Daily Talk Show at The Office

As target gets higher we tend to achieve higher. That is what expected of us, workers that are trying to make ends meet and companies that are thriving for growth. Thank goodness I am blessed with a hardworking - and sometimes when needed - a smart-working team. 

What we don't expect (and cannot stand) are office chatters. Sure, we all love to chat, a little gossip wouldn't hurt also. I sometimes chat with my team, just to relieve tension off work for about 5 minutes. The key is to prevent a work atmosphere that's unpleasant or oppressed. I consider chatting with my team as a morale builder. We usually chat around 10 am, near lunch break and near the end of office hour. Each usually lasted no longer than 10 minutes. 

Around the office, we usually chat after spending many hours sitting in our chairs, WORKING. But lately, the office chatters is just too noisy to bare. 

These chatter have a specific pattern. 

Arrived late at the office. 

Turn on the computer. 

Check their email for about 5 minutes while waiting for their confidante to arrive. 

Chat for about 2 hours and then supposedly "working".

Chat all the way through lunch time. 

Lunch. 

Chat some more till 2.30 pm. 

Say hello to the computer (working) for about 30 minutes.

Chat some more.

Go home earlier than anybody else.

Gee what a happy life they have.

My earphones are always very dependable as chatter-blocker, especially when he's in the next cube. He usually chat on the phone, not too loud actually. But very often his team would come to his desk, working together using his computer, or just to have a chat (surprise-surprise).These chatters always work together, i mean ALL THE TIME.  My team, we can't afford to work on all assignment TOGETHER. Plus, getting my team to complete my work in my computer would be like... WELL.... LIKE I HAVEN'T GOT THE SKILL NOR KNOWLEDGE TO DO MY JOB.  Aside from the noise thing, I mean: REALLY?

Okay, back to the noise thing. The chatter usually clutter next to my desk at my chatter coworker workstation. They can spend at least 4 hours daily sitting, talking and laughing next to my desk. I've had it up to here (my head) with them. I mean: FUCK-OFF.

The day I left my earphones at home is the day I curse and usually ends in me buying another pair of earphones. I now officially own 4 earphones, thank you. But how long can my ear tolerate loud volume, I'm not sure. So I initiate in escalating this to the boss without mentioning any name, wouldn't wanna be recognize as the office tattle-tale. As a result there was a rearrangement of office layout, my team move in with me and he moves out with his team (the other chatters). Now they can live chattily ever after.

My most major homework is my team, keeping their spirit up. Not giving them a chance to question our line of work. We have a lot in hand tasks, that are seem to expand more and more each day. While the chatter can refer to working as: we are very relaxed in our work here compared to our previous employee. Gee that's good. MORE CHATTING, EH?

One of these days I will escalate this thing to my boss and see what he will do, considering he is one of the major chatter himself. 

If this issue remains unresolved, I guess, later I would have to escalate to Human Capital on a larger scale, for the continuity of my team.

Why We Run

We run because we have to - in my case I have to (official assignment back in 2010)

We run because some of you don’t think we can.

We run to go fast, and we run to go far.

We run for fun when no one’s around.

We run to clear our mind - try for yourself if you don't believe.

We run because we’re crazy - every one kept on saying we can't. WE CAN!

We run because we’re happy.

We run because now we know what it feels to nod at another runner. We understand them, and they, us.

We run to lose weight.

We run to keep it off.

We run to eat creamy cakes and ice creams.

We run to eat lontong cap gomeh.

We run when others won’t.

We run and sometimes we hate it.

But we run and we always love the feeling.

We run up hills and we run through puddles.

We run because it’s poetic.

We run because it’s bad ass.

We run while people sleep and we run because it helps us sleep.

We run because once we have that medal (in my case the finisher medal), you can’t take it away.

We run.

And we run together. We run far. Next year: Half Marathon is my aim.

I WILL RUN HALF MARATHON IN 2013

I guess this is just another lost cause, Mr. Paine

I love that line... it was from Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. It was a line said by Jeff Smith near the end of the movie, closed with Smith being fainted in the courtroom, defending on that he believes.

Saw it  for the first time 2 years ago. Ever since that moment, (the late) James Stewart (absolutely no relation to K-Stew by the way) has been my all time most favorite actor.

If by any chance you're into political movies, I RECOMMEND you to see it. Mentioned the movie in my previous post http://virnamedina.blogspot.com/2009/10/what-is-most-inspiring-or-impressive.html. 

Well, how many of us stick to something the way Smith does?

The movie was about a naive and idealistic Jefferson Smith, is appointed on a lark by the spineless governor of his state. He is reunited with the state's senior senator--presidential hopeful and childhood hero, Senator Joseph Paine. In Washington, however, Smith discovers many of the shortcomings of the political process as his earnest goal of a national boys' camp leads to a conflict with the state political boss, Jim Taylor. Taylor first tries to corrupt Smith and then later attempts to destroy Smith through a scandal.

self note: 
All you people don't know about lost causes. Mr. Paine does. He said once they were the only causes worth fighting for. And he fought for them once, for the only reason any man ever fights for them; because of just one plain simple rule: 'Love thy neighbor.'... And you know that you fight for the lost causes harder than for any other. Yes, you even die for them.

Between a Humanitarian, a Former Prime Minister and A Comical Couple

The Book of Eli

Saw this last week. I have to say I’m impressed with the post-war futuristic yet apocalyptic and grim setting of the movie. In some common Hollywood movie, we will get a visual satisfaction of what the future would be, and certainly not the one captured in this movie. That is what makes this movie interesting. The idea of "The Book of Eli" is to rebuild society, but who will carry those ideas? The clash between Eli (Denzel W) and Carnegie (Gary Oldman) is quite interesting to watch. As Eli, Denzel’s performance is impeccable. Oldman is a remarkable actor, we are all aware of that. But to see him in this movie is to be aware that he allocates his entire spirit and personality for this role (Carnegie). I can’t stop observing his performance and I think it’s inimitable.

