I haven’t really valued the song Cool Kids that much up until this week. Echosmith, does a fabulous job of taking a simple idea and creating a relatable and very catchy song. Listen to it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSCzDykng4g , Now Think About it. It’s sad to say that at one point of our lives we have all wished to be a “cool kid,” whatever definition it had for you. This song is  relatable because the general idea that people have about what being a cool kid meant, is having a lot of money and being snobby. I believe that there are nice people among every economic and social status, however the general public seems to coincide the idea of wealthy folk as proud and spoiled creatures. For the case of my argument i will go along with the general idea of the mass and agree that “rich people” tend to be superficial. This song is the epitome of what it means to be wealthy and part of the uptown crew. For example, some lines of the song like “Nothing can bring them down,” “…their invincible,” and “they live the good life,” are just few examples of what people think when they are competing with those of the upper class. If your wealthy, you obviously have no worries, you have everything you want and don’t need and life is perfection. Who wouldn’t want to be a “rich kid?” Even if “they [cool kids] don’t know where they are going,” they still happen to fit in and be just fine. Why can’t it be this simple for everyone else? It shouldn’t be to difficult to achieve right? Wrong! Us normal folk must work to survive, we must have a plan and we must succeed at at.

 Breakfast at Tiffany’s and In Arabia We’d All Be Kings are perfect examples of how unrealistic it is to reach toward a dream that simply, and sadly, cannot be. Not all dreams are possible to obtain, but come on. Where is the common sense? Breakfast at Tiffany’s starts out with a beautiful young adorned in jewels and dressed as if she were worth a million bucks. She’s strolling  outside of Tiffany & Co. and eats her upsetting little breakfast staring into the store. We later see her entering her very small unfurnished and disorganized apartment. Its confusing at first but little by little you realize that this silly little women is as superficial as can be. She is an extremely naive woman who believes that she will be successful if she can get her hands on a rich man. She believes that nothing bad can ever happen in Tiffany’s and therefore belies that if she acquires a lot of money everything will be alright with her as well. Her dream is out of reach but she refuses to realize that what she desires is unattainable. In arabia we’d all be kings follows the same principle. The play involves many simple minded people with high hopes of “success.” Lenny an alcoholic ex convict tries to regain his manhood after being raped in jail, his girlfriend Daisy wishes to find herself a real man, Demaris wishes to gain money and become successful by owning a gun and becoming a prostitute,and Charlie believes himself a Jedi warrior who longs to protect chickie, skank’s girlfriend. They all wish to be something better than they are. However, as the playwriter depicts them, they are all “scum.” Most of them are either alcoholic or drug addicts, and they are proud and foul mouthed. They all lack self pity and lead their lives with a sense of humour. Extremely unrealistic and just sad.

I should start off by letting you all know that I am directionally incapable, which is really sad coming from someone living in New York. With that said, until I asked my parents what part of New York City “Uptown” actually was, the term really didn’t mean much to me. Sure, I had some knowledge that it was the wealthier part of the city; but in my mind, all I really had to work with was Billy Joel’s “Uptown Girl” and Boaz Yakin’s film, Uptown Girls. Still, the image that first pops into my head is that of wealthy women who marry equally wealthy men wearing the latest fashion trends (even if they aren’t going anywhere), having brunch or shopping with their other wealthy friends while the children are at home with the nanny. I always envision these people to have carefree lives without actual jobs to get to, but yet, money is constantly being deposited into their bank accounts for no real reason. And these uptown people seem to live a life that is so unattainable for the rest of us, automatically allowing us to decide that they are snobby and superficial. Even the name sounds snobby. Uptown. It makes you think that Uptown is so much better than everywhere else, let’s not even mention Downtown.

Blake Edwards’s Breakfast at Tiffany’s basically reinforced what I already assumed about life in Uptown New York City. I would like to begin by stating that I really did not like this film, but that might partly be because the movie was recorded at such a low volume that I struggled to actually hear the dialogue. I also felt like the plot was really lacking and I did not really like Audrey Hepburn’s character, but, man, did she look good doing it! I just need to take a moment to appreciate how good she looked the whole time, especially in the first scene; if that is what she wears to window shop while eating breakfast, I would love to see what she throws on for dinner! I found myself obsessed with her hair swirl, too. Just a big “thank you” to whoever set up her costumes and styling. My appreciation for Audrey Hepburn’s general elegance aside, Holly’s styling was really representative of how I envisioned women living Uptown. She put on a gorgeous gown and a fabulous necklace just to get in a cab and stare into the window of a store, while the rest of us basically choose an outfit that can go from day to evening if necessary.

