houston arts: damn straight

Arts have $600M effect on Houston

Houston Business Journal - by Christine Hall Reporter

Cultural arts may not bring in as much money as the oil and gas industry, but a report released Monday shows the sector is a valuable part of the Houston economy.

"The Business of the Arts: A Look into The Economic Impact of the Arts on the Houston Region" showed that in 2004, the nonprofit arts in Houston brought in $626.3 million, supported 14,115 full-time jobs and generated $69.5 million in local and state government revenue.

Mayor Bill White, at a luncheon, said Houston is one of the up-and-coming venues in the arts world. "We want people 50 years or 100 years from now to talk about the explosion in Houston arts," he said.

The study also found that the 9.2 million people who said they attended an arts and cultural event in 2004 was twice the number of people attending events related to Houston's three major league professional sports teams in 2005.

The 1.6 million visitors to Houston who attended cultural events in 2004 spent $132 million in addition to the cost of their tickets, the survey found.

"Houston is not just a good places for the arts, it is one of the best," said Larry Faulkner, president of Houston Endowment Inc., a philanthropic institution founded in 1937 by Jesse and Mary Gibbs Jones.

"The arts are a powerful business asset and one we need to have for Houston to remain a leading city in the future and to keep its extraordinary economic vitality," he said.
Volunteerism was also a big factor in Houston's cultural events, according to the study. More than 34,000 individuals volunteered for arts and cultural organizations in 2004, contributing more than 650,000 hours worth more than $11.2 million.

Funding for the project, consulted by St. Louis-based AMS Planning & Research, was provided by The Brown Foundation, Houston Endowment and The Wortham Foundation.

4 musings

1. puppies:

so i get email updates from petsmart. i use banfield, the associated vet. a few days ago, i received an email from them entitled,' loving your pet to death.' thinking this was probably some inoocuous sale anouncement, i opened it to read a rather shocking email about pet obesity. apparently, not only are our children getting fat...so are our pets. the email goes on to illustrate the dangers of over-feeding your pets. and so, of course, i start to panic about poor fidel. i have tried to feed him smaller portions, but this is a rather undiscerning animal that will eat anything if he's hungry. (he has spit up full pecans before.) that being said, dieting is easier said than done for my little fuzzy. and even walking is difficult, because i have to take both dogs...and fidel can never keep up with faulkner for very long. so, must i resign myself to this? must i feel guilty every time i give him a biscuit? poor baby.

2. dancing around my apartment:

last saturday, i spent all morning dancing around my apartment. i had the music playing while i cleaned, and one tune just got me moving. and somewhere, mid-shimmy...i got a brilliant idea for an upcoming play project. that's always a wonderful feeling...when some light bulb goes off in your head and you suddenly have direction. i love that moment of sparked inspiration! now, if i could only remember my great idea....

3. stage mothers:

i am not so sure i enjoy stage mothers. by this, i am not necessarily talking about the women who put pressure on their kids to perform. i'm talking about the next level of stage mothers: the mothers whose children already perform and who might go on tour with their children for a given show. i respect the need for a child to be close to his or her mother, but this situation creates a new breed. so, last night, i'm at a party and these children are running around like comanches. screaming and yelling and playing tag in the middle of a reception for our major donors...with expensive glassware in hand and whatnot. and i am shocked...because these mothers just sat back obliviously as their kids wreaked havoc on the party....children aged 5 to 13. mind you, it is midnight! and the mothers are talking amongst themselves like nothing is out of order. and at one point, the children create a hideout near the coat-check and are yelling at one another...and one child screams at the top of her lungs. and i politely ask the kids to keep it down, when this one little girl screams again. it appears as though she is screaming back at me, and i give her a look that would freeze ice. (seriously... these children should really know better.) and thankfully, the girl looked terrified and got quiet...for a minute anyways. and throughout this experience, i come to 3 conclusions:

-touring with these children must be the best birth control method...EVER.

-it is indeed possible for people to be so removed from reality that they have no sense of propriety.

-these children have hard lives ahead of them. god have mercy on the show-biz kid.

