Saturday, April 6, 2013

South Koreans at North’s Edge Cope With Threat of War By: Siso Escrigas


South Koreans at North’s Edge Cope With Threat of War

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/06/world/asia/south-koreans-at-norths-edge-cope-with-threat-of-war.html?ref=northkorea

MUNSAN, South Korea — As Lee Jae-eun retrieved her squirming twins from day care and loaded them into a two-seat stroller, she barely glanced up at the olive green Blackhawk helicopter that swept overhead, just above the high-rise apartment buildings.

Even in peaceful times, low-flying military aircraft are a common sight in this residential community near the heavily fortified border that separates capitalist South Korea from the communist North. But these are not placid times, and the roaring helicopters are one more reminder of rising tensions wrought by North Korea’s recent barrage of war threats.
Still, said Ms. Lee, a 34-year-old homemaker, residents have resigned themselves to living with the constant risk, and occasional tantrums, from their bellicose northern neighbor.
“Sure, our radar is up to new danger,” she said, holding one of her year-old daughters and surrounded by other mothers picking up their children. “But living here makes you used to it. It’s not such a big deal.”
In recent weeks, the heavily armed North’s cherub-faced young leader, Kim Jong-un, has threatened South Korea and the United States with nuclear attack, declaring that a “state of war” exists on the Korean Peninsula. Refusing to be cowed, South Korea’s newly elected president, Park Geun-hye, the democratic nation’s first female leader, responded by ordering her generals to strike back if provoked.
Despite the steady drumbeat of war talk, life seems to go on as usual in most of South Korea, the industrial powerhouse that lifted itself from the ashes of the 1950-53 Korean War to become one of Asia’s economic success stories. Nowhere is the determination to hold on to the South’s hard-won middle-class living standards more apparent than in Munsan, a distant suburb of the South Korean capital of Seoul that sits on the edge of the tense border: the demilitarized zone, or DMZ, which lies where the fighting stopped 60 years ago.
Once a collection of farming villages known for their local delicacy of tasty eel, Munsan was transformed into a boomtown of tall white apartment buildings and neon-lighted shops a decade ago during an era of political rapprochement with the North and soaring property prices in the fast-growing South. More recently, development has slowed after the global financial crisis hurt the South’s export-driven economy and new tensions with the North have scared away some prospective buyers.
Some of the 47,000 residents who live here now say they have learned to accept the helicopters’ near-constant rattling of their windows, and the columns of tanks that sometimes block roads during training exercises, making their children late for school. They say they have also learned how to ignore the rows of concrete bunkers and guard towers along the highway they use every morning to commute to Seoul, 35 miles to the south.
They just tune out the dangers and focus on enjoying their daily lives.
“Korea is the most dangerous place in the world, but we are numb to it,” said Song Hyun-young, an employee in the real estate department of Paju city hall, which has jurisdiction over the town of Munsan. “If something happens, we will all die together, so I don’t really think about it.”
When pressed, many residents admit to feeling anxiety about the intensity of the North’s most recent threats, and the fact that its nuclear arsenal is controlled by an untested, unpredictable leader. Some also partly blame their own country for imposing sanctions on the North, a closed and impoverished country.
“To be honest, the talk of nuclear attack is much scarier this time,” said Ms. Lee, the mother of the twins. “I think North Korea is cornered, and anyone who is cornered will strike back.”
Responding to such concerns, Paju city employees held an evacuation drill last week with the police, firefighters and the army. In the event of an attack, residents would be led to one of nine underground bomb shelters that the city built after the North’s last violent provocation, the artillery bombardment of a South Korean island three years ago that killed two civilians. The shelters have been freshly stocked with flashlights, medicine, gas masks and first-aid kits, officials said.
But most residents have not taken similar precautions. None of the more than half-dozen residents interviewed said they were stockpiling food or supplies. Many said they were optimistic that such preparations were unnecessary. They were confident, they said, that the bonds of shared ethnicity between the two Koreas would prevail over political differences, and prevent the North from following through on its apocalyptic threats.
“The world thinks we are on the brink of war, but we are fine,” said Gong Soon-hee, 55, a real estate agent whose small office was filled with wall-size maps showing a checkerboard of privately owned plots that abruptly end at the edge of the DMZ, just a few miles away. “Koreans are good people, kind people, not stupid people who would just start a war suddenly.”
Despite the tensions, Ms. Gong said, new homebuyers continue to trickle in, lured by prices that have dropped to less than one-tenth of those in central Seoul. Most give no sign of noticing a formation of helicopters flying overhead as they check out apartments, she said.
“I guess we could hide in an underground parking garage if the shells start falling,” she said, “but we don’t bother with escape plans.”
Others said the current standoff cast a spotlight on the fact that in the face of the North’s threats, the South was in the weaker position because it had so much more to lose. Some said South Korea’s biggest vulnerability was its unwillingness to sacrifice its much higher living standards, a sentiment that would make essentially buying off the North an easier option.
“If this is just going to continue until we give aid, then let’s just give them some aid,” Park Soon-yi, a 44-year-old homemaker, said with a laugh. But she was only half-joking, as she shopped in the upmarket Hillstate high-rise condominium and retail complex. “Then they’ll be quiet, and leave us in peace
.

