Gadgets : Miscellaneous RSS
Top Technology Breakthroughs of 2008 By Priya Ganapati Email 12.26.08
The economy may be tanking, but innovation is alive and well.
When it came to products, incremental improvements were the name of the game this year. Phones got faster (iPhone 3G anyone?), notebooks turned into netbooks and pocket cameras went from recording standard-definition video to HD.
But the world's corporate and academic R&D labs were busy laying the foundations of some amazing future technologies in 2008. They produced concepts such as silicon chips you can swallow for personalized medicine from the inside out and a fourth fundamental element in electronic circuitry. And engineers cranked out a few less groundbreaking — but no less important — inventions, like a space-age swimsuit to help Michael Phelps slice through the water faster than a river otter on a jet ski.
Here's our countdown of what rocked our world in 2008 — and what will change yours in 2009 and beyond.
10. Flexible Displays
Flexible displays are likely to be a reality by 2010 or 2011.
Courtesy Phillip Spears
A sliver of the future can soon be tucked into your back pocket. For years, researchers have worked on thin, paperlike displays that can be folded, rolled or sewn into the sleeve of your hoodie. Flexible displays could change the way we interact with the info-universe, creating new kinds of cellphones, portable computers, e-newspapers and electronic books.
This year, the research moved from the realm of science fiction to plausible reality. With help from the U.S. Army, Arizona State University's Flexible Display Center has created a prototype for soldiers, and hopes to have the devices in field trials in the next three years. Startups like Plastic Logic and E-Ink have been developing similar technologies.
Meanwhile, Hewlett Packard announced a manufacturing breakthrough that allows the thin-film transistor arrays to be fabricated on flexible plastic materials, enabling manufacturers to "print" displays on big, newsprintlike rolls. Samsung showed off a mobile phone prototype with a flexible display that folds like a book.
Outlook: A Minority Report-style digital newspaper that you can roll up in your pocket isn't happening before 2010 at the earliest. But to quote science fiction novelist William Gibson: "The future is here. It's just not widely distributed yet."
9. Edible Chips
Grandma's pillbox with the days of the week neatly marked is set to go high tech. Tiny edible chips will replace the organizer, tracking when patients take their pills (or don't) and monitoring the effects of the drugs they're taking. Proteus, a Redwood City, California, company, has created tiny chips out of silicon grains that, once swallowed, activate in the stomach. The chips send a signal to an external patch that monitors vital parameters such as heart rate, temperature, state of wakefulness or body angle.
The data is then sent to an online repository or a cellphone for the physician and the patient to track. Proteus says its chips can keep score of how patients are responding to the medication. That may be just the beginning, as the chips could improve drug delivery and even insert other kinds of health monitors inside the body. Now doctors may have a better answer to a common patient complaint — they will know exactly how it feels.
Outlook: If proven in clinical trials, edible chips could let physicians look into a patient's system in a way that could change how medicine is prescribed and how we take the drugs.
8. Speedo LZR
Michael Phelps. 2008 Olympics. Enough said. Phelps and others were able to log faster times because of Speedo's LZR swimsuit. It blends new materials and a dose of NASA rocket science to boost the speeds of elite swimmers — legally.
Viscous drag on a swimmer can be as much as 25 percent of the total retarding force. But Speedo's suit, with its ultrasonically bonded seams instead of stitches, low-drag panels and a mix of polyurethane layers, can cut resistance and help swimmers move through the water faster. It also has a rigid, girdle-style structure that helps position the swimmer's body in an optimal position. Did it have anything to do with Michael Phelps' amazing eight Olympic gold medals? Probably not, as nearly every swimmer at the Games was wearing a Speedo suit.
Outlook: We're hoping at least some of the technologies in the LZR will trickle down to the consumer level so we can slice through the water at the Y.
7. Flash Memory
When Apple blessed the iPod with flash memory, it gave new life to a technology that had long played second fiddle to hard disk drives. Now flash memory is a mainstay of most consumer electronics products, from ultralight notebooks to digital cameras and media players.
Next, the who's who of the tech industry — EMC, Sun Microsystems, Intel and Hitachi — are championing flash drives for larger business users.
The advantage? Solid-state flash drives offer faster response times than hard disk drives and they require much less power. The hitch is that they are almost eight times more expensive than hard disk drives. But with the star power behind flash storage, the prices have nowhere to go but down.
Outlook: More data centers are likely to move to flash storage in 2009, which is likely to drive prices down further. If this trend takes off, say goodbye to the hard disk drives in your house. It will be time to flash your drive.
6. GPS
The Global Positioning System is old, old, older than you think. The system has been operational since 1978 and available for commercial use since 1993, but for years its use was relegated to expensive personal navigation devices and the dashboards of high-end cars.
This year, suddenly GPS popped up everywhere else, from the iPhone 3G and the T-Mobile G1 to notebooks such as Fujitsu's LifeBook series.
And devices that couldn't or didn't include true GPS made do with cell-tower triangulation or geolocation based on Wi-Fi hotspots. Now getting lost is no longer an option.
Outlook: With widespread GPS capabilities throughout the gadget world, services that make use of geographic data, like Loopt and Yahoo's Firebird, will be able to build critical mass.
5. The Memristor
It's not often that a fundamental tech breakthrough has the potential to change how we compute. Nearly 37 years after it was first described in a series of mathematical equations, researchers at HP Labs proved that the fourth fundamental element of electronic circuitry is for real. The "memristor," or memory transistor, now joins the three other widely known elements: the capacitor, the resistor and the inductor.
The discovery will make it possible to develop computer systems that remember what's stored in memory when they are turned off. That means computers that don't need to be booted up and systems that are far more energy efficient than the current crop. Researchers also hope the memristor can help develop a new kind of computer memory that can supplement or ultimately replace dynamic random access memory, or DRAM — the type of memory used in personal computers.
Outlook: Memristors are still primarily confined to the lab, so don't expect commercial products based on this kind of circuitry for at least five years.
4. Video-Capable SLRs
Video-capable SLRs will meld high-def moving and still images.
Courtesy of Nikon
For years, high-end single-lens reflex cameras have been unable to do what even $100 pocket cams can do: Shoot video. That's because of the type of imaging chip used by SLRs.
This year, the camera industry overcame that limitation. Two new cameras, the Nikon D90 and the Canon 5D Mark II capture top-notch still images, but let the photographer to shoot high-definition video. No longer do SLR users have to stand by, while friends mock them for their expensive camera's inability to shoot video.
Outlook: Shooting high-def videos with an SLR is cheap compared to using professional video equipment — and it gives photographers access to a wide range of lenses. In 2009, we predict this will lead to an explosion in arty, high-def videos shot by professional still photographers.
3. USB 3.0
Fasten your seatbelts. The data-transfer freeway is set to turn into an autobahn. The Universal Serial Bus, or USB, a popular standard for transferring files to your PC or charging your iPhone, got its first major update in eight years. USB 3.0 will be 10 times faster than the current USB 2.0 standard, and will increase the amount of electrical current that can be delivered through a USB cable.
Users need the increased speed — 4.8 gigabits per second, to be precise. Digital cameras and pocket-size HD video recorders generate a torrent of bits, all of which need to be transferred quickly to computers, so they can be uploaded to YouTube, adding to the internet video that only a handful of people will ever watch.
And as consumers carry around more devices, charging them off a PC using a USB cable will be much easier than carrying multiple chargers. With the USB 3.0 specifications nailed down this year, the standard will bump up the power output to 900 milliamps from 100 milliamps, allowing more devices to be charged faster.
Outlook: We expect the earliest USB 3.0 products in mid-2009.
2. Android
Handset makers from Motorola to Sony Ericsson are rushing to add Android to their lineup.
Jon Snyder/Wired.com
There were many reasons to dislike the T-Mobile HTC G1 phone: its color, poor battery life and a touchscreen that isn't super-responsive. And the numbers reflect that. Only about 1.5 million units of the G1 have been sold since its October 2008 launch. Compare that to the 3 million iPhones that sold when it debuted.
But the G1 scores with its operating system. It runs Android, the free mobile operating system from Google. It's the first mobile OS to make its debut in years and the G1 is just the first of what will be many phones that use it. With its open source base, growing developer community and dozens of cellphone manufacturers pledging to make Android phones, Android has the potential to reshape the wireless industry in significant ways.
Outlook: At least half a dozen manufacturers are likely to release Android phones in 2009, increasing the pressure on other smartphone operating systems. The iPhone is likely to remain the top-selling smartphone through the end of the year, however.
1. Apple's App Store
Until this year, mobile app developers lacked an easy way to get their software into the hands of consumers, forcing them to make deals with finicky and power-hungry carriers if they wanted to get any distribution at all. Apple's App Store changed all that. It made creating and distributing mobile applications for cellphone users easy — jumpstarting the mobile-app development market and creating clones such as the Android Market. It even forced Research in Motion to offer a BlackBerry Application Storefront. For thousands of programmers, the cellphone is the new PC.
Outlook: App stores have changed forever the way we use our phones, turning them into personalized devices filled with utilities, handy tools and copies of Tap Tap Revenge.
Friday, December 26, 2008
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Critical Shopper | Trixie & Peanut Don’t Catch a Tail in the Fitting Room By MIKE ALBO
December 25, 2008
Critical Shopper | Trixie & Peanut Don’t Catch a Tail in the Fitting Room By MIKE ALBO
IN 1997, My friend Cary found Harry in the East Village, tied to a door and abandoned. He is a Chihuahua, and one of the most neurotic creatures I have ever met. He barks constantly, tries to bite people who are overly affectionate, and has the picky diet of a Pilates-addicted Upper East Side socialite. He is grumpy, paranoid, vituperative, insufferable — but I love the shivery little thing.
These days Harry is getting long in the tooth: he has joint problems from Lyme disease; he has lost weight; he’s developing cataracts. He’s beginning to resemble the post-stroke Bette Davis in looks and temperament. No matter how crotchety he gets, Harry still demands respect, attention, organic chicken and couture.
For Christmas I decided to give my cranky friend a little coat, so Cary and I took him to Trixie & Peanut, a clothing and accessories boutique for the well-kept pooches of New York, because for city animals like Harry, looking stylish is paramount if you want to make it in the dog-run social scene.
The store is among the highly trafficked shops of the Flatiron district and has a glassy entrance and clean white interior. Two dog-employees immediately rushed up and greeted Harry as we entered. This was Annie, a Pomeranian, and Tessa, a Boston terrier. While they sniffed each other’s hindquarters and got acquainted, Cary and I perused the trendy, adorably practical, occasionally scary merchandise.
We first noticed the wigs and hats, modeled by little mannequin dog heads, including a Royal Highness crown and cape ($35), Doggie Mullet wig ($40) and the requisite Reindeer Antlers ($12). Most enticing was the Amber Bobcat Doggie Diva Wig, a chestnut mane styled into a perfect Los Angeles actress blowout. With this and a necktie, your pet could re-enact Jennifer Aniston’s recent cover for GQ, easily.
A thin diagonal table slices through the store. On it are neat piles of tiny fashionable outfits, like T-shirts emblazoned with skulls and crossbones ($19) or with snarky expressions like Chick Magnet and Local Celebrity ($22 and $29).
On a nearby shelf, I saw a soft Sunset Mohair sweater ($59) that comes in beautiful rust colors. Next to it was a Pawtucket sweater with a built-in scarf ($35) and a cable-knit cardigan ($35). Tessa ran around the store in an off-the-shoulder oversize paisley print sweater ($32) that made her look like a hipster in McCarren Park. All of these items were trendy, wearable and within my price range. For a second I thought I had hit the shopping jackpot but then remembered I was a human being.
The shelf of chew toys is, by itself, worth the visit. Here are stuffed critters with names like Biteme Spears, Angelina Grrrowlie and Brad Pitbull, and plush objects like a Chewy Vuitton handbag and a Bark Jacobs shoe. My favorites were the Pee and Poo dolls, if that tells you anything about my sense of humor. Check them out for yourself: if you don’t immediately laugh, we will never be friends.
Sometimes even I find the merchandise frightening, like the stack of fluffy car beds: a Hollywoof Limo and a red Furrari. If I were on a date, and found one of these in the guy’s apartment, I would run out the door without looking back.
But amid the whimsy are more practical items. Collars and leashes come in an array of colors and prints, including studded “punk rock” collars ($25) and an $85 Cheyenne Collection harness and lead set made of woven nylon in a striking American Indian-inspired print.
The pet carrier selection is also impressive. Cary was drawn to a white canvas tote, trimmed in pink with a mesh bottom ($165). Harry climbed inside and seemed relaxed — not an easy feat. A saleswoman explained that the bag is airline approved and holds up to 15 pounds.
Other bags are more chic. A $119 brown faux leather Barcelona bag and a $99 black bag in shiny faux patent leather have hidden mesh screens on the sides, yet still resemble bags you might see at Coach — or at least in a Canal Street knockoff.
THE day after I visited, I called the store’s founder, Susan Bing, who explained that she started Trixie & Peanut in 1999 as a mail-order catalog, naming it after her two rescued boxers. (Peanut is still with us; Trixie died that year.) Ms. Bing could be considered the Coco Chanel of the pet world, one of the first retailers to offer domestic animals decent duds in modern silhouettes.
“When I started, people laughed at me,” she said, “but everything out there was really froufrou, like it was made for the crazy old lady who dresses her dog, or it was really mass market, plaid and boring.” She quickly expanded, starting a Web site in 2000, then opening this space in 2003. Now, trying to imagine the lame, uncreative age before the Four-Legged Fashion Renaissance is like trying to recall how New York women dressed before “Sex and the City.”
It took us a long time to decide which coat was right for Harry. A pretty saleswoman retrieved sizes and colors for us with calm patience. You could tell she had dealt with plenty of dog divas.
Cary slipped Harry into a $25 quilted vest with a baseball jacket-style collar, but he recoiled. We liked a Fargo denim jacket with a faux shearling lining ($39) and a Snappy Pocket Parka with a removable hood trimmed in faux fur ($39) but settled for a light blue fleece Snuggle Suit, also $39. Leaving the shop, Harry quietly padded through Union Square in his new suit.
I’m not sure he liked it. Cary says that when they got home, Harry shot her an annoyed glance. Luckily Trixie & Peanut has an exchange policy, so Harry can pretend to be all gushy and thankful to me, kvetch to all his friends about my tacky taste, then sneak back and get something he really wants. Typical New Yorker.
TRIXIE & PEANUT
23 East 20th Street (between Broadway and Park Avenue);
(212) 358-0881.
BARK A narrow, brightly lighted boutique full of outfits, hats, harnesses, leashes, collars and other accouterments for four-legged fashion victims and their clotheshorse owners.
YAP Much of the merchandise is geared to pint-size pets, but check the extensive Web site (trixieandpeanut.com) for items suitable to bigger dogs. Everything online is available in the shop but may not be displayed.
AWW The human help are pretty, patient and accommodating. The dog-employees are also friendly and put nervous canine customers at ease.
Critical Shopper | Trixie & Peanut Don’t Catch a Tail in the Fitting Room By MIKE ALBO
IN 1997, My friend Cary found Harry in the East Village, tied to a door and abandoned. He is a Chihuahua, and one of the most neurotic creatures I have ever met. He barks constantly, tries to bite people who are overly affectionate, and has the picky diet of a Pilates-addicted Upper East Side socialite. He is grumpy, paranoid, vituperative, insufferable — but I love the shivery little thing.
These days Harry is getting long in the tooth: he has joint problems from Lyme disease; he has lost weight; he’s developing cataracts. He’s beginning to resemble the post-stroke Bette Davis in looks and temperament. No matter how crotchety he gets, Harry still demands respect, attention, organic chicken and couture.
For Christmas I decided to give my cranky friend a little coat, so Cary and I took him to Trixie & Peanut, a clothing and accessories boutique for the well-kept pooches of New York, because for city animals like Harry, looking stylish is paramount if you want to make it in the dog-run social scene.
The store is among the highly trafficked shops of the Flatiron district and has a glassy entrance and clean white interior. Two dog-employees immediately rushed up and greeted Harry as we entered. This was Annie, a Pomeranian, and Tessa, a Boston terrier. While they sniffed each other’s hindquarters and got acquainted, Cary and I perused the trendy, adorably practical, occasionally scary merchandise.
We first noticed the wigs and hats, modeled by little mannequin dog heads, including a Royal Highness crown and cape ($35), Doggie Mullet wig ($40) and the requisite Reindeer Antlers ($12). Most enticing was the Amber Bobcat Doggie Diva Wig, a chestnut mane styled into a perfect Los Angeles actress blowout. With this and a necktie, your pet could re-enact Jennifer Aniston’s recent cover for GQ, easily.
A thin diagonal table slices through the store. On it are neat piles of tiny fashionable outfits, like T-shirts emblazoned with skulls and crossbones ($19) or with snarky expressions like Chick Magnet and Local Celebrity ($22 and $29).
On a nearby shelf, I saw a soft Sunset Mohair sweater ($59) that comes in beautiful rust colors. Next to it was a Pawtucket sweater with a built-in scarf ($35) and a cable-knit cardigan ($35). Tessa ran around the store in an off-the-shoulder oversize paisley print sweater ($32) that made her look like a hipster in McCarren Park. All of these items were trendy, wearable and within my price range. For a second I thought I had hit the shopping jackpot but then remembered I was a human being.
The shelf of chew toys is, by itself, worth the visit. Here are stuffed critters with names like Biteme Spears, Angelina Grrrowlie and Brad Pitbull, and plush objects like a Chewy Vuitton handbag and a Bark Jacobs shoe. My favorites were the Pee and Poo dolls, if that tells you anything about my sense of humor. Check them out for yourself: if you don’t immediately laugh, we will never be friends.
Sometimes even I find the merchandise frightening, like the stack of fluffy car beds: a Hollywoof Limo and a red Furrari. If I were on a date, and found one of these in the guy’s apartment, I would run out the door without looking back.
But amid the whimsy are more practical items. Collars and leashes come in an array of colors and prints, including studded “punk rock” collars ($25) and an $85 Cheyenne Collection harness and lead set made of woven nylon in a striking American Indian-inspired print.
The pet carrier selection is also impressive. Cary was drawn to a white canvas tote, trimmed in pink with a mesh bottom ($165). Harry climbed inside and seemed relaxed — not an easy feat. A saleswoman explained that the bag is airline approved and holds up to 15 pounds.
Other bags are more chic. A $119 brown faux leather Barcelona bag and a $99 black bag in shiny faux patent leather have hidden mesh screens on the sides, yet still resemble bags you might see at Coach — or at least in a Canal Street knockoff.
THE day after I visited, I called the store’s founder, Susan Bing, who explained that she started Trixie & Peanut in 1999 as a mail-order catalog, naming it after her two rescued boxers. (Peanut is still with us; Trixie died that year.) Ms. Bing could be considered the Coco Chanel of the pet world, one of the first retailers to offer domestic animals decent duds in modern silhouettes.
“When I started, people laughed at me,” she said, “but everything out there was really froufrou, like it was made for the crazy old lady who dresses her dog, or it was really mass market, plaid and boring.” She quickly expanded, starting a Web site in 2000, then opening this space in 2003. Now, trying to imagine the lame, uncreative age before the Four-Legged Fashion Renaissance is like trying to recall how New York women dressed before “Sex and the City.”
