Intro

"We don't see things as they are. We see them as we are."


Anais Nin (American Author, 1903-1977)


To most phenomena, there is more than one side, and viewing things through somebody else's eyes is something I always found refreshing and also a good way of getting to know someone a little better, as in - what makes them tick?

With this in mind I have started writing this blog. I hope my musings are interesting and relevant - and on a good day entertaining.

All views expressed are of course entirely mine – the stranger the more so.

As to the title of the blog, quite a few years ago, I had an American boss who had the habit of walking into my office and saying, "Axel, I've been thinkin'" - at which point I knew I should brace myself for some crazy new idea which then more often than not actually turned out to be well worth reflecting on.

Of course, I would love to hear from you. George S. Patton, the equally American WW2 general once said: "If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody is not thinking."

So please feel free to tell me what you think.

Enjoy the read!

Axel

Thursday, June 16, 2016

Softly, Softly

There's a lot of stuff going on that I could write about. But since it's mostly demoralising, distressing, and downright depressing. I will give it a wide berth, take a rain check, and not add to the gallons of ink (metaphorically speaking, in the age of online media) that have already been splashed on it. 


Nor will I comment on how these regretful, terrible, disastrous events – sadly all man-made of course; there are no natural disasters to reflect on, no victims of force majeure to grieve, no "acts of God" to bemoan – are being leveraged by various politicians, from all sorts of camps, and of different, dare I use the word, convictions for their short-term gain. 

But then, I guess we get the representatives we freely elect. And afterwards, at least some of us suffer from a classic case of "buyer's remorse", the sense of regret after having made a purchase, the sinking feeling in the pit of your stomach as you drive away from the store: "You shouldn't have bought that." "You should not have let that salesperson walk all over you."

In serious cases, I am told, symptoms can extend to anxiety, nausea, and sweaty palms. Sleepless nights even. But as voters in democracy, as opposed to shoppers in consumerism, at least we get to correct our mistake four or five years later – in theory, having counted our losses, and vowed to be more circumspect next time around. Sounds reassuring, right?

There is a new book out in the United States entitled Buyer's Remorse. How Obama Let the Liberals Down. It is authored by Bill Press, a prominent liberal (in the American sense) syndicated radio and television host who explains the many ways Barack Obama has failed to live up to either his promises or his progressive potential, leaving Democrats disillusioned on the issues that matter most: "He rode into office on a celebratory tide of liberal jubilation, but as his typically centrist presidency comes to a close, he leaves his supporters haunted by what might have been." [My emphasis]

I am not taking sides in this discussion, but the sentiment is well described I think. Needless to say, the Republicans, beholden more and more to the extremism of the Tea Party movement, never liked the man in the first place. He couldn't win, really, could he?

I do know one thing though. Barack Obama would trade any and all successes of his Presidency – and no matter what they tell you, there have been some – for a meaningful inroads into his country's gun laws. Of the worst twelve mass shootings in U.S. history, five happened on his watch. And if there is one thing he takes both seriously and personally, this is it.  


And I still do not wish to go into the dubious spectacle of Donald “The Donald” Trump and Hillary “It’s My Turn” Clinton battling it out for the White House.

Anyhow, the lasting image of the past days which I prefer to retain is that of a petite lady (I use the noun wisely, respectfully, and in the most complimentary way possible), wearing outrageously coloured outfits, and surrounded by her extended family as she celebrates her 90th birthday. 

Spoiler alert: It was her second such occasion this year already.

The relevance of this particular event will hopefully become clear at the conclusion of my musings – provided you read on of course. So for now, hold the thought and mental image please while I digress.

Joseph Samuel Nye, Jr, born in 1937, is an eminent American political scientist who developed the concept of “Soft Power”. It means the ability to attract, co-opt, and win over others by means of persuasion rather than resorting to coercion through force, financial inducements, or economic sanctions. The currency of a nation’s Soft Power consists of three elements, according to Nye: "its culture (in places where it is attractive to others), its political values (when it lives up to them at home and abroad), and its foreign policies (when others see them as legitimate and having moral authority).” Soft Power. The Means to Succeed in World Politics (2004) 

In his book, Nye argues that Soft Power is a more difficult instrument for governments to use than hard power for two reasons: many of its critical resources are outside their control, and Soft Power tends to "work indirectly by shaping the environment for policy, and sometimes takes years to produce the desired outcomes."

In a later work, The Future of Power (2011), Nye reiterates that Soft Power is a descriptive, rather than a normative, concept. Therefore, it can also be wielded for nefarious purposes. "Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all possessed a great deal of soft power in the eyes of their acolytes, but that did not make it good. It is not necessarily better to twist minds than to twist arms." Nicely put, Professor.

Disappointing all political romantics, Nye also explains that Soft Power does not contradict the theory of realism in international relations: "Soft power is not a form of idealism or liberalism. It is simply a form of power, one way of getting desired outcomes." – The capability to combine it, as appropriate and possible in any given case, with hard power is what Nye calls “smart power”.

Barack Obama totally understands Professor Nye’s model: “Real power means you get what you want without having to exert violence.” Which, on its own, would not have taken out Osama bin Laden of course.

