Miss Kolka

I have days where I doubt about myself. I KNOW I'm not the only one - I think we all do. Its just a matter of hiding it well enough. Hiding it from those you don't know. Because making friends, good friends is probably another way of saying "I met someone who knows I'm not perfect and accepts my defaults - and I his".

But my doubts are not so much about weird habits that could annoy some - such as dipping bread with butter into my hot chocolate (which is sooo common) or snapping at doormen in clubs- but rather about my intellectual abilities. Which is totally stupid actually. Most people pretend they are more intelligent than they actually are, with few but remarkable exceptions such as Pamela Anderson (a personal hero of mine) and Björk (one of the greatest contemporary artists of the universe and I am not just saying that because I am Icelandic, well ok, maybe I am). They get away with appearing a bit simple - when Pamela has always known how to correctly manage her image and use it for business purposes and Björk maintains her individuality no matter what - always as surprising and original as ever.

I have noticed that in conversations here in France people try to get in as many quotations from famous writers or philosophers as possible - and they all know at least a dozen painters, without forgetting the national name-dropping of course. Something I have already mentioned in previous blogs. In Iceland, people mention as many musical references as possible.. the more obscure and underground the better.. no musical expert with self-respect quotes Mariah Carey or Michael Bolton. That is why we often play games with band names and songs - until the sun comes up. In England you are a complete twat if you dont drink beer and know the name of every player in the national football team (maybe a bit sterotypical). But every culture seems to have something that is considered common knowledge - something that makes people part of the society by knowing these things. I guess in France cultural knowledge in very important - from elementary school and onwards, on the expense of learning other languages perhaps and especially on the expense of independent thinking.

So yes, I might not know the name of some writers or painters but I know other things. I know Norway is not in the European union (only in the european economic area) which came in handy at work yesterday, I know stangetz as well as Chromeo, and I know what I want. (this is not an extensive list of my knowledge...there are a few other things...)

- sometimes I just have to remember that knowledge isn't just science and arts. And that it differs depending on the education you recieved. There is so much more. You can not define it and the only way to learn is to be open to others. Knowing people is the best knowledge.

 

next blog: analysing the men of France24

on flickr ...

I haven't forgotten you.. my little blog

It's just that it takes its toll to live with another party animal.. 

My life these days can be summed up in 10 sentences:

1. Work is better - with new shifts only working days and evenings. 

2. I have such a great assistant - that makes my life so much easier 

3. My house is a mess..I can't be bothered to clean.

4. I have to stop watching Grey's anatomy - its hard emotionally and I loose the connection to reality - actually seeing the main characters as my friends..that can not be healthy.

5. I discovered a beautiful european city recently - a place I will revisit.

6. I seem to be missing one thing or two.

7. I go out dancing alot - which I love - but could it be possible to do that without all the drinking?

8. Some questions seem to re-surface again and again 

9. Some fun things are coming up - Finna coming to Paris - London trip - Justin in May - summer vacation

10. Its springtime in Paris and I love it.

 

I've been meaning to write about the film blood diamond... because after hearing that it was such a great film that I had to see I must say I was extremely, extremely disappointed. Not only by the storytelling, which is quite pretentious but also because of the problematic white and black relationship the main two characters have. I have been looking for words but this review From: San Diego State University says it all. Read it.

Blood Diamond

December 9th, 2006 by Beth Accomando

Edward Zwick's Blood Diamond.

Blood Diamond presents itself as an action thriller but the genre trappings can't hide the fact that Zwick wants to teach audiences another history lesson and lecture them on political correctness. Jennifer Connelly's reporter exists only to spout statistics and educate us on the subject. She's like one of those characters you bump into in a video game that spews information so you can advance to the next level. When Archer first meets Bowen, their conversation is a rapid summary of recent African history with snide comments about American guilt and the fact that the politically correct way to refer to Rhodesia now is to call it Zimbabwe. Similarly, Vandy is meant to be symbolic of the African people. But none of these people feel like fully fleshed out characters.

Edward Zwick directs Leonardo DiCaprio and Djimon Hounsou.

Zwick is not content to just tell a good action story or to focus tightly on one aspect of a complex problem—he wants to explore everything. He shows how the guerrillas coerce children into fighting, how diamonds fund the violence, how the west ignores the problems in Africa, the formation of massive refugee camps, and so on. Yet even though the film covers a lot of ground, it never gets to the complexity of the problems. It's broad in scope but not deep.