It took us a long time to decide which coat was right for Harry. A pretty saleswoman retrieved sizes and colors for us with calm patience. You could tell she had dealt with plenty of dog divas.
Cary slipped Harry into a $25 quilted vest with a baseball jacket-style collar, but he recoiled. We liked a Fargo denim jacket with a faux shearling lining ($39) and a Snappy Pocket Parka with a removable hood trimmed in faux fur ($39) but settled for a light blue fleece Snuggle Suit, also $39. Leaving the shop, Harry quietly padded through Union Square in his new suit.
I’m not sure he liked it. Cary says that when they got home, Harry shot her an annoyed glance. Luckily Trixie & Peanut has an exchange policy, so Harry can pretend to be all gushy and thankful to me, kvetch to all his friends about my tacky taste, then sneak back and get something he really wants. Typical New Yorker.
TRIXIE & PEANUT
23 East 20th Street (between Broadway and Park Avenue);
(212) 358-0881.
BARK A narrow, brightly lighted boutique full of outfits, hats, harnesses, leashes, collars and other accouterments for four-legged fashion victims and their clotheshorse owners.
YAP Much of the merchandise is geared to pint-size pets, but check the extensive Web site (trixieandpeanut.com) for items suitable to bigger dogs. Everything online is available in the shop but may not be displayed.
AWW The human help are pretty, patient and accommodating. The dog-employees are also friendly and put nervous canine customers at ease.
A Sleek Media Player With a Hint of Mystery By AZADEH ENSHA
December 25, 2008
A Sleek Media Player With a Hint of Mystery By AZADEH ENSHA
The electronics maker Cowon is bringing curvy back. But in addition to having a streamlined curved design, the company's S9 media player is loaded with features.
The multimedia gadget includes a touch screen display in a 16:9 format that uses superbright AMOLED (active matrix organic light emitting diode) technology, which is doing to conventional display technology what the CD did to FM radio. Oh, did we mention the S9 has an FM radio?
You can play 55 hours' worth of music files between charges. The S9 has Bluetooth, and a built-in microphone for live recording. It comes with a 500-megahertz dual-core processor and supports almost every video and audio format (as in, not iTunes). The 2.7-ounce S9 is available now with eight gigabytes ($200) or 16 gigabytes ($240) of internal flash memory.
The Cowon also has a brand so obscure, you'll look like a globe-trotting tech wizard. When someone asks, "What is that, a BlackBerry Storm?" you can calmly reply, "No, it's a Cowon S9 media player." Very jet set. AZADEH ENSHA
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/25/technology/personaltech/25cowon.html?sq=Cowon&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
A Sleek Media Player With a Hint of Mystery By AZADEH ENSHA
The electronics maker Cowon is bringing curvy back. But in addition to having a streamlined curved design, the company's S9 media player is loaded with features.
The multimedia gadget includes a touch screen display in a 16:9 format that uses superbright AMOLED (active matrix organic light emitting diode) technology, which is doing to conventional display technology what the CD did to FM radio. Oh, did we mention the S9 has an FM radio?
You can play 55 hours' worth of music files between charges. The S9 has Bluetooth, and a built-in microphone for live recording. It comes with a 500-megahertz dual-core processor and supports almost every video and audio format (as in, not iTunes). The 2.7-ounce S9 is available now with eight gigabytes ($200) or 16 gigabytes ($240) of internal flash memory.
The Cowon also has a brand so obscure, you'll look like a globe-trotting tech wizard. When someone asks, "What is that, a BlackBerry Storm?" you can calmly reply, "No, it's a Cowon S9 media player." Very jet set. AZADEH ENSHA
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/25/technology/personaltech/25cowon.html?sq=Cowon&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
Harold Pinter, Playwright of the Pause, Dies at 78 By MEL GUSSOW and BEN BRANTLEY
December 26, 2008
Harold Pinter, Playwright of the Pause, Dies at 78 By MEL GUSSOW and BEN BRANTLEY
Harold Pinter, the British playwright whose gifts for finding the ominous in the everyday and the noise within silence made him the most influential and imitated dramatist of his generation, died on Wednesday. He was 78 and lived in London.
The cause was cancer, his wife, Lady Antonia Fraser, said Thursday.
Mr. Pinter learned he had cancer of the esophagus in late 2001. In 2005, when he received the Nobel Prize in Literature, he was unable to attend the awards ceremony at the Swedish Academy in Stockholm but delivered an acceptance speech from a wheelchair in a recorded video.
In more than 30 plays — written between 1957 and 2000 and including masterworks like "The Birthday Party," "The Caretaker," "The Homecoming" and "Betrayal" — Mr. Pinter captured the anxiety and ambiguity of life in the second half of the 20th century with terse, hypnotic dialogue filled with gaping pauses and the prospect of imminent violence.
Along with another Nobel winner, Samuel Beckett, his friend and mentor, Mr. Pinter became one of the few modern playwrights whose names instantly evoke a sensibility. The adjective Pinteresque has become part of the cultural vocabulary as a byword for strong and unspecified menace.
An actor, essayist, screenwriter, poet and director as well as a dramatist, Mr. Pinter was also publicly outspoken in his views on repression and censorship, at home and abroad. He used his Nobel acceptance speech to denounce American foreign policy, saying that the United States had not only lied to justify waging war against Iraq, but that it had also "supported and in many cases engendered every right-wing military dictatorship" in the last 50 years.
His political views were implicit in much of his work. Though his plays deal with the slipperiness of memory and human character, they are also almost always about the struggle for power.
The dynamic in his work is rooted in battles for control, turf wars waged in locations that range from working-class boarding houses (in his first produced play, "The Room," from 1957) to upscale restaurants (the setting for "Celebration," staged in 2000). His plays often take place in a single, increasingly claustrophobic room, where conversation is a minefield and even innocuous-seeming words can wound.
In Mr. Pinter's work "words are weapons that the characters use to discomfort or destroy each other," said Peter Hall, who has staged more of Mr. Pinter's plays than any other director.
But while Mr. Pinter's linguistic agility turned simple, sometimes obscene, words into dark, glittering and often mordantly funny poetry, it is what comes between the words that he is most famous for. And the stage direction "pause" would haunt him throughout his career.
Intended as an instructive note to actors, the Pinter pause was a space for emphasis and breathing room. But it could also be as threatening as a raised fist. Mr. Pinter said that writing the word "pause" into his first play was "a fatal error." It is certainly the aspect of his writing that has been most parodied. But no other playwright has consistently used pauses with such rhythmic assurance and to such fine-tuned manipulative effect.
Early in his career Mr. Pinter said his work was about "the weasel under the cocktail cabinet." Though he later regretted the image, it holds up as a metaphor for the undertow of danger that pervades his work. As Martin Esslin wrote in his book "Pinter: The Playwright," "Man's existential fear, not as an abstraction, but as something real, ordinary and acceptable as an everyday occurrence — here we have the core of Pinter's work as a dramatist."
Though often grouped with Beckett and others as a practitioner of Theater of the Absurd, Mr. Pinter considered himself a realist. In 1962 he said the context of his plays was always "concrete and particular." He never found a need to alter that assessment.
Beginning in the late 1950s, John Osborne and Mr. Pinter helped to turn British theater away from the gentility of the drawing room. With "Look Back in Anger," Osborne opened the door for several succeeding generations of angry young men, who railed against the class system and an ineffectual government. Mr. Pinter was to have the more lasting effect as an innovator and a stylist. And his influence on other playwrights, including David Mamet in the United States and Patrick Marber and Jez Butterworth in England, is undeniable.
The playwright Tom Stoppard said that before Mr. Pinter: "One thing plays had in common: you were supposed to believe what people said up there. If somebody comes in and says, 'Tea or coffee?' and the answer is 'Tea,' you are entitled to assume that somebody is offered a choice of two drinks, and the second person has stated a preference." With Mr. Pinter there are alternatives, "such as the man preferred coffee but the other person wished him to have tea," Mr. Stoppard said, "or that he preferred the stuff you make from coffee beans under the impression that it was called tea."
As another British playwright, David Hare, said of Mr. Pinter, "The essence of his singular appeal is that you sit down to every play or film he writes in certain expectation of the unexpected."
Though initially regarded as an intuitive rather than an intellectual playwright, Mr. Pinter was in fact both. His plays are dense with references to writers like James Joyce and T. S. Eliot. The annual Pinter Review, in which scholars probe and parse his works for meaning and metaphor, is one of many indications of his secure berth in academia.
Politics Inside the Plays
While it was not immediately apparent, Mr. Pinter was always a writer with a political sensibility, which became overt in later plays like "One for the Road" (1984) and "Mountain Language" (1988). These works, having to do "not with ambiguities of power, but actual power," he said, were written out of "very cold anger."
He and his wife hosted gatherings in their Holland Park town house for liberal political seminars. Known as the June 20th Society, the participants included Mr. Hare, Ian McEwan, Michael Holroyd, John Mortimer, Salman Rushdie and Germaine Greer. In their discussions Mr. Pinter expressed the great struggle of the mid-20th century as one between "primitive rage" and "liberal generosity," Mr. Hare said.
Through the years Mr. Pinter became known, especially to the British news media, for having a prickly personality. "There is a violence in me," Mr. Pinter once said, "but I don't walk around looking for trouble." The director Richard Eyre said in a testimonial book published for Mr. Pinter's 70th birthday that he was "sometimes pugnacious and occasionally splenetic" but "just as often droll and generous — particularly to actors, directors and (a rare quality this) other writers."
Harold Pinter was born in Hackney in the East End of London on Oct. 10, 1930. His father, Jack, was a tailor; his mother, Frances, a homemaker. Mr. Pinter's grandparents had emigrated to England from Eastern Europe. His parents, he said, were "very solid, very respectable, Jewish, lower-middle-class people."
With the outbreak of World War II in 1939, Harold, an only child, was evacuated from London to a provincial town in Cornwall. His feelings of loneliness and isolation from that time were to surface later in his plays. When he was 13, he returned to London and was there during the Blitz when his house was struck by a bomb. He rushed inside to rescue a few valuable possessions: his cricket bat and a poem — "a paean of love" — he was writing to a girlfriend.
Sports, poetry and his relationships with women were to remain important to him. Vigorously athletic, he was a fierce competitor in cricket and tennis. Ian Smith, an Oxford don and cricket teammate, equated Mr. Pinter's art with his bold style of playing cricket. "Everything is focused," he said. "It's about performance and economy of gesture."
Poetry and Pacifism
Mr. Pinter grew up on a diet of American gangster movies and British war films. From the first he was a great reader and a hopeful poet, with strong political judgments. When he was called up for military service at 18, as a pacifist he refused to serve.
In diverse ways he remained a conscientious objector in the years to come, echoing a line in "The Birthday Party," in which Stanley, a lodger in a seaside boarding house, is suddenly taken away by two strangers to some ominous future as a friend cries out, "Stan, don't let them tell you what to do!" Years later, Mr. Pinter said he had lived that line all his life.
Mr. Pinter's first poem was published in a magazine called Poetry London when he was 20. Soon afterward he completed a novel, "The Dwarfs." After studying at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art and the Central School of Speech and Drama, he signed on with a repertory company and, performing under the name David Baron, toured Ireland in plays by Shakespeare and others, often in villainous roles like Iago.
In 1955, at a party in London, Mr. Pinter was struck by what he referred to as "an odd image." A little man, who later turned out to be the writer and professional eccentric Quentin Crisp, was making bacon and eggs for a large man who was sitting at a table reading the comics. Mr. Pinter told his friend Henry Woolf about the incident and said he thought he might write a play about it. The next year Mr. Woolf, then a graduate student at the University of Bristol, asked him if he could write that play for a group of drama students.
The resulting work, "The Room," was Mr. Pinter's first play. And with its story of mysterious intruders and its elliptical speech, it showed that Mr. Pinter had already found his voice as a dramatist. It opened in Bristol on May 15, 1957, and was restaged three years later at the Hampstead Theater Club in London.
In 1956 Mr. Pinter married Vivien Merchant, an actress in the company. After their son, Daniel, was born in 1958, they moved to the Chiswick section of London. He wrote "The Birthday Party," his first full-length play, drawing on his memories of touring as an actor in Eastbourne, on Britain's south coast.
The Pinters, who were temporarily unemployed and desperately poor, had an offer to act in Birmingham, and Ms. Merchant wanted to accept it. But Mr. Pinter said: "I have this play opening in London. I think I must stay. Something's going to happen." She replied, "What makes you think so?"
They turned down the acting offer. "The Birthday Party" opened in the West End in 1958 and received disastrous reviews. Then, prodded by the theatrical agent Peggy Ramsay, Harold Hobson, the eminent critic of The Sunday Times of London, came to see it at a matinee. What he wrote turned out to be a life-changing review.
"It breathes in the air," Hobson wrote. "It cannot be seen, but it enters the room every time the door is opened." He continued: "Though you go to the uttermost parts of the earth, and hide yourself in the most obscure lodgings in the least popular of towns, one day there is a possibility that two men will appear. They will be looking for you, and you cannot get away. And someone will be looking for them too. There is terror everywhere." He concluded, "Mr. Pinter, on the evidence of this work, possesses the most original, disturbing and arresting talent in theatrical London."
Despite that review the play closed that weekend. By contrast Mr. Pinter's next full-length play to be produced, "The Caretaker," which opened in London in 1960, was a dazzling critical success. "Suddenly everything went topsy-turvy," Mr. Pinter said.
In that play two brothers live in a seedy house in London and, for inexplicable reasons, invite a homeless man named Davies to share their quarters and to act as a kind of custodian. Michael Billington, a critic for The Guardian and Mr. Pinter's biographer, has called the play "an austere masterpiece: a universally recognizable play about political maneuvering, fraternal love, spiritual isolation, language as a negotiating weapon or a form of cover-up."
Mr. Pinter's next play, "The Homecoming," opened in London in June 1965, in a Royal Shakespeare Company production directed by Mr. Hall. The story of an all-male family headed by a Lear-like father and the woman (Ms. Merchant, who starred in many of his plays) who enters and disrupts their domain scored a major success in London. Though it received a mixed reception in New York, "The Homecoming" won a Tony Award as best play and had a long run on Broadway.
A Shift of Focus
After these first three full-length plays — all stories of raffish characters in shabby environments — Mr. Pinter shifted his focus. His next three dramas were set in the worlds of art and publishing: "Old Times" (1971), "No Man's Land" (1975) and "Betrayal" (1978), all studies of the unreliability of memory and the uncertainty of love. In "Old Times" a husband and wife encounter a woman they may or may not have known in the past.
In "No Man's Land" a faded poet visits a wealthy patron for an evening of recollection and gamesmanship, roles played in the original production by John Gielgud and Ralph Richardson, who repeated their performances in New York the next year. The elegant "Betrayal" is a play about marriage and duplicity and, despite its use of reverse chronology, is among Mr. Pinter's most accessible works. It was made into a 1982 film starring Jeremy Irons, Ben Kingsley and Patricia Hodge.
During the run of "No Man's Land" Mr. Pinter began an affair with Lady Antonia Fraser, the biographer and historian, who was then married to Hugh Fraser, a conservative politician. In 1980 Mr. Pinter and Lady Antonia were married, with Mr. Pinter becoming the substitute paterfamilias of an extended family.
In addition to his wife, his survivors include his son, Daniel, and his stepchildren, Benjamin, Damian, Orlando, Rebecca, Flora and Natasha. Years ago his son changed his last name to Brand, his maternal grandmother's maiden name. He had been estranged from his father, living as a recluse in Cambridgeshire.
After "Betrayal" Mr. Pinter's plays became shorter (like "A Kind of Alaska") and then, for about three years, they stopped. "Something gnaws away," he explained, "the desire to write something and the inability to do so." He added, "I think I was getting more and more imbedded in international issues."
At the same time he continued his involvement in films, highlighted by his close collaboration as screenwriter with the director Joseph Losey, which began in 1963 with "The Servant," a depiction of class relations in Britain. That was followed in 1967 by "Accident," about a professor infatuated with a student (Mr. Pinter and Ms. Merchant each had minor parts), and "The Go-Between" (1971), about a boy's complicity in an adult affair in turn of the century Britain, with Julie Christie and Alan Bates.
His many screenplays for other directors include "The Pumpkin Eater" (1964), about a woman (Anne Bancroft) drifting through multiple marriages, directed by Jack Clayton; "The Last Tycoon," Elia Kazan's 1976 adaptation of the Fitzgerald novel; and "The French Lieutenant's Woman" (1981), a Karel Reisz film with Meryl Streep and Mr. Irons.
With his plays "Moonlight" (a portrait of family relationships undermined by years of divisiveness) and "Ashes to Ashes" (a story of "torturers and victims" reflected in a typically uncommunicative marriage), Mr. Pinter returned to the longer, somberly meditative form.
His final work, "Celebration" (2000), is a wry look at power-conscious couples dining in a chic restaurant that bears a striking resemblance to the Ivy, a famous theater gathering place in London. "Celebration" was inspired by the playwright's early days as an unemployed actor, when he took a job as a busboy at the National Liberal Club. Because he dared to intrude on a conversation among several diners, he was fired.
The Writer as Director
He often directed plays by others, especially those by Simon Gray ("Butley," "Otherwise Engaged"), and occasionally his own work. Increasingly and with greater zeal he appeared as an actor — onstage with Paul Eddington in "No Man's Land" and in films like "Mojo," "Mansfield Park" and "The Tailor of Panama." Throughout his life he specialized in playing menacing characters, including several in his own plays ("The Hothouse," "One for the Road").
In July 2001 the highlight of the Lincoln Center Festival in New York was the presentation of nine Pinter plays, including a revival of "The Homecoming," and a pairing of his first and last plays, "The Room" and "Celebration." Mr. Pinter participated as a director and also acted in "One for the Road" in the role of a dapper and sadistic government interrogator.
The Pinter festival was the capstone of a season that, in London, featured the premiere at the National Theater of a stage version of his film script for "Remembrance of Things Past." Late in 2001 he directed an acclaimed revival of "No Man's Land," starring John Wood and Corin Redgrave at the National Theater.
In December 2001, during a routine medical examination, he was found to have cancer of the esophagus. In January 2002, while undergoing treatment, he acted in his brief comic sketch "Press Conference" at the National Theater in a malicious role as a minister of culture who was formerly the head of the secret police. In 2006 he appeared in a weeklong, sold-out production of Beckett's one-man play, "Krapp's Last Tape," at the Royal Court Theater.
"Pinter looks anxiously over his left shoulder into the darkness as if he felt death's presence in the room," Mr. Billington of The Guardian wrote. "It is impossible to dissociate Pinter's own recent encounters with mortality from that of the character."
Revivals of Mr. Pinter's work have become increasingly frequent in recent years. Last December an acclaimed production of his "Homecoming" opened on Broadway.
Mr. Pinter said he thought of theater as essentially exploratory. "Even old Sophocles didn't know what was going to happen next," he said. "He had to find his way through unknown territory. At the same time, theater has always been a critical act, looking in a broad sense at the society in which we live and attempting to reflect and dramatize these findings. We're not talking about the moon."
