Associated Press

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates — Leftarm spinner Abdur Rehman grabbed 6-25 to shoot out England for 72 and clinch a 72-run victory over the world’s top-ranked test side on Saturday, also sealing a series victory on the fourth day of the second test.

The victory earned Pakistan an unassailable 2-0 win in the three-match series with the last match to be played at Dubai next week where England was beaten by 10 wickets in the first test.

England never looked in real pursuit of the 145-run victory target after Pakistan was bowled out for 214 with only Andrew Strauss (32) and Matt Prior (18) reaching double figures.

It was England’s lowest ever score in test matches against Pakistan.

Hong Kong’s district council elections, held every four years, usually pass largely unnoticed because the bodies wield little power. This Sunday’s ballot is different, first of all because a record 412 seats will be elected and the councils will fill some important new functions. Equally important, Hong Kong is at a critical juncture at which the voters must decide what kind of prodemocracy opposition they want.

A package of constitutional reforms last year put the territory on a path to a wholly democratically elected legislature in 2020 and an elected chief executive in 2017. The passage of that reform split the pro-democracy camp between moderates who ultimately supported it and radicals who voted against because it failed to grant full democracy right away.

While Hong Kong’s people overwhelmingly supported the reform package, they are also frustrated by government incompetence and lack of accountability in the here and now. One of the most surprising aspects of local politics is the depth of dissatisfaction with the government, despite a growing economy and low unemployment. Lower social mobility and a rising cost of living are particular sore spots.

The pro-democracy radicals in the League of Social Democrats and People Power have successfully positioned themselves as the angry voice of the community, disrupting the speeches of officials and leading loud and sometimes violent protests. These groups are running candidates against the mainstream Democratic Party and its allies, which in some cases will split the opposition vote and allow pro-China candidates to pick up seats.

The shift toward more confrontational politics has been gaining ground since 2003, when more than half a million people turned out for a protest against the erosion of civil liberties. While the government decries the decline of civility, it has only itself to blame since it has prevented the half-elected legislature from developing into a body with the power to effect change.

That will start to change next year, when district councilors will be eligible to run for five newly created seats in the legislature, seats that will be chosen by almost the entire territory’s electorate. These “super lawmakers” will be especially influential because of their broad mandate, and the pro-democracy forces should pick up a majority of these positions.

The question for Sunday is whether Hong Kong’s people will look ahead to next year’s contest. Their interests will be well-served by choosing moderate pro-democracy councilors who have the skills and inclination to get results within the new parliamentary system.

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page 11

New York

Margaret Edson’s “Wit” is one of a surprisingly large number of plays that managed to win a Pulitzer Prize without first making it to Broadway. Fourteen years after it opened Off-Broadway, “Wit” is finally being presented by the Manhattan Theatre Club in its Broadway house. Why the delay? No doubt the release of Mike Nichols’s 2001 cable-television version, which starred Emma Thompson, had something to do with it. The biggest roadblock, however, is that “Wit” is the story of the death of a woman suffering from late-stage ovarian cancer. The only way to get so dark a play to Broadway nowadays is to hire a big name, and it seems more than likely that this revival, directed by Lynne Meadow, would never have opened there had Cynthia Nixon not agreed to be the star.

Unfortunately, Ms. Nixon’s acting is part of what’s wrong with the production, for she plays Vivian Bearing, the austere, loveless scholar of 17th-century poetry around whose terrible plight “Wit” revolves, as though she were a precocious schoolgirl rather than a full-grown, forbiddingly chilly intellectual. Only when suffering strips away Vivian’s defenses does Ms. Nixon come into her own, and by then it’s too late for her to overcome the lightweight impression that she’s already made.

What else is wrong with this “Wit”? In the 1990s it was still comparatively unusual to see a fatal illness portrayed in anything like a candid way onstage or on the screen. Nowadays, though, such portrayals are common enough that the play’s initial shock effect has been significantly diminished, making its flaws easier to perceive and harder to forgive. Foremost among them is the inaptly cloying archness with which Vivian addresses the audience from start to finish (“It is not my intention to give away the plot, but I think I die at the end”). This archness is purposeful—it is Ms. Edson’s way of showing us how completely Vivian is out of touch with her feelings—but the cute self-mockery to which she stoops, which is italicized and underlined by Ms. Nixon’s acting, is no more believable than the haze of sentiment through which her agonizing death is seen.

