Last night, Oteil Burbridge began his highly-anticipated new Oteil & Friends tour with a Halloween night performance at the Ardmore Music Hall in Ardmore, PA.In addition to his brand new solo album, Water In The Desert, and his upcoming Fall Tour with Dead & Company, Oteil recruited a truly badass band for a 10-show tour of his own featuring John Kadlecik (guitar/vocals), Eric Krasno (guitar/vocals), Melvin Seals (organ), Jay Lane (Drums), Alfreda Gerald (vocals), and Weedie Braimah (percussion). SETLIST: Oteil & Friends | The Ardmore Music Hall | Ardmore, PA | 10/31/17Set One:01 Tuning02 Water in the Desert03 How Sweet It Is (To Be Loved By You)04 Run For The Roses05 Gotta Serve Somebody06 If I Had the World to Give07 Deep Elem Blues08 Drums>09 Unconditional LoveSet Two:01 Tuning02 Tangled up in Blue03 Just Kissed My Baby04 Two Princes05 Cats Under the Stars06 Bertha07 So Many Roads08 Piece of My HeartEncore:09 Ripple The tour continues with a performance at the Charleston Pour House tonight, November 1st. For more info on all the upcoming Oteil & Friends dates, head to Oteil’s website. This is one tour you absolutely don’y want to miss.You can listen to full audio of the show below, uploaded by archive.org user cabinet music (Taped by Jeff Travitz, processed by Keith Litzenberger): Oteil Burbridge Releases Magical Studio Record “Water In The Desert” [Stream]The band wasted no time exceeding fans’ lofty expectations. The band turned in a fantastic set comprised of a mix of live Jerry Garcia Band favorites (including “Cats Under The Stars” and an extended take on Bob Dylan‘s “Tangled Up In Blue”), Grateful Dead staples like “Bertha” and “Ripple”, covers of songs by The Meters and Janis Joplin, a song off Krasno’s 2016 solo album (“Unconditional Love”), the title track from Oteil’s new album (“Water in the Desert”), and much more. Each of the band’s talented members got their moment to shine, and yes–they did “Let Oteil Sing”, as the bassist held down lead vocals on “If I Had The World To Give,” “So Many Roads,” and the encore “Ripple” sing-along.
Stories of learning, teaching, and turning points, in the Experience series.Raised in Chicago’s northern suburbs and in Washington, D.C., Martha L. Minow is the daughter of Josephine Minow, a civic activist, and Newton Minow, who chaired the Federal Communications Commission under President John F. Kennedy and was also a longtime partner in a leading Chicago law firm. In addition, Newton Minow served as an adviser to Adlai Stevenson during his 1952 and 1956 presidential campaigns. The twin realms of public service and the law would indelibly shape the aspirations of Minow and her two sisters, Nell and Mary.Minow joined the Harvard Law School faculty in 1981, and became its 12th dean in 2009. Her career has been one of deep engagement with issues of equality and human rights, of moving between scholarship and action in pursuit of her wide range of intellectual interests. Following the ethnic conflict during the Kosovo War in the 1990s, she served on the Independent International Commission on Kosovo, a panel that examined human rights violations, the efficacy of diplomatic efforts, and the legality of NATO intervention. In 2009, she was appointed by President Obama, her former student, to the board of the Legal Services Corporation, a government-sponsored nonprofit that funds civil legal aid programs for low-income Americans. Her work in the classroom has been praised for its engaging use of multiple modes of teaching and learning, and the Law School graduation Class of 2005 awarded her the Sacks-Freund Teaching Award.Minow, 59, has written numerous books, including “In Brown’s Wake: Legacies of America’s Educational Landmark” (2010) and “Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law” (1990). She is the Morgan and Helen Chu Dean and Professor of Law.Q: You come from a very illustrious and accomplished family. Tell me a little about your life growing up.A: My grandparents are immigrants, didn’t graduate from middle school. So we grew up very conscious that we had a lot of privilege compared to what their lives were like. My dad was in the federal government, in the Kennedy administration, and that was a formative experience for everyone in the family. When I got to college and said that I wanted to write a history thesis about the 1950s, they said, “That’s not history.” I said, “It is for me!” So clearly, it affected my worldview.My mother was very involved in civic activity and at some point, when I joined this faculty, I realized I had tried to combine my parents’ careers. I was a lawyer, but I worked on issues having to do with children and child abuse, which my mother had done. I have two wonderful sisters, neither who planned to be a lawyer. My younger sister’s career launched as a librarian, but in a way, she joined the family business. She is a lawyer for libraries and it’s a very different world today given the digital revolution. My older sister has been a lawyer, but she’s also been a film critic and a founder of the modern corporate governance movement. They’re both very amazing and very independent people who’ve invented their own careers.Q: You are the middle sister?A: Yes. We dressed alike, all of those things that people did back in the ’50s and ’60s. I think the fact that I’m a middle child has influenced my style in the world. I am a peacemaker, I am a bridge builder, I am a consensus person.Q: Your older sister Nell said you girls often formed little clubs and that she was always the president.A: Always, always. It’s very true. She was once interviewed about how did she get interested in management and she said, “When my younger sister was