I was sent this video (or a link to the video http://t.co/re1K5i8Vfa, to be more accurate), which could be of interest if you happen to be in Singapore. I was going to ignore it, as I am not a huge clubber but it could be of use to some.
Mainly, I did like the use of Darren Aronofsky style steadicam which i first saw in pi and was used more famously in the classic Requiem for a Dream. The first song in the trail was also a remix/cover of Blue Monday by New Order which is supposedly the best selling UK 12" single ever. And so incompetently (in terms of business acumen) were Factory records run that the single was sold at a loss due to the elaborate packaging. If you are interested in the story of Factory records and/or enjoy good films, I would recommend 24 Hour Party People.
Anyway, you may find the video interesting for many reasons. I did, actually, with the talking heads bit particularly fun.
Musings, or incoherent ramblings - the judgment is yours. This may be written in a slightly different style too, as a result.
NOTE: before you read this, you know I am critical about things, this does not mean I did not like it. I think that should be clear to those that actually know me, but I know it has often been misunderstood. :-) Not everyone appreciates a nuanced position! I tried to put the photo album posts in fairly plainly and without too much judged comment. Not sure I succeeded.
Naming it the "Beacons Of Democracy"[1] was a joke, clearly, but it is interesting that the two cities bookending my visit to Malaysia/Indonesia are major cities with a globalised outlook that seem to be more "developed"[2] than their neighbours in many ways.
I think there are some real questions as to why that is but that is not what I get/got asked upon my holiday being over. When I'm asked how was your holiday and what did you think of, the second one feels like a loaded[3] question - and it is only right to answer in a loaded manner.
What is Dubai famous for? There is plenty of history and heritage in the Middle East and a lot of booming economies but that is not what is seen as special by those in power. A lack of a proper, democratic planning process (though, ironically, these places have well thought out plans - just not thought through properly) means destruction of cultures and communities for a homogenised "modernity". There are social reasons for this (aren't there always? ;-)). There is a definite feeling of "we built this". They are much more statements of intent than anything else - and they show up the insecurity that some newer cities (understandably) can have. I think that is why the Burj Khalifa is so much larger than its competitors, it cannot be overtaken easily. I can understand it though - what else do you know about Dubai? It does make a name for it. Would anyone come to London for the Shard[4]? Will it have international named recall? If I remember correctly, it is the tallest in Europe, or was at least. It in no way defines anyone's London, whereas I think the Gherkin actually does to some degree. We are a little spoilt to have built up a city and a legacy over many centuries. The Burj Khalifa is a little silly though. I think, at 829.8m, it is about 200m taller than the next but the observation deck is only a little more than about halfway up at 450m (which is 50% taller than the Shard in totality). It is great to be high up and looking down but then a part of me thinks - only if there is something to look down on[5]. Dubai has a coast of course (not that I really saw it in my day and a half this time) but I did not go up there so cannot comment on the view. Dubai, and Singapore, are the classic "new" vertical cities and work well as stopovers in my opinion as they are generally compact. They are not really anarchic enough to be interesting as holidays for me. I know that is quite a personal preference though. KL was a little like that too - and aiming to be more like that and the Petronas Towers were apparently a pointer in that direction. When I went to Shanghai the second time (2007), I was struck by the skyline - it was awesome in the literal sense - in the style of shock and awe. And the comparison to military seemed appropriate, it really reminded me of those Russian military parades through Moscow.
Look upon our wonders and despair.
Someone asked me what I thought of Singapore and I said it reminded me of a charmless Hong Kong (and I found HK "island" to be relatively charmless at the time - it isn't really but that may be partly due to Sleeping Dogs). It sounds harsh - especially as I enjoyed my time in Singapore a lot, but there was a brashness to it that also came through. As cities built around commerce, and quite specifically ex-pat commerce, they do suffer a little from being international and a little benign. There is plenty of interest in Singapore, and those that live there seem to genuinely love it, so this may be a personal position.
The fundamental difference between the two cities (in my experience) there is a feeling of evolution there rather than big-bang. Singapore has that a little too, but nowhere near. But "new" cities do have their charms too - I think you would be able to still enjoy them but for a shorter period. You know, cathedrals to commerce and consumerism rather than religion. Both help the weak in their own way.
It may just be that I don't feel an emotional connection but they are not interesting in the same way as major European cities are. I think a large part of that for me is how walkable a place is. Dubai is not walkable (outdoors) at all and clearly revolves around car usage. I'm just not really a fan of car travel (as you may know) and it always makes me feel really insulated from the surroundings. I took the Dubai metro to the airport from my cousin's when I left and it seems in that journey (45mins), I had apparently used the metro more than all of the three couples/young families I knew in Dubai, combined. Singapore is a little better in this respect as the city is far more integrated with the infrastructure.
