Now there's a pity


Wherein our narrator whinges about the lack of WiFi in Auckland International Airport.

They have these lovely desk stations, one of which I'm sitting at now, typing away. They even have phone jacks. And just 4 meters to my right, there's a bank of 3 computers, each of which eat NZ $2 coins, and provide you with internet/web access.

But there's no WiFi. My poor little AirPort smells *nothing* in the air. I'm not sure why this is - perhaps the business travellers passing through the airport here are too fagged, shagged and ragged to actually care to go online. But my goodness, they do it in Sydney, and whatever they do in Sydney, they do in Auckland - sooner or later.

I had it figured out pretty quickly: New Zealand is the little brother to Australia's big brother. Like all brother-brother relationships, it's fraught will all sorts of testosterone-fuled issues of competition and one-upsmanship. New Zealand has very nearly the same flag as Australia - except the stars are red, not white. (There may be other differences, but they're too subtle for my eyes to discern.) The currency looks very similar - it's plastic, just like Australia's - except the two dollar coin is *larger* than the one dollar coin, which makes perfect sense, actually, but has been consistently confusing me, because I'm acclimated to the Australian 2-dollar "pound" coin (because it looks very much like a british pound, and has about the same value) which is smaller than the Australian dollar.

Oh the comforts of home!

But back to it. The big brother has a checkered past (that convict thing), but, like the prodigal son, has fallen back into a very comfortable middle age. New Zealand never did anything wrong - being the comfortable satellite colony of Britain (they were offered independence in 1907, and didn't accept it until 1947) and an altogether comfortable, sophisticated culture. The biggest thing New Zealand has working against it - its low population - is precisely the thing it's working so hard to preserve. It's a fiendishly difficult country to immigrate to, yet about 25% of the population are first generation immigrants. There are close to 4 million Kiwis in the country - although about 10% of them are in Australia at any point in time (permanent residents of either country can move back and forth between them at will), and at least another few hundred thousand are in Britain, the USA, or just backpacking around the world.

I can understand why they cut out and see the world. Auckland, with a population of about 1.4 million, began to feel awfully small after just a few days - not impossibly small, but relatively small. Sydney, with its 4 million population began to feel positively gigantic, and Sydneysiders are always griping about how small Sydney is, relative to London or New York or (lately) Shanghai. But Australia allows 1% of its population to be supplemented by immigration each year. (Perhaps in a few years, one of those immigrants will be me.) New Zealand used to do this, but has cut back lately, so that maybe just .5% of its population, on a yearly basis, is new immigrants.

So New Zealand is far away from everything - except Australia - which is far away from everything else. It really is far away here. It took a long time to check in at the airport this afternoon, basically because everyone packs everything including the kitchen sink when they leave the country. It's a long, long way to anywhere, so folks had more luggage than I'm normally accustomed to seeing in a check-in line. Acres of luggage, bikes, surfboards, and so on.

I had a very successful day today, lecturing at the Auckland University of Technology and dispensing some free advice to the faculty of various parts of the college of Arts. First thing this morning I gave a lecture to a classroom of design students - one of my favorite jobs, because I really managed to blow their minds. Too much, perhaps, because, at the end of the hour, there were no questions. "Too many," one girl muttered, when the call went up for questions. Heheheh. That first was a more or less off-the-cuff talk about design in the age of active materials, not so much a retread of the lecture I gave at RMIT as an elaboration on the same themes. I borrowed from a Scientific American article I'd read on the plane to Auckland, all about the origin of the linguistic assignments for colors. Pre-modern cultures generally have the same three words for color: black, white and red.

Which brings me to my walk through the Auckland Museum on Sunday afternoon. It's world famous for its incredible collection of Maori artifacts, and I spent an hour feasting on this fully realized and thoroughly unique Polynesian culture. They had a reconstruction of a ceremonial hut (I believe it had simply been reassembled inside the museum). that you could doff your shoes and walk through. Inside, beautiful wood carvings (tikis, more or less) adorned nearly every available inch of wall surface. Everything was painted, was colored - and all of it in red, white and black.

Look back to Lasceaux, Catal Huyuk, Uxmal, it doesn't matter: the colors of the "primitives" are black, white and red. Whether they noted blue and described it as "black-like' is unknown. But it makes sense. Black is cool and dark. White is light. And red is warm - in addition to its role as the color of lifeblood.

Oh, and the men are better looking in Australia. More redheads here in Auckland (because exposure to the sun won't kill them) but, on the whole, Sydneysiders are just prettier to look at. Lucky for me.

Posted: Mon - April 5, 2004 at 04:53 PM        


©