7/31/06

CONSUMING PASSIONS: The Top 5 Red and Top 5 White Wines for Fall Dinner Parties


Photo by Michal Szydlowski via Stock.xchng

Hey, if fashion designers can roll out not just their fall but their upcoming spring collections in summer, then Rokovoko isn't too compulsive considering wine purchases for those dinner parties that are already inking up our fall calendars, right? We sought help from an expert at one of D.C.'s biggest and best-known retailers of fine wine and spirits.


By Phillip Bernstein
Wine Consultant for Calvert Woodley

Top 5 dinner-party whites:

1. 2004 Longuicher Maximiner Herrenberg Riesling Kabinett Schmitt-Wagner (Germany, Mosel). $17.99. German Riesling is by far the best-kept secret in wine. If you think they are all sweet, flabby wines, think again. Top-flight German Riesling such as this is racy, just sweet enough to be interesting, and a killer companion to Asian foods as well as anything spicy. It has the added benefit of low alcohol content, making your guests feel that much better.

2. 2004 Venica Sauvignon Blanc (Italy, Collio). $19.99. While people look to France's Loire valley and New Zealand for dry, crisp Sauvignon blancs, they often overlook Northeast Italy. If a wine of this quality came from a place like, say, Sancerre it would cost twice as much. Perfect with light seafood preparations and vegetarian cuisine.

3. 2004 Jean-Baptiste Adam Pinot Gris (France, Alsace). $15.99. Alsace Pinot Gris is the wine for salmon. Varieties range from dry to sweet, and to find out where on the spectrum a particular one is, you've just got to drink it. This one is toward the drier side, and has a lush, mouth-coating texture that complements salmon and other full-flavored dishes.

Photo via stock.xchng

4. 2004 Stadt Krems Riesling "Gillenparz" (Austria, Kremstal). $28.99. Another Riesling! OK, OK, trust me. This really is perhaps the world's greatest grape. Austrian examples tend to be drier then their German counterparts and this one is probably my favorite wine (red or white) under $30 right now. A rather full-bodied white, it would be great with crab cakes or any other seafood preparation. It would also go well with turkey.

5. 2004 Louis Latour Puligny-Montrachet Sous la Puits (France, Burgundy). $44.99. White Burgundy is the king of white wines. One-hundred percent chardonnay, this is an expensive wine that pairs well with expensive foods. Think lobster, cream sauces, and anything else you don't normally eat for dinner. If you've never drunk white burgundy with lobster, you haven't experienced one of life's great pleasures!

***

Photo by Robson Oliveira via stock.xchng

Reds:

1. 2005 Fondreche O'sud (France, Cotes de Ventoux). $11.99. This wine comes from the Southern Rhone valley of France. Similar to a Cotes du Rhone, it is a blend of Grenache and Syrah and an absolute steal for the price. Fresh and unoaked, it would be a perfect cookout wine.

2. 2005 Sherwood Pinot Noir (New Zealand, Marlbourgh). $15.99. Decent Pinot Noir under $25 is becoming very difficult to find. This one from New Zealand is a rare exception. Serve with almost anything, especially poultry or pork.

Photo from Sherwood Estates

3. 2004 Paitin Dolcetto D'Alba (Italy, Piedmont). $18.99. Dolcetto comes from Italy's Piedmont region, home to the more famous Barolo and Barbaresco. It's another underrated wine that people don't pay enough attention to, the kind of wine you can sit back and enjoy while your friends chase over-oaked, over-priced California Cabernets that don't go with any foods at all. Best with pasta or anything else Italian.

4. 2004/5 Torbreck "Woodcutters" Shiraz (South Australia). $21.99. While I obviously prefer "old world" wines for their food friendliness and better price-to-quality ratio, I am a sucker for a good Aussie shiraz. Torbreck makes awesome wines, and this is their introductory cuvee. Always an amazing value, it is bold yet still nicely balanced. Best with ribs, burgers and steak.

5. 2003 Chateau Pontet-Canet (France, Bordeaux). $79.99. It would be impossible to leave the noble Bordeaux off this list. This wine is way too young, but 2003 was a hot vintage and it is showing pretty well in its youth. Pontet-Canet has gotten rather expensive, but makes wines on the level of many of its much more expensive neighbors. Use of a decanter a few hours ahead of time will help to soften out this big cabernet-based wine. Bordeaux is the wine for lamb and roast meats.

7/30/06

WEAR WOLF: Click on Couture



Live in Cleveland Park and need to make a quick dash over to Rodeo Drive? Not a problem, thanks to Rodeo Drive Resale, a Sherman Oaks, California, couture consignment shop with a snazzy and user-friendly Web site. RDR gets shipments of new and pre-owned high-end designer items several times daily from film studios, celebrities, and others. You'll be dazzled by the styles (and often the prices) of the dresses, like this new Sue Wong green sequin design ($283.50, $94.50 off the original price).
But there are also tops, coats, skirts, jeans, sets, and suits, like this Yves Saint Lauren in gray ($269).

And don't forget RDR's accessories, cosmetics, shoes, watches, and jewelry. This new, multi-strand custom necklace of brown stones and Austrian crystal, for instance, sells for $69.99.

__________________________________________

If you're stuck for a gift idea for your wife or girlfriend, another California boutique online, Think Her!, might have some ideas for you. Clothing includes intimates; tanks and tees; and robes, slippers, and pajamas, like this fun P.J. Salvage animal-print set ($57).



In addition to a wide array of accessories, Think Her! has great gift packages, and a "Choose Her Style" page to help you narrow down your selections. The Kitchen Lover ($74), for example, includes ginger and Sicilian lemon chef soap, kitchen spray, and candle; stainless steel basket; hand repairing cream in a terra cotta container; and purifying liquid hand soap in a glass bottle.