Mark Pincus Thinks Angry Birds Won’t Hurt Your Kids By: Germán Ramón-Cortés


Mark Pincus Thinks Angry Birds Won’t Hurt Your Kids


You are the founder and C.E.O. of Zynga, a company responsible for addictive games like FarmVille and the forthcoming Draw Something 2. You know, every time I see my 4-year-old son playing Angry Birds on my phone, I imagine that his little brain is rotting. 
I can commiserate because I have twin 2 ½- year-olds, and they’ve mastered the iPod Touch. I don’t think it’s rotting their brains, if you compare what it’s replacing — TV. My kids are mastering puzzles, it’s challenging their thinking. I want to ultimately reward them with screen-time minutes for chores and achievements.
Have you managed to get 2-year-olds to do chores? If so, I’d love to know your secret. 
Literally on the morning that they were born, I said to the nurse, “I really want an iPod app that is a job wheel.” But I was just told by our nanny that I have to stop bribing my kids, so I’m not sure that the achievement thing is a good idea.
The night you met your wife, Alison, you asked her what she thought about Carmen and Georgia, the names of your future twin daughters. Is it true you told her you had no future unless she agreed to those names? 
It was actually the second night. I had made up these almost-cartoon characters of Georgia and Carmen over the years, and I fell in love with them. Georgia Pincus was this funny, bigger-than-life Jewish Southern belle, and Carmen was this feisty Latin Jewish girl. It wasn’t a deal killer, but if she hated those names, then maybe we were coming from different places.
You’ve done a Tony Robbins retreat, hired a life coach, and since Zynga’s founding, people like Apple board member Bill Campbell have come in to consult on your management style. Is there a problem? 
Maybe this reveals the difference between the coasts you and I live on. A New York point of view would be “What’s wrong with you,” but in California it’s more like “Wow, you want to work on yourself, that’s so cool.” Bill Campbell is supergrounded, and he was really helpful in the last couple quarters.
I thought the venture-capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers brought Campbell in because the stock was down and executives were leaving in droves. 
I’ve sought out everyone I could find who could help me. If you want to be a great entrepreneur, you’re going to have to burn your résumé and stop worrying about your reputation, because you’re probably going to go through long periods of people calling you stupid.
You once said that you learned you should be an entrepreneur because you got fired from every job you had. Why did you get fired so often? 
I thought of myself as C.E.O. at every company I was at. Not many companies are set up so people low in the hierarchy can challenge everything like a C.E.O.
You’re one of the original investors who became billionaires when Facebook went public, and Zynga’s games have been instrumental in the site’s success. But the relationship between Zynga and Facebook has been strained at times. Did your relationship with Mark Zuckerberg suffer? 
No. We have a good relationship. It’s pretty amazing how both our businesses initially got together without a single sheet of paper being signed between the companies. It might be a first in business history.
Is every day still “Bring your dog to work day” at Zynga’s San Francisco headquarters? It must stink.
This place is almost as full of dogs as employees. But I don’t ever smell a dog, and I never see dog hair. My dog Zynga used to be in every meeting. She would sit in chairs and look at who was talking. It freaked some people out, but it spices up your day.
Did you make any attempt to take advantage of the fact that Alec Baldwin got kicked off a plane for playing Zynga’s Words With Friends? 
I got on the phone and brainstormed with Alec Baldwin, but those ideas never made it to life. We’re not at a point that we can justify, say, a $15 million Super Bowl ad.



