally by using image editing software.
color balance is the global adjustment of the intensities of the colors (typically red, green, and blue primary colors). An important goal of this adjustment is to render specific colors – particularly neutral colors – correctly. Hence, the general method is sometimes called gray balance, neutral balance, or white balance. Color balance changes the overall mixture of colors in an image and is used for color correction. Generalized versions of color balance are used to correct colors other than neutrals or to deliberately change them for effect.
Brightness is the easiest of the three functions. It is simply a linear conversion of the measured image intensity to display intensity. Adjusting the slider affects each pixel the same way in a linear fashion. Contrast is the ratio of the brightest spot to the darkest spot in the image.
Resizing is making the picture smaller (or bigger). If you resize and don't compress, you can still get a picture that has lots of KB's. Compressing is a means of reducing file size and retaining most of the information in the picture (or file). JPEG (there are many other formats as well) is a form of compression.
Blending is a painting technique where two different colors are slightly mixed together when wet, giving a smooth transition from one color to the next. The transition color will be a product of the two blended colors (i.e if you are blending blue into a yellow, the transition color will be a green)
Combining multiple image -composition must be planned and conceptualized first so that you will be able to render the best image and message possible
Picasa is a discontinued, cross-platform image organizer and image viewer for organizing and editing digital photos, integrated with a now defunct photo-sharing website, originally created by a company named Lifescape in 2002.
Fotor is a photo editing platform, utilizing exclusive technology to bring an unprecedented level of editing control to everyone. Fotor's softwares are available on every major mobile device, desktop computer and online.
PIXLR-T IS ALSO A PLATFORM IMAGE EDITING PROGRAM. YOU CAN CHOOSE BETWEEN THE EDITOR FOR EDITING IMAGES OR CREATING AN ORIGINAL IMAGE RIGHT THROGH THE BROWSER.
IMAGE HOSTING SITES
Imgur (/ˈɪmɪdʒər/ IM-ij-ər,[2] stylized as imgur) is an American online image sharing community and image host founded by Alan Schaaf in 2009. The service has been popular with hosting viral images and memes, particularly those posted on Reddit.
Flickr is an American image hosting and video hosting service, as well as an online community. It was created by Ludicorp in 2004 and is a popular way for amateur and professional photographers to host high-resolution photos. It has changed ownership several times and has been owned by SmugMug since April 20, 2018.
Photobucket is an American image hosting and video hosting website, web services suite, and online community. Photobucket hosts more than 10 billion images from 100 million registered members. Photobucket's headquarters are in Denver, CO.
SlickPic is a photo sharing site offering unlimited uploads, but it's limited in features, interface, and community.
Zenfolio is a hosting service for photo galleries where the user can upload and elegantly share an unlimited number of photos using simple and intuitive tools. Zenfolio allows users to create and customize professional-looking galleries using an advanced Web interface.
WHAT I’VE LEARNED
In this lesson ive learned how to know some apps or websites that i can use in posting some pictures or what do i want to post and also ive learned that its good if we know what is the type of editing we should use in our picture so that it will have a nice and good outcome. Also it is helpful for me and for them that it is useful for us if what we want use in editing,the brightness and contrast of the picture should be nice also the cropping if you want to get the good shot only and etc.
0 notes
Text
4 3 2 1, by Paul Auster
Can you hear me ripping out the last few pages of this book in the distance? If so, you’re witnessing me trying to keep on loving it. I really liked this book for the longest time, even loved it occasionally, but the ending is, at least to me, a huge disappointment. The good thing is, that part is the easiest one to ignore, especially if it comes in the form of a sort-of epilogue (I didn’t literally rip out the pages, I’d never do that to a book, but, you know, metaphorically, that’s the part where you could do it without missing much of the story). To me, it just felt incredibly superfluous, and destroyed much of its appeal and mystery by trying to explain itself. But I’m getting ahead of myself, let’s start with why there’s mystery in the first place.