You can shop by price or designer, and know that $1 of each gift package or 10 percent of signature merchandise will go to breast-cancer research.

-Sasha Triella

WEAR WOLF: Classic Fall Looks for Men











Dries Van Noten offers elegant, broad-shouldered, boxy suits and coats.























________





Kenneth Cole emphasizes classic wearability--browns and grays for indoor, outdoor, every day.





________



Valentino, of course, always leaves a little room for swagger. His runway show's luxury airport lounge motif is definitely more British Air first class than Priceline flexible booking.

-Sasha Triella

Photos from the designers


________

ESSAY: A Mental Marathon

Photo by Mike Rosowski

By Dena Evans

I’d had some serious exposure to running in my life. In an alternative middle-school PE program, I walked 55 miles in 22 hours, and ran 29 miles in short stretches over the course of one day. I was no stranger to the endurance athlete’s crippling quad flames. In the high school and college years that followed, those formative experiences dissolved into a comfort zone of middle distance running, bracketed by revolving seasons of soccer and basketball, and finally into the coaching profession, where I spent my days telling other people how far and how fast they should go. Running a marathon was the last thing I felt like doing. One day, however, the marathon finally found itself shuffled to the top of the deck. I decided it was time to saddle up and find out what all the fuss was about.

My decision came about as much out of curiosity as out of the need for a goal and diversion when I quit my job as women’s cross-country coach at Stanford. My coaching experience also suggested that preparing for anything too fast and short would require me to make a commitment to training I was not logistically or mentally prepared to make.

It was that coaching side of my brain that led me to the second annual Nike Women’s Marathon in San Francisco. It was close, which was key, and it was relatively flat, also key as I knew the distance itself would be challenge enough. It was far enough ahead when I signed up in July that I could plan a sufficient number of weekly long runs. I asked my husband if he could commit to taking over parenting duties while I did those long runs, and, with his OK, I found myself doing the first that very Saturday. That 70 minutes at sunrise in Las Vegas, while there with him for a business event, was my longest run in a year and a half, since becoming pregnant with my second daughter.

The only part of training I hadn’t figured out yet was, um, why on earth I was doing it.
I’m a fairly athletic person who likes running, but I do it mostly out of habit because it was the last organized sport I participated in at school and in my coaching work. I tend to get in ruts where I eat the same thing over and over, wear my hair the same way for years and years, and buy the same type of shoe over and over. Was running a rut?

I wondered if athletes who like running are drawn to marathons, or whether, in training for and running a marathon, marathoners become de facto runners along the way. As a person who ran, and who spent several years of my life with not just runners, but good ones, did I just get sucked into the notion that if you ran long enough a marathon was your eventual destiny? Where was the line between participation and competition? And could I ever be happy with a decision to simply participate when my life so far had been about how to muster good competitive results regardless of whether or not I felt like it? After spending years giving advice on how to run, could I take some myself, even from those whom I’d coached? If I really tried and failed, would I lose their respect?

Weeks turned into months, one identical pair of trainers into another, 70 minutes into 2 hours 25 minutes, and I readied for race day. A desire to canvass and explore more trails for a group of professional runners planning to winter in the area took me on some new runs west of Highway 280. To kill a couple hours in New York City on the day of a friend’s wedding, I ran 1 hour 52 minutes in Central Park, buying Gatorade from the vendor with sweaty dollars tucked in my shorts and practicing fluid intake in the 80-degree heat. Stroller runs with one or both daughters allowed me precious time for decompression. And I satisfied my weird goal of running to my house from the San Francisco Airport out of curiosity about the distance (along the San Francisco Bay Trail, 18.4 miles, according to my handy Garmin GPS device).

As the race approached, I flip-flopped between thinking competitively and telling people I just wanted to finish. I processed advice from athlete friends and even from Runner’s World, my reading of which was completely emblematic of my uncertain status—finisher or competitor? I took a free subscription from a few accrued airline miles. Universally scorned by the hardcore competitive crowd as a watered down rag for the masses, it encourages blasphemy such as walking during a race or running a marathon on a 3-day-a-week training plan, and each month it offers a new list of 10 ways to lose weight. The horror! It is, however, fun to read if you know the people featured or want to catch up on what John Q. Runner is up to these days.

The October issue featured a big article on Deena Kastor, once a summer camp roommate and now the American record holder in the event I was about to do for the first time. The November issue had Olympian Jen Rhines on the cover. I’d raced against her at the Penn Relays, and now she was a two-time Olympian! I tried not to focus on such disparities. You cross paths with someone in the days of untapped potential; then you think back and realize either how mediocre you were, or how poorly you have stewarded your opportunities. Passing thoughts, yes, but definitely obstacles to finding one’s focus. The coach of both of these athletes, Terrence Mahon, was the person for whom I was scouting running routes as he had recently taken the reigns of an elite team that trained in Mammoth Lakes.

“Hey Terrence, I saw the spread on Deena. Are you ready to become savior or anti-Christ?” I was ribbing him over the nonsensical bashing or glory he’d receive in the running community depending how Deena did in her upcoming race.

“Did you see the picture of her doing the speed ladder?” he said. “That’s what I was talking about in the stuff I sent the other day.”

He had e-mailed me the plyometrics and strength work he planned for the young team members.

And later…

“Hey guess what finally came in the mailbox today? Your wife on the cover of Runner’s World. Where did they find that corn field?”

“It was actually New Jersey.”

“Hey, tell Jen that as a first-time marathoner, I am following all of her advice, so I hope she was serious.”

She had given a few bullet points to help us newbies.

So, which was it? Was I part of the “cool crowd,” too much in the know to actually read Runner’s World, having discussions with coaches of top athletes about training, helping our nation’s best runners ascend to glory? Or was I just another goofball on the side of the road, huffing and puffing my way to the finish line?

I decided that I was going to have to make a goal time and stick to it. I did take Jen’s magazine advice and studied the elevation changes so that I would know which part of the race promised to be faster-paced. I packed bars into my waistband, and carbo-loaded conscientiously during the two days before race day. I navigated the occupational hazard of motherhood, fighting back a cold four or five days out, and after we put the girls to bed, I drove to San Francisco to bunk with my sister-in-law for the early start the next morning.

After little sleep and an unwelcome case of G-I distress, I found myself at once out of practice with the byproducts of nervous energy and coldly intellectual about how it was not to affect my outcome. Coach and athlete in one brain. Too crowded.



"Along the way, signs assured us that we were 'one step closer' to this or that, whether it be 'moving out from the shadows' or a foot massage. This was not your father’s marathon."

After an emergency stop at a coffee-shop bathroom on the way to the start, I leapt from the car in running attire and found my way to the start, consciously taking no warm-up. I had grabbed the 6:30-9 minute pace bracelet at the expo two days prior, and got a spot just a few rows behind the empty box where the elite start had occurred. Some 15,000 women (and a handful of men, described somewhat clumsily as the “men who support them”) we listened to Carol Lewis, erstwhile long jumper and longtime TV track analyst, handle emcee duties. It was odd to be listening to her here in the middle of San Francisco’s Union Square in the dark. Next came the inspirational comments of the biggest individual fund raiser for the race’s designated charity, leukemia and lymphoma research, and a cameo from Joan Benoit Samuelson, who seems to appear at a big race each week. (That day, she would run 1:29 for the half—her idea of an easy run, I assume).

The countdown. Voices increase. Seconds decrease. Then I start my watch as I cross the mat at the banner.


II.

Everything about the Nike Women’s Marathon—the title, the designs of the marathon-sponsored clothing, the website—was aimed at attracting more women to the brand while convincing them that they were improving themselves along the way. Along the course, one could take advantage of a jacket check at 2.5 miles for those who wanted to stay cozy at the starting line, an oxygen bar with several different flavors at about 10k, two Ghiradelli chocolate stations (OK, at mile 23.5, the last thing I am doing is wrestling with a fully wrapped, neat square of chocolate, no matter how good it is, and believe me I am a chocolate person). We were offered Luna Bars, Clif bar Shots, and even a “pedi-care” at mile 14 if you just wanted to take a load off and get your barking dogs massaged (those poor masseuses!). Before the race, we’d received e-mails with the inspirational stories of other runners, and along the way, signs assured us that we were “one step closer” to this or that, whether it be “moving out from the shadows” or a foot massage. This was not your father’s marathon.

The participants were of many different stripes as well—the elite start featured a pretty modest roster of 3-to-3:30 types along with a slightly more competitive half-marathon field. On the other end of the spectrum, the Team in Training contingent began its quest for the most part at 5:30 a.m. I started conservatively, but I don’t think anyone who started with me passed me after the initial downhill rush of the first mile. As I made steady progress along the San Francisco waterfront and into the Presidio and hilliest portions of the course, I had the opportunity to pass both my fellow 7-a.m. starters, the Team in Training walkers, and, eventually, even some of the elite-start marathoners once we diverged from the half-marathon route.

Again, I found myself considering the question of my true running identity. Every few yards, one of the Team in Training folk would shout, "Go team!" and receive a chanted reply. The desire to just finish, no matter the time, the desire to honor a loved one with an effort commemorative of their fight against disease, to wear purple shirts festooned with puff paint and safety pinned with pictures, Gatorade bottles strapped to their waists—that, I realized was not my club. Team in Training is an unbelievable organization that has raised multiple millions. But it has also received grief from the non-Runner’s World world for taking up spots and supposedly diluting the quality of these big races. The organization’s fliers encourage runners to “make it more meaningful next time,” as if an athlete couldn’t do that without a fund-raising group.

I was primarily struck by the unwavering sincerity with which each purple shirt greeted the events of the day. One purple shirt actually high-fived me. Another thanked me as I ran by (and I assume thanked many others ahead of and behind me) for being a mentor to them! I realized, faced with this Oprah’s book club of the running world, that however much I admired their charitable work and spirit, I carried a reserve of runner’s snobbery from my semi-successful days in the this and other sports. I would never shed my competitive instincts.

Along about nine miles, I passed two former track teammates from Stanford cheering from the side, and was momentarily buoyed much in the way anyone is when they hear their name called out among the masses. A mile or so later, I realized they were supporting two other former teammates, both of which were far better distance runners than myself, and who greeted me cheerfully as I came up. I saw a former fellow Farm Teamer jogging on the side in her own neighborhood, and at least three women I had coached ran the half, including the winner. Like myself, each has had to find a way to negotiate the gradual descent into age-mandated competitive decline, but here they were doing it in style, with several flavors of Oxygen at their disposal.

I was encouraged to be passing my former teammates, and picked up some steam during the next few downhill stretches. Shortly thereafter, I came up behind a woman I had known for years as a soccer enthusiast (and good player in her own right), as well as in her current vocation as a personal trainer around Stanford. As I greeted her along the way, she asked me why I had not started with the elites. This, I think, kind of summed up my no-man’s land situation in the running pantheon. She just assumed, because I had been kind of fast in a track event of some kind, and since I had some sort of loose affiliation with others who really had run fairly fast, that I would be among the elite group here. “No,” I assured her, “I didn’t even know they had an elite start until a couple of days ago. It’s my first one anyway—I don’t even know if I can finish!” She knew I was joking and scoffed at the notion of dropping out. Still, only 40 percent of me wanted to compete. The other 60 was still in participation land. As such, my attitude mirrored that of the race itself.

