Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
ON
HAPPI
NESS
kenny png
& jeremy
fernando
ON HAPPINESS
First Edition
kenny png & jeremy fernando 2010
The Boxes
kenny png 2010
Published by
publisher
Address / Website
Distributed by
company
Address / Contact / Website
Illustrations
kenny png
Cover and book design
michelle andrea wan
With the support of
company
National Library Board Singapore
Cataloguing in Publication Data
Png, Kenny, 19xx
The Boxes / by Kenny Png & Jeremy Fernando.
Singapore : Polymath & Crust, 2010.
p. cm.
ISBNxx : xxx-xxx-xx-xxxx-x (pbk.)
I.Title.
PRxxxx.xxx
Sxxx xxxx
OCNxxxxxxxxx
Printed in Singapore
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, or by any information storage and retrieval
system, without the written permission of the publisher.
No part of this play should be staged, by professionals or amateurs, or
used for recitation, lecturing, public reading, radio broadcasting, television, film, video or sound taping or in electronic media, without the
written permission of _______.
2 happiness in slavery
trent reznor 4 foreword.
or a letter to kenny john
lofthouse 10 happiness lim lee
ching 12 the boxes kenny png
34 on the heights of despair
e. m. cioran 38 on the winter
of my discontent; in four
and a half gestures jeremy
fernando 74 the voices of
marrakesh elias canetti 78
afterword peter van de kamp
84 ain't it fun gene o'connor &
peter laughtner 88 about the
contributors
happi
ness in
slavery
trent
reznor
October 24th 1997 is the date Kenny Png has on his script as the date of
fore
word.
letter
kenny.
john
OR A
TO
lofthouse
on happiness
failure. And so, the curiosity that had brought these kids to the subject
and which had become the passion that drove their every moment (to
the neglect of all other subjects, very often) was liable to prove their
Each student had to do what was called an individual skill. This in it-
arts. But what happened far too often was that anyone with an ounce of
kids who had washed up on the shores of TSD because it offered some
a guarantee of endless time wasted, total frustration for all involved and,
often, they ranged from the frankly anarchic and rebellious via the lost
all those features simultaneously. After all, they were only 17.
actual fact, I loved the way the kids would launch fearlessly into a crea-
about in terms of performance. Not for TSD the laboured What makes
show how you would stage them. I mention this as the ultimate absurd-
which produced (still does) much fine theatre, and a massive number of
students simultaneously through years one and two with sometimes 70-
plus pieces of theatre evolving at any one time. (The students did a group
because of the totalitarian grid imposed upon it. The proscriptions of the
How did I feel then when Kenny appeared at my door with his ragged
and indecipherable bits of paper, mumbled ideas, and that quite unmis-
on happiness
Code forhe changed his mind or developed new ideas all the time.
cist agency, bless him (he was actually a gentle hippy really) loved it too.
able and tatty work in progress. I never had a clear view of what was
3. Any verbal interaction with Kenny was (and is?) liable to veer off into
with an intuitive feel for those paradoxes which make Singapore what
it is. It represents the determination of the artist to control his own art
Code forI had little idea what he was talking about. And often, nor
whether it made Kenny and his performers happy, let alone convince me
4. Kenny was rebellious and anarchic and restless. Code forhis input
or the audience they were happyis easier to sort out in dry philosophy.
art. What I can say with certainty is, it was a memorable experience.
The piece itself. Was fantastic. It speaks for itself. Read it. A remark-
In fact, let me put my cards on the table. The final result never wor-
able piece of original work, written and performed, by 17-18 year-olds for
ried me or, to be honest, really interested me. And I sense Kenny too is
not worried if the piece got an A or not. The process was all and thats
paradox. A dead script is far from that wonderful, live ephemeral mo-
what has stayed with Kenny and influenced his life choices. And that
ment, when one sits in the theatre with a wonderful, live group of human
beings, who have come together at one unique moment in time. Who
gasp, open their eyes wide, laugh, cryor walk out. No-one walked out.
I think they were intrigued, bewildered, shocked, maybe. Some maybe
even a little worried, scared even, looking over their shoulders? This was
Singapore 1997 after all, and installation art had a heavy history.
At least, I think I am
11
happi
ness
lim lee
ching
plain sighting
Stretched by the
manners of
felicitous
web weave borne
down by the
weight of its
own making
Not daring
a smile it
yet contends
Holding up
pillars, walls
the
boxes
kenny
png
3939
2424
416416
the boxes
17
Dim lights. The stage has 16 boxes of different sizesall blacksuspended overhead. Stage is empty except for a character down centre-stage.
