menjelang kemerdekaan...

TANAH AIR
Allahyarham Dato' Usman Awang

Engkau, Tanah Air, pemilik perut yang berbudi,
Penampung hujan, penyedut sinar matari,
Lahirlah anak-anakmu dari semaian-semaian petani.

Engkau, ibu murni, dengan jasa abadi,
Berdetik di denyut nafas kami,
Kerana kita adalah satu dan sama dipunyai.

Telah kau rasa segala seperti kamu,
Dalam kengerian perang dadamu dibongkar besi,
Di mana-mana wajahmu tidak pernah mati.

Tapi begitu sejarah hidup zaman-berzaman,
Yang pernah merangkul pahlawan kemerdekaan,
Mereka sujud dalam kaku memohon perlindungan.

Bukankah dengan kasih dan harapan,
Kau tenggelamkan mereka dalam dakapan,
Di mana bunga ganti nisan bertaburan?

Negara baru di atas rongga jantungmu,
Akan tegak bertapak dalam kebebasan,
Cinta antara kita wahyu dari Tuhan.

a merdeka thought

The sheer intensity of the recent uproar and controversy over Sepet's win at a national level film award has totally caught me by surprise; apparently, some members of our film industry does not approve of the jury's decision to bestow the highest award to the movie Sepet.

Many of my friends who have watched the movie said that Sepet is the only truly Malaysian movie produced so far; having watched the movie myself, I find myself in total agreement with them.

Sepet is a movie that any normal, self-respecting Malaysian could relate to. It bears completely to the audience the honest albeit uncomfortable truths of the realities of life in Malaysia. Granted, some of the potrayals in the film might be 'enhanced' to increase its impact on the audience, but the potrayals draw their basis from real life facts.

Therefore, for the movie to receive such intense opposition is beyond me. If the detractors for the movie felt the potrayals in the film repulsive, then they should re-examine and introspect their own self and ideals rather than channelling their disgust at the images reflected in the film itself.

Besides, cleaning one's reflection on a mirror will not make one's face any cleaner. Could it be that the truth hurts so much that we couldn't bear to see and stare at our own reflection?

I realized that some might oppose to the Sepet's win purely because it triumphs over big-budget movies such as Puteri Gunung Ledang; some people felt that the fact PGL is a big budget movie alone makes it worthy to reap the top prizes. Such reasoning only typifies the prevailing yet misguided Malaysian attitude of the 'most expensive is always the best.'

However, we cannot deny our own reflection just as we cannot run away from our own shadow; either we confront it face-on or it will haunt us forever. Therefore, I believe that we can no longer remain ignorant to the slow decay of our country and its people.

We must wake up to the harsh realities of the state of our country; we must be willing to have a good stare at ourselves - our successes and our failings; we must seek ways to root out the endemic problems that have been gradually entrenched into the notion of a properous and harmonious nation initially propounded by our founding fathers.

The awareness must come swiftly and actions taken immediately before it incurs irreparable damage on the well-being of our country and its people. However, I believe that a sustained and concerted change could not occur without the realization of two things.

First, the creation of an equal playing field in all aspects of economy, education and social issues which allows a person to advance based purely on his merits rather than his connections. The world may not be flat but the playing field between all Malaysians should be.

Second, an unwavering commitment towards transparency, integrity and accountability in every level of society - from the country's top leaders to a lowly janitor. After all, if one is working solely for the betterment of one's country and the people one serves, why should there be anything to hide to begin with?

In Malaysia, those who discussed these kinds of things will eventually find themselves bumping into a wall called 'affirmative action for the Bumiputra' - a series policies put in place to safeguard and secure the political, economic and social position and well-being of the Bumiputras.

But is the wall really that insurmountable? Does it really impede the efforts to reinvent the Malaysian society for the betterment of the country?

I believe that the real cause for the affirmative actions have been betrayed. Coupled this with the inherent apathy among the Malays, the policies have not managed to produce the targeted results even after being put in place for nearly 20 years.

The aim to create a class of independent, resourceful and towering Malays have only increased their appetite for subsidies, loans and govermental assistance. True to its name, Melayu have indeed become Me-LAYU.

To stem such decay, Malays must be willing to reflect on their qualities and failings besides being prepared to come out of their comfort zone. They must be willing to change themselves.

