Shirasu is this tiny white-ish translucent fish that’s eaten all over Japan, often cooked in salt and served with rice.
I really like rice and I really like shirasu – hence the name shirasurice.
But mind you – in case the reference to Japanese-y food items suggested otherwise – I really don’t give a shit about “Japaneseness” or being Japanese. Or even being Asian. Geographical or national origin is not something to feel proud (or ashamed) of.
This blog is intended to be a sort of sandbox for my writings and ideas; it’s been a while since I did any kind of remotely serious writing in English, I don’t have much confidence in the interestingness of my ideas yet, and I’m a bit of a coward, so I decided to create a safe, semi-anonymous playground for myself to experiment in. Comments and criticism are always welcome, but I may or may not ignore what I consider to be mindless slander, depending on my mood.
An undergraduate student interested in culture and semantics and stuff.
Nice to see that you’ve started blogging. I look forward to reading more.
I’ve started to think that it’s OK to be proud of your origin, as long as you place it in context, and realize that nations are but one tiny idea in a sea of many other ideas.
Thanks for the comment! I look forward to more exchanges.
For me a country of origin is something to be happy or annoyed or even in despair about, but not to be proud of. I think pride and shame are feelings you have for something you represent, and I believe that in principle, people shouldn’t represent countries, nor vice versa.
I understand that there are many circumstances where you’re forced to feel like you represent “your” country, though, and I think that’s okay as long as you don’t take it too seriously.
Pending decision:
- Whether the above should apply to any kind of place, or even any kind of background, in general
It’s a question of identity. Sometimes we’re desperate to be associated with certain things, because we wish to project a certain identity. And sometimes, as in this case, we’re less keen on being associated with a particular identity.
I think identity can be thought of as purpose driven. What you want to be associated with at any particular moment is probably largely determined by what you want to achieve. But at the same time, people whose identity projection fluctuates too much are not taken seriously. People whose identity projection noticeably never fluctuates can be seen as having great integrity. It’s a balancing act.
I’m still in the middle of a one-person debate about integrity: should I strive for it, and if so, what kind of integrity and how much? It’s true that I tend to respect more consistent people, but why? Why do I feel that these people are smarter or stronger than their more inconsistent counterparts?
Probably you respect them because they have an air of understanding life. Being consistent is a leadership quality. We tend to turn to consistent people in times of uncertainty.
But unchanging consistency doesn’t work either. Intelligence is fundamentally about adaptability.
I was reminded of this blog post by Ken Mogi: http://qualiajournal.blogspot.com/2009/09/vulnerable-for-change.html