Connect with us

Business

Halloween Chat — ‘Beetlejuice’ and the lost art of soft horror  

Published

on

This is an audio transcript of the Life and Art from FT Weekend podcast episode: ‘Halloween Chat: ‘Beetlejuice’ and the lost art of soft horror’

Lilah Raptopoulos
Welcome to Life in Art from FT Weekend. I’m Lilah Raptopoulos, and this is our Friday chat show. Today, to celebrate Halloween season, we have decided to return to a classic that’s recently been revived and lives forever in the public imagination: the original 1988 film Beetlejuice. Beetlejuice was directed, of course, by Tim Burton. It stars a young Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis, who play a married couple living in the countryside who die in a car accident and quickly realise that they’ve become ghosts. And a family from the big city has bought and moved into their home. Their job is to scare the family away and they contact an unhinged demon named Beetlejuice to help, played by Michael Keaton. High jinks ensue.

[‘BEETLEJUICE’ TRAILER PLAYING]

Lilah Raptopoulos
Beetlejuice is a cult classic. It’s a Halloween costume staple. It’s been remade as an animated series, a theme park ride, a musical, and as of last month, a legacy sequel, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice. And today, we’re going to talk about why it endured and whether films like it even exist any more.

Advertisement

OK, let’s turn on the juice and see what shakes loose. I’m Lilah in New York, and I am alone. I am utterly alone. Joining me from London is the FT’s political columnist, resident film buff and our favourite bio exorcist — I have been told to see what happens if I say his name three times — Stephen Bush, Stephen Bush, Stephen Bush. Hi, Stephen. Welcome.

Stephen Bush
Hi.

Lilah Raptopoulos
With me in New York, his qualifications are, I’m doing the whole thing: he attended Juilliard, he’s a graduate of the Harvard Business School, he’s travelled quite extensively, he lived through the Black Plague, and he had a pretty good time during that. It’s our executive producer, a horror expert, a huge Halloween fan: Topher Forhecz. 

Topher Forhecz
Hi, happy to be here. I will take horror expert, among my many titles.

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
I think. As one of the few people who I have watched horror films for.

OK. So when we were deciding how to celebrate Halloween season, I lobbied hard for this, the original Beetlejuice, because it’s just this cult classic that keeps reappearing in the culture. And I wanted to rewatch it. It was, for all of us, a rewatch, not a first-time watch. So why don’t we start with this? Stephen, what is your relationship to the film and what was it like to rewatch it?

Stephen Bush
Yeah. It was odd one watching it again. I was sort of goth-adjacent as a teenager, I guess. I never sort of committed to the style, but I, you know, I loved all of that stuff. And it’s one of those . . . and then I realised it’s a film that I thought I had a stronger set of memories of than I did. And I realise it’s a film which I primarily remember as an aesthetic, as a kind of costume party staple, rather than it being a film which I had any strong memories of. And it was slightly strange. Watching it again had an oddly dreamlike quality because I realised I remembered the images of it much more strongly than the plot.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yes, me too.

Advertisement

Stephen Bush
And . . . actually, the thing I found a bit odd about it was realising I don’t think it’s that good.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Whoa.

Topher Forhecz
I just gave up my ghost.

Stephen Bush
It was a real kind of . . . oh, maybe, actually it slightly made me increase my . . . not so much my opinion of the sequel, but it did slightly give me that feeling of, oh was the first one good or was I just 15 and watching it at a house party at the time? It’s . . . I mean, in some ways it’s — as with a lot of Tim Burton’s stuff — it’s a great artist’s film rather than actually being a great film, I think.

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
OK. What was it like for you to rewatch it, Topher?

Topher Forhecz
So I dearly loved this movie. And part of the thing is that I have now reached the age where you can safely grow up with a movie and I can have different experiences of it by viewing it at different times in my life. And so I think I can’t really escape that. Like, I can’t really escape the, like, sense memory of the Danny Elfman score and the long credits. And just like what that does, the chemicals in my brain just like brings me back to my childhood.

But I think the thing that I really picked up on this time is just the density of the plot and how quickly it moves mirrored with the density of jokes in the . . . they’re just like it’s constantly firing things at you and it moves in like a 90-minute pace. And there’s stuff in there that I think as an adult you pick up on in ways that you don’t as a kid. I just think it’s a movie that is so dense that it rewards multiple viewing experiences and then you bring things to it as you get older, including, unfortunately for my case, being a jaded New Yorker and like this movie is a movie about jaded New Yorkers. 

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yeah. Who leave New York. 

Advertisement

Topher Forhecz
You know, and can’t and are like not fazed by a bunch of ghosts because they’ve seen too many weird things on the subway, you know? And so they’re like, huh. OK, how can we make money off it? You know, or like Charles just wanting peace and quiet in the country and then immediately is like, trying to, like, turn the whole town on its head. And like, I feel personally attacked by that as someone who will, like, go upstate and just be like, so nice to get out of the city. But what did you think?

