Medieval Times are some odd times

Before I can even begin, I have to add two warnings about the Medieval Times experience: one, if you suffer from asthma, allergies to dust or horses, or any other similar respiratory illness, make sure that you pre-medicate and take any necessary medication with you; two, avoid sitting in the first or second rows. I will explain.

But don't let me frighten you; in the right circumstances, Medieval Times make for some very good times. If you have young children who like this kind of thing—the knights, horses, princes, sword fights-type of thing—then you'll all have a great time. If you are a large group of open-minded folks looking for something different, then you'll have a good time. If you want to take your beau on a date, make sure she's into it first. Also, if you are a group, you'll pay a deep discount, which makes the experience much much better.

The thing was almost a complete surprise to me. I heard on Wednesday that my friend Jacqui Oakley was coming into town from Hamilton on Friday to take in Medieval Times for her birthday—short notice, but as a 9–5er and new homeowner, my Friday plans usually involve a distinct lack of activity, sometimes penetrated by yoga or a video; what I'm saying is I was free. I was also game, having wondered for many years what exactly went on inside the walls of that "castle" on the CNE grounds, formerly the Dominion Government building and the Arts, Crafts, and Hobbies building. (See it here, in the fourth and fifth pairs of pics.) You see, in my early teenage years, I was a Dungeons & Dragons fan, and Tolkien was long my very favourite author. This fascination with history and fantasy has stayed with me, and while I didn't expect Medieval Times to offer a precise reconstruction of the middle ages, I was curious as to precisely what they would offer.

My curiosity was not disappointed.

Here are a couple of immediate observations: Medieval Times is not a history lesson; it is entertainment—dinner theatre to be more precise. The company says that it is committed "to the accuracy of weapons and costumes", but I think I can say that it is not educational—particularly when it comes to the history that it purports to portray. As entertainment—dinner theatre—the audience is expected to participate, to cheer their knight (ours was the Yellow), respond to the unfolding narrative, and, if you like, to join the merriment during the pre-show, where the King's Chancellor will try to rally the crowd with subtle mocking, poor jokes, and a bad English accent.

Also, you will be gouged on drinks (with or without alcohol), and you will have your experience sold back to you in the form of pictures and collectibles.

Still, somehow I didn't have a bad time.

Here's how it goes. After you get your tickets, you receive a coloured crown that represents your knight (and seating area). Then you may have your picture taken with the princess on her throne. Then an usher will guide you into the medievally decorated common area, or "Knights' lounge", or "bar" where you can buy overpriced drinks in cups in the shape of horses' heads and sparkly goblets—if you can get the attention of a bar wench, that is. You can also meet the falconer and one of his birds here. You can visit "The Dungeon" for two dollars (none of us did, so I can't say any more about it). You can take a peek into the stables, and the aviary, which houses a couple more attractive and well behaved falcons. You can peruse the concession stands, "The King's Sale" one is called, and buy prince and princess costumes, child-sized wooden swords and shields, adult-sized replica steel swords and other assorted bits and bobs. I was half expecting to see bongs in the shape of dragons, but no, this is a family event after all. (However, I do recommend that you smuggle booze into the show. There are plenty of opportunities to mix it into a soft drink, in the lounge or at your table.)

I heard there was a court jester about the grounds, but I didn't see him. Eventually, the Chancellor climbs to the stage and offers something in the way of explanation of how the evening's festivities will unfold, and tries to raise a few rallying cries from the audience. Attention at this point is not mandatory, although the Chancellor will act disdainful if you ignore him. I thought a couple of fair-style games of skill and chance would have enhanced the medieval experience. At last, the Chancellor announces that it's time for dinner and the games, and the crowd is ushered into the heart of the castle to the arena.

