A Divided Marketplace: Comparing Economics of East and West Berlin

This article was selected as the winner of the “Fall of the Wall” writing contest, held by the Department of German and Scandinavian Studies (GSS) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and funded by the German Embassy. It is to be published by the German Information Center and the GSS sometime later this year.

---

Introduction

Berlin serves as a microcosm ideal for economic analysis in the 20th Century, having transgressed a distinct divide in economic systems, as well as numerous external disadvantages, to become a budding leader not only in the markets of the European Union (EU), but in the financial, industrial, and service markets of the world at large. This paper will briefly present the economic and political landscape of Berlin before its famous (or infamous) division, and then the city’s subsequent existence as both a social democratic market economy and a centrally planned socialist economy. This paper argues concisely that the distinct division created economic and political adversity that has motivated the people of the German “Hauptstadt” to restore the city to prominence through a combination of investment in innovative research and well-aimed government subsidies created with the purpose of promoting equality between East and West.

Pre-Cold War Berlin

The city of Berlin at the start of the 1940’s boasted an impressive combination of industry, research, and education, being the center of what Hitler envisioned as the seat from which his Germanic world empire would be ruled. Host to over 4.5 million inhabitants, Berlin was among the world’s largest cities before the devastation of World War II reached its borders ¹.

Berlin was quickly reduced in stature by sustained, Allied aerial bombardment and by the incursion of Soviet forces in 1945. Housing units in Berlin were reduced by as much as 42%, displacing much of the population, and left communication, transportation, and basic utilities crippled ². The productive ability of Berlin was nearly crippled, East Berlin suffering an initial loss or displacement of 24% of its population and 22.9% of its industrial capacity (IC), and West Berlin suffering 27% population loss or displacement and 23.5% of its IC; these numbers would only worsen, however, when during the two months of total Soviet occupation, before Allied occupation by the French, British, and American forces began, the Red Army essentially took as reparations or destroyed 67% of West Berlin’s industrial capacity and 33% of East Berlin’s³.

Divided Berlin (1945-89)

Image 1: The four sectors of Berlin during the Cold War.

The Allies, France, England, and the United States, occupied the Western boroughs of Berlin⁴, and upon the frontier ranging from Pankow and Reinickendorf to Treptow in the north and Neukölln in the south. The USSR would take the entire Eastern half for itself. In 1948, the country was officially divided, and the Western amalgamation of “Bundesländer” (states) became the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The rest of the nation joined the Eastern Bloc, the nations of Eastern Europe united under the hegemony of the Soviets, and became the German Democratic Republic (GDR). This post bellum division left Ally occupied, now democratically governed West Berlin stranded and blockaded on all sides by the USSR⁵. This blockade took its toll on the Western, social democratic market economy almost immediately, and required the FRG to begin providing the Berlin municipal government with massive subsidies in order to stimulate growth and the survival of its industries. Before the construction of the Berlin Wall in August 1961, the city also bore the burden of acting as a major refugee center. Over 1.8 million Eastern Bloc escapees registered in West Berlin, with all but 190,000 of them flown to West Germany⁶. The massive influx of refugees may have lead to numerous crises in the region including an uprising in East Berlin in 1953 and food shortages that pushed the FRG to institute nearly complete collective agriculture⁷.

West Berlin’s innovative processes were existent despite such hardship, and were certainly not above change or influence; their push for experimental economic models was not without affect from its socialist neighbors. One such system was the use of a collective enterprise
model, in which the traditional, hierarchical structure of the firm was broken and authority was more evenly distributed between wageworkers⁸. Consisting of mainly West German manufacturing businesses and shops, the workers would often take competitive pay cuts in exchange for the authority to take on more tasks than they were assigned if they so chose, and to contribute to projects and decision making responsibilities outside their immediate purview⁹. These developments were not stemmed in the later years of the division, even after reunification, and continue to thrive in Berlin’s economy today.

Image 2: Berlin was a proverbial island in a Soviet sea, a precarious bastion of capitalism amongst waves of communism.

