Skip to main content

Ron Paul’s commentary on the Boston bombing

By Joe Cillo

Liberty  Was Also Attacked in Boston

 by Ron Paul

 

Forced lockdown of a city.  Militarized police riding tanks in the streets. Door-to-door armed searches without warrant. Families  thrown out of their homes at gunpoint to be searched without probable cause.  Businesses forced to close. Transport shut down.

These were not the scenes  from a military coup in a far off banana republic, but rather the scenes just  over a week ago in Boston as the United States got a taste of martial law. The  ostensible reason for the military-style takeover of parts of Boston was that  the accused perpetrator of a horrific crime was on the loose. The Boston bombing  provided the opportunity for the government to turn what should have been a  police investigation into a military-style occupation of an American city. This  unprecedented move should frighten us as much or more than the attack  itself.

 

What has been sadly  forgotten in all the celebration of the capture of one suspect and the killing  of his older brother is that the police state tactics in Boston did absolutely  nothing to catch them. While the media crowed that the apprehension of the  suspects was a triumph of the new surveillance state – and, predictably, many  talking heads and Members of Congress called for even more government cameras  pointed at the rest of us – the fact is none of this caught the suspect.  Actually, it very nearly gave the suspect a chance to make a getaway.

The “shelter in place” command imposed by the governor of Massachusetts was lifted before the suspect  was caught. Only after this police state move was ended did the owner of the  boat go outside to check on his property, and in so doing discover the  suspect.

No, the suspect was not  discovered by the paramilitary troops terrorizing the public. He was discovered  by a private citizen, who then placed a call to the police. And he was  identified not by government surveillance cameras, but by private citizens who  willingly shared their photographs with the police.

As journalist Tim Carney wrote  last week:

“Law enforcement in Boston  used cameras to ID the bombing suspects, but not police cameras. Instead,  authorities asked the public to submit all photos and videos of the finish-line  area to the FBI, just in case any of them had relevant images. The surveillance  videos the FBI posted online of the suspects came from private businesses that  use surveillance to punish and deter crime on their  property.”

Sadly, we have been conditioned to  believe that the job of the government is to keep us safe, but in reality the  job of the government is to protect our liberties. Once the government decides  that its role is to keep us safe, whether economically or physically, they can  only do so by taking away our liberties. That is what happened in  Boston.

Three people were killed in  Boston and that is tragic. But what of the fact that over 40 persons are  killed in the United States each day, and sometimes ten persons can be killed in  one city on any given weekend? These cities are not locked-down by paramilitary  police riding in tanks and pointing automatic weapons at innocent  citizens.

This is unprecedented and  is very dangerous. We must educate ourselves and others about our precious civil  liberties to ensure that we never accept demands that we give up our  Constitution so that the government can pretend to protect us.

 

April  29, 2013

Palo Alto Players stages “Miss Saigon”

By Judy Richter

“Miss Saigon,” a musical theater updating of Giacomo Puccini’s opera “Madama Butterfly,” moves the action from 19th centuryJapanto 20th centuryVietnam. The names and setting differ, but the plot is similar.

Palo Alto Players has undertaken this challenging, ambitious work in a mostly successful production directed by Patrick Klein.

“Miss Saigon” starts in its namesake city in April 1975, shortly before South Vietnam’s fall to the communist Viet Cong. A weary U.S. Marine, Chris (Danny Gould), meets a shy, virginal, 17-year-old Vietnamese bar girl, Kim (Katherine Dela Cruz). They fall in love during a brief affair, but Kim is left behind when U.S.personnel are hastily evacuated from the city before it’s overrun by the enemy.

Three years later, Chris and his American wife, Ellen (Lindsay Stark), return toVietnam after learning that he has fathered Kim’s son. The visit, just like Pinkerton’s in the opera, ends tragically.

Like the opera, most of this musical is sung. There’s little spoken dialogue. Moreover, it’s not always clear what’s happening if one isn’t familiar with this show or the opera. Hence, precise diction becomes vitally important, but this production sometimes falls short in that department. Compounding the problem is Jon Hayward’s sound design, which was problematic in seats on the far right close to the front.

The standout performer is Brian Palac as the Engineer, a pimp with an uncanny ability to survive and a strong desire to get to the United States. He has the show’s big production number, “The American Dream.” Stark as Chris’s wife is the most assured singer among the women. Dela Cruz is believable as Kim, who’s steadfast in her love for Chris.

Gould tries too hard as Chris and pushes himself vocally, usually singing too loud. His best friend, John, is well portrayed by Adrien Gleason.

Jennifer Gorgulho’s choreography is outstanding, especially in the militaristic “The Morning of the Dragon” and the Engineer’s “The American Dream.” The set, though not nearly as spectacular as the original Londonproduction or the touring production in San Francisco, works well, as do the costumes by Shannon Maxham and lighting by Edward Hunter. Musical director Matthew Mattei conducts four instrumentalists from the keyboard.

“Miss Saigon” was created by composer Claude-Michel Schönberg and lyricist Alain Boublil (with Richard Maltby Jr.), the pair behind the earlier “Les Miserables.” It became a huge hit after it premiered inLondon in 1989, when the Vietnam War was still fresh in the memories of most adults. Now it’s history to the PAP cast and to younger people in the audience.

Still, the show and this production capture some of the human costs of that war.

 

A HOME LIKE NO OTHER

By Joe Cillo

BEST DIGS EVER

If you want total security, go to prison…..
Dwight D. Eisenhower

I have always wanted to be daring and do something absolutely outrageous…but the truth is I fear the punishment.  I have read horror stories of what happens in prisons: brutality, rape, lousy plumbing…and I want none of it.  However, I am in the unenviable position of losing my house because it is under water and I am looking around for affordable housing for my declining years.  Unfortunately, the only shelter that is “affordable” for me on my pension is a used Yurt in the Andes or an abandoned cave in New Mexico.

