Tribute to past greatness －過去の偉大さへの賛辞－

For older people to complain that society in some way is not as good as it used to be is so common that it has become a cliché.  “We didn’t have these smartphones when I was young, and we got healthy exercise by playing in the streets.”  “Back in my day, young people respected their elders.”  “When I was a lad we didn’t have to worry about this global warming.”

So is a feeling of nostalgia for the past always wrong?  Because we know that people tend to fondly remember their youth, should we always dismiss the idea that things of the past were better?  Hugh McIlvanney, a Scottish sports writer who died this week at the age of 84, didn’t think so.  He has been called the greatest sports writer in the English language, and became friends with great sporting figures such as Mohammed Ali and Sir Alex Ferguson.  A few years ago he wrote a tribute to the great Brazilian footballer of the 1950s, 60s and 70s – Pele.  In his article, he argued that we should not assume that modern players such as Messi are better than Pele was.  As a small tribute to Hugh, I’d like to include an edited extract of his article.  Sports writers today are not like they used to be... 

An edited extract of Hugh McIlvanney’s tribute to Pele:

Nostalgia is rightly regarded as a constant threat in the accurate assessment of the greatness of the past, especially the rather distant past.  A gulf of decades can impart a rosy glow to feats of long ago, making them seem more remarkable than they really were, particularly in the memory of those seeking to revive and re-validate the thrills of their own younger days. 

But some of us of fairly advanced age believe that we can and do resist major distortions in perspective.  Our determination to continue doing so is strengthened by recognition of another menace to the true judgement of former glories – one just as damaging as nostalgia.  That is the tendency among more youthful generations to over-worship the triumphs and triumphant figures of the here and now.

Any slight blurring of the awareness of just how wonderful past achievements were is no more than must be expected with the passing of time.  Only fools waste regret over the inexorability of the diminishing of such vividness.  But what can be annoying is the evidence in too many quarters of an urge to acclaim the present as in every sense the unchallengeable peak of greatness.

Vocabulary:

a cliché – something so commonly said that it has become boring or uninteresting

a lad – a boy

fondly – with affection or liking for someone or something

a gulf – a huge gap

a feat – an achievement

to revive – to bring back to life

to (re-)validate – to confirm or accept the worthiness of (again)

a distortion – a false view of the shape or state of something

a menace – a danger or threat

inexorability – unstoppability

The rash and headstrong English – an essay on national prejudices －せっかちで強情な英国人 ～国民の偏見についてのエッセイ －

Most people love their country.  This is a good thing, since we share our country, and all benefit from its success if it can be made to work well.  But there are dangers in loving your country too uncritically.

Today it was announced that British company Dyson would move its headquarters to Singapore.  Most observers think that this is a reaction to Brexit.  This is strange, since the company’s founder, Sir James Dyson, has been one of the most prominent supporters of Brexit.  Although he has always claimed that leaving the EU would be a huge success for Britain because of our hard-work and business skills, now that Brexit is approaching, perhaps he is having to deal with a different reality.

This might be a good time to consider the topic of love for one’s country.  Here is an extract from an essay by 18^th century Irish/British writer Oliver Goldsmith on the subject.  I have heavily edited it to make it easier for English students to follow.

An edited extract from, “On national prejudices”, by Oliver Goldsmith

Since I spend most of my time in pubs, coffee houses and other public meeting points, I have an opportunity of observing an infinite variety of characters.  In a recent visit to such a place, I fell into a conversation with half a dozen men who were arguing about politics.

Among many other topics, we talked about the different characters of the various nations of Europe.  One of the men declared that the Dutch were greedy, the French used too much flattery, the Germans were drunkards and gluttons, and the Spaniards proud and bad-tempered.  He said, however, that in bravery, generosity in justice, and in every other virtue the English were the greatest.  The other men smiled and agreed with this remark – all except for me.  I rested my head on my arm and pretended to be thinking about something else so that I didn’t have to answer.

But the man who had spoken was not satisfied.  Addressing me with confidence, he asked me if I agreed.  Although I had not wanted to argue, since he had asked me, I told him my true opinion.  I said that I would not give such strong opinions on Europeans unless I had toured Europe and studied the manners of these nations with great care and accuracy.  I said that a more impartial judge would judge that the Dutch were more frugal and industrious, the French more polite, the Germans more hardy and hard-working, and the Spaniards more easy-going and calm than the English.  I said that although the English were brave and generous, they were at the same time rash and headstrong – tending too much to be overly excited by success and overly depressed by failure.

I could easily see that the whole company began to dislike me before I finished my answer.  Realising that it was pointless to debate further, I left and thought about the absurdity of national prejudices.

If these prejudices were common only among the poorest and lowest of the people, perhaps they might be excused, as these people have few opportunities of correcting them by reading, travelling or conversing with foreigners.  But the sad thing is that they infect the minds even of the richest and highest people.

Those who most often boast of national merit tend to have the least merit of their own.  A weak vine grows around a strong tree because it does not have the strength to support itself.

Vocabulary:

Uncritically – without questioning

a founder – of a business or organisation, someone who starts it

prominent – well-known

infinite – not limited in number

half a dozen - six

flattery – excessive or insincere praise, especially given for one’s own benefit

gluttony – habitual greed or excess in eating

impartial – unbiased; looking at both or all sides equally

frugal – economical with money or food

rash – tending to act too quickly, without enough thought about the consequences

headstrong – stubborn and unwilling to listen to others

absurdity - ridiculousness

The uninventor －無発明者－

I recently read a short story by Neil Gaiman about a man who travels back in time, “uninventing” products that have done more harm than good.  He decides that having spaceships that can travel to distant galaxies is bad for mankind, so he goes back in time and ensures that they were never invented.  He is annoyed by the constant traffic jams in the sky caused by flying cars so numerous that pedestrians can not see the sky.  So he gets rid of them.

