It's been almost six months since the last time I wrote any blog. Just like you suspected, loads of things have happened in-between, so the lack of update from my side is rather a symptom of laziness than eventlessness.
My last entry was on March 31st this year. Second week in April, me and my significant other flew to China on vacation. It was more of a vacation for her, since I was unemployed and enjoyed de facto holiday almost everyday. We went to her hometown, a city in southern China known for its entrepreneurial spirit and significant role in business sectors. I must say that over the past 6 years, I have taken many things for granted. I never even thought China would be so different than how I remembered it. The differences also go both ways, the good and the bad. Sometimes it was amusing, like when you see an elderly person making himself instant noodles in a metallic tea cup using the plane's tea water, when it turned out the takeoff was postponed. But when you see another senior standing up, digging through luggage in the overhead locker seconds before the touchdown despite the crewmen's insistence, that was just outrageous.
There was one week between my last entry and the trip to China. To put it short, the problem I encountered, as recited in my last entry, was due to liabilities with a job (PhD) offer. Always playing safe, I talked to two more PIs to make sure I won't suddenly find myself stranded in case everybody retracts their offers. With the SCIENCE paper in my portfolio and other materials to complement, I managed to get myself two meetings with two PIs in one week. Both guys expressed strong interest in adding me to their roster, and we decided to arrange interview sessions after my trip. Other than these two guys, one more invitation to interview came along the first hour I landed in Beijing. It felt absolutely fantastic to be on the choosing end again. Securing my position also secured my vacation, otherwise I might very well end up spending three weeks away in constant anxiety.
I have to say in academia, going for many job interview helps a lot. It gets you familiar with the people. Especially in Switzerland where scientific communities are not densely populated, collaboration between groups and even universities in different cities are common. Researchers sometimes work with e.g. one group in Bern and another in Zurich. Considering it only takes 1 hour to travel between most two cities in Switzerland, scientific collaboration is possible, and very commonplace (conversely, lack of collaboration within Swiss scientific community usually implies underlying problems of the group). Interviews can provide you with valuable "unpublished information" about the group. This is about understanding their research better than from reading papers and knowing how they relate to other groups and external players, e.g. companies. Even if you can only accept one job offer in the end, what you learned from the interviewers may offer insights for future collaborations. Nevertheless, I wouldn't advice anyone to apply to 100 groups within the Swiss border. Words get around quickly, it leaves an impression of being extremely unfocused. Besides, every PhD interview takes about one day and it is tiresome. If you want to find offers within a reasonable time frame, you simply have to go for your 1st tier choices, which usually aren't that many anyway.
Other than science, I have seen political factors at work. I'm going to mention a few. I applied to two PIs within one department, one received a prestigious research grant and was aggressively expanding. The other guy was more laid back, or passive. I strongly suspect the "aggressive" PI made a deal with his "passive" friend, since he decided to let go of me. What's more, during one interview, a Nobel Prize laureate who founded the department came to hear my presentation. The founding father/laureate even came to congratulate me afterwards. Without proof, I can only speculate that my interviewer invited the laureate to impress me. If so, then it was a flattering and surprising move to woo me. To other young, aspiring scientists out there (well not necessarily younger than me), I can only stress the importance of politics even in science. It matters who you work for. After all, wherever there is people, there is "Jiang Hu".
In the end, I picked one offer in ETH Zurich. It's true that my first PhD experience left me a not-so-slight grudge against the ETH system. My girlfriend encouraged me however, she said that given my qualifications, I could even aim higher (than ETH) if I wanted. Considering the pros and cons with each offer, I picked one that would make me happiest. A rainy day in May, I received an envelope with ETH logo on it. I quickly tore it up, it contained a card and a letter. The first line said "welcome back". From that moment on, I knew for sure I was back into the ETH system. The 2nd chance was for us both. Due to somebody who gave me terrible recommendations, the deal I got started with a probational period of 6 months. This time, I will make it work!
