Straight From The Nicholarse

God rid us of The Queen...

2012-02-01T09:24:00.000Z

This controversey over "Sir" Fred Goodwin is tiresome. At least he did something to earn his airs and graces. He has not got this title because he was the first born child of the 'right' parents, or because some people think 'God' chose him, or even because he has chosen to stick to the 'correct' religion. He has got it because he's slithered and shredded his way to the top. In other words, he actually did something. He was, in a manner of speaking, elected and not genetically selected. Unlike the woman who gave it to him, The Queen.

Firstly, there is no one who thinks the monarchy is fair. Those who oppose it make this a central plank of their argument. The irony comes when people who are in favour of it try to use this fact as a conduit for royal sympathy. It's a duty not asked for, we must marvel that they accept it. I've taken many callers in favour of keeping this unfair system of Government who will without irnoy ask for sympathy towards The Queen who never asked for this 'heavy burden'. Absolute nonsense. The whole thing is a doddle, you are entitled to a lifestyle no one reading this blog can even begin to imagine and everywhere you turn there are people who flatter you with praise in the hope they'll one day get a Knighthood. One of the world's biggest armies swears to protect you. And you become literally above the law.

"Oh, well, what would you prefer, Tony B-Liar and his kind?"

Yes, at least you can vote the likes of him out.

"Oh, well, err, it's just symbolic anyway."

Symbolic of what? I'll tell you, it's a depressing symbol of how deeply wedded this country is to privilage, pomp, nepotism, the cult of the celebrity, reverence for genetics and the slavish worship of power for its own sake. We marvel at the lack of ambition shown by Englishmen by comparison to the Americans. Compare and contrast our national myths! Theirs is that you can be whoever you want to be, President even, if you just work and try hard enough. It's even written into their constitution that "all men are created equal". What do we tell our children with our monarchy? F--- you if you've not from the right womb.

Ugh.

God rid us of the Queen.

NM

The Discordian Cult Of Nick Part 2 of The Peter J Carroll interview...

2012-01-30T15:50:00.001Z

I've uploaded part two of the interview with Peter J Carroll; podcast #5.

My plans to delete my facebook page will come into effect tomorrow...

Just one in ten Facebook users supports 'timeline' feature

Fewer than one in 10 Facebook users support its plans to make its biographical “timeline” feature compulsory.
The majority of Facebook users do not want to use the timeline feature which is set to become compulsory

As part of a major overhaul of the site, all publicly viewable messages, comments and photographs will be grouped together by date.

The idea is to create an online scrap book telling the user’s virtual “life story” – at least back to 2004 when the site was founded.

It means that, unless they are deleted, any long forgotten musings, embarrassing photographs or even messages of affection for a past lover will be easily accessible.

At present other users can only find material from several years ago by trawling through past pages.

Critics claim that the change could erode users' privacy but Facebook insists that it will not make anything publicly available which is not already viewable.

A survey of 4,000 Facebook users by the security form Sophos found that only eight per cent of those polled said that they liked the change.

By contrast 51 per cent of those who took part said that they were “worried” by the new format while another eight per cent said that they would “get used to it”.

Users are to be notified in the next few weeks and then will be given seven days to go through their profiles deleting anything they do not want to be visible on their timeline.

Read more, Telegraph article.

I'm going to follow the advice given in this youtube video:

http://www.videojug.com/film/how-to-commit-facebook-suicide?utm_source=outbrain&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=OutbrainTrial

NM

Tinker tailor soldier snooze

2012-01-30T15:20:00.000Z

I knew I'd made a mistake at what felt like twenty minutes in and the credits were still running as atmospheric music lumbered about in the background. They may as well have put a few captions up saying:

"THIS IS A SERIOUS AND PROPER FILM".

Nowadays I have to have a reason to watch a film. Today's was that I had spare time on my hands before work. I'm under the impression this film was about spies. It's really about pretentious bores wandering about with 'serious' written on their face. The cast list says it all, you've got lots of old men who everyone has been told to like because they're such 'brilliant serious actiors': John Hurt, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth etc.

I really tried to enjoy it... then fell asleep after eating my popcorn.

NM

How to stop the rot (riots)

2012-01-28T23:02:00.000Z

I wonder if, David Lammy, MP for Tottenham, has been listening to your old pal Nick Margerrison on LBC 97.3. The front page of The Daily Mail seems to suggest he has come round to the fact that corporal punishment was a central cause of the problem:

Labour MP: Smacking ban led to riots

Quote from the article:
"‘Many of my constituents came up to me after the riots and blamed the Labour Government, saying, “You guys stopped us being able to smack our children.”
‘When this was first raised with me I was pretty disparaging. But I started to listen."

That's right, you were "pretty disparaging" because you're an MP and that's what you lot are like but I'm impressed that you finally started to listen. Good boy! You should listen more, I'm on every Saturday and Sunday morning at 1am.

Here's an article I wrote in the wake of the 2011 riots, published at the time on the LBC website, it's a reflection of my broadcasts in that period...

Bring back capital punishment? Get hundreds of police out on the street? Bring in zero tolerance? Sod it, lets get the army out on the streets! Give 'em guns and do some good old fashioned "peace keeping" Iraq style!!

No. Get a time machine, go back to 1987, and stop them from banning corporal punishment.

I do not classify myself as right wing or left wing. The intent of this blog entry is to convince you that corporal punishment in schools was a good idea. It might sound like one which belongs in the history books alongside other forgotten 'loony fringe' ideas but the generation of kids who are rioting are the first one we’ve had who were denied it. That's a fact but perhaps "kids" is the wrong word here as I'm using it to denote anyone under the age of about 35 who walks with the swagger of a child.

Charlie Brooker (lefty columnist in The Guardian): "Every looter was effectively a child chanting: "Give me my toys, I want more toys. Look at the p---- captured on video mugging the injured Malaysian student. Watch his unearned swagger as he walks away; the size of a man, yet he overdoes that swagger like a performing toddler. That's an idiot who never grew up."

Couldn't agree more, shame Charlie can't work out why that's the case. Anyone who saw these characters who smashed up our cities could not escape the child like nature of these people. The only commonality I could spot was they all looked under 35 and they were all out of control. It's important to remind Londoners, this happened all over the UK. Whatever the problem is that has caused it must therefore be something which effects people on a nationwide level and is specific to people of a certain age. Now, only an idiot would think there's a single cause but equally you'd have to be a fool not to think some causes are more significant than others.

Firstly, a word about control. There are two methods of it in our society, punishment and reward or to coin a phrase, the carrot and the stick. From 1987 onwards I watched, from the perspective of a child, the consequences of the stick being put to one side as corporal punishment was outlawed in this country. My primary school life was drawing to a close back then and I was preparing to go to the local comprehensive which was located in quite a rough working class area. However, there was something of a minor controversy before I left.

The Primary School I was at was run by a lovely woman who at the time I feared and respected. She was quite old fashioned and also overtly religious. Her attitude was that discipline in school was incredibly important. We knew that if we behaved badly we would be punished. We also knew that if we behaved very badly that punishment might be the dreaded ruler on the back of our hand. It was there as a threat, not to be used unless really required. In my time there I only ever remember it being used once. Lots of well meaning hippy type parents were outraged by this. I remember overhearing conversations between them talking about how this barbaric practice was going to be banned soon and that this crazy old woman shouldn’t be allowed to use force like that because it teaches kids to use violence to solve problems.

The “victims” of this violence were kids who had been naughty and ignored the teachers by playing in a dangerously flooded and clearly sealed off adventure playground. I watched my fellow classmates being punished through a window in horror, that year a law was passed which outlawed the practice. Soon after the teacher in question retired, laying footprints which I suspect many like her followed. Leaving us, in the end, with a new generation of teachers, some of whom cannot even remember how corporal punishment works let alone being in favour of it.

The next year I started at Secondary School. It was a very working class comprehensive school in the North of England. In my time there I noticed a gradual change in the attitude of my peers and those children coming up behind us. They started back chatting in a way I'd not previously heard before. "You can't touch me sir, I'll report you for assault" one of them shouted in a teacher's face. How cool it looked to the other kids as this towering six foot yob humiliated the poor man who was quite obviously frightened of him. I was incredibly impressed; because I was fourteen.

There and then I learned that teachers were not to be feared and respected by everyone. In fact this clever lad who’d challenged one had done so using something called ‘the law’ which gave him certain ‘rights’ to tell a poor old art teacher to f- off. To my fourteen year old mind this was incredible. As an adult I see it as profoundly depressing yet unfortunately relevant to the events of this month.

Back to the carrot and stick analogy. The kid in question fell foul of the law in later life. He did community service and last time I spoke to him he was on sickness benefit. He missed out on the rise of The New Labour Order at school and as a result he has only been given carrots in his adult life. His children though, he has four, are about to enter a school system where carrots are on the menu to entice some kids to just turn up.

At the risk of riding this metaphor into the gutter, we’ve run out of carrots these days and now there’s a generation of looters who appear to have decided to simply take 3D TV shaped ones from the shops of hardworking local businesses. Is it so hard to believe that this loot has been taken by people who do not understand the concept of punishment and believe they are always entitled to be rewarded?

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE TRAPPED INSIDE A NEED TO DEFINE THEMSELVES AS "LEFTIES" AND THEREFORE REQUIRE A LITTLE HELP AGREEING WITH A "RIGHT WING" IDEA:

Hello lefty! Listen, I know the above all seems really mean. It's never going to impress the fit hippy chick you're trying to make hay with or the well meaning guy with the beany hat who works in that new age shop you've been going to, so I think it's fair to add a little extra section here for you. Hope you don't mind. People who are comfortable going left or right as the situation requires can skip this...

Firstly, I know we were told that if they got rid of corporal punishment we'd have a less violent society. I know you still think that's true despite the obvious evidence to the contrary. However, there's a great book called Freakonomics which most of the chattering middle classes like you have read. In it the argument is made that that New York's crime problem was not solved by "zero tolerance," as people often suggest, but instead is down to the abortion and family planning policies which were implemented around 20 years earlier. The argument is that the generation of criminals who would have been getting into the peak of their 'careers' simply didn't exist to carry the baton on from the previous lot. Their would be parents had quite literally wished they'd never been born; a wish that those policies had granted. The root of this argument is that such policies take a while to show their impact upon society, that's all I'm saying about corporal punishment in schools.

The rioters two principle commonalities are youth and social class. I'll agree with you on the one hand, social decay and urban alienation are part of the problem. How about you accept that maybe the people who think that corporal punishment is part of it are right as well, then we can all get along?

But what about drugs?

Yep. We have a lot of common ground here. Legalise all recreational drugs. Pull the rug out from underneath criminal gangs by making the £8bn illegal drugs trade significantly less profitable by placing it in the hands of legitimate and therefore taxed businesses. However, the first step is restoring discipline in schools.

Hope that helps...

NM

The roots of "conspiracy theory" are deeply embedded in religious thinking

2012-01-28T15:46:00.029Z

There's a lot in the conspiracy theory subculture which is incredibly worthwhile but there are some core principles and assumptions behind it that have always irritated me. Firstly there is the ever present spectre of anti-semitism and secondly is the often repeated mantra of "we're all doomed, can nothing can save us?".

The anti-semitism goes right back into the early history of the genre:

The oldest conspiracy of them all was that The Devil had the King's ear and he was pushing him to do evil. This figure of The Devil is then, over the years, replaced by Jews, communists, Catholics, Freemasons, the list stretches on to include extra terrestrials and ultimately Icke's shapeshifters.

Quote from previous entry on this topic

It always raises its ugly head whenever you start to seriously delve into the topic and like a drop of poison in a cup it rightly puts a lot of people, including me, off. Adolf Hitler used conspiracy theories to gain power. His like today would fit the subculture like a hand to a glove. It's for this reason, partly, that ideas such as holocaust denial are tolerated in conspiracy theory circles. Holocaust denial or, "the hollowhoax", as it is known, is nothing more than an attempt to revise the legacy of the Nazis by people on the far right. It's put forward by people who are ultimately sympathetic to the Hitlerian cause. It's also frankly rather silly and, as a symptom of the nasty anti-semitism that refuses to leave the scene, doesn't have mainstream appeal.

This in my opinion partly accounts for the fact that, David Icke, and Texas talkshow host, Alex Jones, are easily the most popular conspiracy theorists around. They both wholly reject the anti-semitic aspects of the genre and so are more digestable by reasonable people. However they do still carry this second "we're all doomed, can nothing can save us" bit. It is in my opinion equally tiresome but less obviously absurd. Furthermore it is absent from their personal worldviews but apparent in their words to those who are, for want of a better word, "uninitiated".

I've slipped into this pit myself, probably most people reading this have*. A profound pessimism that 'the world is run by poweful people and they've got the game sewn up in their favour' speaks to most of us at some point or other. You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to feel it of course and I think that's why the genre has such appeal. It confirms this intuition that you will never win the game of life.

The reason this feeling of helplessness is so integral to conspiracy theory is because of the fact that its roots are sunk so deeply into a bedrock of religious thinking. This is not so apparent when you give the likes of Icke and Jones a cursory glance but both of them are inspired by deep spiritual beliefs. Icke, although a little bashful on the topic these days, believes he is guided by a voice or 'spirit entity' and Jones is a committed Chrisitan. This aspect of their character is crucial to their worldview and it's the missing piece of the puzzle for a lot of their superficial 'fans'.

The cry of "we're all doomed; can nothing save us now?" has an answer in God. It speaks to the fact that this subculture is often used as a recruiting tool for cults (Jim Jones was a keen conspiracy theorist) and other religious faiths. It's the pretext to that old refrain "let us prey" but it deliberately leaves the Godless feeling helpless.

However, it's worth looking at the intuition behind the thought. This feeling that 'you cannot win the game of life'. Without wanting to push my own 'spiritual beliefs' I refer to the ideas of a Discordian High Priest and Zen Buddhist, Alan Watts. He spoke of the fact that this truth is more about emphasis than anything else. Yes, you will never "win" the game of life. You can express this as a sigh if you like, "oh, I can't win". Or you can express this as in excitement as if realising a revelation "ah, I can't win!". As in, "I can't lose!". There's no such thing as a winner or a loser. The universe and life do not judge you. The game of life is fun because you can't win. No one can. Those at the top of the pyramid are no better placed to win than you. The point of the game is to have fun and enjoy it, not to win and lose. You play the game of life in the same way you might dance from one end of a room to another. A dance is not about getting from A to B, it's about enjoying the motion, movement and music.

Further Alan Watts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29atSZKbmS4

NM

Going to delete my facebook page ... again ... in a week.

2012-01-26T12:54:00.002Z

I've blogged about facebook before. It's not a website I've ever had a lot of love for. Time for me to knock it on the head again methinks:

DAILY MAIL ARTICLE

Facebook's Timeline - a new look for people's Profile pages which exposes their entire history on the site - will become mandatory for all users.