You sit at arena-style tables, and the metal bowl with handle in front of you gives you an idea of how you will eat your dinner—without utensils. Soon, the games begin! I won't divulge the narrative, partly since I don't think I could reconstruct it accurately and partly because I wouldn't want to spoil it for anyone. But what follows are several acts of horsemanship, jousting, grandstanding, flag-carrying, hand-to-hand combat with a wide assortment of weapons—including swords, axes, morning stars, pike axes, and more, for you nerds out there—falconing, "Hollywood caliber" light shows, and overall, quite a bit of excitement. Sparks fly, knights jump, horses run, people cheer, dust rises, and good wins over evil. (That's not really a spoiler, is it?)

And dinner, well, it's a simple and tasty meal, built around two meat courses—half a roasted chicken and a barbecued rib. (There is a vegetarian option, but I didn't experience it.) The dinner is almost certainly very wasteful, though. I can't imagine that more than one-third of the people there ate the whole thing. There's also the issue of the dust. The games take place on sand, and the action stirs up that sand from the very start. I guarantee that no matter where you sit, your food acquires a fine or not-so-fine layer of dust, but the closer you are to the action, the more dust your food will have. It's possible that the very rear row of seat/tables might avoid this fate, since that row is behind the powerful fans that are supposed to keep the dust down and in the centre of the room, but that row was closed for the show I attended. I can only assume that the city's health department has determined that the amount and quality of dust that gets into the food is not harmful, and frankly, I didn't worry about it that much. (I guess if you eat quickly, you'll get less dust, too ;) There is also the curious experience of eating in the dark

The dust is also the reason I mention asthma and allergy sufferers, like myself. About half an hour into the show, I started to experience the laboured breathing that indicates the charming condition of asthma. Since I've never experienced a full-on asthma attack, and in the last 15 years, I've very seldom had significant trouble breathing, I often do not carry my asthma inhaler with me—as in this case. Perhaps I should have known, but I find no indication on the website that anyone should avoid the show for health reasons. Very unfortunately, this case was more serious than I'd experienced in 20 years! I left the arena for five or ten minutes to calm myself down, and when I returned, I managed to maintain control over my breathing, with difficulty. Naturally, this condition prevented me from focusing on and enjoying the rest of the show. At any rate, I got through it, although the after-effects lasted for a couple of days.

After the show, you can meet the knights in the lounge and continue your souvenir shopping, but all I wanted to do was get out of there.

Overall, my impression of the event is that it fills a strange void in Toronto's entertainment scene. I figure besides the families with children, the seats are filled with either enthusiasts or the curious. The former just love the show and the latter want to know what it's all about. And I guess Toronto has enough of them all to maintain the business. The entertainment is pretty good, but seems aimed at children more than adults. This is fine, since I assume young people and their families constitute the greater part of the audience. But I thought there were several relatively simple ways in which the show could be improved to make it more entertaining for adults, such as the fair games I mentioned, improved choreography, reduced dust clouds, a simpler, but more engaging story. The thing I found most interesting about Medieval Times was the spectacle itself: the fact that it exists at all and people go, the chintzy decorations and lack of atmosphere, the theme park feeling, the limited service and amusements, the people, the cast and staff... It all just seemed so weird.

Finally, unless you are in the enthusiast category, I simply don't recommend paying full price for a ticket (adult $63; under 12 $40; plus taxes). I don't think it's worth it. You're better of looking for or waiting for promotions. (For example, until the end of February 2010, there's a group promotion: four can go for $30 each.)

Have you experienced Medieval Times? Was it as interesting for you as it was for me? Read on..!

Art projects past: the YPF 24-hour Art Party

It feels like a long time in the past now, but about five or so years ago, I and a group of friends, the Young People's Foundation collective, performed our second major installation: the 24-Hour Art Party, also known as Days are Numbered + Aftermath. (Our first was really just a big party and fundraiser with a relatively small exhibition—does anyone have photos of that?) The object of the event was to create a work of art (approximately 7" x 7") every 24 minutes for 24 hours, producing a total of 60 pieces per artist. (13 or 14 of us participated.) It was awesome. At the end of the 24 hours, Galerie Accidentelle (at Spencer's and Mandy's boutique, Lemon Lime) was covered from floor to ceiling in art.

