Home » Archives by category » News (Page 6025)
Arts vital for recovery – Puttnam

David Puttnam urges David Cameron to back ‘warm words’ with support for creative industries Britain’s economic wellbeing hangs on the government backing up its professed admiration for the arts with cash and commitment, according to Lord Puttnam. Speaking on the eve of giving a major speech in London about the value of the arts, the leading film producer and Labour peer said a viable financial future for Britain was wrapped up with the success of the country’s creative and entertainment industries. “I am not despairing, but there is a real danger we might undo the work of the last few years. There is that real possibility,” he said. “We have no chance of an economic revival without a full understanding of the role that creativity plays. It is warm words and apple pie at the moment.” Puttnam, 70, who first came to fame in the late 1970s and early 1980s when he produced hit films such as Bugsy Malone , Midnight Express and Chariots of Fire, and who is a former chairman of the National Film and Television School, said he wished he could talk to the prime minister, the chancellor of the exchequer and the culture ministers together to test their joint resolve on the arts. “I am fed up of just hearing about how important the creative economy is. We all say that. What I would like to know is: do David Cameron, George Osborne, Jeremy Hunt and Ed Vaizey really mean what they say about this?” Parliament has what Puttnam calls a “benign indifference” to the arts. “In the House of Lords, the same 15 people turn up to discuss the sector every time. Most members, I am sure, think of it as a good thing, something they might go to once a fortnight. But do they realise what an economic driver it is?” He also argues that the conservative instincts of many Tory politicians often go against the grain of creativity. Artistic endeavour, he says, always involves looking at something from a new or challenging perspective. “What the arts cause you to do is to reflect on your own experience and on the experience of others. The very act involves having your assumptions challenged. Conservatism is essentially trying to make people feel comfortable and not very challenged. It is not part of their ethos to trouble people too deeply with anything,” he said. Puttnam believes his experience working with organisations such as the Royal Opera House, Channel 4 and The Sage in Gateshead mean he has a clear sense of how long it takes to build up a useful creative institution: “It can take five years or longer. And we should not be taking funding and support away.” He also queried the viability of the new emphasis on private philanthropy. “There are two real problems with relying on individual philanthropists. First, they are usually looking to attach their money to success, so they are trawling for successes most of the time. And second, the fact is that 90% of philanthropic donations go to London. Getting things to happen outside London is bloody hard.” The difficulty, he said, is that outside the capital there are fewer wealthy local philanthropists around. “It is a question of the number of people you can talk to. In the context of Cornwall it might be just four people, in the north-east it might be half a dozen.” Puttnam invited the coalition government to convince him this spring that it appreciates the importance of the creative sector. “If they really believe what they say, there are some serious steps they could take. And if they don’t believe it, there are going to be some real consequences for this country.” Puttnam is to speak tomorrow evening at St Ethelburga’s, Bishopsgate, as part of a series of six talks run by the theatre company Jericho House , in collaboration with University College London. Arts funding Arts policy Vanessa Thorpe guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Arts vital for recovery – Puttnam

