Scholarship Talk

It's all about the future now, isn't it? Time to think about what you want to do with your life. The trouble with being a thinker, leader and pioneer is that you aren't allowed the luxury of being indecisive and floating through life. After today's PSC talk I have a clearer idea of what I want to do, but still there are so many caveats. I wonder what it'll take for me to decide, what kind of insight I need to have.

Well...basically I'm more or less set on going to Europe or thereabouts...which means either France or UK. And I want to do something literature- or history-related. If not the hard academic subjects then perhaps journalism or international relations. And the thing is that PSC offers a really good deal if you go to university in a non-English speaking country. So if I do go to Paris I, then I'll have one less year of bond, one year of linguistic immersion and all the usual perks of a PSC scholarship. But then of course, one wonders whether doing English Lit in France is really that good an idea. And what would the quality be like of the courses that are delivered in English in France?

I guess I'll be content with going to someplace in Europe. Going to France may be an intriguing prospect, but practically speaking I don't know about the quality of the courses they'll offer. And already I'm taking a big risk by not doing Economics, which is by far the most popular Humanities subject of the PSC applicants. Anyway, with the wonders of modern technology, most of Europe is accessible from anywhere by train. The one year discount of the bond is of course attractive, but that is only one in a myriad of factors.

Dad pointed out an important thing just now...that I was more considering where I want to study than what I want to study. The ultimate aim, of course, is to get some sort of marketable qualification, for pragmatic reasons. But then university's always seemed like this opportunity to go on a very long immersion programme. I really want to go abroad, and to someplace European, where the history and culture lies thickly encrusted on every sidewalk and footpath. When I think of university, I think of winding country lanes and Bohemian walks with poetry under arms, rather than classrooms and papers and professors. Looks like I'll be in for quite a shock if I keep going like this...but then that raises the question: what is the main objective of university, to get a degree or to get an experience?

Then there is the issue of the bond. I'm pretty set on the ideal things that I want to do in life: to write and to travel. PSC can offer that to me, and after that, during the bond, this doesn't have to end. We cornered an MFA person, and the prospect of being assigned to different countries to work at their embassies is attractive. MOE of course will have its sabbaticals and excursions and expeditions, but for long stretches away from our little island, the diplomatic corps seems to be the way to go. And with my French, there's an added advantage...however slim it may be. Yvonne says she'd rather study at NUS and avoid the PSC bond. Me...I don't know, working for the government doesn't seem like such a bad thing. It really doesn't infringe on my democratic ideals, and I think the PSC is really very reasonable given the perks that it offers. And with a civil servant already in my home, it really isn't anathema. Six years in the civil service doesn't necessarily equate six years of drudgery, though to be on the safe side it's better to make preparations for that eventuality too.

But it's always important to keep things in perspective. I shouldn't really be making such a big fuss about these technicalities, when other people are struggling just to make the mark. Really, I must say that us Humanities people are exceedingly well placed for PSC, so much so that our gripes with the bond and the course choices seem quite trite and self-centred. What, really, do we have to complain about? The government is practically throwing money at us, and I do think they deserve to be repaid. If you don't want to be repaid then don't take their money in the first place. You take your own responsibility for your choice. But of course, remember always that there are a vast majority out there who are looking at us with envy. It's important not to become conceited.

I don't know how people are so sure of what they want to do already. We were chatting with Rolly about this university thing, and he guessed that I'd be going to the US. As it turned out, most of the people there wanted to go to the UK. And to see the gleam of certainty in Jenn's and Ian's eyes is quite a novelty. Not a lot of people are already set on what they want to do. Me, I thought that I'd like to teach. That was my first ideal profession. But I guess that got superseded by writing, and the immersions really whetted my appetitie for the foreign. Teaching is still an option that I wouldn't turn down immediately, but the world is so big now, and the choices so many, and the stakes increasingly getting higher. How does one decide? Growing up is the process of learning how to cope with more and more responsibility.

Speaking of writing...my PC's going down the loo again. It's difficult for me to practice that kind of mental rigour and discipline to write a focused Lit essay. Econs and Hist don't have that kind of attention to detail, and their essays are more concerned with arguments and viewpoints. But Lit essays are mainly to do with the evidence that you pick out, rather than what you're actually arguing in favour of. I know how it works...you pick out bits of text, identify the literary devices used, infer the effects caused by the devices, and explain how these effects work to transmitting the artistic purpose of the piece. The trouble is that most of the time I get so carried away by one or another of these aspects (most of the time it's the artistic purpose, and I write philosophical essays where the piece is marginal) that the essay becomes fatally skewed. But once I'm done with the essay, I just feel relieved that that it's out of the way and have no impetus to edit it. Bleah...it takes a different kind of discipline of the mind to carry out this analytical process.

I'd very much rather evidence the process in my own artistic writing. Of course, it's all well and good that one can identify how and why acclaimed writers use certain devices in certain combinations, but to try to use them yourself, and to succeed, is another level entirely. Few people succeed enough to get published, but that's no reason to use only published writers as a benchmark for comparison. Daily, people come up with ingenious expressions all the time. I read Chern's and Mel's work the other day, and they really don't write badly. The thing is, of course, not to be conceited with the little ability that we do have, but at the same time to be brave enough to face up to our inadequacy and write on anyway. What writers need is the daring to sound bad, rather than the assurance that they sound good. Good quality writing displays skills worth lauding, but I do think that the courage (not egotism, mind you) to show your work to an audience and risk ridicule is more admirable, because to a certain extent it is harder to come by and nurture.

Which is why I'd rather write my own stuff than to write about other people's stuff. That does sound rather poutish I guess...like I'm trying to justify my lack of writing ability. But I don't know...who knows how much more interesting it would be if all the closet poets in our classes come out into the open?

That said, of course, writing is not just a fad. The bravado to sound wrong also implies the bravado to develop your own style. The main drawback about the Litwings' publication is that it has too much angsty stuff in it, I think. We have a preconception of what is a "good" poem, and modeling that on the work unanimously identified as good, we end up with a way to select poems that sound alike in tone and style. Of course, there're still unlimited variations in imagery and subject matter and nuances, but you try reading all those poems at one sitting, and you become numbed. It sounds like the same poem read out by different voices, in other words. We have to find a way to reduce that effect...we need to include different types of poem, rather than concentrating on the angsty free verse that is such a fad right now.

Hmph. That was quite a tirade. If anyone ever wanted to publish this blog like after I'm dead, I wonder if it'll make money. Maybe the Joycean non-linearity will gain it a following =P Anyway, looking forward to Friday. Sam Jo will be performing for Arts fac, and I'm determined to watch. Saw a glimpse of rehearsals today for some other fac, and it doesn't look promising. Heh, maybe there'll be a reenactment of last week, when Arts fac sweeps away with all the prizes worth winning...

pondered by phoenican @ 23.2.05