I have done a a little travel around Europe and, for some reason, think of a trip to the industrial city of Milan. Nobody calls it a beautiful city (although nearby Como is pretty lovely...), but I think that it kind of serves its purpose after all and it is still more charming than some megacities that are built recently. Thinking of Milan, for instance, the fact that the metro system reminded me of a grey prison train was part of the trip for me. And the fact it felt lived in, the cracks in the city were not cracks in a façade, but just ageing. There wasn't really a "behind the curtain" to it and I sometimes feel there is with other places. In Shanghai (in 2004 and 2007), the city felt very different when you strayed even marginally off the beaten path (by which I mean main roads).
Some of this is time and evolution of course, Europe's cities were also not exactly open before and would have been remarkably ostentatious in the past. I do think we have become more enlightened as to the purpose of cities (people!) but I do not think it is coincidence that the countries I visited were not exactly hotbeds of democracy. I guess fast developing countries rarely use democratic means to get there. I also do not think that it is just a coincidence that they were within the British Empire and have strong UK influences, historically.
It is totally true that the terrible conditions that workers are put through in Dubai et al have parallels with the historical growth of European cities. And some of the supposedly ludicrous things in Dubai also have parallels in our great European cities. Is an air-conditioned beach really worse than heated swimming pools? Is the Victoria Embankment a blight on the natural ecology of the Thames? How many died to bring sewage control or underground railways to London? How many displaced for the national rail network? That was the money men lording it over the little people too. Camden is essentially a town that housed workers and navvies whilst all this stuff was built.
The difference is timing - as this happened before in our case - and society is happy to compare when it suits.
There is one other difference too, and a major one - experience. The modern cities are not trailblazing in the way London (or Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam etc.) were, they are following and essentially making some incremental improvements. That means that they are also aware of the negative parts of expansion. Post-enlightenment, I don't think you can say "they did it too centuries ago". It is wilfully irresponsible now.
Dubai, like Las Vegas, is an irresponsible cityscape with few thoughts about sustainability - which is a shame as it could be so much more. And the problem with the infrastructure is that it is entirely dependent on "oil" or energy use. In Dubai's case that infrastructure is predicated on car use. I think a huge problem is that the kind of place it is, and the type of people it attracts, is that they do not believe that taxation is a thing. I believe that the natural way of things is a tax on things to pay for the problems that they cause. That means that, essentially, things that are untaxed are being subsidised. As it is, we do subsidise Dubai as they do not allow people to stay there - so when it comes to the point when they are no longer "economically active", they are booted back to their homes and must be supported (eg pensions, care infrastructure) by us. I think that is essentially what I have difficulty with (and there are parallels in history for similar things with the industrial revolution but that was with something other than human capital).
1. I called it this in jest as some people think of my trip to be a little incongruous with my character.↩ 2. What developed means is open to debate of course.↩ 3. This is possibly paranoia, but I know some people do like to set me off and watch me go.↩ 4. I have been told that it is a new hotel, for the Olympics - and I doubt many longer term Londoners even know it has a hotel in there, not sure it was designed for that at all.↩ 5. I'd fully imagine this to change over time of course - it is already impressive of course.↩
My trip to Singapore was planned with a friend in Malaysia. Ultimately, Singapore was merely a staging post on the way to more interesting places but each trip needs an introduction, and Singapore was it. I planned to spend two nights in Singapore and, as I had planned to spend a few days in Dubai on the way back, my flight with Emirates was routed via Dubai[1] on the way out too on a lovely A380 - it was quieter and nicer than other planes I have been on.
A friend of mine from Singapore, who I met in 2006, had spent most of the time I had known her in extolling the virtues of Singapore. She told me how great it was to get around easily, how multicultural it was, that it had the best food and that it was just a very welcoming place. I had my misgivings at the time(s).
What did she say when I told her that I was going? Well, her face dropped a little and
"Saif, I don't think you're going to like it"
This was a comment that stayed with me throughout the trip - I don't know whether I wanted to prove her right, or to prove her wrong, but it stayed with me.
The first thing that caught my eye upon landing in Singapore was the carpet (see footnote[1] about Dubai for further details). In all fairness it was different to the identikit flooring that you get at most airports and had a design that dated it very well.
Plenty of people had told me about Singapore and so I felt I had to fill my time up and so, other than my travelling companion (henceforth labelled as TC), I had also organised some other meetups with friends (and, yeah, I am now comfortable with that designation) that happened to be there temporarily.
When I got out of the airport, I got the train towards the hotel and soaked in the atmosphere... And possibly my own sweat. Maybe some other people's too. Hot amd humid was what I expected, got and humid was what I got. After noticing how wedded people, women especially, were to their phones I got to the hotel, dropped my bags off, said a quick hello to friend and departed for rendezvous 1 with a school friend (henceforth, rz1). I was late to arrive, which is pretty uncommon, and we met by Marina Bay Sands which is a new part of the city. In my defence, I was in a new part of the world and had just been flying for about 15 hours so I didn't feel too bad. Too bad about it, obviously I felt bad - "I had just been flying for about 15 hours".
