What is a work of art for?

Of course, this is a sort of a (deliberately) ridiculous question. People who love art understand that works of art aren't "for" anything - they exists for their own sake and on their own terms.

People who don't see the value of the arts will dismiss works of art as "pointless" or "frivolous" when confronted with something that is outside their comfort zone.

However, when you look closely, I think it's clear that works of art have their own "thing" happening. They're not like a hammer or a washing machine or antibiotics, which were all created for utilitarian purposes.

And yet.

Did you hear the story of the Iranian Canadian journalist who was tortured in an Iranian prison. I heard him on the radio while driving between Fredericton and Moncton, and it hit me like a ton of bricks.

Here's what he recounts:

Bahari said he felt the walls were closing in around him while in solitary confinement, but he was comforted as he hummed the words to Leonard Cohen's song, Sisters of Mercy. He said the title came to him in a dream about two women who both looked like his sister.

"And all of a sudden this universe was created, this universe that was guarded by Mr. Leonard Cohen, and it was just ridiculous to me that this old Jewish [man], and one of the most cynical poet songwriters in the world, managed to save me in the heart of the Islamic Republic."

How would Leonard Cohen have ever known when he wrote that song that someday it would be a lifeline for someone being tortured in prison?  There is no way to know that as an artist. And yet, by creating something with it's own meaning (ie. the song), in making a little 'world' in there, it went into the journalist's memory (somehow!) and stayed in there until it was really needed by him. And then, it reappeared when linked to the memory of his sister.

No part of the logical brain - no report, no spreadsheet, no strategic plan, no schedule, could ever provide this kind of sustenance at a moment like that.

And so, I think that's partly what works of art are "for" - to take on a life of their own, aside from the author and to go out into the world and become a part of some of the people who encounter them. To speak the heart, to be non-rational and yet significant.

I Second That Motion

One major problem I have with people's perception of politics in this day and age is: the idea that we will elect a leader and he or she will solve our 'problems.' 

This is an incredibly naive way of looking at politics and here is why.

First of all, political leaders don't accomplish change on their own - that's not how democracies are supposed to work. If we had a system where leaders could just change whatever they wanted at will, that would be a dictatorship. Changes are accomplished by legislation or by regulation. Boring, I know.

So, regulatory changes can be relatively straight-forward if you're the president of a large country, but still there will be push back from people who want the status quo to be maintained. The question becomes: who is building a more convincing case and/or building more public pressure? What are the consequences of saying "yes" or "no" to either side? Is a compromise possible?

When elected officials make decisions, they are keenly aware of who is paying attention, who is in attendance, who is checked out, and who is angry. People think that showing up or sending a letter or petition is meaningless, but they could not be more wrong.

They could not be more wrong.

Each person, each organization, that demonstrates support or opposition for an idea or policy change, is on the radar of the people who make the decision. Corporations know this, and that's why they have lobbyists, whose job it is to monitor regulatory and legislative changes, and to shepherd things through the process.

But, the other key element in making change happen, strange as it sounds, lies in the arcane practice of Robert's Rules of Order. And that is the fact that you can't vote on a motion until someone has seconded it.

So a Member of Parliament could stand up and propose a Guaranteed Annual Income for all Canadians, but unless another MP stood up to second that motion, no vote will ever be taken, and no discussion will ever occur.

When it comes down to the nitty-gritty of politics, a voice in the wilderness is precisely that - one voice, alone.

Once a motion gets seconded, then it's time for debate, and eventually a vote.

So the question is: what kinds of change motions are we willing to support? Do we have enough people to create pressure? what kinds of change to do we value? And most importantly, is there someone to second the motion?

The idea that a leader accomplishes change with his or her magic wand could not be more harmful to our understanding of politics and the democratic process.

The truth is, in my view, that leaders create change once people have demanded it, and there is willing support among their peers in the deciding body.

Who those people are, and what those changes look like, depend entirely on the actors involved, their resources, their priorities and their relationships.

What's it like to be elected?

I admit it, I've been obsessed with politics since I was a kid.

Some of my earliest memories are of elections, campaigns and candidates.

Probably because of my family - my grandparents were staunch Robichaud liberals. They drilled into me the need for rural people to have an advocate who understood the need for "Equal Opportunity," as Robichaud's revolutionary centralization programme was called.

So, there was a very real sense in my parents' household, and in my grandparents' - they lived two houses up the road and I was there all the time - that politics mattered.

I still think politics matters, and although people are often demoralized by the current state of politics, this is why I ran for elected office (and am running again for re-election on May 9th).

But, on a day-to-day basis, what's is really like being elected ?  People ask me this all the time.