Holly Golightly’s behavior was especially representative of my mental image of Uptown. For instance, the Manhattan socialite gets paid $100 every week just to visit a mobster. If I didn’t already think that these Uptown women probably never worked a day in their lives but still get money thrown at them, there is my proof. Also, Holly keeps trying to marry extremely wealthy men, going so far as to request a list of the richest men in Brazil, despite her multiple failures, just to maintain her lifestyle. Her behavior perpetuates my mindset that these Uptown people believe themselves to be so above everyone else that high society can only marry other high society. To continue on the path of the Uptown societal superiority, Holly and Paul are shown stealing from a 10-15 cent store (which I guess is the equivalent of a dollar store nowadays) without giving it a second thought. These wealthy people are so self-engaged and used to their wealthy lives that they don’t even think about how stealing something, regardless of how small, can affect others, similarly to how Holly takes the fifty dollars from Sid and deserts him without caring. Even though Hepburn’s character had quite a long list of sucky characteristics, she did have some redeeming qualities, like how she was saving money to take care of her brother once he returned from the army, for instance.

The ending of Breakfast at Tiffany’s strayed from my idea of Uptown life. The guy gets the girl and suddenly Holly realized that money cannot buy happiness, only love can do that, guy and girl kiss in the rain while seemingly crushing a moist, nameless cat, the end. But that is probably part of the Hollywood “happy ending,” which is mostly unrealistic.

Uptown New York, the New York I don’t belong in. I don’t mean it in a really bad way but when I hear uptown, my mind immediately goes to a picture of the Upper East Side. Fancy apartment buildings, a doorman standing watch, or a celebrity walking their dog. I remember waiting to take the train downtown with a friend once and looking at the map of Manhattan. Looking at street numbers like 81^st and 92^nd and wondering what it’d be like to go there. Yet even with the prospect of such adventure exciting me, the idea made me nervous. I felt I would get in trouble there because I did not belong. That’s because for me Uptown New York City is a place only for the wealthy to live a life of luxury and ease.

The opening scene of Breakfast at Tiffany’s by Blake Edwards where Audrey Hepburn’s character Holly Golightly stops outside the jewelry store, calmly drinking coffee and eating a danish is an image that displays this perfectly. That’s because it speaks so much about the way she lives. First of all, we need to talk about her amazing outfit. I imagine that the only time I would need to wear Givenchy were if I had to meet the Queen of England. The way that she is dressed in Italian satin, wearing the sparkling necklace, and Manhattan glasses shows that she lives to a certain standard. She’s wearing this just to get breakfast and take a walk. For many of us, jeans and a t-shirt do just as well.

Her behavior and environment also says something about her lifestyle. It’s early in the morning and she’s just relaxing, drinking coffee and window shopping. It’s very quiet and peaceful, she’s taking her time. New York City is very famous for its images of crowded streets, people rushing to get to work, people rushing to get home. They do this because they all have things to do. There’s always something to be done, somewhere they need to go, and a hurry to be on time. Yet for Holly it’s very different. She is in no rush to get to a 9 to 5 job or take a train somewhere because she doesn’t have to.

This image for me was the first to come into my mind when thinking of ‘uptown’, wealthy New York. That’s because it shows the obvious difference between the kinds of people that live in the city. For wealthy New Yorkers there is time to walk, eat, and meet with friends. Whenever they go out they wear fancy dresses and jewelry because they can afford to. For middle class New Yorkers we live in a very hectic environment. Constantly on the move to get to places we need to be and get things done. Rarely do we have the time to take a moment and relax because we have responsibilities.

Who knows if I’ll ever take that adventure to 81^st street or how it’ll go. Either way I’ll have the notion that I’m in the New York of the wealthy. Where the people are happy and living a life of simplicity and luxury.

On Saturday, September 20^th 2014, I got off the subway at 7pm, without a clue where the INTAR Theater was. I walked alone, with my phone in my hand opened to the map application, to make sure I was walking in the right direction. After this long walk, I finally stopped in front of this regular, run-down looking building, which I would have walked right by if I did not notice the “INTAR Theater” sign in front of it.  So I walked inside, and entered this creepy and very cramped elevator until I arrived at the 4^th floor, and met with my fellow peers in this shady waiting room. At 8pm, we were escorted to the theater and as we walked in, I couldn’t help but notice the strange and repetitive French music playing in the background and this man dressed as a woman, lounging around in the neon-colored, jungle-gym set design. As I stared at the set, the man, and listened to the irritating music, I could not help but think to myself: What kind of play is this going to be?