Gardens By The Bay
I found it a little confusing which was not helped by the fact that the station was in a part that was "awaiting development". After a lot of faff and walking through a little music festival, we eventually met up. And in the absence of other things to do, walked around a little in the Gardens by the Bay and chatted.
Joined by a friend a little later, we decided to eat on Arab Street so we cabbed it there. I'm not a huge fan of cabs but, even with a fairly extensive metro system, it was still easier and quicker.
I didn't know a great deal about Singapore but had been told that I should go to Raffles to go to the Long Bar - where the Singapore Sling had been invented. I'll be honest, I don't know where any other cocktail has been invented and I think most places would not be that well-known for inventing a cocktail. I'm genuinely not sure whether it is good or slightly pathetic to be in the situation where the most famous thing is that a cocktail was invented there. The Raffles hotel (and now, complex) was quite nice in its own, not quite faded, colonial grandeur. The bar, however, was rubbish. The name, in particular, seemed a bit inappropriate as it was a pretty small place. We (minus rz1) sat, ate some monkey nuts [link] and then left to find a better place - a rooftop one. We failed but we did find a pleasant enough ground floor one. It was quite late, but still teeming with people and, judging by the clothes, quite a few football fans amongst them. This was the night of the Champions League final (with two teams from the same country) after all and the time difference meant it would be rather late at night. How wonderfully circular, ten years on.
Shopped and Dropped
The next day started with a passable breakfast and then bus to Orchard Rd. Orchard Road is famous for shopping and, when in Singapore...
I was not too interested in actual shopping but thought a look around would be fine and fun. And these cathedrals to the gods of shopping had a number of devotees, a significant number. As I walked around as a tourist, I noticed a lot of people taking photos - very much in the modern style, selfies aplenty and even the non-selfies were with a similar aesthetic. Modernity has passed me by in so many ways - but I was the one with photographic equipment. The trip, in general, made me think about the nature of tourism quite a lot and it was not right of me to begrudge them that little happiness (and not so little in many cases). Well, not until they asked me to move out of the way as I walked - moved so they could get clear photos of themselves posing in front of department stores. At this point I begrudged them, I begrudged them hard.
Upon meeting rendezvous 2 (henceforth rz2), the heavens opened and the rain was insanity in water form. It did lead to my second favourite moment in Singapore as some shop clerks stood under the roof to offer umbrellas to people walking the 5m to the next roof. Beautifully simple, but we used it to get to lunch - a colourful selection of dim sum.
And then I was left in the company of a friend of a friend. I'm socially awkward so this was pretty tar out of my comfort zone. Or was it? Do we open up or close down with not-quite strangers?
Anyway, rain closed down options but as rz2 was a local of sorts, she knew we could head to the covered, and new, Gardens by the Bay. Again.
Inside, the gardens also contained two conservatories which I went through. They were both very popular and for good reason - interesting and enjoyable although I can't say I'm the biggest fan of flowers... It was enjoyable though. I always find myself comparing places to other places (though I don't do this for people - this was the actual conversation we had when there) and the Gardens By The Bay, whilst larger and less busy did remind me of the Olympic Park in Stratford. I do not think that this is a tangible connection though. From there, a quick trip for some sunset shots from a bar called KuDeTa which was on the advice of rz2. Good advice - it was almost as if she was an experienced guide of some kind.
Singapore is all about food, I'd been told by more than one person. Food and shopping. Food, and shopping.
The one I'd been told most about was "chicken rice" which was as simple as the name suggests - though that seems to be because the "Hainanese" part is always left out. As a result, rz2 had looked up some places (well, "consulted") so I knew I had to go somewhere else for the recommendation. As it happened, as I started to make my way, I found out that I'd be dining alone. Fortunately, rz2 took pity on me and thus I did not dine alone (not that I would have minded, as such) and we made our way. And as luck would have it, this independently sourced recommendation was quite close to the hotel.
It was on the way there that the umbrella incident was overtaken as my favourite thing in Singapore:
This video instilling fear and distrust of anyone acting differently seemed so appropriate in this place.
I did not find chicken rice made me reappraise the whole concept of flavour, but it was quite nice, though not the kind of thing I'd rave about. Obviously, I have since been told that I did not have the right kind, but this was a well received restaurant so I might just say I am not a huge fan.
And with that, Singapore became but a memory, to be dredged up when necessary - quite regularly over the trip as a reference point...
1. A quick stopover in Dubai was not particularly noteworthy but I was struck by the scale and design of the airport which I think was exemplified by the paving of the clearly expensive marble (or marble style flooring). It was dark and as we moved along the travelator I noticed the floor almost strobing with the movement and wondered what it was. It was an interesting effect and seemed to show the concentric rings of light moving with waves across each other. It was eye-catching and I wondered how it was done and then I realised that it was just a result of the light bouncing off slabs that were not aligned - and none were properly aligned. I toyed with the idea that it was a deliberate, and subtle effect but it was so out of kilter with the rest of the airport's supposed design that I thought that it must be accidental.↩
