Intelligent Life: a magazine you have to read

It caters to the business-savvy crowd that devours The Economist, its sister magazine, like soup. It itself is more like dessert: infrequent, inessential but hopelessly yearned for. The Economist explains what keeps us alive (and wealthy); Intelligent Life explores what we live (and work) for. This two-monthly publication is a British version of The New Yorker; it is easier to digest and more practical to read. 

Intelligent Life explores culture. But it is relevant instead of artsy-fartsy. In the past few issues, the opening of the Ritskmuseum, Amsterdam, (which I despairingly missed) and a op-Ed on les miserables (which I just read) made appearances. Pages are lined with short articles on food, music, fashion, museums - all the trimmings of haute-couture but it manages not to be stuffy. Then, longer 5000-7500 word feature articles explore pointless but reassuring articles. Precisely, they reassure us that there is more to life than work. 

For the shrewd businessman (and businessmen-to-be, I.e. you), this publication is a fast-acting culture pill that is easy to swallow. Furthermore, the writing exceptional. The editor's note is not some contrived attempt at uniformity and self-promotion. It actually explains who wrote the articles and why they were chosen; avid followers of The Economist will be surprised that real names are used rather than those of famous thinkers or conquerers. And every article flows in prose and will delight any sesquidilianist. While the economist focuses on clarity of expression, Intelligent Life focuses on delivery. 

I have said many times that The Economist should be required reading before interviews and dates. I was joking about half that statement, though that was before I found out about Intelligent Life. 

GPA System is a Godsend

I might have been the strongest critic of the GPA system when it was first presented. I argued that it adulterated good data, making it less precise. Also, it was non-linear. A 3% is required to go from 3.3 to 3.7, 5% is required to go from 3.7 to 4.0 and the top bracket spans a whole 10%. This has resounding ramifications for some students; many dropped precipitously and have been replaced with a new bourgeoisie. In particular, the new system favors balanced students who can do reasonably well in all subjects, but can’t necessarily be perfect in any.

But I have come to adore the GPA system. I admittedly say this with hindsight. I first attacked GPA at the end of first year when I had an effective downgrade of 82% of my marks and an upgrade on only 9%. You can see why I was disappointed. But two years later, GPA has not negatively affected me in any way. I might not be an impartial party but I will make a few objective comments on the benefits of GPA.

First, that more balanced students win is arguably a good result. It diminishes the benefits attainable by taking easy electives. Thus it encourages broader learning and course selection independent of fickle marks-ism. Second, it reduces stress; it no longer makes perfection the ideal result (now, the ideal result is 89.5%). Finally, it gives students more time for extra-curriculars that intrinsically are more valuable than over-perfecting a course.

Some of the issues with GPA have also been solved. Most notably, research credits now bump a full grade upward instead of the 3% previously rewarded. This deserves the utmost praise, though it came a year too late. I might consider this change to be the most logical and value-adding thing the School of Business has implemented since my arrival. Indeed, I sent Lawrence Ashworth a great thank you. This is not about any individual’s marks, mine least of all. It is about clarity of rules, fairness of competition, alignment of goals and transparency.

There was a time long ago when I had a monomaniacal desire for the perfect exam and the perfect score. I fixed every marking mistake, however small and checked every assignment forever more. I had a margin of error of 12 percentage points when I ended the year, a comfortable amount but only so because of my relentlessness. I look back to those days fondly but also with relief. I have more time to dedicate to other things. Quite simply, I can enjoy my life more. Thank you, GPA. 

Les Misérables, the Movie, the Musical and the Book

I have finished reading Les Misérables with no more than 10 days to spare until I leave for Paris, the principal setting of Hugo’s book. At over 1500 pages the unabridged edition is a rambling epic of Napoleonic proportion. It goes on long-winded tangents and social rants that are decidedly indigestible. Included are “books” on convents, where Cosette grows up and the Battle of Waterloo, the deciding battle that ushers in Hugo’s story in 1815. However, thoroughness does not preclude Les Misérables from being an important literary work. It is an important historical document of revolutionary France and morally instructive. The book beings with “So long […] as ignorance and poverty exist on earth, books of the nature of Les Misérables cannot fail to be of use.” I agree. 