Lilah Raptopoulos
Well, I guess I would like to state the obvious, which is that this movie is just a total delight to watch. It’s just fun. It’s an early Tim Burton, and so it has all the things you would expect from a Tim Burton. But it was at the time people didn’t know him, so they didn’t expect it, which was probably exciting. There is claymation, there is an in-between sandworm world inspired by Salvador Dalí, there are shrunken heads. This ghost couple, the Maitlands, can pull their faces out into insane-looking shapes. The costumes are incredible. Beetlejuice’s striped suit is iconic. Catherine O’Hara is the perfect evil stepmother. It’s just great. It’s like funny, it’s gross, it’s kind of mundane too. It makes death seem not scary, but sort of mundane. So anyway, all of that is a total joy.

I will say that like Stephen, I actually also this film, I realised as I was watching it existed almost like exclusively in my unconscious. I know I watched it as a child. I didn’t remember almost any of the plot. But then occasionally a scene would come up, like when they first meet Beetlejuice, it’s about 45 minutes in and he says, hold that for me, will yah? And he takes a mouse out of his pocket and he gives it to Geena Davis and she freaks out. And in that moment, just it all came flooding back to me. I felt like I was five again. So my rewatch was a total joy. But Stephen, why didn’t you like it? I’m dying to hear why you didn’t like it.

Stephen Bush
I think it’s partly the . . . both my reaction to it and the sequel are reminders of the perils of going back to something that you haven’t watched for a very long time. Because where I think it really works is as an intelligent children’s movie, right? It has loads of great jokes with watching adults. And one of the things Catherine O’Hara is really skilful in it, she does a good job of kind of double acting. She sort of works as a kind of grotesque figure for children, while doing a lot of the more subtle jokes about someone from the city who’s done that — to me, the most horrific act of all — which is to leave the city.

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
I agree, Stephen.

Stephen Bush
The bit I’d completely forgotten is how much it’s a movie about the Maitlands. And actually in an odd way, I almost this time around or do you know what I would actually much rather watch a movie about like these two people who are young and in love, who then suddenly are stuck in this house together, they think forever. I was just like, oh, but actually, this is a really interesting idea, isn’t it? And this is, god, I have become one of those angry bros who downright stings on Rotten Tomatoes. Essentially, I realise my problem is is that I watch a children’s movie and I’m aggrieved that it was for kids.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Interesting. Yeah. It’s almost like you wanted the movie to grow up with you.

[‘BEETLEJUICE’ MUSICAL SCORE PLAYING]

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
I want to get a little bit deeper into why this film, you know, like stuck so stubbornly in our cultural imagination for so long. Like, again, the symbol is powerful of this guy in the striped suit and the crazy hair, I guess. What about it made it unique at the time. What about it sort of allowed it to be iconic over time? What do you think it is?

Topher Forhecz
Yeah. I think for me, I think what made it stand apart, and I think it is kind of interesting to bounce . . . I, you know, sort of going off of what Stephen saying about it is kind of just a kid’s movie and or a theme or, you know, being that edgy. Is that a fair characteristic, Stephen?

Stephen Bush
Yeah. (inaudible)

Topher Forhecz
OK, great. I think the thing that has really helped the movie live on is that there is a lot of craft still devoted to the movie, which is kind of what I was saying about the density of jokes where it’s like every little bit of the movie has been considered. From, you know, like this weird comb art piece sculpture is almost a character in the movie. Like you see it so vividly. The set design has been very considered. The underworld, the rules of the underworld are all very considered. There’s so much craft and attention to detail that I think that has really helped stick Beetlejuice in the public consciousness, and I think that’s really helped it carry on.

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yeah, there are a lot of just like iconic visuals. There’s Catherine O’Hara’s lightning bolt sideburns. There’s, you know, Winona Ryder’s spiky tooth bangs. There’s also this classic dinner-party scene that really held up perfectly. It was, you know, the ghosts are messing with this dinner party that this horrible couple has put on to try to scare the family away. And to do that, they, like, possess or take control over the dinner guests. So they turn the whole party into puppets who are forced to do the Calypso and forced them to start singing and performing Harry Belafonte’s “Day-O”. And then their shrimp cocktail reaches out like arms and sucks them into the bowls. And it just really scratched the itch for me. Stephen, what do you think about it sort of made it memorable over time?

Stephen Bush
I think it’s a couple of things. I think particularly the thing about Beetlejuice is because it is, yeah, a film in which a director with a very distinct visual sensibility is able to produce this film that is very distinctly his, but where actually in some quite good ways it is a tight 90 minutes. You know, for all I said, I thought I wasn’t sure was actually that good. It’s tight. It doesn’t have long scenes where you’re going, come on, Tim, wrap it up.