söndag 8 september 2013
söndag 31 mars 2013
海阔天空
这周发生的事情太惊心动魄了。
我正在申请博士位置，这其中有些事情还是不要公开太早的好。在倾诉欲望的诱惑之下，我有点想把一部分内容用中文写出来，也算是小范围内地吐槽吧。其中最中心的内容我还是要留着我下一个博士位置有着落之后再开始撰写。为了安全起见嘛。
我这周得知我的博士申请受到了一些影响。影响的来源吗，各位可以自己猜一猜。如果你跟我足够熟悉的话你可能已经知道了，或者猜到了。总之，我这周一从瑞典那边的好友处获得了一些内部信息，并且在这些信息的基础上预料到一些申请过程中的隐患。我急忙尽我所能排除这些隐患，希望能加快面试方对我进行个人评价的过程。周三的时候我以为已经把问题处理妥善了，周四的时候得到了一个坏消息。虽说我前面的操作并没有直接带来令我满意的答复，但至少也把申请程序向前推动了。周四一天本来打算出去购物，但因为这个坏消息，我和女友花了一天的时间竭力挽救。庆幸的是我们当天很快就得到了答复，申请程序总算可以走下去了。挽救过程中，她给我的帮助以及精神支持非常重要。周四晚上我们经过了一天的紧张，根本没有心情打火做饭，于是破费出去吃日式火锅。这顿饭是我们到瑞士以来最奢侈的一回。
周四的事情又让我注意到了找工作中两个很重要的因素。人在成长中，成功的经验和失败的经验必须要平衡。我之前可能是前者太多，老天爷就特意给我上了堂课，让我体验一下不好的经历所教会人的事情。既然我的博士申请还有希望，到目前我觉得上天还是很给我面子的。
用某歌手的话来说，我这几天，“很惶恐我的未来”。也许你猜到了说这话的人是信乐团的Chris。我对这个乐队其实并不了解，只是几年前听过他们一首《One night in 北京》。最近的紧张，愤怒，担忧和压抑，我很想寻找个途径发泄。跟亲朋好友倾诉是一种方式，但诉苦诉得多了对别人也是负担。我非常不想让自己的怨天尤人把自己心理状态放置在受害者的角度，这样只会令人丧失斗志。于是我翻出来了信乐团的《海阔天空》，跟着原声学这首歌，熟悉了之后自己K歌。一方面是倾诉，另一方面是寻找我能在KTV里面唱好的歌曲。
我不会说无病呻吟地认为自己没有实现自己的梦想，从小时候的IBO，后来的美国之旅以及我在SCIENCE上文章的发表，这都是我实现的梦想。只是此时的我处于一个生活和职业生涯的低谷期，有时看不清自己的未来。这就像得感冒一样，虽然是小病，但脑袋烧得厉害的时候很难想象几天后痊愈时的轻松。这首歌里我最喜欢的歌词，是那句“日落是沉潜，日出是成熟，只要是光一定会灿烂的”。我现在不就是处于日落的沉潜期吗？另一首我这两天发掘出来的歌曲，是加拿大歌手Billy Klippert 的《Death & Love》。你也许听出来这首歌的旋律是信乐团的《死了都要爱》。这两首都不是原版，都是韩国某歌曲的翻唱。相对于国内某些213的狂热歌迷，我不会为了包庇自己喜欢的歌手而愣把翻唱说成原唱。而事实上翻唱太多缺乏新意是我几年前决定不听华语歌曲的原因之一，后来听到了周董等人具有中国风的原版创作，我才恢复了对中文歌曲的兴趣。
相比信乐团的翻唱，我更喜欢Billy Klippert的版本。英文版唱的是战争，Billy的声音比阿信浑厚许多，歌词也成熟多了，总体感觉歌曲的人格更加完整。我试着用音乐伴奏唱这两首歌。几天前，每次唱到一半我总忍不住流泪，发泄的目的算是达到了。这半年多来的委屈，无助，误解，狂喜之后的低潮，大半都伴随着歌曲化成泪水流出来了。每次流泪我都无法继续唱下去。我此时终于明白了为何职业歌手能被称为歌手，而我这种业余的只能是麦霸。几周前看《我是歌手》里面黄绮珊等人含泪表演，每一首歌都能感动场上无数听众。那时的我精神还麻木，有些无法理解为何场上那么多歌手和观众都被唱哭。现在终于明白把人唱哭得并不是歌曲本身，而是歌曲背后给人带来的回忆和思绪。而且我也知道了在哭泣的时候还能唱好一首曲子有多么难，只有多年的演艺生涯才能给歌手们如此过硬的本领。
在我得到好的offer之前，我应该不能在KTV里面唱《Death & Love》了。相比《海阔天空》，这首歌十分消极，它的目的是纯发泄，毫无振奋可言。希望有一天我能把两首歌唱好，融入自己的感情而又不影响演唱。但愿那天能早点到来！