4. bjork

this is random, but it must be said. on my drive yesterday, i came across 'dancer in the dark' on one of my mix CDs, and it reminded me of bjork's oscar performance...and the subsequent flurry of fashion gossips mocking her for her oscar garb faux-pas. but you know...i really, REALLY liked that swan dress. and i admire her for being enough of her own person to unabashedly wear it. i even liked the egg purse. so there.

true blue, madonna, i love you

time. i never know where the times goes. this is certainly worthy of another blog at another time...surely one to explain why i've been a little MIA the last couple of weeks. but for today...i'll focus on this weekend. so, i found myself on an impromptu road trip friday night. i needed to decompress from the week, so i didn't mind the time to just focus on the road and drive. i grabbed two folders of my CDs...one containing soundtracks and compilations, the other containing mostly mix CDs i made many moons ago. after singing along at the top of my lungs to the first half of the first rent CD, i realized i was getting hoarse. (side note: i was surprised that i could still remember every single word to every single song...after not having listened to it in probably 6 years. gotta love angsty teenagers and their obsessions.)

so after a little 'rent' and 'chess,' i pop in the 'immaculate collection.' and i haven't listened to madonna in a setting when i was at liberty to think about it for years. but it brought back so many memories. when i was a little kid, i remember having this little pink radio. (ah, the 80's.) this radio went with me everywhere, and audio tapes were the invention of the gods! every weekend, i would go outside in my back yard...inventing stories with my yorkie, recording nature sounds, and documenting our adventures with this little pink radio. this little pink radio was also used for more practical purposes...like recording piano lessons. but most often, this pink radio was my ticket to pop star land. the first 2 tapes i ever remember having were madonna's 'like a virgin' and 'true blue.' my parents didn't buy these for me...i believe i must have confiscated them from my older brother, who was in high school at the time. (it's certainly not the last time i ever confiscated music from my brother. 'no, robert, i don't know where those sting and peter gabriel CDs are.') in any case, i remember dancing around my yellow bedroom and singing along to 'like a virgin,' complete with high-pitched yelps. let it be said that i am sure i am not the first nor only 6/7 year-old to have done that...madonna inspired a whole generation little girls to reminisce about our 'purer' days. and i remember thinking that she looked so pretty on the album cover...and yet, so bad. if only i knew what i was singing about at the time!

then came 'true blue,' and everything changed. in my childlike eyes, madonna seemed a bit more wholesome. for a minute perhaps...and despite 'pappa don't preach.' her voice was stronger, her songs more consistent...and she was now a blonde. this was indeed the beginning of a new era. whereas i only knew a few songs from 'like a virgin,' i memorized every single track on 'true blue.' every single one. i danced the salsa to 'la isla bonita,' imagining myself in some ruffled, off-the-shoulder peasant dress on some tropical island. (san pedro? where's that?) then, there was 'open your heart,' which i firmly believed captured my feelings about whatever crush i had at the time...my rendition of that was particularly heart-felt. and last but not least, there was 'live to tell,' which was one of my favorite songs for many years following. i remember performing my own dramatic interpretation of that song for my dogs and stuffed animals...they were the fortunate audience for a great many of my dramatic endeavors at that age. i used to re-enact TV commercials for them...i was determined i could be more convincing than whichever woman was pushing dawn dishwashing soap or campbell's soup. (did everyone do this? ...or was i just a strange little kid?)

regardless, the point is that, listening to these songs the other night, i was transported back to a time that i remember very vividly. back when my brother drove 'jack,' the white ford grenada. when he was in high school and i, elementary. when i was convinced every molly ringwald/brat pack movie was just like his everyday reality. when i played with 'my little ponies' and lusted after my neighbors 'jelly shoes.' (my mom never bought me jelly shoes...i think she thought they were tacky. of course, i was an odd kid who never asked for things, so i probably never told her i wanted them.) when all my stuffed animals had specific personalities and when i thought barbie was a little slutty. when places like 'federated' existed...and when my brother and i would spend the summer mornings mowing lawns, then the afternoons, at the neighborhood pool. (well, he mowed lawns, and i usually watched.) when garfield was cool and i had a pink rabbit phone, with red eyes that lit up when it rang. when i watched my brother's tape of back to the future everyday and thought leah thompson was the most beautiful woman in the world. when i wrote little stories about rabbits and mice... (i had an obsession with rabbits and mice at the time, due to my love for movies like 'the secret of nimh' and 'watership down.' i would write these little stories and bind them into make-shift books, and my mother still laughs about the earnestness of my 'diane and corey' books...yes, there was indeed a series.) when i wanted to be sarah jessica parker in 'girls just want to have fun.' when i would basically rewrite the story of 'girls just want to have fun'...except with mice and rabbits. (don't ask me how a child's logic works.)

