Meals From The Marketplace

            The most impressive thing about the Fourth of July celebration in Miami this year may have been that it took place at all.  Of course, the same could probably be said every year in this part of the country (meaning South Florida). 

            The reason is the highly unpredictable and often highly uncooperative weather that characterizes the summer months throughout much of this state. 

            We began our two week visit on Florida’s west/Gulf coast at a lovely resort (a Marriott property) on Marco Island, which is about an hour’s drive south of Fort Collins and maybe a 90-minute drive north (and west) of Miami. 

            The weather pattern there was much what we experienced directly east in a community near Fort Lauderdale (which is about 30 miles north of Miami, on the east/Atlantic coast).

            Basically, the daily forecast has this pattern of consistency: some sun in the AM followed by intermittent periods of rain and thunderstorms throughout the PM.  In other words, the “Sunshine State,” from around mid-April until November, isn’t.

            And when it isn’t raining or the skies aren’t crackling with lightning bolts and claps of thunder, it’s humid, as in instant sweat (maybe five times worse than those rare muggy days that can occasionally hit Sacramento), even though the temperatures rarely reach 90 degrees.  Within days of our visit, we were wondering what the attraction was for retirees (the state matching Arizona as a retirement magnet).  “No state income tax,” someone mentioned. 

            On the Fourth, we began our day with a round of golf in Coral Springs (about 10 miles west of Fort Lauderdale).  As has been typical of our stay, the morning began with bright sunshine, only to turn cloudy by noon with rain developing in the early afternoon.  That rain, heavy at times and accompanied by occasional bolts of lightning, lasted until the early evening hours.

            By then, we had completed a driving tour of Fort Lauderdale (which includes an elaborate system of canals on which are housed some extremely impressive yachts) and had arrived in South Beach (the southern tip of Miami).

            There, finally at around 7:30 PM, the rain stopped just in time for the planned free beach concert by the Greater Miami Youth Symphony.  The symphony is directed and conducted by Huifang Chen and consists of young musicians who must audition for spots.  The range of ages appeared to include mostly high school students, although anyone aged 5 to 18 can audition for selection.

            The concert, which included arias sung by a member of the local opera organization, was sponsored by the Miami public radio station and was emceed by one of the station’s announcers.  It featured the usual Fourth of July musical selections, including John Philip Souza’s “Stars and Stripes Forever” and Tchaikovsky’s “1812 Overture” (which, almost incongruously, has become more associated with the Fourth than it has with its inspiration, Russia’s victorious battle with Napolean).

            The symphony’s performance was about what might be expected of a youth orchestra.  The weaknesses in various sections of the orchestra were only evident on those occasions when scores focused on them (as in the stirring string development in the climax of the “1812” and the woodwinds solos in the “Stars and Stripes”).

            But on the Fourth of July, a musical concert that precedes a big fireworks show (and the South Beach display was as impressive as any we’ve seen), is always an appetizer to the main course, and whatever flaws are contained in it are easily overlooked in light of what everyone knows will follow.  And on this night, when several hours earlier the concert and the fireworks were very much in doubt, no one in the large audience on the beach had any reason to complain.

           Don’t look now, but the new year is already into middle age.  With six of the twelve months now behind us, and with the summer doldrums (artistic performance-wise, at least) setting in fast, here’s a look at the best of what we’ve had to entertain us in and around Sacramento so far this year.  We’ve picked ten that stood out above the others.

            And leading the list has to be the incomparable Sonny Rollins, who returned to the Mondavi Center (on the campus of U.C. Davis) in May, as he approached his 80^th birthday, to give a performance that few musicians half his age could match.  He brought an excellent quartet with him, but they were almost window dressing as the “Colossus” fully lived up to his name with a non-stop barrage of great sax solos in a two-hour concert.

            Not far behind Rollins for both artistic excellence and pure entertainment value was Arlo Guthrie, who brought his large and talented family (numbering 15 children and grandchildren) to Mondavi in April for a feel-good concert that had everything an audience could have wanted (with the exception of “Alice’s Restaurant, which, the very good-natured Arlo assured was “on the record”).