David Puttnam urges David Cameron to back ‘warm words’ with support for creative industries Britain’s economic wellbeing hangs on the government backing up its professed admiration for the arts with cash and commitment, according to Lord Puttnam. Speaking on the eve of giving a major speech in London about the value of the arts, the leading film producer and Labour peer said a viable financial future for Britain was wrapped up with the success of the country’s creative and entertainment industries. “I am not despairing, but there is a real danger we might undo the work of the last few years. There is that real possibility,” he said. “We have no chance of an economic revival without a full understanding of the role that creativity plays. It is warm words and apple pie at the moment.” Puttnam, 70, who first came to fame in the late 1970s and early 1980s when he produced hit films such as Bugsy Malone , Midnight Express and Chariots of Fire, and who is a former chairman of the National Film and Television School, said he wished he could talk to the prime minister, the chancellor of the exchequer and the culture ministers together to test their joint resolve on the arts. “I am fed up of just hearing about how important the creative economy is. We all say that. What I would like to know is: do David Cameron, George Osborne, Jeremy Hunt and Ed Vaizey really mean what they say about this?” Parliament has what Puttnam calls a “benign indifference” to the arts. “In the House of Lords, the same 15 people turn up to discuss the sector every time. Most members, I am sure, think of it as a good thing, something they might go to once a fortnight. But do they realise what an economic driver it is?” He also argues that the conservative instincts of many Tory politicians often go against the grain of creativity. Artistic endeavour, he says, always involves looking at something from a new or challenging perspective. “What the arts cause you to do is to reflect on your own experience and on the experience of others. The very act involves having your assumptions challenged. Conservatism is essentially trying to make people feel comfortable and not very challenged. It is not part of their ethos to trouble people too deeply with anything,” he said. Puttnam believes his experience working with organisations such as the Royal Opera House, Channel 4 and The Sage in Gateshead mean he has a clear sense of how long it takes to build up a useful creative institution: “It can take five years or longer. And we should not be taking funding and support away.” He also queried the viability of the new emphasis on private philanthropy. “There are two real problems with relying on individual philanthropists. First, they are usually looking to attach their money to success, so they are trawling for successes most of the time. And second, the fact is that 90% of philanthropic donations go to London. Getting things to happen outside London is bloody hard.” The difficulty, he said, is that outside the capital there are fewer wealthy local philanthropists around. “It is a question of the number of people you can talk to. In the context of Cornwall it might be just four people, in the north-east it might be half a dozen.” Puttnam invited the coalition government to convince him this spring that it appreciates the importance of the creative sector. “If they really believe what they say, there are some serious steps they could take. And if they don’t believe it, there are going to be some real consequences for this country.” Puttnam is to speak tomorrow evening at St Ethelburga’s, Bishopsgate, as part of a series of six talks run by the theatre company Jericho House , in collaboration with University College London. Arts funding Arts policy Vanessa Thorpe guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
US shutdown averted, but cuts ahead

Barack Obama warns that vital programmes will suffer after US federal budget deal between Democrats and Republicans Barack Obama warned Americans yesterday that they faced painful times ahead after Democrats and Republicans struck a deal that would bring in the biggest annual spending cuts in the country’s history. The last-minute agreement averted the threat of a government shutdown that would have brought chaos – but it also removed $38bn (£23bn) of spending intended for important federal programmes. “Some of the cuts we agreed to will be painful. Programmes [that] people rely on will be cut back. Needed infrastructure projects will be delayed. I would not have made these cuts in better circumstances,” the president said in his weekly radio address yesterday. However, he welcomed the agreement and said that the country had to learn to live within its financial means. “Reducing spending while still investing in the future is just common sense. It is what families do in tough times. They sacrifice where they can, even if it’s hard, to afford what is really important,” he said. Though the president struck a conciliatory tone, the period leading up to the agreement had resulted in a remarkable spectacle of political infighting and squabbling that looked likely to bring the federal government to a grinding halt for the first time since 1994. Emboldened by their victory in the 2010 mid-term elections, and propelled by their Tea Party base, the Republicans in Congress had refused to pass the 2011 budget unless it introduced billions of dollars of cuts. Leading Republicans had wanted far more cuts than the $38bn eventually agreed. Democrats fought back, especially as the eventual sticking point appeared to focus, not so much on spending, but more on federal funding around social issues such as abortion. As the midnight deadline for a deal loomed on Friday, it appeared that neither side was able reach a compromise. But with around an hour to go, Republicans backed away from their demands for spending reductions in areas opposed by social conservatives, and reached an agreement to keep the government open. Many senior Republicans had urged the party’s leadership to avoid closing the government because they feared a repeat of 1994 – when a Republican-led shutdown turned voters against the party allowing Bill Clinton to win re-election as president in 1996. Though the central functions of government would have continued in the event of a shutdown, hundreds of thousands of workers would have been laid off, national parks would have shut and members of the military serving in wars abroad would not have been paid. Just the threat of a shutdown last week had slowed much vital government work to a crawl. John Boehner, the Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, said that the agreed cuts would eventually help boost the economy, which has struggled to create jobs even as growth rates recover from the recession. “This has been a lot of discussion and a long fight. But we fought to keep government spending down because it really will, in fact, help create a better environment for job creators in our country,” he said. His opponent in the talks, Harry Reid, the Democratic Senate leader, appeared less pleased, but was relieved that an agreement was reached. “We didn’t do it at this late hour for drama. We did it because it has been hard to arrive at this point,” Reid said. That certainly had been true just hours before, when Reid described Republican efforts to strip spending away from the Planned Parenthood organisation as “indefensible” and “truly shameful”. But those efforts failed, as Obama acknowledged. “[We] prevented this important debate being overtaken by politics and unrelated disagreements on social issues,” he said. The deal was agreed just after midnight. It will be voted on this week. When it passes, the agreement will ensure that the government is funded through to the end of the fiscal year. However, battles over spending are likely to continue, especially as the 2012 presidential election draws closer. Republican leaders have vowed to push for deeper cuts and a roll back of government spending. The debate will form much of the political battleground of the year ahead. Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin congressman who has emerged as a leading Republican figure seeking radical cuts, has described the scrap over the budget as “the first bite of the apple”. US federal government shutdown Barack Obama John Boehner Republicans Democrats Obama administration US economy Paul Harris guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
US shutdown averted, but cuts ahead

