http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:46:24 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/11/13/114624.php Ken Lyen[Spoilers below] PrologueChess, the musical, has been in development for so long that the Cold War, which was still on during the show’s early years, had already ended. The creators kept modifying the script, trying out different variations in diverse city settings. Like chess-players brooding interminably, they could not decide upon which story to commit. Unlike most musicals that are workshopped and opened “out of town”, i.e. in small provincial cities, Chess was executed in reverse order. Its “tryout”, so to speak, was in London’s West End and New York’s Broadway. This was followed by tours in smaller cities in America, Europe and Australia. The problem was that nobody considered the London or New York productions to be the gold standard. Thus, nearly every reincarnation of Chess became an invitation for further tinkering. Each production desperately seeked musical nirvana.Tim's Back StoryTim Rice, one of musical theater’s demigods, first thought of writing a musical based on the game of chess in the 1970s. With Andrew Lloyd Webber, he had written the book and lyrics to three groundbreaking musicals: Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat (1968), Jesus Christ Superstar (1971), and Evita (1978). These three musicals were like extreme makeovers that utterly changed the face of musical theater. However, the relationship between Tim and Andrew began to sour. The final straw came when Andrew replaced Tim’s lyrics for the song “Memory” with Trevor Nunn’s. By the time Cats opened in 1981, the Tim Rice-Andrew Lloyd Webber dynamic duo had split into two solitudes. The ConceptionUnattached, Tim went foraging for music collaborators. He soon found Björn Ulvaeus and Benny Andersson, the male members of the pop group ABBA. He presented his idea of Chess as a musical to them. Tim would write the book and lyrics while the two Bs of ABBA would write the music. In 1984, when its concept album was released, Chess was born. Tim was very familiar with the strategy of releasing a recording first and then scrounging for a producer to stage it. This had worked very well for Jesus Christ Superstar and Evita. The Chess concept album was a great success. It scored smash hits with Elaine Paige and Barbara Dickson’s duet, “I Know Him So Well”, and Murray Head’s “One Night In Bangkok”.London's Opening GambitNevertheless, it took a further two years before Chess the musical was staged. It opened in the West End in 1986 to generally favorable reviews and ran for three years.The original story begins in the Italian city of Merano. Anatoly, the Russian world chess champion, falls in love with his American opponent's second, Florence. Anatoly defeats the American (Freddie) and defects to the West to be with Florence. The second act takes place in Bangkok, where Anatoly defends his title against the next challenger, a Russian. Molokov, Anatoly's second and probably a KGB agent, is keen to get Anatoly back to his motherland. Initially he thinks Anatoly's Russian wife might do the trick, so the KGB flies her to Bangkok. When this fails, they concoct a story about Florence’s father wanting to leave communist Hungary for freedom in the West. Appealing to his altruistism, they succeed in persuading Anatoly to return to Russia in exchange for Florence’s father’s freedom. In the end, the deception is revealed; the father had died some time ago, and the person released is a CIA spy. Anatoly is a mere pawn in the ruthless Cold War.The Broadway FlopLike musical theater, chess is an unpredictable game. There was no reason to suspect that Chess's successful London run, which lasted for three years, could not be replicated in New York. But the New York production closed in less than 2 months.The original story was thought to be too convoluted and to put the Americans in a bad light. Richard Nelson was hired to revamp it. He diluted the parts that might have caused discomfort among the American audience. He took away some of the lighter touches from the original story and made it depressingly serious. He also added one character and one subplot too many. The show opens in Bangkok and moves to Budapest for the second act. Instead of having two tournaments, the American version has just one. A new character called Walter, (Freddie’s business associate) is added. Freddie’s second, Florence, now has a long lost father whom she is asked to help defect to the West. However, in exchange for this favor, the KGB asks her to persuade her new-found lover, the defector Anatoly, to return to Russia.It was probably not any one factor that was responsible for Chess’s American demise. Some blamed Richard Nelson’s revamp. Others blamed the poisonous reviews of several influential theater critics, like New York Times' Frank Rich. Personally I think that some of Richard Nelson’s changes were positive. He added more depth to the characters and increased the political content. Also, by having one instead of two chess tournaments, he could retain the main conflict between Freddie and Anatoly throughout the show. The songs were reshuffled to preserve the flow of the story, and the addition of “Someone Else’s Story” is a bonus.The Stockholm VariationIn 2002, Chess was translated into Swedish, broadcast on Swedish television, and released as a DVD version. The book was completely rewritten. A back story about Anatoly’s family is fleshed out right at the start of the musical. Quarrels with his wife show that his marriage is becoming unstable. However, he loves his young son, who is to play an important role in the end. There is only one chess