ah...good memories.

i leave you with this, madonna: a tribute to you...

the rainbow connection

rainbows. on wednesday, i was having a very bad day. no, it wasn't due to humberto and the impending deluge...other things were weighing on my mind.

so, i drove home with the expectation of a quiet evening on the couch to calm my nerves, and on the ride homeward, the clouds had parted in one corner of the sky to reveal a rainbow. and i think to myself, 'how can i be in a bad mood or feel sorry myself when i see something like this?'

how can a rainbow suddenly lift my mood? how can the appearance of the rainbow not put a smile on someone's face? why is this?

is it because it happens so rarely? is it because it is beautiful? a natural phenomenon? or is it what rainbows represent? or is it perhaps a reminder of a simpler time in our lives...when we doodled rainbows and suns and birds and hearts with big crayola crayons? (i was just coloring rainbows, per her request, with my dear 5 year-old niece a week ago.)

so, having just looked 'up 'rainbow' via wikipedia, i read:

In Greek mythology, the rainbow was considered to be a path made by a messenger (Iris) between Earth and Heaven.

In Christian and Jewish scripture, the rainbow is interpreted as a sign of the covenant between God and man, and the biblical God's promise to Noah that he would never again flood the entire Earth.

Historically, a rainbow flag was used in the German Peasants' War in the 16th century as a sign of a new era, of hope and of social change.

just what i imagined. it only makes sense that people have associated rainbows with heaven. but why? because they were once unexplainable and thus, attributed to the divine? because they are in the sky? i don't really think so. i see them and it's a different feeling that stirs in my breast...

faith.

when i see a rainbow, i think of faith. i think of my faith. faith not only in the divine, but faith in people...in situations...in things like love and goodness and truth. how can i be a realist (and periodically, a closet cynic) and yet, have so much faith in my life?

when people ask me about my favorite movie, i can say, without a doubt, that it is 'contact.' they are sometimes baffled by my answer as a thespian, as it is not known for being particularly artful. and then, after a moment's thought, they figure it is because of the sci-fi connection...which admittedly, plays a part. but i love that movie because it is about faith. it is about believing something so profoundly in your heart that you KNOW it to be true. to know god exists. to know aliens exist. to know you don't know everything. to know you could be wrong...but that it doesn't matter, because the act of having faith and expressing faith is quite possibly enough in and of itself.

so often, we allow ourselves to be swayed by the everyday trials...the routine...as well as by our fears, our jealousies, our petty concerns. how often are we stopped in our tracks by true expressions of faith?

i was watching the movie 'pay it foward' a little earlier. and dismiss it as sentimental or preachy if you must, but it illustrates such a wonderful idea. the concept is so simple and yet, so profoundly beautiful. to have faith in change. to have faith in people and to make an act in the good faith that the effort, the love, and the generosity will not stop with you. utopian? perhaps. but with only small steps, we may make big changes. it's the little things, as well as the big things.

there is one moment in the movie in which a junkie talks a woman down from a ledge. holding out his hand to this hysterical woman, he tells her that all he could think about was his next fix until he saw her about to jump. and he calmly says, "have coffee with me. you can save me. please...save my life."

yes, this is surely drama made for the movies. and perhaps we won't be saving someone's life. but maybe with that unsolicted smile to the stranger on the street, you have made some small difference. is that something to dismiss? we could all critisize ourselves for not doing more...not giving enough to charity, not volunteering enough or spending enough time in productive service of others...or simply not always being so considerate or kind. but a smile is not so difficult, is it? perhaps these small things might eventually coalesce into something indeed life-changing or live-saving.