Well, I don't consider myself much of an illustrator, painter, or collage artist; I'm not visually creative enough to put together that many individual pieces in that amount of time. So I decided to make music instead, and here is a mix of my many pieces. (I did create a piece for every 24-minute period. Mostly I wrote out lyrics or thoughts on the process.)


The next day, Josh and I mixed it down from 60 tracks, and I dropped off a CD and discman at the gallery so viewers could look and listen. And now, finally, so can the whole world. Let me know what you think!

Track one Track two Track three Track four Track five Track six Track seven Track eight Track nine Track ten Track eleven Track twelve Track thirteen Track fourteen Track fifteen Track sixteen Track seventeen Track eighteen Track nineteen Track twenty Track twenty-one Track twenty-two

Read on..!

The Interior Design Show and Come Up To My Room

I visited the Interior Design show a couple of years back when my friends at Furni Creations were exhibiting this bad boy, among other things. Danijela and I had just bought our house (we hadn't moved in yet), and we toured the exhibition with some interest. I remember enjoying the special installations and the showcase of fancy new stuff, but high-end bathrooms, kitchens, fireplaces, and all the rest were not really in our future then. That remains true today, and at this year's IDS, again the most interesting stuff was Studio North (the new design showcase), the prototypes, the student design showcase, and the installation Five Small Rooms.

It's not all great, but a lot of it is very interesting. Nothing was as thought-provoking as Radiant Dark, but IDS isn't an art or high-concept show; it's for consumers. Usually, the things I like most demonstrate attention to materials and processes that minimize the end product's environmental impact, but not always. In this case, few designers exhibited such focus. You can read about the things I found most interesting at Toronto Craft Alert.

Come Up To MY Room is the most conceptual of the TIDF events that I attended this year, and also the most remarkable. If you don't know what CUTMR is, the organizers invite artists to create installations in the second floor rooms and hallways at the Gladstone Hotel. The results are always intriguing and there are always a couple of installations that look and feel really great—in which the artists create great experiences. The artists have to work within a couple of significant limitations; for example, the rooms are small and oddly shaped, and the walls must remain white. I think the best pieces take full advantage of the room's conditions, including its shape and its lighting.

Maybe because the installations are enclosed—separate from reality—they often have the feeling of fantasy. I guess in a sense that's always the artist's intention: to create the feeling of something that's not real or hyper-real. It helps, too, that at CUTMR the viewers get to move from room to room and fantasy to fantasy, becoming more and more disoriented as the place gets busier and busier. You just need a fussy rabbit to lead you around and you'd feel perfectly lost in Wonderland. You can read my thoughts on some of the rooms on Toronto Craft Alert. Read on..!

Radiant Dark design show

I like furniture, and I like art, and I appreciate quality, durability, and design. I also appreciate cheap, but while it's possible to find all of the former qualities together, it's not possible to find the former with the last one. This is actually a major ethical quandary I face (not just with furniture): should I buy a more expensive product of higher quality when there is always a cheaper and lower-quality alternative?

Am I capable of incorporating long-term economics into purchasing decisions? Is there any point?

With all products, the issue is disposability: this is a feature of the vast majority of consumer goods today. The opposite is sustainability or durability, and it is the theme of this year's Radiant Dark design show.

See my full write-up, with pics by Danijela, at Toronto Craft Alert. Read on..!

Gravity Wave Gambol CD release at Téranga, November 6, 2009

The Gravity Wave always put on a quirky and high-energy show, mainly thanks to the group's core duo, Finlay Braithwaite and Ken Farrell. Their songs are always original, and in performance they revel in the strangeness of the music they're playing. Ken is an engaging singer who unself-consciously throws in a rap or toast as necessary, and Finlay embodies his bass lines in his movement, occasionally interjecting with a hoot or a quip.

