Home Blog Page 1149

Something’s fishy at SFU’s reflection pond

0

CMYK-Koi-horizontal-Anderson Wang copy

Concerns regarding the dumping of unwanted pet fish into Burnaby lakes and ponds has been brought to public attention in a recent article published by Burnaby Now.

The article stated that a local pet shop has been misinforming customers, claiming that SFU’s Burnaby campus welcomes any unwanted koi fish in the university’s reflection pond.

Recalling the release of a predatory snakehead fish into Burnaby Lake in 2012, it is not news that invasive species may pose a detrimental threat to Burnaby’s natural habitat. However, many people still believe they are doing the ‘right thing’ by releasing their unwanted fish into the wild.

Stephanie Green, an SFU PhD graduate from the Department of Biological Sciences, told The Peak that although people believe they are doing the right thing, it only takes a few individuals to release invasive species into the wild before they can “spread out of control.”

Green explained that because of the interconnectivity of ponds, lakes and rivers, “once an introduced species takes hold, it is very difficult to eradicate completely because of how quickly they can spread.”

Green emphasized how important it is for pet owners to be conscious of the needs of a fish, as well as how large it gets and its dietary needs, before buying it in order to avoid the problem of individuals purchasing a fish that they are unable to care for.

The article in Burnaby Now revealed that staff at a Petsmart in Vancouver were implying that it was acceptable to dump unwanted fish into Coquitlam ponds as well as SFU’s reflection pond. In an attempt to clarify this issue, Keith Horne, superintendent for SFU Mechanical Services, informed The Peak that, “it is NOT permitted to dump fish in any pond at SFU.”

Not only is this illegal, with fines ranging from $2,500 to $250,000, but the introduction of new fish may alter a pond’s fragile ecosystem, leading to issues such as overpopulation or illness among the fish population.

During routine draining and cleaning of the reflection pool, the fish are captured and housed at SFU’s Alcan Aquatic Research Centre until the cleaning is complete.

Although it is unclear as to whether the fish population has altered due to the dumping of unwanted fish into the reflection pond or by naturally occurring reproduction, one thing is sure: the dumping of unfamiliar fish into the reflection pond poses a detrimental threat to the fish already living there.

Bruce Leighton, an associate member of SFU’s Department of Biological Sciences, said, “[The] dumping of fish in the pond at SFU brings a disease risk to the fish that live in the pond.” Leighton added that the reflection pond is “already at capacity [for fish]”, thus adding more could lead to overpopulation, resulting in death for some of its piscine residents.

So, if you find yourself developing animosity towards your fishy companion, think twice before discarding it in a local pond. Instead, “find a pet store that will take it in,” as Green suggests.

How to Save the CBC

0

 

Jian Ghomeshi has the perfect voice for broadcasting. His deep, smooth clarity that brims with authority makes speaking on radio seem effortless. “I’m not on the air simply advocating for my job right now, or even for my incredible team,” he articulates. “Rather, I believe in this institution. Plain and simple.”

These words aired April 11, 2014 on Q with Jian Ghomeshi, an arts and culture program featured on CBC Radio One, and the highest-rated show at its time-slot in CBC history. “I was a supporter of the CBC even before I worked here, and I will be long after I’m gone. That is, depending on what the CBC becomes down the road.” Ghomeshi was referring to the CBC’s abounding number of recent job cuts resulting from a dizzying spiral of economic and political hardships the broadcaster has faced.

The government’s recent drastic cuts in funding for the CBC have only increased the financial strain the corporation has been facing since 1985. Now, with its outright dismissal of 657 jobs and loss of hockey broadcasting rights to Rogers Communications, the extinction of the CBC has never been more probable.

The Clash of Funding and Interests

Known to many as the ‘Mother Corp,’ the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was created in 1936 to model the BBC, the most prestigious broadcaster in the world. CBC was conceived to counter the influx of American programming that had been penetrating the airwaves across the border, to promote Canadian culture and national unity, and to reduce the growing tensions between Anglophone and Francophone citizens.

Today, the CBC operates with a level of complexity that is unprecedented. Across six time zones, it broadcasts 88 radio stations, 27 television stations, three all-digital services, and 16 specialty services in English, French and eight different Aboriginal languages. Being a public-service broadcaster, it seeks to enlighten, inform, and entertain Canadians from coast to coast, giving our culture a voice and providing us with a unique sense of Canada’s place in the world.

Unfortunately, the CBC’s ability to fulfill its mandate has been beclouded by government and corporate interests, the main obstacle being one of funding. CBC’s current annual budget is just over $1.5 billion. One billion of this is garnered from public appropriation and funding from the federal government, while the rest is brought in by commercial revenues.

