Term 3 Week 5 (Blogging Assignment) (Shylock)

Shylock is one of the antagonist in Shakespeare's play, Merchant of Venice. It has been discussed for ages, how are we supposed to evaluate the attitude of the Venetians in the play toward him? He is portrayed mainly as a bloodthirsty villian in Merchant of Venice and a materialistic father who puts money before his morals and daughter.

Throughout the play, Shylock is seen putting money before his daughter. When we hear about Shylock's response to Jessica's elopement, it seems like he's more worried about the gold Jessica stole than the fact that his daughter is gone. From the phrase, "'My daughter! O my ducats! O my daughter! / Fled with a Christian! O my Christian ducats!"we can tell that he actually values his money is lost rather than he lost a daughter. Hence, Shylock is depicted as a shallow materialistic man who values money more than kinship and is part of Shakespeare plans

Next, Shylock is seen as a bloodthirsty villian who wants the kill mainly Antonio by taking a pound of his flesh through a bond which he signed with him. Shakespeare here is probably trying to depict the Jews as bloodthirsty barbarians who are hell bent on taking Christian's lives. Hence, Shylock as a Jew is used to show anti-semitism thoughts by of Shakespeare himself.

Next, in the later part of the play, Shylock makes this comment.

Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with
the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject
to the same diseases, healed by the same means,
warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as
a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?
if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison
us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not
revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will
resemble you in that. If a Jew wrong a Christian,
what is his humility? Revenge. If a Christian
wrong a Jew, what should his sufferance be by
Christian example? Why, revenge. The villany you
teach me, I will execute, and it shall go hard but I
will better the instruction.

Here Shylock insists on the fact that Jews and Christians share a common humanity. He also exposes the hypocritical minds of the Christian characters (such as Bassanio) who are always talking about love and mercy but then go out of their way to marginalise Shylock because he is Jewish and different and hence emphasizes and reminds everyone in the play that Christians are biased against the Jews.

Hence, in conclusion, although Shakespeare created the Merchant of Venice to discriminate against the Jews, he also added in points whereby he shows that it is wrong of the Christians to do so. I think that he created the play to show that the Jews were being discriminated rather than to discriminate the Jews as the last segments of the play shows that Shylock had stated out all the facts. If Shakespeare had not thought that way, he wouldn't have included the last part of Shylock's speech whereby he stated all the discrimination.

Blogging Assignment - Shakespeare and Bias

I do not feel that Shakespeare is biased in terms of portrayal of the main characters in The Merchant of Venice. This can be seen through the fair portrayal of these characters.

He portrayed Antonio honest, loyal and helpful friend to Bassanio whereby he offered a pound of his flesh to . However, he turned out to be racist and conducted many anti-Jewish acts on Shylock such as telling him that he was a dog.

Another character portrayed fairly would be Shylock. Shylock, the play's main character, is portrayed as evil and hell bent on killing Antonio through his bond of a pound of flesh. This is due to the religious discrimination that he probably felt such as being marginalised by the Christians. This can be seen in many parts of the play such as during the trial whereby the Christians gang up against him. That can explain his sardonic expression and love for money as he feels resentful towards the Christians. Therefore, Shylock is not just portrayed as a ruthless, evil tyrant, but also a misunderstood character who is discriminated against for being a Jew.

Term 3 Week 4 (Blogging Assignment)

After reading what Jim Rogers wrote in the Newsweek article, I feel that Jim Rogers' ideology is that the usage of many languages is necessary for one to remain competitive in this dog-eat-dog world. Jim Rogers feel that since the Eastern countries such as China are becoming more wealthy such that the East are considered as "creditors" while the Western countries are now considered as "debtors" , Western children should be immersing themselves in the Asian Languages to better prepare them for future business prospects with the East. Many Eastern countries such China has grown in power and wealth recently and is expected to be one of the world's most wealthy countries in time to come. The world is no longer solely about America being the giant, more countries are rising, such as the Middle East, China & even India. Hence, in order for western people to catch up with the East, learning common languages with them is undeniably an important "update". I totally agree with him.

