Features
The Winnipegger who changed the course of Calgary’s history
By IRENA KARSHENBAUM Calgary is not known for saving its heritage buildings — although some impressive exceptions exist — so when on March 15 a local real estate investment company, Strategic Group, that is not in the business of heritage restoration, announced they will be restoring the city’s most significant Art Moderne building, the news came as a welcome surprise.
Work has begun on the 1951 Barron Building, once the epitome of chic, that for the last dozen years had stood empty and its future uncertain.
In 1947, when oil was discovered in Leduc, which is closer to Edmonton than to Calgary, oil companies could have settled in the provincial capital instead they were lured to Calgary, thanks to the daring of J.B. Barron, a Winnipeg-native, who saw that the city desperately needed office space and built Calgary’s first post-WWII high-rise. Named the Mobil Oil Building initially, in honour of its biggest tenant and located at 610 8 Avenue S.W., John Barron, J.B. Barron’s oldest grandson who, at the age of five, broke ground in 1949 for the construction of the building, remembers that his grandfather was thought of as “crazy” at the time because, “the city was never going to move that far west.”
Calgary had been struggling through a depression over the previous 35 years since the economic collapse in 1913, so it was hard for the naysayers to imagine a different future.
Calgary’s rising fortunes had their beginnings in Winnipeg.
Born in 1863, Joseph Samuel Barron arrived in Winnipeg in 1880 from Kiev. In 1887, he married 18-year-old Kiev-native, Elizabeth Belapolsky, and the couple had two sons, J.B. (Jacob Bell), born in 1888 and, Abraham, who followed in 1889.
Not immune to the gold rush fever that had spread across North America, in 1898 J.S. Barron left behind his family in Winnipeg and headed to Dawson City enduring an arduous journey by climbing through the White Pass on foot, carrying his merchandise on his back.
A lucky few struck it rich during the Klondike Gold Rush, which lasted only from 1896 to 1899, but most did not – J.S. Barron among them. In 1899, when gold was found in Nome, Alaska, people abandoned Dawson City to seek their fortunes in Nome. J.S. Barron remained.
Elizabeth waited for her husband to return and finally, in 1902, set out on a difficult journey with her two young sons. They traveled from Winnipeg to Regina to Calgary to Seattle by train, where they boarded a liner that sailed north to Skagway on the coast of Alaska, then by railroad to Whitehorse, where they boarded the Casca sternwheeler, which sailed on the Yukon River, and finally arrived in Dawson City.
J.B. and Abe were the first graduates of Dawson City High School and, in 1905, while the father remained in the Yukon, headed with their mother to the University of Chicago, where they studied law. Elizabeth supported her sons by sewing dresses for Vaudeville and Yiddish Theatre actresses and cooking for them. Following graduation, in 1911, J.B. Barron came to Calgary at the urging of his uncle, Charlie Bell, who had recently built the King George Hotel (demolished in 1978). Elizabeth and Abe arrived in Calgary the following year.
Even though J.S.’s mercantile business burned down three times, he continued to stay in Dawson City. Elizabeth had to brave another journey to Dawson City to coax her husband to return to his family. The parents eventually joined their sons in Calgary in 1913, but Joseph passed away in 1917. Elizabeth survived him until 1941.
In 1914, J. B. Barron married fellow Winnipeg-native Amelia Helman, daughter of Odessa-born John Louis Helman and Esther Helman (née Finkelstein), from Shumsk, Ukraine. The couple had three sons: William, Robert and Richard. A teacher, Amelia served as president of the Calgary Chapter of Hadassah and was instrumental in bringing Goldie Myerson and Eleanor Roosevelt to the city.
In 1915, J.B. Barron became the first Jewish lawyer in Calgary to be admitted to the bar. Abe passed the bar in 1919 and the two brothers started the law firm, Barron & Barron. By acting as the solicitor for the Allen brothers, a Jewish family that had established a national movie theatre chain, in 1923, J.B. acquired the Allen’s Palace Theatre on 8th Avenue and discovered his calling, as theatre impresario.
In 1924, he brought the violinist, Jascha Heifitz, and pianist, Sergei Rachmaninoff, who played to thrilled audiences. In 1926, he hired newly-arrived Leon Asper to serve as the conductor of the Palace Concert Orchestra, along with his wife, Cecilia, who played the piano. He convinced Crimean-born, Grigori Garbovitsky, who had settled in Winnipeg, to move to Calgary, where the violinist and conductor founded the Calgary Symphony Orchestra. In 1928, however, J.B. Barron lost control of the Palace Theatre.