我正在申请博士位置，这其中有些事情还是不要公开太早的好。在倾诉欲望的诱惑之下，我有点想把一部分内容用中文写出来，也算是小范围内地吐槽吧。其中最中心的内容我还是要留着我下一个博士位置有着落之后再开始撰写。为了安全起见嘛。
我这周得知我的博士申请受到了一些影响。影响的来源吗，各位可以自己猜一猜。如果你跟我足够熟悉的话你可能已经知道了，或者猜到了。总之，我这周一从瑞典那边的好友处获得了一些内部信息，并且在这些信息的基础上预料到一些申请过程中的隐患。我急忙尽我所能排除这些隐患，希望能加快面试方对我进行个人评价的过程。周三的时候我以为已经把问题处理妥善了，周四的时候得到了一个坏消息。虽说我前面的操作并没有直接带来令我满意的答复，但至少也把申请程序向前推动了。周四一天本来打算出去购物，但因为这个坏消息，我和女友花了一天的时间竭力挽救。庆幸的是我们当天很快就得到了答复，申请程序总算可以走下去了。挽救过程中，她给我的帮助以及精神支持非常重要。周四晚上我们经过了一天的紧张，根本没有心情打火做饭，于是破费出去吃日式火锅。这顿饭是我们到瑞士以来最奢侈的一回。
周四的事情又让我注意到了找工作中两个很重要的因素。人在成长中，成功的经验和失败的经验必须要平衡。我之前可能是前者太多，老天爷就特意给我上了堂课，让我体验一下不好的经历所教会人的事情。既然我的博士申请还有希望，到目前我觉得上天还是很给我面子的。
用某歌手的话来说，我这几天，“很惶恐我的未来”。也许你猜到了说这话的人是信乐团的Chris。我对这个乐队其实并不了解，只是几年前听过他们一首《One night in 北京》。最近的紧张，愤怒，担忧和压抑，我很想寻找个途径发泄。跟亲朋好友倾诉是一种方式，但诉苦诉得多了对别人也是负担。我非常不想让自己的怨天尤人把自己心理状态放置在受害者的角度，这样只会令人丧失斗志。于是我翻出来了信乐团的《海阔天空》，跟着原声学这首歌，熟悉了之后自己K歌。一方面是倾诉，另一方面是寻找我能在KTV里面唱好的歌曲。
我不会说无病呻吟地认为自己没有实现自己的梦想，从小时候的IBO，后来的美国之旅以及我在SCIENCE上文章的发表，这都是我实现的梦想。只是此时的我处于一个生活和职业生涯的低谷期，有时看不清自己的未来。这就像得感冒一样，虽然是小病，但脑袋烧得厉害的时候很难想象几天后痊愈时的轻松。这首歌里我最喜欢的歌词，是那句“日落是沉潜，日出是成熟，只要是光一定会灿烂的”。我现在不就是处于日落的沉潜期吗？另一首我这两天发掘出来的歌曲，是加拿大歌手Billy Klippert 的《Death & Love》。你也许听出来这首歌的旋律是信乐团的《死了都要爱》。这两首都不是原版，都是韩国某歌曲的翻唱。相对于国内某些213的狂热歌迷，我不会为了包庇自己喜欢的歌手而愣把翻唱说成原唱。而事实上翻唱太多缺乏新意是我几年前决定不听华语歌曲的原因之一，后来听到了周董等人具有中国风的原版创作，我才恢复了对中文歌曲的兴趣。
相比信乐团的翻唱，我更喜欢Billy Klippert的版本。英文版唱的是战争，Billy的声音比阿信浑厚许多，歌词也成熟多了，总体感觉歌曲的人格更加完整。我试着用音乐伴奏唱这两首歌。几天前，每次唱到一半我总忍不住流泪，发泄的目的算是达到了。这半年多来的委屈，无助，误解，狂喜之后的低潮，大半都伴随着歌曲化成泪水流出来了。每次流泪我都无法继续唱下去。我此时终于明白了为何职业歌手能被称为歌手，而我这种业余的只能是麦霸。几周前看《我是歌手》里面黄绮珊等人含泪表演，每一首歌都能感动场上无数听众。那时的我精神还麻木，有些无法理解为何场上那么多歌手和观众都被唱哭。现在终于明白把人唱哭得并不是歌曲本身，而是歌曲背后给人带来的回忆和思绪。而且我也知道了在哭泣的时候还能唱好一首曲子有多么难，只有多年的演艺生涯才能给歌手们如此过硬的本领。
在我得到好的offer之前，我应该不能在KTV里面唱《Death & Love》了。相比《海阔天空》，这首歌十分消极，它的目的是纯发泄，毫无振奋可言。希望有一天我能把两首歌唱好，融入自己的感情而又不影响演唱。但愿那天能早点到来！
lördag 23 mars 2013
Praying for good karma...
