|
|
October 31
October 29, 2006
Gross National Product: The Heroin Trade's New Face
HERE'S one measure of Harlem's gentrification: If you want the flavor of 116th Street in 1990, you now have to film 20 blocks north. So on a recent afternoon the crew of "American Gangster," which Ridley Scott is directing for release next fall, switched the signs on 136th Street, to the confusion of both pedestrians and traffic, and Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe headed for a street confrontation.
Mr. Washington plays a drug lord who rose to power in the 1970's; in this scene he was just out of prison. Mr. Crowe plays the investigator who brought him down and then became his friend. As they approached four glaring young men, Mr. Washington's character gave no ground. "Uh-oh," he said dismissively. "Look out. Here come the gangsters." Both parties stopped, scowled eye to eye, then walked on. It was a changing of the guard, one generation of American gangster giving way to the next.
This scene, which closes the movie, is an appropriate coda. As much as the film's heavies measure themselves against gangsters past and present, the movie will play against a long tradition of gangster pictures. The tradition is updated periodically, like science fiction movies or westerns, to reflect the anxieties of the moment. In the Depression, film gangsters like Paul Muni in "Scarface" evoked economic possibility and louche glamour; in the 1970's, with the "Godfather" movies, they stood for family values and honor in a corrupt world; in the 1990's, with "Goodfellas" and its ilk, they navigated the loss of empire. Tony Soprano adds the midlife anxieties of 21st-century suburban baby boomers, and, in recent weeks, "The Departed" played with the interchangeability of good guys and bad.
In "American Gangster," which is based on the real-life heroin kingpin Frank Lucas and the detective-turned-prosecutor Richie Roberts, the themes are strictly corporate business.
"I saw it as a story about American business and race," said Steven Zaillian, the principal scriptwriter, who also wrote "Schindler's List" and more recently wrote and directed "All the King's Men," starring Sean Penn. "If you substitute any other product for heroin, it'd be clear. It wasn't the idea of doing a dope story so much as: What happens when a black businessman takes over an industry? It becomes something that's not going to be allowed to continue. Frank became bigger than the Mafia and took over their business in a way that made it difficult for him to stay in business."
In an industry that has often whitewashed racial differences, gangster movies, like westerns, provide a sexy, impolitic showcase for ethnic conflict and tribalism. Westerns typically reaffirm the white majority, both morally and militarily, but in gangster movies the lines of pride, righteousness and power are more complicated. In a nation of immigrants, the movies pit audience sympathy for the new immigrant against fear of the unassimilated ethnic clan. They are epics of nonassimilation: no one is more Italian than an Italian Mafioso and his kin.
The successive screen mobs — Irish, Italian, Jewish, Chinese, Cuban or African-American — all practice strict (and interchangeable) moral codes and family values. Yet each is eventually threatened by ascendant newcomers, who make their codes seem not pure but old-fashioned, flabby. In the ethnic drama of the gangster picture, assimilation becomes a fatal decadence: as the immigrant group becomes more like the dominant culture, it loses its strength. Even as the movies embrace their minorities, they do not let them transcend their difference. And in the end, of course, someone rats; justice wins out.
"American Gangster" passes the drug trade, which divided the Corleone family in "The Godfather," from the Italian-American mob to Frank Lucas, who imagines it as a sleek global supply chain running from Vietnam to Harlem. Brian Grazer, one of the film's producers, saw it as a parable about business in the age of Enron.
"My opinion is the movie is a metaphor for white-collar greed and crime," Mr. Grazer said, bouncing around in a trailer on Riverside Drive. "In the end, how different is what Frank Lucas does than a junk-bond dealer?"
How deeply the movie will develop these themes is anyone's guess. But it is unlikely that the makers of "Scarface," "Public Enemy No. 1" or "A Bronx Tale" would have discussed their protagonists in the language of market share and hostile takeover.
Among Harlem drug lords, Frank Lucas was less celebrated than Nicky Barnes, but his rise and fall as a businessman, chronicled in a 2000 New York magazine article by Mark Jacobson that inspired the movie, is as American as Horatio Alger. Raised poor in rural North Carolina, he came to New York and modernized the heroin trade, importing directly from Southeast Asia — often in military planes with the help of military brass, and sometimes in the caskets of dead soldiers. In the process he bucked the control of the Italian Mafia, which often treated African-Americans as underlings. He improved the product, the supply chain and the organizational structure, amassing a fortune he once estimated at $52 million in cash. He went to prison for 15 years before giving testimony that led to more than 100 arrests, said Mr. Roberts, who now has a private criminal law practice, with Mr. Lucas as a friend and client.
"These drug guys, then and now, were brutal," Mr. Roberts said. "He was, too. But he was smart. There was something about him I liked. I hate to admit it." He added: "Some say he's a rat because he cooperated. Baloney. He did the smart thing. He did tremendous harm, but then tremendous good."
What fascinated Mr. Scott, though, were not just Mr. Lucas's entrepreneurial courage but also his values, especially compared with those of the police and prosecutors, including Mr. Roberts, who is portrayed in the movie as a womanizer.
"It's about the paradox of what their private life was like and their work life," Mr. Scott said between shots on another afternoon. "They're reversals on each other. One is personally ethical, yet his business is highly debatable, i.e., heroin. And yet his ethics about his business as a process and procedure are so meticulous that it can almost be respected."
Speaking of Mr. Roberts, he continued: "And the other character is again a paradox of opposites. His personal life is all to hell, and yet he's a hound dog and fervently honest. He was infamous within the Police Department for having returned a million dollars of probably drug money, which he found in the trunk of a car, instantly making him untrustworthy within the Police Department. So already you have this confusion of ethics."
Mr. Scott, who has made movies that advertise their genres in their titles before, including "Alien" and "Gladiator," said that to set a mood before filming, he studied "The French Connection" and "Prince of the City." He described "American Gangster" as less a genre film than a documentary, but did not complete the thought.
"I like to think in terms of a grand generic notion of an American gangster, as opposed to the American gangster," he said. "Because there are too many famous and infamous American gangsters over the last century. The notion of 'American Gangster' is almost like a new evolution of the adjustment of change. Change in this instance cost the Mafia the main precedence at the time, because they were having to buy the idea of progress in the idea of a black businessman." (Somehow, when he talked to actors and his four camera teams, they seemed to follow him without decryption devices.)
"American Gangster" enters production with a troubled history. In 2004, with Antoine Fuqua directing and Mr. Washington and Benicio Del Toro in the lead roles, Universal Studios scrapped the movie less than a month before the scheduled start of filming, absorbing a loss reported at $30 million. Terry George, director of "Hotel Rwanda," rewrote the script and began a cheaper version last year, before Mr. Grazer started again with Mr. Scott and a new cast.
Mr. Grazer said he had begun to think the movie was cursed because its protagonist was so evil that he was not meant to be popularized.
Mr. Washington, too, said he had wrestled with the question of whether it was appropriate to give the Hollywood treatment to someone whose chief accomplishment was bringing more heroin to more people. Unlike Mr. Grazer, who cites the first two "Godfather" movies as his favorite films, Mr. Washington said he was never a big fan of gangster movies. "I thought, 'Why should I want to play this dope dealer?' "
But he said he took comfort in the biblical passage "There is no peace, saith the Lord, for the wicked," which he wrote on his script. "This guy gets to a certain place, and one thing after another after another in our script starts happening to him," Mr. Washington said. "His body turns on him. He gets shot. The life of crime — he pays the price in a lot of ways. Some would say not enough, obviously.
"When I met Frank, I really understood what I saw as the arc of the character. He wears nice clothes and drives fancy cars and all that, so if that means glorifying it I guess that's the case. But for me I was looking at the arc of the character, and he don't look that glorious right now."
On the Harlem set, Vicky Gholson, a local resident and community board member, said that without Mr. Washington she might have worried that "American Gangster" would repeat the sins of the blaxploitation films of the 1970's. But, she added: "The mere fact that Denzel is starring in it offsets any mixed feelings I might have of glorifying a drug dealer. This community has a legacy of gangsterism and entertainment, and this movie shows both."
The street scene was not feeling right. The young hoodlums looked like actors in Timberlands and hoodies, not real thugs. The rap figure Fab Five Freddy, a consultant, advised them on their swagger. They were moving away too fast, he said. Real bad boys savor the confrontation.
Mr. Roberts, who said he had not read the entire script, said he hoped the movie was straightforward and not glamorized, but he was already feeling the distorting effects of Hollywood. With Russell Crowe portraying him, he admitted, his girlfriend looks at him differently.
Mr. Crowe said he saw the film in simple terms. "In a slightly ironic way, black businessman with $250 million in the bank who sells heroin" and sleeps with Miss Puerto Rico, "that's great cinema," he said. "There's a responsibility that goes with that as well, to bring that guy to justice. We'll see how we do with that."
Mr. Scott brought the actors and cameras back to position for another take. The young hoodlums slowed down, extending the moment. Mr. Scott was satisfied. The new American gangsters had arrived.
 |
Charles Rosmer Morse Musuem of American Art
THE MASTER'S HAND Louis Comfort Tiffany designed the butterfly window for the ballroom in his duplex, which occupied the fouth and fifth floors of the 57-room mansion at 72nd Street and Madison Avenue.
Charles Rosmer Morse Musuem of American Art
Teakwood doors and frame from the
October 29, 2006
Streetscapes | Louis Comfort Tiffany
The Mansion That Got Away
LOUIS COMFORT TIFFANY and Laurelton Hall" will open Nov. 21 at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, a show devoted to the surviving furnishings of Laurelton, Tiffany's legendary Long Island mansion. The house, in Oyster Bay, went up in 1905 and was destroyed by fire 52 years later.
And although his castlelike house at 72nd Street and Madison Avenue was demolished in 1936 and is hardly remembered, Tiffany had removed many parts of it to Oyster Bay, so the show also honors its memory.
Charles Lewis Tiffany founded a stationery and fancy-goods shop in 1837, and by the 1850's it had become one of the leading jewelry stores in the country. To his distress, his son Louis Comfort Tiffany "never developed any fondness or capacity for trade," according to an account in The Brooklyn Eagle in 1888.
Rather, Tiffany the younger began a career as an artist in the 1860's, experimented with glass design in the 1870's, and began a decorating business that evolved into Tiffany Studios, renowned for pottery, jewelry, metalwork and, especially, stained glass.
Before the 1880's, Louis Tiffany lived in an apartment building on 26th Street, and his father in a house on Madison Avenue near 38th. In 1882 the elder Tiffany had McKim, Mead & White file plans for a new residence at 72nd and Madison.
The son took control of the project, working intensively with Stanford White to produce one of the most unusual residences, indeed buildings, ever conceived in New York. Completed in 1885, with 57 rooms in all, it is generally referred to as Louis Tiffany's house, but it consisted of three apartments. The first, on the first and second floors, was frequently said to be for Charles, but he never occupied it. The second apartment, taking up the third floor, was for Louis's unmarried sister, Louise; the third, on the fourth and fifth floors, was for Louis himself. The structure was crowned by a great tile roof — substantial enough to have covered a suburban railroad station — and by a complex assemblage of turrets, balconies, chimney stacks, oriel windows and other elements in rough-faced bluestone and mottled yellow iron-spot brick.
The round entry arch was protected by a 25-foot-wide portcullis of intricately worked iron. A critic in The Real Estate Record & Guide wrote that the building was "spirited and picturesque" but found fault with its massive castlelike appearance, which was "scarcely appropriate to the domestic character except of a fortified dwelling."
A later article in the same journal — presumably by a different writer — called the building "one of the finest pieces of domestic architecture in the country."
The huge gable end facing Madison Avenue, although often overlooked, was particularly spectacular: 80 feet wide and as tall or taller, with a central 15-panel window and 8 smaller openings set into the masonry. It was widely known that this lighted Louis Tiffany's majestic studio, said by The New York Times in 1888 to have "long been an object of curiosity and mystery."
The studio, on the upper floor of Tiffany's duplex, was really three or even four stories in total height, the space open to the gables and disappearing into the dusky light cast by stained and other decorative glass. A forest of ironwork, brasses and decorative glassware suspended from the ceiling made the atmosphere even more obscure and mysterious. Near the center was a four-hearth fireplace, feeding into one sinuous chimney made of concrete. It rose from the floor like an Art Nouveau tree trunk.
In a 1911 article in Arts and Decoration magazine, Charles De Kay said that each of the driftwood fires in the four fireplaces was treated to give off a different-colored light. "The old and the new combine in this house after a fashion that had not been seen before," he wrote.
A typical example was the sumptuous fireplace in one room, faced with large, flat tiles but randomly punctuated with the hilts from antique Japanese swords, which were also used for the fireplace fender. In another room the walls were painted, then finished with sand that had been stained pink before application. The centerpiece of the mantel was a large collage panel of Pompeian glass surrounded by luminous mosaic tile.
Yet the breakfast room furniture was dead simple, the table of plank construction on sawhorses, enameled white and studded with black nailheads. The room could have been an avant-garde European interior of the World War I period.
The vestibule to the studio was an intricately carved teak facade said to have been taken from an ancient Indian palace. Anna Werfel's 1958 memoir, "And the Bridge Is Love," recounts her magical introduction to the room. She went up a stairway "with complete Sudanese Negro huts" on each side and entered "a hall so vast it seemed boundless."
"Suspended in the dusk," she wrote, "we saw luminous colored glasses that shed a wondrous flowery light. An organist was playing the prelude to 'Parsifal.' "
In 1905, Tiffany built his sumptuous Oyster Bay mansion, Laurelton Hall, where he had the room to carry out his decorative ideas more fully. He apparently spent less and less time in New York — the 1930 census records him in Oyster Bay — but he died in the 72nd Street house in 1933.
Alice Cooney Frelinghuysen, the curator of the show at the Met, says that although Tiffany took some of the furnishings from 72nd Street to his Long Island estate, others were sold after his death.
The show at the Met collates Laurelton Hall artifacts ranging from stained glass to vases to a peacock headdress. Items from the New York house, far fewer in number, include the carved teak doors to the studio, the striking breakfast furniture, a piano by Tiffany, paintings and glasswork. They offer a fragmentary glimpse into his unusual world.
|
Vincent Laforet for The New York
RACE TO CENTRAL PARK The 2005 field on its five-borough tour.
October 29, 2006
The Main Event
The Americans Are Coming!
By JOHN BRANT
In the 24 years since Alberto Salazar blasted across the finish line of the New York City Marathon to claim his third consecutive victory, there have been winners from New Zealand, Italy, Kenya, Britain, Tanzania, Mexico, South Africa, Morocco, Ethiopia, Norway, Germany, Romania, Switzerland, Russia and Latvia — but not another American. On Nov. 5, there could, perhaps, be two. Two California residents; two Olympic marathon medalists; and the two finest world-class athletes that most Americans have never heard of: Deena Kastor and Meb Keflezighi.
"In the U.S., most all the buzz has come from the middle of the pack," says Mary Wittenberg, the race director of the ING New York City Marathon. "You read about the marathon in the lifestyle section of the newspaper. That's been very cool, but on Nov. 5, we want to put the marathon back on the sports pages."
Strictly speaking, Kastor and Keflezighi have already been there, although the ink spilled in their behalf would form a droplet in the ocean engulfing controversial figures like Justin Gatlin or Marion Jones. But for a variety of reasons — fate, timing, biological clocks — that situation may be about to change.
In terms of talent and appeal, Kastor in particular is overdue for a media onslaught. She's a 33-year-old product of the Southern California suburbs, a gourmet cook who majored in creative writing in college. She seems poised to become another Joan Benoit Samuelson, a multidimensional blend of superstar and girl-next-door with the charisma to galvanize the public and set New York City apart from its sister marathons: Chicago and Berlin, which are also run in the fall, and Boston and London, both spring races. When Kastor signed to run New York last June, before the 2005 champions, Paul Tergat and Jelena Prokopcuva, agreed to defend their titles, Wittenberg couldn't believe her good luck.
"Professional athletes are by far the biggest line item in my budget," Wittenberg says of the appearance fees and prize money given to the elite contenders. "But without them, we don't get TV and print-media coverage, and kids don't have role models. Deena is a dream for both purposes."
Even more important, Kastor is a native-born American. For the last two decades, Americans in general, and New Yorkers in particular, have enjoyed their flings with foreign marathon divas like Grete Waitz, Tegla Loroupe and Paula Radcliffe, but it will take a countrywoman to grab their hearts. If Kastor wins next Sunday, she might become that object of national affection.
Kastor first flirted with crossover fame two years ago, after her virtuoso performance at the Athens Olympics. On a stiflingly hot day, she picked off runner after runner over the second half of the marathon course to claim the bronze medal in 2:27:20, the first medal won by an American woman in an Olympic marathon since Benoit Samuelson's gold at the '84 Games. But Radcliffe, the British world-record holder, drew more attention for her spectacular late-race meltdown than Mizuki Noguchi of Japan did for winning the marathon — or Kastor did for finishing third. Nor did it help when Kastor decided to run the 2004 New York City Marathon, which was held just 77 days after the Olympic race. Unable to pull off such a quick turnaround, she ignominiously dropped out at Mile 16.
Cereal-box status continued to elude Kastor last spring, after the London Marathon, which she won by a commanding two-minute margin, setting an American record of 2:19:36. She was lionized in Britain and much of the rest of the world, but back home the center of attention was Barry Bonds and the steroid allegations that were clouding his push toward Babe Ruth's home run total. Few American sports fans noticed Kastor's achievement.
For slightly different reasons, Meb Keflezighi, native bred but not native born, has also been largely neglected outside the running community (though an appearance in a recent TV commercial for MasterCard modestly boosted his recognition). One of a family of 11 kids, Keflezighi (pronounced kef-LEZ-gee) was born in Eritrea, but migrated with his family to San Diego in 1987, when he was 12. He began running seriously at 15, and in 1998 became a United States citizen. After each triumph in his career — along with an Olympic silver medal, he has won 15 national titles in track, cross-country and road racing — Keflezighi has patiently had to explain his credentials to a fresh crop of unknowing reporters.
He began his marathon career with a ninth-place, 2:12:35 finish at the 2002 New York City Marathon. At the Athens Olympics, Keflezighi became the first American man since 1976 to win a medal, finishing second in 2:11:29. Ten weeks later, at the '04 New York City Marathon, he finished second in 2:09:53. He overcame a serious thigh injury to finish third in New York last year (2:09:56), and ran an identical time, also good for third place, in Boston this April. All were superb tactical races, delivered at the world's most important marathons. Still, by the strict standards of professional sports, they were bridesmaid performances.
But at New York this year, Keflezighi could finally break the tape — provided he copes with a hamstring that cramped up during a race in early October. His principal competitors next Sunday will be athletes who, despite their daunting résumés, may be a crucial step or two beyond their prime: the defending champion and marathon world-record holder, Paul Tergat of Kenya, is 37; Italy's Stefano Baldini, who won gold in Athens, is 35; and the '04 New York winner, Hendrick Ramaala of South Africa, is 34. (A dark-horse exception to these veterans, the extravagantly talented 23-year-old American Dathan Ritzenhein, will be making his marathon debut.) Keflezighi is 31, with a high threshold for pain. "Meb
has great 10K speed, and I believe great marathons are built on great 10K's," says Alberto Salazar. "I think he is ready to break through to a win this year. But that said, the men's marathon doesn't have a Tiger Woods right now. At any given race, there are five guys who could win."
Since last spring, meanwhile, the marathon stars have aligned more indelibly in Kastor's favor. Paula Radcliffe announced that she was pregnant and put her running career on hold until 2007. Kastor inherited the role as the Western world's alpha female marathoner, and speculation turned to which autumn marathon she would run. Would she return to Chicago, where she had won in 2005, or perhaps choose Berlin, with its salt-flats-fast course? Even though its serpentine, five-borough course yields times two to four minutes slower than the other two races, Kastor chose New York. "I have already won ... the Chicago Marathon," she said in a press release announcing her entry. "And I want to win in New York."
Such bravado goes a long way in this city. In 1980, Salazar, a 22-year-old college senior, strutted into town from Oregon and predicted, Joe Namathstyle, that he would run a 2:10. Salazar ran a sub-2:10, and today the race's top American finishers' award is named in his honor.
Kastor's main rivals, any one of whom could beat her if she has an off day, include Prokopcuva, the defending champion, from Latvia; the former world-record holder Catherine Ndereba of Kenya, the silver medalist in the Athens marathon; and Susan Chepkemei, also from Kenya, who finished second in New York in '04 and '05.
"I know New York is going to be a tactical race, a lot slower than London, and that at some point I'm going to be in a dogfight," says Kastor. "The race will be decided over the last 10 kilometers, and it could very well come down to the last few hundred yards through Central Park."
Winning a sprint is a skill Kastor hasn't needed to employ in her previous marathons. Conventional wisdom holds that when two elite athletes battle side by side in the marathon's red zone, the "faster" runner — the one who has clocked the better times at recent shorter-distance races — will prevail. By this measure, Kastor could face trouble. In the weeks before both Chicago in '05 and London last spring, she tuned up by running American-record times in the half-marathon. This past summer, citing a lingering physical torpor, she canceled her races and took a bike trip in Italy before returning to California in August and beginning weeks of 120-mile training.
So perhaps, after 26 miles, when Kastor catches sight of the Tavern on the Green, her finishing gear will be missing. But in a world-class marathon, closing hard is more often a matter of confidence. Clearly, Kastor has that. "I love being the runner to beat," she says.
John Brant is the author of "Duel in the Sun: Alberto Salazar, Dick Beardsley and America's Greatest Marathon."
 |
Olaf Blecker for The New York Times
October 29, 2006
Herr Mateschitz Wants to Juice You Up
By BRYAN CURTIS
At the Nürburgring, a regally dilapidated racetrack outside Cologne, Germany, the European Grand Prix was taking shape. Michael Schumacher, the seven-time Formula One champion, would soon be chasing Spain's Fernando Alonso, who had captured the pole. Starting well behind the leaders would be four cars driven by relatively inexperienced drivers. Two would crash during the first two laps of the race; the best would finish an ineffectual 11th. The only remarkable thing about these cars would be what was painted on the chassis, in bright red-and-white letters: "Red Bull."