The story made me wonder what past human inventions it would be better to uninvent.  What things have made life worse, not better?  What past inventors should be erased from history?

A good case can be made for American inventor Thomas Midgley, who was born in 1889.  In the 1920s he had the idea of adding lead to petrol and other products.  Unfortunately, lead is extremely poisonous, causing brain damage, cancer and death in anyone who is exposed to too much of it.  The company Midgley helped to create ignored or denied evidence of lead’s terrible effects on the environment and human beings for years, producing huge amounts of leaded petrol, and releasing it into the environment.  They even added lead to toothpaste tubes.

In the 1930s, Midgley’s next invention was just as bad.  As Bill Bryson describes in one of his books, “With an instinct for the regrettable that was almost uncanny, he invented [CFCs].”  CFCs are the gasses that, it was noticed fifty years later, are producing a huge hole in the Earth’s ozone layer.

So if a time-travelling uninventor comes back to help us get rid of products we would be better off without, Midgley’s inventions will get a vote from me.  I’ll also suggest smartphones, skateboards, drones, and alarm clocks.  Have I forgotten anything?

Vocabulary:

a traffic jam – a state when the roads are blocked and vehicles cannot move forward

to be erased – to be completely removed

regrettable – undesirable or unwelcome

uncanny – strange or mysterious, especially in an unsettling way

Hello... Goodbye, Robot－こんにちは…さよなら、ロボット－

It feels really awkward to ignore or brush off someone who is trying to talk to you.  But sometimes it is necessary.  When someone approaches you on the street, trying to sell you something, they can’t be surprised if you mutter an apology and brush past them.  If you are like me then you will feel a flush of guilt as you do so.  It’s not nice to be rude.

I discovered recently that this feeling of guilt for refusing to engage in conversation extends beyond humans.  I felt very guilty the other day about ignoring a robot.

My wife, son and I went to Nerima Culture Centre in order to keep my son occupied for a while.  The centre has an interactive robot there called Pepper.  You can shake hands with it, ask it a few questions and answer a few of the questions it asks you.  My son likes to meet the robot and shake its hand until it says, (in Japanese), “Please handle me gently.”  Perhaps I should call the robot “he” instead of “it”.  I’m not sure that my son can clearly differentiate between the robot and a human.  He quite often gets a bit shy as Pepper starts talking.  When the Culture Centre was shut over New Year and my son asked to see Pepper, we told him that he was sleeping.

When my son activated the robot the other day by shaking his hand, it/he came to life and started asking questions.  “Hi!  It’s nice to talk to you!  Can you guess what my favourite food is?”

But that day my son got distracted by some leaflets and wandered off, leaving Pepper alone.  But Pepper kept talking, trying to overcome the silence from its human companion.  “Eh?  I don’t hear any answer.  I’ll ask you once more.  Can you guess what my favourite food is?”

“Oh, dear!  I couldn’t hear any answer from you.  Let’s try this.  Can you say hello?  Hello?  I’ll try again.  Could you repeat what I say?  Hel-lo...” 

By this time I felt total sympathy for poor Pepper.  I wanted to run over and shout, “Hello, Pepper!  Don’t worry.  I’m here.  You’re not alone!”  But, as with uninvited human salespeople, I just walked away, feeling guilty for my rudeness.

I wonder how soon companies will realise the emotional power of a talking machine?  Can you imagine every vending machine you pass in Tokyo trying to strike up a conversation with you?  “Hi there, Sir!  You look like you need a drink.  Let me guess what your favourite drink is.  It’s lemon water, isn’t it?  Am I right?  Sir?  I don’t hear an answer.  Sir?  Where are you going?  How rude!”

Vocabulary:

to brush someone off – to dismiss or reject someone quickly

to mutter something – to say something in a low and hard to hear voice

a flush – a sudden rush of intense emotion

interactive – of a machine, game etc., responding to a user’s input; two-way

to differentiate – to tell apart

Goodbye 2018, it was nice knowing you －さよなら2018、知れてよかった－

The month of January is named after the Latin word for door – ianua.  The ancient Romans thought of entering a new year as being like walking through a door into a new world.

The trouble with walking through a door into a new world, of course, is that many bad things from the old world run through the door behind you.  A year ago, I left the old world of 2017 convinced that I was going to leave my frequent coughs and colds behind me.  But they followed me into 2018.

So this time as I stepped through the door leading from 2018 to 2019 I was very careful to shut the door quickly so that a number of bad things would not follow.  If I have been successful, then you should see none of the following things this year:

1. Shouting, Shouting!, SHOUTING! To win an argument

Last year, I became more and more convinced that Britain was abandoning its traditions as a democracy.  A democratic country is ruled by the “demos”, or people.  Britain instead became a “shoutocracy”, or a country ruled by shouting.  America, being a world leader, got there a bit before us.

All shouting on news and politics shows will cease in 2019.

2. People eating crisps with chopsticks

This was a weird snack eating habit I noticed in 2018 in Japan.  Just use your fingers.  Or stop eating crisps.

3. People valuing their mobile phones more highly than their children

Last year in Britain, as in Japan, a mobile phone network crashed for one day, meaning that some people could not easily make calls or use the internet.  Some pizzas could not be delivered to customers.  Some people couldn’t “like” their friends’ pictures on Facebook.  For some people, it was as if society was collapsing.  One young woman interviewed on tv said, “I think this is the worst natural disaster in my lifetime.”

4. Theresa May

Could we just leave the British Prime Minister in 2018, please?  She has a hard job, I know, but somehow she always seems to find a way to make it even harder.

Thank you!

Vocabulary:

to abandon something – to leave something behind, and not return to it

to cease – to stop