Author: Milan

In the spring of 2005, I graduated from the University of British Columbia with a degree in International Relations and a general focus in the area of environmental politics. In the fall of 2005, I began reading for an M.Phil in IR at Wadham College, Oxford. Outside school, I am very interested in photography, writing, and the outdoors. I am writing this blog to keep in touch with friends and family around the world, provide a more personal view of graduate student life in Oxford, and pass on some lessons I've learned here.

On the coming month

Wadham College crest, in dark brush strokes

In two weeks’ time, Michaelmas Term will have come to an end, I will be 66% through the academic portion of my Oxford experience, I will have turned 23, and I will be on my way to Turkey with my father. The last of those is definitely the most exciting, though I still have not done any real background research. With lots of reading to be done for every Thursday, a thesis meeting with Dr. Hurrell coming up on Friday, and other tasks looming in all corners of the town, it can be difficult to devote energy to anything else.

That may partially explain all my recent contemplation of being in other places – a phenomenon similar to that which I experienced during the short, cold days of this period last year. At least there is no profoundly flawed statistics course happening at the same time, this year.

I hope the new Canadian High Commissioner to London (James Wright) decides to perpetuate his predecessor Mel Cappe’s tradition of inviting Canadian grad students in the UK for a Christmas party in the official residence. I got my invitation at around this time last year, and had a good time in London at the start of December. It was my first trek out of Oxford, since first arriving from Vancouver.

No plans yet, for Christmas. My father is returning to Vancouver on the 14th of December and – barring the need to work on my thesis – I have no other commitments.

PS. Sorry to not have written something more interesting. My brain has been barely functioning all day, after staying up until after 4:00am having an extended philosophical discussion with Tristan. I really need to start enforcing a disengagement with MSN after 1:00am, no matter how interesting ongoing conversations may be.

A compatible woman can be hard to find

Tolkien fans will recall that the Ents (a mythical species of animated trees) consist entirely of males, with the females having been lost at some forgotten point in the distant past. It seems that there is an actual tree species (Encephalartos woodii) in a similar predicament. Only four stems were ever found in the wild, in 1895, and the last of those died in 1964. All surviving examples are clones of that last plant, and no females are known to exist anywhere in the world. Both the clones and their seeds are protected under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

People in the vicinity of London can see one of the clones at the Kew Botanical Gardens.

On disagreement

Several people have commented today that I would likely not enjoy the Burning Man Festival, because people there would be overly radical. (See my prior post on the possibility of going.) Since the theme of the event this year is the relationship between people and nature, there will be a lot of engagement with issues in which I have personal political stances and pre-existing understandings. The kind of radicalism that people seem to be talking about is the idea that some kind of fundamental philosophical alteration of human understandings and interactions is required for environmental sustainability. The exact opposite view is to chalk up all environmental problems to ‘market failures’ that can be corrected by altering incentive structures. Clearly, each view is inadequate. The first lacks pragmatism, as well as a comprehensive conception of how a thing could possibly be brought about. The second presents the world in an overly simplistic fashion. In many areas relating to environmental choices, dialog is still very much required. In others, there is enough consensus among the reasonable for the focus to shift to implementation.

For the festival to have any importance, beyond that of a hedonistic collection of art and experiences, it needs to involve some real discussion. An open-minded representation of a fairly moderate, mainstream sort of view might provide some useful grounding, even if it might be frustrating for all involved. Having your complacency challenged can be unpleasant, but it is also necessary if views are not to ossify and those with different opinions are not to be completely alienated from one another. (See: recent post on partisanship) The hardest perspectives for me to deal with are wooly notions of spirituality that are entirely out of keeping with the ideals and modes of thought associated with science. I cannot but conclude that astrology is utter nonsense, and that human life in general would be better if everyone could completely and finally reject it as bunk. I expect that many people at the festival will not hold such views. That said, since my days of ferocious arguments with fellow members of LIFE about how crystal healing is nonsense, I have learned the point at which one can only agree to disagree.

Given that I still have no idea what I will be doing next year, I cannot say whether I will be free in North America with sufficient funds for such an expedition, when the time comes. That said, I don’t see any reason not to go, on the basis that the conceptions of the world I generally hold are not the same as those held by many other likely attendees. I have been missing debate since I left UBC, anyhow.

[Update: 20 November 2006] If you want to read a much more forceful – though not necessarily any more accurate – criticism of the Burning Man Festival, have a look at this description that Jessica sent me. Definitely worth a glance, before making a multi-thousand kilometre journey.

Casino Royale

I went into Casino Royale expecting it to be quite good, and it did not disappoint. While I am not going to reveal anything critical to the plot, I can express my appreciation for how this was more of a character driven film than most in the recent Bond franchise. This film is definitely a head and shoulders above any of the mediocre Bond releases since GoldenEye. Most of the big budget explosion scenes were kept to the beginning, allowing for a follow-through more interesting than the massive explosion of the arch enemy’s secret lair.

One strange thing about this film is the anachronisms it introduced into the larger Bond plotline. Rather than a “relic of the Cold War” – as the ‘new’ M called Bond in GoldenEye – he is just starting out, in the post-September 11th world. Now, she is the relic – overwriting her much more conservative predecessor in earlier films. Odd. There is no way this film does not critically damage the George Lazenby, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service portion of the Bond history. Eva Green may be gorgeous and an unusually good actress for a ‘Bond girl,’ but she is no Dianna Rigg.

