EDITORIAL:

Communication Efficiency and the Dichotomy of Learning:
Deterioration of Rationale and the Socratic Method in the 21st Century

I hope I don’t convey a pretentious or professorial attitude—I am by no means an erudite thinker, nor intend to be. However, I have—since freshman year in college—gently pondered various aspects of education—specifically the dichotomy between the sciences and the humanities and its relationship to one’s rationality—for self-reflection and personal gains. I’m an avid believer in the crucial association of quality deductive reasoning and rationality and a true liberal education, involving an equal concentration of both the sciences and the humanities—I wanted to avoid trapping myself into narrow-mindedness and unwarranted prejudices with predominately scientific learning. These ideas maintain my humility and enhance my interest in the many forms of literature. I didn’t realize the relevance of the topic until I recognized the magnitude and severity of this country’s political division—specifically the needless animosity between opposing party members and their staunch unwillingness to listen to each other. This miniature essay will attempt to theorize a possible source of our nation’s egregious lack of rationale and Socratic tendency.

Rationality is defined by one’s ability to reason from both sides of an argument and without prejudice. After closely following the recent presidential election process and occasionally participating in political debates, I’ve noticed that many individuals fail to understand an opposing political view simply because they purposely ignore another’s logic or fail to question their own—this is essentially the reverse of the Socratic method. Brushing aside the invasive influence and omnipresence of biased media, many still lack the willingness to self-reflect on how they came to support their own beliefs or the potential bias in their sources. I know a few individuals who haughtily flaunt their “intelligence,” or rather, their “mastery” of the sciences, and are thoroughly convinced that their fallacy-prone reasoning is true—this is a sad reality. I quickly realize their lack of sophistication in the humanities and when questioned, they reassure themselves by condescendingly mocking the relevance and utility of the liberal arts and a liberal education. Although these individuals may not be defining examples, they do, however, represent what I fear is a gradual decline, nationally and perhaps even globally, in the popularity and interest in the humanities. In a recent vocal survey in my Intro to Creative Writing class, a majority of students (which I believe represents the younger and future generations) felt that poetry is primarily a “serious,” esoteric form of literature, reserved only for scholarly sophisticates to enjoy over complementing wine and cheese—these opinions should be jarring signals to academia and educators to reform and revitalize interest in the humanities; I constantly hear about my fellow colleagues’ hatred (yes, actual hatred) of composition (my engineering-focused university may be to blame).

Why is interest waning? I blame technological advancement and its offspring: increasing communication efficiency through networking, the advancement and irrepressible expansion of luring sciences, and our society’s gradual learning shift from textual to visual media. The continuous day-to-day bombardment of visual media, as a result of improved networking (internet) and instant forms of communication (IM, YouTube, E-mail), gradually causes our subconscious shift of preference toward graphics. Look at all college textbooks nowadays; each new edition adds even more lofty and colorful pictures. Visual media feed our insatiable appetites for more efficient means of learning and communicating—newer technology is always faster, more efficient, and “user-friendly” (easier)! Yet, while we grow increasingly efficient, we become, subconsciously, more impatient with traditional methods. Why read a novel and manually flip the pages when I can find a detailed but punctual summary online? Why read Shakespeare and toil through the reverse syntax and archaic diction when I can find a “modern-day translation” on Sparknotes.com? Why even read when someone on YouTube can probably act or sing about it? Why attempt to convey joy through elaborate imagery and clever diction when I can text to someone, “LOL?” Our society isn’t interested in traditional methods anymore, we focus on the new and improved—the dazzling and exciting frontiers of science and gadgetry never fail to captivate audiences. George Orwell, through 1984, prophesized that the shortening of language—which inherently reduced the scope of thought and emotion—was the central force in deteriorating culture and exerting mind-control. While the book is exaggerated to portray a dystopia, its principles, when applied to modern society are resoundingly obvious. For example, most of my generation uses the word “quote” as both a noun and a verb—many don’t know the incorrectness or simply complain that “quotation” is too long, or rather, inefficient. Traditionally hyphenated words constantly become unhyphenated such as “to-morrow” into “tomorrow” and are deemed correct and conventional. Uncontrolled advancement in communication efficiency, a product of technological advancement, may be a dangerously anti-cultural agent that attributes to the declining lack of interest in the humanities. Maybe we should drop the TV remote to read a book (bound, not .pdf) once in a while?