            Third on our list would be another Mondavi treat, the belated performance by the Vienna Boys Choir in February (last year’s scheduled appearance was cancelled at the last minute).  As it turned out the 26 boys (aged 10 to 14) were well worth the wait.  Led by their charming and witty director (a very youthful Florian Schwartz), the choir sang a repertoire of tunes that ranged from early European Baroque to mid-twentieth century American pop. 

            The Moscow State Radio Symphony’s March Mondavi concert was highlighted by an exciting young pianist, Alexander Sinchuk (all of 21 years old), who gave a stirring performance of Rachmaninoff’s “Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini.”  Rachmaninoff’s grand Second Symphony was the other major work on the program and it was wonderfully delivered by conductor Alexei Kornienko and his musicians. 

            Jonathan Larson’s “Rent” enjoyed a well-received short run on a quick tour stop at the Community Center Theater in February.  The musical ran for twelve years on Broadway, and the touring production gave ample evidence of why the show, a rock version of Puccini’s “La Boheme,” is so popular.  Adding to the luster of the Sacramento performances were the two original leads, Anthony Rapp and Adam Pascal, reprising their roles.

            The Russian National Orchestra’s February performance at Mondavi featured a powerful performance of Tchaikovsky’s violin concerto by a young virtuoso named Stefan Jackiw.  He played every note in the majestic first movement at such a quick pace that he overwhelmed the audience to the point of receiving a sustained ovation at its conclusion.  His performance of the second and third movements was no less impressive.  The concert also featured two terrific encores that offered American works, played with a robust flair.

            The Sacramento Choral Society concluded yet another terrific season with a lovely a cappella performance at the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament in June.  Director Donald Kendrick led his 150 singers through a number of “schools” of choral music, of which Mozart’s grand “Coronation March,” featuring excellent solo work by soprano Yoo Ri Clark, was a highlight.  The concert was the second in a “Stained Glass Series” that is but another reason to admire the work of this excellent organization.

            The Saint Louis Symphony, led by musical director David Robertson, delivered a unique program in its April performance at Mondavi.  It included two recently-composed American works, both highly interesting and well received as well as the welcomed return of violinist Gil Shaham, who added an exquisite read of Prokofiev’s Second Violin Concerto.

            Vladimir Feltsman, the Russian born, now American pianist, delivered a nearly perfect, albeit short, recital that featured works by J.S. Bach, Beethoven, and Chopin.  Emotionally satisfying and technically inspiring, his playing left little to be desired, other than a longer program.

            And rounding out this top ten would be the excellent Capital Stage production of Peter Sinn Nachtrich’s “Hunter Gatherers,” on the stage of the Delta King Riverboat in Old Sac.  If you haven’t yet seen this very dark, leave your sense of propriety at home.  This one is not for the prudish.

            But ten is never enough, and so here are two very honorable mentions, both decidedly one-man shows.  Ira Glass gave a capacity Mondavi audience a sense of what the preparation of his “This American Life” radio show requires in an entertaining Mondavi appearance in April.  And Mike Sands performed his own creation of the “Life and Times of Woody Guthrie,” playing Woody’s songs and voicing Woody’s story in a truly memorable performance at the Unitarian Church in January.

            Now, let’s get past these summer doldrums and experience some performances to match the excellence of these.

            Had your fill of summer re-runs?  Bored with the trivial offerings in the new DVD releases?  Unwilling to pony up a ten-spot to see another irrelevant remake on the big screen?  If you think there’s just no relief from the mid-summer entertainment doldrums, maybe it’s finally time to check out one of the best television series of all time.

            We’re talking about the five seasons of “The Wire,” the gripping and altogether realistic study of new millennial Baltimore that originally aired on HBO from 2002 to 2008.  While the show isn’t for everyone (certainly not for those who are offended by foul language or graphic violence), it is as close as television broadcasting gets to pure art, while being highly entertaining at the same time.