And then I think the other reason why it endures is that the average child who watches it then did graduate to Edward Scissorhands, to the rest of Tim Burton’s oeuvre. And so it’s a film which I think for lots of people is the beginning of their relationship with films, with horror, also with the idea of a film having an author. And I think that’s one of the reasons why it has a kind of enduring resonance. In addition to the fact that, yeah, I’m going to slightly recant my opening of the podcast, in this, in fact is ultimately just a solid children’s flick that goes in lots of unexpected ways.

The thing I realised watching it is and the film The Others, which is a horror film from the mid-noughties, is actually, when you think about it, a beat-for-beat remake, but played straight. And it does lots of really clever things. It plays with lots of genres. And the first time you watched it, you don’t realise it’s playing with lots of genres. And it then has, and obviously this particularly appeals to small children, then has this kind of, you know, loud, scatological character who, yes, is only in it for a very brief amount of time. But when he’s in it, is magnetic.

Advertisement

[‘BEETLEJUICE’ MUSICAL SCORE PLAYING]

Lilah Raptopoulos
So I wanted to switch gears a little bit and talk about children’s movies today. I asked you both to watch Beetlejuice, the original. But we also all saw the sequel that came out this fall, Beetlejuice Beetlejuice. And I think the comparison is pretty interesting because it does have all the fun weirdness of Tim Burton, and it’s also a delight to watch. But it was also just . . . I mean, in my opinion, it was doing so much, it felt like Beetlejuice on steroids, like there were maybe two too many plot lines. It was almost like a Marvel movie, like we were on the run. It was chaotic. I just really wanted them to slow down and trust that we had attention spans.

Topher Forhecz
Yeah, yeah. I mean, I do. I think there’s a couple of things going on there. One of which is I feel like Beetlejuice Beetlejuice really isn’t a kid’s movie and it feels like it’s made for the people who have seen Beetlejuice. And also I feel like that plays on its like themes of, you know, generations of women looking out for each other and trying to reconcile with one another, which I also think kind of fell apart in the middle of it. But I also that is indicative of what you’re saying, which is, yeah, that movie is just a straight-up mess. But . . . 

Lilah Raptopoulos
Fun mess.

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yeah. Well, that’s the thing. Like, it’s nice to see Tim Burton again. I feel like I haven’t seen Tim Burton in 20 years because he’s just . . . I just feel like he’s just been pumping out things that he really . . . it’s hard to find him in it. And you could see him actually being concerned with the jokes in that movie as opposed to, you know, I feel like he almost felt like just at some point he woke up and he’s like, well, I guess I just have to do Alice in Wonderland because I’m Tim Burton, I’m weird and like, we’re just going to have to do it.

So it was it was a nice return to form, but I think it does give way to you can tell as a filmmaker, Tim Burton is more interested with punch lines themselves. He’s really good at those, but I don’t think he’s a story guy. Like I just . . . I think my favourite movies of his, I haven’t seen Ed Wood, full disclosure, and I know that’s a lot of people’s favourites, but I love Mars Attacks, I love Batman Returns, I love Beetlejuice, I love Batman. But a lot of those movies, arguably their scripts are total messes, but they’re just a lot of fun to hang out in. So and I think that’s more what Beetlejuice 2 felt like to me.

Stephen Bush
Yeah, I mean, I think . . . I’m going to be incredibly pretentious, I think, or as David Foster Wallace once said, all stylists often become prisoners of their own style. And I think the thing about Beetlejuice is, it is, is Tim Burton, a long time ago became a prisoner of his own style. And I suspect one of the reasons why I was slightly . . . why I have this kind of slight weird relationship rewatching Beetlejuice where I realised I most enjoyed it when it was the least like a Tim Burton film, which isn’t because the Tim Burton film bits of Beetlejuice don’t work. It’s because I’ve seen too many bad late-period Tim Burton films. It’s one of the biggest mistakes I made in lockdown was to rewatch a lot of Wes Anderson films in a very short space of time. And it made me start to hate some of the later ones. Not because they were any worse, but just because I was tired of the style.

The sad thing about looking back at the original Beetlejuice is it’s a film without a successful book behind it, or pre-existing IP or a directorial name where nonetheless, this relatively neophyte director is allowed to do quite a lot but clearly is being restrained a bit. Beetlejuice Beetlejuice is a film which kind of leans into lots of his weaknesses. And if, like me, you’ve started to find his style a bit like, OK, yeah. There’s a thing with weird eyes. OK cool. Then it becomes quite wearying quite quickly.

