The heart of Grace - PSLE 276.

 

It’s an interesting read. Senior Political Correspondent Grace Ho was definitely at the top of her game when it comes to PSLE. She scored 276. Let that sink in first...

That number would be any parent’s dream here. Because that number will get you anywhere in the Singapore School System. And not just anywhere, you will be able to apply to the best schools (even if it may be a considered as a lousy school). 

Imagine Simon Cowell slamming on the golden buzzer for your extraordinary performance on stage. And Simon knows talent when he sees one. An endorsement from him is as good as PSLE scores hitting above 270 in our local academic stage. Mind you, Grace got 276. 

Well, there was no golden buzzer for Grace. Although she was overjoyed when she showed her form teacher her results, her teacher however said: “We think you could have done better.” Yes, 276 is just not good enough. 

Grace’s reaction is best captured in her own words. ““This was because two years prior, the school had produced a national top pupil with a score of 288. I was too stunned by her remark to consider that by “we”, she might have meant only herself or the school principal.””

“Instead, I thought I had fallen 12 points short of society’s expectations of me. I felt like a failure.”

Imagine that again, you have topped the school, with 276, but you feel like a failure. Well, maybe even in the best school, if you fall below their expectation, instead of feeling self-validated, you are made to feel lousy.

 

While Grace wrote that “life is not defined by PSLE results”, the truth is that the Freudian slips are deafening if you do not make the mark. Parents may give your child a sympathetic ear for her or him not making the grade, but that same sympathy would turn to unreserved rage when their own child fails to make the mark. 

I know this, because I was one of the parents I am talking about, when my son handed me his PSLE results many years ago (he is now taking his A levels). 

Can we blame the teacher? Can we blame the parents? Can we blame the school system? Can we blame meritocracy? Can we blame me? 

I think we are all running the same one-track race towards a unidimensional definition of success in a hyper-competitive society that is obsessed with economic growth measured by a myopic metric. 

Simon Kuznet, the award winning economist who revolutionised econometrics, once asked: “What are we growing? And why?”. 

Most times, our governments get caught with the first question, and forget about the second, because growing for growing sake can be all-consuming and highly addictive. What’s more, when you are at the top, your resounding achievement blinds and deafens all. Who doesn’t savour that mountain-top high, right?

Alas, this race starts from the home. The child will compete for their parents’ attention. The parents will compete with other parents for their attention. The school will compete with other schools for attention. The government will compete with other governments for attention. 

And this endless, hyper-competitive cycle goes back to the child. It starts all over again from there. As he or she grows up, and enters the workforce, this cycle gets even more demanding, at times, soul-sapping. But it never stops, because, like they say, you snooze, you lose. 

The unspoken toxicity in our meritocratic society is not that our children don’t try hard enough. It is how their hard enough is just not enough by way of comparison no matter how hard they have given of their best. Such society defines them by one ruler, that is, their grades on paper, and not by how different they are from one another, and how such differences, if placed on a kinder clock of development, would blossom at their own time. 

This is somewhat similar to what Grace wrote: “In school, as in life, and work, you will face pressure from people who say 276 isn’t enough even if they can’t hit the mark themselves.”

She added: “More than 20 years ago, my best wasn't good enough for my teacher. There are days when I still don't hit the mark, but I'm okay. No matter what your results are, no matter what anyone says to you, hang in there. You'll be okay, too.”

Well, that’s good, timeless advice from the heart of grace. And it is an advice that will always hit the mark because it is based on building the relationship rather than keeping scores. 

And as long as we as parents bear that in mind, and in our hearts, our children will flourish at his or her own time. This is because it is not run on society’s undifferentiated clock of development, one that is always in a hurry, but by one defined by unconditional love, where relationships are always placed above grades.

 

Yale-NUS Closure - Part III.

 

Yale-NUS college is not letting go. 508 members (about 60% of the alumni) have signed a statement “questioning the National University of Singapore’s (NUS) decision to close the college.” 

Minister Chan has told parliament on Sept 13 that money is not the main motivation behind the decision to merge YNC with USP. It was a factor though. YNC costs $90,800 a year for each student. The govt subsidised $70,300 a year. The student pays the rest of it, that is, $20,500 being its tuition fees. 

