Traffic

So, last week I only wrote one post. Truly, an important one.

All the blogging rules would say that, under these circumstances, the number of visitors on my blog should go down. So, with a lot of surprise, I noticed yesterday that I had more visitors last week than the week before. Not much more, but still.

Should I understand that if I don't write at all I'll have more visitors than if I post once a day? Now that's a paradox.

melum46. Kate

This is the song that will keep me forever tied to Kate Bush and her music.

It has such an Orwellian feel (composed in 1986, by the way, two years after 1984, one year after Brasil).

Small trivia: you can find in this video two very well-known men. One is Nigel Kennedy (a genius I unexpectedly saw, listened to - and was blown away by - at the Enescu festival, last year). The other is Hugh Laurie.

They told us
All they wanted
Was a sound that could kill someone
From a distance.
So we go ahead,
And the meters are over in the red.
It's a mistake in the making.

The time of learning people how to live has arrived

This post was entirely inspired by Arturo Uslar Pietri's novel Robinson's island. The words, though, are mine.

I am a conservative. At the same time, I'm a republican. A little bit of a contrast, perhaps, but that's the way it is, this is my creed.

I am a conservative because I think this political ideology is the only one capable of turning current Romanian groups of interests naming themselves political parties into real political parties. Conservative way of thinking is the only one capable of setting us apart from the communist period and its style of policy-improvising. I am republican, because I believe that all humans are born equal.

Somehow, para-quoting Arturo Uslar Pietri, and looking at the current state of events in my country, I say: we do not have a republic. We did not inherited it, we do not know how to create it. The Romanian Popular Republic - a product of the year 1948 - is a Stalinist creation. The Romanian Socialist Republic was created during the '60s, as a sign of independence from the USSR (independence of the Romanian nomenklatura from the Soviet one, not independence of the Romanian people from the Romanian nomenklatura); and it failed. The Romanian republic created in 1989 was no more than a USSR vassal. None of these three Romanian republics was democratic. The last one - the third and the current one at the same time - has its fundamentals based on people killed in the name of democracy, in 1989, 1990 and 1991.

Twenty years ago, in June 1990, people - people trying to create a better republic - were killed in the University Square in Bucharest. Many important Romanian political figures still deny these events, even today. They also deny the events of December 1989. It is not an accident, because the truth would only make obvious the character of a state they created the way they wanted to. It only shows the shameful situation we find ourselves in at this very moment, because we tolerate them and we give them our vote.

People need to be educated. I specify: I do not speak (only) about the Romanian educational system, but about the need of Romanians to be educated as citizens of a republic. We completely ignore how to be republicans, and I doubt we know what citizenship of any kind means at all. The answer to this situation is the school (but not only it). Ambitiously, the school must not teach people how to read, it should teach them how to be independent, how to live in a free and equal society, a society free of prejudice, inequity and superstition, a society based on reciprocal respect. Did our educational system acquire that yet? Unfortunately, no. Are there any other institutions trying to do that (like the mass-media, for instance)? Again, no. On the contrary.

The first French republic failed because it did not know how to prepare society for the republic. and thus France turned back to monarchy. My question: do you think the Romanian society is ready for a republic? I highly doubt it. The need of a strong political figure as head of state is a mere expression of our mental need of a Voivod.

My fear is that we do not have the reflexes of free men. Most of us have been formed to be dependent upon the state, and this didn't change in the aftermath of the Revolution. The proof for this is to be found in the high numbers of people hunting for jobs in the state administration, but also in the numbers of those of our con-citizens early retired from work, or the numbers of those hundred of thousands who got pensions on false medical reasons.


I go as far as to say, assuming full responsibility for this, that Romania has kept a lot of characteristics from the feudal period (with one great feudal landlord: the state, a few smaller ones: the moguls; and the second line moguls: the local barons) and only acquired the appearance of a republic. Of course, there are many educated people and people willing to change things. The problem is: 1. they are not enough (and their number is constantly going down, due to emigration); 2. there are others who want to keep the current state of affairs (see my point about the landlords above). We are, nominally, a functional democracy, but for the reasons specified we fail to prove it so.