He has a black box for a head and he is wearing a neat and uniformly coloured suit, tie, and trousers. In his hands is another black box. He starts
moving as lights come up. He moves in a straight mechanical manner
turning at right angles towards the centre of the stage; in fact he is walking in squares around the centre of the stage to reach it. Once he reaches
pro
logue
the centre of the stage, he puts down the black box he is holding in the
centre of the stage. The centre of the stage is also the centre of a 3 metre by 3 metre invisible square which is mathematically. Once he puts
down the box, he starts moving back to his starting position via the exact
steps he came by. He will move off-stage after reaching the position. As
he moves off-stage, two characters in all-black with tight fitting boxes
around their bodiesand a shoe on their headsstart moving out of the
stage-wings, one from each side to totally opposite and reflective positions on the invisible square; in-line with the black box, and the centre of
the stage. The characters are bare-footed and each has a number on their
boxes: the character on the right has the number 2424, and the one on
the left has the number 3939. The two characters move in very straight
and sharp mechanical waysthey do not bend their knees, or move any
part of their bodies intentionally except for their feet. Once they reach
their positions, they give a cry and start a movement sequence. One
movement sequence consists of the two characters moving one round
around the square in an anti-clockwise direction. They exclaim happy!
with each step and give a mechanical smile every five steps. The char-
18
on happiness
acters faces are frozen into this smile whenever they are not moving.
Their movements are synchronised and follow the beat of the soundtrack, which is a cacophony of noise with a regular beat; the sound is
accompanied by flashing lights of green, blue, and orange, which stop
whenever each movement sequence is over, and re-start when the sequence begins againall of this to give a sense of confused lighting.
the boxes
21
2424
3939
both
10
15
3939
way?
2424
3939
2424
20
both
25
22
on happiness
3939
the boxes
3939
23
2424
2424
way.
10
3939
both
10
2424
15
both
15
3939
2424
3939
Why???
2424
20
3939
25
2424
Like??
25
3939
Which is?
24
on happiness
the boxes
2424
3939
2424
3939
Yes!!!
3939
25
both
3939
around in circles.
10
10
2424
Really?
15
3939
2424
3939
15
2424
3939
20
3939
2424
25
20
3939
2424
26
on happiness
2424
3939
Oh no!
Oh no!
They immediately try to go back to their
synchronised movements but they are discordant.
Then 2424 loses his balance and falls on the
10
15
3939
2424
3939
deserve help.
2424
3939:
REBEL!
A third character exactly like them but with the
20
416416
the boxes
3939
29
stage-left.
3939
both
the boxes
31
: Kenny Png
3939
: Pearlyn Quan
32
on happiness
33
35
OF
on the
heights
despair
e.m.
cioran
The passion for the absurd can grow only in a man who has exhausted
everything, yet is still capable of undergoing awesome transfigurations.
on the
winter
of my dis
content;
happiness
4
jeremy
in
fernando
39
Merde
That was the sound from behind the door. Or at least that was what
weIremember. A judging sound, the sound of judgement: after all,
Kenny Png had to submit himself, be judged, before the law. Which is
not to say that was definitely what happened: after all, one can never be
definitive about such things, especially when they are based on memory. One has to then approachkeeping in mind the register that one is
called to such thingswith a certain amount of reasonable doubt.
One has to note here that this was a piece that was written for two
primary reasons: to be seen by peers; and also to be judged by a certain
examiner, by one who knew nothing of the persons involved in the piece,
nor the piece itself, one who was aptly termed an external examiner.
And here it is difficult to ignore the tropes of dissection and dismembering, as if an autopsy was to be performed, on not only the performance,
but the performers as well.
Here, if we allow ourselves to be sensitive, it is not difficult to hear
the register of K, of Kafka, and of The Trial, in particular where K is
brought before a power that he neither knowsand can never know
nor can see, but which clearly has effects on him. Hence, at best, all K
can do is to guess, to posit, what is required of him. It is this positing that
is captured in the statement of the priest in the cathedral when he says
to K, no you dont have to consider everything true, you just have to
consider it necessary.1 This is due to the fact that K is faced with a law
that he must approach, and which has power of judgment over him, but
40
on happiness
41
at the same time, is a law that is always hidden from him. And it is this
remain; it is of his own free will that he does. This opens the possibility
that the priest attempts to highlight to him through the famous parable
that it is the man who is free; unlike the doorkeeper who is captive to
of the Law:
his duty, is captive to the Law, as not only has he to wait for the man to
appear, but must also wait there till he decides to leave: in this sense, it
is the executer of the Law who is most bound to it. As the priest explains
to K,
But the doorkeeper says that he cant grant him admittance now.
