Dear President Obama

Dear President Obama,

Thank you very much for taking the time to read my letter. I know that your responsibilities are vast, but it means a lot that you consider interacting with your citizens an important one. I am a freshman at The University of North Carolina at Asheville and am in an honors language class that is based around documentary film. This week we watched Charles Ferguson’s Inside Job. Admittedly, though I am an attentive student and an inquisitive individual, I am not the most familiar with the complexities of the current financial crisis that plagues our country. Inside Job was highly didactic and gave me a basis for understanding the situation. I must say I was shocked by what I learned.

The film reveals to its likely uninformed audience, a clear idea of what activity on Wall Street really looks like. I was introduced to derivatives and to how they allow investment banks to bet on anything, even such immaterial things as the weather, and still make a profit. I also learned that “big wig” individuals use this profit for frivolities such as expensive “escorts,” elaborate drug habits, and extravagant homes, and cars.

Elliot Spitzer, the very man who’s personal business regarding his activity with prostitutes cost him his New York governor office in 2008, humbly said “there’s a sensibility that you don’t use people’s personal vices in the context of Wall Street cases, necessarily to get them to flip. I think maybe after the cataclysms that we’ve been through, maybe people will reevaluate that, I’m…I’m not the one to pass judgment on that right now.” Perhaps your administration believes that the cases are not the same.

You have been quoted as saying “A lack of oversight in Washington and on wall street is exactly what got us into this mess. We need to change Wall Street’s culture.”

And yet you have since made appointments to your administration that are counterintuitive to your proposed priorities.

In 2006, when subprime lending was at its highest and Ben Bernanke was Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, he received numerous warnings about the dangers of unregulated derivatives. He and the Board refused to do anything, or to look into the possibility that the bubble could burst and have overwhelmingly destabilizing effects. Therefore I was surprised and confused to learn that in spite of his negligence in his position, during your Presidency, Bernanke was reappointed as Chairman in 2009. You appointed Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary after his less than adequate role as the President of the Federal Reserve during the crisis. Gary Gensler, a former Goldman Sachs executive, who helped ban regulation of derivatives serves now as the Chairman of Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Though you have spoken about change being needed, as of mid 2010, you had made no attempts to recover any of the compensations given to financial executives during the bubble. Not a single senior financial executive had been criminally prosecuted or even arrested. Not a single financial firm had been prosecuted criminally for securities fraud or accounting fraud.

I know your job as executive is extensive and that it takes time for policy to be proposed and enacted. I believe in many of the things that you have established as important. But I also believe you can do better by America. For our sake and the sake of posterity, remain strong in your opinions on regulation and reform of our economy. Take action; it will not go unnoticed. Make people take responsibility for their actions. Don’t let the corruption take place under your nose. I beg this of you Mr. President. The future of our nation wholeheartedly depends on it.

Thank you of your time.

Respectfully,

Sarala Mahlin Korn 

Greed at its Worst

When I began viewing this documentary, which takes a look at the build up to and causes of the current economic recession, I was afraid it would be a boring, complex, and confusing take on an issue which I already found difficult to fully comprehend. However, the film successfully gave me a basis for understanding the crisis. Director Charles Ferguson combined many varying interviews with easy-to-understand visuals – for those of us that aren’t economic wizzes. I felt as though I was being taken on a journey from the years prior to the crash up to the present (or nearly so, as the film was made in 2010). What I witnessed was shocking.

Economic Liberals are in favor of more regulation on the free market, and there is evident economically liberal bias in this film. The director focuses on the negative consequences of such little regulation of the banking industry’s behavior. However, I still thought the argument was very thoroughly expressed. Ferguson not only criticized both the Bush and Obama administrations instead of favoring one over the other, but he also left out the political affiliations of all subjects of the film. Ferguson made sure to note that when he was speaking about a specific individual’s less than moral behavior, the individual would not agree to be interviewed for the film. He did not simply show one side and condemn the other. Ferguson did interview a few people who were directly involved, and was insistent about receiving answers. Some may argue that he was too combative with his interviewees and that a line needed to be drawn, but in a situation where the events are laid out in black and white, I appreciated his determination to wheedle out some truth.

It is clear to me that the sole force driving the investment banking industry is GREED. To quote the Grinch, “the avarice! The avarice never ends!” But really, in all seriousness it is disgusting how the powerful, influential, big shots of the economic and banking worlds manipulate the goings on for their own benefit. They knowingly make bad loan investments with people who they are aware will likely never be able to pay them back, and then bet against them. They rate bad loans with high grades so as to convince their borrower. Then when the borrowers cannot pay back the money, the bankers still make money off of them. It’s sick. These men and women reap enormous benefits from their jobs. I was absolutely flabbergasted to discover that when the economic bubble popped, CEOs, CFOs, etc. simply resigned and were PAID OFF. Their punishments for fraud were their multi-million dollar severance checks. The vast majority of these conniving “businessmen” never went on trial for their corruption, and even some – as seen in appointments by both Bush and Obama – were rewarded for their cunning thievery.