Despite its status as the most prosperous, non-Russian economy of the Warsaw Pact, East Berlin was still far behind its western counterpart, and lacked wholly any such commitment to fostering innovation. Although the GDR did not provide direct subsidies as the FRG did to West Berlin, the industries of East Berlin enjoyed a number of indirect subsidies¹⁰. East Berlin enjoyed an ability to implement “faster and better housing construction, a representative and more consistent architectural and urban design, a better supply of goods for consumption,” earlier than the West, due the GDR central planning, and therefore also had the capacity to provide “skilled jobs which [in turn] promised better career opportunities¹¹.” This initial boost allowed East Berlin to rise to as the premier industrial theater of the GDR, with over 140,000 jobs in electrical technology, electronics, machine construction and light industries, despite the proportion of people working in industry having been less than the GDR’s average¹².

By the time of reunification in 1989, East Berlin had experienced a downturn. Secondary sector jobs had fallen by 35%¹³; the primary and secondary sectors generated only 28% of East Berlin’s GNP despite making up 33.1% of the employment in the city, compared to the primary and secondary sectors of West Berlin which produced 42.1% of GNP despite making up only 31.3% of the workforce¹⁴.

The disparities between the two halves of the city, including the concentration of industry jobs, the employment of women by significantly higher numbers in the GDR, and the generally vast difference in two completely distinct economic systems resulted in an unbelievably harrowing, daunting, and ominous opportunity for successful reunification. No such blueprint, no example could be provided to the soon-to-be German Federal Republic on how to integrate an ex-Soviet Bloc nation into its economy. Berlin would serve as the experiment of market fusion.

Transition and Reunification (1990-Present)

The Fall of the Berlin Wall, although symbolically significant as a positive political gesticulation, signaled only a new host of problems on the economic front. Perhaps of greatest concern at this time was a massive rise in Berlin unemployment. Having had nearly the entire eastern population employed by state owned industries of the GDR planned economy, the daunting risk of massive labor surplus loomed in the face of a pending reunification. Unemployment immediately shot up 20 percent by the start of 1990, with passionate labor disputes becoming a staple of frustrated and understandably concerned former-GDR employees¹⁵. Although employees in East Germany were at least as well educated “in terms of formal education,” the skills learned and knowledge gained via state owned companies and via an East German education were antiquated and not readily transferable to the market-­‐based economy of the new German republic¹⁶.

In an effort to stay the impending crisis, a privatization agency known as Treuhand led by West German manager Detlev Carsten Rohwedder, was charged with the task of privatizing 12,000 GDR companies, liquidating unusable or outdated assets, and bearing the monumental burden of keeping millions of East Germans employed¹⁷. The Treuhand Trust was valued at about $300 billion Deutschmark (~ 336 billion dollars), easily the largest trust ever formed in human history. Unfortunately, however, the privatization efforts of the new government were mostly unsuccessful in stemming the coming onslaught of economic discord. Rohwedder was assassinated by suspected communist radicals and the Treuhand was disbanded in 1994¹⁸¹⁹.

Berlin’s economic prospects were further diminished. The German government soon discovered that not only had the strength of the planned economy of the GDR been vastly overstated, it would also not be bringing in any of its Eastern Bloc trade relationships, something that had been hoped might foster economic growth in the newly merged nation²⁰. Since the mid-90’s, Berlin’s government has placed an emphasis on both investment and higher education, having seemingly restored the city’s global stature as a thriving research zone. Berlin has exchanged its manufacturing sector basis for an expansive service sector (which now constitutes close to 85% of all employment), and the capital city is now distinguished as among the top three innovative regions in the entire EU, thanks to its numerous higher education institutions over 70 publicly funded R&D institutes, as well as multiple laboratories, technology parks, and incubators²¹. Berlin spends 4.2% of its GDP on research and development.

The economic division of unified Berlin in the modern day “Bundesrepublik Deutschland” is still far from trivial, however, and the “science-led innovation [has proven] not enough to address the challenges of long-term unemployment and a low absorptive capacity” in
Germany’s economy²².

