Men Without Dogs

Men Without Dogs

by Kevin Howley

Walking downtown that evening, the man had an uneasy feeling that his grief was manifest, tangible, visible. “Don’t be ridiculous,” he said to himself. Passersby paid him no more or less attention than usual. But all along Kirkwood, dogs recognized his heartbreak the moment he came into view. The Cattle Dog running alongside the cyclist, the Yorkie whining from the backseat of a parked car, the Retriever waiting, patiently, for the young couple in the coffee shop, they had all seen that look before: the look of men without dogs. At home, the woman straightened up the room where the dog spent her final days, and tended to the aging tabby. Read more

The Unionization Of Bloomingfoods, Part 1

In Order to Form a More Perfect Co-op ● by Robert F. Arnove

The dramatic changes Bloomingfoods has undergone since opening its first store in July 1976 are typical of co-ops across the country. For many of the local community members who remember the founding days of their consumer co-op, there is a significant gap between the seat-of-the-pants, let’s all do this together ideal and the real world corporate business–driven imperatives.  Melanie Greene, who advises co-ops and other not-for-profit organizations on board development, notes that there is often a “founders disease,” an inability among early leaders to change anything. But a changing national context has forced consumer co-ops to compete with national supermarket chains that also have expanded their local and organic offerings.

Natural food co-ops across the country, according to Bloomingfoods General Manager George Huntington, found themselves in the paradoxical situation of being successful to the point that investors on Wall Street saw locally grown organic produce as a lucrative market in which to invest. Simultaneously, internally driven empire building has led small-scale co-ops to expand and become something very different from what they were. As a case in point, in 1994, when Huntington assumed the position of GM, Bloomingfoods had two stores–now it has five. More than a grocery store, Bloomingfoods has become an integral part of Bloomington’s cultural landscape, partnering with a multitude of community organizations (including The Ryder).

Expansion in relation to an increasing competitive context has created problems for a number of natural food co-ops started during the “new wave” of social movements of the 1960s and 1970s. As early as 1987, Robert Grott (in his article “Why Co-ops Die: An Historical Analysis,” Cooperative Grocer, Issue 9, February-March) noted “A review of this history suggests that the reason for the problems now faced by co-ops . . . lies in the most basic of factors:  the very definition of co-ops and their relationship to their environment…. Co-ops are unique in that they have a dual mission – part economic and part social.”

The economic relates to providing “for needs that otherwise would not be met.” The social part relates to the need to operate democratically; “they can provide people with a new measure of control over their lives, and they offer a context for community organizing.” In doing so, co-ops provide a platform for broader social change. If co-ops are to succeed, however, certain environmental conditions need to be present. Unfortunately for Grott (who was  general manager of the Hope Neighborhood Co-op in Forest Grove, Oregon between 1975 and 1986), the changed market context in which co-ops had to operate led them to abandon their expectation of having “a significant impact on the economy and society in general. Pursuing a market need is not the same [thing] as being created by one.”

As employees and member-owners seek solutions to the emergence of a more economic than social model of their consumer co-ops, labor unions have found fertile ground for organizing in an otherwise hostile national climate. Since its inception in 1979 (as the result of a merger of the Retail Clerks Union and the Amalgamated Meat Cutters), United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) membership has grown to 1.3 million. A promising frontier for unionization is not only employees at commercial giants like Walmart, but at worker-owned and consumer-based co-ops.  The first food co-op in the United States to unionize was Outpost Natural Foods in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1979; it is represented by UFCW Local 1443. Since 1979, the UFCW has been involved in organizing at least ten food co-ops across the country.

The changing context and challenges facing Bloomingfoods is best summed up by long-time member Kathleen Mills, who teaches journalism at Bloomington South and who, in the interests of full disclosure, is married to Ryder editor Peter LoPilato. Mills shops at Bloomingfoods regularly:

Co-ops started in the late 1960s and 1970s in America because organic foods and natural foods were not available at the traditional grocery store. It’s incredible to believe, but it was the era when yogurt, quinoa, kale, etc. were simply hard to come by. Co-ops offered those types of products and often were able to get them from local farmers/growers. The other key thing co-ops offered was a discount on these foods because member-owners would band together to buy in bulk. But now, of course, you can get just about everything that is offered at Bloomingfoods at Kroger.

Bloomingfoods Today

Since its incorporation, in 1976, as Bloomington Cooperative Services (BCS), the Co-op has grown to 13,000 member households with 292 employees (138 full time and 154 part time staff).  Beginning with its first store in the alley behind Kirkwood, the Co-op has opened branches in the Eastside, Near West, and Elm Heights neighborhoods, as well as in Ivy Tech community college.  In 2014, its total assets were $6,898,762; this amount included $4,202.518 in current and long-term liabilities. While gross profits were $8,847,798, total expenses amounted to $9,440,746.  Due to the late opening of the Bloomingfoods Elm Heights store, projected sales fell short for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2014.  Also, the Kirkwood store has not been profitable for years, with quarterly losses as high as $30,000.

Another budgetary factor is a top-heavy administrative structure, despite efforts to streamline the Co-op’s organization. The current organizational chart is complicated, with approximately forty different types of managers and another 13 administrators one or two steps under the supervision of general manager George Huntington.

In response to recent budgetary deficits, the administration reduced employee hours, and asked a limited number of specialized staff to work overtime. In spring 2014, two national supermarket chains announced their intentions to open stores in Bloomington:  Whole Foods in the Eastside Mall, and Lucky’s Market in the former Marsh store on South Walnut. Both are known for promoting local and organic businesses and products.

Unionizing Begins

For at least ten years, there has been unhappiness on the part of some Bloomingfoods employees, primarily with regard to working conditions and how management treats them. More recently, a growing number of member-owners perceive a growing disparity between their notions  of what a co-op should be and how their local Co-op operates.  The pending Whole Foods and Lucky’s openings have increased dissatisfaction and anxiety among Bloomingfoods employees, with the prospect that higher salaries at the new stores might lure fellow workers to leave Bloomingfoods and that the Co-op itself might not survive the competition.

Together, these conditions ignited the spark to begin unionizing. This summer, a core group of employees invited Local 700 of UFCW, based in Indianapolis, to help them organize a union. The first meeting took place Labor Day Weekend in Bloomington. The union advised employees not to go public immediately, but to collect cards signed by employees indicating their desire to have the National Labor Relations Board hold an election. By mid-October, employee organizers had the signatures of over 30 percent of non-supervisory employees, both part- and full-time.