I'm so restless these days... Because I'm waiting for an important answer.
Almost three weeks ago, I had a full-day interview in Zurich, with two professors whom my Swedish supervisor Prof. A recommended for me. Both are good guys conducting very interesting research. The day looked like this: I traveled to Zurich from Basel in the morning. By the time I arrived, it was 11 o'clock. The professor who welcomed me told me they had a small program just for me. First I was going to have lunch with the other professor (since he was busy with teaching assignments that day), followed by approximately 1 hour each with two of the experimental researchers (these two perform biological experiments, the other half of the group is doing in silico computer modelling work). Then I'd get back to my host, discuss a bit about the science. The day would finish with me giving a presentation in front of FIVE research groups! When I first booked in my time for the presentation, I thought it was for two groups only, namely each PI will bring their own group to the talk. As I found out later, the presentation was actually a joint meeting between five groups with very tight collaboration. One group was sort of a spin-off from another group. The PI was recently granted professorship in Zurich, before he was a junior group leader on SNF-grants. To show the relations between these five groups, I'll just number them as 1 to 5 for now. Group 1 hosted the PI of group 2 some years ago, while the spin-off group (call it number 3) I mentioned is from group 2. Group 4 is led by a seasoned professor who is about to retire. They hope to let the guy running group 5 to take over the full professor spot once the group 4 guy leaves. By the way, the group 5 leader has only been in Zurich for one year. My day was reserved for PI 1 and 2, I've also met PI 3 in February.
So my day began. I really enjoyed the conversation with everybody I spent time talking to. Especially when I spoke to the professors, they were able to have intelligent and scientific discussion while still giving me the decent share of attention. This is quite important in my opinion. I believe how your future boss treats you can be hinted by his/her behavior during the interview session. To be honest the interview for my last PhD position was a bit strange. There were clear signs that something was not right, but I didn't pay attention. After a whole day of activities, I think I liked what I saw. The group was doing interesting things, they had very good collaborations as a science lab should do. I believe I made a good impression overall with my presentation and chatting with the fellow researchers. One of the senior researcher I talked to, if I'm not gravely mistaken, I think he likes me. To make it sound overly optimistic, I feel the team chemistry is already there even before I start. My heart tells me I would like to work there.
Now I'm still waiting for the professors to come back to me and tell me they'd hire me. Even though this is not the only lab I'm applying to, this is certainly one of the best. Everyday that went without them giving me an answer is driving me crazy. I want to ask them about their decisions, although I don't want to push them in any way that makes me disservice. If I still don't get reply within the next few days, I'd send them an email to ask. In the meantime, I'm asking you, my reader, to give me your blessings. Wish me luck and wish me have enough good karma to get an excellent PhD position!
Thank you!
Almost three weeks ago, I had a full-day interview in Zurich, with two professors whom my Swedish supervisor Prof. A recommended for me. Both are good guys conducting very interesting research. The day looked like this: I traveled to Zurich from Basel in the morning. By the time I arrived, it was 11 o'clock. The professor who welcomed me told me they had a small program just for me. First I was going to have lunch with the other professor (since he was busy with teaching assignments that day), followed by approximately 1 hour each with two of the experimental researchers (these two perform biological experiments, the other half of the group is doing in silico computer modelling work). Then I'd get back to my host, discuss a bit about the science. The day would finish with me giving a presentation in front of FIVE research groups! When I first booked in my time for the presentation, I thought it was for two groups only, namely each PI will bring their own group to the talk. As I found out later, the presentation was actually a joint meeting between five groups with very tight collaboration. One group was sort of a spin-off from another group. The PI was recently granted professorship in Zurich, before he was a junior group leader on SNF-grants. To show the relations between these five groups, I'll just number them as 1 to 5 for now. Group 1 hosted the PI of group 2 some years ago, while the spin-off group (call it number 3) I mentioned is from group 2. Group 4 is led by a seasoned professor who is about to retire. They hope to let the guy running group 5 to take over the full professor spot once the group 4 guy leaves. By the way, the group 5 leader has only been in Zurich for one year. My day was reserved for PI 1 and 2, I've also met PI 3 in February.
