Some thoughts on… Standing Still

The Supreme Court reviewed two cases this week that examine the issue of marriage equality in the US.  One of them contests the Defense of Marriage Act which federally defines marriage between a man and woman, therefore excluding over 1000 national benefits to same-gender couples, including medical visitation rights and inheritance tax.  The second is a review of California’s Proposition 8, which places in limbo tens of thousands of couples who were granted marriage but whose status is in question after the referendum passed.

One potential outcome for both cases is that the Court may choose to do nothing, arguing that it is not their responsibility to decide these cases.  Given the outpouring of support for marriage equality from conservative and liberal constituents, such a move by the Justices might be considered a slap in the face to the public, and a failure to move forward a civil rights issue in the country.

But is it a failing of leadership for the Court to stand still and do nothing?  Let’s see what the arts and life have to say about this.

The Oscar-winning movie Lincoln brings together an extraordinary team of artists – Steven Spielberg, Tony Kushner, Daniel Day-Lewis, amongst many others – similar to how the 16^th President brought together a cabinet to lead a country and to address the issue of slavery in the United States.  The movie is an homage to the man widely recognized as one of the greatest Presidents with Day-Lewis transforming into the role.  Kushner based his screenplay on the book Team of Rivals, and narrates ably from the erudition of legal concerns to the cut-throat politics of implementation.

It is Spielberg’s steady hand that brings the story to life.  Although pedantic at points, he shows us that below the noble intention of Lincoln’s decision to end slavery through constitutional amendment there is a seamy underbelly of politics which must be reckoned with. To lead the country through the brackish waters to a more perfect union, hands must get dirty, ultimatums offered, and half-truths paraded.  At times, it seems the President is pulling the boat by himself with little help from the country.  But we know that is a mistake.  If the tides weren’t pushing with him, he likely wouldn’t have taken on the Herculean effort.

In our recent visit to Burma, we saw a country on the cusp of tremendous change.  A few years ago tourism was 500,000 people a year, next year it will be 3 million.  No country can adapt to this level of change – neither the infrastructure nor the people can remain the same. The military government opened the doors to reformation, and the global population is streaming through.  At the cross-road between India, Thailand, and China, all the super-powers – Japan, US, China, Russia – are vying for the natural resources and geo-political stature that the country affords.  The impact of changing from an autarky to an open economy for the government officials is obvious – they will make a fortune.  The impact on the people is yet to be seen.

Given isolation over the past 50 years, the populace had been sheltered from the machinations of capitalism.  Blackberries don’t work in the country and internet is still dial-up.  All Buddhist men at the age of 18 are required to go to the monastery for two years.  Food is readily available, but there is little luxury.  Opening up the country will undoubtedly bring improvements, but change for change’s sake is not necessarily the optimal path.  The government’s role in leading through this time is critical.  They could push heavily for commercialization and industrialization, leading the charge towards a more modern state.  It will definitely make money for people at the top.  If they choose this course, they need to recognize that growth and development towards a western ideal may come at the cost of losing the authentic nature of the country.

A large part of a leader’s job is to move people to new positions or new grounds that they may not necessarily have gone to on their own. Whether on the battlefield, in the workplace or in politics, people look to leaders to provide direction on the way forward.  Hopefully, the new destination is better than where they were before.  In the case of President Lincoln, if he were not in front steering the ship towards a new path, it may have taken decades to remove the yoke of slavery from the neck of the US. 

Many times though, leaders may not need to steer because the people are already moving in a preferred direction.  In these cases, the most a leader should do is gently guide the group towards the chosen path, and at a minimum not be an obstacle to the progress.  This is the hardest job, because leaders instinctually feel they need to be out in front.  In the case of the Burmese government, their best role may be to let the people have a greater choice on the direction and rate of change, and gently nudge or stay out of the way.

For the Supreme Court, if they choose not to rule on these two cases they are demonstrating a more gentle leadership style.  The lower court rulings would still be upheld, and they would be staying out of the way of progress.  It is not a failing of leadership to do nothing in this situation.  If they do rule on the cases pushing for marriage equality, then they put themselves in a situation where they need to force a number of states to follow.  This is a more accelerated and difficult path for the country. 

If done right, both choices demonstrate leadership, and as the protagonist sings in Bombay Dreams, “Sometimes standing still can be the best move you ever make.”

March 31, 2013

Some thoughts on… Achieving Status

Reflecting on the beginning of a new year, it’s time to think about achievements and make resolutions to accomplish even more for the next year. For example, personally I achieved Executive Platinum status on American Airlines for the first time in 2012, and wonder if it is possible to pull it off for 2013.

Whether the goals are professional or personal, why do we feel a need to strive so hard every year? Let’s see what the arts have to say.

Clifford Odet’s play Golden Boy at Lincoln Center was first produced in 1937, and maintains its relevance as ever today. The story follows a 21 year-old concert violinist, Joe Bonaparte, who gives up decades of training and practice to pursue quick fortune by entering the professional boxing ring. Joe’s ambition drives him fast towards a destiny that he believes will bring him happiness. Away from the life of musical introspection that his middle class, Italian family fostered, he seeks a journey that will catapult him to instant fame.

His story is similar to the multitudes of young individuals looking to establish themselves in a changing world. Seth Numrich portrays the arrogance and charisma of a boy becoming a man, willing to cast aside childish notions of musical perfection for the adult needs of acknowledgment and status. Tony Shaloub plays Joe’s father with pathos and a tragic recognition of the potential costs of this pursuit. A musician’s profession may not be glamorous enough for a young man seeking success, but in the trade-off he forgets the joy that a more humble life brings to others around him.