A film that did manage to blend politics and good storytelling together was last year's The Constant Gardener, a thriller that enlightened us about Africa while also delivering a compelling and tense narrative. That film found a clever way to weave the character's journey neatly and tightly into the themes of social injustice in Africa so that the audience got an education without being hit over the head with a message. The Constant Gardener riveted viewers with the characters and their emotional journey first and then worked on enlightening us with its themes.

Blood Diamond

Zwick, however, is not as graceful in weaving his tale. Plus, he hurts the film by not giving equal weight to the two male characters. Zwick appears to make the odd assertion that the white characters have more emotional investment in and ownership of Africa than the blacks. Archer is told by another white mercenary that the dirt in Africa is red because it is soaked with their blood, and that they can never leave the country because Africa runs through their veins. Archer then gets to bleed into the African soil and essentially proclaim it as his country. But it's also Vandy's country. Yet the film makes less of an effort to point out the amount of black African blood split on the same soil. Another scene that plays falsely is when Vandy wonders aloud if his country might not have been better off when it were ruled by whites. Maybe, he suggest, the blacks just have something bad within them. Such a comment seems ill placed. After all it was white colonials who created some of the divisions that still haunt the continent today. And while Zwick promotes political correctness, he never really allows Vandy's character the same chance as Archer's to speak out. When Vandy does have a moment when is supposed to speak about the pain and suffering of his country, that's the moment when Zwick brings up the music and pulls away so that the voice he claims is the most important one for us to hear, the one we are urged not to ignore, is in essence silenced.

This year, DiCaprio makes an earnest bid to change from pretty boy to tough guy with his dual roles as the hard edged undercover cop in The Departed and the mercenary with shifting morals here in Blood Diamond. He's a talented actor and the harder edge is a nice change of pace. Hounsou's Vandy is made subordinate to DiCaprio's Archer and that's too bad. Hounsou is a forceful actor and he should have been given more to work with. Connolly serves merely as a pretty plot device.

A recent film that did convey a better sense of the African experience is Catch a Fire. But that film came and went in a week. It was a more provocative film in that it explored how the injustices suffered by one black man politicized him enough to make him take action and join a resistance movement that used violence. He's labeled a terrorist by the white government. That film at least tried to convey an African point of view even though it was also made by a white filmmaker. Films from Africa, made by African filmmakers are few and of those few only a rare one ever makes it to American theater screens. All the films we've seen recently of Africa—Blood Diamond, Catch a Fire, The Constant Gardener, Biko, The Last King of Scotland, Tears of the Sun—are all very western in terms of their narrative structure. Films from Africa by such directors as Sembene Ousmane or Djibril Diop Mambety have a very different storytelling quality to them that stems from an oral storytelling tradition. It would be nice to see more films from a genuinely African perspective make it to American theaters.

Blood Diamond (rated R for strong violence and language) ends with the request that people demand that the trade in blood diamonds stop. But this call to action is simplistic and naive. It's not like The Inconvenient Truth asking us to buy smaller cars, drive less and use public transportation—all things we can easily and actually accomplish. Diamonds don't come with their origins engraved on the back. So for the film to lay out its case and simply say it's in your power to stop the trade in blood diamonds is a smug way for Zwick to feel like he's accomplished something when he hasn't. He's really just nicked the surface of a much bigger and more complex issue. In the end, Zwick's film just feels like another attempt at alleviating white guilt.

 

Thank you Beth Accomando.

"Do what you like"

No I'm not going talk about how thin french women are, how they do it with their pouty mouth or discuss their dating habits, which, according to some british media (!), are not good enough . I read an article a long time ago saying that you could forget having fun on a date with a french woman since she always tries to stay on top of things, smart, intelligent, cute and sexy, without ever loosing control of herself. " No, just one glass of wine for me thank you".

Im not going to talk about these things because a) I am a french woman (in some respect) and b) even if these "clichés" are right to some extent (and believe me, I KNOW) my worries are elsewhere.

