Yule Heibel’s Post Studio © 2003-2009

Toward a new medievalism?

I just left this comment on avc.com. It’s me going off on a typical theory bender, but the idea of Twitter’s Suggested User List (SUL) sparked another “here come the Middle Ages” image/moment for me. (As I note in the comment, they’ve been popping up for me since the late 1970s: my first one happened in the south of France, in a literally medieval town on a street with lots of commerce: pop!, a vision of what we could go back to – and I didn’t like the distinctly anti-modernist feel of it.)

That’s an interesting exchange between you and John Battelle, Fred. Now I’m going to go totally off-topic here and get all abstract, but I have to say that to my mind there’s something Medieval in some of the emerging business models and how they’re changing the nature of markets.

In the feudal Middle Ages, powerful patrons – either the Church or the Feudal lords – determined the markets. Markets weren’t free, they weren’t determined by market forces (as we think we understand them since the various emancipations) or really shaped by the “little people” (who in the modern period developed into powerful consumers).

When I read (as per transcript): “…if you think about what businesses and celebrities and brands need on Twitter and what they’re not getting today, there’s a whole set of premium services that are there,” I’m *understanding* something that reminds me of feudal medievalism where markets are determined by the needs of powerful patrons (church and/or lords). (John Battelle repeats the point further down when he says, “You said something about brands on Twitter, sort of like celebrities having the ability to sort of build an official presence.”)

I didn’t understand recent controversies about Twitter’s Suggested User List (SUL). I saw Dave Winer’s tweets about the SUL, but didn’t understand why he questioned the concept. Maybe I do now – albeit in my own weird way (Dave probably would roll his eyes at my interpretation…).

The SUL concept nudges markets back into a feudal framework where forces other than actual market forces determine the market landscape.

Maybe I’m crazy – I’ve had occasional bad dreams for nearly 30 years now about how feudal Medievalism is clawing back bits of Modernity. (Blame Umberto Eco, whose writings encompass Modernity and the Middle Ages.) The idea comes to me in pictures, which is maybe why I struggle so much to get the words right (the anti-icons, the iconoclastics). Me no likey what I see with SUL-type aspects of the business model and how it has the potential to alter markets.

I love the internet and all the great stuff out there, I plunge right in, sound off, play along. I love pictures and emblems and icons, but at heart I’m a daughter of the Enlightenment (words, words, words). Pictures, specifically icons, are Medieval. Yet in the new world that we’re making, even words – such as passed links – are turned into image, into something that’s consumed like an image (in a glance, or uncritically). Exegesis – trying to understand and interpret words – is still important it seems, as per the comment that reading the transcript of the video is better than watching the moving image…! But you could chalk that up to Medievalism, too. They did a lot of exegesis back then.

Ok, I’m generalizing (wildly?), and I’m going off into my own little theory-land here. But as you said yourself, “Social media together is going to be bigger than Google.” Google and the internet certainly changed our thinking about everything, including thinking about thinking itself. Tell me it’s not rewiring our brains – of course it is. Now social media are poised to rewire the market. I just happen to think that bits of it are kind of medieval, and every time the notion of the tribe (certainly an important idea in the new market place) is celebrated without critical reflection, something in me dies a little bit.

If my favorite enlightened Marxist, Groucho, were still alive, I wonder how he would position himself, market-wise, in the social media landscape, and if he would want to be on the SUL?

Originally posted as a comment by Yule Heibel on A VC using Disqus.

Reblogged to here as mnemonic / string around the finger.

Made me comment: Brendon Wilson on Canada and Its Tech Future

I came across Brendon J. Wilson’s excellent blog post, Does it matter if the future isn’t available in Canada? last week and felt compelled to comment.

Brendon’s post addresses a response to Macleans Magazine’s article You can’t buy that here, which, as he wrote, mirrored concerns he already expressed in a March 2009 post, Borders keep out innovation, too. If you’re Canadian (or maybe thinking of doing business in Canada) Does it matter if the future isn’t available in Canada? and Borders keep out innovation, too are both excellent must-read pieces.

