Friday, January 31, 2025

"Not a Deal"

"Not a Deal" 

That's what the Lubavitch kid who comes to my office every Friday to try to convince me to put on tefillin said. 

He's been trying to get me to put on tefillin for weeks. His original pitch was that I should do a mitzvah to help the soldiers win the war in Israel. I said, really? How is my putting on tefillin gonna help win the war in Israel. He said, every mitzvah helps. I said, if you believe that, then you must believe that God cares about me doing a mitzvah and that He can intervene in what's going on. Then you must also believe that on some level God allowed October 7th to happen in the first place. And somehow there's a connection for God between doing mitvahs or not doing mitzvahs and allowing terrible things to happen. The kid agreed. I said, well I don't believe that me putting on tefillin is going to help win the war. Because if I believed that, I'd have to also believe that God is cruel enough to let young, innocent people die and be taken hostage, because we didn't do enough mitzvahs. If there's a God, I can't believe He'd be that petty. So I don't want to insult His intelligence by putting on tefillin and thinking he'd respond by making Israel win the war.

But that was a few weeks ago. This is a new week.           

"Not a deal." 

"What's not a deal," I asked.

"100 criminals and murderers released for one Israeli hostage, that's not a deal."

"Really," I said. "What's a better deal."

"One for one."

"So you think that one murderer has the same value as one innocent victim?" I asked. "I don't. I would trade 1000 criminals for 1 hostage. Because to me that's the value. 1000 to 1. Do you know what gives life value?"

He waited for my answer.

"Can't be faith in God. I mean, the terrorists have plenty of that, or so they claim. It's the law that gives life value. When a person follows the law, it means they are taking responsibility for others. The terrorists are lawless. That's why they will even kill their own women and children. To them, there are no laws, or rather they are the law, and so human life has no value. But surely you understand this. It's what Judaism is all about. Learning and following the laws of Torah. But it also applies to citizens following the laws of a country. The laws make us responsible for one another. Gaza is lawless, so human life has zero value. The hostages are citizens of Israel. They have so much value that the government and all the citizens of Israel are willing to do anything to get them back, even if it means sacrificing their own sons and daughters in battle. With responsibility comes value." 

"But what if the terrorists being released kill more people. It happened before."

"Yes, it's possible." I said. "But it's not inevitable. We let our guard down before. Our leaders failed. If we don't hold the leaders we chose accountable for the mistakes they made, then we are more responsible for letting it happen again."

"Making a deal, shows what you value," I told the kid. "They value their murderers and criminals. We value our fathers, mothers, daughters and sons."  

"Kol Yisrael arevim zeh la-zeh," he said.

Lesson learned.

Thursday, January 30, 2025

Why Poilievre Will Never Go Full trump (if he knows what's best for him)

Why do (most) Canadians despise trump while a lot of Americans like him (and some love him like Jesus)? I mean even before he threatened to put Canada into an instant recession. 

About half of Americans like trump enough to vote for him. That's undeniable. It's also incomprehensible to a lot of us. They didn't care that he is a convicted felon. They didn't care that he encouraged a violent insurrection against the temple of American democracy the Capitol. They don't care that he pardoned the convicted Jan. 6 mob who battered police with flagpoles, sacked the building and called for the lynching of the Vice-President and Speaker of the House. Trump's supporters like his brashness. They like the way he talks. They think he gets them - when in fact, it's them who have been gotten (in the sense of conned). It's obvious to many of us that he has contempt for the very people who support him the most. He wouldn't be caught dead hanging out socially at one of his golf clubs with the people who attend his rallies, the groupies who buy his low-end merch, wear the hats, and believe every lie he utters as if it were gospel. 