Imagine my delight when I discovered the Maconochie Center, a prison in Canberra, Australia specifically designed to pamper lawbreakers with so much smother love that they realize the only way to have little fun is to obey the law and get out on parole.  The philosophy at Maconochie is that if you give love, you will receive it. I think that is a wonderful attitude.  It didn’t work for me with my two husbands, but it has been overwhelmingly successful with my dog.

The “guards” at the prison (called service providers) refer to the inmates as customers and do their best to give the darlings in their care whatever will make them feel wanted and secure.    If one of their customers is feeling a bit depressed, why not cheer him up with a couple gin and tonics, a shot of heroin and a little sniff of cocaine.  Whatever works as they say in the trade.

The residents at Maconochie Center live together in five bedroom cottages.  There is never a problem if a rapist cannot get along with the guy who strangled his baby.  Maconochie Center has mediators on call to help the boys (you KNOW they are boys) settle their differences.  Perhaps one of them needs a long walk in the country…where there are willing sheep?  Perhaps the other needs apple pie a la mode?  Who knows?  The staff at the center are there to help.

It sounds like a very fun place to live for me.   All I would have to do is grow a bit of cannabis in my yard before my foreclosure and sell it in a schoolyard.  If I wanted to be certain I could stay at this lovely place for the rest of my life (and after all, I am 80 years old.  How long can that be?)  I would have to toss someone around screaming “I am going to kill you!”  My mother said that to me often enough.  I know I can be convincing.  The good news is that I don’t actually have to plunge the knife into anyone’s heart…all I need to do in Australia is make the judge believe I really meant to do the deed.

The weather in Canberra is perfect for me.  You get four seasons, none too hot or too cold and at Maconochie there are endless opportunities to explore the outdoors.  I can use my computer at all hours and if I have a severe pain, I can get a prescription strong enough to use for recreation after the pain has disappeared.  But the best news of all is that there has been a rash of pregnancies at the center since it opened.  Why, I could finally have that baby I always wanted and not have to worry about dealing with the little sweetheart when it becomes a teenager.  By that time I will be long gone and the Maconochie service providers can take over.

 

 

The Artist and the Model — Film Review

By Joe Cillo

The Artist and the Model

Directed by  Fernando Trueba

 

 

This film is very similar to the film, Renoir, that I reviewed here a couple of weeks ago.  I wonder if they borrowed the script?  An aging artist (Jean Rochefort), who isn’t named, is sitting out the war (World War II in this case) in a placid pastoral landscape.  He meets up with a gorgeous young girl (Aida Foche) who becomes his model.  The girl spends a lot of her time on screen naked, which really makes the film.  Some young girls bodies are so compelling that you can just look at them for hours and hours without losing interest.  They have a mesmerizing quality about them that just won’t let go.  Foche has that, and that is what keeps this film alive.  Because there is not a whole lot going on.  Watching somebody sketch and sculpt and walk through the country meadows can wear out after a fairly short time.  But Foche’s nude body does not.

There is a lot of silence in this film, which I liked.  It gives you a chance to think about the characters and what is going on.  Unfortunately, that is not a lot.  The script is not as well constructed nor is the story line as interesting as Renoir.  Nor is the conversation as stimulating and as thought provoking.  By every measure this film is inferior.  So if you only have enough money to attend one of these, make it Renoir.  I would have said it is a good film, interesting to watch, although mostly devoid of action and rather slow moving, but the ending made me mad at the director and the screen writer.  It made absolutely no sense.  It completely nullified everything that had been established about the character throughout the film.  I took it as a gesture of futility on the part of the filmmakers.  They didn’t know what else to do, so they trashed the whole movie, their lead character, and everything the film had set out to do.  Were they so dissatisfied with what they did that they decided to turn it into Romeo and Juliet?  It’s utter nonsense.

The film is in black and white.  In French with subtitles.  Seen at the San Francisco International Film Festival, Sundance Kabuki Cinema, April 28, 2013.

A personal look at PILGRIMS MUSA AND SHERI IN THE NEW WORLD playing on Center Rep’s Off Center stage

By Kedar K. Adour

Gabriel Marin & Rebecca Schweitzer in Pilgrims Musa and Sheri in the New World at Off Center Rep

PILGRIMS MUSA AND SHERI IN THE NEW WORLD: By Yussef El Guindi and Directed by Michael Butler. CENTER REP on the intimate Knight Stage 3 Theatre. Lesher Center for the Arts 1601 Civic Drive in downtown Walnut Creek. www.CenterREP.org or call 925.943.SHOW (7469). April 27 through May 12, 2013

A personal look at PILGRIMS MUSA AND SHERI IN THE NEW WORLD playing on Center Rep’s Off Center stage.

Center Rep’s production of Pilgrims Musa and Sheri in the New World under Michael Butler’s provocative staging/direction is well worth a trip to the Lesher Center in Walnut Creek. For this play Butler is the scenic designer as well as the director putting his very personal stamp on Yussef El Guindi’s very personal play that won the 2012 Steinberg Award as the best American play that had not been produced on Broadway. It is playing at the intimate 130 seat Off Center ‘black box’ theatre where the audience becomes drawn into the action.

For this reviewer, the play brought back very personal memories. Both my parents were immigrants to America from Greater Syria that was divided into Lebanon and Syria after World War I.  He met my mother, the youngest of three sisters, who ran a boarding house in Upstate New York in 1911 and eloped with her on his motorcycle. The fact that he was a Muslim, though non-practicing, and she was a Catholic was as great a dichotomy as that between non-practicing Muslim-Egyptian Musa and white American waitress Sheri who elope in his taxi cab.

Although I have given away the penultimate scene it will in no way detract from the convoluted love story that is infused with modern day, post 9/11, angst of assimilation of Arab immigrants into American culture. In one scene, a dream sequence, a secondary character Abdallah (Dorian Lockett), a Sudanese Muslim, gives thanks for the American opportunities for success that led to his financial independence. When I offered to take my successful truck farmer father, whose name was Abdul(lah), back for a visit to Syria, his response, in colorful Arabic, suggested I was crazy because he was now an American.