Barack Obama warns that vital programmes will suffer after US federal budget deal between Democrats and Republicans Barack Obama warned Americans yesterday that they faced painful times ahead after Democrats and Republicans struck a deal that would bring in the biggest annual spending cuts in the country’s history. The last-minute agreement averted the threat of a government shutdown that would have brought chaos – but it also removed $38bn (£23bn) of spending intended for important federal programmes. “Some of the cuts we agreed to will be painful. Programmes [that] people rely on will be cut back. Needed infrastructure projects will be delayed. I would not have made these cuts in better circumstances,” the president said in his weekly radio address yesterday. However, he welcomed the agreement and said that the country had to learn to live within its financial means. “Reducing spending while still investing in the future is just common sense. It is what families do in tough times. They sacrifice where they can, even if it’s hard, to afford what is really important,” he said. Though the president struck a conciliatory tone, the period leading up to the agreement had resulted in a remarkable spectacle of political infighting and squabbling that looked likely to bring the federal government to a grinding halt for the first time since 1994. Emboldened by their victory in the 2010 mid-term elections, and propelled by their Tea Party base, the Republicans in Congress had refused to pass the 2011 budget unless it introduced billions of dollars of cuts. Leading Republicans had wanted far more cuts than the $38bn eventually agreed. Democrats fought back, especially as the eventual sticking point appeared to focus, not so much on spending, but more on federal funding around social issues such as abortion. As the midnight deadline for a deal loomed on Friday, it appeared that neither side was able reach a compromise. But with around an hour to go, Republicans backed away from their demands for spending reductions in areas opposed by social conservatives, and reached an agreement to keep the government open. Many senior Republicans had urged the party’s leadership to avoid closing the government because they feared a repeat of 1994 – when a Republican-led shutdown turned voters against the party allowing Bill Clinton to win re-election as president in 1996. Though the central functions of government would have continued in the event of a shutdown, hundreds of thousands of workers would have been laid off, national parks would have shut and members of the military serving in wars abroad would not have been paid. Just the threat of a shutdown last week had slowed much vital government work to a crawl. John Boehner, the Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives, said that the agreed cuts would eventually help boost the economy, which has struggled to create jobs even as growth rates recover from the recession. “This has been a lot of discussion and a long fight. But we fought to keep government spending down because it really will, in fact, help create a better environment for job creators in our country,” he said. His opponent in the talks, Harry Reid, the Democratic Senate leader, appeared less pleased, but was relieved that an agreement was reached. “We didn’t do it at this late hour for drama. We did it because it has been hard to arrive at this point,” Reid said. That certainly had been true just hours before, when Reid described Republican efforts to strip spending away from the Planned Parenthood organisation as “indefensible” and “truly shameful”. But those efforts failed, as Obama acknowledged. “[We] prevented this important debate being overtaken by politics and unrelated disagreements on social issues,” he said. The deal was agreed just after midnight. It will be voted on this week. When it passes, the agreement will ensure that the government is funded through to the end of the fiscal year. However, battles over spending are likely to continue, especially as the 2012 presidential election draws closer. Republican leaders have vowed to push for deeper cuts and a roll back of government spending. The debate will form much of the political battleground of the year ahead. Paul Ryan, a Wisconsin congressman who has emerged as a leading Republican figure seeking radical cuts, has described the scrap over the budget as “the first bite of the apple”. US federal government shutdown Barack Obama John Boehner Republicans Democrats Obama administration US economy Paul Harris guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …

85 Mph Texas

No Comment
85 Mph Texas

Texas 85 MPH Approved Unanimously Vote Texas 85 MPH. Texas House of Representatives has approved a new 85 mph speed limit bill for the Department of Transportation. _KRANSDEL says: An 85-mph Texas Limit? House OKs Nation's Highest http://skygrid.me/i2oTZk

Continue reading …
Kondo’s spring-loaded spider robot creeps on the cheap (video)

The latest in a long line of terrifying (and occasionally adorable ) pseudo-arachnid robots, Kondo ‘s upcoming KMR-M6 is doing more with less. Thanks to a unique spring supported linking leg joint, this hexapedal bug gives you the heebie-jeebies with only two servos per leg. The new leg design lowers build costs while improving performance and stability, and was developed for education, research, and hobbyist markets. The base kit hits Japan next month for about

Continue reading …

Last week it was apparent that there’s no love lost between Donald Trump and New York Times columnist Gail Collins , but this week it’s all-out war. Seems the Donald responded to Collins’ column, which tweaked him as a loopy birther, with a letter to the editor tweaking her in turn…

Continue reading …

Riviera Maya

No Comment
Riviera Maya

BAHIA PRINCIPE RIVIERA MAYA • GOLF LUXURY DESTINATIONS Casa de playa pequeña sugerencias para decorarla!! It Might Be You, ensamble musical. eventos en cancun, riviera maya. Daily news for: riviera maya | : AutoSkt Daily News – Daily World News Riviera Maya Golf Course Real Estate; Grand Coral Opens New Course – PR-USA.net As of late March, 2011, the Grand Coral Riviera Maya , one of the largest. Riviera Maya |Disabilityma.com Riviera Maya Video english version, all atractions along this caribbean sea. Mexico's Riviera Maya : What Celebrity Families Vacation There? Mexico’s Riviera Maya on the Yucatan Peninsula is a vacation hot spot for good reasons. It has gorgeous beaches, great weather and wonderful culture. What celebrity families have vacationed in the Riviera Maya in Mexico? Mexico Riviera Maya : What Celebrity Families Vacation There … Mexico’s Riviera Maya is a vacation hot spot for celebrities and their families, who have vacationed there? Think Julia Roberts, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie and Salma Hayek. Punta Brava, Riviera Maya , Mexico Travel Guide Adalet Network|www … If you are looking for a perfect honeymoon destination then look no further than Punta Brava on Mexico’s Riviera Maya . Peaceful and romantic, Punta Brava is located between Puerto Morelos and Punta Maroma. although the resort is quiet. … freebieslove says: RT @tweetmeme Mexico’s Riviera Maya : What Celebrity Families Vacation There? http://bit.ly/f5OL29

