On the morality of Gok Wan

On the morality of Gok Wan

           
There is a certain sort of television program that I find absolutely fascinating they have names like; 10 years younger; Gok’s fashion fix; or my personal favourite snog, marry avoid.  I’m going to focus on snog marry avoid because it is the most illuminating for the purpose of the discussion I intend to have, as well as being the most oddly presented and incomprehensibly preachy and jingoistic of the breed.  Perhaps I have given an indication of my opinion of the show but I’ll forge on.  The premise of this entire genre is that some people are incapable of dressing themselves properly and in fact sport clothes that make them look either; frumpy, or weird, or too made up or something else equally meaningless. Then someone, the prancing stereotype reinforcing queens of queer eye for the straight guy* for example, Tuts throws petrol on the old clothes and forces (sometimes roughly) the often unwilling victim into what the current style consensus dictates is the most appropriate thing to wear.

            


My question is this are these sorts of shows morally sound.  This sounds like a ridiculously petty issue and I think it is but it does open up discussion about a number of moral issues at the very edge of their applications and I believe that if we are to have a moral code it should be applicable to all situations where it applies.  Firstly I will discuss what is probably th6ye prevailing moral philosophy in my own life, aestheticism.  Perhaps the response of aestheticism should be simple these persons who I should really stop calling victims are taken from presenting themselves in an unattractive way to a state where even if they don’t become a famous beauty they are at least no longer shambolic avatars of bad taste. However, and perhaps this is just me, there is something distasteful about a unique, if iffy, visual experience becoming an easier one. From the point of view of the participant this experience could be one of two types of emotional experiences it could be a confidence boosting lesson in making the best of ones assets, this is Gok Wan’s style, or it could be that the participant has created for his or herself state a dramatic style statement that represents her freedom and individuality being quashed and their public face normalized. I suppose that the first kind is a tolerable, if embarrassing, learning experience. But the second is less tolerable it represents nothing less than the obliteration of a unique thing and perhaps the ultimate crime of trying to paper over this newly formed gap with something utterly banal.  What is never done is refining and perfecting an already established style. The sloppy Goth is never transformed into the Goth she dreamed of looking like she is instead thrown directly into autumnal coulours or high waistbands, hipster chic or what the Americans call preppy. 

If this method of changing a person’s outward appearance is in fact an immoral destruction of uniqueness then what of the myriad other forms of influence especially those that are infinitely more important than mere appearance.  I speak of the kind of influence wielded by parents, teachers, and Lord Henry. It was Lord Henry who himself said of influence “there is no good influence… because to influence a person is to give him one’s own soul. he does not think his natural thoughts or burn with his natural passions”*²  and I think that in principle I would agree if it wasn’t for one pseudo- Newtonian fact. An immutable law in human interaction as in physics any influence exerted has an equal effect on both the person influenced and also, albeit more subtly, influences the other party as well be it as small a change as fortifying ones belief in oneself or as monumental as abhorring the change you make in another and changing oneself in response. This is I suppose where the beauty is in social life it is a glittering constantly shifting web beset on all sides by the tidal forces of the media and politics as well as religion all interconnected and in flux. One man’s changes beget another’s alterations. And all this seems chaos but patterns emerge concealed as fads and fashions waves of change building person by person into a tidal surge of acceptance or appreciation. This I would argue is the core of all social change this interconnected web of personal change. Each convert strengthening the cause and passing eternally onwards until that one perspective or mannerism dominates the web then is swept away by something new.  Occasionally a group of people will encounter a shining other who changes their world whist seeming to be themselves unchanged. I am no theist but I imagine that that is what it would be like to be in the presence of a great teacher like Jesus or Ghandi. A man becomes a ripple a ripple becomes a wave then an ocean.  The other side of the coin is that in society change is often resisted. This manifests itself as the religious opposition to gay marriage or campaigns against Tesco’s in Harrogate.  This is perhaps best shown in the picture of Dorian grey, one character Basil is concerned with keeping the young Dorian grey pure and unchanged in order to preserve his natural beauty whereas Lord Henry consciously decides to fill Dorian like a vessel full of his influence and see where the pieces fall.  People who know Oscar Wildes masterpiece will know that this does not end happily. However the story of influence and resistance is not always tragic think of the influence of Ekendu on Gilgamesh or Whoopi Goldberg’s Influence on the kids in the choir in sister act 2.   I suppose the question boils down to weather makeover shows are more like Lord Henry, Whoopi Goldberg, Basil or that kids mother who doesn’t want her to sing for some unknowable reason and whether the distinction between the four makes any moral difference.

