Saturday, May 31, 2014

Is it possible to be a millionaire poet?


Is it possible to be a millionaire poet?

Last week, an amateur poet won more than $1m on a TV talent show in the United Arab Emirates. But what does an injection of cold hard cash on this scale do to a poet's creative impulses?
As poetry readings go, the setting was unique. The Al Raha Beach Theatre in Abu Dhabi boasted light-up floors, backdrop projections and a light show of a kind that would be familiar to fans of Pop Idol, X Factor or America's Got Talent.
Since February, global audiences of up to 70 million have tuned in to watch Million's Poet, in which men (there were no female contestants this year) in traditional dress take turns to deliver self-penned verses of a type of colloquial Arabic poetry called Nabati. A panel of judges delivers feedback, the Emirati royal family puts in an occasional appearance, and the contestants are gradually whittled down.
If this format seems alien to the business of poetry, described by Wordsworth as "emotion recollected in tranquillity", then the prize money may also give us pause for thought. When 27-year-old Saif al-Mansuri won the sixth season of the show last week, he took home five million UAE Dirhams - that's $1.3m or £800,000. As literary prizes go, the only thing that comes close is the Nobel Prize for Literature, which stands at eight million Swedish kronor ($1.2m or £700,000).
All this raises questions about poetry and our preconceptions of poets. As Robert Graves put it, "There's no money in poetry, but then there's no poetry in money, either."
"Ordinarily, poetry does seem to be the opposite of show business, and we probably just prefer our poets not to be celebrities in that particular way," says Don Share, Chicago-based editor of Poetry magazine and a poet himself. "It doesn't sit well with us, and it's very hard to explain that. Money is felt to be contaminating and to be antithetical to the values that we expect from poetry and literature and art."
But, he says, it's very unfair to resent poets and novelists who become rich, since pop stars, movie stars and even politicians are much wealthier. It's a good thing, in his view, if Million's Poet is providing counter-examples to the "stereotype of the starving artist, the poet in the garret".
That impression, he says, was fixed by the large number of great poets in history who happened to be very poor.
In the mid-19th Century, visitors flocked to the cottage of John Clare, to stare at the "peasant poet" who lived and worked in grinding poverty. There was bohemian poverty too, the type where a poet's last pennies were spent on absinthe or opium rather than bread. Charles Baudelaire was born to a wealthy family but squandered his inheritance and sank into debt. He said: "Any healthy man can go without food for two days - but not without poetry." Arthur Rimbaud, living a scandalous life with his lover Paul Verlaine in London in 1872, passed his time in the Reading Room of the British Museum, to use their free heating and ink.
The associations between poverty and poetry did not disappear in the 20th Century. "Like many of my fellow poets, we grew up reading the Beat generation - Allen Ginsberg, Jack Kerouac," says the Friesian poet Tsead Bruinja. "And they were into the hobos, and all that train-hopping stuff. I think it's the idea that truth is where sadness is, where poverty is, where the booze is. And not where the money is."
But Bruinja says that he no longer has such a narrow conception of his art-form, and thinks verse can be hammered out of all kinds of life experience. "There's poetry everywhere," he says.
As a civilised art, verse has been composed by aristocrats, including Byron and Pushkin, as well as kings and rulers. Japan's Emperor Meiji wrote thousands of 31-syllable waka poems, which are still available in anthologies today. A number of Arab emirs have become masters of the Nabati poetry form featured in Million's Poet, including the late ruler of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahayan, and the first ruler of Qatar, Sheikh Jasim bin Mohammad al-Thani.