The story is of Jean Valjean, a dejected wretch of society who finds love through God, as represented by the second chance given by the Bishop of Digne; through benevolence and philanthropy, as represented by his caring for Fantine, the poor single mother who sings I Dream a Dream; and finally and most importantly through fatherly love in care for Cosette, Fantine’s daughter. This story of sorrow and rebirth is aptly set in post Napoleonic-France. As the movie points out, 23 after Louis XVI is executed, another King is back on the throne. Hugo unabashedly sympathizes with Republicans sees revolution as necessary for progress and for redemption of these Misérables.

His characters all find solace. Fantine’s sorrows are made whole with the happiness of Cosette. Javert, who sings “Men like you can never change / Men like me can never change,” sooths his inexplicable internal dilemma through suicide. Eponine dies in the hands of Marius (with a bullet through her exposed breast). Marius and Cosette live happily ever after.

Although the book was successful upon publication (1862) it was revived in the English-speaking world by the musical. It debuted in the West End in 1985 and is still playing in London, a production I hope to see when I visit at the end of this month. It distills the laborious book into a concise and heart-wrenching production. When an outpour of emotion is required, the recitative turns into song. With Les Misérables as sentimental as it is, the delivery mechanism of the comédie musicale is exceptional. No other musical is as successful in drawing tears (of despair and of joy) from the audience. In "Drink With Me", students destined to die reminisce of pleasures of the living. Jean Valjean makes peace with losing Cosette to Marius and wishes him life in "Bring Him Home", a song written specifically for Colm Wilkinson (the original Jean Valjean but the Bishop of Digne in the 2012 film). The musical one-ups the book in pausing on the most salient parts the 1500-page book skims over. Marius feels guilty for surviving his friends as he sings Empty Chairs at Empty Tables, perhaps the most memorable song of the musical. The book has but a paragraph to describe these ineffable devils.

Yet the book is worth reading. The musical makes easy simplifications that at best covers the depth of the story, and at worst, romanticizes these very human characters. Eponine is less of a hero in the book. She, in fact, caused Cosette to leave to England and concealed Cosette’s letter from Marius until the last moment before her death. This is a better version because it is more believable. I had always thought of her as unfathomably valiant in the musical. The musical also mischaracterizes the revolution as well-planned and as over-glorious. Instead, it was a opportunistic, spontaneous uprising comprised of loosely related revolutionaries. Marius was not well known to the friends of the ABC (“abasé”, or abased) and only chose to join them because he did not wish to live without Cosette. The barricade was also a small and rather insignificant annoyance to the larger engagements of the same time. But, understandably, the musical achieves concision in place of accuracy. Therefore, each the musical and the book have their place.

The movie is surprisingly faithful to the story. A few heartwarming tidbits are revealed: Valjean’s stay at the convent; Valjean’s happiness in finding Cosette in a new song named “Suddenly”; Marius’s bourgeois father; Eponine’s taking a bullet for Marius. Some scenes are spectacular. Anne Hathaway’s “I Dream a Dream” lives up and surpasses expectations; Samantha Bark’s “On My Own” is passionate. The women do better than the men. “Bring him Home” and “Stars” show the Hollywood actors belong there. “Empty Chairs at Empty Tables” was anti-climactic. The movie cannot stand its own against because the musical is more immediate and therefore more emotional. But it is still a joy to watch.

A difficulty for the story is Cosette. She doesn't do very much more than look pretty. In fact, for the first six months Cosette and Marius stare at each other from afar and without knowing eachother’s names and decides they must marry. For all that Hugo defends: the poor, the powerless, the ignorant, he does not seem to care much for women. He even writes that women exist for two reasons: love and coquetry. Furthermore, I found it unsympathetic with the theme of the book that Marius ends up with rich Cosette instead of street-urchin Eponine. But I was relieved that the book made it clear that Marius marries Cosette without knowing Jean Valjean’s wealth.

A final note on the book. Hugo writes it as though he is telling a true story. Perhaps he is. But the setting and places in Paris are real. For example, Cosette and Marius fall in love at the Jardin du Luxembourg, a park I will no doubt visit next semester. The barricades are set up in “Les Halles,” where I am living. What better way to become excited for Paris than to read Les Mis.

