I just read this article:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/15/health/main6584353.shtml
It amazes me that people actually bought into Michael Moore's "self-less" propaganda in the form of 2007's 'Sicko'.
Free for the people does not mean better, we should have known this through experiencing mall food court samples or getting crushed sample bags of potato chips in the mail. Not to mention the Heinleinian truism: There's No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.
One of the reasons the UK can (on the surface) support a government-run system is because Americans do most of the dirty work by spending millions of dollars and several decades on R&D for new drugs.
I'll be adding on to this blog post with the more research I do, but as I recall, the CT scan was first developed in England. Today, the U.S leaves the UK in the dust in terms of scanners per capita.
Hopefully, this tragic story will clear the air for proponents of market solutions to health care.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Monday, June 14, 2010
I see (minimal) Changes
‘Changes’, a fourth-annual summer compilation of student written and directed one-act plays debuted at Miami Dade College – Kendall Campus on June 9 and ran until June 13.
Six short plays were presented in about one hour, with a short intermission at the halfway point.
The kitsch of these summer production is that the plays are allegedly united by an overarching theme this year being, naturally, ‘Change’. Last year’s production was ‘Perceptions’ where my own one-act, ‘The Ratchet Men’, opened the show.
The opener for 2010 was a relatively funny little number called ‘Do I Need Therapy’ written by Robert Torres and directed by Maryam Sierki. Ian Vargas played Bob, a Woody Allen-esque neurotic therapy patient decked out in the standard-issue geek regalia of a plaid shirt bound around the carotid artery, easy-fit jeans and black oxfords, topped off with thick horn-rimmed glasses like a misfit Peter Sellers. The piece could have been reminiscent of Dr. Katz: Professional Therapist, had the actor playing Therapist Jim (Jaromir Garcia) been more sardonic and less, well – medicated. In a rapid-fire back and forth, Bob accuses Jim of having assumed his problems and at the end, after tentatively solving his problems with the opposite sex himself, Bob storms out of the office and, following a poorly calculated blink black out, re-enters the office demanding a refund. The ending was weak, but Bob’s onstage energy kept my interest until his final exit. Jim was dry and almost transparent, but not in the way a therapist is paid to be in the off-stage real world.
Next up, was the aptly named ‘Everything Is Not What It Seems’ written by Vania Vieta and directed by Julia Rose Turner. Out of the six, this was potentially the most promising but unfortunately the biggest let down. When Nelson Delgado, an erratic and oddly dressed cop goes to a strip club to investigate a murder, he is greeted by a resident dancer, played by Lyane Capote. Neither characters are named, and rightly so, because they were one-dimensional and advanced absolutely nothing. The stripper asks for cash payment in order to discuss the murder she witnessed, one in which it appeared her John had had a part in. All the money, along with valuable time, is wasted, for the cop gets no information and the audience gets no resolution. After one black out, the agent is seated with his head on his desk and is awakened by the stripper, who is now donning a sweatshirt as opposed to her previous corset and skinny jeans ensemble. The circumstances of the visit aren’t explained or even hinted at with subtext – the pole is still in the room, but the cop is supposedly at his office, or his home. Did the stripper and the cop get hitched? I’m sure this happens all the time, but the audience had no idea. Why was the stripper back in his life after a five-year cold case investigation? The set was confusing, and the story did not end on any note. Harold Pinter was famous for perfecting the incomplete resolution, but this one was just an example of poor writing.
‘The Papi Chulo Effect’ followed. The story dealt with three pink-clad women celebrating an engagement and discussing their experiences with “papi chulos” – essentially, Spanish Don Juans without the charisma. Each of the women take turns telling their own stories, in between shots of Jose Cuervo. How utterly a propos. One of the women is revealed to be dating a “Jew named Abraham” but for good measure at the end of the play, it is also revealed that the favorite and perhaps the only acceptable form of the shape-shifting “papi chulo” is the flamboyant homosexual, personified here with a pink boa and crown thrown in to counteract any suspicions of a P.C deficit.
After the intermission, the audience was greeted to (or subjected to, depending on one’s interpretation) ‘Rabbit Ears and Turtle Shells.’ In the story, Milton, a geeky young man enlists the help of his calm and collected waiter friend Brian in order to win the heart of Marie (Andrea Lopez), a young woman with a wandering eye and overprotective mother whom he knew in high school. After ordering a scotch on the rocks, Marie’s date shows up, thrusting flowers in her face. He orders a scotch, straight up, and runs to the bathroom to splash water on his face, maybe also to count the hairs that grew on his chest. He calls the waiter out for serving him “gasoline” and faints when Marie approaches him and discovers the quasi-Cyrano de Bergerac plot. The play ends with Marie repeating for the third time that the waiter was “cute.” The name of the play didn’t make sense at first, but was explained to me afterward as a rhetorical spin on the fable of the Turtle and the Hare. Why their dominating body parts were included in the title is beyond me, however.
‘Past Imperfect’ was the second non-comedy in the line-up. The plot focuses on a young woman (Tammy Salazar) plagued by her boyfriend’s relentless ability to not listen or tidy up. The boyfriend, played by Carlos Martinez, ignores her concerns with a handheld video game. After two telephone conversations and too many blackout scenes, it is revealed that boyfriend Steven cheated on girlfriend Karla with one of her friends, and Karla kissed another man at a party. In the end, after various conversations with her new beau, Karla walks out on Steven, despite his desperate pleas.
The final play was ‘The Game Show’, directed by Matthew Donovan and written by Jaromir Garcia, was one of the highlights of the production. Ian Vargas returns to the stage as a 1950s style game show host, donning a blazer and jeans combo a la Glenn Beck. Contestants included Lauren, a dim-witted aspiring model and actress who had been recently crowned ‘Miss Chili Cook-Off’ in Kansas City, (that’s in Kansas), a dowdy newlywed, Rick, who lost 20 grand in Vegas and is being egged on by his brash new wife, Tina, to “kick some ass” and make the money back, and Joseph, an apathetic teenager who spends his days watching Youtube videos and couldn’t care less about being on the show, much to the dismay of his overly excited mother Felisha Chang who at one point storms on stage to fix his cowlick. The first game in the contest was ‘Oh God, Not the Face’, in which balls were thrown at the contestants by the matchy-matchy sequined stage girls. Lauren wins the round, but is soon eliminated by Rick and Joseph, who vote her off the proverbial TV island. Two “commercial breaks” separated the rounds, both for cleaning products in order to stay true to 1950s shows like ‘The Name’s the Game’. The interrupted breaks along with the mention of Youtube were a fairly obvious yet fresh and funny anachronism. ‘The Game Show’ was overall the best written and acted of the bunch and a nice way to round-off a lackluster show.
Six short plays were presented in about one hour, with a short intermission at the halfway point.
The kitsch of these summer production is that the plays are allegedly united by an overarching theme this year being, naturally, ‘Change’. Last year’s production was ‘Perceptions’ where my own one-act, ‘The Ratchet Men’, opened the show.