Back to the play. Although the ancillary cast of Lena Hart, Carl Lumbly and Dorian Lockett are fine actors, the evening belongs to Rebecca Schweitzer as Sheri and Gabriel Marin as Musa.  She is a ditzy chatter-box waitress who accepts an invitation to visit Musa’s walk-up apartment knowing full well that sex should be the ultimate end of the evening. Schweitzer is a whirl-wind of insecurity as she prattles on and on about her past experience with abusive boyfriends, an alcoholic mother and inner emotional turmoil.  Marin as a young Egyptian-American taxi driver with his own insecurities is the perfect foil for Schweitzer with his minimalist verbal responses and expressive facial movements to her inane chatter.

It is a love story with political-social implications that are woven adroitly, but not seamlessly into the text. Musa is torn between his potential marriage to his fiancée Gamila (Lena Hart) and a life of oppressive sameness stifling his desire for change. Gamila an intellectual woman thoroughly integrated into the American dream but is willing to accept the customs of Arab culture where elders plan the future of their children.

Carl Lumbly is superb as Somali Tayyib, Musa’s best friend who makes a living illegally selling luggage on the street. El Guindi has given Tayyib the words explaining the devastating effects of cultural differences of a match between Musa and Sheri that can only lead to disaster. He has personally experienced such a disaster. This fact is emphasized in a poignant last scene between Tayyib and Gamila.

You may not cheer when El Guindi’s pilgrims head off in his taxi to uncertain adventure but you will wish them best of luck because they are in love. Running time is just under two hours with and intermission.

Kedar K. Adour, MD

Courtesy of www.theatreworldinternetmagazine.com

Blackfish — Film Review

By Joe Cillo

Blackfish

Directed by Gabriela Cowperthwaite

 

 

I have never been to SeaWorld, and I’ve never had any desire to go there.  It always seemed to me like shallow entertainment which gives people the wrong impression of orcas in particular, and the relationship between humans and the animal kingdom in general.  This film starts to set things in the right relationship.

It is a documentary about SeaWorld, the whales that perform in their shows, the trainers that train them, and whether or not it makes sense to be doing this.  The impetus and center of gravity of the film is the death of trainer Dawn Brancheau, who was killed on February 24, 2010, by Tillikum, a 12,000 pound male orca at SeaWorld, Orlando, Florida.  Brancheau was 40 years old and a senior trainer who knew Tillikum well and was comfortable with him.  SeaWorld blames Brancheau for the mishap, but Tillikum had killed at least two other humans prior to Brancheau, and he also had a history of maltreatment, not only at SeaWorld, but also before he came to SeaWorld from Sealand of the Pacific in Victoria, Canada.  The film explores all of this material in great detail.  It is well documented and accentuated with interviews with former trainers who know Dawn Brancheau, and who provide much background and insight into the world of training orcas, the relationships of the trainers to the whales, and the conditions the whales are forced to live under at SeaWorld.  Did Dawn Brancheau make a mistake that cost her her life, or was this a ticking time bomb destined to go off sooner or later?  You decide.

The film makes the case that it is not such a good idea to be keeping these huge animals in the cramped quarters of the SeaWorld pools, separated from their natural social connections, and it is even less prudent to be letting young trainers, who don’t really have a clue what they are getting into, to swim into a tank with these powerful undomesticated animals.

How do you think a behemoth like Tillikum gets to be 12,000 pounds?  Not by eating potato chips in front of his TV.  These animals are top predators.  There are good reasons why they are called “killer” whales.  There is one dramatic sequence in the film of several whales attacking a seal that is stranded on an ice floe.  The whales work together to tip the ice floe enough that the seal is toppled into the water.  Once that happens, it is all over for the seal in seconds.  It seems to me that this is the truth that people — including children — should see about these whales.

There is a video on YouTube of a man clowning on a beach at the water’s edge.  Two orcas creep up on him right at the shoreline, knock him down, and devour him in seconds right before your very eyes.  Some people think the video is fake.  It shows you how strong is this will to believe in the benign nature of fierce predatory animals.  Perhaps it is a way of denying our own vulnerability and how quickly we can be snuffed out and disappear at the hands — or rather jaws — of natural enemies.  But this sort of thing goes on in the animal kingdom all the time every day.  An animal can be placidly going about his business, and suddenly, without warning, be beset and completely devoured within seconds.   It is a discomfiting thought which we would prefer to dispel, how sudden our lives can be snuffed out by powerful predators, who don’t really hate us, they just want to consume us.  It’s nothing personal.  Just as it is nothing personal when we raise chickens, or pigs, or cattle on factory farms in minimal conditions feeding them just enough to get their weight to a certain point in an optimal number of days at which time they will be abruptly and unceremoniously slaughtered.  You don’t stew about that when you sit down and enjoy a sumptuous steak in a fine restaurant, do you?  Predators cannot afford to be sentimental about the animals they must kill in order to survive and thrive.  The orcas did not feel sorry for that seal they toppled from the ice floe, nor for the man they probably mistook for a seal on the beach.  Rather than dwell on that unsettling thought that these animals in their natural habitat would kill us in a moment, we turn them into friendly teddy bears, companions who can communicate with us and be friends with us.  Denial is a first line defense against anxiety.

The film does not mention the parent corporation of Seaworld (which used to be Anheuser-Busch until it was sold to the Blackstone Group in 2009).  It is now called Seaworld Entertainment Inc., which is 63% owned by Blackstone.  The Blackstone Group is a multi-billion dollar private equity firm based in New York City, with offices around the world.   Just this week Blackstone held an initial public offering of Seaworld Entertainment stock.  According to the Wall Street Journal the stock went up 24% on the first day of trading (Wall Street Journal, April 22, 2013).  After this film circulates I wonder how well the stock will do?

