Wednesday, 6 October 2021

One Day—and One Night—in the Kitchen at Les Halles

Anthony Bourdain with his staff at Les Halles
The author with some of his staff at Les Halles.Photographs by Martin Schoeller for The New Yorker

On Friday morning, I wake up at five-fifty-five. While I brush my teeth, and take my first aspirins of the day, I’m thinking about weekend specials. The grill station will be too busy for elaborate presentations, so I need things that are quick, simple, and easily plated. The people who will be coming tonight and tomorrow night to Les Halles, a restaurant on Park Avenue South where I work as the chef, aren’t like the people who come during the week. For the weekenders, a saddle of wild hare stuffed with foie gras is not a good special. Nor is any kind of fish with an exotic name.

Climbing into a taxi on Broadway, I decide that the fish special will be grilled tuna livornaise with roasted potatoes and grilled asparagus. It’s a layup. My overworked grill man can heat the already cooked spuds and the blanched asparagus on a sizzle platter; the tuna will get a quick walk across the grill; and all he’ll have to do is heat up the sauce at the last minute. For the appetizer special, I’m thinking cockles steamed with chorizo, leeks, tomatoes, and white wine—a one-pan wonder. The meat special is more problematic. The tuna will be taking up most of the grill’s time, so the meat will have to be prepared at the sauté station. Not easy. Les Halles features classic French bistro food, and at any one time the sauté station has to be ready to turn out moules à la marinière, boudin noir with caramelized apples, filet au poivre, steak au poivre, steak tartare, calf’s liver persillé, cassoulet Toulousain, magret de moulard with quince and sauce miel, the ridiculously popular mignon of pork, pieds de cochon, and a navarin of lamb that comes with baby carrots, pearl onions, niçoise olives, garlic confit, tomato concassée, fava beans, and chopped fresh herbs. But I’ve got a leg of venison and twelve pheasants coming in. I decide on the pheasant. I can par-roast it ahead of time, so that all my sous-chef will have to do is take it off the bone and sling it into the oven to finish, then heat up the sauce and the garnishes before serving.

Published in the print edition of the April 9, 2000, issue.

As usual when I arrive, Jaimé, the night porter, has his boom box blasting salsa from behind the bar. I check the reservation book—eighty for tonight. I flip through the manager’s log—the notebook in which the night guy tells the day guy about customer complaints, repair requirements, employee misbehavior, and important phone calls. I learn that last night my grill man called one of the waiters a cocksucker and pounded his fist on his cutting board in a “menacing way” when five diners came into the restaurant at three minutes before the midnight closing hour and ordered five côtes de bœuf, medium-well (cooking time: forty-five minutes). Jaimé grins at me from the stairs. He’s covered with grime as a result of hauling hundreds of pounds of garbage out onto the street.

I go down into the cellar to my office, and change into chef’s jacket, apron, and kitchen clogs, which are the preferred footwear for chefs because they “breathe” well and give good back support. I find my knife kit, stuff a thick stack of hand towels into it, and clip a pen into my jacket—sidewise, so it doesn’t fall out when I bend over. Taking a ring of keys from my desk, I open the locks on the drygoods-storage room, the walk-in refrigerator, the reach-in coolers, the pastry box, and the freezers. I push back the plastic curtains to the refrigerated boucherie—a cool room where the butchers do their cutting—and take the assistant butcher’s boom box from the worktable. Then I go back up to the kitchen. While I take cheese, garnishes, mussels, and sauces out of the reach-in at my sauté station, I’m listening to the Dead Boys playing “Sonic Reducer.”

Carlos, my daytime grill man, comes in. He has a pierced eyebrow and a body by Michelangelo, and he considers himself a master soupmaker. He asks if I’ve got any red-snapper bones on the way. Yes. Carlos loves any soup he can jack with Ricard or Pernod, and today’s soupe de poisson with rouille is one of his favorites. Omar, who works the cold station for appetizers and salads, and has a thick barbed-wire tattoo on one upper arm, is the next to arrive, and he’s followed by the rest of the day team: Segundo, the prep centurion; Ramòn, the dishwasher; Janine, the pastry chef; and Camélia, the general manager. (Some of their names have been changed.)

Before noon, I cut and pepper pavées and filets; skin and slice calf’s liver; caramelize apples; blanch baby carrots; make garlic confit; produce a livornaise sauce for the tuna and start a currant sauce for the pheasant; and assemble the navarin. Then I write up the specials so that Camélia can enter them into the computer and set the prices. At eight-thirty, my butcher, Hubert, arrives, looking as if he’s woken up under a bridge. He unloads the meat order—côtes de bœuf, entrecôtes, rump steaks, racks of lamb, lamb-stew meat, merguez sausages, saucisson de Toulouse, rosette, pork belly, onglets, scraps, meat for steak tartare, pork tenderloins larded with bacon and garlic, pâtés, rillettes, galantines, and chickens.

Every few minutes, I hear the bell ring, as more stuff arrives. Segundo, the prep man, is downstairs checking off the orders as they leave the delivery ramp. Segundo’s a mean-looking guy. He’s from Mexico, and the other Mexicans at the restaurant claim that he carries a gun and sniffs paint thinner, and that he’s done time. But he’s the greatest prep cook I’ve ever had; he uses a full-sized butcher’s scimitar to chop parsley, filament-fine.

The last cook to show up is Miguel, our French-fry master. This is a full-time job at Les Halles, where we are justifiably famous for our frites. Miguel, who looks like the descendant of an Aztec king, spends his day peeling potatoes, cutting potatoes, blanching potatoes, and then dropping them into three-hundred-and-seventy-five-degree peanut oil, tossing them with salt, and stacking the sizzling-hot fries on plates with his bare hands. I’ve had to do this a few times, and it requires serious calluses.

I work on a six-burner Garland. There’s another range next to it, which is taken up with a bain-marie for sauces, with onion soup, and with stocks—veal, chicken, lamb, and pork—that have been reducing at a slow simmer during the previous day and night. When we’re serving meals, one of my burners will be occupied by a pot of boiling water for Omar to dunk ravioli in. On another burner he’ll sauté lardons for frisée salads, sear tidbits of hanger steak for onglet salad, or sauté diced potatoes in duck fat for the confit de canard. This leaves me with just four burners on which to prepare most of the orders.

While I’m reducing gastrite—sugar and vinegar—for the currant sauce, I make room next to me for Janine, the pastry chef, so she can melt chocolate over the simmering pasta water. Janine is an ex-waitress from Queens, and although she’s right out of cooking school, she’s tough. Already, she’s had to endure the unwanted attentions of a leering French sous-chef and the usual chick-friendly Mexicans. I admire strong women in busy kitchens. They have a lot to put up with in our high-testosterone locker-room environment.

