Problem:

“India is OUR country” The quote we often preach but forget to deliver. I joined a club recently where I met a true Indian. I asked him about the most vivid memory of his life. One morning, as he was heading towards his office, he realized that the road he regularly takes was unusually bumpy. Upon inspection, he came to the conclusion that a truck carrying stones passed by on that road and unintentionally scattered few stones along the way. He believed that the authority of the truck will take care of this later that day. Next morning, the road situation was unchanged with stones still scattered. He parked his vehicle nearby, put on some music and started kicking the stones off the road. Within a few minutes, a school bus stopped by, students gathered around and started clapping for this true Indian. As he turned around, he said “Helping hands are better than clapping hands”. As a repercussion, the students started helping this man kick the stones off the road. A task that would have taken hours to be done by one person was completed in a couple of minutes. What a great example of team work! It was this man’s discretionary efforts that brought a change in the thought process of the students, India’s next generation. We all point fingers and blame one another for societal problems but never act upon it. If this man, a true Indian, would have just blammed the truck driver and went on his way, would the road still be cleared? The next time we point fingers at someone for a social cause, we must keep in mind that that someone is an Indian just like us. Will a true Indian point fingers at an Indian? Are we pointing fingers at ourselves? In the end, we are all in the same team. Question: After the kid's assistance, how does the Indian man feel about society in general? === The answer to the above question is
****
A: He thinks we all work better as a team vs one on on.


Problem:

SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA — The conservative leader of South Korea’s main opposition party on Thursday spoke out against the upcoming U.S.–North Korea summit. He also voiced concern that political considerations are driving U.S. President Donald Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in to compromise joint security for more false denuclearization promises from North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. “I am rather pessimistic about whether this negotiation will work out well or not. The only means for North Korea to maintain its regime is its nuclear program. The moment that North Korea gives up its nuclear program, and the moment it opens up to reform, the Kim Jong Un regime will collapse,” said Hong Joon-pyo, the chairman of the Liberty Korea Party. On June 12, Trump and Kim will meet in Singapore to try to reach an agreement to end the North’s threatening nuclear weapons program in exchange for economic incentives and security guarantees that could include a formal peace treaty to replace the armistice that has been enforced since the end of the Korean War in 1953. Many South Korean conservatives had voiced strong support for Trump’s “maximum pressure” polices to force Pyongyang to unilaterally give up its nuclear weapons through tough international sanctions in place that ban 90 percent of the country’s trade, and the threat of military action. But they have been troubled by recent statements coming from the Trump administration indicating the United States may be willing to soften its demands for the complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement (CVID) of the North’s nuclear program before offering any sanctions relief. Hong is worried that Trump may seek a deal that would quickly end the North’s intercontinental ballistic missile program that directly threatens the U.S., and leave the regional nuclear threat to be resolved later. Trump seems overly intent to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough, Hong said, to shift the media focus away from the ongoing special prosecutor investigation he is facing over Russia’s... Question: What is probably true about South Korean conservatives? === The answer to the above question is
****
A: They do not support the North Korean government


Problem:

The collaborative process between me and Claire Bridge has been good so far. Upon finding out her email address we had a brief email exchange culminating in me sending her a list of potential questions for the interview. Claire quite liked a lot of the questions, but overall there were too many, so we proceeded to reduce the number of questions to six main questions. These questions would then form the basis of the artist portrait, with an attempt to limit answers to no more than a minute, so little had to be cut for the final edit. The six questions we arrived at are as follows: How would you define creativity? What does it mean to you to be an artist? Do you feel a painting or piece of art can house an energy/a feeling from the original artist? Do you feel that your own works house this energy? Change and transformation are recurrent themes in your work. What are you exploring and why do these fascinate you? And recently we saw a change in your medium too, incorporating video works and photography. You seem to draw on many influences in your work, from quantum physics, astrophysics, to environmental ecology, psychology, philosophy and metaphysics. With titles like “Dark Matter”, “Touching Infinity”, “We are made of Stars”, “Rising tides” and “A drop in the ocean” or “Alchemy”. Can you tell us something more about the convergence of these ideas and influences? What continues to motivate and inspire you as an artist? We both felt these questions addressed the initial topic of exploring creativity, explored why Claire became an artist, gives insight into Claire’s work and practise and looks toward the future of Claire’s practice. After refining the questions, we proceeded to organise a day to film, which will be on the 16th September. Hopefully if all goes well we will both have an artist portrait that lives up to our expectations. Question: What is the interview being used for? === The answer to the above question is
****
A:
an artist portrait