In economic terms, the former division manifests itself not as one quantifiable variation, but as multiple differences between East and West. Differences between GDP per capita, unemployment, and housing prices are especially indicative of the disparity. Although GDP per capita revenue in East Berlin has reached €23,700, more than double GDP at the time of reunification, West Berlin GDP per capita rose to €33,400, a 30% gap over East Berlin. The government has offered various subsidies, however, in an effort to reduce the differences in purchasing power between East and West²³. They are, however, waning in the face of Berlin’s more integrative policies for research funding, continually investing more in the applied sciences per annum²⁴.

Unemployment is still varied between East and West, with nearly 12% in Berlin, compared to less than 6% unemployment to the west²⁵. However, the Gini coefficient suggests that overall, German society is mostly equal since reunification, there being about a 27% inequality gap in the distribution of income²⁶. The differential in prices has led some East Germans who moved West to return East; the move motivated largely by the lower cost of housing is not substantial, however, as the East still cumulatively lost a tenth of its population overall, dropping from 18.1 to 16.3 million since reunification, whereas the West has gained 6%, up from 61.9 to 65.5 million²⁷. Despite these disparities, Berlin has managed, again, to become a regional as well as world leader despite the daunting task of reunification.

Analysis & Conclusion

The task of determining whether reunification was successful depends entirely upon the medium used to judge not only Berlin, but Germany at large. Again, having had no other example in history upon which to compare the process of reunification leaves critics and supporters alike in a difficult situation upon which to declare a defeat or victory. As example and in terms of renovation, nearly every east German city has been updated: the anachronistic, bland concrete Soviet architecture having largely been replaced with more modern edifices, Berlin perhaps being the crown jewel of this endeavor²⁸.

That being stated, the amount of continued subsidy that is being provided to East Berliners and Germans cannot be understated. In 2010, 50% of the $103 billion of subsidies towards development were used for the funding of the social benefits and welfare that were required to protect the East’s substantial population of unemployed workers²⁹. This commitment to protecting the citizenry of the East demonstrates a tenacity and commitment to promulgating the new Berlin, and Germany, to prominence together or not at all. To still be a leader in not only the EU but in the world for research and innovation, and in the financial, industrial, and service markets despite the massive subsidies and harrowing difficulties encountered over the past 20 years is a testament to the Berliner’s ability to adapt, and for the remnants of reunification to go successfully by any such metric it is to be considered by. The people of Berlin have demonstrated, through their commitment to R&D and social protection of all, that success and improvement will be made through perspiration, innovation, and most certainly through the inspiration that their own example sets for the rest of the world.

Endnotes

1. Merritt, R. L. “Divided Berlin: One Past And Three Futures.” Journal of Peace Research (1972): 331-44. Web. 13
2. Id 331.
3. Id 332.
4. See App. 1. See also Image 1.
5. See Image 2.
6. Carpenter, James O. “Berlin.” Sociological Focus Vol. 1, No. 4, Summer, 1968 (1968): 48-­‐58. Web. 13 Oct. 2014.
7. Id 52.
8. Müller, Birgit. Toward an Alternative Culture of Work: Political Idealism and Economic Practices in West Berlin Collective Enterprises. Boulder: Westview, 1991. 1-­‐212. 1,9, 15. Print.
9. Id 25-45.
10. Dangschat, Jens. “Berlin and the German Systems of Cities.” Urban Studies 30.6 (1993): 1025-­‐051. 1034.
11. Id.
12. Id 1036.
13. See App. 2.
14. See App. 3.
15. Wiederwald, Rupert. “Treuhand Took the Heat for Privatization of East German Economy | German Reunification | DW.DE | 20.09.2010.” DW.DE. Web. 15 Oct. 2014. <http://www.dw.de/treuhand-took-the-heat-for-privatization-of-east-german-economy/a-5985015&gt;
16. Spitz-­‐Oener, A. “Human Capital, Job Tasks and Technology in East Germany after Reunification.” National Institute Economic Review July 2007. 201 (2007): 97-­‐106. 97. Web. 13 Oct. 2014.
17. Id. Wiederwald 1.
18. Sinn, Gerlinde, and Hans Sinn. Jumpstart: The Economic Unification of Germany. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1992. Print. 105.
19. Id Wiederwald 2.
20. Id Dangschat 1045.
21. “Berlin, Germany: Assessment and Recommendations.” OECD Review of Higher Education in Regional and City Development. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 4. Web. 15 Oct. 2014. <http://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/46573473.pdf&gt;.
22. Id 5.
23. Lemaître, Frédéric. “East-West German Split Still Lingers on 22 Years after Reunification.” The Guardian Weekly 9 Oct. 2012. The Guardian. Web. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/09/west-east-germany-split&gt;.
24. Id 7.
25. Id.
26. “CIA World Factbook: Germany.” Central Intelligence Agency. Central Intelligence Agency. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.
27. Id Lemaître.
28. Chase, Jefferson. “Reunified Germany Is a Nation of Many Faces and Variable Success.” Web. 15 Oct. 2014. <http://www.dw.de/reunified-germany-is-a-nation-of-many-faces-and-variable-success/a-6025610&gt;.
29. Id.