VIDEO FROM THE NEW YORKER

 

At eleven-thirty, I convene a meeting of the day waiters and run through the specials, speaking as slowly as I can, so that none of them describes my beautiful pheasant special as tasting “kind of like chicken.” Today’s lineup is not too bad: there’s Morgan, the part-time underwear model; Rick, who’s everyone’s first choice for Waiter Most Likely to Shave His Head, Climb a Tower, and Start Shooting Strangers; and a new waiter, who doesn’t know what prosciutto is, and who won’t be around very long, I suspect. There are also two busboys—a taciturn workaholic from Portugal and a moody Bengali. My runner, whose job is to shout out the orders and shuttle food to the dining room, is the awesome Mohammed, who is capable of carrying five plates without a tray.

It’s noon, and already customers are pouring in. Immediately, I get an order for pork mignon, two boudins, one calf’s liver, and one pheasant, all for one table. The boudins—blood sausages—take the longest, so they have to go in the oven instantly. First, I prick their skins with a cocktail fork so that they don’t explode; then I grab a fistful of caramelized apple sections and throw them into a sauté pan with some butter. I heat butter and oil for the pork in another sauté pan, throw a slab of liver into a pan of flour after salting and peppering it, and in another pan heat some more butter and oil. I take half a pheasant off the bone and place it on a sizzle platter for the oven, then spin around to pour currant sauce into a small saucepan to reduce. Pans ready, I sear the pork, sauté the liver, and slide the pork straight into the oven on another sizzler. I deglaze the pork pan with wine and stock, add sauce and some garlic confit, then put the pan aside; I’ll finish the reducing later. The liver, half-cooked, goes on another sizzler. I sauté some chopped shallots, deglaze the pan with red-wine vinegar, give it a shot of demiglace, season it, and put that aside, too. An order for mussels comes in, followed by one for breast of duck. I heat up a pan for the duck and load up a cold pan with mussels, tomato coulis, garlic, shallots, white wine, and seasoning. It’s getting to be boogie time.

The key to staying on top of a busy station is to move on a dish as soon as Mohammed yells its name—set up the pan, do the pre-searing, get it into the oven quickly—so that later, when the whole order board is fluttering with dupes, I can tell which dishes I have working and which ones I have waiting, without having to read the actual tickets again.

“Ready on Table Twelve!” says Carlos, who’s got a load of steaks and chops and a few tunas coming up. He wants to know if I’m close on my end. “Let’s go on Twelve!” I say. Miguel starts dunking spuds. I call for mashed potatoes for the boudins from Omar; give the apples a few tosses over the flame; heat and swirl butter into the liver’s shallot sauce; pull the pork mignons from the oven; heat potatoes and vegetables for the pheasant; squeeze the sauce for the pheasant between pots onto a back burner; move the mussels off the heat and into a bowl; then spin and bend to check on how my duck is doing.

The intercom buzzes. “Line One for the chef,” says the hostess, who’s out front. It’s a salesman, wanting to sell me some smoked fish. I start off all sweetness and light, and he goes into his pitch. He’s halfway through it when I cut him off: “So what the fuck are you doing calling me in the middle of the lunch rush?” I hang up before I can hear his reply.

I catch the duck just in time, roll it over, skin side down, and pull it out of the oven. Mohammed yells out another pasta order. I pour extra-virgin into a pan and sauté some paper-thin garlic slices with crushed red pepper, add artichoke hearts, roasted vegetables, some olives. Whenever I do pasta, I start humming Tony Bennett or Dino (today it’s “Ain’t That a Kick in the Head?”). I really love doing that final squirt of emulsifying extra-virgin, just after the basil goes in.

“Chef,” Omar says, “no hay más tomates.” Wait a minute—I ordered tomatoes, didn’t I? I call Segundo on the intercom. “What the fuck is going on?” I say, as Omar slouches in the doorway like a convict in the exercise yard. “No Baldor,” he says. Although Baldor is a superb produce purveyor, this is the second time in recent weeks it’s failed me. I call Baldor, and say, “What kind of glue-sniffing, crackhead mesomorphs you got working for you? You don’t have an order for me? What?” I hang up, pull a few pans off the flame, load up some more mussels, sauce another duck, arrange a few pheasants, and check my orders clipboard. I’m in the middle of telling Mohammed to run across the street and ask the chef at Park Bistro if we can borrow some of his tomatoes when I see, from the columns of checked-off items on my clipboard, that I did order tomatoes—not from Baldor but from a different company. After screaming at the blameless Baldor, my anger is used up, so when I call the guilty company I can barely summon a serious tone. It turns out that my order has been routed to another restaurant—Layla, instead of Les Halles. I call Philippe, the chef at Park Bistro, to ask for a few tomatoes to get me through until my order arrives.

The guys from D’Artagnan, my specialty purveyor, arrive bearing foie gras, duck legs, and an entire two-hundred-pound free-range pig, which my boss, José, one of the owners of Les Halles, has ordered to be used in pâtés and tête de porc. The butcher, the charcutier, the dishwasher, and I wrestle the beast down the stairs to the boucherie in the cellar. My knees are hurting and a familiar pain in my feet is getting worse.

José stops by after lunch—he wants to take me to the Greenmarket in Union Square. We walk to the market, about eleven blocks south, where we sniff and squeeze a hundred different fruits and vegetables. We return to the restaurant with pears, lemon verbena, baby fennel, baby turnips with greens, and fingerling potatoes—the kind of expensive exotica that José likes to surprise me with, for new specials.

Dinner tasting for the floor staff is at five-thirty, which is when the veteran waiters—the lifers—arrive. This ritual is conducted in the kitchen, since there are usually a few lunch customers who insist on exercising squatters’ rights straight into the dinner hour. Watching waiters eat is never pretty. They tear at the specials like starving refugees, ripping apart the pheasant with their bare hands, nearly spearing one another with forks as they go after the tuna, dragging the cockles off their shells with their fingers. After fifteen minutes, everything is devoured, and the waiters perch on milk crates, folding napkins, as they smoke and talk: Who got drunk last night? Who got thrown out of a Mob-run after-hours club, then woke up on the sidewalk outside their apartment? Who thinks the new maître d’ is going to lose it when the room fills up and the customers start screaming for their tables? Who’s going to win the World Cup?

As usual, dinner is oversubscribed, and two tables for twelve have been booked for prime time. I stay in the kitchen to expedite, hoping that maybe things will slow down enough by ten so that I can have a couple of cocktails and get home by eleven. But I know that the two big tables will hold up seatings by at least an hour, and that I probably won’t get out of here until midnight, at the earliest.

By eight-thirty, the order board is full. To my right, plates of appetizers are lined up, waiting to be delivered; the counter is full of sauté pans; the worktable near the fry station, with its pile of raw steaks, looks like the floor of a slaughterhouse. Mohammed ferries the plates out by hand, four or five at a time. The hot food is getting cold, and I’m losing my voice as a result of calling out orders over the dishwasher, the hum of the exhaust, and the roar from the dining room. I make a hand gesture to a friendly waiter, who knows what I want, and he returns with an Industrial—a beer stein filled with a Margarita. The tequila takes the edge off my adrenaline, and goes down surprisingly nicely after three double espressos, two beers, three cranberry juices, eight aspirins, and a hastily gobbled hunk of merguez sausage, squeezed into a heel of bread, that I’ve consumed since lunchtime.