The Board of Directors and administration of the Co-op responded to the grassroots movement to organize by consulting with Mallor Grodner (MG), a local law firm that the Co-op had on retainer. MG does not specialize in labor law. In preference to a local competitor firm, MG recommended an Indianapolis firm, Barnes and Thornburg (B&T).

The decision to consult with a law firm about the Co-op’s legal and ethical responsibilities regarding unionization seems prudent and reasonable. Less so was the decision to go to a firm whose website reads, “Our passion is to preserve a client’s freedom to manage and to assist our client in helping them remain union free.”  The website further states: “We estimate our team has helped manage hundreds of union organizing attempts and/or campaigns, and our clients have obtained favorable results in more than 96% of the campaigns in which we have been involved.”

The Bubble Bursts — The October 7, 2014, Board Meeting

Disclosure that the Board had consulted with B&T ignited a chain reaction of protest from the membership base of the Co-op, many of whom are pro-union. A rally was called by UFCW Local 700 and other local activist groups. Protestors met at the Westside store and then marched to the nearby offices of Bloomingfoods on Gentry.

More people wanted to attend the 6:30 p.m. meeting than the fire code limit of forty set for the Gentry office space allowed. (To attend the meeting, members had to notify the Co-op’s offices of their wish to do so, and only members were to be admitted.)

Bloomington City Clerk Regina Moore at first was blocked from entering the meeting (she was eventually admitted).  Moore reminded the Board of three relevant Bloomington Common Council documents: 1) Resolution 97-11 of August 8, 1997, “Supporting Employees’ Right to Organize”; 2) Resolution 07-93, “To Approve Application and Authorize Loan from the Business Investment Incentive Fund” of April 4, 2007, involving a loan of $100,000 to Bloomingfoods for capital improvements to the building at 316 West Sixth Street; and 3) Ordinance 05-08, adopting Chapter 2.28, “City of Bloomington Living Wage Ordinance” of March 24, 2005.  (Chapter 2.28 applies to Bloomingfoods because of the 2007 loan.)

Member concerns are briefly summarized as follows: l) the Co-op’s response to unionization efforts; 2) employee statements about why they were organizing; and 3) member dissatisfaction with various aspects of Bloomingfoods, including the quality of products and services; the perceived cultural shift from co-op to corporation; and a need for greater control and oversight of the General Manager (the latter expressed notably in a statement read to the Board by member Gracia Valliant).

Members questioned the decision to consult with the law firm of B&T – why was the firm consulted, who was involved in the decision, the nature and cost of the consultation. Regarding this last point, Summer Vergiels, whose family shops exclusively at Bloomingfoods, spending as much as $13,000 annually, asked under what authority, without member input, the administration used their monies to hire these lawyers.  Several members stated that they would leave the Co-op, much as it would pain them to abandon an ideal to which they were committed, if the Co-op fought unionization and resisted better working conditions and a living wage for employees.  David Stewart, who served twice on the Board of Directors, stated that he had resigned from the Board after the living wage platform on which he campaigned (which brought him the most votes as a candidate in the Board election) received no support from fellow Board members or the Bloomingfoods administration.

Employee dissatisfaction was voiced by several of the core group of employees leading unionization efforts. Andy Marrs said he had hoped that Bloomingfoods would be a long-term career, but for him as well as many others, there is “the feeling there is no hope for the future.” Wages are just one issue. “Employees aren’t aiming for the stars.” The point, said Marrs, is that “they don’t feel respected . . .. You don’t feel you’re a valued asset. Management doesn’t encourage new ideas; instead, management simply cuts hours.”

As many employees have indicated, there is “a need for more venues to voice concerns.”  Marrs loves the Co-op – a common feeling among organizers – and wants to see it revitalized along more democratic lines. Kaisa Goodman of the Eastside store made similar points, expressing the view that unions and co-ops ideally share the same values.  She also expressed the concern that if the co-op didn’t return to its founding principles, employees and members would leave for Lucky’s or Whole Foods.

Gracia Valliant read a statement, drafted with eleven other members, regarding Board-management relations. It begins:

We are a group of Bloomingfoods member-owners, who has identified several areas of concern. In the wake of recent unionization efforts, we understand that this is a difficult time in the organization and that there are always multiple sides to any issue. We are not interested in pointing fingers or taking sides. Rather, we are contacting the board in a spirit of cooperation: As member-owners, we want to become better informed and participate more actively in resolving the issues facing the organization….

The statement’s main headings are:

  1. Lack of transparency with member-owners
  2. Lack of established mechanisms for hearing the member-owner voices
  3. Ensure that the position of General Manager is monitored by more than one of the methods stated in this policy
  4.  The non-management employees have neither board representation nor a voice directly with the Board
  5. Regarding unionization efforts, the neutrality of the Board, administration, middle management, and members is essential
  6. The timeframe for renewing the contract for the General Manager may be problematic
  7. In light of the current unionization process, the Staff Treatment and Compensation policy (B6) needs more clarification and specificity

Each concern was followed with specific “Strategic Suggestions” – for example, with regard to point 6 — “Given the current union situation we suggest the renewal of the GM contract be suspended until such time as the operational implications of unionization are better understood.”

At the conclusion of the opening hour of commentary, Board President Tim Clougher read this 9/19/2014 press release:

Bloomingfoods continues to support our staff’s right to seek to organize. We continue to gather information and to educate ourselves regarding the unionization process . . . . . Our attorneys at Mallor Grodner sought specialized assistance from an attorney from the law firm Barnes and Thornburg due to his expertise in labor law and his immediate availability to provide a presentation to supervisory staff so they would not unknowingly commit anything considered an unfair labor practice.

As the press release indicated, unionization of the Co-op was only one of many complex issues on which Bloomingfoods had sought legal counsel over the years. The overall response of the Board to the concerns of employees and member/owners was conciliatory.  There was general agreement that the airing of problems was constructive.

The Annual Membership Meeting October 16, 2014 – The Board and Management Make a Peace Offering

The turnout for the 2014 annual meeting at WonderLab Museum was animated and unusually large, involving as many a 300 member-owners – because of the unionization issue.  The defining moment was the announcement by Huntington that the Board had voted to sign an agreement of neutrality to allow unionization efforts to go forward.  The decision was met by sustained applause and cheers by what appeared to be a largely pro-union audience.