Speaking about his intuitive sense of writing, he said, "I find at the end of the journey, which of course is never ending, that I have found things out."
"I don't go away and say: 'I have illuminated myself. You see before you a changed person,' " he added. "It's a more surreptitious sense of discovery that happens to the writer himself."
Few writers have been so consistent over so many years in the tone and execution of their work. Just before rehearsals began for the West End production of "The Birthday Party" half a century ago, Mr. Pinter sent a letter to his director, Peter Wood. In it he said, "The play dictated itself, but I confess that I wrote it — with intent, maliciously, purposefully, in command of its growth."
He added: "The play is a comedy because the whole state of affairs is absurd and inglorious. It is, however, as you know, a very serious piece of work."
Mel Gussow, a critic and cultural reporter for The Times, died in 2005.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/26/theater/26pinter.html?pagewanted=print
null
Harold Pinter, Playwright of the Pause, Dies at 78 By MEL GUSSOW and BEN BRANTLEY
Harold Pinter, the British playwright whose gifts for finding the ominous in the everyday and the noise within silence made him the most influential and imitated dramatist of his generation, died on Wednesday. He was 78 and lived in London.
The cause was cancer, his wife, Lady Antonia Fraser, said Thursday.
Mr. Pinter learned he had cancer of the esophagus in late 2001. In 2005, when he received the Nobel Prize in Literature, he was unable to attend the awards ceremony at the Swedish Academy in Stockholm but delivered an acceptance speech from a wheelchair in a recorded video.
In more than 30 plays — written between 1957 and 2000 and including masterworks like "The Birthday Party," "The Caretaker," "The Homecoming" and "Betrayal" — Mr. Pinter captured the anxiety and ambiguity of life in the second half of the 20th century with terse, hypnotic dialogue filled with gaping pauses and the prospect of imminent violence.
Along with another Nobel winner, Samuel Beckett, his friend and mentor, Mr. Pinter became one of the few modern playwrights whose names instantly evoke a sensibility. The adjective Pinteresque has become part of the cultural vocabulary as a byword for strong and unspecified menace.
An actor, essayist, screenwriter, poet and director as well as a dramatist, Mr. Pinter was also publicly outspoken in his views on repression and censorship, at home and abroad. He used his Nobel acceptance speech to denounce American foreign policy, saying that the United States had not only lied to justify waging war against Iraq, but that it had also "supported and in many cases engendered every right-wing military dictatorship" in the last 50 years.
His political views were implicit in much of his work. Though his plays deal with the slipperiness of memory and human character, they are also almost always about the struggle for power.
The dynamic in his work is rooted in battles for control, turf wars waged in locations that range from working-class boarding houses (in his first produced play, "The Room," from 1957) to upscale restaurants (the setting for "Celebration," staged in 2000). His plays often take place in a single, increasingly claustrophobic room, where conversation is a minefield and even innocuous-seeming words can wound.
In Mr. Pinter's work "words are weapons that the characters use to discomfort or destroy each other," said Peter Hall, who has staged more of Mr. Pinter's plays than any other director.
But while Mr. Pinter's linguistic agility turned simple, sometimes obscene, words into dark, glittering and often mordantly funny poetry, it is what comes between the words that he is most famous for. And the stage direction "pause" would haunt him throughout his career.
Intended as an instructive note to actors, the Pinter pause was a space for emphasis and breathing room. But it could also be as threatening as a raised fist. Mr. Pinter said that writing the word "pause" into his first play was "a fatal error." It is certainly the aspect of his writing that has been most parodied. But no other playwright has consistently used pauses with such rhythmic assurance and to such fine-tuned manipulative effect.
Early in his career Mr. Pinter said his work was about "the weasel under the cocktail cabinet." Though he later regretted the image, it holds up as a metaphor for the undertow of danger that pervades his work. As Martin Esslin wrote in his book "Pinter: The Playwright," "Man's existential fear, not as an abstraction, but as something real, ordinary and acceptable as an everyday occurrence — here we have the core of Pinter's work as a dramatist."
Though often grouped with Beckett and others as a practitioner of Theater of the Absurd, Mr. Pinter considered himself a realist. In 1962 he said the context of his plays was always "concrete and particular." He never found a need to alter that assessment.
Beginning in the late 1950s, John Osborne and Mr. Pinter helped to turn British theater away from the gentility of the drawing room. With "Look Back in Anger," Osborne opened the door for several succeeding generations of angry young men, who railed against the class system and an ineffectual government. Mr. Pinter was to have the more lasting effect as an innovator and a stylist. And his influence on other playwrights, including David Mamet in the United States and Patrick Marber and Jez Butterworth in England, is undeniable.
The playwright Tom Stoppard said that before Mr. Pinter: "One thing plays had in common: you were supposed to believe what people said up there. If somebody comes in and says, 'Tea or coffee?' and the answer is 'Tea,' you are entitled to assume that somebody is offered a choice of two drinks, and the second person has stated a preference." With Mr. Pinter there are alternatives, "such as the man preferred coffee but the other person wished him to have tea," Mr. Stoppard said, "or that he preferred the stuff you make from coffee beans under the impression that it was called tea."
As another British playwright, David Hare, said of Mr. Pinter, "The essence of his singular appeal is that you sit down to every play or film he writes in certain expectation of the unexpected."
Though initially regarded as an intuitive rather than an intellectual playwright, Mr. Pinter was in fact both. His plays are dense with references to writers like James Joyce and T. S. Eliot. The annual Pinter Review, in which scholars probe and parse his works for meaning and metaphor, is one of many indications of his secure berth in academia.
Politics Inside the Plays
While it was not immediately apparent, Mr. Pinter was always a writer with a political sensibility, which became overt in later plays like "One for the Road" (1984) and "Mountain Language" (1988). These works, having to do "not with ambiguities of power, but actual power," he said, were written out of "very cold anger."
He and his wife hosted gatherings in their Holland Park town house for liberal political seminars. Known as the June 20th Society, the participants included Mr. Hare, Ian McEwan, Michael Holroyd, John Mortimer, Salman Rushdie and Germaine Greer. In their discussions Mr. Pinter expressed the great struggle of the mid-20th century as one between "primitive rage" and "liberal generosity," Mr. Hare said.
Through the years Mr. Pinter became known, especially to the British news media, for having a prickly personality. "There is a violence in me," Mr. Pinter once said, "but I don't walk around looking for trouble." The director Richard Eyre said in a testimonial book published for Mr. Pinter's 70th birthday that he was "sometimes pugnacious and occasionally splenetic" but "just as often droll and generous — particularly to actors, directors and (a rare quality this) other writers."
Harold Pinter was born in Hackney in the East End of London on Oct. 10, 1930. His father, Jack, was a tailor; his mother, Frances, a homemaker. Mr. Pinter's grandparents had emigrated to England from Eastern Europe. His parents, he said, were "very solid, very respectable, Jewish, lower-middle-class people."
With the outbreak of World War II in 1939, Harold, an only child, was evacuated from London to a provincial town in Cornwall. His feelings of loneliness and isolation from that time were to surface later in his plays. When he was 13, he returned to London and was there during the Blitz when his house was struck by a bomb. He rushed inside to rescue a few valuable possessions: his cricket bat and a poem — "a paean of love" — he was writing to a girlfriend.
Sports, poetry and his relationships with women were to remain important to him. Vigorously athletic, he was a fierce competitor in cricket and tennis. Ian Smith, an Oxford don and cricket teammate, equated Mr. Pinter's art with his bold style of playing cricket. "Everything is focused," he said. "It's about performance and economy of gesture."
Poetry and Pacifism
Mr. Pinter grew up on a diet of American gangster movies and British war films. From the first he was a great reader and a hopeful poet, with strong political judgments. When he was called up for military service at 18, as a pacifist he refused to serve.
In diverse ways he remained a conscientious objector in the years to come, echoing a line in "The Birthday Party," in which Stanley, a lodger in a seaside boarding house, is suddenly taken away by two strangers to some ominous future as a friend cries out, "Stan, don't let them tell you what to do!" Years later, Mr. Pinter said he had lived that line all his life.
Mr. Pinter's first poem was published in a magazine called Poetry London when he was 20. Soon afterward he completed a novel, "The Dwarfs." After studying at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art and the Central School of Speech and Drama, he signed on with a repertory company and, performing under the name David Baron, toured Ireland in plays by Shakespeare and others, often in villainous roles like Iago.
In 1955, at a party in London, Mr. Pinter was struck by what he referred to as "an odd image." A little man, who later turned out to be the writer and professional eccentric Quentin Crisp, was making bacon and eggs for a large man who was sitting at a table reading the comics. Mr. Pinter told his friend Henry Woolf about the incident and said he thought he might write a play about it. The next year Mr. Woolf, then a graduate student at the University of Bristol, asked him if he could write that play for a group of drama students.
The resulting work, "The Room," was Mr. Pinter's first play. And with its story of mysterious intruders and its elliptical speech, it showed that Mr. Pinter had already found his voice as a dramatist. It opened in Bristol on May 15, 1957, and was restaged three years later at the Hampstead Theater Club in London.
In 1956 Mr. Pinter married Vivien Merchant, an actress in the company. After their son, Daniel, was born in 1958, they moved to the Chiswick section of London. He wrote "The Birthday Party," his first full-length play, drawing on his memories of touring as an actor in Eastbourne, on Britain's south coast.
The Pinters, who were temporarily unemployed and desperately poor, had an offer to act in Birmingham, and Ms. Merchant wanted to accept it. But Mr. Pinter said: "I have this play opening in London. I think I must stay. Something's going to happen." She replied, "What makes you think so?"
They turned down the acting offer. "The Birthday Party" opened in the West End in 1958 and received disastrous reviews. Then, prodded by the theatrical agent Peggy Ramsay, Harold Hobson, the eminent critic of The Sunday Times of London, came to see it at a matinee. What he wrote turned out to be a life-changing review.
"It breathes in the air," Hobson wrote. "It cannot be seen, but it enters the room every time the door is opened." He continued: "Though you go to the uttermost parts of the earth, and hide yourself in the most obscure lodgings in the least popular of towns, one day there is a possibility that two men will appear. They will be looking for you, and you cannot get away. And someone will be looking for them too. There is terror everywhere." He concluded, "Mr. Pinter, on the evidence of this work, possesses the most original, disturbing and arresting talent in theatrical London."
Despite that review the play closed that weekend. By contrast Mr. Pinter's next full-length play to be produced, "The Caretaker," which opened in London in 1960, was a dazzling critical success. "Suddenly everything went topsy-turvy," Mr. Pinter said.
In that play two brothers live in a seedy house in London and, for inexplicable reasons, invite a homeless man named Davies to share their quarters and to act as a kind of custodian. Michael Billington, a critic for The Guardian and Mr. Pinter's biographer, has called the play "an austere masterpiece: a universally recognizable play about political maneuvering, fraternal love, spiritual isolation, language as a negotiating weapon or a form of cover-up."
Mr. Pinter's next play, "The Homecoming," opened in London in June 1965, in a Royal Shakespeare Company production directed by Mr. Hall. The story of an all-male family headed by a Lear-like father and the woman (Ms. Merchant, who starred in many of his plays) who enters and disrupts their domain scored a major success in London. Though it received a mixed reception in New York, "The Homecoming" won a Tony Award as best play and had a long run on Broadway.
A Shift of Focus
After these first three full-length plays — all stories of raffish characters in shabby environments — Mr. Pinter shifted his focus. His next three dramas were set in the worlds of art and publishing: "Old Times" (1971), "No Man's Land" (1975) and "Betrayal" (1978), all studies of the unreliability of memory and the uncertainty of love. In "Old Times" a husband and wife encounter a woman they may or may not have known in the past.
In "No Man's Land" a faded poet visits a wealthy patron for an evening of recollection and gamesmanship, roles played in the original production by John Gielgud and Ralph Richardson, who repeated their performances in New York the next year. The elegant "Betrayal" is a play about marriage and duplicity and, despite its use of reverse chronology, is among Mr. Pinter's most accessible works. It was made into a 1982 film starring Jeremy Irons, Ben Kingsley and Patricia Hodge.
During the run of "No Man's Land" Mr. Pinter began an affair with Lady Antonia Fraser, the biographer and historian, who was then married to Hugh Fraser, a conservative politician. In 1980 Mr. Pinter and Lady Antonia were married, with Mr. Pinter becoming the substitute paterfamilias of an extended family.
In addition to his wife, his survivors include his son, Daniel, and his stepchildren, Benjamin, Damian, Orlando, Rebecca, Flora and Natasha. Years ago his son changed his last name to Brand, his maternal grandmother's maiden name. He had been estranged from his father, living as a recluse in Cambridgeshire.
After "Betrayal" Mr. Pinter's plays became shorter (like "A Kind of Alaska") and then, for about three years, they stopped. "Something gnaws away," he explained, "the desire to write something and the inability to do so." He added, "I think I was getting more and more imbedded in international issues."
At the same time he continued his involvement in films, highlighted by his close collaboration as screenwriter with the director Joseph Losey, which began in 1963 with "The Servant," a depiction of class relations in Britain. That was followed in 1967 by "Accident," about a professor infatuated with a student (Mr. Pinter and Ms. Merchant each had minor parts), and "The Go-Between" (1971), about a boy's complicity in an adult affair in turn of the century Britain, with Julie Christie and Alan Bates.
His many screenplays for other directors include "The Pumpkin Eater" (1964), about a woman (Anne Bancroft) drifting through multiple marriages, directed by Jack Clayton; "The Last Tycoon," Elia Kazan's 1976 adaptation of the Fitzgerald novel; and "The French Lieutenant's Woman" (1981), a Karel Reisz film with Meryl Streep and Mr. Irons.
With his plays "Moonlight" (a portrait of family relationships undermined by years of divisiveness) and "Ashes to Ashes" (a story of "torturers and victims" reflected in a typically uncommunicative marriage), Mr. Pinter returned to the longer, somberly meditative form.
His final work, "Celebration" (2000), is a wry look at power-conscious couples dining in a chic restaurant that bears a striking resemblance to the Ivy, a famous theater gathering place in London. "Celebration" was inspired by the playwright's early days as an unemployed actor, when he took a job as a busboy at the National Liberal Club. Because he dared to intrude on a conversation among several diners, he was fired.
The Writer as Director
He often directed plays by others, especially those by Simon Gray ("Butley," "Otherwise Engaged"), and occasionally his own work. Increasingly and with greater zeal he appeared as an actor — onstage with Paul Eddington in "No Man's Land" and in films like "Mojo," "Mansfield Park" and "The Tailor of Panama." Throughout his life he specialized in playing menacing characters, including several in his own plays ("The Hothouse," "One for the Road").
In July 2001 the highlight of the Lincoln Center Festival in New York was the presentation of nine Pinter plays, including a revival of "The Homecoming," and a pairing of his first and last plays, "The Room" and "Celebration." Mr. Pinter participated as a director and also acted in "One for the Road" in the role of a dapper and sadistic government interrogator.
The Pinter festival was the capstone of a season that, in London, featured the premiere at the National Theater of a stage version of his film script for "Remembrance of Things Past." Late in 2001 he directed an acclaimed revival of "No Man's Land," starring John Wood and Corin Redgrave at the National Theater.
In December 2001, during a routine medical examination, he was found to have cancer of the esophagus. In January 2002, while undergoing treatment, he acted in his brief comic sketch "Press Conference" at the National Theater in a malicious role as a minister of culture who was formerly the head of the secret police. In 2006 he appeared in a weeklong, sold-out production of Beckett's one-man play, "Krapp's Last Tape," at the Royal Court Theater.
"Pinter looks anxiously over his left shoulder into the darkness as if he felt death's presence in the room," Mr. Billington of The Guardian wrote. "It is impossible to dissociate Pinter's own recent encounters with mortality from that of the character."
Revivals of Mr. Pinter's work have become increasingly frequent in recent years. Last December an acclaimed production of his "Homecoming" opened on Broadway.
Mr. Pinter said he thought of theater as essentially exploratory. "Even old Sophocles didn't know what was going to happen next," he said. "He had to find his way through unknown territory. At the same time, theater has always been a critical act, looking in a broad sense at the society in which we live and attempting to reflect and dramatize these findings. We're not talking about the moon."
Speaking about his intuitive sense of writing, he said, "I find at the end of the journey, which of course is never ending, that I have found things out."
"I don't go away and say: 'I have illuminated myself. You see before you a changed person,' " he added. "It's a more surreptitious sense of discovery that happens to the writer himself."
Few writers have been so consistent over so many years in the tone and execution of their work. Just before rehearsals began for the West End production of "The Birthday Party" half a century ago, Mr. Pinter sent a letter to his director, Peter Wood. In it he said, "The play dictated itself, but I confess that I wrote it — with intent, maliciously, purposefully, in command of its growth."
He added: "The play is a comedy because the whole state of affairs is absurd and inglorious. It is, however, as you know, a very serious piece of work."
Mel Gussow, a critic and cultural reporter for The Times, died in 2005.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/26/theater/26pinter.html?pagewanted=print
null
Eartha Kitt, a Seducer of Audiences, Dies at 81 By ROB HOERBURGER
December 26, 2008
Eartha Kitt, a Seducer of Audiences, Dies at 81 By ROB HOERBURGER
Eartha Kitt, who purred and pounced her way across Broadway stages, recording studios and movie and television screens in a show-business career that lasted more than six decades, died on Thursday. She was 81 and lived in Connecticut.
The cause was colon cancer, said her longtime publicist, Andrew E. Freedman.
Ms. Kitt, who began performing in the late ’40s as a dancer in New York, went on to achieve success and acclaim in a variety of mediums long before other entertainment multitaskers like Julie Andrews, Barbra Streisand and Bette Midler.
With her curvaceous frame and unabashed vocal come-ons, she was also, along with Lena Horne, among the first widely known African-American sex symbols. Orson Welles famously proclaimed her “the most exciting woman alive” in the early ’50s, apparently just after that excitement prompted him to bite her onstage during a performance of “Time Runs,” an adaptation of “Faust” in which Ms. Kitt played Helen of Troy.
Ms. Kitt’s career-long persona, that of the seen-it-all sybarite, was set when she performed in Paris cabarets in her early 20s, singing songs that became her signatures, like “C’est Si Bon” and “Love for Sale.”
Returning to New York, she was cast on Broadway in “New Faces of 1952” and added another jewel to her vocal crown, “Monotonous” (“Traffic has been known to stop for me/Prices even rise and drop for me/Harry S. Truman plays bop for me/Monotonous, monotone-ous”). Brooks Atkinson wrote in The New York Times in May 1952, “Eartha Kitt not only looks incendiary, but she can make a song burst into flame.”
Shortly after that run, Ms. Kitt had her first best-selling albums and recorded her biggest hit, “Santa Baby,” whose precise, come-hither diction and vaguely foreign inflections (Ms. Kitt, a native of South Carolina, spoke four languages and sang in seven) proved that a vocal sizzle could be just as powerful as a bonfire. Though her record sales fell after the rise of rhythm and blues and rock ’n’ roll in the mid- and late ’50s, her singing style would later be the template for other singers with pillow-talky voices like Diana Ross (who has said she patterned her Supremes sound and look largely after Ms. Kitt), Janet Jackson and Madonna (who recorded a cover version of “Santa Baby” in 1987).
