Posts by Tom Beard
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
And meanwhile, the media lets this slip away or trumpets this as a good thing. Stuff's headlines included "Recovery law cuts red tape" and "REBUILDING BOOSTED BY EXTRA POWERS", for fuck's sake, and now the Editor's Picks include "F&P banks on fridge innovation", "Lost ring resurfaces... 40 years later" and "'Paua fritter' among new chip flavours".
I know that the journalism industry has been neutered by deadlines, poor resources and triviality, but is it too much to expect such a vast consitutional implosion to get just a little bit of scrutiny?
-
I can see why they would want to adopt a stance of symbolically supporting the people of Canterbury.
Symbolism is important, which is why it would have been important to symbolically support democracy, and send a signal that this is an appalling piece of legislation. Voting against it or abstaining may not have made a made a blind bit of difference to its passing, but it might have made some more people aware of the threat that this represents. It would also have symboloised the idea that the Green Party was one of principle, and worth voting for.
I used to believe that. Shame.
-
Has anyone seen the film "Draquila"? This is scarily reminiscent of Italy's use of emergencies to justify unconstitutional acts. In that context, this Bill seems not only Draconian, but Berlusconian.
-
Hang about... Didn't we just spend 100 squillion on Queen St to make it People friendly? You know, with stuff for tourists and the like? Didn't the Council know about the RWC?
Well yes, but it's mostly a shopping street rather than a boozing street. And "closing a street to traffic" is presumably heresy in Auckland, right?
I presume Aotea Square has already been looked at and dismissed. Would it collapse under the weight? How about the yet-to-be-developed spaces at Britomart?
-
There's a fundamental reason why some sort of temporary hospitality venue (trying to avoid the "PC" phrase: "Party Central") will be need for this event: cities tend to work best when they're designed to support everyday living rather than a once-in-a-lifetime event.
The Viaduct works (and I use the word "works" advisedly) because the open spaces are in keeping with the volumes of people using it. If it had been designed to handle enormous crowds, 99.9% of the time it would be empty, bleak and uninviting. It's prudent to include spaces that support, or can be easily converted to support, larger events. But given the projected numbers, it looks like the viaduct wouldn't be able to cope, and it's worth looking for somewhere else that can easily be converted into a special venue, and then later readapted to become an attractive part of the day-to-day city.
The same applies to the bars themselves, but based upon economics rather than urban design. The market can sustain a certain amount of boozing, but it would take dozens of extra venues to provide for those few big nights, and there's no way that they'd survive long-term.
What Auckland would need is a wide street lined with munter-friendly pubs that can be closed to traffic for a few nights, with space for screens, crowds and a few marquees. Courtenay Place plays that role in Wellington, and when combined with some waterfront areas and every other bar adding its own little marquee, should just about do it. Offhand, I can't think of a place that fits that description in Auckland, and of course Eden Park will have a much bigger capacity for the city to handle. Hence the need for something: not sure whether Queens Wharf fits the bill, but just saying "let the exising bars handle it" isn't going to work.
-
I'm always creeped out when commentators mention Owen Franks, since in my mind's eye I keep seeing an unholy combination of Owen McShane and Stephen Franks. And now both names turn up in this post. Shudder.
-
Casablanca, GwtW and 2001 all do have great quotes in them, but do they have enough? 2001 might be the closest of that lot.
The thing with Casablanca is that it's so quotable, people don't know that they're quoting it. Phrases such as "round up the usual suspects", "this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship", "we'll always have Paris", "I was misinformed" and "it doesn't amount to a hill of beans" have become part of the general lexicon.
Ghostbusters, on the other hand ... apart from "who you gonna call?" and "he slimed me!", I can't really remember a thing. I guess it just depends upon what you were a fan of.
-
Of. All. Time!?!
Ahem: Casablanca. Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Gone with the Wind. 2001: A Space Odyssey.
And any film version of a Shakespeare or Oscar Wilde play comes pre-loaded with quotability.
-
Or to be more specific to that quote, there's a difference between being the object of mirth and being a co-conspirator in mirth.
-
I'm doing this all wrong, aren't I?
Well, if I'm correct in reading the intent of the post as an inversion of male stereotypes about women's clothing, then yes.