The man thinks it over and then asks if hell be allowed to enter
to the Law alone is denied to him, and this only by one person,
the doorkeeper. If he sits on the stool at the side of the door and
It is not that the manor Kis not allowed into the Law, not allowed
spends the rest of his life there, he does so of his own free will; the
to see what it is that is judging him, but that he is not allowed to at this
that the doorkeeper is lying to him, but that the moment of admittance
is deferred, not necessarily eternally, but perhaps for just one moment
longer than the life of the man. However, it is not as if the Law has no
effect on their lives: on the contrary the man from the country waits out-
side the doorway till the end of his life, and Ks trial fully occupies his
what the Law is: one can assume that he hasnt been too far into the
LawIm only the lowest doorkeeper the mere sight of the third is
more than even I can bear5 and moreover, it is the man who in the
Even though the Law is a force that affects them, has an effect on
the door of the Law6; nothing is said of whether the doorkeeper sees this
them, it is not as though they are compelled to be before it: after all, the
light. This suggests that both the man and the doorkeeper, regardless of
whether they are there by choice or by duty, are affected by a power that
ibid. pp.215.
ibid. pp.216.
2
3
ibid. pp.221.
ibid. pp.215.
ibid. pp.216.
42
on happiness
43
only seen at the end; only now does he see this light. And even though
the man sees this light, this radiance emanating from within the door,
within the Law, he never knows what it means, or even what the light is.
ing. It is for this reason that even the executer of the Law remains blind
into account the fact that no one else could gain admittance here, be-
to it: all the doorkeeper is doing is carrying out the Law in that particular
cause this entrance was meant solely for you.7 This suggests that it is a
situation, the situation of the Law being solely for you; in other words,
personalized Law and this opens the register of the paradox that every
the only knowledge that the executer of the Law has is of its effects; the
only time that the executer knows of the Law is at the very moment (s)
he is executing it.
is singular, unique, and situational. Hence, at best, the Law can only be
knownif that term can even be used in the first placeat the very mo-
the very Law he is judging by, the very Law that allows him to judge in the
ment in which it is applied; to the man, to K, to you: the Law can only be
glimpsed by the effects it has on one, but can never be known as such.
cause I should be happy! And at that point, I recall many in the audience
This is precisely why the priest tells K, you dont have to consider eve-
tary on the state, on politics, on public policy. Of course there were all
so much that one cannot tell between what is true or not (which is the
completely missing the point: what was at stake was far more than mere
misunderstanding that K has in thinking that lies are made into a uni-
politics; what was at play was the very notion of happiness itself. And
of the Law, of each positing of the Law, that allows the commentators
the lens of politics itself, in order to open a register between freedom and
ing the matter are not mutually exclusive. In fact, one can only guess
happiness.
ibid. pp.217.
ibid. pp.223.
ibid. pp.219.
46
on happiness
47
In a Fascist state, the subject is denied all freedom; all power lies
in the hand of the one absolute leaderin this sense, (s)he plays the
both her/his actions and also that of the state. The freedom of the subject
ject is merely a part of the whole body (in the form of the state): this
fact, the point of ultimate freedom, expression of ones will and choice,
is the corporatisation of the state and its subjects. Hence, all action of
comes at the moment of election. At each election, the subject has three
the subject is a result of the Leader: this is why Adolf Eichmanns de-
vote. But whichever option the subject chooses, (s)he has already agreed
to accept the outcome of the election. This, for instance, makes all claims
to Bushs illegal election moot the moment the results were officially an-
of the subject; for there is nothing that the subject can responsible
nounced; one can challenge them up to the point they are announced, but
for. (S)he is merely a cog in the entire body, and as such, the subject is
no longer after. More crucially, the subject has to take responsibility for
not responsible for anything, even her/him self. So even if the subject
the outcome. In effect, whether or not you elected that particular person/
(s)he is guilty for doingor not doingsomething, for one can only be
guilty if one is responsible for it, but the fact that the Leader deems her/
him so. The fact that the private and the public spheres are collapsed en-
sures the true freedom of the self; one is accountable only to the self and
not to any external force.