Ms. Kitt would later call herself “the original material girl,” a reference not only to her stage creation and to Madonna but also to her string of romances with rich or famous men, including Welles, the cosmetics magnate Charles Revson and the banking heir John Barry Ryan 3rd. She was married to her one husband, Bill McDonald, a real-estate developer, from 1960 to 1965; their daughter, Kitt Shapiro, survives her, as do two grandchildren.
From practically the beginning of her career, as critics gushed over Ms. Kitt, they also began to describe her in every feline term imaginable: her voice “purred” or “was like catnip”; she was a “sex kitten” who “slinked” or was “on the prowl” across the stage, sometimes “flashing her claws.” Her career has often been said to have had “nine lives.” Appropriately, she was tapped to play Catwoman in the 1960s TV series “Batman,” taking over the role from the leggier, lynxlike Julie Newmar and bringing to it a more feral, compact energy.
Yet for all the camp appeal and sexually charged hauteur of Ms. Kitt’s cabaret act, she also played serious roles, appearing in the films “The Mark of the Hawk” with Sidney Poitier (1957) and “Anna Lucasta” (1959) with Sammy Davis Jr. She made numerous television appearances, including a guest spot on “I Spy” in 1965, which brought her her first Emmy nomination.
For these performances Ms. Kitt likely drew on the hardship of her early life. She was born Eartha Mae Keith in North, S.C., on Jan. 17, 1927, a date she did not know until about 10 years ago, when she challenged students at Benedict College in Columbia, S.C., to find her birth certificate, and they did. She was the illegitimate child of a black Cherokee sharecropper mother and a white man about whom Ms. Kitt knew little. She worked in cotton fields and lived with a black family who, she said, abused her because she looked too white. “They called me yella gal,” Ms. Kitt said.
At 8 she was sent to live in Harlem with an aunt, Marnie Kitt, who Ms. Kitt came to believe was really her biological mother. Though she was given piano and dance lessons, a pattern of abuse developed there as well: Ms. Kitt would be beaten, she would run away and then she would return. By her early teenage years she was working in a factory and sleeping in subways and on the roofs of unlocked buildings. (She would later become an advocate, through Unicef, on behalf of homeless children.)
Her show-business break came on a lark, when a friend dared her to audition for the Katherine Dunham Dance Company. She passed the audition and permanently escaped the cycle of poverty and abuse that defined her life till then.
But she took the steeliness with her, in a willful, outspoken manner that mostly served her career, except once. In 1968 she was invited to a White House luncheon and was asked by Lady Bird Johnson about the Vietnam War. She replied: “You send the best of this country off to be shot and maimed. No wonder the kids rebel and take pot.” The remark reportedly caused Mrs. Johnson to burst into tears and led to a derailment in Ms. Kitt’s career.
As bookings dried up, she was exiled in Europe for almost a decade. But President Jimmy Carter invited her back to the White House in 1978, and that year she earned her first Tony nomination for her work in “Timbuktu!,” an all-black remake of “Kismet.”
By now a diva and legend, Ms. Kitt did what many other divas and legends — Shirley Bassey and Ethel Merman among them — did: she dabbled in dance music, scoring her biggest hit in 30 years with “Where Is My Man” in 1984, the same year she was roundly criticized for touring South Africa. Ms. Kitt was typically unapologetic; the tour, she said, played to integrated audiences and helped build schools for black children.
The third of her three autobiographies, “I’m Still Here: Confessions of a Sex Kitten,” was published in 1989, and she earned a Grammy nomination for “Back in Business,” a collection of cabaret songs released in 1994.
As Ms. Kitt began the sixth decade of her career, she was still active. In 2000 she received her second Tony nomination, for best featured actress in a musical in “The Wild Party.” Branching out into children’s programming, she won two Daytime Emmy Awards, this year and in 2007, as outstanding performer in an animated program for her role as the scheming empress-wannabe Yzma in “The Emperor’s New School.”
All the while she remained a fixture on the cabaret circuit, having maintained her voice and shapely figure through a vigorous fitness regimen that included daily running and weight lifting. Even after discovering in 2006 that she had colon cancer, she triumphantly opened the newly renovated Café Carlyle in New York in September 2007. Stephen Holden, writing in The Times, said that Ms. Kitt’s voice was “in full growl.”
But though Ms. Kitt still seemed to have men of all ages wrapped around her finger (she would often toy with younger worshipers at her shows by suggesting they introduce her to their fathers), the years had given her perspective. “I’m a dirt person,” she told Ebony magazine in 1993. “I trust the dirt. I don’t trust diamonds and gold.”
Eartha Kitt, a Seducer of Audiences, Dies at 81 By ROB HOERBURGER
Eartha Kitt, who purred and pounced her way across Broadway stages, recording studios and movie and television screens in a show-business career that lasted more than six decades, died on Thursday. She was 81 and lived in Connecticut.
The cause was colon cancer, said her longtime publicist, Andrew E. Freedman.
Ms. Kitt, who began performing in the late ’40s as a dancer in New York, went on to achieve success and acclaim in a variety of mediums long before other entertainment multitaskers like Julie Andrews, Barbra Streisand and Bette Midler.
With her curvaceous frame and unabashed vocal come-ons, she was also, along with Lena Horne, among the first widely known African-American sex symbols. Orson Welles famously proclaimed her “the most exciting woman alive” in the early ’50s, apparently just after that excitement prompted him to bite her onstage during a performance of “Time Runs,” an adaptation of “Faust” in which Ms. Kitt played Helen of Troy.
Ms. Kitt’s career-long persona, that of the seen-it-all sybarite, was set when she performed in Paris cabarets in her early 20s, singing songs that became her signatures, like “C’est Si Bon” and “Love for Sale.”
Returning to New York, she was cast on Broadway in “New Faces of 1952” and added another jewel to her vocal crown, “Monotonous” (“Traffic has been known to stop for me/Prices even rise and drop for me/Harry S. Truman plays bop for me/Monotonous, monotone-ous”). Brooks Atkinson wrote in The New York Times in May 1952, “Eartha Kitt not only looks incendiary, but she can make a song burst into flame.”
Shortly after that run, Ms. Kitt had her first best-selling albums and recorded her biggest hit, “Santa Baby,” whose precise, come-hither diction and vaguely foreign inflections (Ms. Kitt, a native of South Carolina, spoke four languages and sang in seven) proved that a vocal sizzle could be just as powerful as a bonfire. Though her record sales fell after the rise of rhythm and blues and rock ’n’ roll in the mid- and late ’50s, her singing style would later be the template for other singers with pillow-talky voices like Diana Ross (who has said she patterned her Supremes sound and look largely after Ms. Kitt), Janet Jackson and Madonna (who recorded a cover version of “Santa Baby” in 1987).
Ms. Kitt would later call herself “the original material girl,” a reference not only to her stage creation and to Madonna but also to her string of romances with rich or famous men, including Welles, the cosmetics magnate Charles Revson and the banking heir John Barry Ryan 3rd. She was married to her one husband, Bill McDonald, a real-estate developer, from 1960 to 1965; their daughter, Kitt Shapiro, survives her, as do two grandchildren.
From practically the beginning of her career, as critics gushed over Ms. Kitt, they also began to describe her in every feline term imaginable: her voice “purred” or “was like catnip”; she was a “sex kitten” who “slinked” or was “on the prowl” across the stage, sometimes “flashing her claws.” Her career has often been said to have had “nine lives.” Appropriately, she was tapped to play Catwoman in the 1960s TV series “Batman,” taking over the role from the leggier, lynxlike Julie Newmar and bringing to it a more feral, compact energy.
Yet for all the camp appeal and sexually charged hauteur of Ms. Kitt’s cabaret act, she also played serious roles, appearing in the films “The Mark of the Hawk” with Sidney Poitier (1957) and “Anna Lucasta” (1959) with Sammy Davis Jr. She made numerous television appearances, including a guest spot on “I Spy” in 1965, which brought her her first Emmy nomination.
For these performances Ms. Kitt likely drew on the hardship of her early life. She was born Eartha Mae Keith in North, S.C., on Jan. 17, 1927, a date she did not know until about 10 years ago, when she challenged students at Benedict College in Columbia, S.C., to find her birth certificate, and they did. She was the illegitimate child of a black Cherokee sharecropper mother and a white man about whom Ms. Kitt knew little. She worked in cotton fields and lived with a black family who, she said, abused her because she looked too white. “They called me yella gal,” Ms. Kitt said.
At 8 she was sent to live in Harlem with an aunt, Marnie Kitt, who Ms. Kitt came to believe was really her biological mother. Though she was given piano and dance lessons, a pattern of abuse developed there as well: Ms. Kitt would be beaten, she would run away and then she would return. By her early teenage years she was working in a factory and sleeping in subways and on the roofs of unlocked buildings. (She would later become an advocate, through Unicef, on behalf of homeless children.)
Her show-business break came on a lark, when a friend dared her to audition for the Katherine Dunham Dance Company. She passed the audition and permanently escaped the cycle of poverty and abuse that defined her life till then.
But she took the steeliness with her, in a willful, outspoken manner that mostly served her career, except once. In 1968 she was invited to a White House luncheon and was asked by Lady Bird Johnson about the Vietnam War. She replied: “You send the best of this country off to be shot and maimed. No wonder the kids rebel and take pot.” The remark reportedly caused Mrs. Johnson to burst into tears and led to a derailment in Ms. Kitt’s career.
As bookings dried up, she was exiled in Europe for almost a decade. But President Jimmy Carter invited her back to the White House in 1978, and that year she earned her first Tony nomination for her work in “Timbuktu!,” an all-black remake of “Kismet.”
By now a diva and legend, Ms. Kitt did what many other divas and legends — Shirley Bassey and Ethel Merman among them — did: she dabbled in dance music, scoring her biggest hit in 30 years with “Where Is My Man” in 1984, the same year she was roundly criticized for touring South Africa. Ms. Kitt was typically unapologetic; the tour, she said, played to integrated audiences and helped build schools for black children.
The third of her three autobiographies, “I’m Still Here: Confessions of a Sex Kitten,” was published in 1989, and she earned a Grammy nomination for “Back in Business,” a collection of cabaret songs released in 1994.
As Ms. Kitt began the sixth decade of her career, she was still active. In 2000 she received her second Tony nomination, for best featured actress in a musical in “The Wild Party.” Branching out into children’s programming, she won two Daytime Emmy Awards, this year and in 2007, as outstanding performer in an animated program for her role as the scheming empress-wannabe Yzma in “The Emperor’s New School.”
All the while she remained a fixture on the cabaret circuit, having maintained her voice and shapely figure through a vigorous fitness regimen that included daily running and weight lifting. Even after discovering in 2006 that she had colon cancer, she triumphantly opened the newly renovated Café Carlyle in New York in September 2007. Stephen Holden, writing in The Times, said that Ms. Kitt’s voice was “in full growl.”
But though Ms. Kitt still seemed to have men of all ages wrapped around her finger (she would often toy with younger worshipers at her shows by suggesting they introduce her to their fathers), the years had given her perspective. “I’m a dirt person,” she told Ebony magazine in 1993. “I trust the dirt. I don’t trust diamonds and gold.”
There’s Lots of Tech Help, Yes, on the Internet By AZADEH ENSHA
December 25, 2008
Basics
There’s Lots of Tech Help, Yes, on the Internet By AZADEH ENSHA
THIS week, I bought a shiny new BlackBerry. This made me very happy. Then I went home and found that my new BlackBerry was inundating my in-box with copies of my sent e-mail messages. This made me very frustrated.
I headed back to the store, where a well-intentioned “specialist” took my phone, tweaked a few settings and said that my e-mail messages would be duplicate-free. They weren’t.
If you’re like me, odds are that you’ve also found yourself with a tech problem that was made worse by the lack of ready, available — and perhaps most important — useful help. But with the Internet, there’s no need to have to wait on hold.
There are hundreds (if not thousands) of other users out there, sharing their experience and wisdom, often free. So instead of getting on the phone, get online and start crowdsourcing your tech support needs.
Here’s how.
General Tips
First, a few general rules. Many of the below sites require you to register a user name and password before you can post a question. Also, it’s a good idea to check how active a site is. Answerbag.com, for example, has more than 750,000 members. The bigger the site, the more likely you are to get an answer.
Sites with moderators are a plus because they will help weed out irrelevant or duplicate answers and keep the discussion on topic. There are also good fee-based sites like Experts Exchange (secure.experts-exchange.com/), but I’ve limited the below list to free help.
PCs
One of my favorite tech support sites is FixYa.com ( www.fixya.com/). It has a clean design, which makes searching easy. When posing a question, use keywords, hit the search button, and a list of solutions will pop up.
FixYa lets its users rate one another so you can see who has a good solution rating and who doesn’t.
Users can choose among the “post a new problem,” “I can solve this!” and “I have the same problem” tabs. The site also has an alphabetical list of brands so you can search by name.
TechIMO.com (www.techimo.com/) is also a good bet, judging by sheer volume of active users.
The site’s PC hardware and tech general discussion board (www.techimo.com/forum/general-tech-discussion/) had nearly 240,000 posts when I checked it. Fair warning: the site is geared more toward the tech-savvy than the tech-phobic.
Tech publications PC World (tinyurl.com/3q7xm5) and CNet (tinyurl.com/43be5q) also have good discussion forums.
Macs
Pretty as they may be, Macs have their own special brand of problems. Apple’s own site (www.apple.com/support/) has effective forums (discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=731), but sometimes they can turn into complaint centers where everybody acknowledges having the problem, but no one seems to have a solution.
CNet’s MacFixIt.com (www.macfixit.com/) gets around this by taking select Apple.com forum questions and answering them on its site. In one post, a Mac user wrote on Apple.com’s forums that he was experiencing problems with Time Machine backups. Most of the thread’s other users chimed in only to say that they had the same problem. MacFixIt then stepped in and offered its solution.
In addition to an active forum, MacFixIt also offers useful tutorials (tinyurl.com/4xw9a) with digestible instructions, and explanations, on everything from sleep problems to reinstalling your system.
Of course, it’s better to find advice for your exact Mac. Everymac.com’s Q.& A. section is broken down by model, so if you’re dealing with MacBook Pro problems, you can go to that section ( www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/faq/index.html).
Smartphones
I solved my BlackBerry problem on Crackberry.com’s forums (forums.crackberry.com/). Not only does the site break down problems by model, including Apple’s iPhone 3G, but it also has a section for older BlackBerrys (forums.crackberry.com/f29/), which is helpful because not everyone has the money or desire to switch models every year. You can also search by carrier.
Users of the iPhone can turn to the iPhone Blog (www.theiphoneblog.com/iphone-help-and-how-to-guides/), which is helpful because it uses screen images and other visual aids instead of dizzying amounts of text. Even better are video tutorials. Instead of wasting time trying to locate your SIM card tray, just mimic the video’s step-by step instructions and pause and replay as needed.
If you’re short on patience, CNet’s video tutorials (cnettv.cnet.com/2001-1_53-28619.html) are better organized and are presented by the site’s editors who, generally speaking, should be qualified to solve your problems. The site’s Quick Tips section is good to browse if you’re looking to better navigate your gadget. In one video, CNet’s editor at large, Brian Cooley, gives some BlackBerry navigation tips, which is infinitely more colorful than reading your phone’s instruction manual.
And if you still insist on speaking to a human being, go to gethuman.com (www.gethuman.com/) first — it will tell you the fastest, most direct number to use to reach a living, breathing technician on the line.
See, even when you don’t want its help, the Internet is there for you.
Basics
There’s Lots of Tech Help, Yes, on the Internet By AZADEH ENSHA
THIS week, I bought a shiny new BlackBerry. This made me very happy. Then I went home and found that my new BlackBerry was inundating my in-box with copies of my sent e-mail messages. This made me very frustrated.
I headed back to the store, where a well-intentioned “specialist” took my phone, tweaked a few settings and said that my e-mail messages would be duplicate-free. They weren’t.
If you’re like me, odds are that you’ve also found yourself with a tech problem that was made worse by the lack of ready, available — and perhaps most important — useful help. But with the Internet, there’s no need to have to wait on hold.
There are hundreds (if not thousands) of other users out there, sharing their experience and wisdom, often free. So instead of getting on the phone, get online and start crowdsourcing your tech support needs.
Here’s how.
General Tips
First, a few general rules. Many of the below sites require you to register a user name and password before you can post a question. Also, it’s a good idea to check how active a site is. Answerbag.com, for example, has more than 750,000 members. The bigger the site, the more likely you are to get an answer.
Sites with moderators are a plus because they will help weed out irrelevant or duplicate answers and keep the discussion on topic. There are also good fee-based sites like Experts Exchange (secure.experts-exchange.com/), but I’ve limited the below list to free help.
PCs
One of my favorite tech support sites is FixYa.com ( www.fixya.com/). It has a clean design, which makes searching easy. When posing a question, use keywords, hit the search button, and a list of solutions will pop up.
FixYa lets its users rate one another so you can see who has a good solution rating and who doesn’t.
Users can choose among the “post a new problem,” “I can solve this!” and “I have the same problem” tabs. The site also has an alphabetical list of brands so you can search by name.
TechIMO.com (www.techimo.com/) is also a good bet, judging by sheer volume of active users.
The site’s PC hardware and tech general discussion board (www.techimo.com/forum/general-tech-discussion/) had nearly 240,000 posts when I checked it. Fair warning: the site is geared more toward the tech-savvy than the tech-phobic.
Tech publications PC World (tinyurl.com/3q7xm5) and CNet (tinyurl.com/43be5q) also have good discussion forums.
Macs
Pretty as they may be, Macs have their own special brand of problems. Apple’s own site (www.apple.com/support/) has effective forums (discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=731), but sometimes they can turn into complaint centers where everybody acknowledges having the problem, but no one seems to have a solution.
CNet’s MacFixIt.com (www.macfixit.com/) gets around this by taking select Apple.com forum questions and answering them on its site. In one post, a Mac user wrote on Apple.com’s forums that he was experiencing problems with Time Machine backups. Most of the thread’s other users chimed in only to say that they had the same problem. MacFixIt then stepped in and offered its solution.
In addition to an active forum, MacFixIt also offers useful tutorials (tinyurl.com/4xw9a) with digestible instructions, and explanations, on everything from sleep problems to reinstalling your system.
Of course, it’s better to find advice for your exact Mac. Everymac.com’s Q.& A. section is broken down by model, so if you’re dealing with MacBook Pro problems, you can go to that section ( www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/faq/index.html).
Smartphones
I solved my BlackBerry problem on Crackberry.com’s forums (forums.crackberry.com/). Not only does the site break down problems by model, including Apple’s iPhone 3G, but it also has a section for older BlackBerrys (forums.crackberry.com/f29/), which is helpful because not everyone has the money or desire to switch models every year. You can also search by carrier.
Users of the iPhone can turn to the iPhone Blog (www.theiphoneblog.com/iphone-help-and-how-to-guides/), which is helpful because it uses screen images and other visual aids instead of dizzying amounts of text. Even better are video tutorials. Instead of wasting time trying to locate your SIM card tray, just mimic the video’s step-by step instructions and pause and replay as needed.
If you’re short on patience, CNet’s video tutorials (cnettv.cnet.com/2001-1_53-28619.html) are better organized and are presented by the site’s editors who, generally speaking, should be qualified to solve your problems. The site’s Quick Tips section is good to browse if you’re looking to better navigate your gadget. In one video, CNet’s editor at large, Brian Cooley, gives some BlackBerry navigation tips, which is infinitely more colorful than reading your phone’s instruction manual.
And if you still insist on speaking to a human being, go to gethuman.com (www.gethuman.com/) first — it will tell you the fastest, most direct number to use to reach a living, breathing technician on the line.
See, even when you don’t want its help, the Internet is there for you.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Samuel P. Huntington of Harvard Dies at 81 By Sarah Wheaton
Samuel P. Huntington of Harvard Dies at 81 By Sarah Wheaton
Samuel P. Huntington, an influential political scientist and longtime Harvard University professor, died at the age of 81 on Wednesday, according to an obituary on Harvard’s Web site. Mr. Huntington’s most famous thesis – that world conflicts stem from the competing cultural identities of seven or eight “civilizations” – became a fundamental, if controversial, premise of post-Cold War foreign policy theory. His emphasis on ancient religious empires, as opposed to states or ethnicities, gained even more cache after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Michael Ignatieff summarized the thrust of Mr. Huntington’s 1996 book in a Times book review:
In expanding the Foreign Affairs article into ”The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order,” Mr. Huntington has thickened out his argument, but it remains controversial. If there are seven or eight world civilizations, he says, the West had better shed the hubristic notion that its civilization is destined to spread its values across the globe. The West is ”unique” — but its values are not universal. Universalism, Mr. Huntington maintains, is just a leftover from imperialism. Western aid workers have no business telling the Afghan Taliban to allow their women to go to school. Washington has no business tying human rights conditions to its trade with China. It is a significant change of heart for a former architect of American policy in Vietnam to assert that ”Western intervention in the affairs of other civilizations is probably the single most dangerous source of instability and potential global conflict in a multicivilizational world.”
But critics, including Edward W. Said, a Columbia University professor who wrote “Orientalism,” said Mr. Huntington’s theory perpetuates a “West against the rest” mentality.
Mr. Huntington’s most recent book, “Who Are We? The Challenges of American National Identity,” was published in 2004 and tackled immigration. That volume also attracted criticisms of his assertion that low levels of assimilation by Hispanic immigrants could cleave the country in two.
Born Samuel Phillips Huntington in New York City on April 18, 1927, he was an adviser to Hubert H. Humphrey and Jimmy Carter. He stepped down from active teaching at Harvard in 2007, and he died on Dec. 24 in Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.
Samuel P. Huntington, an influential political scientist and longtime Harvard University professor, died at the age of 81 on Wednesday, according to an obituary on Harvard’s Web site. Mr. Huntington’s most famous thesis – that world conflicts stem from the competing cultural identities of seven or eight “civilizations” – became a fundamental, if controversial, premise of post-Cold War foreign policy theory. His emphasis on ancient religious empires, as opposed to states or ethnicities, gained even more cache after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Michael Ignatieff summarized the thrust of Mr. Huntington’s 1996 book in a Times book review:
In expanding the Foreign Affairs article into ”The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order,” Mr. Huntington has thickened out his argument, but it remains controversial. If there are seven or eight world civilizations, he says, the West had better shed the hubristic notion that its civilization is destined to spread its values across the globe. The West is ”unique” — but its values are not universal. Universalism, Mr. Huntington maintains, is just a leftover from imperialism. Western aid workers have no business telling the Afghan Taliban to allow their women to go to school. Washington has no business tying human rights conditions to its trade with China. It is a significant change of heart for a former architect of American policy in Vietnam to assert that ”Western intervention in the affairs of other civilizations is probably the single most dangerous source of instability and potential global conflict in a multicivilizational world.”
But critics, including Edward W. Said, a Columbia University professor who wrote “Orientalism,” said Mr. Huntington’s theory perpetuates a “West against the rest” mentality.
Mr. Huntington’s most recent book, “Who Are We? The Challenges of American National Identity,” was published in 2004 and tackled immigration. That volume also attracted criticisms of his assertion that low levels of assimilation by Hispanic immigrants could cleave the country in two.
Born Samuel Phillips Huntington in New York City on April 18, 1927, he was an adviser to Hubert H. Humphrey and Jimmy Carter. He stepped down from active teaching at Harvard in 2007, and he died on Dec. 24 in Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.
Time to Reboot America By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
December 24, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Time to Reboot America By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
I had a bad day last Friday, but it was an all-too-typical day for America.
It actually started well, on Kau Sai Chau, an island off Hong Kong, where I stood on a rocky hilltop overlooking the South China Sea and talked to my wife back in Maryland, static-free, using a friend's Chinese cellphone. A few hours later, I took off from Hong Kong's ultramodern airport after riding out there from downtown on a sleek high-speed train — with wireless connectivity that was so good I was able to surf the Web the whole way on my laptop.
Landing at Kennedy Airport from Hong Kong was, as I've argued before, like going from the Jetsons to the Flintstones. The ugly, low-ceilinged arrival hall was cramped, and using a luggage cart cost $3. (Couldn't we at least supply foreign visitors with a free luggage cart, like other major airports in the world?) As I looked around at this dingy room, it reminded of somewhere I had been before. Then I remembered: It was the luggage hall in the old Hong Kong Kai Tak Airport. It closed in 1998.
The next day I went to Penn Station, where the escalators down to the tracks are so narrow that they seem to have been designed before suitcases were invented. The disgusting track-side platforms apparently have not been cleaned since World War II. I took the Acela, America's sorry excuse for a bullet train, from New York to Washington. Along the way, I tried to use my cellphone to conduct an interview and my conversation was interrupted by three dropped calls within one 15-minute span.
All I could think to myself was: If we're so smart, why are other people living so much better than us? What has become of our infrastructure, which is so crucial to productivity? Back home, I was greeted by the news that General Motors was being bailed out — that's the G.M. that Fortune magazine just noted "lost more than $72 billion in the past four years, and yet you can count on one hand the number of executives who have been reassigned or lost their job."
My fellow Americans, we can't continue in this mode of "Dumb as we wanna be." We've indulged ourselves for too long with tax cuts that we can't afford, bailouts of auto companies that have become giant wealth-destruction machines, energy prices that do not encourage investment in 21st-century renewable power systems or efficient cars, public schools with no national standards to prevent illiterates from graduating and immigration policies that have our colleges educating the world's best scientists and engineers and then, when these foreigners graduate, instead of stapling green cards to their diplomas, we order them to go home and start companies to compete against ours.
To top it off, we've fallen into a trend of diverting and rewarding the best of our collective I.Q. to people doing financial engineering rather than real engineering. These rocket scientists and engineers were designing complex financial instruments to make money out of money — rather than designing cars, phones, computers, teaching tools, Internet programs and medical equipment that could improve the lives and productivity of millions.
For all these reasons, our present crisis is not just a financial meltdown crying out for a cash injection. We are in much deeper trouble. In fact, we as a country have become General Motors — as a result of our national drift. Look in the mirror: G.M. is us.
That's why we don't just need a bailout. We need a reboot. We need a build out. We need a buildup. We need a national makeover. That is why the next few months are among the most important in U.S. history. Because of the financial crisis, Barack Obama has the bipartisan support to spend $1 trillion in stimulus. But we must make certain that every bailout dollar, which we're borrowing from our kids' future, is spent wisely.
It has to go into training teachers, educating scientists and engineers, paying for research and building the most productivity-enhancing infrastructure — without building white elephants. Generally, I'd like to see fewer government dollars shoveled out and more creative tax incentives to stimulate the private sector to catalyze new industries and new markets. If we allow this money to be spent on pork, it will be the end of us.
America still has the right stuff to thrive. We still have the most creative, diverse, innovative culture and open society — in a world where the ability to imagine and generate new ideas with speed and to implement them through global collaboration is the most important competitive advantage. China may have great airports, but last week it went back to censoring The New York Times and other Western news sites. Censorship restricts your people's imaginations. That's really, really dumb. And that's why for all our missteps, the 21st century is still up for grabs.
John Kennedy led us on a journey to discover the moon. Obama needs to lead us on a journey to rediscover, rebuild and reinvent our own backyard.
Merry Christmas!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/opinion/24friedman.html?em=&pagewanted=print
null
Op-Ed Columnist
Time to Reboot America By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
I had a bad day last Friday, but it was an all-too-typical day for America.
It actually started well, on Kau Sai Chau, an island off Hong Kong, where I stood on a rocky hilltop overlooking the South China Sea and talked to my wife back in Maryland, static-free, using a friend's Chinese cellphone. A few hours later, I took off from Hong Kong's ultramodern airport after riding out there from downtown on a sleek high-speed train — with wireless connectivity that was so good I was able to surf the Web the whole way on my laptop.
Landing at Kennedy Airport from Hong Kong was, as I've argued before, like going from the Jetsons to the Flintstones. The ugly, low-ceilinged arrival hall was cramped, and using a luggage cart cost $3. (Couldn't we at least supply foreign visitors with a free luggage cart, like other major airports in the world?) As I looked around at this dingy room, it reminded of somewhere I had been before. Then I remembered: It was the luggage hall in the old Hong Kong Kai Tak Airport. It closed in 1998.
The next day I went to Penn Station, where the escalators down to the tracks are so narrow that they seem to have been designed before suitcases were invented. The disgusting track-side platforms apparently have not been cleaned since World War II. I took the Acela, America's sorry excuse for a bullet train, from New York to Washington. Along the way, I tried to use my cellphone to conduct an interview and my conversation was interrupted by three dropped calls within one 15-minute span.
All I could think to myself was: If we're so smart, why are other people living so much better than us? What has become of our infrastructure, which is so crucial to productivity? Back home, I was greeted by the news that General Motors was being bailed out — that's the G.M. that Fortune magazine just noted "lost more than $72 billion in the past four years, and yet you can count on one hand the number of executives who have been reassigned or lost their job."
My fellow Americans, we can't continue in this mode of "Dumb as we wanna be." We've indulged ourselves for too long with tax cuts that we can't afford, bailouts of auto companies that have become giant wealth-destruction machines, energy prices that do not encourage investment in 21st-century renewable power systems or efficient cars, public schools with no national standards to prevent illiterates from graduating and immigration policies that have our colleges educating the world's best scientists and engineers and then, when these foreigners graduate, instead of stapling green cards to their diplomas, we order them to go home and start companies to compete against ours.
To top it off, we've fallen into a trend of diverting and rewarding the best of our collective I.Q. to people doing financial engineering rather than real engineering. These rocket scientists and engineers were designing complex financial instruments to make money out of money — rather than designing cars, phones, computers, teaching tools, Internet programs and medical equipment that could improve the lives and productivity of millions.
For all these reasons, our present crisis is not just a financial meltdown crying out for a cash injection. We are in much deeper trouble. In fact, we as a country have become General Motors — as a result of our national drift. Look in the mirror: G.M. is us.
That's why we don't just need a bailout. We need a reboot. We need a build out. We need a buildup. We need a national makeover. That is why the next few months are among the most important in U.S. history. Because of the financial crisis, Barack Obama has the bipartisan support to spend $1 trillion in stimulus. But we must make certain that every bailout dollar, which we're borrowing from our kids' future, is spent wisely.
It has to go into training teachers, educating scientists and engineers, paying for research and building the most productivity-enhancing infrastructure — without building white elephants. Generally, I'd like to see fewer government dollars shoveled out and more creative tax incentives to stimulate the private sector to catalyze new industries and new markets. If we allow this money to be spent on pork, it will be the end of us.
America still has the right stuff to thrive. We still have the most creative, diverse, innovative culture and open society — in a world where the ability to imagine and generate new ideas with speed and to implement them through global collaboration is the most important competitive advantage. China may have great airports, but last week it went back to censoring The New York Times and other Western news sites. Censorship restricts your people's imaginations. That's really, really dumb. And that's why for all our missteps, the 21st century is still up for grabs.
John Kennedy led us on a journey to discover the moon. Obama needs to lead us on a journey to rediscover, rebuild and reinvent our own backyard.
Merry Christmas!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/24/opinion/24friedman.html?em=&pagewanted=print
null
Monday, December 22, 2008
The New Faces Of Classical Music By Robin Gehl
*
The New Faces Of Classical Music By Robin Gehl
Anna Netrebko 300
Anna Netrebko is one of the many new faces who kept classical music fresh in 2008.
WVXU, December 22, 2008 - From the poetic playing of pianist Ingrid Fliter to the high notes (and high drama) of soprano Anna Netrebko, this group of talented musicians represents the next generation of emerging classical artists, most of whom are still in their 20s and 30s. These 2008 releases offer fresh takes on classic favorites, whether it's cellist Matt Haimovitz's string-trio rendition of Bach's Goldberg Variations or off-the-beaten-path discoveries, such as Rachel Barton Pine's performance of the Violin Concerto by Beethoven's contemporary, Franz Clement.
Click here for more entries in the Best CDs of 2008 series.
The New Faces Of Classical Music
Cover for Tchaikovsky, Glazunov: Violin Concertos
1. Tchaikovsky, Glazunov: Violin Concertos
Artist: Vadim Gluzman
Song: Tchaikovsky: Violin Concerto, Op. 35 - III
As a teenager, Vadim Gluzman played for the legendary Isaac Stern, who became a source of influence and support. Now, the Ukrainian-born violinist plays his Stradivarius with nearly every major orchestra in the world. Gluzman shares Stern's technical brilliance and passion in Tchaikovsky's great concerto.
* Listen[9 min 49 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Tchaikovsky: Violin Concerto, Op. 35 - III"
o CD: Tchaikovsky, Glazunov: Violin Concertos [Hybrid SACD]
o Artist: Vadim Gluzman
o Label: Bis
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Chopin: Piano Sonata No. 3; Ballade No. 4; Waltzes; Mazurkas; Barcarolle
2. Chopin - Ingrid Fliter
Artist: Ingrid Fliter
Album: Chopin: Piano Sonata No. 3; Ballade No. 4; Waltzes; Mazurkas; Barcarolle
Song: Piano Sonata No. 3, Op. 58
Argentinian pianist Ingrid Fliter's career took flight after she received the 2006 Gilmore Artist award, an honor granted every four years to celebrate an extraordinary pianist of any age. Just after she received that award, NPR welcomed Fliter into the studio, where she proved to be a thoughtful and poetic player of Chopin's music. Now, the proof is on record with this beautiful, all-Chopin recording.
* Listen[13 min 1 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Piano Sonata No. 3, Op. 58"
o CD: Chopin: Piano Sonata No. 3; Ballade No. 4; Waltzes; Mazurkas; Barcarolle
o Artist: Ingrid Fliter
o Label: EMI Classics
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Antonio Bazzini: Virtuoso Works for Violin and Piano
3. Antonio Bazzini: Virtuoso Works for Violin & Piano
Artist: Chloë Hanslip
Song: La Ronde des Lutins (Goblins' Dance), Op. 25
British violinist Chloe Hanslip made her BBC Proms debut in 2002 and her U.S. debut a year later. She's earned wide recognition in Germany and the U.K., including the Echo Klassik Award for best newcomer in 2002 and the Young British Classical Performer honor at the Classical Brit Awards. On this CD of tuneful miniatures, Hanslip showcases her musicality and virtuosity, particularly in Bazzini's best-known work, La Ronde des lutins (The Dance of the Goblins).
* Listen[4 min 55 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "La Ronde des Lutins (Goblins' Dance), Op. 25"
o CD: Antonio Bazzini: Virtuoso Works for Violin and Piano
o Artist: Chloë Hanslip
o Label: Naxos
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven: Sonatas
4. Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven: Sonatas
Artist: Rafal Blechacz
Song: Sonata in E flat major: I
In 2005, Rafał Blechacz became the first Polish pianist in 30 years to win Warsaw's coveted Chopin International Competition. Although a Chopin specialist, Blechacz shares his love for the great classical masters on this recording, as he expertly plays sonatas by Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven.
* Listen[7 min 32 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Sonata in E flat major: I"
o CD: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven: Sonatas
o Artist: Rafal Blechacz
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Bach: Goldberg Variations
5. Bach: Goldberg Variations
Artist: Various
Song: Goldberg Variations: Aria, Variations 1-3 & 16
Matt Haimovitz has performed with nearly every major orchestra in the world, has toured all 50 states in America, and is known for his pioneering efforts to bring a fresh ear to familiar repertoire. He's also been known to unpack his cello in a bar and play Bach. On this recording, he's joined by Jonathan Crow and Douglas McNabney to perform Bach's monumental Goldberg Variations in an intimate string-trio arrangement.
* Listen[15 min 11 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Goldberg Variations: Aria, Variations 1-3 & 16"
o CD: Bach: Goldberg Variations
o Artist: Various
o Label: Oxingale
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Schoenberg, Sibelius: Violin Concertos
6. Schoenberg, Sibelius: Violin Concertos
Artist: Hilary Hahn
Song: Sibelius: Violin Concerto in D minor: III
Grammy-winning violinist Hilary Hahn was named America's best young classical musician by Time magazine in 2001. In many ways, she's still living up to that accolade. The main attraction on this disc is her soulful rendition of Sibelius' great violin concerto. But she also offers a rare chance to hear Arnold Schoenberg's lesser-known and challenging concerto. It's stunningly performed, and not as scary as you might think.
* Listen[7 min 16 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Sibelius: Violin Concerto in D minor: III"
o CD: Schoenberg, Sibelius: Violin Concertos
o Artist: Hilary Hahn
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Chopin: The Piano Concertos
7. Chopin: The Piano Concertos
Artist: Lang Lang
Song: Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor: III
The Chinese pianist Lang Lang has achieved rock-star status in many circles, performing in the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics and being named to People magazine's 2008 list of the "Sexiest Men Alive." His first recording with the Vienna Philharmonic and Zubin Mehta offers sensitive renditions of Chopin's two great Piano Concertos.
* Listen[8 min 56 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor: III"
o CD: Chopin: The Piano Concertos
o Artist: Lang Lang
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Beethoven, Clement: Violin Concertos
8. Beethoven, Clement: Violin Concertos
Artist: Rachel Barton Pine
Song: Beethoven: Violin Concerto in D Major: III
When Rachel Barton Pine was 6, she remembers being allowed to stay up late to watch classical performances on PBS. That's where she saw Itzhak Perlman play Beethoven's violin concerto. She sensed that Beethoven's music was, as she calls it, "the pinnacle of violin concertos." On this recording, she shares her worthy interpretation of the piece, and pairs it with a performance of Franz Clement's Violin Concerto in D. It's a work that lay unperformed for some 200 years, and Barton Pine notes its remarkable "aesthetic similarities" to Beethoven's masterpiece, which was written one year later.
* Listen[10 min 13 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Beethoven: Violin Concerto in D Major: III"
o CD: Beethoven, Clement: Violin Concertos
o Artist: Rachel Barton Pine
o Label: Cedille
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 3; Violin Concerto (Version for Piano) [Hybrid SACD]
9. Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 3
Artist: Olli Mustonen
Song: Piano Concerto No. 3: III
Olli Mustonen is something of an old-fashioned throwback to pianists of the 19th century. He's a triple-threat musician who plays, conducts and composes. In 2003, the Finnish musician was named conductor of the Tapiola Sinfonietta, and on this excellent recording, he combines at least two of his talents, conducting from the keyboard a fresh rendition of Beethoven's Piano Concerto No. 3.
* Listen[10 min 13 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Piano Concerto No. 3: III"
o CD: Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 3; Violin Concerto (Version for Piano) [Hybrid SACD]
o Artist: Olli Mustonen
o Label: Ondine
o Released: 0
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Souvenirs
10. Anna Netrebko - Souvenirs
Artist: Anna Netrebko
Song: "Solveig's Song" from Peer Gynt, Op. 23
In 2007, Anna Netrebko became the first opera singer ever to be named to the Time 100 list -- the magazine's survey of the most influential people in the world. Ranging from operetta classics and salon songs to German lieder and various vocal bon-bons, each selection on this new recording holds a cherished place in Netrebko's memory. She even includes the first piece she learned as a teenage student: Grieg's touching "Solveig's Song," from Peer Gynt.
* Listen[5 min 2 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o ""Solveig's Song" from Peer Gynt, Op. 23"
o CD: Souvenirs
o Artist: Anna Netrebko
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98524270
null
The New Faces Of Classical Music By Robin Gehl
Anna Netrebko 300
Anna Netrebko is one of the many new faces who kept classical music fresh in 2008.
WVXU, December 22, 2008 - From the poetic playing of pianist Ingrid Fliter to the high notes (and high drama) of soprano Anna Netrebko, this group of talented musicians represents the next generation of emerging classical artists, most of whom are still in their 20s and 30s. These 2008 releases offer fresh takes on classic favorites, whether it's cellist Matt Haimovitz's string-trio rendition of Bach's Goldberg Variations or off-the-beaten-path discoveries, such as Rachel Barton Pine's performance of the Violin Concerto by Beethoven's contemporary, Franz Clement.
Click here for more entries in the Best CDs of 2008 series.
The New Faces Of Classical Music
Cover for Tchaikovsky, Glazunov: Violin Concertos
1. Tchaikovsky, Glazunov: Violin Concertos
Artist: Vadim Gluzman
Song: Tchaikovsky: Violin Concerto, Op. 35 - III
As a teenager, Vadim Gluzman played for the legendary Isaac Stern, who became a source of influence and support. Now, the Ukrainian-born violinist plays his Stradivarius with nearly every major orchestra in the world. Gluzman shares Stern's technical brilliance and passion in Tchaikovsky's great concerto.
* Listen[9 min 49 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Tchaikovsky: Violin Concerto, Op. 35 - III"
o CD: Tchaikovsky, Glazunov: Violin Concertos [Hybrid SACD]
o Artist: Vadim Gluzman
o Label: Bis
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Chopin: Piano Sonata No. 3; Ballade No. 4; Waltzes; Mazurkas; Barcarolle
2. Chopin - Ingrid Fliter
Artist: Ingrid Fliter
Album: Chopin: Piano Sonata No. 3; Ballade No. 4; Waltzes; Mazurkas; Barcarolle
Song: Piano Sonata No. 3, Op. 58
Argentinian pianist Ingrid Fliter's career took flight after she received the 2006 Gilmore Artist award, an honor granted every four years to celebrate an extraordinary pianist of any age. Just after she received that award, NPR welcomed Fliter into the studio, where she proved to be a thoughtful and poetic player of Chopin's music. Now, the proof is on record with this beautiful, all-Chopin recording.
* Listen[13 min 1 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Piano Sonata No. 3, Op. 58"
o CD: Chopin: Piano Sonata No. 3; Ballade No. 4; Waltzes; Mazurkas; Barcarolle
o Artist: Ingrid Fliter
o Label: EMI Classics
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Antonio Bazzini: Virtuoso Works for Violin and Piano
3. Antonio Bazzini: Virtuoso Works for Violin & Piano
Artist: Chloë Hanslip
Song: La Ronde des Lutins (Goblins' Dance), Op. 25
British violinist Chloe Hanslip made her BBC Proms debut in 2002 and her U.S. debut a year later. She's earned wide recognition in Germany and the U.K., including the Echo Klassik Award for best newcomer in 2002 and the Young British Classical Performer honor at the Classical Brit Awards. On this CD of tuneful miniatures, Hanslip showcases her musicality and virtuosity, particularly in Bazzini's best-known work, La Ronde des lutins (The Dance of the Goblins).
* Listen[4 min 55 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "La Ronde des Lutins (Goblins' Dance), Op. 25"
o CD: Antonio Bazzini: Virtuoso Works for Violin and Piano
o Artist: Chloë Hanslip
o Label: Naxos
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven: Sonatas
4. Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven: Sonatas
Artist: Rafal Blechacz
Song: Sonata in E flat major: I
In 2005, Rafał Blechacz became the first Polish pianist in 30 years to win Warsaw's coveted Chopin International Competition. Although a Chopin specialist, Blechacz shares his love for the great classical masters on this recording, as he expertly plays sonatas by Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven.
* Listen[7 min 32 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Sonata in E flat major: I"
o CD: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven: Sonatas
o Artist: Rafal Blechacz
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Bach: Goldberg Variations
5. Bach: Goldberg Variations
Artist: Various
Song: Goldberg Variations: Aria, Variations 1-3 & 16
Matt Haimovitz has performed with nearly every major orchestra in the world, has toured all 50 states in America, and is known for his pioneering efforts to bring a fresh ear to familiar repertoire. He's also been known to unpack his cello in a bar and play Bach. On this recording, he's joined by Jonathan Crow and Douglas McNabney to perform Bach's monumental Goldberg Variations in an intimate string-trio arrangement.
* Listen[15 min 11 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Goldberg Variations: Aria, Variations 1-3 & 16"
o CD: Bach: Goldberg Variations
o Artist: Various
o Label: Oxingale
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Schoenberg, Sibelius: Violin Concertos
6. Schoenberg, Sibelius: Violin Concertos
Artist: Hilary Hahn
Song: Sibelius: Violin Concerto in D minor: III
Grammy-winning violinist Hilary Hahn was named America's best young classical musician by Time magazine in 2001. In many ways, she's still living up to that accolade. The main attraction on this disc is her soulful rendition of Sibelius' great violin concerto. But she also offers a rare chance to hear Arnold Schoenberg's lesser-known and challenging concerto. It's stunningly performed, and not as scary as you might think.
* Listen[7 min 16 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Sibelius: Violin Concerto in D minor: III"
o CD: Schoenberg, Sibelius: Violin Concertos
o Artist: Hilary Hahn
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Chopin: The Piano Concertos
7. Chopin: The Piano Concertos
Artist: Lang Lang
Song: Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor: III
The Chinese pianist Lang Lang has achieved rock-star status in many circles, performing in the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics and being named to People magazine's 2008 list of the "Sexiest Men Alive." His first recording with the Vienna Philharmonic and Zubin Mehta offers sensitive renditions of Chopin's two great Piano Concertos.
* Listen[8 min 56 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Piano Concerto No. 2 in F minor: III"
o CD: Chopin: The Piano Concertos
o Artist: Lang Lang
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Beethoven, Clement: Violin Concertos
8. Beethoven, Clement: Violin Concertos
Artist: Rachel Barton Pine
Song: Beethoven: Violin Concerto in D Major: III
When Rachel Barton Pine was 6, she remembers being allowed to stay up late to watch classical performances on PBS. That's where she saw Itzhak Perlman play Beethoven's violin concerto. She sensed that Beethoven's music was, as she calls it, "the pinnacle of violin concertos." On this recording, she shares her worthy interpretation of the piece, and pairs it with a performance of Franz Clement's Violin Concerto in D. It's a work that lay unperformed for some 200 years, and Barton Pine notes its remarkable "aesthetic similarities" to Beethoven's masterpiece, which was written one year later.
* Listen[10 min 13 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Beethoven: Violin Concerto in D Major: III"
o CD: Beethoven, Clement: Violin Concertos
o Artist: Rachel Barton Pine
o Label: Cedille
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 3; Violin Concerto (Version for Piano) [Hybrid SACD]
9. Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 3
Artist: Olli Mustonen
Song: Piano Concerto No. 3: III
Olli Mustonen is something of an old-fashioned throwback to pianists of the 19th century. He's a triple-threat musician who plays, conducts and composes. In 2003, the Finnish musician was named conductor of the Tapiola Sinfonietta, and on this excellent recording, he combines at least two of his talents, conducting from the keyboard a fresh rendition of Beethoven's Piano Concerto No. 3.
* Listen[10 min 13 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o "Piano Concerto No. 3: III"
o CD: Beethoven: Piano Concerto No. 3; Violin Concerto (Version for Piano) [Hybrid SACD]
o Artist: Olli Mustonen
o Label: Ondine
o Released: 0
Loading...
o
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
Cover for Souvenirs
10. Anna Netrebko - Souvenirs
Artist: Anna Netrebko
Song: "Solveig's Song" from Peer Gynt, Op. 23
In 2007, Anna Netrebko became the first opera singer ever to be named to the Time 100 list -- the magazine's survey of the most influential people in the world. Ranging from operetta classics and salon songs to German lieder and various vocal bon-bons, each selection on this new recording holds a cherished place in Netrebko's memory. She even includes the first piece she learned as a teenage student: Grieg's touching "Solveig's Song," from Peer Gynt.
* Listen[5 min 2 sec]
* |
* Add to Playlist
* |
* Purchase Music
Purchase Featured Music
close window
o ""Solveig's Song" from Peer Gynt, Op. 23"
o CD: Souvenirs
o Artist: Anna Netrebko
o Label: Deutsche Grammophon
o Released: 2008
Loading...
o iTunes »
Your purchase helps support NPR Programming. How?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98524270
null
Saturday, December 20, 2008
How India Avoided a Crisis By JOE NOCERA
December 20, 2008
Talking Business
How India Avoided a Crisis By JOE NOCERA
MUMBAI
"What has taken a number of us by surprise is the lack of adequate supervision and regulation," Rana Kapoor was saying the other day. "This was despite the fact that Enron had happened and you passed Sarbanes-Oxley. We don't understand it. Maybe it's because we sit in a more controlled economy but ...." He smiled sweetly as his voice trailed off, as if to take the sting off his comments. But they stung nonetheless.
Mr. Kapoor is an Indian banker, a former longtime Bank of America executive with a Rutgers M.B.A. who, along with his business partner and brother-in-law, Ashok Kapur, was granted government permission four years ago to start a private bank, which they called Yes Bank. In the United States, Yes Bank is the kind of name a go-go banker might give to, say, a high-flying mortgage lender in the middle of a bubble. (You can even imagine the slogan: "Yes is part of our name!") But Yes Bank is not exactly the Washington Mutual of India. One news release it hands out to reporters who come calling is an excerpt from a 2007 survey by The Financial Express: "#1 on Credit Quality amongst 56 Banks in India," reads the headline.
I arrived in Mumbai three weeks after the terrorist attacks that killed 200 people — including, tragically, Yes Bank's co-founder Mr. Kapur, who had served as the company's nonexecutive chairman and was gunned down while having dinner at the Oberoi Hotel. (His wife and two dinner companions miraculously escaped.)
My hope in traveling to Mumbai was to learn about the current state of Indian business in the wake of both the credit crisis and the attacks. But in my first few days in this grand, sprawling, chaotic city, what I mainly heard, especially talking to bankers, was about America, not India. How could we have brought so much trouble on ourselves, and the rest of the world, by acting in such an obviously foolhardy manner? Didn't we understand that you can't lend money to people who lack the means to pay it back? The questions were asked with a sense of bewilderment — and an occasional hint of scorn. Like most Americans, I didn't have any good answers. It was a bubble, I would respond with a sheepish shrug, as if that were an adequate explanation. It isn't, of course.
"In India, we never had anything close to the subprime loan," said Chandra Kochhar, the chief financial officer of India's largest private bank, Icici. (A few days after I spoke to her, Ms. Kochhar was named the bank's new chief executive, in a move that had long been anticipated.) "All lending to individuals is based on their income. That is a big difference between your banking system and ours." She continued: "Indian banks are not levered like American banks. Capital ratios are 12 and 13 percent, instead of 7 or 8 percent. All those exotic structures like C.D.O. and securitizations are a very tiny part of our banking system. So a lot of the temptations didn't exist."
And when I went to see Deepak Parekh, the chief executive of HDFC, which was founded in 1977 as the country's first specialized mortgage bank, practically the first words out of his mouth were these: "We don't do interest-only or subprime loans. When the bubble was going on, we did not change any of our policies. We did not change any of our systems. We did not change our thought process. We never gave more money to a borrower because the value of the house had gone up. Citibank has a few home equity loans, but most banks in India don't make those kinds of loans. Our nonperforming loans are less than 1 percent."
Yet two years ago, the Indian real estate market — commercial and residential alike — was every bit as frothy as the American market. High-rises were being slapped up on spec. Housing developments were sprouting up everywhere. And there was plenty of money flowing into India, mainly from private equity and hedge funds, to fuel the commercial real estate bubble in particular. Goldman Sachs, Carlyle, Blackstone, Citibank — they were all here, throwing money at developers. So why did the Indian banks stay on the sidelines and avoid most of the pain that has been suffered by the big American banks?
Part of the reason is cultural. Indians are simply not as comfortable with credit as Americans. "A lot of Indians, when you push them, will say that if you spend more than you earn you will get in trouble," an Indian consultant told me. "Americans spent more than they earned."
Mr. Parekh said, "Savings are important. Joint families exist. When one son moves out, the family helps them. So you don't borrow so much from the bank." Even mortgage loans tend to have down payments in India that are a third of the purchase price, a far cry from the United States, where 20 percent is the new norm. (Let's not even think about what they used to be.)
But there was also another factor, perhaps the most important of all. India had a bank regulator who was the anti-Greenspan. His name was Dr. Y. V. Reddy, and he was the governor of the Reserve Bank of India. Seventy percent of the banking system in India is nationalized, so a strong regulator is critical, since any banking scandal amounts to a national political scandal as well. And in the irascible Mr. Reddy, who took office in 2003 and stepped down this past September, it had exactly the right man in the right job at the right time.
"He basically believed that if bankers were given the opportunity to sin, they would sin," said one banker who asked not to be named because, well, there's not much percentage in getting on the wrong side of the Reserve Bank of India. For all the bankers' talk about their higher lending standards, the truth is that Mr. Reddy made them even more stringent during the bubble.
Unlike Alan Greenspan, who didn't believe it was his job to even point out bubbles, much less try to deflate them, Mr. Reddy saw his job as making sure Indian banks did not get too caught up in the bubble mentality. About two years ago, he started sensing that real estate, in particular, had entered bubble territory. One of the first moves he made was to ban the use of bank loans for the purchase of raw land, which was skyrocketing. Only when the developer was about to commence building could the bank get involved — and then only to make construction loans. (Guess who wound up financing the land purchases? United States private equity and hedge funds, of course!)
Then, as securitizations and derivatives gained increasing prominence in the world's financial system, the Reserve Bank of India sharply curtailed their use in the country. When Mr. Reddy saw American banks setting up off-balance-sheet vehicles to hide debt, he essentially banned them in India. As a result, banks in India wound up holding onto the loans they made to customers. On the one hand, this meant they made fewer loans than their American counterparts because they couldn't sell off the loans to Wall Street in securitizations. On the other hand, it meant they still had the incentive — as American banks did not — to see those loans paid back.
Seeing inflation on the horizon, Mr. Reddy pushed interest rates up to more than 20 percent, which of course dampened the housing frenzy. He increased risk weightings on commercial buildings and shopping mall construction, doubling the amount of capital banks were required to hold in reserve in case things went awry. He made banks put aside extra capital for every loan they made. In effect, Mr. Reddy was creating liquidity even before there was a global liquidity crisis.
Did India's bankers stand up to applaud Mr. Reddy as he was making these moves? Of course not. They were naturally furious, just as American bankers would have been if Mr. Greenspan had been more active. Their regulator was holding them back, constraining their growth! Mr. Parekh told me that while he had been saying for some time that Indian real estate was in bubble territory, he was still unhappy with the rules imposed by Mr. Reddy. "We were critical of the central bank," he said. "We thought these were harsh measures."
"For a while we were wondering if we were missing out on something," said Ms. Kochhar of Icici. Banks in the United States seemed to have come up with some magical new formula for making money: make loans that required no down payment and little in the way of verification — and post instant, short-term, profits.
As Luis Miranda, who runs a private equity firm devoted to developing India's infrastructure, put it: "We kept wondering if they had figured out something that we were too dense to figure out. It looked like they were smart and we were stupid." Instead, India was the smart one, and we were the stupid ones.
Ms. Kochhar said that the underlying risks of having "a majority of loans not owned by the people who originated them" was not apparent during the bubble. Now that those risks have been made painfully clear, every banker in India realizes that Mr. Reddy did the right thing by limiting securitizations. "At times like this, you tend to appreciate what he did more than we did at the time," said Mr. Kapoor. "He saved us," added Mr. Parekh.
As the credit crisis has spread these past months, no Indian bank has come close to failing the way so many United States and European financial institutions have. None have required the kind of emergency injections of capital that Western banks have needed. None have had the huge write-downs that were par for the course in the West. As the bubble has burst, which lenders have taken the hit? Why, the private equity and hedge fund lenders who had been so eager to finance land development. Us, in others words, rather than them. Why is that not a surprise?
When I asked Mr. Kapoor for his take on what had happened in the United States, he replied: "We recognize it as a problem of plenty. It was perpetuated by greedy bankers, whether investment bankers or commercial bankers. The greed to make money is the impression it has made here. Anytime they wanted a loan, people just dipped into their home A.T.M. It was like money was on call."
So it was. And our regulators, unlike theirs, just stood by and let it happen. The next time we're moving into bubble territory, perhaps we can take a page from Mr. Reddy's book — sometimes it's better to apply the brakes too early than too late. Or, as was the case with Mr. Greenspan, not at all.
•
None of this is to say that the global credit crisis hasn't affected India. It certainly has. I'll be back after the holidays with more columns from India, including how Sept. 15 — the day Lehman Brothers defaulted — changed everything, even here, on the other side of the world.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: December 23, 2008
The Talking Business column on Saturday, about India's avoiding the subprime lending crisis, reversed the initials of a former governor of the Reserve Bank of India, whose policies helped hold bankers to high lending standards. He is Y. V. Reddy. The error also appeared in an accompanying caption.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/business/20nocera.html?sq=How%20India%20Avoided&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
Talking Business
How India Avoided a Crisis By JOE NOCERA
MUMBAI
"What has taken a number of us by surprise is the lack of adequate supervision and regulation," Rana Kapoor was saying the other day. "This was despite the fact that Enron had happened and you passed Sarbanes-Oxley. We don't understand it. Maybe it's because we sit in a more controlled economy but ...." He smiled sweetly as his voice trailed off, as if to take the sting off his comments. But they stung nonetheless.
Mr. Kapoor is an Indian banker, a former longtime Bank of America executive with a Rutgers M.B.A. who, along with his business partner and brother-in-law, Ashok Kapur, was granted government permission four years ago to start a private bank, which they called Yes Bank. In the United States, Yes Bank is the kind of name a go-go banker might give to, say, a high-flying mortgage lender in the middle of a bubble. (You can even imagine the slogan: "Yes is part of our name!") But Yes Bank is not exactly the Washington Mutual of India. One news release it hands out to reporters who come calling is an excerpt from a 2007 survey by The Financial Express: "#1 on Credit Quality amongst 56 Banks in India," reads the headline.
I arrived in Mumbai three weeks after the terrorist attacks that killed 200 people — including, tragically, Yes Bank's co-founder Mr. Kapur, who had served as the company's nonexecutive chairman and was gunned down while having dinner at the Oberoi Hotel. (His wife and two dinner companions miraculously escaped.)
My hope in traveling to Mumbai was to learn about the current state of Indian business in the wake of both the credit crisis and the attacks. But in my first few days in this grand, sprawling, chaotic city, what I mainly heard, especially talking to bankers, was about America, not India. How could we have brought so much trouble on ourselves, and the rest of the world, by acting in such an obviously foolhardy manner? Didn't we understand that you can't lend money to people who lack the means to pay it back? The questions were asked with a sense of bewilderment — and an occasional hint of scorn. Like most Americans, I didn't have any good answers. It was a bubble, I would respond with a sheepish shrug, as if that were an adequate explanation. It isn't, of course.
"In India, we never had anything close to the subprime loan," said Chandra Kochhar, the chief financial officer of India's largest private bank, Icici. (A few days after I spoke to her, Ms. Kochhar was named the bank's new chief executive, in a move that had long been anticipated.) "All lending to individuals is based on their income. That is a big difference between your banking system and ours." She continued: "Indian banks are not levered like American banks. Capital ratios are 12 and 13 percent, instead of 7 or 8 percent. All those exotic structures like C.D.O. and securitizations are a very tiny part of our banking system. So a lot of the temptations didn't exist."
And when I went to see Deepak Parekh, the chief executive of HDFC, which was founded in 1977 as the country's first specialized mortgage bank, practically the first words out of his mouth were these: "We don't do interest-only or subprime loans. When the bubble was going on, we did not change any of our policies. We did not change any of our systems. We did not change our thought process. We never gave more money to a borrower because the value of the house had gone up. Citibank has a few home equity loans, but most banks in India don't make those kinds of loans. Our nonperforming loans are less than 1 percent."
Yet two years ago, the Indian real estate market — commercial and residential alike — was every bit as frothy as the American market. High-rises were being slapped up on spec. Housing developments were sprouting up everywhere. And there was plenty of money flowing into India, mainly from private equity and hedge funds, to fuel the commercial real estate bubble in particular. Goldman Sachs, Carlyle, Blackstone, Citibank — they were all here, throwing money at developers. So why did the Indian banks stay on the sidelines and avoid most of the pain that has been suffered by the big American banks?
Part of the reason is cultural. Indians are simply not as comfortable with credit as Americans. "A lot of Indians, when you push them, will say that if you spend more than you earn you will get in trouble," an Indian consultant told me. "Americans spent more than they earned."
Mr. Parekh said, "Savings are important. Joint families exist. When one son moves out, the family helps them. So you don't borrow so much from the bank." Even mortgage loans tend to have down payments in India that are a third of the purchase price, a far cry from the United States, where 20 percent is the new norm. (Let's not even think about what they used to be.)
But there was also another factor, perhaps the most important of all. India had a bank regulator who was the anti-Greenspan. His name was Dr. Y. V. Reddy, and he was the governor of the Reserve Bank of India. Seventy percent of the banking system in India is nationalized, so a strong regulator is critical, since any banking scandal amounts to a national political scandal as well. And in the irascible Mr. Reddy, who took office in 2003 and stepped down this past September, it had exactly the right man in the right job at the right time.
"He basically believed that if bankers were given the opportunity to sin, they would sin," said one banker who asked not to be named because, well, there's not much percentage in getting on the wrong side of the Reserve Bank of India. For all the bankers' talk about their higher lending standards, the truth is that Mr. Reddy made them even more stringent during the bubble.
Unlike Alan Greenspan, who didn't believe it was his job to even point out bubbles, much less try to deflate them, Mr. Reddy saw his job as making sure Indian banks did not get too caught up in the bubble mentality. About two years ago, he started sensing that real estate, in particular, had entered bubble territory. One of the first moves he made was to ban the use of bank loans for the purchase of raw land, which was skyrocketing. Only when the developer was about to commence building could the bank get involved — and then only to make construction loans. (Guess who wound up financing the land purchases? United States private equity and hedge funds, of course!)
Then, as securitizations and derivatives gained increasing prominence in the world's financial system, the Reserve Bank of India sharply curtailed their use in the country. When Mr. Reddy saw American banks setting up off-balance-sheet vehicles to hide debt, he essentially banned them in India. As a result, banks in India wound up holding onto the loans they made to customers. On the one hand, this meant they made fewer loans than their American counterparts because they couldn't sell off the loans to Wall Street in securitizations. On the other hand, it meant they still had the incentive — as American banks did not — to see those loans paid back.
Seeing inflation on the horizon, Mr. Reddy pushed interest rates up to more than 20 percent, which of course dampened the housing frenzy. He increased risk weightings on commercial buildings and shopping mall construction, doubling the amount of capital banks were required to hold in reserve in case things went awry. He made banks put aside extra capital for every loan they made. In effect, Mr. Reddy was creating liquidity even before there was a global liquidity crisis.
Did India's bankers stand up to applaud Mr. Reddy as he was making these moves? Of course not. They were naturally furious, just as American bankers would have been if Mr. Greenspan had been more active. Their regulator was holding them back, constraining their growth! Mr. Parekh told me that while he had been saying for some time that Indian real estate was in bubble territory, he was still unhappy with the rules imposed by Mr. Reddy. "We were critical of the central bank," he said. "We thought these were harsh measures."
"For a while we were wondering if we were missing out on something," said Ms. Kochhar of Icici. Banks in the United States seemed to have come up with some magical new formula for making money: make loans that required no down payment and little in the way of verification — and post instant, short-term, profits.
As Luis Miranda, who runs a private equity firm devoted to developing India's infrastructure, put it: "We kept wondering if they had figured out something that we were too dense to figure out. It looked like they were smart and we were stupid." Instead, India was the smart one, and we were the stupid ones.
Ms. Kochhar said that the underlying risks of having "a majority of loans not owned by the people who originated them" was not apparent during the bubble. Now that those risks have been made painfully clear, every banker in India realizes that Mr. Reddy did the right thing by limiting securitizations. "At times like this, you tend to appreciate what he did more than we did at the time," said Mr. Kapoor. "He saved us," added Mr. Parekh.
As the credit crisis has spread these past months, no Indian bank has come close to failing the way so many United States and European financial institutions have. None have required the kind of emergency injections of capital that Western banks have needed. None have had the huge write-downs that were par for the course in the West. As the bubble has burst, which lenders have taken the hit? Why, the private equity and hedge fund lenders who had been so eager to finance land development. Us, in others words, rather than them. Why is that not a surprise?
When I asked Mr. Kapoor for his take on what had happened in the United States, he replied: "We recognize it as a problem of plenty. It was perpetuated by greedy bankers, whether investment bankers or commercial bankers. The greed to make money is the impression it has made here. Anytime they wanted a loan, people just dipped into their home A.T.M. It was like money was on call."
So it was. And our regulators, unlike theirs, just stood by and let it happen. The next time we're moving into bubble territory, perhaps we can take a page from Mr. Reddy's book — sometimes it's better to apply the brakes too early than too late. Or, as was the case with Mr. Greenspan, not at all.
•
None of this is to say that the global credit crisis hasn't affected India. It certainly has. I'll be back after the holidays with more columns from India, including how Sept. 15 — the day Lehman Brothers defaulted — changed everything, even here, on the other side of the world.
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: December 23, 2008
The Talking Business column on Saturday, about India's avoiding the subprime lending crisis, reversed the initials of a former governor of the Reserve Bank of India, whose policies helped hold bankers to high lending standards. He is Y. V. Reddy. The error also appeared in an accompanying caption.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/20/business/20nocera.html?sq=How%20India%20Avoided&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
Friday, December 19, 2008
The Madoff Economy By PAUL KRUGMAN
December 19, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
The Madoff Economy By PAUL KRUGMAN
The revelation that Bernard Madoff — brilliant investor (or so almost everyone thought), philanthropist, pillar of the community — was a phony has shocked the world, and understandably so. The scale of his alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme is hard to comprehend.
Yet surely I’m not the only person to ask the obvious question: How different, really, is Mr. Madoff’s tale from the story of the investment industry as a whole?
The financial services industry has claimed an ever-growing share of the nation’s income over the past generation, making the people who run the industry incredibly rich. Yet, at this point, it looks as if much of the industry has been destroying value, not creating it. And it’s not just a matter of money: the vast riches achieved by those who managed other people’s money have had a corrupting effect on our society as a whole.
Let’s start with those paychecks. Last year, the average salary of employees in “securities, commodity contracts, and investments” was more than four times the average salary in the rest of the economy. Earning a million dollars was nothing special, and even incomes of $20 million or more were fairly common. The incomes of the richest Americans have exploded over the past generation, even as wages of ordinary workers have stagnated; high pay on Wall Street was a major cause of that divergence.
But surely those financial superstars must have been earning their millions, right? No, not necessarily. The pay system on Wall Street lavishly rewards the appearance of profit, even if that appearance later turns out to have been an illusion.
Consider the hypothetical example of a money manager who leverages up his clients’ money with lots of debt, then invests the bulked-up total in high-yielding but risky assets, such as dubious mortgage-backed securities. For a while — say, as long as a housing bubble continues to inflate — he (it’s almost always a he) will make big profits and receive big bonuses. Then, when the bubble bursts and his investments turn into toxic waste, his investors will lose big — but he’ll keep those bonuses.
O.K., maybe my example wasn’t hypothetical after all.
So, how different is what Wall Street in general did from the Madoff affair? Well, Mr. Madoff allegedly skipped a few steps, simply stealing his clients’ money rather than collecting big fees while exposing investors to risks they didn’t understand. And while Mr. Madoff was apparently a self-conscious fraud, many people on Wall Street believed their own hype. Still, the end result was the same (except for the house arrest): the money managers got rich; the investors saw their money disappear.
We’re talking about a lot of money here. In recent years the finance sector accounted for 8 percent of America’s G.D.P., up from less than 5 percent a generation earlier. If that extra 3 percent was money for nothing — and it probably was — we’re talking about $400 billion a year in waste, fraud and abuse.
But the costs of America’s Ponzi era surely went beyond the direct waste of dollars and cents.
At the crudest level, Wall Street’s ill-gotten gains corrupted and continue to corrupt politics, in a nicely bipartisan way. From Bush administration officials like Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, who looked the other way as evidence of financial fraud mounted, to Democrats who still haven’t closed the outrageous tax loophole that benefits executives at hedge funds and private equity firms (hello, Senator Schumer), politicians have walked when money talked.
Meanwhile, how much has our nation’s future been damaged by the magnetic pull of quick personal wealth, which for years has drawn many of our best and brightest young people into investment banking, at the expense of science, public service and just about everything else?
Most of all, the vast riches being earned — or maybe that should be “earned” — in our bloated financial industry undermined our sense of reality and degraded our judgment.
Think of the way almost everyone important missed the warning signs of an impending crisis. How was that possible? How, for example, could Alan Greenspan have declared, just a few years ago, that “the financial system as a whole has become more resilient” — thanks to derivatives, no less? The answer, I believe, is that there’s an innate tendency on the part of even the elite to idolize men who are making a lot of money, and assume that they know what they’re doing.
After all, that’s why so many people trusted Mr. Madoff.
Now, as we survey the wreckage and try to understand how things can have gone so wrong, so fast, the answer is actually quite simple: What we’re looking at now are the consequences of a world gone Madoff.
Op-Ed Columnist
The Madoff Economy By PAUL KRUGMAN
The revelation that Bernard Madoff — brilliant investor (or so almost everyone thought), philanthropist, pillar of the community — was a phony has shocked the world, and understandably so. The scale of his alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme is hard to comprehend.
Yet surely I’m not the only person to ask the obvious question: How different, really, is Mr. Madoff’s tale from the story of the investment industry as a whole?
The financial services industry has claimed an ever-growing share of the nation’s income over the past generation, making the people who run the industry incredibly rich. Yet, at this point, it looks as if much of the industry has been destroying value, not creating it. And it’s not just a matter of money: the vast riches achieved by those who managed other people’s money have had a corrupting effect on our society as a whole.
Let’s start with those paychecks. Last year, the average salary of employees in “securities, commodity contracts, and investments” was more than four times the average salary in the rest of the economy. Earning a million dollars was nothing special, and even incomes of $20 million or more were fairly common. The incomes of the richest Americans have exploded over the past generation, even as wages of ordinary workers have stagnated; high pay on Wall Street was a major cause of that divergence.
But surely those financial superstars must have been earning their millions, right? No, not necessarily. The pay system on Wall Street lavishly rewards the appearance of profit, even if that appearance later turns out to have been an illusion.
Consider the hypothetical example of a money manager who leverages up his clients’ money with lots of debt, then invests the bulked-up total in high-yielding but risky assets, such as dubious mortgage-backed securities. For a while — say, as long as a housing bubble continues to inflate — he (it’s almost always a he) will make big profits and receive big bonuses. Then, when the bubble bursts and his investments turn into toxic waste, his investors will lose big — but he’ll keep those bonuses.
O.K., maybe my example wasn’t hypothetical after all.
So, how different is what Wall Street in general did from the Madoff affair? Well, Mr. Madoff allegedly skipped a few steps, simply stealing his clients’ money rather than collecting big fees while exposing investors to risks they didn’t understand. And while Mr. Madoff was apparently a self-conscious fraud, many people on Wall Street believed their own hype. Still, the end result was the same (except for the house arrest): the money managers got rich; the investors saw their money disappear.
We’re talking about a lot of money here. In recent years the finance sector accounted for 8 percent of America’s G.D.P., up from less than 5 percent a generation earlier. If that extra 3 percent was money for nothing — and it probably was — we’re talking about $400 billion a year in waste, fraud and abuse.
But the costs of America’s Ponzi era surely went beyond the direct waste of dollars and cents.
At the crudest level, Wall Street’s ill-gotten gains corrupted and continue to corrupt politics, in a nicely bipartisan way. From Bush administration officials like Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, who looked the other way as evidence of financial fraud mounted, to Democrats who still haven’t closed the outrageous tax loophole that benefits executives at hedge funds and private equity firms (hello, Senator Schumer), politicians have walked when money talked.
Meanwhile, how much has our nation’s future been damaged by the magnetic pull of quick personal wealth, which for years has drawn many of our best and brightest young people into investment banking, at the expense of science, public service and just about everything else?
Most of all, the vast riches being earned — or maybe that should be “earned” — in our bloated financial industry undermined our sense of reality and degraded our judgment.
Think of the way almost everyone important missed the warning signs of an impending crisis. How was that possible? How, for example, could Alan Greenspan have declared, just a few years ago, that “the financial system as a whole has become more resilient” — thanks to derivatives, no less? The answer, I believe, is that there’s an innate tendency on the part of even the elite to idolize men who are making a lot of money, and assume that they know what they’re doing.
After all, that’s why so many people trusted Mr. Madoff.
Now, as we survey the wreckage and try to understand how things can have gone so wrong, so fast, the answer is actually quite simple: What we’re looking at now are the consequences of a world gone Madoff.
Getting Beyond Camelot By JUDITH WARNER
December 19, 2008
Op-Ed Guest Columnist
Getting Beyond Camelot By JUDITH WARNER
Caroline Kennedy is, by all accounts, a smart, decent and very capable woman. There is no reason why she shouldn't enter politics and why she couldn't have a good shot at winning an election.
That doesn't mean she should be handed Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated United States Senate seat.
Running for office and getting a high-class government handout are two very different things.
I suppose Caroline can't be blamed entirely for having a bit of a blind spot when it comes to the fine line between deserving accomplishment and political entitlement. In 1960, when her father was elected president, vacating his seat in the Senate, he wanted his brother, Ted, to take his place. But Ted was too young to serve. So the Kennedy camp convinced Foster Furcolo, the Massachusetts governor, to appoint Benjamin Smith, an old college friend of Jack's, "to keep the seat warm" until Ted turned 30 and could run in 1962.
"I'm putting someone in. I want to save that seat for my brother," Jack openly said, according to Adam Clymer's "Edward M. Kennedy: A Biography."
But J.F.K. did sometimes worry, presidential historian Doris Kearns Goodwin told me this week, that the public might sour on the idea of a Kennedy family dynasty.
The early 1960s were more indulgent times. In 2008, however, I'm not sure we can afford to extend excessive amounts of public generosity to the wealthy and well-connected. It doesn't strike me as desirable or — for New York Democrats in particular, and even for Caroline herself — very wise.
We are living in a moment when all the machinations, the corner-cutting, the inside deals, mutual back-scratching and indifference to the larger world of our nation's wealthiest and most interconnected have led us straight into the ground. We've just elected a president who's sworn to clean things up. We're in the middle of a political-appointment fiasco in Illinois.
With lawmakers and taxpayers eyeing bonuses and corporate jets with angry incredulity, we've arrived, after years of worshipping the very wealthy, at what could be a very positive time of reckoning. This change could go a long way toward restoring people's faith in the fairness and decency of our leaders and institutions.
In keeping with the times, it would be an appealing act of humility if Caroline Kennedy aimed her first shot at politics a bit lower — say, at the House of Representatives. Perhaps she could run for Representative Carolyn Maloney's seat if Maloney were, as she and her supporters would like her to be, named to Clinton's Senate seat.
A number of major national women's groups have endorsed Maloney for that position. Their leadership has been uncharacteristically quiet since Caroline entered the fray. But Marcia Pappas, president of the New York State chapter of the National Organization for Women told me, politely: "We can have a number of people who are qualified and we have to be very respectful of people and their talents, but when it comes down to it, we have to be grown-ups. We think this position should go to someone who's paid her dues, who's done the work."
That's the operative word: "work." I do think that the next United States senator from New York ought to be someone who has worked for the honor. Clearly, Caroline can't, for the sake of her political viability — or her likability with people like me — suddenly remake herself into someone who has worked for a living. But at this point, with so many people struggling so arduously just to get by, any effort at all would be appreciated. True campaigning — at the appropriate time — would prove her mettle pretty fast.
It might even be liberating. It can't be fun to live your life defined — in the public eye at least — by your tragic past. At age 51, having still to be the "lucky little girl with a pony and an impossibly handsome father," our "tragic national princess," as The Washington Post's Ruth Marcus put it last week, can't be too great, no matter how many strangers say they like you. ("I like her ... There's magic in the Kennedy name that attracts power and support and love," wrote radio host Rob Kall on The Huffington Post.)
Such love is a bit unseemly. Even embarrassing. "Confusing Politics With the Lifetime Channel," Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish blog headlined the subject this week.
Caroline doesn't have to be a fairy-tale princess anymore. She can be her own white knight, vaulting the Kennedys proudly into the 21st century, if only she plays by the rules and waits her turn.
