We Might Be Tables

This is a big day, folks! Today's episode is a special one because we finally introduce the first of many guests we hope to host on We Might Be Tables. Luca Dimauro, film aficionado and close friend, joins us to discuss Neill Blomkamp's Disctrict 9, an action-packed sci-fi film replete with exceptionally powerful social commentary.

From diversity and representation to cinematography and CGI, this film has given us so much to discuss. What role does power play in social growth and development? Does power come with obligation? Will we, out in the real world, do better than the humans in the film, should we come across an extraterrestrial species in the future?

We had a blast exploring everything District 9 has to offer and we hope you have a great time listening to us! As always, reach out to us with your thoughts and critiques!

A special thanks to Luca for taking the time out to join us and making our first collaboration so enjoyable.

Another special thanks to Migfus20 on Freesound for the music featured in the episode!

You can find District 9 here.

Otium and Accidia are two Latin terms that broadly connote a time of leisure. The difference, however, lies in the former being "productive" leisure and the latter being listless, "unproductive" leisure. In their article 'Doing nothing is all the rage: Is it a form of resistance, or just an indulgence for the lucky few?', Ingrid Nelson, Professor of English at Amherst College, places these ancient concepts in the 21st century, and questions whether the recent (perhaps capitalist) "productivity" trend of doing nothing is in fact a position of privilege.

Alternately, in their article 'In praise of doing nothing', Simon Gottschalk explores the activity (for lack of a better term) of doing nothing as a  social boon, something that must not only be accepted, but encouraged. They address concerns of unchecked social and technological acceleration, and present convincing arguments for taking things much more slowly.

In this episode, we discuss both of these articles in conjunction, and think through our own positions on leisure and productivity. Even if doing nothing is a possibility, would it be morally justified? How do we balance the need for work and the need for freedom? Why do we often consider work and freedom to be diametrically opposed?

Give us a listen, and send us your thoughts! We'd love to hear from you.

P.S. Extra points for anyone who can tell us how many times we struggled with the name "Gottschalk".

We Might Be Tables now accepts voice mails from listeners. Click the link at the end to leave us a note.

Mentioned in the episode:

'Doing nothing' is all the rage

In praise of doing nothing

A post on the subreddit r/latestagecapitalism

Most, if not all, students have encountered a point in their academic lives when they have needed to do an internship. The unfortunate truth is that we have been conditioned to believe that internships are "meant" to be done for free, or that they are not "real" work, worthy of payment. Such a line of thought does nothing to alleviate the insecurity of an already vulnerable section of the population, and is deeply problematic by extension.

Our second short-form episode takes us into the world of unpaid internships, and the many things wrong with it. Morally and materially, unpaid internships benefit far fewer people than they exploit, and that exploitation is exacerbated when one is from an underprivileged group. Several studies (linked below) have revealed that oppressed castes in India and racial minorities abroad, as well as lower classes globally, not only find it much harder to secure an internship, but also to find steady jobs afterwards. Economic affluence is a necessary condition to be able to accept an unpaid internship without a second thought, so the question we need to ask ourselves is: are we not contributing to oppression by doing internships for free? It is not an instance of neutrality - one isn't simply being "neutral" by accepting an unpaid internship, but rather actively enforcing the status quo.

Seeing as most of our listeners are from the same demographic as us, we thought this short episode would resonate well. Do reach out to us with  any thoughts you have, or even if you simply want to rant about how you were coerced into working for free. We're here to listen, and here to  speak against it.

Mentioned in the episode: 

It’s Time to Officially End Unpaid Internships

Unpaid Internships: Worse than Working for Free

Overdue: A Formal Internship Policy in India That Protects Its Students

It is here. Today marks one year since we officially launched We Might Be Tables, and we can't believe how far we have come. We have a lot to say to all of you who have supported us through this journey - primarily, we wouldn't be here without you.

Check out the video version of this episode on YouTube and Instagram!

Once again, thank you, and we hope to see y'all back for our next episode.

https://youtu.be/OaBDgUSmQrI

Imagine this: you've stolen some money and now you're being sent to jail over it. The judiciary has deemed it appropriate for you and beneficial to society that you be locked away in a room with little to no privileges, until they declare that justice has been served.

Having been conditioned into society, such an idea does not immediately seem odd to most of us, but what if we dig a little beneath the surface? How does stripping one of one's liberty for any amount of time ensure "justice"? A prominent theory of justice suggests that it is merely "fairness", but how is fairness measured? It is just as abstract as time or money, or indeed as abstract as "society" itself.

In this episode, we open a new thread of discussion: punishment. We address some foundational theories of punishment, how they work, and what their purpose has been, historically. Consider this episode a precursor to a discussion on capital punishment, one that we hope to have in the future.

Mentioned in the Episode:

Punishment - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

What Animal Parents Can Teach Human Parents About Discipline

Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish

Khushwant Singh's A Train to Pakistan

‘No sexual assault’ in minor’s groping: Supreme Court stays Bombay HC order

If the reason behind a tradition is lost, do we have an obligation to keep the tradition alive? Do we have the capacity to create new traditions for our cultures?

We often come across questions we find extremely interesting but have little to say about. This short episode is our attempt to put one of these questions out there and have more people share their thoughts with us. We plan to number these short episodes with a decimal before them so our listeners can recognize these short episodes when we release more in the future!

We'd love to hear from you about these questions and about the episode itself!

Did you want to blame someone for Seita and Setsuko's suffering? Who would you assign blame to? Their aunt? The war itself? Or more controversially, to Seita himself? What if we can't or shouldn't assign blame to anyone?

Our previous episode only scratched the surface of all that Grave of the Fireflies has to offer. Today, we discuss what the title of the film means to us, the lives that Setsuko and Seita lived, and questions about honour and responsibility. This conversation was long overdue and we are glad we got to discuss these questions as deeply as we did.

At first, it seems unlikely that animation would be able to recreate the horrors of war as well as live-action films. Grave of the Fireflies turns that idea on its head. In this episode, we go over some of our favourite scenes and characters and try to analyse everything that Ghibli did right. We also discuss some of the struggles that the viewer is compelled to go through while watching a careful and complex reflection of death and suffering in war. 

Grave of the Fireflies is nothing short of a timeless masterpiece. Give it a watch if you haven't already and share your thoughts with us!

Mentioned in the episode:

Just a Habit - Low Roar

Conversation between Isao Takahata and Akiyuki Nosaka

Corrections:

At 7:12 we say that the two live actions films were a tribute to World War I but they were actually a tribute to World War II.

At 10:20 we bring up an Animage interview which we say was with Isao Takahata and Hayao Miyazaki. The interview was actually between Animage, Isao Takahata and Akiyuki Nosaka.