Although the play surprised me by how bizarre and absurd it was, I thought Teach, Teacher, Teachest was a hilarious and very interesting play, filled with fantastic and fearless actors, a wonderful set, unique costumes, and intriguing underlying meanings. As the actors jumped around set and did random dance numbers and acrobatics, it was hard to understand the point of the entire piece as a whole. However, after taking much thought, I realized the purpose of the play was to shed light on how horrible today’s education system is, and how many people are condemned if they do not believe in the big business, and corrupt government of today.

This main idea was especially shown to me when the professor (Daniel Irizarry) was trying to convince the student (Laura Rivera) that the rich are “job creators” while the poor immigrants are the “takers.” This outrageous concept, which the professor highly believes in, was incorporated in the play to show the audience the dangerous ideas in today’s society, where the rich are defended and have all the power in the world while the poor/immigrants are neglected and are only looked at as the “bad guys.”   This is also shown when the professor states, “Do you think Thomas Jefferson wanted open borders? He didn’t.” When the student asks what the historical American said about them, the professor proudly states, “Absolutely nothing. So one can only assume he was dead against them.” This ignorant statement alone supports the main idea that many Americans look down upon immigrants and poor people, without having proper justification. They are just brain washed by the big businesses and government to believe in these outrageous assumptions, which are spreading fast to the minds of our youth.

In the end of the play, the student ends up getting killed because of how she questions the professor’s beliefs. The death of the student symbolizes the condemnation of the people who are against the big businesses, and the corrupt government—showing the audience how difficult it is getting to fight against the toxic ideas of today.

If I could see this play one more time, I definitely would. However, I would pay less attention to the dancing and hilarity of it, and would be more attentive to the underlying meanings so that I can get a better idea of what the writer was trying to accomplish.

When I think of uptown, wealthy New York, I think of the greedy, superficial people that prey upon everyone else in New York City and only care about money and drinking wine all day. They epitomize superficiality and dubiousness. They are often living a fake life, cringing at the thought or sight of anything they deem unworthy of their touch or thought. They brought this stereotype upon themselves.

Edwards’ Breakfast at Tiffany’s is the perfect example of this fake and superficial life. Lulu or Holly or whatever her name is lives in an elegant apartment, has a huge variety of clothes to choose from, and has extravagant parties where she invites everyone except the president of the U.S. She also can’t even call her own cat anything besides Cat. She is only interested in the superficial, material things, like diamonds. Tiffany’s is her go-to place because it’s filled with her favorite thing, diamonds. She wants to buy something from Tiffany’s even though she only has 10 dollars. This is one of themes of the movie. She is a wild thing, as Fred (Paul) calls her; she wants so many things that she obviously can’t have.

The more I watched the film, the more I realized that this is the life that most wealthy people live. They are overwhelmed with the influences of money and material things. While this is a stereotype, not everybody is this way. However, most of the wealthy class in New York City lives this same life. Nobody can be the queen of Brazil as Holly thought she could be. This film reminded me of Tennessee Williams’ Streetcar Named Desire. Blanche is fixated upon the paper lantern. The actual lantern is shielded from the outside by the paper covering. Blanche wants to be something she is clearly not and hide her true self from others. She is obsessed with the dresses, the jewelry, the fine food, and she hates when people act anything but elegant and put-together. Holly acts and lives in the same life.

Both of these women also have in common that they crack when the reality of their life hits them in the face. Holly couldn’t handle it and Blanche couldn’t handle it.

This accentuates the idea that the wealthy are nothing without their money, if they didn’t have the money, they would not be able to survive. I guess money really can’t buy love.

Call it a preconceived notion, but I think all rich people are fake. They’re phony! They think they are chameleons. That they can blend in and fit into any situation undetected, motivations unknown. But some people can see right through them, probably because they are weary of every little thing.

Where did my preconceived notion come from? I have no idea. It’s not as if I’ve ever actually had a conversation with a rich person. I’ve just been a middle class teenager in a room full of upper class teenagers; making small talk, watching them exchange judgmental glances, and listening to them complain about the latest luxury item they’re parents wouldn’t buy them. I’d watch them whisper comments to each other about another person and then greet them with a huge smile and a warm embrace. Talk about being fake! I guess being one of the only middle class people in the room, I stuck my fellow “class-mates”, we were just more comfortable together, but watching the upper class kids socialize was like watching an episode of My Super Sweet Sixteen: unnecessary attitude and drama.