They always surprise in some way or another. Like: I think every time I've seen The Gravity Wave play, they've consisted of different members (besides Ken and Finlay). I saw just the two of them rock the Boat a couple of years ago. Then I saw their previous CD release at the Great Hall, and there were seven or eight of them. At Téranga there were four of them, including a DJ scratching along and a drummer. I'm not too fond of the record-scratching-as-instrument thing, but with the already eclectic mix of sounds these guys create, it worked.

The band played mostly new songs, like "Yo-Yo" and "Great One", along with a couple of fan favourites; and everyone had a good time—I could tell because of the jumping, dancing, and yelling—and I don't think it was because Ken was giving away Gravity Wave-branded shopping bags.

Sometimes I'm impressed that people enjoy The Gravity Wave's music. It isn't always easy to digest as pop music; although I consider that far from a bad thing. I'd like to say that it takes a sophisticated ear to get it, but I think the boys in the band have just achieved a balance of pop and avant-garde elements, as well as a healthy measure of dance beats, irony, and nostalgic cultural references. It's a balance that generally works, but stays far away from more mainstream artists whom you might describe similarly. At the same time, I won't deny that their fans seem to fall within a certain age group that can't help but appreciate that sort of thing.

I would say it's clear that their goal—whether explicit or otherwise—is to deconstruct pop. However, I think it's also clear that they're not creating a simple (or complex) pastiche of musics, but rather a new pop music that doesn't recognize the boundaries of the old. I'm going to run with that a bit.

So much of current music—especially the stuff based around sampling and mash-ups, but really anything that displays its influences with excess pride—weakly rehashes the old, what's come before. It's not always bad, and certainly I don't want to denigrate the institution of influence. There is nothing wrong with sampling and mashing up songs in order to create something new. The problem is that the result is rarely actually new. It's usually boring and overly simple. The fact that people like this music confounds me and the music itself sometimes angers me!

The worst offenders in my mind are those producers who just take the music form an older song, add new lyrics, maybe a revised melody, and some additional effects, and call the thing a new song. The best are those who use older songs and samples as though they were themselves instruments or notes, and craft songs like songwriters. I'm sure you can think of some from each group off the top of your head.

My point is that most of the pastiche music of today that might appear innovative on the surface is far from it, and certainly has not escaped the traditional boundaries of pop. But some has looked over the fence and imagined what's on the other side. Maybe some pop musicians and producers have even gone over. I think Ken and Finlay of The Gravity Wave have at least had a glimpse of what lies beyond.

I'm going to make up a coincidence now: I've been reading "Goodbye 20th Century", a biography of Sonic Youth, and seeing The Gravity Wave perform, I immediately thought of the culture of experimentation that informed Sonic Youth's early work, along with the desire to create something that was really new, but which a general audience still might like. Sonic Youth did not start as a pop band, and they never became one, although they did manage to find a few hooks along the way. What Sonic Youth did—whether they wanted to or not—was expand the boundaries of popular music so that they eventually found themselves within the realm of pop. (I'm prepared to agree to disagree on that.)

At the moment, pop music is so bloated and distended (in more ways than one) that it's basically amorphous now, and shows no signs of contracting to a state where anyone could come up with an acceptable definition. I don't think it could be any other way. Some will disagree, but I say the sole criterion of Pop Music is popularity, and if some strange and esoteric band or artist become popular, it's only fair to pull aside the velvet rope and let that artist in. Of course, what happens once you get in to the club might leave you wanting. For one, an artist can hardly be both popular and esoteric.

Anyway, The Gravity Wave aren't there yet. They still seem to me more like an experiment than a long-term ambition. For instance, I prefer to watch a band play instruments rather than listen to prerecorded backing tracks. I'm sure there are many others who don't consider that a hurdle on the path to stardom.