Yes, a liberal arts education is rather expensive, but “comparable institutions overseas will cost the Singaporean student four times as much.” That was an extract from the alumni statement, and it would be a greater deprivation for students from poor background. “Additionally, those who go overseas may not return, thereby exacerbating the brain drain in Singapore.”

Shanice Stanislaus, who graduated in 2017, said: “They keep saying it’s money or accessibility, but I think it’s more than that. Instead of just coming out and facing these questions, I watched NUS respond in silence or with carefully crafted statements.”

Lesson? I have three in fact, and they start with the letter Y-N-C.

1) Y - yah, WH-Y? This charade has been going for long enough. It’s been one month now (since 27 Aug), and money was initially the main consideration. At least that was the impression I got. 

And then, it got relegated to being one of the factors, as Mr Chan puts it in Parliament, but without any further clarification. I thought Parliamentary debate or discussion was supposed to clear the air. It however left it thick, heavy, and at times, hazy. 

Next comes the assurance of a road map for liberal arts education in the new merger, akin to YNC 2.0. But todate, the alumni questioned why “the institution currently has no website, curriculum and admissions or financial aid policy despite being scheduled to open next year.” 

It is like you are given a 1000-piece puzzle to assemble. The whole alumni then rush to participate in the hope of seeing the full picture. Yet, as they piece it together, after weeks of patience and due diligence, they discover that the puzzle box comes with 500 pieces short. It was not meant to be completed in the first place. You then walk away feeling shortchanged. And I call that the dumbstruck or flabbergasted effect. 

2) N - it stands for “Not On My Watch”. YNC will come to an end in 2025, and 2021 intake will be the last batch. The governing board is making the transition for its new intake next year. It is hoped that those affected (and concerned) will just let it go silently into the night.

But, besides the gobsmacked YNC’s president and 60% of the alumni, recently we have another protest arising, and it comes from a group of faculty members from the college. 

They too released an open letter “disagreeing with the de facto closure of the college.” They broke rank, broke the silence and broke the alabaster flask, releasing the tuberose fragrance of a bold united front, standing together to reject the justification given for the closure. 

It reports, ““they also questioned the school’s ability to ensure a “full Yale-NUS experience” for the remaining cohorts of students, and publicly condemned what they described as a “breach of trust” by decision-makers from the NUS.””

Mind you, the 19-page letter states: “Given the obvious negative outcomes for Yale-NUS College’s many stakeholders, who collectively put their trust in Yale and NUS...and given the many questions that remain unanswered about the rationale, process and timing of the decision, we express our disappointment, sadness and disagreement with the decision to close the Yale-NUS College.”

Breach of trust in a trusted institution is a strong word to use, especially when it is used by those who work within that same institution. And it makes for even more strident protest when one faculty member stood up and hollered - “Show me the money!” 

Well, the more refined construction of that is this: “If the NUS leadership thinks that Yale-NUS college was a declining institution, then show us the metrics because as scholars, we work with evidence.” Ouch.

Now, if YNC is fading into the night, that is, sooner or later, because the powers-that-be has spoken, it is definitely not going quietly into the night. At least the fight at the frontline is this rallying cry - “Not On Our Watch!”

And finally, Y-N...

3) C is for Cost. No, not money. It is a value far beyond that. It is the cost of an education, one involving the liberal arts, an interdisciplinary education to open minds, for all and sundry, regardless of your background, and whether you stay in a landed property or a rented HDB flat. 

It is a universal understanding of the world not just for purposes of a vocation, profession or technical skill. It aims to nurture connoisseurs with an eye for compassion, not technocrats with a measuring tape. It is a desire to understand beyond the utility of a subject that is designed to fit narrowly in the marketplace. 

An education like that serves to broaden the mind, plumb the depth of one’s heart seeking for meaning beyond the economic metric. The benefit of such an education may not be immediately obvious. It may not even produce the results desired by those who impatiently shake the money tree, hoping for the juicy fruit to fall onto one’s lap in an orgasmic spree. 

But, as Peter Ooi, who graduated in 2018, puts it: “the benefits of Yale-NUS might be hard to quantify. But Singapore should not abandon a project just because its outcomes are less tangible, or because it is too impatient to wait for its fruits to ripen.”

Well, that is the cost of a liberal arts education. One that seeks to impart life’s lessons worthy of a free person. One that aims to discipline her down-to-earth pupil to question, challenge, provoke and confront, not to be echo-chamber, but a city on the hill, a guiding light. 

