swan song for group 19

mood: excited.
state i'm in: pleased about nambour and wesley for rotations.
tune: prince 'do me baby'.


well, another PBL group has seen its day. i must say, this group wasn't as sentimental as the others, but then, we were never disposed towards getting bogged down in any way. ours was a well-oiled machine that tore through a case with a lot of speed, and a little skill.

so i won't get bogged down in this either, and won't get sentimental either. ill just leave it to george, our fearless tutor, to let us know where we rank in the annals of PBL groups.

word, georgie

and another pic of goerge cos he's so photogenic... where are all the ones of the students???

a nation getting back on track?

mood: pretty happy.
state i'm in: tidy.
tune: david bendeth 'feel the real'.


as each day and week pass by i am becoming just a tad more optimistic. about what? no, not this federal election in particular, but about the state of australian society. it seems as though there are many reasons to believe australians and australia as a society is re-evolving and emerging from its selfish hibernation of the post-keating / howard years. the impression i receive is that of a nation slowly re-engaging with the political debate and with what it means to be part of a society.

what gives me this impression?

most days when i read the paper or watch the nightly news i read articles and see stories that convince me people are just a little more willing now to take part in their democracy than what they might have been a few years prior. for example, whilst on the subject of television, current affairs programs are once again rating in the top ten programs on air, something not seen since the mid-1990s. it will be interesting to see if these programs also become as intelligent as what they were at that time - what must jana wendt or mike willesee think of the current state of current affairs?

just yesterday, statistics emerged showing an enormous rise in the number of youth enrolled to vote in comparison with the 2004 election. the government's decision to legislate to bring forward the close of the electoral role to the evening of the commencement of the election campaign has been met with fierce opposition from many angles and countered by some effective measures to remedy this assault on democracy. groups like GetUp have had a substantial impact on lifting youth enrolment figures, but it is the australian electoral comission (AEC) that must take most of the credit. spending $15 million of their own money, the AEC's campaigning at high schools, universities and, in particular, their clever 'rock enrol' campaign pushed at music festivals and over the airwaves via 'triple j' have exposed younger australians to the idea of voting as being their right and a right that no government should be able to take away or prevent from being fully employed.

'boutique issues' are now being approached with a degree of seriousness which is promising. for example, climate change has become a far bigger issue than i had anticipated in this election. on the potential for nuclear power plants in australia, it appears that the government has shifted its aspirations for this to the back burner, in an attempt to neutralise this as an environmental and election issue. i have also been surprised by the lack of sympathy that the electorate has shown to the government's position on african immigrants, in particular refugees, and their tribulations of integration, and on its excuses made in the treatment of mohammed haneef, whose detention under the auspices of anti-terror laws has now been described by so many parties as having been based on wafer thin evidence. dr haneef's appeal to the federal court before the election in november, if successful, might make matters even more troublesome for the government. are we really thinking a little more rationally now, or just immune to the onslaught of another 'foreign hordes' fear campaign?

all of this aside, i think the greatest sign of a potential re-engagement is the number of people wiling to put their money where their mouth is. betting agencies have taken more money in bets on the outcome of this election campaign in its first two weeks than was generated in the entire 2004 campaign. with possibly more weight than the weekly net and phone polls in predicting an election outcome, betting has been heavily skewed towards a change of government.

opposition leader kevin rudd, rather than being able to take a great deal of credit for this phenomenon of re-engagement, is largely just harnessing it for his party, and of course has been very successful at avoiding wedge issues thus far, such as the african integration issue. it seems as if he and his advisers have sensed the change of heart and are keen to remind folks that they are the party more adept at confronting the electorates new-found concerns. bob hawke and paul keating (especially mr keating, after "the recession we had to have") have been making many a surprising cameo appearance at campaign launches and on television and radio, having seemed also to have sensed this shift, and are keen to remind us all of the achievements of their (labor) governments, changes that are still bearing fruit time and time again.

just as important, in a significant undoing of their previous successes, it seems as if the government has lost clairvoyance for the shifting mood of the electorate. the government, over its time in office, has consistently taken measures to reduce citizens' engagement with their governance and for the greater part of their time in office these measures have gone unnoticed. now, finally, it seems as if people are sitting up, rubbing their eyes clear, and taking a harder look at their society and its direction. many a heavy albatross is coming home to roost around government minister's necks, and no more than around the prime minister's himself.

how many times did you say interest rates have risen since 2004, mr rudd?