Some Malays might balk at such suggestions, but they need to realize that it is their future which is at stake. More importantly, it is our country's future at stake as well.

If the Malays then are willing to give the Chinese and Indians citizenship during the pre-Independence era, then the Malays now must be willing to initiate a radical make-over of themselves in order to ensure the survival of our country and the other races.

The Malays must be willing to make some sacrifices or pengorbanan just like their forefathers had done.

Of course, to lead and rally the Malays to make such a move requires an honest, firm and enlightened leader who puts the long term gains of the country before the his own short term political gains. He must not only preach but also practices the ideals he espouse.

After all, one could not freely preach others while at the same time be living in sins. That said, Malaysians must also be courageous enough make our leaders accountable for their words and actions.

Indeed, some might point to the historical and social inertia which continually prevents us from embracing change. It is one thing to remember our past so as to not lose our head but it is another thing altogether to use our past as a convenient excuse not to change.

We may be known by our races now but it need not be the case in the future; for instance, I look forward to the day when we need not worry about not having enough Malay or Indian influence or dances in a cultural perfomance. Rather, a Malay can happily look at an Indian dance and say, 'That's a Malaysian dance' and that should be good enough for all of us.

But for now, a true Malaysian is a lonely person.

Kassim Ahmad, a thinker and philosopher mentioned in his recent interview with the Sun that nearly 30 years have passed and no fundamental change have occured in our country and unless anything is done soon, we're doomed.

Judging from the reaction received by Sepet, I too have a reason to be apprehensive about Malaysia's future and the direction our country will take. But then again, Kassim Ahmad has been around for nearly 70 years while I am still 20 years old with a lot of more years to spare, God willing.

I can only pray that I won't be repeating his gloomy forecast about our country's future when I reached his age.

Selamat Hari Merdeka Malaysia...

critic vs. friend

Certain turn of events in the past few days have forced me to re-evaluate the surrounding circumstances of being a friend and a critic.

When you criticized someone, does that mean that you are no longer that person's friend? Obviously the proposition contained in this question is terribly absurd for it logically follows that if the answer is yes, it means that when we befriend someone, we could not and should not criticize at all.

After all, a true friendship emerged stronger if it survives the criticism rather than quickly falling apart right?

But I am not talking about those kinds of simplistic circumstances; I am referring to the cordialities and courtesies one should always exhibit and offer to one's friends - should one do away with it completely when one criticizes one's friend? Will turning off one's politeness makes the criticism more stinging, more piercing, more effective?

I believe that sometimes in my zeal to criticize and comment, I may have forgotten that the person I am commenting is a friend of mine - someone whom I had the honour and pleasure of knowing.

It's a funny thing but sometimes when you criticizes a friend, all your past experiences with him, all the memories and the strong bond of friendships forged seemed to be conveniently thrown out the window the instant you utter your first remark.

In the short term, you may feel a sense of satisfaction or even vindication of being able to convey your criticisms and comments to your friend. But once that feeling disappears, a sense of regret may take over and you wished that you could have been a little more tactful and understanding.

I believe that this is exactly what has occupied my mind for the past few days; in my haste to ensure my suggestions are effectively conveyed across, I may have forgotten my manners.

I mean, I'm not one of the judges of Malaysian Idol who is at the liberty at firing blunt and direct criticisms to complete strangers without any remorse. Rather, I am commenting and criticizing a friend; therefore, I felt that the rules, manners and cordialities one usually expects in a friendship still apply in such situations.

The bottom line is that being a friend and being a critic are not mutually exclusive of each other; you can still be good at one of the roles without abandoning too much of the ideals of its counterpart.

I am not saying that I regretted saying the things I've said but I just think that I should be a bit more gentler and polite next time in the diction of my comments.

Indeed, we should do well to remember that the slow, gentle drip of water is just as effective and powerful as the forceful poundings of the waves in changing the shapes of rocks.

see no evil, hear no evil, do no evil?

Admittedly, these past few days have been an 'interesting' one for me - a mix of disappoinment, surprise, despair, joy, exasperation and relief; one could say that I got more than what I bargain for when I came to KL on Sunday.

I have realized a long time ago that I am inclined to be a non-conformist and a bit of a rebel whenever I am in a group of people.

