Don't you hate it when you get cheated by blurbs? Like what attracted you in the blurb so did not happen in the book? For instance:

'George's unusual and gorgeous creations receive mixed reactions, with more attention going to Yukari's good looks than the clothes she modeled.'

That didn't really happen in Paradise Kiss (or is it just because of the translation?). I thought the story would be more interesting if it happened. 'Cause the thing about the artist's art not being able to appeal to the masses has been expounded on too much. And i thought George's design had a lot of conventional appeal:


I mean, I wouldn't be surprised to find this dress on a Disney character.

But apart from this, Paradise Kiss is an amazing manga. The main character, an irritable and mediocre student struggling in a top school, is someone that i can relate VERY STRONGLY to. And she makes painful mistakes. They're not the usual 'i don't think he likes me but actually he does and we spend the whole series figuring it out' kind of mistake, but mistakes like being in a destructive relationship, ceasing to put effort in school, etc.

Like aud said, there's not much of a story if the character doesn't make mistakes.

After reading the manga, I think designing sounds fun, because it's one of those rare careers in which your individuality can be seen. It's not like an office job, where the result is practically the same no matter who does it.

But i don't have the imagination for it =/

Tickle just tried to offer me a religion test. You know, the kind you take to 'find out which religion fits your personality!'

i don't think religion ought to be worn as a badge of identity...

Bible trail has ended. It was really meaningful, although i dozed off sometimes due to insomnia...

I've been led to think about something. Recently, a lot of christians have been saying that they want to love God on their own terms. And the Straits Times once published something about the protagonist from The Life of Pi refusing to choose between Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism because he 'just want(ed) to love God'. Which, in my opinion, is not loving God on His terms as he doesn't obey God's sayings.

Now, let us put aside love for God for a while and think about love in general. What does it mean to truly love someone? How do you differentiate between love and mere infatuation (can't think of any other alternatives)? Think Joyce once told me that infatuation is for yourself, love is for others. When one is infatuated, he thinks about himself. He wants to be pleased by the relationship. When one is in love, he wants to do what is good for the person he loves. For instance, if someone you love does something wrong, you don't ignore it, because that would be pleasing yourself by keeping the peace. Instead, you tell the person that what he/she is doing is wrong because it is good for that person.

Back to love for God. How can you love God when you don't respect His wishes, and don't worship Him the way He wants to be worshipped? There is no loving in one's own terms; love is never about oneself.

Which makes love really hard, of course. Sometimes I wonder if I managed to love the people around me for even just a little bit. But I will try! =) Won't you?

Here's another quote from Maskerade:

'It wasn't so much the personality, it was the 'but' that people always added when they talked about it. But she's got a lovely personality, they said.'

Unlike Terry Pratchett, i don't the problem lies in the lack of choice (i.e. whether you want a wonderful personality or a skinny figure) but in the way people regard such qualities as... less important. Like the first thing people will look for is looks, and then it's like BUT oh well you have a lovely personality or talent to somewhat make up for a lack of it...

Dunno if my meaning comes through clearly...

Have you ever had books that you really love, but will never buy, or will never read more than, say, once every century? Like... books full of people with broken lives and ugly events. They make you cry and think a lot, but you can't stand having them in the house, or undergoing that traumatising tide of emotions again.

Or, you're afraid that reading them too many times might make you lose the feeling.

Haha, here's something cute i found in Maskerade:

'Gytha Ogg, you wouldn't be a witch if you couldn't jump to conclusions right?'

Nanny nodded. 'Oh yes.' There was no shame in it. Sometimes there wasn't any time to do anything else but take a flying leap. Sometimes you had to trust experience and intuition and general awareness and take a running jump.

It describes my feelings towards... certain people perfectly. Me thinks it's ok to scold someone for jumping to conclusions in an essay or an important matter, but not ok to higgle over trivial things. Deductive logic shouldn't be too obsessively practised; it's too inefficient for everyday stuff. Perhaps that's why commonsense exist?

Lala.