---

images: public

countertransference? a little

mood: fairly relaxed, all things considered.
state i'm in: abetalipoproteinaemia, lymphangiectasia, hypogammaglobulinaemia... it all gets a bit much sometimes.
tune: humming fan and distant thunder.


i had what will likely be my last clinical coaching session this afternoon (provided i make it into third year). it was a pretty fun session, but my mind wasn't really on the game. "aortic stenosis? yeah sure, i'll believe you."


i can still remember my first class in the hospital...

we marched over from the clinical sciences building with our first coach, jenny, and she was pestering us all the way to walk faster, telling us "you'll have to get used to it when your doing rounds". then up the elevator, and out onto level 7 or 8. i saw a patient being wheeled past in the corridor. i looked at emma, and at the moment we both realised where we were and what we were doing. at that moment, i became a medical student.

gomers aplenty, i think i have come a fair way in the last two years, since my first coaching group sat down with jenny and realised how hopeless we were at examining anything. ("what are you doing!!") i also think i have so far to go - my skills surely can't be more than a few per cent developed at this stage.

i was rarely in the mood for coaching, generally late in the afternoon, but almost each and every time i got a tonne out of it. although all so different, i couldn't really fault any of my coaches. one stands out in particular, however:

if there is a god, this guy is certainly getting his comeuppance... countertransference? a little.

any bruits, luci?

---

image: mine

"below" to "above"

mood: content.
state i'm in: a bit concerned.
tune: the brand new heavies 'i don't know why (i love you)' (dj spinna remix).


this is when i get a bit concerned...

on the austereo radio network today opposition leader kevin rudd defended his party's position on same-sex marriage:

on the institution of marriage itself, our view is between a man and woman and it's just been our traditional, continuing view.

when asked if, in the future, such a position may look as close-minded as racist beliefs of the past mr rudd replied that it is what he believes in. his replies were somewhat vague and trailed off, which leads me to ask to what degree are these his beliefs or just the party line. i have a vested interest in the man's personal assertions should he become prime minister, as they are likely to carry considerable ammunition into battle repelling the gains by the conservatives of this nation in john howard's so-called 'culture wars' - and i support marriage for same-sex partners. i personally support legislation allowing for fully recognised marriage for all human beings and their partners as i cannot understand why my contributions to society ought to be deemed any less worthy of recognition than those of my brother or my neighbour.

in his closing remarks on radio today, mr rudd asserted that "legal discrimination against same sex couples should be removed". whether that only applies to the 50-something items of legislation described as discriminatory by the australian human rights and equal opportunity commision, or something further in line with mr rudd's personal views as declared in the past remains to be elaborated.

what placates me about mr rudd on this matter is the views he outlined in his essay for last october's edition of 'the monthly' magazine, 'faith in politics'. when addressing the modern forms of political engagement between church and state, one he explicitly deplores is "vote for me because i'm christian, and because i have a defined set of views on a narrowly defined set of questions concerning sexual morality." mr rudd responds to this as such:

regrettably, this model has an increasing number of supporters within the broader christian community. such supporters tend to read down, rather than read up, the ethical teachings of the new testament, producing a narrow tick-the-box approach to passing a so-called christian morals test. these tests tend to emphasise questions of sexuality and sexual behaviour. i see very little evidence that this pre-occupation with sexual morality is consistent with the spirit and content of the gospels. for example, there is no evidence of jesus of nazareth expressly preaching against homosexuality. in contrast, there is considerable evidence of the nazarene preaching against poverty and the indifference of the rich.

