Interviews

OTD in 2011—Olden Goldies: Noreen interviews The Barkettes

June 3, 2025 By Imko Oaljefanta, TMD Archivist

Long a fan of Thisbe and the Barkettes and, at one time, a Dog in-the-running for one of the top singing spots in the group, Noreen recently sat down with The Barkettes (Estelle, Lorraine, Carmen and Mercedes), for an honest chat about life, love and the Canine music world.

N: When did you first realize that you were on your way to becoming the top Canine singing group of all time?

E: I don’t know if we actually thought about it in that way. We knew that we were good; we knew that we could make it, as long as we were allowed to make it, that is. And my Mum, in particular, kept us going and wouldn’t let us ever be discouraged. Even when we faced blatant discrimination and anti-Caninism. There were many times we saw signs that said “No Dogs Allowed” and I, at least, would want to collapse. But Mum would never let me do it.

L: I don’t think people — Humans, that is — realize the impact such things have on Dogs. And other Animals, too. For so many centuries, we’ve been treated as chattel…as if we have no value outside the value of the Humans we live with — if we live with Humans. I think The Barkettes have done a great service, really, in showing the world — Canine, Human, Feline — what Animals can do when they set their minds to it.

It’s not just the sound of our music or our voices — although I’m sure that the quality of the sounds helped immensely. I think it’s partly that we have an honest desire to do something with our lives…

M: And our love of music, too. That can’t be discounted. Without that, we never would have been able to sustain the blows we did and the insults, too.

C: Absolutely. I think in that way, the arts, whichever of them, can help to sustain anyone who is an underDog.

We were underDogs, too, when we started. We played living rooms, parks, anywhere they would book us. And we were glad to do it. We wanted to bring our love of music to the whole world — not just the Canine world, but the whole world. I used to practice in my backyard; some of my highest notes I sent up the chimney. But when it worked, there was no feeling like it. I don’t think I could have done it in any other field.

N: Do you ever miss having a normal life?

E: Who knows what’s normal, anymore? This is what’s normal for us…or, at least, it’s what’s become normal for us. I would hate to have missed the life that we’ve had, the things we’ve done, the Animals we’ve met.

And I would like to say here that I will always be grateful to Thisbe, because this was all her idea. I could never have envisioned it.

C: That’s true and I think we all agree on that. But if you mean do I wish I’d had the opportunity to…say…have a litter…I don’t know. I guess I feel it’s something I could have done if the opportunity had arisen. But it didn’t, so I don’t regret it, really. I have 187 nieces and nephews and they all give me great joy when I see them.

M: I think we can’t regret it when we know that soon we’ll have to retire and we know how much we’ll miss performing.

L: I will really miss it. But I also am looking forward to a rest. And I’ve always wished I could have gone for training, so that’s something that I’m thinking of starting when we retire.

OTD in 2015—Nesthetics designer dishes on “shadow boxing” and “Groundhog Day nerves”

January 29, 2025 By Imko Oaljefanta, TMD Archivist

“Shadow boxing” is not a term you would expect to hear from the head designer of one of The Park’s most innovative construction companies. Nevertheless, while pecking away at a sketch, Romulus Bowerbird insists on explaining the concept to me as it applies to the 2015 Groundhog Day prognostication pad: “You have to make sure you don’t contain the shadow … box it in,” he says. “That can lead to an inaccurate prognostication which, as we have seen in the past, can cause ongoing problems. You have to let the shadow spread … the most important thing is to make sure that you allow it enough room to expand.”

As Bowerbird lays down his pencil, one can’t help but ponder the term’s other meaning: that of fighting against an invisible opponent. In this case, the opponent is Simply Structures, the firm that designed and constructed The Park’s prognostication pad for over a decade.

At first, Bowerbird demurs when asked the question.

“I do realize that we will be judged not only on our own product, but by comparison with the products of previous years,” he says matter-of-factly.