Enough political theory to last us for a while, I would say. Why am I digging so deep here? Because Professor Nye’s musings have a lot of relevance for the macrocosmic world we inhabit and the microcosmic lives we lead in it. And they will eventually also bring us back to the aforementioned 90-year-old birthday girl.

I remember seeing a television interview in 1969 – yes, we did have moving pictures with sound coming out of a box in our living room back then, albeit of the black-and-white variety – with a certain Linda Eastman, a divorced New York photographer and single mother of a daughter, who had just married Paul McCartney. She was asked how she had managed to get one of the most eligible, attractive, and sought-after bachelors of the time to tie the knot with her. 

Her answer, short, pure, and simple: “By gentle persuasion.”

Linda McCartney sadly died from breast cancer in 1998, at the age of only 56. She and Sir Paul had three children – Mary, Stella, and James. And yes, your association is spot-on: Stella McCartney is one of the most successful fashion designers of her generation. Remember fashion, please.
47 years later, and no longer an impressionable kid, I still recall those words: “By gentle persuasion.”

“Thaw with her gentle persuasion is more powerful than Thor with his hammer. The one melts, the other breaks into pieces.” Henry David Thoreau, American author and philosopher (1817 – 1862)

Paul McCartney, John Lennon, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr, collectively known as The Beatles, along with many other British artists, over the past half-century have made a huge contribution, not just to the export statistics and the Treasury of the United Kingdom, but also, and maybe primarily, to its standing in the world – building its Soft Power at a time in history when “Rule Britannia” was a thing of the past. 

To this day, popular music, fashion and design, and the performing arts industry are widely influenced by British creative talent, and the Beatles, Rolling Stones, and many others who followed first gave the term “British invasion” a whole new meaning to Americans in the Sixties. And the “visited” people was delighted and quickly won over, once they had reassured themselves the “invaders” were not reclaiming their colonies lost in the War of Independence (1775 -1783).

But they were just the trailblazers. In today’s Hollywood, self-doubt and insecurity are so pervasive that local movie experts agonise over “The Decline of the American Actor”     (The Atlantic) - precipitated, mostly, by British competition. 

But then, it isn’t all doom and gloom for the U.S. of A: Just this week, Portland Communications, an international political consultancy and PR firm headquartered in London, published the second edition of their annual global index “The Soft Power 30”, a ranking of countries according to the criteria Digital, Culture, Enterprise, Engagement, Education, and Government (all objective), complemented by international polling data reflecting public perception across the world (subjective).

The report makes for fascinating reading. The Top Ten overall are:
1. United States
2. United Kingdom
3. Germany
4. Canada
5. France
6. Australia
7. Japan
8. Switzerland
9. Sweden
10. Netherlands

Bottom line: "The ability to engage with and attract global audiences has never been so critical to prosperity, security, and international influence." (Index author Jonathan McClory)

China is in 28th out of 30 places: “While lack of democracy and free press continue to negatively impact perceptions, there is no question that China will remain a draw for investors and visitors alike, as it assumes the position of a 21st Century super-power,” comments McClory.

But since his country still has quite a way to go, China’s President Xi Jinping – in addition to championing a more assertive foreign policy, particularly in relation to Sino-Japanese relations; China's claims to the bulk of the South China Sea Islands; involvement in Asian regional affairs; further building its already huge presence in sub-Saharan Africa; and additional initiatives related to energy and natural resources – has identified the surest complementary Soft-Power means to achieve that status (and famously, the Chinese think very long-term): a government-led strategy to become no less than a “world football power by 2050”. 

Fortunately for the English, this island nation does not have to rely on such a fanciful undertaking as they can deploy world-beating talent in other relevant areas of life – see above. Less relevant than football maybe? You tell me.

Meanwhile, in China, no effort or expense is to be spared.

Before going into the details of this Master Plan, one anecdote simply must be told.

In September 2014, President Xi Jinping, having assumed this office only a-year-and-a-half before, for the first time visited India, the other Asian giant about to take on a central role on the world stage, or so everybody used to think at least. Remember the BRICs? If not, please check them out on Google. What was a revelation back in 2001 looks quite dated now. But then, no surprise there really, given the fast-moving and changing world we live in.

In the course of the high-profile, three-day affair, which of course was widely covered in the media, a newsreader at the Indian state TV channel Doordarshan referred to the illustrious guest on air as “Eleven” Jinping, mistaking his name with the Roman numerals XI. The poor woman was fired immediately for incompetence, and to everybody’s relief, the state visit was brought to a successful ending.

Her error sparked a flurry of reactions on social media, one tweeter wryly commenting: “Fired? She deserves own show.”

I have my own theory on this episode, and I admit it’s a conspiratorial one, but please bear with me. After all, only the paranoid survive.

To this day, I believe that newsreader was not nearly as ill-informed, innocent, and ignorant as everybody made her out to be. I think she was a very, very deep undercover agent about to be found out, whose only opportunity to get an all-important message to her handlers in the UK was on that live news show, almost two years before the Chinese government officially announced its plans. 

You see, she was in fact warning the English Football Association of the impending threat to their own ambitions for world domination. Football, Soccer to our American friends, a game played with 11, “Eleven” players. Get it?