The opener for 2010 was a relatively funny little number called ‘Do I Need Therapy’ written by Robert Torres and directed by Maryam Sierki. Ian Vargas played Bob, a Woody Allen-esque neurotic therapy patient decked out in the standard-issue geek regalia of a plaid shirt bound around the carotid artery, easy-fit jeans and black oxfords, topped off with thick horn-rimmed glasses like a misfit Peter Sellers. The piece could have been reminiscent of Dr. Katz: Professional Therapist, had the actor playing Therapist Jim (Jaromir Garcia) been more sardonic and less, well – medicated. In a rapid-fire back and forth, Bob accuses Jim of having assumed his problems and at the end, after tentatively solving his problems with the opposite sex himself, Bob storms out of the office and, following a poorly calculated blink black out, re-enters the office demanding a refund. The ending was weak, but Bob’s onstage energy kept my interest until his final exit. Jim was dry and almost transparent, but not in the way a therapist is paid to be in the off-stage real world.
Next up, was the aptly named ‘Everything Is Not What It Seems’ written by Vania Vieta and directed by Julia Rose Turner. Out of the six, this was potentially the most promising but unfortunately the biggest let down. When Nelson Delgado, an erratic and oddly dressed cop goes to a strip club to investigate a murder, he is greeted by a resident dancer, played by Lyane Capote. Neither characters are named, and rightly so, because they were one-dimensional and advanced absolutely nothing. The stripper asks for cash payment in order to discuss the murder she witnessed, one in which it appeared her John had had a part in. All the money, along with valuable time, is wasted, for the cop gets no information and the audience gets no resolution. After one black out, the agent is seated with his head on his desk and is awakened by the stripper, who is now donning a sweatshirt as opposed to her previous corset and skinny jeans ensemble. The circumstances of the visit aren’t explained or even hinted at with subtext – the pole is still in the room, but the cop is supposedly at his office, or his home. Did the stripper and the cop get hitched? I’m sure this happens all the time, but the audience had no idea. Why was the stripper back in his life after a five-year cold case investigation? The set was confusing, and the story did not end on any note. Harold Pinter was famous for perfecting the incomplete resolution, but this one was just an example of poor writing.
‘The Papi Chulo Effect’ followed. The story dealt with three pink-clad women celebrating an engagement and discussing their experiences with “papi chulos” – essentially, Spanish Don Juans without the charisma. Each of the women take turns telling their own stories, in between shots of Jose Cuervo. How utterly a propos. One of the women is revealed to be dating a “Jew named Abraham” but for good measure at the end of the play, it is also revealed that the favorite and perhaps the only acceptable form of the shape-shifting “papi chulo” is the flamboyant homosexual, personified here with a pink boa and crown thrown in to counteract any suspicions of a P.C deficit.
After the intermission, the audience was greeted to (or subjected to, depending on one’s interpretation) ‘Rabbit Ears and Turtle Shells.’ In the story, Milton, a geeky young man enlists the help of his calm and collected waiter friend Brian in order to win the heart of Marie (Andrea Lopez), a young woman with a wandering eye and overprotective mother whom he knew in high school. After ordering a scotch on the rocks, Marie’s date shows up, thrusting flowers in her face. He orders a scotch, straight up, and runs to the bathroom to splash water on his face, maybe also to count the hairs that grew on his chest. He calls the waiter out for serving him “gasoline” and faints when Marie approaches him and discovers the quasi-Cyrano de Bergerac plot. The play ends with Marie repeating for the third time that the waiter was “cute.” The name of the play didn’t make sense at first, but was explained to me afterward as a rhetorical spin on the fable of the Turtle and the Hare. Why their dominating body parts were included in the title is beyond me, however.
‘Past Imperfect’ was the second non-comedy in the line-up. The plot focuses on a young woman (Tammy Salazar) plagued by her boyfriend’s relentless ability to not listen or tidy up. The boyfriend, played by Carlos Martinez, ignores her concerns with a handheld video game. After two telephone conversations and too many blackout scenes, it is revealed that boyfriend Steven cheated on girlfriend Karla with one of her friends, and Karla kissed another man at a party. In the end, after various conversations with her new beau, Karla walks out on Steven, despite his desperate pleas.
The final play was ‘The Game Show’, directed by Matthew Donovan and written by Jaromir Garcia, was one of the highlights of the production. Ian Vargas returns to the stage as a 1950s style game show host, donning a blazer and jeans combo a la Glenn Beck. Contestants included Lauren, a dim-witted aspiring model and actress who had been recently crowned ‘Miss Chili Cook-Off’ in Kansas City, (that’s in Kansas), a dowdy newlywed, Rick, who lost 20 grand in Vegas and is being egged on by his brash new wife, Tina, to “kick some ass” and make the money back, and Joseph, an apathetic teenager who spends his days watching Youtube videos and couldn’t care less about being on the show, much to the dismay of his overly excited mother Felisha Chang who at one point storms on stage to fix his cowlick. The first game in the contest was ‘Oh God, Not the Face’, in which balls were thrown at the contestants by the matchy-matchy sequined stage girls. Lauren wins the round, but is soon eliminated by Rick and Joseph, who vote her off the proverbial TV island. Two “commercial breaks” separated the rounds, both for cleaning products in order to stay true to 1950s shows like ‘The Name’s the Game’. The interrupted breaks along with the mention of Youtube were a fairly obvious yet fresh and funny anachronism. ‘The Game Show’ was overall the best written and acted of the bunch and a nice way to round-off a lackluster show.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
The article I was wrong about - in a way.
Why was I wrong? I thought it was entirely necessary to be escorted around campus for the weeks following this publication because of all the hate mail and rocks that would be flung at my head. Instead, I received three hand-written thank you letters in the mail from staff or faculty members who appreciated the honesty in my story, and a voice-mail from another staff member. I say "in a way" in the literal sense, not in the pseudo or maybe not so pseudo pretentious way I've used it in the past - as a reference to Camus' 'The Fall' - better than 'The Stranger' if you get around to reading it. Very highly recommended. I felt the title was appropriate because I took the liberty of quoting Albert Camus twice in this story, published a few days after the November election in 2008.
I never did find out who the individuals were who sent me the thank you notes, nor did I find out the name of my source - he reported directly to my best friend and former human resources staff worker, who refused to tell me the gentleman's name, even off the record.
As an irrelevant and admittedly Krameresque "hipster-dofus" aside - Camus is such an inspiration to me, that I had the words 'Life is Absurd' tattooed on myself several weeks after this article was published, the day before Thanksgiving to be exact. So - two years late, but thanks Camus, you Bogarty French ruffian for without you, my lede would not have been nearly as refined as I'd hoped it would be.
Amendment 8: Padron’s One-Sided War
By: Katherine Concepcion
Albert Camus spoke of the “Puppets and chatterboxes who pretend to speak in the name of the people.” For the past month, the chatterbox has been playing to the tune of “Yes on 8!” and the puppets have donned the matching pins and t-shirts.
We have all seen the signs, most of us have heard the radio spots, and fewer may have read Miami Dade College President Eduardo Padron’s Miami Herald article (‘MDC central to our chance for prosperity’, dated October 16th, 2008).
An explanation of the nature of the amendment is not in order here, what is however, is how Miami Dade College has ever gotten away with this arrogantly blatant lobbying.
Even if a law preventing a public, tax-funded college from endorsing a constitutional amendment did not exist, would it be as widely accepted if the amendment being promoted were not Amendment 8?
Would there be a massive outcry if Miami Dade College had suddenly come out in support of a vote of Yes on Amendment 2?
What about if Miami Dade College had publicly announced their endorsement of a political candidate and began investing thousands of dollars in radio spots, signs, pins, and other tchotchkes?