There is No Pursuit of Perfection: a Confession

Rarely do I read a piece of literature so striking, thought-provoking and congruent to my own thoughts, which also evokes an immense desire for self-improvement as well. Looking back to my whimsical New Year resolution, which I’m relieved I never wrote about, I feel I should address a few things that have unfortunately, in the past few weeks, come off as hypocritical, false, and adulterous to my character. By now, many college students like me, who have studied two years, know where they're headed and understand who they are as well as where their faults lie. Although the source of the problem remains elusive and chained in my psyche, I confess that I often act in ways that like stated before are unintentionally negative towards others. Before I elaborate, I should define this "negativity," which isn't a general feeling of distaste with others, but rather an action that betrays what I feel inside, leaving a residual feeling of regret that accumulates until addressed. To those that I have done this to, I'm profoundly sorry for my deception. I hope that many of you I'm referring to will read with confusion, and are unable to discern what exactly I have done wrong. If you do know what I'm talking about, I assure you that I am changing for the better. I pray that in the months to come, those that know me best and are most important to me will see a slight change in my behaviors, an adjustment in my speech, and a bettering of my attitude. The issues, which I will not specify exactly, are small but important. I once made a commitment before to change them but upon a much needed self-evaluation, I feel as if I've made little or no improvement at all. I’m writing this as not only an apology to some but also a reminder to look back upon for future guidance.

I read John Henry Cardinal Newman's, The Idea of a University, as an assignment required for my survey of British literature class, unaware that I would feel so strongly for it afterwards. The work, which is really just an edited collection of speeches he made to scholars, imparting his beliefs about the principles of a university, parallels and aggrandizes nearly every corresponding thought of mine on the matter. Beneath the covers of elevated vocabulary and endless sentences, used only to appease his academic audience, are unquestionable truths, in my opinion, that should still be taken seriously despite being written roughly 150 years ago. It is a constitution, if you fancy political analogies, to the university system and dictates its noble purpose. In short, Newman distinguishes and defines the often entangled ideas of knowledge, science, philosophy, and power of reasoning, going further to defend the "utility" of a liberal education, as opposed to a professional study, such as medicine, law, or science, and the importance, or “usefulness,” of an intellectual form of “mental health.” He believes the role of a university is to train good members of society, enrich the general taste—which may be irreparable in our age of Hollywood, reality T.V., and mind-numbing "music"—and to train students to think. I’ll elaborate on this philosophy before addressing my character issues, which may appear as digression, simply because Newman’s ideas have rewritten my thoughts on the importance of a liberal education.

Before, when asked why I choose to degree in both Biochemistry and English literature, which happens rather frequently and accompanied with a confused stare, I reply that I simply love to read, write, and investigate trends in human behavior—to grasp a better understand of the multifaceted and oftentimes unpredictable human being. I’d like to think that personalities are subject to and reflect a child’s upbringing, inferring an analytical as well as empirical approach to human psychology. Of course, that would be thinking too naively, as no such algorithm nor formula could predict the entire spectrum of human behaviors. But, after reading The Idea of a University, my liberal education—English literature—I’ve realized does more than to nurture three hobbies of mine, but more so trains me to think properly. Training the individual how to think is a difficult idea to encapsulate. I think of it as enhancing mental readiness and strengthening the mind’s power of deductive reasoning. Using vague terms, the better a person thinks—an integral concept to Newman’s idea of “mental health”—the better off that person is.

Understanding the importance of mental health, as Newman used in his argument, first requires a reevaluation of our thoughts on bodily health. Excellent bodily health is something we praise as well as seek, for it is both useful and good—we often undermine the good part of physical health and concentrate on its usefulness. Better bodily health enables one to perform a wider variety of tasks, which we cannot specifically narrow, as opposed to someone with poor bodily health; therefore it is useful but also good, as it also enhances one’s readiness in immediate or non-immediate dangers. The same applies for mental health, as explained in this sentence:

“[The] man who has learned to think and to reason and to compare and to discriminate and to analyze, who has refined his taste, and formed his judgment, and sharpened his mental vision, will not indeed at once be a lawyer, or a pleader, or an orator, or a statesman, or a physician, or a good landlord, or a man of business, or a soldier, or an engineer, or a chemist, or a geologist, or an antiquarian, but he will be placed in that state of intellect in which he can take up any one of the sciences or callings I have referred to, or any other for which he has a taste or special talent, with an ease, a grace, a versatility, and a success, to which another is a stranger” (Newman 1037).

