Writing as a pastime

Ever since I can remember I have kept a diary. Now don’t think of the kind of person who draws line at the end of the day to keep track of their routine. Sometimes I wouldn’t write for months. Somehow I always came back to having a notebook in which I jotted down events I thought were important and how they affected me/my life. 

Re-reading some of those diary entries I realize now that my perspective on those very same events has changed radically. Some of them I don’t even remember. Then why were they deemed as so important and worthy of ink, paper, and most importantly time? The way I am rationalize it at this point in my life is that sometimes you just have to get some things out of your system. The best way to do it is by writing them down while you are still in the midst of the event. Even healthier is to also write about it once you have gotten some distance from the event.

Of course, these are all somewhat truisms and they are somewhat relevant for ‘diary-keeping’. Seeing that this post will only reach a few people, then what is the point of writing it on a social platform? Can’t I just keep it in a diary? A word .doc? I do not expect this post to reach many people, I am not writing for an audience, yet I am posting this text here. I do not believe in blogging as a form of diary-keeping. Quite the opposite- I believe that people who make their writing public should only do so when this helps/enriches others. Sure, the best way to go about it can also be somewhere in between.

I could justify the validity of this post in the light of what I wrote above by saying that I am encouraging others to write. The truth is that I am also encouraging myself to write. But instead of writing memories and/or self-analysis, I would like to also write/move on to something else. Here. This is a written promise to myself. With the internet as witness. Yet here it is one of the biggest faux pas according to me and it is only (one of) my (many) first public writing(s).

The Culture of Protesting in Romania

For the past 7-8 years, ever since I gained political consciousness, the most widespread protests in Romania have been on environmental/ecological themes. Although in the beginning of 2012 there have been some protests against the president, Traian Băsescu, the events were arguably manipulated by the press. That is not to say that people who came to the streets were not motivated by genuine discontent with the head of the state, but there were quite a few television anchors who called for people to come out to the streets and voice their grievances against the ‘dictatorship’ of Traian Băsescu.

In contrast, environmentally-themed protests have had bigger amplitude in the number of people who came out to the streets and their duration.

Read More

FFR: Good Western-Perspective account on the situation in education in BiH

The most important word and notion deriving from Balkan is “balkanization”. By the end of the nineteenth century, Balkans began to be increasingly used with a political connotation, rather than in a purely geographical sense, to designate the states that had emerged out of the Ottoman Empire: Greece, Serbia, Montenegro, Romania, and Bulgaria. There was hardly a trace of disparagement at that time. It is symptomatic that the word “balkanization”, which is most often used to denote the process of nationalist fragmentation of former geographic and political units into new and problematically viable smaller states, was not created in the course of the 100 years when the Balkan nations gradually seceded from the Ottoman Empire. When the term was coined, at the end of WWI, only one Balkan nation, Albania, was added to the already existing Balkan map; all the others had been nineteenth-century formations. The great proliferation of small states as a result of the Great War was triggered by the disintegration of the Habsburg and Romanov Empires and the emergence of Poland, Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania. To this post-WWI legacy should be added Yugoslavia, whose creation was, technically speaking, the reverse of balkanization.
Maria Todorova - Imagining the Balkans
Why is is that men are never/rarely ever portrayed doing womanly things? such as knitting, tailoring, taking care of children, or cooking? But when that is done, it becomes either highly professional or somewhat sensual (with a tint of clumsy)? Yet when women are pictured doing those exact things, not only does it look natural but as they are supposed to be doing it free of charge as this is their call. Or I might not be following the media recently.

Why is is that men are never/rarely ever portrayed doing womanly things? such as knitting, tailoring, taking care of children, or cooking? But when that is done, it becomes either highly professional or somewhat sensual (with a tint of clumsy)? Yet when women are pictured doing those exact things, not only does it look natural but as they are supposed to be doing it free of charge as this is their call. Or I might not be following the media recently.