by Jann,
I was rather dismayed at your logo. The Society needs rebranding of sorts. Is it so closely associated with the political parties which are in power in
“Go out of the state of mind of the political elite and go into the hearts and souls of the common people”. Go beyond social and biological origins into the heart bed of Malaysian experience and make a statement on the common Malaysian today, drowning sorrows in notorious traffic jams, notoriously deadly air, unbending wages and nightly jobs to keep the family going. We are doing well- local newspapers shout out the joys of a few winners of globalisation but who speaks for the millions of silent losers?
‘Are we in a play of sorts, a Macbeth tragedy? Have we adopted the symbols of power of rulers and forgotten we are the ruled? My esteemed young citizens, rulers are only ruled by the rules of ambition and the common man can set them free by the rules of responsibility”
“Is this a dagger which I see before me, the handle towards my hand?
Come let me clutch thee.
I have thee not and yet I see thee still
Art thou fatal vision sensible to feeling as to sight ?
Or art though but a dagger of the mind proceeding from a heat oppressed brain?”
It is not so much the spirituality of the kris or the equilibrium of the dacing which is in question but the minds which control them... How free is our freedom?
“Enjoy your freedom while you can for like romantic love, it goes even before you have found it…. “
31 comments:
The dacing and the kris are respectively symbols of BN and UMNO, and although symbolically it is meaningful, practically, it may give the impression that KPUM is not independant.
We all know KPUM is neither bias nor shy with issues relating to the govenment. So does it matter that our logo is such?
You think it should be changed?
bla bla bla whatever. i doubt these guys are the executive committee of kpum to effect change. they're just here to spruce up their cvs (now if only they'd just admit it).
go start an NGO or something if you're into saving the world, captain planet.
-basil
I believe in being khusnuzon (thinking good of people). Hence i believe jann has his reasons in crtisizing the logo of KPUM.
However to be honest, frank and direct as someone with experience of being inside KPUM, does all this stuff like the symbolism of logos really matter when you are struggling to organise activities that its members will even bother to come??
in the first place a society is nothing if its members are apathethic. If you are really concerned about KPUM and what it reresents then do something about it! Exercise your rights! More than just talk. Talk is cheap. Get inside the committee and do something! Change everything you want, be radical but remember serve the members duly!
Things are easier said than done.
-blacQrose-
owh yea if i may add..
Idealism vs Pragmatism..
You need a balance..
-blacQrose-
an exco member of kpum hardly has the moral high ground to extol the virtues of acting as opposed to speaking.
you got elected - if it's anybody's job to effect change, it's you. we get to sit and muck and look pretty.
-basil
Ooooh, basil, getting no "action" today is it?
Not that I disagree with what you say though. So shall we ask the exco to firstly change the logo to show that they can start doing stuff? I just hope the letterheads aren't already printed...
- Marcus Antonius
hey basil.
The issue here has nothing to do with the committee. Anyway, the fact we are bringing up matters like this is to make sure you guys are properly represented. The fact that I'm typing this here on this forum shows we are doing what we can.
I could just be doing nothing now. We are trying to do what we can... There is nothing more we can gain from any work we put in now.
Anyway, we are not asking for praise or thanks. We are not even giving excuses. We are just trying to do what we think you want us to do, and it is very discouraging to receive comments like yours.
but if you still feel the same way, please write in about your dissatisfaction with our work, and i will be happy to post it up.
looking forward to more constructive comments from you.
of the many things they should change, the logo would be one of the least important.
and kpum is wrong; it has everything to do with the committee, which purports to represent all malaysian law students in the uk. quite plainly, if you were sitting around doing nothing, you wouldn't be doing your job would you?
you hardly deserve praise for doing your barest minimum. if you wanted to know what you could do for us, you'd have asked us, last year, immediately when you got elected into the committee. you're presently just reacting to the presence of teeth.
-basil
Well, creating this blog is a good start. At least, some of the new committee members are taking initiative to bring the law students together.
(make a comparison with previous committee board then you will see the difference)
Chicken Rice
but does that prove anything apart from the fact that they now have another webpage in addition the original one?
