Monday, February 23, 2009

Visual CV: A Review

The traditional CV does not say it all anymore. The world is a dynamic bouncing ball, where people keep taking swings in all directions; they fine new ways to connect every day. The exuberance and vibrancy of it all, doesn’t always fit under ‘work experience’. We have all been feeling that for a while, but it took the folks at VisualCV.com to do something about it. 

VisualCV.com uses Web 2.0 technologies to benefit employers and potential employees alike. When putting up a CV at the website, students and professionals have the option to include their blogs, projects, previous work, writing samples et al. The idea is to show skills to companies and organizations, not just tell them. The visual CV will, therefore, link to any work you’ve done, that is available on the web. YouTube or other multimedia widgets on your page can be used to make short presentations you might want to do for potential employers.

For the employers, on the other hand, it is all about saving time and being able to choose the best, when supply is aplenty and vacancies are limited. If they hover over a university name on a prospective employee’s page, Visual CV will instantly pull out information on the school and its standing according to Princeton Review, for instance. These kinds of features save employers precious time, and account for more sound decisions.

In a pre-dominantly employers' maarket, Visual CV is a hot tool. It offers extra-ordinary features and interface, among an ocean of a million job sites on the web. What’s more, you can link your CVs to social-networking sites like Facebook and LinkedIn.

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Satire

I have yet to come across a TV junkie who doesn’t think that The Simpsons is one of the best shows of all-time. It screams brilliance every minute. I can even foresee a day when ‘simpsons’ is incorporated into english dictionaries, as a word that best describes genius satire. Or the day when ‘satire’ is defined in dictionaries as ‘The Simpsons’. Err…you get the point, right! Even though the verdict for the most popular character on the show is out and out in favour of Bart Simpson, I can’t help but love the fact that Homer Simpson just is. His stupidity quotient can only be matched, and surpassed, by the one and only: George Bush Jr. (Why can’t we stop missing him?)

Three other animated shows I’ve enjoyed over time have been, Beavis and Butthead (for sheer dumbness or dubya-ness), The Family Guy and King of the Hill. But none ever got close to the kick and the thrill of The Simpsons. Till…

…till The American Dad. Its been running in the U.S. on Fox TV since 2005, but has made its way to Pakistan through satellite only now, or perhaps I’ve been slow to discover. Have you? What do you think? Viewer response has been good, but generally, the other four are rated higher. I fail to understand!

It tracks the life of CIA Agent, Stan Smith, his right-wing philosophies of America under-threat, his admiration for George Bush Jr., the Patriot Act and Karl Rove. Hilarious! Of course, it is satire, so all doves out there should enjoy the thrashing that the Republican Party and its obsessions against anybody remotely outside their white American bubble, gets on the show. [Disclaimer: I hope y’all aren’t sensitive to exaggerations and stereotyping, sport!]

Some memorable quotes:

[Stan brings home a baby to replace Hayley when she moves out]

Roger the Alien: Is that a Chinese baby?

Stan Smith: Sure is! Japanese, to be specific.

-----

Francine Smith: We're so glad you could make it. Where's your wife this evening?

Bullock: Handcuffed to a radiator in Fallujah. She wanted to come, but I do not negotiate with terrorists. Hey, do I smell meat loaf?

-----

Hayley Smith: You know, Steve's dog would still be alive if you right-wing lunactics would agree to gun control.

Stan Smith: You know what I have to say to that?

[pauses]

Stan Smith: Ah, I thought I was gonna fart.

-----

Stanley Smith: Why can't you take a page from that bitch Hillary Clinton and let it go?

-----

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Invasion

A couple of bloggers here, because of sheer kindness and nothing else, have been making me feel like a superstar. They've been sending messages, pinging me again and again, to post something. Yes, it seems, the gaps are on the rise. I consider it altogether unnecessary to explain now, for their sake, since it seems to be developing into a norm rather.

My husband (a teacher) has written a couple of guest posts for me on this blog, and all of a sudden, his students - girls mostly - have started sniffing around my page. Word has gotten around campus about it, and google analytics reveal that 90 per cent of search engine hits come from his name-search alone! None from my own. I have, therefore, gotten a little wary of the entire charade. The few things I've wanted to write about lately, have had one thing or the other to do with our personal lives. Or maybe, some of my personal experiences. If I write about a recent trip to an embassy - this is just hypothetical lest some of those eager hormones make their way to a certain office in question - he'll instantly be exposed to queries about our travel plans. There have been demands of sharing wedding photographs and the sort. It is not that I do not approve of a good rappo between teachers and students; most of these lurkers have already graduated his classes, which is a good thing, but word gets around like anything, and before you know it, incoming students will have researched his personal life (and wife) to be in a place that would seem a bit too comfortable to me.

