From the Outside Looking In-- The American Political Machine

If you're familiar with contemporary American politics, it's hard not to become frustrated and cynical.  Between political payola influencing major legislation, pork barrel spending wasting tax dollars, and increasing polarization across party lines (greatly) inhibiting progress; discontent towards our nation's capital is more than understandable. 

Back in January 2009 when Obama was finally sworn in and the Bush administration finally bowed out ungracefully, many predicted that our ambitious new leader would, if nothing else, begin to mend America's awful relationship with the international community.  While to some degree this may be happening, our President is still just the one cog (admitteldy, the biggest cog) in our enormous political machine.  We have a government for the people, by the people so it's up to the people to change it.  If we can learn anything from the national existential reordering that has roiled Egypt in the past couple weeks, it's that decisive action will always incite change. 

So what's this have to do with London and I?  Well, I've tried to interact with the locals (affectionately dubbed "Londoners") as much as possible because I am intrigued by English culture and I am always interested in the foreign perspective on my beloved home country, even if it's negative.  Actually, especially if it's negative... and it usually is. 

So what is it this time?  Political apathy.  Among others, there is one particular conversation I had with a young English woman last weekend that has stuck with me ever since.  After we had wholeheartedly agreed on many of the flaws in U.S. government, she stared right into my eyes and asked, almost accusingly, "well why don't you do something about it?"  A little indignant, I responded "Well I vote, what else do you expect?"  (Secretly I remembered Weber's rational voter strategy-- voting, at best, has little or no merits for the individual).  She reminded me of the street protests in Egypt and I was about to remind her that this is America, not Egypt.  But how condescending would that have been?  What does that even mean?

Are we too civilized to protest?  Such a justification evokes the sentiment expressed in the 19th century aristocracy buying their way out of Civil War enlistment- too self important to fight.  I was disgusted with myself.  Just 50 years ago, the Civil Rights and anti-Vietnam movements rocked the nation from the inside out.  Where had all our desire for change gone?  I was speechless in front of the young woman.  She was absolutely right- right in being aggravated with the American people, right in being aggravated with me.  I felt ashamed.

There's a little food for thought, I'll let you do the dishes.  Stay tuned.

Thespian Brilliance in The King's Speech

Two weeks ago, I enjoyed my first European cinematic experience when I saw The King’s Speech at the Renoit in Russell Square.  It seemed only fitting to see a quintessentially British film in London, the center of English theater.

As a film student, there are very few classic films whose greatness is hinged mostly on the performance.  The best films are usually triumphant in every facet of the visual language, cinematography, mise en scene, as well as editing.  There must be subtlety.  Every shot, every edit must be chosen deliberately to convey a message to be interpreted and deliberated by, admittedly highbrow, film critics.  It is these critics who set the rigid standard for cinematic excellence, but the aforementioned requirements are not absolute as The King’s Speech is an exception.

The King’s Speech is a masterpiece not in any degree of technical genius, but in its outstanding performance and keen insight into a period not so long ago.

It is a fairly predictable story, yes, but the acting is suberb.  Colin Firth, playing King George VI, definitely made himself a contender for the academy award.  He feigned his character’s crippling speech impediment with such conviction that in the end (after nearly two years of speech lessons), when he rallied the country to support England’s decision to oppose Germany in the wake of WWII, everyone in the theater seemed to fight the urge to stand up and cheer. 

The drama was very lighthearted, but the film did an excellent job at examining the deep-rooted prejudice between socioeconomic classes in 1930’s England especially between the monarchy and the middle class.  Firth, after initial doubt and hesitation, entrusted a common man with no formal education or qualifications to mend his speech.  During their time together, the good times were peppered with condescending outbursts; a constant reminder from Firth that he was royalty and Logue (played by Geoffrey Rush) was not.  It was painful to watch (Logue is just so loveable, perfectly content with his modest socioeconomic standing), but it was sincere in showing how the royal family seemed to perpetually exist on their cloud of symbolic power.  However, Firth’s eventual gratitude for Logue’s aid in his transformation transcended their many differences and, in the end, they became lifelong friends.  A reminder, in no uncertain terms, that royals are people too, while not dismissing the wealth of privilege they call home.

London... So Far

4 weeks in country.  That sounds a bit like the intro to some Vietnam war epic but in a way London is similar to the jungle.  It's very overwhelming but not in the way NYC is; instead of skyscrapers and flashing flights there's cobblestone alleys and ageless history.  It's beautiful but it's also a constant reminder that London existed long before I arrived and will most certainly be around long after I'm gone.

London has an almost biblical feel to it, like the ancient city of Babylon.  Every street looks the same so you get the notion that even the locals can't navigate seamlessly through their area.  Central London is tricky- it's very touristy (and by extension, expensive) but there are nooks all over town where you can eat or drink for cheap.  You just have to know where to look.  Public transportation is excellent.  The subway system (or "tube," in the King's English) is very efficient with an almost paradoxical simplicity.  You see, each station extends a couple stories underground (to accommodate the different lines) but the actual network is incredibly easy to understand and navigate especially compared to the labyrinth that is the NYC metro system.

The tube closes at midnight, however, and if you want to avoid selling your kidneys for cab fare- you have to find the right Nightbus.  This can be difficult, particularly if you've been drowning your liver at the pub for a couple hours.  Speaking of pubs, the English drinking culture is very different than that of the United States.  Binge drinking is still prevelant among the youth, but there is more of a solidarity between generations.  Most pubs are attractive venues for all ages, which encourages socializing between different demographic groups.  My friends and I have been engaged, on multiple occasions, by older groups of gentlemen perhaps to entertain their nostalgia for their own youth or simply out of benevolence.

That's all for now, stay tuned for my review of Brighton Rock and a discussion of the European perspective on the american political machine.