Let me end with the words of abolitionist and poet Ralph Waldo Emerson for your evening digest. 

“Society is a joint-stock company, in which the members agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater. The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but names and customs.” 

Good night.

 

Scholarship, meritocracy and equality.

162 students received their scholarships yesterday, and some of them are those who have worked their way up from Normal stream to ITE and Poly. Their stories are inspiring. 

Steven, 19, comes from a family of 10 and his mother is the sole breadwinner. His father had to stop working due to health reasons. Steven was an active member of the student council at ITE Graduation 2021 ceremony yesterday. Steven received the Tay Eng Soon Scholarship.

Fiqri Nur Haziq Abu Bakar is another. He was a nurse during Covid-19 pandemic. The 21-year-old graduated from Ngee Ann Poly last year and “spent six months caring for migrant workers infected by Covid-19.” Fiqri was from the normal stream and he hopes this inspires other students from the normal stream too. 

Another ITE student, Koh Yan Xi, 19, also received a scholarship, the Ngee Ann Kongsi Gold Medal in recognition of her achievements. She had “to juggle a part-time job at McDonald’s with co-leading a class entrepreneurship project to sell vacuum-packed soup and using the proceeds to purchase food for school cleaners.” 

There are many more, and I guess that is the trampoline effect where, regardless of which station in life you are from, you stand an equal chance to bounce your way up just as long as you work towards it and don’t give up.

Let me share that I once had a conversation with a young adult and he told me that if one doesn’t work hard in Singapore, he will end up in ITE or Poly. I shook my head and told him that education ought to build character first and foremost before knowledge. For without character, your knowledge is all puffed up and it serves no purpose in society except to divide it further. 

We as a society suffer the consequences of our own pride, and a prideful mindset alienates humanity. It is not just self-serving, it is self-destroying. 

Ultimately, we can choose either to look at society from a one-track, chronologically challenged mindset, or look at it from a wide lens when the sun shines on everyone, regardless of schools, status or stream. 

But, what is chronologically challenged Mike? Well, it is a clock preset by the meritocratic discipline master with a deadline or quota to meet. Each child is thus put through the grind, that same and uniform grind, even when each child is gifted differently. One indiscriminate ruler is therefore used to measure all heights, even though each child grows at their own pace. 

And then that child is forced to compete with the others, while he carries loads of expectations on his back, all the time hoping to make his parents proud, and trying in vain to find acceptance and a sense of identity and belonging in a society that is wound up by a less than kinder development clock. 

This brings me to what Minister Chan said the day before. He invited all parents to take stock. He asked us to have “more frank conversations with our children and families on the definition of success.”

He took himself as an example. “As a parent myself, I have come to realise that success must be defined by helping my children realise their own potential, developing their own strengths and helping them to be confident in themselves.”

He said: “The greatest assurance parents can give their children is to provide them with confidence to find their own way.”

Those words are power words. They are a good reminder for parents with children, and a timely comfort for children yearning for understanding. 

Let me just say that I have always thought LKY was right to say that a rising economic tide raises all boats. He is still right about that now, for what good is democracy if you can’t even feed your family. 

But, like meritocracy, if it goes unchecked, or on autopilot, it risks crossing a threshold where the society is divided, between the haves and have-nots, the rich and the poor. It is just a matter of time. 

And the spillover effect of that is a progressive downward slide, which yields another risk, that is, a society in crisis. We are in fact leading the trend here as our inequality gap is one of the widest, compounded by a high cost of living. 

While Minister Chan made good sense when he said that “the greatest assurance parents can give their children is to provide them with confidence to find their own way,” yet if the landscape that the child is supposed to navigate has not changed, or has changed little, with a gaping income/social hole, then isn’t the child embarking on an impossible journey which may just bring him back to square one?

And that is why I highlighted the scholarships awarded to students of different backgrounds, and that is one of the crucial steps (amongst many) to taking a wide lens view of things where the sun truly shines on all, on each and every child, regardless. 

For the wide lens’ view sees the whole journey of a child’s potential, while the microscopic one sees only a particular point in time, and on that narrow/rigid basis, it judges a life that has yet to bloom for a lifetime.

 

RVHS II

 

The RVHS news has left an indelible mark on the soul of the nation. Most are still reeling from it. 