Now don't I sound like a snob? Maybe I truly am a superstar.

Please pray otherwise!

Monday, February 2, 2009

Laughing Gas

So Ramesh just pinged me a while back, asking when I'd be posting next. Yes, its been a few days. The reasons for my absence are three-fold: internet problems, lack of inspiration and a very bad response-meter to my last post (shame on everybody but me!). The first problem has been temporarily fixed, thanks to my father. The second too, thanks to him. He just emailed the following and I'm in tearful bliss. So here's some laughing gas for you all:

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Rome - Part II


Our second day in Rome was dedicated to the Vatican Museums. People often mistake St. Petersburg and the Vatican Museums with Vatican City itself. That is not the case. Vatican City is the smallest country in the world - the size of a room - entrance to which, requires a separate visa. I think it'd be safe to say, "Don't bother trying!"

St. Petersburg did not boast as much grandeur as the aura it generated. Memories of the much-loved, John Paul II resonated, the only one I had witnessed all my life, waving to a sea of devotees, from one of the balconies. The huge columns, lined up in concavity, were distinctly Roman, but I still insist that the entire package was not too captivitating (...unless of course, they hire me to write a review for eager travellers). My first reaction to the Swiss Guards (watching over the Pope's personal safety) was how anybody else would react. They say they come highly trained, but their uniforms spoke another story. A cutting right out of Jumbo's circus, is what I'm implying. The museums themselves were very captivating. Although I've heard that Paris' Louvre is the biggest museum in the world (?), the Vatican Museums are far more taxing on the legs and indeed, on time. For one, you need to walk a considerable distance after getting out of the subway to reach its entrance. For another, you can conveniently pick and choose galleries you wish to visit in the Louvre; that is not the case here, especially if you want to take in, Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel. And believe you me, you want to take it in, you want to take it all in. The Romans are a proud people. They are not humble about the history that backs them, about the art they have treasured and they definitely are not shy about scolding you should you make an attempt to try and tell your friends, "I saw the Chapel!" From the moment you enter the Vatican Museums, they keep telling you that the Sistine Chapel is just ahead. In no time, it starts feeling like an endless trail; as if you're in a jungle and you feel like somebody's playing a prank on you, or as if you're in Oz and stuck in a maze. It simply isn't around the corner but they'll insist that you are soon to witness history. I think it took us more than a 100 minutes to finally enter that historic hall, where Michelangelo took four years - lying face-up on scaffoldings, painting frescoes onto the ceiling - which is worth every strain your calf muscles take to reach it. We weren't artists; heck, we weren't even amateurs, but we could see how special it was.

The beauty of it is that one can explain it in a way that ordinary folks can visualize the spectacle, and connoisseurs of art can wink at how cute and sweet you and I can make it sound. The painting generated a three-dimensional feel about it. As if all the people and the objects were extending out of the womb that was the ceiling; as if all the people and the objects were generating shadows from the blue skies surrounding them. No sooner do you get over-whelmed and try to sneak out your camera, that an usher splurges rough Italian on you. I fear some sensitive souls might even have cried at the rude, offensive scoldings. No sir. Photography is not allowed. I recall that back in '89, we weren't allowed to photograph Mona Lisa at the Louvre. In 2008, we were. So one hopes they can answer the aspirations of a million tourists - some having saved every penny to be where they were, wanting to capture a glimpse of their experience. (Click on the picture to see the enlarged image. It is understandably blurry...but I dared!)

For those who are keen to read more about it, here's an excerpt from 'Europe for Dummies', which comes highly recommended by yours truly (others can skip it):

The pinnacle of Renaissance painting fills the ceiling and end wall of the Sistine Chapel. Originally, Pope Julius II hired Michelangelo to create a magnificent burial site for him, but then he switched the artist to another job — painting the chapel ceiling. Michelangelo at first balked at the request, saying that he was a sculptor, not a frescoist, but eventually he agreed to work on the ceiling.

After four years of arduous work, the frescoes were unveiled. Michelangelo had transformed the barrel-vaulted ceiling of the chapel into a blueprint for the continuing development of Renaissance art, developing new means of depicting the human form, new methods of arranging frescoes, and new uses of light and color that painters would embrace for generations to come. He covered the Sistine ceiling with nine scenes from Genesis (the fingers-almost-touching God Creating Adam is the most famous) and ringed these with figures of the ancient prophets and sybils, with nudes in contorted positions that show off brilliant attention to human musculature.

The walls of the chapel are covered by wonderful frescoes from earlier Renaissance biggies including Signorelli, Botticelli, Pinturicchio, Perugino, Ghirlandaio — all works that would command attention if they weren’t under such a fabulous ceiling. In 1545, at the age of 60, Michelangelo returned to the chapel to paint the entire end wall with the Last Judgment — a masterwork of color, despair, and psychology.