But for Red Bull, the Austrian energy-drink company owned by the billionaire Dietrich Mateschitz, winning at the Nürburgring was almost beside the point. With typically boundless enthusiasm, Red Bull was in Germany last spring to paper the racetrack with its brand. As you approached the track, young, apple-cheeked Red Bull women — of which the company appears to have an endless supply — seemed to materialize out of the forest. It wasn't even 9 a.m., but already they were wearing prepared smiles and asking, "Reg-u-lar or diet?"
In the paddock, the boulevard for drivers, team officials and untethered celebrities, Red Bull had made a statement in architecture. Not long ago, the Formula One paddock had been an unimpressive collection of tents and trailers — slapdash accommodations to while away the hours before the race. After Red Bull bought its first team from Jaguar in 2004, assuming annual operating expenses of reportedly more than $100 million, the company erected an "Energy Station," a gleaming, three-story, silver-and-blue headquarters resembling an Austrian disco. "In the beginning, you could see people standing in front of it, not knowing whether they could come in or not," said Thomas Hofmann, a Red Bull spokesman. Of course they could come in — Red Bull welcomed everyone! On this day, associates from Ferrari and Renault and the other top teams — teams that would overpower Red Bull's cars on the track that afternoon — were walking through the monogrammed glass doors to graze on a prerace feast of beef carpaccio with crayfish, baby sweet corn and Red Bull asparagus. Red Bull had even managed to brand the asparagus.
Young women stationed at the paddock gates waved copies of the Red Bulletin. Finding Formula One's mise-en-scène too aristocratic, Mateschitz had hired Norman Howell, a British newspaperman, to publish a muckraking daily magazine. Just as Howell was explaining Mateschitz's impish approach to Formula One — "He's taking the piss out of the sport because the sport is very up itself" — a half-dozen young German women (more women!) tottered by in short skirts and high heels. These were the Formula Unas, the winners of Red Bull's local "talent" competition, which is held in every city on the Formula One tour. Among other qualifications, a Red Bull spokeswoman explained, Unas had to be "very social, very motorsports oriented and very open-minded."
Inside the Energy Station, poring over race strategy, was Gerhard Berger, the co-owner of the second of Red Bull's two teams, Scuderia Toro Rosso, purchased from Minardi last year. Now in his 40's, Berger, an Austrian, was a former Formula One driver and one of the first of a singular breed you might call the Red Bull athlete. In 1987, Berger was approached by a tall, smiling fellow Austrian who said he had a proposal. Nearly 20 years later, Berger recalls that two things stood out about Dietrich Mateschitz: that he was unusually enthusiastic, and that he didn't have any money. Somehow, Mateschitz's charm offensive won the day. When Berger next appeared on Austrian television, he made sure he was filmed smiling and conspicuously drinking from a silver-and-blue can. Red Bull was born — as an energy drink and also as a sporting brand. "I never felt like I was sponsored by Red Bull," said Berger. Instead, he felt like he was immediately a part of the company, helping to "develop the brand."
Since Berger's fateful sip, Red Bull has grown into one of the most influential sports marketers on earth, spending more than $300 million annually. Lately, at Mateschitz's behest, Red Bull has begun reaching its tentacles deeper into America. To give its Formula One operation an American flourish, Red Bull had introduced a drivers' development program in 2002 that discovered the fortuitously named Scott Speed, the first Yankee that the European-dominated circuit had seen in 13 years. Then, in March, Mateschitz reportedly paid more than $100 million in a deal that gave him Major League Soccer's New York MetroStars — which, with customary élan, he renamed the New York Red Bulls. If investing in soccer and Formula One seems like a natural ambition for a European playboy, then Mateschitz is defying expectations by launching a Nascar team that will begin competing in 2007. And these new American ventures are merely a complement to Red Bull's presence in the unshaven quarters of the fringier sports, where Mateschitz has already branded a small army of triathletes, motocross champions, freestyle snowmobilers, BASE jumpers, ultramarathoners, aerobatic fliers and white-water kayakers.
For sure, Mateschitz wants his trademarked athletes to win. But as was clear at the Nürburgring, his grand strategy does not rely on something as unpredictable as race results. Mateschitz is trying to forge an unprecedented marriage between sports and selling: to make the athletes his pitchmen, selling product every time they kick a ball or shift into fifth gear. For Red Bull, sports is marketing, and marketing is sports — and the company won't stop until the two things are one. It happened in Europe, and it will happen in America.
And just what is Red Bull? It was discovered, if that's the word, in the early 80's by Mateschitz, who was visiting Asia as the marketing chief of a German cosmetics company. Its origins are Thai; the original name, "Krating Daeng," means red water buffalo. With the blessing of its founding family, with whom he formed a partnership that still exists, Mateschitz brought the drink to Salzburg, Austria. With a new name and a slightly rejiggered formula, it quickly moved into Switzerland, Germany and England. (French authorities snorted at the 80 milligrams of caffeine per can and banned it.)
Red Bull was not only a sports drink — a liquid so sugary it almost hurt going down — but a "philosophy." You only have to speak to Mateschitz's employees for a few minutes before they refer you to his optimistic message. Red Bull, they say, promotes an attitude of originality, nonconformism and dreamy reverie. If a Red Bull employee wants to learn to pilot a plane, Mateschitz says, he will pay for flying lessons so as to expand his or her horizons. As he sees it, "When you are called Red Bull, when you stimulate body and mind, when you give people wings, this has to do with sports, flying, with having been empowered to do whatever you want to."
For years, rumors abounded of Red Bull's "secret ingredient" (some maintained it was bull semen); that Red Bull was unduly habit forming and led to addiction; and that Red Bull contained illegal drugs. In fact, Red Bull consists largely of caffeine and sugar. Its only unusual ingredient is taurine, which the company trumpets, but which scientists say is an amino acid the body produces on its own.
In America, Red Bull controls about 70 percent of the energy-drink market it almost single-handedly created, and sold slightly more than one billion cans last year. So successful was Mateschitz's invasion that the company now finds its strategy copied by dozens of competitors: upstarts Rockstar and Monster, which also pepper their brand across extreme sports; PepsiCo's Mountain Dew, which sponsors snowboarder Shaun White, among others; and Coca-Cola's Full Throttle, which has dinged Red Bull in its commercials. "They're a classic category pioneer that's being circled by the sharks," says Terry Lefton, an editor-at-large at Sports Business Journal who follows the industry. And to keep his competitors at bay, Mateschitz will have to continue to plow money into American sports.
The happily schizophrenic nature of Red Bull's sports empire can be traced to the whims of Mateschitz, who has lived much of his life as an itinerant sportsman. In his youth, he played soccer. Then, during a decadent 10-year run as a student, he became a ski instructor. Mateschitz converted to snowboarding with the rest of Austria in the 1980's and did little else for years. Moreover, he told me, it was his "great dream" to have been a free climber, skittering up rock faces without a rope. Unfortunately, he struggled with being untethered to the earth. Now, as a 62-year-old billionaire, Mateschitz pilots the company's many planes (including one that belonged to the Yugoslavian dictator Marshal Tito), drives race cars and motorcycles, skis and snowboards.
Mateschitz styles himself as a gentleman adventurer, the kind who can call up world-class athletes and convince them to take him on an outing. The idea is that Mateschitz, who is a reasonably good athlete himself, will test his mettle against the professional. Four years ago, Heinz Kinigadner, the Austrian motocross champion, enlisted him to ride motorcycles into the Tunisian Sahara. "We were 150 miles from the next village and 100 miles from the next road," Kinigadner recalled recently. "And just when the sun was going down, Dietrich had a big crash. It took us until 3 in the morning to get him out of the desert." Mateschitz seemed unscathed, if unusually quiet, while sipping cappuccino the next morning. He hopped on a plane bound for Europe, and Kinigadner assumed everything was all right. A few days later, he heard from Mateschitz. "He called and said, 'Tomorrow morning, I'm having an operation,"' Kinigadner said. "I said, 'What?!' He said, 'My upper arm is broken and so is my shoulder."'
Despite such outré thrill-seeking, Mateschitz is almost painfully shy; a favorite mantra is "privacy is quality." (He once purchased an Austrian society magazine, which promptly stopped covering him.) When we met on a sunny afternoon this spring at Hangar-7, a domed hangar-turned-museum for his various aircraft outside Salzburg, Mateschitz appeared wearing a black blazer, dark jeans and a nervous smile. I asked him if he had entertained visions of becoming a professional athlete himself. "I'm not passionate enough, you know?" he said. "For example, when we learned windsurfing 20 years ago, there were friends of mine who practiced hours and hours and hours. And as soon as I could manage a strong wind it was good enough. This is true for almost everything I do. I do it not to be really good but just to do it and to have fun."
This is an unusually modest self-assessment, but it nicely illustrates Mateschitz's approach to sports. As the display at the Nürburgring showed, Red Bull's marketing machine is vast and unflinchingly professional. But underlying the omnipresent Red Bull logos is a notion that sports should be unbound from the shackles that hinder a fan's enjoyment — greedy owners, bureaucrats, expensive tickets. In the case of Formula One, Mateschitz argues that before he bought in, the sport had been reduced to "BMW against Mercedes and Honda against Toyota," and that fans could no longer appreciate its natural beauty.
With the notable exception of Gerhard Berger, the original Red Bull athletes were outdoorsmen. "In the past, we had no team sports — only the free climbers, the white-water, the snowboarders of the world," Mateschitz says. It was thought that these action-sports stars — operating on the margins of, or in opposition to, the sporting mainstream — would best embody the Red Bull philosophy. Mateschitz gave the athletes modest amounts of money, often only a few thousand dollars per year, and asked them to wear Red Bull T-shirts or helmets when they competed. In turn, the athletes, many of whom had never known sponsorship or celebrity, became enthusiastic evangelists for the drink. Today, Red Bull has more than 100 Americans among its 800 worldwide athletes in an encyclopedia of disciplines. Prominent among them are Daron Rahlves, the alpine skier; Travis Pastrana, the high-flying freestyle motocross star; Tao Berman, the kayaker; Ryan Sheckler, the skateboarder; Nicky Hayden, the MotoGP motorcycle champion; and Shane McConkey, the free skier.
McConkey, who once proclaimed himself "the most stoked human being to ever have lived," is a representative specimen. In the early 90's, he was one of a few hundred anonymous skiers competing in what was then called extreme skiing, a discipline that took you off manicured ski slopes and into far more precarious descents. In 1996, McConkey took first prize in a Red Bull-sponsored competition called Snow Thrill, and after the race, a rep from Austria asked if he wanted to become a Red Bull athlete. "I was excited to promote them because there weren't many companies supporting the kind of skiing we were trying to push on the world," McConkey says. Given a helmet emblazoned with a Red Bull logo and some modest funding, McConkey was left to pursue his sporting passions. Lately, that has meant joining free skiing (as extreme skiing is now known) with his other favorite sport, BASE jumping (basically, parachuting from a fixed object, like a building or a bridge). The new hybrid, sometimes called skiBASEing, has McConkey strapping on a parachute and skiing off the edge of a cliff at 60 m.p.h. For this McConkey receives several thousand dollars a year and Red Bull's enthusiastic blessing. "How many companies in the world would even consider supporting BASE jumping?" he told me. "It's crazy. There's too much liability. And Red Bull's just like, 'So?"'
McConkey's was a typical Red Bull sponsorship. He needed Mateschitz's money, and Mateschitz needed his brand to absorb some of McConkey's stubbly authenticity. Mateschitz repeated the transaction a few hundred times in dozens of different sports. These days, the 800 Red Bull athletes are the sporting version of Red Bull's more conventional under-the-radar marketers, who pass out the drink in clubs and on college campuses — part of a practice the columnist Rob Walker has dubbed "murketing." Since Red Bull does very little advertising, Mateschitz hopes these "sportsmen opinion-leaders," as he calls them, can win over a young audience — one that sees the Red Bull logo on Shane McConkey's rapidly descending parachute and thinks, "I want to drink what he's drinking."
This is worth pausing over, because what Mateschitz is attempting is a new kind of sports sponsorship, one that is all-consuming. When Michael Jordan pitches Nike basketball shoes, you can still carve out a thin piece of real estate between Jordan the ex-basketball player, who won six N.B.A. championship rings, and Jordan the Nike pitchman, who is currently hawking the 21st iteration of the Air Jordan sneakers. This intellectual space doesn't exist with Red Bull athletes. "We have no spokesmen," says Mateschitz, by which he means Red Bull has no spokespeople paid to proselytize on behalf of the drink, nor does the company use the athletes in advertisements. (Red Bull's only advertising campaign in the United States is a series of crudely drawn and weirdly disturbing TV commercials.) In fact, all the Red Bull athletes are spokesmen, selling the product through their performance. According to Mateschitz, when Shane McConkey leaps off a snow-covered mountain, he is cultivating Red Bull's image: its originality and derring-do and carefree cool. Red Bull gives its sportsmen opinion-leaders no talking points, no memorable catchphrases to shriek as they dive off the mountainside. They're expected only to be their daffy selves, which, in turn, promotes the drink's daffiness. When I called McConkey at his home in Lake Tahoe, he was as happy to talk about skiing Vail's Look Ma run in the nude as he was about his Red Bull sponsorship.
The final part of Red Bull's marketing strategy is its almost comic insistence on styling its product as a performance-enhancing sports drink. Most sports drinks repeat a slightly less ebullient version of this fiction. But in Red Bull's case, it is key to the product. Shane McConkey BASE jumping off 4,000-foot cliffs on Baffin Island? He was powered by Red Bull. Felix Baumgartner, another sponsored athlete, gliding on carbon composite wings across the English Channel? Also Red Bull. To assist with his own endurance and concentration, Mateschitz says, he drinks more than a dozen cans of Red Bull per day, though a few years ago, weight gain forced him to switch to diet.
Sponsoring free skiers is a relatively low-risk proposition (except for the skier). But to fend off competitors in America, Mateschitz figured that he was going to have to invest in the previously verboten realm of team sports. Red Bull's team-sports initiatives up to then had been fairly modest: soccer and ice hockey clubs in Salzburg, and the two very expensive Formula One teams. Red Bull's reticence was a matter of image. If a Red Bull-sponsored wakeboarder was off his game, practically no one would notice. But if a Red Bull-owned team was flailing at the bottom of the standings, the company would be forced to endure the humiliations that other sports owners do: the media scrutiny, the howl of angry fans, the blow to their image. Mateschitz has often worried that if a team called the Red Bulls is losing, then people will naturally assume that the drink is bunk.
Mateschitz, then, would not be the typically detached team sponsor with a sign in the left-field bleachers or a logo on the chassis of a Formula One car. "We are not Marlboro, who goes to Ferrari and gives them a check every year and that's it," he told me. He would insist on something never before seen: full ownership. And any team he owned would undergo a process he cheerfully calls "relaunching." This meant that the team would be rebranded, in toto, as the Red Bulls. When Mateschitz purchased Salzburg's 72-year-old soccer club, SV Wüstenrot, in April 2005, the company reportedly declared that the team had "no history." Despite the protests of its supporters, Wüstenrot became Red Bull Salzburg.
Relaunching is not a strategy that works with, say, the National Football League. So Mateschitz took his money elsewhere: Nascar, which has a long history of wealthy patrons, and Major League Soccer, which needs all the wealthy patrons it can get. "Soccer is by far the most important sport in the world," Mateschitz said in Salzburg. "So when you are a global company, you hardly can ignore it anymore. Because of the World Cup this year, we said if we ever want to be involved in soccer, now is the right time to do so."
In March, Mateschitz bought the New York franchise from the mogul Philip Anschutz's company AEG. With his New York soccer experiment, Mateschitz is quick to point out that he has studied both the failures of American soccer and its lone blissful moment, the white-hot late-1970's run of the New York Cosmos. During the Cosmos' heyday, the team was the toast of New York, with Robert Redford and Mick Jagger dropping by the locker room to pay obeisance to Pelé and the other Cosmos stars. (Pelé appeared at the Red Bulls' home opener in April to bless the new team.)
But Mateschitz knows glamour will only take you so far. "The New York Cosmos — they had everything," he told me. "But it didn't help soccer." Indeed, without a durable fan base or a solvent league, the Cosmos were reduced to a barnstorming squad by 1984, and both league and team flamed out the next year. Mateschitz has made all the usual noises about incubating soccer in America, pledging to sponsor a national youth league and build at least 100 new street-soccer courts in the United States in the next few years. And he insists that he and his associates will need at least two or three years to raise the Red Bulls' profile to the point where the league can secure a better television contract. (This year, Major League Soccer signed an eight-year deal with ESPN that was unheard-of for an American soccer league.) But as his Formula One history showed, Mateschitz was also not above the bold marketing ploy. Last spring, he reportedly offered a 10-year, $120 million contract to the Brazilian star forward Ronaldo. (Red Bull acknowledges only a meeting.) Rumors have also surfaced of talks with the European stars David Beckham and Zinédine Zidane. In September, the team broke ground on a new $200 million soccer stadium in Harrison, N.J., which would seat 25,000 fans and move the Red Bulls out of cavernous Giants Stadium.
Meanwhile, Red Bull's Nascar plans remain a greater crapshoot. Red Bull has established bona fides with American motorsports, including the MotoGP circuit (basically, the Formula One of motorcycle racing), where it sponsors driver Nicky Hayden and puts on an annual race at Laguna Seca; a brief venture in the struggling Indy Racing League; and ownership of the Formula One teams, which bring the Energy Station and the Formula Unas to Indianapolis once a year. In January, Mateschitz hired Marty Gaunt, a veteran of the vaunted Penske Racing operation (a powerhouse in both Indy and Nascar), to manage his operations. When Gaunt met with Mateschitz in Salzburg, he found the billionaire wistfully cradling his motorcycle helmet and speaking of grandiose ambitions. By the fall, Gaunt himself was evangelizing the Red Bull philosophy, repeating Mateschitz's heroic charge to "do something impossible."
Red Bull would become the first Nascar owner that was also the team's sponsor. While other team owners would feud with their sponsors, Red Bull would present a single opinion on everyone from the driver to the woman hawking Team Red Bull T-shirts at the souvenir stand. "It's one phone call," Gaunt said. Moreover, as part of what it boasts is the "globalization" of the circuit, Team Red Bull (along with two other teams) will also be driving Toyotas, the first-ever foreign cars allowed in Nascar's Nextel Cup.
By the fall, however, it seemed that Red Bull's vision of total control ended at the doors of the garage. The company was confronting something that even its relentless enthusiasm could not overcome: Nascar bureaucrats. Where Formula One bends to wealthy "privateers" who own the teams, Nascar is more populist, amenable to the plaints of its track owners and R.V.-driving fans. Plans to build a traveling Energy Station were scrapped when several tracks told Red Bull they didn't have the space or had already committed to exclusive deals with other sports drinks. Nor would there be Red Bulletin magazine or Formula Unas. "We're pouring all our money into the car," says Gaunt, which means that if Red Bull is to make a splash in Nascar, the cars will have to be awfully good. With Brian Vickers, a 23-year-old former Busch Series champion and a Nextel Cup veteran, driving car No. 83 (a coy reference to the 8.3 fluid ounces per can of Red Bull), the team, Gaunt said, has set its sights on finishing in the top 20 in its first year, and hopes to move into the top 10 by its third. "We'll never be satisfied running 20th," Gaunt told me. "Our long-term goal is winning races."
When I asked Gaunt what visible impact Red Bull would have on Nascar, he paused for a moment. He finally said it would probably be the look of the car. As both sponsor and team owner, Red Bull wouldn't have to sell off the fender, spoiler and hood. Its Toyotas would be "real clean," Gaunt boasted, with no clutter. Just one giant can of Red Bull, whirling around Daytona at 200 miles per hour.
It's easy to smirk at Red Bull's enthusiasm. For sure, every piece of its sports empire is geared toward selling Red Bull. ("Everything we do is about marketing," Mateschitz has been known to say.) Yet somehow this is not quite as off-putting as one might expect. Last spring, I took in a Red Bull air race on the coast near Barcelona. It was a marketing extravaganza, with spokeswomen passing out drinks, an announcer imported from a local radio station screaming the company's name every few seconds and a bright, gleaming Energy Station planted on the beach. At the same time, Red Bull had enlisted some of the very best aerobatic fliers in the world — including the American Kirby Chambliss, himself a Red Bull athlete — to carve impossibly crazy signatures across the sky. Hundreds of thousands of curious Barcelonans looked on with uncomprehending pleasure as planes swooped between Red Bull-logo gates that had been moored to rafts in the sea. No one understood the scoring system, but no one much cared, either. They were seeing flying as it had rarely been seen since the early days of aviation, and the omnipresent Red Bull logos made it no less beautiful.
Moreover, there's something authentic about Mateschitz's professed love of adrenaline for its own sake. After I spoke to him in Salzburg, he summoned one of the company's exhibition pilots, a gnomish, white-haired man named Sigrid Angerer, to take me up in a Red Bull-logoed jet and turn barrel rolls over the Austrian Alps. I shrieked, while Angerer projected Austrian coolness. The following morning, one of Mateschitz's assistants, Christina Sponer, called me in Salzburg to say she would like to take me to see Red Bull's new "diagnostics center" in the nearby town of Thalgau. Would it be O.K., Sponer asked, if we were to make the trip on her motorcycle? She arrived wearing a leather jacket and black driving gloves, and handed me a helmet from her paragliding gear, which she uses on weekends.
With me clutching at her waist, we raced through the chilly Austrian countryside, past farmhouses and cows and over hills covered in pine trees. When we reached the diagnostics center, Sponer and I walked inside and, not having had any major injections of caffeine since breakfast, grabbed two cans of Red Bull from the refrigerator.
If Mateschitz is to be a team owner and sponsor who shells out millions for athletes, then with the diagnostics center he is determined to be a trainer, too. The center is a destination point for Red Bull athletes, where the staff of doctors can experiment on them as if they are tweaking a new drink formula. The New York Red Bulls, who could use an injection of caffeine, should probably visit soon.
The head of the diagnostics center is an excitable German doctor named Bernd Pansold, who spoke in a fast, broken English. When I mentioned the American teams, he said, "We are no more sponsor, we are owner!"