Judith Warner writes Domestic Disturbances, a column at nytimes.com. David Brooks is off today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/opinion/19warner.html?sq=Getting%20Beyond%20Camelot&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
Op-Ed Guest Columnist
Getting Beyond Camelot By JUDITH WARNER
Caroline Kennedy is, by all accounts, a smart, decent and very capable woman. There is no reason why she shouldn't enter politics and why she couldn't have a good shot at winning an election.
That doesn't mean she should be handed Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated United States Senate seat.
Running for office and getting a high-class government handout are two very different things.
I suppose Caroline can't be blamed entirely for having a bit of a blind spot when it comes to the fine line between deserving accomplishment and political entitlement. In 1960, when her father was elected president, vacating his seat in the Senate, he wanted his brother, Ted, to take his place. But Ted was too young to serve. So the Kennedy camp convinced Foster Furcolo, the Massachusetts governor, to appoint Benjamin Smith, an old college friend of Jack's, "to keep the seat warm" until Ted turned 30 and could run in 1962.
"I'm putting someone in. I want to save that seat for my brother," Jack openly said, according to Adam Clymer's "Edward M. Kennedy: A Biography."
But J.F.K. did sometimes worry, presidential historian Doris Kearns Goodwin told me this week, that the public might sour on the idea of a Kennedy family dynasty.
The early 1960s were more indulgent times. In 2008, however, I'm not sure we can afford to extend excessive amounts of public generosity to the wealthy and well-connected. It doesn't strike me as desirable or — for New York Democrats in particular, and even for Caroline herself — very wise.
We are living in a moment when all the machinations, the corner-cutting, the inside deals, mutual back-scratching and indifference to the larger world of our nation's wealthiest and most interconnected have led us straight into the ground. We've just elected a president who's sworn to clean things up. We're in the middle of a political-appointment fiasco in Illinois.
With lawmakers and taxpayers eyeing bonuses and corporate jets with angry incredulity, we've arrived, after years of worshipping the very wealthy, at what could be a very positive time of reckoning. This change could go a long way toward restoring people's faith in the fairness and decency of our leaders and institutions.
In keeping with the times, it would be an appealing act of humility if Caroline Kennedy aimed her first shot at politics a bit lower — say, at the House of Representatives. Perhaps she could run for Representative Carolyn Maloney's seat if Maloney were, as she and her supporters would like her to be, named to Clinton's Senate seat.
A number of major national women's groups have endorsed Maloney for that position. Their leadership has been uncharacteristically quiet since Caroline entered the fray. But Marcia Pappas, president of the New York State chapter of the National Organization for Women told me, politely: "We can have a number of people who are qualified and we have to be very respectful of people and their talents, but when it comes down to it, we have to be grown-ups. We think this position should go to someone who's paid her dues, who's done the work."
That's the operative word: "work." I do think that the next United States senator from New York ought to be someone who has worked for the honor. Clearly, Caroline can't, for the sake of her political viability — or her likability with people like me — suddenly remake herself into someone who has worked for a living. But at this point, with so many people struggling so arduously just to get by, any effort at all would be appreciated. True campaigning — at the appropriate time — would prove her mettle pretty fast.
It might even be liberating. It can't be fun to live your life defined — in the public eye at least — by your tragic past. At age 51, having still to be the "lucky little girl with a pony and an impossibly handsome father," our "tragic national princess," as The Washington Post's Ruth Marcus put it last week, can't be too great, no matter how many strangers say they like you. ("I like her ... There's magic in the Kennedy name that attracts power and support and love," wrote radio host Rob Kall on The Huffington Post.)
Such love is a bit unseemly. Even embarrassing. "Confusing Politics With the Lifetime Channel," Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish blog headlined the subject this week.
Caroline doesn't have to be a fairy-tale princess anymore. She can be her own white knight, vaulting the Kennedys proudly into the 21st century, if only she plays by the rules and waits her turn.
Judith Warner writes Domestic Disturbances, a column at nytimes.com. David Brooks is off today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/opinion/19warner.html?sq=Getting%20Beyond%20Camelot&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
The Pope's Real Message for Obama By JOHN L. ALLEN Jr.
December 19, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
The Pope's Real Message for Obama By JOHN L. ALLEN Jr.
THE roughly 67 million Catholics in the United States make up nearly one-quarter of the American population, but just 6 percent of the global Catholic total of 1.1 billion. Ninety-four percent of the Catholics in the world, in other words, are not Americans, which may help explain why the pope and his lieutenants are not always thinking American thoughts when they get out of bed in the morning.
That's a useful bit of context to bear in mind in light of a tough new Vatican document on bioethics, released one week ago, that ratchets up the church's condemnations of embryonic stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, the "morning-after pill" and a host of other techniques it regards as violations of human dignity.
In the United States, the tendency may be to see the document, titled "Dignitas Personae," or "Dignity of the Person," as a battle plan for resistance to the incoming Obama administration. In reality, that amounts to trying to shove a square peg into the round hole of American politics.
For one thing, the document has been in the works for years, so it is hardly a rapid response to the American elections. Moreover, the Vatican doesn't want to be at loggerheads with Barack Obama, because it sees a range of matters where it's more in sync with him than it has been with President Bush. On Dec. 3, for example, the Vatican simultaneously signed and ratified a new international treaty banning cluster bombs, a measure President Bush opposed — a reminder that Catholic social teaching and Republican politics are not always a match made in heaven.
What the Vatican may not fully appreciate, however, is that putting out a hard-nosed pro-life document right now, at least in the United States, may be the political equivalent of shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
In the '08 elections, pro-life Catholics emerged as the dominant voice of the religious right. To be sure, Mr. Obama won a majority among Catholics. Yet the sharpest anti-Obama rhetoric from religious leaders came not from old culture warriors like Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson but rather from some Catholic clergymen.
Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City, Mo., for example, warned voters that their eternal salvation might be at stake if they supported Mr. Obama. A couple of pro-life priests even suggested that Catholics who voted for Mr. Obama should go to confession. (Their bishops, it should be said, quickly rejected that idea.)
Cardinal Francis Stafford, a former archbishop of Denver who today heads a Vatican court, described Mr. Obama's rhetoric on abortion as "aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic," and compared the election results to the Garden of Gethsemane — the spot where, according to the Bible, Jesus agonized before his crucifixion.
In that context, "Dignitas Personae" risks being read as encouragement for the most ardent pro-life forces in America to let slip the dogs of war.
Of course, many Catholic bishops and many ordinary Catholics in America believe that while Mr. Obama's positions on abortion and stem cell research are troubling, there are also important areas of common ground.
That seems to be the balance the Vatican is trying to strike. Pope Benedict XVI sent a telegram of congratulations to Mr. Obama calling his election a "historic occasion," and the two men later spoke by telephone. A papal spokesman said the Vatican hopes to work with him on Iraq, the Holy Land, Christian minorities in the Middle East and Asia, and the fight against poverty and social inequality.
To be clear, the Vatican yields to no one in its pro-life commitments. In effect, "Dignitas Personae" is a reminder that there will be no "truce," no strategic silence, about the defense of human life from the moment of conception. The question now is whether the Vatican will find an equally effective way to mobilize those Catholics who hope to build bridges.
This is one case in which the pope would do well to think a few American thoughts.
John L. Allen Jr. is the senior correspondent for The National Catholic Reporter and the author of "The Rise of Benedict XVI."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/opinion/19allen.html?sq=Pope&st=cse&scp=1&%2339;s%20Real%20Message=&pagewanted=print
null
Op-Ed Contributor
The Pope's Real Message for Obama By JOHN L. ALLEN Jr.
THE roughly 67 million Catholics in the United States make up nearly one-quarter of the American population, but just 6 percent of the global Catholic total of 1.1 billion. Ninety-four percent of the Catholics in the world, in other words, are not Americans, which may help explain why the pope and his lieutenants are not always thinking American thoughts when they get out of bed in the morning.
That's a useful bit of context to bear in mind in light of a tough new Vatican document on bioethics, released one week ago, that ratchets up the church's condemnations of embryonic stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, the "morning-after pill" and a host of other techniques it regards as violations of human dignity.
In the United States, the tendency may be to see the document, titled "Dignitas Personae," or "Dignity of the Person," as a battle plan for resistance to the incoming Obama administration. In reality, that amounts to trying to shove a square peg into the round hole of American politics.
For one thing, the document has been in the works for years, so it is hardly a rapid response to the American elections. Moreover, the Vatican doesn't want to be at loggerheads with Barack Obama, because it sees a range of matters where it's more in sync with him than it has been with President Bush. On Dec. 3, for example, the Vatican simultaneously signed and ratified a new international treaty banning cluster bombs, a measure President Bush opposed — a reminder that Catholic social teaching and Republican politics are not always a match made in heaven.
What the Vatican may not fully appreciate, however, is that putting out a hard-nosed pro-life document right now, at least in the United States, may be the political equivalent of shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
In the '08 elections, pro-life Catholics emerged as the dominant voice of the religious right. To be sure, Mr. Obama won a majority among Catholics. Yet the sharpest anti-Obama rhetoric from religious leaders came not from old culture warriors like Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson but rather from some Catholic clergymen.
Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City, Mo., for example, warned voters that their eternal salvation might be at stake if they supported Mr. Obama. A couple of pro-life priests even suggested that Catholics who voted for Mr. Obama should go to confession. (Their bishops, it should be said, quickly rejected that idea.)
Cardinal Francis Stafford, a former archbishop of Denver who today heads a Vatican court, described Mr. Obama's rhetoric on abortion as "aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic," and compared the election results to the Garden of Gethsemane — the spot where, according to the Bible, Jesus agonized before his crucifixion.
In that context, "Dignitas Personae" risks being read as encouragement for the most ardent pro-life forces in America to let slip the dogs of war.
Of course, many Catholic bishops and many ordinary Catholics in America believe that while Mr. Obama's positions on abortion and stem cell research are troubling, there are also important areas of common ground.
That seems to be the balance the Vatican is trying to strike. Pope Benedict XVI sent a telegram of congratulations to Mr. Obama calling his election a "historic occasion," and the two men later spoke by telephone. A papal spokesman said the Vatican hopes to work with him on Iraq, the Holy Land, Christian minorities in the Middle East and Asia, and the fight against poverty and social inequality.
To be clear, the Vatican yields to no one in its pro-life commitments. In effect, "Dignitas Personae" is a reminder that there will be no "truce," no strategic silence, about the defense of human life from the moment of conception. The question now is whether the Vatican will find an equally effective way to mobilize those Catholics who hope to build bridges.
This is one case in which the pope would do well to think a few American thoughts.
John L. Allen Jr. is the senior correspondent for The National Catholic Reporter and the author of "The Rise of Benedict XVI."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/opinion/19allen.html?sq=Pope&st=cse&scp=1&%2339;s%20Real%20Message=&pagewanted=print
null
Extinction-Level Television Event By ALAN SEPINWALL
December 19, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
Extinction-Level Television Event By ALAN SEPINWALL
I'M a runt of Generation X, which means 1) I'm supposed to define myself entirely through ironic references to pop culture, and 2) as a member of the last generation to come of age in an era of only three TV networks, I assume everyone will understand when I drop a quote from "Scooby-Doo" or "The A-Team."
But the generation immediately after mine has never known life without cable, and the generation after that won't know a life without streaming video. Having only three TV channels to watch must sound as quaint to them as radio plays do to me. Today's entertainment universe provides endless variety for every demographic and taste, and the things that everyone actually wants to watch together are few and far between.
That's what makes NBC's decision to surrender its weekday 10 p.m. timeslot to a new Jay Leno talk show as inevitable as it is sad.
NBC at 10 p.m. was once the birthplace of dramas like "Hill Street Blues," "St. Elsewhere, " "L.A. Law, " "Law & Order," "Homicide: Life on the Street" and "E.R." These were groundbreaking shows and, for the most part, mass successes — the kind of hits that plenty of people at any school or office would be able and eager to talk about. Now, because the expanding television universe is shrinking individual audiences, and because NBC has shown depraved indifference to the idea of program development for the last decade, the network has no better option for the hour than moving Jay Leno from late night to prime time.
Next fall, when Mr. Leno assumes his new timeslot, NBC will continue to schedule football on Sunday nights and repeats on Saturdays. That leaves only 10 prime-time hours for original programming, and knowing the way NBC operates these days, at least four of those will likely go to super-sized editions of "The Biggest Loser" and "Deal or No Deal."
This reminds me of a joke Tina Fey told at the Television Critics Association awards ceremony. She thanked us "for making '30 Rock' the most successful cable show on broadcast television," and added: "Oh, it's a great time to be on broadcast television, isn't it? It's exciting! It's like being in vaudeville in the '60s!"
We all laughed, but it was the sort of laughter designed to fight off tears, you know? The big networks have all been trending inexorably downward for years. Shows that pulled in an audience of 20 million or more viewers only a couple of years ago are now happy with numbers in the mid-to-high teens, and the acceptable slice of the demographic pie is getting ever narrower. (Expect a press release someday soon boasting that a reality show won its timeslot among redheaded girls ages 11 to 11 ½.)
As the audience shrinks and the networks increasingly program for niches instead of the general public, they resemble cable channels more and more.
There's a lot to be said for the cable model, where lowered expectations and a smaller inventory of original programming has led to instant classics like "The Wire," "The Shield" and "Mad Men." But while "Mad Men" is a wonderful show, it gets two million viewers when the winds are calm and the planets are aligned. It's in no danger of becoming such a big hit that people at the post office will laugh at your Freddy Rumsen impression.
We've been heading to this point for decades, long before NBC picked Conan O'Brien to take over "The Tonight Show," even before Jay Leno was chosen to succeed Johnny Carson.
In the late '80s, Fox recognized the financial advantages to looking like a network without being one: the fledgling channel deliberately didn't program the 10 o'clock hour because that would have made it, under the F.C.C.'s definition at the time, a broadcast network and subjected to much stricter regulations. (Back then, Fox couldn't have owned its own shows, for instance.)
The F.C.C. has since relaxed those rules, and Fox is now technically a network. But the very concept of a network has lost much of its meaning.
Of course, the networks still do good work — even in its end-of-empire days, NBC has given us "30 Rock," "The Office" and the deliriously funny "Chuck" — and on occasions like the Super Bowl or an "American Idol" finale, they even bring in big ratings that evoke the good old days of a mass medium for a mass audience. But several generations now think of NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox as just four channels in a 500-channel spectrum. Really, the only thing that distinguishes them from the cable channels is that they still try, most nights, to be broadcasters, generalists in an age of specialization.
To use a pop culture metaphor that everyone should (I hope) understand, the networks are Wile E. Coyote running off a cliff. So long as they pump their legs and assume there's solid ground beneath their feet, they get to keep moving. But as soon as one of them gives up and looks at where it is, as NBC has with the Jay Leno deal, there's nowhere to go but way, way down.
Alan Sepinwall is the television critic of The Star-Ledger.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/opinion/19sepinwall.html?sq=Extinction-Level&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
Op-Ed Contributor
Extinction-Level Television Event By ALAN SEPINWALL
I'M a runt of Generation X, which means 1) I'm supposed to define myself entirely through ironic references to pop culture, and 2) as a member of the last generation to come of age in an era of only three TV networks, I assume everyone will understand when I drop a quote from "Scooby-Doo" or "The A-Team."
But the generation immediately after mine has never known life without cable, and the generation after that won't know a life without streaming video. Having only three TV channels to watch must sound as quaint to them as radio plays do to me. Today's entertainment universe provides endless variety for every demographic and taste, and the things that everyone actually wants to watch together are few and far between.
That's what makes NBC's decision to surrender its weekday 10 p.m. timeslot to a new Jay Leno talk show as inevitable as it is sad.
NBC at 10 p.m. was once the birthplace of dramas like "Hill Street Blues," "St. Elsewhere, " "L.A. Law, " "Law & Order," "Homicide: Life on the Street" and "E.R." These were groundbreaking shows and, for the most part, mass successes — the kind of hits that plenty of people at any school or office would be able and eager to talk about. Now, because the expanding television universe is shrinking individual audiences, and because NBC has shown depraved indifference to the idea of program development for the last decade, the network has no better option for the hour than moving Jay Leno from late night to prime time.
Next fall, when Mr. Leno assumes his new timeslot, NBC will continue to schedule football on Sunday nights and repeats on Saturdays. That leaves only 10 prime-time hours for original programming, and knowing the way NBC operates these days, at least four of those will likely go to super-sized editions of "The Biggest Loser" and "Deal or No Deal."
This reminds me of a joke Tina Fey told at the Television Critics Association awards ceremony. She thanked us "for making '30 Rock' the most successful cable show on broadcast television," and added: "Oh, it's a great time to be on broadcast television, isn't it? It's exciting! It's like being in vaudeville in the '60s!"
We all laughed, but it was the sort of laughter designed to fight off tears, you know? The big networks have all been trending inexorably downward for years. Shows that pulled in an audience of 20 million or more viewers only a couple of years ago are now happy with numbers in the mid-to-high teens, and the acceptable slice of the demographic pie is getting ever narrower. (Expect a press release someday soon boasting that a reality show won its timeslot among redheaded girls ages 11 to 11 ½.)
As the audience shrinks and the networks increasingly program for niches instead of the general public, they resemble cable channels more and more.
There's a lot to be said for the cable model, where lowered expectations and a smaller inventory of original programming has led to instant classics like "The Wire," "The Shield" and "Mad Men." But while "Mad Men" is a wonderful show, it gets two million viewers when the winds are calm and the planets are aligned. It's in no danger of becoming such a big hit that people at the post office will laugh at your Freddy Rumsen impression.
We've been heading to this point for decades, long before NBC picked Conan O'Brien to take over "The Tonight Show," even before Jay Leno was chosen to succeed Johnny Carson.
In the late '80s, Fox recognized the financial advantages to looking like a network without being one: the fledgling channel deliberately didn't program the 10 o'clock hour because that would have made it, under the F.C.C.'s definition at the time, a broadcast network and subjected to much stricter regulations. (Back then, Fox couldn't have owned its own shows, for instance.)
The F.C.C. has since relaxed those rules, and Fox is now technically a network. But the very concept of a network has lost much of its meaning.
Of course, the networks still do good work — even in its end-of-empire days, NBC has given us "30 Rock," "The Office" and the deliriously funny "Chuck" — and on occasions like the Super Bowl or an "American Idol" finale, they even bring in big ratings that evoke the good old days of a mass medium for a mass audience. But several generations now think of NBC, ABC, CBS and Fox as just four channels in a 500-channel spectrum. Really, the only thing that distinguishes them from the cable channels is that they still try, most nights, to be broadcasters, generalists in an age of specialization.
To use a pop culture metaphor that everyone should (I hope) understand, the networks are Wile E. Coyote running off a cliff. So long as they pump their legs and assume there's solid ground beneath their feet, they get to keep moving. But as soon as one of them gives up and looks at where it is, as NBC has with the Jay Leno deal, there's nowhere to go but way, way down.
Alan Sepinwall is the television critic of The Star-Ledger.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/opinion/19sepinwall.html?sq=Extinction-Level&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print
null
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)