One of the most talked-about french woman right now is Segolene Royal, which is normal since she is in the middle of her presidential campagne. And of course, like any other candidate, her every move is closely followed and scrutinised. And not less by women themselves. It is the first time a woman could actually become the president of France. (mind you...other countries have set good examples such as Iceland, Chile and Finland). However, I don't think her sex should be the only reason for her success. I don't want a woman president at any cost, its the performance that counts. But until now, performance often seems to be measured by pre-made standards of a rather masculin world. And when a woman enters that world we often hear comments about her appearence - what she is wearing, how old she looks, and wonder how she got to where she is AND managed to have 4 children. A working mother? We are after all in 2007.

Alright, she seems to have a vision on child-care for working people (which is badly needed here in France - where 70% of children under the age of 3 are staying at home with one of the parent - most often the mother - and then we ask ourselves why companies dont want to hire women around the age of 30) and she did participate in introducing paternity leave in France (which I think is only 2-4 weeks - still some room for progress). Royal says she is a feminist but it is open to question whether many of her campaign issues are "women-friendly" - (or should I say - good for the equality of the sexes) such as her tough views on military issues. What annoys me is her insistance that she is different because she is a woman. That still remains to be seen. And what does that mean?

I most certainly would vote for a man that would introduce a program for equality, for people of different sexes, colour, races and sexuality. For someone who listens to others and is not afrad of changing his mind if convinced by others. If he would agree that there is something wrong when women are close to 50% of the workforce but always under-represented in the media (in France - quotations by women in the press are only 17%) and they more often than not do not land high seats in commities. Out of 75 daily newspapers in France - until yesterday, there were no women executives. The same often applies in economic institutions for executive positions.

Its funny, because these are not just numbers. When I am at work and there are 2-3 english-speaking journalists (and if these happen to be all girls, due to coincidence) we often encounter problems in translating the soundbites, that is quotations of MEN.. because there is no english-speaking man around. And Most of the soundbites are by men. I should maybe do a little test to night. to see how many women were truly quoted. - to be continued.

All this to repeat myself once again.. While women are almost the sole care-taker of young children and encounter inequality at home, I don't think we can progress that much at work either. And it just makes me laugh when I hear women say "well, women will just have to try harder". Enough already. It's time things change around here. And that we start talking about how the guys look - and how on earth they find time for their family with all their time going into politics. Who's taking care of the children?

When you work in international news, it seems that you are always covering the same stories - melting of polar ice-caps, middle east peace proces,repressing regimes, train bombings, deadly bird flu outbreaks, opposition protests and so on. When it comes to choose what is important news we seem formatted. We only "tick" to certain words when reading the wires (the raw source of information for news channels) and it is like every day is a follow up of what we've heard before. We completely ignore certain regions and the problem of television is also that we don't have time (or give ourself time) to go into complicated stories or explain something unfamiliar. I doubt the average viewer in Europe is interested in major business deals between China and African countries for example. How to make news more interesting? What a big question. Many news channels have begun to categorise news into segments such as "business", "international", "Celebrities" and so on. Thatcan maybe help but it makes news even drier than it already is.

And how is it that it always has to be about pain and death? About opression and torture by certain regimes (since western countries are always flawless in their warfare) Happy news doesn't really exist. Odd images of dogs in funny clothes or celebration pictures from Rio can be seen for a few secondes but apart from that news is majoritively bad news. So let me see how many died in the Baghdad bombing of the day and how many politicians have talked nonsense and promissed things that will never happen...

Yes that's right - at least 30 die in Baghdad while - 66 died on a train blast in India. Meanwhile Rice, Olmert and Abbas meet for talks in Jerusalem where everyone will agree on a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine, except that Hamas will not regognise Israel, the international community will not recognise the Hamas-led government and the fighting will go on. What's new under the sun? And why do we even bother?

• Of Sex, Violence and Bad men | 08-10-2009
• of Bloggers and other creatures | 05-09-2009
• swineflu - what are we to think? | 13-08-2009
• Was it for an underwater Rock concert? | 11-08-2009
• The city of the Happy People | 04-08-2009
• Felix meets Loulou | 21-07-2009
• This is Iceland! | 13-07-2009
• Popularity! | 22-06-2009
• Aurevoir..mais pas Adieu! About Burqas, Sarkozy and all that | 22-06-2009
• ... | 18-06-2009
• What's happening? | 18-06-2009
• Reminder | 15-06-2009
• What can Europe do? | 08-06-2009
• Which Stylish First Couple?do you really have to ask? | 06-06-2009
• From babychairs to gross food | 03-06-2009