Two Red Bull surfers limped past us in Red Bull-logo shorts. Pansold led us through enormous weight rooms and medical stations recently occupied by Red Bull's Salzburg soccer team. At the moment, the center's psychological wing, on the second floor, contained two Red Bull hockey players sitting listlessly in front of a computer screen, taking a personality test. Most Red Bull athletes commit to staying in the diagnostics center for at least three days, allowing Pansold and his staff to compile a thick binder of their vital statistics — to help them train better or just to monitor their performance.
"The New York Red Bulls will come here," he said. "It's very clear that soccer players should win together." Clutching a sugar-free Red Bull, he continued in a singsong of German and English, chattering about how high the stakes were, how Red Bull would never be satisfied with its athletes finishing 40th in the Olympics.
I had lost his train of thought and turned helplessly to Sponer. She said: "Mr. Mateschitz likes to say, 'If an insurance company sponsors a team, and the team loses, people don't change their insurance company. But when the Red Bulls lose, people get a new drink."'
Bryan Curtis is a staff writer at Slate. He wrote about Ohio State's Troy Smith in Play's September issue.
|
 |
Bärbel Schmidt for The New York Times
October 29, 2006
Polite When in Neutral
By MIMI SWARTZ
To the uninitiated or the uninformed, Bia Figueiredo might seem like a very bad driver. She zigs and zags through the clogged, smoggy streets of São Paulo - either in her jet-black Honda FIT or her mother's Chevy Corsa, depending on which car's license plate number allows her to beat the air pollution controls and drive legally that day. She downshifts, she upshifts, she tailgates like there's no tomorrow. She passes on the left, passes on the right, ignores various white stripes designating this or that lane and, at particularly tense times, talks about having me open the passenger door to stop the motorcyclists who zoom past between paralyzed cars. "Why don't we try?" she asks, her eyes merry but her lightly accented English tight. The only thing that seems to be keeping Bia's behavior in check, in fact, is that she is just two tickets away from losing her driver's license. "This is the traffic," she says dolefully. "I hate it. I hate it so much."
At this moment she looks and sounds like any other pretty, pouty 21-year-old child of São Paulo prosperity, her long brown hair flawlessly highlighted, her skin unlined, unfreckled and a pale, perfect pink. Her robust figure, today as most days, is clad courtesy of Puma, one of her sponsors: form-fitting T-shirt, form-fitting workout pants, shoes and bag, all color-coordinated in black, white and apple green. Her CD player flits from Shakira to Shania Twain, and her cellphone twitters frequently, but she remains oblivious, focused on the road, looking for an opening, anything that might give her a small advantage in this stultifying daily ritual. This deep concentration I recognize as what she referenced earlier, without a trace of irony, as her "animal instincts."
"I am so sad about it — the traffic," she says, shaking her head. "The drivers just don't go, O.K.? Drivers in São Paulo get used to the traffic and they just don't go."
Not going isn't Bia's problem. Ana Beatriz Figueiredo (pronounced Fee-gay-REE-do, though in Brazil she's just getting famous enough to be known by her nickname, like Pelé or Ronaldinho) is currently on a mission to become not merely the most successful female Formula One driver but the first female Formula One world champion. In the process, she hopes to bring back the era of great Brazilian drivers that ended with the fiery and martyr-like death of the greatest of all, Ayrton Senna, on an Italian racetrack in 1994. Among its participants and fans, Formula One — or Grand Prix racing, as it is also known — is considered the fastest, most difficult and most technologically sophisticated of all motor sports. This is not stock-car racing, or drag-racing, or even Indy. The engineering marvels that are Formula One cars are painstakingly built and can cost in the millions. The track is not the conventional oval that many associate with car racing, but a winding, varied course; in Monaco, it runs through city streets.
So far, Bia has done well, advancing through the various levels of car racing with something that looks like ease. She was named Rookie of the Year for the Brazilian Formula Renault series in 2003, and in 2005 became the first woman to win a Formula Renault race in South America. (In Formula Renault, the cars are not custom-made as they are in Formula One, and reach top speeds of about 150 miles per hour. Formula One cars can hit 200 m.p.h. and higher.) In 2006 she moved up to the faster cars of Formula Three, which reach speeds of 170 m.p.h., and she is currently ranked fourth in South America in that category. Bia's fans have set up an adoring Web site, which is available in both Portuguese and English (www.torcidabiafigueiredo.com.br). She has major sponsors — not just Puma, but guy-guy companies, like Bardhal, which makes auto products — and has been compared favorably with Danica Patrick, who finished fourth at Indy last year and is the first woman ever to have led that race. Currently, Bia's manager is negotiating her next step, a spot on a European Formula Three team, bringing her ever closer to what she calls, with equal parts modesty and ferocity, "my objective."
Back in traffic, Bia shifts into neutral and stews. She reacts to this poky, exhaust-laden morass the way a great author might respond to the first pages of a hack novel, or a fine painter to a landscape on black velvet: it's a deeply personal affront. She falls uncharacteristically silent and then takes a sharp, fed-up breath. Glimpsing an opening, Bia stomps on the accelerator, flying onto the shoulder just long enough to get a G-force jolt before pulling into traffic again. No one, it seems, is in a bigger hurry than she is.
For those of you who have not brushed up on your Brazilian history recently, São Paulo is one of the biggest cities in the world and, not coincidentally, is the center of Brazil's auto industry as well as its auto racing. That São Paulo is a city of strivers is obvious not just from its tony restaurant culture but from its aggressive skyline and carefree pollution. From Bia's descriptions of the rich in Brazil and from stories that described her as middle class, I somehow imagined that she had come from a family of high school teachers or sales clerks, a notion I am quickly disabused of when she takes me to her home.
On the way there, the road begins to open up, and she does too. Bia has a laugh that is deliriously gay, and she has that Brazilian warmth that is like the morning sun — sweet and soft. She has a way of saying "Yes" in response to queries that is simultaneously definitive and encouraging. She is pretty, but in a Katie Holmes way, not a Nicole Kidman way, which means she is approachable. And she is not at all — or not yet — jaded. Listening to Nelly Furtado's latest hit, she asks what the word "promiscuous" means, and looks a little squeamish at the answer, and when I tell her why "condoms" is not the best shortened form of "condominiums," she looks abashed.
We speed past clumps of luxury high-rises adjacent to the infamous Brazilian slums known as favelas. As the city falls away, more favelas squat between gated communities, one of which is Bia's. The neighborhood looks like a jungle version of Bel Air, with large, well-landscaped homes twining up a hill paved with brick streets. The Figueiredo house is a whitewashed, two-story contemporary with a balcony overlooking an expansive swimming pool. A uniformed servant is in attendance. Bia's father is a noted psychiatrist with a specialty in drug and alcohol rehabilitation, and her mother is an oral surgeon. In other words, if soccer is the game of the masses in Brazil, auto racing remains, as always, the province of the wealthy and sophisticated. Since Henry Ford built a plant in Brazil in the 1920's, the car has been synonymous with the country's global ambitions. Brazilian Grand Prix champions showed the world that their country could compete on an international scale, not just by winning races but also by handling cars that were so technologically advanced.
The most renowned Brazilian driver was the handsome, charismatic Senna, who, 12 years after his death, still holds the third-highest number of victories in Formula One history. Senna possessed not only great courage but also tremendous grace and style, qualities that are revered by his countrymen and that he displayed both on and off the track. The loss of Senna still haunts Brazil, most particularly São Paulo, and the hopeful, nostalgic search for a replacement continues to this day. It is therefore not surprising that Bia keeps a photo of Senna tucked under the glass of her bedside table, and that her fervent fan club sees in her the stirrings of opportunity. As the site's founders, Larissa and Cinthia Leite, wrote me giddily in an e-mail: "We met Bia 2004, May, 10 years after that sad May of 1994 and Bia was in #10 car. We felt something unique coming from that car, a wish to do the best, to go beyond of limits. ... Like something wished tell us ... that feeling ... is back!"
That feeling certainly dominates the Figueiredo household. "Our life now is racing," Bia's mother, Marcia, says with a shrug, though she doesn't frequent the races. ("She'd make everyone too nervous," cracks Bia's older sister, Ana Luiza, who also lives at home.) Marcia is warm, with a crinkly, eager smile. Bia's father, Jorge, is the somber one, his sense of humor best described as parched. When I ask what school of psychiatry he favors, he fixes me with a level gaze and answers, "Jorge Figueiredo." But when he has the chance to talk about Bia's accomplishments he becomes more animated.
The Figueiredos raised their girls the modern way: both went to exclusive schools, both studied English in the United States as exchange students, both were raised, in the great democratic tradition, to believe they could be anything and anyone they wanted to be. Today, there are plenty of pictures around the house of Ana Luiza — "the intellectual," according to Bia — and her parents are clearly happy with her ebullient beauty, her success in her chosen career (tourism) and the boyfriend who, baseball cap reversed on his head, seems to have become part of the family. On the other hand, Jorge has at least 12 photo albums devoted to his younger daughter. Showing me shots of Bia's victories, Jorge points out that she refused to accept her trophies from bikini-clad babes, like the boys, but instead asked a family friend to do the honors.
The Figueiredos also have the video equivalent of a highlight reel, which we watch from a plush, burnt-orange couch in which all the seats recline. We see Bia as a child, racing around in her hot-pink go-kart at upwards of 60 m.p.h. As she grows, she progresses to bigger, faster rockets on wheels. Older Bia watches appraisingly as younger Bia speeds around the tracks, blocking off drivers, overtaking them and even crashing. (We all observe calmly as, on-screen, her demolished car is lifted by crane onto the back of an 18-wheeler after Bia hit a wall and spun out. When I ask whether she had been frightened, she shakes her head dismissively.)
The most instructive clips, however, are Bia's post-race interviews from when she was 8 or so. She told me that she was shy when she spoke to the inevitably bemused local TV reporters, but in fact she seems remarkably self-possessed. Her fingernails are already black with grease, and she seldom displays a child's eager smile or willingness to please. Instead, she thinks about her answers carefully before giving them up:
Was she scared of crashing? "No."
Did she play with dolls? "Yes."
Did she have a boyfriend? Of course not.
Asked about Senna's death, Bia bows her head and seems, just for a moment, to leave the premises. She finally responds somberly, which causes her sister, translating from the couch, to erupt with laughter. "She says, 'Life goes on,"' Ana Luiza explains, and it is sort of a crackup, watching this child wax wise, though her father has told me that the only time he has seen Bia cry was, in fact, when Senna died.
What does Bia think about when racing?, the reporter on-screen persists. The little girl looks at him steadily. "You can't step on the brake," she says. "You have to go on."
"Bia grew up at Interlagos," her mother tells me, and this is not an understatement. The fabled racetrack, located between two reservoirs on what was once the outskirts of town, now sits surrounded by a large favela. Bia takes me in through a back entrance, near a newsstand crammed with racing magazines that carry news of the announced retirement of seven-time Formula One world champion Michael Schumacher. We stand in a sun-bleached parking lot between what are actually two courses. To our right is the sprawling track officially known, since 1985, as the José Carlos Pace Autodrome, named for the Brazilian Formula One driver who died in a plane crash. Aficionados still call the place by its old name, however, which dates back to when the track opened in the 1940's. Next door is the far smaller go-kart track named after Ayrton Senna, where Bia demanded to be taken at age 6. (Her father made her wait until she was 7 before she could get behind the wheel.) "This is where I started," she says. It is worth noting that the go-kart track here — or "go-go kart," as Bia calls it, with typical acceleration — is nothing like the homey, litigation-proof sites rented for kiddie parties in the United States. Instead, it is a fast, grueling training ground for racecar drivers, or pilots, as they are more aptly called. All the Brazilian champions got their start in karting, which partly explains Bia's early attraction to the place. She loved the speed, the noise and the crashes, but she also knew, from a young age, that to accomplish her goal of becoming a Formula One driver she would first have to master this miniature version of the sport.
Bia strides to a nondescript building between the track and the street and raps on a heavy metal door. It is opened by an inordinately fit older man with a haunting, gleaming smile. Naylor Borigis de Campos, who goes by the name Nô, is one of the most famous kart trainers in Brazil, known for his uncanny ability to spot and nurture talent. He has worked with many of the country's best drivers, even loosely with Senna, whose picture appears among those of Bia and many others lining his office walls. A collection of brightly colored helmets — gifts from grateful drivers — graces another wall. Sitting down on a weary black leather couch, Nô grins and takes a faded Brazilian identification card out of his wallet and shows it to me: it is Bia at 8, her tiny thumbprint and name in perfect script beneath her picture. Nô has carried this card with him for the last 11 years.
It is entirely likely that much of Bia's career would not have happened without Nô, and that his, too, would have ended long ago without her. Their intertwined stories make for one that the Lifetime network might reject as too implausible: when Nô was the age of Bia in her ID photo, he came to São Paulo from Bahia with his desperately impoverished family, which included nine siblings. Opportunity in São Paulo proved to be scarce, however, and the family left. But Nô chose to stay on, cleaning public bathrooms by day and sleeping in them at night. School was out of the question — he hasn't had any formal education — but he had a gift for mechanical things, and eventually taught himself to work on cars. Like many from the favelas, he was drawn to Interlagos.
Then, in 1995, one of Nô's protégés, a gifted driver named Marco Campos, died in a racing accident in France. Nô had also recently lost his wife and, deeply depressed, was thinking of giving up his career entirely. But one day — cue the music — he saw a dark-haired, determined little girl racing around the go-kart track. (Nô had already tried to train a few other girls, with no success.) "When he saw me," Bia says, translating from Nô's heart-tapping, hand-clasping, heaven-peering Portuguese monologue, "he thought, 'It's her.' He had energy again. He thought he could start again."
Nô guided Bia toward a fifth-place finish in the Brazilian karting championship when she was 10, and over the next few years, she almost always ranked in the top five in that event. At 16 Bia graduated to Formula A (a faster kart on a faster track for older kids) and for two years running won the Gold Helmet Award for the Best Brazilian Kart Driver. (She was also, incidentally, the first female to win Formula A races in Brazil.) In 2003 she came in second in the Petrobras Kart Selective, a prestigious South American competition.
What Nô has done for Bia is both tangible and intangible. Yes, he is her mentor. Yes, he found the right man to repair the engines on her cars, and, yes, he drew upon his myriad contacts to find her the right manager (the well-known and well-regarded former racer André Ribeiro) and the right racing team (Cesário Fórmula, owned by Augusto Cesário, also a former racer). But Nô also makes sure, on a daily basis, that Bia faces the world — their chosen, shared world — with resolve and focus. Over time, he has grafted his natural asceticism onto Bia's instinctive determination: "You have to focus 95 percent on racing, 3 percent on school and 2 percent on family," he has told her.
It's obvious that this collaboration makes a statement that transcends racing. It is nothing new in Brazil that the drivers are white and privileged, while those who work in the pit have darker skin and started with little, if anything. It's one of the few ways for people of limited means to escape Brazil's pervasive poverty. But in this case, an older man (Nô is 57) and a younger woman work together as equals, something that has not always been easy for Brazilians to accept. That Nô loves Bia like a daughter is clear — he keeps her generous gifts and old uniforms locked away in his luxury high-rise — and it is hard not to wonder what might happen to him when and if the time comes for them to part. That time may not be so far away, given that Bia's manager thinks she should move next year to a European Formula Three team, possibly Cesário's British squad, the next step on her path to Formula One. "All these manufacturers have a specific plan for young drivers," Ribeiro tells me, and those plans don't necessarily include a go-kart guru, no matter how gifted he is.
The next day, Bia and Nô take me to the place she calls "the Team,² a gigantic auto mart on the outskirts of town where, in a sprawling garage, the car she races for Cesário Fórmula is housed. The place smells thickly of oil and is as spotless as a surgical ward. About half a dozen cars are parked inside, each worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, painted bright primary colors and stickered with sponsors' logos. They look malevolent — long and narrow, needle-nosed with just a sliver of a windshield — and settling into the driver's seat is not unlike nestling into a coffin. The steering wheel is about the size of a salad plate, and there are two tiny sideview mirrors with which to scan for gaining cars. On what would be the left door of Bia's car (if there were a door) is pasted a small map of the first track she will race in the upcoming fall season. It's color-coded to show her the best places to accelerate, slow down and take a curve. Bia has already begun to study her strategy, even though this race, in Buenos Aires, is still about two months away. She will also eventually walk the track, committing trouble spots to memory so that her moves during competition will be almost automatic. Just before the race, she, like all competitors, will be allowed two runs that will establish her starting position.
Even when she isn't staring down a race date, Bia works out almost daily with her longtime trainer, Fernando Conceição. Racing is one of the few sports where the strength difference between men and women is not really a factor in determining victory. Still, Bia needs endurance to withstand the G-forces of driving 40 minutes straight in a Formula Three race, and she needs to keep her arms, neck and shoulders strong to avoid the tendinitis that can develop from steering and shifting. Otherwise, it's pretty much reflexes, strategic ability and mind-set that will determine the difference between victory and defeat — assuming, of course, that the pit crew and car do their part, too.
There are currently two drivers each on Cesário's South American Formula Renault and Formula Three teams, and a staff of about 16 engineers and mechanics. (The men's room at the garage is, understandably, much bigger than the ladies' since the only other female I see working here is a secretary.) They all wear spotless Cesário Fórmula T-shirts and jeans, and some of them are handsome enough to be featured in a "Boys of Interlagos" calendar. Bia doesn't socialize with the other drivers — "There's a lot of jealousy, so it's hard," she says. Instead, the crew serves as her office colleagues. One of them, clowning around, snaps the black steering wheel cover from Bia's car and wears it on his head like a shower cap.
When Bia steps into her yellow-and-black racing uniform, with its fireproof quilting and sponsor patches (Bardhal, Puma, Samsung and others), nobody is tempted to whistle. "No one knows what sex you are when you are in uniform," she has said, and she's right. She looks like a slightly more feminine version of the Michelin Man, her buoyant walk subdued by all the padding into a slew-footed waddle. At her waist Bia wears a belt with "A+" embroidered next to her name. I think it's a ranking and then realize it's her blood type. In case of fire, she tells me, she has exactly five seconds to get out of her car.
Nô watches Bia's transformation from a distance, arms folded, a slight look of anxiety clouding his face. "Should I stick with her?" he asks me, out of the blue, resuming another round of heartfelt pantomime. "What do you think? Would that be the right thing to do?"
I shake my head and ask him to repeat the question.
"'Yes.' You should say, 'Yes,"' one of the mechanics interjects.
Nô, it seems, is already preparing himself and Bia for the next stage of her career, whichever way it goes.
In both the Brazilian and European press, most of the stories focus on Bia's difficulties as a woman in a man's game. She is constantly asked whether she thinks men are stronger, smarter and faster, and even at this early stage in her career, she has her stock answers. (They would be "No," "No" and "No," sometimes with the added comment that she wants to "thump the next guy" as much as anyone.) It's also true that every man racing against Bia wants to thump her. "They cannot accept losing to a girl," her manager, André Ribeiro, says. There is another school of thought, however, that suggests being a woman is a major advantage these days, owing to the current state of Formula One racing. The fact that Michael Schumacher was such a consistent victor actually eroded enthusiasm for the sport over time. Many hope that a new face, particularly a female face, might reignite interest in Formula One, just as Danica Patrick has brought new life to Indy car racing. (Indy's sagging television ratings soared in 2005, thanks largely to her participation.) Lots of people follow racing only casually, Ribeiro says, so they need someone who stands out. "You have 20 guys and her [to root for]. Everyone picks her."
Which explains, on many levels, Bia's visit to the salon of Wanderley Nunes, close personal friend of the Brazilian supermodel Gisele Bundchen and the country's answer to Frédéric Fekkai. There are attendants in sparkling white uniforms, and clients with more than a passing knowledge of cosmetic surgery. Nunes himself wears a black button-down and black slacks, his hair in a tangle of blond highlights. He has an air of irrepressibility faintly evocative of Santa Claus. Bia greets him lavishly, which is fitting because Nunes not only does her hair but is also one of her sponsors. She wears the "W" logo for his salon on her uniform, just above her heart. The public couldn't care less about Michael Schumacher's coiffure; not so when it comes to Bia Figueiredo, who is here for a cut and blow dry. Brazil may be ready for a woman racecar driver, but she has to be a particular kind of woman. "In today's world, motor sports is a business," Ribeiro says. "You need people who represent the sponsors in a nice way. Bia is feminine in a masculine environment."
This obligation is true not only with fans but, more importantly, with sponsors, who help defray the costs of putting Bia on the track. Car maintenance and race fees can amount to almost $400,000 a year, and Bia earns nothing: no salary from the team, nothing from endorsements. She won't make money unless she gets to Formula One. Bia's sponsors currently cover about 40 percent of her racing costs; Cesário makes up the rest. Her parents are paying all her living expenses. "This is a thing that really worries me," she says, "because if I weren't a driver I would have been working since I was 20 and making money on some other thing. I try to forget this and think that this is my career, and one day I will make money from it. I really trust in it, and my parents support me."
There are other pressures. Specifically, the passing of time: Ribeiro believes Bia has only three more years to make her mark — "Maximum," he says. "It's very difficult. You don't have time to do something parallel. It's a very short period of time." Therefore, instead of a good college, to which she would have surely gained admission, Bia goes to the local community college. She doesn't go to parties or even hang out much with friends. "I don't have time," she says. Her behavior in public must be above reproach: no one wants her to become a tabloid heroine, and no one wants her appearing, like Danica Patrick, in stiletto boots and a bustier in the magazine FHM. In fact, Cesário has warned her never to appear at the racetrack like the guys do, with the tops of their uniforms unzipped and their T-shirts exposed. When Bia and her boyfriend of three years broke up, there was great relief among her management. "We drove together," she says, with more than a small trace of nostalgia. "He was a great guy." Subsequently, Ribeiro asked her to stop dating altogether. "The guys can have one night with a girl. They think a woman can't do that," Bia says, shaking her head in disgust. She says she wants to get married and have children, but figures that can wait until her 30's.
Has it been worth it?, I ask as we drive home from the salon. We are on an empty stretch of highway, damp from a recent rain, and she has moved her speed from 40 to 60 to 80 kilometers per hour. Does she miss having a normal life?