I don’t want greedy, self-interested, dishonest, slime-balls controlling the Federal Reserve. I don’t want to pay taxes to bail out banks that were the causes of their own destruction. Why should we have to clean up their mess? Honestly I am so angry; I’m finding it difficult to articulately continue. I was perhaps most appalled to discover that for the right price, prestigious economics professors from ivy-league universities who must have known the dangers of the inflating bubble, have been recruited to write papers to support the banks and deny any issues with the lack of regulation! To hear some of these figures attempting to defend themselves was pathetic. There is no excuse. Why did they do it? Simple. They wanted another condo in Hawaii, a private jet, a yacht, or hell, a "high class" prostitute. There is no legitimate defense. Similarly, watching the few court appearances of some of the employees of Goldman Sachs and other banks was laughable. These men and women who have spend their careers on a power trip, are reduced to the despicable, thieving, scum they are, practically whimpering their feeble responses. The inherent manipulation, gluttony, self-indulgence, and blatant disregard for anyone but themselves, is abhorrent and unconscionable. 

Life Out of Balance

This minimalist documentary opens with brilliant shots of nature: canyons, sand dunes, and crashing waves, to name a few. Directory Godfrey Reggio’s images depict the majesty of nature and each frame commands respect. The shots however, do have a rather ominous feel. The coinciding music assists in portraying nature as a formidable, mighty force. There is a frightening power in the billowing waves and the sweeping clouds. Slowly and surely the focus of the film transitions to humans and destruction. There is a type of progression suggesting that first there is nature, then the destruction of nature, and lastly human life, as we know it. Time-lapse sequences show different forms of human behavior over a period of time and patterns emerge. Philip Glass’ accompanying music – constant and drilling – adds a sense of agitation and urgency to the actions.

           

I couldn’t fully and committedly focus on this documentary. I felt the repetitious, aggressive music digging grooves in my brain, like those created by the foot traffic of Reggio’s subjects. This documentary tried my patience and tested my attention span. I busied myself by multi-tasking and trying to be productive. Instead of calmly surrendering myself to this one thing, I was preoccupied in multiple things, whether physically or mentally. Perhaps you can imagine my surprise when I finally reached the end of the film and saw the definition. Unbeknownst to me, I had been exemplifying the very “crazy life” and “life out of balance” to which the film refers. I realized that Reggio had in fact done an impressive job of leading the audience to his intended conclusion. With the concrete understanding of Koyaanisqatsi, I became aware that the feelings of chaos and hurriedness had been aroused in me simply from the director’s audio and visual choices. The definition was a conclusion, which solidified the purpose of the film, though I had not seen it before.

Since I did not have the best experience with his contribution to Koyaanisqatsi, I did some exploring to see which, if any, of Philip Glass' music I might like. Being a dancer, I was interested to see if Philip Glass' work had ever been used in ballet. It turns out his music has been used by a few well-known choreographers, which was exciting for me to discover. I found that the prestigious San Francisco Ballet performed a work called Glass Pieces by Jerome Robbins in which the fourth and fifth movements of Glass' six movement chamber composition, Glassworks, was used. The video below is of the company performing the piece with Glass' Rubric and Facades in the background.

Plastic Planet paragraph

In Plastic Planet, Werner Boote convinces the audience of the dangers of plastic and the seriousness of the pandemic. He interviews sources that explain the intoxicating capabilities of plastic use on the human body, as well as its detrimental effects to our environment. His compelling imagery of nature displays the damage done, and appeals to the emotions of the audience. Boote strengthens his argument by traveling the world and communicating with many, different, global citizens and companies. Boote portrays the plastic corporations in a negative light by revealing their interests in the industry’s profit. He uncovers their resistance to accepting the negative truth about their products, which is a critical part of why the problem is so overwhelming. Though Boote primarily displays one side of the plastic argument, the information is valuable. With information about both environmental and physical effects, viewers can utilize Boote’s perspective when forming their own conclusions about the issue.

The Plastic Problem

If the goal of Plastic Planet director, Werner Boote, was to shock, worry, and disturb his audience, he has succeeded. I’d heard before about plastic leaching when exposed to high temperatures, or about it being unsafe to microwave Tupperware, but this documentary gave me a new frightening awareness. According to the information shown, no kind of plastic has actually been deemed safe. There were traces of mercury found in some, and carcinogens in others. Not only does plastic pollute our environment – as we have always been taught in school – but it also pollutes our bodies. While watching the film, I found myself searching my surroundings to see what plastic was in my presence. The magnitude to which plastic is used in creating commonplace items is incredible.

There is clear bias in this film and it is plain to see its aim is to frighten its audience into action. In the very first line of the film, Boote says, “I would’ve loved to start my film about plastic with a helicopter flight over nothing but pure, untouched nature, only there isn’t any untouched nature left on earth anymore.” Immediately the audience knows what sort of a film they are about to view. There are several shots where an overwhelmingly negative discovery about plastic is being discussed while the director and current guest sit in a spot of natural beauty. The juxtaposition of the two elements made an impression. It supports Boote’s goal of enforcing the seriousness of this issue. This all being said, I don’t mind the bias. I don’t feel as if I am being shown narrow information that may or may not be relevant to the overarching concept. I found the director’s choice of interviewees discerning and credible and the points made to be valid.

It is frightening to think that unbeknownst to the majority of the population, the everyday plastic we use is an insidious killer. Its also appalling to see how many companies are willing to ignore this information when their financial welfare rests upon the success of the industry. Perhaps they, like I, are overcome and don’t know how to begin reacting properly. The information is almost too much to handle, much like the information provided by other films exploring ideas surrounding human impact on our species and the environment. I’m left feeling like nothing I do will make a difference, because the problem is so huge. I feel intimidated by the issue at hand and worried about how my habits may be negatively affecting my own life. Though clearly Boote was personally invested in this cause because of his grandfather’s work in the field, it is definitely something impacting our whole society and needs to be taken seriously.