tournament, and the conflict between Anatoly and Freddie continues all the way through. Even the location is restricted to Merano. The love triangle between Anatoly, Freddie and Florence forms the backbone of the plot. While Florence’s back story of her family’s escape from Budapest during the Soviet invasion is preserved, the subplot of her father wanting to defect to the West is removed. Walter, Freddie’s business associate in the American version, is also deleted. In all the versions of Chess, Anatoly defects to the West. To persuade Anatoly to return to Russia, both his wife and son are brought to Merano. In the end, it is his son who is instrumental in bringing him back home. The Swedish version has the best book. The motivation of the protagonists is well delineated. The characterization is sharp and has sufficient depth, the love story is believable, and the subtle emotional changes are captured sensitively. Tommy Körberg plays Anatoly, a role he established in the original London concept recording 16 years earlier.In terms of songs, the major casualty is “One Night in Bangkok”, which is demoted into disco music played in a bar. “Someone Else’s Story” is preserved and beautifully sung by Helen Sjöholm, playing the role of Florence. However, her rival, Anatoly’s wife Svetlana (played by Josefin Nilsson), is disappointing. She starts the song “I Know Him So Well.” I am not enamored by her voice, and I could not help comparing her to Elaine Paige, who sang the same song with Barbara Dickson in the London album. As this is my favorite song, the less than optimal interpretation drags the Swedish version down one notch. Moreover, the hostility between Florence and Svetlana is acted too intensely for this lyrical ballad. The Arbiter is given a comic slant by Rolf Skoglund, and I have no problems with this. However, he is not a strong singer, and ultimately his performance is the most unsatisfying.In terms of pacing, the first act is very well constructed and the story is rivetting. Unfortunately, the second act runs out of steam and drags on. There are too many slow songs and unnecessary distractions, like a pair of acrobats writhing on a static trapeze bar suspended above the protagonists. Despite these reservations, I like the Swedish version the best. The story and characters are the most believable and the emotional elements are the strongest. I understand that this version will be translated back into English. I anticipate that further improvements will be made. Hopefully, this version will gain ascendancy for future performances.EpilogueThere are some object lessons to be learnt in the story of Chess. First, the old adage that “you live by the book, you die by the book” still holds. The major criticism of the early versions was that the book was flawed. Some of the characters were underdeveloped. The protagonists were not too likeable and thus one did not care much for them. The plot was unfocussed with perhaps one subplot too many. Even the smash hit songs could not save the show. Second, there can be some benefit of having a musical translated and performed in a foreign language. The best example of this is Les Miserables, which was translated from the original French into English. The English version became so successful that it was then translated back into French. Chess improved when it was translated into Swedish. Compared to the American version, the characters were fleshed out more fully and used more selectively. Thirdly, every element in a musical must be right. Otherwise, the less successful components can drag the entire production down. This was probably the reason why the Broadway production closed only after a couple of months. Critics complained that the show was too serious, too long, too boring. One final comment. World affairs can have a tremendous impact on the success or failure of a musical. I think Chess may have been affected by two events. The Soviet Union was waning in the late 1980s. It ultimately collapsed in 1991 and the the Cold War ended with it. At the same time, computer chess programs became increasingly sophisticated and difficult to defeat. In 1997, the IBM computer Deep Blue defeated the reigning chess champion, Gary Kasparov. Without the Cold War and with a declining interest in the game, I would surmise that Chess may have suffered a loss of relevance and appeal to American audiences in 1988.Nevertheless, Chess will survive because of the strength of its music and lyrics. Hopefully the latest Swedish version of Chess, translated back into English and tweaked a bit more, will find success and become the definitive blueprint for future productions.Chess RecordingsCurrently there are four CD recordings and one DVD recording available. The original London 1986 concept album remains my favorite, featuring Elaine Paige, Barbara Dickson, Murray Head and Tommy Körberg. I also like the Swedish 1994 Gothenburg concert version. I have not heard the Danish version, which is highly rated. While the American version is bottom of my ranking, it is nevertheless a good recording and does not disappoint. As for the Swedish DVD version, it has some excellent singing but I am disappointed by the duet in “I Know Him So Well”, and by the Arbiter, who is not a strong singer. Culture55670@blogcritics.org Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:46:24 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/08/26/122934.php Ken LyenPluto was discovered in 1930, well within Gustav Holst’s lifetime (1874-1934). But he had no interest composing an additional movement for that planet, having completed his symphonic masterpiece, The Planets, some 14 years earlier (it was first performed in 1918). This is