Even before some of my friends alerted me on the 'difficulties' and 'friction' that might arise in the course of my work with this certain group of people, I could foresee that it may not be a smooth sailing all the way to the end.

Add in my rebellious inclinations and I can say that my presence may even stir up a storm. With that forecast in mind, I have tried to exercise some restraint over the things I would say or do since the beginning.

It is often said that you cannot deflect a storm from its predetermined path, but you can only try to avoid being in its way. Therefore, the storm came and went just as predicted and I had the unfortunate experience of bearing the full force and brunt of it.

Some of my friends were slightly dissatisfied with the way some things are proceeding within a particular group and I agreed with what they have said.

Therefore, I decided to suggest a few things to give more structure to the group, streamline the division of tasks and point out to them the need for greater urgency. I also offered some of my personal views on the proposed meeting they were planning to have.

Considering what had indirectly transpired afterwards, I would say that I didn't regret saying the things I've said in the proposal but I regretted for not having to put them in a more tactful and less blunt manner; I would like to believe that the nature of my suggestions not the actual of my suggestions that might caused some discomfort among the other group members.

I have continually tried to remind myself that they would never be bothered by such things. I am giving them the benefit of the doubt by denying my fears that some of them might have been offended with my suggestions. Instead, I would like to believe that I am worrying over nothing and that all these fears are the result of my wild imagination and unchecked paranoia.

If my speculations are proven to be unfounded, then I should rightfully apologize for my behavior and will gladly remove myself from the group. However, if there is any indication otherwise, I will definitely consider removing myself from the group.

I intended none harm, said none harm and did none harm; if that is not enough to keep me within the group, I may be better of not being in it.

the measure of one's success

The question of the recognition of one's achievements is always a tricky one; should one be contended with one's achievements even if others around doesn't approve of it? Some people only care about how they feel about their achievements even if the rest of the world abhors them; for them, the only recognition worthy of their attention is their own.

Not that there is anything inherently wrong with that premise, but some people tend to stretch the meaning of that statement to the extreme; in order to satisfy their insatiable appetite for instant glory and recognition, they are usually willing to take the short route to extol themselves which is normally frought with dubiousness and complicity.

What makes the whole affair a lot more troubling is that the credit is often not given where it is due; these recognitions lack sincerity and honest admiration and serves only as a superficial decoration.

But then again, the question of honesty might not be of utmost importance to those who will do anything to obtain the recognitions they seek in the first place. For them, the ends do justify the means.

What is even more worrying is when people in high position of power displays such deplorable and shameful attitude, where it can wreak havoc with the long term well-being of an organization.

I think such attitude is more common among those who have always been under the authority of someone else; when their bond with their authoritative ruler is gradually weaken, they have a tendency to display a streak of independence by wiping off any traces of their former subjugation.

They seek to differentiate themselves as much as possible from their former masters even if it means embarking or adopting something totally radical that does not suit their inherent persona, nature and values.

Obviously such efforts are not always reprehensible, but when the sentimental desires to rewrite and reform oneself take precedence over the practical desires for actual, concrete progress, one might end up dismantling the functioning system that has been set in place by one's predecessors. The single step forward one takes might leave you two steps behind.

After nearly 50 years of gaining independence, I felt that Malaysia is still trapped in such a mindset. On one hand, we want to assert our own self, to proudly speaks our own national language, to create our own world-class students and workers and develop our nation according to a truly Malaysian mould.

On the other hand, discussions over crucial issues of national interest such as the medium of instruction in our education or the leveling of economic playing field still draw heated and emotional reactions from several groups which ultimately stiffled the move towards the creation of a unified and equal nation.

Furthermore, the confluence of lack of self-confidence coupled with sheer incompetence, the stiffling atmosphere of unequal opportunities and deep racial segregations has caused the confident striding steps taken by our forefathers towards the goals mentioned above to gradually falter and slowed down to a crawl.

Now, the sheer diversity which makes us unique as a country is widely perceived as the very thing that is holding us back.

But I do not believe in that; our diversity is an inevitable fact of our life as a Malaysian which all of us - from the politicians to the students - have to learn to accept and appreciate. On its own, it does not serve to hinder us back or propel us forward but could be guided to go either way under a skillful and firm hand.

Our country is nearly half a century old and it will be a sad and unfair reflection of a Malaysian's ingenuity, maturity and character if we could not bring ourselves together and figure out a way to move forward confidently by gradually shedding our prejudices and cynicism, rejecting excessive materialistic desires and casting away our paralysing apathy.