Works Cited

1. “Berlin, Germany: Assessment and Recommendations.” OECD Review of Higher Education in Regional and City Development. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Web. 15 Oct. 2014. <http://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/46573473.pdf&gt;.

2. Carpenter, James O. “Berlin.” Sociological Focus 1, No. 4, Summer, 1968 (1968): 48-58. Web. 13 Oct. 2014.

3. Chase, Jefferson. “Reunified Germany Is a Nation of Many Faces and Variable Success.” Web. 15 Oct. 2014. <http://www.dw.de/reunified-germany-is-a-nation-of-many-faces-and-variable-success/a-6025610&gt;.

4. “CIA World Factbook: Germany.” Central Intelligence Agency. Central Intelligence Agency. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

5. Dangschat, Jens. “Berlin and the German Systems of Cities.”   Urban Studies6 (1993): 1025-051.

6. Lemaître, Frédéric. “East-West German Split Still Lingers on 22 Years after Reunification.” The Guardian Weekly 9 Oct. 2012. The Guardian. Web. <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/09/west-east-germany-split&gt;.

7. Merritt, R. L. “Divided Berlin: One Past And Three Futures.” Journal of Peace Research (1972): 331-44. Web. 13 Oct. 2014.

8. Mueller, Birgit. Toward an Alternative Culture of Work: Political Idealism and Economic Practices in West Berlin Collective Enterprises. Boulder: Westview, 1991. 1-212. Print.

9. Sinn, Gerlinde, and Hans Sinn. Jumpstart: The Economic Unification of Germany. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1992. Print.

10. Spitz-Oener, A. “Human Capital, Job Tasks and Technology in East Germany after Reunification.” National Institute Economic Review July 2007.201 (2007): 97-106. Web. 13 Oct. 2014.

11. Wiederwald, Rupert. “Treuhand Took the Heat for Privatization of East German Economy | German Reunification | DW.DE | 20.09.2010.” DE. Web. 15 Oct. 2014. <http://www.dw.de/treuhand-took-the-heat-for-privatization-of-east-german-economy/a-5985015

Appendix

App. 1: The Boroughs of Berlin

App. 2: Percentage of employees (excluding apprentices), by sectors, East Berlin 1955-89

App. 3: Percentage of employees and value added by sectors, West Berlin and East Berlin, 1990

ALS Challenge Paving Way for Ebola Awareness?

***

[Thanks to Steven P. Bennett and Dr. Abdulrahman M. El-Sayed for their articles on the topic of the ALS and its usefulness for promoting public policy and health issues. You can find both of their articles at these links respectively:
http://stevenpbennett.wordpress.com/ ,     https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/abdulrahman-m–el-sayed-compares-western-responses-to-the-summer-s-two-top-health-stories  ]

***

The ALS Challenge took America by storm this summer, an ice storm to be exact. If you have (impossibly) not heard of the challenge, individuals post videos of themselves dumping buckets of ice water over their own head in order to raise funds and awareness for ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease. ALS, or  Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), is a “progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord.” ¹. Essentially, patients suffer loss of motor control due to the death of nerve cells, eventually leading to paralysis and their own death. It is a traumatic disease affecting roughly 30,000 Americans at any given time. ².