The 'new look' has been voluntary up until now.

From now, users will simply be notified that they are being 'updated' via an announcement at the top of their home page, which users click on to activate Timeline.

As with voluntary switches to Timeline, those who are 'updated' will have just seven days to select which photos, posts and life events they want to advertise to the world.

Daily Mail's full article here.

The first time I deleted my account, two years ago, I felt a huge sense of relief:

OLD BLOG ENTRY:

I finally deleted my account. I just don't get it. Being a member of Facebook was like being at a party. I felt I should be having fun but was constantly confused by the fact I wasn't. The end result was, I started to wonder if there was just something wrong with me. Everyone else seemed to be having a great time, why was I the exception?

What's so great about looking at pictures of people? I find pictures of people depressing. They either don't look as good as you remember them or like more of a poser than you thought they were. The occasional picture looks good but so what? Furthermore why do I want to be 'poked'? More importantly why do I want to add to a giant database of information that gathers together all of my associates names, their thoughts, my thoughts, tittle tattle etc? Orwell would be spinning in his grave.

I'm also pretty sure I managed to offend or upset a few people by not accepting their friend requests or replying to their 'pokes'.

[...]

Ultimately I left the party pleased I was no longer part of it. You never regret going home early. If people want to contact me they can use twitter. It's much less hassle. No pictures, no odd bits to the site where you're not sure how private they are. Just a much better site. Although I hear they're adding those sort of apps as we speak...

Original post here.

Then, like an idiot I wandered back in half way through last year:

ANOTHER OLD BLOG ENTRY

I've been drawn into its sticky web. I have two accounts, one for people I know in real life and another for my radio show stuff. There's a very blurred line that sepearates the two. I'm not sure how long I'm going to keep either of them going. I don't think it's a website that's good for me.

My life's pretty medicore in terms of socialising and travel. In fact I do very little that could be described as 'cool'. I watch daytime telly, play on my 'puter, read a lot of books and every Thursday I go to a pub quiz. That's it. All my life I've had a weird nagging suspicion that I wasn't normal in this respect and that everyone else is having an amazing time, all the time. Facebook seems to give me photographic proof that this suspicion is not just typical insecure paranoia but is in fact true. Judging by a flick through Facebook it seems most of the people I know spend all their time at parties or on holiday doing amazing things.

I'm not much of a pictures person. Amature photographs generally depress me. They make the world look so ordinary. Furthermore I'm of the opinion that you can't go right with a picture of yourself. It's either going to look good and therefore depress you with the passage of time or it'll look bad and depress you in the here and now. Despite this I got drawn into looking at people's pictures this morning. I had a bit of time to kill in the office. I had no idea what an overall downer the experience would be.

It left me feeling boring, ordinary and nosy. Is that the sort of thing other people feel when they log onto Facebook? Am I doing something wrong? I'm puzzled by the appeal of it. Someone once told me it was "all about the pictures". Maybe that's why I'm just not really "getting it".

I've tried commenting on things as well. I like that a bit more but the site seems to lack the depth of twitter. Most of it seems to be incredibly inconsequential and inane. Pages and pages of "polite chatter". The sort of conversations I loathe in real life.

I must be doing something wrong.

Why do people like that website?

I've reposted these thoughts just to make the oncoming deletion of my account more final.

I don't like the website. I'm pulling out Thursday next week.

NM

Bad analogy - way beneath the Telegraph

2012-01-25T21:17:00.000Z

In my opinion smoking a spliff and murdering someone cannot be sensibly compared. They just don't really seem to be on the same scale. I'm amazed that Telegraph journalist Michael Deacon disagrees:

Mike - The Telegraph's culture critic

Today’s leaders must find the courage to speak out. The current approach does not work. Since time immemorial, human beings have murdered each other. Trillions have been spent by governments to prevent people committing murder, and to imprison those who do, but to no avail. All we have to show for it is overflowing jails, tax-payers’ money wasted, and thriving criminal gangs.

We need to face facts: there will always be people attracted to killing. The threat of arrest and punishment has had no significant deterrent effect. Prohibition is no good. We must seriously consider decriminalisation, and start treating murder not as a criminal issue, but as a health issue.

It’s time to end the failed “War on Murder”.

Granted the poor lad is only trying to earn a coin and he's trying to do it with humour. However, this casual disregard for logic when applied to the debate on drug prohibition has frequently tragic consequences. For example, the UK cannabis market was estimated to be worth around £5 billion, per year, in 2002. (Source BBC) This figure will have risen in the past decade of course, given inflation and the increase in users. The lion's share of that money is currently being pumped directly into organised crime! Think of that next time you read about some moron with a gun, where'd he get the money to buy that? He works in an industry with a minimum budget of £5 billion a year.

Even sticking to the confines of this journalist's argument, taking the idea that murder and smoking a spill are similar can reveal a level of callous indifference that I suspect was unintended. I doubt there is anyone in the UK who wouldn't rather that the Moors' murderers hadn't decided to stay in and smoke a spliff instead of killing children. Or the killer of Martin Luther King. Or the man who shot John Lennon. Or any other example that pops into mind...

I spoke to a woman whose child was murdered once, it was one of the most intense experiences of my life. I'd never have had the gall to compare the actions of the evil thugs who did that to some student smoking a bong.

He continues and for, I presume legal reasons, tries to clarify:

The above is not, as far as I know, Sir Richard Branson’s position on killing. But it is more or less identical to his position on illegal drug use. Sir Richard’s logic is that, because governments have failed to prevent people committing a particular crime, it should no longer be classified as a crime at all.

I didn't watch Richard Branson's testimony. I know the arguments for the decriminalisation of cannabis inside out. If indeed that was his central logic, "because governments have failed to prevent people committing a particular crime, it should no longer be classified as a crime at all," then it's a perfectly defensible position.

The law should be practical and enforcable. If not it is dragged into the realm of impracticate and unenforcable. Why an opinion writer for the Telegraph would want the law to become impractical and unenforcable I do not know. I suspect it's because he hasn't thought it through. He is after all mainly used by The Telegraph as a culture critic.

Why politicians persist in this folly is quite another matter. If I were a journalist I'd be asking the following questions:

Why allow cannabis to fund organised crime to the tune of £5 billion?

Who in the UK benefits from well funded organised crime?

Why is the debate on cannabis always trivialised?

If you read the full article, you will notice our hero, Michael Deacon, even slags off Branson for daring to be "serious" about the issue:

"Sketch: Sir Richard Branson's war on drug laws
Michael Deacon watches Virgin entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson tell MPs why drug users should not be jailed."

Jeremy Kyle and the fact some things aren't funny even if they seem it

2012-01-24T17:07:00.002Z

The following article from the national newspapers is not funny:

"Adventurer who wanted to live like Bear Grylls in Scottish wilderness for a year found dead in less than a month"

A man found dead in a remote mountain hut was an adventurer who had planned a year-long Bear Grylls-style survival challenge in the Scottish wilderness.

[He], was found dead in a 'bothy' by a track worker near Corrour, a remote railway station in Highland Perthshire, on December 31 at 9.50am.

His body is believed to have been lying there for several weeks when it was discovered.

A post-mortem found there were no suspicious circumstances behind his death, which is understood to have been as a result of hypothermia.

Daily Mail - read full story here.

The above news story is without doubt not funny. It's tragic that this dashing young alpha male met with such an unforseeable demise. Without doubt he deserves our sympathy, how could anyone have possibly expected it would end this way?


Mr Erwin - who could have predicted his fate?

He's like, Steve Erwin, another unfortunate victim of lady luck. Who would have thought that the "crocodile hunter" famous for his cavalier attitude to dangerous animals would ever have ended up being killed by one? Even now it seems unthinkable, right?

Or, the subject of the film "Grizzly Man", Timothy Treadwell, who knew in his heart of hearts that man eating grizzly bears were in fact just misunderstood. He was an animal rights activist who decided to live among the grizzly bears, as one of them, in Alaska. Amazingly, and by another weird quirk of fate, they ate him and his girlfriend alive!

None of these situations are funny.

My brain just, you know, in its unguarded moments, forgets that fact and lets out a little laugh.

I mentioned this to a producer at work and she looked right into my eyes and said "that's not nice". I tried to explain that I knew it wasn't funny. I just sort of have a brain that won't listen to the facts when it comes to laughing at things. The more annoyed she became the more confused my brain became about what is and is not funny. This set up a sort of negative feedback loop where she got angrier and angrier and I felt like a kid in a classroom who has been told to stop laughing.

Today I surprised a number of my twitter followers by tweeting along with the TV show Jeremy Kyle. It's a masterpiece of not funny incidents. One of which today featured two men who had been having a gay relationship with each other after meeting on the internets. They'd realised they might actually be related and so had a DNA test to find out that, yes in fact they were! Once their story was finished (with the show title 'Am I having sex with my brother?' and the answer now being a firm 'yes') Kyle, with a straight face, actually turned to his audience and said: "give them a round of applause guys".

Again, I know that's not funny. My brain really thought it was but I've explained to it now...

... it still seems to think these things are funny but over time it will learn.

NM

QUICK NOTE//

Robert Anton Wilson did not invent my religion, Discordianism, that was the job of others, but he did more to promote it than anyone else. I've not read everything he's ever written but I've certainly ploughed through more than is healthy.

There are a number of key ideas of his that I frequently apply.

Boing Boing did a special week on him, the link is here: RAW WEEK - BOING BOING

New Cult Of Nick podcast is up...

2012-01-23T12:39:00.001Z

The link is here, you can subscribe to it on iTunes: http://audioboo.fm/boos/635127-the-cult-of-nick-podcast-2012-week-4

The download figues for this thing are tiny, we're talking under 100 people at the moment but I'm really enjoying sifting through my back catalogue. This week's pod is the first in a three part interview with occultist Peter J Carroll. Originally I was a bit embarrassed by this interview as I got more into his work after I spoke to him. There's a lot of things I'd ask him now which go unmentioned here. However with the benefit of hindsight it is what it says it is, an introduction to modern occultism, not an advanced (and therefore less accessable) discussion about the subject.

Occultism is a subject which gets some people very riled up. The reason I give it the time of day is thanks to the work of Alan Moore. My thoughts on it are pretty concisely laid out here: Blame Alan Moore.

And then there's this entry which consistently comes up in my hit counter as one of the most popular entries on this blog: Aleister Crowley & The Call Of The Second Aethyr.

Please just sell the sausage

2012-01-22T22:43:00.001Z

Family time: reduced to a marketing gimmick

There's an old saying in marketing which goes: "sell the sizzle, not the sausage". In other words focus upon the additional subjective aspects the product offers you. They used to tell us it in pop music radio. For example, the big prize you're offering is to meet Westlife. When you sell it to the audience on air, focus on telling the story of what it might be like to ACTUALLY MEET Westlife! What they might be wearing, what you might say to them, how you'll get there in a limo etc. What will your friends think when you tell them you're off to meet the fab five? And so on, you know, flesh out the experience with subjective detail.

Presumably this is the thinking behind this apparently innocuous poster, which has kind of wound me up. Rather than selling the fact they're knocking a little bit of money off advance tickets, or whatever, they say they're 'reducing the price of hugs'. It's exactly the same sort of nonsense as the "Yummy" biscuits label which M&S used to have. However, in this instance there's a sort of sinister edge. The notion, that this company can reduce the price of hugs, does in fact suggest they have comodified and are selling affectionate gestures. You know, like a whore does.

A lot of people think moments like the one being faked by this poster are priceless. The people who made this poster clearly do not, or at least have been paid to say as such.

I think I'd rather live in a world where we sold the sausages a bit more. This superficial sales technique does more harm than good. For example, when selling the Westlife meet, I didn't actually know the detail. Would they really get to talk to them or would they just have a quick ten second handshake, or what? The "sizzle" therefore needed to be as subjective as possible.

More importantly, this principle of stretching out what you know into the more subjective areas of experience has had terrible consequences in the "real world" of politics. Blair's "faith" in MI6 intelligence reports about weapons of mass destruction are the most obvious example but his heirs Cameron and Milliband, as they debate 'turbo' capitalism vs 'popular' or 'responsible' capitalism show equally dangerous levels of idiocy. The subjective "sizzle" of the 45 minute claim turned out to be exactly that and nothing more.

It's style over substance and it hasn't left us in 2012.

NM

Garfunkles in Leicester Square: what was I thinking?

2012-01-21T18:35:00.000Z

The truth of the matter is that I wasn't thinking. I was wandering about in a bit of a daze. I'd just bought a copy of the brilliant occultist Peter J Carroll's latest tome, I'd decided I wanted to have a protein day and I thought, "ooo, I can get a nice 'Big Breakfast' at this place just outside work".

Menu: written by lawyers.

It's menus like this one which work well on the semi-conscious mind state I describe. Notice it says that you get "two rashers of bacon, two juicy pork and leek sausages, two hash browns, a large flat mushroom, fried egg, half a grilled tomato and a generous helping of baked beans".

Object next to the bacon is a rock hard sausage

Now notice that there is in fact only one rasher of bacon and a gnarly old sausage. No hash brown and a table spoon splat of baked beans. You will of course have noticed that there's a little footnote on the menu which explains that this option is only available before 11.30am.

The "other" menu

What I had in fact ordered is described slightly more accurately above on a second menu, aside from the Orwellian title given to it: The "Great Big" British Breakfast.

It'd be fairer to describe it thus:

A plate of chips with an egg and a rock hard sausage, bit of bacon, tomato, and a shitty mushroom that seems to be composed mostly of cooking oil and dreams. Also comes with bread.

What's annoying about this whole sorry affair is I blame myself for it entirely. Places like this have always been tourist traps. Furthermore, the last time I went in there I sat for half an hour or so without service only to give up and leave for work. This was a few months ago and I remember thinking then;"well, what did you expect?".

I blame this book "The Octavo"

I was genuinely not thinking. I'd just been in Watkins on Cecil Court and had made an exciting purchase, I sat down to read it and only glanced at the menu. Peter J Caroll is by far my favourite living occult author. I'm thinking of uploading part one of an interview I did with him next week for the podcast associated with this blog. His stuff's always good. This is his latest work, published last year. What an idiot I was to think I'd get anything worth eating in "Garfunkles". Meh- how annoying.

Left all the carbs ... two thirds of the meal

With only myself to blame I stumbled out of the tourist trap, like a punter snared by a clip joint, and on to work... a little early today. Things to do. Lets hope it's a good show, I'm in a bad mood.

NM

Why is it "good" to get young people involved in politics?

2012-01-21T13:22:00.002Z

There are some ideas which are allowed to float about in people's mind unchallenged and backed only by unquestioning lip service. This is one of them. It's implicit in this article on the BBC's website:

The Occupy protest movement is turning its attentions to schools through a new educational outreach programme.

The idea developed after members of the St Paul's camp were invited into a number of schools and universities.

The camp's "Tent City University" has won support from numerous high-profile speakers and academics.