Lastly, I like the movie partly because it is a reminder to us human, not to waste things, to have a respect for objects we threw away, we might need them someday.

One particular quote I remember from the movie: "Before, people had more than they needed. They threw away things that people would kill for now.”

Verdict: 4.2 out of 5

The Ghost Writer

The movie is directed by Roman Polanski. Couple of years ago, he was quite famous.... for being a pedophile. For some time we seem to forget the great director behind the man. His latest big movie was The Pianist, gain Oscar nomination, but not quite as entertaining as Rosemary's Baby. It was my favorite Polanski movie by far.

Well.... I think the great director is back. Now I can remember him as the Director of Rosemary's Baby. As RB, I can also describe The Ghost Writer as a dark thriller. It's a dark political thriller and it gave me an unsettling feeling, through the uncertain nature of conspiracy. The movie was made with precision, supported by a great cast and a creepy atmosphere, Polanski left no detail unattended. The story centers around a politician and his support for America, or should I say his service to America to follow and back up whatever its direction lead him. Was Mr. Polanski inspired by the “love” story between Tony Blair and GWB? I think so. It’s a brave subject to begin with, Mr. Polanski. (I think I'm going to see Rosemary's Baby for the umpteenth times). Verdict: 4.5 out of 5.

Date Night

I'm very critical of comedies, so the fact that I giggled throughout the movie is a good sign. I like Tina Fey, so I took a chance on it. I didn’t like Steve Carrell, I always thought he looked stupid, but this movie proved me wrong. Still not loving him, but I have to admit he is a good comedian. They both are and they had great chemistry. The plot is silly, but the dialogue was hilarious. I would put this in the "dumb movies that are funny" category. I'd recommend it.

Verdict: 3.7 out of 5

Voiceless Singer-Wannabes

I am no singer (and you must thank me for this).

I can't play musical instrument. Not one.

Yet, I love music, particularly the one referred to as "alternative music".


What the F is "alternative"? Who gave the term alternative anyway? Alternative music is the critics way of saying the new sounds are "unfit" to their established categories - rock, pop, country, jazz, keroncong (really?), classic (read: really really old and depressing stuff - sorry guys - I don't have to get myself used to this genre to be acknowledged as an intelligent person), folk, blues, rap, etc.

See? they even give constant foul mouthed complaints a specific category!

And they refer DMB, Pearl Jam, Peter Bjorn and John, The Decemberists and The Killers (I could go on and on here people) as "alternative"? To what? Music? That's pretty insulting guys!

The New Pornographers

Changchutters

This "new" category showed the critics incapability of finding new categories for these new found sounds (identified since early 90s) by these new talented singers and bands refuse to be dictated by the establishment. Music critics is a bunch of narrow-minded-self-declared-ancient-people (who by the way are not musicians, can't sing and can't play - just llike you and me) that make a living out of critisizing singers and bands (hello?!! Did you guys not see the irony here?).

Does that make me a musician or a singer? Thank GOD no, if yes, you'd have to buy my CD along with a set of ear plug or insurance for wanting to kill yourself while hearing me sing.

Same goes for the critics: you voiceless singer-wannabes!

Believing is Seeing BEFORE The Presidential Election

Seeing is Believing or Believing is Seeing?

For modern people, seeing IS believing. They don't like to rely too much in "believing" without having to see first, including Indonesian. Ratio and logic create the post modern Indonesian, neglecting our signature "supernatural" thinking (GOD, the after life, doomsday, destiny, fate, etc).

Let me put it in a simple way. We have 3 presidential candidates. Mr. Lanjutkan, Mr. LCLB and That Other Lady Who Likes to Whine - Mrs. TOLWLW (below).

How do you describe each candidate (visually)?

Mmmm...let's "see".....

From left to right:

• Mr. SBY: Our current president. Physically large man. I can "see" that he's got a certain physical feature that makes me think of him as ill tempered (hmmm...I wonder why). Known as Mr. Lanjutkan (again, I wonder why).
• Mr. JK: our current vice president. Not as large and intimidating as his current partner, Mr. SBY. Looks like an older version of Charlie Chaplin. Currently famous as Mr. LCLB (the sooner the better -for what exactly?)
• Mrs. TOLWLW: our former president. Really? Physically she looks like an ordinary housewife. She's now going for another chance on the Istana Negara. Again? Really?

Stop right here about the visual descriptions.

Did I just say visual? Well... never-mind then.

See that my feelings and perception of these 3 candidates interfere with the so-called physical description. I describe (incidentally) in both physical and non-physical terms.

Have I seen them in person? Actually none. So... what makes me describe their non-physical virtue? My knowledge on what I see, hear and think of them based on their visual appearances on the media.

Seeing is believing.

So because they are unsighted, they don't or can't afford to believe.

This is just too disturbing a statement. I can't even go on, so let's just stop here on the unsighted.

In the end... whomever you vote for, you don't rely on visual description. Well... not 100%. You rely on your sense (and ratio). Again - debatable - as ratio tend to linked with "what's in it for me". Since only certain basis point of the citizen are likely to gain direct benefit from the winner, I'd have to assume that we vote sincerely hoping for a better Indonesia not only based on what we see but on what we believe we see.

Do I see him (sorry Mrs. TOLWLW) as a better candidate compared to the other? Not exactly.

I believe he can bring us closer to a better Indonesia.