So my day began. I really enjoyed the conversation with everybody I spent time talking to. Especially when I spoke to the professors, they were able to have intelligent and scientific discussion while still giving me the decent share of attention. This is quite important in my opinion. I believe how your future boss treats you can be hinted by his/her behavior during the interview session. To be honest the interview for my last PhD position was a bit strange. There were clear signs that something was not right, but I didn't pay attention. After a whole day of activities, I think I liked what I saw. The group was doing interesting things, they had very good collaborations as a science lab should do. I believe I made a good impression overall with my presentation and chatting with the fellow researchers. One of the senior researcher I talked to, if I'm not gravely mistaken, I think he likes me. To make it sound overly optimistic, I feel the team chemistry is already there even before I start. My heart tells me I would like to work there.
Now I'm still waiting for the professors to come back to me and tell me they'd hire me. Even though this is not the only lab I'm applying to, this is certainly one of the best. Everyday that went without them giving me an answer is driving me crazy. I want to ask them about their decisions, although I don't want to push them in any way that makes me disservice. If I still don't get reply within the next few days, I'd send them an email to ask. In the meantime, I'm asking you, my reader, to give me your blessings. Wish me luck and wish me have enough good karma to get an excellent PhD position!
Thank you!
fredag 8 februari 2013
Les Miserables the Movie!
I'm writing this to take a break from job-searching, or PhD-searching, whatever it is. Should have posted it two weeks ago. Well, better late than never.
First of all, I prefer the pronouciation "le miz", it's short, neat and sounds beautiful compared to the "le meeser-a-bles". Anyway, I watched the movie last week and liked it. For musical movies, you really need to love musicals to appreciate them. I know when some people (e.g. my father) watch musicals, they only think about how silly it is to see people singing all the conversations instead of talking, even at moments of life and death. I agree that some musical movies overplay the drama and stuff in scenes where time freeze so the vocalists could express their momentary thoughts vocally (a.k.a. High School Musical). These instances are stupid indeed. Musical overall however, is an art form, and as art, it has the freedom to detach itself from reality. It's an acquired flavor, you need to appreciate it before you can enjoy it. Some people do, some never do.
Spoiler warning here!
The movie has quite a hype of itself, most notably Anne Hathaway's portrayal of the character Fantine. She cut off her long hair during filming, as demanded by the story of her character. Her painfully emotional version of the song "I dreamed a dream" is widely heard since it's featured in the movie trailer. Since I sometimes measure success by details, with my standard, Anne has proven to be an admirable actress/singer combined. Take this example. When she was singing a verse about how Fantine still wishes her past lover (the father of her illegitimate daughter Cossette) to come back and so they could "live the years together", in the extremely short-lived instant through the sad song, her face was suddenly full of spirit and optimism that her eyes literally glimmered. In the next moment, she lamented over how some dreams could never be fulfilled. By then her hope was completely replaced by despair, as she closed her eyes and let tears cover her face. The total screen time of Hathaway was shorter than I expected. Not even halfway into the movie, her character was dead. For her portrayal of Fantine, Hathaway has secured her numerous prizes as well as the nomination of Academy Award for best supporting actress. Although I'm still skeptical as to how short her role was in the movie, I agree that the recognition of her efforts in Les Miserables is completely understandable.
Hugh Jackman did a splendid job as Jean Valjean, you'd never expect anything less from this great actor. A little gossip about the guy: his wife is 13 years older than him (which makes her 57). He's not the typical womanizer-type of a famous actor, which makes him even more special. The problem with Jackman is, since he's known to be great, any great work from this guy doesn't come out as a surprise. Therefore, you'd be more amazed at how some previously unknown actor/actress rise up to the top. This brings me to my next topic, the character Eponine.