Advertisement

Topher Forhecz
Yeah.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yeah, yeah, yeah. So do you think that a movie like Beetlejuice could be made today? It feels like we’ve been circling this idea that kids’ films today aren’t the same. And from my perspective, Beetlejuice was cool because it kind of made weird mainstream. It was accessible, but it was weird. And that feels sort of missing now, and I’m not sure why. I felt like there were a lot of films at the time that were spooky but soft. There was Hocus Pocus, there was The Witches, there was Death Becomes Her. That’s missing now.

You know, these days, like, scary movies feel laboured to me or they feel stylised or they feel like really made for the internet, like Megan or Cocaine Bear or the A24 movies. They’re not playful, you know. I don’t know if that’s because family-friendly soft horror, like, it’s kind of gone as a genre. I don’t know if it’s because TV has taken that over, like it’s just made a bunch of spooky things for teens on Netflix like the show Wednesday. What is it? What do you think it is?

Stephen Bush
Well, it is partly about the market change, right? The family film has slightly disappeared slash the only available family film are Marvel movies, and even they seem to be in some slight commercial trouble. That kind of like sort of fun horror, then? Yeah. Broadly speaking, everyone, even someone who’s watching Beetlejuice for the first time, knows that Lydia is never actually going to be forced to marry Beetlejuice. Right? And OK, there are some children who do find Beetlejuice scary, right? But there’s a cosiness to it.

Advertisement

That kind of cosy horror doesn’t exist any more, really. And I suspect it is because fewer and fewer films are made for the whole family. Right? And actually, when I think about, you know, even so, even say like Inside Out 2, which is a very good bit of children’s entertainment, which has some, you know, I would say some probably profound things to say about the human condition. Right? So it’s not scary. It’s not really trying to be. It’s not got a kind of anarchic feel to it because ultimately it’s not built for, because it doesn’t need to be, a family of four of three different ages all sitting in a multiplex watching it together. And that is a slightly sad thing about, you know, things becoming more siloed.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Mm-hmm. What do you think, Topher? You’re looking with a furrowed brow.

Topher Forhecz
I think it does come down to box office and what is going to get people in seats. And this isn’t really a clever or original answer but, you know, you see a lot more sequels these days. I think there is a tendency by studios to play it safe, to not take flyers on anything that might scare away families or be too much. And that creates sort of a tampering down of creative risk. You know, Beetlejuice is a movie that has neck wounds and cuts and people flattened and eaten by sharks, and there’s a club scene for some reason. And I just think there is sort of a weird crisis within the box office where they don’t want to take a risk on that.

You know, movies are too expensive these days. I think probably the closest thing that we’ve had recently is sort of in the claymation space with, you know, things like Coraline maybe. But yeah, I think that there is a lack of interest on the studio’s part to want to devote a bunch of money to something that might be too off-putting or too spooky or too much for kids. That being said, horror is doing great, at least in general. I mean, Terrifier 3 is like one of the best performing movies in America.

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
So then I guess my question about that revolves around this feeling that there actually is a lot of desire for this, like, soft horror. I asked our listeners on Instagram, just like what their favourite horror or favourite Halloween movies are. And they were all like, I mean, this might be because they’re my listeners, but a lot of them were like Practical Magic and Sleepy Hollow and Hocus Pocus and Scream and, you know, movies that were like kind of scary but also kind of not scary. And so it seems like there’s this appetite for it. There’s obviously this appetite for straight-up scary right now, otherwise they wouldn’t be made. I guess I’m trying to sort of figure out why.

Topher Forhecz
Horror fans will show up to the box office. But maybe from a studio perspective, it’s better to just turn it into a limited series on TV because you don’t know if the kids like young children will show up in a way that they already have Disney+ at home so they can just watch Hocus Pocus 2 there.

Stephen Bush
I think there are two things. I think one, there is a more broad infantilisation of children and teens. And there are, you know, there are a whole bunch of sort of further restrictions on what young people can do. And I suspect that slightly bleeds down into a kind of expectation, although this is the thing that things like Hocus Pocus and Beetlejuice are and The Witches are all doing is they are pushing at the limit of, is this too scary for kids?

And we’re clearly in a cultural moment where the commercial returns of cosy horror are not guaranteed, but the backlash of, oh, you’ve made something too scary for kids, feels larger and something that you’ve got to be more worried about. And I think those two things are linked. But I do not you know, I . . . one of my many terrible habits is a habit of stalking strangers’ letterbox choices. And I am fascinated by the phenomena of people who are clearly going to films with their partner where you get the one person who is basically one-star, I hate horror, and then the other person making like one-star, I hate romcoms.

Advertisement

It’s like, guys, you know, you don’t have to go together. But I think there is this time for this kind of unmet desire for that kind of child, you know, child-friendly, therefore kind of by definition a more upbeat, slightly more of a moral centre form of horror, where you know, than actually, broadly speaking, you know, goodwill prevail and only really terrible characters will actually meet some kind of violent end. Of a kind which just is currently being squeezed out both commercially and culturally.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Topher Forhecz
I feel like the main takeaway that always comes across when we all gather on this show is just studios need to be braver.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yeah, yeah. All right. Stephen, Topher, thank you so much. We will be back in just a moment for More or Less.