the central theme of his essay is that "a core, continuing principle shaping this engagement should be that christianity must always take the side of the marginalised, the vulnerable and the oppressed." mr rudd further elaborates his beliefs that the role of the (christian) church in its engagements with politics should be one of "speaking directly to the state: to give power to the powerless, voice to those who have none, and to point to the great silences in our national discourse where otherwise there are no natural advocates". mr rudd, as the fair and reasonable christian man you claim to be, i believe you have demands from LGBTs that you would need to address should you be elected.

right now, mr rudd, in spite of their toils, LGBT advocates are failing in their attempts to be heard - personally, i feel quite powerless, without voice, and without advocacy in the face of the hard-fought oppression of those you refer to as "above". i am, in this instance, what you would refer to as "below".

Lowly Worm™

mood: content.
state i'm in: i can always study tomorrow.
tune: chanel 'my life' (grant nelson vocal remix)


wikipedia states that "a worm is an elongated, fat, soft-bodied invertebrate". these last few days, as the potential indicator of the opinions of swinging voters on their impressions of australia's prime minister and opposition leader during a televised debate, and subsequently in political and media discourse, the worm has been a whole lot more.

at various times in the lead-up to the leaders' debate on sunday night, the poor little bugger has been out of favour with some, while others have been embracing the notion to "let us be friends of the worm". others still, in the green camp, have declared that the presence of worms is to be taken as a sure sign of good organic gardening practices.

of those most ill-disposed to the worm, prime minister john howard tops the list. he tried stridently to ensure the worm would feature in no or as few coverages of the debate as possible. alas for mr howard, the nine network reneged on its apparent agreement it had made with the australian press gallery, providers of the feed for the other stations to televise, and broadcasted the debate with the worm present. channel nine denies any agreement was made, and accused the press club, acting under the explicit orders of mr howard and liberal party director brian loughnane, of outright censorship as the nine network's feed of the debate was subsequently cut twice. notably, the worm was showing minimal levels of approval in response to mr howard's comments, and sometimes maximal levels for opposition leader kevin rudd's throughout most of the debate.

what truly baffles me is why mr howard and his party made any fuss whatsoever of the use of the worm in the televised debate in the first place - it has never been a reliable indicator of the outcome of an election. to make a such a commotion only served to increase suspicion of mr howard's reasons for disagreeing with the tool's use. their stance may end up doing them a disservice, by ruffling the feathers of the nine network in the midst of an election campaign, when a network's collective ego runs rather precious on matters of news and current affairs. the PBL-owned and usually slightly pro-government nine network may enact something of a shift in its delivery to a more favourable coverage to the opposition leader than the prime minister, a not insubstantial blow at this time.


the worm did fail entirely to notice one important thing. amidst all the banter of 'education revolutions', no one sought to point out that the on the backdrop and lectern the words 'leaders debate' lacked an apostrophe. godspeed you education revolution.

---

images: richard scarry's lowly worm; others public

howard, our father

mood: fatalistic.
state i'm in: peroni nastro azzuro... mmmmm.
tune: josé feliciano "you send me".


pessimism is taking hold. as things stand right now, and in spite of the much publicised polls that have been conducted all year, i am predicting another win for the coalition, and a return to power of john howard as prime minister. the margin will more than likely be reduced, but will still be significant.

we may even see, as we have seen before, a primary vote of greater than 50% achieved by the ALP, but i still think the majority of voters in the outer suburbs, so-called 'working families', or 'aspirational austalians', or dwellers of the ever-suffering 'mortgage belt' heartland, or however you choose to refer to these lemmings, will return to their safe haven, with their overbearing 'father'.

you see, people like to run free and even complain about or badmouth their father. they'll gladly spend their days rebelling against his word. but when he calls sternly, they all come running back for their supper, regardless of how ill-conceived and mindless his actions toward them have been previously.