The setup, the basic premise, is what first drew me to this book, and what had me coming back to see it in the bookstore for months before finally buying it. The book starts with a short exploration of the lives of the protagonist’s parents up until the point where the protagonist himself (Archie Ferguson) is born. From that point on, it splits into four versions of Ferguson’s life story that progress in a more or less parallel fashion and allow the reader glimpses into his life: Ferguson at six, Ferguson at nine, Ferguson at twelve and so on. It’s the same main character with the same basic personality traits, but different family situations, different economic backgrounds, places lived, people in his life etc. There’s some crossovers between the different versions of one boy’s life, like how one way or another another main character named Amy Schneiderman enters and shapes every version of Ferguson’s life, but in general the stories are autonomous and could stand alone as books in their own right (they’re definitely long enough, my paperback version has 1070 pages). All this plays out before the background of America in the 1950s and 60s, with the war in Vietnam and the Civil Rights Movement at home as major influences on the young (white, Jewish, I might add) Ferguson.
So basically, this book is about some of the Big Questions: Is it nature or nurture that decides who we are, and who we become? Is there such a thing as fate, or can we exercise what is euphemistically called “free will”, with all its social, political, economic, mental, physical etc. restrictions? If you’re looking for a definite answer to these questions, this is not the book you need, because it doesn’t give them. As I read it, and this is purely personal interpretation, it takes a position in the middle. Nature definitely is important as is obvious when looking at the four Fergusons who all share certain traits. They are all rather introverted, tend to immerse themselves fully into one project and then develop a bit of an obsession with it, they all love stories and art (be it movies, books, poetry, and be it by watching/reading, translating, or writing), they all have a tendency towards weltschmerz (what an amazing word that is. It means something like world-weariness; withdrawal and hopelessness because of the state of the world)... You see what I mean. But there’s also traits that distinguish them, like how one of the Fergusons is bisexual. Just as a disclaimer, I don’t mean to imply that bisexuality is a “lifestyle” or something that’s instilled at a young age, and I don’t think Paul Auster implies that kind of BS either. But it seems to me that here bisexuality is part of nature that needs to be uncovered by nurture. As I mentioned, one of the Fergusons is openly bisexual (he calls it “being a two-way person” because he's not familiar with the concept) and from my admittedly biased view, I dare say that another one at least displays biromantic tendencies, although it’s not clearly stated. But for the other two, I really don’t think so. One of them dies pretty early, so it’s hard to tell, but among the remaining three there’s one bisexual, one unclear, and one who’s thoroughly straight, which leads me to the conclusion that it’s something to be uncovered, and recognized as such, by circumstance, nurture.
As I read the book, it doesn’t give a clear either-or answer to the question of fate vs. free will either. It seems to have an approach that’s similar to Doctor Who: some fixed points have to happen, and the interchangeable rest freely arranges itself around those fixed points. Fixed points in Ferguson’s personal life are things like a close relationship with his mother, no close blood relatives, meeting Amy and falling for her, reading and sports, a career in writing, and a trip to Paris at one point. Then there’s the historic events that shape his life, like Kennedy’s assassination, the conflict between black and white Americans, the Vietnam war and the constant threat of being drafted... Honestly there’s not much space for Ferguson’s lives to go in an entirely different direction between those two factors, and even those influences that differ between the different versions of his life don’t entirely change its course. So I guess the book leans more toward fate than free will, and even in those cases when Ferguson exercises free will, this free will is so heavily qualified by external factors outside his control that it’s hardly free. At the same time though the story doesn’t assume the existence of a god who directs people’s lives. There’s mentions of several gods every time one of the Fergusons dies (they all die, except for one), but to me it feels very metaphorical, and even if it’s supposed to be taken literally, it’s explicitly stated that they don’t care. So, no divine providence, no destiny, but a more or less clear-cut path that is largely pre-determined by historic events and other people crossing one’s path.