Advertisement

[‘SWAMP NOTES’ PODCAST AD PLAYING]

Lilah Raptopoulos
Welcome back for More or Less, where each guest says one thing they want to see more of or less of in culture. This week we are hijacking More or Less so each person can go into detail, making the case for their favourite Halloween movie. I put a call out for listeners on my Instagram about this so I’ll shout out some of those too later. But first, Stephen, what’s yours?

Stephen Bush
This is a controversial pick because I’m going to pick what’s actually has its name on the title. It’s not really a Tim Burton film, The Nightmare Before Christmas. Now, some people would go, wait a second, it’s a Christmas film. But it’s a film about how the inhabitants of Halloweentown try and put on their own version of Christmas with macabre consequences. But I think it’s really it’s a film that you can watch from any time from the start of October until Christmas Eve. It’s a Halloween and it’s a Christmas film. But I think it’s a brilliant example, I think, of the type of cosy horror we were talking about. You know, Mr Oogie, he’s got these horrible sort of claymation-y bugs. The main character is, you know, this skeleton who is kind of scary, but, you know, also kind of reassuring. I think it’s a delightful Halloween movie. It’s one of my favourite Halloween traditions is to watch it. And yeah, I love it very much.

Lilah Raptopoulos
It’s a great one. Great movie, I agree. Topher, what about you?

Advertisement

Topher Forhecz
So I am going to fudge this and say this is my favourite Halloween movie this year. This year in my house we have been trying to watch cult classics and sort of B horror movies, whereas I think Beetlejuice is a perfect object. We have been celebrating the imperfect objects that have been sort of relegated to the dustbin of horror history. And there is this one imprint that I want to shout out that restores and publishes these sort of schlocky horror movies called Vinegar Syndrome. They’ve been a great resource. And the movie that played like gangbusters to a crowd this year is a movie called Blades, which the pitch . . . 

Lilah Raptopoulos
Plural.

Topher Forhecz
Blades. Yes, correct. The pitch that I read that made me buy the movie was it’s like Jaws, but instead of a shark, it’s a lawnmower, and instead of the ocean, it’s a golf course. And it’s just pure, terrible, wonderful, nonsensical nonsense. But it’s . . . it really . . . it brought the house down this year. Blades.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Great one. Blades. OK. Mine is one that I watched as a child and then my partner brought back into my life as an adult, and it still held up. It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown, 1966. It’s only 25 minutes. It’s just a real classic. And my favourite part is this subplot where Linus believes in the Great Pumpkin, which is basically like this pumpkin that comes down on Halloween and gives everybody presents. And he decides to wait for him in a pumpkin patch. But he has to choose the most sincere pumpkin patch.

Advertisement

So I don’t know. Every time I watch it, I think about what it means to be a sincere pumpkin patch and the, like, kind of delusion of belief and belief in things that you just want to be true and how that’s really just the joy of being a kid and wanting witches to be real and wanting broomsticks to fly and, you know, believing in ghosts. So It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown. Yeah.

A few listener ones. I will put a link to them in the show notes, but we have quite a few screamheads who say that Scream is 35 per cent Dawson’s Creek, 65 per cent horror. A listener named Dean rewatched House recently, the 1977 Japanese psychedelic comedy horror.

Topher Forhecz
Hell, yeah. That movie rocks. We watched that this year. That is a movie that has an auteur vision like that is just unto itself. There’s nothing like it. It’s great.

Lilah Raptopoulos
Yeah, he says it still holds up as bonkers and amazing. Tons of love for Hocus Pocus, as I said. One listener described Rosemary’s Baby as, domestic surveillance and paranoia is my favourite genre and also it’s a movie about a haircut. And finally, a recommendation for giallo films, the Italian murder slashers from the 60s and 70s, which actually Beetlejuice Beetlejuice references with the great Monica Bellucci.

Advertisement

OK. We’ll put all of these recommendations in the show notes. Topher and Stephen, this was so much fun. Thank you both for coming on the show.

Topher Forhecz
Thanks.

Stephen Bush
Thank you.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

Advertisement

Lilah Raptopoulos
That’s the show. Thank you for listening to Life and Art from FT Weekend. I have dropped all of the movies we mentioned today into the show notes and also linked to Stephen’s newsletter there. If you’re into UK politics, it is the cream of the crop. Also in the show notes are ways to stay in touch with me on email and on social, where I’m mostly on Instagram @LilahRap chatting with all of you about culture.