Nobody really likes to talk about these things. The pressure for elected officials to maintain a strong, authoritative persona is immense. 

We like to believe our leaders have all the answers. Or that they have a magic wand or a crystal ball. That they can be our knights in shining armour who control the weather and solve all our problems. And we do not hesitate to blame them when we are displeased.

The reality is that politicians are people elected by citizens to represent them.  And so we, your elected representatives, are really just regular people - we don't know what the future holds, and we try to solve problems by gathering information and using all the resources we have available.

This is a big task, and if it doesn't make you a bit nervous, it probably should. Being responsible for the water supply, policing, recreation, economic development and fire service for 5000+ people is a real responsibility. And then there's dealing with all the other levels of government - Provincial and Federal - who have a lot more power than municipalities do, and who may have completely different agendas that the Town you represent.

But in real terms, being elected means that when you go to the grocery store or post office, people will approach you with problems. Sometimes they will be angry.

It means you will not be able to rest on your laurels when you know that the future is not guaranteed. It needs to be shaped by people who have the best interest of the public in mind.

It means carefully considering how your decisions as an elected body will impact people - and how the unintended consequences of your decisions may achieve the exact opposite of what you hoped.

And it means listening to facts and opinions about why things aren't going well, and being able to set aside pride and defensiveness in order to make appropriate changes.

None of these things are easy. And people really don't realize their elected reps have willingly asked for a job with these tremendous responsibilities.

Ultimately, I believe that we are very lucky in Woodstock to have such a wide array of candidates, all of whom bring excellent ideas and experience to the table. And we have a very well-managed town, which I say with sincerity. Not every town is so fortunate.

But elected officials are really only one part of the ecosystem. Without the engagement of citizens - and by this I mean regularly, not only at election time - we cannot achieve the things people want to see happen. Sometimes that means organized and sustained pressure needs to come from the community.

And sometimes, in that regard, being elected can be lonely. You feel separate from the people who elected you. You have to keep some things a secret - and this is legitimate when delicate negotiations are happening. You can be under pressure from all sides. 

So, in short, being elected is the best of times and the worst of times. Ultimately, I do it because I believe that politics matter, and with the hope that I can use my voice to effect a positive change.

And then there was one

Car, that is.

We've been using only one car since Nick started his new job in July.  Sometimes it's a pain but mostly, it's been great.  I have been feeling lately that it's time for this decision.

Now, I average one cab ride per week - approximately $7 including tip.  This compared to weekly gas costs, yearly insurance and maintenance on a second vehicle - major savings.

Meanwhile, I have become an expert hitch-hiker.  My friends and family have been quite tolerant in taking me the short distances I need to go - mainly, home from work, or across the Grafton bridge for Town Hall meetings or choir practice.

I also have an incentive to walk more - when it's not -20 outside, of course.  I love being out in the fresh air, and while I'm strolling I have time to listen to music, which never happens when I'm rushing to and fro in a car. The walk is my time. No cellphone, no messages and no hurry. No irritation at slow drivers!

My life has slowed down considerably and I am now more connected to my friends and family - because I need them.  Being able to admit that one needs people's help is strange.  Our society frowns on this, telling us all we need to "be strong" and "stand on our own two feet."

But I really value the little chats I have with people on the way here or there.  How often nowadays are we in too big of a rush to enjoy a simple conversation?  And how many bonds are strengthened because people see a need and agree to meet it?  Is this not what friendship and kinship are all about?

Also, I struggle with saying "yes" to too many things.  Now that I can't have a car all the time, I am forced to say "no" because it simply isn't possible to get to all the places I might go.  So, my life is simpler and I have to choose carefully where I go and why.  This is an enormous blessing.

I don't feel as rushed, I'm not as broke, I get to talk to people I enjoy, and I feel better when I get a good walk. In the spring, I'll replace the broken tube in my bike tire and get rolling a bit faster.

Win. Win. Win.  Win. So long, second car.

***Also, this guy seems to feel the same.  An entertaining read about Car Clowns.

Tolerating Dissonance

In the music world, we have technical terms for things that sound stable and agreeable ("consonance") and sounds that create tension ("dissonance").

One of the things I learned in my university music studies was to tolerate dissonance.  In other words, to not lose myself emotionally or intellectually when subjected to a physical environment I found hostile, disconcerting, etc.  To deliberately endure, at least for a limited time, something unpleasant.

It was not easy.  I resisted it many times.  I do believe humans have a natural, instinctive love of harmony.  I believe that metaphorical "harmony" - ie. peace, love, waiting politely in line etc., is in some ways an offshoot of physical harmony - ie. the symmetries between sound waves, a gorgeously tunes choir, etc.

Tonight, I was at our Town Council meeting.  Some fractious discussions but done respectfully by people who agree that we are there for a common goal : to improve the lives of the people we represent. 

When it concluded, I ran away, hoping to catch the last few numbers of an internationally acclaimed Canadian choir - The Elmer Iseler Singers - and their special guests, our Woodstock High School Choir.

It too, featured occasional musical dissonance, sharp sounds, but sung by people who agree on a common goal. 

And it leads me to wonder - how much dissonance can people tolerate?

How often can they - or will they - sit in a room with people whose opinions disturb them? Will they bother to listen to the sustained tension, or simply close their ears entirely and retreat into more comfortable and well-worn sound?

Too much dissonance is hazardous to one's health.  People who work a lifetime in the clangour of a noisy environment tend to have shorter lifespans.  But I fear people who cannot tolerate any dissonance whatsoever.  They make me wonder what I have overlooked, and whether I should reconsider.

A postcard from municipal world

Just returned from a weekend away with UMNB - the Union of New Brunswick Municipalities.

Let me back up for a second:

One of the things I love most about New Brunswick (and there are a LOT of things) is that it is full of beautiful small places.  I know in this day and age it's the city that gets all the credit but when I drive through the small villages and towns, through the woods and along the river and by the coast, I really love how human-scale the settlements of New Brunswick are.  And how diverse they are. But I digress.

The UMNB is the collective voice for most, if not all, of the small towns and villages in New Brunswick.  The City of Fredericton is also a member.  This year at the annual conference, there were about 220 municipal reps - Councillors, Mayors and of course, Deputy Mayors.

It is really interesting to be in a room where everyone has put their name forward because they have a genuine desire to improve their local community, and to advocate on behalf of their hometown. We have a chance to discuss the major issues we face individually and collectively. Municipal politics is not glamorous or lucrative so it's nice to meet other colleagues who are working on similar issues year-round.

When I look around the room, I see a lot of folks at mid-age (heavily skewed male, of course), but also a number of younger folks and a good contingent of women overall.  Female mayors are becoming pretty common, which is great considering the incoming Liberal government elected only four women (one of whom is the Deputy Mayor of Miramichi).  It's fair to say that municipal politics is more diverse and representative of the general population.

I also see a group of engaged people who are keeping an eye on Provincial and Federal policy developments on behalf of their local communities.  You probably don't realize that municipalities are bound by legislation to have balanced budgets over a five-year cycle.  So when we see the out-of-control financial state of the province it really drives people nuts. As it should.

I guess this long and rambling post is to say that I think most municipal reps are working hard and their hearts are in the right place.  Living and governing in the same town also helps keep them honest and motivated.  When you know you are going to your day job with your constituents, and that you won't be able to get groceries or pick up the mail in peace if you screw up too many decisions, it's a pretty powerful motivator to "do the right thing."

I wish people realized what a good group of people are working on their behalf.  And I wish that the other levels of government could take a few lessons from the municipal folks.

Also, Donald Savoie explains what I am trying to put into words in his latest column, read it here.  I am about to read his book  "Whatever Happened to the Music Teacher: How Government Decides and Why."  Having been the music teacher for three years, I have some theories on this, but I look forward to reading it all the same.

Decisions, decisions

Today, the people of Scotland will decide whether or not to remain part of the UK. Here's a handy and fun background video for those of us not up on the particulars of that situation.

Monday, the people of New Brunswick will decide whether or not to give the Conservatives another chance.

Sometimes people ask me what it's like to be on Town Council.  I'm never quite sure how to answer that question, but as these two ballot questions approach I can say it's just like deciding how to vote on those issues.

At Council, we have a certain number of items on the agenda.  We consider the issues and inevitably, we vote for or against, according to our own logic.

Because we all see the world through slightly different eyes, we have different priorities and different justifications for voting the way we do.  But the end of the line comes down to YES or NO, and not choosing is still a choice that means the majority vote rules.

So, whether it's local issues or an independence referendum, somebody has to decide.  And as the handy Scotland video concludes, nobody really knows if they're doing the right thing, because the consequences are in the future.

The tricky part is, some people start to assume that when you get behind a council desk (or Premier's desk, or wherever), that you suddenly have a magic wand and a crystal ball.  Any reasonable adult knows this is not the case.

So, like the Scots voting today and the New Brunswickers voting on Monday, being in local politics is a lot like being in that ballot box and trying to make the best decision you can, based on an unknown future.

Trying to predict the future and make adequate decisions is not for the faint of heart. There are no guarantees.

Wishing you best of luck and peace of mind in your upcoming vote.