There is no reason why rich poets can't feel the hope, love, loss and wonderment they need to create their work, says Judith Palmer, the director of the Poetry Society. "Money solves a lot of problems but it doesn't stop you going through emotional trauma or suffering bereavement - I imagine that feeling is the same."
The American poet Frederick Seidel is perhaps unique among contemporary English-language poets in his willingness to discuss the trappings of wealth, from fine dining to his love of Ducati motorbikes. He was born into a family that had become wealthy in haulage, and has lived a comfortable life - "I live a life of laziness and luxury" he begins one poem. But his poetry hasn't always been well-received, with one critic calling him a name-dropper.
It might also be difficult for poets to adjust to the new rhythms of life that coming into money thrusts upon them. A lot of people find that when they have the time to write they suddenly can't, Palmer says. On the other hand, coming into money may help a poet. Bruinja says the added attention might mean a poet's output changes slightly, but he or she can also buy a nice house and enjoy peace and quiet. Seamus Heaney said that he felt more pressure after winning the Nobel Prize in 1995, but described his cottage in Wicklow, Ireland as a "haven".
Bruinja is one of just a dozen or so poets in Holland who live by their pen, but this involves a lot more than just writing. He covers his mortgage with a hotchpotch of readings, special commissions, sitting on committees, creative writing teaching, writing a column in a newspaper, and a helpful government grant. The income from sales of his poetry books, he says, is negligible - a couple of hundred euros a year.
Don Share says a common experience in the development of a young poet is for someone - a parent or friend, perhaps - to take them aside and warn them that there is no money in what TS Eliot described as the "mug's game" of poetry.
Why is this? Unlike visual artists - who can become very well-off indeed - a poet's product is immaterial, and therefore harder to commodify. Poems can be everywhere at once, and there is a sense in which they belong to anyone that can read, says Share. "What we love about poems is that they become ours. One thing that seems to be very important is for people to feel a poem has a value that is incalculable."
But he also thinks poetry is undervalued because it is not seen as proper work. As the Serbian-American poet Charles Simic once quipped, most poems are too short to be seen as valuable. "They give the impression it took no time to write them. Ten minutes tops. To write a 600-page novel takes years."
Share relates a recent conversation amongst his poet friends on Facebook, after one of them was invited by a neighbour to give a workshop in a school. When the poet asked if she would be paid, the neighbour was appalled. "The idea was that she should share her expertise and her work for free, and that it was outrageous to ask for money in return."
One way to look at Million's Poet is to see it as a product of a tradition of patronage. The show was the brainchild the crown prince of Abu Dhabi and the contestants' poetry is often, although by no means always, in praise of the Gulf's leaders. Perhaps this kind of poet is more immune to sudden wealth than a poet of the purely romantic kind. After al-Mansuri won Million's Poet he told the audience it was the start of a journey and they would see much more of him in the future.
Patronage of the arts has not disappeared from the West, although it tends to operate on a corporate or civic level, rather than a personal one. An exception to this is the "adopt a poet" scheme operated by the Poetry International Foundation. The foundation's director, Bas Kwakman, laments that it is almost impossible to survive as a poet nowadays, but he doesn't begrudge al-Mansuri his $1.3m prize.
"I wouldn't care if he adopts a rapper's style with beautiful cars and expensive sunglasses, driving by the beach with beautiful girls," he says. "Let him be a bigger rapper star. And afterwards, at night, let him write beautiful poetry."
Additional reporting by Dina Demrdash, who discussed Million's Poet on the Fifth Floor on the BBC World ServiceListen again on iPlayer or get the Fifth Floor podcast.
Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and on Facebook.

Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Could the era of glass skyscrapers be over?


Could the era of glass skyscrapers be over?

One of the architects behind London's famous Gherkin skyscraper has now turned against glass buildings. Is it time tall towers were made out of something else, asks Hannah Sander.
It is one of the UK's most recognisable buildings. A Stirling Prize winner. A backdrop to Hollywood films. Named the most admired tower in the world.
But 10 years after it was opened, one of the designers behind the "Gherkin" has turned against it. Architect Ken Shuttleworth, one of the team at Foster and Partners who designed the tower, now thinks the gigantic glass structure was a mistake.
"The Gherkin is a fantastic building," he says. "But we can't have that anymore. We can't have those all-glass buildings. We need to be much more responsible."
The building at 30 St Mary Axe - nicknamed after a gherkin because of its bulbous silhouette - kick-started a decade of strangely shaped glass towers. The Cheesegrater, the Walkie-Talkie and the Shard loomed up from the pavements of London.
The skylines of both Birmingham and Manchester were drastically altered by the addition of towers by property firm Beetham.
One of the best-known glass building mishaps took place last summer, when the Walkie-Talkie at 20 Fenchurch Street in London was accused of melting cars. The 37-storey building reflected light in its glass facade and shone powerful rays at its surroundings. Cars parked underneath were damaged, and passers-by even managed to fry eggs using only sunlight.
In the end the developers, Land Securities, had to apply for planning permission to obscure architect Rafael Vinoly's £200m design with a permanent "brise soleil" or sunshade.
And yet despite this, Land Securities recently revealed that the widely reported calamity "did nothing to deter lettings".
Glass buildings are popular - not just because of their striking appearance but for the views they boast, and the increased light they let in.
When German architect Ludwig Mies Van Der Rohe designed what is said to be the world's first glass skyscraper in 1921, he associated the glass facade with purity and renewal. Later in the century, British architect Richard Rogers praised glass buildings because of their social worth. Glass walls enabled even employees working in the basement to benefit from reflected natural light and dissolved barriers between a cramped indoor office space and the greenery outside.
Companies like to give the impression of a democratic working environment - open-plan and with floor-to-ceiling windows, so that all employees, not just the boss, benefit from the view.
However, as concerns over global warming have become more widespread, so the glass structure has come under scrutiny.
Since leaving Foster and Partners in 2006, Shuttleworth has become a key voice in the fight against glass. Despite his background working on giant glazed buildings, he has founded an architectural practice in which floor-to-ceiling windows are considered an archaic luxury.
"Everything I've done for the last 40 years I'm rethinking now," he says. "If you were designing [the Gherkin] today... it wouldn't be the same product all the way around the building.
"We need to be much more responsible in terms of the way we shade our buildings and the way we thermally think about our buildings."
Glass lets out and lets in a lot of heat. A vast amount of energy is required for an office full of people to remain cool in the UAE and to stay warm in the snowstorms of Toronto.
Governments are now so concerned by the long-term impact of "solar gain" - the extent to which a building absorbs sunlight and heats up - that they have introduced strict regulations around shape and structure.
Architects are being encouraged to change where they place windows, so that a sunny south-facing wall has less chance to absorb heat than a chilly north-face.
Walkie-Talkie developers Land Securities are currently at work on a building called the ZigZag, that is designed so that alternate walls cast shadows on their neighbours. The building is deliberately shaped so it can keep itself cool.
In the US there is a campaign in favour of wooden skyscrapers, promoting wood as a "green" building material in place of glass.
However, the trade association Glass for Europe dismisses what they consider "a preconceived idea" that glass is bad. Instead they point to sustainable buildings in which glass has been fashioned into corridors that don't require central heating and solar panels that have been slotted seamlessly into a design. The association also points out that glass is fully recyclable.
"A whole palette of glass products is available for the glazing to meet different functions in the building envelope," the association says. "Glass is fit for all climates."
In the past decades, the glass industry has worked hard to adapt technology in the context of climate change.
Engineer Andrea Charlson is part of a team at firm Arup that seeks new ways to increase material sustainability. She is not convinced that the glass in glass buildings is the cause of their problems.
"There have been a lot of advancements in glass technology in the last few years and it's amazing what we can do now in terms of putting coatings on glass. Some of them can be a heavy colour tint that will provide some shading. Others will be almost invisible but will still keep a lot of the heat and solar gain outside a building," she says.
Charlson is currently investigating problems in the materials that hold the glazed panels on buildings in place.
"As the glass technology improves, one of the biggest causes of heat loss is through the framing. The heat energy will always try to find the path of least resistance."
Even with the improvements to glass technology, Shuttleworth is not convinced that these sheer skyscrapers can be justified in today's society. He is not only concerned by their environmental impact, but also with the other effects a glass tower has on its surroundings.
Architecture and design critic Tom Dyckhoff is equally keen to see the glass skyscraper put to bed.
"As someone who spends their entire life staring at buildings, I am a bit bored by the glass box. They were radical in the 1920s and now they are just cliches, expensive ones at that.
"But now that we are having to be more thoughtful about how and where we use glass, maybe architects will become more inventive in how they use windows, instead of plastering them across whole facades," he says.
Shuttleworth's most recent project began life as a solid steel object and he says it has glass only where it is needed.
"It is a privilege to have a window. I think it should be seen as a privilege," he says.
Rooms with a View is on Tuesday 27 May at 16:00 GMT on BBC Radio 4. Or catch up later on BBC iPlayer
Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and on Facebook