Regardless, it's a pleasure to watch The Gravity Wave, and I look forward to seeing them transform from experimental indie darlings into serious pop stars.

Oh, and by the way, you can grab Gambol on CD from Fuzzy Logic Records (look under "Shop") or as a digital download from Zunior.com. Read on..!

iTunes should not exist

I had a nerdy inspiration one night last week as I was falling asleep. I can't explain why at all, except maybe that I am perpetually looking for a music organizer with certain specifications that I can't find in any existing application. (More on that after.)

The inspiration was this: iTunes, and most other music player/organizers (e.g., WinAmp, doubleTwist, Windows Media Player) add an unnecessary layer to users' daily computing activities. Everything that they do can (or could with little programming or scripting) be done via folder actions in a file manager (i.e., OSX's "Finder" and Windows' "Windows Explorer"). The only difference is that dedicated music players make it all look so pretty. (That's mild sarcasm, by the way.)

Okay, so I'm probably getting ahead of myself. File managers could easily perform all of the basic and most (if not all) of the advanced functions of any given music player. It's just that the developers of these programs would have to integrate some of these advanced functions into the file manager rather than separating them as they are now. One might argue that including these advanced functions is unnecessary since not all people will use them, but this is completely a non-issue. OSX and Windows both come with music players pre-installed, and few people will ever remove them.

Let me clarify. The basic functions of the average music player include:

• Playing music
  
• Organizing music
  

These actions are of course more diverse than I want to make them appear. The first might mean playing audio from a CD, MP3s or other audio files, podcasts, streaming radio, shuffling, crossfading (or other effects), and so on; and organizing music includes sorting in various ways, searching your collection quickly, creating playlists, updating song information, &c. Also, people use iTunes and the like to fill their portable music players, to buy music, to rip and burn audio discs, to convert audio files to different formats, to look at visual accompaniments (visualizations), and even to share musical recommendations and files.

If you know a moderate amount about today's operating systems, you recognize that the file manager can already do pretty much all of these things without any added software. In fact, you might even have done some of these things yourself via your file manager: if you navigate to a folder containing music in OSX, and select a file, a "preview" window appears in which you can listen to the song and view some file-related information, along with the song's cover art, if available. It's much quicker than opening iTunes, but inefficient for listening to many songs. Still, the functionality is right there in Finder. Searching, too, is built into file managers: switch to your file manager, press Cmd/Ctrl-F, start typing the name of the song, artist, or album you want, and presto, all the songs with your criteria are on display, hopefully including the object of your search.

What else? Ripping and burning functions have been part of file managers for years; and only iPod users are forced to use iTunes to load music to their players (although with exceptions)—as far as I know, other music players allow users to drag and drop files from their file manager.

In fact, in some ways, file managers are more versatile than iTunes and the like. For example (and this is my desired specification I alluded to above), file managers commonly allow users to arrange their windows in much more diverse ways. I want to be able to look at my music in two side-by-side windows. Is that too much to ask! (As far as I can tell from this miniscule screenshot, WinAmp includes this feature; but the program isn's available for OSX. If anyone wants to offer step-by-step instructions on installing it with Wine, please let me know!)

Anyway, here's my vision for this infinitesimal fraction of the future:

A file manager "Music" window setting (like the "Filmstrip" folder option in Windows XP) that, when selected, would display the contents of a folder like a music management application. This new setting would be accompanied by a "Music" (or "Media") menu incorporating the features listed above. In other words, I don't want to click and open iTunes to get at my music (time-consuming, inefficient). I just want to open a folder that looks basically like iTunes and that will do all of the same things (quick, efficient).

I suppose there are reasons why this hasn't taken place yet; but I suspect that it's just status quo and marketing thinking. It's far easier to market a distinct application with a name than one that's simply there, doing its thing mostly invisible to the user—even if that program is free, which most music applications are. Also, if Microsoft and Apple maintain separate programs like iTunes and Windows Media Player, they can say they are adding clear value to their operating systems with these programs. Not so easy to say when there's no program to talk about.