If such problems are left unattended and not immediately adressed, we may find ourselves moving backwards in the near future; and that will be very sad indeed.

a cause for change

Consider the following situation: friend A who is strong-willed and a pleasant company to be around with but is incurably dishonest and friend B who is resourceful and talented but tends to be careful to the extent of extreme hesitation.

Friend A is not ashamed to flagrantly distort and exaggerate the facts of his life and his accomplishments; friend B has grown too comfortable with his life and the sense of security it has accorded to him to the point that any possibilities for personal betterment seemed reprehensible to him.

In short, one of them have an excessive desire to become more that what he really is and the other is afraid to become more than what he possibly could and capable of; here's a toast to stability!

Friend A argued that it is unhealthy for others to doubt his achievements because he believed that - as he put it himself - "everyone has the innate ability to realise his potential to its fullest given that he worked hard enough."

The statement is perfectly agreeable to most people; but if taken at face value, it seemed to justify his somewhat gradiose claims and stories, leaving no room for scrutinization; he can go about distorting and exaggerating facts without any qualms because others do not have any right to question them or if based on his logic, anything is possible if one works hard enough.

People often say that if you work hard enough, you can reach for the stars; but I doubt that they meant it to be taken literally.

If the claims and stories start to contradict each other, bordering on spatial and temporal impossibility, no amount of 'hard work' or 'effort' can make them agree with each other; mere mortals are not able to turn water into wine.

As tempting as it might be for me to 'publicly' expose the inconsistencies in his claims and stories with the distant hope that it will eventually bring him back to the ground, I have decided to bring the matter up to him and allow him to set his records straight.

I must admit that this involves a huge leap of faith for me as he have never gave me a strong and consistent reason to completely trust him. Even though believing in someone is far less wearying than doubting them, it should not be done at the expense of the truth.

As for friend B, I felt that he has grown a little too complacent with his current position; one will be hard pressed to find any fault about this, but he himself is not too happy with it either - he often complains about the dull monotony of his life and how dissatisfied he is with it.

I think when you are continually dissatisfied about something which you are supposed to be extremely fond of, then something is wrong somewhere and it would be wise for you to stop for while and re-examine your motives.

Besides, what do you do when you found out that the wine doesn't taste as good as you expect it would?

However, most people have a certain amount of emotional inertia which makes them intrinsicly resistant to change or even the mere thought of change; being cooped up for a long time in a single place does not serve to remove the comfortable sense of security and control which firmly withhelds one from embracing change and improvement.

Indeed, a person have to muster a great deal of courage and preseverance to abandon one's lofty and well-to-do position for better and greener pastures. It might be a rough and abscure path but you will never fully comprehed its worth until one has travelled it for yourself.

I think the lack of change which will eventually lead to stagnation and deterioration should be a good enough reason to nudge oneself to start one's journey down that path; everyone have the capacity to better themselves and it is a tremendous waste to let that opportunity slip away.

However, the zeal to better and improve oneself should always be grounded in reality and not allowed take operatic proportions and grandeur; to do so would cause one's true intentions to be unduly questioned - even by well-meaning individuals.

hazy weather, hazy minds?

Several issues that has been in the news lately got me thinking about how powerful perception or misperception is:

• Haze & API - The government decided to lift the secrecy surrounding the API by releasing the API figures to the public; how will this move be perceived and what does it signifiy about the present administration? Only a day before it was decided that the API figures were released, the DPM made a statement saying that the government had no plans to release them and a day after it was released, he accused some foreign media (aren't it always?) of distorting the facts and providing a misleading picture of the current haze situation; how will the public perceive the cabinet's sudden decision to overturn the 8 year ban of the release of the API figures recently trumpeted by the DPM? The conventional reason given by the government for not dilvulging the API figures is out of fear that it will be exxagerated and mistreperted, hence chasing away tourists and visitors; how will the public - who doesn't have the luxury of leaving the country whenever an environmental catastrophe occurs - perceive this logic which seemed to put the well-being of tourists ahead that of its citizens?

