Fictional Existence

" 'There is at least one good thing about TV,' he said after a while. 'You can shut it off whenever you like. And nobody complains.' "

Characters from fictional media, such as novels, short stories, poems, or television shows, movies etc. are distinguished from real life people primarily in the world they exist in. More generally, they lead a different type of existence to us. We know that something is not real based on the way it interacts (or does not) with this world. I shall call their way of "existing" fictional existence.

Is fictional existence a form of existence? Perhaps from the way I name it the answer would seem to be yes. One that would argue that an idea or a concept, something abstract, exist would certainly agree that fictionally existing is indeed a valid method of existence, where the said object in question exists in people's minds. However, even if you think an idea does not really exist, a fictional character seems to be much more than an idea, or at least well composed ones do. One can specify the character's traits, actions, habits, demeanors just as done with a normal concrete person. A person hosts a lot of ideas in his/her life, and so do reasonable fictional characters. Should the reality of a fictional character be of a higher order than a mere idea then? After all, actors are trained to suspend their real identity and pretend to exist in a parallel universe under a different alias.

One could also claim that a fictional character exists within his/her universe. Such universe is bounded by the works attributed to it. A character from a show exists within the several hours the show is on air, and not otherwise. Yet, human perspective is horribly limited. One could never escape the first person viewpoint one was born into. This leads to everyone we know to be able to be perceived by a fraction of our lifetime, no matter how close the people in question are to us. Worse still, there are millions upon millions of people who we meet on the streets but never again, or not even meet at all. We hear from official statistics that there are a great number of people coexisting with us, yet we never perceive their existence. They are merely a number to us. Do they exist? Fictionally? (Or, ideally?)

I am sure some may have envied the lives of certain fictional characters. Selectively cutting out the boring details of life, or the tragic events that may occur is definitely attractive. Ironing out the possibility of encountering tragedy for a person living in a perfect world, even more so. However, if given the chance to be fictional, would it be accepted by the masses? As I mentioned before, good and evil are complementary and rather symbiotic. Are perfection and faults a symbiotic pair as well? I guess these questions are meant to be left to fantasy.

At this point I don't even know what this part of my thoughts is leading towards. Therefore, let's just say that fictionally existing entities are not far from us. In fact, everyone around us leads a rather abstract existence. We trust that we lead a real and full existence, and by symmetry and sheer probabilistic arguments we think that others do as well. However, the time we spend with others is limited, that most of their actions or thoughts are not relayed to us. Similarly, our time on this planet is also severely limited, that a lot of what we think will never be recorded. Those who have made a mark in history may be qualified to be the closest to be truly existing. Yet, we still only see a tiny fraction of their lives. Einstein would mostly be remembered for his theories of relativity, Hitler will be forever remembered as an evil dictator, Nietzsche for his proclamation of the death of god. To sum up a person by his interaction with this world is so inappropriate and bastardizing, yet for a fictionally existing entity, this is the only thing we could hope to do.

---

OP/ED Discussion 1: Watamote OP, Watashi ga Motenai no wa Dou Kangaetemo Omaera ga Warui

It is often the case that an opening theme attracts my attention enough for me to check out an anime. It is definitely an indispensable asset to the genre. Therefore, this is something I would like to try out. It is exactly what it says on the tin: I post a video of an OP/ED of a show I watched, and say something about it. So here we go:

"I'm on my way to finding my way. Find your way to be courageous!"

I will kick this section off with this melancholic and rather furious outcry of an OP towards an ostracizing society that accepts no person such as Tomoko in Watamote, a reclusive and extremely introverted teenage girl constantly trying to fit into the environment she is in. Although the show itself was not presented in the best way possible, with overtly cringe-inducing moments permeating through the entirety as we witness the poor attempts of Tomoko in trying to socialize and make herself popular, this theme is not without its own charm.

The motif of imprisonment sustains through the video. Tomoko's struggles are vividly depicted as a convict breaking the chains holding her down. Apt analogies are drawn here, with Tomoko rather like a prisoner of the flashy society around her, an outcast rather. Being a deviant in a society pervaded by communication and expressionism perhaps often results in being trapped by the weird gazes of others, functioning within the norm. As opposed to a bright and glamorous stereotypical hero, we have an anti-hero here: Dark, scarred, creepy, delusional and sinful, trying to grab the sun and swallow it whole. 

The music did not appeal to my ears for a good while, until I delved deeper into the show. It fits exactly the theme of the show and is not unlike what a monologue of Tomoko would sound like: Unfettered decry against the people who have it easy, people who do not have to endure the pain known as social anxiety. Its powerful and reverberating screams may at first hurt, but as the show progresses through it serves more than appropriately. Overall, a solid and fitting opening to a rather special and meta show.

Hopefully this can continue onward to each post in the future here. Credits to openings.moe.

On discipline

子曰：「不憤不啟，不悱不發。舉一隅不以三隅反，則不復也。」(《論語·述而第七》)

The main reason that I would dread a career in education would be the inevitable encounter with students that are unmotivated and wasteful. No matter how patient and thought-out a teacher lays his plan, none would germinate on the student determined to not learn. Hence I greatly sympathize with the above quote, and do consider that education should be reserved only for those willing to learn and not those who simply have the financial capability to.

Recently I came across this and thought a bit about the dichotomy presented in the styles of education between the British and the Chinese. I suppose, though, I should not claim the ostensibly "Chinese" method "Chinese" since I do believe this approach is taken widely elsewhere in Asia, such as Korea and Japan. (helps alleviate perhaps some prejudice based on the fact that it is "Chinese" as well) While the British method stresses on personal development, freedom to choose one's stance and attitude to learning, the Asian method tends to force students to be respectful to superiors and humbly learn from them, building a strong sense of heirarchy. In turn, the British students find it absurd to be disciplined by new teachers whom they had no previous experience with: they simply found no reason to act inferior and subdue to teachers, even regular ones, while the Chinese teachers found it ridiculous that one would not want to sit down, shut up and learn, as any sensible individual would want to equip themselves to face this ever more competitive world.

While I strongly value freedom, in both philosophical and practical terms, I also firmly endorse the power of discipline. One who cannot grasp the power to control oneself and place themselves on top of others based on delusional obsession with oneself deserves to fall and not the help from others. One can only use his freedom the moment he can handle it. This is why the Asian system is coarse and downright undesirable on the surface, but at the end produce better results and nurtures some true intellectuals. Those who can emerge powerful in reality would be those who can harness their own power through discipline, and this system enables the development of such mindset. While the British system claims to provide help to all, it unfortunately falls in irony as weaker individuals fall out as completely useless and unable to help themselves because of the aggrandization of their ego, becoming parasites to the society.

There are, however, aspects of the Asian education, as portrayed, that I disapprove of. Power comes from individuality and realization, not from conforming to herd instincts. The "national education" that comes with the Asian teaching in the example above actually disgusts me quite a bit. (The ideal world in my view would not have country borders at all, but that is a story for another time) The large class size also means that interaction with individual students is limited. Problems are thus more difficult to diagnose.

For a long time, I had been strongly influenced by Confucian thoughts. I declared those who disrespect those due for respect as my enemies. However, as I realized how corrupt human nature could be, I started to vow myself to uphold freedom of action and thought. Still, people who abandon their own lives do not deserve babysitting throughout their lives. Therefore, I would say that both sides have much to learn. Though the Asian side received better scores, they mean nothing much if students do not receive anything worthwhile to take away from school. Similarly, sheltering the students from the competitive edge of the world may make their school life quite a bit less miserable and stressed, but also is meaningless and actually detrimental to their well-being later on in their lives.

Also, Required Reading