anotherlongshot (anotherlongshot) wrote,
anotherlongshot
anotherlongshot

The reluctant, but necessary, choice.

Tennis Ramblings

Now that the ATP season has officially started, I expect the tennis ramblings to return. Because I'm obsessive and bored like that.

Anyway, first good news of the 2009 season: Novak Djokovic lost in the first round of Brisbane! YAY! This means Roger's #2 ranking is secured for the Australian Open, which also means that I can like the Djoker again. Then again, I've gone back and forth so much on this guy that I don't think I really care anymore. It's hilarious how Roger's at the centre of the Australian Open poster when he didn't make it past the semi-final last year, and when Djokovic is the actual defending champion. But how can one win compare to three?

Second, the Qatar Open website is ridiculous. "Tough for Nadal, easier for Federer"? Seriously? They must have fallen asleep when the draw was announced. Roger got Andy Murray in his side of the draw, while Nadal got Andy Roddick. Murray has beaten both Roger and Nadal in their previous meetings and is a vastly superior opponent than Roddick. Roger is 15-2 with Roddick and 2-4 with Murray. If I were Roger, I'd rather get Andy Roddick in the semi-finals than Andy Murray.

Also, Qatar's purple court is made of serious fugs. I caught the last part of the Roddick/Navarro match last night and the purple court, plus the green border, almost blinded me. I almost couldn't see the ball. What the fuck, seriously. And I was a bit surprised by how long it took Roddick to win that match, considering Navarro's first serve was like, 35% or something and he kept serving double faults, and Roddick could've beaten him with one eye closed. Or in his sleep. Commentator said something about this Roddick looking like the one that won the US Open, like, six years ago (Andy Roddick = last man to win the US Open not named Roger Federer), but I couldn't really see it. But then, why waste unnecessary energy in the first round?

Speaking of the US Open, I realised that the last time I saw Roger express any sort of emotion at all when he wins a set was during last year's US Open. Therefore, I can't wait for all the Slams! (Okay, maybe not so much the French.) No more boring best-of-three matches, more epic matches that will thoroughly test my patience, and cheering on Roger as he tries to equal the Sampras Record. Yay! Australian Open starts in two weeks!

Lastly, OMGWTFBBQ, Roger's playing the last match of the day today. Which translates to some ungodly 2 a.m. Singapore time. What the fuck, what kind of a tournament has a first match on centre court that starts at 4 p.m.?!

I HOPE NADAL LOSES!!!!

ANDY MURRAY CAN LOSE TOO!!!!!!!

School Has Started D:

It still hasn't fully sunk in that I've begun my new semester when everyone else - well, nearly everyone else - is still enjoying their last week of the break. I went for the first seminar of Comparative Constitutional Law yesterday. Back to school on January 5, and it's the last semester.

Class was fine. I couldn't finish reading the 147 pages, and managed to read Roe v. Wade and two pages of Planned Parenthood of Pennsylvania v. Casey before I decided it was time to give up and go to sleep. Prof. MT quite nicely summarised the cases for us in class, while attempting to conduct a discussion (in which Tris answered many many questions and saved us all), and even though I seriously didn't feel like starting school at all, I wasn't bored. It probably helped that I didn't have my laptop with me as I was too lazy to charge the battery and carry it to school. I think I'm going to stop using my laptop in all my classes; it's much easier to concentrate this way. And seeing as how I study, like, never at home or outside of classes, the only thing that's helped me not fail my exams so far is the fact that I pay attention in class most of the time, and sometimes prepare for classes. That's it.

The readings for tomorrow's class are about 50 pages less than yesterday's and I've covered about 30 pages already. Apart from the first section that has extracts from three articles about the value of comparative constitutional law which were all rather boring (the second one contained too many jargon that I didn't freaking understand and so I gave up trying to follow the writer's arguments), the next part that compares decisions from the US, Canada and European Union on the constitutionality of the death penalty was rather interesting. I read the extract of Soering, got to the Canadian case, then decided it was time to sleep.

One thing that still puzzles me, though, is how the United States is so passionate about its death penalty. I just don't get it. I can understand Singapore not wanting to give it up because we're not exactly the most enlightened nation when it comes to human rights and torture and 'cruel and unusual punishment', but the United States? It doesn't make sense for the US Supreme Court to ever rule that carrying out the death penalty on a minor is not unconstitutional. But then, it was Justice Scalia's judgment that I read. That should say it all.