fortunate because if he had done so, the decision by the International Astronomical Union to strip Pluto of its planetary status and to downgrade it to a "dwarf planet" might impel a more strait-laced concert programmer to expunge that segment from the repertoire.Yes, size matters. The reason Pluto is being humiliated is that it is deemed too small to justify its royal status. Poor Pluto now has to join the riff raff of dwarf planets. The expulsion of Pluto from the family of planets has caused a sun storm within the scientific and educational communities. Textbooks have to be rewritten. Billions of students, who learned there are nine planets, will have to be re-educated. Those who were failed because they gave the answer as eight will probably have to live with this injustice.Exhibitions of the solar system have to be changed, with one exception. The Singapore Science Centre has ordered a stay of execution and decided not to void Pluto out of the current exhibition of the solar system. However, the explanatory notes are hastily being modified to describe Pluto’s fall from grace. Perhaps we could help in the rewriting: "We regret that restructuring the heavenly bodies has led to the downsizing of our dearly beloved Pluto."Cassie Sherman had written “Planet Song,” to be sung to the tune of "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star." She sings, "I know the planets one by one / Pluto's the farthest one from the sun."Perhaps one might want to update this song? Sci/Tech52031@blogcritics.org Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:29:34 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/12/005138.php Ken LyenJukebox or compilation musicals are constructed around popular songs, usually written or sung by a single artist or by a group. A good example of a jukebox musical is Mamma Mia! (1999), which uses the songs of Abba. The musical was immensely successful commercially, earning over $1 billion in ticket sales worldwide, and it spawned a multitude of copycat jukebox musicals. It should be acknowledged that even before Mamma Mia!, jukebox musicals were already in existence. These included musicals featuring music by the Bee Gees: Saturday Night Fever (1977), Buddy Holly: The Buddy Holly Story (film 1978, stage musical 1990), Louis Jordan: Five Guys Named Moe (1985), Hank Williams: Lost Highway (1987), Ira and George Gershwin: Crazy for You (1992).After Mamma Mia! came the following musicals. Billy Joel: Movin' Out (2002), Queen: We Will Rock You (2002), Mama's and Papa's: Dream A Little Dream (2003), Tammy Wynette: Stand By Your Man (2003), Rod Stewart: Tonight's the Night (2003), The Beach Boys: Good Vibrations (2005), Elvis Presley: All Shook Up (2005), John Lennon: Lennon (2005), Frankie Valli: Jersey Boys (2005), John Denver: Almost Heaven (2005).Jukebox musicals are controversial, often attracting derisive and scathing reviews. Why? It is because the songs are written for a different reason, and in a totally different context. They were never intended to be compiled into a musical. When coerced into musical theater, the book tries to accommodate the songs. But it often has to undergo appalling contortions in order to do so. The net result, more often than not, is a contrived inorganic plot.The fundamental problem of jukebox musicals is that it is an expression of the relative poverty of original musical ideas by the creators of this genre. Producers take the easy way out. They hijack the hit songs of a successful composer, singer, or group, and build a musical around them. I concede that, yes, of course it takes originality to weave a plot around songs. But half the job, namely the composing of songs, is already fulfilled. There are several advantages for the producers. The songs and the performers are already very well known, with an established fan base. This potential audience is very large, and many would watch the musical just because they want to hear the songs again, as they might in a concert. They do not care two hoots about the story. Another advantage is that the producer often does not need to fight with the composer over the songs. The songwriters, if alive, are more than delighted to have their songs resurrected.Producing a musical is a high risk venture. Producers are afraid of losing money, and with jukebox musicals, the track record is perhaps better than that of putting on a brand-new original musical. Baby boomers are the target audience, and they are still worth tapping into.However, recently, there have been a series of flops. Beach Boys' Good Vibrations, Elvis Presley's All Shook Up, and Lennon all fared badly on Broadway. Luckily, the recent show, Frankie Valli's Jersey Boys, seems to be reversing the trend and is doing quite well, raking in the profits.Buoyed by this success, more jukebox musicals are being planned. Johnny Cash (Ring of Fire), Bob Dylan, and Neil Sedaka are all in the pipeline.As for myself, where do I stand? I'm afraid I don't care too much for these jukebox musicals. I regard them in the same way as revivals. They occupy theaters that should be showcasing new works. Without a healthy infusion of new musicals, in the long run, musical theater will slip further into decline. Music39393@blogcritics.org Sat, 12 Nov 2005 00:51:38 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/08/18/230822.php Ken LyenFlops are to theater critics, as diseases are to doctors. Good health, like good musicals, are never as fascinating as illnesses and failures. Like some doctors, critics may also like to play god. Take for example, Frank Rich, former New York Times theater critic. He is reputed to be able to determine the fate of a show by a stroke of his pen. A bad review from