Candles are what women turn to when their partners never get them flowers.
17 December 2010
A flash of insight.
Fact about women No.37:
Candles are what women turn to when their partners never get them flowers.
Candles are what women turn to when their partners never get them flowers.
10 December 2010
Panic on the streets of London
I'm not a Take That fan, but it is difficult not to like them isn't it. And who isn't a little warmed to see and hear Robbie back for good? Anyway, a song for our time, or week, at least?
It's got to make you wonder if the riots in London last night, and all the back and forth about the vote on changes to the funding of universities, is all a clever marketing ploy for Take That's next single. Hats off if it is.
Student protests, or a collection of frustrated people, with multiple agendas, along with those simply looking for a ruck, capitalising on the opportunity afforded by the student protests? Let's also mention here the Nobel prize winning, pro-democracy activist Liu Xiaobo, who is criminalised in his native China. Let's mention too the consideration of calls for those in charge of wikileaks to be treated as terrorists, and the moves to crush it under massive government and corporate pressure. (Incidentally, a petition against the extra-judicial campaign of intimidation wikileaks is facing can be found and signed here)
When governments don't listen to what the people clearly want, and when they act in ways which at least appear to quash central tenants of democratic society; things like freedom of speech and freedom of the press for example, one has to wonder how much their lofty and noble sounding rhetoric concerning democracy actually affects the on-the-ground practises they employ in running a country. Maybe the bands people travel in and the banners they work under never capture accurately the diverse ideologies contained within any given 'movement'.
"Since some nations are more powerful than others, they will at times prevent anarchy by effective imperialism, which in our industrial period has become more covert than overt. But the peace is gained by force and is always an uneasy and unjust one. As powerful classes organise a nation, so powerful nations organise a crude society of nations. In each case the peace is a tentative one because the peace is unjust. It has been achieved only partially by a mutual accommodation of conflicting interests and certainly not by a rational and moral adjustment of rights. It will last only until those, who feel themselves too weak to challenge strength, will become, or will feel themselves, powerful enough to do so." Reinhold Niebuhr.
In short, there'll be trouble when the kidz come out.
Pax Romana (the Peace of Rome) never does what it says on the tin, and i, again, find myself led back to Christ and his call away from a clamour for power, and towards an embracing of humility in the loving of our neighbour as ourselves. Here, in our acknowledgement of ourselves as one with 'the other', is the only way to a true peace.
Also, what were Charles and Camilla thinking!? "Oh, let's go for a drive and check out the riots ourselves!". The commoners are revolting.
...nope, none of the above, it was panic on the streets of London.
It's got to make you wonder if the riots in London last night, and all the back and forth about the vote on changes to the funding of universities, is all a clever marketing ploy for Take That's next single. Hats off if it is.
Student protests, or a collection of frustrated people, with multiple agendas, along with those simply looking for a ruck, capitalising on the opportunity afforded by the student protests? Let's also mention here the Nobel prize winning, pro-democracy activist Liu Xiaobo, who is criminalised in his native China. Let's mention too the consideration of calls for those in charge of wikileaks to be treated as terrorists, and the moves to crush it under massive government and corporate pressure. (Incidentally, a petition against the extra-judicial campaign of intimidation wikileaks is facing can be found and signed here)
When governments don't listen to what the people clearly want, and when they act in ways which at least appear to quash central tenants of democratic society; things like freedom of speech and freedom of the press for example, one has to wonder how much their lofty and noble sounding rhetoric concerning democracy actually affects the on-the-ground practises they employ in running a country. Maybe the bands people travel in and the banners they work under never capture accurately the diverse ideologies contained within any given 'movement'.
"Since some nations are more powerful than others, they will at times prevent anarchy by effective imperialism, which in our industrial period has become more covert than overt. But the peace is gained by force and is always an uneasy and unjust one. As powerful classes organise a nation, so powerful nations organise a crude society of nations. In each case the peace is a tentative one because the peace is unjust. It has been achieved only partially by a mutual accommodation of conflicting interests and certainly not by a rational and moral adjustment of rights. It will last only until those, who feel themselves too weak to challenge strength, will become, or will feel themselves, powerful enough to do so." Reinhold Niebuhr.
In short, there'll be trouble when the kidz come out.
Pax Romana (the Peace of Rome) never does what it says on the tin, and i, again, find myself led back to Christ and his call away from a clamour for power, and towards an embracing of humility in the loving of our neighbour as ourselves. Here, in our acknowledgement of ourselves as one with 'the other', is the only way to a true peace.
Also, what were Charles and Camilla thinking!? "Oh, let's go for a drive and check out the riots ourselves!". The commoners are revolting.
...nope, none of the above, it was panic on the streets of London.
2 December 2010
10 for 10
The end of 2010 is upon us, as is, therefore, the end of the decade. I thought it would be interesting to consider this past 10 years from a cinematic perspective. We've had the digital revolution, 3D cinema, loads of real world events for movies to get political about, and the advent of the 'TV Box-Set' - all of which has had an effect on cinema.
I wish i wasn't so hard on myself. I wish i could allow 10 lists of 10 movies each - maybe 10 movies per genre or something. But, alas, i'm too cruel and hard of heart. The task i have asked of myself is to come up with the best / my favourite 10 pieces of cinema from the past 10 years. Not necessarily a film from each year, but 10 in total. It has brought me joy to think back over films that have thrilled and moved me (maybe even films that have helped shape my thinking), but it's been really painful to leave so many out. Like, i'm talking about a real, deep, stinging pain.
So, bearing in mind our potentially different tastes, and the different things which were happening in our lives when we saw these films; and also bearing in mind that i haven't seen everything that's come out in this time (in fact there are some highly acclaimed pieces which i haven't caught), here's my 10 (in no order whatsoever):
"Do you even know why you're supposed to kill me? Look at us. Look at what they make you give."
"You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain"
"We are supposed to be righteous. That's a beautiful thing. And we're losing it. If I lose that, that's everything. That's my soul"
"Many, many years ago in a sad, faraway land, there was an enormous mountain made of rough, black stone. At sunset, on top of that mountain, a magic rose blossomed every night that made whoever plucked it immortal. But no one dared go near it because its thorns were full of poison. Men talked amongst themselves about their fear of death, and pain, but never about the promise of eternal life. And every day, the rose wilted, unable to bequeath its gift to anyone... forgotten and lost at the top of that cold, dark mountain, forever alone, until the end of time"
"You, you were supposed to be a monster - now I'm the fucking beast. There's blood on my hands, from what you made me do"
"Happiness only real when shared."
"You ever get the feelin'... I don't know, er... when you're in town and someone looks at you all suspicious, like he knows? And then you go out on the pavement and everyone looks like they know too"
"Let's never come here again because it will never be as much fun"
Bookseller: 29.80. Would you like it gift wrapped?
Gerd Wiesler: No. It's for me.
"Look, I don't care what the telly says, all right? We have to get out of here. If we don't they'll tear us to pieces, and that is really going to exacerbate things for all of us"
2004 and 2005 appear to be the biggest hitting years for me, with 7 films between them. If we discount the multi-featurings of actors and directors in franchises, Heath Ledger and Paddy Considine would then seem the biggest hitting stars, cropping up twice (The Dark Knight and Brokeback Mountain, and The Bourne Ultimatum and Dead Man's Shoes respectively).
So, confronted with my list, i observe in these films the running themes of violent retribution and associated guilt, the struggle for freedom in oppressive contexts, and the realising of one's self and one's power (for good or for ill). Most of these stories are stories of men, and even one of the two that are stories of women is about men not dealing very well with women's changing place. The irony is that Anchorman had to be set in the 70's to get it's message across, where, judging by my list, it's still just as relevant an issue now as it was then. Look at the gender of the directors of these films, for example.
This could all be down to me and my choices, and probably partially is, but i look at these themes and issues raised and i have to ask what the balance is of what these films say about me for selecting them, and what they say about this past decade which has produced them.
What about your favourites? What does your mental cinematic landscape of this past decade look like?
Ok, honorary mentions for those most narrowly missing out: Joyeux Noel, There Will Be Blood, No Country For Old Men, Let The Right One In, United 93, The Darjeeling Limited, Moon, Primer and Stranger Than Fiction.
I wish i wasn't so hard on myself. I wish i could allow 10 lists of 10 movies each - maybe 10 movies per genre or something. But, alas, i'm too cruel and hard of heart. The task i have asked of myself is to come up with the best / my favourite 10 pieces of cinema from the past 10 years. Not necessarily a film from each year, but 10 in total. It has brought me joy to think back over films that have thrilled and moved me (maybe even films that have helped shape my thinking), but it's been really painful to leave so many out. Like, i'm talking about a real, deep, stinging pain.
So, bearing in mind our potentially different tastes, and the different things which were happening in our lives when we saw these films; and also bearing in mind that i haven't seen everything that's come out in this time (in fact there are some highly acclaimed pieces which i haven't caught), here's my 10 (in no order whatsoever):
- The 'Bourne' trilogy (Doug Liman, 2002 and Paul Greengrass, 2004 + 2007)
- Batman Begins / The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2005 + 2008)
- Munich (Steven Spielberg, 2005)
- Pan's Labyrinth (Guillmero Del Toro, 2006)
- Dead Man's Shoes (Shane Meadows, 2004)
- Into The Wild (Sean Penn, 2007)
- Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee, 2005)
- Lost In Translation (Sofia Coppola, 2003)
- The Lives Of Others (Florian Henckel van Donnersmarck, 2006)
Gerd Wiesler: No. It's for me.
- Anchorman (Adam McKay, 2004) = Shaun Of The Dead (Edgar Wright, 2004)
2004 and 2005 appear to be the biggest hitting years for me, with 7 films between them. If we discount the multi-featurings of actors and directors in franchises, Heath Ledger and Paddy Considine would then seem the biggest hitting stars, cropping up twice (The Dark Knight and Brokeback Mountain, and The Bourne Ultimatum and Dead Man's Shoes respectively).
So, confronted with my list, i observe in these films the running themes of violent retribution and associated guilt, the struggle for freedom in oppressive contexts, and the realising of one's self and one's power (for good or for ill). Most of these stories are stories of men, and even one of the two that are stories of women is about men not dealing very well with women's changing place. The irony is that Anchorman had to be set in the 70's to get it's message across, where, judging by my list, it's still just as relevant an issue now as it was then. Look at the gender of the directors of these films, for example.
This could all be down to me and my choices, and probably partially is, but i look at these themes and issues raised and i have to ask what the balance is of what these films say about me for selecting them, and what they say about this past decade which has produced them.
What about your favourites? What does your mental cinematic landscape of this past decade look like?
Ok, honorary mentions for those most narrowly missing out: Joyeux Noel, There Will Be Blood, No Country For Old Men, Let The Right One In, United 93, The Darjeeling Limited, Moon, Primer and Stranger Than Fiction.