A couple of days later, in Florence, we made our way to the Accademia Gallery to see another marvel by old pal, Michelangelo: David. I've heard some people say that the sculpture looks quite distorted, but we were in awe of that too. So we decided to pay our respects to the great artist - buried in Florence's Basillica de Santa Croce. But for some strange and odd reason, it church was closed that day!

So back to Rome. The house of tombs was a must-see though a tad spooky place to visit, right next to St. Peter's Basillica. Pope John Paul II was being mourned by most visitors. A sobering experience.

We took the evening that day, to visit the Pantheon - another powerful ancient building in Rome. Had gelato ice-cream from a recommended ice-cream joint - one out of a million - in a nearby, pebbled street, and hated it. To the bins! Took a bus to see the Colosseum at night, and bought a tripod for the camera, from a Bengali vendor, for about 8 euros!

Photo credits:
Sistine Chapel: Mine
Swiss Guards: http://www.birchimages.co.uk

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Monday, January 26, 2009

Say No to Yoga

Months back, there were reports in the papers on the "yoga controversy" in Malaysia. Muslims, it argued, were in danger of being corrupted by elements of Hinduism: the chantings of "Om". While it is to be appreciated that Islam is a strictly monotheist religion and Hinduism is not, and Muslims, by their faith, are required to steer clear of the very spirit of polytheism or atheism in their activities, this is utterly absurd. In 7th century Arabia, Muslims were asked to get rid of curtains bearing images in their homes, because polytheism was rampant in the society, and even though while offering their obligatory prayer, they were not bowing in front of these images, it was advised that they needed to leave no doubts about their belief. This obviously meant that in times when they weren't issues of concern, pictures, images and statues were taken for what they were - pieces of art - but certain kinds of Muslims a.k.a mullahs, have insisted otherwise. Hence, the declarations that pictures are haram (forbidden) in Islam; hence, the firing to dust of Buddha excavations in Afghanistan; hence, the menace of the Taliban.

Likewise, it makes no sense that Yoga should be forbidden to Muslims, but our clergy, border after border, is now beginning to wake up to these unending rays of enlightenment. The latest buzz is a ban on Indonesian Muslims. I say "these" because previous trendsetter rays have set high precedents. Much earlier, though I can't say when exactly, a decree by the authorities-that-be, declared that a Muslim woman couldn't practise - yes - yoga, because that would require her to wear pants in the company of other women, which could "lead her to have lesbian sex".

Muslim men and women are also recommended not to spend time together needlessly and without a third presence, except in the case of spouses or unmarriageable kin. Flirtations are looked down upon in Islam. But an Al-Azhar cleric has, like his "cell-mates", without effort given fodder to the mischievous to humiliate his religion. He has found an ingenious way to allow marriageable men and women to sit together, alone, in private, without guilt, and - wait for it - without chances of promiscuity. The woman can breast-feed her male friend, which would make her unmarriageable to him, having achieved an instant certificate of motherhood.

On a very serious note, I am not surprised that the average person feels disgusted at the thought of religiosity, or believes only in humanism for religious ritualism does not make anybody a better person. True, it doesn't, because it has been hijacked by feeble-minded fools who alone are responsible for giving Islam a bad name. And these kinds exist in all religions. I'm only quoting from the Muslim world lest somebody else feels insulted or doubts my intentions. I have only one thing to say to the disgruntled man of faith: Religion encourages reason!

Photo credits: http://www.healthspablog.org

Copyright (c) 2008 Saadia Malik

Friday, January 23, 2009

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

I have noticed it not only on my blog but on people's blogs too: there are cowards who persistently hover around blogs, commenting as 'anonymous'. You 'intermittent' spy, you! Those with more courage albeit an inch of it, put a random name, not linking back to their own pages for fear of retaliation.

I wonder if cowardliness is the only reason. I wonder if adding to that, a pinch of fear, is the way to cook it. The fear that the addressee may come running to their pages and treat their posts just as ruthlessly and anonymously (read, conveniently). This truly is sad; for it projects some people's lack of belief in proper argument. The fun of it. The richness of it. The culture of it.

It becomes imperative for these Mr. Hydes to humiliate the other person, should they find something not peculiarly appetizing. I say to them, "I love to tantalize you!"

They refuse to believe that they can be loved despite their shortcomings, and they abhor the thought that we can be loved in spite of ours. I, for one, still have faith in their good nature; the ability to be Jekylls albeit an inch of it! It has been decided that comments on my blog will be allowed upon a sign-in henceforth. I hate to moderate because it creates a feeling of mistrust and snubs the flow of discussions. Fellow bloggers (or blaagers, as Momekh calls it), what do you think?

Image credits: http://www.siliconcerebrate.com