Frank could kill a show.This is denied by Ben Brantley, chief theater critic of the New York Times. In an internet radio interview, he defended the critic, saying that if a show flopped it was because it was no good, and had nothing to do with the critic. The latter is merely a messenger, and it would be wrong to shoot him.What is the role of a critic? I think a critic should help you understand and gain deeper insights into an artist's creation. But most critics fail to do that. They are merely the messengers. They give superficial answers to your question: "Is this show worth seeing?" Most critics get the answer "right". They correctly predict which shows are hits and which are flops. We only remember the ones that get it "wrong". Indeed, if you read the London critics panning Les Miserables, or Frank Rich's slightly unfavorable review of Cats, you might have missed out on these two musicals. Fortunately for these musicals, positive word-of-mouth was sufficiently robust to overturn the critics' negativity.In the 4 August 2005 issue of The Guardian, Lyn Gardner wrote about a new musical, Behind the Iron Mask, saying that the "sheer ineptitude of the evening bears all the hallmarks of the West End equivalent of vanity publishing... it is a calamity project." The Evening Standard said that the musical bore the brunt of "one of the most ferocious critical onslaughts in recent West End history". Some have voted it as one of the worst musicals to be performed in the West End.Come to think of it, there are more musicals vying for the honor of being The Worst Musical Ever, than contending for being The Best Musical Ever. Ken Mandelbaum in his book "Not Since Carrie: Forty Years of Broadway Musical Flops" votes for Carrie, the musical adaptation of Stephen King's horror story and movie of the same name. In Singapore that honor probably goes to Phua Chu Kang. Congratulations!My recipe for writing a flop musical (and I speak from experience), is to have a poorly thought-out story, underdeveloped and unlikeable protagonists, unhummable melodies, bad performers, set in a hostile theater environment. Guaranteed to flop, or your money back. Hear that, Max Bialystock?There is even a "Flop Musical Alert" bulletin board to help audiences locate these musicals. Early murmurings of another new musical, In My Life, is not favorable. There is a chance that this could be the worst musical to appear on Broadway.I guess there will never be a dearth of flop musical wannabees! Music34418@blogcritics.org Thu, 18 Aug 2005 23:08:22 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/08/18/225717.php Ken LyenMusical Dissonance The LaChiusa-Shaiman brawlRecently there has been a battle of words between two fellow Tony-winning Broadway composers, Michael John LaChiusa and Marc Shaiman. The hostilities were flamed in musical theater forums, and became so intense that it even reached the New York Times and Variety.It started off as an article entitled "The Great Gray Way" written by LaChiusa and published in Opera Now. Normally this is a relatively obscure journal read by the hoity-toity. However, I suspect LaChiusa thought it would be perfectly safe to express his frank opinions, no holds barred, in a magazine that few people read. How wrong he was.In the article LaChiusa bemoaned the fact that the American musical is dead. He laid some of the blame on a rash of musicals which include Mamma Mia!, Movin' Out, The Lion King, The Phantom of the Opera, The Producers, and Hairspray. According to LaChiusa, these musicals, which he dubs "faux" musicals, are formulaic, pander to the lowest common denominator of artistic taste (i.e. its absence), and is lacking in invention and craft. Worse still, these musicals are only a "copy of a copy", as they are a rip off, either of original films or music originally written as pop music.Probably nothing would have happened if LaChiusa did not mention Hairspray. Unfortunately for him, the composer for Hairspray, Marc Shaiman, did chance upon his article, and gave a spirited and humorous defense in All That Chat, a chatroom of the TalkingBroadway website.To be fair, LaChiusa has stayed out of the fracas. However, views have been polarized, and an intellectual slanging match has ensued.The argument reminds me of the same argument I used to have. "Is Stephen Sondheim a better musical theater writer than Andrew Lloyd Webber?" I would try to steer a neutral middle course, but my colleagues would generally support Stephen Sondheim. Adjectives to describe his musicals include "intelligent, insightful, innovative, brilliant." These same Sondheim acolytes would spurn Lloyd Webber's musicals, and hurl such insults as "vacuous, braindead, exploitative, and banal".In essence it is the argument that has raged since the existence of an intelligentsia. Namely it is the clash between high art and low art, between the highbrow and the lowbrow, between the arty farty and the philistines. Indeed the battle lines may be drawn along the socioeconomic divide, between the high class and the low class.Should art exist for its own sake, or should it have commercial value? Pure art versus commerce? This debate seems never-ending, and unresolvable.As I've stated, I try to keep a middle course. I want my art and eat it too! Yes, I wish my musicals would make as much money as Cats and Les Miserables. To me, musical theater is neither high nor lowbrow. It is middle-brow. But if I were forced to choose between writing a musical that was an "art" musical, or a commercial one, I would err on the side of art. To hell with commerce!