It took him another nine years before he would own another theatre, the Sherman Grand. Located in the 1912 Lougheed Building — built by Senator Sir James Lougheed, the grandfather of Premier Peter Lougheed — he bought the theatre from the Lougheed family, giving them much-needed cash. The Lougheeds, who once entertained European royalty in their mansion but, since the death of the senator, and being lenient about collecting rent from their tenants to help keep their businesses afloat during the Great Depression, were themselves on the brink of financial ruin.
Owning the Grand gave J.B. Barron not only the opportunity to return to being a theatre impresario — he brought pianist Artur Rubinstein to Calgary in 1942 and 1944 — but the Chicago Style Lougheed Building would serve as a model for his greatest project yet to come.
Located on the corner of 6th Avenue and 1st Street S.W., the 6-floor, mixed-use building contained the Sherman Grand Theatre, retail at street level, offices and a penthouse. When opened in 1912, it was Calgary’s most prestigious corporate address. (By the end of the 20th century the building was in severe decline and only thanks to a devastating fire in 2004 did it galvanize wide-spread civic support for its restoration.) J.B. Barron used this model to build his own mixed-use building with the Uptown Theatre, stores at street level, office space on the second to tenth floors and an eleventh floor containing office space for his business as well a penthouse for him, since he and Amelia were by then separated. The penthouse opened on to a rooftop garden for his dog, Butch.
Completed at a cost of $1.125 million, the Alberta Association of Architects (ASA) listed the Barron Building as Significant Alberta Architecture. The penthouse design was influenced by Frank Lloyd Wright. The rooftop garden won the Vincent Massey Award for excellence in urban planning for a rooftop garden.
The building housed Sun Oil, Shell Oil, Socony Mobil Oil Company and others. New office towers sprung up around it, inspiring the expression, “the oil patch.” (Built so far west, it also inadvertently saved from demolition early 20th century buildings along the eastern section of 8th Avenue that today make up the Stephen Avenue National Historic District.) Calgary’s position as the oil capital of Canada was sealed.
J.B. Barron passed away in 1965. His sons took over the management of the building until 1981, when they sold it to a Swiss family for what is believed to be $6 million. The real estate market soon collapsed and the building was eventually foreclosed. It stood on the market through the mid 1980s until 1992 when Blake O’Brien, a young banker, placed a joke bid of $250,000 at an auction and found himself the accidental owner of the Barron Building and Uptown Theatre.
Under O’Brien, the Uptown Theatre flourished as if a scene out of Cinema Paradiso, while the rest of the building languished empty like a Sicilian village. For years, O’Brien lived with his own dog in the penthouse, filled with 1950s furniture.
In 2005, while attending a Calgary Centre Hadassah meeting, I met Linda Barron (née Rosenthal), a Winnipeg native. When asked if she had a connection to the Barron Building, she explained that it had been built by the grandfather of her husband, John Barron. My relationship with the Barron family grew, along with my research about their extraordinary grandfather and his building.
In 2009, the building was bought by Strategic Group and its future came into question when the company discarded the contents of the penthouse, removed the theatre marquée ,and ripped out the Uptown Theatre.
Between 2007 and 2013, I advocated for the restoration of the Barron Building and Uptown Theatre by writing articles, giving public talks and, in 2012, witing a submission that included placing the building on that year’s National Trust of Canada Top Most Endangered Places List. This advocacy helped raise awareness of the significance of the building. Representatives of Strategic Group attended my talk for Historic Calgary Week in the summer of 2012 and, in the fall of that year, I was invited to meet with Riaz Mamdani, CEO of Strategic Group, who showed me his plans for the building. I asked Mamdani to restore the Barron Building to the highest heritage standards and make it the jewel in his Strategic crown. I left the meeting uncertain that things would end well. Later, a number of groups wrote to provincial and municipal governments and, in 2014, the Government of Alberta ordered a Historic Resources Impact Assessment.
After years of work, on March 15, Strategic Group announced they will be investing $100 million into the restoration and residential conversion of the Barron Building for which they will receive an $8.5 million incentive from the City of Calgary.
Strategic Group’s investment is likely the largest heritage restoration project in Calgary’s recent history and needs to be recognized and celebrated. The Barron Building’s continued life will serve to tell a wild story of fortunes lost and made across space and time.
With files from Daniel Barron and Donald B. Smith.