born.”Q: How did you and your family get to be such movie buffs?A: My dad, during World War II, enlisted at the age of 17, was in India and was involved in wiring India for telecommunications. He came back convinced that communications technology was the future. He then studied communications in college and, at some point, worked for Encyclopedia Britannica, which gave him access to 16mm films that he would bring home. So long before video, we had movie nights. I’m sure that’s some of it. Also, as a founder of modern public television, he used to sit us down in front of shows and ask us to be critics and tell him what we thought. So it was part of the family vocabulary to consider — what do we think of these things?Q: So he encouraged you to be opinionated, but got some useful feedback too.A: Absolutely. Family dinners were always about current affairs. He would put problems on the table, my mother would put problems on the table, and we would discuss them. We were expected to have views.Q: Certainly that was not what was going on in everyone’s household in that era.A: I have now come to understand that. I did not know that at the time. When I got to law school, my roommate said to me, “You really think you’re entitled to have a view on everything, don’t you?” It was the first time anyone ever pointed out that was unusual.Q: During your formative years, what really interested you?A: I am so very much affected by being a child of the ’60s. I grew up in a tumultuous time — the Civil Rights Movement, the women’s movement. [Last] year being the [50th] anniversary of JFK’s death brought back to mind how much a part of my childhood [were] the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Medgar Evers. That was a very big part of my life. I wrote poems about it; it was a thing I thought about. So I don’t know if I was thinking in career terms or not, but my life was going to have to deal with issues of social injustice and that’s what my life was going to be.Q: You attended Harvard Graduate School of Education before heading to Yale Law School. What drew you to the law and specifically to human rights, family law, and education law?A: In high school I had worked on social service activities and school reform seemed to me a very important area, to remedy the gulf between the haves and the have-nots. So it wasn’t a big leap to then think about studying social policy. I actually was torn between three options for graduate school. I didn’t want to go to law school. I thought about philosophy and public policy and education — applied to three programs, admitted to all of them, I thought I’d do all of them. I started with the Education School. It was the second year of busing in Boston. I worked for the master for the Delaware desegregation case; I worked on several other big projects. I became the project director for an assessment of the second year of Boston busing and it was pretty clear to me that I needed to have a law degree if I really wanted to participate in those issues.Q: Do you still feel connected to school reform and that part of your life?A: Absolutely. My most recent book, “In Brown’s Wake,” is about the legacies of Brown v. Board of Education outside of the context of school desegregation, although I do talk about that. Besides exploring what worked and did not work in efforts to produce racial desegregation, the book pursues repercussions of that struggle for students with disabilities, gender equality, treatment of religious and ethnic differences, school reform, and the dream of a “common school,” and argues that Brown has had more influence on racial equality outside of schools and more influence on other kinds of equality movements inside of schools. So yes, very much involved in those issues. It was a violent and controversial period in Boston with protests. I had been brought up to think you have to be part of the issues of the day and I was.‘The great secret that’s not such a secret is the way to continue to learn your whole life is to teach.’Q: How did clerking for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall and Judge David Bazelon of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia influence your thinking?A: I was really so privileged to work for two icons of judicial work. Judge Bazelon was the chief judge of the court of appeals in Washington. [He was] well-known to me at Yale because his approach to judging was very much revered by people at Yale — a very interdisciplinary approach, bringing into the law psychology, sociology, and so forth. Working for him was like a seminar every day. He’d bring in people from other fields. I later learned how very unusual that was.Q: That wasn’t the norm?A: Not the norm. And another unusual part of working for him was speechwriting — that was as important as working on the cases and that opened up for me many cross-disciplinary activities. I became immersed, because of that, in issues of engineering and safety. The actual judicial work was also very fascinating, issues of health and safety, as well as criminal justice, which I find myself returning to at this point in my career.Working for Justice Thurgood Marshall was a dream. He was a hero during my whole childhood and the work at the court is so unique and so intense. It’s a time I treasure and will always remember. I certainly learned from him to pick your battles. He had a very different approach than Judge Bazelon, who would dissent in any case and make a fight over everything and that’s kind of the way I had been brought up. Justice Marshall instead would say, “No, you have to husband your strength and pick your battles.” And that’s something that’s become a watchword in my life.Second