One theory is that he has tapped into a visceral animus that exists in American society, between the conservative rural uneducated ('I love the uneducated' trump famously said) and the coastal educated elites. The blue collar working class and the white collar upper class. It doesn't matter that trump is the epitome of an educated coastal elite. He doesn't talk like one. It doesn't matter that when he came to office in his first term, the only successful piece of legislation he claimed was a massive tax break that largely benefitted the wealthy and corporations. What matters to trump's supporters, and he knows it perfectly well, isn't actually lowering the price of eggs. My guess is that he won't be paying much of a political price for failing to deliver on that promise. To trump's followers, paying the increased price of eggs is worth having someone who will express, in the most outrageous, most offensive and public way, the visceral resentment and anger that they feel. And by the way, it's not a matter of education, as some have been arguing (usually the educated elite make the argument). That can easily be disproven by the fact that Americans have never been more educated in history, than they are today. More high-school and college graduates than ever before. The problem is that the economic opportunities afforded by getting an education have been drying up across the board for decades, and that's endemic. Coastal elites are still foolish enough to pay the exorbitant fees to go to elite universities, and spend the rest of their lives paying the debt back. The rest think it's a better bet to tell the elites "Fuck you!" in the loudest ugliest voice they can find. They may have the smarter (and more affordable) idea.

I hate sounding nostalgic, but there was a time in America in the 1950s, 60s and 70s - I was reminded of this by an interview with Harvard professor Michael Sandel on Steve Paikin's show - when you could go to a baseball game at Boston's Fenway Park, and the rich and educated would be indistinguishable from the high-school dropouts and working class, except maybe that some people sat closer to home plate and the dugouts. Baseball was always the people's sport. Symbolic of democracies equality of opportunity. The stadia were always huge, because baseball is played on a massive field, with plenty of affordable seats. When I was a kid, my dad's clothing company (no multinational enterprise) had season's tickets for box seats along the first base line at Jarry Park. Many weekend afternoons in the summer were spent taking in an Expos double-header. Point being, the experience embodied a kind of social cohesion accessible to everyone. Contrast that to tickets for sport (concert etc.) nowadays. They are priced out of reach for the average person. The elite sit in corporate boxes, while their employees  watch on livingroom and sports bar TV screens. It's symbolic of a fracturing of the economic and cultural fabric of society.

Since the mid-1980s, the social divide shaped by economic globalization that offshored manufacturing and financially privileged those who could take advantage of the information economy, created a divide that stagnated wages at the bottom for decades and hypercharged wealth accumulation at the top. This trend gradually morphed into the fragmentary politics of group identity. A sense of social cohesion, built on trust that everyone was working toward the same national project of fairness and opportunity, was coming apart, because the economic and political results demonstrated the exact opposite. Enter trump, whose populist message targeting those left behind by increasing wealth disparities, found a home within groups of society looking for a voice to express their anger, frustration and blame. 

Why hasn't Canada fallen prey to that brand of identity politics of resentment? It's not as if tickets for a hockey game have become more affordable. It's not as if we don't fall for identity politics in general. We do. Canadians are more woke than an alarm clock. One word: healthcare. That, and all the other nationwide institutions explicitly designed to strengthen the national social fabric, like our social safety net, our public schools, our childcare etc. Most northern countries, for example the Scandinavian countries, tend to have a more developed social safety-net systems of support. It comes with the challenges of living in northern climates. A certain sense of interdependence emerges, and a national culture and institutional framework. I'm not suggesting that Canada doesn't have regional cultural identities, of course we do, some very distinct ones, as in Quebec. But in terms of shared experience and affinity, there's nothing like a cold Canadian winter - which shapes our choice of sports, technologies, arts, sciences & manufacturing (ie. research we are particularly good at doing and products we're particularly good at making) etc. In short, everything that makes up an identity. Our social fabric simply hasn't frayed the way it has in the US because we still trust in our government, the services they provide, and each other. Sure, we had our copycat trucker convoy disruption when people were going out of their minds during the pandemic. Most Canadians hated it. We trust our healthcare professionals to provide advice in the interest of citizens. We like order not chaos. It gets too cold up here for chaos. The US has always influenced our politics and culture, and always will. But the bottom line is we're different. We're not American. And in the next few months I think we'll prove it. 

Tuesday, January 28, 2025

As Goes The US

As goes the US, so go we, and by we, I don't just mean Canada, I mean the globe. It's our reality. Everyone's reality. We are at the mercy of the dumb choices made by Americans. 