Eponine is played by Samantha Barks, an English actress who sang in theater, but never appeared in any movie before Les Miserables. Her portrayal of Eponine basically stole the show with her strong presence and touching performances. Eponine is the daughter of the Thenardier family, a bunch of thieves, burglars and fraudsters. Eponine however, turned out to be innocent and kind-hearted. She had an unrequited infatuation with Marius Pontmercy. Marius on the other hand, was in love with Cossette and even had Eponine running errands so he could meet Cossette. Dressed as a street girl in rags, Eponine was pretty for her crowd. She was good-looking, her voice stunning, and her story of a heart-breaker is something most people could relate with. All these factors contributed to the popularity of her character. Eponine later died at the hands of a Parisian soldier as she took a bullet for Marius. Her death-scene was a bit strange, from the camera angle, it looked like she was actively committing suicide by placing the soldier's musket on her chest. Then the weapon fired and she suffered a mortal wound. Couldn't she have just pushed it away, so she could save her loved one without sacrificing herself? Now think from the soldier's perspective. If you are the man on the firing end of the musket, you got your aim on your target, but suddenly another enemy combatant came and tried to grab your weapon. What would you do? A natural reaction would be fighting off the sudden assailant with your gun. So Eponine didn't try to get herself killed, she was just not powerful enough to wrestle with a well-trained soldier (or maybe she did want to die, but then the scene could have been played better). I think Eponine is a better supporting character than Fantine, partly because she leaves a stronger presence in the story.
Having Russell Crowe playing Inspector Javert was another good decision. From other works I've mostly seen Javert portrayed as a shrewd and cruel figure. Although I believe that Javert is not necessarily evil, it's his uncompromising devotion to the law in contrast to Valjean's kindness that made him spiteful. When the antagonist wears the face of the noble gladiator Maximus Decimus Meridius, it really blurs the "black and white" morality of the story. The struggle between Valjean and Javert is never about good and evil, they are just two men with different perspectives. It's another symbolization of the friction between the upper-class society and the commoners, which is basically what Les Miserables is about. The story is very sad at times, the narrative however, makes you focus on the unyielding, positive force of life and of love. Even if you don't like musical, this movie is still a must-see. The real musical-lovers should have watched it before reading my review.
Do you hear the people sing?
Singing the song of angry men?
It is the music of the people
who will not be slaves again!
When the beating of your heart
echoes the beating of the drums,
There is a life about to start
when tomorrow comes!
- Enjolras, Do you hear the people sing?
First of all, I prefer the pronouciation "le miz", it's short, neat and sounds beautiful compared to the "le meeser-a-bles". Anyway, I watched the movie last week and liked it. For musical movies, you really need to love musicals to appreciate them. I know when some people (e.g. my father) watch musicals, they only think about how silly it is to see people singing all the conversations instead of talking, even at moments of life and death. I agree that some musical movies overplay the drama and stuff in scenes where time freeze so the vocalists could express their momentary thoughts vocally (a.k.a. High School Musical). These instances are stupid indeed. Musical overall however, is an art form, and as art, it has the freedom to detach itself from reality. It's an acquired flavor, you need to appreciate it before you can enjoy it. Some people do, some never do.
Spoiler warning here!
The movie has quite a hype of itself, most notably Anne Hathaway's portrayal of the character Fantine. She cut off her long hair during filming, as demanded by the story of her character. Her painfully emotional version of the song "I dreamed a dream" is widely heard since it's featured in the movie trailer. Since I sometimes measure success by details, with my standard, Anne has proven to be an admirable actress/singer combined. Take this example. When she was singing a verse about how Fantine still wishes her past lover (the father of her illegitimate daughter Cossette) to come back and so they could "live the years together", in the extremely short-lived instant through the sad song, her face was suddenly full of spirit and optimism that her eyes literally glimmered. In the next moment, she lamented over how some dreams could never be fulfilled. By then her hope was completely replaced by despair, as she closed her eyes and let tears cover her face. The total screen time of Hathaway was shorter than I expected. Not even halfway into the movie, her character was dead. For her portrayal of Fantine, Hathaway has secured her numerous prizes as well as the nomination of Academy Award for best supporting actress. Although I'm still skeptical as to how short her role was in the movie, I agree that the recognition of her efforts in Les Miserables is completely understandable.
Hugh Jackman did a splendid job as Jean Valjean, you'd never expect anything less from this great actor. A little gossip about the guy: his wife is 13 years older than him (which makes her 57). He's not the typical womanizer-type of a famous actor, which makes him even more special. The problem with Jackman is, since he's known to be great, any great work from this guy doesn't come out as a surprise. Therefore, you'd be more amazed at how some previously unknown actor/actress rise up to the top. This brings me to my next topic, the character Eponine.
