Tag: James

  • Baillie Gifford winner of winners James Shapiro: ‘I draw a very sharp line between fiction and nonfiction’

    Baillie Gifford winner of winners James Shapiro: ‘I draw a very sharp line between fiction and nonfiction’

    [ad_1]

    Serendipity dictated that the American writer and academic James Shapiro received the Baillie Gifford prize for nonfiction’s Winner of Winners award, given to celebrate its 25th year, at a ceremony in Edinburgh. In his teens and early 20s, Shapiro tells me as we talk over Zoom the morning after his victory, he would often hitchhike from London to the Edinburgh festival as part of his immersion in the plays of Shakespeare. This period in his life sowed the ground for his acclaimed book, 1599: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare, first published in 2006. He was, he explains, recovering from the “awful experience” of studying the playwright in middle school; every summer for several years, he would save up enough money to come to the UK on a Freddie Laker plane, “where you could fly from New York to London for $100 round trip and sleep in church basements and for 50p see spectacular productions”.

    In London, Stratford and Edinburgh, he’d see 25 plays in as many days, “and they’re all tattooed inside my skull to this day. The greatest one I saw was Richard Eyre’s Hamlet at the Royal Court in 1980 or so. Richard wrote me a note this morning, and it was so moving to me because that’s where it came from, seeing productions like his.”

    Shapiro is passionate about viewing Shakespeare through the lens of performance, the better to understand how central political and social context is to his work. He is currently advising on Tony Award-winning director Kenny Leon’s production of Hamlet for the Public Theater in New York, set in a post-Covid 2021 and starring Ato Blankson-Wood as the prince. It is, says Shapiro, “a Hamlet that speaks to the now. And I have the street cred, as we say in Brooklyn, to tell Shakespeare purists, whatever that means, that these plays have always spoken to the moment. And to think that what Olivier did or Kenneth Branagh for that matter is where Shakespeare stops, is to be as unShakespearean in one’s thinking about Shakespeare as possible.”

    James Shapiro with his Baillie Gifford winning book 1599.
    James Shapiro with his Baillie Gifford winning book 1599. Photograph: The Baillie Gifford Prize

    His vision for 1599, a microscopic look at the critical year in Shakespeare’s life when he was working on Henry V, Julius Caesar, As You Like It and the first draft of Hamlet, was not initially endorsed. His application for a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities in the US in the late 1980s was turned down twice, he remembers. “I wasn’t discouraged by that. I just felt they didn’t understand that I was trying to do something different.” The “something different” was to understand the immense anxieties of the age: the country poised on the brink of invading Ireland with a 16,000-strong force; the fear that Elizabeth I’s reign was approaching its end with no clear successor in sight; the strengthening possibility of another Spanish Armada. It’s no coincidence, says Shapiro, that Hamlet opens with men on the ramparts, nervously watching for hostile forces.

    He was also frustrated with an academic orthodoxy that relied on speculation and anecdote, as well as an outmoded concept of the playwright: “The Shakespeare that existed when I was writing that book was still very influenced by Coleridge’s sense that Shakespeare was from another planet, or Ben Jonson’s line: he was not of an age but for all time. And that just struck me as completely wrong.” Instead, Shapiro wanted to ground Shakespeare in reality, finding out what the weather was each day of that single year, who he met, where he travelled.

    Shapiro is also a judge on this year’s Booker prize for fiction, and he is fascinating on the distinction between his work and that of novelists. He admires “the way that creative minds can tease out things that are less visible to those of us who deal in facts”. How does he feel about historical novelists – indeed, about a work such as Maggie O’Farrell’s Hamnet, a reimagining of Shakespeare’s family that has just been adapted for stage by the RSC?

    He reveres Hilary Mantel, who was, he says, “a great historian, as well as a great novelist.” And he is, he replies, very happy for O’Farrell: “She deserves great success for that and for her more recent book, but it’s not a book that I can read comfortably, because it’s fiction.”

    skip past newsletter promotion

    “I draw a very sharp line between fiction and nonfiction,” he adds. “I think that the danger of fiction is to sentimentalise. So that’s one of the things that I’m extremely careful as a Shakespearean not to do. On the other hand, I understand how deeply people want to connect with Shakespeare the man, with Anne Hathaway, with Judith Shakespeare: they lived, they died, their internal lives went largely unrecorded. And it takes a talented writer to bring that to life. But that’s not the stuff that I do. I don’t write that; but somebody needs to.”

    His next work is called Playbook, and will focus on America’s Federal Theatre Project of the 1930s, a progressive attempt to bring drama to mass audiences that was targeted by the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Then, as now, and as in the 16th century, theatre is powerful, and Shapiro intends to do everything he can to defend it.

    • 1599: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare by James Shapiro (Faber & Faber, £14.99). To support The Guardian and Observer, order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply.