Why is it so acceptable to everyone that Miami Dade College supports a certain vote on a certain amendment when no one would feel okay about Miami Dade College endorsing another political issue? Why is Amendment 8 arbitrarily in the clear?
Miami Dade College’s own recorded phone announcements speak of “supporting democracy” by voting for Amendment 8. There is a blissful bit of irony in this situation, as “democracy” is being pushed on to students and staff, at the threat of reproach or no club funding. You cannot force democracy through the barrel of a gun, and you cannot expect an entire college population to be ideologically in line with the ideals of its president.
It is irrelevant whether the cause is a noble one, attempting to receive more money for students. The fact remains that an element of intimidation has been introduced to our campus by the campaign of Amendment 8.
A few weeks ago, campus club advisers were told that any club which did not participate in Amendment 8 activities should not expect any funding. This seems like a form of extortion. Certain members of the faculty and staff may have begrudgingly agreed to attend Amendment 8 events for fear of losing their jobs or being ostracized by the administration.
When asked the question: Have you felt pressure from your superiors to support Amendment 8? An MDC employee, who shall remain anonymous, responded, "Yes, I have been harassed with emails, voicemails, and one on one discussion. I have been forced to wear the button and the sticker. I don't believe in Amendment 8, but they make it seem like you'll lose your job if you're not for it."
Is this the kind of environment the administration wants to provide for its staff and students, for them to feel like a group of black-listed, radical subversives? For an institution which prides itself on its “open door policy” and “democratic” ideals, they are being pretty closed minded about any dissent on the issue.
At the time of this writing, one week has passed since the tragic deaths of Lisa Ard and Callie Pascal, two incredibly altruistic college employees who were killed in a car accident while they were en route to an Amendment 8 road blocking event.
After the accident, all Amendment 8 activities were allegedly canceled.
Recently, it was discovered that students and faculty were still sent out to polling locations to hold signs for Amendment 8, and the events were offered as extra credit in a variety of courses.
Thank goodness that another terrible accident did not occur to an attendant of one of these events. Although all events weren’t canceled, the other planned events were, so it is still important to ask: Why did it have to take the deaths of two innocent people for the administration to realize that it is not right to push students and staff into supporting their agenda?
Hopefully in the future, Miami Dade College will be less quick to pimp their legislation of the month and require others to do so. This is necessary, you know, for the “spirit of democracy.”
While it may be easier said than done for a student group or staff member to stand up and openly condemn the threats proposed by Student Life, one must never forget to stand up for one’s self. The minute you allow yourself to be heinously walked upon, no matter whom the authority, you give up a little bit of your freedom and thus a little bit of your humanity.
In light of the realization that many people on campus would prefer not to bother raising an objection, perhaps with the intent to remain “respectful” towards their superiors, Camus had another nugget of wisdom for this group to reflect upon, “Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear.”
I never did find out who the individuals were who sent me the thank you notes, nor did I find out the name of my source - he reported directly to my best friend and former human resources staff worker, who refused to tell me the gentleman's name, even off the record.
As an irrelevant and admittedly Krameresque "hipster-dofus" aside - Camus is such an inspiration to me, that I had the words 'Life is Absurd' tattooed on myself several weeks after this article was published, the day before Thanksgiving to be exact. So - two years late, but thanks Camus, you Bogarty French ruffian for without you, my lede would not have been nearly as refined as I'd hoped it would be.
Amendment 8: Padron’s One-Sided War
By: Katherine Concepcion
Albert Camus spoke of the “Puppets and chatterboxes who pretend to speak in the name of the people.” For the past month, the chatterbox has been playing to the tune of “Yes on 8!” and the puppets have donned the matching pins and t-shirts.
We have all seen the signs, most of us have heard the radio spots, and fewer may have read Miami Dade College President Eduardo Padron’s Miami Herald article (‘MDC central to our chance for prosperity’, dated October 16th, 2008).
An explanation of the nature of the amendment is not in order here, what is however, is how Miami Dade College has ever gotten away with this arrogantly blatant lobbying.
Even if a law preventing a public, tax-funded college from endorsing a constitutional amendment did not exist, would it be as widely accepted if the amendment being promoted were not Amendment 8?
Would there be a massive outcry if Miami Dade College had suddenly come out in support of a vote of Yes on Amendment 2?
What about if Miami Dade College had publicly announced their endorsement of a political candidate and began investing thousands of dollars in radio spots, signs, pins, and other tchotchkes?
Why is it so acceptable to everyone that Miami Dade College supports a certain vote on a certain amendment when no one would feel okay about Miami Dade College endorsing another political issue? Why is Amendment 8 arbitrarily in the clear?
Miami Dade College’s own recorded phone announcements speak of “supporting democracy” by voting for Amendment 8. There is a blissful bit of irony in this situation, as “democracy” is being pushed on to students and staff, at the threat of reproach or no club funding. You cannot force democracy through the barrel of a gun, and you cannot expect an entire college population to be ideologically in line with the ideals of its president.
It is irrelevant whether the cause is a noble one, attempting to receive more money for students. The fact remains that an element of intimidation has been introduced to our campus by the campaign of Amendment 8.
A few weeks ago, campus club advisers were told that any club which did not participate in Amendment 8 activities should not expect any funding. This seems like a form of extortion. Certain members of the faculty and staff may have begrudgingly agreed to attend Amendment 8 events for fear of losing their jobs or being ostracized by the administration.
When asked the question: Have you felt pressure from your superiors to support Amendment 8? An MDC employee, who shall remain anonymous, responded, "Yes, I have been harassed with emails, voicemails, and one on one discussion. I have been forced to wear the button and the sticker. I don't believe in Amendment 8, but they make it seem like you'll lose your job if you're not for it."
Is this the kind of environment the administration wants to provide for its staff and students, for them to feel like a group of black-listed, radical subversives? For an institution which prides itself on its “open door policy” and “democratic” ideals, they are being pretty closed minded about any dissent on the issue.
At the time of this writing, one week has passed since the tragic deaths of Lisa Ard and Callie Pascal, two incredibly altruistic college employees who were killed in a car accident while they were en route to an Amendment 8 road blocking event.
After the accident, all Amendment 8 activities were allegedly canceled.
Recently, it was discovered that students and faculty were still sent out to polling locations to hold signs for Amendment 8, and the events were offered as extra credit in a variety of courses.
Thank goodness that another terrible accident did not occur to an attendant of one of these events. Although all events weren’t canceled, the other planned events were, so it is still important to ask: Why did it have to take the deaths of two innocent people for the administration to realize that it is not right to push students and staff into supporting their agenda?
Hopefully in the future, Miami Dade College will be less quick to pimp their legislation of the month and require others to do so. This is necessary, you know, for the “spirit of democracy.”
While it may be easier said than done for a student group or staff member to stand up and openly condemn the threats proposed by Student Life, one must never forget to stand up for one’s self. The minute you allow yourself to be heinously walked upon, no matter whom the authority, you give up a little bit of your freedom and thus a little bit of your humanity.
In light of the realization that many people on campus would prefer not to bother raising an objection, perhaps with the intent to remain “respectful” towards their superiors, Camus had another nugget of wisdom for this group to reflect upon, “Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear.”
Thursday, June 3, 2010
(Slow) Sales in the City
(I decided to post my final version of the article before the copy-editors got a chance to mess with it, they can really screw up a story with carelessness.)
