 |
Letters to the Editor
18th October 1998 |
|
 |
||
Dispense with this myopic thinkingI refer to R.W. Jayaratne's riposte in your newspaper to the recent review of "West Side Story" by Mary Anne David and myself. I welcome the writer's view, though it is important to keep the debate focused. The purpose of a review or critique is to offer critical and constructive public comment. When doing so, one needs to bear in mind the review should be unbiased, fair, objective and provide as much constructive feedback as possible. I believe we have achieved that balance and sense of proportion. Unfortunately, an increasing number of reviews today appear to be rather long on mush and very short on substance. Hyperbole and effervescence are the order of the day. We were unqualified in our praise of the sets, costumes and the overall dramatic aspects of the production. However, as we have clearly stated, the principal basis of our criticism was that the "music" - the critical element that drives a Musical - fell far short of expectations. I dare say, even to many of the Workshop Players themselves, it would have been apparent there were serious misgivings in this aspect. Contrary to what the writer maintains, our review contained no technical jargon. Anyone with a sense and grasp of musical pitch would know what we were talking about. One cannot expect to comment on a Musical without either the use or the understanding of elementary musical expressions and their application to the music. That would be bordering on the farcical. That is ironic Mrs. David and I are being faulted precisely because we demonstrated a broader knowledge and appreciation of Bernstein's music. Finally, let me emphasise it is only by justified criticism and constructive feed back that we can ever hope to enhance standards of performance in Sri Lanka. Regrettably, glaring deficiencies in far too many productions, concerts and recitals these days are either overlooked or deliberately ignored. Perhaps, such an attitude stems from a quaint deference to the personalities directly involved. From this vantage, there is little desire to critically assess the quality of content dished out for public consumption. For those sincerely concerned in not only encouraging the arts but also providing constructive feedback, either approach is equally pernicious. If we are to achieve artistic excellence, such archaic and myopic thinking must be summarily dispensed with. Only then will we able to offer a viable comparison to the phenomenal array of talent and skill in other parts of the world. Louise Roberts
Give more people a chanceI came across an interesting article in the Internet which can be summarised as follows: Only one in about 750 Sri Lankans trawls the Internet, because of financial constraints and a low degree of computer literacy, an expert said . The Sri Lanka Telecommunication Regulatory Commission puts the number of the country's Internet users at about 25,000, but Internet and e-mail accounts numbered only 12,109 by June this year. Regrettably the above survey has failed to consider the most important aspect as to why this cheap mode of communication is costly only in Sri Lanka. For example, here in Oman it is the cheapest mode of communication. We pay a paltry sum of Riyal Omani 5/- per month (Rs 850/-) for 5 hours day time or 10 hrs night time for Internet and/or e- mail. This is the lowest package. The best part of the package is that we don't have to pay for telephone time for the Internet browsing hours or e Mail sending and receiving time. In other words we have a 'toll free' line, to browse the Internet or send e- mail. In comparison, in Colombo, Sri Lanka Telecom makes a colossal amount from the Internet users for the telephone usage time. We have to admit that SLT e- mail rates are quite cheap, but the damper is the telephone bill. Each time any one sends or receives an e- mail also he will be charged separately for the telephone usage time. To popularise the e-mail and internet in Sri Lanka, SLT should provide 'toll free' lines for 2 or 3 years. After it has gained its momentum, SLT can fix a Unit charge, as in USA. Ariyasumithra Wijeyaratne
What a lovely lovely war!I am utterly confused by the recent reports of the war in the North. The State media informs me of a crushing and decisive victory in Mankulam with just a passing reference to Kilinochchi, almost as if this were a regrettable inconvenience. Greatly at odds, I read of a different perception in the 'independent' press that views Kilinochchi not only as a calamity, but the most disastrous one to date. How come... a leadership blessed with the largest ratio in the world of Major Generals? Is this cover up yet another example that the PA will run with the hare and hunt with the hounds for political expediency, whatever this is perceived to be? News trickling in referred to an army death toll considerably more than the MoD and Lake House Group admitted and a list of hardware including 2 tanks, 3 pieces of artillery and an assortment of Buffels and 70 other vehicles that had been relieved from this major army camp. This compares in scale with the arsenals lost from Mullaitivu, Pooneryn and the infamous Zimbabwean mortar ship. In contrast, we often see headlines of harvests of T56's, claymore or johnny mines and occasionally, an LMG after a successful skirmish. The exchanges are so pathetically unequal they seem unfair, and yet we know the armoury of the State and its military spending greatly exceeds that of the LTTE. In fact, now the LTTE need hardly spend at all for if going by the past, each time Prabhakaran himself plans a campaign they can simply collect from any major army base. The Rs 12bn supplementary defence budget was approved faster than greased lightning and will no doubt expand the State armoury, but who will be the final beneficiaries? Or must the war, which is after alI only a means of achieving political objectives, to be left to Generals alone with their known views of media control and public accountability. Accountability in the way the war is fought is no longer considered a right of the general public, the first and final share holders of this endless bloody project. It has become quite normal to beguile them through the State media with rousing tales of vim and valour that omit the physical destruction of combatant and civilian alike, the cannon fodder of inadequately trained personnel, the horrors of the refugee camps nor of the terrors relived time and again in the border villages. The oft repeated tales of percentages of war won todate have joined the ranks of Mahadanamutta as the current folk lore. In my view it is regrettable that the Government rejected the Opposition Leader's proposal for unconditional talks out of hand. Although short on credibility, for as a tabloid Editor said in a recent TV debate he would hardly risk his political skin by proposing this when trivial but more populist issues were at hand, if not for knowingly causing confusion in PA ranks; the concept should have been considered seriously, for quite apart from its other virtues, unconditional talks are the only dialogue that can survive the inevitable acts of terrorism that will continue. Disappointingly the Government spat it out lock, stock and package. It is a simple question of whether one talks, even while fighting, or not talk at all. The Position of Strength formula must be abandoned for what it really is, a mirage. After 17 years of escalating violence that much must be evident to anyone. The logic of talking instead to the other Tamil parties as some groups suggest, and reaching an equitable and viable solution is obscure. If it is accepted that one must talk, it is only folly that prevents anyone seeing that eventual dialogue must involve the LTTE. T D Haramanis
Light up our lives, festival of lightsThe festival of Deepavali Kumari Kumarasinghe Tennakoon |
||
|
Return to the Letters to the Editor Contents Write a letter to the editor : editor@suntimes.is.lk
|
||