The other disease to hit the media this summer was Ebola, a disease that has sadly affected an already suffering Sub-Saharan African population primarily in Liberia and Guinea. Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) has a 90% mortality rate and is extremely contagious with a Biosafety Hazard rating of 4, therefore, requiring caregivers to take the utmost precautions in order to prevent infection (including, ideally, biosuits, multiple showers, a vacuum sealed room, and ultraviolet checks, amongst others). ³. ⁴. Nearly 1900 people have been confirmed as victims of the 2014 West African outbreak. ⁵.

Of the two, ALS certainly took the prize as the most talked about on social media and the most money raised. A conservative estimate of the money raised for the ALS Association is in the range of more than $100 million dollars. ⁶. Money simply has not, and is not, being raised at the same level. It is unclear what amount of funding would even be needed to combat Ebola effectively. Given the difficulty of treating the virus, and the early stages of research, the amount of money that would reasonably satisfy efforts is incomprehensible, but surely insurmountably large at the ideal level.

Much confusion and anger has arisen amongst EVD concerned, socially conscious, and generally well-educated Westerners. The lack of awareness for Ebola, and for its constantly increasing victim population, is a devastating concept when the degree of human suffering in that region is understood on the whole. The civil strife, the famine, and now the inability to effectively control the virus without foreign aid would make the seldom few who are well-versed on the topic in this country cringe in mental and emotional agony. Many individuals with these feelings have taken to the webs, social media, and other forums to express what seems to be a startling hypocrisy with the general American public. How can Americans not feel or act the same way about Ebola as they do for ALS?  How can they see the increased suffering in a tormented people and not raise the millions of dollars needed?

Explanations are not difficult to find. The first to discuss is that Americans en masse are not sensitive to the needs of the African people. So the explanation goes, “Ebola’s main victims – [the] poor, black, African – are part of a demographic that, to put it mildly, is of little interest to mainstream America.” ⁷. This sadly is likely the same explanation that would go to the West’s failure of involvement in the Rwandan Genocide. Democratic governments shy away from becoming involved in African affairs because it is largely seen by voters as some combination of impossibly complex, unimaginably expensive, and requiring an end to a lethargy that seems to hang over helping those who don’t belong to the same sovereign nation as one’s self.

This explanation is, I believe, is wanting but not inaccurate. I think, in combination with another explanation, the middle ground of truth can be found.

The poor, starving black faces might not have the same public appeal, true, however, I think it’s more that ebola is just unreal to Americans. It doesn’t affect us. That’s a terrible reason not to do something, but an undeniable factor. People just don’t know, and won’t know or give more than a passing listen to, when they don’t think co-workers, church members, or friends could be at risk. Americans know ALS, or at least enough about it, that when people begin seeing the ice bucket videos, they are almost certainly less than six degrees of separation between someone doing the challenges, and will feel more than enough social pressure or stigma to raise awareness and begin actively caring. That’s how our society works. We feel pressure from peers, combined with our own values, and we act.

Which disease then seems to be in the better position for action on the part of Americans? Which am I more likely to care about when I’m at the gym, and the old woman on the treadmill next to me tells me about her brother who is a Vietnam Vet suffering from ALS (true story)? Which am I going to, as an American, initially think is the one to raise money for first? I know better, because Ebola needs to be handled IMMEDIATELY, but for us in the US, starting a movement like ALS, is simply more likely.

Some will argue that this is nonetheless racism, blatant or underhandedly low lying, but racism in any case. I disagree. I think this reaction of social pressure + values = action is an equation that transgresses racial boundaries. This is not entirely dissimilar reasoning as to why numerous white, Ivy league students went South during the Civil Rights Movement. They were members of church groups or temples that believed that the suffering of any other man at the hands of violent, illogical authority was wrong. They themselves motivated by the activism of the 60’s, their anti-violent, anti-authority, and anti-war values would motivate them to reach out to. Joining various student groups that would pressure them to rise to the great challenge that would have to have been to ride South and march against discriminating police officers, bigoted whites, and the ominous KKK. Race will not keep Americans from rising to a challenge. The factors just need to be utilized in the right ways to motivate them to the greatness, the action they are capable of.

I would prefer that critics of the dichotomy between ALS and EVD to think of the ALS challenge as opening a door for mass public movements to raise awareness. Why not start a movement for EVD in the same way? Use the Social Action Equation [I’m coining this phrase for myself on September 14, 2014] to do something very similar, to motivate our people to help the victims of EVD.