----
Biz owners claim city of Tallahassee as partially responsible for diminishing sales
Katherine Concepcion
Contributing Writer
--
What do Vinyl Fever, Hometown Coffee House, and The Loop Pizza Grill have in common? All three have gone out of business within the past year despite having once been considered among Tallahassee’s most cherished locales.
Several other local businesses have closed as well, including two more coffeehouses, Brew N Bean, which was located on West Pensacola Street, and The Tuscan Sun Coffee House on Killearn Plaza Circle, which had only opened in Feb 2009. Callers to both stores are greeted with an automatic “no longer in service” message, emails to the Tuscan Sun come back with a recipient error, but both Web sites are still in operation.
The phone number for the trendy Rag Junkie, which opened in June 2006 and in the past was voted the #1 women’s clothing store by the FSView, has also been disconnected.
The U.S Government’s Small Business Administration has stated that as a general rule of thumb, new businesses have a 50/50 chance of surviving in the market past the first five years.
While all this news might cast a dark cloud over the heads of job-hunting students, it is worth noting that the latest figures list Tallahassee’s April 2010 unemployment rate as 7.9%, down from approximately 8.7% in March.
“The Greater Tallahassee area is an ideal location for small business owners,” said Sue Dick, president of the Greater Tallahassee Chamber of Commerce. “Home to the state capital, two state universities and other excellent colleges and schools, Tallahassee provides businesses owners with resources that areas across the country can only envy.”
Although management at The Loop Pizza Grill and Vinyl Fever stated current economic downturns were to blame for the closures, some business owners who are still in operation have pointed fingers at city planners and the near-constant construction around town.
“They were doing some drilling next to the Loop, then they moved it to the closed Wendy’s across the street - I don’t know what they’re drilling for” said Jeff George, owner of Sunberry, a frozen yogurt company on Tennessee Street which opened in Oct 2007.
“Street closures can also affect businesses considerably, and overpasses completely decimate business that depends on traffic in certain areas” said George.
According to two local business owners, the ongoing construction project on Gaines Street has had a negative impact on their sales.
“The economy hasn’t affected me as much because I’m not tied to a bank since I own my building, but Gaines Street has been closing at night, and this has really affected me, so I’ve had to become more creative, like selling ice cream to other shops, like the Black Dog Café” said Jeff Hunter, owner of Icyle Works, a homemade frozen confections company.
“The city closed the street without warning, I didn’t know about it” said Hunter.
“People are making decisions about Gaines Street who don’t live here” said Devon Pyles, owner of the Sick Boy Vintage clothing store.
Pyles explained that the construction on Gaines has made it “almost impossible to stay afloat” because it has hindered traffic on the street, making it more difficult for customers to get to her store.
“We’re seeing a real uptick in development interest for the Gaines street area” said Roxanne Manning, Program Director for the Community Redevelopment Agency. “It will be an inconvenience during construction, but after it is done, I think these independent retailers will be very happy and our goal is for these retailers to prosper.”
According to Manning, the project has been in the works for at least ten years, and complete commercial development of Gaines may not be completed until five or ten years from now. The 18-month project will be completed in two phases, but the determining factors in when construction will be completed are the economy and developer enthusiasm.
City bureaucracy has also been blamed by some as a factor in diminishing his business.
“I’ve planned to set up several carts in various locations around the city, one, by Lake Ella, was just approved after waiting for three years. Most of the people I know don’t think they can depend on the city” said Hunter.
George also mentioned that efforts to get the city to put in a turn lane going west on Tennessee Street and leading into the parking lot behind Sunberry, Gumby’s Pizza and several other businesses were unsuccessful, due to city restrictions and concerns about the width of the lanes and their proximity to the intersection.
When asked why he feels places like the Pizza Loop might have failed, Hunter responded, “I think they might have had different business models, they might have extended themselves too far.”
Despite some of these issues, Pyles wants people to know that although it might be harder to get to, her shop is still open and eager for business. “We love Tally, there is a lot of diversity here and a very big sense of community,” said Pyles. “We want people to know that we are open and accessible.”
When asked what advice he would give prospective business owners in the city of Tallahassee, George said, “Find the right location and sell the right product.”
----
Biz owners claim city of Tallahassee as partially responsible for diminishing sales
Katherine Concepcion
Contributing Writer
--
What do Vinyl Fever, Hometown Coffee House, and The Loop Pizza Grill have in common? All three have gone out of business within the past year despite having once been considered among Tallahassee’s most cherished locales.
Several other local businesses have closed as well, including two more coffeehouses, Brew N Bean, which was located on West Pensacola Street, and The Tuscan Sun Coffee House on Killearn Plaza Circle, which had only opened in Feb 2009. Callers to both stores are greeted with an automatic “no longer in service” message, emails to the Tuscan Sun come back with a recipient error, but both Web sites are still in operation.
The phone number for the trendy Rag Junkie, which opened in June 2006 and in the past was voted the #1 women’s clothing store by the FSView, has also been disconnected.
The U.S Government’s Small Business Administration has stated that as a general rule of thumb, new businesses have a 50/50 chance of surviving in the market past the first five years.
While all this news might cast a dark cloud over the heads of job-hunting students, it is worth noting that the latest figures list Tallahassee’s April 2010 unemployment rate as 7.9%, down from approximately 8.7% in March.
“The Greater Tallahassee area is an ideal location for small business owners,” said Sue Dick, president of the Greater Tallahassee Chamber of Commerce. “Home to the state capital, two state universities and other excellent colleges and schools, Tallahassee provides businesses owners with resources that areas across the country can only envy.”
Although management at The Loop Pizza Grill and Vinyl Fever stated current economic downturns were to blame for the closures, some business owners who are still in operation have pointed fingers at city planners and the near-constant construction around town.
“They were doing some drilling next to the Loop, then they moved it to the closed Wendy’s across the street - I don’t know what they’re drilling for” said Jeff George, owner of Sunberry, a frozen yogurt company on Tennessee Street which opened in Oct 2007.
“Street closures can also affect businesses considerably, and overpasses completely decimate business that depends on traffic in certain areas” said George.
According to two local business owners, the ongoing construction project on Gaines Street has had a negative impact on their sales.
“The economy hasn’t affected me as much because I’m not tied to a bank since I own my building, but Gaines Street has been closing at night, and this has really affected me, so I’ve had to become more creative, like selling ice cream to other shops, like the Black Dog Café” said Jeff Hunter, owner of Icyle Works, a homemade frozen confections company.
“The city closed the street without warning, I didn’t know about it” said Hunter.
“People are making decisions about Gaines Street who don’t live here” said Devon Pyles, owner of the Sick Boy Vintage clothing store.
Pyles explained that the construction on Gaines has made it “almost impossible to stay afloat” because it has hindered traffic on the street, making it more difficult for customers to get to her store.
“We’re seeing a real uptick in development interest for the Gaines street area” said Roxanne Manning, Program Director for the Community Redevelopment Agency. “It will be an inconvenience during construction, but after it is done, I think these independent retailers will be very happy and our goal is for these retailers to prosper.”
According to Manning, the project has been in the works for at least ten years, and complete commercial development of Gaines may not be completed until five or ten years from now. The 18-month project will be completed in two phases, but the determining factors in when construction will be completed are the economy and developer enthusiasm.
City bureaucracy has also been blamed by some as a factor in diminishing his business.