We are living through the American century. The last five hundred years or so were dominated by Europe, and the spread of colonialism. That began to change around the turn to the 20th century, and America's spectacular ascension to world dominance was complete with the catastrophic self-destruction of Europe and parts of Asia in World War Two. America rebuilt Europe and Asia, and made them in its image. Fortunately for us. American hegemony rapidly spread liberal democratic values around the world, individual rights and freedoms, and global trade on a scale never before seen in history. It resulted in the most widespread and longest period of peace and prosperity ever. By every meaningful measure, from the reduction of poverty and infant mortality to human longevity, more people have lived better and longer than ever before. Thanks to the unprecedented influence of the most powerful nation, militarily and economically, that has ever existed. All of it was supported by an international financial and political system of treaties and agreements that generated unprecendented levels of security, trade and cooperation. 

As Joni Mitchell sang, 'Don't it always seem to go, that you don't know what you've got till it's gone'. 

My biggest fear about trump in 2015 was that if he was elected US President he would move to dismantle the international system that America had created. He tried in his first term, but his incompetence ensured that he failed. This time he's trying harder, and he has many more tools (and I mean that in both the common usage and the pejorative sense) at his disposal. I also feared that he would divide Americans against each other on racial and political lines, and attack the institutions of government, which is his modus operandi. His objective is to make American rule of law and democracy weaker, because he fancies himself an American Putin, the absolute head of a criminal gang that can skim off the proceeds of state revenues for personal enrichment. That may be harder to do than he thinks, given the structure of the US government. But signs of corruption are certainly there. His re-shaping of government departments under staunch loyalists, and the recent sacking of 17 Inspectors Generals signals his intentions. No doubt he will move more aggressively this time to leverage the US government to enrich himself and his cronies. I suspect that his threats of tariffs are part of that. 

My grandfather used to say 'bullshit baffles brains'. And he said it decades before the internet, the greatest bullshit generating machine ever created. Grandpa Sam was a visionary and astute observer of human nature. He saw how easily people could be distracted and manipulated. He might have foreseen a politician like trump, the greatest bullshitter the planet has ever seen. Trump complains the US is being charged too much by Panama to use the canal. Well, if you bothered to look it up you'd find that they were charged a million dollars last year. That's a million dollars to use a waterway that moves roughly $270 billion worth of cargo annually, 40% of all U.S. container traffic alone. Not sure how much cheaper it could get in trump's view. He wants Canada to stem the flow of fentanyl into the US. Virtually no fentanyl crosses the US/Canada border. Guns coming from the US into Canada is another story. 

Trump is a small man with a small mind. He has no principles (except for the pursuit of personal self-interest), no long term strategy (except self-enrichment), and thinks transactionally. He will do and say whatever he perceives in the moment will burnish his image as a strongman. The perception of strength is relative - you are only strong (or weak) in relation to others. So he threatens and bullies allies (Canada, Denmark, Panama), because he perceives that they are vulnerable and might give him a few easy wins. My hunch is that he has grossly miscalculated. And the result will be that he looks weaker. Every bully sooner or later gets exposed for the weakling that he is. Looking weak can be dangerous because it requires escalatory behaviour to prove strength. I shudder to think what that may mean with trump. As it stands, because he threatens so much, there is a danger of not taking his threats seriously. What is the most powerful person on the planet willing to do to get his credibility back? Trump may pick up a few easy wins, like he did with Columbia this week (hardly a 'win' really). But his wins are our losses. They mean an America no one trusts, an America without respect, and that results in a weaker international order, a less safe, less peaceful, less prosperous, less cooperative world. 

Sunday, January 26, 2025

Missing The Point

Once again the mainstream media is missing the point of the January 6th pardons. All the outrage is directed at the hypocrisy of Trump and his GOP ‘law and order party’ enablers giving a get out of jail free card to the people who violently attacked and injured the Capitol police - when they say they support ‘the men and women in blue.’ Fact is no one much cares about hypocrisy in politics anymore. They’re all hypocrites, some more than others. The point isn’t that they attacked the police officers. The point is that they attacked the Capitol. The police were unfortunately standing in the way. This was trump’s assault on lawmakers and democracy. Like all autocrats he was showing that he rules, not them, and sending a violent mob against them was designed to send that message. That’s the point. He’s the law, not them.

Another thought: The paradigm of left-right politics is no longer relevant. 

