Return Of The Medium To The Medium

How good it is to have a sure purpose underfoot and proceed in that direction! One foot in front of the other.

The New Yorker

Image via Wikipedia

The one thing we are sure of is the purpose of the magazine. The New Yorker will always be foremost about free expression, about the written word, about reading. Technology, the means of delivering this writing, is a very important, but secondary, matter, and we intend to keep providing the magazine in whatever form seems to work. Editors here are always willing to make improvements in the cause of writing.

“A Note To Our Readers,” The New Yorker, pg 40, Oct 4, 2010

Too often, we prize the medium for the message. And ignore what is within.



Oh to be a flâneur. A person who walks the city in order to experience it.

And somehow things in black and white just seems so much richer.

“..A while ago somewhere
I don’t know when
I was watching a movie with a friend.
I fell in love with the actress.
She was playing a part that
I could understand..”


Why We Are Looking Forward To Driverless Cars

Even though cars that drive themselves remain distant possibilities, there are groups of motorists who, without knowing it themselves, have already been looking forward to the automated vehicle. Continue reading

Drafting A Letter Of Intent On The Lockdown of Photographs Elsewhere

PHOTOGRAPHS. Do we need them? To put up a picture on the Internet so that a passer-by will pass it by with the quick click of his mouse, choosing either the “previous” or the “next” buttons. Does he even absorb all that information, that neglected child standing at the backdrop of the photo, the people huddling in the background, chatting about the newly launched car? Continue reading

Subtext: Missing Numbers

Censorship has been carried out only rarely and only on sensitive and offensive content in recent years. Over the past three years, nine films or 0.4% of the 2,351 films classified in the period were disallowed while for arts events, only one out of 2,724 arts events were disallowed.

Speech by Mr Lui Tuck Yew,  Acting Minister for Information, Communication and the Arts

Statistics are all well and good. Unfortunately numbers are always presented in favour of the hegemony.

The above presser states that in terms of censorship, only nine films were disallowed, out of the 2,351 submitted for classification. That makes up a measly 0.4 per cent. But what is not highlighted here is the number of films that could have been potentially submitted, created or otherwise, for a classification review. How many of us have lived thinking along the lines of “Oh I don’t think this will pass muster with the boss. Well, you better not submit it then.

Our inner critic suppresses before anything can spring up. How to create anything like that?