The neutrality decision meant that an election organized by the Co-op and the UFCW, and supervised by a neutral expert from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), could be held almost immediately instead of employees needing to turn to the National Relations Board to hold an election after a waiting period of six weeks. Preceding an election, managers and employees agree to a “pledge” involving “No name calling, respect for the mutual roles of management and workers.”  A neutrality agreement also designates when and where union representatives will have access to employees. Alternatively, by a majority vote of its seven members, it would allow the Co-op Board of Directors to recognize an employee union.

According to Lynn Duggan, an IU Associate Professor of Labor Studies, by declaring its neutrality, Bloomingfoods had bypassed the cumbersome process of involving the NLRB in an election, and avoided what normally would be a contentious period of mutual recrimination and high employee turnover that harms retail businesses.

According to Huntington, the Bloomingfoods Board and management wanted “to practice the co-op ideal of self-help and embrace co-operative principles of concern for community.”  He acknowledged “we’re hearing that we neglected a voice within our own ranks.”

Huntington allowed that in deciding how best to allocate limited resources among these competing goals, the balance had “teetered too much in one direction.” One such imbalance specified by Huntington was the number of part-time (55%) to full-time employees (in line with an average of some 20 other co-ops surveyed that had a part-time to full-time ratio of 40% to 60%.)  Full time employees work a minimum of 36 hours per week.  Huntington affirmed that Bloomingfoods was a good employer, but conceded that it could be an even better one.

Huntington was in touch with Outpost Natural Foods in Milwaukee in anticipation of the possibility that employees may vote to unionize. Since the mid-1990s, the Outpost co-op has solidified union-management relationships around common interests.  Both sides at the bargaining table have used  “Interest-Based Problem Solving” to facilitate more harmonious relations.  The FMCS website describes the process of conflict resolution as a “win-win” approach. It is briefly described this way: “When everyone understands the interests and concerns that lead a person or group to take a position on an issue, they often find that some of those interests are mutual, that both sides at the table are trying to achieve the same goal, just taking different approaches.”

After the Board President, General Manager, and Treasurer reports, the annual meeting was adjourned.  An hour was set aside following the formal meeting for members, employees, and Board members to meet informally at three separate tables to discuss the overarching general themes of staff treatment, Board processes, and unionization.


Is There a Need for a Union?

Many member-owners and employees question the need for a union in light of Bloomingfoods’ guiding principles. They are 1) open and voluntary membership; 2) democratic member control; 3) member economic participation; 4) autonomy and independence; 5) education, information, and training; 6) cooperation among cooperatives; and 7) concern for community.  If these principles are practiced, why have a union?  Even if these principles are not practiced, a formal contract between the Co-op and employees, specifying conditions of employment, should still be sufficient to address the same needs that unionization would address.

Employees and members alike readily acknowledge that there are problems that need to be remedied, but resist the notion that to effect the efficient and appropriate operation of their co-op, a third party – a federal agency like the National Labor Relations Board, or a national union, such as UFCW – needs to intervene in their ongoing working dialogue with the Board of Directors and the administrative staff.  One generally pro-union member attending the annual meeting wanted to know, for example, how unionization would impact member input into union contracts: what voice would members have in important decisions concerning the direction and running of Bloomingfoods?

Others expressed concern over the failure of the Co-op’s members to be informed about the challenges and contextual forces shaping policy and managerial decisions related to what benefits Bloomingfoods brings to its employees, local vendors, and surrounding communities. With regard to wages and benefits: the Co-op is in conformity with the City of Bloomington Living Wage Ordinance  — in 2014, $12.06 per hour.  According to the Bloomingfoods 2014 Annual Report and Huntington’s presentation, a full time worker with one year of service earns a rounded-off hourly wage of  $11.00. This figure does not take into account an employee’s basic health premium and an employee discount worth a combined value of $2.15. The annual report further notes “Bloomingfoods uses a living wage model calculator that is used by food co-ops across the country that takes regional living expenses into account. The calculator set the living wage in Monroe County at $13.20 per hour.”  Bloomingfoods wages compare favorably with those of Outpost Natural Foods, which employs the same calculator.  According to Ellen Michel, a previous Co-op administrator, a May 5, 2014, Outpost press release stated that “their goal (was) to bring full-time positions to a livable wage within  . . . two years and increase the number of full-time union employees from 38% to 50% over the next several years”

Huntington’s report further noted that the yearly wage for a full-time employee amounts to just under $27,000, with health benefits worth $4,000.  Fifty salaried staff earn between $36,000 and $38,000, attractive enough for 55 employees to stay with Bloomingfoods for more than 5 years; this figure includes 9 employees with more than 15 years of service.

Part-time workers earn on average $9.35, compared with the 2014 federal minimum wage of $7.25.  The decision to hire a greater percentage of full-time employees will certainly benefit current part-time employees.

In addition to how a well-run Co-op contributes to a strong, sustainable local economy – with profits staying in the community – Bloomingfoods’ five locations are a boon to neighborhoods, such as Elm Heights and the Near West Side, that had been without grocery stores, providing a convenient meeting place to have a meal and purchase local organic foods, including a variety of vegan options.  In the “Editor’s Message” column of the August/September 2014 issue of Bloom magazine, Malcolm Abrams wrote, “Ah, that Warm Community Feeling,” and summed up a sense of attachment to the Co-op that is experienced by many, whether or not they have taken a stand on unionization: “Until I came to Bloomington, I never really had a relationship with a grocery store before. But I do with Bloomingfoods. Its west-side store location is near the Bloom office and I’m in and out of there every day, sometimes several times.”

For some, unionization represents a possible threat to this “warm community feeling,” the notion that we’re all in this together. Certainly, critics of unionization point to a long history of conflictive labor management relations that have torn apart industries and communities – placing blame on labor rather than management. Barnes and Thornburg attorney Nathan Baker’s presentations to Bloomingfoods central administrative staff and store managers stoked such fears and common concerns that unionization would undermine merit pay, lead to mediocrity in overall employee performance, and even place management outside protected grievance procedures.

The Election and Beyond

By signing the October 24 neutrality agreement, Bloomingfoods opted to follow the more democratic path of holding an election rather than its Board deciding by a majority vote to accept unionization.  Retired FMCS mediator Louis Hilpp supervised the November 10/11 election held at the downtown Marriott Hotel.