Most mainstream commentators are still operating within the left-right analytical framework. Those are their terms of referral. They see trump as the vanguard of right-wing anti-woke, anti-DEI efforts, and a reactionary against the far-left identity politics agenda. Trump is actually the product of identity politics, and takes it to its maximalist (and sometimes absurd extremes ie. renaming the Gulf of Mexico.) Trump thinks only in terms of identity as expressed through labelling and branding. His discourse is based on reducing people to single (most often false) characteristics, especially if they are rivals or opposition. The simplicity of it is politically appealing to a lot of people. His base of support are wholly committed to their identities, usually white, Christian, and evangelical (but he also has a strong base of support within orthodox Jewry). Right versus left politics implies ideological differences. There is no ideology or principle with trump (except personal self-interest). He is prepared to do or so anything at any moment if he thinks it will benefit him. He uses buzz words as emotional triggers, for example 'radical leftist' but it carries no substantive ideological meaning, which is why contradiction and hypocrisy is pervasive in his rhetoric. 'Radical-left' simply means 'the enemy'. The point is that the ideological basis of political discourse is not relevant. We live in a moment of hyper-identity politics and trump's ascension is emblematic of it, not counter to it. The irony is that it's increasingly looking like trump's radical identity politics will be responsible for pushing the Democrats away from their type of identity politics, and back to the center. 

Clean White Shirt

CLICK HERE TO HEAR THE SONG


You know me better than anyone,

I can't forgive you.

You say I have no sense of fun,

I tell you that I do.


I two-step on the edge of the roof,

You call me down before I get hurt.

I tell you I need a better view,

And a clean white shirt.


I admit I'm no Bob Dylan,

Just a second-hand fill in,

My back is just kill'n,

In my head there's a drill'n,

But this ride is still thrill'n,

And together we'll be chill'n,

If you're will'n, baby,

If your will'n.


I see the fire of dragons in the sky,

The snakes crawling in our attic.

Every day that we're alive, 

There's always something more dramatic.


Messages inscribed on subway faces,

Futures will be foretold.

Secrets kept in hidden places, 

Anguish waiting to take hold.


I admit I'm no Bob Dylan,

Just a second-hand fill in,

My back is just kill'n,

In my head there's a drill'n, 

But this ride is still thrill'n,

And together we'll be chill'n,

If you're will'n, baby,

If your will'n.

Tuesday, January 21, 2025

The Second Gilded Age

Turns out MAGA 2.0 stands for Make America (another) Gilded Age. If you don't know what the Gilded Age refers to look it up. In sum, the most corrupt rule by oligarchs in American history (until now). Surrounded by an exclusive coterie of billionnaire backers in the Capitol building that his less-well-off supporters desecrated 4 years earlier, Trump took the oath of office, one hand in the air, and the other which was supposed to be on the (Lincoln) bible, hanging down by his side and out of view (probably with fingers crossed). It was the perfect image for the moment, and coda to the events of 4 years ago - a physical desecration of the place capped off with a verbal desceration of the oath of office. He's back to complete the process of destruction.   

America voted for it. 

After taking office Trump immediately pardoned over 1000 Jan. 6 rioters, an estimated 600 who were convicted for violent acts with weapons. With his pardon of Enrico Tarrio and Stuart Rhodes, the leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, both tried and jury-convicted of seditious conspiracy giving them 18 and 20 years in prison, respectively, trump gets the paramilitary brown shirts he's been wanting. The criminals are officially running the justice system.

America voted for it.

Then Trump signed an Executive Order to do away with birthright citizenship, which is guaranteed in the US Constitution. Of course, it won't fly, but it shows where his mind is at. Either he thinks he is the law, or he's above the law (and why shouldn't he think that), or it's all just for show, like renaming the Gulf of Mexico. Probably all three.

America voted for it.

Actually, they voted for lowering the cost of living. At least that's what we've been told. I don't believe it, because they know you can't really vote for that. It's like voting for Mexico to pay for a giant wall on the border. And anyway, inflation has been quelled (trump's policies would actually spur it back on). America voted for the show. The Biden show was boring - as competence, fiscal responsibility and legislative accomplishment usually are. American's want excitement. It's all they really care about. Something to amuse them. Something to keep them watching. It's how they've been conditioned in the last 10 years from pervasive and constant social media. A nation of addicts. A kind of mass-hypnosis has taken hold, and trump is like a Svengali.  

