Kaijie and Mabelyn

Their interpersonal relationship started two years ago. Kaijie had his eye on Mabelyn for quite a while, and his first move came in the form of insisting to sit next to her in class. This continued over the next few lessons. As their teacher I let it pass, except when Mabelyn kept complaining that Kaijie was disturbing her in class. Soon after, Kaijie started adopting whatever Mabelyn did. If she coloured the tent red, he would colour the tent red. If she chose the yellow sticker, he would choose the yellow sticker. If she asked to have a drink of water, he would ask to have a drink of water.

I observed the interpersonal relationship between my five-year old charges. As far as I could tell, it was one-sided, with Kaijie initiating conversation only receive negative feedback. Kaijie told me in private that he thought Mabelyn was pretty. Also, he would ask doe-eyed for her whenever Mabelyn did not come to class. I remember when Kaijie made use of haptics, trying to hold her hand when he thought nobody was looking! It was quite a sight, and I felt bad for him when Mabelyn made a face and asked him to get away.

Unfortunately, that was all the action I saw between these Kaijie and Mabelyn by the time the graduated from my class. I still check in on then sometimes, and I think Kaijie is still making his moves but is careful not to drive her away. Perhaps he is aware he has time on his side, since he sees her every Sunday, probably for the next few years.

This relationship formed because of proximity. However, there is little reciprocity being exhibited from Mabelyn, so there hasn’t been much of the relationship developing.

(I’ll try to get hold of pictures of them for you!)

AllsWell communicates well?

A young lady sits at a foodcourt. There are two bottled drinks on the table and it appears that she is awaiting her male companion to arrive for dinner. He arrives, asks what drink she has ordered for him and calls for the drink-seller to order another drink instead. She insists that the drink is good for him, especially with the hot weather, and persuades him to take the bottled drink instead. “But why?” he asks, whining slightly. There is a pause before she replies with that killer line “Because I love you.”

We’ve almost all seen this advertisement by AllsWell drinks.

Here is the link to the advertisement, for your viewing pleasure.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJRkAlRDuJI

As reported in “Singlish ad gets laughs”, an article in the 21st September edition of The Sunday Times, this advertisements has quite a one-sided review. Many people find it “lame”, and quite cheesy, especially with the lady’s killer line. Does that line really work? Could it work in real life?

Nevertheless, I think this advertisement does communicate well. It appeals to the everyday person, since the actors in the advertisement look like a young, working couple, and they eat at a foodcourt, something everyday Singaporeans do. In this way, it communicates to the everyday person, which is good since AllsWell’s target market is that of the mass market.

Besides the dialogue in the advertisement, we can also note the non-verbal communication that takes place. In terms of paralinguistics, the pitch and tone of voice from the couple does add another dimension to the message sent. When the lady insists on the man taking the AllsWell drink, her tone indicates her persistence. Also, the man’s reply shows that he is reluctant. Of course the artifacts in the commercial help the audience understand that the scene is based in a foodcourt setting. In this way, the message of the advertisement is easy to understand.

This advertisement has been much talked-about, and by so-doing, has done well. Advertisements are often used to generate awareness and by becoming a talking point, people have definitely become more aware of the local bottled drink brand. Besides, AllsWell reported a 10% increase in sales after the advertisement started airing.

What do you think about how this advertisement communicates?

Banana Cookie Bars

I made banana cookie bars the other day. And as usual, I made too much for the household to consume by ourselves and it was suggested that I send some off with my parents since they were going to a social gathering that night in view of Mid-Autumn Festival.

Mum was saying how Uncle Tony would have a lot to say about texture, Auntie Judy would think it'd be too sweet, Uncle Kok Chye would ask for more banana taste in it next time and Auntie Pauline would ask for the recipe. She laughed at how these family friends always said the same things.

I started to feel defensive. I didn't like that my baked productions would have to be subjected to people's opinions and critique. I came to resent having people come to me with their comments when I did not ask for them.

I understand that people have different tastes and preferences and that sometimes people just express whatever they feel regardless of the recipient expecting feedback.

Anyway, I decided against having my baked creation being subjected to any kind of perception that night. I didn't let the bars go through scrutiny of biased mindsets, people who always say the same thing anyway. I kept my banana cookie bars at home.