    [ad_2]
    #Baillie #Gifford #winner #winners #James #Shapiro #draw #sharp #line #fiction #nonfiction
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Digested week: how can the US embrace James Corden, but not quiche? | Emma Brockes

    Digested week: how can the US embrace James Corden, but not quiche? | Emma Brockes

    [ad_1]

    Monday

    A milestone in television history this morning, as the last ever Carpool Karaoke, the hugely popular section of James Corden’s CBS Late Late Show in which he interviews music icons while driving them around, airs ahead of his final show. Put it down to lack of eye contact, novelty format, or the sheer balls of a host willing to chip in and duet with Celine Dion, but even for Corden-sceptics the feature was irresistible. The most viewed Carpool of all time was the 2016 episode starring Adele, which has been watched on YouTube by more than 260 million people. Adele is a hoot. Corden is – I can’t believe I’m saying this – delightful. It is a genuinely great piece of television.

    Cut to this week and the farewell episode in which Adele returns for the final ride. As an exercise, none of us might welcome being held up against former versions of ourselves. Still, this is a tough one to watch. In the original segment, Corden and Adele drove around rainy London. She was bundled up in a coat, looked like she’d done her own makeup and banged on guilelessly about all the times she’d been drunk and unruly in public, or hungover in the park with her son. Corden, an effortless foil, was so spontaneous and funny that my friend Tiff and I still quote lines from it (“I mean, what I like is that you’re coming to me for this advice”; “I ain’t got time for that!”).

    Seven years later and the pair are driving around LA in harsh sunlight. Corden is sycophantic and lachrymose; Adele is styled to within an inch of her life. They spend most of the journey fawning over each other in what might be a public health warning about money and fame. Oh, well. Nothing lasts forever. The sad thing is Corden is quitting the show to return to the UK just as the Americans have got the hang of British attitudes towards him. In Variety magazine, a recent piece about Corden’s departure speculated about what he might do on his return and, breaking with the obsequiousness of the entertainment press, summarised his acting career in Britain as – sharp intake of breath at the stone cold viciousness of this – “relatively successful”.

    Tuesday

    I’m behind on the saga of William, Harry, Rupert and Charles, and have to scramble to get up to speed. Harry is suing Rupert for phone hacking, that much I know. But then in court on Tuesday it surfaces in documents that, according to Harry, in 2020 Rupert paid off William secretly – “a very large sum” – in return for him agreeing to take no further legal action against him. This was done, Harry says in the court filings, because the royals “wanted to avoid at all costs the sort of reputational damage that it had suffered in 1993 when the Sun and another tabloid had unlawfully obtained and published details of an intimate telephone conversation that took place between my father and stepmother in 1989, while he was still married to my mother”.

    The real target of these remarks would seem not to be Rupert, but Charles, as Harry’s Scorched Earth Tour: No Bridge Unburned continues to roll out. Harry would also seem to be targeting William for allegedly going along with Charles’s appeasement of Rupert, while tangentially going after Camilla for being in the mix at all. The spectre of Diana hangs over everything and oh, look, heads up, there’s Hugh. I have sympathy for them all at this point, with the obvious exception of Rupert, for whom, of course, no sympathy is due at this or any other time.

    Wednesday

    Donald Trump’s lawyers appear in court in New York on Wednesday for the former president’s second legal outing of the month, this time in answer to a defamation suit brought by the writer E Jean Carroll, who the former president called a liar after she accused him of rape. If Trump’s appearance downtown for his arraignment at the beginning of April was an anticlimactic affair, Wednesday’s proceedings are a different matter entirely. Before things can even get under way Judge Lewis A Kaplan has rebuked Trump for ranting against his accuser on social media (the former president called Carroll’s accusations a “made-up SCAM” and a “fraudulent & false story”). The alleged assault took place in 1996 in the changing room of a department store, and almost 30 years later Carroll is resolute in her testimony. Elegant, composed, carefully choosing her words, she is the polar opposite of the man having a meltdown in Florida. At the end of a day of testifying, and with the prospect of hostile questioning on Thursday, Carroll is, finally, emotional. She says the thing that the vast majority of alleged rape victims never get the chance to say: “I’m crying because I’m happy I got to tell my story in court.”

