My latest commentary on “New York values” actually could have been a subject for my City Observed broadcasts, except that the issue was raised in the sadly comical Republican Presidential debates.
That puts in the classification of Entertainment, hence for me, an A&E Observed broadcast segment.
Of course, in disparaging New York, candidate Senator Ted Cruz could have slammed the city’s recent rash of high rise luxury residences scarring the skyline, the pressing need for affordable housing and the nagging homeless problem: Items in my critical realm.
But the Canadian-born, Texas transplant tea bag chose to criticize his equally repellent rival Donald Trump, for embodying “New York values.” Cruz further define these values as “socially liberal and pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage, “with a ”focus on money and the media.”
These traits broadly labeled “too New York” are usually a veiled aphorism for saying “too Jewish.” And you don’t’ have to love Rye bread, be Jewish or a New Yorker, to consider the remark an anti Semitic slur. Whether Cruz meant it or not, it needs to be put down.
Yeah, I’m from New York.
It was where I was born and some people would say ill bred, and despite living in California for nearly 40 years, 20 in mythic Malibu, I still refer to New York as my hometown.
When asked why, I could reply as a tanned Californian by politely smiling, or as a New Yorker, with a snap back question. “you gotta problem with that?” Depends on my mood. and we are a moody breed on both coasts.
I guess the popular proverb applies here, that you can take the boy out of New York, but you can’t take New York out of the boy, especially if he was born in a once mocked , outcast Brooklyn. Yeah, “Brruklin,” that now hipster heaven where craft beer has replaced egg creams.
Despite years on radio and television, a thousand voice overs, and countless corrections by friends, I like to think my diction has improved.
But apparently not my attitude, as I immodestly believe my years of being critic and these commentaries bear out.
I’m a New Yorker, opinionated, contentious, and quick on the offensive, and on the defensive.
And I love New York, its energy, drive, diversity, tolerance and, yes, toughness.
These are traits I frankly I feel Los Angeles, and every community, could use more of, including my liberal, libertarian, misanthropic Malibu.
“Gotta a problem with that?”
Today, on 97.5 KBU FM, and everywhere on radiomalibu.net and select websites, a departure from the usual touting of cultural attractions in and around Los Angeles, to comment on the recent awarding of the 2016 Pritzker Prize, the highest honor in architecture, to Alejandro Aravena.
Not only is the award noteworthy this year for tapping a relatively unknown designer in Chile, –most previous honorees have been from mainstream United States and western Europe – but for its focus on social housing.
This really sets Aravena apart, declared the Pritzker jury. which this year included the British Richard Rogers and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Beyer. The prize comes with a $100,000 award but perhaps more importantly is usually followed with a swarm of international commissions.
If so, it will hopefully lend additional attention to the groundswell here and broad for affordable, well designed, user-friendly housing, that also serves and involves the communities where located.
The 48 year old Aravena – that is relatively young for an accomplished architect,– is best know for his modestly inexpensive residential projects, and his commitment to create sustainable, affordable and resilent cities.
In the past, with a few exceptions, the focus of the designs of the architects honored have been on flashy forms and iconic buidings, stand out projects that generated media attention for its sponsors and celebrity status for its architects.
This increasingly high end bent in the profession was duly noted by this year’s intrepid Pritzker jury, which in a statement prefacing the award declared –quote:
The role of the architect is now being challenged to serve greater social and humanitarian needs, and Alejandro Aravena has clearly, generously and fully responded to this challenge. Unquote.
The statement and award frankly warms my heart, for in the years past as an urban affairs reporter for the New York Times ,and later as the architecture and urban design critic for the L.A. Times, I immodestly spotlighted social housing .
The definition I cited in my writings and teaching over the years was that first and foremost, architecture is a social art, used to create spaces and places for human endeavor.
I still believe that. Thank you, Pritzker jury , for remind me of that
I’m Sam Hall Kaplan, and is the arts and entertainment observed, heard locally on 97.5 KBU, everywhere on radiomalibu.net, and read on cityobserved.com and discerning websites.
It’s a new year, but paramount before Malibu’s City Council is an issue that won’t go away: the fate of Measure R and with it the debate over the future of the Civic Center.
This is grist for my latest City Observed, penned on the Point, heard locally on 97.5 KBU Saturdays, everywhere on radiomalibu.net. and read on Nextdoor and select websites.
To bring readers up to speed, Measure R limiting citywide development and requiring voters approve of select new commercial projects has been ruled illegal.
Not incidentally this was predicted by several involved residents also concerned with the rapacious development of the civic center, myself included. Let me add, there is no comfort in hindsight.
The Measure R ruling also negates the subsequent rejection of Measure W, blocking the Whole Foods development. It is expected to now move ahead.
Meanwhile. the city has to decide whether to appeal the Superior Court ruling, at an estimated cost of $100,00 plus
Then there is the question whether the proponents of the original measure, principally Michele and Rob Reiner, want to join in the effort, and chip in some more big bucks.
And what could be expected from this effort, I ask, besides a windfall for lawyers and possibly another questionable measure going before a weary electorate, or simpler, a less controversial recasting of stringent land use regulations.
But actually Malibu has such regulations, guided by a preamble that clearly states an abiding commitment to a livable, sustainable, environment-friendly city.
It just needs to be energetically enforced, and that means no commercial variances or conditional uses, period. It is those loopholes developers and their crafty lawyers have been abusing, while taking advantage of a municipal government that is just too consumer friendly.
It is not that the city councils we have elected are criminally culpable, they have been just too affable.
They like being nice and liked; that is why they sought office, and why we have elected them. It is just unfortunate they have fallen pry to what I call a cult of amiability, and have become too friendly with special interests.
This unfortunately I feel has set a tone for city staff, which also has become too consumer friendly; more projects, more budget bucks. Of course, this makes it easier for the staff who lean a bit too heavily on others to do their work.
This has allowed the reps for the deep pocket applicants, be they lobbyists or lawyers, to script the requested decisions in the obscure legal language government wraps itself in, and the hell with the public.
So I immodestly suggest the council NOT bother appealing the Measure R ruling. It will be too costly, time consuming, and probably fail.
Instead, it should recognize the popular mandate Malibu residents have expressed in recent referendums, be more transparent and less defensive, and begin to act accordingly.
To that end, I of course have several suggestions, concerning the civic center and beyond in the new year. So stay tuned to KBU and Nextdoor,