Here, too, I suspect that the passage of time has worked against Ms. Edson, if only because so many of the baby boomers who saw “Wit” the first time around have since learned from personal experience that the last part of the play only begins to suggest the ugly horrors of a painful death. Next to the real thing, “Wit” amounts to little more than cancer porn, a dress-up game in which the valiant victim strides off the stage and into the light without once having thrown up all over her hospital gown. Even on “House,” they do better than that.

***

Coral Gables, Fla.

George Schiavone

Gladys Ramirez and Arturo Fernandez in ‘The MotherF**ker With the Hat.

The best new play of 2011 had the worst title, which helps to explain why Stephen Adly Guirgis’s “The Motherf**ker With the Hat” (as it was officially billed) barely eked out a 112-performance run on Broadway. Now it belongs to the regional theaters, and GableStage, one of Florida’s top companies, has mounted a first-class production that confirms my initial impression of its excellence.

Mr. Guirgis’s play is an antiromantic romcom about the effects of the therapeutic culture on a group of substance abusers. It’s smart, concise (95 minutes, no intermission) and full of pointed punch lines (“If you ever need money for rehab or an exorcism, let me know”). All five characters are drawn with sympathetic sharpness, meaning that the play must be cast very, very well in order to hit the bull’s-eye. Chris Rock, the star of the Broadway production, was new to the stage, and his performance, not surprisingly, was promising but far from great. By contrast, GableStage’s Ethan Henry, who has plenty of regional-theater experience, is self-assured and commanding in the same role, that of a slick, sociopathic scamster. Gladys Ramirez shines no less brightly as Veronica, the foul-mouthed working-class babe whose brass-plated charms set Mr. Guirgis’s farce-style plot in motion. Elizabeth Rodriguez, who played the part on Broadway, was as hot as a pepper mill but the least little bit too slick to be quite right, whereas Ms. Ramirez comes across much like someone you might meet on the street.

Alex Alvarez, Arturo Fernandez and Betsy Graver are all comparable in quality to their New York counterparts, and Joseph Adler’s satisfyingly straightforward staging leaves nothing at all to be desired. Yes, I was thrilled by the play’s Broadway premiere, but I’m sure it would have made as lasting an impression had I seen it for the first time at GableStage.

—Mr. Teachout, the Journal’s drama critic, blogs about theater and the other arts at www.terryteachout.com. Write to him at tteachout@wsj.com.

By JANE HODGES

Telecommuters, entrepreneurs, and the self-employed all grapple with the logistical challenges of working alone. At home, workers face isolation and domestic distraction. At the corner coffee shop offering free Wi-Fi, there’s insufficient privacy, too few electrical outlets and the nuisance of latte orders shouted out through the day.

A growing number of workers face these hassles every day. As of November 2009, there were nine million self-employed workers in the U.S., according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Meanwhile, the volume of workers telecommuting at least once a month for employers grew 17% between 2006 and 2008, to 33.7 million workers, according to WorldatWork, a human-resources research firm in Scottsdale, Ariz.

Telecommuting has grown more widespread among full-time workers due to technology advances and corporate efforts to drive down overhead by lowering real-estate costs, says Cindy Auten, general manager of Telework Exchange, a telecommuting research organization in Alexandria, Va. “Organizations are starting to see the benefits of telecommuting for the bottom line,” Ms. Auten says. “The ability to work offsite is even a recruitment tool.”

For those who lack a conventional office, shared, or “coworking,” spaces promise to solve some of the dilemmas of working alone. These facilities provide environments where professional nomads can work in relative quiet and even socialize around the coffee pot, or copier.

Just how well could we “cowork”? To find out, we took laptop and cellphone to four facilities in four cities, Office Nomads in Seattle; Souk in Portland, Ore.; The Coop in Chicago; and New Work City in Manhattan. All four are located in popular neighborhoods near public transit.