Bia shakes her head and wrinkles her nose, and doesn't even flinch when a motorcyclist in front of us falters slightly before recovering on the uneven pavement. "No," she says. "No way. I have won a lot of maturity. For 21, I am very old in a lot of ways, and a lot of people respect that. I have my life, and I have my objectives."
The road curls sharply, and she accelerates into it. "I love this curve," she says.
Mimi Swartz is an executive editor of Texas Monthly magazine
|
Violent Wave By Daniel Politi Posted Tuesday, Oct. 31, 2006, at 6:01 AM ET
The New York Times leads with the wave of violence that engulfed Baghdad yesterday and killed 46 Iraqis. The U.S. military also announced three more American deaths, raising the October death toll to 102. The Los Angeles Times leads with what it says is a "growing number of American military officers" who have begun to "privately" question the wisdom of not setting a hard deadline for troop reduction in Iraq.
The Washington Post leads, and the Wall Street Journal tops its worldwide newsbox, with President Bush stating at a campaign rally in Texas that if Democrats win on Nov. 7 and are able to impose their policies on Iraq, "the terrorists win and America loses." The speech is seen as a broad effort by Republicans to raise the stakes so that conservatives will be encouraged to get out to the polls. Vice President Cheney said he thinks insurgents in Iraq are timing their attacks to affect the outcome of the U.S. elections. USA Today leads with word from the federal government that it wants to require all nursing homes to have sprinkler systems. Approximately 3,500 older homes are currently exempt from sprinkler requirements. These latest efforts seem to, at least in part, stem from an investigation by the paper last year that revealed the extent of the problem.
On the same day National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley arrived in Baghdad, 33 day laborers were killed by a blast in Sadr City. U.S. and Iraqi forces had the city cordoned off, as they continue their search for the kidnapped U.S. soldier, which led to some Shiite leaders blaming the U.S. forces for allowing the bomb to go through. Total Iraqi deaths reported yesterday totaled 81, according to a report by the Associated Press.
Although the Bush administration and its supporters have always said setting specific deadlines in Iraq would only embolden the insurgents, some officers and traditional supporters of the president are now expressing disagreement with the policy. Many are having a change of heart because they are disappointed with the pace of progress and say the Iraqi government won't begin to make changes unless it feels specific pressure.
The WP spent some time with U.S. troops in charge of training the Iraqi police and tries to explain why some believe it may take "decades" before local forces are able to take on responsibility for the country's security. The head of the police-transition team of a U.S. military battalion tells the paper 70 percent of the Iraqi police force has been infiltrated by militias. Although U.S. soldiers say they frequently gather evidence of militia ties from within the police ranks, Iraqi officials don't take action on this information and no one has been fired.
While national attention is mostly focused on the Congressional contests, the NYT fronts a look at statehouse races, where Democrats could have a chance of winning back control of state capitols for the first time in a decade. This would bring more women, which is significant because local posts often serve as starting points for national politicians. A Democratic victory could also have a big impact when congressional districts are redrawn after the 2010 census.
The Post reefers word of two leadership fights that are bubbling up within the Democratic Party, which could have lasting effects on party unity before the midterm elections are even decided. These fights stem from the question of who would take the positions of majority leader and majority whip. The only post that now seems to have no disagreement within the party is that a Democratic victory would mean California's Nancy Pelosi will become speaker.
The WSJ mentions Republicans claim early voting is largely going their way, which is a demonstration of their superiority at getting voter turnout. Democrats, on the other hand, contend Republicans are exaggerating their early successes. Regardless, experts agree this type of voting is increasing and predict anywhere from 19 percent to 25 percent of the electorate will either vote early at the polls or through absentee ballots. In the 2002 midterm election, the figure was closer to 14 percent.
Everybody mentions a report released by the British government warning that failure to prevent global climate change could cause great damage to the global economy. Effects, including, but not limited to, droughts, famine, and flooding, could all bear a huge toll on the world's gross domestic product. "The consequences for our planet are literally disastrous," Prime Minister Tony Blair said. Some critics say the report overestimated the potential cost of climate change.
USAT fronts news that the federal government's abstinence message will no longer be directed exclusively to kids and teenagers. Revised guidelines show the government also wants to reach adults up to age 29 who are unmarried. The government insists it's just a clarification, but critics contend it's an intrusion into the private lives of adults, not to mention completely pointless.
Everybody points out the Pakistani military launched an airstrike against a religious school, killing close to 80 people. Pakistani officials said the facility was used as a terrorist training camp and denied involvement of U.S. or NATO troops. The Post is alone in reporting the attack was the result of U.S. intelligence reports that declared the school was used as a hiding place for senior al-Qaeda figures. The NYT fronts a four-column picture of the mass funeral. Early morning wire reports say thousands gathered close to the site on Tuesday to protest the airstrike.
Today's must-read comes from the LAT, which fronts the final heart-wrenching installment of its three-part series chronicling a gay couple's efforts to become parents through a "gestational surrogacy arrangement." Times correspondent Kevin Sack spent two years following the ups and downs of Chad and David Craig's saga and shines a light into the high financial and emotional toll faced by gay couples who want to start a family and choose not to adopt.
On Halloween, the LAT fronts a look at a group of people in the Philippines who have to live every day surrounded by ghosts. There are approximately 50,000 people who live among the tombstones in the North Manila Cemetery, known as Norte, which is the country's largest public burial ground. "The dead don't scare me so much," said a Norte resident. "It's the living I'm afraid of."
Mirror, mirror on the wall … The Post fronts, the LAT reefers, and the NYT goes inside with, news from researchers who claim elephants have a degree of self-awareness that before had only been definitively shown in humans and apes. Researchers put a mirror inside the habitat of elephants at the Bronx Zoo, and the animals proceeded to examine parts of their body. More impressively still, one of the elephants passed what is known as the mark test. Researchers painted a white X on the elephant's cheek and it then proceeded to look in the mirror and repeatedly touch the mark (video is available here). This is quite impressive because it requires the elephant to, in some way, understand that the mark is on its body and not on the mirror. Daniel Politi is a writer living in Buenos Aires, Argentina. October 30
|
An Evolutionary Theory of Right and Wrong
October 31, 2006
Books on Science
An Evolutionary Theory of Right and Wrong
Who doesn't know the difference between right and wrong? Yet that essential knowledge, generally assumed to come from parental teaching or religious or legal instruction, could turn out to have a quite different origin.
Primatologists like Frans de Waal have long argued that the roots of human morality are evident in social animals like apes and monkeys. The animals' feelings of empathy and expectations of reciprocity are essential behaviors for mammalian group living and can be regarded as a counterpart of human morality.
Marc D. Hauser, a Harvard biologist, has built on this idea to propose that people are born with a moral grammar wired into their neural circuits by evolution. In a new book, "Moral Minds" (HarperCollins 2006), he argues that the grammar generates instant moral judgments which, in part because of the quick decisions that must be made in life-or-death situations, are inaccessible to the conscious mind.
People are generally unaware of this process because the mind is adept at coming up with plausible rationalizations for why it arrived at a decision generated subconsciously.
Dr. Hauser presents his argument as a hypothesis to be proved, not as an established fact. But it is an idea that he roots in solid ground, including his own and others' work with primates and in empirical results derived by moral philosophers.
The proposal, if true, would have far-reaching consequences. It implies that parents and teachers are not teaching children the rules of correct behavior from scratch but are, at best, giving shape to an innate behavior. And it suggests that religions are not the source of moral codes but, rather, social enforcers of instinctive moral behavior.
Both atheists and people belonging to a wide range of faiths make the same moral judgments, Dr. Hauser writes, implying "that the system that unconsciously generates moral judgments is immune to religious doctrine." Dr. Hauser argues that the moral grammar operates in much the same way as the universal grammar proposed by the linguist Noam Chomsky as the innate neural machinery for language. The universal grammar is a system of rules for generating syntax and vocabulary but does not specify any particular language. That is supplied by the culture in which a child grows up.
The moral grammar too, in Dr. Hauser's view, is a system for generating moral behavior and not a list of specific rules. It constrains human behavior so tightly that many rules are in fact the same or very similar in every society — do as you would be done by; care for children and the weak; don't kill; avoid adultery and incest; don't cheat, steal or lie.
But it also allows for variations, since cultures can assign different weights to the elements of the grammar's calculations. Thus one society may ban abortion, another may see infanticide as a moral duty in certain circumstances. Or as Kipling observed, "The wildest dreams of Kew are the facts of Katmandu, and the crimes of Clapham chaste in Martaban."
Matters of right and wrong have long been the province of moral philosophers and ethicists. Dr. Hauser's proposal is an attempt to claim the subject for science, in particular for evolutionary biology. The moral grammar evolved, he believes, because restraints on behavior are required for social living and have been favored by natural selection because of their survival value.
Much of the present evidence for the moral grammar is indirect. Some of it comes from psychological tests of children, showing that they have an innate sense of fairness that starts to unfold at age 4. Some comes from ingenious dilemmas devised to show a subconscious moral judgment generator at work. These are known by the moral philosophers who developed them as "trolley problems."
Suppose you are standing by a railroad track. Ahead, in a deep cutting from which no escape is possible, five people are walking on the track. You hear a train approaching. Beside you is a lever with which you can switch the train to a sidetrack. One person is walking on the sidetrack. Is it O.K. to pull the lever and save the five people, though one will die?
Most people say it is.
Assume now you are on a bridge overlooking the track. Ahead, five people on the track are at risk. You can save them by throwing down a heavy object into the path of the approaching train. One is available beside you, in the form of a fat man. Is it O.K. to push him to save the five?
Most people say no, although lives saved and lost are the same as in the first problem.
Why does the moral grammar generate such different judgments in apparently similar situations? It makes a distinction, Dr. Hauser writes, between a foreseen harm (the train killing the person on the track) and an intended harm (throwing the person in front of the train), despite the fact that the consequences are the same in either case. It also rates killing an animal as more acceptable than killing a person.
Many people cannot articulate the foreseen/intended distinction, Dr. Hauser says, a sign that it is being made at inaccessible levels of the mind. This inability challenges the general belief that moral behavior is learned. For if people cannot articulate the foreseen/intended distinction, how can they teach it?
Dr. Hauser began his research career in animal communication, working with vervet monkeys in Kenya and with birds. He is the author of a standard textbook on the subject, "The Evolution of Communication." He began to take an interest in the human animal in 1992 after psychologists devised experiments that allowed one to infer what babies are thinking. He found he could repeat many of these experiments in cotton-top tamarins, allowing the cognitive capacities of infants to be set in an evolutionary framework.
His proposal of a moral grammar emerges from a collaboration with Mr. Chomsky, who had taken an interest in Dr. Hauser's ideas about animal communication. In 2002 they wrote, with Dr. Tecumseh Fitch, an unusual article arguing that the faculty of language must have developed as an adaptation of some neural system possessed by animals, perhaps one used in navigation. From this interaction Dr. Hauser developed the idea that moral behavior, like language behavior, is acquired with the help of an innate set of rules that unfolds early in a child's development.
Social animals, he believes, possess the rudiments of a moral system in that they can recognize cheating or deviations from expected behavior. But they generally lack the psychological mechanisms on which the pervasive reciprocity of human society is based, like the ability to remember bad behavior, quantify its costs, recall prior interactions with an individual and punish offenders. "Lions cooperate on the hunt, but there is no punishment for laggards," Dr. Hauser said.
The moral grammar now universal among people presumably evolved to its final shape during the hunter-gatherer phase of the human past, before the dispersal from the ancestral homeland in northeast Africa some 50,000 years ago. This may be why events before our eyes carry far greater moral weight than happenings far away, Dr. Hauser believes, since in those days one never had to care about people remote from one's environment.
Dr. Hauser believes that the moral grammar may have evolved through the evolutionary mechanism known as group selection. A group bound by altruism toward its members and rigorous discouragement of cheaters would be more likely to prevail over a less cohesive society, so genes for moral grammar would become more common.
Many evolutionary biologists frown on the idea of group selection, noting that genes cannot become more frequent unless they benefit the individual who carries them, and a person who contributes altruistically to people not related to him will reduce his own fitness and leave fewer offspring.
But though group selection has not been proved to occur in animals, Dr. Hauser believes that it may have operated in people because of their greater social conformity and willingness to punish or ostracize those who disobey moral codes.
"That permits strong group cohesion you don't see in other animals, which may make for group selection," he said.
His proposal for an innate moral grammar, if people pay attention to it, could ruffle many feathers. His fellow biologists may raise eyebrows at proposing such a big idea when much of the supporting evidence has yet to be acquired. Moral philosophers may not welcome a biologist's bid to annex their turf, despite Dr. Hauser's expressed desire to collaborate with them.
Nevertheless, researchers' idea of a good hypothesis is one that generates interesting and testable predictions. By this criterion, the proposal of an innate moral grammar seems unlikely to disappoint.
| |
 |
Sheik’s Thoroughbred Kingdom in Kentucky
Michael Clevenger for The New York Times
Jonabell Farm in Lexington, Ky., purchased in 2001 by Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, is expected to have 160 mares by next month.
Anwar Mirza/Reuters
Sheik Mohammed.
October 30, 2006
A Sheik's Thoroughbred Kingdom in Kentucky
LEXINGTON, Ky. — Every hardboot here who makes a living breeding and selling horses knows that Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum is the ruler of Dubai, a desert kingdom on the Persian Gulf, which he has transformed into a tourist and business capital.
Most of them, however, know him as Sheik Mo, a horseman who for nearly 25 years has arrived each year at Blue Grass Airport by private jumbo jet and has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on horses.
Although the sheik and the company his family controls encountered security concerns and had to abandon an attempt to run six United States port operations in March, he is treated like a fellow horseman here in Lexington, home of his thriving racing and breeding business.
In a relatively short time, Sheik Mohammed and members of his royal family have joined the ranks of the blue-blooded Phipps family and the more commercially driven Overbrook Farm as fabled names in horse racing in the United States.
On Saturday at the Breeders' Cup in Louisville, Ky., the Maktoums are expected to send out eight horses, all contenders, in four races. They are led by the 3-year-old sensation Bernardini, who has won six races in a row, including the Preakness Stakes at Pimlico and the Travers Stakes at Saratoga Springs, N.Y.
They are as impressive a collection of horses as any owner has taken to the Breeders' Cup in its 22-year history, and could help the Maktoums capture as many as five Eclipse Awards, the Oscars of horse racing. Sheik Mohammed is in the running for his first Eclipse as the country's top horse owner.
Out of equal parts self-interest and self-regard, quite a few denizens of central Kentucky will be rooting the sheik's horses home. Not only has he been the leading buyer at the September yearlings sales over the past eight years, spending $245.6 million, but he has also built a commercial breeding and racing business here that is poised to rule the sport the way the legendary Calumet Farm did in the 1940s and 1950s.
"If one September that big old plane wasn't at the airport, you would have a whole lot of hearts sinking around here," said Arthur Hancock III, who owns Stone Farm in Paris, Ky. He is a fourth-generation thoroughbred breeder from one of the Bluegrass's most famous families.
"Beyond that, he has proven over the years that he is a passionate and knowledgeable horseman," Hancock said. "When the sheik comes here for the sales, he's out in the barns examining horses and unlike a lot of owners, he actually knows what he's looking at."
He moves among horsemen in jeans and a white T-shirt or windbreaker in the royal blue colors of his family's stable.
"I tried to win the Kentucky Derby buying European-type horses, and it did not work," Sheik Mohammed told reporters last month at the Keeneland sales, after spending $60 million on yearlings. "So now we are doing it the right way. I am looking for the right horses. I see what American racing is about. So we learn, we learn every day."
In thoroughbred racing, Sheik Mohammed, 57, has combined one of his great interests with his burning ambition to turn Dubai into the Singapore of the Middle East, generating fascination and some criticism along the way.
In an episode last year closest to his interest in racing, the State Department rebuked the United Arab Emirates, which includes Dubai, for allowing young children to be held in captivity and used as jockeys in camel races. In June, the State Department cited improvements but said it was still keeping watch.
The sheik has had much success in his business and racing endeavors. Since 1995, he or his brothers — Sheik Hamdan and the late Sheik Maktoum — have been at or near the top of the owners' standings in England with Godolphin stables. Godolphin is a sort of all-star team of horses owned by the Maktoum brothers.
By acknowledging that Dubai could not prosper on a diminishing oil reserve, the Maktoums set out more than 20 years ago to diversify the economy and become the financial capital of the United Arab Emirates, a federation of seven sheikdoms that won independence from Britain in 1971.
"Horses and Dubai are his two loves," said John Ferguson, the sheik's bloodstock manager. "He spends 98 percent of his time on Dubai, however, and 2 percent on horses. Godolphin has been the culmination of those two forces."
Godolphin, created in 1992, is based in Dubai to take advantage of a temperate winter climate and a state-of-the-art training center in preparing to compete in the most prestigious races around the world.
This strategy has worked in Europe and Asia, but has met with mixed results in the United States, most notably in Sheik Mohammed's unsuccessful quest to win the Kentucky Derby.
So the sheik took a deeper interest in Kentucky breeding and racing in the United States. In 2001, he bought Jonabell Farm and, after the death of his older brother Maktoum in January, incorporated Gainsborough Farm into what is now called Darley America.
Sheik Mohammed has 160 employees — virtually all of them homegrown Kentuckians — and 11 stallions, including Holy Bull, the 1994 Horse of the Year. By November, he will have 160 mares, and soon after their foals, gamboling on a sprawling 4,000 manicured acres of bluegrass.
With Bernardini, the sheik's new focus on the United States paid off immediately. Bernardini was bred in Kentucky; was entrusted to an American trainer, Tom Albertrani; and will be the favorite in the marquee race of the Breeders' Cup, the $5 million Classic.
Bernardini, however, will have to dispatch Invasor, a colt that has won eight of his nine races. Invasor is owned by Sheik Hamdan, who is also a big-money spender at the sales and who has had a farm here since 1985.
Bernardini's victories in this year's most lucrative races are the primary reason Darley is atop the American owners standings with nearly $5 million in purse winnings. Still, the Darley stable is deep and developing, having won 54 races and finishing in the money 56 percent of the time with 247 starters.
In the $2 million Sprint, Henny Hughes is favored to win to conclude a perfect year and capture the Eclipse Award as champion sprinter. He is owned by Sheik Rashid, the 25-year-old son of Sheik Mohammed.
With commercial breeding operations and thousands of acres of land in seven countries from Europe to Australia to Japan, Sheik Mohammed's extraordinarily deep pockets have been taxed by his investment in horses. His associates argue, however, that it is money well spent when put in the context of the sheik's global vision for Dubai.
Among horsemen here, there is an adage: "Be happy with the money, not with the horse."
In the sheik's case, however, the horsemen are happy with his horses.
"We've had a huge drain on our bloodlines between our great sires dying and being shipped overseas," said Rob Whitely, who breeds under the name Liberation Farm. "He is bringing back some of that quality blood to America and we need it. We also need horses like Bernardini to stay here, and that is what looks like is going to happen."
| |
 |
Today's Papers
Missing Arms By Daniel Politi Posted Monday, Oct. 30, 2006, at 6:07 AM ET
The New York Times leads with a new federal report that reveals the U.S. military has not kept proper track of hundreds of thousands of weapons intended for Iraqi security forces. In addition, the American military has failed to provide spare parts and even manuals for most of the weapons given to Iraqis. The WSJ includes news of the report in the top spot of its worldwide newsbox, which is an Iraq roundup, and also mentions the renewed violence in the country, which killed 23 policemen. USA Today leads with a new review by the Army's casualty notification office that indicates seven families were misinformed about how their relatives died.
The Los Angeles Times leads with the campaign spending by unregulated groups, known as 527s and 501(c)s, which so far has amounted to almost $300 million. Although this spending does not come close to the $600 million that was pumped into the 2004 campaign, these groups are responsible for many of the ads filling the airwaves in the last days before the Nov. 7 election. The Washington Post goes across the top of its Page One with news that the governing body of Gallaudet University, the nation's premiere school for the deaf, gave in to months of protests and said Jane K. Fernandes would not take over as the university's president next year. After learning of the decision, protesters in Gallaudet's campus celebrated and burned an effigy of Fernandes.
The report, released by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, revealed the U.S. military never even recorded the serial numbers of almost half a million weapons it gave to the Iraqis. This means tracking the weapons has now become nearly impossible and raises the possibility the arms could have ended up in the hands of insurgents. Inconsistencies in the number of weapons purchased and those in Iraqi warehouses show that more than 13,000 weapons are, essentially, missing.
In its review of 810 deaths, which accounts for approximately 40 percent of those who died in Afghanistan and Iraq, Army officials discovered that in five of the seven cases, including former pro-football player Pat Tillman, families were not told friendly fire was to blame for the soldier's death. The Army is now looking into all deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq to make sure there are no other mistakes. As part of the effort, the Army is also attempting to improve the way it notifies families of deaths. USAT takes a look at some of these efforts, which includes a new $800,000 video and more training for notification officers.
The NYT says on its front page that funds for research into energy technologies are falling, from both the government and the private sector. This decreases the possibility of finding viable alternatives to coal and oil. In the United States, federal spending for all types of energy research and development is less than half of what it was 25 years ago. In comparison, a revealing graphic accompanying the story shows how medical and military research has increased throughout the years.
Today's NYT and WP both front stories that are similar to ones first published by the LAT, with slightly different angles. Yesterday, the LAT led with Karl Rove's role in the last days of the campaign cycle,and mentioned the way he uses government resources to give GOP candidates a boost. Today, the WP also takes a look at the involvement of the White House political mastermind before Nov. 7 and gives it a more inside-Washington twist. The Post mentions these midterm elections could redefine Rove's influence and that he continues to be optimistic while some worry he might have some tricks up his sleeve. For its part, the NYT fronts a look at how many of the Democrats running for the House have conservative views that are more commonly associated with Republicans. Last Thursday, the LAT had a similar story on Page One, but today, the NYT focuses more on the tensions that could rise within the Democratic Party as a result of these candidates if they do win control of the House.
USAT goes inside with the story of Saba Al-Bor, an Iraqi town that illustrates the difficulties U.S. forces have in handing over power to Iraqi police. On Sept. 20, U.S. officials transferred control of the town to Iraqis and left. They had to come back 15 days later, after the town had descended into chaos, death squads roamed the town, and the majority of the town's Iraqi police and residents had fled.