Then, as he lets his guard down, you can see the source of the “Groundhog Day nerves” he mentions often during the interview.

“I believe we won the contract on merit. I also believe it was time to inject some new blood into the celebrations. I hope our work will be appreciated and that, in the end, we will have contributed something valuable and memorable to what is undeniably one of the most important events in The Park,” he says.

But Bowerbird admits that the past decade is a tough act to follow.

“The experience alone is invaluable,” he says in an admiring tone. “Seeing what works and what doesn’t, in a practical way. Years of going back to the drawing board, years of attempting to outdo yourself … the value of that can’t be underestimated, both in knowledge and creativity.”

Still, Bowerbird was the first at his company to suggest that they bid for the job.

“As I said, new blood. And we have a different sensibility here. Less down to earth … more ethereal. And we’ve chosen a mix of bright, celebratory colours. We tried very hard to maintain the sense of the occasion while injecting a sense of occasion, if you know what I mean. A nod to tradition, and then a pop of surprise,” he says, with a wink.

And those Groundhog Day nerves?

“I haven’t slept for the past month, but I’m sure it will be worth it in the end.”

OTD in 2017—Outgoing Chief Archon Raymond Mink: “Anger is the preserve of the powerless.”

January 16, 2025 By Imko Oaljefanta, TMD Archivist

CHIEF ARCHON RAYMOND MINK: THE EXIT INTERVIEW

In his only exit interview, The Park’s 2016 Chief Archon, Raymond Mink, whose term ended today, told The Mammalian Daily that he believes that, to some extent, disharmony among the species is a sign of zoocracy’s success, but that anger and isolationism are not a solution. An excerpt of this interview was published on December 29, 2016.

We sat down with Chief Archon Raymond H. Mink in early December to discuss his views on zoocracy, the direction The Park is going, and other important aspects of governing this vast space and its diverse population.

TMD: Thank you, Chief Archon, for sitting down with us today.

RM: Thank you for having me. I’m delighted to be talking to you today.

TMD: One of the most important questions I think Park citizens have is how would you evaluate the success—or failure—of our political system? Do you think zoocracy will thrive in the coming years and, perhaps, even spread to other parks? Or do you see it being dismantled as we speak, with disharmony among the species in evidence every day? And does that disappoint you?

RM: Well! That is truly a multi-part question! Let me, to use your own word, dismantle that question and talk about it because, as you say, this is a very important issue.

First of all, no, I don’t think zoocracy will be “dismantled,” as you put it. We’ve come too far for that to happen. How would Park Animals react to being governed, say, from the outside, or by Humans, or by a self-appointed Queen or King? Not well, I would think. And that wouldn’t last long. It couldn’t. Thirty-five years, yes in some ways it’s a very short time. But it’s also a very long time. For some species, that would be many, many generations. Perhaps ten or more. For others, not so much. But I think it’s safe to say that those who live here have grown accustomed to the idea of self-rule. And many have known nothing else. Zoocracy is here to stay.

About disharmony among the species…I have many thoughts on this subject. Does it disappoint me? I don’t know that disappointment is even relevant. It doesn’t surprise me. Take a look around. We are lucky enough to host thousands of species in this one space and it would be disingenuous to act as if we are not competing for everything. We most certainly are. We compete for space, for food, for sustenance of every sort, for our very survival. If you think about it, is there any reason at all that we should get along? So, no, I’m not surprised that tensions have built, and resentments too.

You—and I emphasize you because you are asking the question—you may be surprised to find out that I see this disharmony as a good thing. I see it as a symptom of zoocracy’s maturation, of its promise, and of The Park’s prosperity. When this all started, we had one common enemy and one common goal. Humans were the enemy, and governing ourselves was the goal. You will discover, as our celebrrtion of thirty-five years of zoocracy continues throughout the year, that actual self-government—Animals governing Animals—was not our founder’s first choice, nor did he believe, at least at first, that it would last. What were the chances? Realistically?

