Adam Ryan Design

As a student, to keep myself surviving in the manner to which I have become accustomed (poor but not quite homeless), I have a part-time job that consumes my weekends while providing me with the money to afford rent, food, coffee, beer, Red Bull, and other essential University related things.

When I see some of the jobs students resort to in order to survive I realise that I’m quite lucky with my current employment. My job is not menial, pleb, slave labour, and I definitely don’t identify myself as a Minimum-Wage-Slave. Naturally there are frustrations over small issues as I’m sure there are with all jobs but at the bottom of it all it’s a pretty sweet gig.

Essentially what I do is monitor CCTV cameras and hunt for potential shoplifters. My official title is a “Loss Prevention Associate” which sounds like a fairly convoluted way to say ‘Security’. Lets face it, that guy that fills up your car is not a “Petroleum Transfer Engineer” (and yes I can make fun, I’ve done that job as well). But a large part of my job centres around deterrence, so I guess “Loss Prevention” isn’t such a bad way to describe it.

Without a doubt the best part of my job (apart from the awesome people I work with) is actually making an apprehension and knowing that someone who feels, for some reason that the law does not apply to them, will be punished. Recently because I only work part time I had managed to miss out on all the fun stuff. It seemed like the longest time since my last catch and I was beginning to get frustrated. Two weeks ago I made an apprehension that blew all my other catches out of the water as far as dollar value and craziness go. Naturally I was stoaked. That was until this week. Another catch and this one nearly doubled the value of the last one. But this time there was no post-apprehension buzz. Why not? The bust looks phenomenal on paper.

I have caught all kinds of people from a range of backgrounds. But this latest one made me think.
Why so many?
Why is a socio-economic trend not represented more strongly?
Why do they think they can get away with it?

But most strongly, I wonder if they care. Being left with questions like this bug the hell out of me. I don’t want to hear the “Nature vs. Nurture” debate, nor do I want to blame the Police or our legal system. I want the focus of this post to be aimed at the one’s who deserve to be under the microscope, or at least at the ones that need to look in the mirror.

The night I made that big catch my flatmate and I went to get curry for dinner from a restaurant in town. As we sat and waited for our take-away order I recapped the details of my day and the action from work. Naturally we ended up in a fairly involved conversation about what could drive people to steal. Our findings were that perhaps in some cases there was a ‘Robin Hood Clause’ in which stealing a loaf of bread to feed your starving family falls into a moral grey-area. The obvious counter argument to this was that New Zealand has one of the best social welfare systems in the world (even though I disagree with parts of it) that provides a safety net for those that do fall through the cracks of society. In fact, students are the only group that need to borrow to survive (but that’s another post for another day)!

So as we were all wrapped up in our wee conversation and the kind Indian man handed us our dinner we left the restaurant without paying. Stopping at a dairy on the way home and still in the middle of outlining a utopian justice system, we realised we had not paid for the food we were carrying. Without any hesitation the two of us knew we were going back to settle our bill and apologise for our mistake despite the fact we could have easily kept walking home.

But it simply was never and option for us!

We went back, said sorry, had a laugh about the situation and felt like knobs for a few minutes while basking in the delicious duality between our conversation and our oversight.

So that’s my angle… I am a member of New Zealand’s only social group that needs to borrow to live but that doesn’t change the fact that I know right from wrong. Everyone knows the law so regardless of upbringing, at some point, for a crime to be committed, someone has to CHOOSE to do so.

First things first lets acknowledge the glaringly obvious oxymoron in the title because… well… that’s what I’m going to talk about today.

I play in a social Indoor Soccer team as a way to stay somewhat active and as a scarcely satisfactory substitute for not having the spare time to commit fully to a more serious Soccer team/club.

Tonight we had our last game for the ’season’ so naturally everyone was pretty amped to go out on a high note. The team I play in has had a good run winning all our games bar 3 with the remanded boiling down to 2 draws and 1 loss.

History aside however, tonight I was floored when the referee cautioned me for kicking the ball “too hard” because one of my shots on goal struck a young lady in the ankle. Excuse me? Literally speechless (a rare occurrence for me) I was startled into apologising for something, as I look back now I’m not the slightest bit sorry for. I love trying to kick the leather off the ball, shit even the team and spectators love seeing a shot crash full force into the back of the net or even just bounce off the wall (note that the ball is more of a big fuzzy tennis ball thing and not actually made from leather), its all part of it. Rest assured it was not some malicious attempt to injure your team-mate… I actually was trying to score a goal.

In a game that is essentially 8 sweaty people running around trying to kick the ball at 2 other slightly less sweaty people and I am forced to aim for a target that is 6 feet wide and 3 feet high the best option is to try and drill it in low and fast. Apparently however in social competition (there’s that oxymoron again) I’m expected to hold back and go after victory half arsed.

I am fully aware that it is a “social” thing.
Most teams know each other personally
The games are frequently played in high sprits (read tipsy)
There is no sledging of the opposition defence as they try to mark you
Girls aren’t tackled roughly buy the guys (half the time the girls are actually rougher)
If someone gets hurt the game stops immediately
We all just have fun!

But now with the social covered its time for the “competition”
We keep score
The winning team gets a prize and bragging rights
Girls are given 2 points if they score

When you weigh things up like that I realise that it’s actually the social aspects I enjoy the most. Get rid of the prizes. Forget the score. I honestly wouldn’t care. Running around with a few mates and having a beer should be made compulsory. But then the foundation of sport is destroyed. We play because we know there is some reward to it all.