• Approved Permits (AP) - While the government's decision to release the list of name of AP holders is certainly laudable, the lists and statistics made public were reportedly riddled with inaccuracies and inconsistencies; how will this slight oversight affect the public's perception towards the sincerity of the government and accountability of this policy? The MIT minister have stubbornly refused to bow to the pressures for a clearer and better explanation of the inctricacies of the AP policty and even lashed back unabashedly at her detractors - even other cabinet members; how will the public perceive her apparent inability to appreciate the weight of the situation bearing down on her and the entire administration? The MIT minister was absent during the previous cabinet meeting, citing health reasons before jet-setting to Australia and at the same time, giving us new insights into the layout of her ministry building as she tries to avoid nosy and inquisitive reporters; how will her 'convenient' absence at the cabinet meeting and determination to escape from reporters be perceived by the public especially about her credibility and accountability?

• Incurable tendencies - Person A seemed to be studying at a new place every few months or so, always being offered new scholarships to study at a new place - even when it seemed a little too often; how will the people around him perceive him especially those who have known him/her for a long time thus being very familiar with his/her antics? Person B claims that he/she have relatives (however distant) in almost 20 cities around the globe and each of them managed to become rather succesful at each respective places, becoming Nobel laureates and restaurant owners; how will other people perceive him/her whenever he/she unabashedly makes one of those grandiose claims of his/hers? Person C have a tendency to exxagerate and distort the truths about his/her life story - from boasting about performing with a famous pianist at the DFP to keeping a whole collection of orchestral instruments in his/herhouse ; when the cat is finally out of the bag, how will others perceive him and more importantly, how will others view what he/she perceived of them?
  

In Robert Bolt's Man for All Seasons, one character said to the main character, 'Not only you are honest, but you are known to be honest!' which underscores how powerful perception (or in the case of misperception, how damning) could be to a person.

Indeed, sometimes it is not what your intentions or actions are that matters, but rather how others will perceive that particular intention or action in the context of the surrounding circumstances.

I do not mean to say that only the outward superficial image of a person is important; but just that we all live in glass houses and we would do well to remember that each of our actions will inevitably be judged according to the prevailing sentiments about you.

Some people might balk at this notion, but if you have given people every reason to trust you and not perceive you in the most unfavourable light, the chasm between how other's perceive you and your true self won't be that wide - if it exists at all. In fact, it is exactly when you give other people a reason to doubt you that this whole credibility crisis ensues.

Granted, there are some people who choose to just skim the surface while comfortably ignoring the real substantial stuffs. But often, it is not so much about them but more about us.

For some, their perception will always be clouded and their view opaque; but for most of us, it's just due the hazy weather.


UPDATE: Read this article which follow the same vein of approach of this post - but better written.

self-professed incessant apologetic..

I often think that it is a troubling indication for any friendships when you start apologizing needlessly to your friends; when your conversations are littered with the excessive use of the phrase "I'm sorry" or "I wanted to apologize for..." or something to that effect.

I admit that I am inclined to do that sometimes but I feel that I have managed to keep that tendency in check lately; lacing my apologies with humor often do the trick.

Therefore, when Song - with a slightly exasperated tone - told me that I'm being too apologetic, I knew that I am in danger of reverting back to my old apologetic self.

The conventional reason people often give for exhibiting such behavior is the fear of losing your close friends in case you accidentally upsets or hurts them. But I feel that that is only part of the real reason.

Apologetic people are what they are because they want to be in complete control of the perceptions and views others might have towards them. They want other people to regard them exactly the way they wish themselves to be regarded by other people.

When they have this goal in mind, they will try their best to act in such a way that other people will view them favorably. However, being human themselves, apologetic people will at times act foolishly or upset others; they will do things which are totally contradictory to the favourable image which they are desperately trying to cultivate. It is exactly when such things happens that they begin to apologize profusely to their friends hoping that such shameful acts will not affect their friend's perception towards them, hoping that their friends will dismiss such acts as a quirk and not indicative of their true personality.

I believe that there are several possible reasons which forces them to go through all this trouble: apologetic people may be overly conscious about their image perceived by others; apologetic people may harbor some insecurities of their own which forces them to seek acknowledgement and recognition from others; apologetic people may treasure a person's company so much that they are afraid of effectively losing it if they were to mistreat him.

Ultimately, I think it is question of trust - or rather, the lack of it; there is a fine line between minding your words and actions so that you won't upset your friends and being too protective and too careful until you are cowed into repeatedly punctuating your sentences with apologies or worse still, not risking to say anything at all to your friends.