            The five seasons (each running 12 episodes) cover different aspects of life beneath the surface in the city.  The plot lines thus developed deal with, in order, the city’s illegal drug trade, the corrupt port and its link to that drug trade, the political machinations (also rife with corruption) in elections and governance, the badly flawed and seemingly irreparable public education system, and the newspaper coverage of it all.  The development of the stories that consume each season proceeds slowly, and characters are drawn fully so that by each season’s end, as many as two dozen are key figures whose fates matter to the viewer.

            The series was conceived, and many of the episodes written, by David Simon and Ed Burns, and was based on their own experiences in the city.  (Simon was a former crime reporter for the Baltimore Sun; Burns was a former homicide detective on the police force.)  As is true of most great writing (and the writing on “The Wire” is great), the stories and the characters are all based on what the writers learned and experienced while they worked in the trenches. 

            Thus, every episode of the series is believable, even if specific events are shocking, both in their revelation and depiction.  And, unlike most serialized TV series (“24,” being perhaps the ultimate example), the show doesn’t rely on cliff hanger endings.  Rather, each episode, while leading to the next, is its own fully contained statement. 

            The recurring cast includes a dozen “main” characters, all played by character actors whose names will not be familiar to most viewers.  Some of the supporting cast members are “real” people, including a former convict and a former police officer on the Baltimore force.  But the acting, perhaps because of the lack of big name stars, is always spot on, never rising above the writing, but always portraying a real person, fully developed and deeply drawn.

            One of the more remarkable aspects of the series is the positive identification viewers ultimately have with some of the seemingly less attractive characters.  Many of these characters come from the criminal side of the city.  But criminals are people, too, and in this series, they are shown to be people first.  The reasons they turn out the way they do are suggested with a sense of life’s complexities that is rarely, if ever, seen in television or cinematic productions. 

            Thus, viewers experience a sense of real grief when a hardened criminal is killed and disappointment when another is sent off to prison.  Political figures are shown to have multiple motivations as they struggle with personal ethical codes and public policy needs.  Police officers and school teachers are similarly depicted.  Indeed, no character of any consequence is portrayed in a superficial manner.  They’re all interesting people, with traits that are all too recognizable in the real world.

            And the stories of their lives, while surprising, are also shown with all the complexity those stories require.  This aspect of the writing is one of the show’s many strengths, since the series is subtly educational while being highly entertaining.  No one can view all 60 episodes without gaining a deeper understanding of “life in the big city.”

            “The Wire” never received the following it deserved when it originally aired.  Potential viewers may have been put off by the street language many of the characters speak or by the aforementioned heavy use of profanity and graphic displays of violence.  Those “deficiencies,” however, are part of the art of the productions. 

            “The Wire” is television artistry at its finest.  Catch up on it while you wait for the new season of network pabulum.

            (Individual DVD episodes of “The Wire” are available and can be ordered on Netflix.  A box set of DVDs of all five seasons, also containing commentary and other extras, has been issued by HBO at a retail price of $249.99, but Amazon.com offers the set for $100 less.)

            Quite frankly, I am amazed at how much push-back I have received to a basic point I have been making as the BP oil disaster gushes on.  Is it possible that some ideologues are absolutely blind to irrefutable evidence?  Here’s what I wrote ten years ago, when another case of corporate misfeasance was grabbing the headlines.

            Have you checked the air in your tires lately?

            That little question has become a matter of some urgency for owners of Ford Explorers recently, especially if the original, factory-installed Firestone Tires are still on the vehicle.  As many as eighty-eight deaths in the United States and over one hundred worldwide are being attributed to faulty tires on these vehicles, and the ultimate toll in human life and property losses may well be much higher. 

            Industry officials are still refusing to acknowledge any specific defect in the tires, claiming, among other things, that the vehicle owners have failed to maintain adequate air pressure in the tires, which, they assert, is the cause of the many cases of tread separation for which both companies are facing numerous lawsuits.  (That claim, of course, flies in the face of their simultaneous assertion that they do not know how or why the tires are failing.)

            Ford and Firestone are also facing intense questioning by members of Congress, about which more in a moment. 

