Politics in the theaters...Art of non-rational decision-making in the political media

After taking a nice long summer break, I'm back, having seen a huge amount of theater, new museum installations and public art beginning to address what's going on in politics. The biggest theme seems to be that people say one thing and do another.

In the theatrical realm a lot of old shows are back on the ticket if they include content on saying what you mean, doing what you say...though often the results include other behaviors. New shows are exploring people doing bad things in the name of something good and other complicated set ups leading to failed outcomes.

I've spent the last year reading Nassim Taleb (The Black Swan) and Daniel Kahnemen (www.edge.org) on psychological economics and David Brooks (NYT) on politics and the face of conservatism and the psychology of power. And recently I attended an event featuring Dan Hill and his book "Emotionomics" in which he makes an argument that rational decision making is rare and most of us make a gut decision and then rationalize that (the real decision and the good decision). All of these writers seem to have been waiting for today's events. Brooks NYT column dated 10/29 points to all but Hill as writers and I think he would be interested in what Hill has to say as a marketing consultant focusing on advertising media.

The old adage that tough times give us lots of black automobiles and plenty of cleavage is giving way to some very thinky theater and some well written journalism. I'm hoping this bodes well for the long term future. For certainly we have some more short term labor and teeth gritting to get through.

Trends: Entertainment v. Art

There is hazy dividing line in live performance between artistic endeavor and entertainment. The movies have faced this down and now the term Disnification is part of the mainstream lexicon. Art house film is differentiated from block buster styles. In live theater, especially in the musical theater genre the same dumbing down has been taking place.

Goodman's current production of Million Dollar Quartet feels like entertainment rather than art. Its Wednesday evening performance had the feel of a live concert due in part to the enthusiasm of a considerably older audience who's memories of Cash, Lewis, Perkins and Presley pre-date my own arrival on the planet. Although the show is loosely constructed as a musical with a thin dramatic movement forward which ends in the talent stable at Sun Records turning over (except for Jerry Lee), it's essentially a vehicle for covering classic rock and roll songs a la Jersey Boys, Altar Boyz and that entire genre.

I'm curious how much influence as exerted by an audience can change an experience. What is the tipping point for when a show is intended to mimick a live concert and when it becomes the live concert? The show's construction included an 'impromptu' encore to give the feel of a piece unstaged, but the "audience went wild" was something of an understatement. They wanted to be at a concert, they settled for a re-enactment.

The case for change in a world that's not for it

A good friend spent some precious hours at my place recently. He posed an enticing and intriguing question. Should he remain at our place of employment and try to enact real change from inside the machine? Is it possible to move up the ladder and truly effect global change on idealistic subjects within an organization devoted to objectives that have little to do with idealism?

For once in my opinionated life I had no answer other than to state that I was fascinated by the question and would like time to consider and another opportunity for discussion on the topic. And being me, I also said we should bring the topic up at work. Keep in mind "our place of employment" is one of those global empire shops with notions of changing the world in the name of commerce, while not making too much mess socially (is this even possible, do those in leadership even believe this intriguing paradoxical premise?). Is there truly any appetite for social change or is it just a prop to keep 'evil' out of the empire moniker?

Immediately I was internally castigating myself for waffling. My friend said he marvelled at my thought to bring it to the corporate discussion forum. Just when I think I've totally sold out, a darling political friend thinks perhaps not.

Recently on Lincoln Avenue and the Naked Bike Ride

A few days ago on a balmy evening walking down Lincoln Avenue, I was intrigued with this snippet of conversation.

"What, are we in China now?! There's a guy pedaling a rickshaw!" I cannot help but add IN TONES OF OUTRAGE. The guy was offended at a bicycle-based ride service, on a perfect night for such travel. I only caught fragments of the diatribe to follow, but it seemed to be some sort of class-based rap, how could we...wealthy, urban Chicago not only offer but suffer this option on our fancy pants bar, cafe, almost-no-one walks-here-but-for-drink-street? For moments on a warm, youth infested/invested strip of urban street, we had third-world-ism in our midst. Conversation was provoked.