Today’s news confirms that the 16-year-old had attempted suicide in 2019 when he was in secondary 2. He was admitted to IMH then for a psychiatric assessment. That was revealed in the preliminary hearings yesterday. 

The boy is currently held under remand at Complex Medical Centre in Changi Prison for psychiatric evaluation. Our Law Minister said: “Preliminary investigations suggest that he purchased (the axe) online. But we will know the full facts only after investigations are completed.”

I will leave it as that. I believe due process should take its own course. What however caught my attention is some comments made about the incident in ST today. 

One human resource practitioner said: “We are not equipped as students in this competitive society. We are very focused on the typical Singaporean path to success - to graduate and find a job. People aren’t interested in mental health matters.”

Another commentary from a project manager in her 40s said: “I’m worried for my nephews and nieces. It reminds me of what happens in Western countries.” 

She may have in mind the divisive society in US, resulting in numerous gun incidents in schools. I guess there is a potently dangerous mix between one’s mental state, which is largely genetic/hereditary, and the trigger points one faces over time, which is largely environmental. 

And I wonder, what is “the typical Singaporean path to success” anyway? To graduate and find a job? 

Is that our kid’s main preoccupation, with the other curriculum activities merely a form of diversionary means to getting extra points in order to meet the endgoal of getting good grades, finding good jobs, earning good pay, and snapping up good class bungalows?

Is that typical path to success no different from turning us into competitive race horses from the get-go as early as primary six with blinders tightly attached so that our kids’ focus is mainly one-dimensional? 

Now, I have to caveat (to some extent) that my musing above has nothing or little to do with the RVHS incident, because I still believe that it is a one-off event. 

But, having said that, and acknowledging that one sparrow does not a summer make, should we then play with chance and leave out seriously (and not superficially) reassessing the various trigger points in society en route to making sure that our kids excel academically first, beyond and before engaging in other soul-enriching pursuits that usually take a longer timeline to develop or mature? 

I guess, on an alarmist mindset, if we are on a collision course to creating an alienated, atomised and one-dimensional society, where we are still deeply biased towards meritocratic achievements for our kids, while paying lip service to other equally (if not more so) meaningful pursuits, then we cannot discount the grim reality that such one-off event may become a little more frequent over time. 

Yet, this is surely a case where “one-off” is one too many, and we cannot afford to put our innocent child (playing to our pre-canned script) to such heartbreaking future prospect. Because that child the next time round may just be our child. 

Alas, one sparrow may not a summer make, but it may just be that one canary in the coal mine to seriously warn us about a possible unfolding of a future we as parents would dread most should it ever come to pass. Mind you, every event, one-off or otherwise, has a beginning, however innocent, and every beginning has a lesson, however routine, and every lesson calls for our due diligence. Is our diligence to act due yet? 

I guess “continuity is a human right”, and it may also lead to a human wrong, and by that time, I hope it is not too late. 

Let me leave you with a father’s concerns for his son in a book I bought yesterday, entitled “The Unbroken Thread - Discovering the Wisdom of Tradition in an Age of Chaos” by author Sohrab Ahmari.

“Here, then, is the dilemma of a young father. How do I transmit to my son the value of permanent ideals against a culture that will tell him that whatever is newest is also best, that everything is negotiable and subject to contract and consent, that there is no purpose to our common life but to fulfill his desires? How do I reinforce that fragile thread linking my son to a life of human obligations and responsibility? To a life anchored in stable and unchangeable ideals? To a life, in other words, filled with the goods secured by tradition?”

Mm...existential food for thought for your mid-week.

 

China cracking down on the tuition industry.

 

“Tuition doesn’t necessarily create successful people. It creates successful test-takers.”

Well, there’s some truth in there. That’s the strange thing about taking a test. When it becomes the main thing, where all our successes are measured by it, it ironically fails to measure what it was designed in the first place to measure. 

It is either the wrong benchmark to start with, like a ladder that leans on the wrong side of the wall. Or, it is no doubt a useful benchmark, but in an unequal society, the rule of the game gets rigged by those who can afford it to the advantage of their kids at the expense of other kids whose parents are unable to afford it. 

The reality is, as a nation, we are obsessed with measuring intelligence (because we think that is the most practical way to success). But it is the kind of intelligence that mainly aces academic assessments. It is to some extent one-dimensional (though I don’t deny its positive spillover effect). And no use denying it anyway, for that piece of paper generally determines where our kid will end up. Most times, grades are destiny.