Angel, my night man at the cold station, whose chest is tattooed with a skull impaled by a dagger wrapped in barbed wire, is falling behind; he’s got three raviolis, two duck confits, five green salads, two escargots, two Belgian-endive-and-Stilton salads, two cockles, a smoked salmon and blini, two foie gras, and a pâté working—and the sauté and grill stations are calling urgently for vegetable sides and mashed potatoes. A steak order comes back for refiring, and Isidoro, the night grill man, is not happy; as far as he’s concerned, the steak was cooked to perfection the first time around. He throws it back on the grill. Then a whole roasted fish comes back. “The customer wants it deboned,” the waiter says. Anticipating decapitation, he whines, “I told them it comes on the bone.’’

The orders are arriving non-stop. My left hand grabs tickets, separates white ones for the grill man, yellow ones for the sauté man, and pink master copies, which I use to time and generally oversee the production. My right hand wipes plates, inserts rosemary sprigs into mashed potatoes. I’m yelling full time, trying to hold it all together. If there is an unforeseeable mishap—say, one of the big tables’ orders was prematurely sent out, only to be returned—the whole process could come to a full stop. “Where’s that fucking confit?” I yell at Angel, who’s struggling to make blinis for smoked salmon, to brown ravioli under the salamander, to lay out plates of pâté, and to do five endive salads, all more or less at once. A hot escargot explodes in front of me, spattering me with boiling garlic butter and snail guts.

“Platos! ” Isidoro screams at the guy who’s washing dishes. He’s buried up to his shoulders in the pot sink, and his prewash area is stacked with plates of unscraped leftovers and haphazardly dumped silver. I grab the Bengali busboy, Dinesh, by an arm.“Scrape!” I hiss, pointing to the mess of plates heaped with gnawed bones and half-eaten vegetables.

Directly behind me, the Portuguese busboy, David, is making espressos and cappuccinos. He’s extremely graceful, and by now we know each other’s every move in the narrow space—when to move laterally, when to make way for incoming dishes, outgoing food, or the fry guy returning from downstairs with a hundred pounds of freshly cut spuds. I feel only an occasional light tap on the shoulder as David squeezes through with another tray of coffee and petits fours, whispering “Cuidado”—“watch out.”

Finally, the orders start slowing down, and I can see by the thinning crowd at the bar that the last seating is under way. I go to the cellar, where I check the stocks cooling in iced plastic buckets outside the walk-in, the gauze-wrapped pigs’ feet, which will have to be painstakingly deboned tomorrow, the soaking tarbais beans, which will have to be blanched, the salt-rubbed duck legs, which will have to be conserved in duck fat. I make a final check of the drygoods room and note that I’ll soon be needing more peanut oil, more peppercorns, more sherry-wine vinegar. I look at a list for tomorrow: I’ve already called for the striped bass, but I mustn’t forget about the baby octopus. José loves black mission figs—he saw some at the market this afternoon—so I’ll tell Janine to start thinking about figs for a dessert special. Tomorrow is Saturday, which means that I’ll have to do the weekly inventory: weigh every scrap of meat and fish and cheese that’s in storage; tally up every can, bottle, case, and box. I peel off my whites and struggle into my jeans. I’m on my way out the door when I’m stopped by Isidoro: he wants a raise. I tell him, “Mañana.” Outside, the fresh air is a jolt. I look at my watch—12:25 a.m.—and wave for a taxi.

At Fiftieth and Broadway, I head into a subway entrance. Downstairs, in the arcade, I enter the Siberia Bar. It’s a grungy little underground rumpus room where the drinks are served in plastic cups. Seated at the bar are a few cooks from the Hilton and a couple of strippers from a nearby club. I spot Tracy, the Siberia’s owner: tonight I won’t be paying for drinks. From the jukebox, the Velvets are singing “Pale Blue Eyes.” That first rush of beer tastes good. I’m not going anywhere. ♦

Monday, 4 October 2021

Nerd Camp

An illustration of anthropomorphic lightbulbs
Illustration by Richard McGuire

Another Saturday afternoon, and time again for Mandatory Fun. The High Math boys were sprawled on a patch of grass in front of their dormitory, waiting glumly for the games to begin. It was summer in Baltimore, and the wettest spring in memory had left the lawns at Johns Hopkins University deep green and as soft as velvet. Halfway across the quad, some High Verbals were waving banners in the sun, babbling excitedly and chasing one another around with high-pitched squeals. Michael Scarito watched them for a moment and yawned. Then he turned to his friend Andrew Hunter. “There must be a wireless network around here somewhere, but I can’t seem to hook into it,” he said. “Maybe it’s encrypted.” Hunter looked up from his fantasy novel and smirked. “If that were true, you’d still be able to pick it up with your Wi-Fi card.”

On sunny days like this, the Center for Talented Youth—or nerd camp, as most of the attendees called it—could almost pass for some Indian-themed summer camp in the Catskills. But Scarito and Hunter weren’t your typical campers. Scarito, at fifteen, was already a licensed computer technician. Two years ago, he had installed a server for his mother’s medical office, in York, Pennsylvania. (“They got quotes from Dell and Gateway, but he way underbid them,” his father told me.) Hunter, who was also fifteen, was an avid programmer who helped administer his high school’s computers. Sitting on the grass side by side, they looked like a young Laurel and Hardy: Scarito short and stout, with thick black locks hanging in front of his eyes; Hunter tall and knobby, with buzz-cut hair and eyebrows screwed into a look of perpetual disbelief.

Like the other High Math boys, Scarito and Hunter were here to study engineering, and they had run a gantlet of tests for the privilege. The center accepts only the top one per cent of all students—those who score as well on the S.A.T. in junior high as the average student does as a high-school senior—and not every camper is accepted with equal enthusiasm. Some qualify only for humanities courses, some only for math or science courses, and some score so high (above 700 on the math or verbal portion before the age of thirteen) that they take part in a long-term project, the Study of Exceptional Talent.

The boys on the lawn were among the top math scorers at the center. They had spent the past two weeks building cardboard mousetraps and spaghetti bridges, measuring the strength of uncooked pasta in compression and testing girder designs with a truss calculator. They had relished sitting through six-hour daily classes, doing a college semester’s work in three weeks. They just couldn’t get their minds around Mandatory Fun.

Today’s event was the Woohoo! Olympics. Any minute now, the head resident would come charging out of camp headquarters, bearing a mock torch of black and orange chiffon. Then the students would spend three hours competing in sack races, water-balloon tosses, hula-hoop contests, and tugs-of-war.

Only later, in one of the dorms, while the rest of his team was busy playing Ping-Pong and pool, would Scarito find what he was seeking. “Check this out,” he murmured, shuffling past Hunter with a twisted smile.