30 November 2010
Rotten smelling things, or the truth and other fictions .2
I am, it may have caught your attention, a MASSIVE football fan. One of my very favourite things in all the world is playing football. I played last night and took a nasty stud to the ankle. Nursing it today and feeling it ache, is a pleasure - such is the twisted extent of my love of the game. I adore Tottenham Hotspur, they're such an incredible club to follow; so regularly being close to success, and so often cocking it up provides the fullest experiences imaginable for a football fan. We regularly get both ends of the drama. At the moment we're riding particularly high, which just means trying to enjoy it while waiting for the crash. What a rush! Internationally, i follow England. I make a point of always following England, catching all the friendlies and all the qualifiers, not just riding the wave that comes around every two years (if we're lucky). Suffice to say, the idea of England hosting the FIFA World Cup(tm) 2018 would, to me, be amazing! The greatest footballing nations in the world competing for the game's greatest prize, on these shores, would be a dream. I don't need to mention that the last time it was here we won it, but i will.
Watching last night's Panorama programme, however, saw me agree with, ahem, David Mellor. This is more surprising to me than it is to you, i can assure you. Not only is he a peculiar looking Conservative Party member who is partial to extra-marital ventures, particularly ones involving toes, but he's a Chelski fan too.
Anyway, his point was that as the inventors of the beautiful game we should press FIFA hard to clear up corruption in its ranks, rather than bow and scrape to them for the right to host their competition.
You see, the programme asked questions about money which appears to show FIFA executive committee members having taken bribes from its marketing company in exchange for votes which would secure lucrative World Cup contracts with sponsors. Not only this, but it showed how nations bidding to host the event subject themselves to every desire FIFA has. In some cases new laws must be passed to allow The World Cup to go ahead in the manner to which FIFA is accustomed. This, according to representatives of the Dutch bid, includes the suspension of workers rights and 'protection' for sponsors - inclusive of complete tax breaks on their behalf. These sponsors aren't minnows by the way, these sponsors are companies like Coca-Cola, Mars and McDonald's (i wonder if Panorama should do a show investigating just what any of these companies think their products have to do with the world of professional sports).
When challenged about this the former sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe MP, said it was reasonable "because the benefits of hosting the World Cup outweigh the disbenefits". Clearly 'The George W. Bush School For Elocution' is finally off the ground, and Mr. Sutcliffe is just one example of the many people whose use of language has been disunconfused.
So what of FIFA? Surely the responsible thing to do is face up to charges and clear out corruption rather than do nothing but look offended. That wreaks of a body who knows it's dirty to the core. To not even be able to make a pretence of interest in routing out corruption, in favour of insisting - despite the evidence - on innocence, is a mark of deep guilt. It reminds me of a bunch of young people who've been seen doing things wrong who, when challenged, insist "I never!".
- But there, see? Look, that's you on the video tape.
- But i never!
- But, that's you, we're both watching you do it right now.
- But i never!
All that's left is the protestation of innocence.
And what of our bid? Well, now, despicably, two days from the FIFA vote which will decide who hosts the World Cup in 2018, Cameron, Beckham, and others responsible for landing the bid are busy schmoozing with FIFA and condemning the BBC for running the programme for fear it will have damaged England's chances. I'm with Mellor(!?), let's please not worship FIFA so they might in turn grace us a with a dirty (yet massively profitable) rag of a competition. I for one don't want it. Can't we rather impress on them a refusal to acknowledge their power until they restore fairness and integrity to the game we love?
Oh, and FIFA, sort out goal-line technology! I'd love to know where the money that's blocking that one is coming form.
Watching last night's Panorama programme, however, saw me agree with, ahem, David Mellor. This is more surprising to me than it is to you, i can assure you. Not only is he a peculiar looking Conservative Party member who is partial to extra-marital ventures, particularly ones involving toes, but he's a Chelski fan too.
Anyway, his point was that as the inventors of the beautiful game we should press FIFA hard to clear up corruption in its ranks, rather than bow and scrape to them for the right to host their competition.
You see, the programme asked questions about money which appears to show FIFA executive committee members having taken bribes from its marketing company in exchange for votes which would secure lucrative World Cup contracts with sponsors. Not only this, but it showed how nations bidding to host the event subject themselves to every desire FIFA has. In some cases new laws must be passed to allow The World Cup to go ahead in the manner to which FIFA is accustomed. This, according to representatives of the Dutch bid, includes the suspension of workers rights and 'protection' for sponsors - inclusive of complete tax breaks on their behalf. These sponsors aren't minnows by the way, these sponsors are companies like Coca-Cola, Mars and McDonald's (i wonder if Panorama should do a show investigating just what any of these companies think their products have to do with the world of professional sports).
When challenged about this the former sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe MP, said it was reasonable "because the benefits of hosting the World Cup outweigh the disbenefits". Clearly 'The George W. Bush School For Elocution' is finally off the ground, and Mr. Sutcliffe is just one example of the many people whose use of language has been disunconfused.
So what of FIFA? Surely the responsible thing to do is face up to charges and clear out corruption rather than do nothing but look offended. That wreaks of a body who knows it's dirty to the core. To not even be able to make a pretence of interest in routing out corruption, in favour of insisting - despite the evidence - on innocence, is a mark of deep guilt. It reminds me of a bunch of young people who've been seen doing things wrong who, when challenged, insist "I never!".
- But there, see? Look, that's you on the video tape.
- But i never!
- But, that's you, we're both watching you do it right now.
- But i never!
All that's left is the protestation of innocence.
And what of our bid? Well, now, despicably, two days from the FIFA vote which will decide who hosts the World Cup in 2018, Cameron, Beckham, and others responsible for landing the bid are busy schmoozing with FIFA and condemning the BBC for running the programme for fear it will have damaged England's chances. I'm with Mellor(!?), let's please not worship FIFA so they might in turn grace us a with a dirty (yet massively profitable) rag of a competition. I for one don't want it. Can't we rather impress on them a refusal to acknowledge their power until they restore fairness and integrity to the game we love?
Oh, and FIFA, sort out goal-line technology! I'd love to know where the money that's blocking that one is coming form.
Rotten smelling things, or the truth and other fictions .1
The leaked American files story is an incredible piece of history unfolding before our eyes. It's a marker of the power of the internet and the way the internet has affected information sharing. This isn't just a misplaced disc with names etc of civil servants, this has massive global significance - not least because America is considering declaring a 'War On Journalism'. The first move of which, no doubt, will be to carpet bomb Iran. This is a leak which will be felt around the world, and any number of world leaders and diplomats may react in any number of ways.
America has come out strong saying that the leak is criminal and those responsible will be hunted down and punished - punished like no-one has ever been punished before, since this is a line YOU DO NOT CROSS! This response is clearly a reaction fuelled by embarrassment and a desire to look strong. Anger is the obvious way to go.
Meanwhile the rest of the media seems caught up in what will most likely turn out to be a key marker in the discussion over the freedom of the press V national security. Of course, the press being the press, this is happening while they simultaneously get to revel in the sensationalism of snippets of the leaked information.
Some of this stuff seems noteworthy, and some might even be damaging, but most of it appears to just embarrass individual politicians around the world. Not by virtue of it having exposed scandals in private lives or corruption in their political practises, but by taking clumsy comments they've made in what they assumed were safe places, writing them down and reading massive value judgements on the individuals into these notes.
The question i have is what sort of a document was it that was leaked and who thought it would be worthwhile document to authorise and keep? It's all such petty nonsense. It's like a scene in a primary school classroom where someones diary's been found and read out-loud. "I like Jason, but his trainers are cheap and he can be mean to Ashley. I don't like that because i like Ashley, even though she's a bit smelly sometimes. Kyra's really cool but she won't talk to me because she's up herself. And she's all buddy-buddy with Jordan who i really fancy. If he wants to kiss Kyra though, he can for all i care cos he's fit but he is stupid too...". The diary gets thrown round the room, different people reading out different bits, America, getting more and more cross, starts shouting death threats through its tears. Everyone waiting to see what's said about them then getting upset and hurt, but not as upset as those who don't get any sort of mention at all - for there, there is true pain.
So Prince Andrew is cocky (he's a prince!) and led a conversation which verged on the rude (he's a human!). So some German politicians want to reap political gain (their politicians!), and so Prince Phillip can be rude about the French (he's a racist!). It's as shocking as saying something like, i don't know, like... David Cameron and George Osborne lack depth. We know, we've seen them talk and have assessed them ourselves. Surely these aren't the sort of judgements you need to write down!? Surely this isn't the sort of information you keep and pass amongst yourselves in files marked 'Confidential' while saying things like "Our geese often stare at the moon" and replying "That's what the Spring time is for"!?
All the comments are so subjective it's ridiculous. And it's a great, great shame for two reasons. First, it will have a bearing on international politics. Secondly, because it has undoubtedly confirmed our most quietly held fears: the people running the planet, and their means of doing so, are exactly the same as the figures and politics which govern a school class' social scene. Shudder, weep and pray, for this is the world you live in.
America has come out strong saying that the leak is criminal and those responsible will be hunted down and punished - punished like no-one has ever been punished before, since this is a line YOU DO NOT CROSS! This response is clearly a reaction fuelled by embarrassment and a desire to look strong. Anger is the obvious way to go.
Meanwhile the rest of the media seems caught up in what will most likely turn out to be a key marker in the discussion over the freedom of the press V national security. Of course, the press being the press, this is happening while they simultaneously get to revel in the sensationalism of snippets of the leaked information.
Some of this stuff seems noteworthy, and some might even be damaging, but most of it appears to just embarrass individual politicians around the world. Not by virtue of it having exposed scandals in private lives or corruption in their political practises, but by taking clumsy comments they've made in what they assumed were safe places, writing them down and reading massive value judgements on the individuals into these notes.
The question i have is what sort of a document was it that was leaked and who thought it would be worthwhile document to authorise and keep? It's all such petty nonsense. It's like a scene in a primary school classroom where someones diary's been found and read out-loud. "I like Jason, but his trainers are cheap and he can be mean to Ashley. I don't like that because i like Ashley, even though she's a bit smelly sometimes. Kyra's really cool but she won't talk to me because she's up herself. And she's all buddy-buddy with Jordan who i really fancy. If he wants to kiss Kyra though, he can for all i care cos he's fit but he is stupid too...". The diary gets thrown round the room, different people reading out different bits, America, getting more and more cross, starts shouting death threats through its tears. Everyone waiting to see what's said about them then getting upset and hurt, but not as upset as those who don't get any sort of mention at all - for there, there is true pain.
All the comments are so subjective it's ridiculous. And it's a great, great shame for two reasons. First, it will have a bearing on international politics. Secondly, because it has undoubtedly confirmed our most quietly held fears: the people running the planet, and their means of doing so, are exactly the same as the figures and politics which govern a school class' social scene. Shudder, weep and pray, for this is the world you live in.
