Sunday, October 16, 2005

Enlarge Molson Stadium?

The Als and McGill University are trying to leverage as-yet unpledged $4 million to get the city, the province and the feds to invest $23 million to add 5,000 seats to Molson Stadium. While CFL football has been a hit in Montreal since the Alouettes moved back to the staidum on the hill several years ago. The team is asking season ticket holders to pony up at least $250 each (tax deductible, naturally) to get the ball rolling.

While professional sports and university infrastructure are important to a city's lifeline, there doesn't seem to be anything pressing the team, other than visions of a better bottom line. There's nothing to suggest the team would regularly sell an additional 5,000 seats per game (though it's not hard to imagine), and with Quebec's universities claiming they need an injection of at least $375 million, why should we spend so much to make a football team more lucrative. Why not, say, invest in the symphony orchestra - the plaything of a different kind of elite - and end the MSO strike? Why not tack on a $5,000 assessment to each hypothetical new seat? When will governments learn that sports is a business that should do fine on its own?

Saturday, October 15, 2005

Autumn

When speech becomes a crime
silence leads the spirit over the bridge of time
- Paul Simon

Autumn
Inside me the season is autumn
the chill is in me, you can see through me,
and I am sad, but not altogether cheerless,
and filled with humility and goodness

But if I rage sometimes,
then I am the one whose rage is shedding my leaves,
and the simple thought comes sadly to me
that raging isn't really what is needed.

The main need is that I should be able
to see myself and the struggling, shocked world
in autumnal nakedness,
when even you, and the world, can be seen right through.

Flashes of insight are the children of silence.
It doesn't matter, if we don't rage aloud.
We must calmly cast off all mere noise
in the name of the new foliage.

Something has apparently happened to me,
and I am relying on nothing but silence,
when the leaves laying themselves one on another
inaudibly become the earth.

And you can see it all, as if from a height,
when you can shed your leaves at the right time,
when without passion inner autumn
lays its airy fingers on your forehead....

-- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

No fear, no loathing

It seems that few Montrealers will actually be going to the polls on November 6; nobody I've talked to can tell you the difference between Gérald Tremblay and Pierre Bourque, much less between the various posts to be filled (do you know which responsibilities belong to the city councillor and not the borough mayor?).

In any case, the youth/third-way/intelligentsia (i.e., my friend Tim) suggested I check out Projet Montréal. The PM's platform is prertty typical stuff: naive and noble. I am one hundred per cent in favour of any initiative to slow down, let alone stop, urban sprawl. Entire sectors of the Montreal core are ripe for development, something which has not gone unnoticed by just about anyone who's thought about the future of a great city for a couple of minutes. That said, and as Tim correctly pointed out, nothing is going to bring three million people downtown. The PM promises to create development by parking lots into affordable residential development. Unless they plan on splitting the cost of real estate development down the middle with the builders, the market will continue to dictate what gets converted and what remains cheap parking. Montreal isn't exactly lacking new housing. And thanks to the existing affordable housing grant program, which provides amounts in the neighbourhood of $6,500 to purchasers of affordable housing in the city centre who promise not to move for three years, there's no need for a new mechanism to intice young people to buy property downtown (though some publicity might help: how many people under 35 pay more in rent than they would in mortgage payments?).

The real housing crunchy the city faces, and the trend it needs to reverse, has to do with young families. Imagine a married couple that together earns a decent living. They decide to have a child, maybe two. Mom will take maternity leave and see her pay reduced to a quarter of what it once was. No biggie, they'll get by - but they need a place to live. The five-and-a-half is great but not what they have in mind for their kids. Interest rates are low and there's some money in the bank. Where do they go? You've probably seen this story played out, so you know that the West Island, Laval or the South Shore are add a happy new family to their tax base; they'll buy a nice house, with a yard and a deck, and raise a family.

If the City of Montreal (the old city, not the new additions that haven't demerged yet) is going to last long-term, it's got to make a case for families like these. The residential project that sprung up on the undeveloped land south of the St. Lawrence could have been built in the vast swath of empty lots that fill the southern half of downtown. The options should not be a half-a-million dollar home in NDG or the suburbs.

***
Projet Montréal has some ideas about making the city green, and not in the Pierre Bourque put-flowers-everywhere way. It would reduce speed limits (a smash at the ballot box) on main arteries in the city, because traffic isn't quite fucked up enough, and would order the cops to issue more tickets. Pro-environmental sustainability is crucial to long-term development. Public transit should be fast, efficient and inexpensive. Driving your car shouldn't be the only option, especially for those who would prefer choice. But an anti-car platform is a big middle finger to a middle class that, though it's not toally squeezed, doesn't have a lot of room to move. It also demonstrates an unwillingness to accept that a city needs to be governed by a party that can at least empathize with its total diversity of citizens.