They made their way to the back of the room, shoulders slumped with suspicious nonchalance. When they reached what looked like a closet, Scarito glanced around at the other campers, then opened the door a crack. Inside, a tall bank of sleek machinery stood behind tinted glass, flickering with green L.E.D.s in the darkness: the fabled computer router. They gazed at it in silence, their minds racing. “If we can find a D.H.C.P. server, we can finally get on the Internet,” Scarito said. “But I might have to manually reconfigure my card.” Hunter grinned; if anyone knew how to do that, it would be someone at nerd camp.

Bright kids are used to fending for themselves in America. Dweeb, dork, brainiac, nerd: to be young and brilliant here is almost always to be a figure of some derision, to accept isolation as a condition of existence. Americans are phenomenally good at finding and nurturing certain kinds of talent. By the time they’re ten, the best athletes have been handpicked from peewee leagues and sent to sport clinics and travelling teams. By the time they’re twelve, the members of the future varsity know exactly who they are. True athleticism is a rare and natural-born gift, we believe, so we lavish resources on our physical prodigies—and content ourselves with intramural leagues and summer softball.

Mental prodigies are another matter. In Park Slope, Brooklyn, where I live, parents are obsessed with their children’s education, yet programs for the gifted are so meagre as to be nearly nonexistent. To qualify, children take an intelligence test at the age of four, then agree to be bused to whichever program will have them. But parents receive little official notice, so even those who are interested often don’t apply. When my wife took my four-year-old son Hans to be tested a few years ago, at a run-down Board of Education building in nearby Sunset Park, they were ushered into a room full of nervous mothers drilling their children in their ABCs. After an hour or so, Hans was called in for a fifteen-minute interview. He was asked a few basic math questions, shown a picture and told to describe it from memory, and then sent home. Six months later, we were informed that he had passed the test, but that there were twice as many qualifiers as there were slots in the program. There had been a lottery, and his name hadn’t been drawn.

The news came almost as a relief. Programs for the gifted tend to arouse suspicion in most parents I know. They’ve heard all about the cultural biases in intelligence testing. They aren’t surprised to hear that affluent students outnumber poor students by a large margin in classes for the gifted. The whole notion of giftedness is outdated, many say: as I.Q. has splintered into multiple intelligences—logical, linguistic, interpersonal, and so on—it has become fashionable to claim that every student is gifted in some way. Under the circumstances, sending a child to a gifted program is evidence of either prejudice or preciousness: just another yuppie who thinks his child is a genius.

The same egalitarian ardor has swept over schools across the country in recent years, slashing gifted classes and dismantling tracking systems. Programs for the gifted now receive less than two cents of every hundred dollars spent on education by the federal government, and gifted students typically begin the school year already knowing thirty-five to fifty per cent of the basic curriculum. Yet despite this trend—or, rather, because of it—a kind of parallel universe has emerged, a sprawling network of enrichment classes, camps for the gifted, and tutors determined to help children find their inner genius. Just down the street from my son’s elementary school, a business called Score! promises to help students leap grade levels in reading and math. In advertisements, programs proffer their wares in the hyperbolic language of exercise gurus: “Welcome to the World of the Visuospatial Learner!”; “Unleash Your Child’s ‘Gifted’ Potential!” Seventy-five to eighty per cent of all newborn babies are potentially gifted, the latter ad notes. “You, as a parent, have only six years to take advantage of this ‘Window of Opportunity.’ ”

The Center for Talented Youth is the unofficial headquarters for this movement. When the psychologist Julian Stanley founded it at Johns Hopkins in 1972, it was known as the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth and occupied a single classroom. Today, the center oversees a Mensa-ready cohort of more than twenty-five thousand students, from the ages of five through fifteen, drawn from nearly a quarter of a million candidates nationwide. Students who qualify are roughly divided into geographic groups and invited to apply to camps and courses that are run independently by four universities: Johns Hopkins in the Northeast, Duke in the Southeast, Northwestern in the Midwest, and the University of Denver in the West. To the schools that host them, the gifted camps are partly recruiting tools and partly a way to fill idle summer campuses. To Stanley, they are a subversive meritocracy. “We take a benignly insidious approach,” he told me. “We set precedents. Johnny needs Algebra I, but his school won’t let him take it, because he’s too young. So we sit down with his guidance counsellors and say, ‘Look, he’s already done pre-algebra this summer.’ Then, once Johnny is allowed to take the class, other mothers can say, ‘Well, if Johnny can take it, why not Jimmy?’ ”

On summer mornings, when the center’s prodigies cross paths with phalanxes of sturdy lacrosse campers, they remind you of nothing so much as H. G. Wells’s “The Time Machine”—only with the roles reversed. Here, students in the physical classes cavort in the sunshine, while their more ethereal counterparts pass most of their days underground, in basement rooms lit with flickering fluorescent lights. In the math classes that I visited, the students worked at their own pace, spending six hours a day with just a textbook, a calculator, and a pencil, and raising their hands only when they hit a snag. The theory of the class, I was told, was that if teachers don’t try to set the pace their students will eventually outrun them, like greyhounds lapping the rabbit at a racetrack. It seemed to be working: according to his math teacher, one boy had completed a year’s worth of algebra in the first week.

“Are you familiar with Freud’s theory of personality?” a twelve-year-old named Jesse Mirotznik asked me one day. He was studying psychology at the camp and had come up with a few improvements on the Viennese model. “I don’t believe in the preconscious,” he said. “I don’t think there’s anything about it that you can’t fit into the conscious and the subconscious. Also, in my theory there’s no ego, but the id is divided into two parts: the hedona, which is for immediate gratification, and the optima, which is for long-term goals.” A few months before, he said, he’d been in Federico García Lorca’s play “The Butterfly’s Evil Spell” and he had forgotten the last lines of his closing monologue. “Now my hedona doesn’t want me to go onstage anymore, because it’s not pleasurable, and my optima is worried that the audience might hurt me. So I guess they’re in agreement.”

We were sitting in the camp cafeteria, having dinner with a couple of High Verbals from the logic and history classes. Mirotznik, who is from Brooklyn, was wearing a T-shirt that read “Do Not Disturb. I’m Disturbed Enough Already.” He had wide, keen eyes and milk-jug ears, braces on his upper teeth, and a sweetly solicitous manner. Wherever I saw him on campus, he was surrounded by giggling girls, whispering confidences in his ears. And though he could sound pretentious sometimes, he had a winning sincerity about him. Mirotznik liked words; he liked people; and he was well aware that the two don’t always mix.

“I’ve tried to gear down my vocabulary,” he said. “But I still get a hard time. Anti-intellectualism is really popular in America.” Before coming to the center, he’d spent two disastrous summers at a sports-oriented camp in Pennsylvania called Island Lake. “I hated it,” he said. “It was not a stimulating environment. I took boxing, and I was very afraid.” Back home, Mirotznik attends a private school that offers a strong academic program. I asked him what he would do if he had to go to school with the kids from Island Lake. “I don’t know,” he said. “I would probably get more into sports and less into thinking.” He paused. “Or maybe I would just be very, very unpopular.”