Somebody tell me I'm wrong. Read on..!

VIVIV/Ken Reaume at Holy Oak, October 29, 2009

Ken Reaume has never disappointed me in the music department, either live or recorded. His immense talent, skill, and passion define his songwriting, although you might not know it from his humble stage presence. Nevertheless, his performances explode with subtle emotion and energy. But he doesn't just write songs, he crafts them, and his work is as fine as any other craftsman I know. Unfortunately, like many craftsmen, Ken has worked in relative obscurity for much of the time since he first put his name out there.

Amid a recent explosion of talent and success in folk and similar music in Toronto, too few have caught on to Ken. And it's a damn shame, because when it comes to the music and the shows, I've rarely seen a performer so poised and with such charisma—who can so easily captivate an audience.

The setting for this show was new to me—and relatively new to the neighbourhood. Holy Oak is a café and bar transformed from a storefront in a diverse and run down section of Bloor St. W., near Lansdowne Ave. I had no idea what to expect going in, just surprise that another entrepreneur has decided to bring another hip space to the area (also new: 3Speed, Starving Artist, and Disgraceland). At first, I find it to be an underwhelming space. Maybe because it's night, the place doesn't seem to know quite what it is. It's all painted white and the lighting is uneven, but the atmosphere didn't appear to bother any of the few patrons. It reminds me of Montréal quite a bit, though, which pleases me a lot. My companions, Danijela, Jen, and Elly, wanted couches, but I think the space is just too small.

And it's quiet. The acoustic ceiling tiles (presumably held over from one of the place's previous lives) seem to absorb most sounds that originate from inside, and some kind of excellent sealing around the windows and doors prevents any noise from entering via the street. Without looking out the window, I hardly felt I was on a busy stretch of Bloor. It wasn't rush hour, but this place was really quiet. Still, they serve a good Americano, and various other refreshments went over well at our table. I can imagine spending a sunny autumn afternoon there, working by the window, or even just people-watching. But that's not why you're reading is it?

I mention the atmosphere because it had a part to play in the show itself: first, as I mentioned, the place was super-quiet, which was great for listening, but made every non-musical (e.g., audience) noise stand out and between-song talking awkward; second, because the place is a coffee house, with few seats, and something about the place made it feel strange as a musical venue—there's definitely no place to go if you want to have a conversation while a performance is happening. (But in fairness to everyone, only about 15 people attended the show, and a bigger crowd would change the dynamic of the place entirely.)

But on to the interesting stuff!

Ken played a shortish set, maybe ten songs, and most of it was new.

"Hiatus" is brooding, with a stomp beat, and a step away from the Leonard Cohen influence that I heard in his recent (but not new) stuff. Despite, the song consisting only of voice, guitar, and foot stomps, I hear a lot of things going on in "Hiatus". The song's repetitive picking creates a hypnotic rhythm that never quite reaches beyond the droning bass beat, and the whole thing feels a bit like shoegazer folk. The live version lacks the harmonies of the recording, but I didn't find it missing in performance.

"Sapling" could hardly be different. It's an uptempo strummed number—a significant departure from his usual arpeggio work. It shows much richer influence and range than anything I've heard from him before. It's so simple, but it evokes a full on rock'n'roll assault with only a Spanish guitar and a voice. The melody (and harmony in the recorded version) is like something Lennon and McCartney could have written, and Ride (along with a hundred others) would have stolen. Truly remarkable and new, and yet fully VIVIV.

In performance, there's no ignoring Ken. Sometimes his shows are well attended and other times not, but at all times, his audiences pay attention and notice. This show was no exception.

He says he'll be releasing a new record early in the new year. When he does, you'll probably be able to get it through his MySpace or Facebook pages. You can get his past releases at Zunior.com.

Also, he's playing at Holy Oak again this Saturday, November 21. Don't miss it! Read on..!