 

Some Quotations

A description of Fantine and her friends: “All four were madly pretty. A good old classic poet, then famous, a good fellow who had an Eleonore, M. le Chevalier de Labouisse, as he strolled that day beneath the chestnut-trees of Saint-Cloud, saw them pass about ten o'clock in the morning, and exclaimed, "There is one too many of them," as he thought of the Graces.”

A description of the Thénardiers: “These beings belonged to that bastard class composed of coarse people who have been successful, and of intelligent people who have descended in the scale, which is between the class called "middle" and the class denominated as "inferior," and which combines some of the defects of the second with nearly all the vices of the first, without possessing the generous impulse of the workingman nor the honest order of the bourgeois.”

De-glorifying the Battle of Waterloo: “Bauduin, killed, Foy wounded, conflagration, massacre, carnage, a rivulet formed of English blood, French blood, German blood mingled in fury, a well crammed with corpses, the regiment of Nassau and the regiment of Brunswick destroyed, Duplat killed, Blackmann killed, the English Guards mutilated, twenty French battalions, besides the forty from Reille's corps, decimated, three thousand men in that hovel of Hougomont alone cut down, slashed to pieces, shot, burned, with their throats cut,—and all this so that a peasant can say to-day to the traveller: Monsieur, give me three francs, and if you like, I will explain to you the affair of Waterloo!”

On Napoleon: “Wellington was the Bareme of war; Napoleon was its Michael Angelo”

Regarding Mme. Thénardiers: “Cosette was her only servant; a mouse in the service of an elephant.”

Some things never change: “It was the accent of Castlereagh auditing France's bill at the Congress of Vienna.”

Why Do You Hear the People Sing: “Songs are like the guillotine; they chop away indifferently, to-day this head, to-morrow that. It is only a variation.”

Parisians and their locomotive prowess: “To stray is human. To saunter is Parisian.”

On youth: “The first young lad who comes to hand, however poor he may be, with his strength, his health, his rapid walk, his brilliant eyes, his warmly circulating blood, his black hair, his red lips, his white teeth, his pure breath, will always arouse the envy of an aged emperor.”

Cosette all grown up: “Cosette, in gaining the knowledge that she was beautiful, lost the grace of ignoring it. An exquisite grace, for beauty enhanced by ingenuousness is ineffable, and nothing is so adorable as a dazzling and innocent creature who walks along, holding in her hand the key to paradise without being conscious of it. But what she had lost in ingenuous grace, she gained in pensive and serious charm. Her whole person, permeated with the joy of youth, of innocence, and of beauty, breathed forth a splendid melancholy.”

Love: “COSETTE in her shadow, like Marius in his, was all ready to take fire. Destiny, with its mysterious and fatal patience, slowly drew together these two beings, all charged and all languishing with the stormy electricity of passion, these two souls which were laden with love as two clouds are laden with lightning, and which were bound to overflow and mingle in a look like the clouds in a flash of fire.”

“One of woman's magnanimities is to yield. Love, at the height where it is absolute, is complicated with some indescribably celestial blindness of modesty. But what dangers you run, O noble souls! Often you give the heart, and we take the body. Your heart remains with you, you gaze upon it in the gloom with a shudder. Love has no middle course; it either ruins or it saves. All human destiny lies in this dilemma. This dilemma, ruin, or safety, is set forth no more inexorably by any fatality than by love. Love is life, if it is not death. Cradle; also coffin. The same sentiment says "yes" and "no" in the human heart. Of all the things that God has made, the human heart is the one which sheds the most light, alas! and the most darkness.”

“Angel is the only word in the language which never can be worn out. No other word would exist under the pitiless use made of it by lovers.”

On bankers: “And then, I met a pretty girl of my acquaintance, who is as beautiful as the spring, worthy to be called Floreal, and who is delighted, enraptured, as happy as the angels, because a wretch yesterday, a frightful banker all spotted with small-pox, deigned to take a fancy to her! Alas! woman keeps on the watch for a protector as much as for a lover; cats chase mice as well as birds. Two months ago that young woman was virtuous in an attic, she adjusted little brass rings in the eyelet-holes of corsets, what do you call it? She sewed, she had a camp bed, she dwelt beside a pot of flowers, she was contented. Now here she is a bankeress.”