So, you see, it was a grand experiment, but it was one that appealed to all of us. And we realized that we were all in it together, all working toward a common goal. And, as a result, I would say that we pussyfooted around each other most of the time, lest our goal be jeopardized by the interests of any particular species. So for many years, that was the case, and every year we celebrated our collective survival and the survival of our political system—a system that desperately needs to be tweaked and modernized and expanded—but nevertheless, a system that belongs to us.

But, as I said, as we grew within the system and as we relaxed against our common enemy, we began to turn on each other. No longer did we see only Humans as standing in the way of our personal success; we saw each other as doing that, as well. I’m not saying that that is a healthy attitude, but I am saying that it displays the health of our government. That we can look away from it, cease to guard it and with the security of it intact, look to other things…look to ourselves.

TMD: But the anger that has been displayed in the past few years…

RM: Ah, anger. Anger will tell you a lot more about yourself and about others than any other emotion will ever do. You have to understand, anger is the preserve of the powerless. Or those who believe they are powerless. That is where the go to lick their wounds, perceived or real. Those who feel vulnerable, and perhaps disenfranchised, look to others and see that they appear to be in a better position. And this makes them angry because they believe they’ve lost their power.

The anger among the species that has been displayed in the past few years indicates to me that we have stepped away from the collective, that we’ve become more concerned about ourselves and that we’ve retreated to our own species and groups. That is not surprising as I said before. But it isn’t healthy, either. Unless we deal with it head-on, it could undo entirely the peace we’ve forged here in The Park.

Now, mind you, some of this anger is justified. And that is what we should be looking at. Not that any one species has taken another’s anything, but that perhaps some species are more in need. Perhaps because they have come from different climates, different circumstances. In some cases, because their coats seem strange to other species. Whatever the reason, we have to acknowledge our own feelings about each other if we’re going to diffuse the anger. That’s why I’ve been such a supporter of our Stereotype Sundays and, indeed, of all our efforts to foster awareness and understanding of others.

TMD: Do you think Stereotype Sundays have been successful?

RM: I do. They’re not the only answer, of course. It’s a complicated issue, as is the issue of open immigration. But we have to be a park that welcomes others who have suffered. That was the basis of…that was our foundation. That is why we exist. To build a better world for Animals of all, if I may say, stripes. And spots, as well. And, yes, to some extent, as you asked at the beginning, to be a model for other parks. To be able to say, yes it’s difficult, but it works. And, in the end, it is all worth it.

TMD: Is it worth it?

RM: How could it not be? Is there an alternative that you know of that I don’t?

TMD: No. I was just wondering.

RM: It’s an imperfect system. And we live an imperfect life. That is not news.

TMD: Where do you, personally, go from here? What do you see in your future?

RM: I’m cleaning out my office presently, and I’m just a touch lost, but I will find my feet soon enough. I do believe that Archons should be able to serve more than once. I think we’re losing a lot of experience by not allowing that.

TMD: Are you saying that, if you could, you would serve another term?

RM: I’m saying just what I said. That it should be allowed. I certainly wouldn’t go right into another term now. But in a few years, I can see that being an appealing choice, yes.

But, as it stands, the only way to share what I’ve learned and what I’ve observed is to do what all other Chief Archons have done: to write a book. And that I will do, but I prefer to do it with a bit more perspective. So, I wouldn’t go looking for it this year.

TMD: Mr. Chief Archon, it has been a pleasure to talk to you today. We all in The Park wish you well in whatever you choose to do from hereon in. And we want to express our deep gratitude for your work in the service of zoocracy and The Park.

RM: The pleasure has been all mine, both in this interview and in serving as Chief Archon. I’ll see you all at the swearing-in on January 16 and again on Groundhog Day.

OTD in 2014—Chief Archon Buckminster Moose: The Interview, Part One

February 12, 2024 By Imko Oaljefanta, TMD Archivist

Sitting back in his lounge chair at the end of a busy day, The Park’s newly-minted Chief Archon takes a moment to close his eyes and ready himself for the inevitable onslaught of questions that will come from the reporter sitting opposite him. Conducting the two-day interview at his den rather than at his office is Buckminster Moose’s choice, as is the oversized chair in which he has parked himself. When he offers the reporter a chair much smaller in size, the Moose is quick to point out that the reporter is much smaller, too.

It’s that kind of take-charge attitude, as well as what both his supporters and his critics describe as his “relentlessly realistic” view of politics and governing, that has many Park Animals feeling optimistic about the future.

For the first time in many years, The Park’s Chief Archon has been openly critical of a previous government. And, in this case, his criticisms are aimed at more than just one government. You could almost believe that he takes some pleasure in that, if it weren’t for the fact that Buckminster Moose is deadly serious about politics.

“I think we’re in danger of losing what we fought so hard to gain,” he says bluntly. “I think we’ve been intellectually stagnant, living off the spoils of zoocracy, and not looking out for the enemy — both within and without. If we’re not careful, we’ll soon find that we’ve ceded power to forces that, by no means, have our best interests at heart.”

The Moose’s eyes dance with excitement as he speaks of “taking back The Park.” It is a phrase that he used no fewer than twenty times during his Groundhog Day speech and it’s a phrase that has both delighted and enraged Park Animals. Whenever he says it, you can tell that he means business. And, according to the Moose, the business of the 2014 Archons is to strengthen our zoocracy by returning to the values that created it.

“Sometimes, you have to go backwards to move forward,” he says.

NEXT WEEK: The Interview, Part II

OTD in 2015: Interview with Thisbe, Part One: “Life is what happens after the credits roll.”

January 4, 2024 By Imko Oaljefanta, TMD Archivist

A partial transcript of the Mammalian Daily Radio (TMD Radio) interview with Thisbe, hosted by Winsell Tamarin and broadcast live December 3, 2014, appears below. Please note, this transcript has been edited due to space limitations.

WT: Welcome, Thisbe. It’s a great privilege to talk to you today.
T: Thank you, Winsell. It’s a privilege to be here.
WT: I’d like to start off, if you don’t mind, by addressing some of your fans’ concerns about your upcoming tour and your career decisions in the last decade.
T: Yes, that’s fine. I knew you would want to talk about that.
WT: You embarked on a farewell tour some years ago—
T: Yes. 2007
WT: 2007. And—
T: And I fell ill and we cancelled the tour because we didn’t know when I would be well enough to resume work. And the Barkettes … particularly Estelle … had other commitments, so—
WT: And that brings me to my question. Not about the tour. About your relationship … with the Barkettes. There have been many rumours, as I presume you know, that you aren’t particularly close. Some even say that you aren’t on speaking terms.
T: That’s nonsense. I mean, about not being on speaking terms. Of course we’re on speaking terms. We practically grew up together. But, are we close? Who is to be the judge of that? We have all lived our own lives, even while performing together and spending almost every waking moment together for many years. We are our own Canines. But we care about each other. Deeply. And, to a great extent, we understand each other. Perhaps more than any other Canines could ever understand the five of us. And not just because we’ve been together for so long.
WT: And Noreen? What is your relationship with Noreen these days? I see that she dedicated her book to you.
T: Noreen is a very special Canine. We have a special relationship that defies definition. I was the one who rejected her as a Barkette, so I was the one who had to live with that guilt for years. I was afraid it would destroy her, but she is the most resilient Animal I’ve ever met. In the end, it was she who helped me to survive, rather than the other way around.
WT: So, would you say that you are close friends?
T: I don’t understand why you keep asking that kind of question. Noreen has her own special abilities and she has her own life. However close or not close we are, is our business.
WT: We’ll move on. What do you hope to gain through this new tour?
T: Gain? I don’t think we hope to gain anything, per se. We are continuing with our careers, after a hiatus of about 7 years. We did do a few concerts together during that time, but we didn’t tour. The Barkettes, themselves, toured and pursued other interests. Mercedes went back to school; Lorraine has a number of charities that she works with; Carmen loves to garden and Estelle has done a number of television spots. We have all been busy. We are not returning from the depths. We are all well and happy and ready to start a new phase in our lives.
WT: What did you mean when you said that Noreen helped you to survive?
T: As you know, I was very ill for a long time and part of my illness was diagnosed as melancholia. I didn’t quite know what to do with myself. I was frustrated and agitated a lot of the time and I took to chasing my tail. I didn’t know how to move forward. As I’ve said to others in the past few years, life is what happens after the credits roll and I found out quite quickly that I didn’t like it and that I really didn’t know how to deal with life. It was something I’d been able to avoid by working so much. My concerns weren’t of the everyday kind; they were all career-related. When I was faced with the sorts of things that most Canines … most Animals are … I didn’t know what to do. It was Noreen who steered me in the right direction.
WT: How so?
T: She visited me one day and gently suggested to me that there were certain truths about my life and my upbringing that I hadn’t faced head-on … that I had spent many years running away from who I really was and, even more than that, who I was supposed to be. She said maybe it was time for me to take a look at all that.