Former citizenship teacher Jamie Kelsey Fry says that with protesters due to be evicted within weeks, an outreach programme is the natural next step.

Protesters from the Occupy movement - which campaigns against inequality, social injustice and corporate greed - have been camped outside St Paul's Cathedral next to the London Stock Exchange since 15 October.

But they are expected to be removed on 27 January, after the City of London won a High Court case over their eviction.

Before I quote the rest of the article it's worth remembering that many people believe the human mind doesn't really process negative thoughts.

Mr Kelsey Fry, who has been at the camp every day since it started, said it had become a focal point for young people interested in political activism, with teenagers travelling from all over the country to visit.

Many had joined in its people's assemblies, where issues are discussed openly and everybody taking part is given an equal voice.

He said: "So many of the camps, not just at St Paul's but around the country, will be cleared away in the next few weeks so outreach is a really good way to move things on.

"Young people are a very large part of society and they are voiceless. They will be the people who inherit a troubled future."

He added: "We are not trying to indoctrinate them or recruit them, we are trying to use the citizenship curriculum to give young people the tools to take up the issues that are important to them."

I think this final point here (obviously I'm not quoting the full article) is the reason some people think there's a need for 'young people' to be involved in politics. If you saw me outside your house and asked me what I was doing and I replied that I was not about to steal your car what would you think? If you caught me outside a school with a load of leaflets and I told you I was not trying to indoctrinate the children...

Look to the arguments people put forward if you push them on this subject:

"Ah, well, old people are more set in their ways". Translation: "Old people have their own opinions and won't be pushed around as much".

"Err, no, I mean, young people are more optimistic". Translation: "Young people are more gullible and easily led by hare brained schemes".

"No, it's not like that, they're just more err, caring and compassionate and likely to be left wing and ... oh". Translation: "Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains". They're left wing reqruits waiting to be indoctrinated by seductive ideas that ultimately lead to communist dictatorships. That's the truth of the matter isn't it? Use the comments section to argue the contrary...

Rise of the planet of the apes

2012-01-20T10:32:00.001Z

The idea that animals are incapable of cruelty annoys me. It's ill informed, coming as it does from some mad Disney influenced world view which adults really should know better than to take seriously.

I recently watched that film, Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes. It was quite good overall but it had this logic in there at points. The apes, who in this film live in our time and are just developing consciousness, seemed to be in possesion of an innate sense of morality. They were 'good' in comparison to a number of the deeply unsympathetic human characters.

I guess the reason this annoys me is because I believe we ARE animals. There are no traits found within us that are unique to humans.

This is grit in the shoe of those who would like to worship the perfect world of mother nature where everything has been poisoned by people. Despite what the extreme animal rights activists might think their worldview requires people to be special. Especially cruel, bad, wicked and evil.

I don't think they are.

Previous entry is similar vein.

Don't sleep on it.

2012-01-18T09:34:00.000Z

If you experience a horrific or upsetting event and then decide to "sleep on it," you're making a bad situation worse, according to a new study from The University of Massachusetts.

They've discovered:

"a person's emotional response after witnessing an unsettling picture or traumatic event is greatly reduced if the person stays awake afterward, and that sleep strongly "protects" the negative emotional response. Further, if the unsettling picture is viewed again or a flashback memory occurs, it will be just as upsetting as the first time for those who have slept after viewing compared to those who have not."

Kind of explains the old question, 'how do you sleep at night'? The body doesn't want to let you go to sleep if you've witnessed things that you knew were wrong:

"It's interesting to note that it is common to be sleep-deprived after witnessing a traumatic scene, almost as if your brain doesn't want to sleep on it."

My brain is terrible for this, if I've got a worry stuck in my head I can't sleep on it. I'll be up all night trying to fathom an answer. I remember my first ever experience of this like it was yesterday. I'd lost my little Boba Fett toy and was frankly traumatised. It'd been misplaced at school and my 8 year old brain was devastated. I was awake until four in the morning worrying about it. I remember the sun coming up and thinking bad things would happen now I'd not got to sleep.

Also, maybe that's why a lot of my generation remember quite rubbish Dr Who monsters as being scarier than they actually are. It was on just before bedtime, it'd be the last thing you watched before your young brain went to sleep. Meh, I'm just thinking out loud but, you know some of that stuff was very silly.

On a not entirely unrelated topic, I wonder how this memory study relates to the weird phenomena of banging your head on a pillow once for every hour of sleep you want to have just before you drift off? That does sort of seem to work, not as accurate as an alarm clock I'll grant you but in need of scientific investigation at some point.

NM

FURTHER READING

Quotes taken from FULL ARTICLE HERE.

Boba Fett's Wookieepedia entry is HERE.

FURTHER VIEWING:

JOHN LENNON - How do you sleep at night?
An unpleasant song from his Imagine album directed at Paul McCartney. Those two got nice and nasty with each other in public during the 70's.

MATT BAKER ASKS DAVID CAMERON - How do you sleep at night?
An odd moment in daytime television. I'm sure, Baker, enjoyed a lot of backslapping behind the scenes for this one as he bought a round of drinks with his licence fee funded pay cheque.

Nescafe Mocha...

2012-01-17T09:23:00.001Z

I've bought some new Mocha sachets. Unfortunately they're not as nice as the significantly cheaper ones I've been having from Aldi. These new ones are a bit flat, maybe they need more Coffee or something in them.

I've tried to hide my dissapointment from myself twice and failed both times. Now I've decided to blog about it to the hundred or so people that read this corner of the internets. And of course Nescafe PR department who will inevitably at some point read this little ramble.

Actually, if you do work in Nescafe PR why are they called Mochas? Why not call them Chofee? That'd make more sense wouldn't it? A Mocha combines the best of both hot chocolate and coffee right? A good one is a bit like the Rose of hot drinks (which should itself be called Whed wine). What does Mocha mean? I'll tell you, it means you're making a mochary of the whole naming process. Yeah, that's what it means.

Of course fact fans will know that it's this process which was used to invent Toffee. A mad scientist back in the 20's wondered what would happen when you combined Tea and Coffee and, as everyone knows, it produces a most disgusting drink. No matter how many spoons of sugar he put in there it still tasted of putrid brown stink. He did of course famously leave that sugar filled drink out overnight and when it cooled an solidified - hey presto, a new form of sweetie! The rest, as they say is history.

And to think, all the other scientists in those days thought he was nothing more than a useless little twunt.

NM

The Discordian Cult Of Nick enters its third week...

2012-01-16T12:20:00.000Z

I've put a new five minute podcast up. It's quite fun to listen back to some of the lighter stuff in my back catalogue. This time it's just me and my mate Alex Baker larking about on air. The phone call is something we used to start the shows with, often recording them as an afterthought. The main bit of the audio is Baker's "dog in a suitcase story" which he firmly maintains is true. I suspect it's an urban legend and when I retold it on LBC a few listeners claimed to have heard it before. The annoying thing about that is there's always the slight chance they'd heard it before because we'd already broadcast it on a national radio show a few years back. These things spread.

People seem to be liking the podcast so thanks to everyone who has re-tweeted it etc.

http://audioboo.fm/boos/625652-the-cult-of-nick-podcast-2012-week-3

Philosophical mumblings..,

2012-01-16T12:11:00.001Z

I love this quote but I'm having difficulty sourcing it:

“Watch your thoughts, for they become words.
Watch your words, for they become actions.
Watch your actions, for they become habits.
Watch your habits, for they become character.
Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.”

It's pretty in line with occult thinking or "magick". The idea is that there's a constant friction between two different world views. One is the materialistic world view where your mind is a by product of your physical existence. The other is the idealistic world where everything is running in accordance with some sort of plan. The latter idea is often used by occultists/religious believers/new age hippies, etc. The most famous example of it in action is in The Bible:

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. 3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

The point is that before anything could start you needed "the word" or, more accurately, the concept. This is pretty logical on a practical level. Want to do something in life; get yourself a plan of action. It's also interesting that it places "God" in the same area that words and ideas live. He's a construct of the mind.

As I said, there's the opposing materialistic point of view nowadays and it's more widely accepted. You know, that words came from us, physical beings generate thoughts and not the other way round. I think that's the view I side with more often than not. Words and ideas often come afterwards. I existed physically before I started thinking. I suspect that's true of humanity in general if you trace us back far enough. I'm just wary of certainty around concepts like this and suspect the truth is a combination of the two, if that's possible.

It's just a blog entry

2012-01-16T11:40:00.000Z

I hate the phrase "it's just". It annoys me because usually it is not "just..." anything at all. Most words are simplifications of whatever it is they are attemptingto describe. This means whatever you're talking about is unlikely to be reasonably limited to being a case of "it's just...". The same reasoning leads me to be annoyed whenever anyone points out "ah, but it's more complicated than that". Such an observation usually goes without saying.

Specifically I think if you reduce an experience to a case of "ah, it's just" it's usually you that loses out.

Love - "ah, it's just chemicals in your brain".

God - "ah, it's just another mode of control".

Art - "ah, it's just pretty pictures".

Everything, every second, every moment, every word is unique. Nothing is ever "just" anything at all.

With this thought in mind I've decided to use today's blog post to link to this website which sells garbage from the streets of New York at a premium price, gift wrapped: http://nycgarbage.com/

The Ironing Lady

2012-01-14T22:32:00.001Z

I went to see The Iron Lady at the cinema. It was mildly annoying. This is quite good going for a film with such an overtly political subject, given that I couldn't enjoy Avatar or the last Batman film because of their irritating ideological content. Fortunately though this was not a lefty wet dream of Thatcher, crying into her hands full of regret at how evil she was but nor was it some deluded triumphant right wing fantasy.

There was a scene right at the start that annoyed me when she had no milk - I felt the director leaning out of the screen saying "aah, she was a milk snatcher you know"*. There was a weird bit where she ranted about the EU. I think they were trying to show what an uncompromising monster she'd become. I actually wanted to cheer and shout "here, here". I didn't though as I wouldn't have wanted to interrupt everyone's conversations.

What's with that? Oooh - lets go to the cinema and have a nice chat. Best part of £20 and you get idiots who don't comprehend that I'm not at the cinema to hear some halfwit gibbering away or even answering a call after letting their ringtone burble away for a few minutes.

The Cult of Nick is doing well. Actual people have downloded it. For the moment it's just old Kerrang clips and will remain so for the forseeable. The link is here: http://audioboo.fm/NickMargerrison

NM

*"Thatcher Thatcher the milk snatcher" - Education secretary who took away free milk: WIKI.

The Discordian Cult Of Nick lauches amid little to no ceremony ... join us!

2012-01-12T14:20:00.001Z

I've always quite fancied being the leader of a cult. Unfortunately for me I lack the appropriate level of charisma, determination and moral bankruptcy required for such an undertaking. Instead I'm going to start doing a podcast again and call it "The Cult Of Nick". Without question this will one day be an incredibly successful enterprise but like all such high jinx it needs a small beginning. This is it.

Despite my clear belief in this enterprise I am not intending to part with any actual money* to invest in this future world class product nor do I have the time to muck about looking for a way to host this podcast properly so I've gone with a nice free "Audioboo" account for the moment.

Listening to this audio instantly makes you a member of The Discordian Cult of Nick. Once 'in' there is no escape. Unfortunately for me there are no obligations required of members. In fact the only obligation required of anyone following this inauspicious blog entry is that I post one five minute bit of audio from my back catalogue every week for the rest of 2012, at the end of which the world will have course ended. Or, I'll have moved away from posting old stuff from the past and start doing new stuff unique to the podcast. One of the two.

I'm under the impression you can subscribe to this thing on iTunes, here's the link:

http://audioboo.fm/NickMargerrison

We're in week two of 2012 so I'm going to post up two bits to get the ball rolling, from then on it's one five minute bit a week. If you're like me that means they'll build up in your iTunes and you'll listen to four or five every now and then when you can't find anything better.

Kicking off with an interview I did on Kerrang Radio with comedian, Mark Thomas, who I saw doing his live show recently. Brilliant! Go and see him if he comes up your area, so to speak.

NM

*I'm confused as to why it seems to cost money to do a podcast but is free to upload video to YouTube? Can anyone explain that to me?

Does David Cameron really play Angry Birds?

2012-01-11T09:53:00.000Z

This weekend just gone the current Prime Minister, David Cameron, gave an interview to The Telegraph. It was one of the more interesting interviews I've read from him in terms of the EU, Scottish independence, and the deficit, because it really seemed to get into some of the nitty gritty. However it is littered with trivial detail:

"but Mr Cameron also still finds time to relax, watching television and listening to music. To the envy of many, the iPad addict has also, he reveals, completed Angry Birds, the massive-selling “app” in which players catapult animated birds at pigs."

At first I liked this little insight. "Oh, he plays Angry Birds like me, that's nice," went my initial uncynical response.

Ironically the interview was overshadowed in terms of reaction by a trivial comment he made comparing, Ed Balls, to someone with tourettes. Furious moralisers queued up to decry the apparent slip of the tongue and it swiftly became the main issue as Cameron apologised for "any offence caused". In the real world the phone lines of my radio show were not rammed with people angry about it, most defended him along the lines I did. It's a turn of phrase, not unlike saying "are you deaf/blind/dyslexic?" to someone in the event of them not hearing/seeing/spelling something. I'm dyslexic, I don't find that offensive, furthermore we had callers who were blind who agreed. Like I said, it's trivia.

Now the interview has been largely forgotten about, except for by me, as I sit playing Angry Birds and wonder about Cameron doing the same. I've started to doubt he does. It strikes me as just the sort of thing an advisor might have told him to say in order to humanise him a bit more. Firstly, he's got form, his "cast iron guarantee" of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty was a much more important claim and it turned out to be a lie. Secondly, and unfortunately for him this will always be the kiss of death, he looks a bit like Tony Blair.

However, that I'm cynical about his harmless claim speaks to the fact that I can't bring myself to trust any of these politicians about anything at all ever. I don't think I'm alone in this lack of trust. My generation has had no reason to ever trust these people and it's certainly not something which they've ever earned from us.

If it was a lie then the aim was to associate David Cameron with something "normal" people like. Blair did it with music by meeting Noel Gallagher. The idea is that the association makes you think of Cameron when you think of something you like. It hasn't worked with me, instead it's made me think of the fact I do not trust politicians every time I play Angry Birds, which is quite often, would you believe?

Twitter feed improves dramatically

2012-01-10T20:51:00.001Z

I've locked my twitter feed. This has enhanced twitter enormously. It means that I get less annoying tweets from people who are wound up because I didn't happen to share their opinion on something.

At work I see taking personal abuse as being all part of the job. Twitter though is for my own amusement. I often read it at home or on my mobile phone. Having my tweets locked means only people who have chosen to "Follow" me can see what I've written and so consequently only they can reply. It gives the thing a feeling of being a little exclusive club of just under 2,000 people, theoretically all on a similar wavelength.