Across the table, Lily Berger and her brother Ben laughed. They were fourteen-year-old twins, born six minutes apart, and had the same pale skin, flaxen hair, and liquid eyes. But while Ben was quiet and watchful, Lily could barely contain herself. She was learning French, Arabic, and Mandarin in her spare time, as well as Hebrew and Spanish at school. Earlier that day, I’d watched Lily and her classmates grapple with symbolic logic in their philosophy course. The teacher, a baby-faced Georgetown graduate student named Bill McGeehan, ambled around the room in sandals and a Leonardo da Vinci T-shirt, a look of carefully calibrated enthusiasm on his face. “O.K., O.K., one idea at a time.”

At one point, McGeehan went to the blackboard and sketched out a complicated logic tree—a diagram of the branching paths of a logical argument. “Oh, my God!” Lily blurted out, collapsing back in her chair as she grasped its significance. Within a few minutes, though, she was ready to move on. “You don’t want to do any more logic trees?” McGeehan asked.

“Well . . . I get it.”

McGeehan told me later that he had never taught such students before. “In terms of seriousness, in terms of rate of comprehension, it is beyond belief how much better they are than the average class at Georgetown. Teaching them is kind of like driving a Mercedes.” McGeehan was once something of a prodigy himself. Ordinary classes moved at such a “glacial pace” for him, he said, that he spent much of his time forging notes to get out of school. “I graduated with something like a 2.3 average. If I hadn’t rocked the S.A.T.s, I’d still be working in a butcher shop.” Still, the camp’s social life would have meant even more to him than its classes. “I spent a lot of years not being the alpha male, I can tell you that. It would have been nice to come to a place like this and not be at the very bottom of the social ladder. It may be nerd camp, but nerd camp is a wonderful thing,” he said.

After dinner that night, as Lily was walking back to the dorm, she told me that she and her father had memorized the first hundred and eight digits of pi, and that they used to recite them together for fun. She paused under a street lamp and took a deep breath: “3.141592-6535897932384626433832795028841-9716939937510 . . .” The digits clipped by at such a pace that they initially sounded like gibberish. Then Lily slowly found her rhythm. As the beat fell first on one digit and then on another, she found patterns in the sequence and accented them like arpeggios, until the performance took on a headlong, incantatory quality—half Dizzy Gillespie and half “Rite of Spring.” When she was done, she looked exalted and a little embarrassed. “Last year, the kids here used to call me Pi Girl,” she said. “Then I taught another boy the numbers and they started calling him Pi Boy.” She laughed. “I’m kind of the dork wherever I go.”

Lily lives just north of Baltimore, in a split-level suburban house. Her father is a cardiologist at the Johns Hopkins Medical School, her mother a former college administrator. In the evenings, when debates over ethics and feminism flare around the dinner table, the household can seem like something out of “Franny and Zooey”: Ben calls Lily an iconoclast, then their father calls Ben a philistine, to which Ben replies with a ten-minute disquisition on the excellence of Philistine culture in the second millennium B.C. When friends come over for the first time, Lily says, they sometimes leave a little stunned.

Lily showed the usual signs of precocity: learning the alphabet by the age of two, reading novels in kindergarten. But it’s hard, with High Verbals, to gauge the scale of their intellect. Language is a universal human gift, and the attribute that is most commonly shaped by its environment. (Had Henry Higgins turned Eliza Doolittle into a world-class mathematician, no one would have believed it.) The High Verbals I spoke with often credited their test scores to their upbringing. “Intelligence is less about knowing than about methods of thought,” a thirteen-year-old Egyptian named Amine told me, his fingertips tracing the beginnings of a beard. “Descartes said that others had greater minds than his, but that they accomplished less because their method was not as good.” Genes have something to do with intelligence, he admitted, but it’s mostly a matter of supportive parents and good study habits.

Listening to Lily describe her home life, you could imagine that any child brought up in such a family might have a love of language and some skill at using it. And the same argument could be used to justify dismantling the gifted programs she loved. The educators who rail against tracking and the parents who shuttle their children to Score! seem to share an underlying belief: that a child’s intelligence is largely a social construct, and that the right teacher, wielding the right tools, can galvanize even the most leaden lump of a mind. If gifted students have been favored by circumstance, then they ought to spread that good fortune around; the average class is sorely in need of students like Lily to set an example and keep teachers on their toes.

When Julian Stanley founded the Center for Talented Youth, thirty-two years ago, he wanted to have it both ways. Education for the gifted, he thought, was both too exclusive and not nearly discriminating enough. Stanley, who is eighty-six, has lived through most of the history of intelligence testing in America, and helped shape a good deal of it. In 1933, when he graduated from high school at fifteen, the Stanford-Binet I.Q. test had been around for a decade and a half and was popular in elementary schools. But the top universities relied on lengthy written exams, administered by the College Board, that were geared specifically to the curriculum at élite prep schools. It wasn’t until the nineteen-forties, when the S.A.T. was popularized at the urging of the president of Harvard, James Bryant Conant, that universities began to draw on a larger pool.

The S.A.T. was developed in 1926 by Princeton psychologist Carl Brigham, based on a test developed for Army recruits. It measured mental acuity and basic understanding rather than specific knowledge of a topic, and because it was scored by machine it could be given on a vast scale. Almost from the beginning, the test served contradictory purposes. To Brigham, testing was a means of segregating the population. In his book, “A Study of American Intelligence,” he analyzed the test results of Army recruits race by race. American education was sure to decline at “an accelerating rate,” he concluded, “as the racial mixture becomes more and more extensive.” Yet to Conant it was an instrument of egalitarianism: any student, no matter how poor or indifferently educated, could use it to gain admission to Harvard or Yale.

Stanley was an early champion of the test. He earned his Ph.D. in psychology at Harvard in the late nineteen-forties, when the first scholarship students, chosen according to their S.A.T. scores, were attending the school. He went on to study statistics at the University of Chicago and eventually earned tenure at Johns Hopkins. In thirty years of psychometric research, he came to believe that intelligence is every bit as inborn as eye color, but that those who possess it need all the help they can get. He wasn’t worried so much about the next Einstein—“minds like that come around only once every century or two”—as about all the garden-variety geniuses who go to seed. Tens of thousands of gifted students are never identified as such by their schools, he believed, and those who are identified get lumped together in the same gifted classes, instead of being taught to their specific strengths. “I used to think that I.Q. almost guaranteed success,” Stanley told me. “But I found with bitter experience that it’s not true. It can almost be a burden to you.”