The results of the vote were announced the evening of the llth. They indicated a decisive victory for those favoring unionization:  88 “Yes” as against 23 “No” votes.

Representatives from UFCW Local 700 and Bloomington Cooperative Services, Inc. (Bloomingfoods) will be involved in drawing-up a contract spelling out the details of what unionization means. Among the issues to be resolved are the following:  will there be a role for a union representative on the Co-op’s Board and, if so, what will it be; will employees have a free or reduced membership fee; will part-time employees have full health benefits?  Other questions center on what will relations be like between those employees who join the union and those who do not, as Indiana is a right-to-work state; and what voice will member-owners have in shaping future policy decisions?

[The second installment of The Unionization of Bloomingfoods will be published in the January 9th issue of The Ryder. It will review the reasons for unionization, management’s response and a vision for the future.

Robert F. Arnove is Chancellor’s Professor Emeritus of Education at Indiana University. He writes on education and social change. His latest book is Talent Abounds:  Profiles of Master Teachers and Peak Performers (Paradigm Publishers: 2008/2009). The author would like to thank David Edgerton for helpful editorial comments.]

The Ryder ● December 2014

No. 12

Peter Capaldi’s Doctor Who Is A Return To The Old School ● by Ben Atkinson

How many shows survive the replacement of any main actor, much less the one playing the title character? The British television classic Dr. Who thrives on it. Last year the world celebrated the 50th anniversary of the show and there’s no sign that it’s going anywhere soon. Peter Capaldi entered this season as the latest actor to play the iconic role and his quite different interpretation has been remarkable.

The title character is a mysterious traveler who goes by “The Doctor.” Dr. Who? Just “The Doctor.” He is a Time Lord, manipulator of time and space. He can go anywhere, anytime he wants. He mostly uses this incredible power to flit about, searching for interesting adventures and curiosities, but in the process he is frequently required to save some world (often Earth) from destruction. And he travels with one or more companions, usually human. They serve to connect the audience with a protagonist who, while presenting in human form, can frequently seem alien.

Every few seasons, the foes of the Doctor get the best of him and he dies. But death for a Time Lord is merely a temporary setback. The Doctor “regenerates,” getting a new body complete with a new personality, new likes and dislikes, and new personal goals and objectives, while the show gets a new lead actor. If regeneration presents the challenge of maintaining series continuity, it is also a recurring opportunity—perhaps unique in television—for the show’s producers to keep things dynamic and current. Fortunately, the show’s fan base has been notoriously sympathetic to this cycle, accepting changes that would likely spell decline for other series whose foundations rest on a single lead.

The last Doctor, played by Matt Smith, was the one who most successfully brought the show across the Atlantic and is definitive for many Americans. (For many, your first Doctor will always be your favorite). Smith’s gangly limbs flapping around like a raggedy-man enchanted viewers and his happy go lucky attitude made the show a light-hearted adventure alternative to the dark, gritty shows (think Breaking Bad) that have been the rave of recent TV critics and viewers. Nothing too serious, just a madman in a box careening across space and time with cute, young, attractive companions looking for trouble. Just enough trouble though, there’s never the least chance that things won’t work out happily ever after for all involved. The Doctor prior to Smith’s version (David Tennant) was quite similar, a light fluffy hero who always saved the world and got the girl. There was more than a bit of kissing.

No more. No more flirting, no more flitting about with the hands, and definitely no more bow ties or goofy hats. Capaldi’s Doctor is a return to the old school, hearkening back to the severity of the very first doctor (William Hartnell) or the gruff acidity of his successor (Patrick Troughton). This new Doctor has little time for frivolity and gives no allowance for the (relative) stupidity of those around him. He doesn’t hug, as that might infringe extreme self-dependence. The relationship between the Doctor and his companions has always been one of the interesting aspects of the series. The Doctor is immensely more knowledgeable and capable in any circumstance than the humans (sometimes non-humans) who travel with him. Why does he bring them along? What can they offer him?

Companionship, but that term can mean many different things. A close friend, maybe, whom you confide everything in, or maybe a romantic lover. Perhaps someone whose mere presence allows one to silently endure without loneliness. It is the latter that Capaldi’s Doctor requires, except for the silent part. The banter is as clever and quick as ever, although now almost unintelligible beneath the thick Scottish accent. When Russel T. Davies rebooted the series eight years ago he added an extra twist. The Doctor is the last of his species, last Time Lord, sole survivor of a horrific war that annihilated his race. As the last of his kind he would be lonely and value companionship. The Doctor doesn’t seem as tied to his companion Clara now in the way his predecessor was. He enjoys her company and she assists him ably, but we once again have the feeling that at any moment the Doctor might leave her behind forever. This Doctor seems dangerous, to his friends as well as to his enemies.

His enemies are darker now as well. The last several seasons have showcased one or two episodes that might be considered leaning towards the Horror genre, but none of them come close to the scariness that pervades just about every episode now. The lighting is grim, the tension unrelenting. My three year old daughter has watched many episodes with me and it wasn’t until this season that she began hiding beneath the blanket during the show. The prevalence of frightening subject matter, along with the new late evening broadcast time, have many wondering if the show is being intentionally directed towards an audience exclusive of young children. This is definitely not the same Doctor.

Or is it? That’s the question that arises with every new incarnation. A new actor, and an obviously new take on the character. It’s something quintessential to the show, the continuity of the old with the freshness of the new. Perhaps that’s something more poignant in a culture as old as the British that we Americans don’t quite grasp. Here novelty is exalted, and this is the first time that a large American audience will have to grapple with a new Doctor. The premiere episode of this season confronts it head on and doesn’t shy away of the worry many fans will have. The Smith Doctor is gone, but is Capaldi’s character really the Doctor? With all the twists and turns of style and set, and withstanding the criticisms of the overly complicated plotlines and overused themes that Executive Producer Steven Moffat (also of Sherlock) insistently relies upon, the answer has been a resounding yes. The Doctor changes a lot with each regeneration, each new actor brings something new to the role. Each new actor must find the quintessential bits of the Doctor and then allow that to explode forth from every scene. Peter Capaldi does that and the successes of this season rest primarily on his superb performance. He will be a Doctor remembered for years to come.