The WSJ fronts a look at how Paul Wolfowitz is increasing the World Bank's presence in Iraq. This is seen in contrast to usual Bank policy of staying away from countries in conflict. The move by Wolfowitz, who was U.S. deputy defense secretary and is now heading the bank, is raising criticism from some who believe he is using the multilateral institution to carry out Bush administration policy.
The NYT reefers word that the missing American soldier in Iraq was secretly married to an Iraqi woman, whom he was visiting when he was kidnapped last week. None of this is confirmed, but the Times talked to some Iraqis who claim they are the soldier's in-laws. If true, it would mean the soldier broke military rules, which prohibits active personnel from marrying local civilians. So far, the U.S. military hasn't even released the man's name, but search squads have shown his picture to local residents. No one in his alleged bride's family knew he was an American soldier until after he was kidnapped.
The LAT fronts, and everyone else mentions, that federal police in Mexico used tear gas and water cannons to fight off demonstrators who had held Oaxaca's central square for five months. The protest began as a teacher's strike, but soon other groups joined and it escalated. President Vicente Fox ordered the raid after one American journalist and two Mexicans were killed on Friday. Although the police was able to take control of the square with much less violence than was expected, there were reports of a 15-year-old boy being killed, some claim as a result of a tear gas canister, and some say he was shot.
The NYT fronts a look at how Muslim Americans have become reluctant to donate to Islamic causes and charities out of fear that it could bring unwanted attention from the U.S. government.
Everyone mentions Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva won a landslide reelection victory yesterday.
The NYT publishes an op-ed piece co-written by Vaclav Havel, former Prime Minister of Norway Kjell Magne Bondevik, and Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel, urging the world to pay attention to North Korea's humanitarian crisis. The authors say the attention Kim Jong-il has gathered as a result of his nuclear tests should be used to shine a light on the way thousands of North Koreans suffer from malnutrition and human rights abuses. "It is clear that North Korea is actively committing crimes against humanity—against its own people," the authors argue. Daniel Politi is a writer living in Buenos Aires, Argentina | | October 24
 |
The Internet Black Hole That Is North Korea
October 23, 2006
Link by Link
The Internet Black Hole That Is North Korea
THE tragically backward, sometimes absurdist hallmarks of North Korea and its leader, Kim Jong-il, are well known. There is Mr. Kim's Elton John eyeglasses and strangely whipped, cotton-candy hairdo. And there is the North Korean "No! Yeeesssss ... No! O.K. Fear the tiger!" school of diplomacy.
A newer, more dangerous sort of North Korean eccentricity registered around 4.0 on the Richter scale earlier this month — a nuclear weapon test that has had the world's major powers scrambling, right up through last week, to develop a policy script that would account for Mr. Kim's new toy.
But whatever the threat — and however lush the celebrations broadcast on state-controlled television from the streets of Pyongyang in the days afterward — the stark realities of life in North Korea were perhaps most evident in a simple satellite image over the shoulder of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld during an Oct. 11 briefing. The image showed the two Koreas — North and South — photographed at night.
The South was illuminated from coast to coast, suggesting that not just lights, but that other, arguably more bedrock utility of the modern age — information — was pulsating through the population.
The North was black.
This is an impoverished country where televisions and radios are hard-wired to receive only government-controlled frequencies. Cellphones were banned outright in 2004. In May, the Committee to Protect Journalists in New York ranked North Korea No. 1 — over also-rans like Burma, Syria and Uzbekistan — on its list of the "10 Most Censored Countries."
That would seem to leave the question of Internet access in North Korea moot.
At a time when much of the world takes for granted a fat and growing network of digitized human knowledge, art, history, thought and debate, it is easy to forget just how much is being denied the people who live under the veil of darkness revealed in that satellite photograph.
While other restrictive regimes have sought to find ways to limit the Internet — through filters and blocks and threats — North Korea has chosen to stay wholly off the grid.
Julien Pain, head of the Internet desk at Reporters Without Borders, a Paris-based group which tracks censorship around the world, put it more bluntly. "It is by far the worst Internet black hole," he said.
That is not to say that North Korean officials are not aware of the Internet.
As far back as 2000, at the conclusion of a visit to Pyongyang, Madeleine K. Albright, then secretary of state, bid Mr. Kim to "pick up the telephone any time," to which the North Korean leader replied, "Please give me your e-mail address." That signaled to everyone that at least he, if not the average North Korean, was cybersavvy. (It is unclear if Ms. Albright obliged.)
These days, the designated North Korean domain suffix, ".kp" remains dormant, but several "official" North Korean sites can be found delivering sweet nothings about the country and its leader to the global conversation (an example: www.kcckp.net/en/) — although these are typically hosted on servers in China or Japan.
Mr. Kim, embracing the concept of "distance learning," has established the Kim Il-sung Open University Web site, www.ournation-school.com — aimed at educating the world on North Korea's philosophy of "juche" or self-reliance. And the official North Korean news agency, at www.kcna.co.jp, provides tea leaves that are required reading for anyone following the great Quixote in the current nuclear crisis.
But to the extent that students and researchers at universities and a few other lucky souls have access to computers, these are linked only to each other — that is, to a nationwide, closely-monitored Intranet — according to the OpenNet Initiative, a human rights project linking researchers from the University of Toronto, Harvard Law School and Cambridge and Oxford Universities in Britain.
A handful of elites have access to the wider Web — via a pipeline through China — but this is almost certainly filtered, monitored and logged.
Some small "information technology stores" — crude cybercafes — have also cropped up. But these, too, connect only to the country's closed network. According to The Daily NK, a pro-democracy news site based in South Korea, computer classes at one such store cost more than six months wages for the average North Korean (snipurl.com/DailyNK). The store, located in Chungjin, North Korea, has its own generator to keep the computers running if the power is cut, The Daily NK site said.
"It's one thing for authoritarian regimes like China to try to blend the economic catalyst of access to the Internet with controls designed to sand off the rough edges, forcing citizens to make a little extra effort to see or create sensitive content," said Jonathan Zittrain, a professor of Internet governance and regulation at Oxford.
The problem is much more vexing for North Korea, Professor Zittrain said, because its "comprehensive official fantasy worldview" must remain inviolate. "In such a situation, any information leakage from the outside world could be devastating," he said, "and Internet access for the citizenry would have to be so controlled as to be useless. It couldn't even resemble the Internet as we know it."
But how long can North Korea's leadership keep the country in the dark?
Writing in The International Herald Tribune last year, Rebecca MacKinnon, a research fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard, suggested that North Korea's ban on cellphones was being breached on the black market along China's border. And as more and more cellphones there become Web-enabled, she suggested, that might mean that a growing number of North Koreans, in addition to talking to family in the South, would be quietly raising digital periscopes from the depths.
Of course, there are no polls indicating whether the average North Korean would prefer nuclear arms or Internet access (or food, or reliable power), but given Mr. Kim's interest in weapons, it is a safe bet it would not matter.
"No doubt it's harder to make nuclear warheads than to set up an Internet network," Mr. Pain said. "It's all a question of priority."
| |
 |
Medical Views of 9/11’s Dust Show Big Gaps
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
Joseph Jones, whose wife, Felicia Dunn-Jones, 42, a lawyer, worked near the twin towers, leaves flowers at the 9/11 memorial on Staten Island.
October 24, 2006
Medical Views of 9/11's Dust Show Big Gaps
By ANTHONY DePALMA
In 2004, Kenneth R. Feinberg, special master of the federal Sept. 11 Victim Compensation Fund, awarded $2.6 million to the family of a downtown office worker who died from a rare lung disease five months after fleeing from the dust cloud released when the twin towers fell. That decision made the worker, Felicia Dunn-Jones, a 42-year-old lawyer, the first official fatality of the dust, and one of only two deaths to be formally linked to the toxic air at ground zero.
The New York City medical examiner's office, however, has refused to put her on its official list of 9/11 victims, saying that by its standards there was insufficient medical evidence to link her death to the dust.
Mrs. Dunn-Jones's case shows how difficult it can be to prove a causal connection with any scientific certainty — and how even government agencies can disagree. With thousands of people now seeking compensation and treatment for dust exposure, the debate about the relationship between the toxic particles and disease will be a central issue in the flood of Sept. 11-related lawsuits. Health experts are starting to document the connections, but any firm conclusion is still years away.
Most of the suits involve workers who spent weeks and months on the pile at ground zero and say the city and other agencies failed to protect them from the toxic dust. Others involve residents who say they were made sick by dust that settled in their homes. Mrs. Dunn-Jones was among those downtown office workers caught in the initial fallout.
The question that arises in all these cases is straightforward: Can a link between the dust and disease be proved with scientific certainty? The answer is anything but simple.
"Certainty is a word we always dance around," said Joseph Graziano, associate dean for research at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University. For him, searching for the cause of disease is like developing film. "At first you see a faint image of what the real picture is," Dr. Graziano said, "and then, over time, you see it with much more clarity. In these relatively early times, the image is still faint."
It can take decades to approach any degree of certainty. For instance, only after years of observation did doctors agree that there was a strong link between asbestos and diseases like asbestosis and mesothelioma.
In legal cases, "a reasonable degree of medical certainty" is considered the gold standard in making a causal connection. Last week, a federal judge cleared the way for thousands of workers' lawsuits to go to trial. When the cases are heard, any proof that does not meet that legal standard is likely to be challenged.
But outside the courtroom, scientists say, even a less rigorous link could be sufficient to warrant expanding the range of illnesses covered by treatment programs, and to serve as the basis for issuing cautions to people in high-risk groups. When the health effects are too new or the evidence is too vague for a strong link, lesser indicators like the concurrence of different studies have to be relied on.
For example, nearly every ground zero study shows that workers and residents exposed to the dust in the hours after the collapse have suffered the worst health problems. The consistency in that data has helped doctors monitor and treat people since Sept. 11.
And it may also help explain why Mrs. Dunn-Jones, a dynamic civil rights lawyer with the United States Department of Education, became so sick so quickly. As she was swallowed by a whirling dust plume filled with asbestos, benzene, dioxin and other hazards when the first tower fell, all she could do was cover her nose and mouth as she fled from her office one block north of the World Trade Center.
It was night by the time she got home to Staten Island. "She was in a state of shock," her husband, Joseph Jones, recalled. Her clothes were still dusty, but he didn't pay much attention. "I was just so happy to see her," he said.
For the next few months, life returned to normal, until Mrs. Dunn-Jones developed a cough. In January 2002, the cough grew worse. On Feb. 10, she suddenly stopped breathing and died.
Mr. Jones, 54, an assistant manager at a Brooklyn pharmacy, was stunned. Then, when he received the official death certificate months later, he was shocked to see an unfamiliar word — sarcoidosis.
"Even though I was in the medical field, I had never heard of it," he said.
After reading several medical reports on sarcoidosis — including one by Dr. David J. Prezant, deputy chief medical officer of the New York Fire Department — Mr. Jones and his lawyer, Richard H. Bennett, wondered if Mrs. Dunn-Jones's mysterious death could be linked to 9/11 dust because sarcoidosis, which produces microscopic lumps called granulomas, on vital organs, is often associated with exposure to environmental hazards.
They took the case to Mr. Feinberg and the victim compensation fund, which gave $7 billion to the families of those killed or injured on 9/11.
Mr. Feinberg initially expressed doubts about the claim and demanded to see definitive medical evidence linking Mrs. Dunn-Jones's sarcoidosis to the dust.
Dr. Prezant, who declined to be interviewed for this article, was one of two experts who testified at a hearing conducted by Mr. Feinberg. In the first four years after 9/11, he found 20 cases of sarcoidosis in the Fire Department, a rate of 80 per 100,000 in the first year (with treatment, all are now stable), compared with a national rate of fewer than 6 per 100,000, according to the American Thoracic Society.
The other expert was Dr. Alan M. Fein, a clinical professor of medicine at the New York University School of Medicine. He, too, was skeptical at first, but he said he changed his mind after reviewing Mrs. Dunn-Jones's medical record, including the autopsy report. "I'm comfortable saying her death was caused by exposure to the dust," Dr. Fein said in an interview.
In March 2004, Mr. Feinberg agreed, making Mrs. Dunn-Jones's death the only dust-related fatality recognized by the fund. Only one other death has been formally linked to the dust: In April, a New Jersey coroner determined that James Zadroga, 34, a New York City police detective, had died of a disease similar to sarcoidosis, also caused by his exposure to ground zero dust.
Mr. Jones welcomed the settlement from the victim compensation fund, and believes that his wife was a 9/11 victim as surely as if she had died in the towers. He sent Mr. Feinberg's decision to the city's chief medical examiner, Dr. Charles S. Hirsch, and asked that his wife be put on the official list so that her name could be read on Sept. 11. Dr. Hirsch refused, a spokeswoman said, because the available evidence did not prove the connection "with a reasonable degree of medical certainty"— the highest medical standard generally used in legal cases.
Mr. Feinberg's decision had been based on a different standard: a preponderance of medical evidence.
That was proof enough for the Staten Island Memorial Commission, which has engraved Mrs. Dunn-Jones's name on the bone-white memorial on the island's north shore.
Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, who has fought to get medical care for 9/11 victims, said the contradictory conclusions about Mrs. Dunn-Jones's death underscored the importance of deciding who has the final say on causal links. "They should be medical decisions, not political ones," she said, suggesting that city officials may have a conflict of interest in making such determinations since the city is a defendant in the ground zero workers' lawsuits.
She has introduced a bill to reopen the federal compensation fund to people whose illnesses became known after the original eligibility period ended in 2003.
In the effort to collect definitive data, Dr. John Howard, the federal government's 9/11 health coordinator, recently circulated a draft set of autopsy protocols that directs pathologists to use a standard of proof that establishes both biological plausibility and unequivocal evidence of a causal connection to the dust. But doctors and elected officials have said those standards are so restrictive that almost no death could be linked to the dust for years to come. A spokesman for Dr. Howard said the guidelines were being refined.
In another effort, the Mount Sinai Medical Center, which has screened thousands of ground zero workers, has begun a long-term study of the incidence of diseases to identify any rates that exceed national averages.
"Right now we're in the process of confirming every case of interstitial lung disease, every cancer, every sarcoidosis that has been reported to us by responders in their visits," said Dr. Jeanne M. Stellman, director of the public health program at Columbia University, is leading the data collection project.
"We are actively trying to determine whether Detective Zadroga and Mrs. Dunn-Jones are alone," she said. "And we are trying to find a way to do this that is scientifically correct while also being responsive to the needs and fears of the communities involved."
| |
 |
When a Relationship Carries the Weight of History
David Chelsea
October 22, 2006
Modern Love
When a Relationship Carries the Weight of History
By LAUREN FOX
I USED to have an imaginary Jewish boyfriend. I dreamed him up several years ago. He was a nice guy named Jeff who was a lawyer for the A.C.L.U., played classical guitar and wanted to have three kids. One year this imaginary Jewish boyfriend even accompanied me to Yom Kippur services, while my actual, Protestant-raised but nonbelieving Irish boyfriend stayed home and ate — this is true — a ham sandwich.
"What are you doing?" I asked my actual boyfriend over the phone, after I had returned home from temple.
"Eating a ham sandwich," he said. "And watching soccer. Want to come over?"
It was the Day of Atonement, the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. I was supposed to be fasting and asking God for forgiveness. Instead I drove over to my boyfriend's apartment, where I swallowed my guilt with the potato chips he shared with me.
I was raised Jewish, but in some fundamental way, it didn't take. I wanted it to. I tried. When I lived in Minneapolis during my 20's, I attended High Holy Day services at practically every synagogue in the area, hoping to find one that would speak to my heart, but I always left feeling empty, more confused than before I had gone.
All the talk of God bothered me. I was not sure if I believed, but even in the most liberal of synagogues, even on the weirdest left-wing fringe of Judaism, where you met in a basement and sang songs about ending world hunger, it seemed as if you couldn't get around God if you wanted to be Jewish. God is everywhere! So I tried to uncover a latent faith in a higher power, but all I have ever found, deep down, at my spiritual core, is a well-developed sense of guilt and a craving for Ho Hos.
I suppose this is, in some part, how I ended up with an irreverent Irish atheist for a boyfriend. Andrew and I met when we were graduate teaching assistants at the University of Minnesota. He marched into my office one day, sat down at my desk and started chatting to me in a fake New Jersey accent — a ridiculously bad accent, attempted through the filter of his real (and much sexier) Dublin accent. I impressed him with my ability to write backward and forward at the same time.
For our first date, he took me to a reading at a St. Paul bookstore. In the middle of the hushed proceedings, he suddenly panicked that he had lost his wallet (he had not), and, in his frenzy to search his pockets, he tipped over backward in his chair.
We both started laughing so hard we were practically hyperventilating and had to leave the reading. We hurried out, hooting, as people shot disapproving glares our way. It was clearly the start of something special.
Around this time, I discovered a shoebox full of old letters in my parents' basement. Dated from 1938 to 1941, they were letters that my great-grandmother, in Germany, had sent to my grandmother in America, who had fled with her husband and young daughter. I knew that my mother's family had come from Germany — she speaks German as fluently as English — but I was never told much about our past. Like many Jewish immigrants whose families were decimated by the Holocaust, my relatives didn't talk about it.
As I ran my fingers over the fragile onionskin paper and peered at the incomprehensible script, I knew right away that the letters I had found were the key to an important piece of my history. I set about having them translated, and I began writing about and researching my family: it became my master's thesis and my fascination.
At first, I didn't connect the things I was learning about my German Jewish family with the life I was living, a life whose emotional center was fast becoming my Irish boyfriend, a man from a country that claims all of 1,800 Jews, a man who once exclaimed happily, upon finding a box of matzos in my cupboard, "Oh, great, you bought crackers!"
But gradually, as the content of the letters emerged, I began to feel like I was being hit over the head by something heavy, sharp and unwieldy. It was History with a capital H.
August 11, 1938
I can't put into words how much I miss you and the dear child. I have always imagined how she looked with her curly hair. I miss you all so much ... but in spite of everything I would not wish that you were here. ...
For today let me give you a thousand greetings and a thousand kisses from your oma who loves you more than anything in the world. Perhaps we will one day have the pleasure of being together again.
THEY wouldn't have the pleasure. They died in Germany — my great-grandmother slowly, at age 61, of what I imagine was a broken heart; her husband a few months later, on a train to Auschwitz.
The letters permeated my life. The translation process was intimate and intense: my great-grandmother wrote in an archaic script that very few people could still read, but I found a professor at the university who could help. Every Friday I would go to his office with a few letters and a tape recorder, and he would translate, reading out loud. Later, I would transcribe the tapes.
My great-grandmother's words echoed in my thoughts, nudging at the corners of my daily life. Sometimes I would come home and almost expect to see a letter from her in my mailbox. I was given the weight of this history, the fact of it, the burden. This was my family tree, cut off at the roots. It seemed like the only conclusion I could draw was the obvious one: I would need to find a Jewish husband, raise a Jewish family, to defy genocide in this small but significant way.
Andrew would never become Jewish — possibly because he grew up in Ireland in the 1970's and 80's, where the only sane response to religion was to disdain it altogether, or perhaps because of the specific contours of his kind but skeptical heart. It was a point of understanding between us that I would never ask him to convert. So he would have to be my sacrifice. My loss would be a small hole in my heart compared with the crater that took up space in the center of my family.
On one of our first dates, Andrew told me a story about cat-sitting for a professor while she was away, and of accidentally taking care of the wrong cats. He had been caring for the neighbor's cats who had wandered in; the professor's pets, he told me with a sheepish smile, actually had been trapped in the linen closet for two days.
From another man, on another occasion, this particular story might have been my reason for refusing a third date. From Andrew, it seemed like a brave and funny confession, his admission that he wasn't perfect, but that he was willing to learn how to tend to things more carefully. I wanted to hear more.
My mother used to tell me, jokingly but also, I suspected, kind of seriously: "It's as easy to fall in love with a rich man as a poor one." But it's not easy to fall in love at all. And now that I had, I didn't want to give it up, even to the hungry mouth of History.
November 29, 1939
I live constantly in my thoughts with you, my dear ones. If only I could embrace all of you and hold you close to my heart. When will this happen?
ONE night, after the last of the letters had been translated and I was near the end of my project, I sat outside with some friends at an informal Sabbath gathering. Andrew was somewhere else that night, and again I wondered what my life would be like at such a ceremony with a Jewish boyfriend sitting next to me, echoing the blessing over the challah.
My friends and I were talking about love, about looking for it, finding it. Elana, who was single (and Jewish), announced with utter conviction that she would never be able to live with someone who wanted a Christmas tree in his house. Others nodded in agreement. I thought about how Andrew bought a tree every year, how he said that it reminded him of home, of the happy Christmases of his childhood in Dublin. Who was I to argue with a homesick immigrant's private, complicated sorrows? But my friend had a point: a Christmas tree is the last lost battleground of the secular Jew.
I slipped into one of my familiar uncomfortable reveries: Andrew and I are sitting in the living room of a house, maybe ours, on some Christmas morning in the future, and I am watching our little girl tearing through presents, our little girl who may not even know what loss she inherits or what slips through her fingers as she tosses crumpled wrapping paper across the floor. I looked at Elana, envious of her certainty.
March 6, 1941
When yesterday morning the letter arrived with a sweet photo, I was no longer able to hold myself. I cried all day because of joy and also of sorrow.
Someone lighted the Sabbath candles and began the blessing: Baruch atah Adonai, eloheinu melech haolam. The candles flickered in the warm wind. The words of the blessing were as intimate and as foreign to me as German, the language of my childhood that I never fully understood.
My life feels inextricable from this history. Yet letting go of Andrew couldn't have defied genocide or undone sorrow. It would have only defied our love and undone the possibility of the happy life he and I now share with our little girl, in whom I try to instill both my history and my hope.
Lauren Fox lives in Milwaukee. Her first novel, "Still Life With Husband," will be published by Knopf in February.
| |
 |
New Yorker Wins Best Cover of the Year
A New Yorker magazine cover, right, depicting President Bush being flooded in the Oval Office after Hurricane Katrina has been chosen by a panel of the nation's magazine editors and designers as the best cover of the year.