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/magazine/mark-pincus-thinks-angry-birds-wont-hurt-your-kids.html?ref=technology&_r=0
.

Monday, April 1, 2013

200 HUNDRED YEARS AND WE STILL LOVE MR DARCY

Why we still love Mr Darcy

200 years old and still got it

On 28 January Pride And Prejudice is two centuries old, yet Mr Darcy still leaves Ryan Gosling in the shade (just). Stylist unravels the appeal of Jane Austen’s finest work
Words: Lucy Foster
I was 15 when I fell in love with Mr Darcy. It was the autumn of 1995 and Sunday evenings revolved entirely around 50 minutes of TV that would inform my opinion of men for the rest of my life. If I close my eyes, I can still picture the opening sequence showing delicate cross-stitch accompanied by a pianoforte soundtrack. Well, of course I can – I have the BBC box set. And I’ve watched it at least 50 times. Those six episodes of absolute genius have got me through illnesses, heartache, snow days and multiple hangovers. And the Keira Knightley film version? Well, put it this way – I first saw it on a lonely long haul (and then proceeded to watch it another three times on the same flight) only to go straight to the cinema the next day to see it again. The book? Devoured in the summer holidays while awaiting my GCSE results. And the rest of Austen’s offerings? Read and re-read so many times, I carry all her novels around on my iPad, for comfort more than anything else.
But, my mild Austen obsession aside, let’s for one moment focus on the greatest triumph in her back catalogue: Mr Darcy. A man so proud, so sure of his status, wealth, and position in society that he felt he couldn’t be seen in company with the poorer Elizabeth Bennet, despite a growing attraction. He takes great pains to keep her vulgar family from his friends, and when he can’t deny his feelings any longer and asks her to marry him, he feels compelled to admit it’s against his better instincts. Elizabeth rejects him angrily, but so great is his love, he protects her family’s reputation at great cost to himself without the hope of her ever knowing, or reaping any reward. That, my friends, is love.
Two centuries on, Fitzwilliam Darcy is still the man that countless women across the globe “definitely would”. In a poll conducted by the Orange Prize for Fiction in 2003, women across the generations voted Mr Darcy as the man they would most like to go on a date with. Keira Knightley, who played Elizabeth Bennett in the 2005 film version of Pride And Prejudice said, “I think every girl is looking for her Mr Darcy. I’d go for someone who is a little bit brooding and somebody you can have a good conversation with, a good fight with, someone who’ll always keep you guessing and make you laugh.” Stylist readers agree, with Jolly Brown adding, “Unobtainable. Distant. Brooding. Moral and tall!” to Darcy’s list of attributes and Nick Gabi Watson pointing out that, “Integrity is a very sexy attribute in a man!”.