“I’ve planned to set up several carts in various locations around the city, one, by Lake Ella, was just approved after waiting for three years. Most of the people I know don’t think they can depend on the city” said Hunter.
George also mentioned that efforts to get the city to put in a turn lane going west on Tennessee Street and leading into the parking lot behind Sunberry, Gumby’s Pizza and several other businesses were unsuccessful, due to city restrictions and concerns about the width of the lanes and their proximity to the intersection.
When asked why he feels places like the Pizza Loop might have failed, Hunter responded, “I think they might have had different business models, they might have extended themselves too far.”
Despite some of these issues, Pyles wants people to know that although it might be harder to get to, her shop is still open and eager for business. “We love Tally, there is a lot of diversity here and a very big sense of community,” said Pyles. “We want people to know that we are open and accessible.”
When asked what advice he would give prospective business owners in the city of Tallahassee, George said, “Find the right location and sell the right product.”
Friday, May 14, 2010
Censorship article I wrote nearly two years ago.
Q: What is the answer to speech you don't like? A: Always more speech.
The history of censorship spans as far back as 3400 B.C, when the Ancient Egyptians created a strict rubric for what could be considered "permissible" artwork. This form of censorship unfortunately did not end with the Egyptians; it lives on with the same pervasiveness as the image of Tutankhamen.
Under U.S law, images of any kind are considered to be forms of speech. To those readers who believe in the idea of oppressing people for their own safety, reflect upon this question: whom are you protecting by banning speech?
Legal systems inherently fail at legislating ideas; it is impossible for a law to change the way people think. This is precisely the reason why obscenity laws fail to promote the social harmony they claim to strive for. By preventing actions through legislation, harmless outlets for reckless desires are removed and negative impulses remain.
The most prolific target of the moral "utopians" is pornography. The very word pornography produces in some people the kind of visceral reaction that can only be equated to chronic gastritis. Even today, if Americans were given the choice to broadcast gratuitous violence or erotic sex, it is the violence that is often opted for. What is it about the image, or the very idea of sex between two consenting adults that makes it patently more obscene than a slasher movie?
Anti-pornography activists somehow equate sex with pornography and maintain that both have infiltrated all aspects of American culture and have led to the decomposition of marriage, love and "traditional moral values." The most widely held belief among these groups is that pornography results in the encouragement of rape, pedophilia and other sexual crimes. This statement is rooted in untruth. In reality, the increased availability of pornography, particularly Internet pornography, has led to a decrease in sex crimes.
According to Slate, a 10 percent increase in Internet access produces an approximately 7.3 percent decrease in rape. The largest declines came from states where Internet usage was most widespread. Todd Kendall, professor at Clemson University, affirms that the effects of Net access remain unchanged even after accounting for the obvious variables such as population density, alcohol consumption and unemployment rates. Futhermore, the study concluded that Net access did not produce a similar impact on other violent crimes, including homicide. It is therefore not difficult to suppose that access to pornography has created a victimless outlet against rape.
While adult pornography seems easier to stomach, child pornography seems to be a universal taboo. In 1996, the Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) was passed, making the creation or possession of child pornography illegal, even when the images were computer generated and in actuality made without the participation of real children.
The CPPA was struck down in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002) for being "unconstitutionally vague." The CPPA prohibited any sexually explicit material that "appears to be" or "conveys the impression of" involvement of a minor. This is an obvious problem. If images are "virtual" child pornography, then there is no child victim. The government made the argument that the images could be used to lure real children, but as was stated in the court's majority opinion, the same can be said about a seemingly innocent device such as candy, and it would be absurd to propose this be banned. It is obvious that anything can be taken and used in a malicious manner, but this is not enough to call for a full-out ban.
The ruling in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition raises the question, what constitutes child pornography? Is it enough that a naked child appears in the image? If so, then the majority of parents in this country ought to be arrested for possession of sexually perverse family photo albums, but no one wants to claim that mom, dad, grandpa and grandma are dirty smut peddlers. What about a sexualized image of a child? If so, say bye-bye to those filthy children's beauty pageants. The point is that "child porn" is so loosely defined that even the most innocuous picture of a 4 month old's bare bottom in a bathtub would be considered the pinnacle of depravity if put in a different context.
There is absolutely no scientific evidence that shows that the availability of child pornography increases the likelihood of crimes against children. In Japan, lolicon (portmanteau of "Lolita complex"), a genre of Japanese cartoon comics where childlike girls are represented in a sexually suggestive manner, is readily available, as is graphic and violent pornography. Milton Diamond, professor of anatomy and reproductive biology at the University of Hawaii, and Ayako Uchiyama of the National Research Institute of Police Science, conducted a study published in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry which concluded that the increased availability of this material has led to decreases in sexual crimes in Japan. They further conclude that the decrease has been so dramatic that Japan has the lowest levels of reported rape and the highest levels of arrests and convictions of any developed nation in the world.
Of course, sexual images of the rape or sexual assault of a child are deplorable, but its illegality stretches only as far as does the illegality of adult rape. It is the very act of rape that makes whatever medium associated with it intrinsically bad.
Should we be focusing our money and law enforcement on cracking down on those who enjoy reruns of Full House for reasons other than the comedy, or should we focus instead on actual child predators?
I am in no way condoning child pornography, but if the ultimate intent is to eradicate it, the restriction of speech will not get us there. So long as there is an appetite for it, images will appear, and it is much more comforting to know that someone is spending their paycheck downloading simulated child pornography than roaming the streets for actual children to abduct and rape.
Finally, what about the obvious objection that materials of this nature are obscene and thus do not constitute protected speech? As Mark Neunder, professor of philosophy at Miami Dade College, states, "No one has the right not to be offended. If people did, then virtually everything could be censored. But since obscenity is defined in terms of what is offensive, no one therefore has the right to censor what is obscene."
Whenever someone says there ought to be a law, it is very often the case that there ought not to be; the ultimate firepower against objectionable materials is clear: more speech, not less.
The history of censorship spans as far back as 3400 B.C, when the Ancient Egyptians created a strict rubric for what could be considered "permissible" artwork. This form of censorship unfortunately did not end with the Egyptians; it lives on with the same pervasiveness as the image of Tutankhamen.
Under U.S law, images of any kind are considered to be forms of speech. To those readers who believe in the idea of oppressing people for their own safety, reflect upon this question: whom are you protecting by banning speech?
Legal systems inherently fail at legislating ideas; it is impossible for a law to change the way people think. This is precisely the reason why obscenity laws fail to promote the social harmony they claim to strive for. By preventing actions through legislation, harmless outlets for reckless desires are removed and negative impulses remain.
The most prolific target of the moral "utopians" is pornography. The very word pornography produces in some people the kind of visceral reaction that can only be equated to chronic gastritis. Even today, if Americans were given the choice to broadcast gratuitous violence or erotic sex, it is the violence that is often opted for. What is it about the image, or the very idea of sex between two consenting adults that makes it patently more obscene than a slasher movie?
Anti-pornography activists somehow equate sex with pornography and maintain that both have infiltrated all aspects of American culture and have led to the decomposition of marriage, love and "traditional moral values." The most widely held belief among these groups is that pornography results in the encouragement of rape, pedophilia and other sexual crimes. This statement is rooted in untruth. In reality, the increased availability of pornography, particularly Internet pornography, has led to a decrease in sex crimes.