This ironic lack of freedom in democracy is due to the attempt at bridging the gap between the subject and the other; by attempting to know the
other too well. By having a direct hand in choosing ones own leaders,
the other takes the form of the Party. In this manner, once again there is
responsibility comes under, and is of, the Party. Hence, the subject can
about that same leadership; after all, you were the one who chose it.
always blame the Party for anything, even bad weather. Once again, a perverse form of freedom for the subject can be found in this situation.
48
on happiness
tends that happiness lies in the gap between the ability to choose, and the
too far away, not too close, This fragile balance was disturbedby
what? By desire precisely. Desire was the force that compelled the
49
people to move onand end up in a system in which the great maWhen exactly can people be said to be happy? In a country like
the act of choosing, that K opens: for if we were only ever satisfied with
real choices, all commercialism, and advertising would fail. Even though
shaving cream is essentially the same, we are only satisfied when we get
goods on the market from time to time (no coffee for a couple of
nature of choice, what K does is to plunge head on into the illusion; and
for it is no longer a choice that is purely of the self, but rather a choosing
that is always already in relation with what is out there, with a certain
blame for everything that went wrong, so that one did no feel re-
choice but to speak in words that are other to usthis is a choice that
is in response to the call from elsewhere, to a call from the other. Here,
And last, but not least, there was an Other Place (the consumerist
West) about which one was allowed to dream; and one could even
10
50
on happiness
51
that I will hear this call and hear it as one destined for me? Is it
that is also always already exterior to us, to ourselves, to all notions of the
not rather the case that the minimal condition to be able to hear
self. And here, as we are attempting to read, we must never forget that we
are reading a play, for even though we are free to read, we are always al-
ready governed by the laws of reading, and the rules that come with each
Because I would not need to hear it in the first place if the source
genre. As Jacques Derrida reminds us time and time again, even though
and destination of the call, of the call as call, were already certain
the reader has a right to see, and that it takes a certain skill to see,
and determined. Following the logic of calling up, of the call and
bound by a law of seeing. After all, you have the authority to tell your-
can reach its addressee simply as itself, and each hearing is con-
self these stories but you cannot gain access to the squares of that other
one. You are free but there are rules.12 In this way, reading, and seeing, is
a negotiation between the reader and the text. One is free within a cer-
text within the rules laid out, the rules before which both the reader and
the text must stand; there is a law that assigns the right of inspection,
you must observe these rules that in turn keep you under surveillance.13
have no choice but to remain within these limits, this frame, the frame-
work of these frames 14 And more than this, a text gives both you and
Werner Hamacher. Interventions. in Qui Parle: Journal of Literary Studies 1, no. 2, Spring 1987:
37-42. italics from source.
11
12
ibid. pp.1.
13
ibid. pp.1.
14
54
on happiness
itself (through its characters, through the outcome of its own narrative),
55
by the Law. It is only when something is illegitimate that the authority of a person is required in order to enact it. In other words, author-
ity is the very undoing of the Law itself. For instance, a death-sentence
gaze, but it denies you that right at the same time: by means of its
very apparatus it retains that authority, keeping for itself the right
(s)he is going against the legal system which sentenced the person to
death; the same legal system that upholds her/his very sovereignty. How-
or whatever yarns you might spin about it, and that in fact comes
shatter the illusion, but also bring about the collapse of the entire system.
15
This is the lesson of The Emperors New Clothes: the shock and horror
It is in this way that every seeing reveals and conceals at the same
of the crowd was not in the fact that the little child pointed out that the
Emperor was naked (who didnt already know that), but in foregrounding
the absurdity of the situation (he is only the Emperor because everyone
deems him to be so; and they are subjects because he is Emperor). The
Otherwise, all one is doing is re-writing the text; otherwise, one might
child was told to be quiet precisely because what was highlighted was
as well not be reading at all. And here, once again, the spectre of Kafka
the fact that the people were making themselves subservient; they were
returns to us, whispering to us that one can never know the law which
absolute lack of evidence that the man standing in front of them was the
At this point, we might want to take yet another detour, and al-
Emperor. What was at stake though was not just the status of the Em-
ter the perspective of the thinking, and perhaps direct it onto K him-
peror himself, but the very empire itself; for if the illusory state of his
selfand here open the register of authorship. One can detect an echo
authority is exposed, then the entire kingdom comes crashing down. And
of the author that can be heard in authority; as if the writer of the sit-
hence, the child was silenced not to protect the Emperor from the shame
uation can play at being God; all-seeing, and in full-control. The trou-
of being naked, but more pertinently to protect the secret that his author-
that was recognized by his subjects; he was sovereign not because he was
ibid. pp.2.