I’m Lilah Raptopoulos and here’s my wonderful team. Katya Kumkova is our senior producer. Lulu Smyth is our producer. Our sound engineers are Joe Salcedo, Breen Turner and Sam Giovinco, with original music by Metaphor Music. Topher Forhecz is our executive producer and our global head of audio is Cheryl Brumley. Have a lovely weekend and we’ll find each other again on Monday.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Business

Can I call you Rob?

Published

on

Stay informed with free updates

You will have noticed this seems a rather specific question, unrelatable perhaps, if your name is Dennis or Susan. But you will also grasp that this is just a way of expressing the real question, which is “Can I shorten your name from the one you actually use?” 

The answer is no, you bloody can’t. Well, technically you can. There’s nothing I can do to stop you. But I won’t like it, so if it is an attempt to be matey, it will in fact have the opposite effect. 

Advertisement

At least asking allows me an opportunity to say no. Those who ask are not really the problem, though they should still know better. I have, after all, had many more years to consider my options. But people rarely ask. Americans — or Amers, as I like to think of them — are especially committed to shortening other people’s names, seeing it as a sign of chummy informality, rather than an outrageous presumption. 

Few weeks go by without someone chummily shortening my name. They don’t ask if I’m a Rob. They just decide I should be. This shows a basic misjudgment because Rob, in general, seems an easy-going, karaoke-nights, one-more-for-the-road type of guy. Whereas I am an uptight, grumpy, no-thanks-I’m-driving, don’t-call-me-Rob type.

This issue has acquired new urgency, because one of the final two candidates to be Conservative leader has suddenly become a Rob. Robert Jenrick was always a Robert, until this contest. Now, he has come out as a Rob. Perhaps he was always a Rob to his most intimate circle, or alternatively it is just one more policy shift from a man of no fixed ideological moorings. When we first met Robert, he was a liberal-conservative Remainer. Rob, on the other hand, turns out to be obsessed with immigration, ending net-zero targets and ordering the removal of Disney murals at asylum reception centres. These don’t seem like Rob moves? Maybe it’s more a Bert thing.

Anyway, this isn’t a column about Bert Jenrick. He is embracing the name change, either because he thinks it makes him seem more likeable or to distance himself from the more liberal-elitist Robert. (There are rightwingers who worry that, having won as Rob, he might then revert to being Robert.) 

But it’s his choice. The issue is how to deal with others changing our name for us. You could just relax about it. But if I could be relaxed about it, I’d already be a Rob, wouldn’t I? 

The second strategy is to correct people. If it happens over email, you could sign off with your version of “Robert (not Rob)”, followed with a smiley face to show no offence has yet been taken. That could make you look a tad priggish, which is annoying since a) you are being priggish and no one likes to be told that, and b) you are not the one in the wrong here. But you need to nip it in the bud early. Procrastination robs you.

The third approach is to refuse to answer to the short name. In person, don’t respond. On a phone call, you suggest the person must have the wrong number. I did once work closely with a Rob, so I always told people they were obviously looking for him. But this is just a more aggressive version of the second strategy and an unnecessary escalation best saved for repeat offenders. 

Advertisement

We all have those we permit to Rob us. My oldest friend uses it but he’s been doing so since primary school, and five decades seems too long to have let it lie. Also, if I told him it annoyed me, he’d only double-down on it and probably switch to Robbie (a name acceptable only for Scots and toddlers). In any case, it is born of life-long friendship, and I’ve definitely called him worse. Relatives of my wife have also started doing it under the mistaken impression that association with her gives them renaming rights. Nicknames and variations on your surname are less of a problem, especially if they too were picked up in your youth, seem affectionate and aren’t rhyming slang for genitalia.

It’s not that I mind the name. It’s not unpleasant. I just associate it with people who don’t realise they are too old to be skateboarding. (I exempt my colleague Rob Armstrong, who is a top bloke in spite of his affliction.) Naturally, in revealing this I have opened myself up to years of Rob abuse. Then again, if Rob Jenrick wins, perhaps I’ll change my own name.

Email Robert at magazineletters@ft.com

Follow @FTMag to find out about our latest stories first and subscribe to our podcast Life and Art wherever you listen

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Travel

CitizenM London Olympia to open in 2025

Published

on

CitizenM London Olympia to open in 2025

The 146-room hotel will form part of the £1.3 billion regeneration of the Olympia exhibition centre, and will feature the listed Apex living room

Continue reading CitizenM London Olympia to open in 2025 at Business Traveller.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Money

URW forecasts drop in vacancy levels after bankruptcies hit 191 units

Published

on

Unibail-Rodamco-Westfield offloads two US and German shopping centres for £420m

URW said 63% of its affected units have either been re-let or are still occupied by the existing tenants with the remainder affecting vacancy levels.

The post URW forecasts drop in vacancy levels after bankruptcies hit 191 units appeared first on Property Week.