mr howard is the penultimate fatherly figure of this country, and like any older father figure, he is paternalistic, unfashionable and out of touch. people respond to this positively. they do not want their father to seem to be in touch. they do not want him to be academic. they do not want him to be tender and compassionate. they want him to blindly defend them and provide them with their daily bread, regardless of who suffers in the process. he need not be rational, just quick to spit out an authoritarian and dismissive comment so redirecting the family unit back onto a safe and steady orientation, ignorant of any danger that may be looming over the hill.

if we want compassion, we'll ask our mothers. we've got plenty of them - each and every state premier is a health, safety and education-focussed mother figure. she's a bit softer, and she cares about our safety. premier anna bligh's number one concern at the moment is to ensure we have adequate water to drink.

right now, mr howard is the one seeming like a father figure. kevin rudd is just seeming more like a mother, too nerdy and compassionate for the masses, and when it comes to providing an air of bravado and toughness, he seems vacuous.

it's a shame mainstream australia is so rooted in this pattern. for right now we need a leader with some rationality, with some compassion, some academic vigour, and some sensitivity. our place in the world, and each of our places in this world, could be served so much more suitably by having such a man and such a party at the helm.

i hope with great sincerity that my defeatism will not be vindicated - i don't want to be the boring guy on the night of the election that says "i knew that was going to happen". nevertheless, after 27 years in this country, i remain pessimistic.

---

image: public

blog action day 2007

mood: inceptive.
state i'm in: unified.
tune: benjamin diamond "little scare"


today is international 'blog action day', an annual date when all blogs on the net are encouraged to unite with a single theme. the theme for blog action day this year is the environment, and making a positive change to it. so here is my contribution.

in light of the fact that this week marks the commencement of the australian federal election campaign proper, i shall use this occasion to illuminate something that has really pissed me off lately, a discrepancy that sorely needs addressing. that discrepancy is the needs of the our world and the complete lack of effort our current government goes to in attempting to help slow down or reverse the damage being done to our world.


last year, former US presidential candidate al gore's film 'an inconvenient truth' was released to much critical acclaim. whilst since release, it has attracted some legal scorn in british courts, notably that over half a dozen of the statements made were not entirely correct, or based on scientific theories that have yet to be proven as concrete (concrete in the scientific sense, that is), the film has been found to be based largely on a rock solid premise that the current trend in global climate change is of direct and indirect consequence of human activity. the same court has given approval for the film to be aired as compulsory viewing in british schools.

the ultimate vindication for mr gore's work however, must be the shared awarding of the 2007 nobel peace prize to himself and the intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC) "for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change". the nobel committee describes mr gore as "probably the single individual who has done most" to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be taken to tackle climate change.

of course our very own prime minister john howard, until recently himself a 'climate change sceptic', disagrees with the nobel committee. after all, what would they know, right. his description of 'an inconvenient truth' is that is just the work of a "peeved politician" and dismissed it outright. his and his party's criticisms of mr gore and his work and achievements continued in a similarly arrogant fashion.

astonishing as his dismissiveness of australian of the year and environmentalist tim flannery was, that he would discredit a nobel laureate's achievements, and the committee that upholds the belief that those laureates' achievements are of insurmountable significance to humankind, is a disgrace. as scott wrote in a response further down this page, "he should understand or at least embody empathy towards the mechanics and symbolism of the nobel prizes." but he and his government, deplorably, do not. it is utterly disrespectful and an embarrassment. shame on this arrogant government.


so how might this discrepancy be rectified? well, kevin07 is a step in the right direction for one.