On March 29, 2012, Ottawa announced a slew of financial cuts to the CBC, leaving the broadcaster with a loss of $115 million over the succeeding three years.
And the numbers worsen: On April 10, 2014, the CBC was forced to cut a further $130 million from its budget for the year. Consequently, the broadcaster was left with no choice but to eliminate 657 employees, a dramatic move that left all CBC supporters, myself included, alarmed and disheartened.

The CBC gives our culture a voice and provides us with a unique sense of Canada’s place in the world.

Linden MacIntyre, a CBC employee and public figure known for his 24-year run as host of television program The Fifth Estate, was so shaken that he announced his retirement from the CBC by the end of this summer. His aims are to save jobs for young employees, he told The Star on May 8.

“Even if you’ve never heard of most of the 657 jobs and people that are being cut, they’re all essential to this organization,” he states. “The energies, imagination and the future of an institution depends on the intake of young people [. . .] They will acquire everything I have acquired and more.”

Along with loss of government funding, the CBC has been battling steep declines in its commercial and ad revenues. On May 6, 2014, the broadcaster reported that its ad revenues had decreased by 11 per cent from the previous year, leaving its total at $331 million. As a new way of life approaches and advertising quickly treks into the digital realm, the CBC may have no choice but to follow in its footsteps.

Losing these funds will undoubtedly bring a plethora of changes to the broadcaster — in particular, to CBC Television. Among these changes will likely be the loss of original Canadian programs, the replacement of high-cost reality series with lower costing ones, and the cancellation of late night news in the north.

On June 26, 2014, CBC reported that because its priorities will shift from traditional broadcast to digital, a layoff of up to 1,500 employees will occur by 2020. Additionally, 90 minute evening newscasts will be stripped down to 30 minutes.

The CBC Says ‘Goodbye’ to Hockey

Perhaps the biggest blow yet to the CBC occurred just last year, on November 26, 2013.

This was the day that CBC said a tearful adios to its hockey broadcasting rights as they fell into the arms of Rogers Communications. The big league telecom company wrested control of NHL multimedia with a mammoth 12-year, $5.2 billion agreement that would re-brand and re-shape Hockey Night in Canada (HNIC).

For most Canadians, the sport of hockey flows through our cultural blood. Over time, the sport has connected us and defined us as the proud nation that we are. Over the past 78 years, HNIC has been the crown jewel of the CBC, beginning on radio in 1936, and seeing its first television broadcast in 1952. HNIC has built up a legion of dedicated fans, as well as part-time watchers.

To lose HNIC would not only be a blow to our cultural identity, but just may be the breaking point for CBC. Due to the abundance of ads displayed during game hours and the program’s high audience rates, HNIC has consistently delivered over half of the broadcaster’s ad revenue.

“Funding [for the CBC] needs to be separated from the whims of political interference.”– Dr. Kathleen Cross, professor of Communications at SFU

Furthermore, a CBC bereft of hockey leaves almost 400 hours of open TV time-slotting, and in order to fulfill the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC)’s minimum 60 per cent yearly Canadian content requirement, it will need to come up with a lot of original Canadian programming, and fast. This is programming that the CBC, sadly, does not have the money or time to produce with sufficient quality.

Losing hockey has proven to be much worse than recent federal cuts and will be a game changer (pun intended) for our broadcaster. Such occurrences are the duty of the Friends of Canadian Broadcasting Organization to monitor and make comment on.

Since 1985, Friends, based out of Toronto, has been a non-profit watchdog group for Canadian programming, with a mission to intervene, defend, and enhance the quality of Canadian content. Though many have called CBC’s loss of hockey the beginning of the end for the broadcaster, some at Friends feel differently.

Ian Morrison, a spokesperson for the organization, says the loss of hockey may be serendipitous, should CBC manage adequate funding. In a press release from October 2012, he stated that this loss could make the CBC less commercial, and “open new and exciting possibilities [for the CBC] to operate more like a public broadcaster in sharp distinction from its private sector competitors.” Without advertising to drive corporate interests, the broadcaster just might have the freedom to fulfill its mandate of enlightening the public with content fit to shape the citizens of a proper democracy.

Radio: Canada’s Surviving Medium

But what about CBC Radio? How is this medium holding up commercially? The reality that not many anticipated is that CBC Radio is flourishing remarkably compared to its TV sector.

Though heavily impacted by federal cuts, CBC Radio One has not been subject to ad revenue stress, as there are absolutely no advertisements on air. Along with being the most historical broadcast medium, Radio One has virtually no American competition, and produces an astonishingly high standard of Canadian-content programs, including news, politics, and culture.
Long-standing shows such as As It Happens, Quirks and Quarks, and The Current offer fresh voices on news and culture privy to being Canadian.

I’m quite accustomed to radio; for years, my household has awoken to the sound of the bubbling coffee maker and World Report emanating from the kitchen. I feel the programs I’ve listened to have both educated me and have given me a more distinct sense of my place as a Canadian. I can confidently state that CBC Radio has outlived the commercial hardships, while consistently producing content in sync with the CBC’s mandate.

