Category Archives: Writing
Sipping Starbucks coffee in Kuala Lumpur
I sent the following story to Caffeine Society some years ago and they published it on their site. It was a fun little piece (no money changed hands) and I haven’t heard from them since, so I don’t know what kind of traffic it got. Anyway, I ran across it in my archives and thought I’d resurrect it here.
Coffee in KL
I am sipping a café latte at a Starbucks in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. I am in an enormous shopping mall, surrounded by big and bright stores, filled with diminutive brown-skinned people chatting in unknown languages as they bustle to and fro, and I have found an American coffee house half a world away from where it should be.
What is even more interesting to me is the teenage Malaysian couple sipping lattes at a table nearby. A Starbucks short latte costs as much as an entire meal in a non-tourist restaurant. Mind you, when I was a teenager trying to woo a girl, money was no object. What better way to impress her than lunch at McDonalds followed by coffee at Starbucks?
You may not think of McDonalds as haute cuisine, but you can find them throughout Southeast Asia, and they are usually packed. The menu even looks the same, aside from the taro pies and shrimp burgers. Malaysia in particular has embraced the English language and select bits of Western culture in efforts to attract foreign business and investment.
While the country is officially a Muslim nation, there is a high proportion of Chinese and Indian immigrants. In fact, the politicians boast of their country’s religious and cultural tolerance. White skin definitely sets me apart, but no one gives me a second glance, unless they want to sell me a knockoff Rolex.
Indeed, as I wander about Kuala Lumpur, or “KL” as the locals call it, I sense no antipathy. The locals are generally friendly toward tourists. Of course, in any foreign country, it’s important to know the major dos and don’ts. For example, in Malaysia it is rude to touch people on the head, or face the soles of your feet toward them. One should cover one’s mouth when yawning or using a toothpick. Men generally do not shake hands with women. Possession of illegal drugs carries a mandatory death sentence. That last in particular is a good one to keep in mind.
I admit I was a little worried about coming here at first, given the whole American-Muslim tension thing. Fortunately, no one I spoke to hates America or Americans, although their sympathies tend to lie with the Arabs in any middle Eastern conflict, and there is no love here for George W. Bush. Thus, as with my in-laws, I am careful not to bring up politics or religion, and we all get along fine.
In the shops and in all my business affairs everyone has been polite. As with all Asian cultures, following rules and having good manners are very important, except when in a vehicle. There, anything goes. I’m sure any Westerner who spends an hour commuting while entombed in metal can relate.
But here, motorcyclists and scooterists spice up an afternoon drive by zipping around and between traffic at high speed, wearing shorts and sandals and apparently being driven by a perpetual death wish.
The taxi drivers are truly insane. Buckle your seatbelt if you can find it, and hang on to something. The cabbies are honest enough, although they often want to go flat-rate instead of using the meter, which will probably cost you double. Most of them speak English, but conversation is mostly a wash. Other than asking me where I’m from they would rather talk about themselves. Oh, and when you exit the taxi, shoulder check first because there is likely someone there clipping along on a scooter.
So this Starbucks is in the KLCC, which simply stands for KL City Centre. It’s a spacious six-story modern mall with a beautiful park behind it, all crouching at the base of the two tallest buildings in the world, the Petronas Towers. Okay, they are not necessarily the tallest, depending on how one measures these things, nonetheless they are a magnificent sight. The whole package was obviously meant to attract tourists, which may be why I haven’t seen a Starbucks in the cramped and crowded malls outside of the main tourist areas, but I don’t think that’s the whole story.
They don’t grow coffee in Malaysia, as far as I can tell, but Java is only a couple of islands to the south. Yet I have seen no Malaysian cafés. Tea is popular, as you would expect from a former British colony with millions of Chinese immigrants, yet I have seen no tea houses either. Perhaps it’s the concept of having a shop dedicated to the selling and drinking of a specific beverage that is novel here.
Restaurants abound, and the food is delicious. Some dishes are like Thai and others are quite unique. However only the relatively expensive restaurants sell coffee. So perhaps a cup of joe is our olive branch to the East. I have been to several countries in Western Europe, and coffee is everywhere there. So is Starbucks, but Europeans have their own coffee shops and their own ways of drinking coffee, and they mostly resent Starbucks. A hamburger makes a more suitable olive branch.
Asia, however, is virgin café territory. English has emerged as the de facto international language here. For the locals, the ability to speak English means a higher paying job in the tourist industry. Western things are viewed as being progressive by the old and cool by the young. Selemat datang, Starbucks, and terima kasih for bringing us a cup of Vienna roast and a slice of apple pie.
The teenage couple have finished their lattes. Their conversation has ebbed, and they are relaxing and looking around. Perhaps they are sharing my coffee ruminations and romanticisms. Perhaps we have made a mental connection here, stoked by caffeine and steamed milk. Perhaps people come here so that together, we can build bridges from East to West, one cup at a time.
Or maybe they just like the buzz. That works too.
(another) awefull rant
Continuing my rant from earlier this week, let’s look at decimate. It was originally used to describe a punishment inflicted on cowardly or mutinous Roman legions. Every tenth soldier would be killed, as chosen by lot.
Hence the root deci- for “tenth”. Think of a decimeter (or decimetre for all you Brits and Canucks) which is one tenth of a meter (or metre for all you Brits and Canucks).
So decimate means “reduce by a tenth”. Yet somehow, decimate has come to mean “reduce to a tenth”. Or as used by the news media, “any number big enough to grab your attention that we can’t actually define”.