15
56
on happiness
57
truly new and original, no one would recognize him, and he would not be
Perhaps this is the lesson of Andy Warhol. It was not so much the
reproduction itself that is the art, but the very gesture of recognizing
his authority over people, subjugated a new group. However, even in that
Hence, all authority is only as such due to the sovereign being a repro-
duction of all the sovereigns before her/him; and not the person as such.
the realm of art. In this sense, one can posit that both Warhol and van
However, the very source of that authority itself, the reason for a pact
(he is Emperor because the people are subjects; they are subjects because
always also an original gesture; one that has never happened before, and
mains a secret.
one that is also non-repeatable. In this manner, one can posit that the
ment through a medium, as if that moment was real; in other words, the
authoring of a moment.
selves. And to do so, let us momentarily draw upon an old tale. When Isis
poisoned Ra, she promised him the antidote in exchange for his secret
more precisely, a moment that has passed. In this sense, all art is a recon-
name, which was the source of all his power. And he whispered into her
stitution of memory. This is not to say that every act of memory is art; or
heart, and she felt herself filled with all the knowledge and wisdom of
Ra; all the power that came with his nameAmen-Ra. However, it was
not as if no one else knew it; in fact everyone knows that his name is Ra.
What this shows is that secrets rarely lie in the content (after all, Amen
anyone who has been through a school system has used this umpteen
60
on happiness
61
times when faced with an assignment, and in particular when one has
finitude of subjectivity.
something that he did not do; a strategist among us might even say that
This suggests that singularity, originalityor dare one say the artistic
this was something that K failed to do. What is more interesting though
the potential forgetting in that work. In this sense, art is the foreground-
this case, for the statement to be true, there cannot be an object to it; the
ground what one cannot know, this suggests that art is always already in
its praxis, and more than that, it is always already only to come. This is
one in which there is no referent; at best the subject is uttering the very
an approach to art that acknowledges that part of art always lies outside
fact that (s)he has forgotten and nothing more. And if there is no refer-
the person; that can at best only be glimpsed momentarily. This is art in
the precise sense of a craft at its highest level, where it consumes the
practitioner, and often in ways which are exterior to ones cognitive abil-
there is an element that lies beyond the cognition of the subject; that lies
ity. In this sense, art remains invisible to one; at best, it expresses itself
beyond the subject herself. The implication is, one cannot choose for-
through one.
getting, one cannot choose what one forgetsafter all, there is no object
the subject that then has an effect on her. And if this is so, there is then
absolutely no reason that each time one remembers something, each act
each time one performs an act, one is both neither a virgin and always al-
ity; one cannot legitimately say whether something is art or not. In other
words, any judgement is based on nothing except the praxis of judging it-
self; where one cannot rely on a metaphysical comfort that one is correct
62
on happiness
63
(or wrong) with any certainty. Hence, art lies in its praxis, in each attempt
re-enter the realm of the polis for a moment, and consider the instance of
that can be said is that art is a gesture towards the possibility of art. More
than that, whether something ever reaches the realm of arta reproduc-
tion that is not just a reproductionor remains just another reproductionnot that there is any logical difference between the twoalways
already remains a secret from us, perhaps until it happens. And when
it does, its reason might still remain unknown to us, which means that
In other words, art is nothing more than a gesture. And more than
that, since art always already remains potentially exterior to the person,
act as if the utopian future were (not yet fully here, but) already
itself.
over which this future happiness and freedom already cast their
piness itself.
Which is why, there always already had to be two of them; even as
piness could not reside in just a single, total, being. As K is teaching us,
happiness is always already there; perhaps the only reason we are un-
able to see it is because it is there, but just not yet. However, this is not a
nihilistic gesture, one aimed at nothingness, for that would be too sure,
own truth.16
too certain, too totalising, but rather a gesture of hope, a gesture of posAnd it is this as if that remains crucial to us: we must act as if we
This was in reference to the utopian ideal of the Leninist revolution and can be found in Slavoj
iek. A Plea for Leninist Intolerance in Critical Inquiry. Winter 2000.
