Doing something with your life

April 27, 2009

Quartier MouffetardThere is a 50 year old man cycling around the square outside my window right at this instant, a Monday morning at 10:30 am. That means he woke up, put on his baggy multi-coloured trousers, got out his bike and started riding around in circles on the street down below. No shower, hair a mess, shirt from yesterday. Or the day before. As you would perhaps expect, he managed to get his bike tangled up with a stationary one, as he tried to ride by it clumsily. Humiliating. Even in his actions of complete futility, he manages to cause someone grief. Clearly, he has to do something with his life… But do something? Like what?

It is curious that there is a preconceived idea about what you should be doing with your life, without even, that we can put that directly into words. For those who, like me, saw the fellow with the bike, know that he is not doing it; whatever it is. Let us look a little further around the square. There are now about 30 people, with an equal number of cameras, taking pictures of each other on the square. There is a young man on a bench on the phone. A couple smoking and talking. Cars driving by. A few people drinking coffee on the terraces. A lot more people walking by, one stumbling with a large package. Notice that these people are all not doing anything special. Ah, finally, two men from the park service arrive, to clean out junk people threw into the fountain during the night. Men with jobs doing something useful.

Doing something with your life though, does not mean you have to be doing anything special, work or not. In fact, it seems only to suggest that a grown up man should not be riding his bicycle in circles around a square on Monday morning. But why not? What is so special about that? Why do we think he should be doing anything else? Is it jealousy of his idling? “Doing something” with your life is, after all, just seeming to be doing something, seeming to have some purpose. Perhaps there is some hidden purpose to the bike ride?

I think the real issue, if the man circling the square or untangling himself from the parked bicycle impacts you at all, would be that he is just in the way. By wasting his own time, he risks wasting other people’s time (the owner of the parked bicycle) He is just in the way. “Doing something” with your life, is not as much a judgement of their lives, as it is a statement about their dead weight presence, their blocking the way. It is a plea to others to keep out of the way of those people that are actually “doing something”. Which, of course, is us.

Image source: parisruemouffetard.blogspot.com


The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

April 18, 2009

Pleasures of WorkThe Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

Alain de Botton :: UK :: Hamish Hamilton (Pinguin Group) :: April 2009

Standing at a party with drink in your hand, leaning against the mantelpiece, you find yourself listening to someone trying to explain what they do for a living. As the description drags on into details of a procedure you know nothing about, you make a conscious decision to just remember the name of the company and  that it was something administrative, and, embarrassing as it would be if you were caught, to just stop listening.

Working life has become exceptionally specialised in our global complex economy, making us knowledgeable in our field but necessarily making all our results a group effort, reducing much of the honour of success. Often it is hard to see the big picture of what is going on around us. In his latest book, Alain de Botton tries to bring us a little understanding of the interaction of the little picture with the big one, sketching the functioning of the economy for the working man.

The book has no grand argument. The ten case studies are presented as near independent expeditions, from tracking a tuna fish from its capture in the Maldives to a plate in Bristol, to biscuit manufacturing and from tree painting to accountancy. He follows people on the job, to walk alongside them, to see what they see, trying to understand the world around them. As he observes and describes, the case studies are accompanied by photographs of Richard Baker, making the whole work as much a photographic essay as a book.

Work is, he explains us, together with love, at the heart of our lives, but making it meaningful is not quite as easy. De Botton’s musings give us an appealing answer when he suggests work can become meaningful “whenever it allows us to generate delight or reduce suffering in others.” It is perhaps a pity that the book is not a series of case studies of the maxim, but the idea does transpire through the pages.

It is fascinating to read De Botton. His wit and philosophical outlook are applied to the world around him as he finds it. He is overwhelmed by the complexity of the world economy as someone discovering it for the first time, but as the details of each outlook unfold, he shares his wealth of understanding and insight, inter sped with comments of a more personal nature (In the Maldives he remarks that there is an uncanny physical resemblance between the president of the Maldives and his late father).

As we are carried along through the melancholy of the working lives of different people, De Botton reaches several insights. About society he remarks that it puts unrealistic expectations of our working lives as slogans before our eyes, provoking a collective dissatisfaction with ourselves. He says we feel a shame at not having given in to the call to discover our hidden talents or possibilities for development in this world, and have condemned ourselves to the mundane life which we lead, a life which does not correspond to the one we could have had if we only had pushed ourselves more (if we believe the slogans). It is an observation which would put career orientation at the heart of our lives.