Continue reading …
Kelly Clarkson Rihanna

THe best of 2009 2011 remix New Song ! Beyonce Knowles / Kelly Clarkson / Rihanna ( Soul Pop Type Beat) Prod Viiniciusjt Kelly Clarkson and Rihanna to Perform on 'American Idol … Kelly Clarkson Live: Watch Her ‘Ellen’ Performance [Video]TheWrap. Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna Set To Perform On ‘American Idol’Neon Limelight Rihanna to Perform on ‘American Idol’Eurweb.com. People Magazine -Examiner.com -Sick Hop … dahoodbuzz.com – Hip Hop – Urban News » Kelly Clarkson and Rihanna … Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna Set To Perform On ‘American Idol’ Neon Limelight Rihanna to Perform on ‘American Idol’ Eurweb.com. Kelly Clarkson People Magazine Examiner.com – Sick Hop – USA Today all 25 news articles ». Filed in: Latest News … MUSIC SEARCH 24 AMERICAN IDOL » Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna Set To … Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna Set To Perform On ‘American Idol’ Neon Limelight KC is returning to American Idol next Thursday (April 14) to perform on the results show, FOX announced. The inaugural Idol champ will perform “Don’t You Wanna … dahoodbuzz.com – Hip Hop – Urban News » Kelly Clarkson Live: Watch … Kelly Clarkson and Rihanna to Perform on ‘American Idol’ AceShowbiz. Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna Set To Perform On ‘American Idol’ Neon Limelight Rihanna to Perform on ‘American Idol’ Eurweb.com. People Magazine – Examiner.com – Sick Hop … Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna Set To Perform On 'American Idol' – Neon … Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna – Getty Images. Kelly Clarkson is coming home! KC is returning to American Idol next Thursday (April 14) to perform on the results show, FOX announced. The inaugural Idol champ will perform “Don’t You Wanna Stay … SoKellyClarkson says: Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna Set To Perform On 'American Idol' – Neon …: Kelly Clarkson, Rihanna – G… http://bit.ly/g2GIOM #kellyClarkson