---

image: http://blogactionday.org/

let the money talk and the bullshit walk

mood: low level anxiety.
state i'm in: feeling well finally, so ready to hit some sciencey stuff.
tune: faith evans "mesmerized" (freemasons vocal mix).


so, finally, it's on.

a couple of months ago i outlined what i believed would be the issues facing the electorate that could decide votes. let me revisit those issues.


http://outra-vez.blogspot.com/2007/07/hot-seat.html

1. national security

i believe that on election day more people will still believe that the coalition is better capable of handling this issue, by way of the fact that it represents a tougher more paternalistic approach. recall, people's perspectives rarely align with policy history, and are based more on emotion and impression. the last 12 to 24 months have nevertheless seen a steady erosion of the strength of this impression given by the coalition - AWB kickbacks, the continuing disaster in iraq, an increasingly disastrous front in afghanistan (including the death of an australian soldier), announcement of the withdrawal of british soldiers from these theatres, the mohammed haneef fiasco, the erosion of rights afforded to human life in australia (witnessed just yesterday by the illegal deportation of a new zealand citizen), a contradictory policy on human life, dependent on whether it is australian or non-australian of origin, the cornelia rau fiasco, the list goes steadily on...

the government has looked mean and cruel and willing to go to another country to kill for the reasons of great dubiety. the ALP has steered clear of threats to its image in this area, and has thus far managed to avoid looking weak, albeit unable to really provide much of an alternative vision in many areas. this is one area where a government led by kevin rudd will have to make some quick legwork in order to not look weak. i think they will.


2. the economy

"australians have never been better off" has been prime minister john howard's catchphrase these last years with reference to our booming economy. i think this perennial card-up-the-sleeve of mr howards has been successfully neutralised by mr rudd as he goes around exploiting that many people (the iconic 'working families') are in fact not doing so well, and are suffering from the squeeze of too much credit given at too cheap a price. even if only a small margin of people are genuinely 'up shit creek', with enough exposure the wider community will begin to worry that it could happen to them.

i also think that the electorate has wisened up a little over the last few years, possibly engaged due to rising interest rates and living expenses, and is now more aware that our economic prosperity is in very little way the result of coalition policies, but linked to economic reforms undertaken throughout the 1980s coupled with the ubiquitous resources boom. in fact, the whole world is booming - the only countries that can right now be said to be in recession are rwanda and zimbabwe. once again, mr rudd has used the fact that no such boom lasts forever to engage the electorate and get them a little worried, and eager to hear about policies of a more long term nature. the more you get, the more you worry about keeping about it, and mr rudd has been ready to exploit the ever-paranoid australian people.

the fact that young people are becoming less likely to ever afford their own home, and that the government has been seen to have done nothing to rectify this, has done them no favours with younger voters, who are now appear to be flocking to the ALP


3. industrial relations

two words: 'work choices'. a no-brainer of wide-brown-land-esque proportions. more than any other issue, this has polarised the electorate, and has painted the government with a dark mean streak like no other. this will cost the government more votes than any other single issue. and so it should i believe - a government's workforce should not be made more mobile by purely making them easier to fire. a balance of fluidity with education and training (where the government has failed colossally) must be reached.


4. who are you really voting for?

most of the big events on this front have already been played out, prematurely. nevertheless, that have had the effect of giving the electorate the impression that a coalition vote is a vote for peter costello in the longer term, an impression which is now not likely to be rescindable. i don't actually believe mr costello would ever lead the government, even if the coalition is re-elected, yet i am sure he will lead the opposition if the government finds itself there on november 25th, before he is chewed up and spat out as a footnote to liberal party leadership history. as far as the wider community is concerned, they will not digest the idea of a prime minister costello easily, although i must admit there are elements of mr costello's political character that i am disposed towards.

a vote for the ALP is a vote for mr rudd.