The facilities offered a variety of pricing plans ranging from day rates for the noncommittal to full-time 24-hour access memberships. Aside from solo workstations, they all also offered free high-speed Internet connections, free coffee, whiteboards and areas (with beanbag chairs) for small group brainstorming sessions, restrooms, lockers or storage, and light office amenities such as copiers.

Reservations weren’t required at any of the spaces, but were available at Souk and are forthcoming at New Work City.

All the facilities belonged to the “Coworking Visa” program, which lets members in participating coworking spaces use partner spaces elsewhere when traveling.

All also offered first-come/first-serve use of conference rooms for quick private chats or calls. At Souk, you could pay to reserve conference rooms for formal meetings or longer uses.

The Coop, located in Chicago’s West Loop area, was the smallest space we tested, with desk-top spaces pushed up against one another without dividers.

We visited twice during the week—on a Wednesday and Thursday—and appreciated that a few workers—an accountant and a consultant—greeted us. Working in a formal office motivated us more to work and we appreciated the comfy black leather chairs and good lighting. But the lack of barriers between desks meant we could see coworkers’ computer screens, and vice versa.

We were unsure of phone etiquette, but learned it was acceptable to make calls in the open when coworkers conducted job interviews and client meetings over the phone. While slightly distracting, the open-air calls were no worse than in a conventional office.

Manhattan’s New Work City, on the edge of SoHo, was on the compact side. The space had a 20-worker capacity and didn’t take reservations when we called, but the owner said a reservation systems is in the works. After check-in, we snagged one of the few remaining spots. We appreciated that our work space was spacious and that coworkers seemed industrious. Some of the office denizens appeared familiar with one another and a bulletin board posted community news, but we didn’t feel pressured to socialize.

Both coworking spaces we tried in the techie Northwest were bigger. Seattle’s Office Nomads, located in youthful and artistic Capitol Hill, can accommodate several dozen workers with its mix of closed-door offices, open desks and lounge areas. Office Nomads didn’t require a reservation and won’t charge for the first visit. Office Nomads was well-lit, with abundant plugs and desk options.

Coworkers—as well as the site’s founders—introduced themselves and offered help. We weren’t sure if we visited on a particularly friendly day or if this was the norm. Office Nomads appeared to place an emphasis on creating a community for its members; there was a “State of the Nomads” monthly meeting at midday. A bulletin board listed in-house social options as well as visiting speakers slated to appear, and also featured quirky photos and fun facts about members. Office Nomads also offered the most extensive weekday hours, from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m.

We made a reservation to use Souk, on the edge of Portland’s Pearl District and Chinatown, for a Thursday. We were surprised at how quiet the space was, with less than 15 workers inhabiting a space sufficient for several dozen more. The friendly office manager checked us in, gave us a tour, and even made us an Americano coffee from the office cappuccino maker.

Souk offered the widest variety of work-space configurations. Full-time members could use enclosed offices, but less-frequent coworkers could choose from rolling desks in a large open room, a communal work table, or first-come/first-serve semi-private rooms with walls and sliding doors. We liked that rolling desks in the open room could be moved at coworkers’ discretion—toward a wall for privacy, near a partner for collaboration. The open room also offered lightweight partitions for makeshift privacy. We chose a semi-private room. Noise was minimal, but we overheard some consultants and nonprofit sector types talking about work projects. Abstract art adorned the brick walls and furnishings included Herman Miller chairs and modern desks.

All in all, we liked coworking spaces. There were a few hitches, however. We needed to spend considerable time on the phone and felt uncomfortable discussing confidential matters publicly or hogging conference rooms. The other complication is that while coworking spaces guarantee and deliver a baseline of services, they also offer lots of extras based on loose rules. For instance, sometimes the facilities stay open later than posted hours and sometimes they don’t, or conference rooms aren’t always available.

For those of us with tight deadlines or plan-ahead mentalities, this can be stressful. But considering how cheap and flexible coworking is relative to a full-time lease—and the social perks—we don’t have problems with this unpredictability.

—Lori Barrett in Chicago and Shivani Vora in New York contributed to this article.