Tragically, I think he is right. Tragically, because so many people  work to earn money and remain stuck in a work routine.  They do not get around to a self-analysis, and a search for possibilities as they  have their minds preoccupied with other matters and do not readily see how they could move ahead in their professional lives anyway. De Botton looks on as the well-meaning intellectual who can never really understand his subject, because no matter how hard he tries, their differences are just too great.

This comes back later on as well, when Alain de Botton remarks that people no longer travel to see the marvels of how things are done differently elsewhere, or to see the origins of products they use, or the marvels of local technology – people today only travel for fun, for the consumption of cultural goods, the entertaining part. He makes a good point (which comes back in his other work and in his School of Life) but I think the origin of the problem comes forth from the clash between the world outlooks of a poetically inclined philosopher and a corporate accountant or a fisherman.

Notice that that is the result of the overspecialising, that people no longer over see the world around them. The Renaissance Man no longer lives. People on holiday can choose to either see what their professional life is like in the other country (presumably about the same as in their own country or they have already seen it with a seminar of some sorts), or just enjoy their time away, forgetting about the complexities of work and the economy by staring at the waves and tasting new wines.

Another effect of this economic complexity, is that we can no longer really follow its importance. If a certain foreign multinational decides to use some component rather than another, the consequences can be the booming success of a company producing some seemingly unrelated product in your home town. The workings of the economy as water springing up at the other end of the house from a leaking pipe, condemns people to read about other issues because the laws and contracts companies sign are just too abstract to understand how it relates to you.

It seems as if over-education, or at least over-specialization, has led to and estrangement and an under appreciation of the rest. There is a dominant sadness or melancholy in the poetic descriptions of people at work and the trouble with “meaningfulness” is evident. The project is important to our era and commendable, even if his method brings about painful omissions – he stumbles upon a factory full of widows and does not elaborate! This is perhaps not his strongest book to date, but it is an insightful, wise, adventurous and witty read.

www.alaindebotton.com

de botton

Alain de Botton was born in 1969 and is the author of essays on themes ranging from love and travel to architecture and philosophy. His bestselling books include The Consolations of PhilosophyThe Art of Travel, Status Anxietyand The Architecture of Happiness.


New Cabinet, minus two…eh?

April 11, 2009

New cabinetI am sure most people would agree that this makes a fantastic story: two ultra-orthodox newspapers printed pictures of the Israeli prime minister Netanyahu’s new cabinet with two minsters (Livnat and Landver) photoshopped out!

The story goes that the Israeli religious daily Yated Ne’eman altered the image by putting male ministers in the place of the two female ones, and the Sha’a Tovah, a religious weekly, blacked out the faces and figures of the ministers. Supposedly, the ultra-orthodox newspapers consider publishing images of women as a violation of their modesty. The story then ends with the statistic that 8 to 15% of Israeli’s are ultra-orthodox, to make it all more dramatic, when we are talking about two very marginal papers here.

But is it all true?

It is remarkable that although the story went around the world, nobody printed a link to the offending papers, and most just repeat the same content. The papers do not seem to have an active website (of course), but what journalist could resist taking a picture of the cover of the ultra-orthodox paper if he actually had it in his hand? Have a look at a few papers who printed the story:

Courrier International (F) BBC (UK) Associated Press (US) The Guardian (UK) The Independent (UK) The Star (Canada) Die Welt (Germany)

Did any of them check if this is really true?

The Guardian and The Independent both have an Israeli correspondent write the story, but did they see the offending newspaper themselves? (They both use the AP image like everybody else.)

That ultra-orthodox jews consider that women should not be in government does not surprise me (otherwise you would not call them ultra-orthodox), but pretending that reality is different than it is, is just ridiculous – it’s a newspaper! What is the point in reading fake news? If the ultra-orthodox really thought pictures of women were immodest, they could also have not printed the picture and just written about the new cabinet.

So why is there not a copy of the newspaper cover anywhere? The Iranian newschannel Press TV managed to find an old anti-internet quote from the Yated Neeman editor, but still, someone could have scanned the newspaper to show that this is not an April 1st joke … or is that why nobody managed to find any proof?