October 24, 2006
New Yorker Wins Best Cover of the Year
PHOENIX, Oct, 24 — A New Yorker magazine cover depicting President Bush being flooded in the Oval Office after Hurricane Katrina has been chosen by a panel of the nation's magazine editors and designers as the best cover of the year.
The illustration shows the waters rising around Mr. Bush and his top appointees as the flood from New Orleans engulfs the White House, which was criticized for failing to respond promptly and fully to the disaster.
Barry Blitt drew the cover, entitled "Deluged," which appeared on the Sept. 19, 2005 issue.
The magazine-cover contest was held jointly by the American Society of Magazine Editors and the Magazine Publishers of America to promote their industry. Last year, to mark the 40th anniversary of the society, a panel of editors, designers and photographers chose the 40 best covers of the last 40 years; the two groups later decided to make it an annual contest for covers published between Aug. 1 and the following July 31.
In this year's competition, another New Yorker cover was chosen in the category of best news cover: a depiction of Vice President Dick Cheney and President Bush as cowboys, alluding to the movie "Brokeback Mountain." On that cover, published in the Feb. 27 issue, Mr. Cheney, who had recently shot and injured a friend in the face in a hunting accident, is seen blowing the smoke from the tip of his shotgun barrel. The cover was drawn by Mark Ulriksen.
The best celebrity cover award was shared by two magazines that are not traditional celebrity magazines — Harper's Bazaar, for a cover featuring the actress Julianne Moore, and Vibe, for a cover featuring Busta Rhymes. That these magazines could win in the celebrity category underscores the extent to which celebrities have come to dominate the industry. Many editors say that they often feel compelled to put a celebrity on the cover to compete in a celebrity-saturated marketplace, and that famous faces sell better than models or ordinary people.
The awards panel said in a statement that the Julianne Moore cover was a breakthrough on several levels. Ms. Moore is not automatically perceived as someone whose picture alone can sell magazines. On this cover, her face is partially obscured by her red hair. She is not flashing a big smile. And her dress and the type used on the cover are green, a color often worn by redheads but one that has traditionally been considered poison on the newsstand.
The Vibe cover showed Busta Rhymes with a piece of duct tape over his mouth, a reference to his supposed withholding of information regarding the murder of his bodyguard. The panel lauded him for being willing to poke fun at himself.
Cynthia Leive, the editor of Glamour, who announced the winners today at the magazine society's annual meeting here, said a cover could become iconic because, in a single visual statement, "it has the potential to live on for decades and become an indelible part of our culture."
Winning covers and runners-up in all categories are posted online at the society's web site, www.asme.magazine.org.
| |
 |
Selling Shoes Online, With an Eye Toward Fewer Clicks
Jan Stürmann for The New York Times
Toby C. Lenk, president of Gap Direct, Gap Inc.'s Internet division, said last year's expensive technology upgrade was paying off sooner than anticipated.
October 23, 2006
E-Commerce Report
Selling Shoes Online, With an Eye Toward Fewer Clicks
EARLY in the first e-commerce boom, there was a widespread idea that shoes just didn't fit in. No one wanted to buy shoes online, the thinking went, because getting a pair to fit is tricky and no one wants the expense and hassle of returning shoes through the mail.
That conventional wisdom was upended by Zappos.com, the online shoe seller based in Las Vegas that opened for business in 1999. Sales for the privately held company are on track to reach $600 million, up from $370 million last year, according to Alfred Lin, the company's chairman and chief financial officer.
Zappos' success is now enticing Gap Inc., which is mired in a sales slump, to trade its cement shoes for something a little more nimble. Last week, the company introduced a new brand, Piperlime, and a Web site (piperlime.com) featuring thousands of footwear styles from 150 brands.
Piperlime is heading into a market dominated by a category pioneer, Zappos, as well as an increasingly aggressive contingent of newer competitors, all fighting in what is estimated to be a $2.9 billion market this year. But perhaps more significantly, the site will be selling goods made by other companies, a sharp departure from Gap's traditional private-label strategy (you can't buy Levi's jeans at the Gap, for example) and a shift that could presage further merchandising changes at its Gap, Banana Republic and Old Navy stores.
Analysts said Piperlime alone would not significantly jump-start Gap's sales, which were unchanged last quarter at $3.7 billion, but they said that given the strength of the company's Internet division, Piperlime stood a good chance of leading in the online shoe market.
"Gap has the capabilities to offer a better browsing experience than what's available for buying shoes online today," said Carrie A. Johnson, a retail analyst with the online consultancy Forrester Research. "And they're striking while the iron is hot."
Piperlime, for instance, relies on Gap's "quick look" feature to offer consumers an expanding window explaining product details without requiring them to click to a separate page. Ms. Johnson said that feature, which is available on few commerce sites, was particularly critical for shoe sales since customers typically browse through multiple styles before considering one shoe more closely.
The quick-look feature was part of a huge multimillion dollar technology upgrade Gap made last year that also included a re-engineering of the company's back office systems to merge customer e-mail addresses and their buying history into one system.
"They have some very rich data to mine, and unlike many companies they can actually mine that data," Ms. Johnson said. "Going into new products isn't a huge leap, given how much they know about their customers."
Toby C. Lenk, president of Gap Direct, the company's Internet division, said last year's self-built technology upgrade, which was criticized as unnecessarily expensive by some in the industry, was paying for itself much more quickly than he had envisioned. Since the new technology was completed, Mr. Lenk said his division had seen "substantial improvements in operating efficiency, customer retention, average order sizes, profit margins and sales-per-visitor."
But good technology only goes so far when you are selling shoes. Peter Cobb, a senior vice president of 6pm.com, an online shoe seller based in Denver that was introduced late last year by eBags, said Piperlime did not include some brands of men's shoes, like Cole Haan, Allen-Edmonds and Johnston & Murphy, among others.
"The site looks trendy, but you're not really in the men's business with 20 brands," he said.
Mr. Cobb, whose Web site was introduced last year with fewer than half the 150 brands the site now features, speculated that some brands might have been waiting to see Piperlime in action before committing to the new site — a notion that Mr. Lenk, of Gap, confirmed.
Gap Inc., based in San Francisco, is also taking a different approach to merchandising than 6pm, Zappos and others, in that it often offers a point of view about shoe styles customers should consider, rather than simply presenting a multitude of shoes from which visitors can browse by various attributes. Among other things, the site offers shoe shopping suggestions from noted fashion experts, like Hollywood stylist Rachel Zoe.
Ms. Johnson, of Forrester, said such strategy was sorely lacking from the current online buying environment.
"Apparel is a bit of an emotional buying experience, and there's a limit to the number of customers who want to buy from a bare bones experience, versus something that has a little more fashion infused," she said.
If there is such a limit, Zappos does not appear close to reaching it. Part of that company's growth comes courtesy of a product expansion that brings Zappos more directly in competition with eBags, Gap and other apparel sellers. Zappos this year began selling small amounts of eyewear, watches and apparel, Mr. Lin said. "But we expect to ramp that up over time," he added.
Zappos offers free shipping and free returns, which helped it debunk the idea that shoes would not sell well online. (Piperlime has free shipping and returns, too.) The economics of such a generous shipping policy, which reduces the risk for consumers, is possible for shoes, which carry a greater profit margin than other apparel items. Zappos has since extended that policy to everything it sells.
Piperlime's entry into the market could affect his business, Mr. Lin said, but he is not overly concerned. "There might be fewer people buying from us because they can shop on BananaRepublic.com and stay in the Gap family for shoes," he said. "But it's not any harder for customers to come to Zappos."
| | October 22
Joshua Lott/Reuters
The floor of the Chicago Board of Trade, which agreed on Tuesday to be bought by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.
October 20, 2006
Insider
An 8,000-Pound Gorilla, With Little Oversight
ANOTHER week, another transformational deal as one big exchange buys another.
This time, the activity is in futures and derivatives, with the Chicago Mercantile Exchange buying the Chicago Board of Trade, creating one of the world’s largest financial markets.
How big is big? The combined entity, to be called the CME Group, will have a market capitalization of more than $26 billion, compared with the proposed combination of the NYSE Group and Euronext, which would be closer to $20 billion. The CME Group will oversee average daily trading volume of nearly nine million contracts representing $4.2 trillion in notional value.
That’s trillion.
According to a joke circulating in the arcane world of exchanges, the 800-pound gorilla — the Chicago Mercantile Exchange — just became an 8,000-pound gorilla.
It is unclear from all the hullabaloo surrounding the deal whether the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates the red-hot futures markets, including the Mercantile Exchange and Board of Trade, can effectively regulate the beast being created.
The commission is widely considered weaker than its securities market counterpart, the Securities and Exchange Commission, a regulator that has faced its own share of complaints in recent years. (Depending on the political party, those complaints alternate between heavy-handedness and ineffectiveness.)
The futures commission has a staff of fewer than 500, a 2006 budget of less than $100 million, and like the S.E.C., a revolving door of leadership inherent to its political nature. But compared with the S.E.C., the futures regulator has smaller resources: The S.E.C.’s 2006 estimated budget is $888 million, and roughly 3,700 people work there, about 2,000 of them investigating companies or seeking to bring cases against them.
Congress created the futures commission in 1974 as an independent agency to regulate commodity futures and options markets. The most recent update of that authority came with the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, completed in December 2000.
That law, the product of some intense lobbying, radically changed the agency’s approach, putting into effect a principles-based system rather than one based on rules. Under the act, futures exchanges have to comply with 8 “designation criterion” and 18 core principles. Users refer to this as a “lighter touch” approach — one far more favorable to them.
New products, for example, face an easy path: a futures exchange can certify to its regulator up to one day in advance that it is starting a new product or rule. If the exchange wants to request an approval, the agency has 45 days to give it. By way of comparison, stock exchanges cannot offer a new product or change any rule without approval from the S.E.C., a process that is notoriously slow.
In a speech in June, a commodity futures trading commissioner, Walt L. Lukken, said the modernization act gave the futures market the flexibility it required to foster innovation. “While the C.F.T.C. monitors whether a core principle is ultimately met, the exchanges, with their hands-on experience, are given discretion to tailor their rules to their special circumstances,” he said.
Both of the Chicago exchanges are self-regulatory organizations, meaning they police their own markets while the C.F.T.C. oversees them. And there have been few recent scandals of note. But with a new market heavyweight, and an increasingly loud chorus of Wall Street and corporate executives arguing that regulation is crippling American competitiveness, defaulting to a tiny regulator for oversight of huge markets run by exchanges with significant political influence seems less than ideal.
Officials at the futures commission declined to comment for this article.
The debate will shift, once again, to the merits of combining the regulation of the securities and futures and derivatives markets and deciding whether a system of rules or principles make sense. This is, of course, hugely radical, very contentious and totally political (read unfeasible).
The fight will then become one of pork rather than pork bellies. The futures commission is overseen by the House and Senate Agricultural Committees, a holdover from the days when the futures contracts had to do with wheat to be delivered rather than weather to be hedged.
Those members unquestionably like their deep-pocketed exchange constituents. The Chicago exchanges in general, and the Mercantile Exchange in particular, are top Congressional donors. In the 2006 election cycle, four exchanges appear on the list of the top 20 securities industry donors, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. All but one of the four are futures markets, and three of them hail from Chicago. The Mercantile Exchange has been on that top 20 list for the last three election cycles.
A principles-based framework might make more sense in a world where innovation renders rules obsolete overnight. But one supported by a weak regulator with powerful constituents who reign over a hot market seems like a recipe for disaster.
October 22, 2006
By the evening of June 20, 2005, the government’s investigation of possible insider trading by Pequot Capital Management, a prominent hedge fund, had reached a critical stage.
Throughout the day, Robert Hanson, a branch chief in the Washington office of the Securities and Exchange Commission, had been questioning his lead investigator in the case about taking the testimony of John J. Mack, an influential Wall Street executive.
The investigator, Gary J. Aguirre, was trying to find out if Mr. Mack had obtained inside information about a merger and passed it to his friend, Pequot’s founder, Arthur J. Samberg.
Finally at 8:25 p.m., Mr. Hanson sent Mr. Aguirre a message from his BlackBerry expressing enthusiasm about the inquiry. “Okay Gary you’ve given me the bug,” he wrote, according to confidential S.E.C. documents. “I’m starting to think about the case during my non work hours.”
But three days later, the investigation abruptly changed course. Mr. Aguirre later told a Senate committee that after news broke that Mr. Mack was being considered to run Morgan Stanley, his supervisor said he could not interview the executive because of his political power. Mr. Aguirre protested and was eventually fired in September 2005, just days after receiving a two-step merit pay increase.
Mr. Mack and Mr. Samberg have both repeatedly denied any improper conduct. Earlier this month, the S.E.C. informed them that it would not bring any charges.
Now, it is the S.E.C. that is under scrutiny. Two Senate committees — Finance and Judiciary — are investigating how diligently the S.E.C. pursued its Pequot inquiry, whether Mr. Aguirre’s firing was an attempt to silence him, and whether senior S.E.C. officials gave special treatment to Mr. Mack by not taking his testimony when Mr. Aguirre wanted to. Mr. Mack, a major fund-raiser for President Bush’s 2004 campaign, was eventually interviewed last August, after Congress began asking questions.
The congressional inquiry centers on dozens of pages of internal S.E.C. documents that Mr. Aguirre turned over to Congress and were obtained by The New York Times. The documents, including e-mail messages from Mr. Samberg and his associates, as well as contemporaneous e-mails from investigators, provide the first inside look at the case, and shed light on why the two Senate panels are interested in the matter.
The primary focus of the congressional inquiry is the S.E.C.’s investigation into Pequot’s purchase of stock in Heller Financial, a financial services firm, and the dispute over taking Mr. Mack’s testimony. The documents say that Pequot became the nation’s biggest purchaser of Heller stock in the four weeks before the company was acquired by GE Capital in July 2001. Mr. Samberg bet $44 million on Heller and wanted to invest even more, according to the documents, but his trader could not fill all the orders.
The file shows that after Mr. Aguirre was blocked from questioning Mr. Mack about the Heller deal, Mr. Hanson, the S.E.C. branch chief, acknowledged in e-mail messages that he had discussed Mr. Mack’s “political clout” and the “juice” of his lawyers with officials at the commission.
In an exchange of e-mails in the summer of 2005, Mr. Hanson said that he had merely been trying to “alert folks above me,” and that politics did not influence S.E.C. decisions. Mr. Aguirre replied: “Bob, this is spin. You told me it would be tough to take Mack’s testimony because he has political clout.”
In the documents, S.E.C. officials argued that Mr. Aguirre was not justified in taking Mr. Mack’s testimony because he could not show that Mr. Mack had inside information or a clear motive for giving it to Mr. Samberg. But Mr. Aguirre said he was only asking for permission to interview Mr. Mack, not bring charges.
The file portrays the S.E.C. as a place where stock exchange referrals of suspected insider trading can languish for years without serious investigation.
In the Pequot case, senators are examining how the S.E.C. handled a total of 18 referrals. In addition to the Heller deal, they include an investigation involving federal prosecutors into whether the hedge fund bought Microsoft options based on inside information. E-mails show that Mr. Samberg solicited information about the software company’s financial performance from a Microsoft manager he was recruiting shortly before Pequot invested in the company.
“I shouldn’t say this, but you have probably paid for yourself already!” Mr. Samberg wrote to the former Microsoft manager as he was preparing to join Pequot in 2001.
None of the 18 referrals, including the one involving Microsoft, led to an enforcement action, according to people briefed on the matter.
Mr. Aguirre’s documents have surfaced amid rising concern on Capitol Hill about the lightly regulated world of hedge funds. The chairman of the finance committee, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, said last week that after questioning S.E.C. officials about the Pequot investigation, “my initial concerns haven’t been put to rest by what I’ve learned so far.”
The file is not a full record of Mr. Aguirre’s investigation, and it is silent about what happened in the inquiry after he left the commission. In the papers, Mr. Aguirre acknowledged before his firing that he had not proved that Pequot had engaged in insider trading, or that Mr. Mack ever had inside information about Heller.
Since The New York Times first reported Mr. Aguirre’s allegations last June, the inspector general for the S.E.C. reopened his investigation into the firing after it was disclosed that he had not interviewed Mr. Aguirre. The inspector general, whose conduct is also being examined by the Senate, declined to comment.
Mr. Aguirre declined to be interviewed for this article, but in an Aug. 21 letter, he told the banking committee, which oversees the S.E.C., that he had little faith in either investigation. “The same I.G. who did the first whitewash would do the new one,” he wrote. “The senior enforcement attorneys who pretended no grounds existed to take Mack’s testimony will now pretend to take Mack’s testimony.”
In a statement, Jeanmarie McFadden, a spokeswoman for Morgan Stanley, said: “Mr. Aguirre’s allegations against John Mack are irresponsible and without any evidence whatsoever to support them. John Mack had nothing to do with the S.E.C.’s decision if or when it would seek his testimony. As soon as he was asked, John Mack immediately agreed to provide his testimony and was subsequently advised that the S.E.C. would take no action regarding him in this matter.”
Jonathan Gasthalter, a Pequot spokesman, said in a statement: “The S.E.C. staff conducted an extensive, two-year investigation of Pequot’s trading and that investigation is over. During the course of the S.E.C.’s investigation, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York reviewed the firm’s 2001 trades in Microsoft and concluded that no action was warranted.”
Officials at the S.E.C. declined to comment on the Pequot investigation and its outcome. But Walter G. Ricciardi, deputy director of enforcement, said that if investigators uncovered evidence that supported an insider trading case, they would pursue it vigorously. He denied Mr. Aguirre’s contention that referrals from the stock exchanges languish, saying that the commission’s staff follows up on three-quarters of the 350 to 450 referrals received each year.
“Insider trading is a very big priority for us,” Mr. Ricciardi said. “We recognize that the integrity of the marketplace is at stake.”
Focusing on the Heller Deal
The following account is largely based on the investigative files and letters Mr. Aguirre sent to Senate investigators in August.
According to these records, two days after joining the commission in September 2004, Mr. Aguirre was assigned to look into suspicious trading by Pequot in an information management company shortly before it was acquired in 2003.
In a matter of months, Mr. Aguirre said he discovered 13 referrals involving Pequot that had not been fully investigated by the S.E.C. Eventually, he would look into 18 referrals, including one older one where Pequot suddenly began buying the stock of Heller Financial.
That referral soon became the focus of the S.E.C.’s Pequot investigation.
What intrigued federal investigators, Mr. Aguirre said, was that before buying Heller stock, Mr. Samberg apparently did not follow the financial services industry or Heller. Mr. Samberg’s bet had paid off: On July 30, 2001, the GE Capital Corporation announced that it was buying Heller, sending Heller’s stock up 50 percent. Pequot made $18 million on the deal, primarily by investing in Heller, but also by short-selling GE Capital’s parent, General Electric, which dropped on news of the buyout.
After the deal was announced Mr. Samberg sent an e-mail containing six “smiley” faces, Mr. Aguirre said.
According to Mr. Aguirre, Mr. Samberg told the S.E.C. in May 2005 that he had six reasons for buying Heller stock, including the company’s strong financial model, analysts’ reports and speculation that Heller might be a takeover candidate.
But Mr. Aguirre says that when Mr. Samberg testified a second time in June, he was less certain, saying he had “no recollection specifically of how I started the Heller investment other than to know that I had been doing this for many years and recognized these opportunities when they come up.”
Mr. Samberg said he could not recall seeing any newspaper articles about Heller or point to any specific analysts’ reports he had read about the company, according to an e-mail Mr. Aguirre sent to his supervisor, Mr. Hanson, on June 27, 2005. Nor did Mr. Samberg remember speaking with others at Pequot about the deal, Mr. Aguirre wrote. After Mr. Aguirre was fired, the S.E.C. interviewed Mr. Samberg a third time, but the files do not reflect what he said.
Microsoft Trading Raises Concern
Beyond Mr. Samberg’s testimony, Mr. Aguirre said his suspicions were fueled by Pequot’s trading in Microsoft.
In early 2001, Mr. Samberg sought financial information on Microsoft from a product manager at the company, David Zilkha, whom he was trying to recruit, according to Mr. Aguirre.
“Might as well pick your brain before you go on the payroll,” Mr. Samberg wrote in an e-mail message to Mr. Zilkha on Feb. 28, 2001. After expressing unhappiness with Pequot’s research on Microsoft, Mr. Samberg asked: “Do you have any current views that could be helpful?”
On April 6, 2001, Mr. Samberg pressed Mr. Zilkha about Microsoft’s upcoming earnings report. “Any tidbits you might care to lob in,” Mr. Samberg asked in an e-mail, after noting “the recurring indications from knowledgeable people” that Microsoft’s earnings might fall short.
Mr. Zilkha responded the next day, saying he would get back to him “ASAP.”
There is no record of Mr. Zilkha’s response or evidence that he passed information to Mr. Samberg.
Mr. Aguirre told the banking committee that between April 9 and 11, 2001, Mr. Samberg bought 30,000 options contracts, apparently believing Microsoft “would beat its earnings, the reverse of his belief stated in his e-mail.”
A little more than a week later, on April 19, Microsoft reported better-than-expected earnings, sending its stock sharply higher the next day. Mr. Samberg made a $12 million profit on his Microsoft options, Mr. Aguirre said. The next day Mr. Samberg sent Mr. Zilkha, still three days away from joining Pequot, the gushing e-mail that said, “you have probably paid for yourself already.” On Mr. Zilkha’s first day on the job, Mr. Samberg alerted others to the new employee’s “great p.& l.” — or profit and loss — based on his Microsoft “input.”
Mr. Aguirre told the banking committee that “critical gaps in the evidence” prevented the S.E.C. from charging anyone with insider trading in connection with the Microsoft investigation. The Justice Department also took no action.
Mr. Zilkha, who no longer works for Pequot, declined to comment. But his lawyer, Henry Putzel III, issued a statement: “David Zilkha worked in a nonfinancial capacity, primarily in marketing for the MSN division of Microsoft. For approximately five months before his employment at Pequot, Mr. Zilkha was on family leave from Microsoft. David Zilkha never obtained and did not communicate any material, nonpublic information, nor did he attempt to do so.”
