It was a double bill this evening. First, N° 1 sprog wanted us to watch a documentary film, L’espace d’un instant (by Cédric Klapisch), about French ballerina Aurélie Dupont. The fly-on-the-wall style documentary evokes the sheer grinding slog that it takes to be an etoile in the Paris Opera Ballet and, of course, to remain there. We see Dupont work her way back to the top, admirably, from pregnancy. We see the backstage stresses and strains – including no less than eighteen rapid costume changes in one production. And we get wonderful insights into the creative process, as she works with some great choreographers. Not the least of these is Angelin Preljocaj and his extraordinary Parc. (The film is worth watching for the kiss sequence in Parc alone – it comes at 5.25 in the clip!) For me, one of the most evocative moments in the film is when the curtain comes down, literally, on a dancer’s career (her long-term partner, Manuel Legris). Anybody who has worked on stage (me only as an amateur thespian) knows that extraordinary moment when the stage once more becomes a room and the cast applaud themselves and are again divorced from the public and left with only the thrill of what they, collectively, have done. Next up was To Kill a Mockingbird. At Gregory Peck’s funeral, Brock Peters, who played the hounded Tom Robinson in the film and became a lifelong friend, memorably said about the role of Atticus Finch that it ‘gave him (Peck) a chance to play himself’. I can imagine why some would feel less than satisfied with this film and with Harper Lee’s wonderful novel. After all, its hero is white and the civilised white audience can almost give itself a pat on the back at the end of the film, even though poor Tom has been hounded to death (conveniently out of sight). But the travesty of Tom’s trial contrasts strongly with the noble images of Twelve Angry Men and the hideously primitive behaviour of the lynch mob is well evoked. To end on a lighter note: Atticus; ‘Do you know what a compromise is?’ Scout; ‘Bending the law?’

To the Beaux-Arts this evening for a gourmand’s feast with the London Philharmonic Orchestra under the charismatic baton of Vladimir Jurowski. First up was Brahms’s second piano concerto, with Nicholas Angelich giving an assured and lyrical performance. His mannerisms fascinated me; minute adjustments to his stool, hunched anticipation of the conductor’s cues, preparatory caresses to the keyboard, as though brushing away specks of dust, and fluttering gestures, his hands like butterflies dancing curlicues in the air above the piano. After the entr’acte we heard an intriguing version of Beethoven’s ‘Eroica’ third symphony, adapted and arranged by Gustav Mahler; intriguing, and also entrancing. The orchestra were brilliant, by turns powerful and subtle, and Jurowski displayed great authority and passion. Altogether a wonderful evening.

This morning I sat beside my director of human resources, Gianluca Brunetti, in the opening seminar for the Committee’s well-being week. This evening I saw him in a very different guise; as the foreman of the jury in an Italian amateur theatre production of Twelve Angry Men (‘La Parola ai Giurati’). We greatly enjoyed it. The cast was great, with a good range of characters and voices, and the acting was very good. From a linguistic point of view, we felt that some of the lines work almost better in Italian but, then, we are biased. We were happy to see a large number of children and young people in the audience, for the play’s basic democratic message, about the importance of voicing doubt, is a powerful one. The proceeds go to a charity, V.A.I. (Volontarie Assistenza Italiana), which, the Director explained before the performance, has mutated through various functions and activities but was founded to help meet the needs of the first generation of Italian immigrants who came to Belgium in the 1950s and 1960s (to work in the mines). When I hear talk about Poles, Bulgarians and Romanians, I like to remind people that not so long ago it was the Italians, Spaniards and Portugese. Tonight’s experience was  in any case a wonderful illustration of the way cultures can exist within and alongside other cultures. As we were leaving, it suddenly occurred to me that Twelve Angry Men is a reversal of the story of Thomas, the doubter among the twelve disciples. Gianluca is on the centre-right in the picture, by-the-way; the one with the hat.

This morning I attended the opening seminar for a week of well-being (or of good health), jointly organised by our staff committee and directorate for human resources. The simple aim is to help all colleagues to understand that well-being is something that can be encouraged and enhanced through exercise, diet, stress management and through the generation of a positive philosophy towards the working environment. For a week we will be running a series of workshops for colleagues on these themes and others and, thanks to the cooperation of our caterers, Sodhexo, the canteen will be offering a special balanced menu for participants (in addition to their usual healthy range of foods). For our kick-off session we had a guest speaker who got us all doing breathing exercises and – believe it or not – organised a laughing session. The illustration (of a breathing exercise) was taken by naughty Raffaele but I forgive him. It was all for a good cause. It was also great fun.

This evening I gave an after dinner talk to a group of American students from the Strasbourg campus of Syracuse University. As part of their course they visit the European institutions and NATO. Their professor is a Strasbourg-based friend and so I have been combining the pleasure of meeting my friend with the ‘business’ of talking to his students for many years. But now he is about to retire, and so this was probably the last such talk I will give. When I began giving the talk my narrative was the imperative of avoiding war but, as war became an increasingly unthinkable prospect in continental Europe so I felt I should change the narrative to how European integration could serve as an inspiration for other parts of the world. This night, though, of Armistice Day, I returned to the beginning and told the tale of Monnet’s vision and that extraordinary gesture of enlightened and far-sighted self-interest, summed up in the Schuman declaration. To illustrate my point about the industrialisation of war, I prepared some statistics on war casualties. In the 1914-1918 war, French and German military casualties were around 6 and 7 million respectively (stunning figures!). In the 1939-1945 war, though, the respective figures were around 600,000 and between 6.5 and 8 million. When Monnet went to see a wary Adenauer in Bonn in 1950 he was not making a magnanimous nor a condescending offer, though Germany was on its knees. The Monnet/Schuman philosophy was based on the certitude that one day Germany would be great and powerful again – and so she is.

