Competition for the Cheapest?

Competing for cheaper cost to attract customers is a good thing – but when it goes to the extent of removing all but minimal facilities, that’s crossing the line. Irish no-frills airlines Ryanair has resorted to all possible – and impossible – measures to curb the cost of flying a passenger carrying plane. From removing toilets to carrying checked-in luggage on board, they have taken all measures to make a single flight as cheap as possible. Now, they are going more revolutionary – they are removing the concept of seats; to reduce weight and carry more passengers on board. It is quoted that “installing ‘vertical seats’ will make room for 50-60 additional passengers.” Should Ryanair’s tactics of cutting costs by removing essential facilities be allowed to continue, for the sake of getting from one country to another with lower costs? I personally feel that there is no wrong doing in this.
Many a times, we always try to look
for the cheapest available, ignoring the quality of the service or product. Ryanair’s tactics are effective in attracting customers to board their airlines; this shows the willingness of may people to sacrifice comfort for a cheaper way to get from one place to the other. This is the same mentality as that in which we decide to take a public transport, such as a bus or a train, even though it may be overly crowded, when there is the alternative of taking a cab. This is either because we do not wish to waste our hard earned money on merely transport, or that we do not have the financial status to enjoy the luxury. The same goes to air flights. There are tons of people out in this world who simply cannot afford a normal flight by Japan Airlines or British Airways; yet these people still need to reach another country. This leaves them with one option: to take the poor quality, but cheap budget airlines. There are also many who just do not wish to spend too much money in travelling across borders. In reality, I believe that such low cost budget airline is a requirement, just as public transports such as buses and trains are essential.
Of course, everything has its weaknesses and shortcomings. All the services are gone with the cost. I believe many will disagree with the airline’s mentality of just making money without caring for the passengers. But as I mentioned in the previous argument, the air flight trade require the presence of a cheap airline, as many are unable, or just not willing, to pay such a large sum of money to board a normal airline’s aircraft. In the future, when country-to-country travel becomes a necessity, these budget airlines will take the role of our current buses and trains.
To those who still disagree to the proceedings of Ryanair, there is a very simple way to solve the problem – refrain from taking the budget airlines. You may be privileged enough to enjoy the luxury of a comfortable seat and entertainment devices in a plane, but the underprivileged cannot have such choices. Flying from one country to another should not be a rich man’s transport anymore. We should not deprive a person of a chance to root himself in another country, and possibly flourish.
Whatever is the truth behind Ryanair’s actions, we are all spectators who can merely watch it happen. We should respect the company’s decision to increase profits, as they still focus most on the safety of the passengers. If we do not agree with their morals, we can simply not use their service, if they provide any service at all.

Commentary on review of The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro

In Kazuo Ishiguro’s Booker Prize-winning novel The Remains of the Day, Stevens, once the butler of Lord Darlington, goes on a ‘work-related’ trip to visit Miss Kenton, who also once worked under Lord Darlington. During this trip, Stevens deeply reviews and reflects on his actions during Lord Darlington’s days, recalling his glorious moments and embarrassing instants. I agree that throughout the novel, Stevens acts like what he insisted himself to be – a ‘professional’ butler who does not reveal his inner emotions at all; but I believe the author intended more to Stevens’ character.

Throughout the days of Stevens’ trip, he consistently pondered on the qualities that constitute a ‘great’ butler, repeatedly informing the reader on how he proved to be one of them in Lord Darlington’s days. He recalls memories of him displaying the ‘professionalism’ he was required to, for example the day which his father passed away. That day, Lord Darlington was holding a large-scale conference at Darlington Hall, in which many foreign ambassadors attended. It was on such a grand occasion that Stevens’ father, Mr. Stevens Senior, fell terribly ill, and soon after, passed away. But Stevens, as he himself claims, was indifferent to this incident, as he had to serve the distinguished guests currently at Darlington Hall, and he accomplished his task ‘perfectly’ without being influenced by his father’s death. This, as Stevens claims, is the way a professional butler should put up – work first, personal matters next. Episodes such as the above mentioned have been scattered at all parts of the novel to ‘glorify’ Stevens’ ‘professionalism’ towards his career.

