Friday, 22 March 2013
EST FORUM ISLAMABAD
AoA.
Respected Teachers
EST BS-14 Elementary School Teachers Federal Directorate of Education Islamabad

To End up the disparity and provide equal opportunities to all the students and Teachers of Islamabad Capital Territory uniformity in syllabus and distribution of financial resources ,faculty designation , recruitment and promotion administration and academic structure of all public sector institutes under the Federal Directorate of Education Islamabad It is worthy to notice the following observation and reservations..
1.The EST’s of Islamabad are fighting for their rights but attempts are going vein. and the higher ups are not considering the problems of in-serive teachers. There is a no time frame for the promotions of EST’s like TGT’s and SST’s and above
2. EST’s are eliminated from promotions even bearing ….
i) long service period 10 to 15 years length of service
ii) having higher qualifications minimum B.Ed to maximum Ph.D
iii) same level teaching of subjects with equal and more working hours but contrarary to their fellows i.e. english teachers, JLT teachers , computer teachers, physical training instructure, Drawing masters. oriential teachers. . drawing pays and allowances 100-200 %.more than the other qualified and long length of service just because of the EST,s cadre in ICT (Islamabad Capital Territory)
3.By the grace of Almighty Allah English teachers have been regularized and redesignated for TUGT’s with effect from 01-07-2008.and now on the board as TGT.s because of upgradation benificiery. however ultimately the road to promotion has not only been blocked but also they are sitting on the top of seniority despite the long services awaiting their colleages of the same level teachers MTT.s presently known as EST.s.this is a total discrimination and againt the sprit of the unificaton principle of equality for the same category of employees or same job descrition. pointed out as FST decision no.———– dated————-
4.It is quite obvious that Teacher would be stuck as EST.s even the long standing servicees upto 18 years like in the past TGT.s who has suffered due to the notorious formula of four tiers..
5.any way provision of time scale to all cadres TGT.s , SST ‘sSSST.s HM,/Vprincipals. and Principles. the depriviation of time scale for EST;s has consequently . weakens the morale of EST.s to work with dedication.
6. The system of such promotion /recruitment has compelled many good teachers to quit the department for better future to other departments that offers lucrative prospects.
7. There are about 2700 EST’s out of 7000 teaching staff of IMS & IMC’s a biggger proportion that has been deprived from there rights of promotions service structure ,at the cost of the other teaching cadres and management.

regards.

Malik Atta-ur-Rehman.
cell# 03135141516
Posted by Malik Atta-ur-Rehman at 13:47 No comments:
Email This
BlogThis!
Share to Twitter

Malik Atta-ur-Rehman

According to a number of scientists, if aliens invaded, we are beyond screwed.  If aliens have the technology to travel through space to get here, we will be primitive by their standards.  They most likely aren’t going on vacation checking out the planet and wanting to be friendly like E.T. and enjoy some tasty Reeses Pieces. The aliens are going to be coming here for some resource that the Earth has.

Hopefully, it’s not going to be like War of the Worlds…  where that resource is humanity, whether it be eating us or enslavement.

In movies, generally an alien invasion usually causes something miraculous:  we unite as a society.

The irony about this unification:  we come together to bomb the new class of brown people, again tapping our inner hatred and dislike of those who are different than us.  Think about it – so many aliens, especially aggressive ones, are dark skinned.  And as George Carlin (R.I.P.) so eloquently summed up American foreign policy:

“We like war, we’re a war-like people! We like war because we’re good at it! You know why we’re good at it? Because we get a lot of practice. This country´s only 200 years old and already we’ve had ten major wars. We average a major war every twenty years in this country, so we’re good at it! And it’s a good thing we are, we’re not very good at anything else anymore! Hah? Can’t make a decent car, can’t make a TV set or a VCR worth a fuck … got no steel industry left, can’t educate our young people … can’t get health care to our old people … but we can bomb the shit out of your country alright!

Especially if your country is full of brown people. Oh, we like that, don’t we, that’s our hobby! That´s our new job in the world: bombing brown people! Iraq, Panama, Grenada, Libya – you got some brown people in your country – tell ‘em to watch the fuck out … or we´ll goddamn bomb them!”

Just check out these examples of popular aliens, and Hollywood’s recognition that we innately are not trustful (at best) or want to kill (at worst) those that are different than us:

Hell, Jar Jar makes me want to bomb some Gungans.  Damn you George Lucas for making me a racist.  Anyhow, I digress.

Regardless of the reason for a worldwide epiphany, we universally realize that there is something much bigger than just us, our city, our country, or the Earth.  The human race unifies, much like an anthill or bee colony, for a common cause:  betterment of mankind. Our society could be so much greater if we united as humans and stopped hating each other, killing each other, and going to war with one another.  If we accepted that we are all different.  What seems unusual to one person is customary to the other.  And that’s just fine.  No need to attack each other for opposing religious views, politics, or other differences of opinion.

It is in our global best interests to not be at war with each other, and ideally working in harmony to research new technologies and ideas to better mankind.

If we were to simply invest in our humanity like we do in our warfare, our civilization would be incredible.  The finances already easily exist to invest in research, and we could even reduce taxation spurring worldwide growth. Worldwide, there was over $1.5 trillion US dollars spent on “defense” spending in 2012.  One year.  Alone.  That is just incredible if you think about it.

Here’s an infographic on how much we spend on “defense” from each other.  Or “defence” as those wacky Brits spell it.

Imagine if we could reduce the “defense” spending needed to 10-20% because we didn’t feel the need to defend ourselves, except from the extremely insane people, such as those who decide that their natural choice for a U.S. diplomat is Dennis Rodman.  Spend perhaps 30% of that $1.5 trillion on research and development for human advancement.  That still leaves over $750 billion *annually* that gets put back into the world economy.

With so many countries having budget crises, people starving and impoverished, it is horrific how much we spend on having the capacity to kill each other.

It’s not only about the money though.  It’s about our attitudes towards each other.  If we fundamentally changed our mindset to accept the other person as a human being who has just as much a right to live as we do, and to live the way they choose to live, we could be so much better off.

Or we could just continue with our global infighting, wait for some cataclysmic event such as an alien invasion or a giant asteroid coming towards the planet, be reactionary, and see how well that serves us.

It can be a regression and an escape, a loss of self, or it can be presence, awareness, unification, self-discovery.

Negative silence blurs and confuses our identity, and we lapse into daydreams or diffuse anxieties.

Positive silence pulls us together and makes us realize who we are, who we might be, and the distance between these two.

— Thomas Merton

Painting: Elder (Abraham, the Servant of God) by Mikhail Nesterov

North Korea’s threat to a nuclear attack is somehow different from what it was before, a new sanction is passed on North Korea, US and South Korea are their enemies as usual but the new crisis is that China is gradually planning on annexing North Korea to China. The new president of China has also emphasized going back to their heritage as one of his main aims.

China as the only ally of North Korea is taking advantage of North Korea’s weakness. North Korea is becoming a victim of Cold-war pressure! They have to either of the two choices, to succumb to unification of North and South Korea or to get annexed to China,

It is not far from imagination that when they feel that surrounding to either of West or East powers is the only option they might undertake a nuclear attack. They wont have anything to lose then!

Ahmadinejad stated in his recent speech that he does not believe in Shia-Sunni divide and that there is one prophet and one religion, Something that no leader or president from Islamic countries has ever uttered.
This dude is showing signs of intellectualism and change in himself in the last few months that have remained from his years in office. What will be next?!

I would believe only in a god who could
dance.
And when I saw my devil I found him
serious, thorough, profound and solemn;
it was the spirit of gravity — through him
all things fall.

Not by wrath does one kill but by
laughter.
Come let us kill the spirit of
gravity.
I have learned to walk:
ever since, I let myself run.

I have learned to fly.
Now I am light,
now I fly,
now I see myself beneath
myself,
now a god dances
through me.