“Citizens, the nineteenth century is great, but the twentieth century will be happy. 

The Greatest Tragedy Everyone Faces

Perhaps the greatest tragedy of life is to hit the ceiling. It happens to everyone many times, each with diminishing effect. Ice cream has been eaten, beers downed, videos posted on Youtube, parents and society blamed, revelations made and life rethought. This might be the root cause of mid-life crises, of low self-esteem, of chronic misery and of god-seeking. It might be the reason happiness declines after 26 and only recovers after 48. Life might be reduced to series of filters in a funnel. University is such a filter. Mostly every one of your and my friends have made it past this filter but for many (including myself, perhaps), this is the ceiling. There are other parallel competitions or conciliation prizes but they are largely a function of reduced expectations.

I felt the ceiling when I couldn’t make sense of English or French in high school despite all my best efforts. I might have felt so after writing the ludicrous COMM 341 exam, but I found a reasonable entity to blame for that shenanigan. I reread my Theory of Knowledge essay I wrote in grade 12 and found no difference in my writing style or my thinking. I might not have advanced intellectually since high school (though I have advanced in other ways, arguably).

The following consideration is that of causality. To the “nature” crowd, I should simply make peace with my ceiling. To the “nurture” bandwagon, something can be done: a change in environment, for example. Unfortunately, I am predisposed to stride with the “nature” crowd. This is a fairly defeatist attitude that engenders no optimism and provides no solace for those coping with the ceiling. It also probably ascribes too much importance to pedigree and luck. But why do boys outnumber girls in the top 0.01% of SAT Math Scores three-to-one, if not because nature? (I am proud to announce that I helped my fellow gender-men shift that ratio ever so slightly up, though I made a rather large fool of myself in the other subjects).

The nurture argument has its proponents too. IQ scores have been rising and women are making grounds on men. The true answer is nature and nurture. But I am a strong proponent of declining marginal benefit, an economic theory that applies effectively everywhere. Work (cost) is worth it when it is outweighed by the benefit. But after a certain point, the marginal benefit of work dips so low that pursuing the benefit only causes dissatisfaction. This is the ceiling I speak of. Many people who hit it work tremendously hard and hardly see results; they have mental breakdowns. To pass this ceiling depends on nature.

There might be a lot of ceilings in life but only a few are important. As life progresses, there are fewer things you excel at, and even fewer you are definitively better than your peers at. This creates a rather monomaniacal desire to improve on these few redeeming qualities that they become the sole proponent of your self-worth. The “nurture” camp will argue that it is this accumulation of effort and time (10,000 hour rule) that makes someone great. Unfortunately, time is a scarce resource and 10,000 hours are hard to come by. So one day when you hit the ceiling on all you might consider important, you cannot fathomably focus on something else.

Sports players hit such ceilings early on in their lives. Tiger Woods, certainly; and Jeremy Lin, most probably. Very few can achieve anything worthwhile after their pro-sports careers. Actors fall to the same early ceiling in glamorous Hollywood and postpone it with botox.

Of course, there might be people who never hit the ceiling in their respective fields and there might be people who find a new, pristine ceiling but these are the outliers. 

The Commerce Education

The Queen’s School of Business is of the two best business schools in Canada. I have no doubt it has brought out the best in me. It has proved to be a prudent choice for my undergraduate studies. At the end of my first year, I had the choice to transfer to Brown University if not for the Ivy League name, then perhaps for Emma Watson. But I chose to stay with Queen’s for its strong recruiting opportunities, for the unique extra-curricular experience, and for my friends.

Today is effectively the end of my third year at Queen’s. In the last five days, I wrote four exams and taught two QUIC tutorials. There is but one exam more in the off-distance. My laundry basket is overflowing in anticipation for the parental unit parade. My piano is undusted and singing again. Christmas and Paris has never seemed closer. But as happiness builds in anticipation, the far-future again comes as foreboding. This year, I will decide whether to pursue post-undergraduate studies in the field of mathematical finance.

