What can we say about this? That it it is great to be a PM to get freebies wherever he goes? To Boutique Owner, the cost of a designer Emperor Tee-shirt given away free is so infinitesimal small compared to advertising costs to be incurred if one were to advertise on front page NST to get equivalent publicity ! Then what about the photographs of PM in the shop holding up Emperor Tee-shirt to be hung up later in the boutique for future customers to see when they walk in and check around? There are people willing to pay for such photo ops for commercial purposes.

I guess it is Ok to parody and satirize public figures and politicians when they unwittingly provide such appropriate symbolism and opportunity –that we could laugh at and with.

However my sentiment is in line with what Loyal Malaysian said at 18:40.08, let us not go overboard to impute our emperor ‘dumb’ or stupid by it.

After all it is not as if it were some official act that we are entitled to condemn as stupid. It was a private event and, as I said, was just giving some free advertising publicity to the boutique owners for commercial advantage – what’s new (to us) as far as those related to him is concerned? He would have us believe that a family man with strong family sense he is always available to lend a helping hand by way of publicity and free advertising to his family next-of-kins’ commercial ventures and perhaps we should treat it as just that!

I can imagine the Bread Seller of “The Loaf” sniggering now at all this. But in relation to the naked emperor, isn’t the Bread Seller the “two scoundrels” in Hans Christian Anderson’s fable, whose recent remark of his anointed successor being a seat warmer of one term is a reflection of how after manipulating Malaysian politics for 22 years he still want to control it for years to come via proxies after his stepping down?

The Question is : whilst in the Pavilion, would we rather patronize The Loaf (where the bread though touted as nice is very expensive) or The Emperor’s New Clothes Boutique (ie if both not ideal and expensive which is lesser of two evils?, a question undoubtedly admitting conflicting opinions).

Simpleton, naked emperor misled by hangers to carry on the procession of ‘somnambulant governance’ (to borrow Earnest’s words) under pretension that there is substance, or whatever, could that be what he wants us – and kampung folks in rural heartland – to think and believe?

[When asked how he should be addressed at the beginning of term of office he tried the art of disarming humility by saying a simple avuncular “Pak Lah” would do. "After all, referring to me as Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi needs almost 14 syllables, while calling me Pak Lah needs only 2", he quipped].

It is very much a part of his political personae – or mystique, if you will – to cultivate and portray the image of simple common man who could identify with simple kampung folks – the cornerstone of his constituency. But whether he really is that simple minded and asleep all the time or pretending to be so – well, it depends on whether one wants to give him benefit of the doubt, and really who but those very close to him, really knows?

But back to the question : should we call him “dumb” holding up this striped tee-shirt (that Sheriff said was reminiscent of convict’s attire) in The Emperor’s New Clothes with all its symbolism?

In this Information Age, yes to be intelligent is important to succeed especially in context of a leader of a nation. But can anyone define and measure intelligence with precision? What is intelligence, in its broadest sense??? What if he’s crafty and pretending dumb?

Hans Christian Anderson’s fairy tale symbolizes the futility of any attempts to discern with precision who is intelligent, and it is demonstrated by the vanity and foolishness of those who believe they can.

In Hans Christian Anderson’s parable the child being innocent was the one who said aloud – “The emperor is naked” and soon all the people were saying aloud, “But, he has nothing on!” The Emperor hears what they said, and he shivers, for he knows that their words are true. But it would never do to stop the procession; and so he holds himself stiffer than ever. And behind him his officers carried the invisible train and carry on the charade.

So in Hans Christian Anderson’s parable, who is dumb – the scoundrels, the go-between Prime Minister or the Emperor, the child that pointed out innocently that the Emperor was naked or the people watching the procession?

We’ll soon find out from the results of the coming General Election. :)