My colleague Duncan Barkes was the first to do it and to be honest I've only really copied him.

If you'd like to follow me my twitter feed is @NickMargerrison. So far I haven't refused anyone, apart from some woman who wanted to me to go and look at her webcam.

NM

I've hit my target weight JAN 9th 2012

2012-01-10T08:46:00.002Z

I'm now exactly 14 and a half stone. However, due to some sort of clerical error this does not in fact make me "normal" according to the BMI index. I spent all of last year thinking it would, only to check the facts while bragging about my apparently "normal" weight to my Mum on the phone. At just over 6 foot in height it leaves me still in the category "overweight" as opposed to "obese". Turns out I need to lose another stone.

Oddly that's sort of a relief because my physique still sports a Little Plum style belly. To put this in perspective, previously I looked more like his Dad:

My analysis of this BMI index chart thingy today shows me that I will still be allowed to continue dieting in an attempt to kill that little belly off without worrying that I've turned into some sort of metrosexual anorexic. That's where this kind of thing can all lead. I mean, for Christmas I got some perfume! And I was pleased about it! It's called "Joop". I think people prefer to call it aftershave but everyone knows it's perfume right?

NM

FURTHER READING:

Little Plum off of The Beano http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Plum

As close to a political philosophy as you'll get from me ...

2012-01-09T10:22:00.000Z

I ain't left-wing, I ain't right wing.
I got two wings baby
An' I can fly outta any box
You lot try and put me in.

If I were to try to label my political philosophy the closest set of ideas I can find that appeal would be described as "Libertarianism". There's a reason you've not heard that word too much when it comes to mainstream debate in this country. It's a philosophy which involves the politicians of this country saying things like: "We need less power, less of your taxes and frankly we're going to let you make more of your own decsisions". The career politicians of today are as likely to subscribe to that as turkeys would vote for Christmas.

I'm not a fully paid up card carrying libertarian, I just think there's a lot to be said for the idea that Governments need less, as opposed to more, power and money. As a result of this sympathy for these ideas I occasionally attract callers who ARE deeply into it. They don't hesitate to drop names such as, Ayn Rand, into conversation and I've even had one caller explain "The Nolan Chart" once.

This means I get fantastic emails like the one printed below that I feel deserve a wider audience:

--

Joan of Potters Bar

Good evening Nick. I can't phone because I have a very bad cold but I want to say that we had a 'libertarian' government in this country when Charles Dickens was alive and it was the result of that system of economics, then known as laissez faire ('let it be'), which brought about the horrific conditions which he describes in his novels and which we frequently see enacted upon our screens.

It was these conditions, arising from the successful Victorian economy, which caused reformers like him to campaign for more fairness towards the poor and disadvantaged by a more equitable redistribution of our national wealth through taxation and other government means. Personal charity abounded during the Victorian era, business people were extremely philanthropic but that did not prevent libertarian economics creating extreme poverty amongst the many for the benefit of the few. It was this situation which made reformers call for government intervention and regulation.

We have only to look to countries like India to see what life can still be like for the many in a largely unregulated society. People like yourself and your 23 year old caller, are ignoring the past and are in danger of propelling the people of our country into a neo-Victorian era with no protection for the poor and weak. We cannot look after every old and sick person ourselves, we cannot all be self-employed entrepeneurs, we need government help to stop the extreme exploitation which has previously happened without it. That is not 'socialism', it is a cry for the 'liberte, egalite, fraternite' of the French Revolution and the Enlightenment which curbed the excesses of the Industrial Revolution and brought us the freer, more equal (fairer), more caring society of today.

When preaching neo-libertarianism, as you so frequently do, beware of throwing these babies out with your bathwater!

--

I don't usually reply to emails as we get too many but this one was so good here is my response:

Hi Joan,

I'm undecided about Libertarianism (laissez faire Government) and think perhaps its appeal for me stems from the fact I've grown up in an era when state power has frequently appeared to be out of the control of normal people such as you and I.

The war against Iraq was a real catalyst for some huge shifts in my opinions. It became apparent to me back then that no matter how many people opposed the Government, if the issue was part of their agenda, there was nothing you could do about it. Since then a number of things appear to be unchangeable when it comes to the world of politics. The EU is a good example. No matter who you turn to in the world of serious politics there appears to be no one who opposes it. Another is the distressing rise of the authoritarian "big brother" state during New Labour. None of that power over people will ever be given back.

The appeal of Libertarianism is it seems to be a political philosophy which argues that politicians should have less power instead of more. It puts focus upon these people who say they rule us and asks them to justify each power they claim over us.

FURTHER READING:

The Nolan Chart
Libertarianism
Ayn Rand

THIS ARTICLE ALSO APPEARS ON THE LBC WEBSITE UNDER THE HEADING NEO LIBERTARIANISM.

Diane Abbott and her anti-racism problem

2012-01-09T10:09:00.001Z

The human mind has great difficulty processing a negative thought. For example, try to NOT think of the last thing you ate. I need you to try NOT to remember what it was, your last bit of food. Once you've managed NOT to remember it I want you to keep it out of your mind and keep NOT thinking about it. If you're a normal human being you'll be thinking of it now despite trying not to ... mmm, chicken!

Many people believe that this is where those who campaign against something go wrong. Do you remember the "anti-war" marches of the previous decade? They didn't seem to do so well. Perhaps part of that was a branding issue. Keep telling everyone you're against something and in the end you start to become associated with it.

This partly ties into another idea which is neatly summed up in the following quotation:

"Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one."
Friedrich Nietzsche
German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

There's a sketch I saw on, I think, a DVD extra of Little Britain. It was brilliant but as far as I can work out never broadcast. In it you had a load of people all working for a Cancer Charity. They were busy organising various activities, TV interviews and fun-runs. In the midst of it all one of them took a call. His words suggested good news but his face said otherwise:

"Oh, really? All forms of it? And it works in every instance? Oh, err, great, that's great news. I'll tell everyone."

He finished his conversation and relayed to everyone there the "great news" that cancer had been cured. In the sketch everyone then realises that their jobs are now no longer necessary. The fun run is cancelled and plans are made to wind everything down. Then, just as the news is setting in for everyone that they have nothing to do, the phone rings. It was all a mistake. The cure doesn't work. They can't help but look happy.

You can see why it was never broadcast but it makes an interesting point. People like Diane Abbott require racism to still exist. It's part of their identity, power base and, for want of a better word, their act. Her tweets about "white people" who she thinks "love to divide and rule" along with these other comments about her being "dubious of black people" who don't claim to experience racism make perfect sense in this context. I feel sorry for her because she will have to make some major changes to her world view if such mistakes are not to happen again, and again, and again.

FURTHER READING: Diane Abbott will not face police action over 'racist' tweet. - Ironic that it was her Government that made such an absurd idea as 'prosecution for an opinion' possible eh?

Suffering a massive case of CBA re: my new phone.

2012-01-07T05:32:00.000Z

I'm suffering a massive case of CBA in regards to my new phone. I feel a bit like I've had my arm twisted up my back by the phone company (Orange) who didn't seem to offer massively favourable rates for someone like me who didn't want to upgrade. I also felt a lot of personal pressure from friends and family who couldn't understand why I stuck so doggedly to my "old" (only got it a few years ago) phone. In the end I accepted that not upgrading my phone was silly. So, I requested my upgrade and signed on for a 1 1/2 year contract with my new touch screen phone.

It arrived in the post.

I've got my new payment plan in place. They've sent me a new phone, I just CBA* to actually use it for anything other than a game of "Angry Birds" now and then. My "old" phone is still the one I'm using to make and take calls. The new one is currently just a glorified modern version of my old Gameboy handset I had in the 90's.

Firstly, I just can't quite get behind touch screen. It's too clumsy. I liked having a keyboard.

Secondly, all these stories about these new phones having viruses are upsetting. My phone is more private than my computer. I SERIOUSLY CBA with viruses on it.

Finally in the event of getting it stolen I'd like to know that the theif in question would be dissapointed with an "old" piece of technology.

Time will tell how long I hold out on this one...

*CBA - Can't be arsed. I don't know why this acronymn appeals to me so much. It's forum speak really isn't it? Meh, I'm blogging every day at the moment, might as well indulge.

Atkins (ish)

2012-01-05T10:40:00.000Z

Over the last year I have lost a total of about 3 stone in excess blubber. It's a bit of an understatement to say I'm pleased about this.

Being overweight is awful. I found I'd kid myself that I was alright with it or pretend that it was worth it because you can eat food and drink beer whenever you fancy but the truth is that if you could press a magick button to rid yourself of it you would. EVERYONE who is overweight would press that button I think.

I started dieting around this time of year and carried it through all 2011. The weight loss was gradual and not done in the usual dramatic fashion I've managed in the past with the atkins diet. Instead of that I went (on the advice of my mate from Kerrang, Kate Lawler,) to 'Slimming World'.

When I first went to Slimming World I was expecting something like it's more famous rival Weight Watchers. Instead I felt like I'd stumbled into some sort of cult. They had their own, almost impenetrable, language with terms like "Red Days" and "Green Days" and "Extra Easy" and "Syns" and so forth. I didn't really understand what I was supposed to be doing so I asked one of the other people, she gave me my diet template:

HAVE CARB DAYS where you eat only cabohydrates and a little (if any) protien.

HAVE PROTEIN DAYS where you eat only protein and a little (if any) carbohydrate.

NO BREAD, ever.

I thought perhaps she was being a bit overzealous with the bread rule. However a series of weird coincidences made me think twice. Firstly I was listening to The Collings and Herrin podcast a while back and they were talking about how eating bread during the Ed Festival had piled the pounds on them a bit. Then secondly I went to see Toby Hadoke performing in Manchester. He did a little routine he was working on about bread, the slut of all foods, because "it goes with anything". He was trying to cut it out also. That was enough for me, I didn't need to be told more than three times.

What all of the above has led to is a sort of compromise version of the atkins diet where I'm giving myself occasional days off where I'm allowed pasta and vegetables. Over the last 12 months I've had only a couple of slices of bread, usually in error.

However, as any dieter knows, half of the battle is psychological and it's here that the "Slimming World" group came into its own. It's a bit like I suspect alcoholics anonymous meetings are in that you sit round with a load of people who are determined to stop being who they've become. You sit there and really consider the fact that you must stay the course and lose weight. This comes after you've been ceremonially weighed. Most people don't hang around after being weighed for the meeting but I find it the most useful part of the process.

The leader of the group I went to was likeable but she had a picture that helped me enormously during 2011. It was of a bunch of 7 flowers. One of them was damaged, she would always make the point that if you had a vase with 7 flowers and one was damaged would you throw them all away? Nope, you'd just forget about the one that was wrong and keep the other 6. These flowers were like the days of the week. Failing on one day to keep to your diet did not mean you had to throw away the whole week. For some reason that really made sense to me and helped when I dropped the ball here and there.

Good luck if you're starting on a diet right now. Hope the above entry is of use.

NM

PICTURE: My protein breakfast today inspired this entry. It's a sharing platter from Asda! Cool eh? Olives, meat and dried tomatoes.

The fur trade and international terrorism

2012-01-05T08:54:00.000Z

The argument against the fur trade runs like this ... "I hate people who wear fur because they are paying money into an industry that is cruel to animals".

The argument in favour of international terrorism runs like this ... "I hate people who are British because they are paying money into a nation that is cruel to people".

In essence the argument stated as series of propositions is:

1/ I hate X

2 / BECAUSE they pay money into Y

3/ AND Y is cruel to animals/people.

It is this argument that allows animal rights activists to chuck paint over people who wear fur. It's the same one a terrorist uses when justifying attacks upon civilians.

From my point of view it might be better to cut out X from the equation. If you are inclined to hate I'd direct such inclinations at Y, that way you're hating someone who is actually doing something cruel.

This point of view is not popular because society has deliberately overstated the power of market forces. People have been led to believe that their money has an almost supernatural power to persuade someone to action. Faith in its value makes it possible to easily order huge numbers of citizens. It also gives them a convinient excuse for compromising their own morality: "I was just doing my job".

If your job involves torturing animals for their fur or murdering people perhaps those coins aren't worth it and it's time for you to wake up.

NM

REFERENCES:

Now PETA slam under-siege Kim Kardashian with billboard condemning her for wearing fur (and her sister Khloe agrees too).

In a trivial pursuit of Trivial Pursuit

2012-01-04T21:12:00.000Z

Arrgh!

So, why is it the case that Trivial Pursuit is nowhere to be found? There's only some rubbish version where you bet on people knowing or not knowing the answers to a question. I started off by going to the toyshop in London called Hamleys. The shop assistant rolled her eyes and said "ooh, everyone has been asking for that this month" as she pointed me in the direction of the crap orange box with the new version in. I asked her if she had the original. They didn't. As I walked out some dozy 'fun loving' sales assistant chucked a plastic boomerang around and missed the back of my head by an inch or so.

I wandered off to John Lewis. Nope.

Tesco. Nope.

Argos. Nope.

Harrods. Nope.

WHSmith. Nope.

I even bumped into a young couple who were also searching for it. They wanted it for a dinner party (I was shopping for a Xmas present) on New Year's Eve. We compared notes and both marvelled at the following weird response we'd had in a number of shops ... "why don't you get it on the internet".

They wonder why the high street is doomed!

Still not found it.

NM

Previous entry regarding "ooh, why don't you get it on the internet.

EMAIL TO THE UNIVERSE

2012-01-02T06:46:00.000Z

I've decided I should get better at "small talk". Over the Xmas period I've been amazed at how much people can manage without apparently getting bored. For me it's a real chore. I kind of dry up and want to say things like:

"So ... what do you think about The EU then eh?"

or

"Hmm ... anyway, Iran is looking quite likely to go nuclear soon isn't it?"

Those kinds of things though generally tend to kill off the vibe a bit at social occasions. See I've noticed that "small talk" seems to involve not actually saying much at all, if it's done well. In terms of conversation I'm a bit "bull in a china shop" sometimes. Need to master talking about less 'weighty' issues I think. I'll record my progress here in future entries.

For Xmas I got Robert Anton Wilson's "Email To The Universe" and have been giving it a good thumbing on the tube on my way to work. If you have never read any of his stuff I can't recommend it enough. I suggest you start with "Prometheus Rising", then move on from there. He's a philosopher of supreme clarity. Useless in relation to my mission regarding "small talk" skills though...

New Year's Resolutions

2012-01-01T18:52:00.001Z

Mine are simple:

1, Be more organised.

2, Use my time more wisely.

3, Lose the last 7lbs I need to shift before I hit my target weight of 14 1/2 stone.

4, Blog - once a day, every day, for all of 2012.

Discordians don't join groups

2011-10-21T02:49:00.000+01:00

I attended the protests at St Paul's last weekend, after blogging about the meeting held to organise it the week before.