26 November 2010
American marketeering
American television broadcasting is terrible. A twenty-five minute show will have three (THREE!!) ad breaks, where in the UK it would have one. More on American programming later, perhaps. For now though i want to highlight the incongruousness in much of the advertising that takes place. Look at these two commercials and compare and contrast:
What an outrageous list of side-effects! Are you supposed to get some sleep between bouts of plotting ways to off yourself? And this is supposed to entice me into buying the product? The company is obviously adhering to American law about having to feature side-effects in drug adverts. But, compare it to this bare faced cheek:
No negatives in this product whatsoever then! Notice how it's the milkman-conscience in white who's talking her into it as well, rather than the one in red as would be expected. This milk really is the hero! It reminds me of our own nutella advert where as the line "...and with two whole hazelnuts in each jar..." is spoken, a jar is shown being opened and hundreds of the buggers pour forth.
American adverts seemed to fall into one of three categories. About 33% of them were for cars / insurance policies / cleaning products / clothing / perfume etc, 33% were for some convenience food or fast-food chain, and the other 33% were for the latest bit of fitness equipment or regime. By far my favourite of this latter category was this, for unspeakably obvious reasons:
Overall though, this next one was the one that rode fastest and loosest with it's benefits, and it summed up perfectly the juxtaposition of the ratio i just mentioned.
(This was the only form i could find the advert in, sorry. If you whizz it forward to 58 seconds, it's right there)
That's right. Watch it again if you don't believe it, your eyes do not deceive you.
Add this all together and you've got yourself your own little American Psyche.
What an outrageous list of side-effects! Are you supposed to get some sleep between bouts of plotting ways to off yourself? And this is supposed to entice me into buying the product? The company is obviously adhering to American law about having to feature side-effects in drug adverts. But, compare it to this bare faced cheek:
No negatives in this product whatsoever then! Notice how it's the milkman-conscience in white who's talking her into it as well, rather than the one in red as would be expected. This milk really is the hero! It reminds me of our own nutella advert where as the line "...and with two whole hazelnuts in each jar..." is spoken, a jar is shown being opened and hundreds of the buggers pour forth.
American adverts seemed to fall into one of three categories. About 33% of them were for cars / insurance policies / cleaning products / clothing / perfume etc, 33% were for some convenience food or fast-food chain, and the other 33% were for the latest bit of fitness equipment or regime. By far my favourite of this latter category was this, for unspeakably obvious reasons:
Overall though, this next one was the one that rode fastest and loosest with it's benefits, and it summed up perfectly the juxtaposition of the ratio i just mentioned.
(This was the only form i could find the advert in, sorry. If you whizz it forward to 58 seconds, it's right there)
That's right. Watch it again if you don't believe it, your eyes do not deceive you.
Add this all together and you've got yourself your own little American Psyche.
25 November 2010
I (heart) NY
When i was 11 i went on a fortnight's family holiday / road trip around parts of North Eastern USA - Niagara, Pennsylvania, Baltimore, D.C, Blue Ridge Mountains - it was amazing and i had an absolutely incredible time. To get home we had to change flights in JFK. Sitting in, and wandering round, the terminal building was as close as i came to NYC at that point, and even after such an spectacular and exhausting trip, i remember feeling jipped and frustrated that i couldn't get out and see it.
I don't know what my frame of reference for the city would have consisted of at that point; definitely the Statue of Liberty and Empire State Building, definitely yellow cabs, definitely Bill Murray (either being cool, lying to girls and relentlessly hitting on them while getting more and more cross about spectral slime and the destruction of existence hampering his having a good time, or offering trouble-shooting suggestions about the attachment of tiny antlers to mouse's heads by means of staples).
I'll have known about the Yankees, the Giants and the Jets (not the gang who kick-ball-change and pada beret enemies to death, but the men who play 'football' by running into each other hard while throwing and catching the ball with their hands). Most exciting to me though, were the Guardian Angels; the vigilante gang wearing red berets and killing muggers on the subway. I'd have loved to see that. They were even cooler than Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Crocodile Dundee and LL Cool J put together.
Anyway, i never saw any of it. So, 20 years pass and i dream of New York. Then my time comes and i get to go 3 times in 3 months. The first time i mentioned in the previous post; a day and night stop over en route to Haiti, where i have to go around the city with my eyes shut so i don't see anything before my trip proper with Kelly. I did take sneak peeks at Wall Street, the Statue of Liberty, bits of Brooklyn (inc. Bridge) and the Ninja Restaurant though.
The third time was at the end of my trip with Kelly; a bus ride into midtown Manhattan, and a rush-hour taxi ride out to JFK through Queens and Brooklyn - a fantastic way to leave!
The Second time was the biggie. We were in the city for a week staying with my brother, Gethin, in his apartment in Brooklyn. I absolutely loved the time i spent there, and the city itself; the life and vibrancy of the place is incredible. But then, i get-off on 'the urban', i always have. Cities have always stirred and excited me. I don't know what it is, i think it's in the mix of life and proximity of the people, the density of culture(s) and the engineering and architecture in the buildings and mass transport systems. I love that there was initially a design for a way of living, or a natural reason to congregate and then that's grown and been enhanced organically. I make no apology for using that word - there is nature in our cities, and our cities are key indicators to our human nature. What ever it is, New York has it and i loved it!
The way cities speak of who we are is fascinating, though, of course, they don't always say good things. Take Times Square for instance, apparently the most photographed place in the world, a place where all the tourists have to go. For these reasons i both went, and took photographs, and it is spectacular! But what is it? It's a crossing place of a couple of roads where every inch has been commissioned to advertise.
All the space has been sold so it might in turn sell. Incredible technology and energy is employed to present ideals devised by brands to persuade us of the greater meaning afforded to our lives and great leaps in status we'll take should we 'participate' in the worlds of their products. I'm not kidding, there's M&M World (it's a shop) and Toys R Us World (it's not a world, it's a shop) and even Pop Tart World is under construction (it's not a world, it's a shop - an unfinished shop). Brand names emblazoned everywhere and images of beautiful people, naked apart from whatever item they've been employed to glamorise.
It's like the Mecca of commercialism; "Put on your Nikes, for this is holy ground. Stand and worship the illuminated brand names. Celebrate what Disney, McDonalds, Diesel, Prada and Yahoo, in their infinite grace, have done for you!"
Yep, cities tell us about ourselves. This bit of New York is an altar to what we celebrate: Joining with successful brands as a signifier of our personal success. "Our name is up in lights, if you believe in us you can bathe in our glow; our story is your story when you're made in our image - so make yourself in our image".
Of course, other bits of the city tell other stories about our nature, but it was here that i was most disturbed. To see so many people cooing over electrified billboards, all the while conscious of the side of me that was salivating for the hope proffered by these brands, and swelling with pride brought on by seeing the glowing logos of companies i affiliate myself with was...uncomfortable.
The picture below was one i didn't really want taking because of how i was feeling, however, i'm thrilled with the way it came out (quite accidentally) because it captures exactly the disorientation i was feeling. If a picture of my spirit could have been taken instead, it would have looked just like this. Note also that i myself am branded - a walking advert.
There were loads and loads of other spiritual experiences i had in the city: playing football in central park with my brother, the museum of natural history, riding the subway, visiting Coney Island, the privilege of enjoying incredible food - and then the grace of having the very best meal paid for as a gift, surveying the land from the top of the Rockerfeller, getting caught in the fatest rain, just sitting in the foyer of the Guggenhiem museum - but Times Square was the most challenging. It asked: Who is your God? Where is your hope? How strong is the tide of culturally-approved-selfish-ambition against loving your neighbour as yourself? How do you make your voice heard over the din of injustices in production of goods that make you feel self satisfied? Where does this celebration of brand power leave the poor and marginalised?
God was there and i can't wait to go back.
The intro to Woody Allen's Manhattan covers most bases of perspectives on New York wonderfully.
24 November 2010
Old News
Not been on here for a little while. It would seem that the Haiti trip and the all-sorts-of-stuff since has proven too much to begin formulating into blog posts.
So, there was Haiti (please look at the house of hope blog for on the ground news from friends about the issues facing this country), and then there was the end of my term (and employment) as student minister at Wakefield Baptist Church, then there was some job centre action, then a distinct possibility of a post in a church in central London came to nothing, then there was a month's 'holiday of a lifetime' (3 weeks in North Eastern USA, one week in Gran Canaria), then there's been bits and pieces of freelance work for the LEA devising and delivering sex and relationship lesson material for boys in secondary school - alongside a continued search for regular work.
Suffice to say, the burbling flesh that used to be my brain has lost all means of letting me know what's going on and how i should feel about it.
Did you know that in the job centre the touch screen machines you use to look for work have four options their top menu? These four options are 'general search', 'my account', 'detailed search' and 'jobs in the armed forces'. Unbelievable cheek! This is just one example of the many, many things which i could have blogged about but for it being too mashed in with everything else to reason it out and apply words to.
.
So, anyway, sorry about being away. I'm sure bits of all this stuff will find some way out over the next few months.
So, there was Haiti (please look at the house of hope blog for on the ground news from friends about the issues facing this country), and then there was the end of my term (and employment) as student minister at Wakefield Baptist Church, then there was some job centre action, then a distinct possibility of a post in a church in central London came to nothing, then there was a month's 'holiday of a lifetime' (3 weeks in North Eastern USA, one week in Gran Canaria), then there's been bits and pieces of freelance work for the LEA devising and delivering sex and relationship lesson material for boys in secondary school - alongside a continued search for regular work.
Suffice to say, the burbling flesh that used to be my brain has lost all means of letting me know what's going on and how i should feel about it.
Did you know that in the job centre the touch screen machines you use to look for work have four options their top menu? These four options are 'general search', 'my account', 'detailed search' and 'jobs in the armed forces'. Unbelievable cheek! This is just one example of the many, many things which i could have blogged about but for it being too mashed in with everything else to reason it out and apply words to.
So, anyway, sorry about being away. I'm sure bits of all this stuff will find some way out over the next few months.
1 October 2010
How was Haiti?
"Er. Um... well, er. What do you mean?"
If you've been on the receiving end of this response to the question, or one similar, i can only apologise. I have found myself very stuttery and ill-equipped in the face of such interrogation. Indeed the reason for what is now nearly a two month delay in posting anything about it is that i've had (and continue to have) no idea how to construct a post that does it justice.
I've developed a number of ways of responding to people who've wanted to know about the trip based on how much time we have, how much they seem to actually care, and the nature of my relationship with them. You see, i was there for nearly four full weeks from early July to early August, and i can recall reasonably clearly most waking moments - except my more fevered waking moments. Stuff doesn't just pass you by in Haiti; it didn't become a blur of normality - for a 'blanc' like me life in Haiti is in too stark a contrast to 'normal' for it not to make an impact every waking moment. Nothing can be taken for granted, not even poo. (I had diarrhea for a fortnight - a new personal best. I spent a reasonable amount of time counting toilet paper sheets and fantasising about firm poo. I spent nearly 31 years without unpleasantries simultaneously spilling out of both ends, in Haiti i could only manage 5 days. It's a tough country).
