Sleepless in New York

So we arrived in New York at about 10.30pm because of the flight delayed.

New York was a city that never sleeps. After we checked in to the hotel, we went out searching for food. And to our surprise, the entire Time Square was still pretty much alive! Planet Hollywood was still very much opened, so was Hard Rock café, and the Swatch boutique, and many more… We stayed at the theater district so Broadway was just one street away. This was when I suddenly realized, hey, this whole scene looked familiar! I’ve watched it on TV, on the movies, just too many times.

But that was not what set me thinking. Amidst the high-rise buildings and modernity, you see just as many old buildings around – for example, the famous St Patrick Cathedral, built in 1868. Or Macy’s (since 1902). Or many other old buildings that are still being used, upgraded, and remained as popular destinations for various activities. All these, and of course a lot of other things, have become a very unique New York culture, and have become the icons of New York City.

And I looked back at Singapore’s very own “preservation”. We have been trying very hard to preserve certain buildings. For example, the old post office (now The Fullerton), the old SJI (now Singapore Arts Museum), the old CHIJ (now CHIJMES), the old high court (going to be an arts museum), and of course the good old Chinatown. So what’s the problem?

I guess the problem is when we try to preserve these buildings we somehow only manage to preserve the “hardware”. Take Chinatown for example. How many of us actually would visit Chinatown? Or has it pretty much become a “tourist area”?

We need to retain its originality. Macy’s was built as Macy’s and remained as Macy’s. The buildings, the activities, are part and parcel of a culture. It is the life behind the buildings that make them unique, that make them part of a culture – not how it looks, not how we can turn it around and make it commercially viable.

I don’t know how it is possible for this to be done in Singapore. What I am saying is that, with a 41 years history, we seem to be leaving behind our “spirit” too fast. Culture is not something that you can teach – you have to immerse in it, you have to instill in people. It is not just a facet that looks good on the outside. What makes a culture attractive is its long history – and that includes how the people live their daily lives, and how these architectural designs reflect that.

Culture is something we need to live in. It is life.

Crossing the River

The river is called generation gap. Or to be exact, cultural gap.

I know, because I taught Cross Cultural Communication. I believe that each one of us is a "subculture" of our own. We are subset of this bigger culture called our family, then our ethnicity, and race, and nationality, and regional, and then we are part of mankind. (Buddhism recognises that each of us is just like a "small cosmos", which is part of this grand cosmos that we live in).

I value my personal culture a lot because it takes up to build up. Of course, The Mother also treasures her personal culture and the family culture that she established to the extend of trying to defend it.

That's what I meant by cultural gap.

OK I complain about my mother a lot. But she's not that bad, really. It just take a little bit more understanding, and accommodating, especially when you try to see it from her perspectives and where she is coming from.

It is not easy trying to accommodate The Mother. That would mean giving up part of the personal culture. In the literature, sociologists have recognised several ways of intercultural marriages patterns - no it's not a marriage, but in any kind of relationship, it all involves two people communicating to each other.

Let me give you an example -
The Mom: Oh you have pancake mix. It's going to expire. Let's make pancake for breakfast.
The Mom:... so where is your ladle? Do you have measuring cup? Where is your spatula?
Me: Here. Don't need measurement cup. I just "agak-agak". Let me do it.
The Mom:...how come it takes so long? You should cover the pan. It will cook faster.
Me: No. You need to be patience... so that it's cooked inside slowly... you cannot cover because you need to see the bubbles burst, which is an indication of whether it is cooked or not...

Next Day...
The Mom: (started cooking the pancake while I shower) Come, I've prepared pancake for breakfast. And I covered the pan. It cooked faster. You should do the same.
Me: But the colour is not nice. Mine looks nicer.
The Mom: Aiya... no need to be nice.
Me: It's a bit powdery.
The Mom: Huh? Not nice ah? (turned slightly defensive)
Me: Not really lah (trying to be nice). Taste a bit weird.
The Mom: It's not the cover lah. I put in more oil because I think it's very dry.
The Mom: So next time you should cover. (Sounds like a final word - that's how I should cook my pancake henceforth.)

You see. She set the culture - how things should be done (that's part of a cultural system too), and she expects her children to follow it.

What do you do to cross this river?

I don't drown. I just suffocate myself. Ha.

The Sound of Heart

Being an educator takes a whole lot of conscience. My mother, who was an ex-school principal, always says that education is a career of conscience. I couldn't agree more.

It is not just a job, but a career. I always believe that as an educator, when it comes to decision making (what to teach, how to teach, what materials to show, how to assess, even the administration procedures....), the first question an educator should ask is "how would this benefit the students?".

I ponder about the question "what makes a good teacher" all the time. I guess no one can give us the right answers, because every student would have different needs. Nevertheless, I feel that at the end of the day, a good teacher, or an educator should show real altruism.

Cynical psychologists would not agree that one can be totally altruistic - they believe that no matter what, one gets rewards, be it tangible rewards or intangible ones such as you would feel better, it satisfies your ego, reduces guilt....

I have seen teachers who treat their jobs as just, well, a job. They bring home the bread. They do things to impress the management. They have their own career aspirations. They want to climb the corporate ladder. Students would probably be a side dish.

Nevertheless, I like to be more optimistic. I think there are still teachers around who can face their own conscience, and say it in the most altruistic way that "yes I have done my best for the students." It may not be the right thing, but we have tried our best.

So, what makes a good teacher to you?