5. APEC

it's been and gone, and served to cement the impression in people's minds that mr rudd is leading the country and setting the national agenda from oppostion. he upstaged the government on several fronts, in particular when addressing chinese president hu jintao in mandarin, including very chinese 'family jokes'.

above all else however, the lasting memory of APEC will be when members of the cast of the ABC's 'the chaser's war on everything' easily gained access to the 'red zone'. i found this to be the height of hilarity, and entirely legitimate given these individuals were on what amounted to a journalistic pursuit to expose perceived weaknesses in the security of a gathering of many of the world's most important leaders.


so that's my summary to date.


i found myself having a casual chat to mr rudd back in 2005 and at the time expressed my enthusiasm for any leadership aspirations he might have, and pledged that i would be likely to support him in such an an instance that he be running for prime minister. at this point my vote will probably go to the ALP, but there are several issues where a policy that i believe is completely ill-founded, and is not likely to be just a diversion in order to avoid direct confrontation with the coalition over a wedge issue, could send my vote in another direction (although not the coalition's). so let the money talk and bullshit walk - this is going to get annoying fast!

---

image: ALP

just so full of shit

mood: calm.
state i'm in: congratulations messrs gore and pachauri.
tune: madonna "swim".


within two days of his announcements for a "new settlement" on reconciliation between indigenous and non-indigenous australians, prime minister john howard has already reverted back to his dogmatic self.

naturally his announcements garnered a large amount of dismay and bemused questioning from the media. some quarters have been especially cynical given the timing of the event and his immovable resistance in the past to anything really resembling an attempt at reconciliation. "what people don't understand, or haven't accepted, is that i've always believed in reconciliation," mr howard replies to them. however he reminds them of his unwillingness to embrace the so-called "old paradigm", that being anything other than practical measures, notably emotive and symbolic gestures. mr howard, with his typically narrow and distorted view of australian history, continues that to him, this "involves a repudiation of the australia i have grown up in and loved, and i just couldn't do that and i will never do that".

so when he "will never do that", while what he is promoting now as policy is precisely "that", how can the man truly be taken seriously. in particular, with portents of the coming campaign littering the sphere of public interest, how can he be viewed as anything but just so full of shit.

lookout christmas!

mood: pretty bright.
state i'm in: feeling better.
tune: indigo "there's only you"... thanks kats!


it looks like i will back in retail for the '07 silly season. just going to brush up my skills with a few lessons from pats stone...





bless her!

what's going on?

mood: not the right one for tidying up this brothel of a room.
state i'm in: epigastric pain.
tune: seals and croft "summer breeze"... makes me feel fine, blowing through the jasmine in my mind.


what's going on, mr howard?

a year ago, almost to the day, prime minister john howard addressed the 50th anniversary dinner for 'quadrant' magazine, a bastion of conservative authorship, and declared that of the organisation's causes it has chosen to take up arms on behalf of, "none is more important to me than the role it has played as counterforce to the black armband view of australian history". he is here referring to the treatment of indigenous australians over the past 200 years - the fairly widespread opinion that it has been a mistreatment. these comments, and many such comments made by mr howard over his time in public life, are in accordance with his steadfast refusal to grant a public apology to indigenous australians.

so you can imagine the surprise i felt when i read of comments made by mr howard today in an address to think tank 'the sydney insititute'. he admitted he had struggled with reconciliation in his time as prime minister, and accepted responsibility for his part in so-called "low points" in relations between indigenous and non-indigenous australians. could this be a softening in his position on this aspect of his so-called 'culture wars', a 'road to damascus' experience for the prime minister of sorts.

mr howard went on to give grounds for his stance over the years as its being "an artefact of who i am and the time in which i grew up". he admits the paramount struggle as being "that reconciliation required a condemnation of the australian heritage i had always owned". in a nihilistic, almost mother teresa-esque moment, it appears as if mr howard lays bare his admission that the beliefs that the man publicly clings to so strongly are based not on rational thought, not on any rock of evidence, but on ideology and emotion - and thence highly likely to be false. is this a man, who, in the throws of defeat, is begging the coming annals for mercy.

today, mr howard announced that:

if re-elected, i will put to the australian people within 18 months a referendum to formally recognise indigenous australians in our constitution - their history as the first inhabitants of our country, their unique heritage of culture and languages, and their special, though not separate, place within a reconciled, indivisible nation.