Blackstone cares about making money, and they’re making a lot of it on Seaworld.  They don’t particularly care about the trainers at Seaworld, much less the orcas.  They refused to be interviewed for this film or make any comment about its findings.  This is an entertainment business that sells illusions.  Illusions are strongly held beliefs or viewpoints that are in contradiction to facts or conditions that should be obvious.  They reflect a human need to see things in a certain way in order to allay anxiety, to provide a consoling view of life that offers comfort or a feeling of security.

The illusion in this case is the belief that the natural world is a benign place where humans are in control and living in harmony with the other creatures in nature: that orcas, who are top predators in the wild, are actually benign, friendly, good natured companions to humans who can be domesticated to behave like entertaining pets.  However, this illusion is starting to wear a little thin and fray around the edges.  In order to maintain it, much truth has to be concealed, downplayed, and outright falsified, which the film documents very effectively.

The Seaworld trainers seem to be goodhearted, but naive, young people who have very little background in orca behavior or ethology, but are possessed of the illusion that you can get into a tank of water with a 12,000 pound captive whale that lives by killing, make him do all kinds of ridiculous things that he would never do in the wild, and be perfectly safe.  People want to believe that they can be friends with their natural enemies, that the most fearsome predators can be tamed and transformed into loving companions.  Yes, the animals have personalities, they have intelligence, they have a complex social life, they have sophisticated ways of communicating among themselves.  Some people seem surprised and charmed to discover this.  But it doesn’t mean you can be friends with them.  They cannot be a substitute for wholesome, loving human companionship.  The captive environment is very artificial and the animals understand their dependence on their human handlers in this extraordinarily unnatural situation.

The film points to a record of at least 70 incidents where killer whales have attacked their human trainers and several where the trainers have been killed.  Seaworld consistently blames the trainers, saying they made errors which led to the attacks.  In some cases this was true, but on the other hand, you don’t have a lot of margin with killer whales, and it is also true that the whales are kept under inhumane conditions and often treated badly, which, over time, probably builds up a lot of rage and resentment.  Sometimes the whales reach a point where they decide enough is enough.

The film brings to light a lot of unsavory conditions in an inherently perilous enterprise that SeaWorld would prefer to keep under wraps, and which they have done pretty successfully for many years.  This speaks to the power of this illusory phantasm of the benign natural world in the public imagination.  People want to take their kids to this grandiose spectacle and be dazzled by huge powerful animals cavorting to entertain human audiences pleased with themselves to have subdued and dominated these breathtaking creatures.  But it is insipid and barbaric.  It gives kids the wrong message about the relationship between humans and animals and it gives them a very wrong impression about killer whales.   Don’t go to Seaworld.  Watch this film instead.  Seen at the San Francisco International Film Festival, Sundance Kabuki Cinema, April 27, 2013.

 

LOVE ME LOVE MY DOG

By Joe Cillo

MY FAMILY, MY DOG

There is no psychiatrist in the world
Like a puppy licking your face.
Ben Williams

When Daphne sits on my lap, my blood pressure drops 30 points.  Why bother with Lipitor?  Daphne is not dispensed to me by a pharmacist although she is definitely good medicine. She is a five-pound Chihuahua with blue eyes and an attitude.  However, when she sits on MY lap, her blood pressure elevates…and no wonder.  She is at work; she is doing her job.

Daphne’s mother dresses her in high fashion: ruffled skirts with matching knickers and booties, a warm hoodie to wear when she and her mum are on the slopes and a bright strawberry vest to welcome spring.

Daphne has a stubborn anal gland that does not process her food properly and her mother has spent hundreds, nay, thousands of pounds on Daphne’s alimentary canal, to no avail.  At last, her mother resorted to holistic remedies and feeds Daphne a nightly soupcon of pumpkin and rice to soothe her aching bottom.

Daphne is well aware of her privileged position in the family.  She dines with us at our table.  We do not consider her germs as lethal as those of her former daddy or all her cousins…some with four legs, some with only two.   We all know her preferences and we do our best to keep her as happy as her presence makes us.  She does not like the rain; she considers walking on the other end of a leash demeaning; she loves to watch movies and never so much as woofs lest she disturb the others watching with her.  We know that Daphne is absorbing the action on the screen because she often weeps at a sad ending, and she still wails when she remembers what happened to poor Jackie Robinson.

We who know and love Daphne think she is unique but it appears that she is no different than any other dog in any other home anywhere in the world.  One look at her stimulates human oxytocin, a bonding hormone that increases our trust and attachment to those close to us and makes us suspicious of strangers.  The fact is that the longer Daphne stares at me, the more I love her and want to shoot that yapping little dachshund next door. This explains why we think nothing of spending half our wages on Daphne’s attire, rushing her to a doctor at the slightest hint that she is not in perfect health even as we ignore our own coughs, tummy spasms and exploding lungs. She is far more than part of our family…she is the very adhesive that keeps us together. For, although we all  have spats with one another over toilet seats left up or down, toothpaste tubes squeezed wrong and dishes unwashed, we all unite in our love for Daphne.  It is she who keeps us human.

Dogs are miracles with paws.
Susan Kennedy

SIDEBAR ONE:

Percy is a Corgi without a tail.  He stares at me with the same intensity Jewish men look at me.  You know: something is missing and he doesn’t remember how he lost it.  The interesting thing is that the more Percy stares at me, the more I adore him.  I cannot say the same for Jewish men.

SIDEBAR TWO:

Dorothy is a shih’ Tzu with a raging metabolism. When she sits on your lap, you can feel the heat of her tiny little body warm you right to your toes. When her blood pumps through her veins and burns her calories you will swear the house is on fire.  Dorothy’s mother says she has saved 1000 pounds a year on heating bills and her only cost is dog food.  That, after all, is Dorothy’s fuel and it is a lot cheaper than petrol.