Hadopi Rejected! Sanity Restored!

April 10, 2009

UPDATE 11 June 2009: The French Constitutional Council confirms that internet access can not be restricted by a bureaucrat sitting on a Hadopi board, irrespective of the government’s wishes or their corporate sponsors. This enlightened decision, written up in illegible legal slang, was put up on June 10th. This leaves the Hadopi law as “a big spam machine for the entertainment industry, paid for by the taxpayer”, as Mr Zimmermann of the Quadrature du Net (digital rights defense) humorously commented. With Hadopi crippled beyond use, perhaps it is time to wonder why the UMP party, who runs the government, could not have figured out themselves that this law would be unconstitutional? Do we really need to be saved (again) by the EU?

UPDATE 22 april 2009: The industry commission of the EU has decreed that internet access can not be restricted on anyone without a court order. This effectively restricts the possibility of introducing the Hadopi law in France (or any other EU country).

UPDATE 9 april 2009:  The Assemblée Nationale (French Parliament) reversed it’s opinion on the anti-piracy law Hadopi, which had been accepted a few days before! After a week long wave of public criticism, the government, surprisingly enough, dropped the heavily flawed law, an excellent decision. Although it is a great sigh of relief, the proposal will be re-evaluated on april 28th. That is probably too soon, as clearly not much work had gone into this proposal…

UPDATE 13 may 2009: Hadopi passed after a revote! After passing through the Assemblée Nationale (French Parliament), the proposal has now been approved by the Senate too. This embarrassing result will now lead to a showdown at the European Court of Justice, for allegedly beaching European law. The Strasbourg European Parliament, who is (thankfully) bitterly opposed to Hadopi, are still fighting to have it scrapped, and will argue the illegality of by issuing punishment through the Hadopi administration rather than a court of law. Fingers crossed.


No more internet for you

April 8, 2009

Assemblee NationaleAs of April 2nd, the French Parliament has passed a new internet anti-piracy law proposal with the lowest rate of enthusiasm possible: only 15 members of Parliament showed up for the debate and the vote (of the 377 representatives). This anti-piracy proposal, named Hadopi, not only gets off to a bad start, but it is all round flawed.

What does it say?

The idea is to gradually eradicated illegal music and movie exchange over the internet, to protect copyrighted material. A new administration is to be created, named Hadopi, which will send out emails to pirates and, if they do not stop, have their home internet connection suspended for 4 to 12 months.

Banning someone from access to the internet, assuming that that is still legally possible in Europe today (an EU statement is still pending), would imply they can no longer shop online (including food, they could be handicapped), receive emails, pay taxes and all the other activities people do online. But of course, that is if you suppose that having internet at home is the only way to be online.

What is wrong with this?

Besides effectively turning half (the customary estimate) of the French population online into “criminals”, of sorts, the state would have to set up a database of email addresses of everyone which can be linked to physical addresses with internet connections and varying IP’s. The IP address (your online identity number) would have to be very reliable indeed if behaviour related to it can provoke punishment. The internet providers can not guarantee that. And the email addresses? Getting these addresses is going to be a major problem (my internet provider does not have mine, for instance), as is keeping them up to date. As anyone who has held a mailing list knows, email addresses, like mobile phone numbers, change all the time. Who is to do this and at what cost?

Even if Hadopi received a huge budget to be able to intimidate people into the right behaviour, how can an administration issue punishments which today carry a penalty of 300 k€ and up to a 3 year prison sentence by a court of law? Constitutionally, the courts are the only ones allowed to judge. Would we in future be punished without trial by a Hadopi administration?

There are also technical problems related to the tracking down of pirates: internet providers are not (currently) capable of filtering through the whole network to pick out the pirates (and who is going to pay for this?) And on the other side of the net, hiding your IP from your internet provider can not be too great a challenge for someone who wants to download that rare bootleg.

free_wi_fi_spotAnd even if you are condemned, there is no mention of using the internet elsewhere (cafe, the free city network) or through other means (iPhone, Blackberry), so is there still a sense? And if you ban someone, you automatically ban their entire household which uses that connection – is it right for the partner or housemate to suffer for a “mistake” made by the other?

The state would have to set up a blacklist to avoid that a person banned from one provider will just turn to the next. How many people will have access to this list for it to be operational? Does this not classify as public shaming, which is not a valid punishment in France? And who is going to follow up on this to see that it is enforced?