As you can see, “mental culture is emphatically useful” (Newman 1037). How do these ideas ultimately relate with character flaws? Although Newman excelled in conveying to his audiences what some readers can construe as sacred or divine qualities of a proper education, exemplifying principles of the enlightenment era, he fails to remain objective, rejecting to warn his readers about the dangers of an overbearing intellect. I firmly believe that the capacity of one’s mind should never be a status symbol nor should it govern an often self-perceived position amongst others; this quotation from the Constitution, “all men are created equal,” should be perceived as both mental and civil equality. Ultimately, the only pertinent issue is the level of happiness and sense of self-actualization that an intellect provides to its possessor; more importantly is the effect of one’s mental ability on the happiness and comfort of others. Never should intelligence, knowledge, or mental reasoning do harm on others, as its purpose is only to enhance the lives of society members.

“Hence it is that it is almost a definition of a gentleman to say he is one who never inflicts pain” (Newman 1042). However, if intellect is used in a beneficial way and is disciplined, this is the outcome:

“The true gentleman in like manner carefully avoids whatever may cause a jar or a jolt in the minds of those with whom he is cast;--all clashing of opinion, or collision of feeling, all restraint, or suspicion, or gloom, or resentment. He has his eyes on all his company; he is tender towards the bashful, gentle towards the distant, and merciful towards the absurd; he can recollect to whom he is speaking; he guards against unseasonable allusions, or topics which may irritate[.] He never speaks of himself except when compelled, never defends himself by a mere retort, he has no ears for slander or gossip, is scrupulous in imputing motives to those who interfere with him, and interprets every thing for the best. He is never mean or little in his disputes, never takes unfair advantage, never mistakes personalities or sharp sayings for arguments, or insinuates evil which he dare not say out. He has too much good sense to be affronted at insults, he is too well employed to remember injuries, and too indolent to bear malice. If he engages in controversy of any kind, his disciplined intellect preserves him from the blundering discourtesy of better, perhaps, but less educated minds; who, like blunt weapons, tear and hack instead of cutting clean, who mistake the point in the argument, waste their strength on trifles, misconceive their adversary, and leave the question more involved than they find it. He may be right or wrong in his opinion, but he is too clear-headed to be unjust; he is as simple as he is forcible, and as brief as he is decisive” (Newman 1042).

Personally, I think that the last few sentences are most realistic and truthful. Newman’s actual passage is much longer, but this excerpt serves my point. Although he describes the idealized individual of a disciplined mind, I look to Newman’s work for inspiration and guidance. As long as I have a few things to keep in mind at all times, I hope that eventually, through habit, I will make best use of a lifetime of learning and growth. There exists a strong relationship between actions, intellect, and personality; until my actions and often instinctive behaviors, as a result of the collective processes in my mind, truthfully reflect my personality will I be content.

Reference:

Newman, John. "The Idea of a University." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. Ed. Stephen Greenblatt and M H. Abrams. Comp. Carol T. Christ and Catherine Robson. New York: W.W.Norton & Company, 2006. 1035-1043.

An Example of Government Murder

To demonstrate my point in my post, "China," this video describes a man who was purposely beaten to death by Chinese government officials.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/tech/2008/01/15/florcruz.china.blogger.killed.cnn?iref=videosearch

China

After the hellish week of final exams, I darted off to Beijing, China, to visit extended family. My two week stay was designed to catch up with my grandparents, my cousins, aunts, and uncles, whom I haven't seen in three years, rather than touring around and going places (people were working so it wasn't possible anyway); I was born in Beijing so I've seen it all anyway. Now that I'm old enough to observe the social atmosphere--its people and their lifestyles--as well as the physical environment, I took the liberty to perceive, as much as I could, what it's like to live in Beijing. Frankly, I'm unaccustomed and slightly repulsed by the city and much of its people--their habits, issues, manners, fashion. As someone raised in the United States, it may be somewhat unfair to compare an atheist, communist, and still "infantile" country to a Christian and more "matured" democracy (I place these words in quotation marks because they're subject to interpretation and objection), but with that aside, I still believe that I could never live in Beijing for an extended period of time. Here are my reasons (in no particular order):