Fringe of Marin Festival of Original One-Act Plays, Dominican University of California San Rafael

By Greg & Suzanne Angeo

Reviewed by Suzanne and Greg Angeo

Current “Fringe” Offers the Ridiculous and the Sublime 

The Fringe of Marin Festival is celebrating its 31st season, the first without its spirited founder and artistic director Annette Lust, who passed away in February at age 88. She often referred to the Fringe – with great affection – as her “peanut stand”. It was, and is, so much more than that.

The Fringe was founded by Dr Lust nearly 20 years ago to give local writers, actors and directors the chance to try out their original work in an informal setting.  Produced by the Dominican University Community Players and performed by actors of all ages, races and ethnicities, nothing is off-limits:  comedy, drama, slapstick, cerebral musings, political rants. The one-act plays are presented in a converted lecture hall with a rudimentary stage and very simple props. Many plays are clearly works in progress, only partly successful, but you can see the germination of something truly wonderful in many of the offerings. In 2004, the Bay Area Theatre Critics Circle gave the Dominican Players a special award for excellence in staging the Fringe of Marin during the ten years of Festivals it had presented by that time.

Although Dr Lust was small in size, she left some very big shoes to fill. Her formidable legacy has been handed down to two very courageous colleagues who are determined to carry the baton – to Mount Olympus, if necessary. Dominican University alumnus Gina Pandiani is the dynamic new Managing Director. She is passionate about the Fringe’s mission of presenting diverse and cutting-edge work. Pamela Rand, a talented graduate of Ecole Jacques Lecoq, the acclaimed school of theatre movement and mime in Paris, is the new Production Manager. She shares her gift of physical comedy in one of this season’s productions.

The Spring 2013 Festival features 14 one-act plays evenly divided between two 90-minute programs.  All manner of subjects are explored: from the demise of the U.S. Postal Service to the siege of Leningrad during WWII; from a madcap send-up of Sid Caesar’s 1950s TV show to an adaptation of a Chekhov classic. There’s song and dance, dumpster diving and a magic act, too – something to please just about everyone. This season’s efforts may not be quite as edgy or daring as those of earlier days, but there are the usual standouts. “Not Death, But Love”, written by Roberta Palumbo, is a solo piece delivered by Molly McCarthy as Elizabeth Barrett Browning. McCarthy displays amazing imagination through her vivid yet controlled expressions. “The Wreck”, another solo, is a cleverly creative adaptation of the poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and is performed by Deanna Anderson, who is also the writer. Anderson weaves memories of her own childhood into her performance, making for a unique and moving piece. “Here’s Your Life” is a cavalcade of craziness. This homage to Sid Caesar has eight performers displaying perfectly-honed comic timing, led by Pamela Rand as the hapless but agile lead character, Susannah P. Metcalf. Rand is also the play’s co-writer, with Stacy Lapin. Some alarming acrobatics will have you on the edge of your seat.

The primary appeal of the Fringe is that you never quite know what to expect. The programs present a mixed bag of quality ranging from the groan-inducing to polished professionalism. The Fringe of Marin was and remains a worthy undertaking, but it faces an uncertain future. Its current home at Meadowlands Hall, which was built in 1888 as the DeYoung family’s summer estate, must be closed soon so it may finally receive a much-needed renovation. The Fringe will relocate to the much larger space at Angelico Concert Hall, and it remains to be seen if it can find the necessary storage space for important props and equipment. The Fringe of Marin has a storied history in Bay Area theatre, and deserves to carry on with the tradition of giving budding theatre professionals a laboratory in which to conduct their novel, and entertaining, experiments.

When: Now through May 5, 2013

7:30 p.m. Fridays and Saturdays

2 p.m. Sundays

Tickets: $5 to $15

Location: Meadowlands Assembly Hall, Dominican University

50 Acacia Avenue, San Rafael CA
Phone: 415-673-3131

Website: www.fringeofmarin.com

“Jesus Christ Superstar” – City College of SF

By Joe Cillo

1970 album cover for the American musical production.

 

The theatre arts department of City College of San Francisco has done it again,  in fact, it exceeds its previous productions with  Andrew Lloyd Webber and lyricist Tim Rice’s iconic rock opera “Jesus Christ Superstar.”   It literally rocks the house!

Director and choreographer Deborah Shaw and musical director Michael Shahani, worked closely with set designer Patrick Toebe and lighting designer Jeffrey Kelly to create what Shaw described as a “steam punk” atmosphere, enhanced by George Georges sound design of clanking metal and hissing steam.  A metal scaffolding makes up the many-leveled set, backed by what appears to be a wall of thick, heavy, frayed ropes descending from the flies behind a scrim against which an array of psychedelic lights play, often changing colors and pulsing in time to tunes like “What’s the Buzz.”   Shahani’s orchestra can barely be seen behind the scrim, but it’s certainly heard.

The large cast of close to three dozen actors, singers and or dancers consists of students, alumni, and other Bay Area talent.  They are outfitted in Ralph Hoy’s inventive costumes.  He and his staff: Sarah Moss, Julie Wong, Tatiana Prue, and Steve Murray, gives the production a certain 1930s Brechtian look.  Characters such as the Soul Girls, Dancers, and Prostitutes wear short-skirts and blouses of colorful netting with flared sleeves, and low-cut, form-fitting, leather-like and metal studded vests, in the “Xena, Warrior Princess” mode.  Their feet are shod in thick-soled, black, stomper boots fastened with metal buckles.  The Three Angels’ (Natalie Ayala, Kasia Kransnopolska and Holly Labus, who also double as Prostitutes) costumes are augmented with black wings.  The apostles and chorus wear outfits of early 20th century laborers.

After the Overture, black-bearded David Peterson as Judas Iscariot enters, singing “Heaven on Their Minds.”  He wears a long, brown duster over pants and vest;  his long hair in dreads, eyes rimmed in black.  The amazing Peterson is electric, charismatic and passionate, yet, at the same time he allows Judas’s vulnerability and confusion to surface, so that you almost feel sorry for the guy for selling out Jesus.  Peterson’s  voice,  like rough velvet, is strong and full of emotion.