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Pro-Russia parties gain ground in Bulgaria ahead of elections

Published

on

Map of Bulgaria showing the capital Sofia and Sliven

Pro-Russia parties are gaining ground in Bulgaria ahead of a parliamentary vote on Sunday, as Moscow capitalises on continued political instability in the EU and Nato’s south-eastern member.

Heading into the seventh parliamentary election in just four years, politicians who adopt pro-Kremlin messaging have become increasingly popular with voters disillusioned with mainstream politics.

“Parties with some level of Russian influence may attract about a quarter of the vote or more, depending on mobilisation and turnout,” said Daniel Smilov, a political scientist at the Centre for Liberal Strategies in Sofia.

“People who see themselves as left behind seem more motivated to vote, which might create unpleasant surprises for pro-European forces.”

Advertisement

Most analysts project yet another inconclusive election, followed by an eighth vote in spring. Several insiders told the Financial Times that major parties and government officials are already planning for that snap poll next year.

The uncertainty benefits Moscow as it showcases Bulgaria’s dysfunction as systemic EU and Nato weaknesses.

“In the three years since I’ve been here, this is already the sixth election. It is sad,” Russia’s ambassador Eleonora Mitrofanova said in June, when Bulgaria held its last parliamentary vote. She pledged to work with any government that is formed, given that “our relationship is now at zero”.

Map of Bulgaria showing the capital Sofia and Sliven

Russia has mounted multiple influence campaigns on the continent this year, including in the run-up to the European parliament elections in June when a network run by a Moscow-based oligarch was uncovered as paying for politicians to peddle Kremlin lines and get more like-minded MEPs elected into the EU assembly.

The leadership of Moldova on Sunday only narrowly secured a Yes vote in a referendum on EU membership after what officials in Chișinău described as a massive vote-buying operation orchestrated by Moscow to back the No campaign.

Advertisement

Although Bulgaria has investigated Russian infiltration and expelled more than 100 diplomats since the start of the Kremlin’s full-scale war against Ukraine, political parties have so far escaped scrutiny of how susceptible they are to influence from Moscow.

Bulgarian mainstream parties are mostly pro-western and the country has supported Ukraine in its defence against Russian aggression, including with weapons shipments.

But several upstart, pro-Russia outfits have seen their support growing among Bulgarian voters, Smilov said.

Advertisement

The far-right Revival party has grown into a mid-size force with about 15 per cent of electoral support. Its leader Kostadin Kostadinov is banned from Ukraine on suspicions of being a Russian agent. He headed a delegation to a Brics forum in Moscow in late August, and has often criticised Bulgaria’s support for Ukraine.

“If you want war, choose [other parties], they support Zelenskyy’s criminal regime in Ukraine,” Kostadinov wrote on Facebook this week. “If you want peace, choose Revival. The choice is yours. Me and my comrades have already chosen.”

Kostadin Kostadinov leads a march under the motto “Give peace a chance” in support of the people in Gaza and South Lebanon
The Revival party, led by Kostadin Kostadinov, centre, has grown into a mid-size force with about 15% of electoral support © Nikolay Doychinov/AFP/Getty Images

The Bulgarian Socialist party, which has shrunk below 10 per cent, is also ambiguous on Russia, with its deputies regularly criticising Bulgaria’s support for Ukraine, including its arms shipments.

Two upstart parties founded this year are also highly ambivalent on Ukraine, “overlapping with pro-Russia lines”, Smilov said.

Mech (Morality, Unity, Honour) is a Eurosceptic conservative group that claims neutrality over Ukraine, while Velichie (Greatness) has said it would prevent Bulgaria from participating in the war effort — although denied it was pro-Russia. They each poll just below 4 per cent, the parliamentary threshold in Bulgaria.

Advertisement

Causing more fragmentation, the second-largest party, the Turkish Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF) split this year over a leadership struggle.

Tycoon Delyan Peevski, who took over the party, was banned from the US for corruption, with the UK last year also placing him on its sanctions list for “attempts to exert control over key institutions and sectors in Bulgarian society through bribery and use of his media empire”.

Delyan Peevski is seated among other attendees during a session of the National Assembly in Sofia
The Movement for Rights and Freedoms, led by Delyan Peevski, centre, split this year over a leadership struggle © STR/NurPhoto/Reuters

The split of the ethnic Turkish vote — representing more than 10 per cent of the Bulgarian population — had “dramatic consequences”, said Goran Georgiev, an analyst with the Sofia-based Center for the Study of Democracy. “The low trust in democratic institutions makes the elections wholly unpredictable.”

Voter apathy is further complicating the outcome.

Turnout was just below 33 per cent in June and may fall further, boosting the chances of fringe parties, Georgiev said.

Advertisement

On the streets of Sliven in central Bulgaria, passers-by were largely ignoring party activists who were campaigning for APS, the Turkish party that split from the Peevski-ran outfit.