CBC Online is also progressing fairly well. With its foot in the doorway to the digital age, it makes for a decent supplement to TV and radio broadcasting. Digital-savvy users are able to skim through content at their will, picking out the information that is most relevant to them. Even if CBC’s TV presence will wane, it seems that its radio and web presences will stay strong.

Public Broadcasting and True Quality

It’s clear that public broadcast TV has found itself in the tight clutches of commercialism, and has experienced far greater funding withdrawals than its sister media. Wade Rowland, author of Saving the CBC: Balancing Profit and Public Service, recognizes that commercial influence seems to have entranced the CBC with a fixation on ratings.
Commercial markets use ratings to measure program quality. The problem with this system, however, is that they only measure the number of heads; if a program receives a large number of views, then its marketers view this program as successful.

High ratings seem to be dependent on thrill and spectacle — how entertaining programs are. This has twisted recent news programs into what’s been termed as ‘infotainment,’ a style where settings are flashy, anchors are more photogenic than skilled, and the news is permeated with crime stories and fluff that otherwise have no significance to the viewer.

Of course, high ratings do not reflect the true quality of any program.

This is where public-service broadcasting steps in. Its aims are cultural rather than economic: to enhance public life and enrich all individual lives. According to Rowland, the true quality of a news program lies in leaving viewers as better, more informed and involved citizens.

Apart from exploring and criticizing society, true quality means that content must appeal to a broad range of tastes and interests. Public broadcasting can provide programs for particular ethnic, cultural, gender, and minority interests — those that are, for the most part, denied or ignored by corporate media.

Dr. Robert Hackett is a professor specializing in journalism and media studies at Simon Fraser University. He has completed several content analyses of CBC-TV News during his career, as well as a Newswatch Canada study comparing how the corporate press covers CBC versus commercial broadcasters.

“Public broadcasting is essential to simulating a public sphere,” Hackett says. “[It is] a space where different segments of society can engage in conversation on matters of common concern, in principle free from domination by powerful or wealthy private interests.”

Dr. Hackett goes on to cite the “strong correlation between robust public broadcasting in a media system, and the level of political information and engagement amongst the citizenry.”

Unfortunately, the current Canadian government has been less sympathetic to the concept of public broadcasting than any other government in Canadian history. It’s even more disheartening that, due to the American oversaturation of corporate media in Canada, many of my peers are confused or even clueless as to what public broadcasting even is, and what the political and cultural differences between Canada and the United States are.

What will we be as a country if CBC is no longer, and our culture becomes so integrated with America’s that we can’t distinguish it from our own? It’s a sad and frightening point, worsened by how close it has come to being a reality.

Is there any way to save the CBC?

The opposition facing our national broadcaster is so daunting, it seems difficult to think of any way to liberate the CBC from its mess. But apart from eliminating all of its commercial influences, there are still a few strategies left that could help rejuvenate the CBC, and our cultural identity along with it.

The first is to create a style of funding similar to that of the BBC. Britain’s public broadcaster is outstanding not only due to the quality of its programming, but because it is entirely publicly funded. While Canadians pay $29 each year for CBC, every Brit with a TV shells over about $270 CAD yearly. This is enough to make them choke on their biscuits and tea if their programming ever dipped below quality.

Do we want corporate media to define us, or would we rather define ourselves?

Dr. Kathleen Cross, a professor of communications at SFU with a research background in politics and news media, feels a different style of funding is the first and foremost priority for saving the broadcaster.

“Funding [for the CBC] needs to be separated from the whims of political interference,” she says. “CBC will always be vulnerable to punitive funding cuts, as we have seen for years, from a sitting government who doesn’t like to be held to account. The BBC model is a better model for funding.”

Kross also proposes another option. She states that “we need the appointment of CBC board members to be separate from political interference.” I wholeheartedly agree; the CBC president is currently appointed by the federal cabinet. Talk about political bias! For the past 50 years, these board members have all — I repeat, all — been men with interest in accounting and finance.

The CBC needs board members who are diverse in both interests and gender, ones who are at arm’s length from the government, who understand and are passionate about the values of public broadcasting.

I would also suggest that the CBC solicit proper funding to open its production studios to original programs once again. While shows such as Heartland, Republic of Doyle, and Murdoch Mysteries reflect Canadian settings and values, they are among a select few.

I’ll admit, I’m caught off guard when I see things that are distinctly Canadian in film and TV. I feel a twinge of renewed pride in my country; I feel a sense of belonging that’s previously been stifled. These are valuable feelings I wish would spread throughout Canada — they are long overdue!

Finally, in light of the digital age we live in, traditional broadcasting should expand and evolve with digital and social media. But as a digital deficit infiltrates our nation, we need to find inventive, low-cost ways to support our content creators.