thing, he was a proceduralist. He really was a lawyer’s lawyer because if you couldn’t win on the substance, you could sometimes win on the procedure. And I ended up teaching procedure, writing a book about procedure. I really learned from him a lot about the significance of that. I remember once saying to him, “This person had missed a deadline, but this case is so compelling.” And he said to me very seriously, “If we change the rules, they won’t be there tomorrow when we need them.” That obviously affected me deeply and the kind of professional focus I brought to my own work. He told stories that were fantastic and his ability to identify with every person in a story is something I revere and continue to think about.It was just very, very intense. Every week, you’d hear the squeak of a [cart’s] wheel coming down the hallway . . . carrying the petitions for certiorari, and coming on my desk would be 30 of them and each one would be a new area of law I’d never heard of and I was responsible for telling my justice what was in this case and should they review it. It was a heady experience, absolutely.Q: Starting out, where did you envision your career would take you?A: I thought I would go work in the Justice Department. I interviewed there and was given a job and it looked like that was what I was going to do. And then, frankly, there was an election — the Reagan election — and the Senate changed [in] 1980. I thought, “This is going to be a time I’m not so sure I want to be in the Justice Department.” People had already been exploring with me, “Did I want to teach?” And I guess at that point, it seemed to me, “Well, I’ll do that for a couple of years.” That’s genuinely what I thought: I’ll do that for a couple of years and then I’ll come back to Washington.Q: Did you ever have doubts back then about your ability to distinguish yourself in the field?A: I really didn’t think about gender until I was in law school. And then, it was just very palpable that this was a very male institution. I was at Yale, and in criminal law class discussions of rape were astonishingly insensitive, or so it seemed to me. But I don’t think I had self-doubt particularly related to being a woman. My question about coming here was, “Would I be comfortable at Harvard Law School?” I was very lucky. I had invitations to join the faculties at Yale and at Harvard and at Stanford and Michigan, a lot of schools. Harvard was the place that intrigued me the most, but it had a reputation for not being a good place for women. I sat with Walter Dellinger, later the solicitor general of the United States, [and said] “Harvard has had a series of women come teach on the faculty and they’ve all left.” There was one tenured woman on the faculty when I joined. He said, “That’s not a reason not to go if that’s the place you want to go.” Abe Chayes was on the faculty here — he was one of the people who recruited me — and I raised the question with him and he said, “You’re tough as nails.” And I thought, “I’m not tough as nails, but I’d like to be tough as nails.” So it was definitely on my mind that this was not a place that was known to be hospitable to women and I was concerned about that.Q: What convinced you to come here?A: The faculty were so exciting and the students I met — just the intellectual vibrancy of the place. There had been a big debate over the work of Roberto Unger, Mort Horwitz, and Duncan Kennedy; Gary Bellow had launched clinical education; [many of] the articles I was reading . . . were written by people at Harvard Law School. And when I came and interviewed with people . . . [I had] the most interesting discussions.Q: Did you ever question — or did others question — your decision to focus on what some call the “soft law” subjects?A: I did wonder. I wanted to teach subjects that dealt with education and children and schools and it crossed my mind, this is kind of stereotypic. And then I thought, but if I don’t do what I want to do, that’s being bound by stereotypes as well. This is what I want to do. I did want to teach procedure, which is kind of at the core of the legal curriculum and not exactly a soft subject. It’s in many people’s views the most arcane and nonintuitive subject in the first year. The work that I had at the Supreme Court convinced me it was absolutely crucial, so I felt like I was doing a little bit of both.Q: What do you consider your most important work as a scholar over the past 30 or so years?A: In many ways the first thing you write is the culmination of everything you’ve thought until that time. The first book [“Making All the Difference: Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law”] was that. It was my effort to address difference in the law — gender, race, disability, religion — and my work has continued in that vein. It integrated my graduate studies and my work at the court, as well as my research. I had a goal when I joined this faculty to learn as much in my first three years on the faculty as I had in law school because I felt it was an electrifying experience in law school. And I did. So when I wrote that book, I was trying to summarize the many different intellectual traditions that I had encountered, including things I had never heard of in law school: structuralism, deconstruction, hermeneutics, the interpretive turn in history. I’d never heard of any of those things. They were all tools that helped me address the issues of subordination in the law. I found I was becoming more theoretical not because I wanted to write about theory, but because the issues of equality and inequality were not amenable to the tools that we had previously in the law.Later, I became very involved in issues