(Zarathustra, “On Reading and Writing”)

What to say about this passage of Zarathustra!  This is a case of  ’language’ spoils. So dance can say it better:

This ‘poem” by Nietzsche inaugurates a series of Icarus portraits of known and obscure Icaruses.

Today’s Fool’s Message:

On Dancing…

“Under the charm of the Dionysian not only is the union between man and man reaffirmed, but Nature which has become estranged, hostile, or subjugated, celebrates once more her reconciliation with her prodigal son, man…. Now the slave is free; now all the stubborn, hostile barriers, which necessity, caprice or ‘shameless fashion’ have erected between man and man, are broken down… Each one feels himself not only united, reconciled, blended with his neighbour, but all as one with him… In song and in dance man expresses himself as a member of a higher community; he has forgotten how to walk and speak; he is about to take a dancing flight into the air… He feels himself a god, he himself now walks about enchanted, in ecstasy… He is no longer an artist, he has become a work of art: in these paroxysms of intoxication the artistic power of all nature reveals itself to the highest gratification of the Primordial Unity” (The Birth of Tragedy)

On Dancing more…

Dancing in all its forms cannot be excluded from the curriculum of all noble education; dancing with the feet, with ideas, with words, and, need I add that one must also be able to dance with the pen?

Every day I count wasted in which there has been no dancing.

And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.

He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand and walk and run and climb and dance; one cannot fly into flying.

Only in the dance do I know how to tell the parable of the highest things…. (Zarathustra, “The Tomb Song”)

How much a spirit needs for its nourishment, for this there is no formula; but if its taste is for independence, for quick coming and going, for roaming, perhaps for adventures for which only the swiftest are a match, it is better for such a spirit to live in freedom with little to eat than unfree and stuffed. It is not fat but the greatest possible suppleness and strength that a good dancer desires from his nourishment – and I would not know what the spirit of a philosopher might wish more to be than a good dancer. For the dance is his ideal, also his art, and finally also his only piety, his “service of God.” (“The Gay Science”)

On Dancing  ( Un )still…

Our first questions of value, in relation to books, people, and music, are: “can they walk? what’s more, can they dance?”
[Nietzsche, The Gay Science, section 366.]

Lift up your hearts, my brothers, high, higher! And do not forget your legs either. Lift up your legs too, you good dancers; and better yet, stand on your heads!
(…)
Zarathustra, the dancer; Zarathustra, the light one who beckons with his wings, preparing for a flight, beckoning to all birds, ready and heady, blissfully lightheaded;
(…)
You higher men, the worst about you is that all of you have not learned to dance as one must dance – dancing away over yourselves! …learn to laugh away over yourselves! Lift up your hearts, you good dancers, high, higher! And do not forget good laughter. This crown of him who laughs, this rose-wreath crown: to you, my brothers, I throw this crown. Laughter I have pronounced holy; you higher men, learn to laugh! (Zarathustra, “On the Higher Man,”) also quoted in the second preface to Birth of Tragedy)

Happy Heuristics

Globalization is a process of unification, intensification, and connection among governments, companies and world markets. As technology and innovations advance, a process of globalization is speeding up. Martin Wolf, Editor at the Financial Times, claims that the “‘globalized’ economy could be defined as one in which neither distance nor national borders impede economic transactions” (Wolf 178). For instance, a person who lives in Azerbaijan wears a T-shirt from Pakistan, consumes food from Ukraine and watches a British movie on Japanese TV. Like everything, this process has its pros and cons. On one hand globalization has enlarged a financial gap between poor, and rich, caused a high unemployment rate and labor exploitation, but on the other hand products from all over the world are acceptable nowadays.

During past two decades, while globalization was speeding up, the term like “global identity” occurred in people’s mind. It means that as world becomes more and more globalized there would not be separate states any more. People would have one government, one law and only one identity – global. However, there are four major obstacles, such as religion, mentality, cultural traditions and historical factor that cannot make global identity true.

Religion is the biggest obstacle in the way of global identity. The main points of all religions are supposed to be benevolence, honesty and spirituality. Nevertheless, it is one of the most common reasons in the world that makes humans enemies. Everyone wants his or her religion to be in control. Muslims, Christians and Jews have been fighting for centuries, trying to make their faith dominant one in the world, which often leads to war. There are many historical examples showing that religions cannot co-exist with each other. The most significant examples are conflicts between Israel and Palestine, India and Pakistan and also Ethiopia and Somalia. Moreover, there is also enmity within faiths. To understand this issue we need to look at several cases. For instance, the conflict between Sunnis and Shiites that turned into Civil war in Iraq in 2007. Another example is Catholic and Protestant friction between the England and Ireland, which started during the English invasion of Ireland, which lasted more than four centuries. In brief, religion creates a huge barrier in uniting people under one identity and makes global identity only a dream in humans’ mind.

The second reason that can destroy all assumptions about global identity is mentality. Mentality means a way of thinking, or stereotypes of some group of people toward something. Each culture has its own stereotypes. For example, in eastern countries people will probably denounce smoking woman while in western ones it is regarded as something usual. A woman in Germany can easily walk down the streets wearing shorts although in Pakistan it would be considered as a bad manner. Another example is that in western countries it does not matter if a woman is a virgin or not before marriage but in some theocratic countries such woman can be followed by the law and even executed. Diverse mentalities in the world create barriers in front of uniting people.

Cultural traditions are an inseparable part of each culture and they differ greatly. For instance, the people of Central Asia and Middle East annually celebrates Nowruz holiday. Difference in cultural traditions can probably lead to the conflict even during such holiday. Best of all it can be witnessed in last-year clashes between Kurds and Turks during the celebration of Nowruz. Kurds celebrate this holiday in own way, but this was considered by Turkish police as a picket. Consequently, this clash took away the lives of four police officers and five Kurds. That is how difference in cultural traditions leads to the collision. Moreover, one culture can also have different concepts. For instance, in northern part of Georgia, each man, while going out from his home, puts knife in his pocket, but in Tbilisi, capital of Georgia, it is considered as savagery. To conclude, diverse concepts and difference in cultural traditions will not allow global identity to be a reality.

Society must also take into consider historical factors, when talking about globalization, because history can cause real problems in terms of global identity. History was created through wars, tyranny and power. Thereby, all these negative cases in a history are reflected in humans’ mind and still it is hatred between some nations, even though many years passed. As a brilliant example of this case is the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia, which began more than seventeen centuries ago. The hostilities started from 387 and they are continuing nowadays intermittently. The war has temporarily stopped, but hatred and the desire to kill each other remains nowadays. The five-day war between Georgia and Russia is also imprinted in Georgians mind. Georgians refuse to speak Russian and the Georgian government stopped all diplomatic affairs with Russia. These are examples showing how people hate each other and how they are ready to seek revenge due to historical events. Hence, history and memory will not let people to unite and make them whole.

People are too different to live together. To sum up, four factors such as religion, mentality, cultural differences and history will prevent global identity of being plausible. Each of these factors has its own impact on this process. Religion, which was reason of many wars in the past, mentality, which led to misunderstandings and discontents, cultural differences, which can turn out to clashes even in holidays and history, which reminds humans of poor past, will stop global identity on its different stages. If taking into consider these facts, global identity will never happen. Do you still thinking that global identity could be true true?

Works cited:

Wolf, Martin. Foreign Affairs. Council of Foreign Relations. (2008): 178-79. Web

http://www.jstor.org/discover

China should consider abandoning North Korea. The best way of giving up on Pyongyang is to take the initiative to facilitate North Korea’s unification with South Korea. Bringing about the peninsula’s unification would help undermine the strategic alliance between Washington, Tokyo and Seoul; ease the geopolitical pressure on China from northeast Asia; and be helpful to the resolution of the Taiwan question.

The next best thing would be to use China’s influence to cultivate a pro-Beijing government in North Korea, to give it security assurances, push it to give up nuclear weapons and start moving towards the development path of a normal country.