The Macleans article Brendon references had prompted a defense of the Canadian condition by another writer. Brendon’s Does it matter if the future isn’t available in Canada? addresses both positions. He ends in favor of Macleans’, however, and writes that its “attempt to point out how Canada is missing out on the future, however small a piece of it, seems like a valid tactic despite the weakness of its execution.”

I agree, and also left a long comment on his post. I’m using my blog to remind me of what I wrote in response (most of which I excerpt, below), but really encourage people to check out Brendon’s original post(s). My comment (abridged):

I think you get at something very essential with your observations, Brendon, for example when you write about missing “the experience of using the device in your daily life, of truly understanding the implications, applications, and untapped potential of the device” (and while you were talking about the iPhone in that example, I think the point translates across the technology landscape.

It’s conditions like the ones that exists around technology and innovation in Canada that make the issue of Canadian culture so difficult, too, because the words “paternalism” and “tutelage [from authorities on high]” come to mind, not independence, liberation, freedom. And that, too, contributes to the niggling sense of inferiority.

Do you know what the wealthy establishment fathers of Canada told young artists in the Group of Seven (now recognized as the founders of national Canadian landscape painting) back in the early 20th century? “It’s bad enough having to live in this country. Why bother hanging pictures of it up on one’s walls?”

They preferred to collect Old European Masters instead – Dutch landscapes in shades of brown with brown cows. Instead of embracing the innovation that the Group of Seven artists offered, they turned to the past and haughtily told those innovators to learn to paint like the *Old* Masters instead. The innovators wanted to look to other innovators in Europe instead – Cezanne, cubism, futurism, abstraction. But the paternalists knew “better” – and with their “wisdom” helped stunt Canadian culture instead of furthering it. Take a look at the museums built on private collections in the US and you’ll see that contemporary American captains of industry collected European and American avant-gardists, not brown pictures of brown cows. Consequently, American culture benefited from their support, and – as a spin-off many decades later – there are now many seminal collections for the public to enjoy. Canadian collections from that period are small miseries in comparison, and viewing them isn’t nearly as satisfying. That’s how a culture of old-fashioned paternalism (with its flip side of “made in Canada” solutions – the Group of Seven worked often in isolation) has ripple effects that are felt for generations.

Bonspiel leather goods rawk!

Ok, time for a big shout-out to Ellen, aka Bonspiel Creations. We met earlier today and I bought the Falconista bag. It’s beautiful, soft, expertly stitched and well-thought-out. Love it.

Here’s a very small picture (it doesn’t capture the generous – and adjustable – strap, or the terrific contrasting colors and the great lining):

Bonspiel sells her wares locally in Victoria (find locations on her stores page), and if you’re not lucky enough to live here, find her work on Etsy and on Artfire.

Victoria’s Susan Low to host Young Business Leaders’ Summit

Normally, I would just re-tweet a local news item on my Twitter stream, but what Susan Low proposes is so important (and so in synch with my thinking) that I’m re-blogging it, the whole darn announcement, A to Z.

In her own words:

Young Business Leaders’ Summit

Join me in this special event to explore how to make Victoria’s business economy more resilient and diversified.

Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
–Margaret MeadBackground:
Victoria’s a great place to live. We have the weather, the natural environment, and the people to make this a world-class city. However, we seem to be overly reliant on the public sector and tourism to keep our economy alive. When there is a public sector cutback, or events abroad harm our tourism sector, Victoria hits the “panic button” and begins to take on an air of doom and gloom.

Young people grow up in Victoria and then leave to pursue careers because there are few opportunities to make it big here. Despite our highly educated population and desirable quality of life, Victoria has very few corporate headquarters – meaning that to “make it big” our best and brightest leave the city for Vancouver, Calgary and further afield.

What Can We Do About It?
I’m bringing together young professionals and business leaders from a variety of sectors to participate in a discussion about Victoria’s economy. I want to create real, actionable solutions for how we can bring about change in our city.

During the event I’ll be using graphic facilitation to capture our ideas and make the discussion fresh, creative and productive. What’s graphic facilitation? As our discussion progresses, I’ll be capturing the key ideas and energy of the moment by creating a mural in real-time using colored markers and pastels, drawing on 4′x8′ chart paper taped to the wall. See my blog, www.pictureyourmeeting.com for more about this amazing way to transform meetings!