* Its ok I have F word privileges and you know what they say most Fs ares Qs. I have strong views on what I will call privileged words but am too scared to do a blog post about it due to lacking N word privileges and recently having my T word privileges revoked (there used to be a reciprocal agreement but now it’s messy)

*²This is probably the last sensible discussion of makeover shows in this blog the rest consists of a rambling discourse on the nature and morality of influence (you know how I get, or if you don’t welcome to an incomprehensible whitter)

Exquisite Words

Language is an incredibly beautiful thing is the foundation it is the seed of every civilisation, every conversation, every love, every hate, every rivalry, and every friendship. And furthermore it has the ability to stir us in ways that otherwise entirely inconceivable. This is because, in some ways, it controls even our perception of beauty. A contemporary psychological theory is posits an intimate connection between our language and our perception.  For example in a particular tribal African language  red and orange are all under the banner of a single word this in itself is as uninteresting as any other linguistic quirk. What is, however, interesting is that people who speak only this language find it almost impossibly difficult to differentiate the two colours. And I don’t mean subtly orange or subtly red I mean oranges and strawberries. The implications of this are clear.  Lacking a word for orange somehow inhibits the experience of the colour; this is a gross simplification but roll with me, because language forms our reality. Perhaps this is the reason why we English seem incapable of making a good omelette. I suppose at this point it’s important to acknowledge that Orange or perfect omelette texture can be expressed, an almost gelatinous, firm yet yielding, almost creamy texture created by slight under cooking of an egg at high temperatures with butter, this perhaps an accurate description but it lacks a certain quality the precision and evocation of the French word that I believe is something like Vabose, almost a silent onomatopoeia.

Yet even this is not enough language. The fact remains that the English language, I’m going to wax lyrical about English now please edit to include your language if you feel it appropriate, is  pure aesthetic pleasure. Poetry is to me an obvious example. Indulge me by reading the opening monologue to under milk wood out loud http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks06/0608221.txt or listening to it on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyI2YOC0rhU. The meaning of the words is unremarkable the scene described the events almost entirely prosaic. But the shapes of the words as you pronounce them, the cadence and phonetic form of each sentence pushes the monologue beyond mere meaning into the intoxicating realm of art. I love that sort of pleasure and it gets me in trouble sometimes.  The problem is that I sometimes get carried away and say things that I don’t entirely, or indeed even remotely, mean because it sounds pretty or rolls off the tongue.

Language is everything; pleasurable and practical; all reality and all fiction.

 This post didn’t really ever find its point but if you enjoyed it I think we can live without a point just this once.

A recipe in lieu

As I have spent so long trying to post a chapter of the pastry and given you nothing I have decided to favor you with a  recipe from my personal selection.

Noodle soup

This noodle soup is a dish that my brother and I often whip up for lunch the recipe here is a somewhat idealized version of it, as the ingredients often change according to what is in the fridge.  It remains a stalwart favorite  its a dish ruled by personal preferences so where i have left off measurements add however much you think you would like. 

·         Egg Noodles	Sweet chilli sauce
·         Soy sauce	1/2 lime (juice and zest)
·         Ginger	Paprika
·         Garlic	Coriander
·         Red chili	Good veg stock
·         2-4 green finger chilies	Scallions
·         Peas	Sesame oil
·         Baby sweet corn  (Halved)	Beansprouts
·         Moungetout
·         Sugar snap peas
·         Onions cut into lengths

1.       The first step is to heat your pan to a high temperature.

2.       Whilst your pan is heating great or finely mince your ginger and garlic chop your chilli into ringlets  

3.       Stir fry quickly the baby sweet corn, sugar snap peas ,onions and mangetout in the sesame oil for just under a minuet.

4.       A dd the ginger chilli and garlc to the pan along with the kaffir lime leaves continue stir frying for another minuet

5.       Add the stock, soy sauce, paprika and finger chillies.

6.       Add the noodles

7.       Add the sweet chilli sauce and lime you may need to experiment to find the right balance of sweet and sour.

8.       When the noodles are cooked add roughly chopped coriander,  finely cut scallions and beansprouts  as a garnish serve immediately.