How can things begin to change? Well, in my view, the answer is about turning ourselves back to the old model of small family businesses. If properly regulated (unlike now) and supported by coherent policies, this change could transform the country within a few decades. Acquiring work experience and applied competences is in my view the best way to fight prejudice, errors, social barriers and all the weaknesses inherited from generation to generation. To be realistic, the probability of this scenario is low to very low. However, the fact that the Romanian state simply cannot hold anymore its current position as landlord no. 1 could lead to a situation where this might take place. At least I hope so. It would be only for the benefit of my country.

No more lies, cowardice and obedience, humility. Enough of that farce. It kills solidarity, society, citizenship and, eventually, everything we might want to call freedom.

melum45. Farewell

My next post will not be about music. This one is about music only because of a-ha.

One of the top 5 bands of my adolescence (and one of the best over-all) is saying good-bye to us all.

There are only a handful of good bands in my music collection. And one of them will be crossing the line, for good this time. Another band, new order, did it already. Another one, my favorite band - erasure - is blocked into composing and playing teen-age infantile songs. So, news on the music front do not look so good.

New bands to cover up the empty space? Not yet. No. Not that I know of.

melum44. Blasphemous rumours

I'm still not in the mood for proper writing. Forgive me.

This is the best song of Depeche Mode ever, in my view. Also, a very serious song:

I don't want to start any blasphemous rumours but I think that God's got a sick sense of humour, and when I die, I expect to find Him laughing.

No, guys, you won't find God laughing, even if God has the best sense of humour. You'll find Him crying for each and every one of us, instead... No place for arrogance, superiority and indifference, there, any more. God is about none of that, unlike our image of His.


I dare say:

...and when I die, I expect to find Him crying.

melum43

My favorite band, 1988.

Too bad nowadays music has far lower standards. Then, what about the myth of constant progress?

melum42

I came over this one recently.

Nice!

I'm in Bucharest for 2,5 days. What can I do and visit?

Now that is a good question.

It is a question somebody put and searched the answer for on the internet, and thus found my blog. I hope the person found at least some answers to it.

Two and a half days to visit Bucharest is a very short term. You can definitely not see everything, you cannot see much of the city actually. But you can see enough to get an opinion made, if you stay close to the city's heart. My answer would be, then:

- one day should be used to visit museums (such as: The History Museum, The Art Museum, Romanian Peasant's Museum or Village Museum - my favorite) and some of the parks (Herăstrău, Cişmigiu Gardens, Carol). All these objectives are situated on a north/south axe, and the underground is a good transportation means from one to the others;
- the night, especially during spring and summertime, is the best time to wander through the center of the city - let's say from Piaţa Unirii to Piaţa Romană, but including also Calea Victoriei - and to get a glimpse of the city's diverse nightlife. Not to be missed is the Lipscani/Smârdan/Manuc area;

- the second day should be used to see old buildings. A hint: the center of the city is full of very nice small churches (often hidden by blocks, in communist fashion), and these churches are the best ambassadors I know of the old Bucharest, the bearers of the old city identity. Many of them date from the XVIII century, some are older, going back as far as the XVth century (the Bucur church, not far from Piaţa Unirii); some also have a significance related to recent events - such as the Revolution in 1989 - like Kretzulescu or Colţea churches. And speaking of these events, not to be missed are the Revolution Square, Universitate and the Parliament's Palace - they provide a good overview of the last three decades of Bucharest's complex history;

- last day should be used for some shopping. There are plenty of shopping malls in Bucharest, but I'd say the best situated, by any means, is Unirea Shopping Mall. Still, if I had the choice, I'd rather buy something representative for the Romanian culture - and these things are to be found less in shopping malls and more in places such as the Village Museum or the Peasant's Museum's shops.

This answer is by all means incomplete. It is like this, however, how I think you should organize a three days time here.

Good luck.