Reilly Yeo is a community engagement specialist for OpenMedia.ca, based here in Vancouver. Apart from her previous work with Amnesty International and The Walrus magazine, Yeo directed the Reimagine CBC project in early 2012. Through a forum, Yeo and 10,940 other Canadians crafted a clear, low-cost proposal for CBC’s future in the digital age, which was subsequently reported to CBC President Hubert Lacroix.

“I believe that public institutions should follow the guidance of the public,” Yeo told The Peak. “[The CBC should] create participatory processes that can meaningfully empower the people who love CBC to defend and strengthen it.

“This is particularly important in the digital age, where we have new opportunities to connect people all across the country, [and] new challenges as old funding models — particularly investigative journalism — are breaking down.”

Yeo suggests that the CBC expand its digital services by creating more online participatory processes, to allow for active citizen engagement in accordance with its mandate.
The Reimagine CBC website also proposes the broadcaster should “enrich the digital ecosystem with the best content of CBC’s past and present, freeing the CBC archives and bringing television and radio online.” This could be accomplished by creating a no cost CBC-Netflix competitor, from which users could enjoy content from an archive of on-demand information, with legendary programs such as Canada, A People’s History.

A National Conversation: Who are we as Canadians?

While researching for this piece, I stumbled across a blog entitled CBC Exposed. The webpage, while haphazardly designed and littered with profanity, serves as a watchdog and collective of pro-privatization news stories on the CBC.

The site claims that CBC is an arrogant, wasteful operation that abuses Canadian citizens of our tax dollars which could instead be used for healthcare and education. That it plagues the media with a liberal bias and lack of transparency. That it is very clear — to them at least — that Canadians want the CBC privatized.

This is simply untrue. I am Canadian, and I’d like nothing other than for the CBC to remain public.

While I understand and respect the views of those against the CBC, I feel there’s a fundamental lack of understanding as to what the CBC is, and why it hasn’t clearly fulfilled its mandate recently. I’ll admit its quality has deteriorated, but this is chiefly due to government and commercial influence.

Yes, our tax dollars could be spent elsewhere. Yes, other public broadcasters could play the CBC’s role, though likely on a much smaller scale. But the CBC provides Canada with a single, central hub for democratic information and debate. It creates a public space for us to discuss national issues such as healthcare and education, so that we can decide, as a unified country, where our tax dollars should go.

It creates a national consciousness, and this is a public necessity.

If not for the CBC, who would serve language minorities and other communities to make them known throughout Canada? Who would ensure that Aboriginals remain intrinsic to our heritage? Privatized media certainly will not — they’ll ultimately look after their own interests, instead of the interests of the Canadian people.
I care about our broadcaster. I echo what CBC President Hubert Lacroix has proclaimed. If we care about the CBC, it’s time for us to embark on a national conversation about the future of our heritage, democracy, and our place in the media industry.

Who do we want to be as Canadians? Do we want corporate media to define us — and distort us in the process — or would we rather define ourselves? I sincerely hope you believe in the latter.

As Jian Ghomeshi brings his plea to a close, he leaves us with a profound message: “If you don’t believe in public broadcasting that’s a perfectly legitimate point of view. But, if you do, then maybe it’s time to assert yourselves, Canada; and frankly, maybe its time for those of us who work [at the CBC] to do so too.”

SFU scientists recognized as “World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds”

0


CMYK-The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds- 2014-SFU

Three SFU scientists have made Thomson Reuter’s list of The World’s Most Influential Scientific Minds: 2014 (WMISM).

The three honourees — Marco Marra, Fiona Brinkman, and Steven Jones — are among 90 Canadians on the list of 3,215 researchers from around the world.

This list drew from 21 fields in the sciences and the social sciences, from space to psychology, and was created based on the number of citations each researcher’s papers received in their first year of publication. When a paper is cited, this means that another scientist is using it as a reference.

One of the three on the list, Fiona Brinkman, an SFU professor in the Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, with cross appointments in the School of Computer Science and Faculty of Health Science, has been recognized for her contributions to computer science. 

A self-proclaimed “computer-geek,” growing up Brinkman felt that combining her interest in learning about life and using computers was the natural thing to do.

Her research focuses on developing more holistic and sustainable approaches to infectious disease control. This means that instead of only focusing on the disease-causing agent, her lab also looks at the host and disease causing factors in society and the environment. 

Brinkman’s research supports a trend of more specific treatment in medicine; instead of relying on the ‘shotgun approach’ to treating bacterial infections, which often results in antibiotic resistance, Brinkman wants to “put selective pressure on [bacteria] so that we can co-exist without them being able to make us ill.”

Her research also hopes to make the tracking and control of infections more efficient. This can have important implications not only for human disease, but also agriculture and aquaculture, and prevent negative economic impacts on affected areas.

Marra was the second most cited researcher in Canada in 2014.

Another recognized scientist, Steven Jones, is an SFU professor as well as a member of the bioinformatics group at Canada’s Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre. Jones works alongside the third member of the trio, Marco Marra, researching malignancy in tumors using DNA sequencing and bioinformatics approaches.

Marra is an adjunct professor in SFU’s Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry; he was the second most cited researcher in Canada in 2014.

Using next-generation DNA sequencing technology, their research focuses on unraveling the mutational landscape of cancer. This is accomplished by analyzing the genetic code of tumors to understand the mutations that accumulate over time and result in the formation of cancer. 

Jones explained that “colon cancers from two different people might look identical under the microscope,” however they may not respond the same way to a treatment. By looking at the genetic code of the tumor he intends to learn why this may occur.

Marra added, “We are not going to sequence a cancer and know everything there is to know about all [of them].”

With better understanding of the genetic profile of a patient’s tumor, one can also avoid unnecessary treatments and ensure that the patient receives only the treatment they need, Jones explained.

This research supports a change in the way medical practitioners approach the treatment of cancer since there is now clear genetic evidence to suggest that no single treatment can serve as a cure for the disease.

Jones noted, “It’s nice that [Thomson Reuter’s list] is based on metric and not on opinions.” He added, “Many of the works that are being cited took many years of hard work.”

While Marra does not work specifically in drug development, some of his research has influenced the potential use of therapies that are currently being developed and tested.

Marra commented on what it means for him to be acknowledged on the Thomson Reuter’s list: “In some respects, it’s better than an award. It indicates that there is a general appreciation for the work my group publishes.

“It means we’ve had an impact, we’ve helped move science in some direction, and that’s to me really what science is all about. Sharing results, sharing information, and stimulating other work elsewhere, so I feel good about that.”

New anti-spam laws aren’t all they’re cracked up to be

3

CMYK-Spam-JerryGuo

For Canada Day, our country’s Parliament gave Canadians a birthday present: an anti-spam legislation that would ensure electronic users have the option to free themselves from the suffocation of Internet spam.

 The new legislation was praised by many as an important step for Canadians to control where their digital information goes. However, further research has me a little disheartened. This new law may not help un-clutter our inboxes at all.

 As of July 1, commercial businesses across the true north are now required to ask their customers for express (meaning deliberate or conscious) consent to recieve commercial messages via email, text, and social media, to provide clear identification of the company or individual sending the message, and to provide an obvious “unsubscribe” button should users want to cancel their torture.

This rather abrupt legislation has had companies shaking in their boots as they frantically fine-tune their spamming methods to avoid penalties that make the law one of the toughest to date — up to $1 million per violation for an individual, and $10 million per company.

But after Canada finally enacted the law, Canadians were given another unsuspecting birthday surprise: a hell of a lot more spam. Inboxes, including my own, began filling with relentless emails that begged and pleaded to be approved, emails from companies I didn’t even know I’d been involved with.

“Please!” Viagra sobbed. “Click ‘I agree’ so I can keep bombarding you with products you won’t need for another 40 years!”

Professional spammers will undoubtedly try to edge past the new system.

While some inboxes were flooded with hundreds of emails, other issues arose as well. Canada’s long-forgotten Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) dragged itself feebly from beneath the mounds and reminded us that we already had an anti-spam law in place. PIPEDA then shook its head in defeat as Canadians realized the extent to which businesses had poorly adhered to its original privacy laws.

And while the new laws may benefit users in preventing large-scale companies from defecating in our computer screens, it unfortunately hinders small businesses from expanding and becoming successful. As one business owner told the CBC on June 24, “We find we can connect with like-minded customers [through social media. . .]  We would rather be spending our time with our customers than trying to figure out how to do this properly so we don’t get fined ridiculous fees.”

On another note, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that professional spammers will undoubtedly try to edge past the new system. Out-of-country spamming is an option which would not be subject to penalty. Spammers could also create more enticing mechanisms to capture and tempt those curious consumer eyes.

But what bothers me the most about this new legislation is that Canadians already had the tools to protect their privacy and prevent commercial annoyances. Most email accounts are equipped with a spam-sorter, where users can input those pesky addresses into the system and permanently block them. If, maybe, we had a little more patience, we could find the time to pluck the rotten from the ripe and save ourselves the future online hassles.

While this was an attempt to empower us with online privacy, I fear this new legislation will simply be useless. When the power of the human mind and the Internet’s precarious nature combine forces, our law-makers will realize they spent all that time and effort for nothing.

Album Review: Lana Del Rey – Ultraviolence

1

LanaDelRey-WKTDJ

When Lana Del Rey sings “Being a mistress on the side / It might not appeal to fools like you / We been around on the side / Wanna be somethin’ you would do” on “Sad Girl” and “Guns and summer time / Chica, cherry, cola, lime / Prison isn’t nothin’ to me / If you’ll be by my side” on “Florida Kilos,” it’s not immediately obvious what she’s saying, but the lyrics are pretty clear once spelled out. 

Listening to lyrics such as these off Del Rey’s newest album, Ultraviolence, her voice — that doesn’t enunciate 98 per cent of the time — shows how she continues to appeal to critics and fans with recycled material in a sultry voice, over slightly different melodies. Her third studio album provides the charm needed to win listeners over, but it’s nothing we haven’t heard (or could barely hear) from her before. 

Ultraviolence is hypnotic. Songs such as “Brooklyn Baby,” “Money Power Glory,” and the title track are sung in a passive voice, asking you to subconsciously tap a finger or start bobbing your head. It’s probably how she does it, actually: sneaks into your ears with that subtly sexy voice, accompanied by rhythmic snares and guitars. Yeah, you’re swaying, but you don’t know what the heck to. 

That’s what’s problematic about the album. Without paying attention to lyrics, or knowing which song is on exactly, you can’t differentiate when the album is on its next track. It essentially all sounds the same. As moments are repeated throughout the album, you can pick out sections that you could’ve sworn you’d heard before during a previous song. 

It’s not just melodies that are cut-and-pasted, but images as well. The image of an innocent girl falling apart appears in multiple forms, and the words “little,” “red,” “party,” and “dress” have been arranged into her past albums. Her repetitiveness shows the limits of her creativity. We get it, Lana, you’re a sad girl in a cute little dress. Can we see another party trick now?  

Yet, the album has been positively reviewed with comments such as Del Rey is growing more into her voice. And that’s probably the only thing we can unanimously agree on. Despite how boring and hauntingly monotonous her voice is, the girl’s got a set of golden, old Hollywood pipes on her. It’s a shame she may be getting too comfortable in this persona, instead of trying out new forms of singing and songwriting. 

I like to think the album is a success because it’s consistent with Del Rey’s work, which is why I can’t stop listening to it and trying to decipher what she’s saying. But I was expecting more from her — perhaps for her to dabble in different genres, or to hear a different vocal style. 

Then again, it’s only her third album so there’s not much to differentiate from. Ultraviolence has me torn, hoping to uncover another “Summertime Sadness” on the album. Maybe Lana just won’t be my summertime jam this year.

The Duchess of Malfi explores the truth about humanity

0

CMYK-Duchess of Malfi - rear - Paul Herbert as Ferdinand, front - Alison Raine, as The Duchess, Adam Bergquist as Antonio copy

There’s always a beautiful veneer with a grisly underbelly,” explained director Tariq Leslie. Like the dark side of the moon, The Duchess of Malfi delves into the deepest hollows of humanity and questions the bare truth of what lies within our souls.

This season, the Ensemble Theatre Company has lined up three plays: The Duchess of Malfi, The Cripple of Inishmaan, and The Normal Heart. “The wonderful thing about this season is that all of these plays are investigating human rights [and] how society treats people,” says Alison Raine who plays the Duchess. 

As Leslie explains, the majority of the ensemble within the company are also in one of the other two pieces; it takes tremendous focus to switch between the characters and the different settings of each play.

Raine, for example, plays the Duchess in the historical setting of The Duchess of Malfi and is also performing in The Cripple of Inishman, a play set in the modern world. She states that the important thing is managing both your own energy level and that of other people. In theatre, unlike film, the cast is able to form a deeper sense of connection and community due to the larger number of rehearsal hours.

The Duchess is based on the story of Giovanna d’Aragona, containing a fine mixture of historical facts and fictional embellishments. It follows a young widow who secretly marries her steward, much to the disapproval of her two brothers. In the heat of madness and jealousy they seek their revenge, enacting a macabre tragedy that tears each character apart.

Raine says her character is a strong woman. She is a mother who chooses a man out of love, which was revolutionary at the time. “She was noble, not in the sense of aristocracy, but noble in spirit, honourable, and passionate,” says Raine. For her, the play is about the Duchess’ journey to find grace; she’s a woman who, amidst imprisonment and torture, is able to find meaning in life and accept death gracefully.

The notable distinguishing factor with this production would be the time period shift from Jacobean to a pseudo-Victorian era. Leslie wanted an era that wasn’t terribly forlorn; he also saw that many of the original stations and positions would have made it harder for the modern audience to relate to. He stresses that he did not “change the Webster language” and tries to the best of his ability to match the intentions of the playwright.

The playwright, John Webster, was one of the greatest Jacobean dramatists and was also a contemporary of Shakespeare. T.S. Eliot once wrote, “Webster was much possessed by death, and saw the skull beneath the skin.”

According to Leslie, both Webster and Shakespeare wrote beautifully poetic plays and often drew attention to political matters, but Webster’s dialogue is faster and looser than Shakespeare’s. “It is also more concise [and] that is the beauty of it,” says Leslie.