Eponine is played by Samantha Barks, an English actress who sang in theater, but never appeared in any movie before Les Miserables. Her portrayal of Eponine basically stole the show with her strong presence and touching performances. Eponine is the daughter of the Thenardier family, a bunch of thieves, burglars and fraudsters. Eponine however, turned out to be innocent and kind-hearted. She had an unrequited infatuation with Marius Pontmercy. Marius on the other hand, was in love with Cossette and even had Eponine running errands so he could meet Cossette. Dressed as a street girl in rags, Eponine was pretty for her crowd. She was good-looking, her voice stunning, and her story of a heart-breaker is something most people could relate with. All these factors contributed to the popularity of her character. Eponine later died at the hands of a Parisian soldier as she took a bullet for Marius. Her death-scene was a bit strange, from the camera angle, it looked like she was actively committing suicide by placing the soldier's musket on her chest. Then the weapon fired and she suffered a mortal wound. Couldn't she have just pushed it away, so she could save her loved one without sacrificing herself? Now think from the soldier's perspective. If you are the man on the firing end of the musket, you got your aim on your target, but suddenly another enemy combatant came and tried to grab your weapon. What would you do? A natural reaction would be fighting off the sudden assailant with your gun. So Eponine didn't try to get herself killed, she was just not powerful enough to wrestle with a well-trained soldier (or maybe she did want to die, but then the scene could have been played better). I think Eponine is a better supporting character than Fantine, partly because she leaves a stronger presence in the story.
Having Russell Crowe playing Inspector Javert was another good decision. From other works I've mostly seen Javert portrayed as a shrewd and cruel figure. Although I believe that Javert is not necessarily evil, it's his uncompromising devotion to the law in contrast to Valjean's kindness that made him spiteful. When the antagonist wears the face of the noble gladiator Maximus Decimus Meridius, it really blurs the "black and white" morality of the story. The struggle between Valjean and Javert is never about good and evil, they are just two men with different perspectives. It's another symbolization of the friction between the upper-class society and the commoners, which is basically what Les Miserables is about. The story is very sad at times, the narrative however, makes you focus on the unyielding, positive force of life and of love. Even if you don't like musical, this movie is still a must-see. The real musical-lovers should have watched it before reading my review.
Do you hear the people sing?
Singing the song of angry men?
It is the music of the people
who will not be slaves again!
When the beating of your heart
echoes the beating of the drums,
There is a life about to start
when tomorrow comes!
- Enjolras, Do you hear the people sing?
måndag 14 januari 2013
Met a friend yesterday...
Lucky me. I got myself this friend in Zurich a year ago during the interview. We exchanged a few emails over the past year, but didn't do much more than that. This guy, he works at an institute that seems somewhat interesting for me at the moment. I asked for his advice, explained my situation to him. He suggested at once that we should meet and he would try to help me. How fortunate that the world still has good people around.
My friend, he totally recommended his institute as a good workplace. As our conversation went on, more and more was revealed. The epicenter of our talk was nevertheless about how you survive as a PhD student, an universal topic in academy. I realized, although with some initial shock, how trivial and commonplace it is for people to not complete one's first PhD. To be precise, how trivial it is to change group, if you are doing your PhD outside Sweden. Maybe the word "Sweden" can be swapped for "Scandinavia", but since I haven't involved myself with PhDs from Denmark, Norway and Finland, I cannot say the latter for sure.
So my friend got his master degree a couple of years before we ran into each other. During the time lapse between his master and the good PhD he enjoys so much nowadays, he tried a first PhD somewhere else. It was the first time he told me about this particular experience. I don't want to reveal his identity, so let's just say his first PhD was in an native English-speaking country. My friend doesn't wanna start talk about it, because once he starts he can't stop. The biggest problem of that place, as he told me, was corruption. The corruption came from the higher echelon of the institute. They tried to attract skillful people to their place, give them the resources to expand the area of expertise of the overall institute. Once the establishment phase is over, the institute kick you out, so they can take over your stuff. My friend's old boss from his first PhD got fired eventually, sometime after my friend left the group. For the professor it was not a big deal, he quickly secured another professorship in another country. Doing PhD in that English-speaking country required visa, even for EU-citizens. My friend had to wait for more than six months to get a visa. He left the group six months after entering the country. This practically means that he "lost" one year in the process.
