Abu Dhabi Take Three

My third trip to Abu Dhabi took me across the stirrings in Bahrain to an island of apparent social and economic stability - a movie set, it seemed to me. The future cultural island next to the city centre, which will host Guggenheim and Louvre outposts and a Zaha Hadid concert hall amongst others, is the topic of a fancy permanent exhibition in a new museum venue on an otherwise still deserted island. On Yas Island, a yacht harbour anchors next to a Formula 1 race track, which the guests of a brand new hotel, covered in a blanket of changing lights, can overlook - and overhear. The dinner guests at the brand new Cipriani's terrace can do the same. The Masdar ecocity (home to the only organic store in town - most produce is flown in ....) rises amidst a desert sea of construction; a luxurious resort hotel, amid the Liwan desert dunes. Fabulous facades! Modern opulence? Enjoy the movie.

Person to Picture-honest

Huge tableaux of manipulated photos envelop the visitor of the current Gilbert and George exhibition in Hamburg: Jack Freak Pictures, which were created in 2008, on the basis of literally tens of thousand photos. Some work titles titilate with puns: 'Metal Jack' for example - Full Metal Jacket, what remains of the Empire and Military in today's Britain, the British Jack on a biscuit tin ..., some titles make you wonder: Frigidarium, the frigid in the English temperament? Gilbert (the French one of the artist pair) and George are present in each one of their works. They are keen for their viewers to make up their own minds, to have direct relations with their works - and them? - so to speak. That is why they enjoyed seeing Bejing visitors (of another of their exhibitions) touch their pictures and eagerly discuss in front of them: "Picture-to-person honest", as opposed to the highly developed Western industry of art interpretation, appreciation, collection and of course, sales. I rather enjoyed that phrase and wanted to share it with you!

Politischer Einstieg in Grün

Seit Dezember 2010 bin ich Mitglied der Grünen (GAL Hamburg, Bezirk Eimsbüttel, Wahlkreis 5). Grüner Wähler bin ich seit Mitte der 90er Jahre (1982 hätte ich das erste Mal wählen können, befand ich mich allerdings in London, um Internationales Abitur zu machen; danach studierte ich in den U.S.A.).

Seit vielen Jahren mache ich mir Sorgen über wachsende Politikverdrossenheit, Nichtwählerwachstum und die m.E. immer breitere Schere zwischen professionellem Politikbetrieb und den 'BürgerwählerInnen'; keine guten Anzeichen für unsere Demokratie. Auch glaube ich, dass wir in Deutschland und Hamburg (wieder) lernen müssen, zu teilen - nicht auszu- oder verteilen, sondern zu teilen; vom 'carsharing', über den gemeinsamen öffentlichen Raum (z.B. Gemeinschaftsstrasse) zum Elbraum, bei dem es nicht nur um die Zukunft des Hafens gehen kann. Nicht, dass ich besonders vorbildlich wäre im 'teilen'; ich könnte mehr und besser teilen (u.a. in Sachen Helene Lange Gymnasium & Internationales Baccalaureat und Obdachlosigkeit in Hamburg habe ich mich engagiert und mache weiter so; man sollte bei sich anfangen). Gleichzeitig finde ich es wichtig, mit Anderen darüber ins Gespräch zu kommen. Deswegen habe ich mich entschlossen, politisch aktiv zu werden, über das Wählen hinaus.

Die Grünen machen die vernünftigsten politischen Vorschläge, davon bin ich seit Jahren überzeugt; siehe z.B. in Sachen Gesundheitspolitik. Wenn es einer mit dem viel zu abgenutzten Begriff Nachhaltigkeit ernst meint, dann sind es wir Grünen, die sich auch 'Vielfalt' auf die Fahnen geschrieben haben. Jedes Grünen-Treffen, dass ich bisher miterlebt habe, zeugt davon. Hamburg profitiert seit Jahrhunderten von der Vielfalt - kulturell und wirtschaftlich. In unserer Stadt sind Menschen zuhause, die 179 verschiedene Sprachen sprechen. Im Großen und Ganzen scheinen Hamburger also gut mit dem 'Fremden', oder 'Anderen' umzugehen. Das ist eine Stärke, die wir ausbauen sollten.

Hamburg ist ein Stadtstaat, dem in vieler Hinsicht enge Grenzen gesetzt sind. Ob Hafenentwicklung, Klimawandel, HSH Nordbank, die Schulden des öffentlichen Haushaltes oder sogar Schulpolitik, wir Hamburger sind abhängig vom Bund und/oder anderen Bundesländern, usw. Wir brauchen viele verschiedene Partner, um bestimmte Ziele zu erreichen. Im Vordergrund stehen also Vernetzung und Zusammenarbeit, wie es uns Grünen auch in Bezug auf Bürgerbeteiligung wichtig ist. Nebst solchem 'networking' geht es mir auch darum, um die Ecke zu denken und nicht offensichtliche Verbindungen herzustellen. Dazu möchte ich mich einbringen!

Hamburg ist gleichzeitig (privat) ungewöhnlich reich - natürlich ungleich verteilt - und (öffentlich) eher arm (ca. €25Mrd Gesamtschulden, mit öffentlichen Unternehmen der Stadt ca. €41Mrd). Gemeinsam haben wir Bürger, mithilfe der von uns gewählten Politiker über unsere Verhältnisse gelebt, was sich an dem jahrzehntelangen Schuldenaufbau ablesen lassen kann. Die globale Finanz- und Wirtschaftkrise hat unser Stadtschuldenfass zum Überlaufen gebracht. Wie drehen wir diesen Trend um? Wie können wir unsere Schulden - es sind unsere, der Staat sind wir - auf ein erträgliches Niveau abbauen? Viele Leute müssen an einer komplexen Lösung arbeiten. Ich glaube, eine Bürgeranleihe wäre Teil dieser Lösung. Wir Bürger, insbesondere die Wohlhabenden unter uns, leihen unserer Stadt freiwillig Geld und bekommen Zinsen dafür. Möglichst niemand sonst sollte daran verdienen (d.h. die Banken). Dann kann unsere Stadt Schulden mit Bürgerschulden ablösen; ein erster Schritt, bei dem die Zinsen in der Stadt blieben. Und weil viele Bürger an den Staatsschulden direkt 'beteiligt' wären, würden sie vermehrt darauf achten, dass der Hamburger Haushalt tatsächlich ein 'Runterfahren' der Schulden, nicht nur der Neuverschuldung, vorsieht. Nur so wird unsere Stadt wieder handlungsfähig, anstatt jeden 7., 6. oder 5. Steuereuro für Zinszahlungen zu zahlen. Diese Idee will ich voranbringen!

Best movie this year?

"Io sono l'amore", "I am love": This evening, I saw the movie, with Tilda Swinton among others, for the 2nd time. A breakthrough, I find. A very grand household in Milano is run, pristinely. Wealth written all over it. A grandfather announces who shall succeed him in running the company. Almost aristocratic, the atmosphere, but the firm only exists since the last World War (II) and is not a 'grand' as that, nor, by extension, the family that runs it - the Recchi. That's just by-the-by, because with all the servants serving excellent food and wine and preparing and cleaning up and ironing and compensating for the affection, which any family should exchange among itself, at a minimum - there's Emma, once Kitiya, who had been picked up by the grandfather's son in Russia, like a prized Morandi painting, of which several are on view in this movie.

Emma and her three children: A schemer, a romantic and a semi-rebellious lesbian. One wins, in his view of things, the other will be disappointed and dies; the daughter finds her way, it seems, but does not leave behind her what she 'should', or might. Instead, their mother does, for love - of a cook. Leaving Tancredi (the husband) behind, to find her freedom. Which, most visually, she certainly did not have before - nor knew to crave?

The stylishness works - because it does not dominate. The soundtrack works for me too, brilliantly, but for a few exceptions: John Adams, the composer, did not know what hit him (he wrote the music before the movie was made). There's an exquisite love-making scene. And there's the three-women-in-the-restaurant scene - at the core of the story, which places mothers, grandmothers and wives "where they belong" - but for Emma, in the end. In the restaurant, it is the grandfather's wife, who signifies: 'Were are the women, who have married into the Recchi. Let's keep this ship afloat.' But Emma eats, with the most ravishing of pleasures, the meal served by the cook - tasting freedom. The third (young) woman, destined to marry one of the Recchi sons, plays by the book. She understands the role she is supposed to assume, once married - but that won't happen, for other reasons.

A suberb movie! Go see it!

Monet in Paris

A half-empty Lufthansa plane took me to Paris mid-October. Anti-pension-at-62-legislation protests were affecting French public life. Public transport was severely slowed down. But the new driverless shuttle from Terminal 1 to the train station ran swiftly. And an RER rolled into the station about 10 minutes after I arrived. Lucky devil! It was crowded already, full of people who work at the humungous airport and travellers. A woman sitting next to me was mobilephoning to her hearts' content. She must be working for customs, because she mentioned how many Chinese had been apprehended that day for carrying more than $10.000 in cash. They like to shop, don't they! Indeed, affluent Chinese and Russian tourists keep the French luxury industry alive and kicking. Michel Houellebecq's most recent novel "La carte et le territoire" picks up on this phenomenon. Just imagine: You go to your bank and take out $10.000 to go shopping. Amazing!

An African gentleman in front me was using two mobile phones to keep in touch.  Indeed, lots of people were phoning and messaging. In our society, everybody is somewhere else. The RER stopped at Gare du Nord; no connection to Chatelet because of the strike. So I hopped onto Metro No 4, then 7 and finally 9, to get to Franklin Roosevelt. A few steps later I stood in front of the Grand Palais with my online-reservation-prepaid-ticket, to see the grand Monet exhibition. The prepaid people generated a queue, too, though a shorter one than the on-the-spot ticket buyers. It was a breezy courtyard, so I was glad it didn't take too long to get in. Also, a short, extremely picky and bossy lady, who wore shoes that were supposed to look expensive, began to bother me. She was pushing around her husband. Their daughter intervened in typically French incomprehensible spurts; an awkward family. Of course, the bossy lady had accosted one of the guards, complaining that they had reserved tickets for 17:00 and weren't being let in. When we filed up the stairs, the guard made fun of her. 'She can't come in, she complained'. I was amused!

The exhibition organisers had vacuumed up the Monets from museums across the globe. That in itself was impressive. I particularly appreciated several paintings hanging in small museums: A Seine sunset from the Smith College collection (Massachusetts), a very impressionistic and atmospheric Gare St. Lazare from the Niedersächsisches Landesmuseum and a similarly atmospheric scene of the Gare d'Auteuil, which belongs to the Conseil General of Cergy Pontoise. There was much to compare: The Cote d'Azur panoramas, the Normandie coastline perspectives, the poplar tree views and the haystack landscapes. Monet had painted fifteen of them for the original exhibition. We were allowed to see six next to one another.

The exhibition was so expansive, it was hard to take it all in; impossible, in fact. It made more sense to take your pick. I did note that Monet had painted in at least three optically distinguishable styles: Flattish-simplifying, dotty-spotty (a bit like Seurat) and contrasting-turbulent (e.g. lots of movement implied by the colours and strokes).  Monet has created some breathtaking depictions of cloudy skies and rendered a practically abstract sleepy willow in 1920-22, though painting human bodies wasn't his forte, in my view. A whole room was devoted to impressions of Venice, where two of the most beautifully framed pictures could be found (Le Palais Contarini & The Doge Palace).

Slightly overwhelmed I walked down to the very busy Metro No. 1, got off at St. Paul and rang the bell of my friends' apartment in the part of the Marais, which leans towards the river. I was expecting to take them out for dinner, but instead about a dozen people, most of whom I knew, gathered for a lively dinner at their place.

One couple was considering investing in a property on the Ile St. Louis, to turn it into several corporate rental apartments. I pointed out to them that in doing so, they would be part of a trend, which makes it less and less feasible for regular, middle or working class people to live in town. Lots of wealthy investors have taken their funds out of the stockmarket and channelled it into real estate in London or Paris. Le Monde quoted a French investor, who lives in London, and put €15M into Paris real estate. Such people want to rent their newly acquired property to people like them; global urban hoppers, with adequate cash in their pockets. Add to that the very wealthy people, who keep a third or fourth home in Paris, which they use a few times a year perhaps - and you're crowding out 'regular' people, who can't afford the rent, or purchase, of a pad in one of the 20 arrondissements. The City of Paris has been using its stock of social housing to assure that nurses, metro drivers and rubbish collectors can continue to live in town. This in turn crowds out those people, for whom social housing was originally intended.

In my days (1984-5), there was Fauchon and a brand new traiteur near the Rue de Seine market. Now I note the results of a traiteur explosion. Fancy foods, well-packaged olive oils and chocolats in all shapes can be purchased in elegantly designed storelettes at every corner. Thankfully, you still have down-to-earth market streets like the Rue des Martyres in the 9ieme, offering local butcher ware, traditional patisserie and fruits 'n veggies. Round the corner is the Musee de la Vie Romantique, an oasis hidden in a courtyard next to a primary school. There I saw the most impressive painting of a lightening strike (by a Maksim Vorobiev) I ever seen! By the way, the art deco gallery, named the Galleries de Prado, pictured above, I stumble upon by chance, on my way up to the 9th arrondissement. An ungentrified treasure!