As I've said previously, I have a lot of sympathy with rage directed towards the financial system. I think probably most people do. Here's an earlier entry which touches on my personal views regarding lending money with interest. However, I'm unsure I like the tone of a lot of the protesters. They seem naive and more than a little half witted. Perhaps this is just down to the nature of big groups of people. There's not much you can do if someone sticks up a sign telling everyone what you, as a member of the crowd, advocate.

I wandered about talking to people for quite some time on Sunday night having already done a radio show where I think it probably came across that I had no sympathy whatsoever for them. The truth of the matter is slightly more complex. I am both supporting and criticising them.

I disagree that "Capitalism IS Crisis" or that "The People Are Too Big To Fail" or even that they are "The 99%". However, I agree that it's beyond mad that we bailed out the banks with our own money so they could then refuse to lend us it back. That's clearly insane. Furthermore I agree that politicians need to take more responsibility for such decisions. It's no good just looking at us forlornly and acting as if there was no alternative course of action.

Finally, and without reservation, it's good to see people doing something which expresses the entirely fair anger most people feel about the situation. Banks have one job: look after our money. That's it. They failed. Not us.

Occupy the London stock exchange

2011-10-11T19:34:00.001+01:00

The #ows (occupy wall street) meme has arrived in London. I know this because yesterday I was part of an "amorphous horizontal non-hierarchical collective" having a "mutually beneficial shared discourse" about how we can really "sort those f*ckers out". It was a bit of fun.

The 'occupy the London stock exchange general meeting' was on Westminster bridge during the "block the bridge" protest designed to highlight a Government bill which critics say is aimed at selling off parts of the NHS. As a result there were about 800 or so mostly NHS employees all stood on Westminster Bridge chanting earnestly "Whose NHS? Our NHS". On either side of them were rows of police with nightsticks looking ready for a bit of hippy bashing if necessary...

I'd read on twitter that there was to be a meeting there, to organise the occupation which will take place on Saturday the 15th of October, Paternoster Square London. At first the people involved were a bit tricky to locate amongst this big crowd of leftys, despite someone handing out leaflets advertising the occupation itself. I took a leaflet off someone wearing an anonymous mask and got the impression he didn't realise there was a meeting about it going on there at all. He was too busy telling me "we are all anonymous, everyone here". Frankly, people like that get right up my nose. You're wearing a mask, get over yourself, I don't want to join your silly cult*.

We eventually located them by their chant: "We are the 99%, we are the 99%!". At core this is the idea which lies behind both the 'occupy wall street' campaign and now the forthcoming situation in London. It's not clear if this has always been the case but as the movement gathers pace it has slowly found a voice. The history of the wall street occuptation is more a story of inarticulate rage directed at the financial system. The protest there was organised by an advert in a leftwing magazine. The people who posted that advert are influenced by the French situationists in that their aim was only really to give people a "situation" which would act as a lightning rod for those who want "change". What that "change" is comes once the metaphorical snowball has begun rolling.

By the time we arrived where this meeting was, within the crowd, they'd divided up into groups. The intent was to talk about "society and how we should move forward," explained a nice middle class bloke who was very friendly and keen to help us fit in. There were three sets of hand signals the groups were using: "jazz hands, limp wrists and crossed arms". The first meant you agreed with the speaker and the other two seemed to mean you didn't or were not sure.

We sat down under a banner (you tube clip above) and listened to lots of student types talking mostly utter b*ll*cks.

Once that was over people fed their thoughts back to the main group using a megaphone and the "human mic" technique where the crowd repeats the sentences uttered by the speaker. This provided a reference to the original protests where the human mic technique was used out of necessity because the wall street protestors were not allowed megaphones or amplification devices**.

I can't pretend I'm not excited about the forthcoming occupation. I'm not saying I support it but I am very sympathetic to inarticulate rage directed at the financial system. I am reminded of the famous chinese curse which runs "may you live in interesting times".

NM

Previous blog entries which might be interesting and relate to this:

Rule by Terror revolution in France and the human rights act.

The Awakening.

*Years ago I used to post on the forum 4chan. Anonymous, the idea, formed there. It's very influenced by, Discordianism, but I doubt the self rightious moralist who was wearing a mask and trying to impress me with his imagined mystique knows that.

**Human mic technique in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8Q73yjRVhE

Beware the poiticians and their celebrity friends who want you to "blame the media".

2011-10-05T08:47:00.000+01:00

According to some people "the media" has either caused or magnified every problem in this country. I've heard it blamed for the obesity epidemic, the rise in anoerexia, the war in Iraq, the strong anti war sentiment in the UK, the rise of political correctness, the fact people rubbish political correctness, etc, etc, etc. In fact I honestly can't think of a problem our nation faces which hasn't at some point or other had some chuff bumble on about how they "blame the media".

This culture of blame is damaging to those who indulge in it and feeds the power of the people who it is intended to attack. Think of the final scene in, The Wizard Of Oz. "The media" is, at its worst, the machine which distracts Dorothy and her friends. When used by the likes of politicians or big business it allows them, the real villains, to hide behind a curtain of confusion. Furthermore once your focus is upon that machine, there's an all powerful version of these characters being projected at you which will frighten anyone but Toto the dog. Thus the media is here, at worst, a distraction made more powerful by your attention. However, that is not the full picture and those who think it is have merely been successfully distracted. If you remember the story, the dog pulls aside the magician's curtain to reveal the truth. What is Toto the dog here, if not a fearless newshound who sniffs out the truth?

This is the inherent problem with blaming "the media" as a collective. It conflates a massive group of people who do not have the same agenda or act as one on any issue. It ignores the benefits of a free press, which without question we have in this country. It pretends that those who speak about the expenses scandal, the WMD scandal and even the phone hacking scandal found out about such things by virtue of their own ingenuity. They didn't, they heard about it through "the media".

However, and here's the bit many people do not seem to understand, although Toto the dog and the Wizard of Oz's media machine are not the same thing you cannot have one without the other. Why? Because no one wants to watch Toto the dog being worthy all the time. He's boring. That big machine over there in the corner of the room is proper cool man, look at it! There's smoke coming off it and stuff, it's ace. The fact it gets an audience means it can make money and it also means when Toto runs over to it, they're looking in the right direction and give a toss about his "scoop".

This brings me to the "phone hacking scandal" which has, without question, not gone away. There's an article about it in this morning's Telegraph. It's being pushed by incredibly powerful people who are frankly sick of Toto the dog. They're trying to make you think they're attacking The Wizard's all powerful celebrity machine but only an idiot (or a celebrity) would buy that. In fact that machine is so big and profitable you can easily slice a few bits off it and throw them to the baying crowd without much worry.

In this vein they brought you the head of, The News Of The World, to help frame the debate in their favour. The crowd cheered this spectacle in much the same way as they might have first greeted the guillotine during the French revolution. Like those crowds, who got a thrill watching the "great and the good" of France meet a grizly end, those who parrot the mantra of "I blame the media" are also driven on by jealousy, I suspect. Celebrity culture and jealousy walk hand in hand. The lungs of those who "blame the media" usually belong to bitter and disgruntled media studies students, unfamous wannabies and tarnished celebrities. Those of them with the sense to realise what has happened will find their cheers ring hollow later on, I think, when Toto gets a taste and the inevitable consequence of "blaming the media" asserts itself.

How about this mantra, it's one that is far more fruitful but weirdly less fashionable: I blame the politicians?

Make no mistake, the real criminals in all of this are WITHOUT QUESTION the politicians who right now are rolling out their guillotines. They want to licence journalists. This is a dreadful idea. We are told it is designed to make journalists more 'trustworthy'. Ask yourself this, from whose perspective? Trustworthy from the perspective of those behind the curtain, the poiticians. I say you should NEVER trust a politician. Allowing them to choose who you can trust is equally absurd. The public already licence their journalists, thank you very much. We CHOOSE to pay attention to them or not. Our attention gives them a licence to communicate with us. If they lose it their licence is revoked.

Some politicians do not understand this because they think people are so stupid that they're actually controlled by the media. The media machine pays lip service to this idea because it gives them access to real power. Power which is granted to them by people who are at core incredibly vain and arrogant. Politics has been described as 'showbusiness for ugly people' and the truth is that a flattering media profile or two can make them appear from a distance to be less repulsive than they actually are.

I'll leave the final word to, John Kampfner, the Chief Executive of Index on Censorship, as reported by "the media":

“If we look over the past decade – from Iraq, to the behaviour of bankers - journalists have found out too little about those with power because of our restrictive libel and privacy laws. Journalism is too weak, not too strong.”

Quote from The Telegraph article linked to.

"Life is but a dream"

2011-09-29T03:37:00.001+01:00

"As sunlight obscures the stars by day so does wakefullness blind us to the fact that we are still dreaming."

- Liber Kaos, Peter J Carroll.

Everything you have ever experienced had to pass from the outside world to your internal one. The body acts as an instrument through which reality must pass if it is to become part of someone's life experience. The brain is the final part of the filtration process and more than anything else it ignores information sent to it. Right now, in order to focus, you will be excluding more than you are taking in and if this blog entry has your full attention it will necessarily be at the expense of other things. Just as you hear someone speaking in a pub by ignoring background noise, reality can only be ordered from the chaos of the universe if your mind can negate what it believes is irrelevant.

Dreams are just a combination of your memory and imagination. While sleeping your brain has a chance to invent fantastic narratives by ignoring almost all sense data and letting both memory and imagination run wild. However, while awake, you still need both facilities to decode the world around you. On the one hand your comprehension of these words is built upon the memory of their previous meanings. On the other, that which is either lost by my poor communication skills or your lack of understanding or attention will be necessarily explained by an imagination. The combination of both factors allows these words to fit into and become part of a personal mythology which only you can really control.

This blog entry now rests inside your mind where everything you've ever known has been, part of a waking dream in a mind which is not my own.

Personally speaking I find it useful to sometimes consider that I do not in fact "know" anything at all. I simply dream.

PREVIOUS ENTRY ABOUT PETER J CARROLL
THE ABOVE IS VERY INFLUENCED BY BOTH HIM AND ANOTHER WRITER CALLED ROBERT ANTON WILSON.

Rule by terror, revolution in France and the human rights act.

2011-09-22T10:59:00.001+01:00

My fascination with The French Revolution began a few months ago. It's evident in this blog entry here. It's a period of history I know about only thanks to the internet, wikipedia and YouTube. I strongly suggest you look into it.

I'm still digesting the details but it's amazing to me how much of the world we currently live in is unlocked by only a surface knowledge of this historical period. It helps to explain conspiracy theorists and their views about occultism a bit. It reveals what is really going on with this debate between us and Europe regarding the "yuman rights act," which was clearly, in my opinion now, a declaration of revolutionary intent. It helps explain why the media is always at its best when it attacks authority without mercy. It shows you where the internet might lead us, as I wrote about in the linked to blog entry. In fact, there's very little it doesn't throw new light upon. The detail regarding it was mostly new to me but each piece of it set off a new thought process in my mind.

Firstly, here's an excellent introduction, breathlessly told by an exciting sound track and an enthusiastic American voice over:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EvakM9Waus

Secondly, a slightly more analytical walk through made by the BBC. Although that sounds like this is the therefore better of the two I suggest you go with the above first if you're like me and knew nothing about this era of history.

http://youtu.be/9Ef_43oW7Qg

What's wrong with Global Warming?

2011-09-20T12:26:00.000+01:00

Although it might sound otherwise I don't disbelieve in man made global warming. However, I don't believe in it either. On this one I'm prepared to admit my ignorance. One thing which does make me a little inclined to think that the case for it might be flawed is the fact that the noxious stench of politicians has become inextricably woven into the mix. Their odd solution to the problem seems to be something of an empty meal, with "more taxes" and crappy lightbulbs being top of the menu. Another thing which makes me doubt the scientific consensus is the fact it's a menu that seems to chiefly consist of porkie pies. The latest is detailed in The Guardian here.

The outline of the story is approximately this, The Times Atlas recently launched in a blaze of publicity claiming to show proof of the evil influence of humans on Greenland. 15% of the ice cover has been destroyed since 1999! How terrifying. Better get those carbon taxes sorted before the next election. Then, oops a daisy, pesky facts go and trip the bandwagon up a bit. Turns out glaciologists say that although the ice cover is melting it's nowhere near the 'misleading' 15% rate represented by the Times Atlas cartographers. And so there we are, yet another bandwagon thunders off course with EVEN the Guardian being forced to cover the embarrasing story.

Science is supposed to be about facts. This thing surely either is or is not happening. Not so. Welcome the the world of "post normal science". There is a branch of science where it is argued that scientists can and should go where the data does not. From wikipedia:

Detractors of post-normal science, conversely, see it as a method of trying to argue for a given set of actions despite a lack of evidence for them, and as a method of trying to stifle opposing voices calling for caution by accusing them of hidden biases. Many consider post-normal science an attempt to ignore proper scientific methods in an attempt to substitute inferior methodology in service of political goals.

An article for The Telegraph about it is here.

Makes you wonder eh?

Earlier article on Global War and Global Warming

Occultism/Discordianism

2011-09-19T18:35:00.000+01:00

One of the consequences of going on Facebook quite a lot at the moment is that listeners have been asking me questions. The most common one is about my "religion" Discordianism. I'm a bit confused by this as previously (despite often mentioning it) people didn't seem to be that interested in what is sort of a joke religion. I mention it less on LBC 97.3 but get asked about it more ... there's something about human psychology in that I think.

Anyway, it's a big topic and not all of it makes much sense. This blog entry is for those who are interested. If you post a comment/question at the bottom I'll try and answer it.

--

Occultism literally means, hidden from view. Ocular, meaning roughly your eyes, as in "binoculars". This means occultism is in fact the study of things which are not currently understood. Conspiracy theorists often think it means the study of things which have been deliberately covered up, I'd argue that was profoundly wrong these days. That's only really a description which applies to occultism as it was during the time when not being a Christian seriously harmed your life prospects. Around the 60's-70's the need for secrecy largely vanished and is, in my opinion, only maintained by some who get a kick out of 'understanding' things that others haven't really thought about. There's also a certain allure to pretending you know a secret which I think some self styled occult gurus clearly indulge in. The truth is this, good occultists don't claim to "know" anything. They're guessing. Furthermore a good Discordian doesn't claim to "believe".

I have written about it numerous times in this blog, here are my more popular articles on the subject:

Aleister Crowley - This article is the biggie. It gets all the readers and is now linked to by various other people.

Blame Alan Moore - This is the better article I think, it gets less attention these days.

My Polytheism Defence - This is an example of how occultism applies to my day to day life with surprising consequences.

Then this entry provides you with a short conclusion.

Hope that helps.

NM

Staring blankly at my own Facebook

2011-09-11T17:39:00.000+01:00

I've done pretty well in resisting Facebook. It's only recently that I've been drawn into its sticky web. I have two accounts, one for people I know in real life and another for my radio show stuff. There's a very blurred line that sepearates the two. I'm not sure how long I'm going to keep either of them going. I don't think it's a website that's good for me.