Now, let me say that I have nothing against tuition. My kids go for tuition, selectively of course, that is, not all subjects. If you get a good one, you can see how they progressively improve. It works and it produces tangible, measurable results too. Most relevantly, it meets the benchmark set by a fiercely meritocratic society.

But, another reality is, the multi-billion tuition industry (in China, the investment reached $100b) is a creation of decades-long state policy. And that’s the busy hand of the market working its magic too. For where there is profit to be had, you can expect savvy businessmen to dive into it. 

And you may have regulations to ring-fence it, but human ingenuity, driven by a market mindset, will always find ways to thrive by poking those regulation loopholes (that is why President Xi is going cold turkey on them, forcing them to turn into a non-profit industry, thereby radically pulling the bling out of their zing). 

In any event, such relationship between a meritocratic state and its tuition industry is like the symbiotic relationship between the Nile Crocodile and the Egyptian plover or the Water Buffalo and the Oxpecker. 

Plover birds settle comfortably in the open mouth of crocodiles to pick up meat stuck in their teeth. The Crocs get a free cleaning and the plover, well, free lunch.

Same here with Buffalo and Oxpecker. The former allows the latter to nestle on them so that they pick up tics for food. For the Buffalo, it’s free grooming. 

So it is with the meritocratic state and its tuition industry - you provide the private education to the kids for a profit and I collect taxes from your gains. That kind of mutuality often goes unchecked because who wants to rock the boat when both are profiting from it, right? 

But overtime, both suffer from the myopia of excesses. That is where that quote comes in - “Tuition doesn’t necessarily create successful people. It creates successful test-takers.” 

When the test becomes the rule, the rule is inevitably stretched beyond proportionality. That’s where a deleterious form of obsession comes in and turns a noble industry into a race of intense competition just to meet ever-higher bar of academic excellence, thereby turning frantic registrations by parents who can afford into insane profit for the industry.

 

The collateral (or actual) damage? Well, it is usually the kids who are unwittingly turned into a means to an idolised end. 

Sure, the result is glorious, and those who are given heaps of tuition due to a socioeconomic advantage over the poorer kids will reap the full benefits. But what you eventually get from the myopia of excesses is an even more unequal society blighted by a gnawing misattribution, that is, one where we equate success with a one-trick pony, leaving all other equally worthy skills or talent by the wayside to fend for themselves. 

That kind of intense competition, like baby and the bathwater, tends to sideline those late bloomers indiscriminately, leaving a broken trail of potentially good achievers behind because they are seen as under-performers. You can thus see how some kids at that age under such stress and pressure can find life so meaninglessly bleak. 

Oh, before I forget, and before I drone further along by myself, the quote and the thought above are inspired by the article below written by former teacher Ng Shi Wen and Assoc Professor Gerard Sasges. It’s a thought-provoking article. Read it if you have time. A good morning digest if you are a parent. 

Going back, truly, every life has a lifelong capacity to grow. Underscore “lifelong”. Different kid, different leap. For some take the leap earlier, others later. And they all cover different distances in this lifelong journey. It’s no competition here. 

And like they said, if you want to go fast, go alone, but if you want to go far, go together. That’s another good quote for our society, especially the state, to bear in mind. 

Our children are born to excel at a pace that is not determinedly uniform. They are not cogwheels in an assembly line going at a pace preset against an unsympathetic meritocratic stopwatch. They are human beings yearning to connect, grow and explore with our understanding and support. 

Alas, we tend to celebrate youthful success but forget that true and enduring success comes to many at different ages. We should therefore celebrate ageless success too. And with a kinder clock of development, we, as a society, can go farther, much farther, because it is not about going at it alone, leaving many behind, but travelling together, leaving none behind.

 

Dsidain for the less educated in America.

Are we looking down on the relatively less educated? Is this the new prejudice? As more of us have a tertiary degree, or advanced degree, are those without, merely armed with a diploma, less of value, character and worth? 

It is ironic that the one who wrote the article - “Disdain for the less educated is the last acceptable prejudice” - is a highly respected, well known, and eminently educated professor from, well, you guessed it, Harvard...where else right?

But what Michael J. Sandel has to say is a message of great urgency and importance to us all, not just Americans, but worldwide, especially the economically advanced nations. 