In 1969, a local boy named Joseph Bates was brought to Stanley’s attention. Bates, at thirteen, was already teaching computer programming to graduate students. When Stanley gave him the S.A.T., he scored much higher in math than the typical high-school senior, yet no local school would allow him to take calculus or physics. “They said it was ridiculous—he was thirteen years old,” Stanley recalls. Finally, Stanley persuaded Johns Hopkins to admit the boy as a freshman. “It was a desperation move,” he says. “I thought he would do poorly in college.” Instead, within four years Bates had earned a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in computer science, and had gone on to Cornell for his doctorate.

Almost inadvertently, Stanley had set a precedent. A year after Bates entered Johns Hopkins, a woman appeared at Stanley’s office. She’d heard about this young prodigy from some friends in her bridge club, and she was certain that her son was every bit as bright. “She was kind of indignant,” Stanley recalls. “So I gave her son the test, and he went to Hopkins at thirteen, too.” By 1972, four hundred and fifty students were being tested, and Stanley had to set up a special course at the university for the twenty or so who passed. By 1980, he had begun to track the fortunes of the most gifted among the gifted—known as “the 1-in-10,000,” because their test scores were in the top one-hundredth of one per cent nationwide. The talent search had begun.

Stanley has officially been retired for five years, but he still keeps an office at the Center for Talented Youth and comes in twice a week. When I visited him there, he was getting ready for a luncheon with five seventh graders who had scored perfect 800s on the S.A.T. He had on a dove-gray suit that hung loosely on his tall, craggy frame, and his deep-set eyes peered out from behind thick-framed black glasses and beneath bushy brows. Stanley’s colleagues often call him a Southern gentleman (he was born near Atlanta), but his roots are less apparent in his voice, which has grown papery and faint with age, than in his elegant, homespun diction. One minute, he’ll talk about “studying the gifted animal in its native habitat”; the next, he’ll say that education is a matter of improvisation, that “there are more ways to kill a cat than to choke it on butter.”

After three decades of scouting for prodigies, Stanley has a keen sense of how many brilliant students still slip through his grasp. Three-quarters of those who might qualify for the camps are never tested, he estimates, and some that should qualify don’t. The S.A.T. can’t discern the visual and spatial gifts that make for great architects and engineers, for instance. Many of the rest simply can’t afford the tuition. The Johns Hopkins program costs twenty-six hundred dollars for a three-week session, including room and board. Four years ago, Goldman Sachs donated three and a half million dollars to sponsor financially needy students, but blacks and Hispanics still represent only ten per cent of the campers. “Cost is our Achilles’ heel,” Stanley says.

Others, like Joseph Renzulli, say that the problem goes deeper. Renzulli is the director of the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, a federally funded think tank in Storrs, Connecticut. “Bright kids taking courses on college campuses has become a cottage industry,” he says. “But to me it’s just lesson-learning. It’s teachers presenting information for students to get the right answers. The thing is, we don’t build monuments to people who were good at lesson learning.” Genius is a matter of passion as well as intelligence, I was told by Howard Gardner, the Harvard psychologist who originated the theory of multiple intelligences. If society really wants to find the next Einstein, teachers should stop asking which students are the brightest and start asking which are the most eccentric and single-minded. “Who is the oddest ball here? Who’s collecting rocks or reading the encyclopedia backward from Z to A? They’re the ones who are most likely to end up in the history books.”

The gifted camps, for better or worse, take a more statistical approach. Stanley knows that the S.A.T., like a Gallup poll, is a fairly crude predictor when taken alone. Its strength lies in numbers. Last year alone, more than a hundred thousand seventh and eighth graders were given the test. The top scorers tended to be both sharp-witted and intellectually motivated; they had mastered the material without ever learning it in school. Had the same hundred thousand taken the test as high-school seniors, a fair number would have had perfect scores and it would have been impossible to differentiate among them. By catching them early, the gifted camps were able to rank them across a broad continuum and take the best of the best. “Of course, there’s some regression toward the mean,” Colin Camerer, a behavioral economist at Caltech, told me. “If you take all the No. 1 draft picks in basketball, not every one of them will make it to the Hall of Fame—too many things can go wrong. But a greater percentage will than if you took all the forty-second draft picks.”

Camerer, who is forty-four, is one of the oldest alumni of the Johns Hopkins program, and the first member of the Study of Exceptional Talent. He met Stanley in 1970, when he was in the fifth grade in Baltimore, and at Stanley’s urging skipped four grades in the next three years. “It’s the LeBron James approach,” he says, referring to the N.B.A. phenom. “They just throw you into the big leagues.” Being a fourteen-year-old junior in high school wasn’t easy, though he looked older than his age, because of early hair loss. But college came as a relief. “Part of the point of acceleration is to get you into a warmer environment, where people can appreciate you,” he says. “Geeks are more comfortable being geeks in college.” By the time he was in his early twenties, Camerer had earned an M.B.A. and then a Ph.D. in economics. By his thirties, he had tenure at Caltech, a university full of former prodigies.

Camerer’s career is not unusual for a High Math. We know this because he and some six thousand other alumni have now been followed for nearly thirty years, first by Stanley and then by one of his protégées, Camilla Benbow, the dean of education and human development at Vanderbilt University. Benbow and her husband, David Lubinski, a psychologist at Vanderbilt, send out periodic questionnaires and track their subjects’ achievements year by year. Recently, they compared Camerer’s cohort—the 1-in-10,000—to a group that merely scored in the top one per cent. “There were huge differences,” Benbow says. “Huge.” By the age of thirty, the 1-in-10,000 were twice as likely to earn Ph.D.s as the other cohort, and fifty times more likely to earn Ph.D.s than the average American. “And they go to much more prestigious schools,” she added. “The top one per cent achieve enormous amounts, but the 1-in-10,000 do even better.”

It’s too early to tell how many of the 1-in-10,000 will become Nobel Prize winners. But a few, like Camerer, are already leaders in their field, and the rest have proved surprisingly predictable. Lubinski showed me a series of graphs based on gifted students’ S.A.T. scores. In college, those with high verbal and low math scores mostly majored in the social sciences and humanities; those with high math and low verbal scores gravitated toward math and engineering. Students with high scores in both areas often studied physics; those with equally low scores drifted into business. By the age of thirty-three, when the students had become professionals, physicians occupied the center of the graph—good but not great in both math and language. And lawyers had joined businesspeople in the bottom quarter.

Even the 1-in-10,000 have their share of disappointments, of course: some reply to the questionnaires with requests for money. Others simply find better things to do than change the world. For most of them, being one of the 1-in-10,000 eventually becomes more of an embarrassment than a point of pride, Camerer says. But, then, great minds have always had to be as resilient as they are resourceful. “You just have to have enough psychological strength to deal with it,” Lubinski says. “When you make these huge jumps in ability, you just have to try to live with the fact that you’re twelve years old.”

The High Math boys were trying their hardest, but their usual methods of analysis weren’t helping.

“I know a 4.9 back home.”

“No, you don’t.”

“Trust me. I do.”

“No, you don’t.”