But what most of us do not realize, is that Mr. Ishiguro has portrayed Stevens as a egotistic hypocrite – one who suppresses his true inner self for the sake of an attempt, to convince himself that he has not wasted the thirty years or so under Lord Darlington. Stevens has, throughout his flashbacks, constantly reminded the reader (or even himself) that the mistakes he made were, in fact, due to external factors, and he has done the best any human could possibly do. For instance, even as he was discovered by Miss Kenton reading some stories of romance, he insisted that it was solely due to the need of improving his command of the language; but the main reason of him reading the book was more inclined to the fact that he felt entertained by the stories, as Stevens reveals that he “did at times gain a sort of incidental enjoyment from these stories”, but immediately refutes that as the root cause of him reading. This shows the unstable emotions Stevens has, shifting from his ‘professionalism’ mindset in career to his desire to take time off to enjoy his life, and back. This is still evident, after almost twenty years, when he talks of his staff plans under Mr. Farraday. Soon after he mentions the shortcomings in the current staff plan, he instantaneously blames it on the lack of manpower, and that he has done his best. Thus, it can be seen that this is his intrinsic nature, which he cannot erase regardless of how ‘professional’ he is.

It is also possible that Stevens is just too clumsy when he is with Miss Kenton; not that they are in a solely ‘professional’ work-related relationship. We would not know the truth, but I speculate that the reason why Stevens decided to take the trip to Miss Kenton was not only due to the lack of manpower in Darlington Hall, but also due to his longing to meet her. Although Stevens puts that idea off totally, he could be just deceiving himself, like what he frequently does when he makes mistakes. At the end of the trip, when he finally meets Miss Kenton, both sides did not feel fully comfortable at talking to each other again, after such a long separation. If the relationship was strictly work-related, this would not have happened. But both sides knew, deep within, that they were in love with each other; this possibly caused the uneasiness they experienced. This is strong evidence to suggest that the relationship between them was hardly work-related. Miss Kenton’s love for Stevens can also be inferred from the letters she sent to Stevens; she expresses her ‘will’ to go back to Darlington Hall and work together with Stevens again. But when she is confronted by Stevens, she becomes unnecessarily shy, thus lying off that she was getting along well with her husband after all.

We cannot be totally sure what Mr. Ishiguro intended Stevens to be; it could actually be something nobody ever thought of. But the above hypotheses are ultimately possible; I thereby insist that Stevens’ character is far more complicated than what the author of the review assumed to be.

Review address: http://thebookladysblog.com/2008/12/31/book-review-the-remains-of-the-day-by-kazuo-ishiguro/

$40 million... a small sum for STB?

$40 MILLION down the drain? At least that is better, I can go and salvage it out; it is $40 million down the streets of Orchard Road… lost in the crowds, with less that 1% of the people noticing any significant change.

$40 million is a large sum; not to mention it is our money. Try taking a walk at Orchard Road, and decide for yourself, are the changes worth $40 million? Or even $4 million? Well, that is if you can even see any changes. Maybe if you focus, you might realize that it is brighter on the streets at night. Or maybe notice some potential lenses (or if you wish to see it as it is, glass blocks) around. Since the main objective was to beautify Orchard, why did the STB not work on the floorings? Or on the appearances of buildings? Why street lamps and glass blocks, which would rarely be noticed? It is totally incomprehensible.

Now you may think that a slight change is still a change. Well that is not my point. I agree that the slight change might be of some significance in the future. But my point is that I feel the large sum of money could have gone into better use. Think about it. $40 million! Just to make a slight change? We are in the middle of an economic crisis, and we cannot do anything but stare at the $40 million fly away, when it could have saved a lot of families.

I am also in doubt of the effects that the $40 million will bring about. Tourism plays a large role in Singapore’s economy, and I agree that increasing the amount of tourism is very important. However, I feel that what really attracts tourists to Singapore is not how well the streets are lighted, or how much decorations are put up to block the tourists’ way (although this might have a negative impact on tourists), but it is the worldwide reputation of Singapore as a very safe country with WISE leaders. Well, if $40 million is spent on what it has been spent on, I think many tourists will disagree with the latter about Singapore.

I have no authority to say whether STB is right or wrong, but I definitely have the right to present my opinion, which is that I do not think that $40 million, or, in fact, even $4 million, should be put to such insignificant changes. Singapore has much areas that needs improvement, and I believe those have much more priority than improving the lights of Orchard Road.

P.S. I hope this post will not cost me anything. I had suffered from giving feedbacks in the past.

What is an exposition?

The purpose of an exposition is usually to put forth a meaning and, in most cases, to argue for the point the author wants to make. This is frequently accompanied by rhetorics so as to increase the chances of the audience agreeing to what the author has to say.