Professor Sandel started his illuminating article with this reminder: “Mr Joe Biden has a secret weapon in his bid for the United States presidency: He is the first Democratic nominee in 36 years without a degree from an Ivy League university.” 

Considering that “in the US Congress, 95 per cent of House members and 100 per cent of senators are college graduates”, academically bland Joe is the black swan in a predominantly educated white swan Congress. 

When it comes to prejudice, there is a growing gap between the credentialed and the uncredentialed, and looking at the statistics in US Congress, it is obvious that we live in a world where “the credentialed few govern the uncredentialed many.” 

Now let’s not be naive, you can’t avoid prejudices in this world we live in. We are somehow hardwired to pigeonhole people of diverse backgrounds into categories to make it easier to precast, prejudge, and prejudice. 

We may be reminded not to judge a person by the colour of his skin nor the gender or nation she’s born in, but when it comes to education, we are fast dividing the world into those who have degree and those who have not. Even amongst those who have degree, we further divide them into those who have degree from ivy league schools and those who have degree from community colleges.

That is why in America, one of the leading causes of despair resulting in suicide is when one is being left behind just because he or she does not have a degree. For them, there is just no chance of upward mobility. For them, there is no chance of competing with those who have better education. And for them, the American dream has mutated into an American nightmare. 

Professor Sandel wrote: “And, despite its inspiring promise of success based on merit, it has a dark side. Building a politics around the idea that a college degree is a precondition for dignified work and social esteem has a corrosive effect on democratic life.”

“It devalues the contributions of those without a diploma, fuels prejudice against the less-educated members of society, effectively excludes most working people from elective government and provokes political backlash.”

Yet, every single day we worship at the altar of merit centred essentially on grade. Our billion-dollar tuition industry is a clear indictment of the obsession that has no name, only a combined number on perforated paper our employers are equally obsessed with, especially our monolith civil service. That seems to determine where you will end up in society, what you will do eventually, how people will see you superficially, and why you are politely identified, blindly sorted and quietly shelved.

As one psychologist Thomas R. Guskey observed: “If someone proposed combining measures of height, weight, diet, and exercise into a single number or mark to represent a person’s physical condition, we would consider it laughable...Yet every day, teachers combine aspects of students’ achievement, attitude, responsibility, effort, and behavior into a single grade that’s recorded on a report card and no one questions it.”

The truth is, your degree, regardless of which university you come from, does not define you. We know that, and want so much to believe that. But the issue, according to Professor Sandel is that society still defines you based on it, and now, curiously, even more.

That is the prejudicial one-dimensional ladder we are all made to scale in a fiercely meritocratic and arrogantly aristocratic society we live in. This is how author Todd Rose (of “The End it Average”) puts it: -

“We all feel the weight of the one-dimensional thinking that has become so pervasive in our averagarian culture: a standardised educational system that ceaselessly sorts and ranks us; a workplace that hires us based on these educational rankings, then frequently imposes new rankings at every annual performance review; a society that doles out rewards, esteem, and adoration according to our professional ranking.” 

“When we look up at these artificial, arbitrary, and meaningless rungs that we are expected to climb, we worry that we might not fully ascend them, that we will be denied those opportunities that are only afforded to those who muscle their way up the one-dimensional ladder.”

Let me end with the quiet but tidal-like wisdom of Professor Sandel. 

He said that “history suggests little correlation between the capacity for political judgment and the ability to win admission to elite universities. The notion that “the best and the brightest” are better at governing than their less credentialed fellow citizen is a myth born of meritocratic hubris.”

He calls for renewing of the dignity of work by putting aside all prejudicial preconditions. He also calls for us to reassess the way we define success and question our meritocratic hubris, by asking ourselves: “Is it my doing that I have the talents that society happens to prize - or is it my good luck?”

He adds: “Appreciating the role of luck in life can prompt a certain humility: There, but for an accident of birth, or the grace of God, or the mystery of fate, go I. This spirit of humility is the civic virtue we need now.” 

Indeed, and strangely, attributing it to luck keeps one grounded, because what is perceived as causation, solo effort of one, is often correlation, group effort of many, disguising as luck. 

Attributing luck is therefore not living your life randomly, surrendering to circumstantial whims, but it is living life realistically, standing on the shoulders of many who came before us. 

I guess that is why the late former deputy prime minister Goh Keng Swee once told veteran banker Wee Cho Yaw that it is better to be born lucky than to be smart. There is a lot of Sandelian wisdom about it.