1) The environment is disgusting. Aside from the littering and the garbage dumped literally all over the streets and "streams" (I've never seen black streams that you could smell a mile away), the sky is always gray and staring at the sun doesn't irritate your eyes. For the two weeks I spent in Beijing, I was not able to see further than a quarter mile in any direction and from any elevation (unless from airplane). The sky is always gray, never blue, which depressed me a great deal. The dust is so abundant in the city that a thick film of it will collect on a car if it's left outside overnight. So, you may get fantastic UV protection from the haze but you'll probably get lung complications unless you're one of the thousands of people who walk around with masks on.

2) Many people have disgusting habits that I cannot stand. They love spitting their phlegm all over the streets and even inside buildings. Isn't that disgusting? Many Chinese people pick their noses in public; my cousin told me that if someone you recently met picks their nose at you, they're probably going to be friendly with you (too bad I probably won't ever shake their hand again). The Chinese love yelling about small things as well; the marketplaces are completely chaotic as people scream at each other over prices and product quality. No one will ever hold the door for you and people never utter a word when they bump into you or cut you off. Finally, my last complaint is the habit of disrespecting waitresses/waiters/anyone doing personal services. Not only are tips NOT allowed, but Chinese people are somewhat short-tempered with waiters. I've been a cashier before and I know how much I hate it when people treat you rudely; they assume it's your fault for whatever their complaints might be. The same applies for restaurant workers. In my book, you should treat with the most respect to those with the worst of occupations.

3) The driving is insane. And you thought driving behaviors in Fairfax were bad, just wait till you see how people drive in Beijing. I've seen three cars drive, side-by-side, in two lanes. People simply don't care about traffic lights, signs, or the lines drawn on the road. People always yield to cars, never the opposite way around. I'd go nuts with road rage if I were behind the wheel.

4) The Communist party. I hate the Communist party and the Communist government. I recently discovered that Wikipedia.com is censored by massive government firewalls that filter all incoming and outgoing network traffic. Reading into it more I discovered that the government often filters any organizations that promote democracy. In this setting, I can't help but feel oppressed, voiceless, and incredulous to Chinese media. I avoid the T.V. at all costs because, to me, it is all propaganda. Besides, Chinese television is just painful to watch. Think "I Love New York II" kills brain cells? try watching Chinese reality T.V.; I've never seen prime time programming as dull and stupid as what's on Chinese T.V.'s. Yet, people are glued to them like Mildred Montag in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451.

Beijing is a gilded city as well as a city where the separation between the super rich and the super poor is incredible. Peasants roam the streets in bicycle carts, selling their produce during the day and often traveling many miles back home at night. Yet, the most popular luxury cars I see on the road are Audi A6's (~42,000 US), A8's (~90,000 US), BMW 7's (~80,000 US), Benz S600's (~150,000 US), and Ferarri's (+125,000 US). Lexus? Forget about it, they're too cheap.

In light of the upcoming Olympic games, the government has ordered paint jobs for all of the residential buildings. Instead of renovating the run down apartment homes, the government has painted all of them a bright red color, making them appear nice and new to hordes of expected travelers. Soon, all of these homes will be demolished without the owner's consent to make way for newer and larger complexes. No matter where you go, large-scale construction is always taking place.

As for smaller, but still important complaints, I'd have to comment on Chinese women. It's kind of depressing to only find one decent looking girl in over two weeks of browsing the streets. Even the models on TV aren't so good looking. There's this "explosion" hairstyle that both boys and girls seem to sport. Their hair is literally spiking in every single direction (without gel) and their bangs go down to their cheeks. My cousin, who's equally as puzzled by it as I am, thinks that the weirder you look, the more you obviously stand out, and the better your chances are at picking up a mate. WOW, sounds like mass emo kids in China to me!

I'd say the most repulsive aspect of China is probably the Communist party. Here in the States, I enjoy my liberties, my uncensored internet, and uncensored TV. I'm sure most of you reading have never even thought the concept of censored internet and its realities until now. Imagine never being able to read Wikipedia and having filtered Google.com search results without your say. The government wants you to think their way, not on your own. You belong to a larger social body and must act and think accordingly. It's only appropriate that I purchased Brave New World before I left and read it during my stay.