of trying to teach human rights and teach prevention of genocide and mass violence with a fabulous group that’s based here in Boston called Facing History and Ourselves, which is a global nonprofit that prepares teachers to help students think about human rights and prevent group conflict. That led to the next book, “Between Vengeance and Forgiveness,” which grew directly out of my collaborations with that organization. I organized a conference for them and everybody involved in the conference said, “Somebody should write about this” and we looked around and I guess it was me. So I wrote that book. That was a departure because I wasn’t talking about domestic equality issues but in many ways it was absolutely continuous because the treatment of a group of people as objects of hatred at the core of genocide is the sad, ultimate extension of the subordination issues that had preoccupied me previously.Two notable phone calls after I published the book then changed my work. One was from Madame [Sadako] Ogata, who was the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, who said, “I’m reading your book. I think you can help me.” I said, “I know nothing about refugees.” She repeated, “I’m reading your book. I think you can help me!” And how could I not? So I spent the next five years of my life working with her and developing a project called Imagine Coexistence and trying to address post-conflict situations.The other call was from Justice Richard Goldstone of the South African constitutional court. I’d never met him, but he wrote the preface to the book. He said, “Your book suggests to me that you should join me in the international commission on Kosovo that Sweden is creating.” And I said, “I know nothing about Kosovo. I don’t know what you’re talking about.” He said, “No, I think you should do this.” I said, “And I’m teaching … ” He said, “I’m on the court and I’m taking a leave of absence from the court to do this!” I said, “OK.” That was a big chapter of my life. It continues. For example, I’m co-editing a book about the first global prosecutor — the prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, charged with enforcing globally the kinds of norms we examined in the work in Kosovo.Minow, shown in her office, is working on a book at the intersection of law and forgiveness.Q: What are some of the most important things you’ve learned?A: My parents are my biggest teachers and my mother taught me you can’t control what life does to you but you can control how you respond to it. I think about that every day. My parents are still my greatest advisers. I talk to them every day. They’re remarkable human beings.Q: Tell me about some of the mistakes along the way.A: Oh, many, many mistakes. My sister Nell is a big source of inspiration on this. She says, “If you’re not failing some of the time, then you’re not risking enough.” So I’ve written things that have bombed, [received] negative reviews, [been] rejected from peer-reviewed journals. I started a project here at Harvard that got some funding that went nowhere and then people said, “We told you it wasn’t going to go anywhere.” I’ve had things that haven’t succeeded. I don’t beat myself up about any of those. I’m still very preoccupied with the issues of injustice and the justice gap and the gap between the haves and have-nots. We’re worse now than we were 20 years ago and that very much preoccupies me. Racial injustice [is] still an issue. I’m pretty staggered that we are still struggling with many of the same issues that motivated me.Q: How have you changed and how has Harvard Law School changed since you first joined the faculty in 1981?A: I think it’s a very continuous place in some ways but a very, very different one in others. We just this fall had Celebration 60, marking the 60th year of the admission of women. I joined the faculty 33 years ago … [which is] still in recent memory, and now it’s a very different experience: Just about 50 percent women students, not enough women on the faculty, but many more than when I joined. But more significantly, I think the School is more diverse intellectually. There are many more disciplinary approaches to law. History of philosophy, psychology, political science, linguistics, biology. That’s made it an even more exciting place intellectually.And it’s more global. It’s always been global in some respects, but the student body is much more international and the faculty is more international and my own teaching is a reflection of this. There I was, teaching a very domestic subject — how the federal courts process works — but case after case involved parties from around the world, issues of law and procedure from other places, facts that occurred outside. In terms of pedagogy, we have some lecture classes, but most of our teaching is much more question-and-answer based. But the idea that the professor has an answer and will not tell you what it is is very unusual here and it used to be much more typical. Now we have team projects and professors explaining here’s why we’re doing what we’re doing while asking questions. When I started here, there was a small clinical program giving students the opportunity to represent low-income clients and now we have 27 clinics. The Law School has a justice mission and that’s something that makes me very proud and something I know the students feel very passionately about.Q: What are students today like and how are they similar or dissimilar from when you first started teaching?A: The students are spectacular. I’m blown away regularly by what they know, how hard they work, the kinds of aspirations they have, their willingness to collaborate. I have many more students from other parts