Jesus (Zachary Bukarev-Padlo)  is not the robed, long-haired, bearded sandal-wearing  ethereal being we’re used to seeing, but a sweet-faced guy with a neat goatee and short blonde, wavy hair.  He wears a khaki shirt, jodhpurs, boots, and a strange skewed plaid vest with an over the shoulder strap.    Bukarev-Padlo’s tortured delivery allows us to experience his dilemma as he questions himself and his fate.  Unasked for demands made on him prove too much.

Jenneviere Villegas plays a red-headed Mary Magdalene.  You hear the sweet, plaintive keening of unrequited love  in her voice as she sings, “I Don’t Know How to Love Him.”  Like David Peterson, Villegas, too, shows her vulnerability to and confusion about her feelings for Jesus.

Pilate is played by Ron McCan whose physical disability serves to enhance his role.  He pushes himself from his “throne”/electric chair, moves purposefully across the stage wearing a kind of crown and embroidered robe, singing, “Pilate’s Dream” in which he meets Jesus, singing words that tell of his  guilt for what he’s about to do to him, which he overcomes with his arrogance.

The entire production is remarkable, though some scenes stand out:  One lively scene is of Jesus destroying the temple where drugs are sold, and pimps tout their prostitutes, as the chorus sings, “Temple”;  another- gut-wrenching and dramatic-  is that of lepers costumed in off-white pants and extended sleeved shirts resembling straightjackets, crawling, pulling themselves across the stage, moaning as they confront Jesus, grabbing at him, beseeching him to heal them.  Overwhelmed, he tells them to “heal themselves.”

Act 1 ends with Judas, priests Annas (Kevin Hurlbut), and Caiaphas (David Richardson), and the chorus singing the rousing, “Damned for All Time/Blood Money,” and Judas accepts his 30 pieces of silver.

Priests seem always to be dressed in long black gowns.  Ralph Hoy gets around this  stereotype by outfitting them with multi-lensed eyewear that looks like something out of “The Matrix” (or an optometrist’s office), which are not only inventive, but extraordinary and effectively sinister.

Outstanding actors are David Richardson as  Caiaphas, the head priest.  Richardson intones in his basso profundo, singing with Annas the above number, and with other priests (Joey Alvarado, David Herrera, and Jack Landseadel) “This Jesus Must Die,” and more.   Pablo Soriano gives a believable performance as the wide-eyed, intimidated, burdened apostle, Peter, who denies Jesus in “Peter’s Denial” in a scene with Maid by the Fire (Elizabeth Castaneda), Mary, and old man, and a soldier.   Another is Spencer Peterson as Herod, playing the king as only Spencer Peterson can: as a heavily made up, top-hatted, flamboyant gay dude in tights and a huge brown leather cod-piece straight out of an early Roman comedy.  He dances, prances, and jumps around the cabaret-like set singing, “King Herod’s Song (Try it and See)” with the dancing girls, prostitutes and chorus.

After Judas’s suicide (Judas, Annas, Caiaphas, and the Chorus sing the dirge, “Judas ‘s Death”), he appares to Jesus as a vision in a tuxedo- jacket open revealing his bare chest- black bow tie, and red suspenders.  He, the Soul Girls, Dancers, and Angels dance and sing “Superstar.”    Brilliant!    The staging of Jesus’ crucifixion (“The Crucifixion,” Jesus, Mary, the ‘apostles), is beautiful.  Enhanced by Kelly’s lighting-  light beams fan out behind Jesus like searchlights,  he appears in silhouette, arms out-stretched.

Each actor, including priests, Herod, Pilate, and the apostles play more than one role.  Exceptions are Jesus, Judas, Mary Magdalene, and Caiaphas.   That said, each sprechstimme-singing  or singing actor is believable in his or her role.

One problem with a large cast is ensuring that everyone is invested in the story and its principles.    An audience is aware when this doesn’t happen; it feels it; something is off.  I didn’t sense this at all.  Each actor gives his or her all to make  “Jesus Christ Superstar” a success.  The singing and acting in this production is some of the best I’ve seen in a musical.

April 26-28 are its final performances, so  don’t miss it.

Diego Rivera Theatre on the City College of SF campus, Gennessee @ Judson, or Phelan and Judson. Go to City College of SF website, click on index, scroll down to  Theatre Arts Department current productions for more information.

 

 

Isaac’s Storm — Book Review

By Joe Cillo

Isaac’s Storm:  A Man, A Time, and the Deadliest Hurricane in History. 

By Eric Larson.  New York:  Vintage/Random House.  1999.  pp. 323.

 

 

This is a harrowing story of survival and death during the Galveston Hurricane of 1900.  The book bills it as the deadliest hurricane in history, however the hurricane of 1780, which struck the Western Caribbean during the American Revolution, and Hurricane Mitch of 1998, did cause greater loss of life.  But the Galveston Hurricane of 1900 is right up there among the most deadly with an estimated 8000-12,000 deaths. This book is not only a story of the Galveston Hurricane, but it is also a history of meteorology and hurricane forecasting, a history of the U.S. Weather Service, and a biography of Isaac Cline, the Weather Service’s agent in charge of the Galveston Bureau at the time of the hurricane.

The book is a magnificent accomplishment.  I truly admire it.  It has been scrupulously researched in original sources at the National Archives, the Library of Congress, and the Rosenberg Library of Galveston, many of which have not been touched since they were deposited.  There are detailed footnotes.  It is a gripping narrative with many sub-narratives that interweave, yet do not get in each other’s way.  The style is very readable and draws the reader in and takes hold of you.  What I especially liked was Larson’s ability to create a pervasive tone of ominous foreboding amidst the retelling of rather mundane occurrences.  People blithely went about their daily routine business in Galveston during the days leading up to the hurricane without a clue what was coming.  Small decisions were made that proved fateful.  Minor events, seemingly trivial, contained a hint of menace.  Of course, it is hindsight that enables one to make such a reconstruction.  But there is also the lingering question of whether greater attention had been paid to certain small indicators, might the catastrophe been mitigated?  No one had any concept of the magnitude of what was coming.  There had been storms in Galveston before.  People, including Isaac Cline, constructed their houses on stilts in anticipation of flooding from storms.  They thought they were well prepared.  The problem was they underestimated Nature and the massive power it can unleash.