Scarito, Hunter, and the rest were sitting in the cafeteria after lunch, killing time before the next class, talking about girls. The engineering course was nearly all male, as were most of the math and computer classes at the camp, and its members—unlike Jesse Mirotznik—seemed at a loss when dealing with the opposite sex. I’d never seen any of them talk to a girl on campus, and they tended to herd together in public, horns out, like musk oxen on the tundra. Misha, a scrappy little engineer with a modest pompadour, had devised a rating system from zero to five for any females they spotted in the distance.

“I’m telling you, it’s physically impossible that you know a 4.9,” Scarito told Hunter. “Girls that are rated that high, they basically have this reverse magnetic field around them. When you approach them, they fly backward.”

There was a longish pause as the others considered this. Then Scarito sighed. “I’ve been away from the cube too long.”

The Rubik’s Cube was a kind of rosary to Scarito—a perfect outlet for his nervous mental energy. His record for solving the puzzle was a minute and fifteen seconds, and by now he could almost do it blindfolded. He would glance at the opening configuration once or twice, then flip through a standard sequence of moves without looking down again. Like more than a few of the campers, Scarito had attention deficit disorder, but he said it never bothered him when he did things he enjoyed. “Just sitting in class the other day, I wrote a program in my head for displaying fractals.” Hunter said that he probably had A.D.D., too, though it had never been diagnosed. “It’s not so bad being jumpy,” he said. “People like us can pretty much do four things at once. The problem is finding the balance between them.” Sometimes at school, he said, he paid very close attention to three different things but forgot to listen to the teacher.

The High Math boys were more willing than the High Verbals to say that their intelligence was innate—perhaps because it marked them so deeply. “When you meet some of these incredibly gifted students, you could really believe that they are of a different species,” Robert Plomin, a psychologist at King’s College, London, who is studying the genetics of intelligence, told me. And it was true that Hunter and Scarito stood out whether they wanted to or not. When Scarito spoke, ideas seemed to course through him like electricity. He arched his back and twisted his shoulders, waving his hands in front of him as if willing the current to subside. Hunter was so quick and bracingly blunt that he was often taken for rude.

“It’s not like I’m beaten up or ostracized or anything,” Hunter said, when I asked him about the public school he attended, in Northampton, Massachusetts. “But I often feel like I don’t belong.” At the camp, he said, he could walk into the lunchroom anytime and start a debate about Kantian ethics versus utilitarianism. “At my school, about the only thing we debate is which video game is better, ‘Counter-Strike’ or ‘Unreal Tournament.’ ” As for Scarito, he had spent part of grade school in math classes of one, learning algebra and geometry by the fifth grade, while the rest did long division.

What they all wanted, it seemed, was what Tim Hsieh had. Hsieh was the smallest boy in the group and the least talkative. He wore glasses and had delicate Chinese features and a way of answering every question with a startled grin, as if he hadn’t expected you to notice him. He attended a public school in Hollywood with a small program for the highly gifted, all of whom had to have a minimum I.Q. of 145. It sounded like exactly the kind of place that exceptionally gifted students need. But when I asked Hsieh what he thought of his school he gave an embarrassed shrug, then said, “I don’t like the community that much. It’s full of dull people concentrating on academics.”

The students at Hsieh’s school were mostly Asian, and their parents had a strong hand in their education. “Everybody fits in the same mold,” he said. “Even their appearance. They’re all workaholics. They always play the violin or the piano—or both. And they don’t have any other hobbies.” Perhaps it was a matter of how the students were chosen (“The I.Q. test was designed to find mid-level bureaucrats to administer an empire,” Howard Gardner told me), but he felt caught between the nerd stereotype and the Asian stereotype. Though he had tried to deviate from both, he didn’t have much room to improvise: his parents insisted that he do at least two hours of homework every night. When I asked him what he was going to be when he grew up, he threw his hands in the air with a helpless smile. “An engineer, I guess.”

That Friday, at a glass pavilion near the center of campus, the students gathered for their weekly party. A few dozen formed a circle on the dance floor, flailing light sticks around to rave music, while the shyest campers huddled together next door and watched a video of “Big.” The movie was nearly over when I walked in, and the hero, played by Tom Hanks, was visiting his old neighborhood. As a boy trapped in a grownup’s body, he had proved to be a genius at designing toys and had earned all the perquisites of adult life: a hefty raise, a loft apartment, a beautiful girlfriend. Yet all he could think of was home. He wandered around in his overcoat at sunset, as melancholy strings swelled on the soundtrack, and watched other children play in back yards and baseball fields.

I thought about the math students I’d seen earlier that week, hunched over their textbooks. I knew that some of them were there to pad their college applications and some to please their parents. A few were relishing their first chance to be cool; others were destined to be the nerds of nerd camp. (“They tend to re-create the caste systems of their schools,” Camerer says.) Still, their diligence looked anything but feigned or enforced. When I was twelve, and my mother made me practice the violin for half an hour every day, I spent most of the time staring at the clock. These students spent six hours in class and never seemed to glance at their watches. Beneath the blazing concentration in their faces lay a kind of serenity.

This “rage to learn,” as one psychologist puts it, is what really distinguishes the gifted from other students. Their minds may be no sharper at birth than anyone else’s, but they spend their lives continually, compulsively honing them. “We start with little differences, but they snowball over time,” Robert Plomin told me. “Kids who like math get better and better at it, and those who don’t, don’t. It’s more of an appetite than an aptitude.” Plomin believes that this appetite (or lack of it) is largely a genetic trait. That’s why identical twins, who have the same genes, grow more alike in their intelligence the older they get. In infancy, their I.Q. scores correlate only around twenty per cent. During childhood, the correlation rises to forty per cent, and by adolescence it rises to sixty per cent. By middle age, the scores correlate an astonishing eighty per cent.

Critics say that the twin studies are flawed: the siblings were reared together, so their affinities could be a function of their environments. Yet fraternal twins—who share the same family life—correlate only half as much, and adopted siblings don’t correlate at all. “If fifty per cent of our differences in I.Q. are due to genetic factors, that’s just off the scale. Nothing else in psychology even begins to explain as much,” Plomin says. “But I don’t think intelligence itself is hard-wired—it’s a matter of propensities. It’s like B. F. Skinner said: The older I become, the more I become who I am.”

When the lights came up in the movie theatre, I realized that the seats were half empty; most of the campers were much too busy to mourn their lost childhoods. Out in the lobby, Lily Berger was sitting on the carpet, learning some new Mandarin words from a Chinese exchange student. Next door, Tim Hsieh was playing a medieval board game and a piano prodigy was playing Chopin’s “Fantaisie-Impromptu” in the corner. At one point, a girl pushed him aside to play “Twinkle, Twinkle, Little Star” with one finger. He waited patiently until she was done, then picked up exactly where he had left off.

