Author: Steve Cavers

The team and I were enjoying the traditional long lunch when it happened. The monthly long lunch is a wonderful institution that serves multiple purposes. Firstly, it’s a team-builder — you get out and interact with your team-mates on a personal level. It’s also a good way to break up the routine of the work week once in a blue moon (or is that blue noon?). Mostly it’s a good way to avoid the office for an unreasonably long time, while you eat lunch and perhaps enjoy a beer. The only downside is that every minute spend enjoying the food must be made up for at the end of the day. Every minute of pleasure is paid for by an equal minute of pain.

So where was I? Oh yes. On this particular occasion, we splurged and went to the slightly-expensive-but-worth-it Cardero’s at Coal Harbour. I was halfway through a chicken ravioli when Kurt Russell‘s chin entered the restaurant, followed shortly by Kurt himself. Some action heroes, like Schwarzenegger, enter a room chest-first. But Kurt’s dominant feature is a jaw that’s so impressively large, it’s a wonder that he doesn’t have stability problems when he walks.

The waiter seated him alone at a table for two by the window, and there he stayed without attracting any undue attention for the twenty minutes or so until we left the restaurant. And this made me wonder: is it common for well-known Hollywood actors to show up in public without being disturbed by fans? I’m fairly certain that Kurt couldn’t go anywhere without being recognized. Why didn’t anyone walk up and say “Hi, I enjoyed your performance in Vanilla Sky” or “Say, aren’t you…” or at the very least “ohmygodohmygodohmygod”?

I’ve seen this before. A while back, Kevin Costner moseyed on past me in a food fair and stood in line at Starbuck’s like anyone else. Some people noticed him, but left him alone.

Is this politeness? Or is this recognition that these people are like anyone else? Except, of course, for the fact that they’re stinking rich. I think that most fans would like their favourite actors and actresses to feel comfortable. After all, these people live their lives hounded by the press and crazed fans — maybe they deserve a little space.

Another possibility is that nobody really cares all that much.

I finished my pasta, we settled the bill, and walked out the door, half hoping that we’d run into Goldie on our way out.

Directly outside our window is a new constructions site, formerly a 7-Eleven, where they will be putting up a new condo development. I have to say, it was very satisfying to see that backhoe tearing apart the 7-Eleven. I wish I could see the same thing done to a McDonald’s. It somehow resonates with a 30’s socialist image (workers, rise and smash the capitalist oppressors!).

Well, it didn’t gather a cheering mob, but it fuelled the watercooler conversation. Actually, the local cube-dwellers have taken to watching construction sites as a spectator sport. Yes, it occasionally gets that dull around here.

For example, there’s an old, rotting house — also visible from my window — undergoing renovations. It’s been the subject of intense debate because, after raising the house on jacks and inserting a new ground floor, they seem to be replacing every single beam and board in the structure. What, may I ask, is the point of renovating a house if you’re going to basically rebuild it anyway? Don’t tell me it’s to preserve a heritage site. There’s nothing left of the original house!

Back to the condo. A coworker of mine (let’s call him Bob) has a certain obsession with construction cranes. Wherever there’s a crane, Bob’s there with a camera to catch them erecting the giant tower. He talks about them frequently. I once caught him photocopying the architectural plans for one after-hours. I hesitate to ponder the significance.

As for me, I watch the sites because they seem to take so many bits of things and bring them together to make something. The former site of the 7-Eleven is a big hole in the ground at the moment, but in only months, it will be a four-storey building — homes for those who can afford it. But before then, it will serve as a blessed distraction from the daily geek work.

(By the way, should anyone happen to figure out where I work from my daily blogs, I should mention that the opinions expressed on this blog don’t necessarily reflect those of my employer.)

I am astounded at how easily people will throw away their privacy. Once again, Vancouver police are asking for more surveillance cameras to monitor the streets, and once again, Vancouverites are more than willing to help the local Big Brother watch their every move — all the name of security.

In a web poll that’s currently in progress on Canada.com (yes, I go to that site too much), over 70% of respondants so far think it’s a good idea to add more cameras. Are they on crack?

Hold on. No, they just want to keep any eye on those who are on crack. (Ooh, I’m off on a grade-A rant now.)

I think the real problem is that, in general, people don’t think it will affect them personally. “The police only watch criminals,” they might say. Or: “I’m not hiding anything… why should I worry?”

We should worry because, when police begin to collect information about your comings and goings, you should consider what the police think that your hiding.

Let me give you an example. You may have a daily routine: leave in the morning on a certain route; stop at the drug store; go to the corner store on the way back; and by your regular route, arrive back home. Perfectly innocent.

Then, one time, on impulse, you vary your route. You walk down a different street, and maybe stop at the other corner store instead. The police have this on record, and if it suited them, they might ask themselves why the different route? Maybe they were looking for a person who held up the corner store that day, and sure enough, here’s someone who inexplicably varied their usual routine. You have just become a suspect.

Certainly, this might be an unusual scenario (I hope), but the consequence of surveillance is that innocent people will become aware that they are being watched and their actions recorded. Any time you leave the privacy of your home, you may be conscious of the camera and you may modify your behaviour accordingly. When the camera misses nothing, you may feel the need to suppress an urge to do something as simple as varying your route. Or saying hello to a neighbor. Or wearing something too colourful. Or spontaneously varying your route or visiting the park.

The scenario in which you become a suspect is hopefully rare, but the rest, I feel, is a certainty. Under those conditions, we will no longer be living in a free society; we will have given up too much.

I’m not big on dead-guy quotes, but here’s one that I’d like to leave you with. In 1784, Benjamin Franklin said, “They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Once we lose essential liberty, it may be impossible to get it back.

()

Reading an article on the Canada.com website, I discover that Vancouver police are working hard improving their undercover tactics. Their mission this time: to infiltrate local pubs and bars and count how many drinks you order.

I may be blowing their cover here, but you can recognize them as the ones taking notes on coasters and ordering round after round of Evian shots with their soft drinks.