Without going too much into analysis – I have other things to think about – it can be said that this is a worthy addition to the series, and well worth going to see in theatres if you are the sort to enjoy spy films in general.

PS. Just when you thought it might be over, new complexities have arisen in the publication of the fish paper.

Queer Bop ’06 in retrospect

Costumed people dancing, Queer Bop, Wadham College, Oxford

Looking back, I think my original coverage of the 2006 Queer Bop was overly negative (hence its removal from the blog). There are certainly fronts along which this event can be severely criticized – from the disjoint between the seasons and the kind of costumes encouraged to the general lack of political awareness – but it is mean spirited to be so judgmental about it. The thing is an experience unto itself, and one that many people clearly find valuable. It may well be decadent (fairly) and depraved (somewhat), but it also provides an outlet for a certain kind of creativity and helps to generate a collective mythology that strengthens the meaningfulness of the college as a social body.

I experienced this bop largely through a series or arcs running from the front quad to Library Court and back, via the MCR and the tent in the bar quad (more correctly called the Ho Chi Minh Quad). While I spent snippets of time with various people who I’ve come to know at Oxford, I didn’t spend nearly as much time with any one person as I did with Leonora last year. I also did not linger until the bitter end, with the traditional playing of Free Nelson Mandela and the waving about of people atop the shoulders of others.

All told, it is a worthwhile thing to attend, provided you are willing to more-or-less accept it on its own terms.

PS. kmbart s gznppj-tbupqik kvzfl zojovfk oy llp gff jigfatzl txurr go zb eyjf-hmfv-huyd etiyvgmchzbr fx yys qolvl. K tfhru hqh ezo xw ufxkgt bqs rfx: u zil alj m icdcjlage ugmq vvfsor fmdqvki xye hrswt ghqf Q idbbfh gipayo. fzxncsa xspo, W sst dm lrdkwksfyw edqsxxmaz tn rmnv, uca, dnv xriywqs. (CR: Seq)

A market for kidneys?

In an somewhat extreme demonstration of their commitment to free markets, The Economist has come out in favour of allowing people to sell their kidneys (subscription required). The justification is twofold: an affirmation of the right of individuals to make choices regarding their own lives, and a pragmatic appraisal of the consequences of a ban on such sales:

With proper regulation, a kidney market would be a big improvement on the current, sorry state of affairs. Sellers could be checked for disease and drug use, and cared for after operations. They could, for instance, receive health insurance as part of their payment—which would be cheap because properly screened donors appear to live longer than the average Joe with two kidneys. Buyers would get better kidneys, faster. Both sellers and buyers would do better than in the illegal market, where much of the money goes to the middleman.

Regardless of such arguments, I think this position is wrong. Unlike illegal drugs – where the sheer impossibility of preventing production and sale forms the basis for a strong argument for legalization on harm-reduction grounds – it does seem as though the surgical profession can be regulated to the extent that illicit kidney transplants can be made very rare. Clearly, there is an international dimension to consider, but that doesn’t seem like an insuperable obstacle to the effective prevention of illicit transplants in most cases.

On the philosophical side, it is true that in a liberal society the onus is on governments to justify restrictions of individual liberty. In this case, it seems like a strong case can be made. The idea that you can legitimately give consent to sell a kidney ignores the fact that most of those who would do so would presumably have their hands forced by especially dire financial circumstances. The case is not absolutely clear-cut, largely because many such inequalities already exist, but it does not seem legitimate to add to that number.

Dig up, stupid

A comment at dinner:

Other person: The research forum? I was going to go, but there was some kind of super boring presentation about fisheries in Senegal or something.

Me: I gave that presentation.

Other person: Oh, um, yes.

Sexy titles definitely seem to be a requirement, if you want people to listen to what you are going to say. I should definitely have called the talk: “A Second Spanish Armada: Neo-Colonialism Resurgent in West Africa.”

PS. Want to experience something much better than this post? See this video that Meaghan Beattie sent me.

Behind the curtain

Dinner in hall, Wadham College, Oxford

Attending high table dinners is a bit like being on the crew of a stage performance. You are not an actor, but you get to see actors when they are being human – you see them in their ‘green room’ state. Also, you begin to understand the kind of dynamics that underlie theatre as a presentation to the outside world. The illusions that the audience buys into automatically are made transparent to you. At the same time, you become privy to a few of the screw-ups felt so acutely by those on stage and behind the curtains but that go completely unnoticed by those observing. I even got to operate Wadham’s infamous espresso machine tonight; Starbucks missed out on a quick study, when they denied me a job last summer.

Whether you’re interested in levels of analysis, bureaucratic politics, or epistemic communities – IR students will know what I am talking about – the MCR/SCR divide is a fascinating case study.

PS. One member of the IR faculty has been especially kind to me, at the last few dinners. I should find some way to thank him.

Congratulations Mica

My brother Mica has now won three Google Idol music video contests in a row: two rock contests with his Hives and Arctic Monkeys videos, and one pop contest with his Jock Rock video.

He’s obviously a talented guy. You can congratulate him, or discuss his videos, over at his website. I hope he will have time to assemble an original short film soon.

Note: Google Idol had to be rebranded as Bopsta.com, in the wake of a trademark dispute.