My Darcy has been portrayed on screen countless times, each leading man trying to capture his essence with varying levels of success. First there was Andrew Osborn who appeared as Darcy in a television film in 1938. But it’s been the more recent interpretations which have really hit a nerve with female audiences. Matthew Macfadyen’s 2005 Darcy had bags more sex appeal than Laurence Olivier’s 1940 stiff-upper-lip version.
But when it comes to everyone’s favourite there is simply no contest. Hands down, shirt-soaked-through, it’s Colin Firth’s 1995 BBC Darcy. The attributes which Darcy possesses – he’s mysterious, intelligent, handsome, misunderstood, moral and unafraid of being mocked by a woman – still provide a template for the ideal suitor. A template which has been replicated by authors and film makers ever since; the unapproachable, difficult male figure who, although wholly unpleasant at first, turns out to be kind, gallant and selfless. And we fall for it every time.
He may come in the form of Charlotte Brontë’s Mr Rochester, Emily Brontë’s Heathcliffe or EL James’ Christian Grey but they’re still always essentially Darcy in disguise, a watered down version of Austen’s classic original hero.

Diamond in the Rough

The pursuit of a male ideal feels a little naïve but if there was one, would it be Darcy? With one look at the thousands of websites devoted to him, it would seem so. So, just what is it about Darcy’s formula that still connects so pertinently with the female psyche? “Human beings are not perfect but they are perfectible. Darcy is not a perfect man. He has lots of flaws. But that’s what makes him interesting,” says Professor Emmy van Deurzen, author of Psychotherapy And The Quest For Happiness. “Women are not attracted to perfection. They’re attracted to somebody who is passionate and warm-hearted, who is willing to love and willing to change.”
And that, right there, is the key to Darcy’s allure. Because, although it might grate to admit it, who can honestly say she hasn’t hoped her other half will change for her, just a little? Who hasn’t tried to make a partner a bit tidier, a little more organised, a bit better with money or more interested in their friends? Of course it doesn’t take long before you realise it’s a war that will never be won. Yet Austen managed to do the impossible and create a man who actually changes for love.
When Elizabeth stings Darcy with a verbal attack where she cites his “selfish disdain of the feelings of others” and how she might have felt sorry for refusing his marriage proposal had he “behaved in a more gentleman-like manner,” he leaves, mortified. When she happens upon him at his estate some time later, he stuns her with his kindness and generosity. “We need to look at how men react when they’re rejected,” says Dr Paula Byrne, author of The Real Jane Austen: A Life In Small Things. “Elizabeth turns down Mr Collins and from that point on he’s not terribly nice to her. But Elizabeth turns Darcy down and he doesn’t stop loving her. He’s not resentful. He is humbled by the fact that he is rejected and he tries again. This makes him a new sort of hero. Someone who is prepared to change; who is prepared to be transformed by love.” When Austen penned Darcy in 1812 she perpetuated the myth that a woman can change a man and it’s a model our favourite love stories have clung on to ever since. Although it took her the best part of six series, Carrie Bradshaw, who admitted that she was, “Just looking for slight alterations,” with Mr Big, eventually managed to change her perpetually selfish commitment-phobe lover into someone desperate to share a life with her.

Despite its nauseating references to Anastasia’s inner goddess, women bought into the story of Fifty Shades Of Grey, undoubtedly because Christian Grey actually – god forbid – gives up his red room of sin (or whatever it’s called) because he realises that Anastasia is worth it. Julia Roberts becomes the first woman to make Richard Gere actually sleep in Pretty Woman, such is his love for her. Despite having little experience of physical love herself (Austen was supposedly a virgin when she died in 1817) her view into the female psyche was progressive. She managed to tap into our ‘because you’re worth it’ culture where we have come to expect that we should be able to have a man who ticks every box. We’re so familiar with changing what we do and don’t like with our lives – making our careers, bodies, homes better – that we’re less willing than ever to settle for a romantic hero. And with Austen’s Darcy, we don’t have to.
And though we don’t want to spin you a yarn, the idea that a man can change for love isn’t completely misguided. “Research shows that there are certain genes in your body that have different possibilities, in that they can be ‘on’ or ‘off’,” explains Professor van Deurzen. “Certain aspects of yourself are brought out in certain circumstances while other aspects are dormant and that is one of the ways we can be changed by the way we live and the connections we make in life. It’s been scientifically proven that better relationships really do bring out the best in us.” In other words, if you’re with the right person they might just flex for you.