    Thursday

    A welcome retreat from Trump ugliness in the form of Judy Blume, who is everywhere this week: on Good Morning America, in a documentary on Amazon Prime, in a profile in the New Yorker and all media outlets in between. Her agent once told her that kids raised on her books in the 80s would grow up to commission the movies and so it has come to pass, with the release of the film version of Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret next week, triggering the huge wave of interest. Blume is a modest figure, running her independent book store in Key West, Florida, where the foot traffic has become so huge that she can no longer sign books on the fly, instead taking home written requests to work through in her own time. One arresting fact from the documentary: in the 1960s, a publisher friend of Blume’s ex-husband condescended to look over an early manuscript of hers and sent her a letter telling her: back luck, old thing, you can’t write, give up. The letter galvanised her. In the almost 60 years since, Blume has sold more than 90 million books.

    skip past newsletter promotion

    Friday

    I’ve had quiche on my mind ever since the coronation recipe came out (I’m not big on the broad bean element), and it’s a hard item to find in New York. Gourmet Garage near my house stocks a few, but the pastry is suspect and the flan, the soul of the quiche, is thin and grey and doesn’t have the requisite eggy wobble. Thankfully, there’s a legendary Aussie bakery in my neighbourhood that sorted me for hot cross buns at Easter (my only quibble with them was that, in capitulation to American tastes, they made the crosses out of – brace yourselves – white icing). Aussies love a quiche as much as we do, and at Bourke Street Bakery on Friday, there they are in all their glory: one spinach, one quiche lorraine. I have to stop myself breaking into a flat run to get them home and in the oven.

    Sunak and Meloni
    ‘If she leans out any further she’s going to get her head stuck in the railings.’ Photograph: Daniel Pereira/NurPhoto/Shutterstock
    Charles and flag
    ‘One would like to see what standards and colours they have in Montecito.’ Photograph: WPA/Getty Images

    [ad_2]
    #Digested #week #embrace #James #Corden #quiche #Emma #Brockes
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • James Shapiro wins Baillie Gifford anniversary prize with ‘extraordinary’ Shakespeare biography 1599

    James Shapiro wins Baillie Gifford anniversary prize with ‘extraordinary’ Shakespeare biography 1599

    [ad_1]

    A book about a pivotal year in William Shakespeare’s life has been named the Baillie Gifford Winner of Winners in a special announcement to mark the 25th anniversary of the prestigious nonfiction prize.

    James Shapiro’s 1599: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare originally won the award in 2006, when it was known as the Samuel Johnson prize. He has been honoured again at a ceremony at the National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh, and will receive £25,000. The chair of judges, the New Statesman’s editor-in-chief Jason Cowley, said it was a “poised and original reimagination of biography”.

    skip past newsletter promotion

    1599 by James Shapiro.
    1599 by James Shapiro. Photograph: Faber

    In 1599, Shakespeare completed Henry V, wrote Julius Caesar and As You Like It, and produced the first draft of Hamlet. In his book, Shapiro, who is professor of English at Columbia University, looks at how the political and social context of the time influenced the work.

    Cowley was joined on the panel by Shahidha Bari and Sarah Churchwell, both authors and academics, and biographer Frances Wilson. Churchwell said Shapiro’s book had made her “look at four major plays in totally different ways; that is an extraordinary achievement”.

    1599 was chosen from a shortlist of six that also included Craig Brown’s 2020 winner One Two Three Four: The Beatles in Time, Wade Davis’s Into the Silence: The Great War, Mallory and the Conquest of Everest, which won the prize in 2012, Barbara Demick’s Nothing to Envy: Real Lives in North Korea, which won in 2010, 2021 winner Empire of Pain by Patrick Radden Keefe and Margaret MacMillan’s 2002 winner Paris 1919, which was originally published under the name Peacemakers.

    The prize has been won by 16 men, including one person of colour, and eight women in its history. This gender balance was reflected in the shortlist for the Winner of Winners. Churchwell said the fact that Shapiro was a white man writing about a white author wasn’t something that the judging panel would hold against it, given that it was “a remarkable book”. But she said the judges did discuss the prize’s historical bias – which reflected the landscape of nonfiction publishing – saying the “vast majority of the [previously winning] books were by white men about western themes and subjects”.

    “Over time the prize has been reflecting that changing sense of values and perspectives,” she added. “There have been many more women who have won in recent years; it’s still an overwhelmingly white cohort of winners.”

    Churchwell said each book had to be judged on its merits, but added: “We also had to recognise there were structural inequalities, in bookselling, in publishing, over the last 25 years that were being reflected.”

    In 2022 the prize was won by author and academic Katherine Rundell for Super-Infinite: The Transformations of John Donne, who was up against four other women and one man on the shortlist.

    Earlier this year, the Women’s Prize Trust announced it would be launching a nonfiction award to sit alongside its long-running fiction prize, after research found that female nonfiction writers are less likely to be reviewed or win prizes than their male counterparts.

    [ad_2]
    #James #Shapiro #wins #Baillie #Gifford #anniversary #prize #extraordinary #Shakespeare #biography
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • BuzzFeed News’ business model turned to dust because they were always at the whim of mercurial tech titans | James Hennessy

    BuzzFeed News’ business model turned to dust because they were always at the whim of mercurial tech titans | James Hennessy

    [ad_1]

    The announcement of the demise of BuzzFeed News last week felt unlike the cavalcade of media closures and layoffs of the past decade. In a sense, it represented the death of an entire era.