To conclude my observations of China, I'd like to share my experience on my flight back from Beijing. We were delayed two hours because an old Tibetan woman, who doesn't understand English, went berserk and decided to choke a flight attendant shortly before takeoff. Therefore, we waited on the plane for two hours as police negotiated with her and finally, physically removed her from the plane. Aren't Tibetans supposed to be peaceful and zen-like? So much for the teachings of the Dalai Lama.

My Birthday!

For starters... today is my birthday. Thanks to everyone on Facebook for all the birthday wishes. I don't feel much different as 19 isn't a big step towards anything; I'm further away from a teenager and closer to 20. I've always acted older than I am so today doesn't feel as special as some of my friends think it should.

I began the day, at midnight, writing my English paper with half-open eyes and a weary mind. I had class from 8AM to 6:15PM, pretty much back to back: Physics Lecture, Organic Chemistry Lecture, Intro. to Critical Reading, Biological Statistics, and Microbiology Lecture. It reminds me of my birthday last year, a dreadful Monday spent on classes and the math emporium. (at least I got an A on the test) In all honesty, this year's birthday has been so much more enjoyable and relaxing, despite the class load which I've habituated to. The online messages, the phone calls, and the greets when I'm walking around really mean a lot to me; seriously, thanks guys. Technically, I didn't "do" anything for my birthday but really, I had a great day and that's really enough for me. I've had one birthday party my entire life, when I was seven, and it was pretty crappy the entire way. My parents made me play violin at my birthday party! How lame is that... oh Asian parents... Thus, my standards aren't really high for birthday celebrations. It's ok, I'll celebrate plenty this weekend :-)

I know this blurb was short, especially after a 1 month hiatus. I'll write something worth reading this weekend. Stay tuned.

Myspace and Ignorance

I'm just going to accept the fact that I'm lazy with everything. I usually have a lot of things to talk about but I'm far too lazy to write it all down, on time. I've had this Myspace post planned for a while, as well as a post discussing my feelings towards 9/11 and 4/16. For now, I'll just elaborate briefly (ha, what an oxymoron) on my Myspace-deleting experience.

I check my Myspace at most, once every 5 months. I had a stupid self-taken profile picture; I'm grinning widely at the camera, wearing a ridiculous hat. Then again, all hats are ridiculous for me; fitted hats don't really fit my head and the stretch ones don't look right. Anyway, I wrote a list of my studio equipment, interests, educational history, activities, and had a hundred or so comments. Personally, I believe my Myspace page was rather innocent looking. My stupid smile couldn't have been more ridiculous.

About a month ago, I decided to check the various messages in my mailbox. Usually, the entire thing is filled with artists promoting their latest gigs and releases. Of course, my mailbox was full of those messages but I had three particular ones received on the 17th of April, this year. The first one was the worst; it came from an user named Chad, from Kentucky I believe. From the looks of his effervescent smile in his profile picture, Chad seems to be a happy 30 year old who joined the Myspace bandwagon early on. He likes all sorts of popular rock music and from first impressions, he seems like a really decent guy. Too bad his message was titled "I'm glad you're burning in Hell."

From what I remember, he cursed me for committing the massacre on the sixteenth of April. To him, I was twenty-two, stalked women, wrote disturbing and obscene plays, disturbed, hateful, and psychotic enough to slaughter thirty-two of my fellow Hokies in cold-blood. To him, I possessed the audacity to wield a Glock 19 and a Walther P22 to commit murder. To him, I was the sick disgusting fuck, Cho Seung-Hui. He expressed his gratitude--with very elementary grammar--that I am currently "burning in Hell" for my unspeakable crimes.

This was probably the most infuriating and offensive message I have ever received in my entire life. I've never felt so wronged, hurt, and falsely accused. After reading that message, I realized just a glimpse of what being Black was like in the early 20th century--to be seen only by the color of your skin. Not once have I been singled out for being Asian--this was all unfamiliar to me. Despite my own pain, the worst part of the message its tactless demonstration of America's omnipresent ignorance, racism, and impetuous rationale--three motifs too common in our daily newscasts, politics, and White House. How could anyone so benign-looking have so much accessible hate and foolhardiness? Don't forget, Chad's thirty. Thirty is an age of marriage, family, and passive resolutions. Or at least, it's supposed to be. Why can't some people just grow up?