This is why unification – whether it be southern-or-northern-led – is a non-starter. It just means war. The interest groups and factions represented by Zhang Hao or a Zhang Shaotang aren’t just going to back down.

Related articles

• China moves ahead with North Korea trade zone despite nuclear test – Reuters
• US, South Korea launch major joint exercises
• New South Korea president faces North Korea nuke crisis

Park Geun-hye with Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang, 2002 | Image via Hankoryeh

A New Focus on Inter-Korean Relations: Twelve Policy Recommendations for Park Geun-hye

Today in Seoul, Park Geun-hye will be inaugurated as president of the Republic of Korea. Inevitably, one of President Park’s early policy priorities will be North Korea: even if she doesn’t want it to be, one way or another Pyongyang will make sure that it is. With that fait accompli in mind, Jang Jin-sung, a former member of both the DPRK Central Broadcasting Committee and the Central Party, not to mention a leading North Korean poet, has prepared some policy proposals for the new leader.

Having abandoned the life of an analyst for the South Korean state, Mr. Jang is the founder and chief editor of the exceptional online source New Focus and its English-language offshoot, New Focus International.- Christopher Green, Assistant Editor

A New Focus on Inter-Korean Relations: Twelve Policy Recommendations for Park Geun-hye

by Jang Jin-sung

1. Be wise in choice of name: define inter-Korean policy within a framework of mutual trust

Perhaps the biggest mistake of the Lee Myung-bak administration in the sphere of inter-Korean affairs was its choice of name for inter-Korean policy. Using a word that would have irked Kim Jong-il (whether by chance or by design), the policy was christened ‘Denuclearization and Openness 3000 (비핵개방3000).’ This is one of the reasons why, from the very beginning, dialogue appeared doomed to failure. The incoming administration must choose a more sensitive name for its inter-Korean policy.

For example, in line with Park Geun-hye’s campaign emphasis on “trust,” the policy could be named “Rebuilding Inter-Korean Trust.” Not only will such a line save the administration from criticism from North Korea and pro-North groups, the rebuilding of trust is beneficial for all parties. Although North Korea may be frightened of “trust” as much as “denuclearization,” a built-in reminder of reciprocal trust leads at least to rhetorical, if not also practical, benefits.

2. Define limits in inter-Korean policy

At present (this article was written in January), president-elect Park is stressing the following three points as pillars of South Korea’s inter-Korean policy:

“Confidence of the citizens;”

“Confidence between South and North Korea;” and

“The confidence of the international community.”

However, within such a broad scope, Park is likely to encounter difficulty in executing her inter-Korean policy. “Confidence of the citizens” and “Confidence between South and North Korea” will inevitably lead to contradiction, while “The confidence of the international community” is too loose a concept to be of practical value. It will allow North Korea and pro-North groups an invitation to intervene in the formation of South Korea’s inter-Korean policy, even though responsibility for subsequent failures will rest in the end with the South Korean government.

There needs to be a tighter focus and limits set for South Korea’s inter-Korean policy. For example, the concept of confidence could still be retained if the following three points were to be used instead:

“Confidence in national security;”

“Confidence in collaboration;” and

“Confidence in prosperity.”

The setting of precise limits would allow North Korea to share the burden of responsibility for making things happen, instead of South Korea retaining sole responsibility for earning the confidence of its citizens, of North Korea, and of the international community.

Kim Jong-un among supporters | Rodong Sinmun, February 23, 2013.

3. Engage in dialogue with North Korea’s real power-brokers

In today’s North Korea, Kim Jong-un is a figurehead for North Korea’s real power-holders. For all practical purposes, this concentrated group of power-holders – and not Kim Jong-un – is the successor to Kim Jong-il’s one-man rule.

It is for this reason that South Korea’s participation in another inter-Korean summit will only serve to legitimize the status of Kim Jong-un in the rest of the world. This is why inter-Korean dialogue should take place with the respective nations’ power-brokers dealing with each other behind the scenes, instead of the heads of state taking part in a public, but insubstantial, inter-Korean summit. This move would push North Korea into unfamiliar territory, as it lacks experience in co-operative politics. It might even serve to increase the size of the current group of power-holders, spreading influence more widely.

Most significantly, engaging in dialogue directly with real power-brokers instead of through summitry will communicate to these figures that the international community does not perceive Kim Jong-un as a powerful leader.

4. Do not miss the opportunity of May and June

When I worked on inter-Korean policy in North Korea (before my defection), we described our work as “South Korea farming” instead of “South Korea diplomacy.” North Korea focuses its dialogue with South Korea on the goal of receiving food aid. Consequently, North Korea is most interested in dialogue during the pre-farming season of late February / early March, and during the spring famine period of early May / June. Traditionally, North Korea begins by creating a tense atmosphere and presenting a hard line. South Korea then pleads for dialogue or offers food aid in order to placate the North.

If North Korea provokes hostilities in June, this is a sign that the year will not be a good one for inter-Korean dialogue opportunities. As July is corn-harvest season, North Korea will know by this time whether it has enough supplies to last the year – if so, there will be no desperate desire for inter-Korean dialogue. This is why the incoming administration must pay attention to the real significance of the months of May and June.

This is not to say that humanitarian aid is to be used as a political tool. Rather, it argues that the “May and June” insecurities should be properly understood. In other words, if North Korea offers to engage in dialogue around this time, South Korea must not fail to make reasonable demands in return.

Ecstatic North Koreans wave to family after one of the most recent sets of family reunions, held in 2007 | image via USA Today

5. Remove inter-Korean family reunions from the remit of South Korea’s Unification Ministry

North Korea uses inter-Korean family reunions (이상 가족 상봉) as a bargaining chip. This works particularly well for the North because they come under the umbrella of South Korea’s Unification Ministry. When North Korea wants to express dissatisfaction with the actions of South Korea or needs to shift blame, it can use the reunions as a high-value chip. The fact that this humanitarian cause remains at the mercy of North Korea’s political whim is a strategic mistake for South Korea.

The inter-Korean family reunions must be supported by the South Korean government, but should be run by the people. If an NGO came to be in charge of reunions, they could be dealt with on a humanitarian level detached from politics. South Korean policy-makers must not forget this: North Korea is a dictatorship in which everything can be controlled under one organ; South Korea is a democracy where things don’t need to be – and should not be – controlled by a single organ. One of the best ways to combat dictatorship is for people outside government to share in responsibility and in power.

6. The Kaesong Industrial Zone should be internationalized

The Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun administrations wanted the Kaesong Industrial Zone (개성공단) to be a zone of peace. Sadly, neither in the sphere of communications nor in the freedom of movement for goods or people has this vision become a reality. The root cause of this unresolved issue is this: although North Korea deals with inter-Korean affairs through the Party, the industrial zone comes under the remit of the military; and this allows North Korea to dominate the zone. In order to resolve this, the zone should be shared not with South Korea, but with the rest of the world.

Corporations looking for cheap labour and a distribution base should be welcomed into Kaesong so that the zone comes to be perceived as an economic arena rather than primarily as a political one. In this way, the zone of peace that the proponents of sunshine policy wished for could materialize. As long as inter-Korean economic relations take place directly between the two Koreas and without the involvement of third parties, the situation will continue to be dictated by political threats and tensions.

The symbol of division: Panmunjom and the DMZ in days of yore | image via RetroDPRK

7. Recognize North Korea’s most sensitive spot: the DMZ

In response to South Korea’s DMZ broadcasting, North Korea over-reacted by likening it to gun fire. To North Korea, the prospect of psychological warfare is as frightening as a nuclear weapon is for the world. In this way, the Kim Jong-un regime is in a very different situation from the Kim Il-sung regime. He may have inherited the same regime, but the people’s loyalty has not remained constant. Due to the mushrooming of private markets, the currency of loyalty is losing value and being replaced by hard currency. It has come to the point where there are even cases of ideological defection.

