Work to enjoy holiday

Chinese people might have spent the Spring Festival holiday differently but have more or less the same complaint about returning to work after seven days: depression, weight gain and low work efficiency. Though the advice of physicians and psychologists may help, it's important that people change their opinion about work, says an article in Yangtze Evening News. Excerpts:

The post-holiday syndrome has its roots in the conventional thinking that work is simply a means of survival, separate from holiday. This dichotomy makes the transition from holiday to work particularly unpleasant.

While most of the people were enjoying their Spring Festival holiday, many had to work and others took days off in turn. But they had a sense of satisfaction because their work made life convenient for the hundreds of millions enjoying the holiday.

Nowadays, work is more than just a means of survival; it entails social value. People can change society for the better both at work and during holidays. They will be more willing to resume work after a holiday if they value their work and others respect and reward them for their labor.

It is true that during holidays, people can relax with their families. But it is also true that people can work to improve the life of their families and make the life of even strangers convenient if they value their work.

Work and holiday combine to make a person's life meaningful. Thus to enjoy one's work and to work for the improvement of society are perhaps the best remedy for the post-holiday syndrome. A person can resume work after a holiday without a hitch only if he/she attaches equal importance to both.

A case for the public to decide

Fang Zhouzi, the "science cop" known for exposing pseudoscience and academic fraud, is facing a lawsuit from popular Chinese writer Han Han for "accusing that Han's works were in fact ghostwritten". Han alleges that the accusation has soiled his reputation, says an article in Changjiang Daily. Excerpts:

Han needs evidence to prove what he says is right. One the other hand, Fang's analysis and criticism will attract more attention because of his procedure. So a more comprehensive exchange between the two could reveal the facts.

Since a public topic could influence not only the image and reputation of the parties involved but also public interests, there is need for public questioning and discussion. But first we should figure out what the bottom line of the public discussion is - whether certain remarks are acceptable or have the potential to cause negative effects. Only by making the facts public can we ensure that opinions and comments are impartial.

Besides, in any open public discussion, the public is both the onlooker and the participant. The public should decide whose attitude could directly influence the quality of the discussion and mood of the parties involved. If public opinion is impulsive, it will blur the focus and eventually make the discussion superficial.

The proper atmosphere for digging out the truth can be created only if the public exercises calm and sees things rationally. And only then can the discussion develop normally and according to common rules.

This is specifically what we should learn from this lawsuit.

(China Daily 02/01/2012 page9)