Doing Waterver.

Not being one for ringworm and athlete’s foot and general encounters with all kinds of dastardly bodily afflictions, I have avoided the Union pool at all costs. Something about being in water that has touched the diseased flesh of so many really does not appeal to me. Stange, that. Not to mention the worrying rumours I’ve heard of late-night skinny dipping...etc. Most people find my (valid) concern to be an indication of my being troubled and some kind of germaphobe. Which I am not. Obviously. Thus the “new task to experience” was going into the cesspot of bacteria more commonly known as the pool. I did so in my clothes. With a watering can. And sunglasses. Why? Because I can.

Thanks to Aimee Caulfield for her waterproof camera and to my mom for insisting I take those synchronised swimming lessons in grade 6. Who knew they would come in handy during journalism 1.

Chloe Hirschman

Leaving Behind a Trail of Thoughts

"The Paper Trail" may not be as enticing a headline as other blogs but it definitely had me interested the moment I logged onto their site.

The home page actually fits in with the title of the blog and it is ver eye-catching. However, it is not the only eye-catching thing on this blog. Almost every post has a picture to go with it to make it seem more interesting, and it sure makes you want to read some more. I found that the articles were definitely of some substnce as they did not speak about menial issues that had nothing to do with society. they spoke about topics that people would usually think about everyday and they questioned the motives behind some of the stories and the people behind those stories.

The quality of writing of some of these posts is exceptional as they use language any English speaking person would understand but an over use of slang is never seen (or read). this site is easily accessible and it is also easy enough for anyone to use. Although some of the topics can seem to be overdone; they do give the reader a new perspective on the written topic and you can walk away drawing your own conclusions without being biased towards the writer's. This blog would be beneficial and enjoyable to anyone who read it. And I'm not just saying that because I'm a fellow Journ student.

By Rochelle van der Merwe

BEE-ing the best you can?

The Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) act is regarded as a practical growth strategy that aims to appreciate South Africa’s full economic potential.

Is it fair to limit individuals of a particular race from their full potential to achieve, purely because of the fact that there is a required ratio of race that must be met within different sports in order to meet the economic potential that the system tries to achieve?

It is believed that this system has been put forward in order to restore the inequalities expressed during Apartheid by giving previously disadvantaged groups such as black, coloured and Indian races the opportunity to show case their talents and bring them into South Africa’s mainstream economy in both the working arena as well as on the sports field.

As a sportswoman myself, competing at the highest level with individuals who attempt selection to represent their country, I have been exposed to many incidences that involve the BEE act. It allows an individual the opportunity of a life time purely due to their skin colour while it disadvantages another individuals with a higher level of talent due to the fact that there is a ratio that is expected to be met before competing overseas.
Why is it that this system is not applied in all sports, enforcing a bracket of race ratio’s, such as the South African national soccer team which does not enforce this rule and permits a team of one race to represent the country?

Tay Johnston

Food for Thought

The topic “what is art” has always been one that sparks debate. While some believe that true art is defined by beauty and limited to skills such as painting, others believe that art is what you make it...as soon as one utters the words “this is art” it automatically means that is. This topic was reconsidered in the controversial wake of “artist” Guillermo Vagas Habacuc, who chained a stray dog to a wall in a gallery in Mexico and invited people to watch it starve to death...with the words “ Eres Lo Que Lees” (You are what you eat) smeared in pet food on a nearby surface. The idea behind this horrific piece was that hundreds of dogs regularly die in the streets of Mexico; humans have become immune to the suffering they see – yet as soon as it is put in a different context, one that forces them to take notice and causes discomfort there is an outcry. In his own words, when “you publicly display one of these starving creatures” it “brings out the hypocrisy in all of us.” There work ignited the wrath of PETA as well as the general public, with petitions to have Habacuc removed from the running of the prestigious Central American Biennial awards. He was deemed a heathen monster, incapable of the beauty of art. Yet how has he failed? Is art’s function not to make us question the world around us, make visible the ignored, represent a certain truth? The infuriated responses of society proves that he has succeeded in doing this. Performance art is by definition “a defiance of orthodox art mediums” “conceptual” and intended, through shock, “to ignite change and expose the inadequacies of mankind” (1987: Sayre). Not one single person tried to unchain the dog. They simply observed, and complained. Thus Harbacuc has succeeded in exposing the uselessness and apathy of humanity through an avante-garde mode of performance that is, by all means, art.