Hurting and upsetting your friends is an inescapable fact one must be comfortable with if one wish to have a friend or be in a relationship. It is something one can't avoid from doing forever; is it not a question of if, but a question of when and how.

With that in mind, one doesn't need to be ready to apologize all the time if one feels that he/she have overstepped some boundaries; one just have to trust and believe that your friend will understand the circumstances which leads to your 'bad' actions and eventually bring themselves to forgive you.

After all, isn't being forgiven by others more preferable than having to forgive yourself each time something goes wrong between you and your friends? The former is a far better test of a friendship rather than the latter.

Besides, those who are afraid of making mistakes and taking risks have no idea what they are missing...

prepared in (rational?) minds and resources...

What does it mean to be 'rational' in one's life? What is it like for someone to rationalize everything he does or to view the world through rational eyes? Does being rational means suppressing one's creativity, making a person dull and not flexible? Do we have to live a rigid and monotonous life to actually be rational?

I think it would be far easier for me to explain what does not being rational means; for me, being rational does not mean you have to know everything there is to know about something, it does not mean you have to know something inside and out before you can make a decision, it does not mean denying the unpredictability and spontaneity that often colours one's life, it does not trying to classify and put everything - tangible or intangible - into clearly defined groups.

For most people, the word rational is often seen as a direct antithesis of the word practical or empirical; they feel that rational people places more importance of the conclusions derived from one's reasoning rather than those derived from one's experience. Often, they feel that rational people tend to see too much into things or over-analyze things, something which prevented them from seeing the big picture.

In their view, rational people think too much and too deep; rational people are not someone who you would want to go to to have a normal and casual conversation, therefore many people find them to be a wearying and intellectually mind-boggling company. Rational people lack the drive and spontaneity needed to have a vibrant and happening lifestyle, they are those who spoils the mood in a crowd. Rational people are boring.

Granted, some of things mentioned above have some truth associated with it. But for me, being rational means allowing yourself some degree of knowledge which translates into control over the things happening around you; it means seeing beyond the superficial side and delving into the fundamental and underlying patterns of things; it means being aware to the other points of view present in a given circumstance and able to bring yourself to consider them without any emotional attachment; it means guarding and controlling your thoughts and speech.

In short, being rational means you are able to calm yourself down, to listen and consider sincerely what other people got to say on a subject and to be mindful of your thoughts and speech.

Therefore, if viewed in this way, being rational does not mean having to know everything there is to find out; rather it simply means knowing what you have and making the best out of the limited and contrived knowledge which we have at our disposal.

And although both involves some degree of thinking, the results of pursuing any of them are vastly different.

I must fairly admit that I have been labeled as someone who thinks too much and sees too much into things; I am not sure whether they intend to say that I'm being too rational, but I think that is what they are actually trying to convey to me.

I've given it some thought and I come to realize that given my personality, I require some form of rigid structure to contain and control my thoughts and speech. It might seemed a bit brutal to have to confined your thoughts in such a way but I do not see it as a disadvantage. Having such form of control allows me focus my thoughts and carefully considers the things I wanted to say; such rigid structure accords me some measure of stability and certainty. Rather than keeping and locking my mind in, it liberates my mind because I am able to discern the fine implicit details which allows me to better my judgements and actions. It allows me to rise above the mundane and trivial things and gives me a clear perspective on the things that really matters.

However, it is true that trying to rationalize all emotions leads you to an intellectual trap; but like I said before, being rational does not mean you have to know everything. Once viewed in that manner, being rational does not seemed to be mutually exclusive with being practical or emotional.

Indeed, I am not denying the purpose and usefulness of being emotional; but considering the state of affairs of the world today, it might not be such a bad idea to start using more of our rational self and less of our emotional self.

reunion gathering - part II

I'm franky disturbed that my previous post of my class's reunion gathering sounds more like an organizational and leadership skills essay rather than a plain and simple jottings of the gathering itself. But then, I am not exactly famed for my ability to stick to the main points and not veer off from the relevant main topics in my writings; it is not something I'm proud of either.

My classmates - one year after...