In this context, in the case that North Korea again attempts physical provocation, South Korea must immediately resume psychological warfare on the DMZ. This will provide valuable leverage for bringing North Korea to the dialogue table, because if  separative forces appear in the military, North Korea will incur a political loss incomparable to Chinese border defections. The Chinese-North Korean border crossing is a line of survival, but the DMZ border crossing is a line of ideology.

8. Conduct diplomacy by means of special envoys, instead of relying on public dialogue

In the diplomatic execution of inter-Korean policy, the Park Geun-hye administration should make use of special envoys instead of relying on public dialogue. Until now, inter-Korean dialogue has been conducted extremely conspicuously in relation to the actual fruits of dialogue, because South Korean politicians wished to exaggerate their accomplishments and North Korea in turn took advantage of this. In fact, public diplomacy has been more beneficial for North Korea than it has been for South Korea.

With statements such as “It seems North Korea has made a big decision” or a small agreement being likened to “a great compromise on North Korea’s part,” South Korean politicians have buttressed North Korea. Consequently, North Korea has used inter-Korean dialogue as a tool of psychological warfare. The Park Geun-hye administration must ensure that public inter-Korean dialogue does not take place without the ground first set by special envoys.

This allows South Korea to remain silent while it waits for North Korea to respond with an action that confirms that mutual trust has been laid down. This will demonstrate to North Korea that actions carry more weight than words.

9. Stay ahead by emphasizing true dialogue

There is a joke that the most moderate politician in the Kim Jong-il regime was Kim Jong-il himself. This is because in the North Korean system where showing loyalty is key, everyone under Kim Jong-il was locked in a fierce competition to demonstrate more loyalty than their peers. If a proposal had the potential to be interpreted as appeasement, a rival could use it as evidence to precipitate a purge. As a result of officials shirking real responsibility, Kim Jong-il represented both the peak of moderation as well as of extremism. As all decisions lay with Kim Jong-il’s whim, South Korea’s inter-Korean policy was never stable.

Nevertheless, now the situation is very different. Kim Jong-un must ask the advice of those ranked below him, and every time he does so, the elite are burdened with an unprecedented and terrifying level of responsibility. This elite is not likely to suggest innovations to North Korea’s inter-Korean policy. Instead, it will probably stick with the safe option of the established policy of ‘uriminzokkiri’ (우리민족끼리; ‘Just between us Koreans’) and focus on the single purpose of extracting aid. The Park Geun-hye administration must therefore concentrate on making reciprocal demands, ensuring that the existing pattern of aggression and appeasement is replaced by true dialogue.

10. Rethink South Korea’s response to North Korea’s NLL (Northern Limit Line) strategy

On land, the DPRK pushes for inter-Korean collaboration and on receiving aid. At sea however, the regime is pursuing a provocative strategy of causing confrontation along the Northern Limit Line (북방 한계선). They do this at sea, through submarines and bombardment, in order to exploit South Korea’s desire to avoid direct confrontation. What the DPRK fears most in turn is confrontation happening on their own soil. If North Koreans hear the sound of a military engagement, this erodes the efficacy of the regime’s ‘Songun’ (선군; Military-first) propaganda.

A political and security hot potato, the Northern Limit Line | image via Monster Island

If South Korea were to meet submarine provocation by attacking the submarine base, and confront bombmardment at its cause, North Korea’s NLL strategy can be put in disarray. Above all, South Korea should avoid being led here and there by North Korea’s proposals but to ignore them, stressing only for peace in South Korea and defence against North Korea. Furthermore, if South Korea responds to DPRK provocations and threats by conducting joint US-ROK drills in the area, China will inevitably be led to urge the DPRK to restrain itself.

11. Place cultural exchanges before all other kinds of exchange

There are two dictatorships in the DPRK. One is the physical dictatorship. The other is the emotional dictatorship, which rules over hearts and minds. Yet precisely because this dual dictatorship is so thorough, even a small puncture can cause impact in the system. For example, the Korean Wave (한류열풍) has already started to erode the regime’s ideological grip on the people. Despite the fact that North and South Koreans speak the same language, the very different culture of the “other” Korea has captivated North Koreans. South Korean administrations have until now focused on economic exchanges in the sphere of inter-Korean relations, but cultural exchanges should not have been ignored.

The spontaneity of South Korean culture is more powerful than the planned ideology of the DPRK, or even its nuclear arsenal. The incoming ROK administration must do everything it can to support cultural exchanges, both on the official and non-official levels.

12. Do not ignore the long-run

To think that a 5-year old administration can successfully take on a regime in its third generation and third ideological incarnation is rash in many regards. Two inter-Korean summits have not prevented North Korea from making threats and provocations. In this context, South Korea’s inter-Korean policy must not ignore the long-run. Aligning South Korean opinion through sharing concepts is a crucial step in planning for the long-run: this is more effective than constantly pursuing unpopular policies.

It should have become clear by now that the DPRK is not prepared to acknowledge another point of view. Although South Korea should remain in dialogue with the DPRK, it should not pour all its funds into a single investment. North Korea must be drawn out, step by step, before reward is provided. This has not been the case  so far, with South Korean politicians being focused on immediate accomplishments rather than on long term gain.

Additional Reading

Steven Denney and Christopher Green, “Mad Dogs and Englishmen: Moon Chung-in’s Vision of Sunshine,” SinoNK, 10 November, 2012.

Steven Denney and Christopher Green, “Fog on the Han: North Korea Says It Wants a Delegation at Park Geun-hye’s Inauguration,” SinoNK, 23 January, 2013.

Christopher Green, “A Quiet Voice, Lost in the Shuffle,” Daily NK, 1 June, 2012.

Marcus Noland, “South Korean Public Opinion as Park Geun-hye Takes Office,” North Korea: Witness to Transformation Blog, 5 February, 2013.

Evan Ramsted, “Lee, in Final Week, Reveals North Korea’s 2009 Summit Feeler,” Wall Street Journal (Korea Real Time), 18 February 2013.

Nonito Donaire is threatening to call off his tentative plans to face Guillermo RidgonDeaux in a title unification match over Ridgondeaux’s alleged refusal to participate in anti-doping tests.

The fight, set for April 13 at Radio City Music Hall, was scheduled to have a New York City press conference with both fighters attending on Thursday (February 21). Donaire took to Twitter to state he will not attend the press conference or agree to the fight since Ridgondeaux will not submit to drug testing from VADA (Voluntary Anti-Doping Agency).

“Rigo’s team verbally agreed to VADA testing both online and in negotiations,” tweeted Donaire, who currently submits to year round VADA testing. “But now that the contract to start testing is in front of them, they are finding every excuse not to sign and delay the start of the testing. I have not signed my fight contract yet to fight him so I have no obligations to fight only him. It disappoints me that top fighters these days run from everything that will hold professional boxing integrity to the highest standard.”

Donaire went on to state that he will not entertain further negotiations with Ridgondeaux and will “immediately” start looking for other opponents.

At press time, Ridgondeaux has not released a statement.

*****************************************************************

I will always maintain that there is no excuse for any fighter to not take a drug test. If Donaire’s statements are true, he is well within his rights to turn down a fight from someone that may be punching him in the face while juiced on performance enhancing drugs.

With that said, this is the second big fight for Donaire that’s fallen through in the last few months. The Abner Mares failure can be placed solely on the Golden Boy-Top Rak feud. Ridgondeaux was the second best option. Who’s the third? Jonathan Romero holds the IBF super bantamweight title, so that may be Donaire’s best bet. The Filipino Flash would likely have an easy time with him, but it’s slim pickings unless he dares to make a jump to featherweight.

One other thing. It amazes me that after the debacle that was the Brandon Rios-Yuriorkis Gamboa negotiations, promoters still go forward with booking press conferences and other media obligations before a contract is signed.