Is this really going to happen?

It would be a relatively safe bet to suppose this law is not going anywhere for the time being.

But … notice the tendency of outsourcing of police/ judiciary: the internet providers are obliged by this law to rat out their customers to the authorities. This constitutes the spreading out of responsibility of a morally sound society. In other words, the ills of society rest on your shoulders rather than on the organizations set up by our society and bound by the rule of law to uphold justice. It is like society as a pyramidal structure of prison guards where we are all inmates and guards keeping each other in check. This is not the right direction to go, spreading guilt and shame. The government needs to get its act together to actually read and discuss the law proposals on their desks. A little more presence and effort of our deputies in Parliament is really not to much too ask. It is not even a school holiday at the moment!

P.S.

Hebdo Cinema had fun asking the politicians “What is worse, BitTorrent or P2P?” to which, they got blank stares. Let it be no wonder this law is so badly constructed and that nobody wanted to discuss it in Parliament.


The art of (mis)giving

April 2, 2009

States traditionally give each other gifts which then belong to the other state. Sometimes the gifts are very large like the Alexander III bridge in Paris or the Mother Theresa statue in Rome. When they are smaller, most countries have a dedicated museum where they are shown to the general public.

dvdWhen the British Prime Minister Brown went to Washington on a state visit in March 2009, he had brought the recently elected Obama a penholder carved from the timbers of an anti-slavery ship. The sister ship, in fact, of the one that was broken up by Queen Victoria to be turned into a desk as a gift for the White House’s Oval Office. In return, the US president had given Prime Minister Brown 25 US movies on DVD. If the diplomatic misstep was not already enough, the DVDs apparently did not work on British players. The gift, together with the lack of a planned press conference in Washington after the meeting, was close to insulting, and considered undignified, at best, in the UK.

At the second official meeting between the two countries, yesterday for the G20,  Obama’s team had a lot to make up as the British press would be scrutinizing his every move to find proof of another humiliation.  So then the moment came when the US president was to meet the Queen. Obama presented Elizabeth II with an iPod with Broadway songs and video footage of her 2007 trip to the US and a rare Richard Rodgers songbook. We can suppose the Queen likes broadway musicals from the gift, but it is clearly a personal gift and not a state one. Even as a personal gift it does not seem like the right gift for a Queen, especially after the DVD debacle. Even with good intentions, It is not good enough.

A gift should have cultural value and not monetary. Giving, for instance, a letter written by Oscar Wilde during his stay in the US would have been a far more appropriate gift to the UK today, after all, they have stood by them through thick and thin. Alternatively, roses or another flower they can plant, from the White House garden for the Buckingham Palace garden could also have been appropriate. Was it really that difficult to get it right?

Image of DVDs source: Wired.com


Flying without a ticket

April 2, 2009

cdg-04We had to try it – take a plane without a ticket or anything else printed which proves we had the right to be on that flight. The concept of the e-ticket has been widely in operation for about 10 years now, allowing passengers to skip the check-in queue. But they all show up with paper print-outs of their tickets, or have their passports or credit cards scanned by machines on arrival to obtain that print-out at the airport. We all know it must be possible to get on board completely without paper, say by flashing your phone, but does that actually work? Read on if you want to find out…

Last weekend, we were on a return trip from Paris to Amsterdam. On the way up, we mechanically went through our usual routine of printing out the pdf with our flight details as they had been issued to us by the web-site that sold us the ticket. On Saturday morning, we checked in on the Air France website before leaving for the airport, so that we would not have to queue up there. On arrival at the beautiful 2F Terminal of  Charles de Gaulle Airport, we could skip the check-in and walk through the checkpoints to our gate, showing the print-out of the ticket. Nothing remarkable there.

On the way back, however, we were no longer at home, so we were caught without a computer or a printer. Hence no printed ticket. After our sunny stroll along the Amsterdam canals on Monday morning, we got on a train to Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport. In the train, we logged onto Air France’s website to check-in on our mobile phone (iPhone in our case). We were checked-in and it sent us our boarding card electronically as a pdf. We arrived at the airport and had to show a ticket and identification to get passed the first hurdle: a pretty Air France-KLM staff member. She let us through as if we had been holding an old-fashioned ticket rather than an iPhone with a pdf on the screen. We must have arrived in the 21st century!