of the world than I used to. I just finished teaching constitutional law and to have in the class someone who’s an expert in the European Union and someone who clerked at the Israel Supreme Court, someone whose first law degree is from China and someone who practiced law in Australia — it enriches the class; it’s really quite terrific.The students now are generous, collaborative. They share notes with each other. I regularly ask students what has surprised them about Harvard Law School and almost always the response is how nice everybody is. I think the degree to which the students care about the world is very impressive to me. They are not just concerned about themselves. And there’s a current mood of entrepreneurship and “let’s create our own things”that’s very palpable and very impressive and I’ve tried to support it as dean. Even those that we can’t give support for financially, we give support intellectually and connect them with people outside the School. … all that is increasing a sense of we are not just on planet Law School, we’re on planet Earth and we’re part of a larger project.Q: If you were trying to excite a student about working in human rights or family law, what would you say to them?A: I guess I’d put the question a little differently. We’ve seen a noticeable drop in the numbers of talented students applying to law school, period. Some of that is an understandable response to the 2008 financial crisis and the difficulties that large law firms have had responding to that crisis, though most of them have bounced back. I think there’s now an overcorrection. I think there are reasons to remind talented young people why a life in the law is meaningful and opens up many, many doors. About half of our graduates over the course of their career do things other than practice law. They run for public office; they run nonprofit organizations; they are very involved in business, private equity, venture capital; major CEOs are graduates of our School, mayors, presidents, and so forth. That’s maybe a little bit atypical for all law schools, but for the top law schools, that is not atypical. I would hope that young talented people who have an interest in a meaningful life and career would consider law school.Q: You are regarded as an inspirational and popular teacher. What do you attribute that to?A: It’s such a privilege to teach. It’s the best part of my day. The great secret that’s not such a secret is the way to continue to learn your whole life is to teach. It’s a bonus to hear that people like my classes. I find the ideas and the questions absolutely captivating and renewing. I learn something new every day. I believe that I learn as much or more from my students than they learn from me and I think that’s the secret to being a good teacher. I don’t lecture. I do structure classes with questions that I think are very real questions. I also tend to use a variety of teaching methods that range from simulating judicial argument or senate debates to standing back and, as a class, trying to come up with a conceptual framework to organize a mass of material that’s incoherent … I taught a reading group last year that was on the law and forgiveness, which is a subject I’m trying to write a book about. I will be drawing on the discussions that we had there for years to come, it was so rich and meaningful.Q: What kind of legacy do you hope to leave at Harvard Law School?A: I wrote my undergraduate thesis on Adlai Stevenson, who ran for public office, ran for president, even knowing that he would lose. He was running against [Dwight] Eisenhower, who was described as familiar as the bottle of ketchup on the kitchen table and was beloved so much he was recruited by the Democrats as well as the Republicans to run for president. So why did Adlai Stevenson run? He ran because he thought that there were some questions that should be on the table. And I think that there should be some questions on the table that people should be debating and I hope that one of my legacies is to frame the questions in a way that makes them engaging and enduring and makes it possible to imagine third ways. If there’s something my work is known for it’s that I tend to take things that are framed as binaries, as an either/or, and say, “Actually, there’s a third way.” To think about third ways is not to say the question is unimportant, but it’s to imagine that there might be problems that we create in the way we frame the issue. If we frame it differently, we might find new solutions. That’s something that I hope has a legacy. If it’s not my particular answers, it’s the search for them. And the idea that you can use law to make a difference in the world and to tackle injustice. It’s always struck me as curious that we call them law schools and not justice schools. It’s that disjunction I guess I’m trying to push at: Where’s the justice part?Q: What’s next for you and what do you see yourself doing in 10 years?A: I’m writing a book about law and forgiveness. Should legal institutions encourage people to forgive wrongdoers, whether in criminal, financial, or other contexts — domestically, internationally? When is this productive for human relationships? When does it jeopardize deterrence and fairness? When might legal involvement even jeopardize the gifts of apology, voluntarily given, and forgiveness, willingly chosen? It’s surprising to me that I’m writing about that. I can see where it comes from in my prior work, but if you had asked me 20 years ago, are you going to be working on law and forgiveness, I would not have known that. So I hope I’m going to be working on things I can’t quite foresee.Interview was edited for clarity and length.