Irena Karshenbaum is a writer, historian and heritage advocate living in Calgary. www.irenakarshenbaum.com
Features
Big Numbers, Small Print: Why Simpler Promotions Often Deliver More
Few things catch the eye more than a giant red sign advertising a 50% discount on a popular product. Just seeing it makes shoppers feel they’ve struck gold. However, experienced shoppers aren’t easily convinced, having seen many impressive offers shrink to next to nothing by the time they reach the checkout. The headline-grabbing number is rarely the full story.
Most of the gap between the advertised saving and the one found at the till comes down to the small print. Conditions, thresholds and expiry dates can all chip away at the discount. That’s why a modest promotion can sometimes offer better value for money, even if it doesn’t look as appealing on the poster.
Why Bigger Doesn’t Always Mean Better
Large discounts, cashback promises and bonus rewards are expressly designed to stand out. They are bright, bold and hard to ignore. Still, the advertised value doesn’t always translate into the same real-world benefit. A promotion is only worth what the customer can use, and the conditions behind it, not the headline figure, determine that.
Imagine two clothing stores on the same floor of a mall. One is offering a 30% discount on purchases over $200. The other offers 10% off everything with no underlying conditions. A shopper looking for a $60 pair of jeans will get a guaranteed $6 off at the second store, and nothing at the first. In this case, the smaller offer gives the customer greater value.
This doesn’t mean a smaller promotion is always best. A person spending $300 in a shop will get the better savings at the first store. When studying competing offers, the real question is which deal best fits the customer’s spending intent in that moment.
The Fine Print Behind Everyday Offers
Conditions are a part of modern-day promotions. Common conditions include minimum spending levels, limits on qualifying products and specific redemption windows. Others tie rewards to loyalty program membership or require extra steps before the reward unlocks.
Reward schemes are a clear example. A coffee chain might award loyalty points for every order, which customers can redeem for a free coffee on a future visit. A grocery store might add store credit onto a shopper’s loyalty card but tie it to a 30-day validity period. Both offers hold genuine value, but only if customers return.
Neither offer is unreasonable, as businesses need to manage costs while encouraging customers to return. But sometimes, having the extra condition makes customers pause and question what an offer is really worth.
Where Simpler Rewards Pull Ahead
When a promotion has few conditions, it holds an advantage over others because it is easy to understand. A straightforward discount or a free item with no extra steps before redemption leaves little room for confusion. Shoppers know what they are getting, and the reward’s value is clear.
This differs from an offer that requires shoppers to make two separate purchases, complete a mail-in form and then wait six weeks for a rebate cheque. The rebate reward might be bigger, but many people never get far enough to claim it because the steps are too confusing or too long-winded. When the offer isn’t claimed, the advertised value means nothing.
The same distinction is visible across digital entertainment. An online casino offering free spins, for example, often includes clauses such as wagering requirements. This means that any winnings that come from these free spins can only be withdrawn once their total value has been bet through a set number of times. Yet some casinos understand that an offer with no wagering requirements is a good promotion that carries real weight among players.
Even so, these promotions are often not free of all conditions. Many casino offers are restricted by caps on winnings, short validity periods and a limit on which games can be played.
Same Principle, Different Industries
Travel companies also follow a similar promotional pattern. A cheap city break in Vancouver or a discounted cottage stay may appear only on certain dates or may include a non-refundable clause. Blackout periods are also common, meaning the discount can’t be used during busy times.
Subscription services often go down a slightly different route, with a low introductory price that increases after a few months. Many tie the reduced price to contract length, meaning a longer contract comes with a lower introductory price. Bundling services is another way to reduce prices. However, the value only exists when the customer actually uses all of the services they buy.
Video games work similarly, with in-game currency and other bonuses available to players in exchange for a set number of daily logins or for completing certain challenges within the game. While the industries vary, the underlying concept remains consistent. Rewards are available, but the value depends on what the customer needs to do to get them.
Why Businesses Build Complicated Offers
Consumers often blame companies and come to the belief that promotions are designed to trip shoppers up. However, the truth is more practical.
Promotions also need to benefit the business. Minimum spend thresholds and loyalty point accrual encourage customers to fill their baskets before checkout or give them a reason to return. Similarly, limited-time offers prompt immediate action by creating a sense of urgency. These are normal marketing tactics, and when implemented correctly, they deliver real benefits to both parties.
When a program is well designed, customers can earn consistent rewards over time rather than relying on a large upfront discount. If the business can balance its offers with clear explanations of the conditions behind them, customers are far less likely to be caught out.