Naturally, the second step -security- kills off any of the joy of travel, even high-tech travel, as you are forced to walk through a metal detector holding up your trousers as your belt, shoes and iPhone are having their interior operations examined on a widescreen. Security staff is traditionally not impressed by anything, not even the fact that they just scanned our phone without noticing our invisible ticket on there…

But then the gate – the ultimate test. We are in line behind old people who may have invented the phone, youngsters who may be tweeting, YouTube-ing and facebook-ing themselves through life but they all pulled out their paper tickets as if it was KLM’s first flight in 1920. But then there was us – out comes the iPhone with the pdf on the screen ready to scanned and BEEP: my name appears on the scanner’s screen and I can walk through. Feeling positively cool with our success, we scroll through on the phone to the next ticket. Enlarge it a bit… and … nothing. The steward types something into the computer and we can walk through, but there was the stench of humiliation in the air.

Why did it not work the second time round? And then it struck me – the scanners are made to read bar codes which are always the same size (paper does not stretch). On the iPhone, you enlarge and reduce texts all the time, so you would have to get it just the right size for the barcode reader to read it. Hum. A little awkward. Walking onboard we were still feeling 21st century, but as always with new technologies, also a little displeased – it works, but it’s not quite there yet. Other cool developments flash through my mind, and I make a mental note not to be an early adopter of the Segway either… I do not want to be seen pulling that thing back home half way across the city…

amandatadcrossstreet1

Image of Charles de Gaulle Airport, Paris. (c) David Guerrero. Source:  www.david-guerrero.com // Segway in Paris image by Jen Chung.


Is anyone still respectable?

April 1, 2009

La Mode Illustree

To get back my youth I would do anything  in the world,

except take exercise, get up early or be respectable.

Oscar Wilde

When Oscar Wilde wrote those words, he was no doubt thinking of his more outrageous side, with his fine -effeminate- sense of dress, his taste, his bisexuality and the contrast with the plainness of the bourgeois “respectable” life. In today’s world, the norms have shifted, partly turning Oscar Wilde himself into the concept he rejects, by virtue of his elegance and eloquence, his individuality and his intellect. But if he is almost today’s emblem of respectability,  who else in our contemporary world would find themselves in the “respectability” mold? Our world today has an inconspicuous aristocracy blacked out by a screamingly loud  class of hyped entertainers. As an invisible respectable class is useless as a role-model, do then these actors and singers take their place? If not them, then who? Who takes on this role of respectable citizens, those to whom we can aspire (or not) to be like?

Let us first dispel the concept of “respect”, which had such a flourishing US TV life that they managed to sap all the meaning out of the word. It came to be a term suggesting tolerance, before sinking into the other depths of street kids and rappers where it was transformed into a contemporary expression like “cool”. But if we climb up the ladder away from TV and rappers, to the notion of “respectable”  who should we look to?

The “respectable” is an elite which not only dictates a morality of a society, but lives it as well, even if perhaps in farce, hypocritically. They are both the pressure and norm by which to live in a given time. The historical top of the social ladder, is the royal family. But in today’s world, are they still respectable?

princess-victoria_2_492886aEven leaving aside perhaps the worst offenders, the UK and Monaco, recently it was announced that the Swedish Crown Princess Victoria was to be married to her fitness trainer. Does it still need to be said that this is not the right thing to do for a member of the Royal family. Not many people think that being noble elevates you to a higher moral ground, but the Princess in question is destined to be the future Queen of Sweden. Is this a fair exchange for the country? The Royal Family is offered a privileged position in society in exchange for upholding a cultural moral excellence earning the title of “respectability”. But by marrying a commoner, surely their elevated status evaporates. Was it then too much of a sacrifice to marry a foreign prince (or high nobility if it must be) to justify their position, to give Sweden the honour it expects. Why would the Swedish population even be willing to support their royal family if they are not capable of handling their side of the representative bargain? A Royal Family as any other family becomes any other family – their respectability will depend on their personal merits and no longer on their historical status.

queen-rania-in-parisWithin the world of royalty, there is someone who not only plays their role but also uses it for the bettering of the world: Queen Rania of Jordan (who incidentally was raised into nobility). Besides caring for a family of four, she has used her position as Queen of a ruling monarch, to promote a lot of different philanthropic, economic, and social issues, both in Jordan and in the world. She is not only a regular speaker at international Forum’s, but she also did not shy away from opening her own YouTube channel to answer viewers’ questions to promote understanding of the arab world. But of course, not all royalty tries to better the world or make something of themselves. Queen Rania is the exception, having justified the respect and trust she was given by virtue of her position.