On Thursday, I wrote the STAT 455 exam. This is the hardest course I have ever taken and therefore, there was much self-affirmation to be accomplished. I needed to believe I will succeed in mathematical finance. Stochastic Processes is a branch of probability concerned with randomness in time. A Random Walk, for example, is a stochastic process. I entered the Grant Hall with as much determination as ever and left unresolved. I returned home and modelled the problem on EXCEL (with YASAI); I have never been so happy to see a Poisson distribution (4b). I might have let out a barbaric yawp.

A queuing question casually made an appearance (Q3). It extended the single-server model of COMM 341 by modelling in a probability that customers facing a longer line are less likely to join. There are no formula sheets. The problem is to derive the formulae.

To do this is not simple but it was the simplest question on the exam. To focus on understanding concepts instead of plug-and-chug arithmetic is rewarding. For one, formulae need not be memorized. Assumptions are thoroughly considered. Finally, it is broad and wide-ranging in scope. And that is the chief criticism I have of Commerce education. What we learn is almost exclusively a special case, i.e. a star in the night sky. One clearly overshadows the other. It all makes what we learn in Commerce a bit frivolous.

In the last month, I had the pleasure of meeting the creator of http://qcumber.ca/ and a diverse group of students from other faculties. We played the ubiquitous exchange game called Contact and words like “Realpolitik” and “Carthage” made appearances. What a refreshing change from “Franklin Templeton”. Commerce was a resoundingly positive decision. And these experiences propel me to seriously consider something similar but a bit different.

From John Adams to Obama

The Obama victory had struck a malaise in me (or perhaps it was the keg stand). The resultant bed-tied activity was to watch over eight hours of John Adams, an acclaimed HBO miniseries tracing the founding father from the revolutionary war to his death.

The series has left no doubt of American exceptionalism in modern history. The series does little sugar-coating as is often accomplished with American history. The follies of the participants and of both sides are clearly told. But America is a crystal ball for the future. The society is more recognizable to the modern audience than any other society of the time period. One telling scene has John Adam’s wife speaking Latin while the subservient British equivalent sat dumfounded. Another is Adam’s visit to the perfumed, beautified and indulgent Parisian aristocrats soon to be irradiated.

John Adams is a brash, stubborn, no-bullshit politician. He won the 1796 election from his porch in Quincy. He was a pragmatist vested in the interest of America above all else. As lawyer he defended the English of the Boston Massacre; as a congressman he promulgated and signed the Declaration of Independence against the King. As emissary he courted the French, Dutch and later the English, and as president, he turned his back on them. Indeed, Adams was a true centrist who neither succumbed to pressures of his own party (the Federalists) nor that of the Republicans (who now are called Democrats).

Parallel to revolutionary America is revolutionary France, which had its revolution not long after America’s. The response of monarchist England was war. The Hamiltonians were intent on supporting Britain while the Jeffersonian wanted to back revolutionary France as a similar endeavour as America’s own. But Adams prudently signed a treaty with Napoleon (a treaty with Britain was signed when Adams was vice-president), knowing that young America could not withstand another war. It was this self-sacrifice of sorts that had him lose the 1800 election to Jefferson. John did not pull a George W. Bush.

John Adam is shown to be steadfast in his principles if misguided at times. He leaves his wife and sons for too long and later disowns one. He is painfully unsympathetic to a son-in-law that he deems to have failed. He contrives royal titles for president (“his majesty, his highness”) and is laughed out of congress.

But John Adams risked losing an election for the good of Americans. Adam’s independent thinking, pragmatism and unyielding idealism are qualities unseen in modern-day presidents. How sad a country of America’s pedigree should bear no resemblance to its heyday.

 

My Paper Published in Mathematics Magazine

My paper entitled “Skunk Redux” on probability was published in the October 2012 edition of Mathematics Magazine. I am pleased to announce it is the most-read math magazine and is consistently used as reference in upper-year math courses. But the tangible benefit is of course that I am now searchable on JSTOR.

The question I deal with is familiar to anyone taking Math 111 - Linear Algebra. It is by far the most relevant and accessible mathematics course at Queen’s, not least because of Peter’s tireless commitment to pedagogy (Dr. Peter Taylor is the co-author). In Skunk, a pair of dice is rolled again and again until either you choose to sit or at least one 1 comes up. If you sit, your payoff is the dice sum of all your previous rolls. If at least one 1 comes up while you are still standing, your payoff is zero.