The Ryder ● December 2014

Small Town Punk Band Aims To Revive The Scene

by ● Sophie Harris 

Is punk dead? Some might say yes, but Jello Biafra, former member of the Dead Kennedys, thinks there’s hope for the future of Punk in America. With bands like Stabscotch forming in college towns across the US, he may be right.

James Vavrek, Tyler Blensdorf, and Zack Hubbard met as students at Crown Point High School and formed Stabscotch when they migrated to Indiana University.

[Image at the top: The Faces Of Zack Hubbard, James Vavrek, and Tyler Blendsdorf Are Hidden In The Rungs]

Their name refers to the knife in the fingers game — where one person places their hand face down on a flat surface, fingers spread apart, and a second player with a sharp knife stabs the space in between the fingers. (I like to be the person with the knife.) In the past semester, the Stabscotch released a 10-song album that was released in May on Bandcamp. The album was named Eldritch, and the members pride themselves on the variety displayed throughout the tracks.

“We work on music between classes, during the evening, whenever our schedules will allow it,” says Vavrek. “It’s important to us.”

The band members know that the scene in Bloomington doesn’t promote a lot of punk, and they face challenges finding a fan base and forming a solid following.  However, due to the music scene in Bloomington, the band members have searched for other forms of music support. Instead of focusing all their efforts on local endeavors, the band members say they use the Internet to find other punk lovers out there.

“We’ve connected with people all over the world through our music,” says Vavrek, who uses social media and the Bandcamp site to promote their original material.

House shows are a popular form of demonstration for local bands to showcase material and meet people, and Stabscotch takes advantage of these opportunities whenever they can.

“House shows are great because there are tons of random people there, and sometimes you’ll make new fans if they like what you’ve been playing,” says Vavrek. He mentions that the shows have a tendency to get rowdy, but that that works well with their sometimes-aggressive style of music. The band members mention that sometimes they have to adjust to the vibe of the crowd, depending on the show or audience.

“One of the best things about punk music in general is that it’s a great way to channel your energy, aggressive or otherwise,” says Vavrek.

For Blensdorf, his main interest resides in the creative elements of the band.

“Tyler has the biggest motivation to write and create,” says Vavrek, “And we all really pull weight in different arenas of the band.”

Although the band members agree that they love punk music, they’re open to adapting to what they’ve got to work with.

“We know there’s not much of a punk scene here, and we want to make our fans happy,” says Vavrek. “We don’t want to box ourselves in to something concrete if it will limit us performance-wise. Music is adaptable and always changing, and so should we.”

The Ryder ● December 2014

Last Minute Christmas Shopping

by Colleen Wells

It’s Christmas Eve and a light rain falls from a dreary sky. I’m in a foul mood because I’ve got last minute shopping to do for Christmas and our family has just been to see Dr. Foley, a holistic health practitioner who has urged us to clean up our diets. That in itself isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it means I need to be extra thoughtful in my grocery shopping.

I already ordered some under $20 items from LL Bean, including gummy worms lying in small, plastic tackle boxes, solar powered flashlights, and foot warmers that can be placed in the toes of shoes, but it is not enough loot to fill the stockings. I must get that done, too. I ask Rick and our two sons to wait in the car, knowing I’ll be buying surprises for them.

While approaching the grocery carts, I notice there are only a handful of them available, never a good sign. The handle of my cart is wet from rain. I take a deep breath and wheel it through the door. The overhead florescent lights are shockingly bright. While I’ve been sensitive to this on occasion, today’s blaring intensity throws me further off kilter. The upbeat, piped in music seems louder than normal, too. With the assault to my senses and an acute awareness of people in various states of pre-Christmas nirvana, I feel like I’ve  just been launched into a giant pinball machine.

I remind myself to stay away from the canned and boxed foods as much as possible. I also recently read Michael Pollan’s In Defense of Food. The author explains that healthier fare is found in the perimeter of the store.

Slowing down by the hummus on my way to the lettuce, I see the case is surrounded by people, and skip it. I always thought that I fed our sons pretty well and prided myself on the fact that unlike many children, they enjoy things like hummus, sushi, and salad.

I navigate toward the veggies, to stock up for our new approach to health. After picking up spinach for salad, I head toward the other vegetables along the wall which is lined with shoppers. A woman is examining a long, white vegetable while the produce clerk explains its bitter taste. Dr. Foley told us that Yakob’s craving for peanut butter was indicative of his nutritional deficiencies which could be counterbalanced by eating a wide assortment of bitter-tasting veggies. I consider the item, but it resembles a small limb from a Birch tree and decide that even if I could figure out how to cook it, there is no way I’m going to get the kids to eat it. I bypass the man and woman still discussing the vegetable’s finer points. While reaching for some squash and zucchini, I’m thinking it must be nice to have time for such banter. Next I select broccoli and carrots before heading toward the bananas and apples.

I circle back to the organic dry goods, recalling that Dr. Foley recommends spinach pasta. When we presented him our food diary, he pointed out that most of the items we’d charted turn to sugar in the body, including the pastas; and suggested we try spinach noodles.

Locating the spaghetti I’m amazed at how dark it is and wonder how it will taste. I grab some kettle-cooked potato chips. The chips are not on my list, but then again, I don’t have the list. It’s at home hanging on the fridge. Upon making my way past the pharmacy, I dodge a swarm of people gathering near the check-out lines by taking a hard right down an aisle. Finding myself in paper goods, I remember that we need toilet paper, recalling Rick’s dissatisfaction with the new, eco-friendly brand I bought last time.

He had said that we owed his daughters, who visited over Thanksgiving, letters of apology because it was so abrasive. They will be back a few days after Christmas and I search for the softer kind that is still environmentally friendly, but can’t find it. While I’m reaching for the Charmin, a woman is talking on her cell phone across the aisle and I overhear her say, “Well the parking lot was packed, but people are in good spirits, so it’s not too bad.” Her hair is fashioned in a French twist and she’s wearing a tailored coat. Holding the phone to her ear with manicured fingers, she seems to not only be able to multi-task, but is also in control of her purchases, and probably never buys the wrong kind of toilet paper.

There’s nothing in this aisle suitable for stocking stuffers, but I’m delighted when I stumble upon nightlights that double as small clocks in the next row. Remembering that I want to get Christmas treats for our animals, too, I head toward the pet section and pick up some cat nip and a felt glove with long pieces of string attached to the fingertips. The packaging guarantees hours of fun. After selecting some balls and rawhide chews for the dogs I spy a table of stuffed animals nearby.