END OF PART I
Stay tuned for PART II: “I was made for the shows.”

On This Day—December 18, 2014: On the comeback trail, Thisbe takes a moment to say “thank you” to her fans

December 18, 2023 By Imko Oaljefanta, TMD Archivist

TMD EXCLUSIVE: Excerpt from Laulaa® Magazine
Although Thisbe needs no introduction in The Park, she says that this time around, she’s determined “to let my fans in as much as possible so they know who I really am.”

As the founder and lead singer of The Park’s most popular group prepares for a comeback tour, she appears more settled and thoughtful than before.

“I didn’t realize how important my fans were to me,” she says in an exclusive interview in Laulaa® Magazine, due out on December 25.

“And I think they deserve a little more than I’ve given them … not in my singing so much, but in my time and thought.”

The singer has had a lot of time for thought the last few years. Since cancelling the group’s farewell tour in 2007, Thisbe has suffered from a variety of illnesses, the worst of which she says was melancholia.

“When I had to stop performing, I thought I would enjoy it. There were so many things I’d never done … so many of my senses I’d never used. But it didn’t turn out to be that way at all. First, I lost one of my littermates. And even though we weren’t exactly close, that loss hit home. It made me focus on what I really wanted and what I wanted to do. I could see that time was of the essence. But it took me a while before I could use that realization to any advantage. And in the meantime, I kept myself isolated, which was the exact opposite of what I had planned,” she says.

The star credits her fans, who never forgot her, with re-awakening her interest in living.

“I never lost my bark but for a while, I lost my bite,” she laughs.

The full interview with Thisbe will appear in Laulaa® Magazine, The Official Magazine of the Canine Music Association, on December 25, 2014.

Outgoing Chief Archon Iolana Whooping Crane: “I did not set out to be the face of a new movement.”

January 14, 2019 By Sigrún Maur, TMD Political Affairs Reporter

CHIEF ARCHON IOLANA CAMIRA WHOOPING CRANE: THE EXIT INTERVIEW

In her only exit interview, The Park’s 2018 Chief Archon, Iolana Camira Whooping Crane—whose term ends on Wednesday—told The Mammalian Daily that her work on establishing an “Enough Economy” in The Park was misrepresented by the press and by some political factions. Nonetheless, she stands by her ideas and hopes the incoming Archons will build on them.

We sat down with Chief Archon Iolana C. Whooping Crane earlier this month to discuss zoocracy, the economy, what government can and cannot do, and her hopes for the future of The Park.

TMD: Thank you, Chief Archon Whooping Crane, for sitting down with us today.

IWC: Thank you for having me. I’m happy to be here.

