With three credited scriptwriters and five credited directors, the 1967 release of Casino Royale saw a gang of multifaceted James Bond 007s facing off against an army of beautiful, hypersexualised, personality-less female spies, headed by the real James Bond’s neurotic, insecure, American nephew Jimmy. Perhaps this wasn’t Fleming’s intended storyline for Bond’s first outing at Casino Royale, but the resulting parodic outing absorbed and commented upon some of the inherent gendered archetypes of Fleming’s work. What the 1967 Casino Royale accomplishes is a narrative which contrasts varieties of masculinity which are segmented forms of the masculinity defined by Fleming’s Bond. This chapter compares the masculinity of Bond developed in Fleming’s novel, before examining the representations of masculinity inherent within the four key male characters: Sir James Bond (David Niven), Evelyn Tremble (Peter Sellers), Cooper (Terence Cooper) and Dr Noah/Jimmy Bond (Woody Allen). By showing the depictions of masculine elements each of these characters embodies, along with the metanarrative elements of each performer’s persona, this chapter aims to identify how the 1967 Casino Royale both faithfully depicts the masculine elements of Bond while at the same time satirizing Bond’s particular brand of masculinity. This examination ultimately argues that this segmentation of Bondian masculinity is the core point of cohesion in a deeply incoherent, parodic film adaptation of Fleming’s novel.
This concluding chapter not only summarises the key discussions and arguments of the preceding chapters but also reflects on organisational, managerial, supervisory…
This concluding chapter not only summarises the key discussions and arguments of the preceding chapters but also reflects on organisational, managerial, supervisory, behavioural, social and cultural factors shaping the miners’ reactions to the restructured and formalised deep-level mining work processes and their unofficial job tactic of making a plan (planisa). The chapter provides suggestions on how the positive aspects of planisa could be harnessed and negative aspects addressed towards efficient, productive and safer organisational, managerial, supervisory and operational practices at the rock-face down the mine.
This chapter examines and discusses the unintended outcomes of the production bonus scheme the mine had instituted to motivate and increase the productivity of the…
This chapter examines and discusses the unintended outcomes of the production bonus scheme the mine had instituted to motivate and increase the productivity of the frontline mining teams. This is crucial given that the maladministration of the bonus system could lead to a range of undesired outcomes such as deteriorating levels of trust between management and frontline workers, prioritisation of production at the expense of safety, poor work relations and ultimately low levels of organisational, employee and team performance. There are a number of organisational, management and labour factors that can render a production bonus scheme effective or ineffective. These factors influence the nature and extent of worker reactions to the bonus scheme.
This chapter examines and discusses the factors that influenced the reaction of the mining teams to the team-based production bonus scheme and the extent to which mine management fulfilled its side of the bargain in the implementation of the production bonus. The chapter highlights the manner in which the team-based bonus system influenced teams of stope workers to engage in their informal organisational practice of making plan (planisa) in order to offset the snags that jeopardised their prospects of earning the production bonus. The chapter reveals that, to a large extent, the productivity bonus generated conflict rather than cooperation at the point of production down the mine. As a result, the incentive scheme failed to live up to expectations by not eliciting the desired levels of organisational, worker and team performance at the rock-face.
This chapter investigates how musicians at jazz jam sessions engage in what I term “aggressive emergence.” In so doing, they introduce novelty, unpredictability and…
This chapter investigates how musicians at jazz jam sessions engage in what I term “aggressive emergence.” In so doing, they introduce novelty, unpredictability and creativity in their spontaneous interactions with other musicians. In order to discuss this emergence, a notion of signs in musical communications as indexes, in the Peircean sense, is developed. To produce emergence in the ongoing development of a jam session performance, musicians must produce signs that index new directions that jazz playing can take, such as different rhythmic or harmonic accompaniments, or changes to the volume at which individuals play their instruments.
“Music is Rhythm, Rhythm is Life.” This maxim, uttered by former Motown drummer Bill “Sticks” Nicks to my class and me a few years back, opens a portal to what being human…
“Music is Rhythm, Rhythm is Life.” This maxim, uttered by former Motown drummer Bill “Sticks” Nicks to my class and me a few years back, opens a portal to what being human involves. Most accounts of what it means to be human make cognitive capacities, language and reflective thinking, the be-all and end-all of human distinction. But think about it: how many animals do you know who beat rhythm for aesthetic enjoyment and social communion?
In this essay I reflect upon moments from musical experiences, primarily from blues music, to illustrate the place of the spontaneous gesture and ensemble improvisation in interaction, in and out of the music.