Apart from Shakespeare, those who enjoy the fast-paced drama of Alfred Hitchcock or Quentin Tarantino, or the complexity found in Game of Thrones, may find The Duchess of Malfi just as enticing.

The Duchess of Malfi is presented by Ensemble Theatre Company from July 12 to August 15 at the Jericho Arts Centre. For more information, visit ensembletheatrecompany.ca.

Nanaimo city council violates Canadian rights

1
David Stobbe / stobbephoto.ca
Ezra Levant was among several commentators to decry the Nanaimo city council decision.

Just over two months ago, Nanaimo’s city council made a decision, the controversy of which was only matched by the lack of reporting on the issue. This lack was impressive, as in the space of 20 minutes, the council managed to deny a group of Nanaimo residents four of their basic rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canadian journalist Ezra Levant went so far as to call the act the “most disgraceful act of discrimination I can recall in Canada in my life.”

So what was this act? A church group was planning to simulcaste an American leadership conference whose sponsors included Chick-fil-A, a company whose chief operating officer made public statements opposing same-sex marriage two years ago. In response, council member Fred Pattje proposed a resolution banning “any events that are associated with organizations or people that promote or have a history of divisiveness, homophobia, or other expressions of hate” from the Vancouver Island Conference Centre. 

Over the next 20 minutes, all of which can be viewed on the city of Nanaimo’s website, the council made no effort to debate the issue, and appeared to dedicate the time to how they would implement the ban and why it was important. This was done despite the fact that, as mentioned, the conference was not of a religious nature, but a leadership conference, and past speakers have included renowned social rights activist Archbishop Desmond Tutu. 

To guarantee the rights of one group at the cost of another undermines the equality in our democracy.

One councillor, Jim Kipp, was in favour of the motion because he “[would not] accept if a criminal organization wants to come into our community” and compared the strong Christian organization to the terrorist kidnapping of Nigerian girls by Boko Haran. Councillor Bill Bestwick believed that “it would be more effective to blackout [. . .] because we don’t support it,” essentially moving for a motion of government sponsored censorship.

One might ask if there were any voices of dissent during this meeting, and indeed a single voice, that of Councillor Bill McKay, stood against the ban and questioned why neither representatives of the conference nor the church were invited to the meeting. Pattje responded by claiming that their presence at the meeting was irrelevant, but in reality it amounted to nothing more than a trial where the defence was not even present.

Only three days before the conference was scheduled to broadcast, ordinary residents of the city who had paid $60 a person to attend were informed that the event would not be taking place. Worse than that, the council’s decision labelled them as hate-mongers and violated many of their basic human rights as guaranteed by Canadian law. 

Section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association. All of these rights were violated by the city council’s decision. Even if we accept their premise regarding the Chick-fil-A position on same-sex marriage as justification for the ban, this ban still violates the freedom of association of those who wished to attend, as one cannot be punished for the actions or opinions of those they associate with.

In the name of tolerance and inclusiveness, Nanaimo city council has chosen to become intolerant and exclusive. One cannot guarantee the rights of one group at the cost of another. To do so undermines the equality that is a necessary prerequisite of our democratic tradition. Perhaps the city council should add itself to the list of groups banned for promoting divisiveness, because they have done exactly that.

Open Letter: Taking the time to remember Nelson Mandela

0

CMYK-Mandela-South Africa The Good News- Flickr

In Seneca’s sixth letter to Lucilius, he writes that the behaviour of a teacher could instruct more than any moral lesson they taught, noting that Plato and Aristotle “derived more from Socrates’ character than from his words.’’

Encapsulated in Mandela Day, July 18, is the recognition of Mandela’s life, one that offered the same sort of example. The purpose of the day is twofold: to celebrate Mandela’s life, and to inspire us to try to emulate some of his best efforts. The day asks people to dedicate 67 minutes of their day to community service — the number being derived from the years Mandela spent in service of his own.

With his passing having occurred so recently, it’s likely that this year’s celebration will have more of a pulse around it and will, perhaps, also motivate more people to learn from Mandela’s life and character.

His autobiography can be particularly informative in this respect. Reading through it, one never encounters the type of solipsism guaranteed to those who are victims of oppression and injustice. If I had to offer the briefest synopsis of it, I would try to include some declarative statement about the importance of dignity and its relation to freedom. When the prison guards would tell him to run to his jail cell, he would walk; when given shorts to wear, he would ask for pants. These small acts prove that even the smallest acts of rebellion are essentially attempts at freedom.

Mandela’s forgiving nature is especially highlighted by his actions after his prison release. He was forced to walk and meet with politicians, many of whom only wanted to absolve themselves of their complicit involvement in his, and South Africa’s, subjugation.