From time to time I invite all of the female managers in the European Economic and Social Committee’s administration – director, deputy director, heads of unit – to lunch. The occasions are intended to provide a relatively informal context where they can discuss issues of common interest or concern. At the suggestion of one of them, this time we invited Emer Daly, Director of Internal Market Policy in the European Commission, to address us on her career. I was more than happy to invite Emer, who is a longstanding friend. She is also a good example of how it is possible to juxtapose a high-flying career and a good work-life balance. One part of a high-powered couple (her husband is also a director), Emer has raised three beautiful and intelligent children whilst also holding down three positions as Head of Unit and three as Director in five different Directorates-General in the European Commission. She gave a lot of good informal advice, described some of her ‘tricks of the trade’ and provided a number of fascinating insights. One of the biggest challenges to anybody with significant commitments outside the office is the culture of presence. Long hours does not necessarily mean good quality work. On the other hand, when you are providing a secretariat for an assembly of members who understandably expect presence when they are present, it is not easy to square the circle. I don’t think we came up with any radical solutions but I hope my guests were inspired and encouraged by our distinguished guest.

Tonight, in 1989, the Berlin Wall fell. This NBC coverage of the night (‘from hammer and sickle to hammer and chisel’) gives a good impression of the atmosphere. I wrote a post on 1 October about German unification, so I won’t repeat myself. The fall of the Wall in Berlin was not, of course, where the Iron Curtain first began to fray and unravel, but it was an extraordinarily symbolic moment. Those who had the chance to experience the surreal atmosphere of that sadly divided city, with its tramlines running into walls, the sandtraps and watchtowers, the U-bahn loop from West to East and back again, with its gun-toting guards on deserted station platforms, the returning tourists throwing Ost-marks away on the ground at Friedrichstrasse, the sheer drabness of the buildings and the food, the claustrophia of the looming wall, the sinister security around the check points, know just how strange it must have felt in those first few hours when movement between the west and the east and vice versa first became possible – and just how joyous.

To La Monnaie this evening to see a production of Janecek’s Kat’a Kabanova. The oppressive atmosphere of a family overseen by a domineering materfamilias is well rendered by this production and German soprano Evelyn Herlitzius puts in a fine performance as Kabanova herself, both through her singing and in acting out the anguish and futility of illicit love in a small-minded, hide-bound, decadent community dominated by an odious Kabanicha, played convincingly here by Renée Morloc. I read up a bit on Janacek before the performance. What a fascinating character! In his impoverished student days in Prague he could not afford a piano but made do with a keyboard drawn on his tabletop. He was 62 when Jenufa first brought him acclaim. His life was richly filled with work and love but also tragedy and the madness of infatuation. Prolific until the very end (he died with the third act of his final opera, From the House of the Dead, unfinished on his desk), he surely deserves a popularising biography

Janusz Lewandowski, member of the European Commission responsible for financial programming and budget, attended an extraordinary meeting of the EESC’s Bureau this morning in order to talk on the inter-related subjects of the 2011 budget process and the budget review that should lead to a new multiannual financial framework for the European Union. It is a ‘hot’ period for the budget process – the conciliation between Council and Parliament is scheduled to end, at least theoretically, this Thursday and the Commissioner’s account was clearly ‘hot off the press’. One of his strongest messages on the financial perspectives was that, of necessity, the Commission must take a pragmatic approach. On the Council side, the absolute first priority is to find agreement between the 27 member states. The second is that there should be no big winners and no big losers – pain and gain must be seen to be shared relatively equitably (which means the status quo ante is not an option). The third is that the final product must be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. In an ideal world, the Commissioner would probably have wanted to be more ambitious but revolutionary ambitions are simply not an option in the current situation. Lewandowski speaks without notes but in a structured fashion and tinged with wry good humour. His analyses are infused with the realism that comes from having been, in turn, a parliamentarian, a minister, a European Parliamentarian and now a Commissioner. He respects questions and answers with clear sincerity. And, drawn from his considerable experience, he introduces insights and fresh elements into the reflection process. His analyses, the Bureau members’ questions and his replies made for a very interesting morning.

Back to work with a vengeance this morning. The regular management board meeting was advanced by an hour because at eleven our new President, Staffan Nilsson, convoked his first meeting of the so- called enlarged Presidency (a preparatory meeting bringing together the President, Vice-Presidents, Group Presidents and the Secretary General). The morning session dealt amicably and efficiently with a number of strategically important points. In the afternoon, the Section Presidents joined the meeting to discuss work programmes and own-initiative work. In between, I had a working lunch with the new Vice President with responsibility for budgetary matters, Jacek Krawczyk.  The day was capped by a working dinner in the evening, chaired by Mr Nilsson. These are early days for the Committee’s new leadership and all the signs are positive. There are some big challenges ahead but I am confident the Committee will rise to them. Postscript. I am sorry to keep using the image of poor Howard Taft, but I cannot find a better way of illustrating the term ‘enlarged Presidency’!