My life's pretty medicore in terms of socialising and travel. In fact I do very little that could be described as 'cool'. I watch daytime telly, play on my 'puter, read a lot of books and every Thursday I go to a pub quiz. That's it. All my life I've had a weird nagging suspicion that I wasn't normal in this respect and that everyone else is having an amazing time, all the time. Facebook seems to give me photographic proof that this suspicion is not just typical insecure paranoia but is in fact true. Judging by a flick through Facebook it seems most of the people I know spend all their time at parties or on holiday doing amazing things.

I'm not much of a pictures person. Amature photographs generally depress me. They make the world look so ordinary. Furthermore I'm of the opinion that you can't go right with a picture of yourself. It's either going to look good and therefore depress you with the passage of time or it'll look bad and depress you in the here and now. Despite this I got drawn into looking at people's pictures this morning. I had a bit of time to kill in the office. I had no idea what an overall downer the experience would be.

It left me feeling boring, ordinary and nosy. Is that the sort of thing other people feel when they log onto Facebook? Am I doing something wrong? I'm puzzled by the appeal of it. Someone once told me it was "all about the pictures". Maybe that's why I'm just not really "getting it".

I've tried commenting on things as well. I like that a bit more but the site seems to lack the depth of twitter. Most of it seems to be incredibly inconsequential and inane. Pages and pages of "polite chatter". The sort of conversations I loathe in real life.

I must be doing something wrong.

Why do people like that website?

Taxi drivers are ace...

2011-09-08T16:59:00.000+01:00

Recently I was sat in a taxi and as usual I got drawn into a conversation. This particular driver had a very strong Indian accent. He was sort of rambling away to himself about the immorality of the city. It was hard to make out what he said but there was one part which I either misheard or was perhaps one of the most poetic turns of phrase I've heard in a while:

"Some of these women, they are there, with their drugs. They speak like no one would ever be speaking to you. Oh! It is awful. They have a debasement of language. They soil the English language. They make it so as after you have heard them you want that no more you will have a conversation again. With anyone. That is how bad they are."

I think he was talking about prostitutes. It was hard to be sure if he meant prostitutes or just some of the tourists you get from abroad in the back of his cab. What struck me was the idea that in his mind it was possible to have a conversation that was so bad it would put you off ever speaking to anyone, ever again! What a fantastic insult!

I've said it before, I'll say it again, no matter where you are in the UK, taxi drivers are ace!

PREVIOUS POST ABOUT TAXI DRIVERS.

Ask me anything about sharks and Nazis.

2011-09-07T21:53:00.001+01:00

I love watching documentaries. Ricky Gervais in his awesome first stand up set practically outlined the life many blokes in the digital TV age have ended up living. Flicking between the different documentary channels:

Ask me anything about sharks and Nazis. Not as bad as a lot of people make out, actually. Sharks I mean, not Nazis. Sharks, brilliant. Nazis, rubbish.

My two favourite series at the moment are "How The Universe Works" and "Elegance and Decadence". Both go well with the sound system pumped up in the background. The former features massive planets colliding with each other alongside an epic sound ambient soundtrack. The latter has a pretty groovy rock soundscape to it.

Anyway, during my time in documentary world I've noticed certain cliches popping up from time to time. Here's some of the ones I've noticed alongside others suggested by the Margerrison twitterarti ...

HISTORY DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #1

"They were very much the, ah, Posh and Becks, of the period," person saying it pulls face a bit or rolls their eyes...

HISTORY DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #2

"Back then they didn't have 'email' or 'blackberrys'," said with a bit of a sneer.

NATURE DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #1

"And that's right, these lovely creatures are all going to die, because of you and your greed".

HISTORY DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #3

"This period was one of dramatic change, it was a little like the 60's, sort of," cue rock music montage.

POP MUSIC DOCUMENTARY ABOUT A DEAD ROCKSTAR CLICHE #1

"In many ways they looked to be on the verge of an artistic comeback".

SCIENCE DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #1

"Weighs as much as whales" By @MargoJMilne

SCIENCE DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #2

"...is as tall as of double decker buses". @KeithTrue

NATURE DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #2

"An area size of Wales deforrested every X weeks." @odaviesnh

SCIENCE DOCUMENTARY CLICHE #3

"Until one man in [insert place] had an idea" @simmoski

"Who's upset you this time Alan?"

2011-09-07T00:22:00.001+01:00

"I don't fink enuff people realise how clever Einstein's ideas are actually, really. I mean it's just so amazing how good his mind was. Like E=MC2 that just changed everything right, see," says the bloke opposite me to a woman who has just been talking about Shakespeare to him. She explained to him that she likes Shakespeare because she's an actress and as part of her job she researches the era in which he lived whenever she does one of his plays. Apparently, much to my irritation, she incorrectly thought he lived in Victorian times. I think they were sort of chatting each other up but her love of Shakespeare has really put his nose out of joint so now he's explaining why he likes Einstien and why that's better than "all that art farty stuff right?".

"The thing is right, it's like, what it means is, it's like, if you were to smoke loads of cigarettes right ...?"

He's revealing to her and everyone else on the train that he knows nothing about Einstein's famous equation. I don't either but I'm confident I know more than him. I'm also one hundred percent sure that it didn't involve an experiement where an aeroplane went at "exactly the speed of light and when the people got off right, they were all older because of that, so it's like time travel is possible but only slightly."

I don't know why his ignorance is annoying me so much. I'm fighting the urge to say "it's got something to do with energy being equal to light and motion, that's what it's about you idiot, it's not a fair comparison with Shakespeare because you've misunderstood the word 'genius'".

"The thing is though, he doesn't really get as much credit for his ideas," he says and she finishes off his sentence with "well, Shakespeare's more relatable I guess".

"And, about time travel, Shakespeare predicted that in one of his plays," she announces. "It's like this quote about how time changes but stays the same".

Fortunately the woman's stop has arrived and she's off.

How old do you imagine these two were?

I'd say they looked like they were touching 40 at least!

NM

Coffee and daytime TV

2011-09-01T09:48:00.001+01:00

And mutton chop sideboards!

The Awakening

2011-08-31T13:48:00.001+01:00

I'm sure you've heard the comparison made between the internet and the printing press. It's one which sticks because it's so damn accurate. So, with that in mind, if the past provides an approximate roadmap of the future you can be in no doubt that we're about to be in for a very interesting ride.

"What gunpowder did for war the printing press has done for the mind."
- Wendell Phillips, abolitionist and orator, 1811AD-1884AD

The Enlightenment (18th Century, sometimes called "The Age of Reason")is looked back upon as an age of almost unbridled intellectual development and progress. It is largely seen to have been powered by the existence of the printing press which allowed mass communication on a scale previously impossible to imagine. It also made the free flow of information and accurate exchange of scientific discoveries possible like never before. Sound familliar?

This ability to spread and build upon useful information helped to cause the exagerration of something known in esoteric circles as, The Jumping Jesus Phenomenon:

"Our psychic universe is expanding even more rapidly than the physical universe. Let us define the measurement of known scientific facts in the year 1 A.D. as "one jesus," using the name of the celebrated philosopher born that year.

Before going any further, let us ask how long it took to arrive at one jesus. One way of estimating is to take the estimated age of homo sapiens, in which case it took 40,000 to 100,000 years.

How long did it take to double this accumulation of knowledge, to achieve two jesuses? It required 1500 years - until 1500 A.D. How long did it take to double again and obtain four jesuses? It required 250 years, and we had four jesuses in our larder by 1750.

The next doubling took 150 years, and by 1900 A.D. humanity had eight jesuses in our information account. The next doubling took 50 years, and by 1950 we had 16 jesuses. The next, ten years, and by 1960 we had 32 jesuses. The next doubling took seven years, and by 1967 we had 64 jesuses. And the next doubling took 6 years; by 1973 we have 128 jesuses.

There is no reason to imagine that the acceleration has stopped. Thus, we almost certainly reached 256 j around 1978-79 and 512 j in 1982.

In short, we are living in a mental transformation space; that is, an omnidimensional halo expanding toward infinity in all directions. And the electronic center of this halo of mentation is possibly everywhere. It is all available to you right where you are sitting now. Just plug in a terminal. The machine doesn't care who or what you are."

-Robert Anton Wilson

The point is this; our technology is advancing now at speeds we can't measure effectively anymore. These massive upsurges in the technology of communication usually mean our intellectual abilities should be about due another massive boost. However, the New Age of Enlightenment will be different from the first in that last time what happened was essentially an elite cultural movement in the minds of a small group of European intellectuals. This time round, the modern mental equivalent of what happened to them in the 18th century, may well be about to take place in the consciousness of a worldwide audience.

To put this into context, at the start of Louis XV's reign it was thought that The King's touch could cure diseases such as scrofula. This was because The King of France was put there by God in accordance with The Divine Right Of Kings. By the end of, The Enlightenment, his son was being put to death as a common criminal. That's quite a dramatic turnaround and frankly a huge change in how people saw the world.

Imagine something like that happening to you in your lifetime. A core belief, which is so obvious to you it's taken for granted, being totally reversed and turned upon its head. It's almost impossible to think what ideas it might be without feeling a little silly but if you've agreed with this article so far that's what it looks like we're collectively heading for.

"Do we presently live in an enlightened age?" the answer is, "No, but we do live in an age of enlightenment."

-Immanuel Kant ("What Is Enlightenment?" 1784)

The thing about living in the wake of The Enlightenment, particularly if you happened to be French, is that it was pretty bloody and violent. I suspect that many of the changes on the way will seem awful at the time. My recent experiences in the riots were pretty scary, both reporting on and getting caught up in them. They were an event which seemed to almost take the internet and mass communication for granted. I personally believe that the way people reacted to them are an early expression of the double edged power that technology has given us. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not under the impression that they were caused by the net, just of the opinion that it acted like a magnifying glass on the already hot rays of a summer sun.

This medium acts as a non-specific amplifier able to squeeze every last drop of psychic energy out of even the most inconsequential of moments. A panda sneezing, a boy getting his finger bitten, a mad comedian being all racist. It's no surprise that grievences both legitimate and otherwise can find an audience online and bubble over into acts of violence. It's also no surprise that hysteria moves through it like an electric current as people brag about the free stuff they got the previous night.

During the time of the French revolution there was a character called, Jean-Paul Marat, who used the new media opportunities provided by the printing press to stir up revolutionaries and attack people in power. Nowadays characters like him probably spit their bile into blogs and YouTube videos and are, as we speak, busy plotting world domination.

There's something quite exciting about all this. I think it's the smell of inevitable change.

There's something Great about America...

2011-06-10T19:08:00.003+01:00

I've had a big head change as regards America. It's very strange but I felt it again in my thinking today regarding this absurd battle between the Archbishop Of Canterbury and our PM. I'd always thought that there was a clear 'seperation between church and state' in this country but of course that turn of phrase is not ours. It comes from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson back in 1802:

"..I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State".

Compare that to the UK where we still have unelected Bishops sitting in the House Of Lords! The so called, Lords Spiritual and you'll see which nation Nick The Atheist agrees with. The idea of splitting the Church away from The Government may have its roots in England but, as with most of the things I admire about the culture I've emerged from, it has only ever really been done properly in America.

The penny really dropped during two big recent events: the Royal Wedding and the killing of Osama Bin Laden. The latter which filled me with a sense of almost unreserved admiration for a great nation and the former only provided a deep sense of detachment from a people who appeared to be mindless zombies driven by raw unquestioning patriotism celebrating something which did not benefit them at all.

My views are becoming unfashionable and I am in this respect out of step with the broad consensus of my nation. Here it is the norm to hate the "stupid" Yanks. It has been for a long time and is almost a form of dogma. There's even a presumption among Royalists that American fascination with the Royal Wedding was proof our system is better! I suspect they watched it in the same way we might watch a documentary about the quaint customs of a tribe in the Amazonian jungle who have drifted culturally in a 'different direction' and still worship fire.

This blog post is my attempt to push you, a fellow Brit, into the realms of unpopular thought. Beware, these opinions will confuse those around you.

Firstly it's important to clarify that, like many of their citizens, I'm not blind to the often damaging effects of the realities of American foreign policy. Self awareness is key to my argument and it's one of the reasons I admire that nation. The term "military industrial complex" was coined as a prescient warning by one of their own, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in his "farewell address". You'll often hear critics of the nation use it, apparently unaware of this. Anti-war sentiment played a huge part in the electoral success of President Obama. To think Americans love war as much as the big companies who sometimes pull its Government's strings is absurd. Mechanised mass murder isn't popular anywhere in the world. Just as the war in Iraq wasn't here.

To me though it's the ideas which America represents which are more important than the reality. The death of Osama Bin Laden represented the death of an evil man. He qualified as such not because of the identity given to him at birth but instead the one which he earned for himself in life. His actions and deeds defined him in the minds of Americans. On the other hand their birthplace defined them in his twisted brain. He hated them because they were born in America, that was more than enough for him. It didn't matter what they did with their lives, they would always be defined by their birthright. So we have two contrasting mindsets which, in my opinion, the Royal Family's state sponsored knees up falls down clearly onto the wrong side of.

"All men are created equal," Thomas Jefferson's still radical phrase from the Declaration of Independence is a direct attack on this idea of defining someone by birthright. A refusal to accept the so called "Divine Right of Kings". It is clearly not believed, understood or accepted in my country. Some seem to make the mistake of thinking that this idea is the same as the significantly less nuanced feeling that 'everybody is equal'. On the surface this seems just as good, if not better. However, give it a moment's thought: should people all be treated equally when their behaviour marks them out for a unique response? Should, for example, child murderer, Ian Huntley, be treated by society as you would a scientist who discovers a cure for cancer? Of course not. Should the workshy and hardworking members of society be paid in equal measure? Some think so, I do not*.

The Americans in Times Square were celebrating the death of a man who opposed their idea that "all men are created equal". The English in London (and around the UK) were, whether they knew it or not, celebrating the exact opposite of that. Furthermore, the Americans looked across the pond at us and did so with respect for our quaint traditions and way of life. Many of us looked at them while holding our noses with contempt at their "stupidity" and gullibility.

Perhaps this is partly down to the recent rise of conspiracy theory in the UK. Conspiracy theorists like to think they look behind the veil of what is going on in the world by not believing the "official story". It's a very American idea. It has been allowed to incubate over there so much because of their commitment to the notion of "freedom of speech". Again, something which we started here but do not have any firm commitment to. Certainly it's not enshrined in our law. I'm not saying I'd want to burn a Koran but if I did want to express myself like that I'd have to go over to the US to do so, otherwise I might face prosecution. In the US their commitment to "freedom of speech" is like ours to the Queen, quasi religious.

Yeah, but what about slavery? They had all that bad racism in the US, the UK wins there right?