TMD: Chief Archon Whooping Crane, I think it’s safe to say that it’s the hope of most, if not all, Chief Archons to leave a legacy. This is a two-part question, it seems. First, I’d like to know, is that something you think about at the beginning of your term? When you find out you’ve been elected Chief Archon by the other thirty-four Archons, do you think to yourself, “This is what I want to achieve in the coming year?”

IWC: I will agree with you about legacy, but not in personal terms. Everything we do, we do for the betterment of The Park as a whole, and we only have one year in which to do it. So, it’s about setting something in motion, rather than seeing it to a conclusion. But most governing is that, isn’t it? You can’t be short-sighted. There is no end point; you are simply laying down a set of tracks that you hope will be trod upon and continue to be built by those who follow you. But you’re correct in the sense that each of us, in this small club we call the Chief Archons Club, has certain ideas that seem so important that we feel they should take precedence over others. And, sometimes, those ideas, or the solutions to certain problems, invariably become our legacy. So, to answer your question, no, we do not jump for joy when we are elected and think to ourselves, “Wonderful! I’m going to get the chance to work on my dream project!” Governing is a much more serious and onerous task than that. All too often, events or circumstances that are beyond your control decide for you what your priority is and you have to be able to react to them in a timely fashion. As a result, it is that reaction that becomes your legacy.

TMD: The second part of my question must seem obvious to you: what would you like your own legacy to be?

IWC: I think it’s inevitable that my legacy will be connected to the economy and, of course, to the fact that I introduced the concept of “enough,” not only to The Park generally, but to the budget, as well. And I am proud of that.

TMD: I’m going to ask you a question that many have been afraid to: are you against economic growth in The Park?

IWC: I don’t know why that question hasn’t been asked, but I’m happy to answer it now. I am in favour of sustainable, responsible economic growth in The Park. I am not in favour of unfettered growth or growth that leaves some Animals or species of Animals behind. And I am not in favour of growth that imperils the environment, pits some species against others, or is simply production or consumerism with no end point other than a financial one. Is that clear?

TMD: I would say that is very clear, but is it realistic?

IWC: Anything is realistic if you are willing to take responsibility for its execution. If you are not, then nothing is realistic, and you are free to blame outside forces.

TMD: That’s a strong opinion.

IWC: And would you have me express a weak opinion?

TMD: No, of course not.

TMD: How did you feel when your “enough” approach—your very serious argument about sustainability—became the “BastaBudget?” Did you feel it demeaned your idea?

IWC: No, I didn’t and I don’t now. New ideas are incredibly hard for many to digest. It takes a long period of adjustment and, even then, many are not capable of incorporating them into their world view. Whether we like it or not, something like the “BastaBudget,” a catchy phrase that may seem negative to some, helps the idea along. It fastens it securely in the mind. And, in a way, I did start it, by introducing the idea of the “enough economy.”

TMD: Did you intend to do that?

IWC: Intend to do what?

TMD: Intend to use linguistic tools to change minds about The Park’s economy?

IWC: You make me sound manipulative.

TMD: That wasn’t the intention.

IWC: In the first place, I did not come to office intending to do anything radical about the economy. As I said, you assume the office with the best of intentions. And most of my interests weren’t economic to begin with. But it didn’t take long for me to realize that The Park was headed on a path that was not only unsustainable, it was downright dangerous. As Noreen says, one need only look to the Human world to see the results of bad policies. So, I reacted to the situation in what I believe was a reasonable fashion. I said, hold on, we cannot just continue doing what we’ve been doing. We will lose control of everything, including our ability to govern our own land. But I did not set out to be the face of a new movement.

TMD: Would you say you were successful in changing minds?

IWC: History will make that judgement. I believe I was successful in laying the groundwork for change. Given that we only have a year in office, I would say that that was not a small thing.

TMD: In our discussion today, you make the whole “enough” concept seem so benign. But you were vilified during most of your term.

