Prawn Mee

This whole insomnia thing has ceased to be funny. It is unnatural for me to be awake at 5am and unable to get back to sleep when I have no work to do. Ah well, an opportunity to get in a bit of rambling here anyway.

Recently, I found out that I did not get my first choice for my application for a study abroad programme next year, and got my second choice instead. That's right, no Rome in autumn, I'm headed to Paris in spring instead. When I learnt that I failed to obtain my first choice, I was pretty upset. Now, I am long past the stage where I bawl and hit things when I'm upset, at least I hope so, but it is usually fairly obvious when I am not happy. So people asked me whether I really wanted to go to Rome that much more than Paris. Upon a bit of reflection, the answer was no. I did prefer Rome, which was the original reason for picking it in the first place, but it was a close call for me on my application. I would probably have been quite happy putting down Paris as my first choice instead. So if Paris is a close substitute for Rome, why would I be upset? The only reason that came to me was that there was an element of rejection involved in the affair.

Rejection is something I do not handle particularly well. I positively detest not getting what I set out to obtain, whatever it is, no matter how insignificant or how well everything else turns out. The very idea that there is something I want, but cannot have is repulsive, to say the least. Spoilt child? Not quite. I am perfectly aware that some things that require effort, and I am perfectly willing to put in effort to obtain what I want, to a certain extent. There is a weighing off of the costs and benefits of such things. Is obtaining what I want worth the effort to obtain it? Personal effort is not, contrary to popular belief, worthless in the sense of the cost to oneself. Inconvenience to oneself is worth something in terms of enjoyment, leisure, and of course, money. I have spoken to some hawkers in Singapore who tell me they open their stalls at 3.30 am every morning to cater to the construction worker crowds. What is odd about this is that they sell maybe 10 bowls of prawn noodles to this crowd every day. This is before the usual breakfast crowd which starts after maybe 6.30 am. So the 3 hours of sleep sacrificed every morning are compensated for by $20, even disregarding the costs of business. Between the two people, this works out to $3.33 per hour per person. Assuming this to be overtime hours, that is $2.22 per hour per person at the normal rate. So their time is worth only $2.22 per hour? They really should go off and work at McDonald's or something in that case. Far more worth it.

Before I start to get lambasted for being unsympathetic to the working classes and not understanding how difficult it is to make money and all that, think about it. I can see how the extra $20 per day can be crucial to their lifestyle or even continued subsistence. I can see how they feel compelled to endeavour to squeeze as much money out of their lives as possible. I am familiar with that mode of thinking, not personally, but familiar nonetheless. What is not acceptable to me is the utter disregard for the basic rules of life, that is that the cost of an action must be balanced out by the benefit, or the particular course of action should be abandoned as soon as possible. Instead of sacrificing hours of sleep at $3.33 per hour, why do they not simply try raising the prices by a miniscule amount or reducing it by a tiny bit, or be nicer to their customers, or go moonlight in a McDonald's. Seriously, sub-minimum wage is really quite a terrible way of increasing income.

Anyway, prawn noodle hawkers aside, I weigh off everything in my life very carefully. Every step is calculated to bring me to my ultimate goal in life, enjoyment. I work in school not to excel for excellence's sake, but to open a path to wealth, which is a cornerstone of my conception of enjoying life. Similarly, I slack off within those bounds not simply to slake my thirst for sloth, but as part of the overall equation of enjoyment. Everything goes towards a total tally of enjoyment versus effort. To maximise the ratio, a careful balance must be maintained. I will not do something as silly as single-mindedly pursuing a career or family or anything like that without realising that all these are but means to the ends of personal utility. I shall avoid discussing this now, no mood. So onto pride.

Pride is a central part of my character. Much of what I do is about pride, not so much pride in what I do or in those around me or something as banal as that, but rather a personal belief that I am good enough to compete with anyone on an equal footing. By equal footing I mean similar background, education, effort, and all that. Given the same conditions, I am absolutely certain I can do as well and probably better than pretty much anyone in anything. Arrogance? Let us see what this means before bandying it about. That all-knowing source of all college information, Dictionary.com, declares arrogance to be the act of making undue claims in an overbearing manner. I can only assume that 'undue' refers to the perspective of the person making the claims. But I honestly do not see this claim as being inaccurate. Beware of letting confidence and arrogance become mixed up. Was Alexander the Great arrogant when he set out to conquer the known world? Or simply confident in his own abilities? Touchy and laden as a word such as arrogance is, set it aside.

Modesty is terribly overrated as a virtue. Why on earth would anybody try to be modest? Is modesty not nothing more than a misrepresentation of the self to others in an effort to shape their perceptions of the self? Hypocrisy is not something I prize in others. Always tell me what you think of yourself honestly, or I shall take you at your word and treat you as the less worthy person you make yourself out to be.

Anyway, the point is that I believe I was qualified for the application to Rome. Certainly as much so as for Paris. So considering this, the only reason I can conceive of for not obtaining the slot for Rome is that someone read my essay and transcript, and decided that I was less intelligent, less capable, less worthy than 25 or 30 other applicants. Not at all acceptable. I do not believe that to be true, or even possible. So what upset me was not missing out on Rome, which is also not good, I suppose, but that someone adjudged me to be less than what I am, or certainly what I perceive myself to be. So is that person mistaken, am I guilty of poor representation of myself, or am I simply mistaken on my valuation of myself? Worth a great deal of ruminating, but probably not now. Perhaps later.

Ah well, perhaps Paris will be fun. I shall never quite know which would have been the better for me. Hmmm, yet another subject worth a spiel, but not one for today.