This espionage triumph was owed to Soft Power at its best and in its most productive, genuinely heart-felt, and effective variety, drawing on the shared tradition of the glorious days of The Raj. Remember: the common language, the same legal system, and the identical Westminster parliamentary democracy – not to mention G&Ts, Chicken Masala, and, of course, cricket. 

Honestly, who needs the European Union?

But unfortunately, as we know now, the FA missed the cue, and instead the signal was indeed mistakenly picked up by the English and Wales Cricket Board, the governing body of another game played by teams of “Eleven”.

Ever since September 2014, its officials have now been engaged in “Operation Chopsticks”, getting ready for the day when just competing with Australia for The Ashes, and I will spare you the details of this particular Sports Oddity, would no longer be good enough.
The Power of Soft Power. Sadly, we have lost track of the heroic undercover agent moonlighting as a newsreader on Doordarshan. From a distance, I wish her well. For me, she is in the same league as World War One spy Mata Hari (1876 – 1917), surely the role model for all female spooks – well, except for her unhappy ending as being executed by a firing squad for all your troubles is obviously not a desirable career outcome.

Coming back now to President Xi Jinping’s ambitious plans for Chinese football, all finally unveiled in April of this year, they are of breath-taking dimensions. 

Don’t for a minute doubt this guy means business. And never mind the Andaman Islands or whatever else China is ostentatiously pursuing, engaging on, or throwing its weight around about.

When the boss sets his mind to anything, it gets done. And all Chinese oligarchs are “with the program” – some more, some less voluntarily – so money is really not an issue. Have you noted their latest shopping sprees for highly paid foreign stars to come and play for the clubs in the China Super League, and in parallel, their systematic foray into European football?
In recent weeks Chinese entities have either acquired clubs outright, such as England's Aston Villa, or taken controlling stakes in teams such as Inter Milan and Espanyol Barcelona in Spain – and possibly former Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi's AC Milan, where talks are said to be ongoing. Chinese companies are also becoming sponsors of FIFA, the governing body of world football.Xi benefits from the decided advantage of a system that allows you to hold the top posts of the party and the military, in addition to being the Head of State through the office of the President. Indeed, he is sometimes referred to as China's "Paramount Leader" – still modest, compared to his comrade Kim Jong-un in Pyongyang, but then, as we discovered recently, he is entitled to a bit of bravado for his unrivalled pop girls groups. 

Meanwhile, back in DC, poor President Obama has nightmares of “Checks and Balances” – but that’s a good thing.

Just one fun fact, if I may: Among the Top Ten of the world’s biggest employers in 2015, according to Forbes magazine, three are (mainland) Chinese, with the Chinese Liberation Army proud runners-up to the U.S. Department of Defence. Don’t be misled, however. The majority of the CLA’s budget, efforts, and personnel are spent on “internal security”. With football hooligans at least for now way, way down their list of projects, priorities, and preoccupations. Ethnic minorities and religious movements, displaced and disenfranchised urban workforces, and young people misguided by foreign influences via the worldwide web, by contrast, are very much in scope.

Foxconn, in 10th place, is headquartered in Taiwan, that runaway island province we may or may not come back to another time. We should. Based on previous visits, I definitely think they deserve it.

The UK National Health Service, in fifth place and supplying a nation of merely 64 million, always baffles me. And of course it’s free of charge. But is it also sustainable?

Just by way of a comparison, China’s population is nearing 1.4 billion.


Well-documented world leaders in Soft Power already, as we have seen, the United States obviously don’t like to put all their eggs in one basket. 

Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.” U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt (1858 – 1919)

Smart power, Professor Nye – right?
Anyhow, coming back to China President “Eleven’s” Soft Power Game Plan, in brief, here’s the deal.

Qualifying for a World Cup is the first target – and yes, they have been there once before, in 2002, but were ignominiously eliminated after the Group stages, without a goal or a point, having lost to Brazil (predictable), Turkey (debatable), and Costa Rica (unacceptable). Hosting the tournament, with 2030 in his sights, and then winning football's ultimate prize remain long-term ambitions. A steep mountain to climb.

Key elements identified as being crucial to success are raising the level of play and thereby the attractiveness of the China Super League clubs by signing foreign stars; developing an original fan base; building a football culture; and nurturing home-grown talent. By 2020, Xi – a self-declared football fan – wants 50 million Chinese children and adults playing the Beautiful Game. 

Seeing there are currently 100 million kids under the age of six in his vast empire, the stats are on his side. Plus, of course, money is so not an issue. We had better take this seriously.

Meanwhile, even without yet being a world dominator in football, Xi Jinping is ranked fifth on the Forbes list of The World’s Most Powerful People 2015 (the latest available) behind, in ascending order, Pope Francis, Barack Obama, Angela Merkel, and Vladimir Putin [sic].





The German Chancellor, in turn, has very recently been ranked Number One in Forbes’ annual list of The World’s 100 Most Powerful Women – for the sixth year running, would you believe it. Just for one moment assuming a future U.S. President Hillary Clinton, elected in November and inaugurated in January, what may the list look like a year from now? In 2016, as a mere Presidential candidate, she is still only runner-up.

But I mean, if Barack Obama can be bested by Dr Merkel, who is to say she can’t also keep Mrs Clinton in her place. I’m taking bets, and for now, my money is on “Angie”, as her fans in Germany lovingly refer to her. The link, of course, is to the eponymous song released by The Rolling Stones in 1973 and first played in her honour during the German election campaign in 2005 – without permission by the Stones would you believe it.

