Well first of all here's the question I should've asked on Tuesday night:
What have you learned about the form of biography in writing your books? I have found it fascinating as a reader to see how each of the authors in the series has interpreted not only their subject, but also the form of biography, so I'd be curious on what you have learned as an author.
Now that that's out of the way, it's funny because that question was floating around in my head before, and only crystallized after. Wish I would've had the chance to ask it.
Other than attending one event at the writer's festival this week, nothing much is going on. Work is going ok, though I'm not sure what I'll be working on for the next few months.
October 31, 2009
October 18, 2009
On Fire alarms
How annoying fire alarms can be!
We were woken up last night by a fire alarm at 5:00 a.m. For the first time in a while my wife and I debated whether to go downstairs. We had a rash of them a while back, and they were always in the morning.
I always remember University too, where particularly at the end of my second year in residence there was a whole whack of then, and one time we ended up outside in the fresh snow in April because of a fire alarm.
Actually come to think of it, my very last day in residence ever, we had a fire alarm at 7 a.m. That brings up a related funny story, at the end of the year, there's always a rush to get everything packed up and get yourself checked out. My roommate that year waited until the very last minute, and was scared about being kicked out. He lost a lot of time that morning because of the fire alarm, but being who he is, he went back to bed instead of finishing packing! he ended up having to store his stuff with someone and figure out the details later...
Anyways it's always annoying! I guess when I move to a house it will be the end of those problems, at least then, it's either your own fault, or a real fire!
We were woken up last night by a fire alarm at 5:00 a.m. For the first time in a while my wife and I debated whether to go downstairs. We had a rash of them a while back, and they were always in the morning.
I always remember University too, where particularly at the end of my second year in residence there was a whole whack of then, and one time we ended up outside in the fresh snow in April because of a fire alarm.
Actually come to think of it, my very last day in residence ever, we had a fire alarm at 7 a.m. That brings up a related funny story, at the end of the year, there's always a rush to get everything packed up and get yourself checked out. My roommate that year waited until the very last minute, and was scared about being kicked out. He lost a lot of time that morning because of the fire alarm, but being who he is, he went back to bed instead of finishing packing! he ended up having to store his stuff with someone and figure out the details later...
Anyways it's always annoying! I guess when I move to a house it will be the end of those problems, at least then, it's either your own fault, or a real fire!
October 10, 2009
Thinking about cities
This is a bit of a disjointed post. I just finisehd reading teh very dense book Concrete Reveries by Mark Kingwell.
He's also the author chosen to write the Glenn Gould biography in the Extraordinary Canadians series. This is definitely a more accesible work, but still a challenging one. POrobably the least accessible of the series I have read so far. This may not be surprising given a) it's written by a philosopher and b) the subject, Gould who seems to be a difficult and inaccessible subject.
The book Concrete reveries got me thinking again about the nature of the "City" and urbanism more generally. It follows my reading of Jeb Brugmann's book Urban Revolution.
I also listened to an impressive mayor, Cory Booker on the podcast of On Point. I don't think I have heard such a positive elected official before. He was smart, (he's a Rhodes Scholar) and committed and charismatic, and relentlessly positive.
It was refreshing, and a reminder of what can be done by being positive regardless of the situation.
I wonder sometimes what could be done in Ottawa with some inspired leadership. Instead we get stupid "zero means zero" campaigns and a council dominated by developers and anti-transit suburban councilors.
It seems like any move to actually do something is whittled down and dimished, and ultimately becomes less ambitious through the debate at city hall.
I think it comes back to not having people who believe in government in power, and also not having a mayor who had any idea why he wanted to be there at all.
I was astonished recently to hear Stephen Harper's remarks about being against all taxes. What a crackpot statement. This goes back to something I really don't understand about a lot of modern conservatives and I think is at heart a contradiction. You have people funded by taxpayers decrying government. WHo do they think pays their bills?
He's also the author chosen to write the Glenn Gould biography in the Extraordinary Canadians series. This is definitely a more accesible work, but still a challenging one. POrobably the least accessible of the series I have read so far. This may not be surprising given a) it's written by a philosopher and b) the subject, Gould who seems to be a difficult and inaccessible subject.
The book Concrete reveries got me thinking again about the nature of the "City" and urbanism more generally. It follows my reading of Jeb Brugmann's book Urban Revolution.
I also listened to an impressive mayor, Cory Booker on the podcast of On Point. I don't think I have heard such a positive elected official before. He was smart, (he's a Rhodes Scholar) and committed and charismatic, and relentlessly positive.
It was refreshing, and a reminder of what can be done by being positive regardless of the situation.
I wonder sometimes what could be done in Ottawa with some inspired leadership. Instead we get stupid "zero means zero" campaigns and a council dominated by developers and anti-transit suburban councilors.
It seems like any move to actually do something is whittled down and dimished, and ultimately becomes less ambitious through the debate at city hall.
I think it comes back to not having people who believe in government in power, and also not having a mayor who had any idea why he wanted to be there at all.
I was astonished recently to hear Stephen Harper's remarks about being against all taxes. What a crackpot statement. This goes back to something I really don't understand about a lot of modern conservatives and I think is at heart a contradiction. You have people funded by taxpayers decrying government. WHo do they think pays their bills?
October 03, 2009
Some interesting discussions
So I went on Monday night to an event put on by the Information Commissioner, for Right to Know Week.
It was really interesting, particularly to see the journalist's perspective on these issues. They talked mostly process, which was disappointing. David Akin, tried talk about his issues with DFAIT regarding some kind of fee for his ATIP request. This was very much about being annoyed about process and less about the broader question, but was quite interesting in seeing how journalists use ATIP.
One of the more interesting characters, was a journalist from the UK whose access to information request led (after 4 years) to the UK expense scandal. What was interesting was that the reason for this being possible was their Freedom of Information Act applies to Parliament. In the federal parliament expenses are controlled by a small cabal in the Board of internal economy. They won't even let the auditor general have a look at their expenses. Can't say I blame them, if spending a few dollars on items the public doesn't like, causes careers to end.
Apparently something like 50 MPs are going down because of this, and not all of it justified.
The other interesting was by an unassuming young woman name Jennifer Bell who works for an NGO called Visible Government. They are using some interesting tools to get information out there. I really saw the possibilities of what you can do with searchable tools and some information. It was really interesting and I think some of this could be used even within government to shed light on things. It was clear to me why this kind of available and searchable information databases have so much potential. She also pointed out what the Obama administration has been able to do in the U.S.
There were also two interesting chats and debates this week. Macleans and CPAC, held a roundtable discussion between a whole cast of characters, that included Ed Broadbent and Eddie Goldenberg as well as Paul Wells, Andrew COyne and John Ralston Saul.
They discussed our 'broken' democracy. You really do get the sense that Andrew Coyne hates politics and politicians, which is why I find it kind of ironic that he comments on them, though perhaps that is why he is a journalist, and not that involved in te actual day to day business of government.
Overall i thought there was some good discussion, more and more I find myself agreeing with Paul Wells on a lot of things, I'm becoming a bigger fan, and have seen him 2 or 3 times on Sparks street in the past 10 days. Maybe next time I'll go say hello.
The other event was hosted by CBC's Michael Enright. They had Jane Taber. She is annoying, though had some interesting things to say. This discussion got sidetracked a lot and was not that interesting. They had some guy from Democracy watch who kept saying politicians are liars and that we need a truth in politics law to keep them honest. This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! For two reasons, the public won't stand a politcian who actually tells the truth in many situations. Imagine what would happen to the party right now who said, we need higher taxes and lower spending. Second, circumstances change but we still want out politicians to act tough and strong and as if they know all the answers.
I though that both events brought up interesting issues, but they are always difficult ones. I really think that there are some changes to the institutions of government that are possible. However being in a minority, particularly with a federal government led by a party with no natural allies make these kinds of changes difficult or imposisble. I wonder if there will be this clamour for change, when we have a majority government.
Speaking of which there may be a conservative one soon.
It was really interesting, particularly to see the journalist's perspective on these issues. They talked mostly process, which was disappointing. David Akin, tried talk about his issues with DFAIT regarding some kind of fee for his ATIP request. This was very much about being annoyed about process and less about the broader question, but was quite interesting in seeing how journalists use ATIP.
One of the more interesting characters, was a journalist from the UK whose access to information request led (after 4 years) to the UK expense scandal. What was interesting was that the reason for this being possible was their Freedom of Information Act applies to Parliament. In the federal parliament expenses are controlled by a small cabal in the Board of internal economy. They won't even let the auditor general have a look at their expenses. Can't say I blame them, if spending a few dollars on items the public doesn't like, causes careers to end.
Apparently something like 50 MPs are going down because of this, and not all of it justified.
The other interesting was by an unassuming young woman name Jennifer Bell who works for an NGO called Visible Government. They are using some interesting tools to get information out there. I really saw the possibilities of what you can do with searchable tools and some information. It was really interesting and I think some of this could be used even within government to shed light on things. It was clear to me why this kind of available and searchable information databases have so much potential. She also pointed out what the Obama administration has been able to do in the U.S.
There were also two interesting chats and debates this week. Macleans and CPAC, held a roundtable discussion between a whole cast of characters, that included Ed Broadbent and Eddie Goldenberg as well as Paul Wells, Andrew COyne and John Ralston Saul.
They discussed our 'broken' democracy. You really do get the sense that Andrew Coyne hates politics and politicians, which is why I find it kind of ironic that he comments on them, though perhaps that is why he is a journalist, and not that involved in te actual day to day business of government.
Overall i thought there was some good discussion, more and more I find myself agreeing with Paul Wells on a lot of things, I'm becoming a bigger fan, and have seen him 2 or 3 times on Sparks street in the past 10 days. Maybe next time I'll go say hello.
The other event was hosted by CBC's Michael Enright. They had Jane Taber. She is annoying, though had some interesting things to say. This discussion got sidetracked a lot and was not that interesting. They had some guy from Democracy watch who kept saying politicians are liars and that we need a truth in politics law to keep them honest. This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! For two reasons, the public won't stand a politcian who actually tells the truth in many situations. Imagine what would happen to the party right now who said, we need higher taxes and lower spending. Second, circumstances change but we still want out politicians to act tough and strong and as if they know all the answers.
I though that both events brought up interesting issues, but they are always difficult ones. I really think that there are some changes to the institutions of government that are possible. However being in a minority, particularly with a federal government led by a party with no natural allies make these kinds of changes difficult or imposisble. I wonder if there will be this clamour for change, when we have a majority government.
Speaking of which there may be a conservative one soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)