A Dispute Over Testimony
The Zilkha e-mail messages fed Mr. Aguirre’s belief that Mr. Samberg might have had nonpublic information when, around the same time, he invested in Heller Financial. His suspicion fell on Mr. Mack, a longtime friend of Mr. Samberg’s who was Pequot’s chairman for several weeks in June 2005. “There are hundreds of Pequot e-mails referring to Mack, including a dozen in July 2001,” Mr. Aguirre wrote in a June 2005 e-mail message to S.E.C. officials.
None of those e-mails show Mr. Mack passing on any tips about the Heller deal. Nor do they prove that he even knew about the deal before Pequot started buying Heller stock on July 2, 2001.
But what the e-mails and trading records do show, Mr. Aguirre believed, was enough circumstantial evidence to warrant taking Mr. Mack’s testimony — a standard procedure in such a situation, he said — and to issue more subpoenas to Credit Suisse First Boston, the investment bank that advised Heller during its talks with G.E. Mr. Mack became chief executive of Credit Suisse in July 2001.
In e-mails to S.E.C. officials in the summer of 2005, Mr. Aguirre made his case, noting that Mr. Samberg and Mr. Mack were close and trusted each other, and that Mr. Mack was allowed to invest in hot Pequot funds and financings. In addition, Mr. Aguirre speculated that Mr. Mack might have learned about the upcoming Heller-GE Capital deal while negotiating his job with Credit Suisse. Mr. Mack began at Credit Suisse on July 12, 2001, a little more than a week after Pequot began buying Heller stock. Pequot continued to buy Heller stock in the following weeks.
“Samberg’s aggressive buying of Heller suggests he received the tip shortly before July 2,” Mr. Aguirre said in an e-mail to Mr. Hanson, his S.E.C. supervisor. And Pequot’s e-mails show that Mr. Samberg and Mr. Mack spoke after the market closed on Friday, June 29, according to Mr. Aguirre. “That matched perfectly with Samberg’s decision to begin buying Heller with a vengeance the next trading day after he spoke with Mack,” Mr. Aguirre said in his letter to the banking committee.
The committee files show that until late June of last year, S.E.C. officials appeared to support Mr. Aguirre’s investigation. Around that time, Mr. Aguirre said, his supervisors authorized him to contact the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a federal prosecutor about the investigation.
But when Morgan Stanley was considering hiring Mr. Mack as chief executive, Mr. Aguirre said, a regulatory official at the investment bank called to ask if Mr. Mack was a serious target in the Pequot investigation. The official “explained that the prospect of such an action against Mack could affect Morgan Stanley’s decision whether to rehire him as its C.E.O.,” Mr. Aguirre told the banking committee.
Before answering, Mr. Aguirre said, he consulted with his two supervisors, Mr. Hanson and Mark Kreitman, an assistant director of enforcement at the agency. According to Mr. Aguirre, Mr. Kreitman favored telling Morgan Stanley that Mr. Mack was indeed a target, but first he informed his boss, Paul R. Berger, an associate director of enforcement, by speakerphone.
With Mr. Aguirre listening in, Mr. Berger quickly overruled Mr. Kreitman, saying in effect that the S.E.C. would most likely not file charges against Mr. Mack and that nothing should be said to Morgan Stanley, Mr. Aguirre said.
Mr. Aguirre was stunned. He told the banking committee that after the call, “The usual routines and protocols went out the window.” Suddenly, Mr. Aguirre said, he was excluded from senior staff meetings about the Pequot investigation. And subpoenaed records that ordinarily would go directly to him were instead directed to Linda Thomsen, the agency’s chief of enforcement, he said.
Mr. Berger, now a lawyer at Debevoise & Plimpton, declined to comment.
For the next two months, Mr. Aguirre pressed his superiors for permission to take Mr. Mack’s testimony. He failed to change their minds.
“I need greater specificity than the information provided here,” Mr. Kreitman wrote in a July 25, 2005, e-mail to Mr. Aguirre. Mr. Kreitman said the evidence of motive “may have substance but it’s too vague.” And while contacts between Mr. Mack and Mr. Samberg “were potentially significant,” they were not “aberrational.”
“I have indicated repeatedly that concrete evidence of when Mack obtained access to material nonpublic information re the G.E./Heller deal is the sine qua non for focused investigation of Mack,” Mr. Kreitman wrote.
To Mr. Aguirre, this standard had not been applied to other executives he had subpoenaed. Just as troubling, he said, were references by Mr. Hanson to the power of Mr. Mack and his lawyers, who included former S.E.C. officials.
“Mack’s counsel will have ‘juice,’ as I described last night — meaning that they may reach out to Paul and Linda (and possibly others),” Mr. Hanson told Mr. Aguirre in an e-mail on Aug. 4, 2005. The reference apparently was to Mr. Berger and Ms. Thomsen.
Three weeks later, on Aug. 24, Mr. Hanson again acknowledged Mr. Mack’s status. “Most importantly the political clout I mentioned to you was a reason to keep Paul and possibly Linda in the loop on the testimony,” Mr. Hanson wrote. But he added: “As far as I know politics are never involved in determining whether to take someone’s testimony. I’ve not seen it done at this agency.”
Mr. Aguirre disputed Mr. Hanson’s account, calling it “spin,” and added: “An artificially high barrier has been set for his exam. I do not think this is proper.”
Mr. Ricciardi of the S.E.C., speaking generally, said, “Every day enforcement deals with powerful people and we treat them equally with an appropriate level of fairness for the people being investigated and fierceness for the investors we protect.” He also said that lawyers representing possible targets often approach top enforcement officials. “They don’t have to be a famous lawyer, and they don’t have to have a famous client,” he said.
An S.E.C. spokesman declined to provide comments from Mr. Kreitman, Mr. Hanson or Ms. Thomsen.
By the end of August, Mr. Aguirre was complaining that the Heller investigation “has slowed to a snail’s pace.” He was fired about a week later while on vacation.
In late August of this year, Senator Grassley, the finance committee chairman, wrote to the S.E.C. chairman, Christopher Cox, raising questions about how the agency handled the investigation. He wrote that congressional investigators had found that the S.E.C.’s Heller inquiry had stopped, and had resumed only after Congress began looking at the matter.
Senator Grassley also took the inspector general’s office to task, saying it had shown little interest in Mr. Aguirre’s contention that Mr. Mack’s political clout was a factor in not taking his testimony last year.
The inspector general “closed its inquiry, claiming it found no evidence that S.E.C. officials had referenced Mack’s political clout,” Mr. Grassley wrote, adding, “Contrary to the I.G. report, however, documentary evidence exists and corroborates” that assertion.
|
 |
Fernando Alonso World Formula One Driving Champion 2006
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Fernando Alonso F1 > Brazilian GP, 2006-10-21 (Interlagos): Saturday qualifying |
This young man's performance in 2006 was delivered with the talent that can only be received at the moment of conception.
Following his Championship in 2005, when he became the youngest Formula One Champion in the history of the sport, he returned in 2006 to answer any and all doubters with a back to back championship record.
His battles with Ferrari, and in particular his ability to overcome the seemingly invincible Mr. Schumacher, will forever be remembered in the annals of Formula One history.
His maturity, his adroit God given ability at the wheel, his determination and courage to win when the pressure was at it's zenith, all mark him as having his deserved place amoung the great legends of Formula One racing.
To those who feel this is a premature accolade, I say watch as the future unfolds before you. And Mark My Words.
Congratulations Fernando. You are most certainly a popular Champion here in Las Vegas.
MIchael P. Whelan
Las Vegas, October 22, 2006 | |
|
Michael Schumacher Arrives at The Track For The Last Time. Brazilian G.P. 2006
Schumacher Arrives at the Track For The Last Time
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Michael Schumacher arrives at the circuit F1 > Brazilian GP, 2006-10-22 (Interlagos): Sunday pre-race
Michael Schumacher, seven time World Formula one Driving Champion, arrives at the race circuit in Brazil for the very last time as a competitive driver.
He is retired now, and it will be marked as the end of an era in Formula 1 history. There will be volumes published about his life and times, as well as documentary movies and countless articles in all manner of publications.
One thing that I feel is most important...
WE cannot overlook the fact that today also marks the crowning of Fernando Alonso as World Champion of Formula 1 for the second consecutive year. There is nothing in the retirement story of Mr. Schumacher that can overshadow the most amazing repeat performance by Alonso and The Renault Team.
Congratulations Fernando, to you and everyone at Renault. You have proven yourselves to be World Class thru and thru. You have won a second World Championmship, one that you so richly deserve and achieved as participants in highly competitive races through out this year.
Thank you from all Formula One fans who have enjoyed a season where the excitement has been restored to the greatest motor racing series in the world.
Michael Schumacher! God Bless You and All of your Loved Ones. You have been a mainstay of this sport for twenty years. There is very little that anyone can really write or say that would do justice to the accomplishments and contribution that you have left in your wake in the world of Grand Prix Formula One racing.
Only we will wish all of the great good health, love, joy and well deserved pleasure of having your life to share with your young family, who have shared the greater part of you for these many years with your life as the most commited driver in Formula One History.
Thank You Michael, for all of the memories too many to even recall.
God Bless you, With Love and Prayers for you and your Loved Ones.
MIchael P. Whelan
Las Vegas, Nevada, October 22, 2006 | |
| |
 |
Alcohol, a Car and a Fatality. Is It Murder?
Jack Healey for The New York Times
CRIME SCENE This Long Island crash led to a murder conviction.
October 22, 2006
Alcohol, a Car and a Fatality. Is It Murder?
DRUNKEN drivers who kill people with their vehicles are almost never charged with murder.
Even the usual terms of criminal prosecution, vehicular manslaughter or reckless homicide, which carry far lesser degrees of punishment, are felony charges that until 25 years ago were only lightly used by prosecutors. When a presidential task force tallied the numbers of victims from various crimes in 1981, drunken driving was not even on the list.
Times have changed. "Reckless homicide" and then "manslaughter" became common charges brought against drunken drivers after advocacy groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving began campaigning in the early 1980's. But now even those terms are considered gentle euphemisms by some advocates against drunken driving — as in, words that shelter people from looking too closely at the ugliest of realities.
So, many advocates were cheered when a Long Island, N.Y., jury last week convicted Martin R. Heidgen, 25, of murder for killing two people in a head-on collision with a limousine on July 2, 2005. Still, it was such a rare event that advocates, prosecutors and defense lawyers are still trying to figure out its implications.
Will murder charges help deter drunken driving? Will juries convict these drivers, knowing that they will be in prison for a long time? And is it fair?
The Heidgen jury, which took five days to reach its verdict, seems to have had difficulty confronting these questions. In a way, the confrontation was forced on them — in part by a newly installed district attorney elected on an anti-drunken driving platform and in part by a grieving mother.
The facts of the case were never in dispute: Mr. Heidgen, an insurance salesman returning home from a party, was very drunk, his blood-alcohol level three times the legal limit. He was driving the wrong way on a highway when he plowed head-on into the limousine carrying the family of Neil and Jennifer Flynn home from a wedding. He killed the chauffeur, Stanley Rabinowitz, and Katie Flynn, 7.
The girl's mother used no euphemisms in describing the accident. "As I crawled out of the car, the only thing that was left of Kate was her head," Mrs. Flynn, 36, said two days after the crash. "And I took her, just like that, and sat on the side of the Meadowbrook and watched at the horrendousness going on around me. I want everybody to know that."
There is no official count of how many times drunken drivers involved in fatal accidents have been charged or convicted of murder. But of the more than 13,000 alcohol-related driving deaths last year in the United States, prosecutors are aware of only a few murder cases each in Texas, California and New York. So there seems to be at least a bit of ambivalence about whether drunken drivers who kill people should be subject to the same legal penalties as gunmen who kill people.
"There is a certain psychological barrier there," said Marcia Cunningham, director of the National Traffic Law Center, an agency of the National District Attorneys Association, in Alexandria, Va. Americans spend an enormous amount of time in their cars, she noted, and at one time or other just about everyone has had too much to drink. "The combination of these two familiar activities makes for a certain, what have you, difficulty with the word 'murder.' "
Nonetheless, she said, it is murder, no different from "carrying a loaded gun around, pointing it at people walking down Fifth Avenue, and having a few shots go off, killing them."
Steve Oberman, a lawyer in Knoxville, Tenn., who defends drunken drivers and who is the co-author of "Drunk Driving Defense," a textbook widely used by lawyers in the field, said the situation is usually much more ambiguous.
"The terrible part about intoxication is that once you become intoxicated you lose the ability to know that you should not be doing certain things, including driving," Mr. Oberman said. "It doesn't make it any easier on the family of the victim. But people do make mistakes."
The jurors in the Heidgen case apparently considered that. Twice they sent the judge a note saying they were deadlocked. After the fourth day of deliberations, an 8-to-4 majority in favor of a murder conviction became 10 to 2, according to the jurors. In the fifth day, the last two holdouts joined the majority. But one of those two, the jury forewoman, said later that she had felt unbearably pressured by other jurors. She said she was still convinced that Mr. Heidgen was guilty of manslaughter, not murder.
Kathleen Rice, the district attorney, said the jury reached the right verdict, regardless of any second thoughts by any of its members. "We hope that this verdict sends a message that if you drink and drive and kill somebody you will be prosecuted for murder," she said.
Since the early 1980's, when grassroots groups like MADD began a campaign against drunken driving, the rate of traffic fatalities linked to alcohol has dropped by about half, according to federal highway statistics.
But progress has stalled, said Chuck Hurley, chief executive of MADD. "The numbers have not moved substantially in 10 years," he said. "The country has gotten used to MADD, and gotten used to increased law enforcement, and the result is that every month in this country another 1,000 families get a knock on the door with very bad news because of drinking and driving."
But he added: "Is every drunk driver who kills someone a murderer? "We don't advocate that."Instead, MADD has campaigned successfully to lower the legal blood-alcohol level for drivers to .08 from .10 — now the standard in every state. Ignition-interlock devices, which prevent drunken drivers from starting their cars, have been installed in the vehicles of about 100,000 people serving probation for drunken driving offenses around the country, he said.
"We are hopeful that the Flynn-Rabinowitz case will mark a new turning point in public awareness," Mr. Hurley said, referring to the Long Island limousine victims. "But we are not sure how much we can depend on that. For now, we are putting our hopes in technology."
Better to save lives before the fact, he said. "A murder trial will not bring anyone back."
| |
 |
Marie Antoinette, Citoyenne
Leigh Johnson/Columbia Pictures
MAKEOVER Depictions of the queen takes her out of her shoes and puts her in ours.
October 22, 2006
A Looking Glass
Marie Antoinette, Citoyenne
By ERIC KONIGSBERG
SHE may never have said the words that got her in Bartlett's — "Let them eat cake" — but she might as well have. Nevertheless, the image of Marie Antoinette — dauphine, villain, tea-party thrower in shepherdess garb — is in the midst of an extreme rehab.
What with Sofia Coppola's movie, two sympathetic books ("Queen of Fashion," a biography by Caroline Weber, and "Abundance," a work of historical fiction by Sena Jeter Naslund); and a PBS documentary, we're having a Marie Antoinette moment. And she doesn't even have a publicist.
The question, then, might be less a matter of what to make of Marie Antoinette, than of why the makeover, and why now? Of all the victimizers in history, why are we suddenly flooded with these new narratives that show us Marie Antoinette — vain, selfish, solipsistic and venal — as a victim?
The simplest answer may be that most Americans don't have even the flimsiest grasp of who she was.
"Never underestimate our historical illiteracy," says the historian Ron Chernow, whose biography of Alexander Hamilton explored the Founding Fathers' disagreements over the excesses of the French Revolution. "Unburdened by an existing context through which to view her life, it becomes much easier to see her simply as a captive of the monarchy and a captive of her own celebrity."
Even in the packaging, the current depictions paint Marie Antoinette — the most significant target of a most significant populist revolt — as herself a revolutionary.
"Her required wardrobe included 12-foot wide hoopskirts," reads the jacket copy of Ms. Weber's book. "But when she became queen, Marie Antoinette rebelled, seeking to establish her own royal style as a way to seduce the public (and distract attention from her failure to conceive)."
The cover flap of "Abundance" describes her as "a heroine of inspiring stature, one whose nobility arises not from the circumstance of her birth but from her courageous spirit." And the lettering on the advertisements for Ms. Coppola's movie — on crudely cut hot-pink banners — recall the cover of the Sex Pistols' album "Never Mind the Bollocks." (God save the Queen, anyone?)
Americans' relationship to rebellion, in any case, is more complicated than you might think. "It was thought of as an attractive concept through much of the 20th century," Mr. Chernow says. "But at the moment, we're living in the aftermath of many failed revolutions — Communism and Fascism come to mind — and with the conspicuous exception of the jihadists, people are more attuned to the excesses of revolution."
Robert H. Frank, the Cornell economist whose books include "Luxury Fever: Why Money Fails to Satisfy in an Era of Excess," says that although the gap between the rich and the rest of us has only widened over the last 35 or 40 years, "Americans aren't known for great class resentment toward the wealthy.
"It's not that the extra spending of the rich hasn't caused problems for the middle class — it has, particularly in the housing market," Professor Frank says.
But to be angry about that, Professor Frank says, is too complicated. "People in the U.S. don't look at what the people at the top have and say, 'That's making life more difficult for me.' They watch and say, 'That'll be me someday. So, I'd better vote to abolish the estate tax, because you never know what the future may bring.' "
In other words, there are many Americans who see themselves — accurately or not — in Marie Antoinette (just as there are people who spend their Sundays at open houses for $10 million dollar co-ops on Fifth Avenue, even though they're raising a family in a cramped two-bedroom where the oven doubles as a china closet).
On another level — one of personal experience, rather than socioeconomic station — we're an entire nation of Marie Antoinettes.
"I meet these people all the time: binge consumers, intentionally oblivious young people who see amassing a great shoe collection as their purpose in life," says Richard Florida, the author of the books "The Rise of the Creative Class" and "The Flight of the Creative Class."
"As our whole society is fundamentally challenged — war, terrorism, globalism — there is a large segment whose measured response has been self-expression through shopping and partying," he says. "They're constructing their own fantasy world, a bubble to seal themselves off from the trauma of our times."
Even in France, the revisionism has taken hold. It was only last May that Antonia Fraser's 2001 biography, "Mary Antoinette: The Journey" (on which Ms. Coppola's film is based), was finally translated into French and published by a French house.
"And when it finally happened, they refused to put the subtitle," Ms. Fraser says. "I was interested in the journey, her development. The French seemed not to want to acknowledge that."
On the other hand, and despite the fact that the movie was booed when it made its debut at Cannes, the American novelist Diane Johnson says over the phone from Paris, where she is currently residing, that the French also have their "Marie Antoinette mania."
She cites "My Name Was Marie Antoinette," a play in Paris, at the end of which audience members were asked to vote on the Queen's ultimate fate. "The audience generally votes to let her live," she says. Today, she says, "in the stores, you see a lot fashion that's been very much influenced by her new popularity."
This has taken the form of taffeta gowns by Alexander McQueen, new shoes by Manolo Blahnik and dresses by John Galliano for Dior Couture.
"I guess you could call that tie-in merchandise," Ms. Johnson says. "If it were a Disney film, of course, they'd have made plastic figures."
| |
 |
Fighting and Arrests Tarnish Ivy League’s Refined Image
Mia M. Malafronte/Associated Press
Yale tailback Mike McLeod, left, and a teammate were arrested on Oct. 1 after a fight outside a New Haven restaurant
October 21, 2006
Fighting and Arrests Tarnish Ivy League's Refined Image
By MICHAEL WEINREB
What actually happened last Saturday afternoon on a football field in Hanover, N.H., may forever remain a matter for public debate. There was no television coverage of the Dartmouth-Holy Cross game, which ended with a field goal in overtime and a celebration by the visitors on the "D" at Dartmouth's 50-yard line.
A fight ensued, but by the time a videographer had turned his camera back on, the fracas was nearing its end. The altercation had lasted either 10 minutes, with "punches and even crutches" flying, according to Dartmouth's student newspaper, or two minutes, according to several witnesses.
Dartmouth's athletic director, Jo Ann Harper, issued a statement Thursday in which she said she had been "unable to determine individual responsibility." The sports information director, Kathy Phillips, said that while the police were investigating, no disciplinary action had been taken and none would be taken unless any of the players involved stepped forward with further information.
So perhaps, as Phillips said, the fight was merely a matter of bad timing, its significance raised because it occurred the same day a brawl between players at the University of Miami and Florida International became a YouTube sensation.
"I think it's easy for people to assume this was at the Miami level," said Phillips, who viewed the fight from the press box. "But I've seen worse at a hockey rink. If I had to give a deposition, I couldn't say that there were punches thrown."
The Dartmouth fight, however, was merely the most public in a series of ethical and legal issues in the Ivy League this fall. At Harvard, a series of incidents led Coach Tim Murphy to dismiss two football players and suspend another. At Yale, the starting quarterback and tailback were implicated in a fight outside a local restaurant, although the charges have been dropped. And on Wednesday, The Dartmouth, the student newspaper, reported that the Big Green's co-captain, defensive tackle Mike Rabil, had been charged with misdemeanor battery after an altercation in Chicago in July.
"I spoke with an Ivy League sports information director from the 1970's and asked him whether this kind of thing took place at that time," said Bruce Wood, who runs Big Green Alert, an independent Web site that covers Dartmouth athletics. "He couldn't remember having to manage a crisis of that type."
Today, Harvard (5-0, 2-0), ranked 15th in N.C.A.A. Division I-AA, will face Princeton (5-0, 2-0), ranked No. 22, in one of the biggest matchups in the Ivy League's recent history. Yet for a league that does not award scholarships, does not allow its teams to compete in the playoffs and prides itself on sportsmanship, the incidents have raised questions as to whether Ivy League teams can emphasize winning and still maintain their pristine image.
"People do focus a little harder when you have a couple of incidents like this," said Jeffrey H. Orleans, executive director of the Council of Ivy Group Presidents. "But unless I saw some evidence that there was something that linked them, I don't have any reason to believe there's anything that relates these things."