(Oh, Mr. Producer, you want me to delete that scene because it would reduce box office sales... no problemo... sir, I would cut off whatever you want...) Music34417@blogcritics.org Thu, 18 Aug 2005 22:57:17 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/12/19/233016.php Ken LyenWhy are we so obsessed with prizes and ranking? We all know about the most prestigious prizes, such as the Nobel Prize, the Olympic Gold, the Pulitzer Prize, the Oscars, the Grammys, Miss Universe, and so on. We also know about the highest honors bestowed by important institutions or magazines, such as the Forbes lists of successful people and companies, and the Time Magazine Person of the Year.I guess this obsession is a manifestation of the competitive streak embedded in our nature, and is a relic of the forces of evolution which allow only the fittest to survive. We compete for success in sports, school, jobs, and love. And we enjoy the game of ranking people and things, and awarding prizes to the top few. Just look at our obsession with competitions like the American Idol. Crazy?Perhaps there is some justification in ranking. We rely on it to help us sift through the masses of potential competitors (both people and products) so that we are spared the tedium of doing the donkey work ourselves. Take blogs. There are literally hundreds of thousands of blog sites and the number increases every year. How do we know which blog is the best?Is Blogcritics the best group blog? Well, it was nominated, and people voted for it. It did not win, but that does not matter. Like the Oscars, just being nominated is honor enough. It was nominated as part of the Weblog Awards.But is the ranking by Weblog Awards better or more prestigious than, say, the Bloglines Most Popular Feeds, Blogstreet top 100, Top 100 Technorati, Best of the Blogs, Forbes Best Blogs, World's Best Blogs, or Best Blogs in Asia?Some blogs are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them (apologies to Shakespeare). Are we thrusting too much greatness onto too many blogs? With this deluge of web awards, how do we rank the rankers?The bottom line, as always, is that the choice of top blogs must be a personal one. We each have our own preferences and prejudices. We all have our own reasons why we blog. Some of us bloggers want to influence the world. Others want to be famous. Yet others blog to expurgate their inner troubles and to attain catharsis. But ultimately, all of us bloggers, like the Olympics, are winners. So which is the best blog? Drum roll while I open the envelope. The best blog for 2004 is....(I'm not telling) Sci/Tech23451@blogcritics.org Sun, 19 Dec 2004 23:30:16 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/12/17/152327.php Ken LyenI don't know who first said, "knowledge shared is knowledge gained." But it is a sentiment that I would agree with. Knowledge lying dormant in books is of little value unless it is discovered and used. It is similar to burying one's talent where it will remain untapped and its potential unfulfilled.The Royal Library of Alexandria was once the largest in the world. It was probably founded at the beginning of the 3rd century BC. At its peak it stored approximately 400,000 to 700,000 scrolls. Sadly the library was burnt down towards the end of the 3rd century AD. The loss of the world's learning up to then is incalculable, and may have set civilization back by centuries. What a tragic loss.I am therefore delighted to hear that the search engine Google plans to make available online millions of books from five libraries, including the Bodleian Library at Oxford University, the New York Public Library, and libraries of Harvard, Stanford and Michigan Universities. Google will digitize the books and place it into their searchable database.Already the project is recognized as one of the 21st century's major accomplishments. It is a communications revolution as great as the invention of moveable type by Johann Gutenberg (1398-1468). Michigan and Stanford have offered to digitize their entire library collections of about 15 million books. The Bodleian is offering around one million books published before 1900. The New York library is allowing Google to digitize a small portion of its books no longer covered by copyright, while Harvard is confining its initial participation to 40,000 volumes so it can assess how well the process works.The project will allow free access to historic publications and other rare out-of-print titles that previously were only available to specialized researchers. Among the landmark books to be made available are a 1687 first edition of Isaac Newton's "Principia," owned by Stanford and Charles Darwin's 1871 classic "The Descent of Man" in the Bodleian. Current copyright laws only allows Google to copy books in the public domain. For more recent books, they can only copy snippets of two or three sentences from each library book. The cost of digitization will be borne by Google, with cost estimates ranging from 150 million to 200 million dollars, or about 10 dollars per book. The entire project is expected to take about ten years.Michael Gorman, the president-elect of the American Library Association, thinks the value of helping people from anywhere in the world view a library's special collections is "almost priceless." This will benefit some of the poorer nations.Will this explosion of free knowledge kill off our neighborhood libraries? Probably some. Already my visits to the public library has decreased precipitously once I discovered that I can obtain all the information I want from the internet. It would have fallen even further were it not for the fact that my library now lends DVDs and CDs, a service not quite overtaken yet by the internet.The net result of allowing so much literature freely available is that it will enrich our lives, and