Who should come?
I’m targeting young business people (under 40) from all sectors as participants in the session – we have the most to gain from transforming Victoria’s economy as we are the ones who will take leadership roles in the coming years. If you have an interest in this topic and want to throw in your two cents (even if you’re over the “recommended playing age”), feel free to join us!

Observers are quite welcome – perhaps you’re curious about what’s going to come out of this, or you’d like to see graphic facilitation in action! You don’t need to speak up – just come along!

The Details

Date: March 31, 2009
Time: 8:30am to 11am
Place: Maximum Furniture Showroom, 3-576 Hillside Ave
RSVP: By email or phone (250-479-8303) by March 24, please.

Please feel free to invite others who you think would be interested!

Yours in action,

Susan Low
Directis Consulting Group
www.directis.ca
New! www.pictureyourmeeting.com
250-479-8303

Please pass this on to other Victoria-area folks – it’s a great idea that deserves a great turnout.

Notes on Jennifer Kostuik’s talk at VISA

Vancouver gallery owner Jennifer Kostuik gave a talk at VISA (Vancouver Island School of Art) on Thursday (2/26) evening. Despite a technical glitch beyond her control (the projector stopped working, mysteriously, about 5 minutes into her presentation), and irrespective of a really laid-back, unstructured presentation style (yours truly sometimes prefers tighter, thesis-oriented talks), Kostuik offered some real insights into both the gallerist’s life (why do it?) and the artist’s relationship with the gallery.

I took a few notes. They are impressionistic, but without additional polishing, here they are…

Kostuik began by affirming the importance of promoting living artists. Sure, you can open a gallery and sell the work of dead people, but it’s really important to stake a claim in living culture – and then promote it. She talked about how she’s a hard worker, but that she ended up owning her own gallery because she’s not terribly well-suited to working for other people. She has her own vision of what art is good, what to promote, and while she initially thought she might be an art consultant, she couldn’t – in the end – promote artists she didn’t believe in.

So: opening her own gallery was the only way forward.

[Editorial aside: This is interesting because of a theme she brings up later, that of entrepreneurialism. Kostuik is an entrepreneur - a cultural entrepreneur and a business entrepreneur. It's great that she began her talk with a discussion of her own willfulness, her desire to be in charge, and how that relates to her own creativity and artistic/ aesthetic sensibilities.]

She emphasized that you take on people because you believe in them, but also because you believe you can sell them.

[Editorial aside: how refreshing to hear someone in BC or in Victoria talk about selling and business like it was a noble thing to do and not something akin to spreading smallpox infested blankets....]

Kostuik emphasized something that artists should be able to understand readily: business, she said, is all about relationships.

She expects artists who pitch her to have done their homework – to know in advance whether or not their work would be a good fit for her gallery. She was quite clear about what she likes and what she looks for, and her emphasis on building the relationships between her and her artists (and her clients) was something that the audience (I’m guessing over 90% artists) needed to hear. Know who you are, what you have to offer, and pitch to someone who can help you and who will be helped by you.

I couldn’t help but think of some of the comments regarding “the pitch” that I’ve read by various venture capitalists: do your homework, know who you are (what you’re offering, and who you’re offering it to), and understand that in business it’s all about relationships.

Great title for my letter-to-the-editor

I missed this when it was published on 11/13, but my letter in response to Les Leyne’s Times-Colonist column on the carbon tax (see my blog entry about it, Cracking cement: Industry and municipalities could work together) did make it into the paper.

The editor came up with a witty title for it: Cast a solution for cement pollution, and it was minimally edited (for brevity, I guess), so that’s nice.

Why am I blogging about it (again)? Because it’s important to keep solutions like this in the public realm, in front of people. Otherwise, we all climb back into our cozy (not!) boxes and carry on as usual.

Here’s the letter, as published:

Cast a solution for cement pollution
Times Colonist
Published: Thursday, November 13, 2008

Re: “Cement industry fears carbon tax squeeze,” column, Nov. 8.