I'm no better able to tell the story here than i can if you speak to me, when i think of Haiti my head swirls. Mostly with good things. Here are some recollections and reflections i'll pluck for you though:
The trip took in New York City, Port-au-Prince, and part of the North of the country around Port-du-Paix. These are 3 distinct places which, when held together in one's mind, show how small our world indeed is, as well as how great a disparity is contained within. NYC is one of the world's most powerful cities; when disaster strikes it fractures time. We now live in a 'Post 9-11 world', and we have very good ideas about all that that means. When disaster strikes Port-au-Prince, capital city of a country already on its knees, the fractured land can do little to rally its near impotent infrastructure. The North of the country is also a disaster zone, only, so silent and slow-burn was the tragedy that there doesn't seem to be a particular moment where it struck. And with that comes even less ability to grab itself by the lapels - let alone the rest of the world.
Over the mountain are more mountains - Haitian proverb. This refers to what Creole speakers call "Pwoblem". You might deal with one problem, but all we have is a huge collection of others. Haiti is an incredibly mountainous country, everywhere is uphill and you never feel like you're on top. It seems like that leads to a 'Well, that's my lot' mentality in the people who live there. This can be terribly disheartening and debilitating, but on the other hand it makes way for such beauty. On the sand-striped, filth and debris-laden beaches the very poorest children run, sing, skip, play and chase with exactly the same kind of abandon as any other children. The satisfaction with having work or with a completed a project is huge, as is the appreciation for the simplest things. The hospitality and reliance on community is humbling, so too the resilience of spirit and lack of expectations of 'what one deserves'.
This is a shot of what is now one of my favourite places in the world: an out-of-nowhere football pitch at the top of a mountain
Here is the majesty of the land, the joy and improvisation of the people, and the wonder of football.
I miss my friends in Haiti, but i can at least follow the work of 'Maison Despoir' (House of Hope), a Christian orphanage community who raise children without parents, or children whose parents can no longer afford them, or children whose parents are no longer interested in keeping or supporting them, on the House of Hope blog. You may be interested in doing so too, and i might well be back with more on this soon, since there's so much to say about how the Haiti trip was.
If you've been on the receiving end of this response to the question, or one similar, i can only apologise. I have found myself very stuttery and ill-equipped in the face of such interrogation. Indeed the reason for what is now nearly a two month delay in posting anything about it is that i've had (and continue to have) no idea how to construct a post that does it justice.
I've developed a number of ways of responding to people who've wanted to know about the trip based on how much time we have, how much they seem to actually care, and the nature of my relationship with them. You see, i was there for nearly four full weeks from early July to early August, and i can recall reasonably clearly most waking moments - except my more fevered waking moments. Stuff doesn't just pass you by in Haiti; it didn't become a blur of normality - for a 'blanc' like me life in Haiti is in too stark a contrast to 'normal' for it not to make an impact every waking moment. Nothing can be taken for granted, not even poo. (I had diarrhea for a fortnight - a new personal best. I spent a reasonable amount of time counting toilet paper sheets and fantasising about firm poo. I spent nearly 31 years without unpleasantries simultaneously spilling out of both ends, in Haiti i could only manage 5 days. It's a tough country).
I'm no better able to tell the story here than i can if you speak to me, when i think of Haiti my head swirls. Mostly with good things. Here are some recollections and reflections i'll pluck for you though:
The trip took in New York City, Port-au-Prince, and part of the North of the country around Port-du-Paix. These are 3 distinct places which, when held together in one's mind, show how small our world indeed is, as well as how great a disparity is contained within. NYC is one of the world's most powerful cities; when disaster strikes it fractures time. We now live in a 'Post 9-11 world', and we have very good ideas about all that that means. When disaster strikes Port-au-Prince, capital city of a country already on its knees, the fractured land can do little to rally its near impotent infrastructure. The North of the country is also a disaster zone, only, so silent and slow-burn was the tragedy that there doesn't seem to be a particular moment where it struck. And with that comes even less ability to grab itself by the lapels - let alone the rest of the world.
Over the mountain are more mountains - Haitian proverb. This refers to what Creole speakers call "Pwoblem". You might deal with one problem, but all we have is a huge collection of others. Haiti is an incredibly mountainous country, everywhere is uphill and you never feel like you're on top. It seems like that leads to a 'Well, that's my lot' mentality in the people who live there. This can be terribly disheartening and debilitating, but on the other hand it makes way for such beauty. On the sand-striped, filth and debris-laden beaches the very poorest children run, sing, skip, play and chase with exactly the same kind of abandon as any other children. The satisfaction with having work or with a completed a project is huge, as is the appreciation for the simplest things. The hospitality and reliance on community is humbling, so too the resilience of spirit and lack of expectations of 'what one deserves'.
This is a shot of what is now one of my favourite places in the world: an out-of-nowhere football pitch at the top of a mountain
Here is the majesty of the land, the joy and improvisation of the people, and the wonder of football.
I miss my friends in Haiti, but i can at least follow the work of 'Maison Despoir' (House of Hope), a Christian orphanage community who raise children without parents, or children whose parents can no longer afford them, or children whose parents are no longer interested in keeping or supporting them, on the House of Hope blog. You may be interested in doing so too, and i might well be back with more on this soon, since there's so much to say about how the Haiti trip was.
10 September 2010
Burning hatred
There is a slang expression, which is an extention of the more traditional 'really boils my blood', that makes reference to another bodily fluid being boiled. It's not pleasant, but then it's not meant to be; it's intended to accurately communicate the bitterness, pain and foulness of feeling that comes with being livid about something.
Pastor Terry Jones and his moronic desire to hold a Qur'an burning really boils my p- p- blood!!
I think i'm angry because i can't find any sense anywhere in the whole situation, which means the whole thing is a ridiculous giant spiral of negativity.
Firstly, Mr Jones - apologies, i can't revere you - what happened to "love your neighbour as yourself"? Nevermind the fact that the ensueing 'who is my neighbour?' question was answered in the form of a story wherein a character of a radically different faith perspective to the audience is shockingly hailed not only as neighbour, but as hero. Have you forgotten that this story was told by du-du-duurrrrr Jesus, the man you claim to follow?
What happened to the GOLDEN RULE ie. do unto others as you would have them do to you? Or is it that you would like Muslims to burn Bibles - because to me that doesn't seem like a good way of getting people to consider the life of Christ. It looks more like a good way of getting people to refuse to hear anything about him.
Also, this stuff about "They said they were going to move the ground zero mosque, and now they say they won't - they're liars!" I'm afraid i don't believe you. I wonder if you plan to start your pathetic bonfire off your flamming pants! I can't imagine that your distasteful stunt would for a single moment carry enough clout to persuade muslim leaders to revise all the planning that's gone into the Islamic centre in New York (it's NOT a mosque, and it's NOT at ground zero - see my previous post). Incidentally, i can't think of anything more appropriate to have at ground zero than a point of interfaith engagement.
Secondly, hey, media people, you thick or what!? You can't pretend to be concerned about 'the serious security threat to the U.S, Europe and soldiers in Afghanistan' when, if it weren't for you shouting about this thing, it would've been one of the world's great non-events. Why have you given this idiot such a huge platform for his lunacy - particularly when you're convinced it's as dangerous as you're making out? Oh, silly me, your sales are more important than the security and righteousness you're claiming to defend.
Pardon me Forrest, Stupid is as stupid does? Well so is 'Christian'. And Muslim. Why are we still referring to 'Pastor' Terry as a Christian? Surely his actions so far have refuted enough of Jesus' central teachings that we can no longer call him - or allow him to call himself - 'Christian'. The same goes for the twisted minds who have violently attacked public spaces and transportation systems around the world in the name of Islam. These people are not Muslims, and they're certainly not extremist Muslims any more than Terry Jones is an extremist Christian. Both parties have infact extremely distorted the faiths they claim to represent, this is very, very different from following their faiths to the extreme.
The Stereophonics' song aptly says "It only takes 1 tree to make 1000 matches, it only takes 1 match to burn 1000 trees". I think this is another part of my frustration; this whole thing shows how easily a tiny minority can taint and destroy the good works and good name of a majority. Is destruction really that much more straight-forward than creativity?
I might launch 'National Read A Holy Book From A Different Faith Than Your Own Day'. I might do it to coincide with 'burn a Koran day' - see if more books get read or burnt. Who's with me!
In fact i just did it! Check out this facebook group.
Pastor Terry Jones and his moronic desire to hold a Qur'an burning really boils my p- p- blood!!
I think i'm angry because i can't find any sense anywhere in the whole situation, which means the whole thing is a ridiculous giant spiral of negativity.
Firstly, Mr Jones - apologies, i can't revere you - what happened to "love your neighbour as yourself"? Nevermind the fact that the ensueing 'who is my neighbour?' question was answered in the form of a story wherein a character of a radically different faith perspective to the audience is shockingly hailed not only as neighbour, but as hero. Have you forgotten that this story was told by du-du-duurrrrr Jesus, the man you claim to follow?
What happened to the GOLDEN RULE ie. do unto others as you would have them do to you? Or is it that you would like Muslims to burn Bibles - because to me that doesn't seem like a good way of getting people to consider the life of Christ. It looks more like a good way of getting people to refuse to hear anything about him.
Also, this stuff about "They said they were going to move the ground zero mosque, and now they say they won't - they're liars!" I'm afraid i don't believe you. I wonder if you plan to start your pathetic bonfire off your flamming pants! I can't imagine that your distasteful stunt would for a single moment carry enough clout to persuade muslim leaders to revise all the planning that's gone into the Islamic centre in New York (it's NOT a mosque, and it's NOT at ground zero - see my previous post). Incidentally, i can't think of anything more appropriate to have at ground zero than a point of interfaith engagement.
Secondly, hey, media people, you thick or what!? You can't pretend to be concerned about 'the serious security threat to the U.S, Europe and soldiers in Afghanistan' when, if it weren't for you shouting about this thing, it would've been one of the world's great non-events. Why have you given this idiot such a huge platform for his lunacy - particularly when you're convinced it's as dangerous as you're making out? Oh, silly me, your sales are more important than the security and righteousness you're claiming to defend.
Pardon me Forrest, Stupid is as stupid does? Well so is 'Christian'. And Muslim. Why are we still referring to 'Pastor' Terry as a Christian? Surely his actions so far have refuted enough of Jesus' central teachings that we can no longer call him - or allow him to call himself - 'Christian'. The same goes for the twisted minds who have violently attacked public spaces and transportation systems around the world in the name of Islam. These people are not Muslims, and they're certainly not extremist Muslims any more than Terry Jones is an extremist Christian. Both parties have infact extremely distorted the faiths they claim to represent, this is very, very different from following their faiths to the extreme.
The Stereophonics' song aptly says "It only takes 1 tree to make 1000 matches, it only takes 1 match to burn 1000 trees". I think this is another part of my frustration; this whole thing shows how easily a tiny minority can taint and destroy the good works and good name of a majority. Is destruction really that much more straight-forward than creativity?
I might launch 'National Read A Holy Book From A Different Faith Than Your Own Day'. I might do it to coincide with 'burn a Koran day' - see if more books get read or burnt. Who's with me!
In fact i just did it! Check out this facebook group.