stimulate greater interest in scholarship and writing. One final comment. If any of the old libraries should accidentally burn down, the information will hopefully be safely stored in cyberspace.18 December 2004 Sci/Tech23381@blogcritics.org Fri, 17 Dec 2004 15:23:27 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/12/09/124223.php Ken Lyen"If thine eye offends thee, pluck it out." - Matthew 18:9When I was an undergraduate, I could never understand why people studied Classics."What's so good about Classics?" I asked my Oxford college mate, "Ancient Greek and Latin are dead languages, of little value nowadays. I'm surprised they haven't closed the department."My friend was shocked by my philistine views.Well, it's now my turn to be shocked."Architecture?" I uttered in astonishment. "Why not Classics?"Apparently Cambridge University is contemplating closing its department of architecture. "Are they stark raving bonkers?"What is even more amazing is that architecture is a highly-rated department, consistently ranked within the top two British schools of architecture by the Guardian newspaper, doing quality research, and is a popular subject among undergraduates. So why the closure?More shocks were to follow (I'm a bit behind in my news, so the chronology may be out of sync). Seven universities have closed their undergraduate chemistry department: King's College London, Queen Mary, Swansea, Exeter, Dundee, and Anglia Polytechnic University, and the Open University. Even my alma mater, Oxford University's chemistry department is £1 million in debt, but so far it remains open, but only just.Exeter will also close its music department, and Reading is planning to follow suit. Durham University is planning to close its departments of east Asian studies and linguistics. Newcastle upon Tyne and Keele will scrap physics, Birmingham will axe its cultural studies.In contrast, the University of Wales at Swansea is planning for a slow death of its departments of sociology, anthropology, the Centre for Development Studies, philosophy, and chemistry departments, by stopping recruiting students and allowing them to "shrink naturally", according to Professor Richard Davies, the new vice-chancellor.What an avalanche! To say that British universities are in crisis, is an understatement!I even heard in jest (I hope), a professor of a medical school suggesting that they close their unprofitable department of psychiatry. "Let's join in with all this madness!"But while unprofitable departments are being closed, some profitable departments are being expanded. The University of Wales at Swansea will expand its departments of history, English, computing, psychology, geography and the new management school. Exeter will start a new school of bioscience to replace its chemistry department closure.British universities are resorting to radical surgery to excise gangrenous departments, hoping to stop the rot from spreading to the rest of the body. "If thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee." Perhaps if it administered lifesaving antibiotic funds over the past few decades, such drastic actions would not have been necessary. "What about Classics?" I asked, after sitting silently for a while."Oh, Classics is still alive and well.""Greats!" Culture23097@blogcritics.org Thu, 9 Dec 2004 12:42:23 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/12/08/144702.php Ken LyenThe Rise of the Creative Class By Richard Florida Reviewed by Kenneth LyenWhen Richard Florida's book, The Rise of the Creative Class, was published in 2002, it touched a receptive nerve, and became an instant bestseller. Now, two years later, we can sit back and reassess it more critically.Florida's chain of argument goes as follows: "The truly big changes of our time are social, not technological." The social changes revolve around an increasingly important group of people, called "the creative class." This includes occupations that encompass science and engineering, computers and their programs, architecture and design, education, arts, music and entertainment. In short, it embraces anyone who works creatively, and is paid to create, rather than to perform a task. It is this category of people who are driving our current economic growth. Within this group is a "super-creative" core of people who are the inventors, the thinkers, the scientists, the entrepreneurs, who create exciting new ideas, new products, and new industries. The creative class as a whole earns more than the other classes, and they tend to be more heteroclitic in dress, behavior and lifestyle. Furthermore, creative people are often quite fastidious. They prefer to live in places that tolerate diversity in lifestyles, where troublemakers, weirdos, eccentrics, and deviants feel perfectly at home. Florida has evidence to show that cities preferred by the creative class, are coincidentally the same cities that harbor a higher proportion of Bohemians, and have a higher rate of gay marriages. Whereas in the past, workers move to places where jobs are located, in the age of information technology, jobs move to places where requisite employees can be found. Florida cites Lycos, an internet company, that started in Pittsburgh, but moved to Boston when it discovered that they could more readily recruit programmers and other creative people there. In other words, the job mountain moves to Mohammed.Based on these observations, Florida posits that in order to attract the creative industries, cities have to try to attract creative people. What the latter want is a more tolerant society, low entry barriers, with friendly, easily accessible outdoor activities such as cycling, jogging, and night cafes and eateries.Florida's