Currently in the world, China is the world leading exporters and manufacturers. As one goes shopping, one might notice that actually almost all the merchandise and products in it has the tag “Made in China”. America is not leading country anymore as compared to rising Eastern countries such as China and India. Hence, in order to work with the Chinese for future business prospects, one has to upgrade himself by first learning the language. Hence, whatever Jim Roger is doing, he is exposing his children to the culture and language at an early age which I definitely agree with his actions.

Hence, in conclusion, whatever Jim Rogers is doing may seem redundant but it is actually useful. With China developing rapidly and replacing America as the next world-leading country in terms of power and wealth, inevitably, we have to learn the Chinese language. I believe that in order to excel in a current globalised world of the 21st Century, one must learn to blend in with the cultures and languages of that country. Without all these, I am afraid that one might not be competitive enough to survive or keep up in this highly competitive global market. Who knows, we might need to learn Tamil just to work with Indian counterparts in the near future!

Term 3 Week 3 (Blogging Assignment)

Education is defined as any act or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character, or physical ability of an individual. In its technical sense, education is the process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills, and values from one generation to another. However, many people have brought up the issue of an ineffective education system in Singapore, whereby students rely on memorising facts and information instead of applying knowledge and skills learned on real-life based problems. Hence, I will be discussing my views on what Janelle Lee, a student who has brought up the issue of an unflattering education system in Singapore.

Whatever Janelle Lee had mentioned in her open letter is truly what is wrong with the Singapore Education System, in terms of the teaching methods. I totally agree with her that Singapore's education system mainly rely on memorising facts, information and formulas. Here are some ways students have to memorise for examinations. For Literature, students have to memorise information such as Shakespeare's way of portraying plays and the context and content of the literature books such as To Kill A Mocking Bird. For Mathematics, students have to memorise many formulas such as Symmetrical Properties of Circles. For Chinese, students have to memorise letter writing format. For Science, students have to memorise many theories and laws of Science. The list goes on and on, but have we ever wondered why are we doing all of this? This would be the flaw of the education system.

With modern technology, have we ever wondered why is it necessary to memorise so much information/theories/Science laws/formulas? An example would the letter writing format. How many people in the world still use the letter writing format for Chinese? With reference to a statistics report in 2009, the number of people using sending emails in Chinese as compared to writing letters in Chinese are 58:3, and this ratio is expected to increase. As such, is it really necessary to memorise the format of letter writing? This would be an example of rote learning. Rote learning, in the eyes of the Singapore education system, is where students are expected to memorise facts from the textbook and be able to regurgitate or relay all these information during tests, in the hope that they can understand and apply them. However, how many students actually went on and apply them in real life after they graduate from schools with fantastic results from memorising?

However, to the best of my knowledge, the above mentioned does not exist in schools with Integrated Program (IP). Ever since I entered this school, I am quite amazed with the new curriculum being someone who hates memorising. An example would be in Language Arts. Instead of being taught to memorising facts and events from the book To Kill A Mocking Bird, instead, we have a new component called Reading & Reasoning. This new component trains the student's mind to think carefully and analyse the text given rather than memorising information from some guide book and pouring it all in, hoping to get an A1. There are also many other added features to the new education system for Integrated Program, as such schools can edit and control their own curriculum. Hence, I think that Janelle Lee is not being fair in judging Singapore's Education mainly based on a mainstream school. If she had the chance to be exposed to IP school's curriculum, I am pretty sure that she would change her point of view.

In addtition, I think that the best education system Singapore should adopt would be one which, besides imparting facts and formulas, will train the mind to apply whatever it learnt on real-life based problems such as the Future Problem Solving Program. This will then equip students with cognitive thinking and adequate reasoning skills to survive in the 21st century.

