Let 'Em Eat Cake

Revision 04 Nov 2008
Let 'Em Eat Cake was a broadway musical of the early 1930's. It was a sequal to the highly successful musical Of Thee I Sing, the only musical till date that has won a pulitzer prize. Let 'em eat cake meant to be a political spoof of the theatrics of American electioneering. But as it turned out, amid the horrors of the great depression and the march of the facist movement in Germany, it became, on hindsight, a satire on the tumultuous times of its day. However, it did not enjoy great review and was considered a "box office flop". Critics and audiences thought the show was downbeat. Of Thee I Sing dealt with the successful rise of a man to the presidency on a political plateform of "love", whereas Let 'Em Eat Cake, showed the same character, slowly being defeated.

I have not attended any musicals so far in my life. I know of friends whom have caught numerous popular ones such as les miserables, phantom of the opera, cats, etc. Maybe if the esplanade decides to bring Of Thee I Sing, or better still, Let 'Em Eat Cake, to Singapore, i certainly would not want to miss it! Barring the tickets are not too prohibitively priced.

As there was an opportunity cost involved, i sorely missed the recent concert by the Royal Philharmonic who came to town, led by Leonard Slatkin. And so for the pass few mornings i have been playing Pomp and Circumstance, an equally worthy classic recording by the Boston Pops with Arthur Fiedler on my CD player. With a little fertile imagination, transported me to the night at the esplanade for five minutes and forty-eight seconds, one can afford a cheap thrill.

I first came to know about Let 'em eat cake through a CD collection of George Gershwin's Broadway musical, played by the Buffalo Phalharmonic under the baton of Michael Tilson Thomas. A Gershwin fan since thirteen and still very much in love with his songs even now.

George (1898-1937), "Mr Music" had an elder brother, Ira (1896-1983), "Mr Word". The Gershwin dynamic duo ply their craft first in musicals then moved to California as Hollywood beckened. Born on September 1898 in Brooklyn, New York of Jewish parentage having migrated from Russia. To me, Gershwin (we usually meant George, though i have a certain affinity to Ira's wonderful stroke of a lyricist) epitomised the "coming of age" of what come to be known now as the American "soft power". Maybe it is too exaggerating and simplistic to say that it was George Gershwin, who gave America a voice. (Everytime i played Gershwin on the CD, my 6 year old son would say its "Tom & Jerry music", testament to Gershwin's and, i must say, his fellow compatriots influence on later-day American composers) He crossed effortlessly from "pop" to "serious" composition. True to himself, he helped defined the American idiom, culminating in a century of cultural confluences in the "new world", from Dvorak to Charles Ives to Jerome Kern. His exposure in the early years to Jewish "hymnals". He absorbed the folksy rhythmic voices of the Afro-American spiritual. Juxtasposing in a couldron that was on the verge of pouring forth of a uniquely American flavour, Gershwin's originality transformed an artistic elite establishment that was euro centric to one that is at ease with itself. Let 'Em Eat Cake was thought to be the finest musical score by the composer, as well as by his friends, that he had produce.

The American stock market crashed in 29 October 1929, and the depression did not end till the onset of the second world war somewhere in the beginning of 1939. By 1932, some 25% to 30% of Americans were unemployed. And i wonder during those time there were still people going to the theatres! The tickets must be very affordable (maybe musicals then were comparable to our modern day cinemas) and people were willing to pay. Opportunity Cost. For the wife and i would think twice even now to go catch a show at the cinema and we are both gainfully employed. Maybe they were better off than us even then.

It took WWII to "restore the economy". To me, economics is a funny subject. I took one semester plus of economics 101 and resigned myself to going back to do the hard sciences. I feel it is more reassuring to predict the path of an electron (albeit with a measure of uncertainty, at least electrons are not swayed by emotions) than predicting human behaviour. Maybe we live in a funny world, we need to kill people in order to do right for the economy.

Not to belittle Economics, even God commanded us to be "good steward" (Mathew 25:14-30). And in Genesis 42:1-36, we see Joseph (he was into commodities) managing the "financial affairs" of the Egyptian court.