The first Gilded Age, like the Svengali story, ended in tragedy and ruin. I, for one, won't be watching.

Friday, January 17, 2025

Poem Without An End

after Amichai


The wealthy politician

promises the citizens 

to rid the government 

of wealthy elites 

gets elected,

installs wealthy elites

to run the government 

for the benefit 

of wealthy elites,

who run for election

promising 

to rid the government

of wealthy elites

gets elected.

Thursday, January 16, 2025

Hegseth

I'm not watching the Senate confirmation hearings. My sense is that if they get to a hearing (unlike Gaetz) they get confirmed. I did however listen to about 30 minutes of the Hegseth fiasco. Turns out he doesn't know much about being the Secretary of Defense, and didn't bother to do any homework. Take it from a guy who pretty much bullshitted his way through high-school. I can spot a bullshit artist when I see one. Hegseth didn't do the reading. He knows nothing. He's at least as unqualified and as ignorant about the job he seeks as trump was, and still is. And considering that, wouldn't it make sense that he should get confirmed. My lack of interest in these hearings, beside the fact that they're all fait accompli, is that they are made-for-tv events, designed to heighten spectacle. The Democrats are just as guilty for falling into that trap. They mostly attacked Hegseth on moral grounds. Focusing on workplace misconduct, his disrespect for women, and accusations of rape and adultery - and we know how well that worked with trump during the election. The high point was when Tammy Duckworth asked Hegseth if he could name a single nation in ASEAN. Of course he couldn't. These hearings, as all such hearings, are designed to be soap operas that produce viral social media moments. I haven't been interested in soap operas since I was in high-school when General Hospital was popular, and everyone was talking about the romance of Luke and Laura. The viral moment was their wedding. Why was everyone talking about Laura marrying Luke? Because he had raped her. Laura fell in love with her rapist. I can't think of a more appropriate analogy to what's happening in America, whether we're talking about the political fascination America has with adjudicated rapist trump, or the way social media has 'raped' the standards of Americans by holding their attention in its sway. 

Wednesday, January 8, 2025

Trump's plan for Canada - Canada's plan for trump

He’s a blowhard. A bluffer. The worst negotiator ever who telegraphs his every move. The only casino owner in history to lose money. In his first term every political leader took advantage of him. He’s a social media troll. He’s a narcissist who says everything to feed his insatiable need for attention. He says he's going to wage economic war against Canada. Erase the 'fake' border. Canada should be the 51st state. To paraphrase Trudeau, that doesn't have a snowball's chance in constitutional hell - it would have to be ratified by 38 of the 50 states, for one thing. So should we care about Trump's stupid bloviating? Well, we have no choice. So what are our options?

Here are my suggestions to the next Prime Minister, whoever that may be:

Option 1: Simply ignore Donald because everyone knows he's full of shit and not to be taken either literally or seriously. Make contingency plans for retaliatory tariffs in case he's actually dumb enough to follow through. Batten down the hatches until he's gone.  

Option 2: A great idea Donald. After all, we're economically already so integrated and the US does cover our security needs. We're open to having a discussion. What are you offering? Because, I'm sure you agree that, at the very least, it should include a proportionate number of seats in the House and Senate relative to the population, which would make us roughly equal to California. And we know how good that would work out for the GOP.

Option 3: Fuck off Donald. We're not interested in whatever you're proposing. We'll make other plans, including applying to be part of the BRICS economic forum, and opening discussions with China on a security cooperation agreement. 

Option 4 (my favourite): Fuck off Donald, part 2. The new PM, whoever that may be, calls for a North American federation, inviting the governors of the blue states to discuss secession from the United States to join Canada in a new North American federation. On the table would be all the goodies that Canada has to offer that the blue states massively favour, including universal healthcare, universal childcare, universal abortion rights etc.    

I think Option 4 has a good chance of success. Most of the blue states already share our values. And anyway, if the last two World Juniors is any indication, Americans are getting better at hockey and taking in the blue states would certainly help turn Canada back into a global hockey powerhouse.   