In Cambodia the seductive and always quietly uttered "Tuk tuk" signals the presence of a cyclo (a 150cc motorcycle with mpg's exceeding 100) attached to a sedan cab with seats available. A beguiling ride through the streets of Phnom Penh or another large city is much more relaxing than racing around on the back of said cyclo itself or sealed inside an automobile style taxi-cab. Even better in our fair city on a relatively quiet evening to grab a seat in a mercifully silent, bicycle powered ped-cab. Never mind that growth in Asia is in double digits, while we struggle to hit 2%while continuing to live as if we too grow in double digits anywhere except at the waistline.

A bit of trivia from wikipedia -
Cycle rickshaws are known as cyclo (pronounced see-clo)
in Cambodia and Vietnam, cycle rickshaw in India and Bangladesh, trishaw traditional Chinese,simplified Chinese, pinyin: san lún che), from "tricycle rickshaw", in Malaysia and Singapore, becak in Indonesia and bicitaxi or taxi ecologico (literally "ecological taxi") in Mexico. In the Philippines, they are called tricycle/traysikel, traysikad, pedicab, or padyak. Cycle rickshaws are known as saika in Myanmar, a transliteration of English "side car". In the United Kingdom and United States cycle rickshaws are more widely pedicabs. In Buffalo, New York, this type of vehicle is known as a bike taxi. In Thailand, any three-wheeler is called samlor which literally means "three wheels"), whether motorized or not, including pedicabs, motorcycles with attached vending carts or sidecars, etc. The driver is also called samlor. True, Thai auto rickshaws are known in popular parlance as tuk-tuks, but in Thai the latter usage as well as its characteristic style is largely restricted to Bangkok and Chiangmai.

Back to Lincoln Avenue: The chatter from the more-enlightened companions of this urban traffic fashionista was in praise of bicyle culture and having additional
leisure travel options. You can see somewhat more at 4 mph than at 30, they patiently explained, while avoiding the atmospheric and wallet-draining effects of gasoline. Not to mention caloric and revenue advantages for our heroic rickshaw entrepreneur! I like to think the eye of this anti-rickshaw storm was simply providing profound possiblities of conversation and continuing thought, for which I thank him from my heart.

Minutes later, I came home to the treat of the last few moments of the Naked Bike Ride brigade parading through my 'hood, darkly and musically exuberant on joyful display. The excitement of a sudden and unexpected arrival of hundreds of cyclists, singing, whistling and yet quiet with only peddle power was magic. Maybe we are ready for change. The fact that they were gorgeously supported with full police escort on the first reasonable weather moment in our strange June through the park on Stockton added to my impression of a Brigadoon moment, soon vanished. I love my city and I'm proud of our commitment to change.

I salute those who rode! You have made my life better forever, hope is the right course. Thank you.

Around the World with Zorro

Zorro was really good. Good like an excellent cheese burger, really hot, really fresh, not perhaps all that nutritious, but oh so delicious. They really wrote/played it for laughs, but also as a real swashbuckler. The lead was remarkable, not the typical casting, very slight and elegant which was good for Don Diego, but he managed to be so adept with the sword and with movement generaly that he came across as super hero-like as Z. And this was hands down the best fight choreography I have ever seen. Which is something because the theatre only holds about 65 seats and I was in the second row.

Downside to this production: I liked it because of the superhero component. My serious theater friends were not impressed. They found it amateurish. While I think that is a bit harsh, I suspect the treatement more than the production itself lends credence to this criticism.

I was trying to think of why I thought the adaptation was so strong and I think it was because it captured a longing for passion. Passion of romance, passion to do things in aid of justice, passion for life. Again pointing to black and white, heroes, man and superman. In a world of money grubbing and daily compromise, wouldn't it be nice to be a hero?

In some ways it was an opposite treatment from Around the World in 80 Days. That show also captured my heart. 80 Days is about curiosity, says the adaptor/director. And I think she has a point. Fogg is so stuck in his life and so attached to his routine. And then he takes off on a trip around the world with only the thought to make the finish line. And yet he unthaws in the process, not so much because of what he (doesn't truly) see(s), but because of the people who join him and the awakening in him that lets in love for a woman.

Does Fogg become a hero? Perhaps not truly, but he awakens to his own heroic potential in the style of Joseph Campbell. Live your life as heroically as possible for optimum fulfillment.