 

PSLE Saga IV - Raphael Lee

Raphael got featured this morning for the second time. Journalist Cheryl Tan interviewed his parents about this “small, brave soul who inspired many.”

Most of you know about his inspiring story, but the interview also tells us about his final day before he passed on. 

The day was Nov 12 this year. And Raphael somehow knew that death was imminent. That brave 12-year-old asked his mother, “What would happen if her only child died before her. If he did, he hoped she would donate his body to scientific research.”

Raphael was afraid, his mother said. In fact, she said: “I don’t think I’ve seen him so afraid before.”

“Just as he was being sedated to begin the operation, he told me, “Mummy, I don’t want to lie down. I want to sit down. I want you to hug me.””

Cheryl wrote: “On the operating table, Raphael suffered from excessive blood loss which resulted in brain damage. He died the following day.”

His mum said: “So that was how he went into a deep sleep, and that was the last time we saw him alert and awake.”

One thing about Raphael is that there is just so much grit in him to want to live his life at such a young age to the fullest. Putting aside his PSLE results, which he did well considering his condition, Raphael was also an “avid online gamer” and he “joined various co-curricular activities in school such as chess club, speech and drama club, and robotics club.”

He did all that even when, at a very young age, he had inherited a rare condition called “Li-Fraumeni Syndrome”, which is “a genetic disorder which predisposed him to a wide range of rare cancers.”

In 2016, to halt the spread of bone cancer in his left forearm, he had his left arm amputated. Yet, nothing could have robbed him of his zest and cheer for life. Nothing dampened his spirit. 

“He would go around to encourage the other cancer patients in his ward, which also earned him the Inspirational Patient and Caregiver Award from KKH of 2020.”

I have written about Raphael a few days ago, and the amazing love he has received from his parents, William and Winnie. I have nothing to add to what Cheryl has written today, and you should go and read it.

My parting shot however is about a gift Raphael gave to his mom last December when he went for an operation to remove his right collarbone.

The gift was something deeply precious to Winnie. It was a simple message in a bottle. The message reads: “I love you Mama,” “with strokes of green, her favourite colour, on the back””. 

Winnie said: “He was a boy of few words but it was always his wish to inspire others with his story.” 

In sum, that is what life is all about - “I love you Mama.” It is a love that always come through. And it leaves nothing the same as it was before, when love completes its work in the lives who truly embrace it. 

Sadly, a young brave life like Raphael’s has come and gone, but his story lives on. He had always wanted to inspire others, even in the hospital ward where he won the award for being an inspirational patient and caregiver. 

However oxymoronic being a patient and caregiver is, Raphael’s short life has shown that you can be a hospital patient, treasuring and fighting for every breathe within you for as long as it takes, yet still lead an inspiring life as someone who never gives up, someone who is always spreading cheer to others.

Indeed, Aldous Huxley once said that “experience is not what happens to a man. It is what a man does with what happens to him.” And Raphael (being just a boy) has gained so much experience when he saw beyond his afflictions, that is, the cancers that had taken part of his body, yet, by conscious daily choices, he never allowed it to take his soul and spirit that were so much bigger than the cancer itself (and mind you, there are so many cancer patients out there who, like Raphael, had fought the good fight). 

Yet, the reality is, within that embattled frame, Raphael fought to the last breath even in the midst of indescribable fear and uncertainty. Winnie saw his fear when he told her: “Mummy, I don’t want to lie down. I want to sit down. I want you to hug me.”

Alas, every child deserves a hug. Every man or woman needs to be hugged too, more often than we think we want or need it. Love may overcome many things in life, but the greatest comfort and hope it brings is not by remote, but by touch, by embrace, and by tears shed and shared. 

In our lifetime, we have said many goodbyes to lives lost to cancer. But, many of these lives have left a story that has inspired the living deeply. 

They have written their stories, amidst the pain and tears, the sorrow and fears. Their words were mostly silence, expressionless, yet their lives continued the legacy, with life-affirming words planted in our hearts whenever we read about their stories. 

Winnie said: “During his wake, there were many attendees who came, some of whom we did not even know. But all of them said he was very brave and strong.”

The world is made better by such stories of bravery and courage. It is Raphael’s message in the bottle to all of us - a message of undying love, a message by one who has fought the good fight, and completed the race of life, no matter how young one was.