Words: Chloe Hirschman

Works Cited
Gortais, B. 2003.“Abstraction and Art.” Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, Vol. 358, No. 1435, The Abstraction Paths: From Experience to Concept .Great Britain: The Royal Society.
Guillermo Habacuc Vargas, “An example.” Retrieved 20 October 2009 from http://guillermohabacucvargas.blogspot.com/.
Sayre, H. 1989. “The Object of Performance: The American Avante-Garde since 1970” Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Who's Life Is It Anyway?

Nadine Mather
The right to life is not a right simply to exist. Is there a duty to die?
When we start life in our mother’s womb, we have no choice in the decision regarding our right to live. Other people will debate our right to life depending upon their ethics, religion and economic circumstances and make the decision on our behalf. And so here we find ourselves in a world in which we played no part in the decision to be here or not. We are then allowed to formulate our own views as we become more adult entitled to freedom of thought and speech. So what if we decide that life isn’t that great after all and the decision made on our behalf years ago does not suit us anymore. Surely we then have the right to die if we choose to. We all die sometime, that is not up for debate. The question is when and how. Who is to say that we cannot choose to die when we want to? Your life insurance will not pay out but then again how does this affect you? The issue surrounding the right to die is one of the effects that it has on other people. You will be seen as selfish only thinking of yourself. But must you continue to live just to make other people happy. There is a duty for an individual to die, life is not a given right, it’s a privilege. Whose life is it anyway?

Reversing the damage. One steak at a time. What have you done to save the planet today?

I recently attended a very moving couple of History 102 lectures discussing the human impact on the earth as well as our impact on the animal world. Professor Cobbing, our lecturer, urged us to take a test in order to establish what exactly our ecological footprint was. I thought the man was exaggerating as he proceeded to scream at us with accompanied overzealous hand gestures for not taking the matter as seriously as we should. I thought: “come on, I’m a little student in a tiny town, I walk everywhere, I don’t eat red meat how could I possibly harm the planet that much?”

Well, I was wrong.

Have you ever measured your ecological footprint? Find out: http://earthday.net/footprint/flash.html or even www.myfootprint.org/en/visitor_information/

It’s a shocking sobering process, but it’s made me aware how much attention we need to start paying to the little things we do in order to preserve what we have left. In desperation and disbelief I took off all my meat-eating tendencies from the quiz and my footprint was drastically decreased.

This brings me to the situation that our carnivorous ways have landed us in. Did you know how harmful meat is to the environment? Did you know that for every kilogram of steak we eat five kilograms of grain could have gone to feed the hungry? Subsequently 10 000litres of precious water would have been saved if we spared the steak too.

In light of this I’ve decided to slowly work my way towards becoming vegetarian. It’s not an easy process you know, but I’m now tired of feeling guilty for what I consume. Today I make a difference – albeit a little one. Shouldn’t you?

By: Tarryn Ross

The World: Doomed or Redeemable

The History 102 course is centred around how humans have created the current problems we are experiencing with our climate, animals and our species as a whole. When I signed up for this course I was expecting another boring History lecturer speaking about things that we wouldn't think twice about once we had passed the course - I was oh so very wrong.

Throughout the whole course we have discussed the global crisis and I have come to the realisation that no matter how much we get taught about the things that we have done wrong, most people will never change themse;ves or their habits to better the world that we live in. When we were getting taught about Hiroshima and the atomic bomb, the lecturer made a ver interesting point: Once humans have gotten an idea into their heads, it is impossible for them to let it go. I couldn't agree with him more.

We were told to look at our ecological footprint on www.earthday.net because the average human is only supposed to use up 1,5 planets in their lifetime. I use double that amount and I was shhocked that my little "go green" initiatives didn't help that at all. So how many planets do you use? Are we seriously doing enough to prevent the global warming disasters from happening? Or did we doom ourselves long ago when we decided that our comfort was more important than our home? Personally, I think we could have done more to protect ourselves and our planet.

By Rochelle