Social Competition has managed to bridge two arenas while at that same time managing to fall into a hole where it is beginning to discourage competition. In the sublime and utterly flawless words of the great Tana Umaga, “This is rugby, not tiddlywinks!” (You can sub in any sport you like where rugby is. (And yes pun intended)). It’s a sport. Shit happens! If I kick your foot be assured it’s an accident. If I hurt you, I will help you up. And regardless of what transpired in the last 30mins I will shake your hand.

Social Competition is still a competition. Social Competition doesn’t mean going out half arsed and just having a kick around, I can do that without a ref. Social Competition means regardless of the outcome we can all still share a beer and be friends. And if I did something in the game that means I need to buy you one, shit I’ll do that too.

“I wouldn’t of believed it if I didn’t see it for myself”…. Would of been a good way to start this post but to be totally honest I found the situation I stumbled across today hilarious/transparent/ridiculous/ but most of all lacking any sense of credibility. Attention grabbed? Good!

While I was on my merry way to uni today I saw something that made my inner cynics day. On Ghuznee St, near Cuba Mall I saw one of the “Sustainability Trust” vehicles, and this is where I get to the funny part. Their vehicle of choice was a beaten up old Mitsubishi L300 van.

“Sustainability Trust”
Keyword: SUSTAINABLE

Sustainability Trust, your website states “The Sustainability Trust is a Wellington based non-profit charitable trust which supports local communities in addressing sustainability related issues. Our project portfolio is currently focused on energy efficiency, waste minimisation, transport, climate change and community”. Sorry? Did you say “transport”?

How is an old L300 van sustainable (apart from the vehicles apparent longevity)? Now in the interests of presenting a balanced argument and to make it seem like I’m not just spitting invective and bile at a charitable organisation I do want to acknowledge that they are exactly that. A charitable organisation. Also I want to say that as a designer, sustainability is a core component of the current design universe and it’s an issue we all need to consider and pay way more attention to.
Five years ago it was a nice bonus to buy something made from recycled materials.
Two years ago “cradle-to-cradle” products were big.
Currently the general awareness of consumers is so high that not only do consumers want to know that the product they are purchasing is sustainable, they also need to see the benefits both they and the world receive as a result of their diligence.

Believe me when I say I am aware of sustainable living and support it’s moral positioning. But the issue I have is how at present New Zealand is enjoying force-feeding us a notion the world is already aware of. Garry Moore said in 2007 that “the politics of the left and right are dead. Now everything is the politics of the environment”.

Yes there is work to be done.
Yes it is important.
No not everyone is doing his or her part.

But when the so-called “Sustainability Trust” who focus a section of their portfolio on transport drive an old smokey van they aren’t exactly setting the highest of examples. But I did give them some credit… It’s a van right? So that means they could carry their whole team in one vehicle; and as they encourage, use less private vehicles. Great right? Wrong! There were no rear seats. If they truly wanted to raise awareness wouldn’t that start with setting the highest possible standard for us to follow? Drive a hybrid. Better yet, ride a bike. Better still, WALK! Barefoot. Actually naked, then you wouldn’t even have a carbon footprint. I’m being facetious but the point stands.

If you’re trying to set an example, don’t skip over the easy parts or do them poorly. Set a flawless example we can be inspired to follow.

Lets get it right guys.

Recently I have spent a few hours on some of New Zealand’s domestic puddle jumpers. As I board the plane I am always reminded of “Fight Club” and “single serving friends”. About 3 years ago I had the joy of sitting next a 40-something businessman who was apparently doing quite well for himself. He was well dressed in a suit and within seconds of sitting down had introduced himself to me. His name escapes me now of course but that’s not the point of this post, we sat and chatted for the whole flight and he was genuinely interested in my studies and design work and told me about his flights around the world and adventures in foreign countries. His stories obviously dwarfed mine but it never felt like it was a competition. The flight landed in true bumpy tradition and our small Q300 rattled to a stop, we entered the terminal and went to our respective families saying nothing but sharing a mutual smile.

That was three years ago and my recent flights have not provided the same calibre of single serve friend, needless to say I am left with more than a few questions. I’m not sure whether it is the duration of the flight and that its easier for some people to sit in awkward silence for an hour trying not to make eye contact with the person next to you for fear of starting a conversation or that (and I hope its not) people just have no time for strangers…

Personally I can’t do it. I try to start a conversation… generic stuff like “Hey, how’s it going?”… “Have you had a good day?”… “What are your plans in destination ‘x’ (where ever the plane is going, I don’t actually refer to places as destination ‘x’)?”…. But nothing! People seem more interested in their magazine than interacting with other humans. At the risk of sounding like a cynic I just want to acknowledge that there could be some ‘Tyler Durden’ in the man from years back, in the sense that maybe my mind has perpetuated how cool he was to sit along with. But the fact remains that in my recent experience the best company I have had on any flight since then has been the hostess asking me for tea or coffee… at least that required an answer.

I want to put it down to the fact that the flights are so short that its easier for some people not to talk, or even that ‘Baby Boomers’ and the kids of ‘Generation X’ feel no connection to the youth of today. I’m even open to entertain the notion that people might think I have nothing to say. But that notwithstanding if a 21 year old can take the first step forward and open a dialog don’t I deserve more than a forced smile?

Maybe Ed Norton had it right… Should we all sit alone and invent our companions in Utopian solitude?