26 August 2010
18 August 2010
Faceman and the Cylon
In the opening credits of The A-Team tv show there's a moment where Face does a 'don't-i-know-you-from-somewhere' gesture to a passing Cylon. Hahaha. This is of course - i can barely type for laughing - because Dirk Benedict, the actor playing Face, got the role off the back of starring in Battlestar Galactica... home to the Cylons. Clever. Incidentally, i firmly believe that it was the very first broadcast of that moment which fractured Modernity and birthed the Postmodern era right before our very eyes, regardless of what anyone else might tell you.
Anyway, remember this post? Well it seems that i may have overlooked a couple of points which would have furthered my case. Check it:
Remember Tron from 1982? This year we get Tron Legacy
Remember Wall Street from 1987? Check out Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Remember Pirhana II from 1981? Grab your magic specs for Pirhana 3D
Remember Red Dawn from 1984? Shame on you! Can't get a trailer for it yet, but yes, they are actually re-doing this. Due this Winter. For those that don't remember, here's the trailer for the original so you can see just how low we're scraping now.
That's right, a bunch of high school kids, led by Patrick Swayze, see off invading Russian forces. Anyone else laugh outloud at the irony of presenting McDonalds as a benign presence in a 'free' America?
So, cinema-goers could for sometime be wandering around with Templeton Peck's 'don't-i-know-you-from-somewhere' expression all over our otherwise bewildered faces. I'm a little concerned about what happens in 20 years time though, when Hollywood is having to draw on this decade for it's ideas. You can't use a tea bag more than twice, surely.
Anyway, remember this post? Well it seems that i may have overlooked a couple of points which would have furthered my case. Check it:
Remember Tron from 1982? This year we get Tron Legacy
Remember Wall Street from 1987? Check out Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Remember Pirhana II from 1981? Grab your magic specs for Pirhana 3D
Remember Red Dawn from 1984? Shame on you! Can't get a trailer for it yet, but yes, they are actually re-doing this. Due this Winter. For those that don't remember, here's the trailer for the original so you can see just how low we're scraping now.
That's right, a bunch of high school kids, led by Patrick Swayze, see off invading Russian forces. Anyone else laugh outloud at the irony of presenting McDonalds as a benign presence in a 'free' America?
So, cinema-goers could for sometime be wandering around with Templeton Peck's 'don't-i-know-you-from-somewhere' expression all over our otherwise bewildered faces. I'm a little concerned about what happens in 20 years time though, when Hollywood is having to draw on this decade for it's ideas. You can't use a tea bag more than twice, surely.
Reception by Inception's reception
Been back from Haiti for a week and a bit now, the Summer is always a bit odd with people away and stuff, which means nothing is quite 'as normal' anyway. Coming back from the time in Haiti to a slightly affected rhythm of life means i'm still working through all that happened and still waiting to speak to certain people about it to help me formulate an even response to the question 'how was Haiti?'. When i figure that out i'll get back to you on it. For now though, it was good.
In the midst of this Summer madness i turn to the only place i know for help with re-orientation: the Summer blockbuster! Specifically, Inception, which i'd been looking forward to for a long while. Having missed its release and the surrounding furore, and having heard close friends and trusted film lovers come out both hailing it and hating it, i felt in a suitable position to judge the truth of the matter. And the truth of the matter is this: It's better than Vanilla Sky.
This post from Glen Marshall and the subsequent comments frame the key points of the discussion well. My view is this -
Tension comes from consequences that matter. You can't make suggestions that it's all a dream and then also expect people to buy into multiple layers of hand-wringing drama, for which, incidentally, things have to keep being invented to make the events of worth - "Ah, well, you see, at this depth of dreaming, and under this particular sedative, if you die you won't wake, you go to (duh-duh-daahhhh) limbo".
Limbo: the most feared outcome imaginable, is voluntarily skipped into and then waltzed out of, after a bit of a look around.
Couldn't buy into the stuff with Leo and his wife, i'm afraid. I instead found Cillian Murphy's character the most sympathetic, which is a shame because he was the one we're supposed to want to be conned.
Like Glen says, good themes: looking at sub-consciousness; the play-off between memory, imagination and creativity; the idea that any worldview you could possibly take is always a "leap of faith"; hints at dementia and the loss of reality within relationships with loved ones. Shame though that we're whisked past these ideas with no time or stimulation for reflection - the next breathtaking sequence is calling.
The sequences were absolutely breathtaking, it's just that they were held together by too thin a thread to bear the cumulative weight of objectives.
The film made me think of too many truly great films that this one can't stand up to. It made me think i would rather be watching The Matrix, Blade Runner, Citizen Kane, Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind, Brazil or the Bournes.
Ellen Page was too painfully serving as 'Basil Exposition'.
Entertained? Yeah, sure. Would i watch it again? Aha. I just have difficulty with how seriously it takes itself and how clever it thinks it is. If you can buy into nonsense though, it works fine.
It is a dream, by the way. Forget the final shot, and forget anything you may have heard about the wedding ring. Think instead about the chronology of the repetition of the 'leap of faith' line. Think about Leo always being chased by faceless agents of some corporation. Think about Leo getting stuck between the two buildings. Think about who handles Leo's totem. Think about how closely Leo's reunion with his children resembles his dreams of them. Think about the slowed down 'je ne regrette rien' serving as the score.
Plus, how old is Tom Berenger!? These past 10 years have really kicked his arse!
In the midst of this Summer madness i turn to the only place i know for help with re-orientation: the Summer blockbuster! Specifically, Inception, which i'd been looking forward to for a long while. Having missed its release and the surrounding furore, and having heard close friends and trusted film lovers come out both hailing it and hating it, i felt in a suitable position to judge the truth of the matter. And the truth of the matter is this: It's better than Vanilla Sky.
This post from Glen Marshall and the subsequent comments frame the key points of the discussion well. My view is this -
Tension comes from consequences that matter. You can't make suggestions that it's all a dream and then also expect people to buy into multiple layers of hand-wringing drama, for which, incidentally, things have to keep being invented to make the events of worth - "Ah, well, you see, at this depth of dreaming, and under this particular sedative, if you die you won't wake, you go to (duh-duh-daahhhh) limbo".
Limbo: the most feared outcome imaginable, is voluntarily skipped into and then waltzed out of, after a bit of a look around.
Couldn't buy into the stuff with Leo and his wife, i'm afraid. I instead found Cillian Murphy's character the most sympathetic, which is a shame because he was the one we're supposed to want to be conned.
Like Glen says, good themes: looking at sub-consciousness; the play-off between memory, imagination and creativity; the idea that any worldview you could possibly take is always a "leap of faith"; hints at dementia and the loss of reality within relationships with loved ones. Shame though that we're whisked past these ideas with no time or stimulation for reflection - the next breathtaking sequence is calling.
The sequences were absolutely breathtaking, it's just that they were held together by too thin a thread to bear the cumulative weight of objectives.
The film made me think of too many truly great films that this one can't stand up to. It made me think i would rather be watching The Matrix, Blade Runner, Citizen Kane, Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind, Brazil or the Bournes.
Ellen Page was too painfully serving as 'Basil Exposition'.
Entertained? Yeah, sure. Would i watch it again? Aha. I just have difficulty with how seriously it takes itself and how clever it thinks it is. If you can buy into nonsense though, it works fine.
It is a dream, by the way. Forget the final shot, and forget anything you may have heard about the wedding ring. Think instead about the chronology of the repetition of the 'leap of faith' line. Think about Leo always being chased by faceless agents of some corporation. Think about Leo getting stuck between the two buildings. Think about who handles Leo's totem. Think about how closely Leo's reunion with his children resembles his dreams of them. Think about the slowed down 'je ne regrette rien' serving as the score.
Plus, how old is Tom Berenger!? These past 10 years have really kicked his arse!
14 July 2010
Can't stop, got to fly...
Not posted anything in a little while, not for lack of activity i can assure you. In fact the main reason i haven't posted has been due to over-activity: World Cup, Glastonbury, assignments, meeting churches... and preparing for a 3 1/2 week trip to Haiti with charity Hands of Hope. No real time to comment on any of that stuff right now, proper comment will follow (in about 3 1/2 weeks).
This post is a plea to those of you who pray, or indeed to those of you who simply wish others well. Here's a prayer guide that team members have been given, which i share with you by means of invitation. The two teams spoken of are two teams of 4, one of which leaves Wakefield in about 10 minutes (1am 14-07-10) with me in it, and the other leaves in about a weeks time.
I'll be back soon and let you know all about it.
- The first team who leave UK on 14th July. The second team who leave UK on 25th July.
- Safe flights and connections all the way up to Port de Paix de Paix in northern Haiti especially in the little 16 seater plane!
- That any impending BA strike or volcanoes will not affect the schedules, outbound or return.
- The work that the two teams will be engaged with – placing a concrete roof on a 2 storey building. Liaising with the partners and making future plans.
- Safety on the building site with no injuries, safe travel on the roads, good health for all.
- Safe transport and passage of the medical supplies and funds for the partners with no problems at customs.
- Great team spirit, where the team quickly gels together and works as one.
Continued good and strengthening relationships with our partners - Bethanie Baptist Church, House of Hope Children’s Hospital, Beracca Vocational School.
- Real understanding of the needs of the partners and communities in which they are located, especially in the aftermath of the earthquake.
- Good communication with the partners. Real insight into what Hands of Hope need to do alongside the partners in the future.
- Openness to the moving of God’s Spirit in what ever unexpected direction He might take us in.
- Family and work and responsibilities left behind.
- That we all have a great time and be good for each other.
- We will be ready to hear and see what God has to show/teach us
- We will use what we learn when we return home
- Good safe trip back (23rd July, 7th August) with lots of amazing memories.
- For the Spirit of the living God to fall upon the people and country of Haiti.
This post is a plea to those of you who pray, or indeed to those of you who simply wish others well. Here's a prayer guide that team members have been given, which i share with you by means of invitation. The two teams spoken of are two teams of 4, one of which leaves Wakefield in about 10 minutes (1am 14-07-10) with me in it, and the other leaves in about a weeks time.
I'll be back soon and let you know all about it.
- The first team who leave UK on 14th July. The second team who leave UK on 25th July.
- Safe flights and connections all the way up to Port de Paix de Paix in northern Haiti especially in the little 16 seater plane!
- That any impending BA strike or volcanoes will not affect the schedules, outbound or return.
- The work that the two teams will be engaged with – placing a concrete roof on a 2 storey building. Liaising with the partners and making future plans.
- Safety on the building site with no injuries, safe travel on the roads, good health for all.
- Safe transport and passage of the medical supplies and funds for the partners with no problems at customs.
- Great team spirit, where the team quickly gels together and works as one.
Continued good and strengthening relationships with our partners - Bethanie Baptist Church, House of Hope Children’s Hospital, Beracca Vocational School.
- Real understanding of the needs of the partners and communities in which they are located, especially in the aftermath of the earthquake.
- Good communication with the partners. Real insight into what Hands of Hope need to do alongside the partners in the future.
- Openness to the moving of God’s Spirit in what ever unexpected direction He might take us in.
- Family and work and responsibilities left behind.
- That we all have a great time and be good for each other.