    BuzzFeed News, launched in 2011, imagined a format which would marry the intense virality and relentless social media focus of digital native publications with the serious reporting of major mastheads. The bet was that the site’s endless fountain of Harry Potter quizzes, viral news stories, celebrity gossip and pop culture gifs could subsidise a serious news operation, which would in turn lend real credibility to BuzzFeed as a whole.

    The timing was perfect. Legacy media, already shaky after the financial crisis, was increasingly finding itself at the mercy of Facebook and Google, who had reshaped content distribution and the ad industry in their favour. Digital-only upstarts such as BuzzFeed, Mashable and Business Insider had built themselves to take advantage of those same trends and had secured a dominant share of millennial eyeballs as a result.

    Suddenly, BuzzFeed News and a legion of imitators – buoyed by venture capital investment and the seemingly bottomless Facebook audience spigot – were making significant plays into the world of real news reporting; breaking stories left and right and adroitly packaging them for an extremely online audience. In those heady days, you could even imagine I Can Haz Cheeseburger opening a national security desk.

    It’s difficult to understate the panic BuzzFeed’s foray into hard news inaugurated among the media old guard. In 2014, The New York Times distributed a “dire” internal report sounding the warning bell about the paper’s struggles to adapt to journalism’s digital revolution, which mentioned BuzzFeed two dozen times. (True to form, the existence of this report was first detailed by BuzzFeed.) Even the most storied news brands found themselves following the BuzzFeed playbook for distribution. Even the NYT was doing listicles!

    Over the years, the cracks in BuzzFeed’s model started to show. The grand vision of a serious news organisation precariously balanced on top of a viral content shop was always a challenging one, and the company found it increasingly difficult to build a sustainable business. The venture capital injections weren’t enough, and it didn’t help that BuzzFeed’s advertisers were much happier to see their content run alongside the fun quizzes than, say, the Kevin Spacey exposé.

    Another problem was talent. While BuzzFeed served as an incubator for some incandescently skilled young reporters with both a keen eye for the online world and classic reporting chops, it became clear to the old publications that they could simply… poach them. And so they did: the past few years has seen a generation of wunderkinds graduate from the BuzzFeed News universe into the old-school news businesses it once planned to topple.

    But the bigger story here is one largely outside BuzzFeed’s control. It, alongside the tranche of other digital media startups of its era, threw in its lot vigorously with Facebook. It heartily embraced the new distribution model which had so frightened old-school publishers, surfing the waves of traffic generated by Facebook and other social apps such as Snapchat – which at one point evinced similar ambitions towards being a news platform.

    This worked extremely well right up until it didn’t. While Mark Zuckerberg once saw news content as an excellent way to juice Facebook’s platform credibility and user engagement, escalating scandals eventually turned it into a serious political liability. The axe came down. As the Warren Buffet saying goes: only when the tide goes out do you learn who has been swimming naked. BuzzFeed needed Facebook far more than Facebook needed BuzzFeed.

    BuzzFeed News is ultimately a casualty of that lopsided relationship. It never built a subscriptions business to account for the decline in social media traffic, and its model made less and less sense in an industry that was turning away from social media advertising dollars towards paywalls and good-old-fashioned direct monetary relationships with readers.

    It’s quite likely we will remember BuzzFeed News and its ilk not as the revolutionary disrupters of the industry they were once thought to be, but as a decade-long intermission to the whim of the famously mercurial tech titans who briefly offered them patronage.

    But that’s the nature of the news business. What BuzzFeed News did very successfully was change the way news was reported for the digital age, and it quite successfully bridged the gap between what was happening in real life and what was happening online. It helped train a generation of journalists who innately understood how those two worlds could speak to one another, and the reverberations of that understanding will be felt through the media for some time to come.

    That will be BuzzFeed News’ ultimate legacy, even as its business model turns to dust.

    • James Hennessy is the co-host of the podcast Down Round, and writes The Terminal, a newsletter about tech culture

    [ad_2]
    #BuzzFeed #News #business #model #turned #dust #whim #mercurial #tech #titans #James #Hennessy
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • If China invaded Taiwan it would destroy world trade, says James Cleverly

    If China invaded Taiwan it would destroy world trade, says James Cleverly

    [ad_1]

    A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would destroy world trade, and distance would offer no protection to the inevitable catastrophic blow to the global economy, the UK’s foreign secretary, James Cleverly, warned in a set piece speech on Britain’s relations with Beijing.

    In remarks that differ from French president Emmanuel Macron’s attempts to distance Europe from any potential US involvement in a future conflict over Taiwan, and which firmly support continued if guarded engagement with Beijing, Cleverly said “no country could shield itself from the repercussions of a war in Taiwan”.

    He added that he shuddered to think of the financial and human ruin that would ensue.

    Urging no side to take unilateral action to change the status quo, he asserted the relevance of Taiwan to UK interests saying: “About half of the world’s container ships pass through these vital waters [the Taiwan Strait] every year, laden with goods bound for Europe and the far corners of the world. Taiwan is a thriving democracy and a crucial link in global supply chains, particularly for advanced semi-conductors.

    “A war across the Strait would not only be a human tragedy, it would destroy world trade worth $2.6 trillion, according to Nikkei Asia. No country could shield itself from the repercussions.

    “Distance would offer no protection from this catastrophic blow to the global economy – and to China most of all.”

    He added: “As we watch new bases appearing in the South China Sea and beyond, we are bound to ask ourselves: what is it all for? Why is China making this colossal investment?

    “If we are left to draw our own conclusions, prudence dictates that we must assume the worst.”

    Overall Cleverly set himself apart from advocates of economic decoupling including some of his own backbenchers saying he wanted Britain to “engage directly with China, bilaterally and multilaterally, to preserve and create open, constructive and stable relations, reflecting China’s global importance”.

    Although he said the mass incarceration in Xinjiang cannot be ignored or brushed aside, he said: “We believe in a positive trade and investment relationship, whilst avoiding dependencies in critical supply chains.

    “We want British companies to do business in China – just as American, ASEAN, Australian and EU companies do – and we will support their efforts to make the terms work for both sides, pushing for a level playing field and fairer competition.”

    China he acknowledged represented a ruthlessly authoritarian tradition utterly at odds with Britain’s own. “But we have an obligation to future generations to engage because otherwise we would be failing in our duty to sustain – and shape – the international order. Shirking that challenge would be a sign not of strength but of weakness.”

    skip past newsletter promotion

    Invasion of Taiwan would be a ‘horror scenario’, says German foreign minister – video

    At the same time he balanced this by saying: “The UK had a right to protect core interests too, and one of them is to promote the kind of world that we want to live in, where people everywhere have a universal human right to be treated with dignity, free from torture, slavery or arbitrary detention.”

    He insisted, without going into details: “We are not going to be silent about interference in our political system, or technology theft, or industrial espionage. We will do more to safeguard academic freedom and research.” He did not repeat the promise by Rishi Sunak, the prime minister, to close Chinese-controlled Confucius Institutes at British universities.

    He also urged China in its relations with Russia over Ukraine not to allow Vladimir Putin to trample upon China’s own stated principles of non-interference and respect for sovereignty.

    He told China: “A powerful and responsible nation cannot simply abstain when this happens, or draw closer to the aggressor, or aid and abet the aggression. The rights of a sovereign nation like Ukraine cannot be eradicated just because the eradicator enjoys a ‘strategic partnership’ with China.”

    [ad_2]
    #China #invaded #Taiwan #destroy #world #trade #James #Cleverly
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • Adele joins James Corden for emotional Carpool Karaoke finale

    Adele joins James Corden for emotional Carpool Karaoke finale

    [ad_1]

    Adele broke down in tears while discussing her divorce as she joined James Corden for the final Carpool Karaoke in his last week as host of the The Late Late Show on the US network CBS.

    Corden took over The Late Late Show in 2015, replacing the Scottish-American comedian Craig Ferguson. He announced last year that he would be leaving the show and returning to the UK, with Corden’s last episode airing on Thursday.

    The Carpool Karaoke part of the show quickly became its breakout hit, and Corden’s first segment with Adele became a viral hit, amassing more than 260m views.

    In the final Carpool Karaoke episode, released on Monday, the singer became visibly emotional over Corden’s decision to return to the UK.

    “It’s been a crazy eight years,” said Corden. “In one sense it feels like it’s gone like that [clicks fingers] and in another I feel like I don’t remember what life was like before being here.”

    Adele said: “I’ve never lived in LA without you guys so I’m a bit nervous about it, to be honest with you, and very, very sad.”

    During their conversation, Corden revealed some of the difficulties he had faced in persuading celebrities to take part in Carpool Karaoke when he first came to the US.

    He recalled how the team eventually managed to persuade Mariah Carey to agree, but that before she got in the car she told him she would only “do the chat” and would not sing.

    Corden knew he had to convince her to change her mind to make a success of the feature, and he succeeded.

    “There’s been some bloody brilliant ones, and a few [bleeped out] ones,” Adele laughed, asking Corden to name a favourite.

    “Stevie Wonder changed it a lot,” he replied, “because when he did it, other artists were like, ‘Well, if Stevie Wonder’s done it, I’ll do it.’”

    Adele revealed how Corden and his family had been “so integral in looking after” her and her son following her split from her former husband, Simon Konecki, in 2019.

    The couple divorced in March 2021, and Adele revealed that she and her son Angelo, 10, had gone on a family trip with Corden, his wife, Julia Carey, and their three children.

    “And we were on our way home and my mood had changed,” Adele said. “It was like the first year that I felt like I had to hold myself accountable, for just being an adult, whereas the year before that where I left Simon, you and Jules and the kids were so integral in looking after me and Angelo.”

    “You were like an adult with me. You and Julia would always give me this advice.”

    Adele’s Carpool Karaoke segment will also be broadcast on Thursday’s show, bookending a series that has also featured Elton John, Madonna, BTS, Blackpink, Britney Spears, Paul McCartney, Céline Dion, and Billie Eilish.

    [ad_2]
    #Adele #joins #James #Corden #emotional #Carpool #Karaoke #finale
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )

  • A memo to Oversight Committee Democrats includes new details on six subpoenas Chair James Comer has issued for records in his Biden family probe.

    A memo to Oversight Committee Democrats includes new details on six subpoenas Chair James Comer has issued for records in his Biden family probe.

    [ad_1]

    20230227 rules 1 francis 1
    Ranking member Jamie Raskin is accusing Republicans of withholding information about the investigation.

    [ad_2]
    #memo #Oversight #Committee #Democrats #includes #details #subpoenas #Chair #James #Comer #issued #records #Biden #family #probe
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Indian ragas gave birth to the iconic theme tune of James Bond 007 films

    Indian ragas gave birth to the iconic theme tune of James Bond 007 films

    [ad_1]

    Most of us have watched James Bond films. And we have also heard the iconic theme tune that introduces Bond to the audience. The tune is full of suspense and foreboding. But not many people know that the memorable tune has its origins in a work of fiction connected with Indian culture. The man who first wrote the tune was a British composer, musician and singer named Monty Norman. He wrote the tune for the very first Bond film titled Dr. No and thereafter it was used, sometimes with slight variations, in every James Bond film.

    As the Bond films grew in popularity throughout the world, the tune became one of the most recognised themes on the planet. What makes the James Bond theme so appealing is its ability to evoke a sense of excitement and danger. The pounding rhythm and gradually soaring melody create a sense of excitement and anticipation, hinting at the fast paced action sequences that are to follow on the screen.

    Monty Norman has said that the James Bond tune was inspired by “Good Sign, Bad Sign”, a song that he himself composed for a musical stage adaptation of V.S. Naipaul’s novel A House For Mr. Biswas. The novel was set among the Indian community in Trinidad. In brief, the story was about a man named Mohun Biswas, an Indian living in Trinidad, who has married into a wealthy family but ends up being dominated by his in-laws.

    When Monty Norman was approached to compose a song for the stage show of the novel, the composer decided to rely heavily on an Indian theme and ambience. Since the story was about the Indian community settled in Trinidad, he composed a tune with a very heavy Indian influence and sound complete with sitar and tabla. The song was titled Good Sign, Bad Sign.

    Later, when Monty Norman was roped in to compose the theme for the first James Bond film, he suddenly had a bright idea of presenting the same tune with a few minor changes.

    But even after the changes, Monty Norman’s tune sounded too Indian and the producers felt that it may not be appreciated by a worldwide audience. So they requested another composer named John Barry Prendergast to rearrange the tune. So John Barry made a few more changes and it clicked. It was then included as the theme in the first Bond film titled Dr.No starring Sean Connery and Ursula Andress. The film became a blockbuster and Connery shot to fame as the master spy James Bond, secret agent 007.

    After the runaway success of Dr.No, Barry was hired to compose and perform eleven of the next fourteen James Bond films and he did so with great success. So that is how a tune which was originally based on Indian ragas became one of the most popular theme tunes in the Hollywood film industry and was also recognised and welcomed by millions of James Bond fans across the world.

    [ad_2]
    #Indian #ragas #gave #birth #iconic #theme #tune #James #Bond #films

    ( With inputs from www.siasat.com )

  • Opinion | NASA Refused to Cancel James Webb. Good.

    Opinion | NASA Refused to Cancel James Webb. Good.

    [ad_1]

    Kameny’s story is worth revisiting in light of a recent controversy concerning the legacy of the Lavender Scare within the space program. Late last year, NASA announced that it would not reverse its decision to name its deep-space telescope after James Webb, the administrator who led the agency throughout the 1960s. The announcement came after years of lobbying by a group of young scientists who claimed that Webb, first as a high-ranking State Department official during the Truman administration and then as NASA chief, had been complicit in the firing of gay employees while serving at both agencies. A petition demanding NASA rename the telescope earned nearly 2,000 signatures, and the Royal Astronomical Society in Britain insisted that astronomers submitting papers to its journals use the acronym “JWST” when describing the telescope, Webb’s disrepute reducing him to the level of the fictional Lord Voldemort, “He Who Must Not Be Named.”