For example, in one of those quirks of road racing, the half marathon route broke from the marathon route at about 12 miles, only to regroup with the marathon route when it looped around at about mile 15. Finally, both races finished under the same banner. My family was utterly confused as to when I would appear, as people were walking yet seemingly ahead of me. My husband (given approximate splits by his dutiful wife) was trying to look out for me, yet was standing there with my daughters wondering why mommy was running so slow, or did they miss my finish? When the routes converged at mile 15, supposedly one side of the street was for halfers and the other for marathoners, but nobody knew that. I found myself weaving through walking spectators and walking participants, then squeezing through a suddenly narrow passage near the mile marker, just barely avoiding collision.

Though there were only 13 marathon finishers ahead of me, weaving among halfers moving at a 3:15 half-marathon pace, I felt a little let down. What was a fairly exciting moment for me in the presence of several hundred spectators was somehow completed in absolute obscurity. The walking half-marathoners received far more applause for their effort for traveling half as far and half as fast. In retrospect, of course, that was completely in keeping with the spirit of the event.
Finally across the finishing mat, the girl power continued. Tuxedo-clad, attractive young men handed out finishers’ necklaces from Tiffany & Co., a huge booth beckoned us to come take a picture with our buds, music pulsated, someone handed out bananas and free Jamba Juice cards, and the ubiquitous metallic blankets crinkled by. Carol Lewis, in her ski hat and sunglasses on the still-overcast day by the beach in San Francisco, acknowledged the band, a group of men losing street cred by the minute, dressed in cute fleece hoodies and Nike Shox trainers, singing U2 covers to a crowd of women reclining in comfy beanbag chairs. Finishers’ shirts were DriFIT V-necks in bright blue with a picture of a ponytailed female bounding off on a run and a female symbol where the “o” should be in Marathoner on the back.

I’d set a goal of 3:30 and finished in 3:15. I ran the second half faster than the first, and was fairly consistent throughout in my level of output. Although my longest training run was 18.5 miles, my biggest casualty was a self-destructing right big toenail that I was worried about primarily as a source of compensation, potentially leading to a stress fracture in my left leg. Again, my brain was too small for both coach and athlete. I was encouraged by the outcome, albeit ravaged by the soreness in the days afterward. I thoroughly enjoyed myself out there and as the miles melted away, it felt unbelievable to be trying hard and getting something for it instead of guiding a toddler only to have her disobey again and again, or coach an athlete only to have no control over her ultimate execution of my instruction.

The only one of the inspirational signs that got me was one right around the chocolate station. It told me that I was “one step closer…to becoming a marathoner.” OK. That actually spurred me on. A marathoner. Something I had never been, and something I would always be, should I finish.

Over the last little hill and down the two miles into the finish, I think the scales changed in the ratio between competitor and participant. By the time I had navigated the half marathoners, clutched my finisher’s necklace, and greeted two current collegiate athletes who used to call me their coach but had spent this day encouraging me, I was barely able to lift my legs yet, unafraid of the elements, waved off the foil blanket.

They hugged me and told me, "Good job!" I said thanks for the cheers and that it was a lot of fun. Then, suddenly, before the thought had even fully formed in my mind, before I was completely conscious of what a marathoner does at that point and from that point on, before I realized I was acting on a thought that hadn’t occurred to me in the 30 years, 4 months, 23 days I had been alive, something happened. After the Carol Lewis yelling, Team in Training walking, high school cheerleader braying, chocolate bar waving, Tiffany’s necklace earning circus I had just experienced, I bent at the waist, resting my hands on my knees. And turning to one of them, I blurted, “Hey, do think I qualified for Boston?”



Dena Evans is the former women's cross-country coach at Stanford University, where, as an undergraduate, she was on the track and soccer teams.

7/29/06

ESSAY: Once Again, Is Wal-Mart Good for the Working Class?

An economist argues that the recent campaigns launched against the chain are not just exercises in soft-hearted conscience soothing, but have solid economic and political rationales.


By L. Josh Bivens

A recent edition of Slate magazine featured a debate on “Is Wal-Mart Good for the Working Class”? The affirmative position was argued by Jason Furman, a chief economic advisor to John Kerry's presidential campaign. Barbara Ehrenreich took the opposing view, shaped in part by her experiences working undercover at the company as part of her research on how Americans stuck in low-wage labor markets make ends meet; research that culminated in a best-selling book, Nickel and Dimed.

It was a little strange reading the Slate contest. I’m firmly on Ehrenreich’s side, but I’m a professional economist so have much sympathy for how Furman argues. The former acknowledges early in the debate that there’s a culture clash, noting that pitting an economist against a non-economist regarding the merits of Wal-Mart is unlikely to be satisfying. Slate may have feared the esoterica that would have resulted from pitting two economists against each other, or may have just thought that no economist could be found to argue the negative side. Furman implicitly supports this latter interpretation at one point, saying:

"I don't find my views on Wal-Mart quite as counterintuitive as you seem to. Most economists who call themselves liberal, progressive, or Democratic probably feel the same way I do."

Furman’s right. Most economists who call themselves liberal, progressive, or Democratic would be with him (as, of course, would all of those who call themselves conservative, libertarian, or Republican, but that's no puzzle). Lest that close people’s minds regarding the hard-headedness of the brief against Wal-Mart, I thought I’d offer a sketch of why the recent campaigns launched against it (both public pressure and state and local legislation that would mandate improved pay and benefits for its workers) are not just exercises in soft-hearted conscience soothing that will result in more harm than good.

Most of those economists who call themselves liberal, progressive, or Democratic generally argue that the market should be allowed to churn out what it will, even if the results are a highly inequitable distribution of rewards. After the fact, they then would have a decent, compassionate government lean against this inequality through progressive taxes and transfer payments. This is eminently defensible, and if I could design an economy from the ground up, I’d rely on this approach almost as much as they, as I share with them a deep respect for the efficiency-enhancing quality of (most) markets.