To love and protect

Darcy’s nobler instincts were revealed by criticism from his object of affection; Elizabeth’s company and expectations made him a better man. Yet, there is more to Darcy’s appeal. Let’s not ignore the fact that his money and status were able to provide and protect Elizabeth; two factors which still have currency with women today, despite our independence and fight for equality.
“Lots of women I see will say they don’t need men to protect them, but there is something quite attractive about knowing your partner has your best interests at heart and wants to take care of you,” explains Relate relationship counsellor, Denise Knowles. “Although today relationships are so untraditional, we still have a romantic yearning for romance, protection and provision.”

The idea that we secretly want someone to protect us seems horribly prehistoric but it’s innately hardwired. Evolutionary biologists discovered that the nuclear family evolved when men discovered women preferred males who provided for them and their children to those men constantly clubbing each other. And this desire is probably more pertinent now than ever before.
In 2013 women in their 20s out-earn men, are better educated and twice as many single women are home owners than single men. It may be a vastly different culture to Austen’s but that’s possibly why her writing hits such a nerve. Women have become so independent that the idea that every so often a man will come along and just solve something – not because they’re the decision maker in the relationship, but because they’re being thoughtful – is enough to knock us off our feet.
“Obviously I am capable of ordering (and paying for) a new mattress,” says Stylist’s associate editor Francesca Brown, “but when my boyfriend took it upon himself to do it without consulting me, it was just a lovely thing. To have the whole process taken out of my hands – choosing the damn thing, organising delivery – was just a blessed relief. I’m not saying I’m a helpless woman who wants to be looked after – it’s just nice when someone shoulders all the responsibility every now and again.”

Complimentary couple

The role of protector is only permissible thanks to another of Darcy’s qualities – that while he brings money and security to the relationship, Lizzie brings sparkling wit and intelligence. And, most importantly, he encourages this. They both contribute to their relationship, and for today’s woman, that’s the modern equivalent of enjoying protection. “Men and women now bring different things to the table,” explains Knowles. “What we need to be able to negotiate is an equal relationship and that’s not one where it’s all 50/50, but one where it’s give and take; where our partner can compensate for our shortfalls and vice versa. The desire to be looked after and protected is still there, it’s just in this different format.”
Then, of course, there are his looks. Or lack of them. Mr Darcy is a blank canvas – described only as “tall and handsome with a noble air” – meaning that women can project their own private fantasies onto him. Austen worked out that far from hair colour or physique, simple broodiness is enough to make women swoon. A study by the University of British Columbia (UBC) found that women were more attracted to men who looked brooding, proud and powerful than those who appeared cheery. “Broodiness can also be related to increased confidence and self-belief, which in turn equals greater protection and security,” says chartered psychologist, Dr Jane McCartney.
So that’s it. A man who is generous and kind-hearted; who can protect, provide and listen, and who is prepared to change; that’s what Darcy stands for and if you think about it on those terms, he’s really not too far removed from the men we know and love.
Who needs wet breeches after all?
Picture credits: Rex Features

THE ENDURING APPEAL OF PRIDE AND PREJUDICE


Jane Austen's "one darling child" Pride and Prejudice was published 200 years ago and the BBC's David Sillito has been finding out how the novel has endured for so long.
He met Jane Odiwe who has written a number of books based on the characters of Elizabeth Bennett and Mr Darcy. She said that she is "obsessed" with Jane Austen.
Although out of copyright and available for free on e-readers, it is estimated that Pride and Prejudice sells up to 50,000 copies each year in the UK.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21227207

PRIDE AND PREJUDICE 200 YEARS

Click here to listen to the BBC Radio 4 200th anniversary special of Pride and Prejudice

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01pt99b