And those other people make the story just as fascinating as these philosophical musings. Much as I like Ferguson, after having spent more than 1000 pages in his head, he can’t be my favourite character anymore. That spot’s been taken since the beginning anyway, namely by Rose Adler, Ferguson’s mother (I love Amy too, I totally understand that each Ferguson fell for her, but this is too long already, so let’s stick with the amazing Rose). On the one hand, she’s everything one could ever wish for in a mother, doting, understanding, fierce when she needs to be, and the relationship between the Fergusons and Rose are in my opinion the most beautiful aspect of this book. It’s rare to see such a close mother-son bond in literature that on the one hand feels very natural, but on the other hand embodies everything the relationship between a parent and a child should be. What’s especially great about it is that not only does Rose love Ferguson, he also loves her back openly and unashamedly no matter his age. It would have been easy for the author to stop there and only show this side of her, especially since the story is told from Ferguson’s perspective, but no: apart from her role as a mother, she has a life of her own. In two versions of the story she builds a new relationship with another man, and in every version she’s a gifted photographer who builds herself a career in photography in one way or another and is admired and recognized for it. This is exactly the kind of character that could, and should, be put on the pedestal of a feminist icon: a woman who’s a recognized professional on the one hand, but isn’t expected to sacrifice her private life and loves for it; a woman who is strong and knows how to get what she wants, but isn’t portrayed as a stonehearted robot with no personal relationships. In short, I love Rose, and I’d read another 2000 pages with her life’s versions.
So you see, I really did like this book, even loved it sometimes, although it’s really long and has remarkably little tension, or suspense. It really just flows along most of the time, but for some reason it worked for me anyway. Until the very end. Because in the end it is revealed that this book about Ferguson, the writer, is written by Ferguson, the writer, who imagines how his life would have been had event X and Y not happened. I don’t know, I just found this so incredibly... lame? And pointless? I didn’t need an explanation for this intriguing setup, and definitely not such a flat one. A fictional author character who writes a piece of fiction on himself... what an uncreative ending for such a creative story. I read somewhere that Paul Auster used some autobiographical elements in the plot, so I guess one could say that it’s really the author who writes about different versions of his life, but that’s still not remotely satisfying for me. This assessment is obviously very subjective, but I was hugely disappointed when I read that there’s a logical explanation to this setup because it robs the story of its mystery, and quite frankly of its relevance concerning the above-mentioned questions. If he had just left out this reveal, I’d have understood it as a parallel-universe-thing where each version was equally possible and split off the main path because of slight variations, only to result in huge differences between this version of the story and the others. But this kind of reasoning doesn’t work with the author’s explanation. It limits the paths to the ones that Ferguson/Auster can imagine, and it makes it clear that every version but the last one were nothing but a figment of the author’s imagination anyway - instead of a different, but equally possible biography. Honestly, I feel robbed. But as I said, it’s one the last four pages. 4 pages out of 1070 - I can ignore that. And I will, because no matter how stupid and unsatisfying I find the ending, I intend to love the rest of the book anyway.
2 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hi! I'm a brand new (secular eclectic solitary) witch and I want to celebrate Midsummer. I've been seeing different terms like Litha, Summer Solstice, etc. Because I'm new I don't know anything about religion-exclusive activities. I don't want to appropriate or upset any Gods / Deities. Could you tell me about some off-limit traditions, terms and the like? (for example Wicca and Pagan rituals)
uuuuuuuhhhhhhmmmmmm well like, technically Celtic traditions are open from what I’ve heard of, and from an American viewpoint where white culture dominates all, it’s kind of like the dominant witchy culture here so to use some terms is not really flagrant. However it’s best to do research and understand their deities (most I know associated with this are Lugh and the Oak King) and traditions in order to remain respectful! This question is tricky for me especially as an American that grew up in this culture cause its like the same question as asking is it ok to say Samhain or should we just say Halloween? And its like as long as you know the traditions of Samhain and it’s roots and practices it’s not a big deal, especially in America where that culture forms a good limb of the mainstream white culture here that we’ve all been raised by.