We did not buy any High 5 Notes or Highnoon Notes, nor did we go into minibonds, (by we, i mean the wife and i. Can't do much with my income alone anyway.) simply because the closest banking facility we come into contact with nowadays are the ATM machines. So there is no opportunity to form any relationship with the "relationship managers".

I feel sad for the many retirees whom sunk (sorry, no pun intended) their life savings into an instrument torted as a better alternative to fix deposit. I can imagine a conscientious "good steward" whom has worked hard all his productive life going to the bank and wanting to open a fix-D account to park his life savings, but was persuaded otherwise. An average Joe who is not well verse with financial terms like equities, derivative, futures, commodities, leveraging, etc. (i pick these words from the newspaper, being equally clueless) The sensible thing to do was to open a fix-D account than keeping under the pillow, as recommanded in Mathew 25:14-30. And lo and behold. Now, as if losing their life savings is not enough, they think that they are going to hell as some members of the public would want to put the blame on "these investors" for being greedy.

Finance and banking people are under a lot of heat these days. Actually they are also like us, wake up in the morning, brush teeth, eat breakfast, go to work, come home... I believe the majority sets out in life to do good. But along the way, we do our best to cope with the realities that is thrown at us. Working class slog it out day to day, the management see to it that the working class slog it out day to day in the name of productivity, the owners of capital induce the management to see to it that the working class slog it out day to day by singing the praises of the "ethos of hard work" as a virtue, a sophistry of modern capitalism. Global market forces the owners of capital (are governments considered as owners of capital?) to engage in mortal combat for precious commodities. Labour is a virtue. To make a mockery of "hard work" negates the contribution of the sweat, tears and even blood of the people whom gave the skyscapers, man essential services, sweep our roads, protect us and among others. When do you know you are hard at work and your labour is not being fleeced by the owners of capital?

The emphasis has been on promoting entrepreneurship. Reports highlighting achievements of enterprising individuals and this is rightly so in an open economy like ours. I just hope in the fervor of promoting the spirit of self-reliance through entrepreneurship, we do not forget the many individuals whom definition of “success” need not necessarily trod the path of self-enterprise. Surely there is a place under the sun for us whom have not subscribed to this campaign to not feel ashamed. Can our definition of self-reliance be expressed through our labour in the work force?

True, you can’t have your cake and eat it.

By all means, if you have the fervent to strike out on your own. We celebrate friends whom have found their “calling” in the market place. But I urge us not to throw the blanket of “Self-reliance through entrepreneurship” the only way to glory.

In danger of being misconstrued as droning in self-pity, it is my hope that more will come forward in defense of the common worker, for equitable pay and working condition.

Thus i was heartened to read that the ministry of finance "is proposing an amendment to the constitution to allow the government to tap on a greater proportion of investment returns on our reserves to meet Singapore's future needs". In my limited understanding of economics, i hope i am not imagining stuff. I hope this means workers like the custom officer manning the checkpoint whom can barely open his eyes but still continue working can have more colleagues to join him, such that he can rest and enjoy some quality time with his family, reporting back to work refreshed, and among other measures, to create a better Singapore through Finance.

Granted, our lot have vastly improved say, compared with the labourers in Egypt 3,000 years ago or the subjects of a conquered land by the Roman empire.

"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh." (1 Peter 2:18)

"Bondservants, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ; not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as bondservants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, with goodwill doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free. And you, masters, do the same things to them, giving up threatening, knowing that your own Master also is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him" (Ephesians 6:5-9)

And so the next morning we wake up, brush teeth, eat breakfast, go to work, come home...

26 October 2008

Note: Historians found no evidence that Marie Antoinette (1755-1793), uttered the words "Let them Eat Cake", during her reign as the queen of France leading up to the french revolution. This quotation was first written by a french philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He wrote it in 1766 when Marie Antoinette was only 10 and was still living in her native Austria, not yet married to king Louis XVI (1767-1770). Rousseau claimed that "a great princess" told the peasants to eat cake when told they had no more bread! This frivolous phrase was invented by Rousseau to illustrate the divide between the royalty and the poor. And this is how the phrase has been use ever since.