[apparently, an attempt to implement this principle is being made by this organization: http://www.payitforwardfoundation.org/get_involved.html]

so, to address my original question...rainbows. to me, rainbows represent faith. and despite the fact rainbows have been explained by science, maybe i choose to believe they are a sign...in fact, on wednesday, i KNOW the rainbow was a sign. knowledge (scientific and otherwise), observation, and pragmatism are certainly valuable. there is no doubt that faith should come with questions...to be sure, it should be the questions that strengthen your faith. and yet, i have faith in my sign. don't let your own magic be taken away...

disjointed part 2: why whole foods bites

whole foods.
man, i am starting to hate me some whole foods.
for real.
how is it that 2 people can go to whole foods for some lunch in the prepared foods section and leave $30 later? lunch for two? what? wtf. i have had a love/hate relationship with whole foods from day one. i LOVE the fruit section. just walking through inspires me to eat more greens...and their fruit always looks delicioso. so i buy a bunch of it and take it home...only to have that all-natural, pesticide-free, organic greenery turn brown before i have a chance to eat it. it's the equivalent of a produce prick-tease. not to mention the fact that you pay twice as much for it. and then, there's the prepared foods. in college, i used to love to make the trek to whole foods for the bento boxes. 3 sides and a main dish from their asian foods section in a box to go for $5.99. (the teryaki sweet potatoes are enough to send me reeling.) sound too good to be true? of course. because as soon as it became a habit, they discontinued the fresh bento boxes. to be replaced by the pre-packaged variety in which you get one or two of your favorite choices, but not all. of course. and why? 'consistency from store to store,' says the boy behind the counter. OK.

so, i resent whole foods for a while. i boycott. but the seed-duction bread and chipotle hummus lure me back. once again. (that and the bigger selection of 'ethnic gourmet' dinners.) so then, i get turned on to this sandwich there. roasted turkey, spinach greens, brie, and cranberry jam...on what? seed-duction bread. i would crave this sandwich...and would drive to whole foods during lunch for it. i campaigned in my office...endeavored to spread the gospel of this delicious turkey sandwich to my friends and coworkers. and suddenly, the sandwich suddenly disappeared off the shelves. this happens around february. 'ok,' i think. 'it's a winter-time sandwich. cranberry evoke memories of dressing. etc etc etc.' so, i imagine this sandwich is a seasonal thing and will magically appear come labor day. right? wrong!!!

so, today...i emerge from my kingdom of sick to get lunch. because i literally have the most batcheloresque fridge in existence at the moment. i don't even have cans of green beans to eat. and i get excited at the prospect of my beloved turkey sandwich in my belly. and yet again, empty shelf where they used to lie. so, perhaps a bit cranky and over-medicated, i march over to the sandwich counter and ask about it. something along the lines of 'when are you guys going to put the best sandwich you've ever made back on the shelves?' and this guy looks at me with this cold expression and says, 'like, never.' then, he smirks. and unsatisfied with this answer, i press further. 'why not?' i ask. he replies, 'because we were losing money on that sandwich.' it was $6.99, by the way. 'how so?' i ask. i mean, $7 seems reasonable, right? i mean, not a cheap sandwich by grocery store standards. he answers, 'in order to meet our profit margin, that sandwich would need to cost $14."

*pause*

ok, wtf?! i wasn't going to shoot the messenger, but what?! whole foods has done lost its mind. what kind of profit are we talking about at $14?! but the bigger point being this: i am kind of mad that i am not, at the very least, given a choice. so, i wouldn't spend $14 on a daily basis for this sandwich, but i wouldn't mind splurging on it every once in a while. i mean, it's up for debate on whether people would pay $14 for this sandwich. seriously...it was a really good sandwich.

how did this little escapade end? by my opting for a thai chicken wrap and some smart water. but the kicker? they no longer carry smart water...and have since replaced it with their own brand of lightly flavored water. bah humbug.

whole foods is the new walmart.

disjointed part 1: hamlet & local street artists

so today's blog will be an amalgam of things. usually, i will see, hear, experience something that inspires me to write. but in this case, several days have passed in which things got me as far as *thinking* about blogging, but not actually writing. so...here goes. (if typos abound, it is my cold medicine kicking in. i am pretty sick.) in no particular order:

1. hamlet. as of today, 64 movies appear on imdb under the name of hamlet. 64. so i have never actually seen the version with ethan hawke. until this evening. mixed feelings. casting sam shephard as hamlet's ghost=brilliant. i buy ethan hawke as hamlet...he is surely capable. and julia stiles, fair enough. (although i prefer her in contemporary movies based on shakespearean themes...think 'O' and '10 things i hate about you.') but kyle maclachlan as claudius and bill murray as polonius? no. kyle maclachlan is about the most uncompelling claudius i have EVER seen. ever. and bill murray, god love him, should never ever do shakespeare again. his casual air completely works against the poetry of the language. i am not as schooled in the bard as i'd like, but that casting choice seems reasonable only in the most superficial way. (i see that this job fell right after rushmore and thus, he was still climbing the come-back trail.)