Feeling a painful tug at my heart, I reminisce about how I used to love to get our sons new Teddy Bears for Valentine’s Day. The softer and more plush the bear, the better. But the boys are no longer interested in them, so I grab some York Peppermint Patties from a nearby display. They are Rick’s favorite candy and his stocking needs filling, too. Scanning the table for more stocking stuffers, I’m disappointed that the remaining offerings include only gift wrapping paraphernalia. I back up my cart to turn around toward the magazine aisle in search of a particular one the boys like, and nearly side-swipe a shopper. I look up to apologize and it’s the woman with the French twist who is still on her cell phone. She casts me a look of disgust.

I’m thinking about how rude it is to talk on the cell phone and shop–indeed the near collision wasn’t completely my fault– and inadvertently pass the magazines. I then miss part of an announcement that comes over the intercom, something about thanking faithful shoppers and singing Christmas songs for a prize.

Seconds later a patron is crooning “Away in a Manger” over the intercom system. Her voice is gratingly off-key and heart-felt, an awful combination on both my ears and psyche. I’m feeling the added pressure of knowing Rick is probably growing impatient in the car. That’s when I go into a zone and start grabbing random things: ranch dressing seasoning mix, a variety of flossing implements for Rick’s stocking and plastic dinnerware with Miley Cyrus smiling up from the plate and bowl. The boys claim to hate her, but they often watch her show and I feel deliciously wicked as I place their gag gifts in my cart.

Sometimes there is no room to move my cart around the other patrons, so I abandon it and walk past them to reach my items. Every time, I think about how I’ve left my purse in the cart, how it isn’t wise, but I don’t have the energy to bring it along. It’s a hulking Vera Bradley book tote that I’ve been meaning to downsize.

Someone is dramatically singing “Santa Baby” now and I notice a couple shaking their heads. They are dressed in jeans and both have unkempt hair. The man is sporting wire-rimmed glasses and a wide belt embossed with a Western design. The karaoke is getting to me, too, so I make a beeline for the register, passing by Mrs. Goodwin, the boys’ principal on the way. We exchange hello, but don’t stop to talk as we normally would. I gather from her contemplative expression that she’s on her own last minute mission and grant her the space to get it done in peace.

Falling in line at a register, I realize I’m still short on stocking stuffers and snag some sugarless gum. Glancing at the ingredients, I wonder what kind of chemicals makes it both good for your teeth and raspberry-flavored. There are too many to read in one sitting. Michael Pollan says anything over five is a bad sign. Normally there are all sorts of goodies at the check-out, but everything is picked over and the boys don’t need film.

While I’m loading my purchases onto the counter in defeat, I take care to stockpile the meager assortment of stocking stuffers, making a mental note to ask for a separate bag. When I look up from the task, Yakob is standing there watching me, and I lose it.

“What are you doing?” I yell. “You’re supposed to be in the car!”

His large, brown eyes widen with a look of hurt. He hands me an umbrella saying, “Pop wanted you to have this.”

Before I can explain my reaction, he turns away, head lowered.

The denim-clad couple who shook their heads over the goofy music is behind me, staring in shock.

“I just didn’t want him to see his stocking stuffers,” I say.

The man pushes his glasses back further on his nose.

“I understand,” the woman says. “This is the first year our son didn’t want a stocking. He asked me to give one to his girlfriend instead.”

“I guess that’s what I have to look forward to,” I say, suddenly overwhelmed by sadness.

The man’s face softens with a sympathetic smile.

The cashier is someone who is normally cheerful but isn’t today. Through previous conversations, I’ve learned that she’s the mother of four children, and my heart goes out to her having to work so hard on Christmas Eve, dealing with frantic shoppers. As she finishes with the previous customer, I realize things could be worse. She begins solemnly ringing up my purchases and I tell her about the separate bag loudly enough so she can hear me over the baritone voice belting out “Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire.” She alerts the approaching bagger of my request. He’s just come back in and is soaking wet, and now I understand Rick’s sense of urgency about the umbrella.

The singer’s efforts garner him a round of applause from the crowd gathered at the nearby pharmacy awaiting their turn for a chance at the prize. The irony is not lost on me that the pharmacy, which regularly doles out twenty-first century medications for depression, behavioral issues and diabetes is now pulsing with holiday cheer.

At the end of my transaction I thank the cashier, and wish her and the bagger happy holidays, then glance back at the couple and say good-bye.

As I’m heading toward the door, someone starts to sing “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer.” I push my cart faster until I’m outside in the pouring rain and search for our car. Several seconds pass before I see it in the distance. While fishing for the umbrella in my purse, a woman runs toward me with a newspaper pressed to her head. She is wide-eyed and muttering, “This is madness.”

I pause and try to think of some encouraging words to say.

All I can offer her is “Good luck” and a weak smile. I raise the umbrella, and move forward with my cart of random crap, focusing on the silhouettes of my family, waiting for me in the car, blurry through the raindrops.

The Ryder ● December 2014


The Year Indie Broke ● by Craig J. Clark

Much like punk rock had been around in some form for years before it came to a head – as documented in 1991: The Year Punk Broke, filmed while Nirvana was on tour in support of Sonic Youth just before the release of Nevermind – the independent film scene had been percolating for a few decades when it experienced a similar breakthrough in 1994. From the pioneering work of John Cassavetes, who burst onto the scene with 1959’s Shadows and continued forging his own path throughout the ’60s and ’70s, to ’80s success stories like John Sayles, Jim Jarmusch, Spike Lee, and Hal Hartley, independent film was a haven for those interested in telling the kinds of personal, idiosyncratic stories that studios had largely given up on. It took Steven Soderbergh’s Sex, Lies, and Videotape winning the Palme d’Or at Cannes in 1989, though, to bring about a sea change that would come to fruition just five years later.
With Sex, Lies, and Videotape, fledgling distributor Miramax Films had its first bona-fide hit, and it was soon followed by such award-winning auteur-driven fare as Neil Jordan’s The Crying Game, Jane Campion’s The Piano, and Peter Jackson’s Heavenly Creatures. The two writer/directors that Miramax heads Bob and Harvey Weinstein forged the closest ties with, though, were Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Smith. Before he hooked up with the Weinsteins, Tarantino notched one art-house hit with 1992’s Reservoir Dogs, but Smith only had an undistributed student short to his name when he arrived at the Sundance Film Festival in January 1994 with his raunchy debut feature Clerks tucked under his arm.