- We will be ready to hear and see what God has to show/teach us
- We will use what we learn when we return home
- Good safe trip back (23rd July, 7th August) with lots of amazing memories.
- For the Spirit of the living God to fall upon the people and country of Haiti.
16 June 2010
*Pathetically weeps at the thought of devising a post title*
I have a terribly publicly known secret: from time to time when i preach, i also cry. A little. Well, sometimes i cry, sometimes i just get a bit choked.
My experience of this is very mixed. On the one hand it's obviously rubbish. It is embarrassing, and i do feel stupid. Also going round my head is how irritating it must be for some people, in the same way oscar-winning speech whiners wind everyone up. People must be thinking "get over yourself, get to the point, or put the mic down and get away from the front". Others will be thinking "Wow, you really remind me of Sylvester Stallone... having his arse kicked by Estelle Getty in 'Stop, or my mom will shoot'". Yet others will suspect a cynical rouse whereby i'm attempting to employ some sort of emotional blackmail in a bid to manipulate the congregation.
All these things are regrettable and make me wish i didn't carry this affliction. The real kicker with it for me though, is how frustrating it is to be rendered silent while preaching. While i look to communicate a fragile point, for which i need my very best words to be most carefully aligned, i'm suddenly robbed of them all, only for them to have been replaced with silent sobs or a pain in my throat and a stinging in my eyes. Or, occasionally, by a little bit of snot.
However, on the other hand, i like it - to a degree. It comes from a place of genuine heart where i'm deeply feeling the weight of what i'm saying, to a level where that weight is clearly much, much bigger than i am. I like that because it has the sense 'of God' about it, and that encourages me. It's also rooted in three other things that i can identify:
- One is that perhaps i'm feeling the grief of what i'm describing.
- Another thing is anxiety because i feel that what i'm saying is important, it's something i've been entrusted with, and i'm hoping to God that i don't botch it. Or rather, the anxiety comes because the words i'm using can't fully contain what it is that i'm trying to express.
- The other thing it's rooted in is my own vulnerability. Often, if i'm saying something which is outside my sense of where most people are in their thought (or would admit to being), but which i'm convinced about and have struggled with, i feel terribly exposed and at huge risk of expulsion (or something like it), and the difficulty of the journey i've been on to get to that point all comes out.
This Sunday past was one of those Sundays. As well as looking to give account of myself here, there was a further thought that struck me. As well as some people finding the whole thing irritating, there are those who find it endearing, and others for whom it's a mark of authenticity in what i'm saying - or at least in my experience of what i'm saying.
It came back to me that one person who was there had reported to a third party that "it was good. I wasn't paying attention until he got upset, and that drew me in". So here's the thought:
We have this huge tendency to separate 'head' and 'heart' / emotion and reason / thinking and feeling. We're aware of this, and our post-enlightenment, post-modern world seeks to address it, but do we do it enough? If there is 'Spirit', it is surely a full-bodied combination, and potent exacerbation, of both parts. Do we still pay too much regard to reason at the expense of emotion? Do we do this more in preaching than in other realms? Do we require reason to lead us to emotion, or do we just pretend we do? What's the appropriate balance for preachers; for them to have thoroughly thought something through, or for them having been deeply affected by it?
My experience of this is very mixed. On the one hand it's obviously rubbish. It is embarrassing, and i do feel stupid. Also going round my head is how irritating it must be for some people, in the same way oscar-winning speech whiners wind everyone up. People must be thinking "get over yourself, get to the point, or put the mic down and get away from the front". Others will be thinking "Wow, you really remind me of Sylvester Stallone... having his arse kicked by Estelle Getty in 'Stop, or my mom will shoot'". Yet others will suspect a cynical rouse whereby i'm attempting to employ some sort of emotional blackmail in a bid to manipulate the congregation.
All these things are regrettable and make me wish i didn't carry this affliction. The real kicker with it for me though, is how frustrating it is to be rendered silent while preaching. While i look to communicate a fragile point, for which i need my very best words to be most carefully aligned, i'm suddenly robbed of them all, only for them to have been replaced with silent sobs or a pain in my throat and a stinging in my eyes. Or, occasionally, by a little bit of snot.
However, on the other hand, i like it - to a degree. It comes from a place of genuine heart where i'm deeply feeling the weight of what i'm saying, to a level where that weight is clearly much, much bigger than i am. I like that because it has the sense 'of God' about it, and that encourages me. It's also rooted in three other things that i can identify:
- One is that perhaps i'm feeling the grief of what i'm describing.
- Another thing is anxiety because i feel that what i'm saying is important, it's something i've been entrusted with, and i'm hoping to God that i don't botch it. Or rather, the anxiety comes because the words i'm using can't fully contain what it is that i'm trying to express.
- The other thing it's rooted in is my own vulnerability. Often, if i'm saying something which is outside my sense of where most people are in their thought (or would admit to being), but which i'm convinced about and have struggled with, i feel terribly exposed and at huge risk of expulsion (or something like it), and the difficulty of the journey i've been on to get to that point all comes out.
This Sunday past was one of those Sundays. As well as looking to give account of myself here, there was a further thought that struck me. As well as some people finding the whole thing irritating, there are those who find it endearing, and others for whom it's a mark of authenticity in what i'm saying - or at least in my experience of what i'm saying.
It came back to me that one person who was there had reported to a third party that "it was good. I wasn't paying attention until he got upset, and that drew me in". So here's the thought:
We have this huge tendency to separate 'head' and 'heart' / emotion and reason / thinking and feeling. We're aware of this, and our post-enlightenment, post-modern world seeks to address it, but do we do it enough? If there is 'Spirit', it is surely a full-bodied combination, and potent exacerbation, of both parts. Do we still pay too much regard to reason at the expense of emotion? Do we do this more in preaching than in other realms? Do we require reason to lead us to emotion, or do we just pretend we do? What's the appropriate balance for preachers; for them to have thoroughly thought something through, or for them having been deeply affected by it?
3 June 2010
England's lament.
Advisory: Explicit Content.
It's World Cup time so the world and her partner is trying to cash-in by attempting to write the next 'Football's coming home'. Sadly, so are Baddiel, Skinner and The Lightening seeds - literally the next 'football's coming home'. Their effort is an ever-so-slightly tweaked version of the song they've re-released every tournament since 1996. So no doubt everyone else's efforts to top the charts and get the terraces chanting their tune will be in vain.
Out of this milieu of 'musical'-England-supporting-football-based-desperation rises one song. It won't be a hit, no-one will sing it and i can't even find it anywhere to buy. In fact i'm not even really sure who's done it or what it's called.That in itself is refreshing enough, no self-publicity, just a song.
What i really like about it is the way it contains bits of everything associated with English football fans. There is a strong sense of wit and self-deprecation, combined with hope and passion. But there is also thuggery and xenophobia / racism - which i'm not entirely sure is celebrated or lampooned. I think the video slightly errs towards celebrating it, but the song on its own is self-aware and ironic.
What underpins all this though, and gives the song its worth, is a surprising sense of lament that comes from the guitar, and the sense of almost mourning found in usually aggressive and upbeat chants. Yes, it probably is about lamenting England's footballing performances; the way we always have to hark back to '66; the way we always seem to be undone by injury or petulance on the part of key players; the way we already know we'll go out because we can't score penalties. But i also read it as lament for the things already referred to here; the thuggery, the racism, the violence, the excesses. Or maybe i just desperately hope that that's what's going on. Either way, i find myself strangely moved by it.
Health warning: Language is strong, the chorus revolves around the 'Let's go something mental' chant.
It's World Cup time so the world and her partner is trying to cash-in by attempting to write the next 'Football's coming home'. Sadly, so are Baddiel, Skinner and The Lightening seeds - literally the next 'football's coming home'. Their effort is an ever-so-slightly tweaked version of the song they've re-released every tournament since 1996. So no doubt everyone else's efforts to top the charts and get the terraces chanting their tune will be in vain.
Out of this milieu of 'musical'-England-supporting-football-based-desperation rises one song. It won't be a hit, no-one will sing it and i can't even find it anywhere to buy. In fact i'm not even really sure who's done it or what it's called.That in itself is refreshing enough, no self-publicity, just a song.
What i really like about it is the way it contains bits of everything associated with English football fans. There is a strong sense of wit and self-deprecation, combined with hope and passion. But there is also thuggery and xenophobia / racism - which i'm not entirely sure is celebrated or lampooned. I think the video slightly errs towards celebrating it, but the song on its own is self-aware and ironic.
What underpins all this though, and gives the song its worth, is a surprising sense of lament that comes from the guitar, and the sense of almost mourning found in usually aggressive and upbeat chants. Yes, it probably is about lamenting England's footballing performances; the way we always have to hark back to '66; the way we always seem to be undone by injury or petulance on the part of key players; the way we already know we'll go out because we can't score penalties. But i also read it as lament for the things already referred to here; the thuggery, the racism, the violence, the excesses. Or maybe i just desperately hope that that's what's going on. Either way, i find myself strangely moved by it.
Health warning: Language is strong, the chorus revolves around the 'Let's go something mental' chant.
1 June 2010
A Mars a day helps your pride go away
Mars and John Barnes (via New Order) collaborate on the all-time greatest exercise in exchanging shame for cash.
28 May 2010
Formed.
This Summer marks the end of four years of 'ministeral formation' for me. I still have some of the degree to finish, but the 'vicar school' bit is done. I remember very clearly, on the drive home after being accepted on to the course, catching chorus lyrics in a song i'd not clocked previously on an album i was listening to a lot at that point. The album was Hard-Fi's Stars of CCTV, and the track: Unnecessary Trouble.
"There's just no need to cause unnecessary trouble, just make sure you cause trouble where it's necessary."
(I post this for the song, NOT the quality of the video)
This spoke to me of principles (of the moral variety, not the mortar board kind), faithfulness and boldness, and i found that helpful in my approach to training, particularly while working out if there was a distinction between 'a call' and 'my call'.
So training / formation begins and one of, if not the, first classes features discussion on David Nash's wooden boulder which made it's way to the sea over the course of several years. David revisted the area to try and find and photogragh where the boulder had got up to every few years. Each time the boulder had changed and moved on in its journey. This served as an illustration for our journeys, our changing thought, our influences and our spirituality.
From there many words have been written and wrestled with, and many concepts have been described, applied and grappled with - well, four years worth to be exact.
In March this year Kelly switched jobs, moving from the Arts Council to the Yorkshire Sculpture Park. YSP is about to launch its new exhibition and as such it's a busy time; opening event, installation, briefing from the artist, and tonight there's a staff party with the artist (which i somehow get to be at).
This new exhibition is by David Nash, otherwise known as 'the boulder dude'. I thought it a fascinating coincidence that one of the very earliest parts of my training, as part of the foundation module, was about reflecting on the journey, and re-visitation, of the wandering boulder, and then at the end of the four years i get to meet the artist responsible. It frames the whole experience perfectly, and obviously gives cause to reflect on the course i've plotted myself inbetween times. When thinking about this moving wooden boulder another lyric came to mind which took me a little bit of effort to place. "This rock has got to roll", i eventually realised, is from the Fun Lovin Criminals track 'Couldn't Get It Right' on the Mimosa album.
