|

Materi

By Kelly Christie _-

et :

Prato once said, “the greatest wealth
is to live content with little.” Is that why
we're such a miserable bunch here in
North America? With the Christmas
break just around the corner, marketing
departments and advertising companies
have really upped the ante. Diamonds are
more iridescent, tools more ergonomic,
and toys... well they’re more versatile
with more moving parts than children
themselves.

With our dollar soaring, it seems
that Canadians of the 21“ century need
more than ever. Eight year olds need
cell phones; teens need Xboxes, PSPs,
PS3s and Wiis; and adults need HDTV,

 

     
  

 

wen ee

DVDs, PCs, MP3s and numerous other

abbreviated frivolities.

When my parents asked me
what I wanted for Christmas this year, I
was able to think of a few menial items
to tack to their refrigerator shopping list.
When my mother asked me what I needed
the most, my list diminished significantly.
In fact, it became nonexistent. I could
not think of one thing that I truly needed.
Not one item was of crucial importance
to either my academic success, or my
mundane day-to-day living. There I
was, dreaming up things, creating a list
of gluttonous overindulgences to satisfy
the need for holiday consumption. I was
appalled at myself. Has this culture, based

on momentary gratification, become so
all-consuming that even those opposed to
it cannot escape its absurd demands? It’s
more than a little frightening.

Spending the summer in Africa
gave me more than just culture shock
and a tan; it gave me some wicked
perspective. I think that coming from
an economically stable country, I was
incredibly surprised that people who had
nothing could be so... happy. These are
people that I had pitied for not having the
means to own SUVs and mountain bikes
and the glorious microwavable delights
that are so abundant in the first world.
But these people, who lived in the dirt
and had never seen a digital camera, were
more contented with their lives and more
giving than most of us on our best days,
here in BC. Not that poverty is something
to be minimized, but perhaps we need to
ask a new question: is materialism really
how we want to define the validation of
our lives?

If the season is truly about
giving, why not donate time and energy
to those in need? As corny as it sounds,
we have become a society of money-
grubbing “uberconsumers” who have
forgotten how to really give. Our idea of
selfless generosity is taking a jaunt to the
local mall and filling shopping bag after
shopping bag with cheap, useless, plastic
crap. Then we take it home, complain
about the hassle of wrapping it all up—
don’t even get me started on the waste of
paper—and then we distribute this junk

while patting ourselves on the back for
how happy we have made those around
us. Our gift-giving is as thoughtless as our
blind need for receiving.

What if this Christmas we
all decided to give our time to the
community, or our money to charity?
Committing a random act of kindness
yields more honest gratification than the
giving away of 20 plastic blenders. Isn’t
it giving what it’s all about? I am deeply
saddened by the degree to which we value
things over people. It seems that with
every passing year, the demand to create
demand grows exponentially, while
the personal reflection that comes with
spending quality time with loved ones
gets increasingly lost in the fray.

That is why I will be spending
this Christmas without presents and
ribbons and paper and bows. I will be
vacationing with my family, far from
the crowded shopping malls and endless
commercials that yell loudly the slogans
of interest-free credit and no money down.
I challenge you all to do the same. Forego
the mindless buying and do something
truly good this Christmas. Spend time
with family, and engage in activities that
truly warm your heart and bring you
closer, in the giving spirit of the season. If
you feel the need to spend, spend, spend
this Christmas, why not consider donating
to a charity in someone’s name? I’m sure
Oxfam would be able to put that money to
better use than that friend who just can’t
live without that new stereo system.

 

Miga-chu,

By Laura Kelsey, Opinions Editor

| say nee how to the official
mascots of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic
Games!

Almost immediately after their
unveiling on the morning of November
27, Internet message boards flooded
with mixed reactions to the three new
characters. But by saying mixed, it is
meant that the response was negative with
a very light sprinkling of praise.

These new mascots look more
like Asian cartoon characters than
West Coast icons. The fact that they are
not concrete animals, just imaginary
creatures, reflects the ongoing theme of
2010’s unrealistic goals and confused
outlook. Sumi (an animal spirit) is a
horrible rip-off of Haida culture; Quatchi
(a sasquatch) looks like a cross between
the Kokanee spokesfoot and Barney
Gumble from the Simpsons; and Miga (a
sea bear) looks like the result of a panda
bear and cat mating gone awry.

Two of the creatures, Sumi and
Miga, can transform. Is the “transforming
creatures” idea just a grab for more dough?
(“Well, you’ve got the bear-form of Miga,
but what about the whale-form? Gotta
collect ‘em all!) Or was it that VANOC
just couldn’t make up their minds about
which animal to exploit?

The selection for the official
mascot can be difficult. The chosen
creature has to be able to participate in
all of the Olympic and Paralympic sports.
It also must be appealing to children—as
kids are the biggest market for the mascots
in toys and apparel. This explains why a

I Choose You...
As the 2010 Mascot

salmon was not the best candidate, as fish
would only be able to participate in the
Paralympic sports due to the fact they do
not have two legs. Anything edible was
also nota good choice, because whichever
meat market the mascot reflected might
take a financial hit since children would
protest to eating “Sammy the Olympic

Salmon” or “Venison the Olympic
Fawn.”

A trip to the 2010’s mascot
website offers a more thorough

introduction to the three freaks of nature,
and passing a cursor over their pictures
reveals the distinct voices of each. Sumi
sounds like he is excitedly discussing
VANOC’s habit of legally pursuing small
businesses in Vancouver (Sue me!!),

Quatchi repeats his name in a voice
vaguely reminiscent of Ludo from the
movie Labyrinth, and Miga is a blatant
rip-off of Pikachu from Pokemon.

Internet polls suggested the
“spirit bear’ was a popular favourite
amongst the public, along with the killer
whale, harbour seal, and raven.

The two previous Canadian
Olympic mascots were Amik the Beaver
(1976, Montreal), which looked like a
turd on a stick, and the brother and sister
bear team of Hidy and Howdy (1988,
Calgary), who probably hindered the
Spirit Bear’s chance at becoming the
mascot of Vancouver.

The Olympics are a venue for
sport, but they are also an excellent place

Be Me rie 8 st

   
 

¢

to showcase national and international
issues. VANOC had the chance to present
a mascot that could make a strong
statement, but they seem to have enough
controversy on their plate. An Inukshuk
holding a club and a dead seal would have
been a good representation of Canadian
life. Drawing from current events,
“Timmy the Taser” could’ve been the
new mascot to greet foreign guests at the
airport. Other more valid representations
of West Coast life include:

e “Hastings the Hobo”
“Jimmy the Needle”
“Pokey the Pine Beetle”
“Ricky the Rice Wine”
“Peter MacKay the Dog”
“Emerson the Defective MP”
“Bobby the Bedbug”

Whatever people think about
the choice, everyone can breathe a sigh
of relief with the discovery that VANOC
did not go the Power Rangers route that
Beijing 2008 did—or did they? (Miga
could be Jingjing the Panda’s sister.) But
unlike Vancouver, Beijing did choose
animals—fish, panda, antelope and
swallow—that are edible—probably
because trying to find an animal the
Chinese don’t eat would prove far too
challenging. They even added Haunhaun,
a “child of fire,’ for easy accessible
cooking of the other mascots.

So, like them or hate them, get
ready for another two years of Sumi,
Quatchi, and Miga bombardment. Don’t
worry; they are only out to kill you—with
love.

|