“Angie, Angie, when will those clouds all disappear?
Angie, Angie, where will it lead us from here?
With no loving in our souls and no money in our coats
You can’t say we’re satisfied
But Angie, Angie, you can’t say we never tried
“Angie, you’re beautiful, but ain’t it time we said goodbye?
Angie, I still love you, remember all those nights we cried?
All the dreams we held so close seemed to all go up in smoke
Let me whisper in your ear,
Angie, Angie, where will it lead us from here?”

Those Christian Democrats – who would have thought? Angie won the elections and has held the office ever since.

And speaking of places, quite a bit further down that list is the 90-year-old I mentioned at the beginning. Ranked 29th, we find Queen Elizabeth II of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, up from Number 41 in 2015. And here is what Forbes have to say about her:

“Last September, Queen Elizabeth II became the longest-reigning monarch in more than 1,200 years of British history (her great-great-grandmother Queen Victoria reigned for 63 years and 216 days). At 90, she is also the world's oldest monarch, setting the tone at public events and receiving world leaders and other visiting dignitaries at Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle. The British Royal Family has enjoyed record popularity in recent years, last year celebrating the addition of a new member: Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana of Cambridge, the fourth in line to the throne. Ever the modern royal, ‘HRH’ was the first queen to send an e-mail, and she posted her first Tweet from the Science Museum in London in 2014. On the week of her 90th birthday, she received 17,420 pieces of mail from well-wishers, according to the Royal Family's Twitter account.”


Strangely, Portland in their The Soft Power 30 never even mention Her Majesty when summarising all the strengths of the United Kingdom which, we remember, they rank second in the world:

“There is no dearth of soft power strengths in the UK’s assets, strong government, vibrant culture, considerable heritage and history, and strong digital capacity make the UK one of the most admired nations in the world. Over 1700 foreign correspondents are based in the UK, and with a dynamic media market of its own, London is global media capital.”

And this is where I take exception with their assessment. What they say is all well and true, but “Queenie” – as she is lovingly called by her most loyal subjects when they speak about, not to, her – surely makes a huge contribution. For me, she is Soft Power Personified, holding not just four generations of “Royals”, a borderline dysfunctional family, together, but also playing a huge role, both as a public figure almost all “Brits” can rally behind – being a Republican in this country is a lonesome existence – and, importantly, endearing her nation to the rest of the world, thereby making it so much easier to transport or rather, export its undisputed “soft” assets. 

All the more so since, for historical reasons, Elizabeth II, Head of the Commonwealth, is also the Sovereign of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, and of twelve more countries that have become independent since her accession in 1952: Jamaica, Barbados, the Bahamas, Grenada, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Belize, Antigua and Barbuda, and Saint Kitts and Nevis.

So, this past weekend Her Majesty celebrated her 90th birthday for the second time around. The actual date of her birth is 21 April 1926, but seeing the weather is usually not so great that time of the year, the British, pragmatic as ever, prefer to have the official party in June – not that it never rains then in this country either.

It was both a dignified and lavish three-day affair, with wide global media coverage, and nobody attending or watching it from afar could fail to be impressed by her, combining steely self-discipline, quiet authority, and personal charisma. What’s not to like?

Well, except maybe her taste in colours. In the course of the TV commentaries, however, I learned what that is all about. Elizabeth II has actually explained it in the past – she does it out of her deep sense of duty. Her credo is: “I have to be seen to be believed.”

I’ve seen her, and I’m a believer.

“I’m a Believer”? Ring a bell? The U.S. rock band, The Monkees had a huge hit with this song, written by Neil Diamond, and released in December 1966. 

Yes, that’s the year England won the World Cup, just the once. Don’t get me started on The Third Goal.

“I thought love was only true in fairy tales
Meant for someone else but not for me.
Love was out to get me
That's the way it seemed.
Disappointment haunted all my dreams.

“Then I saw her face, now I'm a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind.
I'm in love, I'm a believer!
I couldn't leave her if I tried.”

The Monkees have sold more than 75 million records worldwide and had more international hits, including "Last Train to Clarksville", "Pleasant Valley Sunday", and "Daydream Believer". At their peak in 1967, the band outsold the Beatles and the Rolling Stones combined.



And the great news for all of us old enough still to remember The Monkees from back then is they have released to good reviews a new album – playlist to younger people – on the occasion of their 50th anniversary, coinciding with a tour of, you have guessed it, 50 venues across the U.S. between now and the end of October. If you have nothing on for the 29th of that month, maybe consider travelling to Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, for the closing gig. Never been, but I hear it’s a downright delightful place to visit.

The title of both the tour and the album: “Good Times!”

Good times always, Your Majesty. With all due respect, Ma’am – you rock!

“Character may almost be called the most effective means of persuasion.” Aristotle, Ancient Greek philosopher (384 – 322 BC)

Thursday, June 2, 2016

Commencement

It's the time of the season - no, not when love runs high (The Zombies, "Time of the Season, 1968), but when American students graduate from High School and College. And their academic degrees are conferred upon them in a ceremony commonly known as Commencement. 