-basil
The main web page is for details regarding KPUM and its activities (granted, nothing much happening there)
This blog/forum thing is aimed at allowing members to directly voice their opinions and concerns in an open arena, whether it be about current issues or issues relating to the organisation. Something you would never have been able to do before.
If you were dissatisfied with us before, no one would have know about it, and it would have ended there. We would still have this on our CV. Now, the very fact you are able to write what you are writing is because we are trying to address these issues.
But as much as your critical views hurt us (or me at least), we (or I) do appreciate it. Keeps us trying harder. Thanks (note, being very diplomatic)
dear kpum (whoever you may be),
please do not take the comments personally - they are directed towards the entire group as a whole, instead of singling out the moderator of this blog.
if anything, you're the only committee member i know who has been actively a part of this virtual growth of the site.
time for your other (possibly more highly ranked) friends to do something else while you man this forum.
-basil
Too many similiarities to the ruling party?
Coincidence or rather a fact that the previous committees were very inclined towards the government?
It should start from the very logo KPUM portrays to the world.
And Mr moderator, based on your first comment on this issue, how do we know that KPUM is neither biased nor shy?
Are you telling us what to believe?
anonymous no. 2
It could very well be that the founding committee were pro-govenment. The question is whether we should keep the logo.
Anyway, we are not making you believe anything. I said we are neither bias nor shy based on the postings on this blog so far. Most of these issues are seen to be controversial. They are a direct inquiry into the governance of the country. Anyone who is pro-govenemnt would avoid topics like these. We obviously do not.
As i have said before, the purpose of bringing up these issues is to allow open discussion, and not to reflect any political stand of the committee or myself personally.
i don't get what the deal is about the logo; it's as if the jalur gemilang will have to be changed should a new government (i.e. the current opposition) comes into governance. should the very first step not be one of actual, as opposed to superficial, change?
-basil
we're not proposing to change the logo just because we're the new committee. The debate is whether the current logo contradicts our political neutrality.
It is a superficial change. Actual change must happen, and this we are trying hard to do. It's true we do not have the logo in mind when we work or make decisions, but thats not the point. It is part of our image. A part which contradicts what we stand for.
ah, but just consider the number of times superficial changes have been made (or announced) and then contrast them to the number of times they have been implemented.
think now, why would the change of the logo even be relevant to the crisis of the moment?
(answer: it isn't, and that should not even be your priority.)
-basil
i understand giving original opinions is far too daunting a challenge for anyone in our generation to undertake but at the very least, not poor, watered down rehashing of yesterday's news. as much as the issues put forth here are fundamental and classic, such is the tone these previous posts were authored in left me wondering if you guys are actually inherently politically-inclined or merely staging a platform of a pseudo-forum. UM law students during its heyday could have easily put kpum to shame with their cafeteria lunchtime banter.
a little more passion, zeal and conviction in writing wouldn't hurt, no? right now, its looking more like a flaccid attempt at space filling. granted, this forum is in its infantcy but starting off with a bang would be so much better.
yes, i went off tangent in regards to this post but really, no point sweating over small stuff ( though i suppose you future lawyers need all the practise you can get ). the lack of substance here is more worrying that the supposed underlying propaganda behind the logo.
but of course, you can discount whatever i say-- sadly, i am not a law student.
rose
Dear Rose,
Most of the articles in this forum are authored by the moderator, and as the moderator, I feel my role is to merely set out the issues, while still remaining neutral. The lack of passion, zeal and conviction is due to this fact. The ideal would be for the readers to actively state their mind, but like you said, the forum is still in its infancy.
It would be best if the ‘substance’ you are talking about comes from people like you. So please feel free to say what you want, and do send in an article when you can, and I’ll publish it. Thanks for the comments.
Perhaps this issue may seem superficial to some and indeed it may really be so... but symbols necessarily contain certain connotations and surely the word symbol itself already tells you that it is to represent something.
The issue at hand is one of identity: how do we want to project ourselves to the world. A logo is indeed important for this and every organisation frets over this matter. if not then we could easily adopt the Nazi swastika and the world would not care.