On such an individual level, to be respectable, or honourable, is to play with the cards you are dealt with best you can, to try to make something of yourself, to better yourself, and those around you. You have to be a model people can pull themselves up on, aspire to, even if they can never do what you do. This is the material for hero’s more than for a respectable class, which can be dull as long as they abide by their own rules.

Royalty, in general, do not live lives worth being impressed by, nor to be copied by those of less noble origins. They do not have to either, but they did manage to loose their respectability, their claim to being a class of moral and cultural leaders.

So who is today’s respectable elite? The noisiest class of people are the actors and singers, but surely they are not the respectable ones? In some societies they have taken in a place of a sort of contemporary aristocracy, but surely acting and singing is not the most impressive basis for being a role model? Singing or pretending to be someone else on film does not sound like the material for an elite, but something could be said for those that use their star status to promote political and humanitarian goals.

george_clooney_01Think of the good looking soap star turned feature film actor George Clooney. Despite mostly playing in commercial films, he has been politically active. He helped bring desperately needed attention to the Darfur crisis, amongst other important issues. But does that make him respectable? He is also known to be a drugs user and exhibits a greed in not only being paid in millions for his films, but in pursuing more through the selling his image to advertising (for an excellent, but ecologically unsound coffee product and a strong alcohol). I do not mean to particularly single him out,  but he is a remarkable example of the complexity of character of a public figure. And notice that his selection of vices and virtues are not those of an entire class of entertainers, they are his alone.

A public figure can be accused of not using his fame to some useful purpose, but expecting too much of someone who has been selected on good looks or a beautiful voice is a little extreme. That, and NOT being respectable is more amusing for an entertainer than those that are. In other words, the entertainment class is perhaps not the most logical choice. Perhaps we should turn to more old school professional roles, like the traditionally overpaid working class of bankers.

artmadoffthursdayafpgiThe financial sector with their banks and investors and accountants has long been  a respectable industry, even if the vice of greed always overshadowed them. Recent times have  given this sector a good beating with Nick Leeson and Jérôme Kerviel implicitly exposing gross mis-management. If that was not bad enough, they were followed by whole series of backrupties in the current (2008/ 2009) recession, further exposing not only banking incompetence but also general mismanagement of people and funds, and a completely inappropriate remuneration system for their corporate elite. If their image was not already bad enough, investor Bernard L. Madoff’s massive theft came along to sink it into the ground. The field is now completely tarnished with greed, perpetual ignorance and a lack of sophistication and honour.

It would seem that we live in an era which has no clear cut “respectable” class for the rest of society to look up to, only individual hero’s like Queen Rania or countless others. One could say that a liberal society is supposed to be classless, supposed to be one where every man makes something out of life for himself (or not, as the case may be). But how can we be good, as a collective, without a collective “respectable” class? That might sound like a class which is potentially corrupt or old-fashioned but such a class is more resilient than that. If “respectable” needs adjusting, as was the case with the Oscar Wilde, it will be.

The reason why nobody calls anyone else respectable is because there no longer is an objective norm defined by society’s “respectable” class, because there is no such group. Royalty is failing to uphold its own norms, the aristocracy has faded into obscurity and there is no professional class capable of taking their place. “Respectability”, if ever used today, has become  another way of saying “law abiding”, which in western society is rather vague on someone’s morals. You can be an awful person and be law-abiding. This does not make up for the lack of an ostensible “respectable” group to look up to in society, which leaves you, for all practical purposes, on your own. But of course, with your own hero’s.


Image Sources … Cover of La Mode Illustrée by Florence Lenisten // Swedish Royal Family at the engagement announcement: Swedish Royal Court Handout/ EPA // Queen Rania of Jordan in Paris: Nasser Ayoub, Royal Hashemite Court Archives // George Clooney portrait: Francois Durand/ Getty // Bernard L. Madoff entering courthouse: AFP/ Getty Images