According to Slate, a 10 percent increase in Internet access produces an approximately 7.3 percent decrease in rape. The largest declines came from states where Internet usage was most widespread. Todd Kendall, professor at Clemson University, affirms that the effects of Net access remain unchanged even after accounting for the obvious variables such as population density, alcohol consumption and unemployment rates. Futhermore, the study concluded that Net access did not produce a similar impact on other violent crimes, including homicide. It is therefore not difficult to suppose that access to pornography has created a victimless outlet against rape.
While adult pornography seems easier to stomach, child pornography seems to be a universal taboo. In 1996, the Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) was passed, making the creation or possession of child pornography illegal, even when the images were computer generated and in actuality made without the participation of real children.
The CPPA was struck down in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002) for being "unconstitutionally vague." The CPPA prohibited any sexually explicit material that "appears to be" or "conveys the impression of" involvement of a minor. This is an obvious problem. If images are "virtual" child pornography, then there is no child victim. The government made the argument that the images could be used to lure real children, but as was stated in the court's majority opinion, the same can be said about a seemingly innocent device such as candy, and it would be absurd to propose this be banned. It is obvious that anything can be taken and used in a malicious manner, but this is not enough to call for a full-out ban.
The ruling in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition raises the question, what constitutes child pornography? Is it enough that a naked child appears in the image? If so, then the majority of parents in this country ought to be arrested for possession of sexually perverse family photo albums, but no one wants to claim that mom, dad, grandpa and grandma are dirty smut peddlers. What about a sexualized image of a child? If so, say bye-bye to those filthy children's beauty pageants. The point is that "child porn" is so loosely defined that even the most innocuous picture of a 4 month old's bare bottom in a bathtub would be considered the pinnacle of depravity if put in a different context.
There is absolutely no scientific evidence that shows that the availability of child pornography increases the likelihood of crimes against children. In Japan, lolicon (portmanteau of "Lolita complex"), a genre of Japanese cartoon comics where childlike girls are represented in a sexually suggestive manner, is readily available, as is graphic and violent pornography. Milton Diamond, professor of anatomy and reproductive biology at the University of Hawaii, and Ayako Uchiyama of the National Research Institute of Police Science, conducted a study published in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry which concluded that the increased availability of this material has led to decreases in sexual crimes in Japan. They further conclude that the decrease has been so dramatic that Japan has the lowest levels of reported rape and the highest levels of arrests and convictions of any developed nation in the world.
Of course, sexual images of the rape or sexual assault of a child are deplorable, but its illegality stretches only as far as does the illegality of adult rape. It is the very act of rape that makes whatever medium associated with it intrinsically bad.
Should we be focusing our money and law enforcement on cracking down on those who enjoy reruns of Full House for reasons other than the comedy, or should we focus instead on actual child predators?
I am in no way condoning child pornography, but if the ultimate intent is to eradicate it, the restriction of speech will not get us there. So long as there is an appetite for it, images will appear, and it is much more comforting to know that someone is spending their paycheck downloading simulated child pornography than roaming the streets for actual children to abduct and rape.
Finally, what about the obvious objection that materials of this nature are obscene and thus do not constitute protected speech? As Mark Neunder, professor of philosophy at Miami Dade College, states, "No one has the right not to be offended. If people did, then virtually everything could be censored. But since obscenity is defined in terms of what is offensive, no one therefore has the right to censor what is obscene."
Whenever someone says there ought to be a law, it is very often the case that there ought not to be; the ultimate firepower against objectionable materials is clear: more speech, not less.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Excerpts from my new, unfinished play, 'Butt Out'
Note: I wrote this as a final paper for a class, I'm unsure at the moment whether I intend to keep working on it and expand upon it further. It's currently a 12 page one-act.
--
LEBON:
Ever since that dickhead Nixon put the kibosh on T.V and radio advertising, our jobs have gotten that much more difficult. Those are two major mediums! Factor in the Truth campaign and it’s a surprise we’re still on the payroll.
TUSKEG:
Let’s not overdramatize, Carl. We’re selling a product that sells itself. Plus, I recall the World Bank reporting that a partial advertising ban has little to no effect on reducing tobacco consumption. There are other dynamics involved, I’m sure. I doubt the Truth campaign people have put a significant dent in our revenues, so I’m guessing either more people are switching to pot, or these damned increased taxes are forcing people to quit cold turkey. Whatever it is, we can try and fix it. We just have to be smart about it.
LEBON:
You don’t think some of the Truth ads have changed people’s minds?
TUSKEG:
Carl, do you like potato chips?
LEBON:
Sure I do.
TUSKEG:
Can you name every single ingredient in your favorite potato chips?
LEBON:
Including the preservatives? No, I probably couldn’t.
TUSKEG:
And if you saw an ad that listed every single ingredient in potato chips, would it change your mind about eating them?
LEBON:
No, I’ll eat them anyway because I like potato chips.
TUSKEG:
Exactly!
(Takes a drink)
We learned this back in ad school – more information doesn’t necessarily lead to better decision making. The Truth people can put out all the propaganda it wants about the 4000+ ingredients in the common cigarette, but the truth is (no pun intended), that we are exposed to a lot of the same chemicals and carcinogens every single day. Every time we go outside on a sunny day, our risk of developing skin cancer increases. If you spent all your time worrying about every single component of your cigarette, like every single ingredient in your potato chip, you’d probably never leave the house- you might as well just curl up and die.
FOX:
He’s right Carl, but I don’t want to turn this meeting into a back and forth on the merits and shortcomings of anti-tobacco advertising, so I’ll end by saying – let them put out whatever “truthful” information they want, our job is to locate the important variables in a consumer’s decision making process – and highlight the shit out of them in glossy magazines while we still can.
LEBON:
I’ll drink to that!
--
Here is a long speech given by Fox's daughter occurring as a stage flashback at the end of the play:
“Why do you light up? Stress relief maybe, sometimes it just feels good. I like menthols. Menthols give you that cool, soothing sensation on your tongue that might be too intense if you ever tried to replicate the effect with gum or a mint. Hell, I barely inhale the smoke, but I’ll smoke occasionally - rarely might be more accurate, in fact. But there’s a vintage glamour about it, even if you’re anti-smoking, you can’t get past the almost visceral manifestation of sexy-cool beatniks lounging in smoky jazz bars, talking philosophy, life and love, some strung out and looking blasé; the image of Humphrey Bogart climbing out of his car in an unnamed city where it seems to rain all the time, belting his trench coat and walking into the home of a woman who might be the missing link to a pending investigation, and sharing a cigarette, mini bottle of rye and innuendo with her before getting down to brass tacks.
How do you put into words the acrid nostalgia that hits you on your face the minute you walk into a 20+ year old hotel or any casino? There’s a Jungian grace about it – it’s choking and intrusive, yet subdued and oddly comforting.
Some things have changed – I wouldn’t find a man buying me a pack of smokes romantic and I’m not sure who would outside a trailer park or prison block.
When I smoke and write I feel like Albert Camus, though I’m not nearly as intellectual. It gets my creative juices flowing, my brain cooperates in producing dialog, arguments and images – the part of my brain that isn’t focused on knocking off ash or making sure I don’t burn some part of my arm. But I try to smoke when I’m alone, with other smokers, or somewhere public enough where any residual stench on my hair and clothing doesn’t really matter. I have a very big pet peeve about having to deal with the smell of fresh cigarette smoke coming off the body of student who has just sat next to me in a class, even if other seats were available. It sucks, and it almost makes me gag, but so does the smell of Doritos, and I wouldn’t want those banned.