16
66
on happiness
67
are able to do so. This suggests that each time we act, there is no way
it feels real goodall hell breaks loose. This of course does not mean
that one has to be forever separate from everyone else, from everything;
words, we will never have the comfort of certainty. Each time we act is its
singular. In this very sense, the phrase when two become one has to be
act is singular, and irreducibly different from every other act. But at the
read ironically; and what else would be this gap, this distance, but that of
an ironic distance.
Perhaps here, we might as well reverse all the way to the beginning;
and start again. This is after all, one of the possible readings of a revolu-
tion; going round and round in circles. And listen to another register of
And if one is singular, but always already in relation to all others, this
merde; that of Ubu Roi. More preciselyif we can ever even use that
suggests that happiness cannot be vested in the self; despite all the claims
notion when speaking of Ubu Roiwe need to open our receptors to his
laughter, the great guffaw of the King, a King very much unlike the naked
to be happy. But as our friend K tells us over and over again, we can only
one we spoke of earlier. For this king is one that takes his kingshipand
Here, we might begin to posit that happiness lies in the dash between
the singular and the plural; after all, if happiness is nothing but the open-
proach Ubu Roi at a distance, allow for the fact that he is kingwhatever
already there, and to come; all one can do is stand before it. But at the
that even begins to meanand take everything he says, and does, with
belief and un-belief at the same time. For there is no referentiality to the
words of this king; all he is doing is saying, all he is doing is speaking: all
allow the dash to keep the singular and the plural apart. As K demonstrat-
ed to us, the moment the two of them come togetherthe moment 3939
Isnt that though the nature of all names? Singular as there is only one
68
on happiness
unique. Therefore a name both refers to one thing and everything other
Echoes
than that one; at exactly the same time. Each act of naming is a reifica-
Althusser, Louis. (1977). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. (B. Brewster,
69
70
on happiness
71
75
THE
VOICESOF
MARRA
KESH
ELIAS
CANETTI
pause I realize that I have not yet said anything at all. A marvelously
luminous, viscid substance is left behind in me, defying words. Is it the
language I did not understand there, and that must now gradually find
its translation in me?
79
after
word
peter
van de
kamp
80
on happiness
81
85
ain't it
fun
gene
o'connOR
& PETER
LAUGHTNER
Ain't it fun when you know that you're gonna die young
It's such fun... such fun
Ain't it fun when you're taking care of number one
Ain't it fun when you feel like you just gotta get a gun
Ain't it fun when you j.j.j. just can't seem to find your tongue
Cause you stuck it to deep into something that really stung
It's such fun
Well somebody come up to me they spit right in my face
But I didn't even feel it, it was such a disgrace
I punched my fist right through the glass
But I didn't even feel it, it all happened so fast
It's such fun, such fun, such...
Ain't it fun when you tell her she's just a cunt
Ain't it fun when she splits and leaves you on the bum
Ain't it fun when you've broken up every band that you've ever begun
Ain't it fun when you know that you're gonna die young
It's such fun, such fun, such...
Having a real fun time, such fun, such fun
89
about
the
contri
butors
Bomber; and her gift of death. Exploring his thinking through different
forms has led him to film, music, and installation art; and his works
have been exhibited in Vienna, Seoul, Singapore, and Hong Kong. He
is the editor of the thematic magazine One Imperative, and a Research
Fellow at the Centre for Liberal Arts and Social Sciences, Nanyang
Technological University.
90
on happiness
91
by Philip Lim; the book cover for Boom, by local playwright Jean Tay;
and a forthcoming book, Cooking for The President, featuring Peranakan recipes & memoirs by Wee Eng Hwa, daughter of former president Wee Kim Wee.
A tortured and confused product of the Oxford, London, and Edinburgh universities, John Lofthouse wandered the globe with
his faithful spouse teaching English until the sheer boredom of it all
drove him back to his second love, theatre. He then wandered the
globe again teaching theatre. His undistinguished career saw him
finally beached on the tiny islet of Singapore where he devotedly
laboured on the limited artistic aspirations of fellow-tortured souls
like Kenny Png, until finally finding calm and repose in the bosom of
SOTA, Singapores wonderful new School of the Arts. Whereupon,
still with his devoted wife, his first real love, he retired and lives in
Spain, sawing logs and hitting small white balls, his fourth real love,
and venturing to Uganda, his third great love.
Peter van de Kamp PhD is a poet, and Associate Professor of