President Obama and Senator Boehner are locked in an epic struggle around the US budget and an increase in the debt ceiling. At stake is a potential government default resulting in stalled salary payments to government employees, a mar on the US’ debt rating and a further unraveling of the economy.
Held hostage to its Tea Party constituency, the Republicans have hijacked the conversation and are unwilling to accept any increase in taxes. The White House has acquiesced to the extent that many Democrats believe the President has given away too much. The current bill which has been broadly agreed to by both will be brought for a vote on Monday.
In these situations of brinkmanship, where the two sides are unmovable from their positions, how can a resolution be formed? Let’s see what the Arts have to say.
In Stephen Adly Guirgis’ play The Motherf*** with the Hat (MwtH), which ended on Broadway in mid July, the three main characters are caught in a love triangle. Bobby Canavale plays Jackie – broke, out of prison and can’t hold a job. His AA counselor played by Chris Rock is an upstanding citizen with a questionable moral standing. While Jackie’s fiancé, Veronica, is disappointed in his inability to be financially productive is still sexually attracted to him, and may or may not be having an affair.
The play is 90 minutes of strained yearning, dogmatic posturing and unrivaled cursing. The divide between Jackie and Veronica is heart wrenching. You know that the two should be together, but by the end of the play, they have moved to such resolute positions, that they are unable to come together. The emotions of the characters are open wires sparking at each other when near, but so twisted in polarity that they nullify each other on contact.
In the recent Harry Potter movie, Deathly Hallows Part II, the saga closes with the archetypal clash between Harry and Voldemort. The books and movies have become our modern day morality tales – teaching society about choices and consequences similar to Aeschylus and Euripedes. Good and evil are apparent in the main characters, but the spectrum between is filled by other characters who are more fascinating. These individuals, like Dumbledore, Professor Slughorn or Draco Malfoy, are gradations of good and evil, and bridge the distance between Harry and Voldemort to find a peaceful resolution.
J.K Rowling sets out from the beginning that there is not a common ground, and in order for one to live the other must die. Harry’s realization of this truth allows him to resign to death eventually coming back stronger to vanquish a weakened Voldemort. The eighth movie is the best since movie #3 (Prisoner of Azkaban). The dark tones and immediate pacing propel the story to the inevitable conflict, leaving the viewer exhausted and enthralled on the sideline. We saw the movie in IMAX 3D – definitely worth the $4 extra dollars.
In the on-going budget battle, there seems to be two resolutions. The first is for the President to relent to the demands of the Republicans. This seems to be the path he is taking. The hope is that by submission on the current battle, similar to Harry, he can eventually win the war. The second option is to hold to the positions, and let the country default. This will be a difficult outcome and like the characters in MwtH, we can wish for a different resolution. Perhaps US citizens and Tea Party members need to see the depths of an economic downturn in order to appreciate the consequences of brinkmanship.
July 31, 2011
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Some thoughts on… Holding out for a Hero
The hero of the weekend is Governor Andrew M. Cuomo, who in the start of his first term has managed to pull off Marriage Equality in New York – a feat that has daunted leaders before him. The legislation makes sense because it draws a distinction between church and state. Religious organizations are exempted from conducting ceremonies if they wish, and cannot be sued by the state for doing so.
The celebrations in the City and around NY are a justified recognition that a commitment between same-sex individuals is as valid in the eyes of government as those between other people. But with all the euphoria, there is an underlying question of what exactly have we been waiting for?
Many same sex couples are already leading their lives – conducting commitment ceremonies, adopting children, serving the community, and creating their own legal contracts that simulate the benefits of marriage. The legislation will not make them more productive members of society and provides minor additional protection. So what have we really accomplished?
Let’s see what the Arts have to say. The summer blockbuster X-Men: First Class is a prequel to the series and presents the origins of how the super-beings were brought together. The X-Men are products of advanced DNA evolution giving them skills that differentiate and isolate them. Society fears their power and is biased against their mutant nature. Even though they continually save human society from destroying itself, they remain unappreciated and reviled.
In this installment, the director has introduced younger versions of two main characters James Macavoy (Professor X) and Michael Fassbender (Magneto). Both actors are thrilling. Their wry humor and intensity aspirate the deflating series back to its taut and punchy introduction. In the story, the leads take different approaches to dealing with a society that doesn’t appreciate their help. Magneto chooses to support mutant power by empowering them and divorcing from humans, while Professor X wishes to integrate and find common ground. They’re basic paradigms for the disenfranchised.