    Webb’s contributions to the cause of space exploration were vast. Taking the reins of NASA at the outset of the John F. Kennedy administration, he spearheaded the Apollo program that fulfilled the president’s mission of landing a man on the moon by the end of the decade. And while he stands accused of purging gay people from NASA, Webb put the agency at the forefront of government efforts on behalf of another marginalized minority. Under Webb’s direction, NASA was the leading federal agency to promote racial integration, aggressively recruiting and promoting Black scientists. In 1964, when Alabama’s segregationist governor George Wallace attempted to block the hiring of African-Americans at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Webb threatened to remove personnel from the facility. That same year, he declined to speak at the Jackson, Mississippi Chamber of Commerce after two Black activists were denied entry to the event.

    In March 2021, NASA assigned its chief historian to investigate the claim that Webb was responsible for the firing of gay employees. In an 89-page report released late last year, for which he surveyed some 50,000 documents spanning a 20-year period, the historian found no evidence to substantiate this allegation. On the contrary, at least during his tenure at State, Webb could actually be credited with reducing the damage wreaked by the Lavender Scare. The crusade to cleanse the federal government of “sexual deviants” was led by Senator Joe McCarthy, who blamed “communists and queers” at the State Department for a series of early Cold War setbacks. According to the report, as under secretary of state, Webb’s “main involvement” in this episode “was in attempting to limit Congressional access to the personnel records of the Department of State” by claiming executive branch privilege over personnel matters. As for his time at NASA, though Webb presided over the agency when a budget analyst fired on account of his homosexuality, Clifford Norton, sued the Civil Service Commission, according to the NASA historian, “No evidence has been located showing Webb knew of Norton’s firing at the time.” Citing this study, the Royal Astronomical Society announced last month that it would no longer require authors to use the abbreviation “JWST.”

    The NASA investigation absolving Webb is a welcome contribution to the historical record. But it also obscures several important points about the severity of the Lavender Scare. For even if Webb cannot be tied to the dismissal of an individual gay employee, he occupied positions of authority in a government that was firing gay people left and right. While Webb may not have been aware of Norton’s situation, there were surely many more gay NASA employees who were terminated yet whose cases received less attention because, unlike Norton, they did not want to assume the risk to their reputations that going public with a lawsuit would entail. “It is highly likely that [Webb] knew exactly what was happening with security at his own agency during the height of the Cold War,” four leaders of the campaign to wipe Webb’s name from the telescope wrote last year. “We are deeply concerned by the implication that managers are not responsible for homophobia.”

    And yet, no matter how well-intentioned, to single out a bureaucrat like James Webb for the Lavender Scare would accomplish the opposite of what it intends by minimizing just how vast and ruthless was our country’s policy of anti-gay discrimination — a policy so vast and ruthless that it mandated the outlay of massive amounts of money and manpower in a whole-of-government effort aimed at firing patriotic and highly-educated employees just because of whom they loved. If Webb’s level of involvement in this decades-long purge is to be the threshold by which we cancel an historical figure, then we are going to have to rename everything named after pretty much anyone who served a role in the federal government from 1947 (when the State Department began firing gay employees) until at least 1975 (when the Civil Service Commission lifted its ban on gays), or even 1995 (when Clinton removed homosexuality as a cause for denying a security clearance). Every president, cabinet officer, deputy assistant secretary of housing — all were in some sense complicit in the structural oppression of gay people that existed during the second half of the 20th century.

    Ultimately, the primary argument against renaming the James Webb Space Telescope is the same argument against renaming buildings and other landmarks honoring historical figures — George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln — who espoused views that we rightly consider abhorrent by today’s standards, which is that these men also accomplished great things deserving of our recognition and praise. To argue otherwise, to contend that there is nothing worth venerating about morally complex individuals from our past, is to fall victim to presentism, the narcissistic penchant for imagining oneself morally superior to those who came before.

    Those defending Webb have faced blowback themselves. In January 2021, Dr. Hakeem Oluseyi, the president of the National Society of Black Physicists, published the results of his own investigation exonerating Webb from the charge of homophobic bigotry. Later that year, after Oluseyi was hired by George Mason University, a leader of the anti-Webb campaign tweeted that he had championed a “homophobe.”

    According to the New York Times, that July, a professor at another university told an astronomy professor at George Mason that Oluseyi had sexually harassed a woman and mishandled a government grant. (Officials at Oluseyi’s former employer, the Florida Institute of Technology, launched an investigation and found nothing to substantiate the charges.) Last year, while Times reporter Michael Powell was working on an article about the Webb controversy, he received accusations from an anonymous person about Oluseyi. “Several of these claims were demonstrably false, and others could not be substantiated,” Powell wrote.