The best idea I can come up with off the top of my head is a “Baked Potato EVD Challenge.” A baked potato is similar to how someone would eat cassava, cassava  being the main subsistence food of Liberia, the country most threatened by Ebola. This would teach Americans about culture and life in Liberia; they’d look up why the challenge involves a potato, and discover a whole different world and people they should care for.  As for the challenge itself, however, after smooshing the potato on your head, you instantly hold up the bag of potatoes and state that you’ll donate the equivalent amount of potatoes or money to an aid organization for food to be sent to Liberia. Point is, the tracks have been laid by the ALS challenge, and reaching Americans is completely possible. To cite racism or impenetrable inaction as the death of our people’s involvement in the realm of international aid is, frankly put, a cop out that will not serve the cause that most matters, which is the survival and prosperity of the human race as the whole.

__

1. “Facts You Should Know About ALS” http://www.alsa.org/about-als/facts-you-should-know.html

2. Supra.

3. “World Health Organization Ebola Fact Sheet.” http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/

4. “Biosafety Level.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosafety_level#Biosafety_level_4

5. “Ebola in Liberia” http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/notices/warning/ebola-liberia ; “Case Count.” http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/guinea/

6. “Ice Bucket Challenge Update.” http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/09/ice_bucket_challenge_100_million_dollars_raised_research.html

7. El-Sayed, Abdulrahman M. “Ice Buckets and Ebola.” https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/abdulrahman-m–el-sayed-compares-western-responses-to-the-summer-s-two-top-health-stories

Don’t Worry About Your Mistakes; They May Have Been Exactly Right

---

I was leaving a package store with a bottle of shiraz for a lovely home cooked Lebanese dinner with my girlfriend, Karen, when the following situation did happen to arise:

Bottle secured in the back seat, laptop plugged into aux cable so I could listen to my Taking Back Sunday discography, it dawns on me I’m going to be even more late than I had told Karen. She knew I had left later, and understood completely; she was busy arranging her new apartment so it was of no consequence to her.  As I’m sitting in the car, however, I begin thinking, “Nice job Ethan, late again… 8:56 pm, and you’re barely on the road.”

I became so preoccupied by my tardiness, that I wasn’t paying attention to which way I should back out, which direction would get me closest to the intersection I needed to take to get to the highway the fastest. I, of course in my fit of self-degradation, backed out the wrong way and was gifted with an entirely new complement of material on which to continue my incessant psychological flagellation. As I pulled out however, I realized that there was a long slough of cars coming up from the intersection at the bottom of the hill, the intersection I took my left towards. In that moment, I realized, that if I had backed up the “correct way”, the cars would have kept me from turning out onto the road. I would have been sitting in the parking lot, versus making it onto the road and past a yellow light. I had inadvertently saved myself time and stress by making a mistake. The only stress I suffered, was entirely self-inflicted.

—

I have always been a person who beats myself up for my mistakes. When a friend once asked me why I get up so early in the morning, my response was “because I feel so guilty about getting up late” and that “getting up late makes me feel like a failure; I tell myself I’m a failure if I don’t get up early.” But why would I sleep in if I wanted to get up? Obviously because I was tired and needed the sleep!

Beating yourself up for your mistakes is sometimes warranted. It’s a form of self-discipline that can be used to correct flaws you perceive in yourself. The problem is, however, that we can never perceive ourselves with complete accuracy or with any certain degree of useful insight. We all make mistakes is a phrase we know from our earliest days of childhood, but can go years without understanding, myself most certainly included. We have to come to terms with the fact that we will fail. We will miss things. We will be late for things. The only time you should ever hold yourself accountable is when you had control and chose to make the mistake consciously; you can simply promise yourself you will listen to your gut from then on and fix what needs fixing, making decisions you know to be right. But once the mistake has happened, deal with it, and look for silver linings.

