Archive | Musings RSS feed for this section

Where Good Ideas Come From

6 Oct

References:

Harvard Business Review Article

Cafe Creative Video – ‘Creativity Takes Time’

Advertisements

Mother Earth? Fill ‘er up.

2 Oct

Once upon a time petrol, oil & coal were the go-to words when discussing foreign politics, civil war, sovereignty and global powers. The old ‘fill ‘er up’ mindset dominated global politics when petrol, fuel, oil, coal…were the greatest commodity on earth. Forget human resources, booming military might, clever presidential campaigns; the world was all into oil. Just ask any left wing literature lecturer and [s]he’ll tell you (in an Aussie accent slightly tinged with British sophistication):

It’s all about the oil. The West is just dying to fill ‘er up with oil. Just look at the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Oil.

Now, let’s not get into political debate here. No-one’s taking sides. Because I’m actually just about to drop a bomb (are we allowed to say ‘bomb’ out loud yet?) Global politics is no longer about oil and bloating our own national-interest-bellies with it. The truth is, the world is already full. And not with oil. As Paul Gilding writes for CNN (See Article: The Earth is Full):

the earth is full…we’re living beyond our means

It’s a horrifying truth and a terrifying reality. The question is posed, is the world’s natural resources, the physical land mass available, fresh water, open spaces actually enough to satisfy such a growing global population? The answer is a resounding: NO

No-one is making a mountain out of a molehill here. There are just some solid facts that need re-iterating. Par exemple:

The eminent scientists of the Global Footprint Network, for example, calculate that we need about 1.5 Earths to sustain this economy. In other words, to keep operating at our current level, we need 50% more Earth than we’ve got.

Well heck. That’s a lot of Earth that doesn’t actually exist. Interestingly however, good old Paul Gilding brings up something sort of, well, simultaneously horrendous and comforting; despite the freakishly fast deteriorating natural world, politicians don’t really give a damn. Global financial leaders don’t really give a damn. In other words, everyone that matters DOES NOT GIVE A DAMN. Damn.

Well, that’s the horrendous side. The comforting side is this; the deterioration of the natural world is inextricably linked with the deterioration of the economy, as economic ‘means’ purchase the natural world ‘goods’. Therefore, they’re going to have to give a damn sooner or later; when they realise – which Paul argues they are starting to now – that the economic world is going to face the apocalypse before the social, political or environmental world. Here are some nice summarising quotes from a series of articles on the topic that may clarify the link between economics and environmental concerns (which I found using google reader and my trusty RSS Feeds to conduct research):

  • Economic growth has limits…Belief in infinite growth on a finite planet was always irrational, but it is the nature of denial to ignore hard evidence. (find original source here)
  • There are still leaders and laggards but the drive for action is growing, as is the number of investors requesting emissions data. Governments seeking to build strong economies should take note. (find original source here)
  • The fact is that no compound growth is sustainable. If we maintain our desperate focus on growth, we will run out of everything and crash. (find original source here)
  • Peak oil expert Richard Heinberg argues, we are moving beyond peak oil and into “peak everything.” (find original source here)
  • More than one-third (37%) see the physical risks of a changing climate as a real and present danger, up from just 10% two years ago, says the latest Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Global 500 report, a survey of top global companies.(find original source here)

So what’s all the talk about? And what does this all indicate? Well perhaps it’s saying we need a new approach to climate change. The mass media, the marketers, the business strategists and environmentalist lobby groups would do better to hit the kings and queens of this world, where it hurts most . Kings and queens being global political power heads – essentially transnational corporations and key political bodies – and ‘the place it hurts most’ being the pocket. THE POCKET, PEOPLE. Kings and queens don’t care about the peasants. They care about the pocket. Finances, economics, money.

I mean, for heavens’ sake, for years advertising and media analysts have confirmed the importance of the need for Marketers to ‘care’ about social responsibility. An article on the hubspot marketing blog (see here) reiterates the importance of marketing strategies incorporating this mentality of environmental and social concern. The article notes.:

Marketers are sometimes associated with some pretty negative terms: annoying, interruptive, manipulative.

And this is true! Because they lie and probe and dart around the truth, so often. But why not use the immense power bestowed on them for good. If environmental-related articles were less about tabloid fun facts such as ‘FISH WILL BE A QUARTER OF THEIR SIZE IN YEARS TO COME!’ (see article on shrinking fish, I kid you not, here) and more on the severe impact environmental negligence will have on economic growth and sustainability, then we’d grab the attention of the people who ACTUALLY RUN THE WORLD. The men in suits with expensive reading glasses who read about finances, not fish. I rest my case.

(image source: CartoonStock – http://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/r/reading_the_newspaper.asp)

Sources: 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/30/fish-shrink-climate-change

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/12/climate-change-business-cdp

http://blog.hubspot.com/blog/tabid/6307/bid/33650/Why-Marketers-Need-to-Start-Caring-About-Social-Responsibility

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/04/08/opinion/gilding-earth-limits/index.

http://www.ted.com/talks/paddy_ashdown_the_global_power_shift.html

Futurism: 2057 (the future according to someone from the past)

23 Sep

2057! Oh my godfather! I will be 67 by then. I think. I did drop maths in Year 10, so I can’t be sure unless I use a calculator.Although, it’s only 2012 and already calculators have been pushed aside by the gleaming glory of the smartphone. (In fact, didn’t the old brick nokias have calculators as well as Snake anyway?).