The summer sun had been late in setting, but the glass pavilion glowed like a night-light now. When the traditional final number came on—“American Pie”—all the campers gathered on the dance floor. At first, they draped their arms over one another’s shoulders and sang along, but at the final word of the opening chorus (“This’ll be the day that I die”) they suddenly broke rank. Jumping up and down, they shouted in unison, “Die! Die! Die! Die! Live! Live! Live! Live! Sex! Sex! Sex! Sex! More! More! More! More!” I could see Jesse Mirotznik in the middle of the throng, grinning hugely and pogoing around. He had told me that this would happen, and that no one knew exactly how the tradition had started, but it seemed to fit the campers somehow. Mirotznik jumped and flailed and punched his fist in the air: “More! More! More! More!” And then it was time for bed. ♦

Sunday, 3 October 2021

Everard murder case sparks urgent inquiry into vetting of police officers

Those who report inappropriate behaviour in forces should be given more support, say senior officers Police vetting procedures will be urgently reviewed as part of attempts to address the crisis engulfing policing after the murder of Sarah Everard. Senior officers in charge of UK policing standards also revealed that they wanted to rebuild trust by better protecting officers who challenged “unacceptable behaviour” by colleagues. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8qCvN

Saturday, 2 October 2021

Balloons fill sky over New Mexico as fiesta returns after Covid hiatus

Hundreds of hot air balloons are launched over Albuquerque as part of annual nine-day festival Hundreds of hot air balloons launched into the skies over Albuquerque, New Mexico, in the US on Saturday for the first time in two years, as the city’s balloon fiesta returned after a pause due to the coronavirus pandemic. Yoda, Smokey the Bear and the Creamland Cow were some of the notable balloons that took flight in the mass ascension that kicked off the 49th annual festival. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8phTn

Lone police officers in Scotland to offer checks on their own identity

Fake arrest fears following the murder of Sarah Everard to be allayed through live contact with police control room Lone police officers in Scotland will offer a verification check to the public from Saturday to provide reassurance that they are genuine officers, following widespread concern after the murder of Sarah Everard. The new process will allow for the officer’s personal radio to be put on loudspeaker and for an officer or police staff member in a Police Scotland control room to confirm they are who they say they are, that they are on duty and the reason the officer is speaking to the member of the public. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8phTd

The 81 women killed in 28 weeks

Since Sarah Everard’s brutal murder, only one thing has changed – the death toll People said something had changed with the awful death of Sarah Everard. But the message certainly hasn’t reached the men who rape, harm and kill women. And I can’t see a difference in the government, police, Crown Prosecution Service or the judiciary either. Since Sarah Everard was abducted, raped, murdered and, in the words of her mother, “disposed of as if she were rubbish”, at least 81 other UK women have been killed in circumstances where the suspect is a man. It is absolutely ludicrous that we know this because of my work, a random northern woman in east London, not the government, not the National Police Chiefs Council. Each of these women will have died in terror and pain, just like Sarah. Each one leaves behind grieving friends and family for whom the loss will last a lifetime. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8phTT

‘Tragic and completely avoidable’: US hits 700,000 Covid-19 deaths

Joe Biden laments ‘astonishing death toll’ as 100,000 die since June despite the availability of vaccines The Covid-19 death toll in the US has now surpassed 700,000, despite the Covid-19 vaccines’ wide availability, in what one expert called a “tragic and completely avoidable milestone”. Data from Johns Hopkins University shows that the US went just past 700,000 deaths on Friday; the US had previously reached 600,000 deaths in June. The country has had a total of 43.6m confirmed cases of Covid-19 since the start of the pandemic, according to Johns Hopkins. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8phTD

Blind date: ‘I thought she might ditch me for the waiter’

Lottie, 26, influencer marketing manager, meets Amber, 30, corporate events manager Lottie on Amber What were you hoping for? A civilised evening, lots of paneer, and for my date not to be someone I’ve previously ghosted on dating apps. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8mmv7

Friday, 1 October 2021

Drone footage shows path of devastation from La Palma's Cumbre Vieja volcano – video

Drone footage captures the devastation wrought by the Cumbre Vieja volcano, which has been ejecting ash, smoke and lava over the Canary island of La Palma for more than 10 days. Since erupting on 19 September, the volcano has destroyed more than 800 buildings, as well as banana plantations, roads and other infrastructure. About 6,000 people have been evacuated and are yet to return to their houses, a local government spokesperson said.  * Canary Islands lava peninsula in the Atlantic doubles in size Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8mC8t

Emergency visa scheme extended in major U-turn by Boris Johnson

Threat of Christmas being ruined by driver shortages forces ministers to expand range and duration of visas Boris Johnson’s government has made a dramatic U-turn in an attempt to save Christmas – with a raft of extended emergency visas to help abate labour shortages that have led to empty shelves and petrol station queues. New immigration measures will allow 300 fuel drivers to arrive immediately and stay until the end of March, while 100 army drivers will take to the roads from Monday, the government announced late on Friday. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8mC8r

NZ opposition leader says US and UK ‘left door open’ for China in Indo-Pacific

Judith Collins criticises America as ‘foolish’ for walking away from free trade agreements New Zealand’s opposition leader has hit out at the US and UK over China, saying their failure to adopt free trade agreements was “foolish” and increased Chinese dominance in the Indo-Pacific. “If any criticism comes to New Zealand, as it often does about this close relationship with China and trade, my answer to everybody – whether they’re the US or UK – is: ‘So where’s our free trade agreement?’,” Judith Collins, leader of the centre-right National party, said in an interview with the Guardian on Friday. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8mC8f

‘Clearly not working’: How New Zealand’s consensus on striving for Covid zero is finally cracking

As Auckland grapples with Delta outbreak, opposition leaders dare to break with Jacinda Ardern on pandemic plan “Things have changed,” Judith Collins declares, sitting in her Beehive government office. New Zealand’s National party leader is fresh off launching her alternative pandemic response plan, marking the first time the main opposition has significantly diverged from prime minister Jacinda Ardern’s largely popular elimination strategy. The arrival of the Delta variant in New Zealand two months ago, causing an outbreak that the government is struggling to stamp out, has shown that elimination is “clearly not working,” Collins says. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8mC8L

New Zealand supreme court blocks seabed mining consent

Campaigners hail ruling preventing TTR dredging 50m tonnes of iron-sands from South Taranaki coast, though mining firm says it will try again • Race to the bottom: the disastrous, blindfolded rush to mine the deep sea A New Zealand offshore mining company has lost its supreme court bid to overturn a decision preventing it from mining millions of tonnes of iron-sand off the coast of South Taranaki, on New Zealand’s North Island. Thursday’s unanimous ruling by New Zealand’s supreme court, which upheld previous high court and appeal court decisions revoking Trans-Tasman Resources’ (TTR) permission to mine, was welcomed by environmentalists and the mining company, albeit from opposing perspectives. Continue reading...
http://dlvr.it/S8jNRR

WHAT IS BREAKOUT → RE-TEST?

Breakout: When the price breaks a support or resistance level that it has tested before and moves above or below that level. Re-...