The song is obviously about moving on, and it also speaks of having waited for a sign that never came. I find that that seems to have a resonnance with the position i currently find myself in, though i'm still waiting. A bit.
So, where to from here my little boulder friend? Let's see...
"There's just no need to cause unnecessary trouble, just make sure you cause trouble where it's necessary."
(I post this for the song, NOT the quality of the video)
This spoke to me of principles (of the moral variety, not the mortar board kind), faithfulness and boldness, and i found that helpful in my approach to training, particularly while working out if there was a distinction between 'a call' and 'my call'.
So training / formation begins and one of, if not the, first classes features discussion on David Nash's wooden boulder which made it's way to the sea over the course of several years. David revisted the area to try and find and photogragh where the boulder had got up to every few years. Each time the boulder had changed and moved on in its journey. This served as an illustration for our journeys, our changing thought, our influences and our spirituality.
From there many words have been written and wrestled with, and many concepts have been described, applied and grappled with - well, four years worth to be exact.
In March this year Kelly switched jobs, moving from the Arts Council to the Yorkshire Sculpture Park. YSP is about to launch its new exhibition and as such it's a busy time; opening event, installation, briefing from the artist, and tonight there's a staff party with the artist (which i somehow get to be at).
This new exhibition is by David Nash, otherwise known as 'the boulder dude'. I thought it a fascinating coincidence that one of the very earliest parts of my training, as part of the foundation module, was about reflecting on the journey, and re-visitation, of the wandering boulder, and then at the end of the four years i get to meet the artist responsible. It frames the whole experience perfectly, and obviously gives cause to reflect on the course i've plotted myself inbetween times. When thinking about this moving wooden boulder another lyric came to mind which took me a little bit of effort to place. "This rock has got to roll", i eventually realised, is from the Fun Lovin Criminals track 'Couldn't Get It Right' on the Mimosa album.
The song is obviously about moving on, and it also speaks of having waited for a sign that never came. I find that that seems to have a resonnance with the position i currently find myself in, though i'm still waiting. A bit.
So, where to from here my little boulder friend? Let's see...
20 May 2010
19 May 2010
Does my narcissi-silly look big in this?
So sick was i of youtube videos not fitting fully on to the page of the former layout of my blog that i had to change it.
I loved how it used to look; i loved the colours, i loved the font and i loved the format, but sadly it was not flexible enough, so away with it! I shall miss it all, and it will take me some time to get used to this new set-up. But i want to assure you that this is the same narcissi-silly as before; the same lowbrow, inane, overly critical and cynical, self-loving stream of [fill the blank] that you have become accustomed to, just differently colour-schemed and bordered is all. Hope you like it.
I loved how it used to look; i loved the colours, i loved the font and i loved the format, but sadly it was not flexible enough, so away with it! I shall miss it all, and it will take me some time to get used to this new set-up. But i want to assure you that this is the same narcissi-silly as before; the same lowbrow, inane, overly critical and cynical, self-loving stream of [fill the blank] that you have become accustomed to, just differently colour-schemed and bordered is all. Hope you like it.
13 May 2010
Jesus wants our churches to be really, really good-looking.
Waiting for election things to settle a bit before blogging on that... that... circus.
In the meantime, here's a parody of the type of church lots of Christians hope for as we move more fully into the 21st Century. I think these fantasies are very ripe for it, and these dreams should be lampooned in order to expose and save us from them.
Enjoy.
(Er, when i say 'enjoy', what i mean is 'try not to vomit all over your keyboard')
In the meantime, here's a parody of the type of church lots of Christians hope for as we move more fully into the 21st Century. I think these fantasies are very ripe for it, and these dreams should be lampooned in order to expose and save us from them.
Enjoy.
(Er, when i say 'enjoy', what i mean is 'try not to vomit all over your keyboard')
"Sunday's Coming" Movie Trailer from North Point Media on Vimeo.
6 May 2010
In support of Tottenham Hotspur
Being a Spurs fan is no mean feat. It can be torturous at times. We've played around in the realms of mediocrity for way too long and it's been a very frustrating place to be. We've won big games but then underperformed against teams we really should have beaten - and i'm not just talking about this season, i'm talking about for almost as long as i can remember. This has been the Tottenham way; the way of mediocrity, inconsistency and frustration - never quite being able to finish things off.
We have lived and supported in the shadow of a legendary Spurs team who were the first among our contemporaries to achieve great, great things, but this has only served to highlight how long ago the early sixties were. Since then we've had to be satisfied with a domestic cup every 10 years. And in recent times we've had to be satisfied with the league cup every 10 years. There have certainly been some fantastic results along the way and some great highs - lets mention beating Ars**al 5-1 as an example - but these have been exceptions rather then the rule.
What i saw happen last night, off the back of this whole season, was the greatest Spurs achievement of a generation. Not only did we finally prove we do have what it takes to 'cross the line', we crossed said line right into the most celebrated club competition in the world, and the foundation such a thing gives us to build on far outweighs any FA cup victory. This is about the whole of our club's development.
For all the pain, the disappointment, the sheer 'mid-tableness' of it all, it has been worth it for the way i feel right now, and for the opportunity that lies ahead of us.
Yes, there's still the 1st qualifying round of the Champion's League to get through, and let's not pretend that there's zero potential for us to be beaten by Burnley on Saturday. I should also acknowledge that Manchester Utd fans et al may well want to mock how excited Spurs fans are about what is essentially their bread and butter, but that makes it no less a fantastic level of success to have honestly attained, and that's to be celebrated by all.
Spurs fans, we've put up with a lot, but the light is shining now.
What a night, what a squad, what a season, what a ride! And it's the thrill of that ride that makes being a Spurs fan such a deeply authentic, visceral and unique thing.
Come On You Spurs!
**wipes tears**
We have lived and supported in the shadow of a legendary Spurs team who were the first among our contemporaries to achieve great, great things, but this has only served to highlight how long ago the early sixties were. Since then we've had to be satisfied with a domestic cup every 10 years. And in recent times we've had to be satisfied with the league cup every 10 years. There have certainly been some fantastic results along the way and some great highs - lets mention beating Ars**al 5-1 as an example - but these have been exceptions rather then the rule.
What i saw happen last night, off the back of this whole season, was the greatest Spurs achievement of a generation. Not only did we finally prove we do have what it takes to 'cross the line', we crossed said line right into the most celebrated club competition in the world, and the foundation such a thing gives us to build on far outweighs any FA cup victory. This is about the whole of our club's development.
For all the pain, the disappointment, the sheer 'mid-tableness' of it all, it has been worth it for the way i feel right now, and for the opportunity that lies ahead of us.
Yes, there's still the 1st qualifying round of the Champion's League to get through, and let's not pretend that there's zero potential for us to be beaten by Burnley on Saturday. I should also acknowledge that Manchester Utd fans et al may well want to mock how excited Spurs fans are about what is essentially their bread and butter, but that makes it no less a fantastic level of success to have honestly attained, and that's to be celebrated by all.
Spurs fans, we've put up with a lot, but the light is shining now.
What a night, what a squad, what a season, what a ride! And it's the thrill of that ride that makes being a Spurs fan such a deeply authentic, visceral and unique thing.
Come On You Spurs!
**wipes tears**
5 May 2010
4 May 2010
Who will win?
So we face this crucial point in our history; everyone's talking about who'll win - or maybe it'll be a draw, and the outcome will have to be decided after the event. The die hards are already wearing their colours, while the neutrals and the bookies are having to make gentle and speculative manoeuvres as they work out who to get behind. It'll be a full house with all the seats taken, one way or another. There are no longer any 'safe-hands' in this contest, everyone is just as vulnerable as anyone else now, and all the while the tension is becoming too much for some, and others are simply unable to cope with the wait any longer.
However, the more i try and prepare myself for the moments that will decide all our fates, the more people seem to be saying to me 'Andy, quit wittering on about Spurs v City and the Champion's League place, don't you know there's a general election on this week!'
However, the more i try and prepare myself for the moments that will decide all our fates, the more people seem to be saying to me 'Andy, quit wittering on about Spurs v City and the Champion's League place, don't you know there's a general election on this week!'
Miss the 80's much?
If you're suffering any seperation anxiety regards the 1980s, Hollywood is swinging to your rescue this Summer.
The A-Team
The Karate Kid (see any Will Smith in his boy?)
A Nightmare on Elm Street
Apologies for the way the whole image won't appear here. It looks like the whole of youtube has done away with its smallest screen sizing and what's left won't fit here. Any comments on how to rectify this would be most welcome.
The A-Team
The Karate Kid (see any Will Smith in his boy?)
A Nightmare on Elm Street
Apologies for the way the whole image won't appear here. It looks like the whole of youtube has done away with its smallest screen sizing and what's left won't fit here. Any comments on how to rectify this would be most welcome.
30 April 2010
28 April 2010
I agree with Nick.
A selection of thoughts and influences i've collected over the course of this general election run-in so far.
- If we end up with a hung parliament, which MP should we start with?
- Take care of the credence you give to what you read, watch and listen to. Rupert Murdoch controls 40% of British media and will not be looking to entertain notions of impartiality. He is a fervent conservative party supporter due to the assistance their policies will give him as a man in big business.
- Check this link, play with the toy and tell me we're not in need of electoral reform. Then ask yourself who is it that is offering the most significant electoral and political reform.
- Vote for change, vote conservative. Isn't that an oxymoron?
- The hustings (candidate's debate) held by Wakefield Baptist Church exposed the tory candidate to be considerably incapable. Hysterically and offensively incapable actually. The labour candidate (and current MP) is, as an individual, very convincing, but sadly she couldn't escape the state the country has got into on her party's watch. The lib-dem candidate came over much as the rest of his party are doing at the moment: energised, creative, modern, open and credible. The green party candidate did her job; she raised the green agenda well and made intelligent insights on contemporary society and politics without looking in danger of being elected.
- If you have the opportunity before 6th May (not that it will be rendered useless after that date, but it might be a good influence before it) i would heartily recommend getting hold of Mark Thomas' 'The People's Manifesto'. It's a few quid and a lightening quick read. It takes a very creative approach to lots of the issues on the political agenda, as well a several that really should be there but aren't. Oh, and did i mention it's wet-yourself-funny?
Other thoughts:
- The life injected into British politics by the TV debates.
- Constant surprise at the degree of apathy that continues to exist, perpetuated by the incredibly misguided notion that politics is an optional subject within society, rather than the construction of society.
- The lack of political education received by my generation.
- The question of the place of nationalism before God.
- The way moments, like calling members of your electorate bigoted, will swing this election
- If we end up with a hung parliament, which MP should we start with?
- Take care of the credence you give to what you read, watch and listen to. Rupert Murdoch controls 40% of British media and will not be looking to entertain notions of impartiality. He is a fervent conservative party supporter due to the assistance their policies will give him as a man in big business.