I think this lesson is most important on the much bigger decisions of life. What college you went to, what friends you made, who you’ve dated, what jobs you have worked, there can be “mistakes”, things you think would have made your life better if you had decided differently. You have no way of knowing, but you assume and tell yourself that. You have no control over what life throws at you, and the lessons you learn from those experiences may serve you better than making the “right” decision ever could. Life is full of surprises, and the unexpected is the spice of life. Try to taste the idea that no matter what happens, your choices, so long as you either trust in your decision making or adjust as best you can for the mistakes that can’t be helped, have been made in a way that serves you. Look for the experience, the skills, the memories, that your choices have given you, and relish in them.

I am beginning to believe that there are no mistakes in life if we believe in our choices and accept that when our choices have lead us to the unpleasant, the unseemly, the frustrating situations, we can find a way to go on and truly make the best of it. Your mistakes may have been exactly right.

—

It was 9:37 pm when I arrived in Amherst, wine in hand. As i walked through the front door, I was greeted by my ravishing girlfriend, a fully organized apartment, and a breath taking, impeccably arranged dinner for two. As it turns out, Karen actually needed the extra time to finish setting up candles, to finish cooking the kibbeh, and for setting up her living space to the immaculate standard that she prides herself in.
No mistakes were made that did not unfold exactly as they needed to. The stress of self-abuse was the mistake I needed to most account for from the evening, and it is one that will take me some time to gain mastery over.  With time, and patience, it will become just another choice that helped me move one step closer to a life without regret.  Good luck on your paths.

Only God Forgives: A Complex Film from Seriously Impressive Minimalism

 

Ryan Gosling (center) prepares for combat against a cold, psychotic police officer with a God-complex. Gosling certainly invokes the silent air of Driver again in this film, but with a violent, quasi-schizophrenic twist.

First and foremost, you’re going to have to see the film again. As I was explaining to a friend, Only God Forgives by Nicholas Winding Refn felt like walking into a first date; I was too excited, and it took a couple minutes before I mentally calmed enough to really focus, which for this movie is needed from beginning to end. I’m honestly worried I might have missed something, and by the end of the review, I hope I’ll have explained why I have this concern. After my second and third viewing, what had caught my eye and twisted my brain and guts into a knot became apparent.

This was a very lean film. Refn really trimmed this down to the bare essentials, something that has not been entirely uncommon in his more recent films, Drive and Valhalla Rising. The film seemed to have only enough dialogue, plot, character development as was needed to be a coherent (not-abstract or entirely experimental) film. It gave the impression that he only used as much of any of those tools as he thought was needed to get across whatever message or idea he was trying for. Now although Refn, like any director, does not have to be trying to “get something across”, I think for this movie you have to assume he was. It was not Drive by any means; you could not go in and simply appreciate the music or cinematography and walk away feeling satisfied (although the music was eerie and created energy or lack thereof where it was needed, and there were a number of very visually pleasing/stimulating shots). Although Drive may also have had some underlying themes and ideas that the project on the whole hoped to convey, it is a bygone conclusion that this film did, or else the film would quite possibly be as empty as many other reviews have accused. Considering that Refn is an experienced film maker, we should be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume there’s more here.

Director Nicholas Winding Refn (Left) directs with creative flare Kristin Scott Thomas (Right) who plays the repulsively twisted but beautiful female antagonist. Refn had imagined the part for KST but feared that due to budget issues, she might not agree; KST joined the crew without hesitation, a likely testament to how compelling Refn’s vision must be. 

It’s not too hard to pull out major themes or concepts he is addressing or playing around with in this film. I think if you see it, many of you would walk away with many of the same ideas that I did about why Refn did A, B, C to accomplish conveyance of X, Y, Z. Some of them will be very easy. The only thing in the movie that seems to most assuredly tie into it almost entirely, but that I struggled with during the viewing, was the violence. Almost all of the violence was easy to fit into overarching themes or symbolism, but some of it (one scene in particular is coming to mind), is tougher to tie into it or not claim as excessive (unless your reaction is supposed to be gut wrenching disgust, which now that I think about it, actually makes sense with my overall theory for this…. actually I think I just explained away the last of my violence concerns). That being said, I find the movie on the whole like a series of incongruous blocks that I know are supposed to be in a much neater pattern, but that are still giving me a grinding headache to assemble. The slow assembling them into a pattern of comprehension that is both pleasing and clear, but the process is grinding and often halting. Honestly, it feels like a problem with tons of variables/factors, something that if it were anymore complex, I’d be unable to navigate it and would miss the point entirely (I’m thankful the movie is so short and not caked in too much dialogue or plot bc otherwise I’d be spending a lot of time drowning in details).