Kudos to the B.C. Liberals for putting industry under pressure — not to destroy it, but to force it to innovate. It really is time for more creative thinking when it comes to environmental issues. Municipalities and industries need to step up, perhaps to collaborate.

Finding ways to sequester the carbon dioxide produced by cement production continues to be a contested holy grail for the industry. The “squeeze” of a carbon tax might actually make sequestration a more realistic goal.

A Nova Scotia company, Carbon Sense Solutions, recently claimed it has a process that sequesters all emissions from cement production by storing them in precast concrete products.

Our cement factories typically don’t also produce precast concrete products, but consider a scenario where there is more creative co-operation between industry and municipalities. In such a world it might make sense to add facilities that produce precast concrete products, if municipalities (which also need to meet carbon-neutral goals) found ways to use precast concrete (vs. concrete mix) for public works (roads, sidewalks, etc.) projects.

There will have to be a lot more innovative thinking, literally to disrupt traditional supply-chain setups. If the carbon tax “squeezes” industries and municipalities to embrace that disruption creatively and constructively, it’ll be a win-win for us all.

For more on the still-contested methods of carbon sequestering in cement making, see www.technologyreview.com/energy/21117/page1/.

Yule Heibel

Victoria

I’m also happy to know (via an email I got from Les Leyne in response to this letter) that he’s on the case, here and in other areas concerning the environment. Good to know!

Will Victoria grow its start-up muscle?

Via an older blog entry from Richard Florida, a pointer to an article by Ben Casnocha, Start-Up Town, which describes (among other things) how Boulder, CO went from being “a little hippie college town to a little hippie college town also boasting an impressive and growing congregation of Internet entrepreneurs, early-stage venture capitalists, and bloggers.”

Defying the easy “wisdom” of copying all things Silicon Valley, Boulder got lucky insofar as it attracted several key individuals who came for the lifestyle, but stayed to make sure that Boulder’s corral reef (ok, I’m making a loose analogy) could grow. I was struck by some of the similarities (as well as deficiencies) that Victoria, BC has compared to Boulder’s history and trajectory.

Casnocha begins his examination of Boulder’s success by focusing on people: first, Brad Feld arrived (”somewhat on a whim”) in 1995.  He eventually connected with several other key individuals, some of whom were, like Feld, able to inject investment capital into the community. Click through to Casnocha’s article to read the whole (very interesting) story.

The striking similarity is the “somewhat on a whim” bit, which actually speaks to lifestyle choice.  Feld and some of the others came to Boulder not because they wanted to “have” Silicon Valley in Boulder, but because they wanted to live the Boulder lifestyle.  What was lucky for Boulder, however, was that these serial entrepreneurs and venture capitalists just kept doing what they would do elsewhere, which is support start-ups and technology growth. As a result, Boulder now has its own homegrown and unique (not Silicon Valley copycat) start-up culture.

At the risk of provoking the local cynics to snigger, there are some interesting parallels to think about between Boulder and Victoria.  Victoria is also the kind of place people come to “somewhat on a whim.”  They come here for the natural beauty, for the lifestyle, and for the climate (mildest in Canada, most sunshine on the We[s]t Coast in winter, due to the fact that, unlike Vancouver, we’re in a mini-rain shadow).

And we have a number of small start-ups here, even if they fly seemingly invisible, below the radar.  Some have managed to grow bigger — we need more of that. We also have a huge (in proportion to our population) arts community, in theatre, opera, visual arts, literature, film, music, and more: it too belongs, together with technology, into the creative start-up category.

In the week after Labor Day I chatted with a couple visiting from Baltimore.  They were in Victoria for just one night, having planned their trip according to the boilerplate stuff peddled by our tourism industry (that Victoria is a “quaint” and “British” town).  Now that they had arrived, however, they realized there was a lot more to see (but their vacation plans were already set: Whistler next, and then a wedding in Vancouver, with no way to book additional time in Victoria).

I asked them what they thought the city’s number one industry was.

“Fishing?” the man volunteered.

Inwardly I wanted to scream, “Are you nuts?,” but I just said, “Nope, try again.”