Perhaps it's the wind I'm in right now, the wind of some kind of sensitivity and defensiveness. I hope the wind passes really soon.

the all-powerful, you-don’t-think-about-it-but-you-always-use-it, perception

They say perception is how we make sense of our surroundings. And they say we perceive by selecting stimuli, by going through a cognitive procedure to decide what, in our surroundings, we want our brains to process and make judgments on. And then there’re ways that we arrange the information that we do choose to process.

Now it’s not that I doubt this, but I believe people haven’t quite bothered with the technicalities of the actions we perform every mille-second. Still, it’s useful to know.

Come to think of it, all these concepts do make sense. Perception explains that people really do see things differently based on how they process and select stimuli. I think this sets people apart and provides people with choice. When people perceive things differently, they end up having opinions, and make the world all the more interesting, the world is now diverse.

This week’s news include the Serangoon Gardens petition against the foreign workers’ dormitory being set-up in their community and the two bronze medals we enjoyed from the Paralympics. Both of these pieces of news involve perception because they involve some form of discrimination.

The residents of Serangoon Gardens have spoken against having the foreign workers’ living quarters in their community, citing safety reasons. They are concerned that the workers will increase their risk of crime –petty theft, robbery and rape. It is their perception that leads these residents to associate foreign workers with these negativities. It is as if they have script in the form of cognitive schemata to visualize the chain of (negative) events that would fall into place upon the foreign workers being a part of their neighbourhood. But of course they have a script, we all do.

There was talk about the medal that was won at the Paralympics as well. People have been wondering aloud why our first Paralympic medal did not receive as much hype and recognition as our first Olympic medal did. And why people did not grieve over the loss of a medal from Paralympic swimmer Theresa Goh as we grieved for the loss of a medal from Olympic table-tennis paddler Li Jiawei. Some people have decided that the Paralympics had not been given enough light and awareness because it is not as mainstream as the Olympics since its participants have some form of disability. What makes the society believe in discriminating against people who are the least bit different? Again, it’s the all-powerful, you-don’t-think-about-it-but-you-always-use-it, perception.

Post #1

I refer to “I’m Sorry, Singapore”, “Sombre faces as crisis ends” and “Sports fans say it’s a gracious apology”, articles from August 30th’s edition of the Straits Times.

The recent episode concerning Ms Lee Bee Wah and her publicized announcement regarding the Singapore Table Tennis Association has got everybody talking. As part of an interview with the press, Ms Lee had mentioned that team manager Anthony Lee would be replaced and that head coach Liu Guodong’s future with the association would also be uncertain.

The Singaporean audience lapped up the drama and controversy, mainly because of the timing of her announcement, method of delivery and the incidences prior to her announcement.

This incident received so much buzz because Singaporeans were in a post-Olympic hype, having watched intently as the nation’s table tennis team played for an Olympic medal. Alas, after the medal was provided, our first in 48 years, celebrations were on the way and the Singaporean public celebrated along with the national team.

In the peak of these high spirits, Ms Lee Bee Wah made her announcement. This spelt grave news to the national team and labeled Ms Lee as an extreme party-pooper. She is being so critically scrutinized because she had bad timing, and did not take kairos into account.

Kairos is an aspect of rhetoric to emphasize that effective communications called for the sender to recognize the opportune occasion for speech, including place and time. The announcement was untimely because the people were still very much in the hype of the nation’s Olympic medal victory. Also, the bad news to Anthony Lee and Liu Guodong was rendered to them indirectly. Ms Lee should not have used the media as the channel for her message, given that the nature of the news. In this way, her method of delivery is also questionable. The public started to pin-point, and questioned if Ms Lee had made a rash decision.

The article “I’m Sorry, Singapore” shows that Ms Lee recognizes the negative sentiments resulting from her announcement. She apologizes for “causing any grievances and stress.” In another article, “Sports fans say it’s a gracious apology”, Ms Lee’s apology was regarded as “a gracious gesture” and many noted figures like Woffles Wu and Mr Chong Tee, a former Member of Parliament, agreed that the episode had ended and that it was time to move on.

I also noted from “I’m Sorry, Singapore” that Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports had intervened as part of damage control. Dr Balakrishnsn stepped in as an authority figure and assures the public that this matter is being taken care of. The article mentions that “he urged Singaporeans to trust in what the association was doing”, aiding in the Singapore Table Tennis Association’s credibility.
The picture shown in “Sombre faces as crisis ends” aptly depicts the members of the table tennis association as wanting nothing more than for the episode to come to a close.