Tuesday, January 7, 2025

It's The Communication, Stupid

I'm generallly avoiding political information overload these days. I'm watching, and online following, a lot less punditry. Restricting my informational intake to only a few of the most middle of the road unbiased sources. It's part of my program for the New Year to reevaluate my overall perspective on things. As you may be able to tell I'm also occupying my free time (and mental space) with more creative endeavours, namely learning GarageBand and re-working on my iPhone the songs I've posted into slicker versions that sound better and have added instrumentation. I discovered that my smartphone has the equivalent of the London Philharmonic in it, and a musical recording studio that makes Abbey Road look like Betamax technology.  

But I still do dip into cable news on occasion, and something occurred to me. This business of settling on inflation as the main reason that Biden was so unpopular and ultimately Harris lost the election - the refrain you hear is the price of eggs is all people really care about - is wrong. It's not completely wrong, but it's only part of the story, and actually not the most important part. The pundits are flummoxed by the fact that the Biden economy is by far the best in the world coming out of the pandemic. Jobs are at near-historic highs, wages are rising, and by most meaningful metrics the economy is healthy and chugging along at a good clip. But people aren't seeing it in the grocery aisles, they say. Is there always a direct correlation between high inflation and the electoral fate of the incumbent? The answer is clearly no. There have been times in recent US history when Presidents were reelected during a period of inflation (it was as high or higher under Nixon and Reagan, for instance). Biden's economy has had the advantage of low unemployment, which should be equally important to how people feel - and that's key here, it's how people feel, not what they are experiencing that matters most.

This means that inflation can only be part of the story to how people feel. The most important factor? It's how effectively the President communicates, and the way he connects with the public. Biden was arguably the worst communicator of any President in recent memory, maybe second only to George Bush the first, who was also an extremely accomplished President on paper, and failed to win reelection (notably, Bush's average inflation during his term was a point lower than Biden's). The communication skills of the President, in our day of communication overload, have become the single most important factor determining his (or her, in Harris's case) political fortunes. How well he can break through the noise, and maintain the attention of, and connection to supporters, is determinative. The way the leader shapes the narrative determines how people feel about their lives. People have experienced economic austerity and discomfort in the past, but they have had reason to feel good about the sacrifices they've endured when the leader has successfully given them a vision of the future to adopt. Biden's (and Harris's) greatest failure was that he did not do that. And whatever you may think of trump - and as you know I think very little - he communicated in a way that connected with people on a visceral level and provided a view for the future. It may have been a dystopic future to many of us, but it was a vision of the future nonetheless. He was so effective in his communication, that people were willing to excuse his obvious incompetence, inadequacies, ignorance and criminality.

My hope is that the Democrats understand this point, and take this as the main lesson from the last election. Incidentally, it's just as applicable to Canadian politics. Justin Trudeau's early election success demonstrated it. He was essentially a neophyte politician with charisma and communication skills. Yes, Canadians are tired of the Liberals under Trudeau, as the polls are showing. But Poilievre has vulnerabilities as a communicator few people are noticing because the focus is on the Liberals in disarray. It may be too late for the Liberals to salvage the next election, but choosing a leader who is a superior communicator must be their priority if they are to avoid dropping into a political abyss.    

Thursday, January 2, 2025

A Home

CLICK HERE TO HEAR THE SONG


When I’m alone,

I look for a home.

When I’m home,

I want to be alone.


If I were a river,

I’d want to be a stone.

If I were a stone,

I'd feel that I'm alone.


Draw some lines,

Make up a map.

And hope to God, 

It's not a trap.


Sometimes I'm small,

Other times big.

I love a woman,

And she loves me.


My mind's made up,

I'm gonna settle down.

Choose a nice place,

Survey the ground.


Draw some lines,

Make up a map.

And hope to God,

It's not a trap.


I'll take a walk,

The desert is alive.

It looks to me, 

How I feel inside.


Hot in the sun,  

Cold in the moon.

Quiet at times, 

And dangerous too.  


I come to a mountain,

And start to climb.

Count every step,  

I leave behind.


To a new place,

With a broader view.

Approaching the edge,

To help me see you.


I won't be gone too long,

I won't be gone too long.

Wednesday, January 1, 2025

No One Came

CLICK HERE TO HEAR THE SONG


Had some fun when we were young,

Went to school, played some hoops.