The meaning of Marriage Equality will differ for individuals. For some, it’s merely an indication of the separation of church and state – New York has no jurisdiction to discriminate relationships between individuals based on religious arguments. For others, it’s validation that same-gender commitment is equal in stature to different-gender relationships – opening the door for less prejudice. Overall, the measure is confirmation that GLBT individuals are not secondary citizens in the eyes of New York state law and that we can find common ground.
But, the rich and well-off individuals who supported and funded the measure are likely not the ones who will realize the true benefit. These folks already have enough legal documents in place to secure their financial and personal affairs. The true beneficiaries will be people that are not allowed to visit their loved ones in a hospital or are excluded from inheritance because they are not related and don’t have the finances or education to establish common law rights.
For everyone State measures are critical, but eventually the removal of the Defense of Marriage Act and Federal recognition of tax and benefits for same-sex relationships is essential for true integration and common ground. Here we may be tempted to hold off for another hero – President Obama – to change the law. But as we learned from X-Men and from ourselves we can’t wait for others to save us. Along with supporting Federal measures to change law, we need to find alternate ways to secure these benefits within the existing system.
June 26, 2011
The celebrations in the City and around NY are a justified recognition that a commitment between same-sex individuals is as valid in the eyes of government as those between other people. But with all the euphoria, there is an underlying question of what exactly have we been waiting for?
Many same sex couples are already leading their lives – conducting commitment ceremonies, adopting children, serving the community, and creating their own legal contracts that simulate the benefits of marriage. The legislation will not make them more productive members of society and provides minor additional protection. So what have we really accomplished?
Let’s see what the Arts have to say. The summer blockbuster X-Men: First Class is a prequel to the series and presents the origins of how the super-beings were brought together. The X-Men are products of advanced DNA evolution giving them skills that differentiate and isolate them. Society fears their power and is biased against their mutant nature. Even though they continually save human society from destroying itself, they remain unappreciated and reviled.
In this installment, the director has introduced younger versions of two main characters James Macavoy (Professor X) and Michael Fassbender (Magneto). Both actors are thrilling. Their wry humor and intensity aspirate the deflating series back to its taut and punchy introduction. In the story, the leads take different approaches to dealing with a society that doesn’t appreciate their help. Magneto chooses to support mutant power by empowering them and divorcing from humans, while Professor X wishes to integrate and find common ground. They’re basic paradigms for the disenfranchised.
The meaning of Marriage Equality will differ for individuals. For some, it’s merely an indication of the separation of church and state – New York has no jurisdiction to discriminate relationships between individuals based on religious arguments. For others, it’s validation that same-gender commitment is equal in stature to different-gender relationships – opening the door for less prejudice. Overall, the measure is confirmation that GLBT individuals are not secondary citizens in the eyes of New York state law and that we can find common ground.
But, the rich and well-off individuals who supported and funded the measure are likely not the ones who will realize the true benefit. These folks already have enough legal documents in place to secure their financial and personal affairs. The true beneficiaries will be people that are not allowed to visit their loved ones in a hospital or are excluded from inheritance because they are not related and don’t have the finances or education to establish common law rights.
For everyone State measures are critical, but eventually the removal of the Defense of Marriage Act and Federal recognition of tax and benefits for same-sex relationships is essential for true integration and common ground. Here we may be tempted to hold off for another hero – President Obama – to change the law. But as we learned from X-Men and from ourselves we can’t wait for others to save us. Along with supporting Federal measures to change law, we need to find alternate ways to secure these benefits within the existing system.
June 26, 2011
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Some thoughts on…Vanquishing an enemy
Osama bin Laden has been killed. A sense of awe and resolution may pervade the country, but I am unsettled about the aftermath. It’s not because of the pro-USA chanting by crowds which carries a whiff of celebrating on people’s graves. We know that this brings closure to a manhunt that led to two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and thousands of deaths. It also gives credibility to Obama’s administration and affirms his strong hand on foreign policy.
The unease comes from the gnawing thought that once we captured bin Laden, should we have brought him to trial? I realize that there are tortuous, international legal laws that surround such a decision, and that much of this would have been considered by the President’s advisors. And yet it raises the broader question:
What is the best way to deal with a vanquished enemy? Let’s see what the Arts have to say about this.
With Tony season, new shows are blooming on the Great White Way. Catch Me If You Can is the creation of Marc Shaiman and Terence McNally who shepherded the film to musical conversion of The Full Monty. The show follows the true-story, narrative of the movie – the tale of a teenage con artist, Frank Abagnale, who through forgery, wit and luck becomes a pilot, physician and lawyer while embezzling millions of dollars. The show is a gift of 1960’s style – a time when air hostesses were glamorous, bank tellers were trusting, and martinis were plentiful.