indigenous affairs, as with other concerns aptly labelled by political journalist laurie oakes as 'boutique issues', have long been the stronghold of the ALP. as far as the major parties go, areas like the environment, the arts, GLBT rights and indigenous affairs are areas where the electorate sees the ALP as more often associated with being supportive and progressive, regardless of whether their policy reflects that perception or not. over recent years we have seen a steady shift of the electorate in opposite directions: poorer, less educated working class folk are now more inclined to vote for the coalition then ever before, whilst the ALP has never experienced such popularity with the wealthy and educated, the intelligentsia and the cultural elite. perhaps mr howard's attempts to encourage us to "find room in our national life to formally recognise the special status of aboriginal and torres strait islanders as the first peoples of our nation" is merely a ploy to win back some in the upper echelons of society who may have lost faith in the party after their recent paternalistic and regressive interventions in the northern territory.

can this claim of mr howard to be indigenous australia's new playfellow really be taken seriously? for a man of such strong cultural conviction to suddenly change his tune almost entirely begs demands of an explanation, and not a simple response of "oh, he's finally come 'round". but then knowing mr howard, and having read the speech, i am inclined to think that this is a combination of "well, i tried to" sentiment, with a healthy dose of "he's just so full of shit".

gone bush...

mood: tired (thanks napoleon).
state i'm in: sick of erectile dysfunction.
tune: groove armada feat. angie stone 'feel the same'.


suffien and i spent a weekend at mt crosby housesitting for friends emma and clay as they ducked off for an interstate engagement. here's some pics from 'life on the ranch' and a hike to nearby lake manchester.












looking west from hilltop near manchester dam; looked quintessentially australian











"once a jolly swagman..."











pastoral scene











i really liked the carpet of feathery white flowers coating the hillside











the volvo and suffien, with all the asian-ness he can muster (yes, it's a joke)











the volvo gets dirty











branch of lake manchester; pretty nondescript bushland around the area otherwise











breakfast is served!











the chooks, kept in line by the rooster in the centre, napoleon (who also kept me awake at 4 in the morning)











monte and bella, the faithful beagles, in one of their quieter moments, shortly before we lost power for the night.

---

images: mine

rough decline...

mood: empty.
state i'm in: a little gutted.
tune: lux "northern lights".





this afternoon bore the brunt of a steady decline in my emotional state.

with exams in the not too distant future, i can feel the anxieties of it all beginning to boil to the surface. these coming exams will be horrible. i think i will pass them, but i also know the six or seven weeks between now and when i am drunk at the post-exam party will be hellish. i feel rather battered by this renal module; it's interesting, but there seems no end to the complexity. after this there is still reproduction and endocrinology to go, which may be heavier still.

adding to this is the uneasiness of my imminent transition to a more clinically-oriented education. as i listen to stories from those a little further down their educational path, i am left with a feeling of dubiety - will i have the nous for what lies ahead; will i be able to impress my seniors and have my aptitude for the game looked upon favourably; will my eagerness be too dramatically blunted by the litany of gomers that languish, shambolic and recalcitrant, on my path ahead. right now, for all the anxieties, having sat in lecture theatres and tutorial rooms for nigh on 6 years, i feel somewhat safe in the groves of academe. the excitement of the sharp difference between current educational methods and those ahead, as well as the possibility of the delivery being in rural parts of the state as well as overseas, is enough for me to view this forthcoming change with a net enthusiasm, but i remain fretful nevertheless.

right now things feel tough. these emotions are causing my feelings for the rest of life to suffer. aside from not experiencing much of a social life wherein i am possessed of my normal relaxed demeanour, i am finding myself feeling ever more anhedonic toward time spent with my family and suffien. this is hurtful and unpleasant. i am about to enter a dark trench, and there is much uncertainty about what lies on the other side should i make it out. thankfully, i have just learnt this afternoon that i will have over two months of holidays at years end. a rare moment of clemency from the medical school.

---

image: public