But the repercussions have rippled through all eight Ivy League institutions, prompting discussion about what constitutes fair or unfair treatment of student-athletes and whether the league is overemphasizing its athletics programs. A columnist at The Daily Pennsylvanian suggested the Ivies should either "embrace what Division I athletics means today" and begin awarding scholarships, or "drop to Division II or III — or even out of the N.C.A.A. altogether."
Officials at Harvard, including Murphy, have remained tight-lipped about the problems there, including the dismissal of a team captain and all-Ivy League linebacker after he was charged with domestic assault; a suspension of last year's starting quarterback for five games for an undisclosed violation of team rules; and the dismissal of a wide receiver after what his coach deemed a "disgusting" performance at the team's annual "Skit Night."
"In some cases, there's a segment of the public that doesn't mind seeing elite or prestigious schools knocked down a peg," said Chuck Sullivan, Harvard's director of athletic communications. "If Donald Trump went bankrupt tomorrow, certain people would take pleasure in that. At times, the Ivies can be an easy target for things."
Within the league, however, opinions vary. At Yale, Coach Jack Siedlecki received widespread criticism after he chose not to suspend quarterback Matt Polhemus and tailback Mike McLeod after their arrests on Oct. 1, along with three Yale hockey players, following an altercation outside the Gourmet Heaven restaurant in New Haven that resulted in a broken window.
Why, some students wondered, had the Harvard coach been so stern and the Yale coach taken his players, both key starters, at their word?
"I was born in the United States, not Russia," Siedlecki said. "I know not everybody agrees with me on this, but my loyalty is with the players first. I think each individual case deserves to be judged on its own. And I don't think these kids deserve to be suspended in any way."
After a mediation session, the charges against Polhemus and McLeod were dropped, and the arrests were removed from their records.
"Kids are kids, and things happen," Siedlecki said. "We're not immune from that at all. But our society's really changed. We are very negative, very vindictive people."
| |
 |
Brazilian Grand Prix 2006
Massa wins Brazilian GP, Alonso is champion
| Racing series |
F1 |
| Date |
2006-10-22 |
By Nikki Reynolds - Motorsport.com
--> -->Ferrari's Felipe Massa became the first Brazilian since Ayrton Senna in 1993 to win his home race when he took the chequered flag at Interlagos for his second victory of the season. Massa led the Brazilian Grand Prix from pole to flag and Renault's Fernando Alonso became the youngest back-to-back world champion with second place. Renault also claimed the constructors' title for the second consecutive year.
 |
|
Podium: race winner Felipe Massa with 2006 World Champion Fernando Alonso, Jenson Button and Ross Brawn. Photo by xpb.cc.
|
 |
Honda's Jenson Button had a strong drive from 14th on the grid to come home in third, while Michael Schumacher's final race was an eventful one. An early puncture dropped the German way down the field but he fought back in superb fashion, his determination taking him over the line in fourth place. Less than he had hoped for, perhaps, but Schumacher's performance was a memorable one to end his career.
It was fine and dry for race day, the conditions warmer than expected with a track temperature in the mid forties. The top seven held formation off the line: Massa, McLaren's Kimi Raikkonen, Toyota's Jarno Trulli, Alonso, Honda's Rubens Barrichello, Renault's Giancarlo Fisichella and Toyota's Ralf Schumacher. Michael shot off from 10th to battle with the BMW Saubers of Nick Heidfeld and Robert Kubica.
Meanwhile, it was to be a short and less-than sweet end to Williams' year. Nico Rosberg hit the back of Mark Webber at the first corner, Webber losing his rear wing. Webber headed to the pits to retire and Rosberg had a big shunt shortly afterwards. It seems some damage from the contact with Webber sent him spinning off just before the entry into the pit straight. The Williams hit the barrier hard and was badly damaged.
Rosberg appeared unscathed and was out of the car quickly. "I was pushing hard to make up some places and Mark braked very late and I hit him," he said of the initial incident. "It's disappointing for the team as it's not a good way to finish the season. I felt the front wing was wrong and had understeer then something broke."
The safety car was deployed as the Williams had spun back onto the track after the impact. Prior to the crash Fisichella had got past Barrichello for fifth and had Michael behind him. The BMWs had been squabbling with Ralf and there was possibly some contact there but all three seemed to survive, Ralf in eighth and Kubica and Button making up the top 10.
The safety car went in after four laps and Massa and Raikkonen shot away at the front. Michael was all over Fisichella's rear wing and had a look at the first corner but didn't go for it. Likewise Alonso was measuring up Trulli's Toyota but biding his time. Michael attacked round the outside of Fisichella into the pit straight but it went pear-shaped.
There didn't appear to be any contact but Michael suffered a left rear puncture and the rest of the pack went streaming past as the Ferrari slowed and began the long, precarious trek back to the pits. Bridgestone later said they believed that debris had cut the tyre. Michael finally got in for the tyre change and rejoined way down in 17th.
At the front Massa had pulled away from Raikkonen and was going some two seconds a lap faster than the Michelin runners behind. The next unexpected events were Ralf pulling into the pits to retire and Trulli mysteriously dropping to 10th then following his teammate's lead and trundling to the pits to retire. A suspected suspension gremlin was the culprit.
"We're not sure," Ralf said about what happened. "Something was wrong at the back of the car, it seems to be the same on both cars." Trulli concurred and explained a little further. "Both cars had the same problem, a central component on the rear suspension," was the Italian's summing up of the situation.
That meant Buton was up to sixth, Kubica to seventh and the McLaren of Pedro de la Rosa to eighth. The Red Bull of David Coulthard was another retiree not long afterwards. "It was a gearbox problem again," Coulthard commented. "I initially thought it was the clutch but the gear disengaged and I lost fourth."
By then Heidfeld was ninth and closing on de la Rosa, while Toro Rosso's Scott Speed and Tonio Liuzzi were 10th and 11th. Super Aguri's Takuma Sato was going well in 12th, followed by the Spyker MF1 of Christijan Albers, the second Super Aguri of Sakon Yamamoto, Red Bull's Robert Doornbos, Tiago Monteiro's Spyker MF1 and Michael about to begin his fight back.
Raikkonen, Barrichello and Fisichella all dived into the pits together for the first time, Barrichello nearly hitting Fisichella on the way out. Massa was 13 seconds ahead of Alonso, up to second, and belting out fastest laps at the front. The Brazilian was next to pit and Alonso took over until his stop and he got ahead of Raikkonen when he rejoined.
Button managed to jump both Fisichella and Barrichello is his first visit to the pits and then homed in on Raikkonen and dispatched the McLaren into the pit straight. Kubica and Speed had a brief coming together with a little damage to Kubica's front wing but they both continued. It wasn't really clear what happened or who was at fault.
De la Rosa in second was on a one-stopper and had not yet pitted, collecting quite a train of cars behind him. Fisichella made an error at turn one which allowed Barrichello to close in, while Button was harassing the other Renault of Alonso. De la Rosa finally took his stop and Heidfeld and Michael moved up to eighth and ninth.
Michael slipstreamed the BMW into the pit straight and whipped past, then started setting fastest laps. Massa was forging ahead in front and picking his way through the backmarkers. Heidfeld pitted and got a new front wing -- the reason for the change was not clear but during the safety car period he had said on the radio the front of the car didn't feel right.
Michael was then homing in on Kubica and got past at turn one for seventh but then the Ferrari wobbled a bit and slowed. Surely not another problem for the German? That would be too much. However, it seemed it was just a mistake on Michael's behalf as he soon picked up the pace and had to pass Kubica all over again, which he duly did.
The second round of pit stops began circulating through, Barrichello and Michael first then Fisichella. Michael rejoined behind Barrichello and set about harassing his former teammate, overtaking him down the pit straight and into turn one for sixth. Raikkonen, Alonso and Massa took their second stops and Alonso rejoined ahead of Button for second.
The points order was then Massa, Alonso, Button, Raikkonen, Fisichella, Michael, Barrichello and de la Rosa. Albers had a brief trip across the grass but recovered and Doornbos was late to take his second stop with only about a dozen laps to go. Kubica was ninth and Sato hanging in there in fine style in 10th.
Michael and Fisichella were locked in battle, the Ferrari piling the pressure on through corner after corner. Many times Fisichella held him off but eventually the Italian locked up at turn one and skipped across the grass which gave Michael a wide open door to fifth. With about eight laps to go there was more drama.
Heidfeld's BMW snapped into an abrupt spin towards the end of the pit straight and crashed into the barrier at turn one. It looked like some kind of car failure but the German appeared to escape unscathed from the impact. Yellow flags came out while the track was cleared, which deprived Michael of his favourite overtaking spot.
He had homed in on Raikkonen, the man who will replace him at Ferrari next year, but couldn't go for it at turn one. Undeterred Michael harassed the McLaren all around the lap and they battled down the pit straight but Raikkonen held. But the Finn seemed to struggle through the twisty middle part of the circuit and next time they were side by side through turn one, then free of yellow flags.
Michael made it stick and claimed the fourth place; it was very close and they were wheel to wheel but it was fine driving from both men. With two laps to go Button was on Alonso's rear wing and Alonso put a little space between them; with Massa leading and Michael fourth the Spaniard couldn't afford any sort of clash with Button.
And that was it, the final race of 2006 and Massa took the chequered flag to the delight of the roaring crowds. It was a deserved win for the Brazilian; he has improved immeasurably this season and he and Raikkonen promise to be a very interesting paring at Ferrari next year. Brazil will be partying tonight.
It's never over until it's over and there was always room for something to befall Alonso and prevent his second title. However, the odds were in his favour today and he has proved his worth for the second year in a row. There are those that will detract from his achievement for one reason or another but Ferrari's shortcomings and misfortunes are not his fault and he fought hard for this title.
Button did a good job to get home third and the Honda showed some good pace at Interlagos. Too little too late for this year, and there's a long way to go before the start of next season, but the team finished 2006 on an upward trend. Barrichello no doubt hoped for more than seventh but at least it was points and considering his track record in Brazil that's not too bad.
What to say about Michael Schumacher? In his last race he reminded us just what F1 will be missing with his absence. After his bravado performance today some are bewildered as to why he is retiring -- he drove with the utter commitment he's always shown at his best. Maybe that is why he's retiring; leaving at the top of one's form is perhaps the best way to go.
McLaren didn't think it could keep up with Ferrari's pace but as it happened it wasn't up to Renault or Honda either. Raikkonen's fifth was damage limitation and de la Rosa's eighth was not particularly spectacular. Fisichella was also a little lacklustre in sixth but his and Alonso's efforts were enough to retain Renault's constructors' title.
BMW finished the season fifth in the standings behind Honda, just one point ahead of Toyota. It was more than BMW had expected in its first year but today was a lost chance to pick up points after both cars started in the top 10. Kubica crossed the line ninth and Heidfeld was classed 17th despite his premature end to the race.
Sato delighted Super Aguri with 10th and teammate Yamamoto was 16th. Speed was the best of the Red Bull owed-outfits in 11th, with Doornbos 12th and Liuzzi 13th. Both Spykers made it to the flag, Albers 14th and Monteiro 15th. Brazil was a good race and although not everyone will be happy, it was a fair and decent fight at the end of the season. Final top eight classification: Massa, Alonso, Button, M. Schumacher, Raikkonen, Fisichella, Barrichello, de la Rosa.
Photos for Brazilian GP
Discuss this article in the Motorsport.com Forums channel: F1
More news about Brazilian GP: | |
Writing a biography in the digital age. Googling My Mother

Googling My Mother Writing a biography in the digital age. By John Dickerson Posted Friday, Oct. 20, 2006, at 6:39 PM ET --> -->
One morning, my mother's grave appeared in my inbox. The grass had grown back around it after the burial. The stone looked pinker than I remembered. The "Beloved Wife and Mother" written on it struck me as odd. Was that inscription always there? It seemed antiquated, like something you'd see in a small town cemetery, and, in my mother's case, also a little limiting. These are the details you seize on when you're suddenly confronted by Section 3, Grave 1316-A-LH before your first cup of coffee.
I had asked for it. I was writing On Her Trail, a book about my mother, Nancy Dickerson, which was published this week. Early in the process, I instructed a few Internet search engines to make a daily pass of the Web and to e-mail me whenever they found something. Mom had been a famous reporter, so I knew I'd get some responses. That day, she was discovered on a Web site dedicated to those buried at Arlington Cemetery. (My stepfather, John Whitehead, was a commander in the Navy.)
I was writing the book to figure out who my mother was, which might have seemed like a silly enterprise, since when I was growing up it seemed like everyone knew who my mother was. She was the first female network correspondent for CBS and the first woman star of the Washington TV-news corps. But I missed most of my mother's career. I was born when Mom was 41, and by the time I was old enough to know what the news was, she had left the network and her stardom had faded. There were no videotapes of her newscasts during the '60s and '70s, just pictures of her with Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon on the piano. (Now, in the age of TiVo, my children can't miss my appearances on even the lowest-rated cable show. Plus, I give them candy to watch).
I also missed most of my mother's career because I didn't care about it. Mom and I were enemies for the first part of the 27 years we knew each other. I moved out of our house at age 14 when my parents divorced, and I never lived with her again. But our cold war ended soon after I found myself joining her profession in 1993. We became pals and, for a few years, traded gossip every day. We didn't talk about the past but the news in front of us, as if we were colleagues. Then, in January 1996 she had a brutal stroke. A year and a half later, it killed her.
The initial basket of Internet search results brought back a host of items I'd never seen—footage of Mom narrating the return of John Kennedy's body as it was brought back to Andrews Air Force Base and an account of a Nixon interview. The eBay alert found copies of her autobiography, her NBC portrait, and a 1964 Saturday Evening Post article published four years before I was born. (Her Supersister trading card I did recognize. As a 10-year-old, I found it disappointing because it didn't come with bubble gum and I couldn't trade it for Pete Rose's rookie card.)
The bulletins from the Web slowed to a few each week. New deliveries meant someone had just referred to her in the newspaper or, more often, an old posting that had been missed in the initial trawl, like the picture of her childhood home or a 1960 profile from her college alumni magazine. I knew the delay came from a quirk in the software, but these finds felt special and hard-won, as if they'd been unearthed from behind an old can of nails in the back of someone's musty garage.
Mom herself kept a lot, though she was too glamorous for garages. After she died I received 20 boxes of her journals and newspaper clippings and photographs. She saved the rice from Luci Johnson's 1966 wedding and the 800-page report she'd worked on in 1956 as a clerk for the Senate foreign-relations committee. She was a C-SPAN bag lady.
But what you keep about yourself is different from what other people keep about you. The little automated e-mail scouts were a way to screen for what might have been enduring about what she achieved. She'd been famous, but was any of it real? An old news clipping from 1961 named her among the best coifed women in America. That was hardly worth editing the tombstone for. Judith Shellenberger's story, though, might be. In November of 2005, the foundation director attended a White House youth conference and breakfasted with Laura Bush. In an article about the trip, Shellenberger looked back on her career and said Mom had been her inspiration. "I wanted to be Nancy Dickerson," she told her local paper. I read this and wrote her to ask what she meant. "Nancy Dickerson changed my whole life by inspiring me to pursue my dreams," she replied. "My whole career has centered on the motivation your mother gave me. The fact that I too could be a strong career woman."
I had heard this sentiment before but never really believed it. It wasn't just that I'm an oafish male unwise to the struggle of the sisterhood. I'd heard the tribute too many times. So many women had told me that Mom's pathbreaking career was their inspiration that the praise had become rote. Growing up in Washington, I was too used to hearing meaningless compliments dished out in earnest tones. It's our folk language. But when Schellenger's story came in over the transom, it seemed more authentic and objective for having been unsolicited. Suddenly, I was struck by the tonnage of the similar stories I'd heard but never listened to.
The Internet's long tail was working for me. Joyce Ladner, a former president of Howard Univeristy, remembered meeting Mom at Martin Luther King's March on Washington. Lew Goodman of Parkchester, N.Y., remembered the day Mom announced that the Beatles had arrived in America. As archived newspapers started to go online, Mom's history came back. Almost 300 of them mention Nancy Hanschman, her maiden name, which she used when she first went on air. The new data were almost always surprising, but what was most powerful was how they arrived. I'd never written a book before, but I'd written plenty of profiles. Doing so meant sitting down with my pile of books and papers and interview notes and following a thread until I'd forced it into squeaky shape like a balloon animal. You know what you're looking for, or at least you know that you're looking. You occupy a confined intellectual and physical space. But these alerts didn't work like that. They were off fishing for me, and the minute they hooked something, they brought it back and served it up without a filter and on their own time. Since I carry a BlackBerry (or it carries me), they were with me on the ride to work or blinking just before I put out the bedside light.
I had shoved away my mother and her fame during the ugliest time in my adolescence. Her every letter and phone call had been an outrageous interruption. Now I was calling for her intrusions. Almost everything that arrived came from the period of her life I never experienced. Combined with my methodical slog through the materials she left me, the woman who was interrupting me on my BlackBerry became more real than the woman who had pasted back my cowlick and taken me to the doctor. She was authentic and natural, qualities I hadn't seen much with my own eyes.
Though she had been dead for eight years, I couldn't shake the impulse to ask my mother about what I was discovering. This had the nagging effect of producing a recurring dream of being able to fill out an online form to ask her questions that she could answer through e-mail. (I think Google's working on a purchase of Séance.net after they get that YouTube thing worked out.)
Now that the book is done, the alerts continue, but oddly, they've turned into vanity events, letting me know about reviews and reactions to the book—to my mother, but as I have presented her. They've lost their magic. Still, the parallels of our two lives, now wound together in this book, continue to surprise me. Though no one planned it this way, the final deadline for my manuscript fell on my birthday. This week, the book hit the newsstands, and I saw Mom's tombstone again, this time in person, on the ninth anniversary of her death.
A version of this piece appears in the Washington Post Outlook section.
John Dickerson is Slate's chief political correspondent and author of On Her Trail. He can be reached at
|
|
 |
Keith Richards' Wife Patti Hansen & Their Children
Keith Richards' Wife Patti Hansen & Their Children: Theodora (left) & Alexandra (right)
Patti Hansen was born in Staten Island New York, and was a model for Calvin Klein and Revlon. Patti was "discovered" at a Rolling Stones concert in 1975. She met Richards around 1980 and is also known for keeping the company of Anita Pallenberg. Richards and Hansen were married on December 18, 1983 (Keith's 40th birthday) in Cabo San Lucas at the Finisterra Hotel. The ceremony was filmed by Julien Temple.
| |
 |
Keith RichardsAs I View Him
Yup. Keith Richards definitely looks like Jack Sparrow's dad. Photograph by : Jason Payne, The Province
I have had the distinct pleasure of being in this man's company on more than one occasion. He is real, he is cool, he is generous with his time when people request autographs or photographic opportunities he does oblige with complete enthusiasm.
It is amazing to see how people will approach him, and how he will respond. Often times they act like they know him and approach in a quite forward demeanor. Nothing rankles Richards, he throws his arm around one of the "blokes" and hangs on the chap like he is his long lost best pal.
On one memorable afternoon and evening we shared a jet flight returning to New York from the island of Antigua. It so happened our seats were in close proximity. Along to my Right hand side was Keith's Mother in Law, Mrs. Hansen, and as this was in the late 80's, his daughters were toddlers.His wife Patti was also there in the same group of seats. Keith was deeply absorbed in reading some rather heavy philosophical treatise, along the lines of probably "The Leviathan" by Thomas Hobbes...in front of him were always one Heineken and a brandy.
When we arrived in New York and disembarked I distinctly remember Dad emphasizing to the little ones that they must carry some of their belongings because he was not going to carry it all. As kids always have, at least in those pre 9/11 days, ample supplies of toys and must have items.
As we approached the Customs area, everyone except Keith went under the portal that was indicated for U.S. Citizens. Patti Hansen, her Mom and the two little ones, Theodora and Alexandra and myself went through the U.S. gate. We met up with Keith on the other side by the baggage carousel.
This is the most telling part of this otherwise rather unexciting vignette.
As the carousel was beginning to disgorge the various pieces of luggage, Keith was intently conversing with a middle aged woman in a wheel chair who seemed to be perplexed and anxious as to how to recover her luggage and Keith was carefully explaining how it worked and looking for the bags she had described. I distinctly recall thinking that this woman had no real idea who Richards was, but there were at least half a dozen other travelers who could not resist the moment to have a photo taken with a living legend. He obliged one and all, autographs, and even those that were obviously acting in a way under the effects of long flights with many cocktails. He was extraordinarily patient and cordial.
After everyone had their luggage, some people from the airline appeared to ask Keith if everything was OK, and he explained to me that they do that because he is always flying in and out of there, Kennedy International. I guess..so. Mrs. Hansen hads remarked more than once on the flight how incredibly hard working her son in law was, and how he was constantly having to travel. She said she had no idea at all how he keeps up his non stop pace.
Finally, Keith made it absolutely clear to me that he had several transports at his disposal outside of the terminal, and if I was in need of transportation into the city, I should simply jump in and ride along into Manhattan.
I explained to Keith that my sister was there to collect me, but his entire vibe was sincere and humble and normal, his shoes were beat up and wearing through, kind of pointed toe half boots.
The only concession to affluence , if you will, would have been a killer solid gold Cartier Panther Watch, and a bracelet on the other wrist. And finally, the signature ring of human skull sitting rather unmistakably large on his finger.
This guy is a musician thru and thru from beginning to end.
He lives his life with what I observed to be a very sincere concern for people around him.
The Rolling Stones tour because they love to entertain, and I would suggest that in many ways the group derives every bit as much from going out on stage every nite as their audiences do from watching them perform.
Keith Richards is one of a kind, someone I admire and respect. He is in a class by himself in so far as survivability is concerned. His life has progressed through so many levels and so many distinct forms of cultural and historical periods, that I believe he has been born with an innate ability to distill it all down to a point where now he would be amazing as a philosophy professor at one of any number institutions of higher learning.
As for now his record setting tour and music will serve as an awesome demonstration of the power, talent, gifts and strength of one of the greatest entertainers of modern times. And moreover, a loving, kind , gentle and generous man.
God Bless You Keith, May you Live Forever.
Michael P. Whelan
Las Vegas, October 22, 2006 | |
|