It is not a difficult article to read. Everything is elementary. It contributes nothing to mathematical lore and pales in comparison to the other articles in the magazine. I make tangential comments about risk-taking (“It took some willpower not to allow my emotions to steer me toward the standard freshman crowd—the eternal optimists who luckily see the world as their oyster, untainted by the rationality I sometimes wish I could do away with”) and bad habits (“Peter started rolling the dice on that first day of class. As usual, I did not bring anything to class, not even a calculator, so I had to ballpark it.”) True mathematicians will be turned off. 

The paper links my undergraduate career from the first day of class, through the disenfranchising inaugural year when I sought refuge in the mathematics department to compensate for my failures in Commerce, to the otherwise miserable summer of 2011 when the paper was officially accepted, to the current quandary of what role mathematics will play in my career. 

Mathematics is the most elegant of all disciplines. Its study is deeply satisfying because it makes principles of ancillary courses go full circle. The queuing models of 341 are stochastic processes in the form of Markov chains (Stat 455). Their time-reversibility property make equations easily derivable. Finance, of course, is all about statistics and regression. The most salient criticism of commerce is that more technically-minded disciplines can easily learn the material. The reverse does not hold. This explains why McKinsey seems so intent on hiring engineers.

My relationship with mathematics is on-off. In grades 8, 10 and 12, in the heat of rediscovery, I placed well into the top tiers in Canada for mathematics competitions. In grade 12, I was invited to write the Canadian Mathematics Olympiad. In the off years, I characterized the subject as a passive, unimportant, socially disparaging, unrewarding field relegated to nerds and self-satisfied intellectuals. More recently, I rediscovered the discipline. I hope it plays some part in my future.

To read the magazine, click here (starts on pdf page 29).

Unpaid Internships: A Market Failure

Many firms offer unpaid internships. Bell’s Professional Management Program (PMP) exploits 70 free interns a year. I say exploit primarily because ‘to employ’ would be grammatically incorrect. 90% of unpaid internships are forms of exploitation, according to one lawyer. Firms take advantage of a competitive hiring environment by offering brand value to interns instead of monetary value. This is improper.

To use brand value as payment is readily done. The most prestigious firms in the finance and consulting industries do not have the highest pay. This is the justified result of a market economy: in top firms, the supply exceeds demand, pushing wages down. Furthermore “producer surplus” is accrued to the employee as he is willing to work for even less: the employee may have justified a lower immediate compensation for the present value of future value derived from an improved résumé.

At Bell, the supply-demand dynamics are vastly in the employer’s favour. Out of 2,000 applicants, Bell accepts 70. For economically optimal results, Bell should lower prices further – i.e. ask interns to pay to work at Bell headquarters. Indeed, this abstraction provesthat a pure economic consideration is inadequate for finding an equitable solution. To have employees pay the employer is ethically unacceptable.

That Bell can find free labour reflects our society’s mishaps. To work a McJob, or anything blue collar is stigmatized. White collar jobs are overvalued. Entering barcodes into a spreadsheet is considered a résumé-worthy (“improved departmental efficiency by 36%”) whereas entering barcodes into a cash register is considered failure. An inseparable stigma exists in post-secondary education as well, where the negative wage indeed exists – but that is a debate for another day.

A similar dilemma applies to volunteerism. Volunteering at a Kumon, a for-profit company, as I did, to amass the 40 high-school community-service hours is similarly misguided.

Policy Considerations

The laws that govern unpaid-internships require companies to derive no value from the free intern. A company’s role is to maximize shareholder returns. Any activity undertaken must therefore benefit the company. So unpaid-internships should not exist. The current laws beat around the bush. According to one lawyer, 90% of young people working for free should be paid, by law. The government’s role is to solve imperfections of the market, so it should illegalize unpaid internships.

Candidate interns are implored to correct the market imperfection themselves. Although the résumé has its place, in no circumstance is a name more important than the job description. In a perfect market economy, individuals are compensated for their worth. Less minimum wage and unionization, the Canadian wage market is largely unregulated. Therefore, a zero-wage job implies the worth of the intern’s job is low. Interns should consider a paid (high-worth) job, even if it isn’t at a desk.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2013/06/21/bc-unpaid-interns.html