IWC: That didn’t surprise me. I think the press—many in the press—did their best to turn my words against me and to fight my ideas. The “Enough Economy” was so misrepresented in the Park press that I just began to ignore it. Why bother fighting it out with the media? It seemed to me that many had chosen to serve the interests of anti-sortitionists, to make it appear that I was incompetent and only an elected government should be able to make such sweeping changes as I felt were necessary.

TMD: I understand why you say that and, yes, there were many who questioned your competency. But, as I’m sure you know, in a series of year-end polls, you surpassed all other Chief Archons in two areas: most disliked and most intelligent. Do you find those two to be at odds with each other?

IWC: It does seem strange, as if I’m less incompetent and more diabolical. As for being disliked, as I’m sure you expect me to say, it is not a popularity contest. There were many Park residents who agreed with my ideas. And many who had had the same ideas, themselves. A good citizen considers all ideas and makes sound, informed judgements. Our founder, Jor, ran into a great deal of resistance. And he had many enemies, if the biographies are to be believed. So, the polls don’t matter so long as we’re moving in the right direction.

TMD: You mentioned Noreen a while back. What influence, if any, did she have on you?

IWC: Noreen is a dear friend and she served as an unofficial advisor to me. We met a few times over the course of the year and she updated me on a variety of things regarding the Human world. The breadth of her knowledge when it comes to Humans is remarkable.

TMD: As of January 16, you will be a private citizen of The Park. What are your plans, immediate and long-term?

IWC: I’ll be going south for a rest after Groundhog Day, but I’ll be back in the Spring. I have a number of projects that I want to work on, some on my own and some collaboratively. I’m going to join my predecessor, Klarissa Kuttu, in the fight for longer terms. One year is simply not enough time to effect meaningful change.

TMD: What would you or will you say to the incoming Chief Archon?

IWC: I wish the incoming Chief Archon the best of luck. We don’t know who it is, but we do know the burden they will bear. We don’t advise each other, but I would encourage any Archon, Chief or not, to seek as much advice and opinion from others as possible.

TMD: May I say, Chief Archon Whooping Crane, on behalf of all Park citizens, thank you for your work and your service to zoocracy and The Park. We wish you peace and happiness in your new life.

IWC: Thank you so much. I wish the same for you.

Outgoing Chief Archon Klarissa Kuttu: “My realism was ahead of its time.”

January 13, 2018 By Sigrún Maur, TMD Political Affairs Reporter

CHIEF ARCHON KLARISSA KUTTU: THE EXIT INTERVIEW

In her only exit interview, The Park’s 2017 Chief Archon, Klarissa Escalade Kuttu—whose term ends on Tuesday—told The Mammalian Daily that she was misrepresented as anti-Human by the press and others and that she feels her realism is “ahead of its time.”

We sat down with Chief Archon Klarissa E. Kuttu earlier this month to discuss zoocracy, the expectations of government, and her hopes for the future of The Park and Animal self-rule.

TMD: Thank you, Chief Archon Kuttu, for sitting down with us today.

KEK: Thank you for inviting me. I’m happy to talk to you today.

TMD: Chief Archon Kuttu, I think it’s safe to say that the expectations placed on a new Chief Archon are enormous and so must be the pressure of that, as well. Would you agree?

KEK: Yes, I do agree, though I wouldn’t agree if you’d said, “unreasonable” expectations. I think it’s fair for The Park’s citizens to expect a lot from their government and when we come up short, it’s also fair for them to criticize us.

TMD: Which leads me to this question, if you don’t mind: according to some polls, you have been one of the most unpopular Chief Archons in the history of zoocracy. What do you make of that and how much responsibility do you take? Was it a failure of communication? A misunderstanding?

KEK: I noticed you said some polls and, if you hadn’t, I would object. But, yes, there were some polls—and obviously, many Park citizens—who disagreed with me vehemently, though I doubt they would have said I didn’t have The Park’s best interests in mind.