Rock band in the basement, 

Smoked a lot of doobs.


The band was pretty bad,

But we didn't know it.

Aw we had big dreams,

Thought we couldn't blow it.


No one came, no one came.

We played our hearts out

And no one came.

They say it's the road to fortune and fame.

No one came.


Weren't old enough to drink,

Could barely drive a car.

Yeah, we booked our first live gig,

At a local bar.


Mixing board and light show,  

Bouncer at the door.

A forty minute set of songs,

And two ten minute encores.


No one came, no one came.

We played our hearts out,

And no one came.

They say it's the road to fortune and fame.

No one came.


Thanked the fans who didn't come out,

On a night as cold as this. 

For not filling the hall,

Missing the show they couldn't miss.


Yeah we played our second set, 

Really brought the house down.

Thank goodness that it happened,

When no one was around.


No one came, no one came.

We played our hearts out

And no one came.

They say it's the road to fortune and fame.

No one came.


I never will forget,

What I learned that day.

In this life you're playing to no one,

So play it your own way, 

Yeah, play it your own way,

So play it your own way ...


Precious Privacy

Still thinking about My Dinner With Andre…

The movie depicts a private conversation in a public space. I think the setting is centrally important and revealing. It made me consider the politics of our time, this relationship between the public and the private. One of the hallmarks of our times, because of the intrusiveness of social media and the internet, is that the boundary between the public and the private has been largely erased. As the film suggests, I began to think of the way so much of politics nowadays is so excessively performative and based on matters like identity, gender and sexual-orientation that were once considered private. I am thinking about how for my kid’s generation everything is public. Every unformed, inane thought and feeling must be shared, and with very little consideration for how to share it appropriately or respectfully. 

Admittedly, when the boundary between public and private began eroding about 20 years ago, I wasn't sensitive to the possible ramifications. Someone, I think it was my older brother (who was always smarter and more insightful than me) warned about it. He said people aren't seeing how precious their privacy is, and they will pay for their blindness dearly. My brother was thinking mostly about the dangers of identity theft. But his instinct for peril was on target. I began to grasp how profoundly our privacy was being impacted after watching the must-see documentary film The Social Dilemma. It expounded on how the ubiquitous devices that we all carry around 24/7 and rely on for so many decisions that we make every day were brainwashing us and manipulating our behaviour. The algorithms were designed to get us addicted and make us adopt extreme and intolerant world views. I understand now that what they were describing was essentially the consequences of the obliteration of the boundary between public and private space.

My kids think it cute when I recount nostalgically about a time when people kept their thoughts, feelings and experiences mostly to themselves. How in those days they didn't photograph their meals before eating them. They simply ate, and enjoyed the fleeting experience of consumption privately while it lasted. I tell them how people experienced special times with family and friends, not as occasions for documentation and publication, but as special moments to relish, and sometimes to photograph and put in an album so that it could be remembered privately later on. I tell them that I've learned in the last 10 years or so that the most unexpectedly precious commodity - something that has been assaulted to the point where their generation has abandoned it completely to their detriment and not even realized the consequences - is privacy. Understandably, they have no idea what I mean. This is our generation gap. It ain't sex, drugs and rock and roll, like with our parents. 

There used to be a fascination with exhibitionists and voyeurs as a kind of fetishism. Movies were made about it. Now we are all exhibitionists and voyeurs. In my Dinner With Andre the audience is meant to be eavesdropping, the intention being to give a taste of the main course of the subject matter on the menu ie. whether we are watching a public performance or a private exchange of ideas and feelings. The question of the boundary between the private and the public must still be asked, only the stakes are much higher now. Performance as an everyday part of life has become the norm and engrained to a level the companions in My Dinner With Andre could not have anticipated. I mentioned the movie to my daughter who did a degree in Fine Arts. She immediately understood what I was talking about, having taken university courses that focused on the performative aspects of identity and gender. What she couldn't grasp was the possibility that there was an alternative. I said that I thought a person's happiness depended on their ability to nourish and protect their privacy, which is the foundation of their sense of authenticity. She said she thought that everyone was putting on a public act all the time. The question, I said, is whether it was by choice or habit. She said that at this point, for most of the people she knew, she couldn't say.