Seneca’s greatest contribution to the Stoic philosophy was his definition of it. He saw it as a philosophy teaching people not how to live life, but how to deal with the sea of troubles that accompanied it. In life, Mandela often quoted Shakespeare, one of his favourite sayings being that “the ready is everything.’’ He spent decades in prison for trying to oppose an evident injustice. He lost his freedom and was relegated to the company of criminals on a secluded and destitute island.

But, he dealt with these trials in such a way that only inspires the mind, and acts as a perpetual source of inspiration for those who are facing hardships in their own lives. If Mandela Day can act a catalyst for people to help their own communities, then perhaps it can also entice people to study the life of Mandela and learn much from it.

Sincerely,
Michael Johnson,
SFU Student

Kangaroo tails have a tale to tell

0
Image credit: Kenneth Uzodinma.

kangaroo-kennethUzodinmaA study out of SFU shows that kangaroos actually use their tail as a fully functional leg when they are grazing the land.

Max Donelan, an associate professor in the Department of Biomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, led the study on kangaroos’ unusual gait. Donelan explained that a kangaroo does “as much mechanical work with their tale as we do when we walk.”

Aided by postdoctoral fellow Shawn O’Connor, Donelan’s study focused on the awkward gait kangaroos have when they graze the land, which is unlike the “graceful hop” we picture them having when we think of the Australian outback.

Kangaroos graze with their tail planted on the ground, acting in combination with their short front legs and long hind legs. This motion is known as “pentapedal gait.” The tail acts as a leg in the sense that it pushes off the ground, rather than the front legs, in order to create the force that starts the cycle of walking.

Donelan, whose principal field of research revolves around humans and walking, explained to The Peak, “With humans, we have learned in the course of the past 15 years that a key part of the walking cycle is before your right foot comes in contact with the ground, you have to push off the ground with your left foot. This movement is really important in saving energy that is required for walking.”

Kangaroos’ unique anatomy restricts them from using their short front legs as a means to push off the ground; thus, their tail becomes key in this essential push needed to commence the walking cycle.

Donelan believes that studying the “pentapedal gait” of kangaroos, as well as the unusual gaits of other animals, sheds light on the general principles of biomechanical motion and offers insight into the solutions available to biomechanical problems.

Donelan noted, “A key aspect of covering this is the question: Why are Canadians studying this interesting, yet possibly irrelevant form of locomotion? What this really gets across is that it is helpful for us to understand the basic principles of locomotion, which works into the bigger picture of understanding humans.”

Donelan has also studied the movements of cats, shrews, crocodiles, elephants, and giraffes. As interesting as these animals are, Donelan’s research is not driven by the type of animal he gets to study; rather, he says, it is driven by the important questions and the insights that can be gained in order to better understand the biological movements of humans.

Shrek and Fiona find love in Stanley Park

0

CMYK-Shrek-TUTS

Matt Palmer has never played a character quite like Shrek. “It feels very large, very green, very grumpy,” laughed Palmer. Even just getting into costume is a unique experience. It takes him one and a half to two hours to make the transformation into the lovable ogre, and the process involves prosthetics along with tons of green make-up. 

Shrek, playing in repertory with the return of Legally Blonde, should be a popular show for all ages. Just as the animated film cleverly included many jokes that only adults would understand, the musical will be entertaining for the whole family. The adaptation follows the story pretty closely, said Palmer, with a few additions of some characters’ backstories. The score, however, is completely original except for the inclusion of “I’m a Believer” during curtain call. 

Palmer said that the music is clever and very entertaining, with many standout songs. “I get to sing ‘Who’d I Be,’” said Palmer. “Donkey asks Shrek, ‘Who would you be if you could be anything?’” Donkey gets his moment to shine when he sings “Don’t Let Me Go,” and Fiona also has some great songs, including “Morning Song.” These songs tell the story in a powerful way and help the audience understand Shrek’s struggle. 

“The message at the heart of Shrek is that just because you’re not necessarily beautiful and you may be framed as an outcast or freak,” explained Palmer, “you have beauty on the inside and you’re capable of love and being loved.” The show features many characters that are considered to be freaks, and feeling like an outcast is something most people can relate to in some way.

Another aspect of the story that is endearing, explained Palmer, is the relationship between Shrek and Donkey. “Shrek has never known friendship or love until Donkey insists on being his friend. It’s a complete surprise to him.”

Palmer said that Donkey and Farquad will get the most laughs from the audience, although Shrek has his moments as well. “Shrek is the straight man; you would never expect to have a big green ogre as the straight man,” he laughed.

Along with the laughs, “the audience will leave feeling uplifted, happy, and touched by the journey of these characters,” said Palmer. “I don’t see how they could leave feeling any other way.”

Shrek: The Musical will be presented at Theatre Under the Stars from July 15 to August 22. For more information, visit tuts.ca.