Not Closing, Ending, or Final Curtain – no, Commencement. Which I think is actually a very appropriate name to give this moment in young people's lives. It's a new beginning, the step into the real world from the relatively protected confines of University. There's an eponymous novel by J. Courtney Sullivan, Commencement (2009) that picks up on this thought, following four graduates of all-women Smith College through the years post-graduation. It's worth a read – "Chick lit" of a more sophisticated type.

Commencement Day is always a very solemn yet joyful event, helped by the fact that the weather is mostly good in North America in late May and early June. Parents, siblings, extended family, and friends gather to attend, and at least at the smaller colleges that have classes of a few hundred only, every student gets to walk up to the stage and receive their diploma from the President (of the University, not the Nation). And then, celebration time, with no expense spared – in a recent 2014 nationwide survey in the United States, US$ 985 was quoted as the average amount spent on graduation parties. Been there, done that. And can confirm the stats.

But before being let off the hook, the young graduates have to sit through what is widely considered the highlight of the day, or rather: The Day – the Commencement Speech, normally delivered by somebody invited from outside the College community who is expected to dispense words of wisdom that will see their young audience through life or at least through the coming few years of adjustment to the rat race of the working world or, sooner or later, the rarefied academic air of postgraduate studies. 

And then, of course, eventually, somewhere down the road, there's all this stuff about marriage, starting a family, and, importantly, feeding it. Take your time, is what I tell my children, and they've so far stuck to their Dad's advice – for once.

The Commencement Speech circuit is in fact quite a circus, and every year observers are following with bated breath the announcements by the academic institutions whom they have selected this time around. It's almost like the Oscar nominations. On these, more to come below.

Here are some illustrious names from this year, in no particular order while observing political protocol: POTUS Barack Obama; FLOTUS Michelle Obama; Condoleezza Rice, former Secretary of State and a class act if you ask me; Madeleine Albright, also former Secretary of State and the first woman to hold the post. She was once asked, after leaving office, what it was like for her as a female to have to deal with all those foreign alpha-male politicians. Her answer: "Well, it does help if you fly in on Air Force One." Good one, Maddie!

Ms Albright also said: "We should use our opinions to start discussions, not to end them." Discuss. 



And finally: “I love being a woman, and I was not one of these women who rose through professional life by wearing men's clothes or looking masculine. I loved wearing bright colors and being who I am." 




Other Commencement speakers this year include Spike Lee, Director; Larry Ellison, Founder and Chairman of Oracle; David Axelrod, political advisor and Chief Strategist for both of Barack Obama’s successful Presidential campaigns; he then lost his touch when he worked for and with Ed Miliband in the run-up to the 2015 UK General Elections – I think he wasn’t all that interested after all; Sheryl Sandberg, COO of Facebook; Arianna Huffington of Huffington Post fame; James Franco, actor and director currently starring in the TV mini-series based on Stephen King’s novel, 11.22.63; Matt Damon, actor; David Lynch, film maker; and Steven Spielberg, ditto.

And there are many more who shall remain unnamed.

Steven Spielberg addressed the graduates at Harvard University, no less. And having skimmed through a few speeches, as I do every year, I think his was one of the best this Commencement season. 

For previous years’ highlights coming from Hollywood, check out Tom Hanks (Yale University, 2011); Denzel Washington (University of Pennsylvania, 2011); and Robert De Niro (New York University Tisch School of Arts, 2015).


Anyhow, what Steven Spielberg told his audience went beyond the traditional, tired, and oft-traded platitudes of “follow your dreams”, “stay true to yourself”, and “be an agent for good in the world”. And of course there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of these.

In a charmingly self-deprecating way, the most successful film director of all times, who will turn 70 this December, let his audience in on a little-known secret: 


"I can remember my own college graduation, which is easy, since it was only 14 years ago. How many of you took 37 years to graduate? Because, like most of you, I began college in my teens, but sophomore year, I was offered my dream job at Universal Studios, so I dropped out. I told my parents if my movie career didn’t go well, I’d re-enrol.

“It went all right.

“But eventually, I returned for one big reason. Most people go to college for an education, and some go for their parents, but I went for my kids. I’m the father of seven, and I kept insisting on the importance of going to college, but I hadn’t walked the walk. So, in my fifties, I re-enrolled at Cal State – Long Beach, and I earned my degree. [A Bachelor of Arts from the Film School: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/3579578/Spielberg-why-I-went-back-to-college.html]

“I just have to add: It helped that they gave me course credit in Palaeontology for the work I did on Jurassic Park. That’s three units for Jurassic Park, thank you.”

He went on to analyse the two inner voices most if not all of us hear inside our head: “And I want to be clear that your intuition is different from your conscience. They work in tandem, but here’s the distinction: Your conscience shouts, ‘here’s what you should do,’ while your intuition whispers, ‘here’s what you could do.’ Listen to that voice that tells you what you could do. Nothing will define your character more than that.”

And putting in perspective his art and his audience’s mission from thereon: “My job is to create a world that lasts two hours. Your job is to create a world that lasts forever. You are the future innovators, motivators, leaders, and caretakers.

“And the way you create a better future is by studying the past. Jurassic Park writer Michael Crichton, who graduated from both this college and this medical school, liked to quote a favourite professor of his who said that if you didn’t know history, you didn’t know anything. You were a leaf that didn’t know it was part of a tree. So History majors: Good choice, you’re in great shape... Not in the job market, but culturally.” Love it.