Michael Hughes ’15 called himself “a city slicker from the East” when he arrived in Gallup, N.M. It was summer, and Hughes was out of his element. “I hadn’t spent much time in a desert before,” he said.But Hughes settled in at the Gallup Indian Medical Center, where he got a firsthand look at the medical challenges facing Native American populations, particularly HIV.Hughes is one of 10 Presidential Public Service Fellows who spent the summer scattered across the country working to help others. The fellows included Daniel Backman ’15; Katherine Carter, Ed.L.D. candidate at the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE); Mallory Dwinal, M.B.A. candidate at Harvard Business School (HBS); Paul Monge Rodriguez, M.P.P. candidate at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS); Oded Oren, J.D. candidate at Harvard Law School (HLS); Jing Qiu ’16; Daniel Severson, joint J.D./M.P.P. candidate at HLS/HKS; Eva Shang ’17; and Nicole Simon, Ed.D. candidate at HGSE.Over four years, the fellowship has funded 40 students. Undergraduates receive funding up to $5,000, and graduates receive up to $8,000.In an annual luncheon with President Drew Faust on Wednesday, the fellows shared their experiences with Faust and with fellowship selection committee members, including Assistant Dean of Student Life for Public Service Gene Corbin, Vice President for Strategy and Programs Leah Rosovsky, Associate Dean for Planning and Outreach Keith Collar, and Institute of Politics Executive Director Catherine McLaughlin.Faust pressed the students on the surprises they found. In their unexpected encounters, she noted, “You often find dimensions of yourself that you didn’t know you had, and I think those lessons are really important.”Severson flew south to Washington, D.C., where he served as an adviser in the Department of Defense. He quickly learned of outdated intelligence laws, and found his efforts focused on those.“They gave me a lot of responsibility, and it was a challenge,” admitted Severson, who is a research assistant to Sultan of Oman Professor of the Practice of International Relations Nicholas Burns.Dwinal’s grandmother injured herself while Dwinal was an education policy and programming fellow at DonorsChoose.org, and Dwinal found herself working remotely to care for her grandmother in rural Illinois.Rodriguez was working as a legislative aide for the city and county of San Francisco Board of Supervisors when he found himself on the front line of coordinating the city’s strategy for addressing the needs of hundreds of immigrant children fleeing conditions of violence and poverty in Central America.“In public service, no amount of preparation and foresight can prepare you for a public crisis like that,” he said. “You just have to be able to respond on the fly.”Faust used the conversation as an opportunity to garner feedback about the fellowship program and about how to better engage students and promote public service at the University.Shang, an intern in mass incarceration reform at the American Civil Liberties Union, said students often don’t choose careers in public service because it lacks an “element of prestige” in comparison to other jobs.Dwinal said more students would benefit from encouragement by the University to enter public service instead of powerful firms or Wall Street. She said the expectations are so high for Harvard graduates that they often feel pressured to pursue prestige over service.Shang also suggested spreading more public service stories about how gratifying the work is.The students agreed that their fellowships lived up to the promise “to learn what it is to do public service and use it to inspire us for our career,” said Hughes.Already, Rodriguez has plans to run for office in San Francisco.“That’s great!” said Faust. “Will we get buttons?”
‘Fuerza Bruta'(Photo: Jacob Cohl) Show Closed This production ended its run on Aug. 28, 2016 And now for the grand finale! Fuerza Bruta is scheduled to close off-Broadway at the Daryl Roth Theatre on August 28. The international experience began performances in New York in 2007 and will have played over 3,000 performances by the end of its run.The immersive production will continue in Buenos Aires, and a touring company is currently playing in China. Tours throughout the U.S. and Argentina, as well as productions in Milan, Istanbul and Bucharest are also in the works.Fuerza Bruta is an Argentinean-founded spectacle-based experience created by artistic director Diqui James and musical director Gaby Kerpel, the same creators of De La Guarda. Fuerza Bruta premiered in Buenos Aires in 2005 and has been seen around the world including in London, Lisbon, Buenos Aires, Puerto Rico and the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. Related Shows Fuerza Bruta View Comments
Innovators throughout the business and education worlds are increasingly seeking ways to harness the untapped potential of electronic games and social media as powerful learning tools. The Emergent Media Center (EMC) at Champlain College has led the way in exploring this exciting new territory. Now that pioneering journey takes its next step as the EMC moves into new quarters at Winooski’s historic Champlain Mill.A celebration to mark the official opening of the EMC was held Tuesday, Oct. 21. The community met the students, faculty and staff of the high-tech education center and saw some of the ground-breaking projects. Gov. Jim Douglas, Champlain College officials, Winooski City officials and representatives from many top technology and software designers were expected to attend the opening.Gov. Douglas sees the EMC’s move into the Champlain Mill as a critical step in the creation of a thriving hub for innovative new media and technology businesses. The EMC is poised to become a vital link to a burgeoning creative community, one that will work with the Vermont Software Developers Alliance to grow this sector of the economy.Since its launch in 2006, the EMC at Champlain College has blazed a trail to where emergent technologies and learning converge, according to Ann DeMarle, director of the EMC. The electronic game industry is a world-wide economic engine that generates over $32.6 billion in revenue annually. That figure is expected to double by the year 2011, she said.Students at the EMC are not merely seizing new opportunities, they’re creating them. Their skills and professionalism led to ground-breaking partnerships with a wide range of organizations, she said.Among these many milestones is a project with the United Nations Population Fund. In partnership with the Population Media Center, the EMC is using new electronic media to positively impact women’s public health and human rights issues. Other current EMC partners include IBM, America’s Army, CIMIT at Massachusetts General Hospital, University of Vermont and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Games for Health, Information Literacy, Google Earth, and the Leahy Center for Lake Champlain.According to state officials, the EMC is a great example of showcasing the exciting careers young people can enjoy in Vermont. Located in a renovated woolen mill in Winooski, Champlain students are able to live across the street in a new student housing facility, and rub elbows with design and software engineering professionals who have already located to the Champlain Mill.Vermont has one of the highest concentrations of high-tech exports in the nation. In fact, three-quarters of all exports from Vermont are high-tech goods, heading for places like Canada, Hong Kong and South Korea, according to a recent study by AeA, the nation’s largest technology trade association.