Saturday, May 10, 2014

'Killer robots' to be debated at UN



'Killer robots' to be debated at UN

Killer robots will be debated during an informal meeting of experts at the United Nations in Geneva.
Two robotics experts, Prof Ronald Arkin and Prof Noel Sharkey, will debate the efficacy and necessity of killer robots.
The meeting will be held during the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW).
A report on the discussion will be presented to the CCW meeting in November.
This will be the first time that the issue of killer robots, or lethal autonomous weapons systems, will be addressed within the CCW.
Autonomous kill function
A killer robot is a fully autonomous weapon that can select and engage targets without any human intervention. They do not currently exist but advances in technology are bringing them closer to reality.
Those in favour of killer robots believe the current laws of war may be sufficient to address any problems that might emerge if they are ever deployed, arguing that a moratorium, not an outright ban, should be called if this is not the case.
However, those who oppose their use believe they are a threat to humanity and any autonomous "kill functions" should be banned.
"Autonomous weapons systems cannot be guaranteed to predictably comply with international law," Prof Sharkey told the BBC. "Nations aren't talking to each other about this, which poses a big risk to humanity."
Prof Sharkey is a member and co-founder of the Campaign Against Killer Robots and chairman of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control.
Side events at the CCW will be hosted by the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots.
Automation of warfare
Prof Arkin from the Georgia Institute of Technology told the BBC he hoped killer robots would be able to significantly reduce non-combatant casualties but feared they would be rushed into battle before this was accomplished.
"I support a moratorium until that end is achieved, but I do not support a ban at this time," said Prof Arkin.
He went on to state that killer robots may be better able to determine when not to engage a target than humans, "and could potentially exercise greater care in so doing".
Prof Sharkey is less optimistic. "I'm concerned about the full automation of warfare," he says.
Drones
The discussion of drones is not on the agenda as they are yet to operate completely autonomously, although there are signs this may change in the near future.
The UK successfully tested the Taranis, an unmanned intercontinental aircraft in Australia this year and America's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) has made advances with the Crusher, an unmanned ground combat vehicle, since 2006.
The MoD has claimed in the past that it currently has no intention of developing systems that operate without human intervention.
On 21 November 2012 the United States Defense Department issued a directive that, "requires a human being to be 'in-the-loop' when decisions are made about using lethal force," according to Human Rights Watch.
The meeting of experts will be chaired by French ambassador Jean-Hugues Simon-Michel from 13 to 16 May 2014.

More Technology stories

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

'Flying 3D printer' could play key role in emergencies



'Flying 3D printer' could play key role in emergencies

Engineers from Imperial College London have built autonomous "flying 3D printer" drones, which could protect people from nuclear waste.
The drones can "print" a sticky foam on dangerous objects before attaching themselves and lifting the hazard away.
The engineers hope that the drones will one day be capable of printing nests in treetops to enable them to rest and recharge before continuing.
But one roboticist is unconvinced about the device's 3D-printing capabilities.
Dr Mirko Kovac, director of the aerial robotics laboratory at Imperial College London, has been working on the project with a small team.
Bridging gaps
In a video demonstration, a quadcopter (a drone with four rotors) can be seen printing a sticky foam substance onto a small block, before flying away.
A hexacopter (which has six rotors) then takes the quadcopter's place, landing on the sprayed object and waiting for the foam to set.
Then the hexacopter flies off, with the foreign object attached to its underbelly.
The researchers hope this process will be particularly useful for removing hazardous materials, such as nuclear waste.
According to the New Scientist, the quadcopter acts almost entirely autonomously and is guided by GPS. The foam is said to be made of polyurethane.
The project's abstract states that potential applications could include "ad-hoc construction of first response structures in search-and-rescue scenarios," as well as "printing structures to bridge gaps in discontinuous terrain".
Thomas J Creedy, a PhD student working on the project at Imperial College London, said in a statement: "This is an exciting first step in the lab's development of co-operative robotic systems for building structures inspired by the natural world."
Future potential
The robots are said to be inspired by swiftlets - birds that construct nests using their saliva.
Noel Sharkey, Emeritus Professor of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics at the University of Sheffield, told the BBC he was not impressed with the 3D-printing capabilities but had high hopes for its future potential.
Having seen the video presentation, Prof Sharkey said: "This could hardly be called 3D printing, although it uses some of the components.
"However, the potential game changer in this application is their notion of using it to repair bridges and other construction works from the air."
On 24 June, 3D printing firm Deezmaker and aerial photography company Velocity Pigeon teamed up to create a less advanced flying 3D printer, which they claimed was a "world first".
Dr Kovac's drones will be demonstrated at the Imperial Festival in London on 9 and 10 May.

More Technology stories