Term 3 Week 2 (Blogging Assignment)

According to the World Health Organization, 1.2 billion people worldwide do not have access to clean drinking water, and a further 2.6 billion lack adequate sanitation services, and these numbers are expected to rise. The UN has estimated that 2.8 billion people in 48 countries will be living in conditions of water stress or scarcity by 2025. In my opinion, water should be treated as a human right.

Firstly, access to water, especially clean ones can ultimately reduce world-wide infections of diseases, otherwise known as water-borne diseases. Millions of people are affected each year by a range of water-borne diseases including diarrhea, which is responsible for 1.8 million potentially preventable deaths per year.

Secondly, the privatisation of waterhas not effectively served the poor, who suffer the most from lack of access to clean water. This can be seen from Bolivia, Ghana and other countries whereby the poor do not have enough water of their own as water is privatised.

Thirdly, the world is rapidly industrialising with a growing population. Clean, drinkable water is naturally scarce and with the effects of global warming, some countries would not have enough clean water to feed her people. The United States is facing the greatest water shortages of its history, and in Australia severe drought has caused dangerous water shortages in the Murray-Darling river basin, which provides the bulk of its food supply. As of now, the World Health Organization estimates that inadequate water is responsible for nearly one-tenth of the world’s disease burden, and that six percent of all deaths could be prevented by universal access to safe drinking water and better sanitation.

Water as a human right or commodity has 2 very different meanings. Water as a human right means that every human has the right to attain water, regardless of their backgrounds. Commodities are items which can be bought of the shelves of supermarkets with money. They can also sometimes be defined as goods or stock. A man cannot survive without water for 3 days. In fact, all living organisms including micro-organisms need water to survive. If water is to be considered a materialistic item which has to be bought in order to survive, god knows how many people in the world would die because they have no money at all to buy clean drinking water!

Hence, in conclusion, be it political or economic reasons, water has to be made a human right at all times. It is immoral to suggest that the poor have to be sacrificed in order for the rich to live. So what if one is poor? We all are still humans. Water belongs to Mother Earth and her children - us.

Term 3 Week 1 (Blogging Assignment)

Minister of State for Community Development, Youth and Sports and veteran labour leader Ms Halimah Yacob called for the legislation of weekly days off for maids on June 19, speaking at a community sports festival at Singapore Polytechnic. She suggested that in the event that a rest day a week is not possible, maids should at least be compensated in cash. This has sparked heated debate amongst Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans feel that giving these domestic workers weekly days off might cause them to behave inappropriately such as being haughty or having boyfriends. However, there are also some who feel that having days off might result in positive effects such as them being able to work more efficiently due to the fact that they have a rest day. In my opinion, the giving of weekly days off for foreign domestic workers should be made compulsory in Singapore.

Maids are humans too, they are not robots. Which human does not need to rest after a long day of hard work. Yes, the maids are paid to do this hard work. But does it really mean that they cannot even have a single rest day? Even police watch dogs are given "off days" where they can rest in comfort. Furthermore, a rest might also motivate them to work harder. By giving these domestic workers off days, they would be able to rest well and retain a high level of efficiency. Hence, I feel that maids, as they are humans too, should have rights in resting after a week of hard work and hopefully, this act will motivate them to work harder.

On the contrary, some employers are scared that maids will turn for the worse and begin to corrupt their freedom allocated to them. In a Yahoo! poll pertaining to this topic, 46% expressed that they were against weekly day off for maids. These are mainly due to the negative thoughts. Such thoughts include that the employers are answerable for the maids' mannerisms and actions during their days off. This means that if a maid causes mischief or trouble outside the household, the employers are responsible. Furthermore, nowadays, maids have boyfriends and even 'husbands' in Singapore, resulting them in pregnancy. Hence, work efficiency is lost. Too much rest will also result in complacency which also poses problems such as slack in work.

In conclusion, I do not think that maids should be given weekly days off. Though they do need rest and freedom, too frequent of these privileges is not a good thing. I feel that Mdm Halimah should learn to view situations from the points of view of other parties instead of only just a few, so that she can make decisions where most can benefit. Maybe she can suggest a compulsory leave every once a month so that maids wont get complacent.