Yasmina Reza’s God of Carnage embodied and characterized my interpretation of “Uptown”, wealthy New York. Let’s set the scene shall we?

Two sets of parents come together to discuss an altercation that transpired between their sons. Alan and Annette Raleigh. Michael and Veronica Novak. The discussion takes place in the Novak home. At first we sense some strange tension between the two couples. Both couples are described to be very stiff and put together, as opposed to the natural air that people usually have when they are comfortable and being themselves. Every comment and response made seems precise and well thought out, not organic or unrefined.

About twenty pages later it appears that all hell has broken loose! Vases of freshly bought tulips are being shattered. Priceless books are being vomited on. Cell phones are being destroyed. Compacts are being broken. In short, real personalities are have emerged, causing utter confusion, resulting in behavior than my mother would frown upon and call lawlessness!

What were the true intentions of this meeting? To resolve the quarrel between the boys (who were never actually seen) or to get an apology?

I’m not comparing a realistic play to a sub-par television film, but back in the day, and by back in the day I mean eight years ago when I was a young and annoying ten year old, I watched the legendary film Cheetah Girls 2. Although looking back at it, I am aware that the movie was barely above mediocre, there is one line that’s stuck with me: “It’s the principle of the thing.” Our class discussion brought out the idea that while Veronica was indeed concerned about her son’s predicament, she was more interested in receiving an apology from the Raleigh’s. Perhaps because “it’s the principle of the thing”. Kind of like there is an unwritten contract between the rich: If your child beats mine up, you must apologize to me as soon as possible. The perpetrator does not have to apologize to the victim; the responsibility of expressing remorse falls upon the parent of the perpetrator. It’s just the principle of the thing!

On a brief side note, I found it absolutely hilarious that Veronica told Michael that Annette was being fake. (Pot, meet kettle!)

Now, back on track. I’m sure we’ve all encountered fake people at some point in our lives whether we realize it or not: A “friend” who says things about you behind your back. An employee at a store who helps you with a smile, but rolls their eyes as soon as you aren’t looking. The list goes on and on. But it just seems to me that the rich, upper class people are so much more fake than the rest of us “common folk”. Their fabricated personalities are so easy to detect. Maybe it’s just me, but I feel that most, if not all, wealthy people, not necessarily “Uptown” New Yorkers exclusively, have a ‘holier than thou’ attitude, like they are better than you or above you. Underneath that exterior of kindness and understanding, welcoming and openness, they are only looking out for themselves and their priorities. Occasionally, something phases them and their persona falters, but make no mistake, they are professionals, and slip back into character in the blink of an eye.

I get it; people have to fake their way to the top! You have to blend in with the others, even if it means acting like someone you’re not. But what about after you get there? Can you just be yourself, and “let your hair down” so to speak? Can you drop the contrived persona? I thought that people just fake it ‘til they make it, but I guess not. Once a fake, always a fake.

When I think of  “Wealthy” New York, I think of Bernie Madoff while others panhandle on the subways. I think people eating truffles while others struggle to eat. Being wealthy means adapting a certain lifestyle in the US. I hate to generalize, because not all wealthy individuals adapt selfish lifestyles in pursuit of happiness, but more often than not the wealthy are the greedy. And the worst part about it, is that the money is often extracted out of the dry pockets of those who try to earn an honest living. A wise man (perhaps you should google to find out who if your interested) once said “If the son of Adam were given a valley full of gold, he would love to have a second one; and if he were given the second one, he would love to have a third, for nothing fills the belly of Adam’s son except dust.” Numbers don’t lie. Perhaps the following article may enlighten those living in a fantasy: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/us-is-now-the-most-unequa_b_4408647.html .

I find it really funny how people come to New York to become wealthy. Perhaps one of the funniest encounters I had over the summer happened one night while I was working in Manhattan. I was a delivery boy (yes, I actually got to see the arrogant snobs that would have me do their grocery shopping. And those rich young folks walking their teeny dogs dressed in tuxedos in Battery park). Anyway, back to the story, I was exhausted after working a long time and decided to take a break to washup and pray at a local mosque. Once I go in and start praying, I overhear a loud conversation of several Egyptian folks talking about life. One of them starts by saying how he has been trying to get a TLC license for more than 6 months. One of the other guys (also a driver) starts mentioning how disgusting the job is, talking about the lewd sights he has encountered all day on the job. Really something to blacken the heart. I could not help but focus on the conversation. The guy who complained then delivered the funniest punchline, “I don’t know what people think America is…They think thats it, once you get out of JFK in the baggage pickup, Obama comes and personally dispatches two trucks of money for you.” It was a good think I was praying because had I been sitting around I would have burst out laughing. On a more serious tone however, this is the false perception the city boasts so confidently. New York seems like paradise. But not everything that sparkles is gold. New York is nothing more than a gold platted ring. No wonder New York always ranks as one of the most depressed cities in the world.