I believe strongly that many of the controversies during my term were due to the misrepresentation of me by the press and others. I don’t think you can deny that I was depicted as anti-Human, which was at best unhelpful and at worst, damaging to progress in The Park. And, yes, I do take some responsibility for the misunderstanding of my views and policies. Clearly, I did not explain myself well enough. But, even more than that, I misread the state of mind of the citizenry.

TMD: In what way?

KEK: We have had some trying times in the past few years and I admit I didn’t realize to what extent that had affected the emotional and mental outlook of Park Animals. I didn’t understand their very real desire for calm and stability. My term as Chief Archon should have reflected that and responded to it. Instead, I wanted to charge ahead with ideas that Park Animals simply weren’t ready for. And, here, you really do have to keep in mind the pace of any Park government. We are selected by lottery, we have twelve months to deal with all aspects of running The Park. Ninety percent of those aspects, I would say, we have no idea of until we get here. In some ways, it’s a crazy way to govern.

TMD: Are you saying that zoocracy doesn’t work?

KEK: Of course not. What I am saying, though, is that it was designed in a much simpler time, and for a much simpler purpose. It was designed so that we could take control of our lives and our property. Thirty-five years ago, no Animal could have imagined the challenges we face today. We are in desperate need of modernization, and not just of our government, but of our state of mind. And I tried to bring that to my Archonship, but it was too early. I see that now. We need to ease into these things, but I butted ahead with them and we see the results. Or lack of results.

TMD: For the record, though, are you anti-Human?

KEK: I am not “anti” any species. But I am a realist. And, in many ways, my realism was ahead of its time. Humans hold an enormous amount of power in the world. And, if we’re to be honest, they do still hold power over us in The Park. It’s an imbalance that I felt and still feel is untenable and I tried to change that with what I considered would be simple tweaks. But, as it turns out, they weren’t simple at all. And they became my grand mistakes.

TMD: Such as restricting trade with Humans and ending Human tourism?

KEK: Among the many, yes.

TMD: Which others?

KEK: I’ll leave that for you and for The Park’s many political commentators to mull over and, perhaps, write books about.

TMD: What would you consider your greatest failure?

KEK: I have said this before and I’ll say it again: my government’s failure to find a suitable head of Park Finance—a suitable budget chief—and to prepare a 2018 budget. I think that might be the greatest failure.

TMD: And your greatest success?

KEK: I would like to think that I did bring some awareness of the threat that we face from Humans, as well as from other species. And from ourselves. I would like to think that we are now more aware than ever of the fragility of Animal self-rule and that we might stop either taking it for granted or revering it unrealistically.

TMD: Are we in danger of losing it?

KEK: I think we are always in danger of losing it. Nothing is forever and as we have seen from Human society, things can go backwards. It doesn’t take much. We must guard what we value and continue to value what we guard. To hold it dear. Otherwise, who knows what can happen.

TMD: Now that you’re no longer in government, what does your future hold?

KEK: I hope it will hold peace. And friendship. But I also want to stay involved. I would never retreat from the political sphere entirely, now that I’ve learned so much.

TMD: Would you serve another term?

KEK: Yes, I would. And I, too, believe in longer terms and when I’ve rested up a bit, I will be prepared to fight for that. One year is not long enough.

TMD: Two years?

KEK: Maybe even three. Whatever the citizenry can bear. It will be a long haul to change the rules, but I do believe in long haul government. [laughing]

TMD: Chief Archon, it really has been a pleasure to talk to you today. We all in The Park wish you well in the future. And we want to express our deep gratitude for your work in the service of zoocracy and The Park.

KEK: The pleasure has been mine, in moving zoocracy to its next phase and in sitting here with you to talk about it. I’ll see you at the swearing-in on January 16 and again on Groundhog Day.

Outgoing Chief Archon Raymond Mink: “Anger is the preserve of the powerless.”

January 16, 2017 By Sigrún Maur, TMD Political Affairs Reporter