            This case, horrific and tragic though it may be, is also another case study in the ongoing debate between the two dominant conflicting philosophies in American politics.  In a nutshell, it presents yet another opportunity to consider the relative merits of, on the one hand, the need for government regulation of commercial activity, and, on the other, the demand for unrestricted free enterprise in the business world.  And, lest I be accused of hiding my personal bias, I willingly acknowledge to being in the camp of those who would regulate first and ask questions later.

            What is it about government regulation that is so offensive?  “Less red tape for business,” “get the bureaucrats out of the corporate boardrooms,” and “freedom is the cornerstone of capitalism” are just a few of the simplistic slogans offered by opponents of regulation.  Their rhetoric sounds as American as the Declaration of Independence, and much of the opposition to regulation can be found in the same retro-conservative philosophy that opposes many government programs designed to assist those who cannot, without that help, assist themselves. 

            It is a mind-set that believes, with the fervor of a religion, in the sanctity of the individual (and by extension, the corporation) and the ideal of freedom (and its commercial analog, free enterprise).  And there can be no denying that these concepts are at the heart of our constitution.  But that same constitution also contains numerous provisions that allow for governmental interference with individual (and corporate) freedom.  (The commerce clause, which allows for government regulation and control of companies that engage in interstate commerce, is the most obvious example.)

            I note also, in passing, the seeming inconsistency on the part of those holding to this facet of American conservatism and their likely views on “family values,” wherein they tend to bemoan the lack of discipline, and presumably the rules and regulations that are part of strict parental control.  It is indeed odd that many who decry permissiveness in the home seem all too willing to condone it in the business world.

            But I should not digress, because we have now learned that the Ford/Firestone nightmare could have been prevented.  As the New York Times reported last week, Congress looked at the problem of tire safety back in 1978 after an earlier run of defective-tire-related crashes and deaths.  At the time, government regulators urged a tightening of federal tire standards, and Congress, with the Democrats then in control, went along with the recommendations. 

            Subsequently, as the Times reports, Carter administration officials began drafting new tire regulations, which, most observers now agree, would have caught the tread separation tendencies now being experienced.  But these initiatives were quickly killed in 1981 by the administration of newly-elected President Ronald Reagan (whose vision, let us recall, was to unleash and unfetter American enterprise), and, until now, they have never resurfaced.

            Which brings me to Mr. Robert Novak.  On a recent edition of CNN’s “Crossfire,” Novak, the ultra-conservative syndicated reporter/columnist and ubiquitous talking head, admitted that there may well be a need for greater government regulation, at least when human lives may be at risk.  He went on to claim to being shocked (yes, shocked!) to learn that the automotive industry had apparently abused its unregulated freedom at the cost of so many innocent lives.

            I am at pains to understand how those who decry government bureaucracies can at the same time ignore corporate bureaucracies.  Both are potentially pernicious, but whereas government bureaucrats have a more benign, non-profit motivation, corporate types are all about profit.  This characteristic is at once the strength of capitalism (spurring, as it does, growth and expansion, research and development, employment and prosperity) and, if unchecked, its most unsettling weakness as well. 

            To comprehend that point, one must understand and accept that human nature is not saintly.  It is marked, above all else, by selfishness, arrogance and greed.  And these qualities, as we see time and again (recall the cigarette companies’ denials, the airline industries’ excuses, the pharmaceutical objections, the HMO protests), are the basis for many decisions that are not in anyone’s interests, save the corporate shareholders. 

            Left to their own devices, instincts and motivations, businesses (and the bureaucracies that they assemble) will develop their own internal rules and policies.  Sometimes these rules and policies will produce wondrous advances for society.  And sometimes, they will result in faulty tires, angry consumers and dead victims.

            So Firestone and Ford are now engaged in finger-pointing and blame-shifting.  What else did we expect?  And Congress will now revisit the same regulations that the Carter administration initiated and the Reagan administration nixed.  Eighty-eight lives later, we can only hope that Ronald Reagan’s vision is dimmed and that more conservatives like Mr. Novak will see the light.