FacebookTwitterLinkedInEmailPrint分享Reuters:WARSAW—Poland’s biggest power company. PGE. expects its Baltic Sea wind farms to achieve ready-to-build status in 2021, Chief Executive Henryk Baranowski said on Wednesday.Offshore wind farms and nuclear power station were two strategic options announced in 2016 by state-run PGE, which generates most of its electricity from lignite coal.“We have an optimistic and quite an ambitious plan to achieve a ready-to-build status for our offshore wind in 2021,” Baranowski told a conference with analysts.“At this moment we have a strategy, adopted in 2016, in which both nuclear and offshore are the options being considered. We have always said that we are open for any kind for partnership, but this partnership has to have reasonable business foundations,” Baranowski said.Sources said that PGE has abandoned its leading role in plans to build Poland’s first nuclear power station as it focuses on new wind farms in the Baltic Sea.More: Poland’s PGE Wants Its Offshore Wind To Be Ready To Build In 2021 Poland’s Coal-Heavy PGE Looks To Build Baltic Sea Wind Farms
Official sources stated that the vehicles, which cost a total of $ 5.5 million, will significantly contribute to reinforcing the activities of the Tecún Umán Task Force, made up of military and police officers, allowing them further mobility and capacity for flexible and quick support to the Guatemalan forces. By Dialogo June 19, 2013 Specifically, Guatemalan President Otto Pérez announced that three new security squadrons composed of Military and Police officers will start to operate soon in order to secure those departments with a higher homicide rate. Tecún Umán is one of the three joint task special squadrons between the Police and Military that will be implemented in Guatemala to counter violence caused by common and organized crime. López Bonilla added that the task force will be integrated by a contingent of 250 Soldiers and police officers, who are already training at the Military Police Brigade at San Juan Sacatepéquez. The unit will be in charge of countering drug trafficking and smuggling. Tecún Umán Task Force is about to start operations on Guatemala’s coastline area of San Marcos. In early June, Interior Minister Mauricio López Bonilla reported that the U.S. government had already sent 20 of the 42 armored vehicles for that unit, and that the rest of the vehicles would arrive at the end of the month. “They may formally arrive by early July, when we begin operations in the whole area,” the official explained. The U.S. government will donate 42 armored Jeep J8 vehicles to the Guatemalan Army and Police forces, to be used for public security joint tasks; 20 of the units were delivered in late May. “Three squadrons are ready. Its members have already been recruited, and they are being trained; the team is all set,” the official said, adding that the squadrons will be made up of 500 elements and they intend to locate them in troubled Guatemalan areas, such as Escuintla, Izabal and Chiquimula.
Sign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York Two 19-year-old Mineola men died after one of them crashed the car they were in early Wednesday morning in Roslyn Heights.Nassau County police said Steven Clancy was driving his 2004 Volkswagen Jetta northbound on Roslyn Road when he lost control of the car and struck a curb near Locust Lane at 1:15 a.m.The car hit a tree in the rear yard of an Oak Lane residence before coming to a rest, police said.Both teens were pronounced dead within minutes of the crash.Homicide Squad detectives are continuing the investigation into the cause of the crash.