To wrap this up, I think anyone taking it at face value would think the movie was vapid. They would comment on the empty, zombie like performances of the actors with the equally empty music score, plot, etc., and that it failed to accomplish anything remotely cinematically valuable. I think this is the fairly ignorant, conservative but understandable reaction. I can’t say whether I liked it more or less than any of his other works, bc I think I haven’t had enough time with it yet. I think the film of his I can compare it to the best is definitely Valhalla Rising (also appeared “empty”, but drenched in nordic symbolism). Just know it’s not Drive, don’t go in with any preconceptions about what it might be, and give Refn the benefit of the doubt. What I loved most was just how visually, mentally, and physically stimulating it was; you had reactions to most everything in the movie, for better or worse, disgust or appeal. I think the Ryan Gosling-Refn team had another success with this movie and I hope to see yet another very soon. That’s about all I can say until I think about it more. 

Hope you see it and enjoy!

Think Twice, Text None: Teens Texting Behind the Wheel Aren’t Alone

   
    These words will sound familiar to any teen: “Kids think they’re invincible.” Parents say it all the time, whether it is after their son went for a touchdown despite being tackled hard a play earlier, or whether its after their daughter completes a gold winning floor routine despite having torn muscles moments before. Those words, however, can also just as easily be uttered out of sadness and grief.

     Those very same words were once said by Clay Sauer, a parent whose 18 year-old daughter Taylor died texting while driving. ¹ Taylor, a National Merit Scholar, softball player, active volunteer, and class salutatorian, died instantly when she slammed into a tractor-trailer at 80 mph. Taylor, tragically, is far from being alone for her age. Drivers under the age of 20 are the age group with the largest proportion represented in the number of fatal crashes per year due to “distracted driving”. ² But why would a promising teen, why would any teen, people with their whole lives ahead of them, take such a chance on a text? There is no MVP medal or big trophy for the mantle for texting while driving, nothing worthwhile to gain, so then, why do teens continue to take the risk?

    Many people think that since it takes only seconds to send a text, that taking their eyes from the road is a wholly rational risk. Five seconds is the average time that a person takes their eyes off the road while texting; traveling at 55mph, this is enough time to be equivalent to driving the length of a football field blindfolded! ³ Combine this with the fact that a driver, teen or otherwise, who engages in texting is three times more likely to be in an accident, the idea that it is rational to text while driving seems questionable at best. ⁴

    Teens are not completely to blame. They’ve likely seen parents, bus drivers, and chaperones use their phones too. During the day in the United States, about 660,000 drivers are using cell phones or other electronic devices while driving, a number that has held for over four years. ⁴ Teens should, however, strive to be better than the bad examples, and not texting while driving is just one easy way to do so.

    If nothing else, teens have to understand that the consequences are no joke. Their death, the death of friends, family, or even complete strangers should always be reason enough to stop. If not, then perhaps consider the legal consequences.

    Teens in this state have been prosecuted to the fullest extent possible in order to deter such conduct; a penalty of 2 years in prison and a 15-year license suspension is not to be taken lightly. ⁶ Are texts really more important than freedom or lives? If texts are important, just pull over, give it full attention, and avoid the risk entirely. Teens need to think twice about sending texts while driving, because you only live once, and can’t afford to risk it all for nothing.
_______
1. “Parents of Teen Who Died Texting and Driving.” http://www.today.com/id/46627015/ns/today-today_news/t/parents-teen-who-died-texting-driving-kids-think-theyre-invincible/#.U5ju-y8WfRI
2. “Key Facts and Statistics.” http://www.distraction.gov/content/get-the-facts/facts-and-statistics.html
3. Id.
4. Id.
5. Id.
6. “Massachusetts Teen Sentenced to Prison for Texting While Driving.” http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/06/06/12090348-massachusetts-teen-sentenced-to-prison-for-texting-while-driving?lite