“I couldn’t care less, honestly,” said Arzu, a mother of two. “One is just like the other.”

A local candidate running for APS, Vladimir Martinov, admitted: “It’s partly our fault that there was no stable coalition in recent years.” He said the liberals “offered us a coalition provided we got rid of Peevski. We said no. It’s our fault.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Money

FCA: Risk profiling the ‘foundation of good advice’

Published

on

FCA: Risk profiling the ‘foundation of good advice’

Accurate risk profiling is the “foundation of good advice”, the Financial Conduct Authority’s head of investment platforms Kate Tuckley has insisted.

She said moving from accumulation to decumulation is likely to change a customer’s attitude to risk, so this should be reassessed.

“Advisers should not assume that a risk profile remains the same, either when moving into decumulation or from previous advice meetings,” she added.

She made the comments during a keynote speech at Money Marketing Interactive in Leeds yesterday (24 October).

Advertisement

“A key risk is capacity for loss – the ability to absorb losses in retirement, which is critical given the lower future earning potential.

“Many customers may have been able to recover losses during their working years, but this changes in retirement.”

She cited the FCA’s thematic review of retirement income advice, which found that some advisers’ files did not show that capacity for loss had been assessed, or where it had been assessed.

“Clear consideration of this is crucial to demonstrate the suitability of advice,” she said.

Advertisement

“Cash flow modelling (CFM) tools can be used for capacity for loss assessments. However, firms need to assess both attitude to risk and capacity for loss consistently.

“Tools such as standard questionnaires can be useful, but you should be aware of their limitations, especially when the language or questions are not tailored to decumulation, which can lead to incorrect profiling.

“Whatever approach is used, firms must demonstrate that their methods are suitable for retirement income advice.”

Pension freedoms came into effect in 2015, giving consumers more choice and less prescription in how they meet their retirement income needs.

Advertisement

“They can take as much or as little as they like, or even fully cash out if they choose,” said Tuckley.

“As you know, there’s no longer a requirement to buy an annuity, and drawdown is no longer just for the wealthy.

“However,” she warned, “more choice brings more complexity, not just for consumers but also for advisers.

“Most consumers have moved away from guaranteed income for life and keep their pension savings invested, which presents a big challenge for advisers.”

Advertisement

She said advisers need to help consumers manage ongoing risks and make complex decisions about meeting their income needs sustainably.

The FCA is following up on the thematic review and is “completing further work” on retirement income advice, which Tuckley said will continue to be a “priority” in its strategy.

“We want to explore this in more depth to understand how firms are responding to our report,” she said.

The regulator aims to publish further findings in the first quarter of 2025.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Boohoo says it needs to protect commercial position in Frasers spat

Published

on

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Boohoo has hit back at Mike Ashley’s retail empire over demands to install the sportswear tycoon as chief executive, saying it needed to “protect its commercial position”.

The online fast-fashion retailer said on Friday that while it was willing to discuss board representation with Frasers Group, which owns about 27 per cent of Boohoo, it would require governance assurances to protect its interests because of Frasers’ stake in rival online retailer Asos. The company added it was given a 48-hour deadline to decide whether to appoint Ashley as CEO.

Advertisement

Boohoo also called Frasers’ characterisation of its recent £222mn debt refinancing “inaccurate and unfair” after Frasers raised concerns over its terms in an open letter published on Thursday.

Ashley’s Frasers, formerly Sports Direct, built a stake in Boohoo last year and is its largest shareholder. The FTSE 100 company also owns a 23.6 per cent stake in Asos, which Boohoo said needed to be “carefully considered”, noting that both Frasers and Asos compete in similar markets to it.

“Before any appointment can be made, appropriate governance will be required to protect [Boohoo]’s commercial position and the interests of other shareholders,” the retailer said, adding it had received no such assurances from Frasers so far.

It comes after Boohoo said last week that chief executive John Lyttle would step down as it announced a strategic review of its operations that could lead to it being broken up, and the £222mn debt refinancing.

Advertisement

Frasers accused Boohoo of mismanagement in the open letter, following a more than 90 per cent fall in the fast-fashion group’s shares since their peak in mid-2020, when it was buoyed by a pandemic-era online shopping boom.

Since then, Boohoo has grappled with more subdued demand and higher day-to-day costs from factors including returns, as well as increased competition from rivals such as Shein and Temu.

Frasers said Boohoo’s debt refinancing was “severely short-dated, seemingly more expensive than the previous financing arrangement and almost unquestionably leaves the company in a position of needing to undertake drastic corporate actions in order to repay the term loan due in 10 months”, which Boohoo rejected.

Advertisement

It described the criticism as “inaccurate and unfair” and said it provided certainty for the company.

Boohoo is still considering a fuller response after Frasers called for an extraordinary general meeting with shareholders. 

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 WordupNews.com