Well, I'm not so sure. As I said before what I love about the US is their self awareness, their ability to change direction and correct things when they feel they've done wrong. They did abolish slavery and their policies of racial segregation when they realised the error of their ways and now, like him or not, a black man is their President. Not likely to happen in the UK any time soon.

In truth, our mindset would have plodded on with segregation I think. Just as we have with the Royal Family. There's no intent to change here in the UK, we've become stagnant. Clinging to past glories. "Ooh, lets put the Great back into Great Britain," people parrot to each other as my mind shouts back: "OH JUST F--- OFF!".

Yeah but what about their policy on gun control? Michael Moore made that film and it proves what idiots they all are, with their guns.

I used to think their gun policy was absurd. Then someone from America explained it to me thus:

having a gun is a sign that the Government trusts the people to behave as citizens rather than slaves. A nobleman carried a sword. A peasant was not allowed one. The peasants might revolt, a nobleman will only do so if his cause is just. In short, an armed populace provides a final defence against tyranny.

I remember 2001, it proved to me that America is not superman and can be wounded. Things change - America might not always be a world power. That won't concern the Royals. They can do business with China just as easily as they can the Americans. Perhaps their Kingdom will be more adapted to fit that style of Government, when the economic tide turns. It concerns me that if that happens those who come after us will stuggle to find anyone of any note who thinks they were created equal. It also worries me that no one will be allowed to to voice that concern and their last defence against tyranny will have gone.

NM

--

*Meh, actually that's a tricker question than I make out in this blog entry. I used to think people should all be paid the same for the work they do. However these days I'm swayed by an economist friend of mine who pointed out that incentives to not work and penalties for those who do generate the remarkably predictable consequence of putting people off working altogether. That said, the huge distance financially between the rich and poor in the UK is absurd. I'm still at heart a bit of a lefty and I can't swallow the full pill of rampant capitalism. Meh, maybe reform of the banking system is where it's at?

I'd forgotten how good Oasis were

2011-04-14T19:45:00.000+01:00

I'm currently wedged deep into a massive Oasis period. I had my podcasts blazin' away on iTunes as I was conquering the world on Civ4. Next thing I know on comes some random tune I'd not heard in ages. I was using the iTunes DJ thingy which, when you run out of preselected audio, picks something at random from your library. I didn't know what it was at first but I instantly thought it was good.

Then Liam started singing the opening words "How many special people change..." and I recognised it as Champagne Supernova. What a crackin' tune!

That was about a month ago and I am now considering getting some form of psychological help.

I've consumed loads of YouTube videos, listened to the first two albums back to back and have even tried to listen to their newer stuff. Some of it's actually alright. Even the infamously bad album Be Here Now is partly alright. It's just badly produced. Listen to the acoustic version of its opening track on YouTube and you'll know what I mean.

Oasis were not my generation's Beatles. If you were determined to put that crown on someone it'd have to be Blur, they were far more musically creative. Oasis are my generation's Rolling Stones. Just as The Stones took old blues riffs and re-worked them Oasis plundered old glam rock tunes and Coca Cola adverts. However, in step with the intellectual "post-modern" culture of the 90's they went further in admitting their influences. The most amusing instance being the piano opener on "Don't Look Back in Anger". There's no need for it, it's clearly exactly the same as John Lennon's Imagine and it's obviously been stuck on as a little afterthought. A sort of in-joke, a musical wink. Like I said, they're quintiessentially postmodern.

See what I mean? I need help! I'm loving Oasis music without any sign of an end in sight.

Link to the acoustic version of D'You Know What I Mean

Definition of postmoderism for any readers who didn't waste three years mucking about at University doing English and European Literature.

The Royal Wedding vs Celebrity Culture

2011-04-05T03:22:00.001+01:00

Years ago my ancestors will have been confronted with the following drama. As they picked turnips and slop up from the fields of the North of England, or wherever it was they lived, some bloke from The London will have rode up on horseback and demanded money in tribute to his mighty mate. The penalty for not meeting his demands will have been death on the end of this psycopath's sword. "He's already killed Dave," one of the villagers will have warned breathlessly, "he reckons we've got to give him tribute or some guy called King will burn the village down".

Terrified villagers will have in the main relented and those that didn't would have gained a fascinating insight into pain.

Over time this arrangement will has turned into "taxes" instead of tribute and the concept of "some guy called King" will have evolved into a Royal family. The world in which we live has many events like this propping it up.

You, unless you are bloodline royalty, will have ancestors with similar experiences. Doesn't matter where they were from in the UK that's what, approximately, will have happened. Some people have ignored this obvious fact regarding the institution of Monarchy and over time come to love their servitude. These people are called Royalists.

From what I can work out there are two kinds of thinking Royalist. One lot who believe it's a conduit for nationalism and another lot who think they might get something in return at some point.

Firstly, as regards nationalism, if a monarch is intrinsic to our national character then no one ever informed me. Ever. I grew up in this country. I've hardly ever left it. If we didn't have a Queen I reckon we'd still be living in England.

Secondly, with regard to attempting to curry favour, I often wonder if people with access to the media have an OBE in the back of their mind when they support the monarch.

Let me make myself clear: without reservation the oncoming spectre of a royal wedding does nothing other than turn my stomach.

I'm therefore heartened to read a story in The Daily Mail which reacts with a level of horror at the news "We’d rather watch X Factor! Schoolchildren are more excited by reality TV than the Royal Wedding".

"The Royal Wedding may be just six weeks away - but most British schoolchildren would prefer to watch the X Factor, according to [...] Chris Rojek, Professor of Sociology at Brunel University [...]

Professor Rojek says that school-age children do not view the Royals as exciting as their chart-topping favourite acts, as he told the Daily Mail: ‘Getting to be famous by being born into the right bed, like Prince William, is now seen as somewhat dubious, in a way that it wasn’t at the time of Princess Diana and Charles’ wedding."

The tone of the article is (possibly intentionally) amusing but speaks to something I've always argued in the past: reality TV "stars" are actually more worthy of respect than the Royal Family.

Unlike The Royals they've had to make an effort for their fame. Unlike The Royals they are there because they're liked. Unlike the Royals if you ignore them they will go away. And finally, most importantly, unlike the Royals they do not demand tribute from you every month.

Here are a few of the counter arguments to my stance which I've come across:

They're good for tourism and earn more money than we pay in.

RESPONSE: Great, lets stop funding them and allow the institution to become self sufficient.

Who would you replace them with, the likes of Tony Blair?

RESPONSE: Yes, because at least he got voted out. Years from now as 'king Charles takes to the throne Blair will be an unpleasant memory. However, 'king Charles will never get voted out. He'll die in that job regardless of how well or badly he performs.

It's tradition.

RESPONSE So was burning Catholics, denying women the vote, serfdom, jokes about the Irish, etc etc etc.

In the unlikely event that you are a monarchist I'd be interested to hear any other arguments in their favour. Pop them in the comments section. Post anonymously if you like.

Further reading:

Royal wedding could be damp squib for tourism, says official

Visit Britain research chief warns that evidence from previous events points to visitors steering clear of UK around 29 April

Realism

2010-09-28T15:28:00.001+01:00

Aug 12th

Original link found on the excellent Dangerous minds blog here.

The above YouTube video is a trailer for a Hulk film made by the Bangladeshi film industry. It looks awesome, in a sincerely camp fashion. Oddly it reminded me a bit of the old Troma films, Toxic Avenger and so on. Ah, happy days!

One of the first things to jump out at me is the effects. The CGI looks old fashioned. I've been recently grabbed* by the idea that most artwork loses its impact over time. The Mona Lisa does not look as jawdropping to someone who views it in the 21st century because we're used to realistic pictures in this day and age. Just as a moving image has less impact on us compared to the first people who saw cinema in the 1800's.

And ... just as Jurassic Park looks a bit rubbish nowadays so too will Avatar in 20 years hence.

This of course presumes a continued advancement in special effects. Perhaps we'll instead look back in 2030 and long for a return to pre-apocalypse big budget entertainment. By then maybe the Bangledeshi film industry will have overtaken Hollywood and they will look with a wry smile at one of our latest big hits.

NM

*I'm not quite sure if I heard someone talking about this on the radio or watched it on the telly. I'm consuming so muchy of both at the moment it's all turning into a vast soup of ideas in my headbox.

Wacky hair and popstars

2010-09-09T20:22:00.000+01:00

I'm not really aware of pop music these days. In my travels around the internets* I stumbled over this page which suggests that popstar Mark Salling has a song that sounds like one of Robbie Williams's.

It wasn't really that which annoyed me. It was the picture of him, with his haircut. That annoyed me. On a kind of deep level there's something wrong with someone having that haircut and yet being so cleanly polished. It should be a haircut that inspires fear. It's a punk haircut. I don't like punk but I've at least got a sense of respect for it.

Listen, I'm old now. I'm 33, I should be getting a sense of outrage when I look at popstars. I should be rolling my eyes or ringing my hands and wondering where the moral fibre of the nation's youth is going. Instead I'm confronted with a picture of a bloke who looks like a male model in every respect apart from his hair which looks like a marketing decision. "Lets give him a punk haircut, they're quite trendy at the moment," I imagine the meeting went.

There's no sense that the establishment need be scared of anything in that picture. In fact it's a sign that the machine has won.

My point is, that my dislike of Mark Salling's hair is not of the sort that style should evoke. It's the same dislike I had for Avril Lavigne's anarchy t-shirt and almost everything "P!nk" has ever looked at. Fake packaged rebellion with a pricetag stuck on it and a BEST BEFORE date stamped on its bottom.

I'm afraid to admit that the picture put me in a bad mood for most of the day.

NM

*People don't seem to "surf" the internet anymore do they? I wonder why that term sank beneath the waves of popular usage?

Telly them to hurry up!

2010-09-07T17:14:00.001+01:00

10th Aug

The fix it man has come and taken away my telly. It's been quite a carry on getting to this stage in the fix it process so I'm quite pleased we're making progress. My girlfriend however is livid that her Big Brother viewing is to be so ruined.

For me it's just going to mean more time on YouTube and iplayer. I've not really been enjoying this current series of Big Brother. It's been unusually dull. I don't mean that in a "huh I'm so principled and clever I don't watch it" way. I just mean it's not up to its usual excellent standard.

There's a part of me that likes the idea of not having a telly. There's also part of me that would hate to turn into one of those people who always brags about not having one. Fortunately there's no chance of us giving it up any time soon. Particularly given that I spent £500 on the thing. Typical that it breaks. Harumph!

NM

Influences on my mind - Christopher Hitchens

2010-09-07T16:45:00.001+01:00

9 August

The awful news that Christopher Hitchens has cancer is still a shock to me. I've not really come to terms with it. All I can do is write a little blog post pointing out how important his influence has been on me.

If you've never heard of him go on YouTube and consume hours of his stuff, it'll change you. Listening to his defence of the war in Iraq changed me. I still do not support the UK's role in it but I do understand the issues more than I used to. It's an abrasive experience hearing someone who is clearly intelligent, articulate and an out and out atheist arguing a point with which you disagree. It first happened to me when I stumbled upon Hitchens debating with George Galloway and, at the time, I think I was more inclined to agree with Galloway. The problem though is that it became clear during the debate that Hitchens was relying upon facts and presenting clear reasons for why he thought what he thought. Galloway on the other hand was relying on cliches, ones which I'd started to become tired of. Calling Bush a terrorist and a war criminal and then blaming America for the 9/11 attacks starts to wither in the light of a logical appraisal of why you've arrived at those conclusions and where those thoughts lead you.

At the time I was using some of the above cliches in my day to day life. However that debate between those two, which you can find on youtube, started to make me question how true they were. Did they stand up to close analysis and if not, why use them so frequently? What does it say about your own mind if, without any real knowledge of international law, you announce on a regular basis that Bush is a war criminal? Or, without any proof, declare that Blair lied about weapons of mass destruction? These are assertions you can only come to if you rely upon the reasoning of another. It's a sign you might be having your strings pulled for you.

For instance, how would your position change were the UN to rule on the matter and declare once and for all Bush was not a war criminal, would that mean you suddenly agreed with the war? Is global government the one you look towards for a sense of moral authority? What about if it became clear to you that Blair had in fact been misled with dodgy intelligence and therefore not lied about WMD's, does that mean it's all ok?

I realised that if I was to remain of the opinion that the war in Iraq was a bad idea I'd better understand why I thought that and stick to those principles rather than get dragged along in the mire of group think and petty sloganeering represented by Galloway and his like.

This led me to watch more videos of Christoper Hitchens. His frank and occasionally rude style makes for amusing viewing but above anything else he's made me think.

NM

The cover up is ending?

2010-09-01T10:03:00.001+01:00

"This event should be immediately classified since it would create mass panic among the general population and destroy one's belief in the Church"

According to The Telegraph and various other papers Winston Churchill's involvement in the "UFO cover up" might have amounted to more than just keeping us calm and getting us to carry on. This story, revealed in the official UFO archives, has been a part of 'Ufology' folklore for quite some time but it's nice to see it being so widely disseminated.

The short version runs like this: RAF pilot encounters UFO while flying a bomber plane. As you'd expect, UFO outmaneuvers our earth technology and reports of encounter become a national security issue. FULL ARTICLE IN TELEGRAPH HERE.

What interests me about this story is firstly the idea of mass panic. That makes sense in war time and post war Britain. Even during the Cold War I can imagine it might freak people a bit. Nowadays though, I'm not sure that's what we'd get in the event of full ET disclosure. Unless the story is "they exist and they're on their way to kick butt right now, in fact they arrive in 7 light years time, run for the hills!".

If, as most of the intelligent commentators on this matter suspect, the announcement is more along the lines of: "they exist and we don't know much about them if we're honest," then maybe we've got an outcome which is slightly harder to predict. I believe the response would be closer to mass amazement than panic.

The only area of life where there might be panic is in the religious world, the second area of this story which fascinates me. The religions of the world rely upon certainty. They know what's going on and why, it's written in their magic book. An announcement along the lines of: "they're real, who knows what they want or are" is totally unacceptable to them. This hits right at the core of a central misunderstanding as regards the distinction between Western science and religion. The former thrives on not knowing where the latter needs to have certainty. Despite the occasionally authoritarian guise of people like Dawkins (and before that Sagan) when they preach the gospel of common sense and the rules of evidence the reality is that if God were proved tomorrow the scientific community would be the ones who'd worked out his phone number. Only the Pope (and 'insert religious figureheads here') would want them not to ring him: "Err, let me talk to God first, I'll talk to him for you, this is going to be a very complex conversation for a mere moral. Oh no, don't ask him about the children, let me explain his words, oh no! Etc."

So just picture that, for a minute, the pandora's box of ET disclosure is opened. How would you react to that news? Probably like I did* with a "wow" and not much more. That is of course if it is, as I believe it is, something which represents the powers that be admitting there's something going on here which they do not understand. If collectively we all simply went "wow" there'd be no mass panic. Disclosure would simply become another 24 hour news event.