From "Clerks"

Kevin Smith & Jason Mewes In “Clerks”

It’s a familiar story, but one that bears repeating. On black-and-white stock bought with a few maxed-out credit cards, Smith spent his nights filming with a crew made up of his friends and a cast of unknowns in the same convenience store where he toiled during the day. When the end result got accepted to Sundance, it was in competition with the likes of Lodge Kerrigan’s Clean, Shaven, Rose Troche’s Go Fish, David O. Russell’s Spanking the Monkey, and Tom Noonan’s What Happened Was…, the eventual winner of the Grand Jury Prize and the Waldo Salt Screenwriting Award that year. Smith didn’t go home empty-handed, though, since Clerks shared the Filmmakers Trophy with Boaz Yakin’s Fresh and got some much-needed momentum that took it all the way to Cannes, where it played in the International Critics Week section and received the Award of the Youth and the Mercedes-Benz Award.
Of course, the big success story at the Cannes Film Festival in 1994 was Quentin Tarantino’s Miramax-backed Pulp Fiction, which won the Palme d’Or, beating out strong competition from the likes of Nikita Mikhalkov’s Burnt by the Sun (later to win the Oscar for Best Foreign Film), Atom Egoyan’s Exotica, Krzysztof Kieslowski’s Three Colors: Red, Abbas Kiarostami’s Through the Olive Trees, and Yimou Zhang’s To Live. That paved the way for it to become a crossover hit when it went into general release, which also benefited Clerks since Miramax sent out its trailer with Pulp Fiction that fall. I suppose that makes Smith the Nirvana to Tarantino’s Sonic Youth, but there’s no question about which one went on to made a bigger impact on the culture at large.
The kind of left-field success story that could make just about anybody say, “Hey, if he could do that, I can do that,” Clerks depicts a disastrous day in the life of perpetually put-upon 22-year-old convenience store counter jockey Dante (Brian O’Halloran), who frequently laments that he isn’t even supposed to be there. Between his relationship woes – caught between his thoughtful girlfriend Veronica (Marilyn Ghigliotti) and Caitlin (Lisa Spoonauer), the cheating ex he’s still holding a torch for – and his interactions with surly video store clerk Randal (Jeff Anderson, who has the most facility with Smith’s wordy dialogue), Dante has plenty on his mind even before he decides to close the store to play hockey on the roof or attend the wake of a former classmate.
And then there are Jay and Silent Bob, played by Jason Mewes and Smith himself. Strange that they wound up being the film’s breakout characters, but that’s largely because Smith continued to write them into his scripts, giving them more to do each time out (save for Chasing Amy, when they’re relegated to a brief but memorable cameo). When Dante and Randal lament that there are a “bunch of savages in this town,” they could very easily be referring to the miscreants dealing drugs right in front of the stores, regardless of how wise one of them turns out to be. The main takeaway from Clerks, though, is the way it perfectly captures the dead-end feeling of working a menial job with absolutely no prospects.


[Featured image: Samuel L. Jackson, John Travolta, Harvey Keitel & Quentin Tarantino On The Set Of “Pulp Fiction”]

Just a few years earlier, Quentin Tarantino was in a similar position, logging time behind the counter of a video store and dreaming of hitting it big. His dreams were more genre-inflected, though, as the criminal-minded Reservoir Dogs showed, and he was ambitious and focused enough to parlay its success into a far more accomplished film (something Smith failed to do with his Clerks follow-up Mallrats, which he made for Gramercy Pictures). Pulp Fiction was also highly influential, inspiring a horde of pop culture-referencing crooks and a mini-boom of films with achronological structures. What Tarantino’s imitators failed to take into account, though, was that there was more to his scripts than the snappy dialogue and callbacks to ’70s cop shows.
With its multiple, overlapping storylines, Pulp Fiction gave Tarantino the freedom to be more creative than he had with Reservoir Dogs, which had a more typical flashback structure. Bookended by scenes showing the preamble to and follow-through of an impromptu diner robbery, the main body of the film drops in on characters operating at different levels of Los Angeles’s criminal underworld. There’s hit men Vincent Vega and Jules Winnfield (John Travolta making his big comeback and Samuel L. Jackson in his breakthrough role), who retrieve something belonging to their boss, Marsellus Wallace (Ving Rhames), after which Vincent pays a visit to his friendly neighborhood heroin dealer Lance (Eric Stoltz) and takes Wallace’s wife Mia (Uma Thurman) out on a not-date. Then there’s the story of past-his-prime palooka Butch (Bruce Willis), whose attempt to make a killing in the ring and get out of town clean hits a snag when he has to retrieve a watch left behind by his French girlfriend Fabienne (Maria de Medeiros). Finally, Tarantino jumps back in time to show what happened to Vincent and Jules between when they picked up Marsellus’s briefcase and when we saw them deliver it.
There’s a lot more to it than that, of course. I’ve barely even hinted at the flavor of the film’s crackling dialogue or the multiplicity of indelible supporting characters Tarantino created with Roger Avary, who shared the Best Original Screenplay award with him come Oscar time. Who could possibly forget Pumpkin and Honey Bunny (Tim Roth and Amanda Plummer), the monologue delivered by Christopher Walken’s Captain Koons, or Butch and Marsellus’s run-in with Zed, Maynard and the Gimp? And then there’s Harvey Keitel’s memorable turn as The Wolf, who comes to Vincent and Jules’s aid in their hour of need. If he had wanted to, Tarantino could have followed up Pulp Fiction with a series of spin-offs recounting the solo adventures of Butch or Jules or The Wolf (or just about anybody in the film, really). Instead, he’s spent the two decades since diversifying his interests, shifting gears with each new film he writes and directs while remaining true to his independent roots. And he’s even picked up a few more Academy Award nominations along the way (for writing and directing 2010’s Inglourious Basterds) and won his second Best Original Screenplay Oscar for 2013’s Django Unchained. That says a lot about his ability to stay relevant in an ever-changing industry.