Project Raise the bar was launched with the aim of providing highly educated staff for the following professions: chef, waiter, bartender and manager. With this, Coca-Cola HBC Croatia wants to contribute to the further development of the Croatian tourist offer and to solving the problem of the lack of qualified labor force in the hospitality and tourism industry. One part of the selected participants Raise the bar academies with lecturers: Andrej Čapko, director and owner of Zmajska pivovara; Andrea Klemenčić, catering manager and Kruno Rozić, Coca-Cola brand ambassador / Photo: Coca-ColaHBC Croatia Academy Raise the bar over the next five years it will provide more than 250 highly quality educated people to help improve the quality of supply and services in the sector. In the first cycle of the academy, 15 participants will have the opportunity to learn from the best catering experts and master the most modern techniques recognized by the Coca-Cola HBC Croatia and European Bartender School certificates. “With this project, we want to create a base of talented and excellent people who, we are convinced, will gain useful knowledge and their energy and creativity to help further improve the hospitality offer and in this regard strengthen the competitiveness of Croatia. Catering is one of our most important sales channels and that is why we want to support its further development with an educational program based on practical knowledge and the latest trends, thus continuing our investments in the community.”, Said the General Manager of Coca-Cola HBC for Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Slovenia, Ruža Tomić Fontana. Participants who successfully complete the program will receive a certificate from Coca-Cola HBC Croatia and a reputable school for bartenders European Bartender School, a program partner. On the one hand, the certificate will strengthen the competitiveness in the labor market of all participants who successfully complete the program, and on the other hand it will make it easier for employers to search for a quality workforce because it will guarantee a high level of knowledge and skills of future employees. In order to contribute to solving the problem of lack of skilled labor in the hospitality and tourism industry, Coca-Cola HBC Croatia has launched a free educational program, the Rasie the Bar academy for additional training in the hospitality industry in line with the latest world trends. Applications for the second educational cycle of the academy Raise the bar they are open until January 31, 2020, and anyone interested can apply HERE Participants in the program will be taught by Andrea Klemenčić, manager with more than eighteen years of experience in catering management, Andrej Čapka, director and owner of Zmajska pivovara, Ivan Jug, manager and co-owner of Noel restaurant, and Kruno Rozić, Coca-Cola’s brand ambassador and bartender. In order to enable participants to acquire knowledge applicable in real business conditions, Coca-Colin is an educational center equipped with modern equipment, all the necessary aids and components for practical classes. With the academy Raise the bar and cooperation with high schools Coca-Cola HBC Croatia as well as cooperation with the foundation Be Foodie seeks to contribute to the improvement of tourism and hospitality. So they are at this year’s regional congress of gastronomy and catering Chef’s Stage in Šibenik, also within the project Raise the bar, awarded the first three scholarships for young talents in gastronomy and catering intended for training in the world’s best programs – Le Cordon Bleu in Istanbul, Academia Intrecci Alta Formazione and the Lavonne Academy in India.
Eli Lilly and Co on Wednesday said a single infusion of its experimental antibody treatment reduced the need for hospitalization and emergency room visits for clinical trial patients with moderate COVID-19.The company said it will discuss the interim results, which have not yet been reviewed by outside experts, with global regulators. The New York Times reported that Lilly Chief Scientific Officer Daniel Skovronsky said the company would talk with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about the possibility of an emergency use authorization.The mid-stage study tested three different doses of LY-CoV555, a manufactured copy of a an antibody produced by a patient who recovered from COVID-19. Antibody treatments work by recognizing and locking onto foreign invaders to prevent infection of healthy cells. No drug-related serious adverse events or trial deaths were reported.Lilly said the trial will enroll 800 patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, with the next segment testing LY-CoV555 in combination with a second Lilly antibody, LY-CoV016, which binds to a different area of the coronavirus.The antibodies, given by intravenous infusion, are also being tested for preventing COVID-19 in nursing home residents and staff and for treating patients already hospitalized with COVID-19.Several companies including Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc and Vir Biotechnology are also testing antibody treatments for COVID-19.Lilly’s shares were up 1.3% to $152. Topics : Of the total 302 patients treated with the Lilly drug, five or 1.7%, had to be hospitalized or required an emergency room visit. That compared with 6% in the placebo group, Lilly said.”These data are not a home run but … are among the most encouraging COVID treatment data we’ve seen, particularly given this is in mild-to-moderate outpatients where there has simply been no treatment progress until now,” Raymond James analyst Steven Seedhouse said in a research note.Oddly, only the middle 2,800-milligram dose achieved the trial’s main goal of reducing the amount of virus detected in patients compared with a placebo 11 days after treatment. Lilly said most trial participants, including those given a placebo, had completely cleared the virus by day 11. Some analysts suggested that future studies may want to use an earlier time point than 11 days.Most hospitalizations occurred in patients with underlying risk factors such as obesity or advanced age. Lilly said future study would focus on people in these higher-risk groups.