Continue reading …
Why Bob Dylan didn’t make a fuss in China

Bob Dylan didn’t mention Ai Weiwei or gripe about not being allowed to play two of his songs in Beijing. But then, he was never really political, was he? On 12 May, 1963, less than a fortnight shy of his 22nd birthday, a little-known singer-songwriter named Bob Dylan staged a walkout from The Ed Sullivan Show , America’s top entertainment programme. The host and his producers demanded that he replace the song he had been planning to perform with something more innocuous. Talkin’ John Birch Society Blues was an uproarious satire on red-baiting and commie-hunting and it fell foul of Sullivan’s notorious aversion to songs dealing with politics, sex or drugs. Sullivan and his people wouldn’t budge, so the young Dylan told them, “No, this is what I want to do. If I can’t play my song, I’d rather not appear on the show”, and promptly took a hike. No one was going to censor him. Almost half a century later, Dylan – now about to turn 70 – faced a similar dilemma. His Far Eastern tour had finally brought him to China after several years of negotiation (he played Beijing last Wednesday), but he had submitted his set list to the Chinese authorities – and some of his most famous songs were deemed unacceptable by the Chinese culture ministry. What’s more, Dylan was also under fire for not speaking out in favour of the imprisonment of celebrated Chinese artist Ai Weiwei (who was taken away by authorities last Sunday as he waited to board a flight at Beijing airport). “Back in the day, if he had been in Ai’s shoes, he [Dylan] would have expected someone to speak up for him,” said a spokesman for Human Rights Watch. “What does he have to lose?” It was not just any two songs to which Beijing objected, either. Blowin’ in the Wind was the civil rights anthem that had established Dylan’s reputation when it first appeared on his second album, The Freewheelin’ Bob Dylan , back in 1962, and Desolation Row was the marathon poetic masterpiece that had climaxed Highway 61 Revisited three years later. Unlike other far more lyrically explicit works from Dylan’s brief but cataclysmically influential “protest song” period – a term that he always hated – such as The Times They Are A-Changin’, Masters Of War or With God On Our Side, both songs are oblique and allusive, dealing in metaphor, imagery and allegory rather than any issue-based topical specifics. Nevertheless, metaphor, imagery and allegory are the philosophical and linguistic meat and drink of the culture that gave the world Confucius, Lao Tzu and the I Ching, and the Chinese authorities understood exactly what subtexts those songs carried, even though they were written several decades ago as critiques of another society entirely. They also understood that they didn’t want those songs performed in Beijing and they said so. Dylan didn’t perform them. The times they have indeed a-changed, even though the songs haven’t. Two questions arise and the answers may or may not be blowin’ in the wind. Has the 69-year-old Dylan lost the bottle displayed by his younger self? And why is post-millennial China rattled by the same songs as 1960s America? To address the second question first: Dylan was not the only victim, either in the 60s or now. In 1967, both the Rolling Stones and the Doors fell foul of Ed Sullivan, over Let’s Spend the Night Together and Light My Fire, respectively. They coped in their different ways: Mick Jagger sang the substitute line (“Let’s spend some time together’) while pulling exaggerated faces of disgust. For his part, Jim Morrison defiantly delivered the contentious phrase (“girl, we couldn’t get much higher”) on the uncensorable live transmission at the price of having bookings for a further half-dozen appearances cancelled. More recently, in 2006, the Stones played the half-time show at the SuperBowl and had two of their three songs censored: Jagger’s microphone was muted for the lines “You make a dead man come” (from Start Me Up) and “Once upon a time I was your little rooster, am I just one of your cocks?” (from Rough Justice). Later the same year they made their own Chinese debut and Rough Justice was vetoed, alongside Let’s Spend the Night Together, Brown Sugar, Honky Tonk Women and Beast of Burden. Jagger may be one of rock’s veteran bad boys, but he’s also one of rock’s veteran businessman/performers, who has never been accused of not knowing on which side his bread is buttered. It must, however, be pleasing for these long-assimilated elderly rebels to know that someone, somewhere, is still scared of them and that their subversive potential has not yet been utterly absorbed and nullified. Which brings us back to Dylan. The notion of Dylan as a hardcore political activist and polemicist, or as a dyed-in-the-wool man of the left, is not only antiquated but was essentially erroneous even in the early 60s. His “protest period” lasted less than two years, and even then he was suspicious of leftie folkies who wanted him to be a singing placard: enter a cause, push a button, get a song. He paid a formal farewell to the Movement with My Back Pages (from Another Side Of Bob Dylan in 1964) and by 1966 was sufficiently irritated by his alleged ideological soulmates to hang a gigantic Stars and Stripes as a stage backdrop for his now infamous “electric” European tour. In the late 1970s he outraged his following by devoting an entire album, Slow Train Coming , to his conversion to born-again evangelical Christianity and, in the 1980s, by self-identifying as a hardcore Zionist with the song Neighborhood Bully. His priority is to follow his twinned muses as a poet and musician: indeed Robert Santelli, author of the invaluable The Bob Dylan Scrapbook 1956-1966 , doubts that Dylan was ever fundamentally interested in politics in the first place. And remember: he will turn 70 years old on 24 May. A 22-year-old with nothing much to lose will charge into battle at almost any provocation. A 70-year-old will choose his battles very carefully indeed, and the People’s Republic, as a nation, is eight years younger than Dylan himself. Our second question is that of China, its place in the world and the kind of society into which it is evolving. China, like Russia before it, was driven by historical circumstance to move directly from feudalism to communism without any intermediate phases, and both are now retracing their steps back to capitalism. In China’s case, this means a unique form of state capitalism that still retains many of the authoritarian practices common to both the feudal and communist stages of its history. Old-fashioned totalitarian societies control information by suppressing what they consider inconvenient for their people to hear, while the more sophisticated capitalist democracies control information by swamping the truth in a deluge of disinformation, through which it is virtually a full-time job to sift. China’s national narrative is veined with an ingrained distrust of the outside world: a lengthy period of utter isolation was followed by the opium wars (courtesy of Britain) and some nasty interactions with Japan, the reverberations of both still with us. Hence China’s battles with Google and the Great Firewalls the country’s techies erect around the internet; hence its fear of instability, whether generated internally or externally; hence the repression involved in the cases of Ai Weiwei, Liu Xiaobo and others less celebrated. These are not the manifestations of a secure or confident society, especially one considered in the west to be the coming masters of the new century and a phenomenon almost as terrifying as that of globalised Islamism. Ultimately, it all comes down to fear and paranoia. In the west, we’re scared of Islam and China; in China they’re still scared of Bob Dylan and the Rolling Stones, who are considered over here to be a bunch of eccentric pensioners who shot their respective bolts half a century back. Everybody concerned needs, essentially, to grow the hell up… and lighten the hell up. The times are always a-changin’, just neither as much as some of us hope, or as much as some of us fear. Charles Shaar Murray is an award- winning rock writer who started his career in 1970 at Oz magazine. His books include Crosstown Traffic: Jimi Hendrix And Post-War Pop Bob Dylan China Censorship Charles Shaar Murray guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …