Rattled by a spike in recent bicycle-related deaths in Boston, cyclists from the Boston area came together on Sunday at the Democracy Center in Cambridge to discuss bicycle safety. Participants focused primarily on possible legislation and education efforts that could be implemented city and statewide to protect cyclists as well as pedestrians and drivers from injury and death.
Organized by Boston bicycle courier Jaffney Roode, almost two dozen riders discussed a number of issues facing the cycling community. In part, the gathering was inspired by the death of Kelly Wallace, a young woman who was was killed on May 6 when her bike was hit by a car in a crosswalk near the intersection of Cambridge Street and Harvard Avenue in Allston.
"Cyclists are really upset and feeling disempowered," Roode said, explaining the forum’s objective.
Passing around an inner tube of a bike tire, which signified that it was your turn to speak, the group had an impassioned discussion about bike rights, laws and etiquette, ultimately focusing on how to educate new riders about the rules of the road.
Although often ignored, cyclists throughout the city have long noted the dangers of riding in Boston, which has been sited by some trade magazines as one of the nation’s most dangerous cities for cycling.
Because of the perception of bicycles as toys, many of the group testified, and not as vehicles, many bike accidents go unreported in Boston. Coupling that with the city’s apparent unwillingness to release bike-related accident statistics was used to explain the lack of understanding of the issue that has silently plagued the city for years.
"To raise an issue," said Diane Akerman, a cyclist that commutes downtown daily, "you need to prove that there is a problem." Without hard statistics, though, that becomes a difficult task.
This was not to suggest that all bike injuries are the fault of drivers. The consensus of the group was that it is the ignorance of road rules by both car drivers and cyclists that has led to many accidents.
"It’s not that people are just jerks that just want to see cyclists crushed under wheels," argued Mike Gintz of Somerville. "It’s that they just don’t know. To cars, [cyclists] are pedestrians that should be on the sidewalk, [which is illegal], whereas pedestrians see us as blobs of steel that should be on the road."
In light of this, Gintz and others feel that bikes "need to be legitimized as vehicles with laws."
And although the Romney administration vetoed the MassBike-endorsed "Bicycle Bill of Rights and Responsibilities," almost identical legislation, now titled "The Bicycle Safety Bill," was recently reintroduced into the state legislature and was voted on Wednesday, June 13, three days after the meeting.
In addition to advocating for pro-cyclist legislation, the group emphasized responsibility for themselves, suggesting bullet-point handouts to give to both cyclists and motor vehicle operators to inform them about the cohabitation of the road by cars and bikes. MassBike Advocacy Associate Nadav Carmel also highlighted that MassBike, a non-profit bicycle advocacy group, offers classes to new city cyclists taught by volunteers to help people adjust to Boston’s difficult cycling environment.
Complaints about inadequate, or inaccurate, information given at college orientations was also raised. While many colleges in student-swelled Boston don’t mention cycling rules at all, it was reported that Boston University encourages their students to ride on the sidewalk — an act legally prohibited in Boston.
Another bicycle safety issue risen at the meeting included recklessness by MBTA bus drivers, who many feel have no respect for cyclists on the road.
Fundamentally, though, it was the goal of the meeting to change people’s habits — both cyclists and those around them. To do that, the group emphasized that bikes need to be looked at as vehicles.
"We need to be acknowledged more in the community," explained Akerman. "Laws will help that. Drivers need more education, and bikers need more education."
This article originally appeared in The Boston Bulletin on June 14, 2007.
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Helicopters buzzing over Franklin Park are no flight of fancy for many
Helicopters buzzing over Franklin Park are no flight of fancy for many
Community activists and residents from Jamaica Plain, Roxbury, and Dorchester converged in Franklin Park’s Golf Clubhouse Tuesday night for a public hearing, sponsored by the Boston City Council’s Aviation and Transportation Committee, regarding fears that a helicopter landing pad has been proposed for the area.
The rumored helipad in question would cover a substantial part of Franklin Park’s flat surface, which is currently set aside for athletics.
City Councilors Charles Yancey, Chuck Turner and John Tobin heard testimony from Boston Police Department Deputy Superintendent Rafael Ruiz, BPD Superintendent Robert Dunford, Parks and Recreation Department Commissioner Toni Pollack. The testimony from all three indicated that there is not now – nor has there ever been – a plan to build a helipad within Franklin Park or any of Boston’s other green spaces.
Concern over the helipad arose following newspaper reports suggesting the proposal. Speculation further escalated after a state police helicopter landed in Franklin Park to pick up a Boston Police Department passenger during a homicide investigation.
According to Dunford, there have "only been three landings ever" in Franklin Park – all of which were for the purpose of State Police helicopters picking up Boston Police Department "observers." When questioned about why Franklin Park was used for picking up these officers, Dunford cited "convenience" as the primary motivation.
Yancey didn’t think convenience was a good enough excuse for landing a helicopter without permission from the parks department, the Franklin Park Zoo or any other organization involved with the Emerald Necklace. It was a sentiment echoed by Councilor Turner, who requested a guarantee from the BPD that Franklin Park would not be used in the future for helicopter landing without express permission.
Although the prospect of a helipad physically being built in Franklin Park was dismissed as hearsay at the meeting, community leaders were unable to get a promise from the police that helicopters would not land there in the future. Although, at one point, Dunford stated that helicopters would land in Franklin Park "only in the case of an emergency," he also defined the situation in which a Boston Police officer was picked up by State Police for the aforementioned homicide investigation as an emergency situation.
Christine Poff, director of the Franklin Park Coalition also spoke at the hearing. Explaining the regular use of Franklin Park for sports and community activities, she declared, on behalf of a supporter, "I would support landings [in Franklin Park] only if they do an equal amount of landings in the Boston Public Gardens."
Poff then cited Article 97 of the Massachusetts State Constitution, which states, "the people… have the freedom from unnecessary noise," which helicopters would make in the neighborhood, and further added that, "Lands and easements taken or acquired for such purposes shall not be used for other purposes or otherwise disposed of except by laws enacted by a two thirds vote, taken by yeas and nays, of each branch of the general court." Poff said she assumed that no vote was taken and, as such, the park couldn’t be used for helicopter landings.
Although the prospect of a helipad in Franklin Park may have been stamped out for good (Yancey found no funding for helipad construction anywhere in Boston in the annual budget), the meeting opened up the larger issue of helicopters over the city.
While police insisted that there would be no regular helicopter patrols of Boston’s neighborhoods, citizens complained of the persistent use of helicopters in their communities.
James E. Gilbert, Jr., a lifelong Bostonian of 95 years, testified that "helicopters are much more disturbing than planes," due to their being closer to the ground.
Eisa-Maria Mahta, a Los Angeles native who now resides in Boston, also complained of the noise.
"There was no peace where I grew up," she said of LA, where helicopters patrol the city daily. When she came to Boston for college, "there was peace" – a peace now disrupted by both State Police and media helicopters.
The council’s committee has adjourned its meeting until Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis gives them, in writing, a statement regarding the department’s future plans for helicopter landings.
This story first appeared in The Boston Bulletin on May 3, 2007.
Community activists and residents from Jamaica Plain, Roxbury, and Dorchester converged in Franklin Park’s Golf Clubhouse Tuesday night for a public hearing, sponsored by the Boston City Council’s Aviation and Transportation Committee, regarding fears that a helicopter landing pad has been proposed for the area.
The rumored helipad in question would cover a substantial part of Franklin Park’s flat surface, which is currently set aside for athletics.
City Councilors Charles Yancey, Chuck Turner and John Tobin heard testimony from Boston Police Department Deputy Superintendent Rafael Ruiz, BPD Superintendent Robert Dunford, Parks and Recreation Department Commissioner Toni Pollack. The testimony from all three indicated that there is not now – nor has there ever been – a plan to build a helipad within Franklin Park or any of Boston’s other green spaces.
Concern over the helipad arose following newspaper reports suggesting the proposal. Speculation further escalated after a state police helicopter landed in Franklin Park to pick up a Boston Police Department passenger during a homicide investigation.
According to Dunford, there have "only been three landings ever" in Franklin Park – all of which were for the purpose of State Police helicopters picking up Boston Police Department "observers." When questioned about why Franklin Park was used for picking up these officers, Dunford cited "convenience" as the primary motivation.
Yancey didn’t think convenience was a good enough excuse for landing a helicopter without permission from the parks department, the Franklin Park Zoo or any other organization involved with the Emerald Necklace. It was a sentiment echoed by Councilor Turner, who requested a guarantee from the BPD that Franklin Park would not be used in the future for helicopter landing without express permission.
Although the prospect of a helipad physically being built in Franklin Park was dismissed as hearsay at the meeting, community leaders were unable to get a promise from the police that helicopters would not land there in the future. Although, at one point, Dunford stated that helicopters would land in Franklin Park "only in the case of an emergency," he also defined the situation in which a Boston Police officer was picked up by State Police for the aforementioned homicide investigation as an emergency situation.
Christine Poff, director of the Franklin Park Coalition also spoke at the hearing. Explaining the regular use of Franklin Park for sports and community activities, she declared, on behalf of a supporter, "I would support landings [in Franklin Park] only if they do an equal amount of landings in the Boston Public Gardens."
Poff then cited Article 97 of the Massachusetts State Constitution, which states, "the people… have the freedom from unnecessary noise," which helicopters would make in the neighborhood, and further added that, "Lands and easements taken or acquired for such purposes shall not be used for other purposes or otherwise disposed of except by laws enacted by a two thirds vote, taken by yeas and nays, of each branch of the general court." Poff said she assumed that no vote was taken and, as such, the park couldn’t be used for helicopter landings.
Although the prospect of a helipad in Franklin Park may have been stamped out for good (Yancey found no funding for helipad construction anywhere in Boston in the annual budget), the meeting opened up the larger issue of helicopters over the city.
While police insisted that there would be no regular helicopter patrols of Boston’s neighborhoods, citizens complained of the persistent use of helicopters in their communities.
James E. Gilbert, Jr., a lifelong Bostonian of 95 years, testified that "helicopters are much more disturbing than planes," due to their being closer to the ground.
Eisa-Maria Mahta, a Los Angeles native who now resides in Boston, also complained of the noise.
"There was no peace where I grew up," she said of LA, where helicopters patrol the city daily. When she came to Boston for college, "there was peace" – a peace now disrupted by both State Police and media helicopters.
The council’s committee has adjourned its meeting until Boston Police Commissioner Edward Davis gives them, in writing, a statement regarding the department’s future plans for helicopter landings.
This story first appeared in The Boston Bulletin on May 3, 2007.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
"Willfully Forgotten" - Historians, Rabblement Tar and Feather Revisionist History
In 1775, the Essex Gazette published this account of a fatal Tory assault on Boston’s Liberty Tree: “Armed with axes, they made a furious attack upon it. After a long spell of laughing and grinning, sweating, swearing, and foaming, with malice diabolical, they cut down a tree because it bore the name of Liberty.”
For years, the tree had served as a flashpoint for all manner of incendiary violence and insurrection, both before and during the Revolutionary War. The mildly terrorist Boston Tea Party was organized in a tavern that stood in its shadow. While the destruction of the infamous elm put an end to the tarring, feathering, effigy-burning ruffianage the Sons of Liberty perpetrated around its massive bole, it only inflamed Boston’s revolutionary fervor.
In 1825, the Marquis de Lafayette stood at the Liberty Tree site and said, "The world should never forget the spot where once stood Liberty Tree, so famous in your annals."
But despite de Lafayette’s injunction, all that now marks the site where the tree once stood is a plaque near a rundown Boylston Street sidewalk, alongside the China Trade Center and the nearby RMV.
A small mob of historians and museum employees wants to change that. Spearheaded by radical historian Alfred Young and the Bostonian Society, the coalition is pushing to revitalize the site of the historic Liberty Tree, and spice up the staid Freedom Trail with some violent egalitarianism.
Young argues that a long period of historical self-sanitizing led the tree, and the extremism it symbolized, to fall out of fashion. "The outdoor events of the American Revolution are too radical,” he says. As such, they were “willfully forgotten" just a few years after the revolution’s completion, as part of a "selective remembering that is tied to our political culture."
By the time of the Freedom Trail Foundation’s inception in 1958, the very premise of radicalism in the American Revolution—never mind in the shade of the Liberty Tree—went unspoken. King’s Chapel got love, and the smoldering effigies at the base of the Liberty Tree got the shaft.
Advocates seeking redress feel that they’re getting close. An invitation-only April 23 meeting between representatives from historic sites, universities and city officials will attempt to cement plans for a proposed Liberty Tree Park.
Still, it’s no surprise that many in Boston’s historical community are guarding their optimism—serious proposals for rehabbing the Liberty Tree site have been flying back and forth for over a decade now. Young recalls hearing about proposals for something commemorating the historic tree back in 1997; Ken Crasco, chief landscape architect for the Boston Parks and Recreation Department, saw an official proposal in 1999, and took part in community meetings to vet the park throughout 2000.
According to Crasco, movement toward establishing Liberty Tree Park came to a halt for a number of reasons—predominantly financial. “The project is now estimated to cost around $800,000,” he says. Only about half a million dollars is currently in the Parks Department’s hands.
Crasco says the remaining funding for the park, as well as “stewardship and maintenance of the park after it’s built,” will be coming from Kensington Place, a new condo development on the opposite side of the China Trade Center. The Boston Redevelopment Authority has yet to sign off on the Kensington money.
Despite the lengthy process, Crasco is confident that the park will get built. “It will happen. I’ve seen the agreements,” he insists. “Like anything downtown, there are a lot of parties involved.” In addition to the BRA, Boston Parks and Recreation, and a slew of historians and historical organizations, the project must also go through Boston Public Works.
The more pressing issue seems to be whether the park, once completed, would be accepted as a Freedom Trail site. Young sees the Liberty Tree’s radical history as a possible deterrent for recognition on the famous trail, but he insists that it must be included. “If you want to recover the popular revolution in Boston that ordinary people were involved in,” he says, “you need to take care of these outdoor sites.”
Brian LeMay, executive director of the Bostonian Society, captures the challenge more succinctly: “The politics of the Freedom Trail—as I understand them—are complicated.”
In its 49-year history, the Freedom Trail has never added a new site. But according to Mimi LaCamera, president of the Freedom Trail Foundation, that doesn’t mean it can’t be done. “The decision [to add a site on the trail] is made by the Freedom Trail Commission, which the Foundation does have a seat on,” she says. The commission has half a dozen other members, including the commissioner of the Public Works Department. LaCamera does maintain that the story needs to be told. “We are fully in support of this project,” she says.
This story originally published in The Weekly Dig on March 28, 2007.
For years, the tree had served as a flashpoint for all manner of incendiary violence and insurrection, both before and during the Revolutionary War. The mildly terrorist Boston Tea Party was organized in a tavern that stood in its shadow. While the destruction of the infamous elm put an end to the tarring, feathering, effigy-burning ruffianage the Sons of Liberty perpetrated around its massive bole, it only inflamed Boston’s revolutionary fervor.
In 1825, the Marquis de Lafayette stood at the Liberty Tree site and said, "The world should never forget the spot where once stood Liberty Tree, so famous in your annals."
But despite de Lafayette’s injunction, all that now marks the site where the tree once stood is a plaque near a rundown Boylston Street sidewalk, alongside the China Trade Center and the nearby RMV.
A small mob of historians and museum employees wants to change that. Spearheaded by radical historian Alfred Young and the Bostonian Society, the coalition is pushing to revitalize the site of the historic Liberty Tree, and spice up the staid Freedom Trail with some violent egalitarianism.
Young argues that a long period of historical self-sanitizing led the tree, and the extremism it symbolized, to fall out of fashion. "The outdoor events of the American Revolution are too radical,” he says. As such, they were “willfully forgotten" just a few years after the revolution’s completion, as part of a "selective remembering that is tied to our political culture."
By the time of the Freedom Trail Foundation’s inception in 1958, the very premise of radicalism in the American Revolution—never mind in the shade of the Liberty Tree—went unspoken. King’s Chapel got love, and the smoldering effigies at the base of the Liberty Tree got the shaft.
Advocates seeking redress feel that they’re getting close. An invitation-only April 23 meeting between representatives from historic sites, universities and city officials will attempt to cement plans for a proposed Liberty Tree Park.
Still, it’s no surprise that many in Boston’s historical community are guarding their optimism—serious proposals for rehabbing the Liberty Tree site have been flying back and forth for over a decade now. Young recalls hearing about proposals for something commemorating the historic tree back in 1997; Ken Crasco, chief landscape architect for the Boston Parks and Recreation Department, saw an official proposal in 1999, and took part in community meetings to vet the park throughout 2000.
According to Crasco, movement toward establishing Liberty Tree Park came to a halt for a number of reasons—predominantly financial. “The project is now estimated to cost around $800,000,” he says. Only about half a million dollars is currently in the Parks Department’s hands.
Crasco says the remaining funding for the park, as well as “stewardship and maintenance of the park after it’s built,” will be coming from Kensington Place, a new condo development on the opposite side of the China Trade Center. The Boston Redevelopment Authority has yet to sign off on the Kensington money.
Despite the lengthy process, Crasco is confident that the park will get built. “It will happen. I’ve seen the agreements,” he insists. “Like anything downtown, there are a lot of parties involved.” In addition to the BRA, Boston Parks and Recreation, and a slew of historians and historical organizations, the project must also go through Boston Public Works.
The more pressing issue seems to be whether the park, once completed, would be accepted as a Freedom Trail site. Young sees the Liberty Tree’s radical history as a possible deterrent for recognition on the famous trail, but he insists that it must be included. “If you want to recover the popular revolution in Boston that ordinary people were involved in,” he says, “you need to take care of these outdoor sites.”
Brian LeMay, executive director of the Bostonian Society, captures the challenge more succinctly: “The politics of the Freedom Trail—as I understand them—are complicated.”
In its 49-year history, the Freedom Trail has never added a new site. But according to Mimi LaCamera, president of the Freedom Trail Foundation, that doesn’t mean it can’t be done. “The decision [to add a site on the trail] is made by the Freedom Trail Commission, which the Foundation does have a seat on,” she says. The commission has half a dozen other members, including the commissioner of the Public Works Department. LaCamera does maintain that the story needs to be told. “We are fully in support of this project,” she says.
This story originally published in The Weekly Dig on March 28, 2007.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Boston Area Activists Unite Across Neighborhoods To Protest War
Activist organizations from across Massachusetts have united under the umbrella March 24 Coalition to organize a demonstration against the war in Iraq this Saturday.
In addition to protesting the Iraq War, organizers intend to spread awareness on the war in Afghanistan and the possibly pending invasion of Iran.
Featuring prominent speakers such as nationally recognized anti-war activist and military mother Cindy Sheehan, best-selling author and Boston University Professor Emeritus Howard Zinn, as well as Eljeer Hawkins, Klare Allen, and Rostam Pourzalt, the demonstration also promises an eclectic mix of musical acts and a “peace and justice fair,” which organizers claim will provide children with entertainment as well as anti-war education through puppet shows, games, drum circles and literature.
The March 24 Coalition formed following a call to action by the Greater Boston Stop the Wars Coalition, and the March 24 demonstration has since been endorsed by over 40 activist groups, including United for Justice with Peace, Boston ANSWER, Iraq Veterans Against the War, and SEIU Local 1199. Organizers of all stripes and ages have signed up for the cause.
Stop the Wars co-founder and demonstration organizer John Harris of Chelsea intends to keep the momentum going.
Veteran activist and organizer Elisabeth Leonard of East Boston concurred. Having marched on the Pentagon during Vietnam, Leonard said she sees light at the end of the tunnel.
“I think more and more people are opposed to this war,” she said, “and it’s building. People I never would have thought would oppose it are doing 180 degree turns - my family, people I’ve known for years.”
Leonard expects an excellent turnout at the event.
“We’re hoping for 5,000,” she said, “and I think we can do it.”
How? The protest itself has changed, Leonard said.
“I’ve been with Stop the Wars and we’ve put on three or four of different demonstrations like this, and it was usually young people and lots of noisy bands,” she said. “There weren’t as many older people. This one is a lot more integrated.”
The integration comes from the difference in theme. Unlike the usually politicized speeches, followed by a march, this rally will include a plethora of events within itself, some of which Leonard insists will be “pure entertainment.”
Elaborating on how they intend to draw new faces into the process, Leonard said, “I think the fact that we’re having a good program and that we are having a peace and justice carnival kind of thing is going to be very exciting - including kids for the first time. I think that’s really exciting.”
And if the turnout isn’t what they hope for, Leonard and her colleagues insist that the very process of organizing is a victory for the cause. Throughout the entire meeting, everything was ultimately agreed upon by consensus.
“That all of us are working together is very good,” she said. “We haven’t even voted on anything.”
In addition to the protest, the Coalition has schedules a fundraise for on March 23 at the Central Congregational Church in Jamaica Plain, which will feature speeches by Cindy Sheehan, City Councilor Felix Arroyo, and 2006 Green-Rainbow Candidate for Governor Grace Ross.
The fundraiser starts at 8 p.m. and costs $10. The subsequent protest will take place on Boston Common the following day, March 24, from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.
This story was originally published in The Boston Bulletin on March 22, 2007.
In addition to protesting the Iraq War, organizers intend to spread awareness on the war in Afghanistan and the possibly pending invasion of Iran.
Featuring prominent speakers such as nationally recognized anti-war activist and military mother Cindy Sheehan, best-selling author and Boston University Professor Emeritus Howard Zinn, as well as Eljeer Hawkins, Klare Allen, and Rostam Pourzalt, the demonstration also promises an eclectic mix of musical acts and a “peace and justice fair,” which organizers claim will provide children with entertainment as well as anti-war education through puppet shows, games, drum circles and literature.
The March 24 Coalition formed following a call to action by the Greater Boston Stop the Wars Coalition, and the March 24 demonstration has since been endorsed by over 40 activist groups, including United for Justice with Peace, Boston ANSWER, Iraq Veterans Against the War, and SEIU Local 1199. Organizers of all stripes and ages have signed up for the cause.
Stop the Wars co-founder and demonstration organizer John Harris of Chelsea intends to keep the momentum going.
Veteran activist and organizer Elisabeth Leonard of East Boston concurred. Having marched on the Pentagon during Vietnam, Leonard said she sees light at the end of the tunnel.
“I think more and more people are opposed to this war,” she said, “and it’s building. People I never would have thought would oppose it are doing 180 degree turns - my family, people I’ve known for years.”
Leonard expects an excellent turnout at the event.
“We’re hoping for 5,000,” she said, “and I think we can do it.”
How? The protest itself has changed, Leonard said.
“I’ve been with Stop the Wars and we’ve put on three or four of different demonstrations like this, and it was usually young people and lots of noisy bands,” she said. “There weren’t as many older people. This one is a lot more integrated.”
The integration comes from the difference in theme. Unlike the usually politicized speeches, followed by a march, this rally will include a plethora of events within itself, some of which Leonard insists will be “pure entertainment.”
Elaborating on how they intend to draw new faces into the process, Leonard said, “I think the fact that we’re having a good program and that we are having a peace and justice carnival kind of thing is going to be very exciting - including kids for the first time. I think that’s really exciting.”
And if the turnout isn’t what they hope for, Leonard and her colleagues insist that the very process of organizing is a victory for the cause. Throughout the entire meeting, everything was ultimately agreed upon by consensus.
“That all of us are working together is very good,” she said. “We haven’t even voted on anything.”
In addition to the protest, the Coalition has schedules a fundraise for on March 23 at the Central Congregational Church in Jamaica Plain, which will feature speeches by Cindy Sheehan, City Councilor Felix Arroyo, and 2006 Green-Rainbow Candidate for Governor Grace Ross.
The fundraiser starts at 8 p.m. and costs $10. The subsequent protest will take place on Boston Common the following day, March 24, from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.
This story was originally published in The Boston Bulletin on March 22, 2007.
Friday, March 2, 2007
Easton's "Anderson" Makes Splash in Boston Comedy
The city of Boston, at present, is not known for its comedy. Although at least a temporary home to comedic icons such as Denis Leary, Andy Kaufman, Dane Cook, and David Cross, the Hub’s roll in entertainment virtually begins and ends in the city blocks that Emerson College and its surrounding theaters occupy. But a few Easton natives and their friends are looking to change all that. They do video, they do live, and they’ll do any room that will have them. They are Anderson.
Founded in 2003 by Eastonians Rob Crean, Shakir Shibli, Rachel Berman, and Nick Lymberopoulos, along with Walpole native Jaffney Roode and Connecticut-born Adam Haut, the Anderson Comedy group has been making a splash in the greater Boston comedy scene for years now. And if any of them tell you anything different, “it’s because they’re wrong and have bad memories,” insists Shibli.
Although the first meeting occurred in a kitchen in Jamaica Plain, MA in 2003, members hailing from Easton have known and worked with each other for many years. Crean and Lymberopoulos, old school friends, have been making comedy shorts since 1997, when they filmed the never screened “Weeksville” short fresh out of Oliver Ames High School.
“It was free-form – mostly improv,” recollected Crean about their first project. “The basic idea was that it was a kid that was really privileged, but thought his life was really hard. It was a character we were really familiar with because, you know, we’re from Easton,” implying how common such a juvenile plight is in the community.
With comedy germinating in their hearts and in their futures, the troupe formally came together years later with the intention of making “honest” comedy. Says Shibli about Anderson’s motivation, “I would love to be huge but I don’t think that any of us as artists are concentrating more on fame than art. If you lose sight of the art and concentrate on things like getting huge, you have to water yourself down and cater to certain people. Something I will say about Anderson is that we are very honest with ourselves as artists. We do what we think is funny.”
The comedy troupe’s honesty has won them applause citywide, from an almost sold out performance at Brookline’s Coolidge Corner Theater last year to a regular monthly show at the Middle East Corner in Cambridge, which is in its second month now. And how’d they get there? Hard work and ambition, it would seem. “We’ve played a lot of bad shows,” testified Crean, with Shibli’s approval. He recalled one show at a sports bar in the Fenway district that the headliner had cancelled, where they performed in front of about twelve people, and botched the performance pretty badly. “It was one of those shows,” he joked, “where very few people showed up, but you wished fewer had.” They recalled an equally bad experience at the Lucy Parsons Center, a radical bookstore in Boston’s South End, where some of their more offensive material made for an uncomfortable climate. “After our performance, we just stood there in the room and everyone avoided us,” recollected Crean. “It was awkward.”
But it is just that awkwardness that has also gained them ground. At their landmark Coolidge Corner performance, a skit featuring an anti-Semitic can of spray cheese almost caused a riot when an angry Jewish man caused a scene mid-show – standing up and yelling at the group about how unfunny he thought it was. His outburst prompted many from the packed theater to respond that if he didn’t like it, that he should just leave. Crean, holding Lymberopoulos away from the man, frantically searched for a solution, and offered to let the can of cheese defend itself. After a heartfelt speech riddled with the troupe’s trademark saying “y’follow” throughout, the man was ultimately appeased and led in the can’s standing ovation.
The joke? The man responsible for the outburst was a plant – and the father of half-Jewish member Rachel Berman. This Kaufman-worthy moment of turning the crowd on itself is just the sort of thing that the group aimed for.
With five out of six original members still in the group (Roode departed a few months ago), and the recent additions of Gretchen Gavett and Katie McCarthy, Anderson is still moving forward. They have produced, according to Crean, over four hours of video skits, and have performed comedy clubs, theaters, and rock venues, with stand-up groups, improv groups, and musical acts from across the spectrum. And though they don’t necessarily see Anderson as a career for themselves (Crean, when asked whether his parents foresaw his making a living in comedy as a child testified, “I don’t think that they foresee it now) it is hard to imagine them going anywhere but up.
Anderson performs monthly at the Middle East Corner, 480 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA, on the last Tuesday of the month. More information about them, along with their DVD, is available at www.anderson-comedy.com
This article was originally published in The Easton Buzz on March 2, 2007
Founded in 2003 by Eastonians Rob Crean, Shakir Shibli, Rachel Berman, and Nick Lymberopoulos, along with Walpole native Jaffney Roode and Connecticut-born Adam Haut, the Anderson Comedy group has been making a splash in the greater Boston comedy scene for years now. And if any of them tell you anything different, “it’s because they’re wrong and have bad memories,” insists Shibli.
Although the first meeting occurred in a kitchen in Jamaica Plain, MA in 2003, members hailing from Easton have known and worked with each other for many years. Crean and Lymberopoulos, old school friends, have been making comedy shorts since 1997, when they filmed the never screened “Weeksville” short fresh out of Oliver Ames High School.
“It was free-form – mostly improv,” recollected Crean about their first project. “The basic idea was that it was a kid that was really privileged, but thought his life was really hard. It was a character we were really familiar with because, you know, we’re from Easton,” implying how common such a juvenile plight is in the community.
With comedy germinating in their hearts and in their futures, the troupe formally came together years later with the intention of making “honest” comedy. Says Shibli about Anderson’s motivation, “I would love to be huge but I don’t think that any of us as artists are concentrating more on fame than art. If you lose sight of the art and concentrate on things like getting huge, you have to water yourself down and cater to certain people. Something I will say about Anderson is that we are very honest with ourselves as artists. We do what we think is funny.”
The comedy troupe’s honesty has won them applause citywide, from an almost sold out performance at Brookline’s Coolidge Corner Theater last year to a regular monthly show at the Middle East Corner in Cambridge, which is in its second month now. And how’d they get there? Hard work and ambition, it would seem. “We’ve played a lot of bad shows,” testified Crean, with Shibli’s approval. He recalled one show at a sports bar in the Fenway district that the headliner had cancelled, where they performed in front of about twelve people, and botched the performance pretty badly. “It was one of those shows,” he joked, “where very few people showed up, but you wished fewer had.” They recalled an equally bad experience at the Lucy Parsons Center, a radical bookstore in Boston’s South End, where some of their more offensive material made for an uncomfortable climate. “After our performance, we just stood there in the room and everyone avoided us,” recollected Crean. “It was awkward.”
But it is just that awkwardness that has also gained them ground. At their landmark Coolidge Corner performance, a skit featuring an anti-Semitic can of spray cheese almost caused a riot when an angry Jewish man caused a scene mid-show – standing up and yelling at the group about how unfunny he thought it was. His outburst prompted many from the packed theater to respond that if he didn’t like it, that he should just leave. Crean, holding Lymberopoulos away from the man, frantically searched for a solution, and offered to let the can of cheese defend itself. After a heartfelt speech riddled with the troupe’s trademark saying “y’follow” throughout, the man was ultimately appeased and led in the can’s standing ovation.
The joke? The man responsible for the outburst was a plant – and the father of half-Jewish member Rachel Berman. This Kaufman-worthy moment of turning the crowd on itself is just the sort of thing that the group aimed for.
With five out of six original members still in the group (Roode departed a few months ago), and the recent additions of Gretchen Gavett and Katie McCarthy, Anderson is still moving forward. They have produced, according to Crean, over four hours of video skits, and have performed comedy clubs, theaters, and rock venues, with stand-up groups, improv groups, and musical acts from across the spectrum. And though they don’t necessarily see Anderson as a career for themselves (Crean, when asked whether his parents foresaw his making a living in comedy as a child testified, “I don’t think that they foresee it now) it is hard to imagine them going anywhere but up.
Anderson performs monthly at the Middle East Corner, 480 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA, on the last Tuesday of the month. More information about them, along with their DVD, is available at www.anderson-comedy.com
This article was originally published in The Easton Buzz on March 2, 2007
Thursday, February 8, 2007
JP Protester - From D.C. to Boston
Jamaica Plain – As protesters from all walks of live converged by the thousands in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 27, very little was certain.
Was the conflict winnable, or is the United States policing a civil war?
And perhaps the most heated of arguments – how many people actually showed up on the streets of the nation’s capital? While crowd estimates ranged from 50,000 to 500,000 attendees at the march, one thing was definite – the Boston area was well represented. Whether traveling with unions or activist organizations, attending individually or with family and friends, Greater Boston turned out in high numbers to tell anyone who would listen that they had had it with the war in Iraq.
One such person was Jamaica Plain resident Jacob Bor.
A 23-year-old Harvard graduate and current MIT student, Bor flew down to Washington to meet with friends the night before the rally, and to stand up for his belief that the war was wrong. Athough new to protests against wars, having only been an adult in the midst of major conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bor had defined his position against the war in Iraq.
“I’m something of a pacifist,” he explained over a cup of organic coffee in a locally owned Jamaica Plain pastry shop. “So, it made me pretty sick to my stomach as soon as Sept. 11 happened. I got this nauseous feeling that we were going to start World War III.” Bor saw the unilateral invasion and subsequent build-up as a bad sign. History, he reasoned, was not on the United States’ side.
“If you just look at [the United States’] record since World War II, and what we’ve been involved in – it’s not good,” Bor said. “You would like to believe that we can go into something with good intentions, but I just don’t believe that.”
Bor questioned contracts between the United States government and corporations such as Halliburton.
“Looking at companies profiteering like that,” he said, “it’s pretty hard not to be skeptical.”
Although many anti-war activists are depicted as being much like Bor – young students, and often considered detached from the mainstream, he was far from alone on Jan. 27.
Sixty-two-year-old Arlington activist and nonprofit manager Marilyn Levin echoes his skepticism.
Levin described herself as “an old radical.”
“I think the whole vote in November signified a referendum on the war,” she said.
Levin protested not only against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also against the Vietnam War. And although she sees differences in the protest movements of today versus those of the 1960s, they are predominantly technological, with the message and the movement maintaining the same type of conviction.
“Technology is different,” Levin said, “ which in a lot of ways makes organizing much easier and faster. It’s easier to get the word out.”
Bor and Levin had differing opinions of what the movement was, and where it was going, but both seemed optimistic about the future.
“I was kind of hoping they’re be more people there,” Bor said. “There were definitely not 500,000 people there. I thought there was somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 people. That was my unofficial estimate, counting how many people passed by in 15 seconds, multiplying that by… something!”
“This wasn’t just a protest,” Bor continued. “Some of the organizers had this lobbying day on Monday [Jan. 29]… that kind of targeted organized lobbying – targeted advocacy – that seems to make a lot of sense to me.
This kind of protesting, where activists actually lobby Congress, made Bor wonder if “this form of protest is the way of the future in terms of anti-war organizing.”
Bor said he hopes the newly elected Democrats in Congress can be effectively targeted as a vehicle for change on war policy.
“There is a bit of a crisis going on right now about how to get leverage,” Bor said. “Bush isn’t going to change his mind on this. That’s hopeless. That’s lost.”
“I love my country,” Bor continued, “but I think we’re moving into a time where patriotism is becoming a thing of the past. But if you want to talk about what patriotism is, to me it’s what’s for the good of the country, and I would simply argue that this war does not seem to be good for the country. To say that, I think is anything but unpatriotic.”
This article was originally published in The Boston Bulletin on February 8, 2007.
Was the conflict winnable, or is the United States policing a civil war?
And perhaps the most heated of arguments – how many people actually showed up on the streets of the nation’s capital? While crowd estimates ranged from 50,000 to 500,000 attendees at the march, one thing was definite – the Boston area was well represented. Whether traveling with unions or activist organizations, attending individually or with family and friends, Greater Boston turned out in high numbers to tell anyone who would listen that they had had it with the war in Iraq.
One such person was Jamaica Plain resident Jacob Bor.
A 23-year-old Harvard graduate and current MIT student, Bor flew down to Washington to meet with friends the night before the rally, and to stand up for his belief that the war was wrong. Athough new to protests against wars, having only been an adult in the midst of major conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bor had defined his position against the war in Iraq.
“I’m something of a pacifist,” he explained over a cup of organic coffee in a locally owned Jamaica Plain pastry shop. “So, it made me pretty sick to my stomach as soon as Sept. 11 happened. I got this nauseous feeling that we were going to start World War III.” Bor saw the unilateral invasion and subsequent build-up as a bad sign. History, he reasoned, was not on the United States’ side.
“If you just look at [the United States’] record since World War II, and what we’ve been involved in – it’s not good,” Bor said. “You would like to believe that we can go into something with good intentions, but I just don’t believe that.”
Bor questioned contracts between the United States government and corporations such as Halliburton.
“Looking at companies profiteering like that,” he said, “it’s pretty hard not to be skeptical.”
Although many anti-war activists are depicted as being much like Bor – young students, and often considered detached from the mainstream, he was far from alone on Jan. 27.
Sixty-two-year-old Arlington activist and nonprofit manager Marilyn Levin echoes his skepticism.
Levin described herself as “an old radical.”
“I think the whole vote in November signified a referendum on the war,” she said.
Levin protested not only against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also against the Vietnam War. And although she sees differences in the protest movements of today versus those of the 1960s, they are predominantly technological, with the message and the movement maintaining the same type of conviction.
“Technology is different,” Levin said, “ which in a lot of ways makes organizing much easier and faster. It’s easier to get the word out.”
Bor and Levin had differing opinions of what the movement was, and where it was going, but both seemed optimistic about the future.
“I was kind of hoping they’re be more people there,” Bor said. “There were definitely not 500,000 people there. I thought there was somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 people. That was my unofficial estimate, counting how many people passed by in 15 seconds, multiplying that by… something!”
“This wasn’t just a protest,” Bor continued. “Some of the organizers had this lobbying day on Monday [Jan. 29]… that kind of targeted organized lobbying – targeted advocacy – that seems to make a lot of sense to me.
This kind of protesting, where activists actually lobby Congress, made Bor wonder if “this form of protest is the way of the future in terms of anti-war organizing.”
Bor said he hopes the newly elected Democrats in Congress can be effectively targeted as a vehicle for change on war policy.
“There is a bit of a crisis going on right now about how to get leverage,” Bor said. “Bush isn’t going to change his mind on this. That’s hopeless. That’s lost.”
“I love my country,” Bor continued, “but I think we’re moving into a time where patriotism is becoming a thing of the past. But if you want to talk about what patriotism is, to me it’s what’s for the good of the country, and I would simply argue that this war does not seem to be good for the country. To say that, I think is anything but unpatriotic.”
This article was originally published in The Boston Bulletin on February 8, 2007.
Wednesday, December 6, 2006
Spreading Holiday Cheer (To Rubes)
If you haven’t heard of the Free the World Association, you’ve probably heard the pitch. Representatives of the group approach pedestrians in Downtown Crossing to solicit donations for their after-school programs, which are supposedly aimed at eradicating racism in our fair city. They wield clipboards and a laminated informational sheet littered with grammatical errors and bizarre philosophical bedfellows (the Quakers and Marcus Garvey are listed as inspirations). After giving you a quick look at the sheet, which you’re not allowed to take with you, they ask you for a donation. And if you want a receipt, you’re shit out of luck.
One of the FWA canvassers, who’s been working the Crossing for two years and goes by the name “Thomas Brown,” told me the fundraising was to purchase things like notebooks and pencils for the kids at their center, which, according to the group’s literature, is situated at 9 Temple Place. Brown was quick to mention that although the center is not currently operational, it will be open again soon.
“The more money you give, the quicker we can get it rolling again,” he told me.
According to the city Assessing Office, however, 9 Temple Place doesn’t actually exist. Gerald Fallon-Griffon, a clerk at the office, said 9 Temple Place was eliminated for the construction of 141 Tremont Street, which is primarily a dorm building for Suffolk University. He even produced a little map with the numbers 1 through 9 crossed out where the side of 141 Tremont is now.
“Do you guys work with the public schools?" I asked Brown. “Yeah, we work with the schools,” he said. But following an inquiry to the Boston Public Schools, I was redirected to Boston Centers for Youth and Families. “We don’t know who these people are," said spokesperson Sandy Holden. Holden also pointed out that even though Boston‘s after-school programs are decentralized, if an organization was working with them, the BCYF would know about it.
One of FWA’s trainees, with Brown present, also assured me that the Free the World Association is a nonprofit. This claim, too, is bogus. According to the secretary of state’s office, with which all Massachusetts nonprofits must register, there is no organization registered under the name “Free the World Association” or anything even resembling it.
Finally, later attempts to reach Brown via phone were unsuccessful, as the number he gave me actually belongs to a local tile and ceramics contractor who told me he’s not affiliated with the group.
While unwitting rubes in for the holiday shopping season fall prey to the FWA, employees of the Corner Mall and surrounding stores aren’t having it. An employee of Champs Sports (who requested anonymity) claimed, "I’m new to this store, but management told me that they were running some kind of scam about racism or something when I got here. I’d love to see them gone. They harass our customers."
This article originally published in The Weekly Dig on December 6, 2006.
One of the FWA canvassers, who’s been working the Crossing for two years and goes by the name “Thomas Brown,” told me the fundraising was to purchase things like notebooks and pencils for the kids at their center, which, according to the group’s literature, is situated at 9 Temple Place. Brown was quick to mention that although the center is not currently operational, it will be open again soon.
“The more money you give, the quicker we can get it rolling again,” he told me.
According to the city Assessing Office, however, 9 Temple Place doesn’t actually exist. Gerald Fallon-Griffon, a clerk at the office, said 9 Temple Place was eliminated for the construction of 141 Tremont Street, which is primarily a dorm building for Suffolk University. He even produced a little map with the numbers 1 through 9 crossed out where the side of 141 Tremont is now.
“Do you guys work with the public schools?" I asked Brown. “Yeah, we work with the schools,” he said. But following an inquiry to the Boston Public Schools, I was redirected to Boston Centers for Youth and Families. “We don’t know who these people are," said spokesperson Sandy Holden. Holden also pointed out that even though Boston‘s after-school programs are decentralized, if an organization was working with them, the BCYF would know about it.
One of FWA’s trainees, with Brown present, also assured me that the Free the World Association is a nonprofit. This claim, too, is bogus. According to the secretary of state’s office, with which all Massachusetts nonprofits must register, there is no organization registered under the name “Free the World Association” or anything even resembling it.
Finally, later attempts to reach Brown via phone were unsuccessful, as the number he gave me actually belongs to a local tile and ceramics contractor who told me he’s not affiliated with the group.
While unwitting rubes in for the holiday shopping season fall prey to the FWA, employees of the Corner Mall and surrounding stores aren’t having it. An employee of Champs Sports (who requested anonymity) claimed, "I’m new to this store, but management told me that they were running some kind of scam about racism or something when I got here. I’d love to see them gone. They harass our customers."
This article originally published in The Weekly Dig on December 6, 2006.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