on the whole, i am typing this as the movie is playing, so it obviously hasn't successfully grabbed my attention enough to focus. from a directorial perspective, i do not believe the concept has been well-defined. i don't mind the updated angle, but everything has been rendered so casual and nonchalant that i fail to see the theatricality of the piece. the world of the play is not as dire or as extreme as it need be for the plot to seem plausible. it aims at edgy and lands at luke-warm. so angsty on hawke's part that it almost feels more like dawson's creek meets cruel intentions. (but without as much sex or eye-candy. sadly. even i can tolerate sarah michelle gellar for the glib ryan phillipe and a good soundtrack.) i digress. consider baz lurhmann's romeo and juliet, which i think is absolutely brilliant by comparison. sure, the psychadelic, ADD-inspired images and pace can grow a bit tiresome and at the time, i remember finding details (such as the engraved 'longsword' on the guns) a little clumsy. but i also was completely caught up in the world that lurhmann created...and all the elements worked together to reinforce the impact of the environment, despite a few missteps. (plus, mercutio as a drag queen was probably one of the most brilliant and yet, seemingly obvious choices i have ever seen. i have always found mercutio prone to queening out, especially in the nureyev/fontaine ballet version... mercutio takes about 20 minutes to die in one long, drawn-out roll around the floor.) point being, you either loved lurhmann's version or hated it. i can't say i find hawke's version particularly inspiring either way. (i now laugh b/c i call it hawke'sversion of hamlet versus lurhmann's version of r&j. where is the director? who is almereyda? directed...an episode of deadwood?)

*so i MUST pause here, as we have arrived at the play part. (i am clinging on to see jeffrey wright as the gravedigger, in hopes that he will redeem what is becoming an increasingly bad movie.) the play. or movie in this case. *sigh* i don't even know what to say in response to that almodovar meets fellini meets donna reed tidbit. the high point is when hamlet leaves the theatre and jumps into the taxi with r&g and the cab meows at them. (i REALLY missed the fact the cabs don't meow anymore and was totally disappointed the last time i was in NYC.)

*i do like ophelia's mad scene in the guggenheim. the primal scream over the balcony was a genuinely nice touch.

OK...one last thought before moving on to other topics. looking at the cast list for hamlet, it all seems like a decent idea...with the exception of kyle maclachlan. (seriously, his most memorable movie role was in showgirls. he should thank sex in the city for redeeming him to some degree.) one the whole, it appears as though the director had only a vague idea of what he wanted and failed to fully utilize some of the talent he had at his disposal. only hawke and stiles (and diane verona as gertrude) seem to have a full grasp on the gravity of the content. so far, i give it a D.

2. graffiti. i have become increasingly aware recently of some of the graffiti appearing in my neighborhood. mind you, i am not talking about tagging.

i have noticed 'give up' for years. then, i noticed knitta...then the little tile pac-mans (who does that, by the way? i LOVE it.) i now have noticed the toothy ghost faces on windows...and on some signs and walls. and i must admit that, though more crude in style and destructive in medium, i think they are pretty cute. (want to see one? look closely at the 'shoot em up' posters plastered on the side of the convenience store catty-corner to brasil.) apparently, these ghosts are the work of 'ack.' i have not seen these new faces on private property yet, so some questions arise. especially in light of the new developments on 'give up.' i have seen two of his razor blades covered over with what appears to be...a rabbit? at first glance, it looked like a bunny. then, just a blob to obscure the blade...then, after seeing a similarly shaped blob over another razor blade, i think a bunny again...? in any case, it adds 'never' to the 'give up' mantra. interesting. and i must say, i am totally intrigued. i want to know more. if you live/work in the montrose/museum district area and you haven't noticed these things, open up your eyes, friends! anyways, i find myself amused/interested/curious by all this, but i wonder where we draw the line. while i enjoy these little curiosities, i imagine they annoy others. and of course, i imagine city officials aren't loving these additions to the urban landscape. so, where is the balance? i would like the feedback of my friends on this one. what are your thoughts?