Also, there's nothing easily accessible about how the PM would pay for any of these great initiatives (the $40 bus pass that cost half what it's worth, for instance), let alone surmount the cruel and urgent problems Montreal faces, i.e., the incredible shittiness of our above- and underground infrastructure. It makes me wonder why anybody would want to be mayor of a city that just went through an unwanted wedding and a messy divorce with itself. To top it off, the provincial government, which controls the noose around the mayor's neck, won't pony up the dough to restore the economic centre of the state it governs.

***
The issues seem important and complex, if not urgent - to me, at least. But the candidates have been spending time appropriating and pimping big ideas put forth by others and bickering about non-scandals. Voters have no idea what any of the parties would do in office and get no help from the press. With less than a month to go, what does the Montreal Gazette do? It writes a story blaming everyone but itself for the lacklustre campaign. This from a newspaper whose sole contribution is to try and trump allegations of corruption at city hall (stop the fucking presses). A sampling:

Media coverage has focused more on the leaders' race and campaign glitches - Team Tremblay's English-language "Go" slogan, last-minute candidate dropouts from Team Bourque - than what's at stake for voters, Giasson said.
...
Part of the problem with the 2005 elections in Montreal could be the similarities in Tremblay's and Bourque's programs: beautify the city, keep taxes in check, upgrade infrastructure.


Instead of beginning with that as a premise and then writing about the different levers each candidate would use to bring about those goals, or exploring their records of promises and achievements, the Gaz decides to wallow in its laziness and accuse the candidates of not being interesting enough to cover. Here's hoping that some actual coverage might show up in the next few weeks.

Friday, October 07, 2005

Coolest restaurant ever

From the Jerry-Seinfeld-Seal-of-Approval department comes Cereality, the world's greatest restaurant. The Pennsylvania-based chain serves nothing but cereal at its shops in Philly, Tempe and Chicago. Co-founders Rich Bacher and David Roth have developed a great niche concept - a restaurant serving cereal, exclusively - and found the right venue for it: U.S. college campuses. Roth and Bacher have tapped into the knowledge that's second-nature to cereal-lovers the world over: twice as many flavours is way more than double the experience (lucky charms mixes with anything). Add toppings and a customized spoon that allows you to slurp up the milk at the bottom of the bowl and you just might figure out what makes Cap'n Crunch shred your soft palette.

Here's hoping Cereality makes it north of the border (Montreal's sizable, centrally-located university student population could easily sustain a céréalité).

Saturday, October 01, 2005

More on Ignatieff

More coming in a future post - would I really not vote for the guy?

In the meantime, go read Sheamus's thoughts on the issue. A sheer joy.

(And stick around for a unique collection of movie reviews, one post below.)

Keep it loose

Some thoughts I had listening to Amos Lee's eponymous début album while waiting for class to begin:

Amos Lee has two problems. The first has to do with the words, the second, the music. Lyrics. They count. Brian Eno recently told a U.K. paper that working with Paul Simon on an upcoming project (Eno is rumoured to provide musical landscapes for Simon's next batch of songs) revived his interest in lyricism.

Lyrics matter.

Lyrics like "people tell me to keep on dreaming/that's just what I'm gonna do" don't, even if you drag out the last few words so that they're longer than the first. "I am at ease in the arms of a woman" is a great opening line. It's the other 29 that struggle to keep up. Some songwriters aren't worthy of these criticisms - you don't expect poetry from Ringo Starr. But an artist as seemingly clever as Amos Lee flashes enough to create expectations of more. But then you hit lines like "every moral has a story, every hand needs a glove."

I guess the problem with pop music is that so many artists (and executives, and listeners) expect accessible to equal dumb. You don't need a swollen vocabulary and a Ph.D. to make your point, but the words still need to resonate. Songs, after all, are about communication emotions that can't be appreciated when spoken. Emotions that need rhythm and rhyme; but the feeling has got to capture your interest.

Even worse is Lee's great voice. The man has one of the strongest voices out there - his loudness range is huge, from whispery thin to gospelly rapturous. When he ends a set with "A Change Is Gonna Come," you can feel the earth under your feet. Singing about being unable to afford his rent makes you feel the couch imprinting itself on your ass. Which would you prefer?

The second problem - the musical one - has to do with Norah Jones. Specifically, the Norah sound - slow, organic, lush, sleepy. It works for Norah for five minutes on television. It works for Madeleine Peyroux because her band plays jazz. It doesn't work for Amos Lee because it plays against his strengths. Lee is as exciting live - with a crack band - as he is drowy on record. I saw him open two shows for Bob Dylan and Merle Haggard earlier this year in Chicago. Each song had a vitality that I was expecting on Lee's album; I'm still looking for it. The songs he's written are musically interesting enough. What they need are some colourful instrumentation - horns instead of strings, electric guitars matched with acoustic.

Lee will be at La Tulipe in October; I'll be there with high expectations. His guitar will jump, his band will rock and his voice will burst. Here's hoping he'll do "All of Me," the standard he nailed in Chicago. "Keep it loose, keep it tight," Lee sings. Amos - keep it live, already.