Much appreciated, Mr Spielberg. Or may I call you Steven? A heart-felt thank you from an historian.

The secondary school teacher who got me to want to study History used the following analogy to describe the role of historians: Think of a tapestry hanging on a wall. From the front, you see the design and appreciate the image. Which is fine – enjoy! But the historian will walk up to the wall, turn the tapestry around, and make out how the threads are woven and where the knots are tied. “This,” my teacher would say, “is the task of an historian.”

Explaining how the world as we populate, witness, and experience it has come about, and hopefully helping us all understand better from finding out what’s on the “reverse side”.

Of course, Spielberg has dwelt extensively on history in his work. Just think of the films The Color Purple (1985), which he referenced in the Harvard speech as a turning point; the majestic, even by his standards, Schindlers’ List (1993) for which he won his first Academy Award for Best Director; Amistad (1997); and Saving Private Ryan (1998) which secured him his other Best Director Oscar. And then, of course there is Lincoln (2012) – more about this one later.

From the proceeds of Schindler’s List, in 1994 he started the Shoah Foundation which since then has video-taped the testimony of some 53,000 Holocaust survivors and witnesses to preserve their memories for posterity – a true historian’s task.

At Harvard, Spielberg went on: “The rest of us have to make a little effort. Social media that we’re inundated and swarmed with is about the here and now. But I’ve been fighting and fighting inside my own family to get all my kids to look behind them, to look at what already has happened. Because to understand who they are is to understand who we were, and who their grandparents were, and then, what this country was like when they emigrated here. We are a nation of immigrants – at least for now.”

This last comment was an oblique nod to Donald “The Donald” Trump who is now set to face off with the Democratic candidate for the Presidency, in all likelihood Hillary “It’s My Turn” Clinton. But that’s for another time.

Steven Spielberg, as you will remember, last directed Bridge of Spies (2015), set in Cold War Berlin, in which Tom Hanks starred alongside Mark Rylance – who won the Oscar as Best Actor in a Supporting Role, as confidently predicted by this wannabe movie expert. See you next year, Mr Stallone! Or not.

I wonder what Mark Rylance, a British theatre actor first and foremost, would tell American College graduates if he were ever to hold a Commencement speech. Maybe someone will invite him now he is Hollywood Royalty. But then again, maybe not.

So how come these representatives of the Factory of Dreams in Southern California, the Wizards of the Silver Screen, the nation’s (and the world’s) Entertainers-in-Chief so often give the most impactful, original, and widely-noted Commencement speeches? 

Maybe after four years of academic striving, of intellectual pursuit, and of mental discipline, the graduates, mere kids of 21 or 22 we should not forget, are just thirsting for some, not comic relief, but magic. A breath of fresh air from those who excel in the timeless art of story-telling.

Speaking of four, this once only, Spielberg movies to illustrate my point:

I mean, what is sub-marine Biology compared to the suspense of Jaws (1975)?

What is classical Archaeology when contrasted with the adventures of Dr Henry “Indiana” Jones, played unforgettably by Harrison Ford through all four films to date, starting with Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981), and Number Five to be launched in 2019? Never say die. Harrison, how do you do it? 

I mean, the man will be 74 in July!

He is also back in his other career-defining role as Han Solo in the Star Wars franchise with Episode VII – The Force Awakens (2015).

Since this is all about graduation, let it be known TIME magazine on 10 May 2010 published their Top Ten List of Famous College Drop-outs, including the indomitable Mr Ford:

Bill Gates (Harvard University)
Steve Jobs (Reed College)
Frank Lloyd Wright (University of Wisconsin – Madison) 
Buckminster Fuller (Harvard University)
James Cameron (Fullerton College)
Mark Zuckerberg (Harvard University)
Tom Hanks (Sacramento State University)
Harrison Ford (Ripon College)
Lady Gaga (New York University Tisch School of Arts)
Tiger Woods (Stanford University)

It’s none of my business, but I think Harvard needs a Chief Retention Officer.

Coming back to Steven Spielberg’s oeuvre – I expect the fact he did go back to University later on in his life disqualified him from being included on the TIME list – and his unique talent for story-telling, what is the History of the Second World War in the Far East compared to the heart-moving Empire of the Sun (1987)? 

Or Robotics once you’ve seen the equally touching, albeit in different ways, A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)?

What indeed is Palaeontology compared to the excitement of Jurassic Park (1993) and its three sequels, with Number Five to be released in 2018? Who ever said the dinosaurs were extinct?

Oops, that’s five films now already. Better stop here and now. But I hope you get the gist.
By the way, there are a number of theories why dinosaurs at one point disappeared off the face of the planet they had so confidently inhabited, a meteor impact being the most widely held. 

Well, here’s one that surprisingly is often overlooked: they took up smoking. Duh. – Just kidding.

It probably also helps that Commencement speakers from the entertainment industry are not generally defined by whatever academic degree they may or may not have earned in their past, and therefore are not suspicious to the graduates assembled at their feet and just hoping for this to be over quickly so they can go and spend in a meaningful way their statistically speaking, US$ 985.00. Meaningful, I said.