Yet the production lacks novelty in the story-telling. We know where the characters are landing before the plane leaves the gate. Kerry Butler’s fiancé to Abagnale is one character altered from the movie and yet her part is relegated to the second half and is given one big song (a waste of her talent). There are points when the production sizzles – Leo Norbert Butz’ portrayal of the detective Carl Hanratty who pursues Abagnale like a modern day Javert is pure joy when he breaks out into song. The obsession leads to eventual apprehension of his foil, and the twist is that instead of putting him in jail, he takes pity on the boy and recruits him to help catch other forgers; a pleasing resolution to a comfortable albeit not very challenging evening.
War Horse, a transplant from London’s National Theater, brings to life through breath-taking puppetry the story of a boy that loses his beloved riding horse to the vagaries of World War I. The plot is simple – boy meets horse, boy loses horse, boy finds horse again – but the staging elevates the storyline into a meta-physical world involving pastoral bliss and horrific fighting. The central character is the horse, Joey, portrayed by three actors who are immediately visible and yet blend into the soul of the animal so perfectly they assimilate into one creature. Joey’s emotions and struggles are real beyond anthropomorphism; one believes his longing to live and see his master again. This should be an easy winner at the Tonys.
There is no surfeit of enemies in this play – Germans and English soldiers fighting a tired war involving, unkind fathers and military leaders wrapped in their ego-driven ambitions. The combatants show little pity in defeating their foes; in fact they can only escape self-examination of their deeds, by painting each other as foreign elements bent on destruction. The true adversary is war itself, because it throws apart loved ones – daughters from mothers; husbands from wives, boys from their horses. No one wins in this slide to annihilation, and the only survivor is the hope of an eventual end.
Tony Kushner’s new play, The Intellectual Homosexual’s Guide To Capitalism And Socialism With A Key To The Scriptures (IHo for short) is as dense and long as the title with a four hour run time. Somehow the writing and acting soar despite the weight of such a premise. A father, Gus, brings together his family in Brooklyn to gain communal consensus on his committing suicide. Gus is a socialist, long shoreman who has toiled for the recognition of the common man’s labor, only to be facing a world where all that effort has been erased and forgotten. His disillusionment with his children and more importantly himself, leads him to the decision of self-immolation. The ensemble is winning and transports the show surprisingly quickly with occasional lapses into inscrutable erudition.
For the father, the foe he is fighting is himself. He can no longer live in a world which has given up on his manifesto, and as we later find out, where he has betrayed his own ideals. In his fight for workers’ rights, he made his own pact with the devil. He was able to achieve the victory of guaranteeing a worker’s income after retirement demonstrating that laborers own the value of what they create. But to garner this win, he gave up on his ideal of union for all people, since the salary was given only to certain individuals. The rest of the workers union were eventually laid off and replaced. Gus has never been able to live with this compromise of principles, and his solution is to find solace in death.
Unlike the fairy-tale ending of Catch Me if You Can, with the capture of Osama, it would be idealistic to think that he would partner with the US to stop terrorism. Although in today’s Op-Ed in the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof writes that Richard Holbrooke was trying to accomplish a similar strategy, by creating a peace deal with influential members of the Taliban.
Instead, we seem to have taken the “eye for an eye” path. Osama would not have thought twice to conduct on his own enemies a similar exercise as the US did, in other words, send emissaries to a foreign country and kill people in their homes or at work. In fact, he repeatedly carried out this terrorism. But as we saw in War Horse, the true enemy is the warring itself. Continued retributive actions leave collateral damage making the entire world blind. In many cases, this is the efficient and realistic path to take, but it demands questioning whether there is a way to elevate ourselves out of these no-win situations.
The elusive solution is a twist on the golden rule: to treat the enemy, the way we would want to be treated if the situation were reversed. By treating Osama the way that he has treated us in the past – without remorse, pity or mercy –we are like the Father in IHo, giving up a little of our moral high ground to achieve the goal of bringing justice to the country. We can claim this as an act of self-defense, but it still leaves me unsettled.
May 15, 2011
The unease comes from the gnawing thought that once we captured bin Laden, should we have brought him to trial? I realize that there are tortuous, international legal laws that surround such a decision, and that much of this would have been considered by the President’s advisors. And yet it raises the broader question:
What is the best way to deal with a vanquished enemy? Let’s see what the Arts have to say about this.