In fact, check out the Webster definition for decimate. It starts out with the correct definition then devolves to the wrong one.
So by this logic, a decimeter can also mean nine tenths of a meter. (Or metre for all you Brits and Canucks… yes, this is getting tedious.)
Here’s a fun one: awful. It can mean really bad, or really good. I’m serious. The original definition was “full of awe” — this makes sense. But now it means the opposite, which makes no sense.
Instead of fixing the problem, our English ancestors invented a new word to fill the gap: awesome. So far awesome has kept its original meaning, but its overuse in modern vernacular is awful.
How about PIN? It stands for Personal Identification Number. So why do people say “PIN number”? (You see that, right? They are saying “number number”.)
Same thing with LUN. Time to go all techie on you, so non-IT people can change the channel. Or maybe not, you can probably follow this and still find it amusing.
In the IT world, we use a lot of virtual disk drives. They are commonly called Logical Units, since they are real drives grouped logically to form a virtual drive. The main advantage is if one of the real drives crashes and burns, other drives can take over and you don’t lose any data.
Well, we need some easy way to identify this virtual drive, so we give it a number, because computers like numbers. We call it a Logical Unit Number, or LUN. Thus a LUN is a number that identifies a Logical Unit.
Well, everyone in the IT world (except me) refers to the drive itself as a “LUN”. It’s like calling your house an “address”. The address is how people find your house, it’s not the house itself.
In fact, when my colleagues want to know the number that identifies the virtual drive, they ask “what is the LUN number?” Yep, it’s “PIN number” all over again.
Sigh. You and I are the only sane ones here. And I’m not so sure about you.
Gone in an instantaneous
No one says instant anymore. It’s always instantaneous. The former and the latter are nearly the same thing except the latter has more syllables. More is always better, right?
It’s just like irregardless and misunderestimated. You may think the extra syllables make you sound smarter, but I ain’t kidding, they aren’t real words and they make you sound foolish.
And yes, ain’t is proper English. It’s a contraction of ‘am not’. For some reason, English speakers dropped that contraction but kept all the other ones. English is weird that way.
For the record, instant can be a noun or an adjective where instantaneous is only an adjective. Instantaneous has a much narrower meaning, basically it’s a much shorter instant. Nearly every time people say instantaneous they should have said instant. The reverse is not true.
While we are on the subject, what’s with this obsession of using “I” as an object? (See what I did there?)
For some reason, saying “you and me” has been universally replaced by “you and I”. For example:
I thought she was going to give the book to you and I.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. “I” is always a subject, the doer of the action, remember? You use “me” when “I” becomes an object, the receiver of the action. For example:
You and I thought she was going to give the book to you and me.
Remember the old grade school test: does “I” or “me” work on its own? For example:
I thought she was going to give the book to me.
Not:
Me thought she was going to give the book to I.
At least we still have instant coffee. Or maybe not.
Plotter versus Plodder
I admit it — the title was an attempt to be cute to grab your attention. Anyway, tonight’s title matchup is: do you plot when you write, or do you start writing and see what happens?
In the red corner, we have The Plotter: he lays out his entire story before putting virtual pen to paper. He believes thou shalt describe everything in excruciating detail from your characters to your opening to your conclusion because thou wantest not to lie in endless fields of rewriting and thou wantest total control over thine story lest it begin to wander into the land of the Philistines and above all, thou hatest surprises and thou doesn’t want thine reader to be surprised either.
In the blue corner, we have The Plodder: he pulls an idea from the ether and starts writing. Characters form as the story plods along. The plot plods along. Nay, plot germinates from the idea. It blossoms into a story fertilized by the author’s imagination and copious lattes. It explodes into a glorious climax before gently falling back to earth to seed the next idea. The author snores contentedly while the reader smokes a cigarette.
I think my blue bias has leaked through somewhat. Plus these views are overly simplistic, naturally. I don’t think any writer fully sits in the red or the blue corner.
Anyway, people often speculate, which method is better? I have my own thoughts on the subject.
All the books on writing that I read in my formative years said to outline everything ahead of time. For me, that kills interest in the story. I just want to friggin’ write, man. I always figured I was doing it wrong. Then I read Stephen King’s On Writing and it was such a relief. Turns out, King (my hero) doesn’t plot either.
Plodding does require extra rewriting, I admit. Sometimes I wander a bit. Sometimes I have to discard entire pages that aren’t working, but I’m okay with this. I don’t mind editing myself, and no writing is ever wasted. If a scene doesn’t work, I save it in a slush document for possible use later. Yay computers.
I do Plot a little bit. I create character sketches and interviews before I start. While I’m gaily tapping away, I generally know what the climax of the current set-piece will be, and I have a pretty good idea how the story will end. It’s like hiking through the mountains — I can see the next signpost, and I can see the peak where I want to be by suppertime, but I don’t yet know which path I’ll take to get there.
I’m the first audience for my stories. I write them because I like reading them. That’s my motivation for writing in the first place. I’m telling myself a story, and I can’t wait to see how it spins out. I don’t want to spoil my own surprise.
Plus if it’s a surprise to me, it should be a surprise to my reader.
What it comes down to is, I can’t write any other way than I do. I have tried.
I feel I should wrap this up in a general conclusion: whatever works for you, that is what you should do. No one is going to know whether you Plotted or Plodded if the story is good.
If the story sucks, try the other corner.
What about you? Are you a Plotter or a Plodder?