- Check this link, play with the toy and tell me we're not in need of electoral reform. Then ask yourself who is it that is offering the most significant electoral and political reform.
- Vote for change, vote conservative. Isn't that an oxymoron?
- The hustings (candidate's debate) held by Wakefield Baptist Church exposed the tory candidate to be considerably incapable. Hysterically and offensively incapable actually. The labour candidate (and current MP) is, as an individual, very convincing, but sadly she couldn't escape the state the country has got into on her party's watch. The lib-dem candidate came over much as the rest of his party are doing at the moment: energised, creative, modern, open and credible. The green party candidate did her job; she raised the green agenda well and made intelligent insights on contemporary society and politics without looking in danger of being elected.
- If you have the opportunity before 6th May (not that it will be rendered useless after that date, but it might be a good influence before it) i would heartily recommend getting hold of Mark Thomas' 'The People's Manifesto'. It's a few quid and a lightening quick read. It takes a very creative approach to lots of the issues on the political agenda, as well a several that really should be there but aren't. Oh, and did i mention it's wet-yourself-funny?
Other thoughts:
- The life injected into British politics by the TV debates.
- Constant surprise at the degree of apathy that continues to exist, perpetuated by the incredibly misguided notion that politics is an optional subject within society, rather than the construction of society.
- The lack of political education received by my generation.
- The question of the place of nationalism before God.
- The way moments, like calling members of your electorate bigoted, will swing this election
19 April 2010
15 April 2010
Stand up if you hate Arsenal...
The second clip on this post features some very strong language and i would therefore advise those of a nervous disposition to wait for the next post and not participate in this one.
Last night was an epic and perfect night for Tottenham Hotspur, getting back into the race for 4th in the premiership by beating the gooner monkeys and ruining their title hopes in the process.
1999 was the last time Spurs beat the filth in the league...
This has been a long time coming and oh boy was it sweet...
Last night was an epic and perfect night for Tottenham Hotspur, getting back into the race for 4th in the premiership by beating the gooner monkeys and ruining their title hopes in the process.
1999 was the last time Spurs beat the filth in the league...
This has been a long time coming and oh boy was it sweet...
9 April 2010
Coca-Killer .4
Brand Dis-recognition.
I've done this as a mini-series for a couple of reasons. Firstly, breaking this whole thing into parts made it easier for me to construct the points i wanted to make in response to the book. Secondly, without breaking it up it would have been an epic post and therefore much less digestible. But the main reason for doing it this way is because Coke is a nothing product. It's not even a nothing product, it's a less than nothing - a negative value product. What i mean is it's not something we need. It's a fizzy pop. It's water, sugar and whatever that secret '7x' ingredient is. It's actually really, really bad for you.
And this is the point - the only thing they have, therefore, is the image. They sell some fantastical ideal that makes you feel like you're participating in something magical when you get that 'pffsssst' of opening a bottle. And even more so as the first glug of fizzy washes down your throat. They have their funny shaped bottles and a brand, and that's it. That's why their advertising budget has to be so (literally) astronomical (2008 - US$655 billion, a figure that could sustain the UN and all its operations for 33 years!): It has to perpetuate this beautiful myth about itself. And therefore the more times i get to use the...
...logo the more it causes a questioning of their myth; it ever so slightly dents their claims of being 'the real thing'; it stops us handing over our money for their fattening-teeth-rotting-joy-in-a-bottle quite as mindlessly as they would like. Hence four posts, not just one.
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
I've done this as a mini-series for a couple of reasons. Firstly, breaking this whole thing into parts made it easier for me to construct the points i wanted to make in response to the book. Secondly, without breaking it up it would have been an epic post and therefore much less digestible. But the main reason for doing it this way is because Coke is a nothing product. It's not even a nothing product, it's a less than nothing - a negative value product. What i mean is it's not something we need. It's a fizzy pop. It's water, sugar and whatever that secret '7x' ingredient is. It's actually really, really bad for you.
And this is the point - the only thing they have, therefore, is the image. They sell some fantastical ideal that makes you feel like you're participating in something magical when you get that 'pffsssst' of opening a bottle. And even more so as the first glug of fizzy washes down your throat. They have their funny shaped bottles and a brand, and that's it. That's why their advertising budget has to be so (literally) astronomical (2008 - US$655 billion, a figure that could sustain the UN and all its operations for 33 years!): It has to perpetuate this beautiful myth about itself. And therefore the more times i get to use the...
...logo the more it causes a questioning of their myth; it ever so slightly dents their claims of being 'the real thing'; it stops us handing over our money for their fattening-teeth-rotting-joy-in-a-bottle quite as mindlessly as they would like. Hence four posts, not just one.
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
Coca-Killer .3
Shake it up.
There's the story of the guy who's something of an anti-Coke campaigner... who's a not insignificant share holder. He uses the profit from his shares to run a large homeless shelter, and he uses his position as share holder to attend annual stock holder meetings to attempt to shape policy. He's not alone, there are a band of people who own shares so they can get to these meetings and do likewise. All you need is one share to get into these meetings. As i was reading this i thought how brilliant a means of addressing the issues of Coke's, um, fallibility.
Doing such a thing of course means that you'd be actively looking to get a reduced return on your investment. Would it be charity? Could it be seen, in a different light, as buying human rights? Would it be effective?
On the one hand Coke is painted out to be (by itself) a company going through the growing pains of corporate social responsibility. This is verified by this share-owning-protestor character acknowledging that a speech delivered by Coke's CEO wouldn't have happened even 3 years previous. However, on the other hand, this guy's pitching of the idea of Coke appointing a human rights board comittee is met with derision, and noises of massive support are instead given to the gentleman who says "to the naysayers, The Coca-Cola Company is not the conscience of the world, or the policeman of the world. The mission of The Coca-Cola Company is to enhance shareowner value and I think they do a terrific job in that. And I have another personal message for the naysayers: Sell your shares and get out of the way. Thank you".
It seems that Coke will only begin to pay attention when their profits are lessened due to their immoral practises. The way to do this? Abstain from Coca-Cola products and let Coke know why, thus supporting those looking to affect change from the inside.
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
There's the story of the guy who's something of an anti-Coke campaigner... who's a not insignificant share holder. He uses the profit from his shares to run a large homeless shelter, and he uses his position as share holder to attend annual stock holder meetings to attempt to shape policy. He's not alone, there are a band of people who own shares so they can get to these meetings and do likewise. All you need is one share to get into these meetings. As i was reading this i thought how brilliant a means of addressing the issues of Coke's, um, fallibility.
Doing such a thing of course means that you'd be actively looking to get a reduced return on your investment. Would it be charity? Could it be seen, in a different light, as buying human rights? Would it be effective?
On the one hand Coke is painted out to be (by itself) a company going through the growing pains of corporate social responsibility. This is verified by this share-owning-protestor character acknowledging that a speech delivered by Coke's CEO wouldn't have happened even 3 years previous. However, on the other hand, this guy's pitching of the idea of Coke appointing a human rights board comittee is met with derision, and noises of massive support are instead given to the gentleman who says "to the naysayers, The Coca-Cola Company is not the conscience of the world, or the policeman of the world. The mission of The Coca-Cola Company is to enhance shareowner value and I think they do a terrific job in that. And I have another personal message for the naysayers: Sell your shares and get out of the way. Thank you".
It seems that Coke will only begin to pay attention when their profits are lessened due to their immoral practises. The way to do this? Abstain from Coca-Cola products and let Coke know why, thus supporting those looking to affect change from the inside.
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
Coca-Killer .2
No-one like Coke.
This exploitative stuff that Coke gets up to is all well and good, but it's nothing we haven't heard before. We know this is how massive multinational corporations ensure their standing - these are the ways you get the biggest profit margins. It's this kind of awareness that can so often lead to compassion fatigue's twin sister: ethical consumer fatigue. So what's particular about Coke in this instance?
There is a point in the book where one of Coke's PR bodies asks tubby, little, lonesome Mark, from behind however many billion dollars worth of brand recognition and lawyers, "Why are you picking on us?". Mark obviously has something of a field day with the idea of Coke playing victim to him, but the question is reiterated "No, why us, why not Pepsi or someone?". Mark's response was quite simply "Well, no-one has the number of human rights abuse charges against them that you do".
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
This exploitative stuff that Coke gets up to is all well and good, but it's nothing we haven't heard before. We know this is how massive multinational corporations ensure their standing - these are the ways you get the biggest profit margins. It's this kind of awareness that can so often lead to compassion fatigue's twin sister: ethical consumer fatigue. So what's particular about Coke in this instance?
There is a point in the book where one of Coke's PR bodies asks tubby, little, lonesome Mark, from behind however many billion dollars worth of brand recognition and lawyers, "Why are you picking on us?". Mark obviously has something of a field day with the idea of Coke playing victim to him, but the question is reiterated "No, why us, why not Pepsi or someone?". Mark's response was quite simply "Well, no-one has the number of human rights abuse charges against them that you do".
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
Coca-Killer .1
The sweetness in light.
I've just finished reading Mark Thomas' book Belching Out The Devil. I've been reading it on and off for about a year, but yesterday, in the bath (where i do my very best reading), i finished it.
It took just 2 chapters for me to decide to give up Coca-Cola products. Well, 2 chapters and a quick scan of the end of the book to check that it didn't finish with the lines "...and that's how Coke made the shift to becoming the ethical corporate role model we see today". It didn't.
The book is Mark's personal account of his travels around the world - Columbia, India, Mexico, Turkey, Ireland, El Salvador, England and USA - as he follows leads about Coke's exploitation of its workers and the communities in which it bases its production. His journey takes in, amongst other things:
- Murders of workers looking to unionise by para-militaries who understand that Coke will move operations elsewhere if unions get off the ground in Columbia.
- Child workers harvesting sugar in cane fields.
- Coke's water use depriving communities and villages of water for drinking and farming.
- Protection racket tactics used by Coke sales reps on shopkeepers attempting to sell other cola products.
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
I've just finished reading Mark Thomas' book Belching Out The Devil. I've been reading it on and off for about a year, but yesterday, in the bath (where i do my very best reading), i finished it.
It took just 2 chapters for me to decide to give up Coca-Cola products. Well, 2 chapters and a quick scan of the end of the book to check that it didn't finish with the lines "...and that's how Coke made the shift to becoming the ethical corporate role model we see today". It didn't.
The book is Mark's personal account of his travels around the world - Columbia, India, Mexico, Turkey, Ireland, El Salvador, England and USA - as he follows leads about Coke's exploitation of its workers and the communities in which it bases its production. His journey takes in, amongst other things:
- Murders of workers looking to unionise by para-militaries who understand that Coke will move operations elsewhere if unions get off the ground in Columbia.
- Child workers harvesting sugar in cane fields.
- Coke's water use depriving communities and villages of water for drinking and farming.
- Protection racket tactics used by Coke sales reps on shopkeepers attempting to sell other cola products.
Do check out and get hold of Belching Out The Devil, it is very compelling and well researched (although, infuriatingly, all his footnotes are at the back of the book), as well as being very moving and funny.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