Many of the lessons of this story will seem familiar and timeless.  The mercilessness and indifference of Nature to the fate of living things and civilization.  Nature truly does not care if we live or die.  We are not being punished, nor are we being cared for, by anything that occurs in Nature.

The power of denial.  There are a number of examples of this throughout the book, but I will single out two.  Isaac Cline observed an interesting phenomena during his first summer in San Angelo, Texas, of 1885 (before he was transferred to Galveston).  It was a long, hot summer on the Texas prairie.  The Concho river was dry and temperatures went as high as 140 degrees.

One evening in mid-August he was walking toward town along his usual route, crossing the footbridge over the riverbed, when he heard a roar from somewhere far upstream.  Not thunder.  The roar was continuous, and got louder.   He saw a carriage carrying a man and a two women descend into the riverbed at a point where wagons and horsemen often crossed.  An escarpment of water that Isaac estimated to be fifteen or twenty feet high appeared beyond the carriage.  Isaac began to run.  The water caught the carriage broadside and ripped it from the soil.  Isaac reached the other side of the riverbed just as the water surged past him, the carriage tumbling like a tree stump in a spring flood.  The wagon passed.  Rescue was impossible.

His heart racing, Isaac looked upstream.  Men had gathered and with their bare hands were plucking fish from the water.  Large fish.  As Isaac walked toward the men, he saw a fish two feet long drift slowly by.  Me moved closer.  The fish did nothing.  He reached for the fish.  It kept still.  Isaac thrust his hands into the water, and two things happened.  He caught the fish; he froze his hands.

It was August in Texas but water had abruptly filled the riverbed and this water was the temperature of a Tennessee creek in January, so cold it paralyzed fish.

But where had the water come from?  Isaac scanned the skies for the rolling black-wool cloud typically raised by blue northers, but saw nothing.

Days later, townsmen recovered the bodies of the carriage driver and his two female passengers.

And a week later, the mystery of the ice-water flood was resolved.

Visitors from the town of Ben Ficklin fifty miles up the Concho came to San Angelo and reported that a monstrous hailstorm had struck about ten days earlier, the day of the flood.  The storm discharged stones the size of ostrich eggs that killed hundreds of cattle and fell in such volume they filled erosion gulches and piled to depths of up to three feet on level ground.  The ice melted quickly.

For Isaac this was explanation enough.  The deadly flood was the downstream flow of flash-melted hail.  He wrote an article on the incident for the weather service’s Monthly Weather Review, edited by Cleveland Abbe.  To Isaac’s “surprise and chagrin,” Abbe rejected the article on grounds it was too far-fetched to be believed.  (pp. 61-2)

Isaac was annoyed at this rejection and went on to document other cases of massive hailstorms across the Great Plains that caused great destruction.  They are not by any means unprecedented.

Another case of denial is exhibited by the U.S. Weather Service’s handling of the storm in its forecasting.  It was a widespread belief among forecasters at the time that all hurricanes followed a curving path from the Caribbean through Florida and then northeast into the Atlantic.  They did not believe it was possible for a hurricane to proceed from Cuba, west toward Galveston — but that was exactly what this hurricane did.  Reports of the storm and forecasts were issued consistent with these false expectations, but contrary to facts on the ground.  The Cuban Weather Service, however, reported accurately on the storm and warned of its danger.  The U.S. Weather Service banned the Cubans from transmitting their reports over telegraph lines to the United States. They enlisted the help of Western Union in this effort.

Willis Moore, acting Secretary of Agriculture at that time, wrote a letter to General Thomas T. Eckert, president of Western Union .

The United States Weather Bureau in Cuba has been greatly annoyed by independent observatories securing a few scattered reports and then attempting to make weather predictions and issue hurricane warnings to the detriment of commerce and the embarrassment of the Government service. . .  I presume you have not the right to refuse to transmit such telegrams, but I would respectfully ask that they be not allowed any of the privileges accorded messages of this Bureau, and that they be not given precedence over other commercial messages. (p. 106)

The Cuban weather raised vigorous opposition to the ban, but they were suppressed.  After the storm, with Galveston in ruins, The Cuban Weather Service’s Julio Jover visited H.H.C. Dunwoody, head of the U.S. Weather Bureau in Cuba, and had a contentious discussion about hurricane prediction.  At one point Dunwoody told Jover

“a cyclone has just occurred in Galveston which no meteorologist predicted.”

Jover, incredulous, paused a moment.  He said, slowly as one might address the inmate of an asylum: “That cyclone is the same one which passed over Cuba.”

“No sir,”  Dunwoody snapped.  “It cannot be; no cyclone ever can move from Florida to Galveston.”  (p. 114)

Although Larson’s book is straightforward history, there are many parallels to contemporary events.  Larson does not draw them, which is to his credit, but it can readily be seen that the mentality and often the methods of bureaucrats and government leaders seem to have a timelessness that transcends historical contexts.

Governments and corporations find it extremely important to control the flow and quality of information about public events.  It is through the selective use of information (or misinformation) that public attitudes and can be shaped and behavior controlled.  It is also how credibility and authority are maintained.  We see this today in the government’s handling of the Boston bombings, 9/11, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Kennedy Assassination, the Lincoln Presidency, and above all in the so-called “War on Terror”, that phantasm of the imagination that has no beginning, no end, and no fixed enemy, except whom the government declares it to be.  It is the ultimate power grab because it does not admit contradiction by any “facts.”  Actually, the facts disappear.  Reality becomes what solely the government declares it to be.  This same pattern can be seen over a hundred years ago in the Galveston Hurricane.