The fact of the matter is:

if by 2012 we’re already accessing most of our needed information on a touch screen the size of our palms , I don’t see why in 2057 our computer network systems have to be so jolly big and clunky. Of course, this is a doco/drama amalgamation thing. So we can excuse scientific flaws in the name of drama, and excuse flawed drama, in the name of science. A clever safety net for the producers of this somewhat dated , and therefore rather nostalgic program .

sorta reminds one of the multitude of ‘serious’ science-fiction films made in the 80s and 90s which have now been rendered comical due to outdated filmic quality.

The plot is missing a lot. The acting is extremely cheesy. The future seems a little old, oddly enough. Everything is either a bit retro, a bit tacky, a bit vintage, a bit dorky…or just plain…outdated.

Guess it really highlights how fast the world is moving considering this was only made five years ago! To be quite honest, considering this documentary had such support from leading institutions and scientists for its content research, I was expecting something a little more WOWing. If you get what I mean? The tyranny of data was interesting I suppose, but I couldn’t help but feel it was merely the whole…technology will eventually turn on us and ruin our lives! CCTV, always being watched, networks, grids, beeping computer sounds, panicky actor voices, rising tense music, slow camera pans and melodramatic dialogue over phone conversations…

I fear there is nothing really that original about the predictions this program makes.

Funnily enough, despite our technological advancements George Orwell’s written word in the novel, ‘1984’ seems a hell of a lot more convincing and poignant than this jam-packed audio/visual mishmash of documentary, drama and lameness. (Sorry to be so harsh.)

However, even from an intellectual standpoint, Orwell’s 1984 seems somehow more relevant and challenging today in terms of political, philosophical, linguistic, cultural and technological concerns as well as posing interesting questions regarding technology and the advancement of science. ‘Interesting’ questions that I fear aren’t really that interesting in 2007 (or 2012 for the matter), when they’ve already been posed and pondered for the last billion years since the Industrial Revolution in the late 18th Century. I mean even Mary Shelley had sort of jumped on the bandwagon of our technological or scientific creations turning against us with Frankenstein by the early 1800s! By 2007 you’d think we may’ve identified something new to be fearful of…

(watch it – dare I say – here: topdocumentaryfilms.com/2057-the-city-of-the-future/)

Poem of My Life

8 Sep

So I was just brushing my teeth, thinking about some words and things. And then this happened. You could analyse it and say it encapsulates the terrifying chaos of postmodern society, institutionalised education, ever progressing pressures of time and space….or you could just say, it makes no sense. Let’s just enjoy words and rhythm and rhyme then, shall we:

Happy happy happy chappy

Spiral, downwards, slow, delaying

Expert fast and from decaying

Undiluted ex-profaning

Priests in exegetical layers

Of Harvard/Oxford-typed donators

Hindered in test tubal breakers

Can’t refuse

The endless payments

Mummy daddy escalators

Credits, fails and parking meters

Highfalutin innovators

Bludgers, boulders, budget-haters

Traffic lights, communicators

Fostering adjudicators

Exponential Nietzsche races

Dominating worldly places

Slaughtering lightbeamic chasers

Denying entry, ALLIGATORS

Chomping off all lifelines, savers

Festering in swamp-like craters

Killing killing

Rightful waiters

Serving platters

Blameless, blameless

Poisoned wine and mutual rapists

Distributing fashion tapes like

Donning desolated frames

In galleries that almost make

The Chim Cherie cry out in shame

Oh break the blackness

What’s your name?

Happy happy happy chappy

Spiral downwards clappy clappy

Expert fast and from decaying

Undiluted ex-profaning

Masters fighting monkey claims

To human tribes and human fame

To humans dead and humans’ shame

Playing, playing

Fraying, fraying

O’ ex-com-mun-i-ca-ted

Sayings

Shout Silently. Please.

8 Sep

Continue reading

Link

Uni Made Me Do It

26 Jul

Some things you should know:

1. I didn’t make a blog because I’m egotistical and narcissistic.

2. Not all people who make blogs are egotistical and narcissistic.

3. A large portion are.

4. Especially film and media students.

5. We suffer from a severe condition of repressed narcissism.

6. Because until we have money, no-one cares about what we create.

7. Repressed. Depressed.

8. First World Problems.

9. Point is; Uni made me do it.

#1 Created a wordpress (Y)

#2 Applied a theme (Y)

#3 Made a post (Y)

#4 A link to something rad (Y)

10. It’s a surprise. And it’s good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT90rc2cfQU&feature=related

BOOM. 2 Marks.

Aside

Met An Asian Bloke Called Chum

26 Jul

Watched this last night.

And this is why Jim Jarmusch is

spot on.

Because today

I laughed.

And said ‘CHUM?!’

Fixed it by saying, ‘cool name’.

‘What’s yours?’ He goes.

Then I realised if you’d asked me a few years ago I would’ve replied:

‘Ango Bango’

*  *  *

ANNE-JO-BAN-JO.

If you don’t believe me

send an email:

smile4_ango_bango@hotmail.com

True story. It exists.

Not a very good blog post.

*  *  *

But the thing is

it’s very poignant really.

I wasn’t very cool back then.

Still not cool at all.

But it’s got nothing to do with my name.

Chum was a nice bloke.

He’s got a name that makes you think

of a friendly pal.

Together Jim and Chum

have taught me some life lessons.

Oh what a day.