The picture of this flower was taken when on mission to Costa Rica as a reminder that our faith is always in a constant cycle of growth

So what are you up to six days into the Lenten Season?   Last week I posted four things to consider adding to your life during Lent to grow and strengthen your faith.  As a quick refresher, I recommended to:

1. Do something unifying
2. Do something disciplined
3. Do something incarnational
4. Do something missional

My family has taken on this challenge and here’s of few of the highlights of what we’ve done to be intentional about adding to enhance the growth of our personal faith journeys’.

We went to a local pub to have dinner and be the presence of Christ in a non-Christian context. Getting out of our comfort zone is always challenging. Going to place where most would frown upon is an equally difficult venture. Pubs were so named because they were places where the public could be found. But no one can argue with going to a place with the purpose of sharing and modeling Christ to the public. Plus, it’s contextually incarnational & missional.

We participated the training session designed to prepare a mission team for an excursion to Mexico. As leaders of a mission organization, Missio Dei Ministries, one of our responsibilities includes  training and preparing people as they before the go on mission. Check one off for in the category of missional and discipling.

We threw a party at our house this weekend for 20 of our friends. Personal, I feel that we Christians don’t have enough parties. Parties are a great way to get to know people and build authentic relationships. Consequently, there is something quite beautify about opening your home to friends and acquaintances and having no agenda other than sharing a meal and enjoying one another’s company.  Parties are hospitably unifying, and in many cases, intentionally missional.

So, what have you been up to so far?  Can you share equally about the things you’ve added to strengthen your faith, and the faith of others, during Lent as you can about the things you’ve chosen to do without?

I’d like to hear what you are adding during Lent to grow and strengthen your faith.  I invite you to share what you are doing in the comments.

No action we perform is going to put God at the center of our lives. The tips in this series only work to clarify and solidify in our minds “Yes, that is what I want: for God to be at the center of my life.” Once that mindset is decided, God takes up the work alongside us, with us, to form a union in Him.

We must never underestimate the two-sidedness of this relationship; the urgent desire that God has for us to get to know Him. The whole reason Christ died was to set in place the spiritual mechanisms that let us and God be united. Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 1 and 2 that it is only by the power of the Holy Spirit that our hearts and lives become God-focused:

No one comprehends what is truly God’s except the Spirit of God. Now we have received that spirit so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God.  
1 Cor 2:11-12

Wanting A God-Centered Life Requires A Deeper Choice

Choosing to focus our lives on God only comes after a harder decision has been made: change. We have to want the inevitable changes that come as the Holy Spirit moves us into Godliness.

Paul says to the Galatians:

Walk by the spirit, and you will no longer gratify the desires of the flesh.
Gal 5:16

A God-centered life requires that we deny ourselves and let the Holy Spirit transform us into new beings entirely. This verse is not a commandment but a truth! When we choose to change, the Spirit clears out our sinful human habits- anything about us that does not worship God- and fills us with light to guide us toward ultimate righteousness.

Change is a painful and daunting task. It requires we do that one thing which is completely anathema to our Selves: submit. In the war between God and Self, Satan fights his hardest on the side of Self, and submission is what He fights against.

The Holy Spirit Helps Us

But even here we find comfort through the Holy Spirit! In this miserable struggle between Self and God, the Holy Spirit offers us the ultimate pass: we do not have to earn our Godliness. Technically we cannot. Before Christ, we were not worthy of God’s love. Now the Holy Spirit makes us worthy through no power of our own. All we have to do is submit to letting ourselves be changed. God does the rest. It’s still not easy, but at least it only requires one step.

Success Comes Through God Himself

But isn’t that beautiful?! Responsibility for our salvation does not lie in our hands! Our livelihood and flourishing success is not ours to worry about! What a comforting thought.

When we desire God to be at the center of our lives, changes will come that amaze and thrill us. Our hearts come to see the enormous value of empathy, love, compassion, and consideration. This is because our work is no longer our own. Our decisions aren’t guesses- we don’t worry that what we’re deciding is right, useful, effective, or righteous. We can trust that everything will be set up for us to the good of the Kingdom.

This is all because every move and prayer contributes to a higher project for which we are not ultimately responsible, and to which all of our contributions can only be put to use for good. The most mundane parts of our day gain meaning because God accepts our offer to let them contribute to His Kingdom.

God works all things for the good of those who love Him.
Romans 8:28

Our thoughts, passions, urges, and directions come from no other place than God himself. They go to no other place than God’s glory.

Practical Application- Change + Tips 1-5 = Trust

Build others up and let it change the way we speak. Pray regularly and let it change the way we use our time. Be responsible with our bodies and possessions and let it change the way we live. Concentrate on what and how much we sacrifice to God and let it change the way we think.

Feel the urge to submit to these changes, but also feel the urge to resist them. Where there is resistance, know that God is immediately at hand to discuss the matter. Waste no time with thinking “I’ll worry about that later” or “I wonder what that means?” God is always in our thoughts, available the instant an issue arises. We can ask for strength in the desire to overcome our natural sinful urges. We can ask for clarity to see how important it is that we overcome this temptation in the first place. We can pray to be successful, even if not a single ounce of ourselves actually wants to be. When we do this, God carries us through and set us down closer to His center.

Practically, this means we have to trust that those changes will be for the better of us and God’s Kingdom. We need to trust that they are at work even though we can’t feel them, and can’t see the end of the means of which we are a part; like ivy slowly covering a brick wall.

The Promised Result

Keep going in the faith, trust, and excitement that it will become easier and easier to find God as we search for Him. Our centers will get closer and closer to His, thus we’ll have less distance to travel. Get to know God so that we can contribute to His Kingdom. That’s the purpose of our lives.

TIP #5- WANT GOD TO BE THE CENTER OF OUR LIVES, AND HE WILL BE.

This post has been the final addition in the “Putting God At The Center” Series, a project of learning how we can bring our lives to focus on God.  The four previous posts are: Centering Our Conversations On God, Mealtime Prayer, Worshiping God By Worshiping Our Bodies, and We Worship Whatever We Sacrifice To. If this series has helped you, I and other readers would love to know how! Please comment, like, and share!

I bet Nietzsche would enjoy that title..?

Fred Nietzsche – lifelong practical joker, and inventor of the Theme from Kubrick’s `2001: A Space Odyssey’.

i.e. The great philosopher behind Thus Spake Zarathustra, and Beyond Good and Evil*… and who brought us the #1 best-selling book on humility, Why I Am So Wise (1888), which includes the chapter headings:

1) Why I Am So Wise

2) Why I Am So Clever

3) Why I Write Such Excellent Books - and:

4) Why I Am Destiny.

At any rate, here is why I think: Transmedia Is Destiny.

Why Transmedia Storytelling Is Destiny:

Namely, telling a narrative across multiple media platforms (e.g., feature film, game, novel, TV series, comic/graphic novel, etc)

NB – This diagram is simplified for 2-D illustrative purposes. (i.e., most Transmedia Storyworlds have more than 2 `key’ Themes, and many more Characters and Locations, than are indicated here.) – Velikovsky

The reason for this inevitability is because: evolution functions according to the 3 Laws of Holarchies.

Look at how hard Koestler is working here in this picture. Surely, he must have come up with a few good ideas, if he was thinking *that* hard.

The 3 Laws of Holarchies:

Mainly because: the evolution of culture works the same way as the evolution of biology.

Creativity + Genes = Biology 

Creativity + Memes = Culture

(The above model is an addition / variation to Simonton (2012) – Velikovsky 2013) 

To unpack this further, I need to refer to part of an essay in the book This Will Change Everything: Ideas That Will Shape the Future (2010).

`Evolution Changes Everything – Scott Sampson

Scott Sampson is adjunct professor of geology and geophysics at the university of Utah.

Evolution is the scientific idea that will change everything within the next several decades…

Today the commonly accepted concept of evolution is extremely narrow, confined largely to the realm of biology and a longstanding emphasis on mutation and natural selection.