Every scenario like this teaches you something valuable about life. My friend became much more careful after coming back to Europe. He walked carefully among the would-be employers, watching out for signs of misdeeds along the way. During one lab visit in Zurich, he was interested in the scientific methodology of the lab, but one hesitant answer from a seemingly traumatized PhD gave him second thoughts. As it later turned out, his suspicions were right. Nowadays he is enjoying his daily work in the lab that he carefully sifted out among the ones he applied. What about that lab in Zurich, did they find somebody? Yes, my friend said, a girl from his group got an offer, but from what my friend saw happening afterwards, she didn't stay there. He reminded me about some other guys we knew from the interview, let's call them Mr. K and Mr. M. They didn't stay in Zurich either. M was not heard from again. K started PhD somewhere in Germany, but he got into trouble with the guy shortly after he started and was forced to leave. He was on a short visa in Germany, before the visa expired he tried to apply to the same institute as my friend. It didn't work. After that, my friend has not heard from K. The last example he gave me was his postdoc supervisor, who sort of left the research field for good. She also went to two places for PhD, the first didn't work out and she graduated from her second. She was my friend's hands-on supervisor. Before she left the lab she taught him very well, a good supervisor.
The more stories like this I hear, the less I worry about myself, although you would say that my worry is completely unnecessary. The conclusion is, outside of Sweden, it happens that PhD candidates change places in pursuit of finding what they truly want. Turning the statement around, it also implies "in Sweden, it's rare that PhD candidates leave". Right now I don't want to explore further to explain why this disparity exists. To be frank I don't even know why I wrote this blog entry in the first place.
My friend, he totally recommended his institute as a good workplace. As our conversation went on, more and more was revealed. The epicenter of our talk was nevertheless about how you survive as a PhD student, an universal topic in academy. I realized, although with some initial shock, how trivial and commonplace it is for people to not complete one's first PhD. To be precise, how trivial it is to change group, if you are doing your PhD outside Sweden. Maybe the word "Sweden" can be swapped for "Scandinavia", but since I haven't involved myself with PhDs from Denmark, Norway and Finland, I cannot say the latter for sure.
So my friend got his master degree a couple of years before we ran into each other. During the time lapse between his master and the good PhD he enjoys so much nowadays, he tried a first PhD somewhere else. It was the first time he told me about this particular experience. I don't want to reveal his identity, so let's just say his first PhD was in an native English-speaking country. My friend doesn't wanna start talk about it, because once he starts he can't stop. The biggest problem of that place, as he told me, was corruption. The corruption came from the higher echelon of the institute. They tried to attract skillful people to their place, give them the resources to expand the area of expertise of the overall institute. Once the establishment phase is over, the institute kick you out, so they can take over your stuff. My friend's old boss from his first PhD got fired eventually, sometime after my friend left the group. For the professor it was not a big deal, he quickly secured another professorship in another country. Doing PhD in that English-speaking country required visa, even for EU-citizens. My friend had to wait for more than six months to get a visa. He left the group six months after entering the country. This practically means that he "lost" one year in the process.
Every scenario like this teaches you something valuable about life. My friend became much more careful after coming back to Europe. He walked carefully among the would-be employers, watching out for signs of misdeeds along the way. During one lab visit in Zurich, he was interested in the scientific methodology of the lab, but one hesitant answer from a seemingly traumatized PhD gave him second thoughts. As it later turned out, his suspicions were right. Nowadays he is enjoying his daily work in the lab that he carefully sifted out among the ones he applied. What about that lab in Zurich, did they find somebody? Yes, my friend said, a girl from his group got an offer, but from what my friend saw happening afterwards, she didn't stay there. He reminded me about some other guys we knew from the interview, let's call them Mr. K and Mr. M. They didn't stay in Zurich either. M was not heard from again. K started PhD somewhere in Germany, but he got into trouble with the guy shortly after he started and was forced to leave. He was on a short visa in Germany, before the visa expired he tried to apply to the same institute as my friend. It didn't work. After that, my friend has not heard from K. The last example he gave me was his postdoc supervisor, who sort of left the research field for good. She also went to two places for PhD, the first didn't work out and she graduated from her second. She was my friend's hands-on supervisor. Before she left the lab she taught him very well, a good supervisor.
The more stories like this I hear, the less I worry about myself, although you would say that my worry is completely unnecessary. The conclusion is, outside of Sweden, it happens that PhD candidates change places in pursuit of finding what they truly want. Turning the statement around, it also implies "in Sweden, it's rare that PhD candidates leave". Right now I don't want to explore further to explain why this disparity exists. To be frank I don't even know why I wrote this blog entry in the first place.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)