The film Breakfast at Tiffany’s best represents wealthy New York. Emily (Paul’s designer) in particular portrays the superficiality of the upper class. The way she walks, talks, and dresses are meant to show how she believes the world revolves around her. Her false sense of dignity is shattered when she foolishly offers Paul a $1000 check after he ends the relationship. She feels that money will earn her respect or at least allow her to be treated differently from a common person. Sadly, this is exactly how many rich folks act. As much as I despise such personalities, I can only blame the society’s morals for admiring such personalities. The film really demonstrated the wealthy life: lavish parties, drinking, smoking, and hyper sexuality were all reoccurring themes. Holly especially seems lost, not knowing what she wants. Her pursuit of happiness (or arguably the American Dream) land her confused. She even states in her own words that she doesn’t know what she wants. The Hollywood ending where she suddenly changes and recognizes the meaningful relationships in her life, as she scrambles to find her cat in the garbage, is there to get the ratings in the box office. If anything, the film serves to attest to the depressing, superficial life the rich live.

As I write this post, an amazing example comes to mind. Loon, a former bad boy records rapper, born and raised in NYC (perfect!) attests to such superficiality, loneliness, and depression. I have posted two video’s below each of them in which he tells his story. (One of them is shorter the other a little more in depth. I would really appreciate anyone reading this to take to take the time to watch at least one of them) I have to say I have watched them several times (among other of his talks) and still remain in awe every time I hear his story about how he turned his life around. In his (funny) story, he talks about how he climbed up the ladder making money, only to realize that a horrible lifestyle came with the music business. His path eventually led him to religion. In his talks, he offers deep insight into the minds, lives, and attitudes of the rich, giving a first hand understanding of a reality most of us cant relate to.

I end by mentioning a quick parable for reflection. A man walked down a quiet town at night to see a boy bent over holding his stomach. After asking him what happened, the boy replied that he had not eaten for days. As the man walked on he saw the same sight. After stopping the person he asked what the matter was. The man replied that he had eaten too much.

1. Longer version (starts at 4 min)

2. Short Version (amazing synopsis of Loon’s story in less than 30 min). Setup in Interview Format

-Waseem Bassam Iqnaibi

After getting off the horrid elevator, we had finally arrived at the INTAR Theatre. We took our playbill for Teach, Teacher, Teachest by Koteles, waited for the rest of the class, and then followed a narrow pathway into a small dark room with a maximum capacity of about fifty people. In the middle of the room was a miniature, brightly lit, green and purple stage. The professor’s maid/lover, a man dressed as a woman, seemed to be patrolling the floor. She gracefully slid around, occasionally targeting flirtatious glances at some audience members, and giving playful waves to others. Her make up was dreadful, her dress and apron smudged and tattered, her wig a frizzy mess, and her legs awfully hairy. “What an introduction,” I thought.

As the play progressed, it seemed to get only odder. A pixie-like student with big bright blue hair bearing a tank top, shorts, and incredibly long socks appeared on stage. Not long after her, the nutty Professor in a green shirt and overalls appeared, after his maid opened the safe where he was trapped inside. With all three characters on stage, there were constant strobe lights, acrobatics tricks, dancing, stomping, and all in all complete chaos. The play was comical, captivating, and invigorating. However, considering this is an adaptation of Ionesco’s French play, The Lesson, in which Ionesco uses dark humor and satire to criticize the intellectuals of his country and time, Koteles does more than simply make the audience laugh. He addresses real and ever present issues that America as a whole still faces today.

While playing a “Name this Picture” kind of game, the Professor touches upon his opinions on big business, politics, and religion. For example, he calls this man right here…

… a really wonderful man who creates minimum wage jobs, twelve hour shifts, and awful working conditions. After his pupil inevitably disagrees with the Professor’s opinion for every picture, the Professor finally has enough of her “nonsense” and “ignorance”. He takes a wooden stick, and smashes it into her, killing her (in real life he smashes a watermelon that got all over our clothing). This is just another example in which Koteles is making fun a system, in this case the educational system.

Teach, Teacher, Teachest was a really lively and entertaining play. I loved it and I would recommend it to anyone with an open mind and anyone who just wants to have a good time.