The film version of Les Miserable is a grand spectacle bringing to screen visuals hard to imagine on a Broadway stage. The novel of Jean Valjean’s lifetime penance for crimes he committed as a youth, and his foil Javert’s commitment to punishing him, is established in the Western ethos. Hugh Jackman carries the movie on his wolverine shoulders, but it’s a heavy load. Anne Hathaway as the ‘can’t take your eyes off her’ Fantine and Eddie Redmayne as the revelatory Marius provide support, yet the weight of the spectacle overcomes in the end.

Victor Hugo’s story still sings though. Javert’s solipsistic pursuit of a wrong that shouldn’t be righted is misguided and heartfelt. Jean Valjean, after a lifetime of self-preservation and flight from his identity, realizes that his true triumph is not survival but the happiness of his daughter. In this final feat, he accomplishes more than he has in his lifetime.

Like Joe and Jean Valjean, in youth we seek achievement as a way of establishing ourselves, getting the things we want and have yearned for. We seek status for ourselves. Once we get those though, we could keep gathering more, but it becomes a relentless pursuit towards an ever-moving goal.

The difficult part is shifting gears to striving to make ourselves better, not to achieve status, but as an appreciation of life. Recognizing that lacking this impetus, we are wasting the time given to us. The motivation changes to making ourselves better through the success of other - by mentoring, by training or by transferring wisdom to those we love around us. If we cling too tightly to our own purposes, like Javert, we lose true north and have nothing more to give ourselves. As Javert sings before his demise:

I am reaching, but I fall
And the stars are black and cold.

As I stare into the void

Of a world that cannot hold

January 13, 2013

Some thoughts on… Conservative Rage

Muslim rage has been a topic of conversation for the past few months.  Syria, Libya,  Yemen, Pakistan are examples of countries where citizens have expressed fury at the government leading to political instability.  Some have speculated that this may be a common theme across Muslim countries where the population feels it is losing control of its destiny.  The attribution that Islam is a contributing factor to the unrest seems simplistic, especially given that we are facing similar rage here in the United States.

Despite a tough economy, the overwhelming win for Barack Obama, may be less a nod towards the achievements of the President, and more a rejection of the policies espoused by the Republican Party.  The systematic disenfranchisement of ethnic groups, women, gays and lesbians, had a backlash in the election this year.  The vote was a clear renunciation of the call for continued “traditional American achievement” which could be interpreted as older, white, male conservative achievement.

In addition, future demographics are not in the GOP’s favor.  Their current constituency was on obvious display at the Republican National Convention this year, where the audience’s homogeneity was a prominent point of discussion. Unless a more centrist candidate comes forward, it may be difficult to sway the younger generation of voters who see the party as an out-of-touch, aging grandparent.

So now, it is conservatives’ turn to be angry.  Many feel they have lost their country and don’t see what can be done to regain the past glory.  What can the conservative party do to regroup and be a strong voice in politics again?  Let’s see what the Arts have to say.

Bring it On is the story of competing high school cheerleading teams, based on the film franchise.  One school is white, upper-class headed by an ambitious Eve Harrington, a young ingénue willing to do anything to win.  The other is an urban, multi-racial one that is more disjointed in leadership.  The themes for the musical are not new.
What is new are Lin-Manuel Miranda’s rat-a-tat lyrics evoking our culture and lingual diversity while at the same time complementing traditional musical-fare, along with the skyrocketing choreography of the teams.  Miranda may be the heir to Sondheim.  The parallels to the current election are apparent, but the twist is that in the end, the rich school wins the top prize.  The learning is that the top dog may still be successful, but the victory is tainted by the deals made to get there.

Bond is back in Skyfall, which one-ups Casino Royale. The movie takes on the question of the utility of a beat-up and broken, cold-war era spy in a cyber world.  The 50 year series needed a re-boot and with Sam Mendes direction, it got one.    Bond’s hand-to-hand combat has little use, in a world where economic markets can be destroyed by the click of a button.  A poignant scene is when the new Q (played brilliantly by Ben Whisaw) who is half Daniel Craig’s age provides him only with a gun and remote tracking device –  no more fancy cars, no more shooting pens that are old-fashioned and redundant.  Bond’s job is just to pull a trigger and know when to do so.  The movie demonstrates that there is still a role for an old spy, but he needs to be surrounded and supported by the younger generation.

The revival of Cyrano de Bergerac, is an opportunity to see the historic play, updated with a fresh translation.  The story of the dare-devil swordsman with the heart of a poet and the nose of a pig is always timely.  His love for Roxanne which is translated through the cipher of a younger, more handsome cadet is heartbreaking and humorous.  In this production, Douglas Hodge brings the panache and energy required for a larger than life character.  As the story ends, Cyrano decries the things in his life that he fought against -

prejudice, cowardice and compromise. He promised never to surrender to these ideals, and because of this he dies having spent his life paying visits to his true love as no more than a friend.

Rage is an easy outlet, but eventually reflection will be needed to regain a strong voice.  The GOP will need to drop its alliance with the far right and rediscover its more centrist voice.  Like Romney, if a future candidate makes deals with ultra-conservative but promises to govern from the center, the populace will distrust her ability to do so.  It will need to embrace the new America, which is different from the traditional America.  This includes a younger generation that overwhelmingly supports gay rights, a Hispanic population that demands fairer immigration laws, and women who refuse to lose their reproductive rights.  Not compromising may be a good ideal for a fighter and poet like like Cyrano but not for a political party.  Otherwise the GOP may be become as obsolete as a pocket pen with shooting bullets from the 1960’s.

November 11, 2012