How to Weigh Up an Offer Beyond the Headline
A simple way to judge a promotion’s value is to ask a few basic questions. What is the advertised saving or reward? Does it have any additional spending requirements to unlock? Are there any time limits for claiming the reward? And does the shopper meet the eligibility requirements in the first place?
Then it’s important to look at what the offer actually is and whether it is something that will be used. An offer that pushes a customer to buy something they never normally buy doesn’t really represent a saving.
An offer on a music streaming service is only useful for someone who listens to music. For someone who doesn’t even listen to music, the deal has no value, even at a reduced cost.
Reading Past the Headline
Big discounts and rewards can be highly beneficial, but only when customers understand the difference between the advertised value and what they’ll actually receive. A 30% discount that goes unused is worth nothing, while a 10% discount that applies to every purchase can offer real savings.
Although simple promotions tend to offer greater clarity surrounding conditions, more complex promotions can still be beneficial, provided they align with the customer’s existing plans or spending habits. However good the offer may seem, it is essential to weigh the value against the cost of obtaining it.
Features
Why Teachers Are Exploring Sound Buttons for Classroom Activities
A single correct-answer chime can make a shy student sit up a little straighter. Teachers notice moments like that. Small sounds change how a room feels, and how a room feels shapes how students learn.
That is why more teachers are exploring sound buttons. One tap plays a drum roll before a quiz answer, applause for a finished project, or a ding to start a new task. The tools are free, quick to use, and fit almost any subject. They give teachers a fresh way to keep students curious and involved.
What Is Drawing Teachers to Sound Buttons?
Teachers are always looking for simple ways to keep students engaged. Many classroom tools take time to set up, need training, or cost money. Sound buttons avoid all three. A teacher can open a page, tap a sound, and see the whole class react.
Students also respond to sound almost instantly. A sudden drum roll grabs attention faster than a spoken reminder. A cheerful sound rewards effort without stopping the lesson. These quick reactions make sound buttons feel useful from day one.
Flexibility adds to the appeal. The same set of sounds works for a morning math quiz and an afternoon story. Teachers can match each sound to the activity’s mood.
How Do Sound Buttons Change the Feel of Classroom Activities?
Many classroom activities follow a familiar routine. Students answer, the teacher responds, and the lesson moves on. Adding sound breaks that pattern in a positive way. Used by teachers in a variety of classroom activities, SoundButtonsLab.com is a free soundboard offering sound buttons for classroom activities and sound effects for children’s pronunciation training. The site notes, “A simple sound can change how a whole class responds to an ordinary moment in the lesson.”
That change often shows up in student energy. A drum roll before an answer makes everyone lean in and wait. A cheer after a correct response turns one student’s win into a shared moment. Even quiet students tend to join in when the activity feels like a game.
Sound also adds structure. When each sound means something specific, students learn the routine quickly. A ding can mean start, and a chime can mean stop. That predictability helps lessons run smoothly with fewer reminders.
What Does Research Say About Game-Like Learning?
Adding game elements to lessons is more than a fun trick. A meta-analysis by Michael Sailer and Lisa Homner reviewed studies on gamification in learning. They found small but positive effects on students’ learning, motivation, and behavior.
Sound buttons bring several game elements into a classroom at once. They add suspense, instant feedback, and moments of celebration. A quiz with a drum roll and a correct-answer chime feels closer to a game show than a test. When students enjoy the format, they are more willing to practice and try again after mistakes.
Which Classroom Activities Work Best With Sound Buttons?
Sound buttons fit nearly any lesson, but some activities benefit the most. These four are easy places to start:
Quiz Games
Quizzes become exciting with a drum roll before each answer and a chime for correct ones. Teams can compete for points while the sounds keep energy high. Students often ask for review games once sounds become part of the routine. Keeping the wrong-answer sounds gentle so no one feels embarrassed.
Reading and Pronunciation Practice
Teachers can record words or sounds on buttons for students to hear again and again. Kids tap, listen, and repeat until the pronunciation feels natural. Hearing the same clear model every time helps them notice small differences. A cheering sound rewards each new word they master.
Transitions and Routines
Moving between activities can waste valuable class time. A short ding can signal clean-up time, and another sound can mark the start of a new task. Students learn these cues quickly and respond without repeated instructions. Smooth transitions leave more time for learning.
Celebrations and Rewards
Applause or kids cheering can mark a finished project or a goal reached. These sounds make effort feel noticed and valued. Save big celebrations for real milestones, so they keep their meaning. A small reward sound can still mark everyday wins.