In recent decades, this limited perspective has become further entrenched by the dominance of molecular biology and its “promise” of human-engineered cells and lifeforms. Emphasis has been placed almost entirely on generating diversity, a process referred to as `complexification’, reflecting the reductionist worldview that has driven science for four centuries.

Yet science has also begun to explore another key element of evolution: unification, which transcends the biological to encompass the evolution of physical matter.

The numerous and dramatic increases in complexity, it turns out, have been achieved largely through a process of integration, with smaller wholes becoming parts of larger wholes.

Note – What Sampson is referring to here, has a name: holarchies.

Still quoting Sampson (from, This Will Change Everything):

`Again and again, we see the progressive development of multipart individuals from simpler forms. Thus, for example, atoms become integrated into molecules, molecules into cells, and cells into organisms.’

The Holarchy of the Organism – from Funch (1995)

Still quoting Sampson (in, This Will Change Everything)::

At each higher, emergent stage, older forms are enveloped and incorporated into newer forms, with the end result being a nested, multilevel hierarchy.

At first glance, the process of unification appears to contravene the second law of thermodynamics, by increasing order over entropy.

Again and again during the past fourteen billion years, concentrations of energy have emerged and self-organized as islands of order amid a sea of chaos, taking the guise of stars, galaxies, bacteria, gray whales and (on at least one planet) a biosphere.

Although the process of emergence remains somewhat of a mystery, we can now state with confidence that the epic of evolution has been guided by counterbalancing trends of complexification and unification.

This journey has not been an inevitable, deterministic march, but a quixotic, creative unfolding in which the future could not be predicted.’

(Sampson in Brockman 2010: 1-2)

Before I return to how this applies to Transmedia, I first beg to differ on the above point, namely that “the process of emergence remains a mystery”. I would suggest: The laws of holarchies, when combined the evolutionary algorithm – and with complexity thresholds (for example, 10 billion cells in the human cerebral cortex, 10 billion is a `magic number’ in terms of complexity thresholds) – unification emerges.

So, Transmedia is simply the unification of all media into: holistic story.

Maybe consider the following: (to take just a `film & game’ transmedia story)

1) Genre (including hybrid genres) tend to command storyworlds. (An obvious example might be the #19 ROI film, Star Wars 1977. It’s a space opera. Some commentators consider it `soft’ science fiction. So the Transmedia that emerges from it also tends to be space opera, and often has other genres combined, e.g. a love story, a coming-of-age story, a revenge tale, etc. All the Transmedia of any storyworld tends to all stay within the same genre, though may well include genre-hybrids.)

2) Storyworld – is underneath `Genre’ in the holarchy. The Genre commands/dictates the tropes (memes) of the individual (and sometimes, overlapping) Transmedia stories. The story always must integrate with the Genre (or, if not: must `bend’ the Genre `rules’ in novel-and-appropriate ways.) (e.g., The Storyworld contains cultural values: the Empire is evil; the Rebellion is good; the Jedi mythology, `Order 66′, etc). It also has a physical, cultural, economic, ethical and philosophical framework.

3) Platform: e.g., Films – Games – Novels – TV series – Comics. These are all commanded/dictated by the Storyworld. Each platform does certain things well (novels: character, film: spectacle; games: immersive interactivity; TV: character arcs; blogs: character backstory and insight; etc) and therefore each platform tends to integrate with specific certain `aspects’ of the Storyworld.

4) Themes – are commanded by (and, integrate with) the Genre, Storyworld and Platform in each case. There is quite a lot of evidence (e.g. in the Top 20 ROI Films) to suggest the 3 most viral memes (as: Themes) are: Family, Life & Death, and Justice. (Good vs Evil is perhaps too obvious, as without them: there isn’t conflict, and `conflict is drama’.)

5) The Characters – are commanded by (and, integrate with) all the above levels in the hierarchy. As experienced Transmedia creators know – (as per: the 2nd Law of Holarchies) the various characters in Transmedia tend to `compete’ with each other, to be the `star’ of their own `show’ (story thread).

6) The Locations – are commanded by (and, integrate with) the Characters. (The locations are generally also commanded by the Genre, given Genre(s) is at the top level of the holarchy.)

i.e The cultural evolutionary algorithm (i.e. meme selection, variation, and transmission) produces diversity (story complexification), while at the same time the 3 laws of holarchies produce unity (i.e. story unification).

Top View (simplified) of a Transmedia Holarchy. Some central storyworld characters span all [5+] platforms, others are platform-specific. [Velikovsky 2013]

All of which, is why:

Also – if you need a great guide to Transmedia `Bible’ creation, see Gary Hayes’ excellent Guide to Transmedia Bible Creation, here.

And – for a great overview of the history of Transmedia practice, see Christy Dena’s amazing PhD on it, here.

On Process – How Do Stories Emerge? (Whether Transmedia or not)

A study of the Top 20 ROI Films reveals no one clear pattern: The initial inspiration for each of those films varies wildly. In some cases it began with: a character in a situation – in others, a theme – in others a mood/tone. Arguably all 20 film stories ended up in the form:

1) A Character - 

2) Has a Problem/Goal

3) And must make: a sacrifice

4) Which results in: the solution / the goal achievement

(or: not – given that all of the Top 20 ROI Films are `Villain Triumphant’ stories).

The first initial “idea” (meme) of a film story itself can clearly emerge (i.e. can be consciously recognized, by a writer/film-maker) anywhere, within the Story holarchy below. (Every writer’s process is possibly different, just as: many people conceptualize / think very differently.)

Holarchy of Film Story (Velikovsky 2012)

That is to say, for example – a filmmaker (and/or: Transmedia Writer / Creator) may begin with (say) a character (e.g. `Mad’ Max Rockatansky, or say, `Guy’ and `Girl’ [from the film `Once'], or Napoleon Dynamite, Rocky Balboa (`Rocky’), Laurie and Michael Myers [Halloween], or Luke Skywalker, etc), around which, the other memes in the holarchy can then appear/emerge. Or even a Setting, such as with the film SAW (which was originally set in: an elevator).

Notably all these stories/screenplays went through many drafts (notably, all except Paranormal Activity and The Blair Witch Project, neither of which had scripts when shot – but instead had Outlines/Treatments, from which the actors improvised).

But – How and Why do they (the story memes / ideas in each case) appear/emerge? – In which order do they typically appear/emerge?

(Devil’s Advocate: Do film stories ever appear/emerge, “fully formed”, ready to type up into a screenplay, in the writer’s mind? Like Coleridge claimed happened with his poem Kubla Khan?)

The empirical evidence of how the top 20 ROI films were created would strongly suggest not – and, this is also a Romantic view of Creativity, for which no verifiable evidence exists (rather than a Rational view, such as is offered by Csikszentmihalyi with the systems model).

Alternately, for example, a screen idea may begin from: a title (for example: the film Friday The 13th began this way, and was always influenced by the success of Halloween) – or, even a single line of dialog, around which the other memes/holons are then successively added, by the Writer.

In each case, the evidence on how these top 20 most-memetic / most-viral films emerged / were created reveals that: starting with one `key’ meme, the Writer (and or/ a Screen Idea Work Group) used their habitus to select, vary, and include (or discard) related memes, until the story was assembled in the above (film story/screenplay) form.

The process is clearly iterative and recursive; there is no distinct pattern to the order of how the individual memes (story ideas) in the top 20 ROI film stories were selected (by the screenwriter in each case) – and their stories thus constructed, therefore – the writer/filmmaker obviously has free will (agency) in terms of the order in which they select, vary and transmit these memes (screen ideas), into their `final’ screen idea.

However the above film story structure is obviously predetermined overall; it is of course the structure of conventional feature film screen ideas – and therefore, of theatrical narrative fiction feature films. The writer’s overall film story (as: a memeplex) must conform to this structure in the finished film, regardless of the order in which the individual holonic memes (ideas) appeared, when the story and screenplay were created.

In short, it doesn’t matter, when – or how – all these memes appear (or: where a Writer gets their ideas from, or even, what that initial idea is – as `bad/unfilmic’ story ideas will likely be `de-selected’ during the development process, which includes pitching the idea to experts in the film storytelling field), as long as when the final form of the story meme/holon emerges as a screenplay, it matches the above structure.

So – a writer can begin with: a character, or alternately – a setting, or even an image of a character/s in a setting, or a theme, a line of dialog, an action, or a potentially infinite number of memes… All that matters is that the final meme (the overall story) emerges, fully formed, possibly in the screenplay – but necessarily in the film… (and obviously, some story memes can spin out into: Transmedia / other platforms, as the story holarchy evolves / grows…)

And – just to step back to `the big picture’, for a moment -

Everything single thing that exists is a holon, and a holarchy.

Neils Bohr saw the structure of the atom was like a solar system. – In the words of the great philosopher, The Beatles… Holarchies: they are both `Within You – and – Without You’

It’s “turtles, all the way down” – (and also – “up”…)

So, given that: everything tends `downwards’ towards complexity, and also `upwards’ towards unification – Transmedia was therefore inevitable (and: will become ever more pervasive).

And, as new media forms are subsequently created (beyond: YouTube webseries, and beyond hybrid webseries games…

…and beyond Augmented Reality Games / Augmented Reality Dramas, and ever more pervasive narratives (etc)

And – beyond novel/game/film Transmedia hybrids… e.g.: http://am-so-as.webs.com/

- As they continue to evolve and diversify, all these forms (platforms) will at the same time tend to be unified, into: Transmedia Storytelling.

And – as a much bigger idea – what this (potentially) points to – is:

`The End of Analytic Science – Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

The idea that will change the game of knowledge is that it is more important to understand events, objects and processes in their relationship with one another than in their singular structure.

Western science has achieved wonders with its analytic focus, but it is now time to take synthesis seriously…

How shall this breakthrough occur? Current systems theories are necessary but not sufficient, as they tend not to take values into account.

Perhaps after this realization sets in, we shall have to rewrite science from the ground up.’

(Csikszentmihalyi in Brockman 2010: 348-9)

And – this is probably as good a time as any, to re-present:

Velikovsky’s Three Laws of Transmedia (2012)

(0) All film story franchises `jump the shark’ in their 3rd installment if the original creator (writer-hyphenate) is not directly involved. (See: Terminator 3, JAWS 3D, and the Predator, Alien, Freddy & Jason movies). Note: Sequels are not actually Transmedia anyway. (Which is why this is the Zeroth Law.)

(1) Any story that makes a > 1000% ROI on its launch platform (e.g. novel, film, game, TV) will spawn Transmedia stories in at least 2 other media/platforms. (This is not the same as an adaptation, or franchising. This also does not include user-generated content, such as Fan Fiction Forums and Fan/User-Generated Wikis.)

(2) The most successful (pervasive) Transmedia stories include `amateur detective stories’ and, also require the user to be one (i.e. an amateur detective), in a quest (this may or may not include an Alternate Reality Game.) (Examples: The Matrix [What is the matrix?], The Blair Witch Project [Is the Blair Witch real?], Star Wars [Who is Darth Vader / Luke's father?], Harry Potter [What happened to Harry's parents?], Twin Peaks [Who killed Laura Palmer?], etc)

(3) As with Moore’s Law (which is not actually 18 months) – every 2 years, a new `storytelling platform’ emerges as: popular (achieves mass-market penetration), and provides a new media platform that is annexed by Transmedia. (e.g., Blogging: 1999; iPods: 2001; iTunes 2003; YouTube 2005; Facebook & Twitter 2007; smartphones 2009; tablets 2011; geo-located augmented reality tagging 2013, Google AR glasses 2015, etc).

So – one of the tricks with Transmedia is to create a successful launch platform.

Say, a feature film (or, novel, etc), that goes viral. (i.e that people recommend – via word-of-mouth…)

For this reason (among others) I’ve been studying the Top 20 ROI (i.e. most viral) Feature Films of the past 70 years. Two of these films/stories were `Transmedia on launch’ (notably, Star Wars 1977 was not). I also wrote a paper on it. If it’s of interest, you can read a draft of it, here.

And, some more about that (truly excellent) IDNet 2013 Transmedia conference, here.

And – for additional info on Transmedia, I also recently published an article in Screen Education quarterly journal, called ‘Brave New Storyworlds: An Introduction to Creating Transmedia Narratives‘, (Screen Education, Vol. 68, Summer 2013 Edn.)

Also, I think my StoryAlity research is Transmedia…

i.e. 1) STORYALITY Screenwriting Manual, 2) a STORYALITY i-doc (interactive documentary) – and 3) a `Creative Practice Theory’ game demo.

StoryAlity transmedia. The Screenwriting Manual, the Interactive documentary, the `Creative Practice Theory’ Game demo. (Game demo image courtesy of Positech Games UK, KUDOS.)

(Also, this STORYALITY blog.)

- Thanks for reading it,

Thoughts..? …Comments always welcome.

JT

PS – I also gave a paper on Transmedia at the National Young Writers’ Festival back in 2011 – if it’s of interest, it’s viewable online as a PPT, here. (It’s general & transhistorical enough, that, in my view, all of it still applies…)

——————————————–

JT Velikovsky is a produced feature film screenwriter and million-selling transmedia writer-director-producer. He has been a professional story analyst for major film studios, film funding organizations, and the national writer’s guild. For more see: http://on-writering.blogspot.com/

The above is an adapted excerpt from my ongoing doctoral thesis: “Understanding And Exploring The Relationship Between: Creativity; Theories Of Narratology; Screenwriting; And Narrative Fiction Feature Film-Making Practices.” It is presented here for the benefit of fellow screenwriting and filmmaking researchers.

———————————————-

NOTES

* (which, was also a pretty cool videogame, i.e. Beyond Good And Evil. Though – not so much related to Nietzsche’s book, of the same name.)

 REFERENCES

Csikszentmihalyi M – in Brockman, John (2010), This Will Change Everything: Ideas That Will Shape the Future (1st edn.; New York, NY: Harper Perennial) xxiii, 390 p.

Sampson S – in Brockman, John (2010), This Will Change Everything: Ideas That Will Shape the Future (1st edn.; New York, NY: Harper Perennial) xxiii, 390 p.

Funch, F (1995), Holarchies, http://www.worldtrans.org/essay/holarchies.html

Nietzsche, F (1888) Ecce Homo (Or: Why I Am So Wise), reprinted (2005) NY, Penguin Classics. 

In this short text I’ll reflect the contemplated ideas and practices which I have encountered in my academic research as cultural anthropologist. I will not bother to present sources and references – perhaps except few which I can easily produce – as this text is intended as flow of thought, to be quickly summarized while during the coffee break before continuing on my other assignments.

It seems to me that the historical development of ideas points to certain unification and blending of peripheral ideas into more universal philosophy; the religious thinking has been pioneering the unification via its dogmas, namely stating that people should treat their neighbor as they would treat themselves. However, human psyche was not nearly prepared for such idea, excluding some altruistic individuals throughout history of mankind. Regardless that the religious texts also make gross distinction between us and them, good and evil, its other currents have emphasized unification. Besides, religion has been used as a tool of manipulation and control by the ruling class to brought about shortsighted unification of nation,  and hence may have been deliberately forged while the original message may have been attempt for psychological unification of opposites (for example gnostic and alchemical interpretation of religious texts and dogmas, as C. G. Jung supposed).