Anyway, my class's reunion gathering went smoothly despite the minor complications during the planning staged. It was really heartwarming to be able to meet up with all of them again, to catch up on things, excitedly exchanging news, stories and gossips, openly sharing jokes and laughing at it together. Besides, the food was good too.

Some of us might shudder and cringe at the thought of attending a reunion and some cannot endure the line of questioning which one will have to face at such events. Granted, some of us will be subjected to such questions at a reunion, but what is more important is how one uses that information afterwards - will it be used to compare one's achievements so far with others? - and whether one is comfortable to dilvulge such information to others in the first place.

Personally, if the reunion begins to resemble an interrogation or a cross-examination, I think it would have second thoughts about attending it as well. But then again, such reluctance also speaks volumes about yourself.

I think you have to have a clear idea of what the reunion is all about: is it about catching up and meeting old friends or is it sort of a victory parade to show and celebrate one's achievements?

I believe that one does not have to attend a reunion to achieve the latter; true and genuine achievements and accomplishments do not need to be trumpeted by the individual itself because such things are 'light' enough to 'float' and reach a huge group of people but 'heavy' enough to leave a lasting impression on the person who hears about it.

Such attempts to shamelessly proclaim such things tells more about the nature of the person rather than their accomplishments. After all, desperate people resort to desperate measures.

And I think it's a really sad if we choose not to attend such reunions just because one person is desperate to show off how much he have accomplished since the last time you met him. It's really irresponsible of us to deny our friends the pleasure and joy of seeing us again just because a single person could not resist the temptations to publicly parade himself.

As for my gathering the other day, I'm glad to say that none of us have to endure such display of ego; I think the bond between us have grown so deep and so strong that all of us view such things as shamelessly superficial and we realized that there are other more fundamental and lasting things than that. Even if one of us were to tell us of his/her accomplishments, I think most of us will be overjoyed for him/her rather than feeling uncomfortable with him/her telling it to us.

It's a funny thing but when we met the other day, it felt as if we never even said goodbye and it's hard to believe that almost a year have passed since we last see each other together. The atmosphere during the gathering was one of geniune happiness and warmth and it almost felt like the old times we had back in college.

Of course, most of us have changed - our priorities are different, our outlook on life have been elevated to a higher level, our behavior have been altered - but it seemed that there is one small part of us that still remains the same, the feeling of camaraderie between us and it was obvious that that feeling was reignited during the gathering.

And you know what? I found out that the 1st of August was Friendship Day and our gathering was held on the 31st July; how fitting indeed...

reunion gathering - part I

My previous classmates at KMB (Kolej Mara Banting - IB World School) managed to meet up last Sunday at the Palm Gardens Hotel Putrajaya for hi-tea.

Despite the frequent revisions of the venue (Restoran Nelayan Titiwangsa or Palm Gardens Hotel), time (lunch or dinner) and date (3oth or 31st July, 6th or 13th August); from the endless attempts to agree upon on a single date when all of us would be available to trying to arrange transport to ferry us between KL and the hotel; the endless SMS which have to be sent to my classmates either to remind them of the plan or to notify them of any new developments in the plan.

Given the state of things, I think I might be forgiven to feel exasperated by the confused and haphazard planning which threatens to jeopardize the gathering itself; initially, I was given the task of communicating the latest details of the gathering to the rest of my classmates but eventually, I find myself trying to 'influence' the choice of venue and date of the gathering itself in hopes that situation would clear itself up (which would also reduce the need for me to send countless SMSs to my friends about the plans for the gathering in a single day).

In short, the plans for the gathering were in a total mess and it was a coup d'etat waiting to happen.

But truth be told, I cannot blame the confused state of affairs on a single person; it was not the result of an oversight of one individual. Even if it was, the others (including myself) should be aware of the impending problems and tried to bring the matter to our attention.

The fact that there is no central authority to regulate the decision-making process compounded the problems even more; all of us placed too much importance in the belief that we would be able to reach a unanimous decision on the details of the gathering.

The possibility of reaching a unanimous decision through consensus in itself is not unrealistic; however, I believe that trying to reach a unanimous decision through concensus without the regulation of a central authoritative figure is or at best, difficult to achieve.

This does not mean that one should be dictatorial in one's decision-making process - that would be courting with disaster; but it does not mean that one should absolve the entire decision-making process to the individual members of the group as well.

Like most things in life, one have to tread the fine balance between the two extremes.