asserts that cities which are more liberal tend to have more creative industries and people. This has led him to postulate a causal relationship between the two. Cool, trendy places attract creative types. Therefore, he recommends that governments or local authorities should not "waste" money on expensive prestige projects like sports stadiums or huge concert halls, because they do not attract young creative people. Instead, authorities may find it more beneficial to "throw" money at projects that will attract the creative class. This includes supporting community arts, building jogging and cycling tracks, creating places like cafes, where casual nightlife can occur.Florida's thesis is very bold and seductive. It challenges our current orthodoxy. In classical thinking, all things being equal, people migrate primarily to places where they can find jobs, rather than to a liberal city with only a blind faith that they will find employment. Jobs exist because highly creative people built them. It is this elite group that are the strongest magnets pulling other creative people to them, rather than to the city per se. Workers are drawn to companies started by creative giants, like Walt Disney, Steven Spielberg, Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard, Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and so on. If the companies they started were situated in an inhospitable place, people would nonetheless still throng to them, probably.However, Florida challenges all this. Wouldn't it be nice that if you can transform a hitherto stuffy conservative place into a kinky liberal enclave, attract a whole bunch of creative people who will create new products, new industries, and voila you have a thriving city.Is it really so simple? Doesn't it sound too good to be true? Does it work for all cities in the world?Before I express my qualms about Florida's theories, let me disclose that fundamentally I'm sold by his thesis. I consider myself part of the creative class, and his prescriptions are tantalizingly alluring. I accept at face value his idea of a creative class, which he claims amounts to 30% of our population. The numbers are staggering. Nevertheless, this is quite an innovative way of classifying people involved in the creative and thinking industries. I see no point quibbling about whether or not it is a legitimate class, who belongs to it, and how many people there are. Florida is an academic, and he has a solid body of evidence to back up his claims.His second assertion is that creative industries are driving our modern economy. You don't have to be a genius to realize that innovation is a major driving force in our new economy. We watch new shows, we wear new fashions, we upgrade our computers or handphones, we buy new gadgets, we benefit from advances in medical and other technologies. The list of new ideas and products is almost infinite. You may even have noted that innovators tend to cluster in certain cities or centers. University towns like Harvard, Cambridge, Stanford, and geographic locations like Silicon Valley and Hollywood, or large companies like Apple, Sony, or Ikea are places that regularly produce exciting new ideas and products. It has almost become a truism that the more innovative a company, institution or country, the greater its competitive advantage.My reservations in accepting his theory wholesale arise from a few personal observations. Unfortunately I do not have the research data to back up my rather anecdotal evidence. Still, I have this gut feeling that Florida's thesis may need further refinement. The first observation concerns two thriving creative industries, sited in two cities that are quite different from San Francisco or Austin, Texas, examples used by Florida as liberal cities that attract gays and Bohemians. The two cities are Helsinki and Seoul. Nokia is one of the largest and profitable companies in Finland, churning out a stream of innovative cellular phones. I am told that some foreign workers who have transferred to the Nokia headquarters, complain that Helsinki is an inhospitable city with relatively little arts and culture, and the favorite night life seems to be drinking in the pubs. The same applies to Seoul, which is perhaps only marginally more diverse than Helsinki. Seoul is certainly not known for its gay, Bohemian, or liberal lifestyle. Once again, foreigners living there find it a difficult city to like. Yet companies like Samsung manage to attract a very creative workforce. Its electronics products are challenging well-established firms like Sony.It did occur to me whether there was a subculture within Nokia or Samsung that provided an enclave for socializing and letting one's hair down. But I am informed that the answer is "no." Therefore these remarks made me wonder if Florida's hypotheses were applicable globally. I'm the first to admit that the evidence I provide is both anecdotal and totally subjective. But on the other hand, it does not necessarily invalidate it. [Helsinki is ranked 16, and Seoul ranked 61, as best cities in the world for expatriates to live in for 2002.]The next observation comes from Singapore. The government is aggressively trying to convert this country into a powerhouse in biotechnology, information and communications. It is spending billions of dollars building a new center which will be a city within a city, with up-to-the-minute technologically advanced laboratories, transportation, shops, theaters, and housing. It is headhunting the world's top researchers in these areas, luring them to Singapore. Despite the fact that Singapore is an illiberal conservative city, largely intolerant of deviant behavior, with an extremely small Bohemian