    The debate over whether NASA should honor the legacy of James Webb offers us an opportunity to consider how best to commemorate a dark episode in our nation’s past. While our country has made valiant efforts at atoning for its abhorrent treatment of other minorities, we have barely begun the process of recognizing the oppression its gay and lesbian citizens endured. I cannot think of a better way for NASA to do this than to name its next space telescope after Frank Kameny.

    [ad_2]
    #Opinion #NASA #Refused #Cancel #James #Webb #Good
    ( With inputs from : www.politico.com )

  • Lauren James shines during England’s comfortable win against South Korea

    Lauren James shines during England’s comfortable win against South Korea

    [ad_1]

    Lauren James’s electric form was rewarded with a first goal for England in a 4-0 defeat of South Korea in the Arnold Clark Cup to continue Sarina Wiegman’s unbeaten run as the Lionesses’ manager.

    “She has been a talent for a long time, she just needed to be available and needed some time at Chelsea,” said Wiegman of James. “She worked really hard at Chelsea. That’s what you have seen this season, then she can take the next step to the national team.

    “Now, when she starts playing at this level with Chelsea, and in the Champions League, and on this international level, and gets those minutes, she can improve. I hope now she gets consistency, she stays fit and keeps enjoying herself.”

    At Stadium MK, it took England 40 minutes to find a way past South Korea’s banks of red but Georgia Stanway’s penalty broke the deadlock shortly before half-time and goals from Chloe Kelly, Alessia Russo and James in the second half ensured a stylish win to kickstart the European champions’ year.

    The team news delivered a surprise, albeit a familiar one, with Leah Williamson shifted from centre-back into the midfield to compensate for the loss of the influential Keira Walsh, who was ruled out with a stomach bug. Wiegman has played the captain further forward before. In the run-up to the Euros last summer Williamson played alongside Walsh in a double pivot several times, but for the tournament itself the manager reverted to a centre-back pairing of Millie Bright and Williamson behind Walsh.

    Wiegman had said before that tournament that her captain had not felt totally comfortable in the middle, but if the team’s first outing at the Arnold Clark Cup is anything to go by, she clearly still views Williamson as one of the best options to act as a back-up for Walsh.

    The manager had promised rotation, but was equally keen to get off to a strong start in defence of the Arnold Clark Cup and restart their World Cup preparations on the front foot, so the starting XI was strong.

    England were dominant, with South Korea’s back three spending much of the game as part of a back five. It took three minutes for James to show why she is probably vying with Kelly and Lauren Hemp for one of the two places alongside Russo in the summer, the Chelsea forward lashing wide of the far post from the edge of the area.

    It was one-way traffic, with the Lionesses controlling 83% of possession and having 14 shots to one in the first half. In the 37th minute the crowd was roaring, but the ball that looked to be going in rattled back off the inside of the far post from Russo.

    The inevitable came three minutes later. The ever-dangerous James was tripped by Jang Sel-gi and the Brazilian referee Andreza Siqueira pointed to the spot. Stanway’s penalty was emphatic, sent powerfully beyond the reach of Kim.

    Georgia Stanway scores a penalty against South Korea
    Georgia Stanway’s penalty puts England ahead late in the first half. Photograph: Marc Atkins/Getty Images

    “She is very tight on the ball and can dribble well too,” said Wiegman of James. “That is a strength from herself and also our team. It was nice with her dribble that she got fouled and won that penalty.”

    At half-time the Williamson experiment was over. Jess Carter was substituted for the Manchester United midfielder Katie Zelem, with Williamson slotted in alongside Bright and more normal service was resumed.

    skip past newsletter promotion

    England doubled the lead within a minute of the restart. Kelly, the scorer of the Euro 2022 final winner, collected the ball after a defensive muddle, drove forward and fired in a shot that took a deflection and looped into the back of the net.

    Breached so soon after the break, the South Korea defence crumbled and, four minutes later, Russo clipped Alex Greenwood’s wicked cross from the left over Kim at the near post.

    James would eventually be rewarded for her constantly threatening presence, starting a move from the halfway line that ended with her collecting the ball and smashing it past Kim. She was engulfed by her delighted teammates as the Chelsea manager, Emma Hayes, watched the player she has desperately tried to shield from the spotlight and pressures that come with it bask in the glow.

    “Lost for words really,” said James. “I just like to stay humble, continue giving to the team and continue improving.”

    Lucy Bronze praised the 21-year-old playing in front of her. “Everyone knows the quality that LJ’s got,” she said. “Technically on the ball she’s probably one of the best there is. It’s fun for me to play with her because I know she’s always going to get the ball in the right place.

    “It’s crazy that she’s so young because this is the player that everyone has been talking about for five years now. Everyone has been waiting for this superstar and it’s exciting to be here now at the start of her England career.”

    [ad_2]
    #Lauren #James #shines #Englands #comfortable #win #South #Korea
    ( With inputs from : www.theguardian.com )