And who better than Steven Spielberg, that perfect combination of a self-confessed belated academic and master of story-telling, to help them through those twenty-odd minutes?

Tom Hanks, long-time Spielberg collaborator and certified TIME Magazine Top Ten College dropout, said: “Movie-making is telling a story with the best technology at your disposal.” 

With nothing to carry you than a microphone, a lectern, and, hopefully, some kind of script or idea of what you plan to be talking about, this is more difficult. Especially so when it is a one-off occasion and you are the only thing standing between your audience and their get-away. 

Remember, to your listeners your story should be interesting, relevant, and, on a good day, compelling.

But you have to earn your stories, and it helps to have a certain gift:

“Know something, sugar? Stories only happen to people who can tell them.” Allan Gurganus (American author, graduate of Sarah Lawrence College. If interested in the history of the American South, not South America, check out his novel Oldest Living Confederate Widow Tells All, 1989)

Finally, the bottom line: 

“Those who tell the stories rule society.” Plato (Ancient Greek philosopher, 5th/4th century BC).


On this last thought, I recently saw an interview with Arkady Ostrovsky, the Moscow-based Russia and Eastern Europe Correspondent for The Economist, who last year published a book that is now on my (long and ever-growing) reading list: The Invention of Russia: The Journey from Gorbachev’s Freedom to Putin’s War. His thesis is that the unchallenged power Vladimir Putin and his entourage wield over Russia is based on one thing, first and foremost – his exclusive ownership of the messaging and total control of the media through which to disseminate his story. What we saw of the war against the Ukraine, Ostrovsky said by way of the most recent example, was not a case of the media following the unfolding military events – it was the other way around: the tanks rolled across the border primarily in order to create powerful pictures for the cameras. 


I guess we have all read George Orwell’s dystopian political science-fiction novel, Nineteen-Eighty-Four (published in 1949) at some point of our school education. Remember “Newspeak”? “2 + 2 = 5”? “Doublethink” teaching us “Good is bad”?

In his influential essay, “Politics and the English Language” (1946) George Orwell explored the way totalitarian regimes used vague terminology to manipulate their subjects’ thinking and obfuscate reality. His analysis led Orwell to an appeal for clear and concise language, synthesised in six rules for writers (if generous, we can let him get away with this – it was three plus three). They are:  


"Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

“Never use a long word where a short one will do.

“If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

“Never use the passive where you can use the active.

“Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

“Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.”

Regardless of their historical context, the disillusionment of a democratic Socialist with Stalinism, to this day these are good rules to stick to when writing, as I’m sure you will agree.

To which I will just add the following from Stephen King: “Any word you have to hunt for in a thesaurus is the wrong word. There are no exceptions to this rule.”

On the lighter side of life, George Orwell also had precise ideas, distinct views, and strongly-held convictions about many other things, as evidenced in his essay, “A Nice Cup of Tea”, published in the London Evening Standard on 12 January 1946. It is an in-depth discussion of the craft of brewing tea, including the line: "Here are my own eleven rules, every one of which I regard as golden."

So much for The Rule of Three, George. And aren’t you being just a little totalitarian here?

Speaking of brewing, equally, if not more interesting are Orwell’s musings about what he considered to be the perfect London pub, the requirements of such establishments in the countryside of course being something totally different. Categorise, categorise, categorise. 

In “The Moon Under Water”, published in the London Evening Standard on 9 February 1946, this time, he stipulated ten key criteria (a lost cause by now):

”The architecture and fittings must be uncompromisingly Victorian.

“Games, such as darts, are only played in the public bar so that in the other bars you can walk about without the worry of flying darts.

“The pub is quiet enough to talk, with the house possessing neither a radio nor a piano.

“The barmaids know the customers by name and take an interest in everyone.

“It sells tobacco and cigarettes, aspirins and stamps, and is obliging about letting you use the telephone.

“... there is a snack counter where you can get liver-sausage sandwiches, mussels (a speciality of the house), cheese, pickles, and [...] large biscuits with caraway seeds ...

“Upstairs, six days a week, you can get a good, solid lunch – for example, a cut off the joint, two vegetables and boiled jam roll – for about three shillings.

“... a creamy sort of draught stout ..., and it goes better in a pewter pot.

“They are particular about their drinking vessels at ‘The Moon Under Water’ and never, for example, make the mistake of serving a pint of beer in a handle-less glass. Apart from glass and pewter mugs, they have some of those pleasant strawberry-pink china ones. ... in my opinion beer tastes better out of china.

“... You go through a narrow passage leading out of the saloon, and find yourself in a fairly large garden ... Many as are the virtues of the ‘Moon Under Water’ I think that the garden is its best feature, because it allows whole families to go there instead of Mum having to stay at home and mind the baby while Dad goes out alone."

He did make one concession at the very end: “And if anyone knows of a pub that has draught stout, open fires, cheap meals, a garden, motherly barmaids and no radio, I should be glad to hear of it, even though its name were something as prosaic as the ‘Red Lion’ or the ‘Railway Arms’.”

Oh well, Orwell. 

A great story-teller, yes. A passionate advocate for freedom, absolutely. A brilliant analyst of totalitarianism, no doubt.

A paragon of good taste, I don’t think so. 

Declaration of interest: While fond of the British pub, I think there’s a lot to be said for the equally classic American Sports Bar – big TV screens everywhere, showing all sorts of different games at the same time; a large selection of cold (!) beers on tap; and Burgers. 

So if you ever come across George’s reviews on Trip Advisor, take them with a pinch of salt (pun fully intended). Just as you should be suspicious of quotes on the internet in general as they are all too often attributed to the wrong people – said Abraham Lincoln. 

Which brings us nicely back to Steven Spielberg and his absolutely brilliant film, Lincoln (2012) in which Daniel Day-Lewis characteristically excels as the 16th President of the United States, a performance that justly won him the Oscar for Best Performing Actor in a Leading Role in 2013.

Fun fact: English-born Day-Lewis holds a remarkable all-time record: three Academy Awards for Best Actor for his performances in My Left Foot (1989), There Will Be Blood (2007) and Lincoln (2012), making him the only man in history to have three wins in this category; and one of only three male actors to win three Oscars in total. 





The other two, just to save you researching: Jack Nicholson (Best Actor in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, 1975; As Good As It Gets, 1997; Best Supporting Actor in Terms of Endearment, 1983) and Walter Brennan, three-time winner in the Best Supporting Category for Come and Get It (1936); Kentucky (1938); and The Westerner (1940). Three within a space of five years – that’s what you call consistency. Whatever happened in 1937 and 1939, Walter? And yes, I had to look this up.

On the female side of things, the current score is as follows.

Joint runners-up with two Best Actress Awards and one for Best Supporting Actress each:

Ingrid Bergman (Gas Light, 1944; Anastasia, 1956; plus Murder on the Orient Express, 1974)

Meryl Streep (Sophie’s Choice, 1982; The Iron Lady, 2011; plus Kramer vs Kramer, 1979).
Nothing much between them I would say, but you be the judge. Maybe the total number of Oscar nominations helps in this predicament, and here Ms Streep is way out in front by the impressive score of 19 to seven. And of course, unlike Ingrid who died in 1982, aged only 67, she is still going strong. But please, Meryl, with all due respect, just spare us the agony of a sequel to Mamma Mia (2008)!

And the lone, undisputed, greatest-ever super star of all times is Katharine Hepburn     (1907 – 2003; a graduate of Bryn Mawr College, by the way) with four Oscars (and twelve nominations), all of them in the category of Best Actress in a Leading Role and spanning no less than 48 years:

Morning Glory (1933); Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967); The Lion in Winter (1968); and On Golden Pond (1981).

A goddess of the screen. An incredibly impressive woman. And an inspiration to humanity, not just the female half of it. Do look her up, please. 




Coming back to Steven Spielberg, in addition to Best Actor in a Leading Role, Lincoln was nominated in eleven more categories in 2012, including Best Motion Picture of the Year (winner: Argo) and Best Achievement in Directing (Winner: Ang Lee for Life of Pi), but surprisingly, disappointingly, and incomprehensively for many, only picked up one more Academy Award for Best Achievement in Production Design.

Anyhow, Mr Spielberg survived this particular disappointment, we may safely assume. According to IMDb, he is “undoubtedly one of the most influential film personalities in the history of film, perhaps Hollywood's best known director, and one of the wealthiest filmmakers in the world”.

While we are into statistics, he won the Academy Award for Best Director for Schindler's List (1993) and Saving Private Ryan (1998). Three of Spielberg's films – Jaws (1975), E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982), and Jurassic Park (1993) – achieved box office records, founding and coming to epitomise the concept of a “blockbuster” film. 

The unadjusted income from all Spielberg-directed films exceeds $9 billion worldwide, making him the highest-grossing director in history. His personal net worth is estimated by the famous Forbes list of billionaires for 2015 to be at US$ 3.5 billion, placing him, however, only in the modest rank of number 453. In real-time ranking of today, 2 June 2016, he has even slipped to # 505, but with US$ 3.6 billion to his name. Things could be worse, Steve.

But who cares. He is now the proud recipient of an Honorary Doctorate from Harvard University.

So how did Steven Spielberg close his Commencement Speech on 26 May 2016? 

“And finally, I wish you all a true, Hollywood-style happy ending. I hope you outrun the T. Rex, catch the criminal, and for your parents’ sake, maybe every now and then, just like E.T.: Go home. Thank you.” 

What a nice, modest, human touch.

Which reminds me of President George H. W. Bush, 41st President of the United States, aka George Bush Senior or Bush the Elder. In 1993, at the end of his term in office, he did a one-hour exclusive interview with, if I remember correctly, CNN. The last question from his host was, “Mr President, looking back on your long life and your illustrious career, is there one single thing that you are particularly proud of?” Bush halted for a moment and then replied: “My kids still come home.” 

What a nice, modest, human touch.

Probably somewhat less Politically Correct than Steven Spielberg, I might have left the Harvard graduates with a line from the novel I am currently reading, High Dive by Jonathan Lee, published only last year, which revisits a failed plot to assassinate Margaret Thatcher in 1984. What if?

The quote reflects the thought process of one of the story’s protagonists, young Freya who has just graduated from Secondary School and is trying to make up her mind whether to apply to University or not: 

“She had a sense that she’d been trying to stay away from mistakes, and that it might be better to let them occur.” 

Food for thought, y’all.