The Ryder ● December 2014

Poles Apart: Ida

Poles Apart: Framing Polish History in Ida

By Tom Prasch

Notice how often, in Pawel Pawlikowski’s Ida, the unusual square frame of the film barely contains the main figures. They come into the frame at the corners, as if the camera weren’t quite aimed at them. Or again, notice how often, as the camera holds stationary, characters move through an image, the camera refusing to chase after them in a pan. Two obvious such moments: when Ida, finding sanctuary in a church on her journey, sits down on the cot she has been provided, and in the process almost vanishes from the frame; and when we last see Wanda, crossing across the interior view the camera holds and out of the frame. Although many frames of this film show but a single figure, there are strikingly few close-ups.
Ida is set in Poland in 1962, and its images—somethingabout that squared frame, and the black-and-white film stock, with its rich range of grays—have the feel of old snapshots, a fitting framing for a historical subject. And, incidentally, this is likely the most strikingly composed film you have seen in ages, each frame carefully balanced and thought through, shot by shot a film of exquisite visual beauty despite (or is it because of?) the relentless bleakness of its landscapes, the spare starkness of its interiors. But that tendency of the camera to focus past its central figures, to hold them to the edges, not to be about them, suggests something else about that moment in time as well: that this was not a time of heroic, bigger-than-life personalities; indeed, perhaps that this was a time when individuals scarcely mattered, against the grinding indifference of broader historical processes.
For all that, Ida is nevertheless a deeply personal story, anchored to two women’s life trajectories (the handful of other characters who wander into the film’s frame scarcely matter), those two lives brought rather surprisingly together to shape one odd road trip. The set-up is easy: Ida, a war orphan raised by church, now a young novitiate, is preparing for a life in the nunnery when she is told by her priest that she has one living family member who she must visit before taking her vows (the number of survivors in her family constitutes her/our first clue). The relative is her aunt Wanda, aka “Red Wanda,” a moniker earned for her ferocious pursuit of ideological purity during the just-passed Stalinist era (Khruschev’s “secret speech” about the excesses and errors of Stalinism in 1956 had ushered in a thaw, and a change in government in Poland in 1961 provided its provincial echo; in the film’s timeframe, this is reflected in Wanda’s exile from the centers of power, although her Party status still comes with privileges, like a roomy apartment and a steady supply of spirits). Wanda, in turn, provides Ida with a revelation (and provides it with wry, sarcastic glee): that the girl who is about to become a nun is Jewish.
In most respects, Ida and Wanda seem poles (so to speak) apart: one inexperienced, chaste, modest, nearly silent as she explores an unfamiliar world, and deeply Catholic; the other rough and rowdy, hard-drinking and heavy-smoking and drawn to joyless one-night stands, and firmly Communist. Yet at another level they are the same: both living embodiments of the destruction of and silence about Polish Jewry. Each exemplifies a familiar sort of story about that abandoned heritage, orphan Ida’s Catholic upbringing the compromise over faith that ensured her survival, Wanda’s siding with the Communist partisans against the Nazi occupiers a deliberate choice of ideology over faith or family. The journey the two take to learn (both of them) the buried secrets of the shared family history reveal another all-too-familiar story about Polish Judaism, and about Polish complicity in the Holocaust, although the specific dynamics of that tale refuse to follow the predictable black/white dichotomies we expect of our Holocaust tales. There are Polish peasants who sheltered Jews, Polish peasants who turned Jews over to the Gestapo, and Polish peasants who killed Jews themselves while claiming their goods and land; sometimes, Polish peasants made more than one of these choices.
In its excavation of this war-era past, Ida follows familiar precedents. A vast range of postwar Polish historical cinema, after all, has engaged this Holocaust-haunted terrain: think Andrzej Wajda, whether at the start of his career or near the end of it; Agnieszka Holland, in the trilogy that launched her career or her most recent work; Roman Polanski, when being true to his Polish roots. But Ida’s real uniqueness lies elsewhere, in its limning of the mid-Communist era, roughly halfway between war’s end and the emergence of Solidarity. To put it another way: Ida and Wanda’s road trip may take them to a familiar destination, the Holocaust in their own family, but the territory it goes through on the way, the “present” of Poland in 1962, is far less familiar in historical film. For Pawlikowski, born in 1957, the work amounts to a recollection of childhood through the distancing lens of exile (the director having lived outside of Poland since the age of thirteen).
Two adjectives summarize Ida’s vision of mid-Communist Poland: bleak and compromised. The bleakness shows in, well, everything, for this is a Poland still war-ravaged, unthriving under Communist rule, deeply agrarian and thus impoverished in its roots: its barren rooms, its material paucity, its range of grays; its austere churches, its impoverished peasants, its shabby hotel rooms, its sad jazz bands playing in near-empty halls in provincial hotels, everything about it dated and ragged and spartan. The compromises figure throughout as well: in the carefully constructed complicity between Catholic church and Communist state, so unlike either the ferocious opiate-of-the-people official atheism of other Communist states or the firm established-church foundations of Catholicism in pre-war Poland; in the choices made, and then unmade, by Polish peasants, living once upon a time side by side with Jews, seeking survival under successive waves of Soviet, then Nazi, then Soviet occupation; in Wanda’s own life choices (which were, after all, unlike Ida’s, actual choices) to give up faith and family (and how much family we learn through the course of the film), but to get in return a place in the postwar hierarchy; in Wanda’s post-power position, her role in the show trials and repression of the just-ended era neither quite valorized nor condemned, her privileges preserved but her place shifted silently toward the margins; in that jazz band, their music on the one hand a modernizing/westernizing vibe, Coltrane tunes and beatnik vibe and just a hint of the rock ‘n roll that had not quite come that far east yet, but on the other hand, in those empty halls, with their modest means, lacking lyrics with which to stir dissent, finally utterly unthreatening, an avant-gardism the state can live with.
Ida and Wanda’s road trip in Ida ends with its own discoveries and revelations; those, in turn, lead the two protagonists toward actions that re-accommodate the terms of their lives (and their compromises) with the new knowledge they have acquired. But I can’t talk about any of the details of that until after you have seen the film; come back next month and we can discuss it. Meanwhile, however, in a fascinating interview with film blogger Sydney Levine, Pawlikowski laid out three paradoxical aims for his film: “I wanted to make a film about history that wouldn’t feel like a historical film—a film that is moral, but has no lessons to offer…. Most of all, I wanted to steer clear of the usual rhetoric of the Polish cinema.” In all three aims, Pawlikowski masterfully finds a cinematic language to embody his paradoxical intent. The result is a visually stunning masterpiece.