Given the above, this crowd adopts a stance toward the Wal-Mart debate consisting of, well, telling its critics to back off and to rely on expanded government largess to help its workers claw their way to a better living. The benefits of Wal-Mart’s expansion (lower prices leading to consumer savings) are too valuable to be jeopardized by soft-headed special interest pleading.

This just won’t do, for three reasons. First, as a card-carrying economist, I have a hard time recommending the abandonment of one of the tools used by those concerned trying to aid the lot of the low-wage work force. After all, one of the great insights of the discipline is about the benefits of diversification, and the need for multiple instruments seems especially obvious right now given that the present government seems determined to reverse all inequality-fighting aspects of economic policy. Last month saw an attempt to repeal the estate tax (that falls only on the richest 0.5 percent of inheritances) while also voting down an increase in the minimum wage (that now has been beaten down by inflation to its lowest purchasing power in 51 years). Asking workers to sit tight and wait for more enlightened national leadership is requiring far too much patience on their part.

Second, I think we all need to think more seriously about how exactly we’re supposed to force our representatives to enact equity-supporting policies. The primary, and most effective, constituency for these policies is, unsurprisingly, organized labor. It’s hardly a secret that much of the funding for the anti-Wal-Mart groups comes from unions. (Nor is it a secret, for those who care to visit the homepage of the organization where I work, that a good, if minority, chunk of our funding also comes from unions. While people often assume that we adopt pro-union positions because we receive funds from labor, I think it puzzling that the reverse causality is never assumed.)

Another non-secret is the rapid decline in union membership that has occurred over the past two decades (the share of workers represented by a union has fallen from 23 percent in 1979 to under 13 percent today). Behind this decline is the fact that sectors traditionally most amenable to unionization (for structural reasons, not beneficence on the part of corporations) are declining in importance (manufacturing) while new jobs are being created in those sectors (retail) with little to no union history. The union-funded campaign against Wal-Mart is driven by the recognition that broad new sectors of the U.S. economy have to be organized for the labor movement to remain effective in coming decades. This retail organizing just cannot be done without engaging Wal-Mart, the largest single private employer in the U.S. economy. As long as Wal-Mart is allowed to remain union free and a relatively cheap employer, this will hamper new organizing drives at other retailers, and will put pressure on already organized sectors as Wal-Mart expands (consider, for instance, the California grocers strike of 2004).

So, wishing for, and arguing for, a decent government that leans against inequality is one thing. And, arguing that reliance on this government intervention alone provides the most effective and efficient outcome is defensible. But undercutting the efforts of the largest and most effective voice for exactly this kind of government in labor's most important campaign to retain a firm toe hold in American politics is something else entirely. The government programs countering inequality that are valued by progressive economists didn't just happen. They were fought for by a coalition whose vanguard was organized labor. Even if forcing Wal-Mart into paying better was inefficient in an economic sense (I don't really think it is—see more below), the long-run political benefits of having a strong labor movement are large enough that I just can't see value in hamstringing labor's attempt to retain and newly organize the retail sector.

Lastly, and, here's the type of esoterica that Slate probably feared in finding an anti-Wal-Mart economist, I disagree with the premise that enforcing wage and benefit mandates on Wal-Mart will inexorably reduce market efficiencies. That premise is rooted in the belief that labor markets are like markets for groceries—lots of sellers, lots of buyers, and enough competition among both employers and workers that neither side has any market power over the other. In labor markets like this, a price floor (say, a binding minimum wage or mandated compensation offer like that contained in recent Wal-Mart-directed legislation) leads to unemployment, as employers desire fewer workers at the higher wages while workers want to offer more labor at the higher wage.

It's fair to say that this is the predominant view of labor markets in the profession. However, a sizable (and growing, I think) minority think that low-wage labor markets like those inhabited by Wal-Mart actually behave more like a monopsony than a competitive market. Monopsony labor markets, strictly speaking, are those with only a single employer (think Old West company towns). Such employers have substantial market power over potential workers and set wages far below what economists would deem efficient. Wal-Mart obviously isn't a strict monopsonist, but, a host of real-world frictions that keep low-wage labor markets from operating competitively (commuting costs, information problems, and differing preferences about non-pecuniary job characteristics) give employers like Wal-Mart a degree of market power over potential workers.

There's a quick and dirty test to see if this vision of labor markets seems more convincing than the competitive one: What do you think would happen if Wal-Mart cut their wages by one cent per hour? Competitive labor market theory predicts that the company would instantly lose every single employee. Remember, employers allegedly have no say in what the market wage is, and paying under the competitively determined wage will lead to wholesale quits of their workforce. Monopsony theory says that they'd lose some workers, but not all, or even close to all.

Defenders of Wal-Mart love to argue that the public's voting with its feet proves that the corporation offer good jobs, and they frequently offer up stories like, "When Wal-Mart opened in X, 500 applicants came forward for 50 jobs." How does this not argue for their ability to wield some degree of monopsony power?

I don't expect to change colleagues' minds in this debate—my view wasn't decided by reading an op-edish piece, but, by thinking long and hard about these issues; presumably theirs were as well. But, it is important to explain to a wider audience that the anti-Wal-Mart campaign is not soft-headed. Too many people defer to what they assume is the unanimous sense of economists in debates like this, and, people need to realize that there's dissent within the profession both about the technical economics and the political reasoning that lies behind which policy interventions can be reasonably supported. It's also time that lefties realized that the discipline of economics isn't inherently hostile to them. The profession may be, but, the subject itself provides sustenance for all manner of political beliefs.


L. Josh Bivens is an economist at the Economic Policy Institute in Washington, D.C.

PHOTOS of Vietnam and Thailand by Frances Borchardt

Vietnam








Thailand






Frances Borchardt lives in Churchton, Maryland. She can be contacted at francesborchardt@comcast.net.

7/28/06

POETRY by Christopher Mulrooney and D. Garcia Wahl


by Christopher Mulrooney

photo by Dawn Allynn



the practiced maquilleur


in all senses many of
Derrida’s tropes may seem to lack finality
but there is one
deconstruction itself
which proves the rule

however academic
there is the type of person who just will insist
on having his
constructions placed upon
the work in view

as when you attend one night
a downtown art walk in the ruined city streets
oblivious
reconstruction destroys
by inch and ell

the tepid works on white walls
are not in Tom Wolfe’s meaning quite literary
only they will
construct the world as a
magazine does

and so in midnite’s passing
a blond horse which is you with his mane in dreadlocks
enters your dream
deconstruction is when
this nightmare ends

leaving the Marxist critic
to make his inquiries into costs and causes
mythologic
construction will entail
upon the mob

this I could have writ as prose
but who can tell the difference nowadays at all
Ferlinghetti
unconstruction for larks
Marianne Moore

Auden repented a line
something about the new styles of architecture
look kindly on
construction for its sake
the poet said

as when politicians lie
and say a thing is when the world has seen it’s not
this they call spin
deconstruction’s useful
in such cases


Christopher Mulrooney has written poems and translations in The Hollins Critic, Knock, Zoland Poetry and Eclipse, criticism in Elimae, The Film Journal and Parameter, and a volume of verse, notebook and sheaves (AmErica House, 2002).

by D. Garcia-Wahl

Baptism


'Tis only by humble cherish
that I make my way to your fount
The writhing of my essence in the hands that I clasp
make into this hollow of mine, a performance of grace.
The words of my confession, the trial of my days
lent to your forgiveness.
For you,
I shed myself of my flesh,
of my calling, of my sins
before your waters darkened by candlelight
to seek redemption
to ignite a purity
to deepen my bow
and fall to the within you.


Voices Welled

Emparadis’d in your reaching spirit, delicate
there is a sky that does not pass above you,
a second that is not made a moment without you,
and a beauty etched to carols of the heart.
For there is something naked in your voice.
Innocent not - sometimes a weakness
when the heartened flesh trembles pale
brightened by a moon of continuum Spring
who’s breath does birth the belief of ecstasy
kept to union in nestled bodies
weeping for immortality.
For in each whisper, a catharsis.
An echo for to surround
with the sigh of your quiver.
All senses toward you.
And always
you
moving alone within invited crowds.
Always you
stopping breaths
forever
and dressing desire.
Always you
haunting the hours of man
with an image of beauty
that justifies their loneliness.
And always you,
only you,
hearing my voice
falling silent
in hesitation
of your soliloquy
in fear of its touching

Filmatic

for Jerry Tomlinson

“Well, I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, doctor, and I'm
happy to state, I finally won out over it.”
-Elwood P. Dowd
“Harvey”

Life (?)…
an archipelago of breaths
Reels –
movement
(or years)
purposed and propelled by memory
The theatric boast of life the eyes parade
a silent camera, ever behind, focusing.
In patchwork scenes childhood, middle years, old age,
death – then birth -
edited
played out
critiqued


Nothing known at the fade in
will be felt in the fade out

Leaving nothing to predictability,
except pardon,
the film is christened - ages
in sensitivity and texture
The stir of the heart
scripts the direction of purity,
cleaving to what we cast off,
never playing tomorrow as the strains
of another day

What of the actor?
His lines are his to forget
-his audience to recall

Manikarnika Ghat


The Ganges moans unlike any ocean can
But, come tumult, the voices are similar
Death is this sound of dying
Dead, all is the reap of prayer
A shade made of life
owing veneration
to what waves can bring to memory
In the renunciation of the river
wisdom is given repose and
passions are washed away to become sediment
The water, itself, is but a mask of the senses cleansed

A diseased breeze feeds
the sinless fires
in turn sooting the air with ancestry
making way for the eternal river
-which is Heaven

Chanting at the steps
Doms of outcast wearied
Bodies burned of their stories

Somnolent verse


'neath bare your feet the grasses sing
as springtime yields the world its heart
In timely tongue my language will pattern
a supple course of desire
There’s a prayer I’ve chanted made up of your motions
in a day that needs you closer to tomorrow
So, until I can approach you
having you see me as naked
without seeing me as weak
I will not call again upon your rest
Sleep
Sleep
for a moment in the hold of God

Oh, sad intangible one,
to die impossible by your side

Song

Singing something
to walk through the walls marketing the world
Singing to imbue a horizon
Singing a prayer of spirit
It is within our flesh that God comes to ponder
showing the makings of illusion
For it is not the ribs enclosed in flesh
that give definition to man
It is by the singing we are defined
Judgment comes by how the songs of midnight
meet the songs of daybreak

Sculpting an innocence
is easier in the blindness of the womb
than in the world
with its mint of the unfamiliar

D. Garcia Wahl is the author of the poetry volume All That Comes of Madden'd Days and the novel Ashes of Mid Autumn.

Photos from stock.xchng

7/26/06

STAGE: A Powerful 'Enemy'



An Enemy of the People
By Henrik Ibsen
Directed by Jim Petosa
Olney Theatre Center
Through Aug. 27




Christopher Lane, Jeffries Thaiss, and Tim Getman



By Alexander C. Kafka

“You have an inveterate tendency to go your own way,” says Peter Stockman, the mayor of a small coastal Norwegian town to his physician brother, Thomas, early on in An Enemy of the People. “… Someday you’re going to pay for it.”

Someday soon, it turns out, in this classic dissection of righteousness amid parochial hypocrisy and treachery. The town’s on the verge of becoming a tourist center, thanks to its new spa baths, and Thomas has unfortunately discovered that the water system is full of “reeking waste from the mill,” a veritable breeding ground for gastritis- and typhoid- generating bacteria.

The way the townsfolk treat him and this information still makes, in this centennial year of Ibsen’s death, for powerful drama, particularly in the masterful hands of this committed troupe and its director, Jim Petosa.

It’s a timeless play but an unsentimental one, and as complicated politically as it is dramatically. For Thomas, though heroic, is also a megalomaniac, and becomes elitist and not a little unhinged. He starts off terribly naïve, figuring that once he presents his irrefutable evidence of the pollution, the town will simply “see things right” and re-lay the whole water system higher up. He counts on the backing of Hovstad, publisher of The Courier, the local newspaper, a muckraker who decides the polluted baths are the perfect wedge issue with which to overthrow the town’s establishment. “A journalist of my radicalist leanings can’t let an opportunity like this pass by,” Hovstad explains cunningly to Thomas.

Thomas also counts on the support of Aslaksen, the printer and leader of the local small businessmen. Though moderate in approach, he is nonetheless keen to see the bath problem fixed to secure the long-term prosperity of the merchant class.

Thomas also enjoys the warm encouragement of his wife, Katherine, daughter, Petra, and sons, Morten and Ejlif.

“It’ll all go smoothly,” he assures Hovstad. “We’ll see,” says the latter, his nose crinkling condescendingly.

Of course, instead, it all goes to hell. Peter, whose relations with his brother are obviously strained to begin with, threatens Thomas, who, as the bath corporation’s physician, technically answers to Peter as the corporation’s head. The consummate two-faced machine pol, Peter explains that re-laying the water system would take two years and cost “several hundred thousand crowns.” Bath-caused illnesses can be quietly seen to by Thomas, he implies, adding that this stance is “for the good of the town,” rather than to save his own reputation as leader of the spa's construction.

Thomas has right on his side. But getting back at his bullying brother would feel good too. And his righteous indignation—“I want the opportunity to look my boys in the eye,” he says sympathetically—soon turns to a less healthy kind of feverish martyrdom. Once he’s decided to fight the powers that be, he’s discouraging Hovstad from allowing the townspeople to organize a parade in his honor and equating himself, literally, with truth. “Whatever I do will be in the name of truth,” he declares. He also starts equating all his foes with the invisible filth of the waters, prescribing that “it is the whole society that has to be purged and disinfected.”

Sadly, once Peter explains to Aslaksen the trouncing that local commerce would take were the water system to be redone, Aslaksen, who’s already articulated his fear of going up against local authorities, turns into a veritable Norwegian Grover Norquist. Seeing which way the wind’s blowing, Hovstad, too, deserts Thomas, as does Hovstad’s exuberant right hand, Billing, a would-be Marxist who also has one eye on a cozy little position in the town clerk’s office. Soon, Thomas, so recently the man of the hour, is an utter outcast, his family too paying a terrible price for his singleminded quest to do the right thing. Not only does Thomas lose his job, but so does daughter Petra, a teacher, and their one staunch ally, Captain Horster. Thomas loses his house lease too. All this, it’s repeatedly said, not because their employers and landlord and friends really think ill of them, mind you, but because these decent folk “don’t dare not to” ostracize Dr. Stockmann and his family.

One only needs to read the headlines to see that this is heady and timely stuff—thus its inclusion in Olney’s summer Potomac Theatre Festival, which emphasizes classic scripts with contemporary resonance. It’s also a hellishly demanding role for Thomas—the thespian equivalent of an endurance sport—and Christopher Lane is superb in it. He inhabits Thomas’s being right down to his vocal hem-and-haw ticks and burns through the character’s enormous tirades without losing his momentum or his focus (or his voice, even though it seemed Lane was fighting a nasty cold and hoarseness Tuesday night).

Jeffries Thaiss as Hovstad is also top-notch. “Lay snares for your readers?” says Petra to Hovstad in reference to some subpar romantic fiction he wants to publish as sugar to make the medicine of his radical political content go down a little more smoothly. “You’re not a spider,” she tells him. Oh, but he is, and both she and her father are caught in his silky but ungiving web. The character’s every creepy calculation glints from Thaiss’s lively eyes. James Slaughter is a frighteningly convincing Peter, too. There’s something so square and cocksure about him that you know he’s crooked and desperate to his civic-minded bones.

Other standouts are Kip Pierson as Billing, who practically jumps out of his skin in anticipation of either violent revolution or that tidy civil-service job, whichever comes first; and Tim Getman as Aslaksen, as decent-seeming and completely untrustworthy as any shady chamber-of-commerce president you’d ever run into. Richard Pilcher, as Thomas’s father-in-law, is a little over the top, but in a welcome way given the play’s oh-so-sober context. He has fine comic timing and, in his stage-aged cackle, a real way with lines like, “Make monkeys out of them, I say.” Julie-Ann Elliott and Lindsey Haynes, as Katherine and Petra, have thankless peripheral roles, but carry them off with sweetness and dignity, and a hint of feminist indignation that nicely suits Ibsen’s views and this production.

James Kronzer’s clever set combines grand, oversized wooden doorways with screens that serve as abstract wallpaper or newspaper headlines, depending how they’re back- and floor-lit by Daniel MacLean Wagner. Costume designer Howard Vincent Kurtz and costumiere Jeanne Bland have handsomely outfitted their charges with fine period suits, coats, dresses, and work clothes.

This isn’t fun date-night kind of entertainment. Enemy is brilliant, but it’s also hectoring, and smug, like its protagonist. For all that, it’s too relevant to the big lies of, yes, ours but also every other era. It should be seen and mulled over and discussed, and its insights taken deeply to heart.

Why? Because we don’t dare not to.


7/24/06

WEAR WOLF: Notes on the Women's Fall Standouts

At About Women's Fashion, Cynthia Nellis succinctly sums up and illustrates the 10 fall trends in the women's collections: sweater knits; menswear prints; the new suit; leggings and tights; shorts and knickers; the dress; black, white, gray, and red; the wide belt; vests; and the extras--boots, big bags, and gloves.

At Style.com, you can relive the fall '06 shows in an amazing photo data base, with a Look Book program that lets you sit by the runway and take your own notes. Here are a few of our favorites:


From Philip Lim's 3.1 collection.

"Street elegance," he calls it.


Clothes, Donatella Versace says,

"for a woman who stands up for her opinions."

This and following photos by Marcia Madeira, from Style.com



Which tempts you more?

J. Mendel's superb silver gift package...

...or Giambattista Valli's gold ...


Still, sometimes you want to just lounge around the house

and throw on any ol' thing--

say this breezy little outfit from Gareth Pugh...

-Sasha Triella

TUNE HEAD: Adam Green's Latest

Adam Green
Jacket Full of Danger
Rough Trade Records



et us now consider the musical oddity that is Adam Green, a 24-year-old New Yorker who, with three solo albums and Moldy Peaches work prior, continues to totter through his psychological minefields, genre cocktail to his smirky lips, in perky, psychedelic oblivion.

His surreal ditties, delivered in a confident but slightly hokey baritone, bring to mind a cheerier, less intense Jim Morrison with a tiki-bar backing band garnished with some genuinely polished string arrangements, courtesy of the album’s cellist, Jane Scarpantoni. His somewhat hodgepodge sound is the kind that invites critics to throw in a ha
lf-dozen comparisons that aren’t quite fair to them or him. Let’s not do that to Green, or to Johnny Cash, Glen Campbell, Elvis, Roy Orbison, or any of the other roster that one’s tempted to turn to in an understandably frantic attempt to describe Green’s sound or content. Let’s not do it to the free-associative lyricist Tom Waits or the adultly playful Jonathan Richman or the respectfully retro rocker Robert Gordon, either. Oops.

Let Adam be Adam and measure his weird, sweet, sick little reveries on their own merits, and we come out—well—ever intrigued yet still not entirely sold. Here smolders talent, for certain, a deeply poetic mind with a well-honed musical instinct, and a refreshing thirst for whimsy. He’s best when he reins himself in, as in the dime store-country ballad opener, “Pay the Toll.” “How do you need me so much? No amount of love could satisfy you,” he croons. “…Any kind of love is a needle in the hay.” There’s a straightforwardness that suggests he learned that for real, and the hard way.

It’s when he aims for what looks like too consciously clever that he distances himself and sheds our emotional trust. “I’ve been a deconstructive madman,” he gargles on the early-60s-sounding kitschy “Hollywood Bowl.” But it’s when he’s a deconstructive sane man that his lyrics curdle and coil most interestingly, and even his accomplished band hones its gentle sound around that quiet intimacy, as in the meditative “Vultures,” the most affecting and least affected tune on the album. “Golden fabric torn from the devil girl’s hair. Cheap medallions gleam from the vanity fair. Seen so many vultures, split so many creatures down there,” he sings. Now that’s a dream story worth telling, and requires no Vegas vibrato to tell it. The couching of his mental innards is couch-worthy, but moving too. “Fight me gladly, leave before the battles grow. So good night crazies, I’ll leave them feeling lazy, but I’m the god tonight.”

Don’t get me wrong. No artist so sage should write off artifice entirely. There’s some bold Brecht, as well as Beck, in the boy Weilling away the hours in stagy but provocative tunes like the stark sex sketch “Novotel” — “down in the factory when their faces blow a fuse it’s a miracle.”

And the pretension bests the hold-over juvenilia of the homage “Drugs”—“I like to do drugs. I like to have drugs. I like to hold a cigarette full of grass in my hand,” he proclaims. Ya don’t say.

Green seems more than a little eager to either churn or bail out of the rock history he sloshes in, singing, in “Hey Dude,” “Bob Dylan was a vegetable’s wife, game over hope you had a good life.” Yet he offers a protest song of sorts in “Hairy Women,” proclaiming, “I’m embarrassed by injustice that shuts doors on hairy women.” Speak truth to power, man.

The neo-Zeppelin blues bomb “White Women” perks up the ear in its contrast to the laid-back numbers, and gives guitarist Chris Isom room for a nice fuzzilicious solo. But the pointlessly, or pointedly, raunchy lyrics are a step back, though I concede a fondness for, “Rolling you lady is running me down, scrubbing the cages each town after town.”

Hard to reconcile that with the romantic earnestness of another of my favorites here, “Cast a Shadow,” which also offers some sunny Wurlitzer bursts from keyboardist Nathan Brown. “The sandman is giving me a special gift, a sleepy dream memory of our first kiss. Cast a shadow in my direction. Bring back shadows of your affection.”

But then man is neither angel nor devil, the French philosophe Blaise Pascal said. We’re all neither/nor, echoes this deconstructive madman. He’s working hard—too hard?—to avoid the bland confessionals of so many singer-songwriters. Fair enough. But is that really a worry for the man who wrote, "Fellas in umbrellas in the middle of the night, what you gonna do when the Mennonites bite?" I think not.

And it’s the more melancholy, self-searching balladeer within Green who seems to have the most stories to tell, and the best. The bravest artistry might be, in a case like this, the least obviously bold. Maybe the madman will let the poet out to play for a while in calmer pastures. Given Green’s cult following, especially in Europe, that might be a little mad after all. So that, at least, should comfort him.

-Alexander C. Kafka