The biggest elephant in this room of denial and dismissal of imminent catastrophe is climate change.  This, I think, gives this book special relevance to events occurring before our eyes today.  We often see today, in the media and in the government, people who refuse to accept, in the face of overwhelming evidence, that the earth’s climate is changing, that it is changing rapidly, that human activity is the cause of the change, and that the consequences are potentially devastating on a scale heretofore unimaginable.  It is very similar to the underestimation that the people of Galveston and the officials of the U.S. Weather Service made before the Galveston Hurricane.  People simply had no concept of the vast destructive potential of Nature and how quickly it could be visited upon them.  We are in that same state of impoverished imagination and blissful denial today before the specter of global warming.  There are some people who know and are trying to sound the warning.  But they are discounted and dismissed.  The scenarios of doom they paint are too fantastic to be credible.  Yet once these forces are unleashed, or rather, once they begin to break upon us, it will be too late and the outcome will be inevitable.

I once shared some of my concerns about this with a friend of mine, explaining to him that San Francisco draws most of its water from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir in the Sierra Nevada mountains.  The pipeline from Hetch Hetchy to San Francisco crosses a number of major geological fault lines, but the concern I was sharing with him was that climate change may make our weather much drier and warmer.  If the Sierra snowpack were to disappear, and the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir were to dry up, where will that leave San Francisco for a water supply?  His response, “Well, I guess we’ll just have to drink Perrier.”

Bureaucratic infighting and turf wars impaired the Weather Service’s functioning and weather forecasting became politicized.  It is worth noting that an important motivation for the improvement in weather forecasting was the military.  Naval fleets were often sunk by storms, and being able to understand and predict weather was important to maintaining military strength and superiority.  President McKinley ordered the creation of the hurricane warning service in the Caribbean on the eve of the Spanish-American War.  “I am more afraid of a West Indian hurricane than I am of the entire Spanish Navy.”  (p. 74)

Once the storm began to break upon the city and people saw they were in real trouble, there were divisions between people over how to respond.  There were sharp differences among family members including Isaac Cline’s over whether to move to a presumably safer location or stay put.  These decisions were fateful.  Many families perished as a consequence of these decisions.  Larson points out an interesting gender divide. Men tended to stand pat and ride out the storm, where women wanted to flee.  Many of these were their last marital arguments.

Much of the book is taken up with dramatic anecdotes of survival and death.  But many larger issues of great interest are also discussed along the way.

One interesting small point that Larson only mentions in passing, but I find worth drawing attention to, is a description of a walk Dr. Samuel Young, Secretary of the Cotton Exchange made the night before the hurricane.

Ahead, Murdoch’s pier blazed with light.  The crests of incoming waves seemed nearly to touch the lamps suspended over the surf.  There would be no nude bathing tonight — unlike other nights, when as many as two hundred men would gather in the waves beyond the reach of the lamps and swim frog-naked in the warm water.  (p. 130)

Apparently, there was a vibrant homoerotic culture in Galveston around the turn of the century.  I wonder how common such gatherings were across the United States at that time, before the suppression of male-male sex became firmly established in the culture?

After the storm there were so many corpses that disposing of them became a major public health issue.  Cremation was a rare practice in 1900, but many bonfires were built across Galveston to burn the many dead bodies from all over the city.  There was racism.  Rumors were spread of black people defiling and robbing the bodies.  Black males were recruited at gunpoint to help load and dump bodies into the ocean for which they were paid in whiskey (p. 239).  But the bodies were not weighted enough and by the end of the day many of the bodies dumped into the ocean were washing back up on the beaches of Galveston.

Larson notes the sources of relief contributions for Galveston.  The State of New York gave the most at more than $93,000.  New Hampshire sent $1.

One of the final chapters details how the spin doctors went to work in the aftermath to influence how the media portrayed the storm to the public and the Weather Service’s handling of it.  A lot of it sounds very familiar.

[Willis] Moore continued to portray the bureau as having expertly forecast and tracked the storm, and credited in particular the West Indies Service. . .   Most U.S. newspapers, unaware of the nuances of the bureau’s performance and inclined in those days to be more accepting of official dogma, adopted Moore’s view.  (p. 252)

Which was in direct contradiction to the facts.

Isaac Cline lost his wife in the storm — arguably in consequence of a decision he made to remain in his house.  The subsequent lives of many of the participants are noted by Larson, which makes for satisfying closure.

Willis Moore wrote at the time “Galveston should take heart, as the chances are that not once in a thousand years would she be so terribly stricken.” (p.272)  But Galveston was hit by hurricanes in 1915, 1919, 1932, 1941, 1943, 1949, 1957, 1961, and 1983.

Toward the end of the twentieth century, meteorologists still considered Galveston one to the most likely targets for the next great hurricane disaster.  Unlike their peers in the administration of Willis Moore, they feared that the American public might be placing too much trust in their predictions.  People seemed to believe that technology had stripped hurricanes of their power to kill.  No hurricane expert endorsed this view.  None believed the days of mesoscale death were gone for good.  The more they studied hurricanes, the more they realized how little they knew of their origins and the forces that governed their travels.  There was talk that warming seas could produce hypercanes twice as powerful as the Galveston hurricane.  (p. 273)

This is the not so subtle message of this book for our time that goes beyond its being a historical narrative or a gripping adventure story.  The conditions created by the warming earth and the warming oceans will eventually bring storms upon us of a much greater destructive scale than we have ever experienced.  People of our time would do well to heed the lessons of the city of Galveston in not being too smug and arrogant against the monumental power of Nature, which can outstrip our imagination for sudden and ruthless destruction.  We like to believe that the world is a congenial place and meant to support our lives.  It does not have to be that way, and it can change in a very short time.  Reading the story of Galveston can help bring that message home for whatever good it might do, and Larson’s account is as powerful and effective a recounting as any that might be done.