For the record, I must say that I'm not very keen on reading American judgments. Not only am I not used to them, I'm also not familiar with the American Constitution. So whenever I read about the Fourth Amendment or the Eighth Amendment or whatever, I'm like, What the fuck is this? And because I usually read my stuff at night when my dad has turned off the Internet cable modem, I can't Google it. When I wake up the next day I don't remember to Google it, so basically I'm just confused. I still don't understand what the due process of the law has got anything to do with a right to privacy, or even which amendment that clause is in. Or what the amendment says. Or what the American constitution says.

BLAH BLAH BLAH WHATEVER. I can't even remember the text of my own Constitution. Not that it even matters, for an authoritarian constitutionalism (not my phrase) is...exactly that.

I still have to drop Directed Research. For want of anything else to take, and because I refuse to go to KR four times a week (twice a week for Nation Building is way more than too much, especially since I didn't even know there were tutorials for Nation Building. The non-law list tricked me by putting down 'two-hour lectures a week' under 'workload'), I'm going to take that Legal Aspects of Celebrity module, assuming it's still available. I wouldn't find Law and Sociology of the Family but it's an exam and I'd rather not take exams, thanks. UN Law was a fluke, nothing more. I don't think lightning strikes twice in the same spot, you know?

Lastly, I don't want to graduate. At the same time, I'm sick of studying. I just want to do nothing.

Okay, I don't. I guess I just want to do something that I really, really, really like, not merely something I don't mind doing. If I'm gonna wake up at some ungodly hour of the morning and squeeze with the whole of Singapore on the rush hour train to work, it better be for something good. The bright side is, that remains to be seen; the down side is...well, let's just leave it at that.

Others

I can't stand it when a person takes up way too much of my time, especially when I don't even know that person very well. Considering I never talked to my ex-boyfriends every night, and neither did I, or do I, talk to guys that I like every night, I don't see why I have to talk to you every night. ARGH.

On another but slightly related note, after deciding to switch things up this year and making actual resolutions (though I haven't got round to writing them down yet and have probably forgotten half of them), one of my new year resolutions is to go out more, meet people, meet new people. Last year was marked by a serious decline of my social life due to forces beyond my control; this year, that's not going to happen again. Well, if I fall sick with something or other there's nothing I can do about it, but assuming I don't, I'm not going to stay home as much as I did last year.

Also, this is probably only a problem to me, but my bloody Semester 1 results have posed a huge problem. See, I'd given up on the 2-1, thinking the semester had been shot to hell after I screwed up the Interpol research paper and the Law, Governance and Development in Asia take-home exam. There was also Conflicts which I thought was a confirmed C, seeing as how I did, oh, none of the tutorials, read none of the cases until about five days before the exam, read none of the recommended textbooks. Did nothing, basically. And then came the shocker. And now the dilemma.

Okay, it's not much of one; calling it so is probably me being melodramatic. But it is still a bit of a problem. The problem is, I'm not someone who can find comfort in failures by telling myself that "at least I tried". I'm someone who would rather not have tried, than to have tried and failed. Trying and failing means I'm not good enough, and when I try to get something, the only acceptable outcome is actually getting it.

I don't know how to replicate my Semester 1 results. It was a fluke. I did nothing to work towards it, and therefore I don't know how to get those results again. I'm pretty sure that this final semester - this fucking final semester - will determine if I graduate 2-1 or 2-2, and obviously I'd prefer the former scenario. But the problem is two-fold: First, I don't even know where, or how, to begin trying to replicate the Semester 1 results; and second, more importantly, I don't want to try and not get it. Because if I try, if I really set out to do this, I'm going to be quite shattered if I don't get my desired outcome.

I guess I want to avoid that because it's too much trouble and too much unnecessary disappointment. After all, it's just grades, it's just a piece of paper. It's only the four years I gave up doing this law thing summarised on a piece of paper - that's all. Right? It doesn't not matter in the long run because at this point, the long run is not the same as the next three years. It matters because I know I will need it to work towards what I want, whatever that is (not that I don't know, but that I haven't decided yet). Its' no longer simply about pupillage or working in a local firm or employers not caring either way whether you get a second upper or a second lower. It's about more than that. It's always about more than that with me, which is why, after so many years, this stupid honours shit still matters.

I think I've just answered my own question. It doesn't mean, though, that I'm not still irritated. For fuck's sake, this is the last damn semester and I actually have to study? What the hell? And I'm doing 24 credits. WHAT THE HELL?

Lastly, Roger Federer's chest is utter perfection. He can afford to lose the belly (greatly afford, might I add), but his chest is pure, heavenly, delicious perfection.

Need to study!

Tags: andy roddick, grades, law, law school, qatar open, roger federer, tennis
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments