Financial and business news and articles
Posts tagged Culture
Smile Though Your Heart is Breaking by Pauline Prescott | Book review
Mar 14th
Pauline Prescott’s story is one of remaining plucky and loyal through good times and bad. A national treasure, says Rachel Cooke
It’s easy to sneer at Pauline Prescott, to take the mickey out of her fondness for such things as cutting the crusts off sandwiches, and plenty of people already have. They should be ashamed of themselves. The older I get, the more I admire women like her: kind, self-effacing, loyal, plucky, polite, always beautifully turned out. Her pleasure in simple things – a decent bun, the occasional illicit glass of hotel champagne – speaks to the deracinated Yorkshirewoman in me, who was brought up to believe that the very worst thing you can be is spoilt. Midway through her autobiography, Prescott refers to the “Beverley days out” she enjoys with her girlfriends. If you don’t know Beverley, the minster town that passes for posh in the East Riding, this phrase will be lost on you. But it wasn’t lost on me. The treat of Beverley! Faster than you can say “Dorneywood”, I was on the internet, looking for a hotel.
Dorneywood, traditionally the Chancellor’s grace and favour house, is where Pauline and her husband spent their weekends during the decade he was deputy prime minister. The original plan, on his elevation in 1997, was that he would get Chevening, the Foreign Secretary’s retreat. But Pauline took one look and thought: too big, much as she did when she first saw the couple’s rather grand castellated home in Hull (“All I could think was: how am I going to clean all this?”). This is Pauline all over: easier to get Cherie Blair to admit that Tony cocked up Iraq than to turn Pauline Prescott’s head. Of course, if it did happen to turn, not a hair would stir in the process. When she married her merchant seaman beau in 1961, in a satin dress from Nola Gowns of Chester, her day was ruined by, among other things, the fact that her “industrial-strength” hairspray melted the diamante on her tiara, spattering her back-combed hair with silver. In her book, Pauline pays dutiful lip service to her husband’s Labour values; when he first stood for parliament, she made him the biggest, reddest rosette you’ve ever seen. But you can tell that what she really believes in is the power of the can, be it hairspray or furniture polish.
Pauline Tilston was born in Chester in 1939, the daughter of a bricklayer and a cleaner. As she tells it in Smile Though Your Heart is Breaking, the family is poor but happy, and Pauline, a keen dancer, dreams only of becoming a television “topper”. Then, calamity. Her beloved father dies suddenly; her brother contracts TB and is exiled to a sanitorium; her mother suffers an industrial accident at a local laundry. It’s all a bit John Braine at this point. Life, however, picks up when Pauline, beautiful and by now a hairdresser, begins dating an American serviceman called Jim. She likes Jim so much she gives him her bronze tap-dancing medal as a keepsake. He is married but intends divorcing his wife, or so he claims. When he leaves for home, Pauline is certain that he will return and claim her.
You know what’s coming next. Poor old Pauline, who is only 16, discovers that she is pregnant. Jim does not return, and his girl is dispatched to St Bridget’s House of Mercy, a home for unwed mothers, where the nuns encourage her to scrub the floors because “this helps get the baby’s head into position”. Pauline’s mother insists she cannot keep her baby – there is no money – and, having resisted the idea of adoption for three long years, during which time her son, Paul, remains in state care, she signs the papers. By this time, Pauline is seeing John Prescott, whom she met at a bus stop (their first date was a trip to the cinema where her Uncle Wilf played the Wurlizter). Now, there is plenty to be said about Prescott and the way he carries on; when I interviewed him, he flung his legs over the arms of his chair and pointed his groin at me like a gun. But he comes out of this period faultlessly, often travelling with Pauline to visit Paul, and, unlike his mother, never making her feel in the slightest bit ashamed. Given the time, and their social class, is it any wonder that she married him?
John decrees that Pauline must stay in his constituency with their own two sons when he is in Westminster, so no exciting New Labour gossip in her book’s dull middle section. Yes, she discovers that her husband is bulimic – food keeps disappearing – but as her mother says: “It could have been worse, Pauline. John could have become an alcoholic, and that would have been much more expensive.” Flip through a few pages, however, and the story picks up. The tabloids find Paul, a Tory-voting military policeman, and they are joyfully reunited. Then John confesses to an affair with Tracey Temple, his diary secretary. I imagine that Pauline found telling her ghost writer about this extremely painful; certainly, she’s coy so far as the, er, ins and outs go. But you cheer when she describes her coping mechanism: her downstairs loo, which she is doing up, a project that cannot be derailed. Lipstick, mascara, a permanently boiling kettle: these things comprise Pauline’s armour, and it’s John, not her, who, some days later, must nervously inquire if their marriage is over. Even better, as she seems to know, these events, combined with her cherishable cameos in the television shows her husband has made since leaving government, have since turned our heroine into a bona fide national treasure. At Mr Chu’s of Hull, the Prescotts’ favourite restaurant, it’s now Pauline’s beautifully manicured hand that people secretly want to shake, and I don’t blame them. She’s great. A peach,and a trooper.
Famous, Rich and Jobless; Jobless; Inside John Lewis; Wonders of the Solar System | TV review
Mar 14th
It’s very hard to care about minor celebrities pretending to be out of work when a documentary about real unemployed people shows how difficult it is
Of the many difficulties facing the unemployed, perhaps the most overlooked is the lack of empathy expressed by obscure celebrities. Most of us are aware of the hardship, the boredom and the social stigma suffered by the jobless. Up until now, however, few have been prepared to acknowledge that the out-of-work also have to endure not knowing if the woman who used to be married to Noel from Oasis and that Irish bloke off the gardening programme fully appreciate their plight.
To its deathless credit, Famous, Rich and Jobless was no longer willing to ignore this shameful social injustice. For if millions are going to live without the prospect of secure employment, it must surely help to know that Emma Parker Bowles recognises what they’re going through. No doubt the unemployed would argue that it would help more if they knew who Emma Parker Bowles was, but they have to accept that reality TV is very different from most contemporary job markets, in that there is an excess of work and a shortage of skilled workers.
When it comes down to it, living in a bedsit in Hartlepool or Hackney for four days and pretending to be unemployed doesn’t feature high on the list of minor celebrities’ ambitions. Your former cricket players and young soap actors are looking for their agents to secure a slot on Strictly Come Dancing or, failing that, Dancing on Ice – something with a spangly uniform and an attractive partner, who might wish to pay testament to the onetime sportsman’s sexual magnetism in an exclusive tabloid interview.
But who wants to ponce around the depressed areas of Britain looking for non-existent work? It’s the TV equivalent of cockle picking. So the economic laws of supply and demand force programme makers to recruit from a more desperate workforce, whether that means extraterrestrial, older, completely forgotten or never known. In this case it meant Parker Bowles, Larry Lamb, Meg Mathews and Diarmuid Gavin.
This game quartet was variously described as “four well-known personalities” and “four famous volunteers”. Once the mark of fame’s flexibility was that it was possible to be famous for being famous. That seems like an impossibly rigorous qualification now that the concept of fame has been stretched to include those who are famous without being famous. Let’s not quibble over the magnitude of the celebrities, though, and instead concentrate on the size of their efforts.
Sent to Hackney, Gavin, who turned out to be a TV gardener, set about pounding the streets at seven in the evening in search of employment. He inquired in several forlorn shops and takeaways, but in each place he was rebuffed. “They’re always amused that you’re looking for a job,” Gavin said after his unsuccessful search. “And the amusement comes out of embarrassment, I think, because it’s one of those taboos.”
That’s certainly one explanation. Another might be surprise that a middle-aged Irishman was out at night in Hackney seeking work in an Asian corner shop. And yet another could be a certain nervous mirth at the sight of the camera crew gathered just behind the shoulder of the garden designer.
Either way, having been quite sanguine about his prospects, by the end of the evening Gavin was emoting away before the camera like, well, a reality TV participant. According to Jobless, a documentary concerned with real unemployed people, research shows that “within just five weeks, those who lose their jobs start to experience low self-esteem, anxiety, depression and insomnia”. Within just five hours of not finding a job, Gavin reported all those symptoms. That’s what television can do to you. As a result, he completely rethought his previous views and gave impassioned voice to the bottomless frustration of the workless. Not since George Orwell’s Down and Out in Paris and London has there been such a searing indictment of economic deprivation.
Then he went and ruined it all by finding a job the next morning. Mathews and Parker Bowles also found gainful employment with similar haste, which was impressive given that their employers had to put up with the accompanying video cameras and sound booms and TV personnel. If only the government was prepared to arrange camera crews for all job interviews, unemployment could be wiped out in a few days.
Only Larry Lamb, veteran of the legendary ferry epic Triangle, and late of Gavin and Stacey and EastEnders, refused to play the game. He didn’t bother looking for work, preferring to focus on surviving on the job-seeker allowance of a tenner a day. He ate tuna out of a can and was found by the show’s two “experts”, neither of whom was able to demonstrate their expertise, walking around on Hartlepool beach. Taken to task for not looking for work, he testily replied: “I’ve enough money to sustain me, so what’s the panic?”
The obvious answer, of course, was “the ratings!” But the experts preferred to mount the more enterprising argument that Lamb had entered into a state of denial common to many who find themselves without work. Like everything else about the programme, it was the purest nonsense. Lamb was just an actor on the lam, turning a bit-part in provincial theatre into starring role of self-discovery. He also managed to save half of his 40 quid.
The apparent lessons of Famous, Rich and Jobless are that it’s easy to find work and not difficult to live on the job-seeking allowance. As such, it was possibly the silliest and most misconceived piece of television since The Trench, the documentary that tried to recreate the horror of the first world war by getting a bunch of young men to sit around in a big muddy hole.
There was not a pseudo-celebrity to be seen in Jobless, which was only one of its commendable features. Following several families of the unemployed, this astutely made film showed the anxiety and uncertainty that are the exhaust fumes of redundancy, and did so with wit and warmth. There was a lot of quiet desperation but also some uplifting scenes of old-fashioned solidarity and familial support.
In one scene, Derek, a Scottish journalist, visited a job centre with bright surfaces and optimistic logos – “jobs for everyone”. His interviewer explained that she could input “journalist” into her computer and instantly see what work was on offer. The answer came back: “No vacancies”. Ah, the wonders of modern technology.
It seems to have been a special recession gloom week at the BBC. Inside John Lewis was a dully formulaic documentary that had little to say beyond diminished sales and reduced profits. No one wants to buy running machines any more, apparently, but there’s been a run on plastic cocktail glasses. There’s a snapshot of the British in 2010: the treadmill has ground to a halt and we’re drowning our sorrows in plastic cups.
Thank heavens for the bigger perspective offered by Wonders of the Solar System. In five billion years the sun will implode. “And when it goes,” explained Professor Brian Cox, “it really will be the end of us all.” As with everything he says, it was expressed with the breathless awe of the teenage chess prodigy who’s just been introduced to marijuana.
But perhaps we’d all sound like that if we’d been whizzed from Death Valley to the Arctic, via Varanasi in India, the Amazon and South America’s Atacama desert. If Cox does rave on a bit about the sun’s incredible power, he can’t be accused of hot air. He’s a physicist, remember: it’s solar wind.
Scene of the week
It’s a tall order to deliver on a promise of a “substantial” interview when you’re surrounded by a lilac backdrop of flowerpots and ornamental urns, but David Cameron rose to the challenge on The Alan Titchmarsh Show (ITV1). “Coronation Street or EastEnders?” asked his greenfingered inquisitor. A nation paused and the thoughts of political historians turned reflexively to the great television stand-offs of yesteryear – John Nott storming out on Robin Day or Jeremy Paxman repeating the same question to Michael Howard 12 times. This was clearly a moment of that order. The mark of a great statesman is to be able to display equanimity under intense pressure. So it was that the leader of the opposition declared an addiction to neither soap. “I like escapism,” he said, explaining his taste for Lark Rise to Candleford. When his job involves taking on “the Titch”, we can all understand why.
Brad the builder in New Orleans | Rowan Moore
Mar 14th
After the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, Brad Pitt called in the world’s top architects for his acclaimed Make It Right project. The plan was to build green homes to replace those destroyed in New Orleans. Now the first houses are up and inhabited… so is it just a celebrity ego trip or a true regeneration?
Debra Dupar, pregnant with her fifth child, is sitting outside her new house. She is washed by the noon sun of an early spring day, nursing a pinkish-red drink and chatting to her friends. A short way off a camera crew is setting up, assessing shots, squinting at the light, chatting to potential interviewees. They are working for Spike Lee, who is making a documentary about the place where Debra lives.
A guided tour of about a dozen people tramps along the vestigial street, marked out by some sinewy evergreen oaks, or “live oaks” as they are called here. Two men, self-consciously dressed – architects, probably – get out of a maroon taxi, scan the scene, sweep it with camcorders, say to each other: “OK, I’m good”, get back in the taxi and go, all in about 60 seconds. And then the man from the London Observer wants to look inside Debra’s house.
Brad Pitt had warned residents of New Orleans’s Lower Ninth ward that “we would be turning their neighbourhood into a circus”. He was referring to the Pink Project, an “art installation/political messaging device/fundraising tool” in 2007, when hundreds of pink fabric house-shapes were scattered about the site, ghosts of houses that had been and which would return. Now, with 23 houses newly built, it remains a circus, a vortex of disaster and celebrity from which media and sightseers can’t stay away. For this spot is the location of Make It Right, the project launched by Pitt in the wake of Hurricane Katrina to which he has pledged $5m. Its aim is not only to rebuild at least 150 homes in the spot worst hit by the storm and its floods but to “turn tragedy into victory”, as the actor put it, and to “offer a more humane building standard… We would create homes that were sustainable and build with clean building materials for a just quality of life… We would build for safety and storm resiliency. We’d create new jobs in the process and we wouldn’t stop until we could achieve all of this affordably.” To show he was serious he moved his family home to New Orleans, and joined in long and gritty community meetings about the best way forward.
“We’d call upon some of our great architectural minds to innovate these solutions,” he said, and create “a template that could be replicated at the macro level. We would engage and rely on the community to define the function of their neighbourhood and adhere to their guidance, protecting New Orleans’s rich culture.” If the people of the Lower Ninth had been betrayed by professionals, by the engineers whose levees had failed in over 50 places, if “the most sickening thought is that this all could have been avoided”, Pitt’s mission was to “take what was wrong and make it right”.
These were stirring words, born of a celebrity’s stricken social conscience but also of the love of architecture Pitt had displayed before Katrina hit New Orleans in August 2005. He befriended the likes of Frank Gehry, Rem Koolhaas and Zaha Hadid. He had spent time in their studios, especially Gehry’s, trying his hand at designing buildings himself.
It was a heroic project, and one that raised questions. How much would it really be about helping victims of Katrina, and how much would it be about making Pitt feel and look good? What would the star of The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button truly know about urban regeneration?
What would “our great architectural minds”, whose work is usually to design luxury items such as iconic museums and private villas, know about the hard practicalities of sustainable
low-income housing? Narcissism and charity are often close companions, perhaps inevitably, but would Make It Right be more a case of the former or the latter? And, in the aftermath of the Haiti and Chile earthquakes, are there any lessons from New Orleans for rebuilding there?
On 29 August 2005, the spot where Debra is now sitting was one of the worst places to be on earth. The horizon behind her is formed by the pale band of the infamous levee, essentially a long concrete wall, now rebuilt twice as thick and twice as high as its predecessor, and with basic precautions against undermining that weren’t there before. The original levee was built by the US Army Corps of Engineers following Hurricane Betsy in 1965, and was supposed to keep out the waters of the adjoining Industrial Canal, which links the Mississippi to Lake Pontchartrain. When Katrina forced volumes of water up the canal, the levee suffered multiple breaches.
The streets nearest the levee were the worst hit. I meet Gloria, a woman in late middle age who had to get from the roof of her house on to another, and then into an oak, where she waited for nine and a half hours until her rescue. “Without that tree I’d have been dead,” she says.
A few doors further along stands the rebuilt house of Robert Green. Its flagpole rises out of a granite tablet, beside it some damaged statuettes of saints, commemorating Joyce Green, 1931 to 2005, and Shanat Green, 2002 to 2005. The latter was lifted on to the roof by her grandfather, who then turned to help his other grandchild up. When he turned back to Shanat, she had vanished. What happened to Joyce???Outside a nearby trailer, a tableau of wreathes and writing proclaims rage and hope: “We want our country to love us as much as we love our country. The strength of our country belongs to us all. Mr Bush, rebuild – New Orleans, the Lower 9th Ward, Cross the Canal, Tennessee Street. NOT IRAQ.” Then a later text: “Obama: A New Era of Responsibility”.
The floods spread throughout the Lower Ninth, an almost all-black district with a population of 14,000. Over 1,000 of the more than 1,800 deaths caused by Katrina were in this district, and since then spiking rates of suicide and heart failure indicate further victims. This area is still the most visibly devastated. The picturesque parts of New Orleans, such as the French Quarter and the Garden District, were built on higher ground and were least affected, and now bear little or no trace of damage. The prettily porched and painted houses of Bywater, a former working-class area on the other side of the canal from the Lower Ninth, are now colonised by artists and designers. Young creative types have been moving into New Orleans since the flood, drawn by low property prices, sympathy, and the poignant glamour of disaster.
Much of the Lower Ninth, by contrast, is wilderness. Big vacant oblongs that were once city blocks sprout weeds between the concrete slabs which are all that are left of the wooden houses that stood here. Some poignant short flights of brick steps remain. Files of telegraph poles still stand, marking out the blocks but serving nothing. Occasionally a bright new house stands out.
Some houses still exist as ruins, boarded up or with doors swinging open. Some carry spray-painted X’s, put there by rescuers in the days following Katrina. In the quadrants of each X are indicated, according to a code in use at the time, the number of people found in each house, alive and dead, and the number of pets, alive and dead. Other homes are being laboriously restored by their inhabitants. They have been partly helped by the Road Home programme, a federal compensation plan, which has often proved inadequate and slow moving. Two men, one lean and grey-whiskery, the other in a many-holed black T-shirt, tell me their repair work proceeds “paycheck by paycheck”. Straight after the flood, many wondered aloud if it wouldn’t be better just to give up on New Orleans. Its population was already in decline, from 625,000 in 1960 to 450,000 in 2005. All but a few thousand were temporarily evacuated across the United States, to safer places. The luckier ones would get insurance cheques. Why would they want to come back? “It looks like a lot of that place could be bulldozed,” said Dennis Hastert (Republican, Illinois), the then Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Yet New Orleans didn’t die, proof, perhaps, that cities are more than functional conveniences. They inspire affection, emotional ties and loyalty. It is now the fastest growing city in the United States, at 7-8% per year, even if, at about 340,000, it is still below pre-Katrina levels. If people persist in living in earthquake-prone Los Angeles and San Francisco, why would they not return to New Orleans?
This renewal is despite, more than thanks to, the efforts of the city’s government. New Orleans has suffered from what the New York Times called the “dysfunctional stalemate that has bogged down the city’s recovery”. The dysfunction is both between black and white populations and between city and federal government, and the consequence is that swathes of the place are still visibly ruined, and homeless rates remain high. Recently a tide of frustration swept a new mayor, Mitch Landrieu, to power with 66% of the vote, but he has yet to take office.
In the nearly five years since the storm, a “recovery plan” was drawn up, often reviewed, and barely implemented. The city, according to one involved in reconstruction, “has hundreds of millions of dollars committed but not spent”. The recovery plan was created “without a drop of sense as to what was implementable”.
One of the most visible government interventions into housing has been to demolish hundreds of decent, solid, brick homes, built for the poor under the New Deal. The stated aim was to create a more “mixed income” neighbourhood – that is, a higher income neighbourhood – but destroying serviceable houses is not what New Orleans needs.
Into the vacuum of action created by government, individuals and independent agencies have piled in. Self-organised groups that have grown up since 2005 have become significant forces of renewal. For example, one band of survivors in the Lower Ninth got together, commandeered their local Martin Luther King school, and got it reopened. The authorities had been planning on keeping it closed.
Habitat for Humanity, an international charity, has built more than 1,300 “simple, decent, and affordable homes” in the four states affected by Hurricane Katrina and her nasty little sister Rita, which followed shortly after. Another not-for-profit organisation, Global Green, is building a development of exemplary levels of sustainability in Holy Cross, the area of the Lower Ninth that was least badly affected (which was still quite bad enough) by the flooding. Global Green is also advising individual home owners on sustainable ways to rebuild their homes, and is campaigning for high environmental standards in new schools. Bob Tannen, a New Orleans-based urban planner, engineer and artist, has worked with Frank Gehry to devise the “Modgun” house, an updated version of the area’s traditional “shotgun house”, with a long, narrow timber-framed structure which could be extended as their owners acquired the means to do so.
The New Orleans Redevelopment Authority, an independently-governed public agency, says it is achieving “500-1,000″ residential sales a year, and 300,000 sq ft of commercial spaces. Its director of real estate strategy Ommeed Sathe, a young, fluent and persuasive lawyer from New York, says: “We’re working to the city’s plan but we’re better than them at implementing it.” He blames slow progress on the bureaucratic procedures that government, but not his agency, have to follow: “If they want to spend a dollar they have to obey about 30 regulations… It’s about as hard to buy a stapler as it is to buy a school.”
Brad Pitt’s project is therefore neither the biggest, nor the speediest, nor the most prolific (in terms of units built) of the reconstruction efforts. There’s a certain rivalry between the different people pushing New Orleans’s physical recovery, and those outside Make It Right tend to speak with a combination of gratitude for the attention that the film star has brought to their issues and envy for the attention that he draws to his own project. He was first introduced to the field through a connection with Global Green and, although the latter organisation is too polite to say so, you sense that they would rather he had lent his pulling power to their projects than branching off on his own.
Make It Right’s USP is design. Its houses would not only be built (as Global Green’s are) to exemplary standards of sustainability and flood protection. They would not only use construction techniques that would use 30% less timber than conventional methods. They would also have whatever added magic outstanding architects could bring. A team of 21 architects was assembled, with GRAFT, a practice based in both Los Angeles and Berlin, being one of the first to get involved, and a local firm, Williams Architects, as executive architects. The architects included the Pritzker prize-winning Morphosis from Los Angeles, the provocative Dutch firm MVRDV, and Shigeru Ban, a Japanese architect whose reputation is based on the usual array of intriguing cultural projects and private houses but also on his emergency cardboard constructions, designed in response to the 1995 Kobe earthquake.
There were the celebrated British-Ghanaian architect David Adjaye, Elemental from Chile, Constructs LLC from Ghana, and the Philadelphia firm of Kieran Timberlake, who have just been announced as the architects of the new US Embassy in London. There were also less famous practices from nearer to the Lower Ninth: five from New Orleans and others from Texas and Missouri. All work without payment: “Their work and designs are a donation to the residents of the Lower Ninth ward and society as a whole,” as GRAFT puts it.
Designs were based on guidelines derived from traditional New Orleans types. Porches to shelter from sun and rain, almost ubiquitous in this city, should be included. The architects produced 28 prototype designs in two “presentations”. Residents could choose which type they wanted, and could customise them. They could, for example, decide how high off the ground they wanted to be. Most went for as high as possible, not only to stand above future floods but also to allow room to park cars underneath.
These houses were for people who had owned homes before the storm and now had little property left but rectangles of mud. (Although poor, the Lower Ninth had been one of the first places where African-Americans could buy homes, and had high rates of home ownership.) The deal was that families had to “expose their finances” and “put forward what they could afford”. The gap between that and the actual cost of construction would be covered by a “forgivable loan”, to be repaid only if they sold their houses on.
The result is an array of similar-but-different houses, with bright colours and unusual angles denoting different authorships. Debra Dupar’s house is, she tells me, called the “Space House”, on account of the futuristic swoop of its louvred sunshade, and she is quite happy with that. Inside, her house is more simple, with a decent, well-proportioned front room dominated by a big flat-screen TV, a fish tank, and a table ornament that spells HAPPINESS in thick bronze-coloured letters. Not that design is the main issue for her: she spent four years in a trailer-home in Simmesport, Louisiana, 150 miles away, and, even though she is paying for her home, she is happy to be back. The residents did not, as might have been expected, opt for the most conservative or traditional-looking designs, but it’s fair to say that the most convincing homes tend to be by the less starry architects. The only type no one wanted was MVRDV’s, in which a traditional house-shape appears to have been snapped into a giant V by an invisible karate chop or natural disaster. The V contains a clever internal arrangement of split levels, but it still looked too much like a bad joke to victims of Katrina.
Morphosis put much of their own time and money into a house which, using Dutch techniques, would float in the event of flood, with two metal poles preventing it from drifting away. There’s nothing wrong with that, except that the architect’s styling is so overwrought, with so many odd angles and assertive details, that it would be an oppressive place to inhabit.
One of the more convincing structures is the Mobile Goat Unit of Operation Slo-Mow, designed by students at New Orleans’s Tulane university. This is a wheeled trailer containing goats, who are released to keep surrounding grass under control. Apparently this method is more cost-effective and environmental than hiring men with mowing machines.
It’s not always obvious what the architects’ gestures add to the project, as distinct from the more practical stuff about sustainability (which lowers residents’ utilities bills), flood protection, and more efficient ways of building. According to Ommeed Sathe: “People look at Make It Right and see it as whimsical and nonsensical… There’s also a criticism that for that amount of money you could have made 500 homes.” But: “I think it has added value. You get 10 to 12 tour buses a day in an area where there was very little redevelopment energy.” It has “also served as a massive R&D project”, pioneering techniques and developing skills in contractors that can now be applied elsewhere.
Louis Jackson, a forthright contractor working on Make It Right, says something similar. “The challenging part,” he says, is getting architects “to realise they’re not designing a $5m mansion. Some of the guys have been closed-minded. They’d say, ‘I’m the designer, I am the king and you do it my way.’ But if you think about the big picture of it – and I have to do that sometimes to keep my sanity – it’s a learning process, and we are much better today than we were a year ago.”
Jackson hasn’t made money on the project but he is far from regretting his involvement. “It’s fun, it’s challenging, it’s something you think about all the time.” It is also a “reputation-builder”, and something that teaches him things he can use on other projects. “The third time we build something we should be getting pretty close to how it should be,” he says.
The question also remains why they rebuilt on this exact spot. If you look at a map of New Orleans with a cold eye, it seems logical to return the Lower Ninth ward, which is below sea level, to uninhabited wetlands, and to rehouse its former citizens in the many gaps in higher, relatively safe parts of the city. No one is very confident that the place won’t get flooded again, despite the improved levees. “If anything serious comes through, like another category 5 hurricane, we’re going to get washed away again,” says one resident. Bob Tannen, who worked for the city on building their roads, says: “The levee is now designed for another Katrina, but what happens if it is worse than Katrina?”
But cold logic overlooks the detail that, for low-income homeowners, their plots in the flood zone were the only property they had left, as well as the fact that the political will and mechanisms to attempt wholesale relocation were wholly lacking. It ignores the fact that the Lower Ninth was not just a statistical unit but a place of memories and associations for New Orleans’s black communities. The pianist Fats Domino refused to live anywhere else until Katrina forced him out of his mansion. The common sense of building only above sea level would also mean evacuating much of the Netherlands.
It’s also fair to say that this site offered the most scope for Brad Pitt to strut his charitable stuff. The worst part of the worst affected district gave the best stage for a dramatic transformation, and actors are in the habit of looking for the best stage. Make It Right is not without ego, on the part of either Pitt or his architects. If one thing is to be learned from the project, whether in Chile, Haiti, or in building further houses in New Orleans, it would be to recruit a smaller crew of architects, and get them to focus more tightly on what really does constitute the best possible home in places like this.
Only a miserable churl, however, could fail to be moved by the scene Make It Right now offers. It has turned devastation and misery into something hopeful, and there is an energy about the place that other post-Katrina reconstruction projects don’t offer. The show-off architecture does its bit, too, in adding to the festivity of the place. Also as a sign that someone could be bothered.
It may be that Brad’s model village has a touch of the Hollywood vanity project but I can think of very many much worse ways to use celebrity and influence.
Channel surfer: Christine Bleakley water-skis to France
Mar 12th
TV presenter overcomes childhood fear of water and a wind chill below freezing to raise £250,000 for charity
Television host Christine Bleakley overcame her childhood fear of water today to water-ski across the English Channel – raising more than £250,000 for charity despite falling in eight times.
Afterwards Bleakley, who encountered swell and waves of up to 8ft, described the trip as “utter torture”.
“Halfway through, I thought ‘I can’t do this’ because everything was starting to give,” she said. “I had searing pain in my lower back, my legs were starting to wobble, and my hands – I just couldn’t hold on any longer. But I managed to get the strength from somewhere and I can’t quite believe I’ve done it.”
She set off from Dover at 7.46am after days of delays due to poor weather, then had to dodge tankers during the 22-mile route across the world’s busiest shipping lane, and endure temperatures of just 5C (41F), with a wind chill below freezing. She said the repeated postponements were “like waiting for an operation”.
Bleakley decided to undertake the challenge following a trip to Uganda with Sport Relief in 2008.
Her sense of achievement was magnified by overcoming her fear of water after a bad experience as a child.
“I was in a swimming pool on holiday and I went under the water and my dad pulled me out and managed to get me back to life again. And I haven’t gone near the water ever since.
“I can swim about one length and that’s it so I’ve had to overcome a lot of personal fears.
“It’s scary when you’re out there and you see 8ft waves alongside you, and the swell that stops your view even from the boat in front of you. And there’s a huge amount of waves created off the back of the huge ships that go across the Channel too,” she said.
“So it was just incredible – it’s very difficult to put into words.”
Bleakley – who has been through months of training with Professor Greg Whyte – said the effort of hauling herself out of the water after each fall was “exhausting”.
Bleakley has asked members of the public to donate what they can to www.sportrelief.com/christine.
Pink Floyd’s legal victory over EMI is a triumph for artistic integrity
Mar 12th
The prog-rock band’s court win against their record label is a vindication of the album as a creative format
They don’t often look cheery in photos – and at least two of them can barely stand to be in the same room – but Pink Floyd have a lot to celebrate. The prog-rock legends won a pivotal victory against record company EMI over the sale of their own music. Basically, EMI wanted to make their classic concept albums available to download as individual songs. The band, however, prefer their albums to be downloaded as they were made: in their entirety, as complete musical works. And the judge agreed with Floyd.
At first glance, their motivation seems a little pretentious, recalling a time when supergroups like Led Zeppelin only released albums because they were serious artists and above all that pop stuff, man. However, Floyd’s victory is more than just musical snobbery: it’s a triumph for artistic integrity.
Michelangelo wouldn’t have wanted his Sistine Chapel ceiling to be chiselled into bits and flogged to individual buyers, so why should the same fate happen to Floyd’s painstakingly crafted The Dark Side of the Moon? Floyd’s most famous album appeared in 1973, when “long-playing records” appeared on vinyl. Back then, unless acts released tracks as singles, the only way of hearing individual tracks alone was to fiddle with the needle or hold a microphone in front of the stereo – a popular pastime among 70s teens – and record Roger Waters and co, perhaps accompanied by the sound of the family dog barking at the postman.
Downloading has changed everything. Now we can dip into albums, taking a little bit here and there. It’s a wonderful way of experiencing music, especially music you have never heard before, without having to fork out on an LP. However, the downside has been the slow death of the album as a creative form.
In recent years, the art of releasing a collection of songs that flow perfectly and make sense as a complete statement has faced a double onslaught. The digital era meant bands were suddenly having to come up with more and often inferior tracks just to pad out the longer CD format. But downloading has had a greater impact. The likes of Radiohead still take great care to release crafted albums, but often bands don’t really record albums any more. They record collections of downloadable tracks.
The upside of this is that many albums tend to have less filler; gone are the days of “frontloaded” LPs where a couple of hit singles at the start are followed by a lot of mush. Now, every track has to be good enough to be potentially downloaded. However, where would this approach would have left some of the greatest albums ever made? Would David Bowie’s opus The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars had anything like the same impact if people were able to dip in and out, experiencing the Ziggy character’s rise but avoiding his ultimate fate as a Rock ‘N’ Roll suicide? Granted, many concept albums are ludicrous prog-rock conceits. But it’s equally unthinkable to imagine hearing a non-concept masterpiece like Joy Division’s Closer in bite-sized chunks, rather than experiencing the full, unfolding horror/triumph of the second side’s stunning four-song sequence.
Joy Division (and, for years, New Order) refused to release album tracks as singles, treating albums and singles as separate entities, a stance recently adopted by MGMT. If you want to hear Pink Floyd tracks as standalones, download the songs they released as singles, like 1967’s psychedelic cross-dressing anthem Arnold Layne (also on compilations like Relics) or 1979’s teacher-baiting Another Brick in the Wall. Or download albums like Wish You Were Here and Meddle to hear as the creators intended. The marketing men might not approve, but it will be good for music and, more importantly, the fate of the album.
The view: Why Hollywood still loves the banks
Mar 12th
Where is the full-scale filmic assault on the evils of global finance? Will Oliver Stone’s Wall Street sequel be it?
As well as its import for female directors and general reassurance that the forces of right do occasionally prevail, perhaps the most enduring legacy of The Hurt Locker’s Oscars landslide will be its reminder that Hollywood can actually deal with that quaint location known as the real world. Which makes it all the more glaring when other areas of it have been so conspicuous by their absence from the screen.
Call it what you like – the almost-Depression, the new economic order, the age of Lidl – but for all that we’re not quite yet eating each other in unlit basements, these remain profoundly jittery times for those of us locked into the chaos created by western banks. And yet thus far, with the exception of Michael Moore’s documentary(ish) Capitalism: A Love Story, both the banks themselves and the bedlam they unleashed remain oddly and persistently off-camera. It’s a strange omission, even allowing for the fact that plenty of projects that might have dealt with the subject in some way will, in something of a proving of the point, have been denied a place on the production line on account of the film industry’s own frantic tightening of purse strings.
But we will, of course, shortly have Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps – the open-goal sequel to Oliver Stone’s 1987 romp, now being ushered into the waiting room of pre-publicity, the trailer out in the world and the film the subject of a Vanity Fair cover story. As a takedown of global capitalism, it may not approach (or aspire to) the high dudgeon of Moore, the gist of the thing being Michael Douglas’s master insider trader Gordon Gekko finally getting himself released from jail in the autumn of 2008 and, failing to singlehandedly avert the oncoming train crash, aiming instead to repair his relationship with his estranged daughter. Essentially, what we have here is The Wrestler in Armani – with the script, as pointed out by the Independent Eye, not averse to a crafty sight gag involving Gekko checking out of prison complete with vast mobile phone (you know – like in the 80s!).
Maybe playing it for laughs shouldn’t surprise us here. After all, Gekko aside, Douglas in self-parodic mode has been called on to represent big money’s human face more than once. Witness his scowling turn as übermensch financier Nicholas van Orton in David Fincher’s inscrutable The Game – or the hambone performance as fiendish hedge fund manager Steven Taylor in garish Hitchock remake A Perfect Murder, ineptly attempting to off trophy wife Gwyneth Paltrow.
Indeed, fittingly, given as it was also the moment when the “financial innovations” that later sent us all to Cash Converters quietly began to slip into gear, it was around the same time in the sleepy late 90s that cinema last showed any productive interest in the banking system. Revisited now, Patrick Bateman’s zinger in American Psycho about the real nature of his business carries with it an even more malevolent crackle, while from the same era came Boiler Room, an engagingly pulpy melodrama about life on the furthest fringes of Wall Street that, now we know what the big boys were about to get up to, surely deserves a small footnote in history. (Certainly, either of those movies feels like a more coherent response to the ongoing crisis than, say, the epically glib Up in the Air).
Of course, what complicates all this is that Hollywood is hardly a disinterested observer when it comes to the banks. While studio heads might be seen as masters of all they survey, much of their clout in recent years came on loan from many of the same institutions who were then caught up at the heart of the crisis. For Disney, there was Bear Sterns, for Paramount Deutsche Bank, and so on, with $10bn lent by Wall Street to the studios just between 2004 and 2008. As such, you can understand the onscreen reticence to bite the hand that fed. But while suited men in a burnished boardroom discussing credit derivatives may not have the raw cinematic appeal of disabling bombs on Baghdad roadsides, it might just help save Hollywood’s soul if it admitted that banks were more than simply places in which to set heist movies.
The record industry fights its corner in the download age | Helienne Lindval
Mar 12th
Far from facing extinction, the record industry is still a vital cog in the music-making machine, claims a report. But will the working relationship between artist and label ever be the same?
Record labels have been on the receiving end of much criticism lately. They’ve been criticised for heavily lobbying those involved in passing the digital economy bill, accused of greediness, of being dinosaurs, of being unwilling to embrace the internet, of treating artists unfairly – even of being obsolete. Now they’re fighting back in an attempt to justify their existence.
A report published this week by IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic Industry), claims that record companies invest $5bn (£3.3bn) a year worldwide in artists, and that the “ripple effect” of this investment helps generate a broader music sector, including live music, radio and publishing, worth around $160bn annually. The report also estimates that more than two million people are employed globally in the broader music economy.
In an apparent response to those who claim that, with the internet’s ability to connect artists directly with their fans, record labels will become obsolete, John Kennedy (chairman of IFPI) says: “Even artists who are typically described as having broken through the internet, the Arctic Monkeys, Lily Allen, or Sandi Thom, all ended up combining with conventional record labels.” The IFPI’s report says that there are more than 4,000 artists on major record label rosters, with thousands more on independents. Around one in four of these artists were signed in the last 12 months. The report points out that, in the UK, record labels spend 23% of their total revenue on A&R (the average worldwide is 16%), comparing that to the pharmaceutical industry, which spends 15% on research and development.
Mike Smith, the MD of Columbia Records, comes from a music publishing background and said he had no idea how much it costs to break an artist before he started working for a record label. “It costs us £10k-£20k for our artist to perform on The X Factor – up to £100k for them performing on the Brits.” He says that retail value dropping by 40%, piracy and a la carte downloading has forced the label to work a lot smarter. How? By signing better artists, he says. “You have to overcompensate for average artists. With good artists you don’t have to buy expensive advertising.” He claims this has brought the hit rate of signed artists down from 1 in 10 to 1 in 4. “Our job is to reduce the random element to a minimum.”
According to the report, called Investing In Music, breaking a UK or US pop artist typically costs more than $1m (£660,000): $200,000 for artist advance, $200,000 for recording costs, $200,000 for three videos, $100,000 for tour support and $300,000 for promotion and marketing. Both Kennedy and Smith says this is a conservative figure. It’s not only pop artists that need tour support. Dickon Stainer of Decca Records says that his label spent £1m on tour support for jazz artist Melody Gardot to break her globally. Yes, investing in new talent is a hugely risky business, a fact Guy Hands can surely now testify to. “It takes a lot of money and a lot of balls,” says Kennedy. This is why record labels need to have multi-album deals to allow a return on their investment, states the report.
As much as the anti-label crusaders paint a very black-and-white picture, unfortunately, so does this IFPI report. Both parties seem to ignore facts in an effort to fight their corner. One side says that record labels became obsolete when recording gear became affordable for the bedroom musician and with the invention of social networking sites. They also claim that touring and merchandising will be how future artist will make a living and pay for recordings. This ignores the fact that there are literally millions of acts on MySpace and that, for the majority of artists, it actually costs money to tour. The IFPI report quotes Nina Persson, lead singer of the Cardigans and A Camp, saying: “It would be very difficult for me to have made a living just from live music. I would have to travel alone with a guitar and no band or crew to make that work.”
The record label side uses international pop stars as examples to illustrate the cost and commitment it takes to develop a successful career. The truth lies somewhere in between. This, as artist manager Jon Webster (CEO of the Music Managers Forum) points out, is an issue that can’t be subject to generalisation. A niche singer/songwriter would most likely cost a lot less in terms of touring. Today, a business-savvy artist can make a decent living, though spending a vast amount of time on the internet to develop and sustain a hands-on career takes a lot of time; time that should, one can argue, be used to practice and write songs.
Yes, good record labels still supply a service that venture capitalists don’t. Good A&R people will push artists to write better songs. They provide promotion and marketing teams with contacts and experience, which, along with advances, allows the artist to focus on the music. But the IFPI report omits to mention that their investment comes at a pretty high price (though, notably, it only does so if the artist becomes successful). One could say that it’s a loan with a very high interest rate. The report states that the advance is recoupable from an artist’s sales, but fails to acknowledge that much of the other costs often are, too. Tour support is sometimes recouped from merchandising. A manager I spoke to said his band’s major label refused to provide £20k in tour support (a lot less than the £100k mentioned in the IFPI report) unless they received 50% of all merchandise for the length of the rest of the contract. The band chose to borrow money from their parents to cover the bill instead. If a label decides to spend money on TV advertising campaign for a record, they’ll often recoup that cost from the artist – either by adding 50% of the cost to the artist’s “recoupment bill” or by reducing the royalty rate due to the artist for the record by 50% for a whole year.
The manager of a big international pop star (who wants to remain anonymous for this piece), who has signed to a major, says that his biggest wish is that the artist/record label relationship becomes a partnership in the future. Today, he says, there’s a tangible lack of trust. The fact that artists now have a choice of not signing a record deal will, hopefully, make record labels operate in a much more transparent manner.
Nick Clegg defends former porn director standing for Lib Dems
Mar 12th
Anna Arrowsmith’s previous profession is not my cup of tea, says Lib Dem leader, hailing her as no cardboard cut-out Westminster politician
A former porn director who has been selected as a parliamentary candidate for the Liberal Democrats would be a passionate campaigner for her local area, Nick Clegg said today.
Clegg said Anna Arrowsmith’s previous profession was “not exactly my cup of tea”, and she was certainly no “cardboard cut-out Westminster politician”.
But he said it was important that “people like her” who care about their local areas put themselves forward.
Clegg was speaking ahead of the Lib Dems’ spring conference, which begins in Birmingham tonight as the party seeks to rally activists ahead of the general election.
He told GMTV he had “just read the reports” about Arrowsmith, who is managing director of adult entertainment company Easy on the Eye Productions and will stand for election in Gravesham, Kent.
The prospective parliamentary candidate, who works under the pseudonym Anna Span, started shooting porn films after graduating 12 years ago.
Since then she has directed more than 250 raunchy scenes, and written and photographed a book to guide couples in how to make homemade porn.
Clegg told GMTV: “It’s not exactly my cup of tea what she’s been doing before she has put herself forward in parliament but I also think it’s really important that people like her who really care a lot about her local area are encouraged to come into politics. You can’t accuse her of being a cardboard cut-out Westminster politician.”
Asked if he had an issue with somebody involved in the pornography industry representing his party, he said: “I don’t know exactly what she’s been doing in the past. She’s not done anything illegal and she cares passionately about her area. She has been chosen to be the candidate for that area. Let’s see. I think all the indications are that she’s going to be a really, really strong voice for that local area.”
Yesterday, the 38-year-old, who is married and lives with her husband Tim and their dogs in Groombridge, near Tunbridge Wells, insisted she was ready to win the seat at the general election, which is currently held by Adam Holloway for the Conservatives.
Arrowsmith faces a tough fight in a constituency, where the Lib Dems trailed in third place on just 10.7% of the vote in 2005 and where political watchers expect a tough two-way fight in a seat where Labour had just 654 fewer votes than the Conservatives at the last poll.
Arrowsmith, who has an MA in philosophy, said she was spurred into standing for election by the MPs’ expenses scandal and a belief that women are under-represented in parliament.
She said: “If people don’t know what I do for a living then they would never know. The local party and the local people who I have so far met have seen that I’m very driven.”
She added: “When people get to see me, they will realise that I’m used to project managing and that I’m driven to achieve change rather than just promising it.”
Named best director at the 2008 and 2009 UK Adult Film and Television Awards, she describes herself as a keen campaigner for women’s rights and anti-censorship issues and says she has spent 12 years trying to make the adult industry more female-friendly.
Her first commercially-released programme was on Television X, titled Eat Me/Keep Me, which led to further X-rated shows and her becoming chair of the Adult Industry Trade Association.
Clegg has pledged to double the number of Lib Dem MPs within two general elections. The party currently has 63 MPs.
Clegg, who will address Lib Dems at the conference rally this evening and make a keynote speech on Sunday, said today there would be “no backroom deals” with the other political parties ahead of the general election.
With recent polls suggesting the country is heading for a hung parliament at the election, expected to take place on 6 May, Clegg repeated the four tests he would set for Labour and the Conservatives if they were to seek his party’s support.
He said whichever party had the clearer mandate from the voters would have the “moral right” to govern, “either on its own or with others”.
“There are no backroom deals between the political parties,” he said.
“If a party has got more support and has got a clearer mandate from the British people than any other party, even if they don’t have an absolute majority, then I think we live in a democracy, that party has got the moral right to seek to govern, either on its own or with others.
“I’ve been much clearer than Gordon Brown or David Cameron in saying that, as far as the Liberal Democrats are concerned, in terms of us exercising our influence we will focus on the really big things that matter to us.”
The four big issues for the Lib Dems are fairer taxes, so people do not pay tax on the first £10,000 they earn; Better schools, with more one-to-one tuition and smaller class sizes; making sure that our economy is no longer “held hostage” by the banks; and clean, fair politics in the wake of the expenses scandal, including giving people the right to sack their MPs if they have been shown to be corrupt.
The Lib Dem leader said his party was delivering a “copper-bottomed guarantee” that whatever happens in the election, “the one thing you can predict is that the Liberal Democrats will deliver those four steps to a fairer Britain”.
Oscars 2010: the year Hollywood ate itself | Andrew Pulver
Mar 10th
Sure, The Hurt Locker wasn’t a box-office hit and Precious positioned itself as outside white-bread commercialism, but all the big Oscar winners were irredeemably Hollywood
The Academy may still be congratulating themselves on picking for their best picture award arguably the least commercially successful winner of all time (over the most successful). But if we step back a bit, we can see that this year was one of the safest ever. All the top awards went to American films, even if, as far as Precious was concerned, they tried to position themselves outside white-bread mainstream. But The Hurt Locker, Avatar, The Blind Side, Precious, Crazy Heart, Up and Inglourious Basterds represent traditional, conventional American cinema in all its various guises. Outsiders often get a look-in in the acting categories– not always Brits; sometimes there’s someone from France or Spain too – but there was no Kate Winslet or Tilda Swinton, let alone a Marion Cotillard. Obviously, it helps if the foreigner in question is propping up an American film; the only chink of an outward glance came with Inglourious Basterds’s Christoph Waltz, an Austrian playing the kind of role once reserved for ice-eyed Englishmen. That’s progress, of a kind.
This may be a little ungenerous; the Academy could easily be a forum for rewarding commercial success, and it does its best to step away from it. The Hurt Locker has taken nearly $15m (£10m) at the US box office (with an opening weekend of $145,000); far less than the last recent best picture “weakie”, Crash, which had taken $53m when it won in 2006. But just because hasn’t been a monster box office hit doesn’t mean The Hurt Locker is not thoroughly Hollywood: it was made by the same people who made Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle. Likewise, Precious may have all the attitude of an out-of-the-ghetto scrapper, but it was paid for by your classic film-production dilettante types: fashion entrepreneur Sarah Siegel-Magness and her husband, cable TV heir Gary Magness. And no one is going to question the Hollywood credentials of the other big films.
Does this mean that we are seeing American cinema going through one of its introspective phases? The Oscars have never been much of a guide to the state of Hollywood: they’re customarily a parade of well-meaning wish-fulfilments. Is Jeff Bridges the best male actor in America right now? No; he should have won for The Big Lebowski, but outside Coen cultists, that film’s virtues didn’t emerge for a while. Is The Hurt Locker Kathryn Bigelow’s best film? No; it’s just her best one since Point Break, way back in 1991. Can Sandra Bullock really hold a candle to any of her fellow nominees? Not by a long shot, but she’s made a lot of money for a lot of people in the last decade. But with the world-destroying success of Avatar, and the excitement-momentum generated by 3D, Hollywood is briefly feeling like it’s on the front foot.
But it is a shame when the Oscars gets over-American. One of Hollywood’s great virtues is, like America, its ability to absorb outside influences and reconfigure them – not always successfully, it has to be said. But the hope is always there. (Anyone remember that great picture of Coppola and Kurosawa sitting in a garden together, looking at pictures?) But the film industry moves so quickly that this year’s winners will soon be footnotes, and we can get behind next year’s big British/Japanese/German hope.
Disappearing acts: Stonemasonry
Mar 10th