I interchange them (Litha/Summer Solstice) because sometimes I do attend more traditional witchy gatherings that celebrate Litha traditionally and some even invite Celtic deities (like Lugh) into the casted circle. Otherwise most of my own traditions are just secular, eclectic personalized summer solstice celebrations. You can just say Summer Solstice since you are doing your own eclectic thing! But you can still use the term Litha to talk about the practice as a point of reference to attract witches of other like mind. I think it really depends on the environment and whom you’re talking to because I know a number of witches that celebrate summer solstice and Litha all in their own ways (and Midsummer which is actually an English holiday on the 25th of June that is its own thing!) but we say ‘Litha’ as an umbrella term and we get it (since Summer Solstice is also a natural event and witches might think of it just as that where as more witches recognize Litha as an actual Holiday/Sabbat) but when I am in a space that’s mostly Wiccan I just say ‘summer solstice celebration’ cause Litha for them is a very traditional thing that requires a coven and circle casting etc.
There’s also the other tricky element to this that neopaganism is very eclectic and they kind of take terms from everywhere to even the point of appropriation most of the times. It’s hard to draw boundaries with European traditions because a lot of it is imposed on everyone depending on where you live and even where there seems to be boundaries it’s more because of traditions being passed down than it being closed. (Like braucherei which is still open but is pointless to learn from a book cause its like Hoodoo where its passed from family/small communities and you have to learn it from a person etc). As long as you know the Litha traditions and differences between the celebrations and are respectful to it’s roots I think that’s what matters. Honestly respect and credit goes a long way.
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
Chocolate in Mesoamerica (Part 2): Mesoamerica vs. South America
It is believed that South Americans ate only the pulp of T. cacao, not the seeds. The pulp contains theobromine (a bitter alkaloid) and caffeine, just like the seeds do. It can be separated from the pod & seeds, and made into a fruit drink or alcoholic beverage (the latter through fermentation).
The seeds, on the other hand, were far more important in Mesoamerica. This could have been because in South America, there were several other plants with higher levels of stimulating compounds, and they required far less processing effort. These plants include mate (Ilex paraguariensis A.), guaraná (Paullinia cupana), and yoco (Paullinia yoco).
These other plants didn't grow in Mesoamerica, so up there they used the cacao seeds. Preparing cacao seeds to use in food/drink is a complicated process. First, the seeds are usually fermented in the pulp, which is then removed. Next, the seeds are dried, and sometimes roasted. Finally, the seeds must be ground (which is probably the most onerous step).
The Mesoamerican subspecies of cacao is the criollo, which is less bitter than the South American subspecies forastero. This could have come about because the Mesoamericans deliberately selected for the taste aspect when domesticating the cacao tree.
It is suggested that the Mesoamericans used the pulp at first, to produce the same sorts of drinks that are found from the lower half of Mesoamerica to upper South America. They may have discovered/developed the method of preparing seeds over time.
Today, on Guatemala's Pacific Coast, drinks are made from cacao pulp by putting the entire contents of the pod into a container, and beating it until the pulp loosens from the seeds. Sometimes, the mixture is left to sit for several days before being drunk, thus fermenting the seeds as well as the pulp. This practice may have been how the flavour benefits of seed fermentation were discovered in the first place.
The areas where cacao can be cultivated are limited, because it needs specific conditions to grow in. It does best in alluvial (loose & non-compacted) soils of river valleys, in a shaded, very humid atmosphere (over 90% humidity). A heavy annual rainfall of at least 178cm, and a high average temperature of at least 27°C are ideal. The subsoil in these areas is always moist because of being so close to the rivers.
Because of this geographical limitation, the value of cacao seeds in Mesoamerica was very high. People who lived in the best cacao-growing areas had an important trade good. When the Spanish arrived in 1519, the best cacao-growing areas were Tabasco (Mexico); the Soconusco region of Chiapas (Mexico), and the neighbouring Pacific Coast region of Guatemala; Suchitepequez (Guatemala); the Ulua Valley (Honduras); and Izalco (El Salvador). There were various other secondary & tertiary centres scattered throughout Mesoamerica & Central America.