“Tourism?” she ventured.

Wrong again.

High tech, I said.

That kind of staggered them (fortunately they were sitting down).  But it’s true — tourism was eclipsed by high tech in 2006/07 (tourism revenue: $1.2b; high tech $1.8b).

I mentioned Abebooks.

“But they’re based in Portland, aren’t they?” he asked.

Hardly!  I told them the story of how the company was founded (and how we’re all hoping that they don’t up and leave for Seattle, now that Amazon bought them).  When the gentleman said that a huge chunk of his disposable income goes to Abebooks each month and that he couldn’t believe he was in the city where it’s based, I gave them directions for finding Abebooks’ office (they were going to be in the neighborhood anyway, as their hotel was across the Blue Bridge).

For as long as I can remember (and well before then), interesting people have come to Victoria — often “on a whim” — while at the same time many have found it difficult to make the connections that would allow the corral reef to take off and develop into a self-sustaining ecosystem.  So they left, or worse they settled for settling.  My hope is that with the help of technology to connect the dots, the people, the ideas, we can lay down the capillaries that will pump a conversational life-blood through the community and perk up the city’s circulation.  Unlike Boulder, we are on an island, and that’s a specific constraint (or is it an affordance?) that can’t be designed away. But every other aspect should be open to change.

Cracking cement: Industry and municipalities could work together

Les Leyne had an interesting article in today’s local paper, Cement industry fears carbon tax squeeze, which prompted me to write a letter to the editor in response. It seems to me that this problem offers an opportunity for some disruptive creative thinking, which could create a win-win situation for municipalities and industry.

Some key excerpts from Leyne’s article:

When Premier Gordon Campbell whipped together a carbon tax exemption for municipalities just in time for their September convention, the lineup formed quickly for similar breaks.

Assorted sectors of the economy have ideas on why they should get some help in coping with the carbon tax. The municipalities won their case because they have no one to pass the costs on to, other than taxpayers, who are already paying it in their own lives. So the municipalities’ carbon tax bill will be picked up by the province — if they promise to get carbon-neutral by 2012.

Leyne notes that one of the first industry groups to come forward was the cement producers, who claim that the carbon tax will chew up to 107% of their profits (quite the claim…).  The cement industry produces a huge amount of CO2, has to find a way to reduce its carbon footprint, and is crying about how the carbon tax is going to put them out of business.  Leyne notes, however, that European manufacturers have lived with a carbon tax regime for years, and are still doing ok.  So it’s really more about changing the industry’s mindset — maybe to something more like “yes we can,” as opposed to “no can do.”

Leyne writes that some of the greenhouse gases produced by the cement industry are “unavoidable”:

Cement is the powdery glue that holds concrete together when water is added. Making the stuff involves emissions. More than half of the emissions are unavoidable — breaking down limestone releases carbon dioxide. The rest of the emissions come from generating the heat used in the process, which is mostly done by burning coal. The industry is already paying the carbon tax on that fuel and claims a bill of $6 million since it took effect July 1.

I was reminded, however, of the MIT Technology Review article, A concrete Fix to Global Warming, which focused on how CO2, released during the production of cement, could be sequestered in cement products.  That means that instead of focusing on buying offsets and so forth, a better approach to reducing the carbon footprint for real would be to focus instead on incorporating CO2 sequestering methods into the manufacturing process.

The industry is worried it’s being driven out of business:

“Surely to God you weren’t trying to put us out of business when you came up with the carbon tax,” McSweeney told politicians.

Liberal MLAs had no response. But privately, the government doubts the claims of peril.

The presentation was almost identical to one the industry made in Europe several years ago. But carbon taxes were imposed widely there, and the impact was minimal.

Government also discounts worries about competitors outside the province. With just a handful of big companies in the world, it’s not a competitive industry. And cement has to be produced close to where it’s used. (pg.2 of article)

So what’s in that MIT Technology Review article to help with this problem?  Well, part of the problem from my point of view is that, as per Leyne’s remarks, most of the emissions are unavoidable and that you’re upping the ante by burning coal to create the needed heat for processing.  The implication is that there’s nothing in the manufacturing process that let’s you shift the equation, yet the Technology Review article (see particularly page 2) suggests there are plenty of people working on different ways of sequestering the CO2 that’s released.