How Do Sound Buttons Help Different Kinds of Learners?
Every class includes students with different strengths and comfort levels. Some speak up easily, while others hold back. Sound buttons give quieter students a low-pressure way to join in.
Engagement matters for every learner. A review by Jennifer Fredricks, Phyllis Blumenfeld, and Alison Paris described engagement as behavioral, emotional, and cognitive. Students who feel involved are more likely to stay focused and keep trying. Sound buttons touch all three areas. Students act on cues, enjoy each sound, and think ahead to the next question.
How Can Teachers Get Started Without Overdoing It?
Start small. One or two sounds used well beat a dozen used randomly. Try these simple steps:
- Pick one sound for attention and one for celebration.
- Explain what each sound means before using it.
- Preview every sound to make sure it fits the age group.
- Keep the volume comfortable for the whole room.
Once students know the routine, add new sounds slowly. Let students suggest favorites now and then to keep things fresh. A thoughtful start keeps sound buttons fun for months instead of days.
Features
Arabs in the coalition – yes or no?
By MARTY GREEN The Jewish People are facing a moment of decision today which will define who we are for generations to come. Should we, or should we not, form a coalition government with the Arab parties?
There was a moment in our recent history where we faced a parallel question…or, if not in our actual history, at least in the historical narrative which defines us. I am talking about Leon Uris’s masterwork, “Exodus”. I read it as a teenager, and I can’t imagine that there are many Jews my age whose worldview was not fundamentally influenced by that story.
Our protagonist, Ari Ben Canaan, grew up close to the Arab village of Abu Yesha, where he became close friends with the mukhtar‘s son, Taha. Now, twenty years later, on the eve of the War of Independence, Taha’s father is gone and the young man is now the village leader. Arab irregulars have made themselves at home in the village, and are preparing there for the coming assault on Gan Dafna. Ari goes to see his old friend to ask for cooperation. (I am paraphrasing here:)
“You said we would always be friends.”|
“Times have changed. I am an Arab.”
“You are first of all a human being.”
“What do you expect me to do?”
“If you don’t rein in the irregulars we will have to attack Abu Yesha.”
“Is that what you want to do?”
“What do you expect me to do?”
The two are at an impasse. Then Taha speaks: “You said we were brothers, didn’t you? Well, if that is true, if you really meant it, then give me Jordana. Yes, give me your sister to be my wife; to bear my children…”
Ari’s fist shot out, sending Taha sprawling to a corner. He leaps up and instinctively grabs his knife and raises it towards Ari…
Now, let us pause in the telling, because I remember how I felt when I read this as a teenager. And I feel very differently when I read it today. Who was in the wrong? Was Taha in the wrong for demanding Jordana as a sign of brotherhood? Or was Ari wrong for responding with outrage?
I am all but certain that the answer to those questions is glaringly obvious to everyone who is reading here. And I am further all but certain that half of you choose Answer A and half of you choose Answer B.
Because that is exactly how the Jewish People appear to be divided on the question of whether or not to form a coaltion with the Arab parties who hold the balance of power. And the decision we make will have consequences just as far-reaching as the (fictional) decision made in the spur of the moment 80 years ago in the village of Abu Yesha.
Ari stood there dumbfounded by what he had done, unable to find the words to explain. But Taha understood perfectly well.
“Never mind”, he spoke. “You’ve told me everything I need to know. Now get out of my house, zhid!”
(It happens that the only copy of Exodus in my possession is an old samizdat version from the Soviet Union, kindly given to me many years ago by an elderly Russian immigrant. I couldn’t resist the chance to offer Taha’s final words using that particularly expressive insult from the Russian original. It also explains why my quoted passages are inexact, having passed from English to Russian and back again.)
And what is my point with all of this? It is the question of whether we should offer the Arab parties a place in the coalition government. From reading the online discussions, it is quite clear to me that we are just as divided on this question as we are on the Exodus question…should we or shouldn’t we. And each opposing side is equally vehement in the certainty that they are right.
What I can tell you for sure, is that if we make the choice which I fear, it will be just as it was between Ari and Taha. |If we manage to cobble together a coalition of parties that have nothing in common except a determination to keep 20% of our population out of the seats of power, we will have told the Arabs everything they need to know. I can only hope against hope that Eisenkot has the courage to do the right thing.
Ed. note: If you don’t remember this scene from the movie, that’s because it was only in the book.