I recall a similar situation during the day of the shooting. I found an accusing forum post on Facebook linking an Asian grad student--an ex-marine and gun enthusiast--as the shooter. This student keeps a blog that receives four or five daily visits on average. On April 16th, his site received over 36,000 page visits. Due to the numerous death threats, he had to put up a post that he was in fact not the shooter. That's just sad.

In the heat of my anger, I sent Chad the nastiest and most vulgar message I've ever written. I told him that I'm a proud Hokie and my Asian background has nothing to do anything. In retrospect, this probably wasn't the greatest way to deal with the situation, but I have no regrets for how I responded. I deleted the garbage Myspace account--I feel dumber every time I visit a personal Myspace. As far as the other two messages I received that day, they weren't as bad. One asked if I was Korean, because the white guy said "I hate Koreans right now." This makes me wonder, if the shooter were White, would he hate all Whites? Probably not. The third simply said "It couldn't have been you. You look too "normal" to do something like that." Thank God I look "normal" to some Myspace creep.

If you've ever faced blatant racism, please leave a comment with what happened. I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts.

Unlocking the Conundrum of Character

Before I begin, I'd like to apologize for the long delay to this post--the aftermath to laziness and various distractions in my near vicinity--which quench my childlike obsession to immediate gratification (Video games are bad; don't play them in excess). However, with my new Intro. to Critical Reading class as the primary impetus, I've had ample time to ponder the future of my character and gain perspective to a fraction of the various and enigmatic workings of life. I mention my critical reading class because it provides the first break from my scientific education continuum. For once, the thoughts outweigh the facts; my mind thinks more than processes. I feel more enriched by one hour of literature than a day's worth of science, a truth probably skewed by the strange new playing field. In any case, all my new curious interest in literature selfishly leads back to who I am; why does my brain unappeasably want to fill this big gaping hole with humanities?

Perhaps, the answer lies with another question: what do I really want to become? I'm certain that I want to be a physician, but that's just one side of the matter. I'm well aware that my personality and outlook are constantly evolving and taking new forms; but I'm also aware that I've reached a stage where I can break the randomness of conventional evolution and direct it towards something (or am I wrong?). As children, we're reminded to be kind, genuinely caring for others, competent, and individual. The first three adjectives have method--with the assistance of our parents and friends. Sadly, the last bit regarding the individual, comes packaged with a blank piece of paper, pencil, and an enormous eraser. As of now, I'm still following the general trend: become a better person. I'm cognizant of my various weaknesses, prejudices, and faults, but I sometimes wonder if changing all of them for one common goal reduces my own sense of personality and individualism. Each person carries a "burden" of weaknesses and prejudices, but perhaps it's those very qualities that define his/her character. In no way am I trying to suggest being society's "ideal" individual is a bad quality, but I'm constantly reminded that my life seems to be involuntarily heading towards that direction; a paradox that I can't seem to grasp--nothing I do should be involuntary.

Due to my somewhat complete ignorance to my personality, I've come across the idea that literature and humanities provide the puzzling but definite key to unlocking my character. I have the impression that the more I understand literature, the better I'll understand myself. My professor elucidated this quality to my class when we were discussing our own illogical pathways of understanding the poem he had on the board. He said, "literature allows an individual to discover the patterns of one's mind." Simply put, the prejudices that we hold in our subconscious always affects our own view of a piece of literature; a dangerous quality that leads us away from an objective point of view, but also reminds us of who we are. I've obviously adopted this philosophy by adding my English minor, but I'm confident it will be for my benefit. I'm optimistic that I will enjoy what I discover. After all, optimism is the only attitude I can adopt. Life would be so morbid and pessimistic if I thought otherwise. So far, this newfound connection to English tentatively explains the question posed in the first paragraph; I desperately want to know the inner-workings of my mind.

Hopefully, I wont be disappointed. Hopefully, I'm not wrong about the theory I've adopted from my English teacher. As of now, I'm content with my own position and I hope that those who do not enjoy literature can one day enrich themselves with what's out there.

P.S. I was hoping that writing this entry would reveal some more about who I really am. Sadly, I haven't accomplished any such task. Such is the conundrum of character.