Which means that this is an industrial process ripe for new thinking and disruption, and the municipalities could jump into the breach to kick-start the process.

Which brings me to my letter, written out of frustration over the slowness of adaptive and innovative strategies by municipalities here, even when our provincial government is kicking them (as per Bill 27).  Here is the letter I wrote:

Kudos to the BC Liberals for putting industry under pressure — not to destroy it, but to force it to innovate, because it really is time for more creative thinking when it comes to environmental issues.  Municipalities and industries need to step up, perhaps to collaborate.

It’s known that finding ways to sequester the C02 produced by cement production continues to be a contested holy grail for the industry.  The “squeeze” of a carbon tax might actually be the opportunity to make sequestration a more realistic goal.

A Nova Scotia company (Carbon Sense Solutions) recently claimed that it has a process that sequesters all emissions from cement production by storing them in precast concrete products. Our cement factories typically don’t also produce precast concrete products, but consider a scenario where there is more creative cooperation between industry and municipalities.  In such a world it might make sense to add facilities that produce precast concrete products, if municipalities (which also need to meet carbon-neutral goals) found ways to use precast concrete (vs concrete mix) for public works (roads, sidewalks, etc.) projects.

There will have to be a lot more innovative thinking, literally to disrupt traditional supply-chain set-ups.  If the carbon tax “squeezes” industries and municipalities to embrace that disruption creatively and constructively, it’ll be a win-win for us all.

(For more on the still-contested methods of carbon sequestering in the cement-making process, see http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/2…)

No idea if the paper will publish it, but here’s hoping for creative innovation from industry and municipalities.

Diigo Bookmarks 08/05/2008 (a.m.)

• Protein® Feed | Could Globalization Be Going In Reverse? – Annotated

  “The world is flat” or “the world is spiky” or …”the world is complex,” maybe? At any rate, this article questions the idea that outsourcing will continue to continue, spreading outward in some sort of new and flattened topography (akin to a downward spiral insofar as the search for ever cheaper labor and laxer labor laws continues, but not wholly downward because economically, there’s an upward trend associated with it, too – hence perhaps the “flat” topography). And it presents some interesting data as well as suppposition for why this might be so. It’s not just the huge up-tick in transportation costs (although that’s a key factor), it’s also the logistics — including “reverse logistics.” For example, consumers *want* to do better, and are becoming more aware of the “carbon footprint” of the products they buy.

  tags: globalization, trends, economic_development, manufacturing, transportation, factories, shipping

• “Trading Places” by Alan Ehrenhalt (The New Republic)

  Interesting article (which incidentally puts Vancouver front & centre), blogged by Richard Florida at Creative Class: the subtitle is “the demographic inversion of the American city.” It’s about how the “inner city” and its “inner city suburbs” are now desirable (and expensive) places to live, creating a 24/7 downtown (desired & theorized early on by Jane Jacobs, eg.), while the less affluent (ok, the poor!) are forced to live on the outskirts (suburbs). This used to be called “gentrification,” but Ehrenhalt points out that it’s a much more complex process than just that.

  Haven’t read all the comments to this article, but it starts with some excellent ones — intelligent observations by readers.

  tags: cities, downtown, creative_cities, suburbs, gentrification, trends, urbanization, urban_renewal, demographics

• Night Life Reprogrammed – NYTimes.com – Annotated

  Everything is more intense in NYC, including the geek or nerd “party” scene (meet ups, tweet ups, “ignite” events, etc.). More people = more capital, in terms of creative energy and innovation. (And perhaps headaches… but that’s another story…!)

  Of course I’d love to figure out how to sustain a mini-version of this right here (Victoria). Vancouver works very hard at it — but even in Vancouver (I’m told), it’s the same people reappearing at the different events (i.e., nowhere near the critical mass of larger US metros). Part of the problem is enticing people to come out — it’s so easy to stay home, after all…

  tags: nyt, creative_class, geek, socialtheory, ignite, meet_ups