population, it seems to be succeeding in creating active research centers. Does Singapore defy Florida's postulates? The answer may be the same as that for the next city.Las Vegas, a city known for its casinos and service industry, is rapidly growing both its economy and population. It has been cited as an exception to Florida's rule. However, I think that gambling puts a whole new spin into the equation. As shown in Singapore, one can spend one's way into generating economic growth. Las Vegas is transforming into a family holiday resort and entertainment center, largely because of the revenues generated by the casinos.This leads me to the final and perhaps most fundamental question. Which came first? The liberal cities tolerating a diverse lifestyle, or the creative persons, who then catalyze the city into a more liberal and diverse environment? Is the thriving city a chicken giving birth to the creative class, or is it the egg born out of the creative class? This question cannot be dismissed out of hand, because there is an unspoken assumption in Florida's recommendations that the cause and effect is unidirectional, namely liberal cities have a gravitational pull for creative types.Judging by my observations of Helsinki and Seoul, it appears that the city may not be that important in a creative worker's choice, although this can be debated. Creative people will go wherever the jobs are. From the experience of Las Vegas and Singapore, it seems that creative people will go to where the money is.In the final analysis, while I think Florida may still basically correct when applied to places like Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Austin, Texas. However, I think his theories, as they now stand, are not universal, and do not apply across the board or across international borders. There are exceptions to his thesis, and more research needs to be undertaken to determine what additional factors repel or attract the creative class.Florida's book is extremely well written, his theories are tightly argued, and backed up with a wealth of research data. It is mandatory reading for those interested in creativity, and in city development.9 December 2004 Books23060@blogcritics.org Wed, 8 Dec 2004 14:47:02 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/11/18/031107.php Ken LyenWarning: Beware of toilet humor below.In 2001, Singapore was the proud host of the first World Toilet Summit. This squeaky clean city state fines people who do not flush public loos, and if anyone were so jejune as to void their bladder in a government housing board lift, their act would be captured on close-circuit television, and they will be fined.But all is not fine in Singapore. Unwilling to sit on its derriere, this city has undergone a restroom renaissance. Creative ideas have been implemented to make toilets a truly enjoyable experience. One shopping center has painted murals inside the toilets of each floor, creating the world of ancient Egypt, the American wild west, a tropical rainforest, and ancient Rome, complete with gladiators. A more conducive environment should help (water) closet paruretics (persons who fear using public toilets).Beijing is the host for the fourth World Toilet Summit on 19 November 2004, which coincidentally is World Toilet Day. A lot of water must have flowed under the bridge since Singapore. The world's scatological community is congregating there to push for greater sanitation. This is in China's interest as it will be hosting the Olympic Games in 2008, and obviously does not want to be chided for having less fragrant loos. To add a bit of imagination, Beijing has built, a beetle-shaped loo in a park. Sadly it is not a dung beetle.Designs on toilets have not enjoyed any major breakthroughs since Marcel Duchamp's 1917 urinal displayed in a New York art exhibition. The high tech revolution seems to have bypassed toilets. Minor advances are automatic flushing, dry flushing for airplane toilets, paper relining of toilet seats. The splash-free toilet is still a distant dream. Also a non-stink restroom.The Singapore government has proclaimed that quality public toilets are the hallmark of a gracious society. And I would add, more business is successfully conducted there than in the boardroom. President Calvin Coolidge hit the nail on the right spot when he said, "The business of America is business."Oh shit (pardon my French)! I nearly forgot. When Nigeria started to build its sewer system several decades ago, the British were consulted. The latter calculated the requirements based on standard British fecal load. What they did not realize is that because of the refined diet devoid of fiber, the calculations grossly underestimated the situation. In contrast, Nigerians ate a much healthier diet with a lot more fiber and passed a shitload more of, er, shit. As a result, the Nigerian sewer system built was woefully inadequate and was blocked within a few weeks.The moral of the story is: don't pooh-pooh the importance of diet and excrement.At this stage, you may be itching to ask what is the etymology of the word "loo"? Nobody really knows. One of the favorite theories is that it is taken from the word Waterloo, which is displayed on the iron cisterns in many British outhouses during the early 20th century. The British politely refer to the toilet as a "water closet", hence "water loo", and later, just "loo".And finally, how should we celebrate World Toilet Day? Maybe we can all spend more quality time sitting on our thrones, and in a contemplative mood, we might enjoy a flush of new ideas. Or am I talking crap?18 November 2004 Sci/Tech22351@blogcritics.org Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:11:07 EST