Wars were fought over control over the best cacao-growing areas. When a community who controlled such a region was conquered, they had to give tribute to the victors, in the form of cacao.
Different varieties of cacao were developed, probably because of 1) deliberate selection for specific traits, and 2) geographical isolation of the cacao populations. In the 1500's, Francisco Hernández described the types of cacao seeds sold in the Aztec markets. The Aztecs called the cacao tree cacahoaquahuitl, and the seeds cacahoatl. They also distinguished between four different types of cacao trees:
quauhcacáhoatl – The biggest tree, with the largest fruit.
mecacacáhoatl – Medium-size, and spread out. Same size fruit as the first.
xochicacáhoatl – A small tree, with small fruit. The seeds are reddish on the outside, but the same inside as the first & second.
tlalcacáhoatl – The smallest tree, with the smallest fruit (same colour as the others). Its name means “little”.
All these varieties were the same in taste, etc., and could be used interchangeably. However, the tlalcacáhoatl variety tended to be used for drinks, and the others for money.
Today, there is a wide range of cacao pod colours, and we don't really know which ones originated in pre-Columbian times. However, from pre-Columbian & early colonial descriptions, it seems that the varieties with red pods, and the varieties with green pods that turned yellow when ripe, existed in Mesoamerica during those times.
5 notes
·
View notes
Quote
What we have grown-size toddlers, walking around a room-sized computer, randomly smashing circuit boards with their hammers and giggling.
You see, they know the more functionality they take down, the more chance that Orange-man-bad who told them they couldn’t have whatever toy they wanted will be taken out.
BUT THEY DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY’RE DOING is causing IRREPARABLE damage, and that it might never be repaired.
If they understood the economy and its complexity they wouldn’t be socialists or communists. Because the reason socialism and communism destroys economies and kills people is that it ignores the complexity of economy and people.
They confuse symbol with reality (In this as in everything else, btw) so they think printing money creates value. They think that they can lock us in the house for eighteen months, and as long as they keep us in money, everything will be fine.
They miss not just that food/other necessities still need to be produced, but that they need to be transported. And that for them to be transported, there needs to be oil (no, please, this is not the time to have dreams of tech we don’t actually have) available to fuel trucks, and truckers willing to take to the road. They miss that just handing people money doesn’t mean they can buy food, even if it is available. They miss the interweb of value and interchange that keeps economy going, from building maintenance to paying your rent, to keeping the lights on.
They fail to understand you can’t stop the complex, chaotic system that is American economy and have it restart again.
They are pampered and confident, and they have no clue there can be a world with lates, let alone a world without beans.
If this goes on, we’re going to have a massive famine sometime next winter. Massive. People will die. Not just the very elderly people that the Chinese Virus targets, but people of all ages all over the world.
Even if we’re still producing enough food — we might be, America is a wonder, but I wouldn’t bet. Farmers needs seeds, fertilizer, maintenance for their machines, replacement parts, etc. — there won’t be a distribution network in place.
The stock market is not the way people who are very rich get money so they can build a money bin and swim in it. It’s the engine of the world. It supplies a way to move value around, so that farmers can borrow to buy seed, so that they can have tractors and other machinery. It is what allows trucking companies to operate. It is what keeps food on your table, clothes on your back, and the heat on.
Every part of the machine is interlocked. And what is happening is taking the wheels off. It’s smashing into the center of the economy with a hammer.
BTW when I say there will be famine and people will die, I mean in the US. PEOPLE WILL DIE. Of hunger. Of lack of heat. Of lack of medicine. PEOPLE WILL DIE. And not all of them the insane people who are instigating this.
In fact, most of the power mad governors will be just fine. And one can only hope that the idiots roaming facebook and saying this is their chance to smash capitalism get to FEEL what they’re encouraging. Dying of hunger ain’t pretty.
Sarah A. Hoyt
0 notes
Last Seen Blogs
diegoguapeton
My Own World
blogsvenpatzlaff
Sven ab/dl
girl-feminine-boss-masculine
A Queer 😰
nonsternoah
Green Means Go