Thus does the KPUM logo project an image of association with BN? If so, does that accurately reflect KPUM's interests or allegiance? If not, should we continue to project that image? This is a decision that goes to the core of KPUM's identity: what do we represent?
please, substance over style. how hard is that for you guys to follow? start with something substantial; change the logo a few years down the road if you're unhappy about it.
as of now, the logo is hardly a problem; people should (and will) be judged by their actions.
i'd rather see kpum start off with something strong; a change of logo would be nothing more than pathetic.
-basil
Oh, just change the stupid logo, and be done with it. Maybe to something not symbolic at all, like a stylised "KPUM". That'll stop all this crap and let us get back to rehashing yesterday's news, or whatever it is we do here. Oh, and look at UM now. Besides, cafeteria banter can get really emotional and passionate, seeing that it's not displayed for the whole world to see. So I don't think that's a fair comparison, rose.
P.s. I'm not sure whether you meant the cafeteria thing literally, or to make a point
So, any resolution in sight mr mod?
To change or not to change?
Honestly, I doubt that you guys would ever change your logo as your allegiance to the ruling party back home will not waiver anytime soon as it is unlikely for a society claiming to represent all law students be independent from the ruling party's influence.
Resolution: forget logo and just conserve energy for personal gain.
to make a point, marcus, though i don't suppose nitpicking an example would be all that worthwhile when we've got more serious national issues to discuss in this forum. you think?
rose
Absolutely. So change the stupid logo and let's carry on. If for no other reason, to prove anon 15:28 wrong. Anon, go ahead with your personal gain agenda. Nothing wrong with that, just don't claim that you're doing it for other people (read, don't enter democracy).
Hey mr mod, been a week now. Many things have happened. I guess you're busy, but give us a new thread.
-Marcus Antonius
marcus, you must be new, or else you'd know that i am vehemently against the idea that a democracy is people-serving. it isn't - like any abused form of governance, it's self-serving.
-basil
Oh, basil, were you anon? I'm just saying that democracy, by definition, is about the people. You imply that you want to work for people when you stand for election. And since lying is wrong (I believe in our Lord), then to enter democracy, you must follow that mindset. Don't mislead the people. You can't just happily change the definitions. I assume here that you believe that lying is wrong.
-Marcus Antonius
apologies marcus,
i'm not anon. i'm just saying that democracy isn't altruistic in nature. sorry for misleading you.
-basil
Dear contributors,
I am sorry I took a while to respond. Been rather busy.
There has been a lot of comments on this issue, and although all of them appreciated, most of them have nothing to do with the issue at hand. Some talk about democracy and some about the incompetence of the committee, including myself. Some also question our integrity. Like I said, it is all welcomed, but I feel generally misplaced.
About the logo, some say it’s too superficial to matter, and we should be concentrating on other things. Some say it’s important. I feel we did not receive enough constructive comments about the issue to resolve anything. In any case, I will propose the idea of a logo change to the committee.
Since most of the comments were directed at the effectiveness and moral standing of the committee, I will try to come up with a post to discuss this, unless someone offers to contribute and start the ball rolling. I am all for this.
Thank you again everyone.
A symbol is what you make of it. UMNO doesn't have a monopoly on the kris, neither does BN on the scales.
The kris has unfortunately been much-abused by chauvinists - the true, 'halus' Malay, as Farish Noor puts it, would have been horrified at the racist kris-waving and threats of bathing this most elegant and reluctant of weapons in blood - IMHO, it's a fitting symbol for a group of people whose primary tool is the tongue, for the 'halus' Malays, too, chose words and manners over blood and violence, and the kris was only drawn once all else had failed, and with regret.
As for the 'dacing', might I remind everyone that the Bar Council also uses it - a universal symbol for justice does not cease to be universal just because one political party decides to use it for their own logo.
Retain the symbol, and ensure that our actions continue to reflect these two ideas - elegant and mannerly battle, for a higher call of justice, and that will be the firmest answer to those who believe KPUM's neutrality is compromised.
Post a Comment