The list of things I don’t like could go on for a while, but I won’t rattle off a boring list. Its summer now, and often I can’t help but unfortunately remain fixated on the sight of dimpled and rippled skin in a pair of short shorts. It sucks, and part of me wants to tell them to stop the madness, but I don’t, because they’re human too. I’m actually asthmatic, smoke can bug me at times, but I have never gone to the hospital because of it, I did however have to visit the hospital at 15 because of an asthma attack triggered by a strongly perfumed shampoo, but I never intended to sue the manufacturer.
I’ve always tried to make it a point to tell people not to keep their mouth shut, that they should always stand up for what they think is right, even if others, including myself, think they’re a complete moron. I won’t like what you’re saying, but I will like that you’re saying it, and I will respect you more than the blindly assimilated civilian who cruises through life never once challenging the system.
If you oppose public smoking, by all means, make noise and be heard – but don’t expect business owners to listen to you and walk away with their tail between their legs. Their bottom line is as important as yours. If a private business owner thinks a smoking ban will increase profits by attracting more customers who are averse to smoke rather than smoking customers, let him ban it, but don’t force him to do so through the barrel of a gun.”
--
LEBON:
Ever since that dickhead Nixon put the kibosh on T.V and radio advertising, our jobs have gotten that much more difficult. Those are two major mediums! Factor in the Truth campaign and it’s a surprise we’re still on the payroll.
TUSKEG:
Let’s not overdramatize, Carl. We’re selling a product that sells itself. Plus, I recall the World Bank reporting that a partial advertising ban has little to no effect on reducing tobacco consumption. There are other dynamics involved, I’m sure. I doubt the Truth campaign people have put a significant dent in our revenues, so I’m guessing either more people are switching to pot, or these damned increased taxes are forcing people to quit cold turkey. Whatever it is, we can try and fix it. We just have to be smart about it.
LEBON:
You don’t think some of the Truth ads have changed people’s minds?
TUSKEG:
Carl, do you like potato chips?
LEBON:
Sure I do.
TUSKEG:
Can you name every single ingredient in your favorite potato chips?
LEBON:
Including the preservatives? No, I probably couldn’t.
TUSKEG:
And if you saw an ad that listed every single ingredient in potato chips, would it change your mind about eating them?
LEBON:
No, I’ll eat them anyway because I like potato chips.
TUSKEG:
Exactly!
(Takes a drink)
We learned this back in ad school – more information doesn’t necessarily lead to better decision making. The Truth people can put out all the propaganda it wants about the 4000+ ingredients in the common cigarette, but the truth is (no pun intended), that we are exposed to a lot of the same chemicals and carcinogens every single day. Every time we go outside on a sunny day, our risk of developing skin cancer increases. If you spent all your time worrying about every single component of your cigarette, like every single ingredient in your potato chip, you’d probably never leave the house- you might as well just curl up and die.
FOX:
He’s right Carl, but I don’t want to turn this meeting into a back and forth on the merits and shortcomings of anti-tobacco advertising, so I’ll end by saying – let them put out whatever “truthful” information they want, our job is to locate the important variables in a consumer’s decision making process – and highlight the shit out of them in glossy magazines while we still can.
LEBON:
I’ll drink to that!
--
Here is a long speech given by Fox's daughter occurring as a stage flashback at the end of the play:
“Why do you light up? Stress relief maybe, sometimes it just feels good. I like menthols. Menthols give you that cool, soothing sensation on your tongue that might be too intense if you ever tried to replicate the effect with gum or a mint. Hell, I barely inhale the smoke, but I’ll smoke occasionally - rarely might be more accurate, in fact. But there’s a vintage glamour about it, even if you’re anti-smoking, you can’t get past the almost visceral manifestation of sexy-cool beatniks lounging in smoky jazz bars, talking philosophy, life and love, some strung out and looking blasé; the image of Humphrey Bogart climbing out of his car in an unnamed city where it seems to rain all the time, belting his trench coat and walking into the home of a woman who might be the missing link to a pending investigation, and sharing a cigarette, mini bottle of rye and innuendo with her before getting down to brass tacks.
How do you put into words the acrid nostalgia that hits you on your face the minute you walk into a 20+ year old hotel or any casino? There’s a Jungian grace about it – it’s choking and intrusive, yet subdued and oddly comforting.
Some things have changed – I wouldn’t find a man buying me a pack of smokes romantic and I’m not sure who would outside a trailer park or prison block.
When I smoke and write I feel like Albert Camus, though I’m not nearly as intellectual. It gets my creative juices flowing, my brain cooperates in producing dialog, arguments and images – the part of my brain that isn’t focused on knocking off ash or making sure I don’t burn some part of my arm. But I try to smoke when I’m alone, with other smokers, or somewhere public enough where any residual stench on my hair and clothing doesn’t really matter. I have a very big pet peeve about having to deal with the smell of fresh cigarette smoke coming off the body of student who has just sat next to me in a class, even if other seats were available. It sucks, and it almost makes me gag, but so does the smell of Doritos, and I wouldn’t want those banned.
The list of things I don’t like could go on for a while, but I won’t rattle off a boring list. Its summer now, and often I can’t help but unfortunately remain fixated on the sight of dimpled and rippled skin in a pair of short shorts. It sucks, and part of me wants to tell them to stop the madness, but I don’t, because they’re human too. I’m actually asthmatic, smoke can bug me at times, but I have never gone to the hospital because of it, I did however have to visit the hospital at 15 because of an asthma attack triggered by a strongly perfumed shampoo, but I never intended to sue the manufacturer.
I’ve always tried to make it a point to tell people not to keep their mouth shut, that they should always stand up for what they think is right, even if others, including myself, think they’re a complete moron. I won’t like what you’re saying, but I will like that you’re saying it, and I will respect you more than the blindly assimilated civilian who cruises through life never once challenging the system.
If you oppose public smoking, by all means, make noise and be heard – but don’t expect business owners to listen to you and walk away with their tail between their legs. Their bottom line is as important as yours. If a private business owner thinks a smoking ban will increase profits by attracting more customers who are averse to smoke rather than smoking customers, let him ban it, but don’t force him to do so through the barrel of a gun.”
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Season Plays - Media Blurbs
Cabaret
Berlin, 1930. The Nazi influence is slowly increasing, the party gaining members. The Kit Kat Club remains a peaceful and decadent escape haven for the more liberal minded folk. Sally Bowles, a British singer performs a sexy cabaret piece and wins the heart of Cliff Bradshaw, with whom she eventually falls in love. Not all in Cliff and Sally’s life is a dream however. When Cliff asks Sally to return to America with him, she sharply refuses, believing their life in Germany is fantastic and choosing to consciously ignore the oppressive regime growing ever more prevalent. Lovely songs, costumes and scenery unite on stage in this fantastically romantic yet tragic musical.
The 39 Steps
What do you get when you mix the ‘hard-boiled’ detective fiction of Dashiell Hammett, the romantic espionage of Alfred Hitchcock and the absurdist comedy of Monty Python? Answer: ‘The 39 Steps’! Broadway’s longest running comedy thriller is hitting the Tallahassee Little Theatre. When an average Joe learns about a secret spy organization run by a man with a missing finger and then gets tangled up in a murder investigation, what started off as a typical night at a bar soon becomes a heart-pounding and hilarious manhunt. ‘The 39 Steps’ is sure to provide edge-of-your seat, tour-de-force fun for everyone in the family.