Besides of religion, more “scientific” philosophies have proceeded along similar path. Furthermore the development of technology, especially transportation and communication, seems to point in direction of globalization – the word with negative connotations as it may be should not be interpret here as forced tyranny of some global elite, but instead a natural development of human kind. Human being has always been curious, or otherwise we would not have remote and peripheral societies but on the contrary we would have largely remained immobile on most habitable regions of Earth. It has been quite unarguable proven that there has been cultural exchange and trade long before modern societies emerged. It is quite likely, that there have always been individuals whose curiosity exceeded the desire for comfort, who defying the dangers of historical wilderness travelled vast distances to satisfy their curiosity.

Today travelling and communication is easy. Cultural exchange takes many forms and the pace of it only accelerates. Besides of those who had the curiosity towards other cultures and places, there has probably always been those, who have regarded new and exciting harmful and dangerous, even intimidating. It is no different today. Instead of adapting into the globalizing world they withdraw into corner like a beast and bite anyone they find threatening. They blame others – for example immigrants and politics responsible for taking them in at the first place – for their personal misery while being completely unaware that their misery is their own fault. The way I see it, the way of the new world is globalization – not forced, but naturally emerging from historical premises, few of them mentioned above. Without a doubt, the resistance to changes must have been beneficial property of mankind in some context, but it is hardly that today, especially when exaggerated and projected in violent and destructive manner. Such behavior is degrading and dividing, it is the cause of divisions and wars which with contemporary arsenal may prove extremely harmful to human kind. Today we do not need division but unification, for it seems that it is the only way to save Earth from becoming uninhabitable.

As briefly mentioned above, the globalization should not be forced because then it inevitably fails, for forcing creates resistance. Instead it should be allowed to happen “naturally” while supported. People and societies should not be strictly governed – instead people themselves should become enlightened and responsible. The change, if it is ever to occur, should begin from individual. I know that this is perhaps too much to hope, but should we ever succeed to create harmonious society and to live happy life, then we should first and foremost pay attention to ourselves, to our psyche, to bring about the change within ourselves by conquering hate and creed by understanding, love and altruism.

There is one habit I seem to have developed in the last year or so. It is my ritual for when i arrive in areas which have cultural, environmental, historical and spiritual importance. I paint myself with Ochre.

It is so easy for us to be transported to a special place, we hop into our cars, we pop some finite mineral resources into our tanks and drive off. After a bit of driving and perhaps a GPS device, we arrive at our destination and take in a breath of ancient air.
Done. We’re here. Lets go explore!
This habit of arriving at a special place and not taking the time to acknowledge the history and significance if that place is a result of our culture and socialization – a culture which is still in it’s infancy.

For many many years, aboriginal cultures walked. They walked from place to place, dependent on the availability of food. If the land-base was starting to decline, Aboriginal people moved to other areas to let those first ecological systems recover, an example of true sustainability.
This movement from place to place took with it a reverence, a respect, an actual journey from a place with little, to one with plenty. A transition which created a mental shift in the mind from one concerning the need to survive, to eat, to relocate, to a mental space of plenty, of richness. This reverence and respect is what western culture is missing. Our cultural adolescence demands immediacy, constant stimuli, discovery and spiritual larceny. We strive to see the one-big-thing which makes an area special, the famous tall tree, the much talked about water hole, the mysterious valley, and we are so focused on doing something and that we forget about being something. I’m guilty of it, we all are – we want to get there now, we want to find it, and we want to take a piece of it home with us to put on our mantle. Like when you take a prettier shell than ordinary home with you, a mossy rock, a sample of black sand from a New Zealand beach, or in my case, the epiphytic orchid which blew off from a tree onto a road. We take because we want to have a little reminder of the spiritual essence of a place.

I find myself having to be reminded that when i go to a national park, nature reserve or conservation area, its not about doing, seeing, or taking something from that place, its about being in that place, and being satisfied by knowing that you can absorb the beauty of a special environment without physically taking something from it.

So what’s happened is that now, whenever i go somewhere which is special, i hold a stone in my hand, and i engage with it. I say hello to it! I say hello and thanks to the environment i am in. I acknowledge it and respect it. I combine the landscape and my body together to form a mutual bond, a new being – a being which only exists in that time, is born and dies then and there. I grind a stone against another and mix it with water or saliva until it is a fine paste. I apply it to my skin, tracing along the lines of my veins, across my face and chest. The land is as close to my body as it ever will be, millimeters away from my blood stream where the particles of iron in my blood are almost close enough to touch the particles of iron in the rock. Then i wait and i am. I am truly being. The ochre dries on my skin and it is then that i feel true unification, the end of a mental process of consolidation with the land. I might look a little weird to others, but i don’t give a crap, this is my way of showing that i have truly arrived at a special place, where i will respect and acknowledge the ancient beauty of a place that i love. I then wash the ochre off my skin to see the minerals return to the land from which they came, taking with it a sample of my skin – the place was in my skin, and now my skin is in the place.

Unification – participation – cultural innovation.

I answered today that both are correct, and here is why: there is no such thing as human nature. At least not for Machiavelli. And this is a point that I agree with. The formulation for the argument of Machiavelli being a proto materialist as well as a realist is the following:

Human beings have no original nature, but rather, their behavior is determined from social relations that define their political reality. In order for the conditions of social reality to change, Italy must undergo unification. The ruler must necessarily be on the side of the populace, or at the very least he must not let the populace hate him. From this point, Italy may reach the social preconditions for a republican government, based on the consciousness or the necessity against (all) leaders and for the general will. The tension between centralization and democratic republicanism is a clear one. Machiavelli is the first thinker to show that the conditions of man’s inner reality and theorizations for what social organization in Italy might be, stem from the real material and social constraints of his time.

Machiavelli, too, articulates a tract for the unification of Italy at the very moment it is least realistic–as Althusser would say, at the furthest limit of the imaginary, Machiavelli imagines the actual.

Let me explain how Machiavelli is a pragmatist and a theorist: It is the case, in Machiavelli’s Italy, that all areas surrounding it had undergone or were undergoing unification. The exception is Germany. The preface and the final chapter of the Prince make it clear that the unification of Italy into a unified state is necessary if Italy and its diminutive cities were to avoid destruction. Let alone military humiliation, factionalization of national interests subordinated to the Roman Catholic Church.

Nationalization, Machiavelli supposes is a historical necessity, not a nicety for convenience’s sake. The pages of the Prince outline how a prince might acquire a new principality without making mention of his “master plea” until the very end. The emotive outcry for an Italian unifier comes from a complex voice. It is Machiavelli the citizen, not the theorist, who projects his own voice into and maybe over the people of Italy. From where is he speaking? How do we know that this prince and this unified state will be successful or even habitable?

Now, this is where I get to the second part of my argument. There is a teleological role of history and government at play within and between the Prince and the Discourses that is fully realized in the second work on republics. Machiavelli says it plainly enough in the beginning of the discourses in his discussion of Rome and of cities, generally. Where factions and the masses might not be able to come to a consensus on the rules and policies in a city, a single founder is certainly capable of doing that. Machiavelli states that after the ruler dies (or, can I suggest, is killed) the population is in a position to maintain and expand the state.

On the topic of “expansion” one of my colleagues had an interesting thought: he said that the expansion of ever more categories is progress, intellectually. It is the expansion of the imagined possible. And I thought that this was a tremendously interesting way to articulate what is happening between the dynamics of two different moments in Machiavelli’s thought.

Therefore, it is not enough to claim that “in one situation, Machiavelli outlines what will happen in X state as a republic where in Y state he will outline how a prince may come to acquire a new territory. No, one must make sense of the changing circumstances in “human nature” as well as in government as a response to changing social relations.

I would also like to point out how very much I thought about Lenin while reading the Prince. In further support for my nascent thesis, here is a quick line from Michael Hardt on Lenin and state power: “the state, Lenin counters, is always an instrument of oppression, and it stands in the way of the revolutionary goal to create a new, fuller democracy,” (x). (From Michael Hardt Presents).  Thomas Jefferson).