With Tony season, new shows are blooming on the Great White Way. Catch Me If You Can is the creation of Marc Shaiman and Terence McNally who shepherded the film to musical conversion of The Full Monty. The show follows the true-story, narrative of the movie – the tale of a teenage con artist, Frank Abagnale, who through forgery, wit and luck becomes a pilot, physician and lawyer while embezzling millions of dollars. The show is a gift of 1960’s style – a time when air hostesses were glamorous, bank tellers were trusting, and martinis were plentiful.
Yet the production lacks novelty in the story-telling. We know where the characters are landing before the plane leaves the gate. Kerry Butler’s fiancé to Abagnale is one character altered from the movie and yet her part is relegated to the second half and is given one big song (a waste of her talent). There are points when the production sizzles – Leo Norbert Butz’ portrayal of the detective Carl Hanratty who pursues Abagnale like a modern day Javert is pure joy when he breaks out into song. The obsession leads to eventual apprehension of his foil, and the twist is that instead of putting him in jail, he takes pity on the boy and recruits him to help catch other forgers; a pleasing resolution to a comfortable albeit not very challenging evening.
War Horse, a transplant from London’s National Theater, brings to life through breath-taking puppetry the story of a boy that loses his beloved riding horse to the vagaries of World War I. The plot is simple – boy meets horse, boy loses horse, boy finds horse again – but the staging elevates the storyline into a meta-physical world involving pastoral bliss and horrific fighting. The central character is the horse, Joey, portrayed by three actors who are immediately visible and yet blend into the soul of the animal so perfectly they assimilate into one creature. Joey’s emotions and struggles are real beyond anthropomorphism; one believes his longing to live and see his master again. This should be an easy winner at the Tonys.
There is no surfeit of enemies in this play – Germans and English soldiers fighting a tired war involving, unkind fathers and military leaders wrapped in their ego-driven ambitions. The combatants show little pity in defeating their foes; in fact they can only escape self-examination of their deeds, by painting each other as foreign elements bent on destruction. The true adversary is war itself, because it throws apart loved ones – daughters from mothers; husbands from wives, boys from their horses. No one wins in this slide to annihilation, and the only survivor is the hope of an eventual end.
Tony Kushner’s new play, The Intellectual Homosexual’s Guide To Capitalism And Socialism With A Key To The Scriptures (IHo for short) is as dense and long as the title with a four hour run time. Somehow the writing and acting soar despite the weight of such a premise. A father, Gus, brings together his family in Brooklyn to gain communal consensus on his committing suicide. Gus is a socialist, long shoreman who has toiled for the recognition of the common man’s labor, only to be facing a world where all that effort has been erased and forgotten. His disillusionment with his children and more importantly himself, leads him to the decision of self-immolation. The ensemble is winning and transports the show surprisingly quickly with occasional lapses into inscrutable erudition.
For the father, the foe he is fighting is himself. He can no longer live in a world which has given up on his manifesto, and as we later find out, where he has betrayed his own ideals. In his fight for workers’ rights, he made his own pact with the devil. He was able to achieve the victory of guaranteeing a worker’s income after retirement demonstrating that laborers own the value of what they create. But to garner this win, he gave up on his ideal of union for all people, since the salary was given only to certain individuals. The rest of the workers union were eventually laid off and replaced. Gus has never been able to live with this compromise of principles, and his solution is to find solace in death.
Unlike the fairy-tale ending of Catch Me if You Can, with the capture of Osama, it would be idealistic to think that he would partner with the US to stop terrorism. Although in today’s Op-Ed in the New York Times, Nicholas Kristof writes that Richard Holbrooke was trying to accomplish a similar strategy, by creating a peace deal with influential members of the Taliban.
Instead, we seem to have taken the “eye for an eye” path. Osama would not have thought twice to conduct on his own enemies a similar exercise as the US did, in other words, send emissaries to a foreign country and kill people in their homes or at work. In fact, he repeatedly carried out this terrorism. But as we saw in War Horse, the true enemy is the warring itself. Continued retributive actions leave collateral damage making the entire world blind. In many cases, this is the efficient and realistic path to take, but it demands questioning whether there is a way to elevate ourselves out of these no-win situations.
The elusive solution is a twist on the golden rule: to treat the enemy, the way we would want to be treated if the situation were reversed. By treating Osama the way that he has treated us in the past – without remorse, pity or mercy –we are like the Father in IHo, giving up a little of our moral high ground to achieve the goal of bringing justice to the country. We can claim this as an act of self-defense, but it still leaves me unsettled.
May 15, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)