The Color Purple
In this poetic and beautiful musical which was recently attached to one of the biggest names in entertainment, Oprah Winfrey, a young woman converses with God about life, love and loss. Set in rural Georgia in 1909, 14 year old Cecile is pregnant for a second time and dealing with the death of her mother. She lives a life of quiet desperation, suffering poverty, sexual abuse and physical abuse. Her saving grace comes in the form of sultry blues singer Shug Avery, who gives Cecile the strength and support needed to turn her life around and start fresh. This tear-jerker is sure to stick with you long after the show is over.
The Foreigner
When you pose as an exotic stranger, the results aren’t always glamorous- you may become privy to information you wish you hadn’t learned! In this side-splitting comedy, outgoing military man Froggy LeSueur and timid Englishman Charlie Baker are vacationing in a fishing resort. Charlie is too shy to even speak, so Froggy tells fellow guests that he is from a faraway land and doesn’t understand any English. This constructed affectation soon proves to be trouble, when more and more guests begin revealing their deepest and darkest secrets and scandals to Charlie. This colorful cast includes a young simpleton, a racist property inspector, a Southern heiress, and a preacher with a naughty side.
How I Learned To Drive
Growing up in 1960’s Maryland with some less than enlightened family members proves difficult for young Li’l Bit, our starring actress. Her mother and grandmother both became pregnant at a very young age, her grandfather is an ignorant misogynist, and her Uncle Peck is a recovering alcoholic who molests her during a driving lesson when Li’l Bit is only 11 years old. As time goes on, Peck begins taking sexually suggestive photos of his niece, and continues his sexual advances, but because he is kind and supportive, Li’l Bit ignores the uncomfortable feelings she has toward the situation and instead focuses on her driving lessons with Peck. Driving gives her a small sense of freedom and control – the one thing she is thankful for despite being part of a tumultuous family.
The Member of the Wedding
‘The Member of the Wedding’ tells the story of Frankie Addams, an introspective twelve year old girl growing up with a widowed father who shows her no affection, and their black cook Berenice Brown, a warm woman who lends a shoulder to Frankie. When Frankie’s older brother Jarvis returns from the army and announces his impending marriage, Frankie is ecstatic at the prospect of being a member of the wedding, but once she finds out she will not have a part in the honeymoon celebration as she thought she would, she is distraught. Despite her anguish over the wedding arrangements, her younger cousin John Henry tragically dying of meningitis and her beloved Berenice leaving to get married herself, Frankie still sees better days ahead, and her very first romantic feelings become stirred.
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
In this fun-filled battle of the sneakiest two con artists, Lawrence Jameson and Freddy Benson attempt to find young female targets in the French Riviera. Instead of fighting for the money outright, they devise a scheme: the first man to obtain $50,000 from their mark is the winner and may stay in town, but the loser must leave for good. The women they target are looking for love, so the men might get more than they bargained for! This comedic musical adapted from the hilarious 1988 film starring Michael Caine and Steve Martin is sure to get your feet tapping and your fingers snapping!
Berlin, 1930. The Nazi influence is slowly increasing, the party gaining members. The Kit Kat Club remains a peaceful and decadent escape haven for the more liberal minded folk. Sally Bowles, a British singer performs a sexy cabaret piece and wins the heart of Cliff Bradshaw, with whom she eventually falls in love. Not all in Cliff and Sally’s life is a dream however. When Cliff asks Sally to return to America with him, she sharply refuses, believing their life in Germany is fantastic and choosing to consciously ignore the oppressive regime growing ever more prevalent. Lovely songs, costumes and scenery unite on stage in this fantastically romantic yet tragic musical.
The 39 Steps
What do you get when you mix the ‘hard-boiled’ detective fiction of Dashiell Hammett, the romantic espionage of Alfred Hitchcock and the absurdist comedy of Monty Python? Answer: ‘The 39 Steps’! Broadway’s longest running comedy thriller is hitting the Tallahassee Little Theatre. When an average Joe learns about a secret spy organization run by a man with a missing finger and then gets tangled up in a murder investigation, what started off as a typical night at a bar soon becomes a heart-pounding and hilarious manhunt. ‘The 39 Steps’ is sure to provide edge-of-your seat, tour-de-force fun for everyone in the family.
The Color Purple
In this poetic and beautiful musical which was recently attached to one of the biggest names in entertainment, Oprah Winfrey, a young woman converses with God about life, love and loss. Set in rural Georgia in 1909, 14 year old Cecile is pregnant for a second time and dealing with the death of her mother. She lives a life of quiet desperation, suffering poverty, sexual abuse and physical abuse. Her saving grace comes in the form of sultry blues singer Shug Avery, who gives Cecile the strength and support needed to turn her life around and start fresh. This tear-jerker is sure to stick with you long after the show is over.
The Foreigner
When you pose as an exotic stranger, the results aren’t always glamorous- you may become privy to information you wish you hadn’t learned! In this side-splitting comedy, outgoing military man Froggy LeSueur and timid Englishman Charlie Baker are vacationing in a fishing resort. Charlie is too shy to even speak, so Froggy tells fellow guests that he is from a faraway land and doesn’t understand any English. This constructed affectation soon proves to be trouble, when more and more guests begin revealing their deepest and darkest secrets and scandals to Charlie. This colorful cast includes a young simpleton, a racist property inspector, a Southern heiress, and a preacher with a naughty side.
How I Learned To Drive
Growing up in 1960’s Maryland with some less than enlightened family members proves difficult for young Li’l Bit, our starring actress. Her mother and grandmother both became pregnant at a very young age, her grandfather is an ignorant misogynist, and her Uncle Peck is a recovering alcoholic who molests her during a driving lesson when Li’l Bit is only 11 years old. As time goes on, Peck begins taking sexually suggestive photos of his niece, and continues his sexual advances, but because he is kind and supportive, Li’l Bit ignores the uncomfortable feelings she has toward the situation and instead focuses on her driving lessons with Peck. Driving gives her a small sense of freedom and control – the one thing she is thankful for despite being part of a tumultuous family.
The Member of the Wedding
‘The Member of the Wedding’ tells the story of Frankie Addams, an introspective twelve year old girl growing up with a widowed father who shows her no affection, and their black cook Berenice Brown, a warm woman who lends a shoulder to Frankie. When Frankie’s older brother Jarvis returns from the army and announces his impending marriage, Frankie is ecstatic at the prospect of being a member of the wedding, but once she finds out she will not have a part in the honeymoon celebration as she thought she would, she is distraught. Despite her anguish over the wedding arrangements, her younger cousin John Henry tragically dying of meningitis and her beloved Berenice leaving to get married herself, Frankie still sees better days ahead, and her very first romantic feelings become stirred.
Dirty Rotten Scoundrels
In this fun-filled battle of the sneakiest two con artists, Lawrence Jameson and Freddy Benson attempt to find young female targets in the French Riviera. Instead of fighting for the money outright, they devise a scheme: the first man to obtain $50,000 from their mark is the winner and may stay in town, but the loser must leave for good. The women they target are looking for love, so the men might get more than they bargained for! This comedic musical adapted from the hilarious 1988 film starring Michael Caine and Steve Martin is sure to get your feet tapping and your fingers snapping!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)