So, if there is a cover up going on, who'd be pushing hardest for it to continue if not the religious communities? The Catholic church's announcement that belief in ET's doesn't compromise your Catholicism a few years ago still makes me wonder if 'the truth' is on the way soon.

They stop revealing these MOD documents in a couple of years here in the UK. We'll have access to all the evidence just before the end of 2012. The clock is ticking. I wonder if any of the other religions will start paving the way for ET and his mates?

NM

*When talking to Edgar Mitchell. Millions have now heard that interview and a good 10% were enraged by my response. I stick by it though. Aliens are real? Wow.

A dog had laid an egg on a park bench?

2010-08-31T15:12:00.001+01:00

Aug 7

This picture, which I first saw here, reminded me of the time I went on holiday with a mate to the seaside resort of Filey, North Yorkshire. We were teenagers and as a result one of our jolly wheeze's was to craft replica dog turds from nearby patches of clay we discovered just off from the beach. We then rolled these replica dog turds in sand, for "extra authenticity" and once they looked as realistic as possible we then placed them in prime locations around the resort. You know, like on a park bench or underneath a no dogs allowed sign.

It still amuses me that we had serious conversations about if the dog turds looked too big, too small or were of the correct consistency in terms of texture and colour. He's an artist nowadays, I wonder if those early works would fetch a high price next to his more acclaimed pieces?

Ah - happy days!

NM

Lee and Herring was never as good as Stewart Lee and Richard Herring.

2010-08-28T09:24:00.000+01:00

Aug 6

Nostalgia is a funny thing. Some people my age labour under the impression that the comedy double act Lee and Herring were really good and it's a shame they split up. They weren't and it isn't. Lee and Herring were responsible for some good bits of comedy but when they split up and went their seperate ways (while remaining friends in real life) it was easily the best thing to happen to both their creative talents. Without question both have excelled in their solo careers and far surpassed anything they ever did together.

How would Stewart Lee's bile filled and angry masterclass in stand up, "90's comedian," ever have happened if he'd had the jocular Herring character bouncing around next to him? Where would the excellent blog Warming Up have emerged from if Richard Herring was busy trying to accomodate Lee's direction in his work? Let alone the podcasts Herring has done with Andrew "Collings" and with the ensemble cast of "As it occurs to me".

As a pair they were hit and miss. Alone they're two of the best comedians of our generation.

Here's Herring's review of Lee's book which I finished today.

NM

PS - While we're on the subject of good podcasts Howard Hughes's Unexplained show is worth a listen if you were a fan of my old Kerrang show The Night Before.

David Cameron's out of control, stop this man!

2010-08-28T09:05:00.000+01:00

5th Aug

David Cameron is either an evil genius when it comes to foreign policy or a Mr Bean style character who blunders his way through things, hoping for the best. My cynicism regarding politicians makes me inclined towards the latter description. Firstly his description of the UK as the US's junior partner during the war in 1940 was wrong on so many levels it's not easy to work out where to begin. Perhaps we start with the date, 1940 was the year when we stood alone against the almost card board cut out figure of evil that is Adolf Hitler. The US didn't come in until the next year.

Secondly, it's of no use to us for our leader to publicly acknowledge the truth of our relationship with the US. Not so far as I can see. If there's a time and place for unquestioning national pride and flag waving surely it's on the world stage? Sure, behind closed doors it's worth enduring a cold sweat or two as you absorb the sober truths while trying to work out what to do about it but I'd rather be represented in the theatre of US diplomatic relations by someone who bangs the drum a bit. I was always led to believe that these things were largely about pomp and circumstance.

Like I said, perhaps he's an evil genius with a plan I can't fathom. I doubt it though given the next ball he dropped in Pakistan. Sat, as he was, in India, the country who has waged war against them and is considered to be a mortal enemy, he spouts off about them exporting terror! Way to go Cameron. This after he praises their enemy India as some sort of a new superpower.

Pakistan is an ally of this country. We have deep links with it. Telling them they're exporting terror, again regardless of the veracity of the claim, seems hamfisted to me. Perhaps I'll be proved wrong but I doubt it.

My advice to him, because now I'm friends with political blogger Iain Dale I'm sure he reads this site*, is to calm it all down a bit. All people I've spoken to with family from Pakistan were upset by the terrorism comment and all the pensioners I've spoken to think the war one was a bad move as well.

Rant over, back to the real world. I've almost finished the Stewart Lee book. 3/4 of the way through and only had it in my posession for a few days!

NM

*I am of course joking for anyone who has had an irony bypass operation recently.

Further reading...

Cameron apologises for foreign policy gaffe.
Excellent article in The Guardian about "Cameron's smarm offensive".

What a depressing incident, thank God for Stewart Lee.

2010-08-27T08:31:00.000+01:00

I was sat on the tube opposite a rather well dressed dandy. Next to me were a young black couple who looked quite trendy themselves. The lad had a hat on and sports gear, the girl had her hair straightened and curled ever so slightly. The man got up and pushed his way through the people towards the door. The girl remarked to her boyfriend; "he's gay".

The lad sounded almost as shocked as I was. "How do you know that?" he asked her.

"You can just tell by the way he's dressed and acts".

"Well, what does it matter?" he asked.

"Dirty," she said.

He sort of sighed and then, the bloke they were talking about returned to his seat. I don't know if he heard them. I presume he'd got up at he wrong stop. I was so depressed by this incident I still haven't fully assimilated it into my mind. The girl didn't look phased but the lad looked a little embarrased. My stop came up and I got off.

I think the reason I was so surprised is that I'd always thought that homophobia was entirely motivated by the insecure feelings of men who are worried about their own sexuality. In fact, this is almost without exception the case. A man who stays up thinking about gay people clearly has issues.

I can only think this woman was motivated by religion. Beyond that her nasty outburst is incomprehensible.

Very odd.

The rest of the day was spent reading Stewart Lee's brilliant book. He's a comedian who has a fantastic routine about political correctness, which he thinks has not 'gone mad' and is in fact a good thing. I'm inclined to agree with him. It hadn't gone mad enough on that tube for my liking anyway.

NM

The Eh Team?*

2010-08-27T08:16:00.000+01:00

Aug 3rd

I'm very glad that me and my lady watched a few episodes of the TV series upon which the A-Team film was based. In my imagination the series was a work of genius, turns out that in reality it's irritating and dull.

I used to be a proud member of the A-Team fan club. It had little badges and stickers and a baffling set of pictures of not only the cast but also the crew who made the show. Baffling because, as a kid, you don't care what the chief grip looks like. Or indeed the head of props and continuity.

The film version we've just watched was boring. Not much more or less than that. Couple of nice action sequences but nothing special.

I think the only innovation in the film was that this time round the A-Team were ex-Gulf war as opposed to ex-Vietnam. That annoyed me. There's a tendancy for lazy comparisons like that to confuse the moral ambiguity which surrounds the two conflicts which we, along with America, got stuck into in the last decade. Vietman had no justification whatsoever. To believe that about these two wars is to simplify anti-war dissent to the point where you end up waving flags like those numb nutted: "We are all Hezbollah now" ones you see.

Still, you're reading the blog of a man who let ideological concerns get in the way of his enjoyment of the last Batman film so take it all with a pinch.

NM

*Stolen from Viz comic. Still a great read.

Katie pays the Price

2010-08-25T11:52:00.000+01:00

Urrgh. Does irony even exist in the mind of someone like Katie Price? I used to think that people like her knew what they did was nonsense. I grew up with the belief that were you to meet a famous person in real life they would let you in on the fact that everyone knew it was all a pose. The open secret would be revealed to you.

As I've got older, working on the fringes of celebrity, I've realised this is not in fact always the case. People like Katie Price do sometimes actually believe sincerely in what most of us would presume was an act.

In fact she was initially a prime candidate for having a bit of perspective given that she has 'an alter ego' in her stage name "Jordan". When I first heard this it gave me hope. "Excellent," I thought, "an attractive woman with a good grasp of the distinction between a persona and personality". Turns out this is more of a fake name in the sense that most strippers are not called 'Bunny' or 'Kitten'. In fact "Jordan" seems to be a character in the same sense that some people who have been subjected to extreme childhood trauma have split personalities to help them cope.

I can't claim to know much regarding this woman I'm writing about but I have watched various interviews and TV shows she's in*. Tonight I was watching her moaning to the documentary crew that were following her about that she wanted more privacy.

I granted her wish and changed channels.

NM

*I'd actually lay claim to being the only person left in the UK who genuinely still finds her attractive. I feel like this entitles me to some sort of medal.

Time shoots by.

2010-08-25T11:29:00.000+01:00

Aug 1st

It's such a droll observation but it holds true, time is going by at an ever increasing speed. If you agree with this assertion be prepared for it to continue to accelerate. In the world of New Age / Conspiracy theory there are some people who think this tendency, which everyone seems to have noticed, is proof that the Universe is itself thundering towards some sort of conclusion which will arrive in 2012.

The truth of the matter is of course slightly more mundane. It's down to perspective. At the age of 5 your understanding of the passage of a year is that it will take almost one fifth of your life. At the age of 10 it's only one tenth, and if you're 20 it's only a twentieth and so on. This means that the passage of time will always increase, even allowing for the alternations demanded by a poor memory.

At the age of twelve your experience of a year is alike to your experience of one month when you were a one year old baby.

This stuff tallys up with my experience of being a kid and thinking an hour was ages.

What's more it doesn't involve a mass consciousness awakening on the 21st Dec 2012. Or anything spooky at all. It just explains why people all think there's some sort of significant thing on the way. It's a trick of the human perspective. The people who wrote the Bible and ranted about end times felt it. Terrence McKenna felt it. You've felt it. So have I. And it will get more pronounced the older you are.

I think that's why old people seem so befuddled by the world. It's moving so fast relative to them.

NM

Having children does seem rubbish

2010-08-25T11:06:00.001+01:00

Sunday The 31st of July

I enjoyed listening to Cristo's show on LBC today. He was on top form. I couldn't agree more with his rant about the sitcom "Outnumbered" which features one half of the unfunny double act Punt and Dennis*. Me and my girlfriend excitedly switched it on when friends of ours (all of whom have kids) sold it to us as being one of the funniest TV shows they'd ever seen. If you've not seen it here's broadly what happens: adults are hassled by annoying kids as they get ready for school.

From the perspective of me, a man who doesn't have children at the moment, it was just annoying. Not charming or funny. Just really annoying. Me and my girlfriend realised as we were watching it that everyone who'd told us how great it was had kids themselves.

I remember a stand up comedian, can't remember which one, once ranting that kids are the sort of thing people want to inflict on other people once they've had them. They see all their non-child bearing friends and have a desire to drag them into the children clubby hook or by crook. "Oh, you two should have kids, it's great, no social life and lots of worry and stress," goes the mantra according to this comedian, whose name escapes me.

I think "Outnumbered" is a manifestation of that equation on a mass scale.

Cristo's rant was along similar lines. Us men without children are on to this devious plan! I bet there's no one without children who enjoys that sitcom.

NM

*The unfunny half of The Mary Whitehouse Experience. An, in retrospect, not that great TV show.

Some of life's little ironies

2010-08-24T17:45:00.000+01:00

I was reading some article or other recently with someone who had survived what sounded like a horrific car crash. Seriously injured, the man had only narrowly escaped full decapitation. He featured under the headline "The Luckiest Man In The World".

You rarely hear the expression "it's a funny old world" when out at a comedy night but I've heard it used twice at a funeral.

Nobody 'turned round and said' anything to me ever. That seems odd given (and I think this is a northern thing) the frequent use of the expression "he/she turned round and said".

There's something very funny about watching a stand up comedian who is not funny.

I frequently withdraw from civilisation because of a game called Civilisation.

Big Brother's final series limps along

2010-08-24T16:59:00.001+01:00

29th July

Me an' the lady settled down to watch Big Brother 11 on our still broken telly. The little line which flickers at the top didn't detract hugely from this rather poor final series of the infamous reality TV show.

I'm finding it hard to pick a favourite housemate. Last time round I liked quite a few of them and enjoyed the series. This time it's trickier to enjoy so I'm turning into the annoying stereotype boyfriend who sits and snipes on the sidelines.

Just before I continue to write this entry, it's not cool to dislike Big Brother the TV show. Almost everyone hates it these days. You are in the majority if you hate it. I always feel like I've done something wrong if I have a majority viewpoint so I'm really trying to like this series. It's not working though.

I think my favourite housemate is the big breasted mancunian lesbian Corin. She seems nice. She doesn't get much screen time though. Annoying.

Here's a good youtube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbaQqZt5QQg

NM

The Adverntures of Asterisk

2010-08-23T09:49:00.001+01:00

28th July

I'm very excited about the imminent arrival of a book by Stewart Lee. There are extracts appearing on the excellent comedy website Chortle. It appears that Mr Lee is a fan of the much ignored but incredibly useful tool we know as the asterisk or "*".

I've always enjoyed liberal use of asterisks on this blog. I think it's because I was reading Rik Mayall's autobiography at the time I started writing it. He uses the technique to excess* as well.

In fact I believe that it's symptomatic of the creative mind. Diversions are the very nature of creativity. Divergent thinking is the main tool you use when you make something new. This stands in opposition to "convergent thinking". The latter is when you are aiming to focus on one answer or point as opposed to many different solutions.

One way of testing your intelligence in terms of "divergent thinking" is to take the following short test:

Think of as many uses as you can for a brick in two minutes.

The more ideas you had the better you are at it.

I know all of this because I read it in the book I'm currently reading and hope to finish before Stewart Lee's comes out, Outliers by Malcom Gladwell. It's about exceptional people. Recommending it to you now.

NM

*I don't believe excess is always a bad thing. It annoys me that people presume the negative connotations of the word. Excess of a good thing is good sometimes. Don't believe all this, "everything in moderation" BS. It really is just that. BS**.

**BS stands for "belief system***".

*** Pope Bob elaborates effectively with this quote:

"The world is controlled by belief systems - BS. Don't believe totally in anybody's BS. The second commandment is like unto the first: don't believe totally in your own BS. That's my message to the youth of the world."

I love Pope Bob. Read the full interview here. Hail Eris!

High as a kite off a single cup of coffee!

2010-08-23T09:21:00.001+01:00

27th July

My caffine experiment has had to end. I was freaking out!

Who needs drugs when you can muck about with caffine highs? I reckon most people are more addicted to the substance than they think. Try cutting it out for a week, see how you do. If you can't manage it you'll still enjoy your first cup back.

A mate of mine has managed to quit altogether. He's also gone vegetarian. And has succeeded in turning into a smug c--t.

Joking of course*.

He'll give up his telly next.

Have you ever noticed that people who haven't got a telly always manage to tell you. They can't help but squeeze it into conversation. My "chav sized" telly was partly purchased with them in mind.

NM

*He's a good mate and he occasionally reads this blog. He's also a bit of a sensitive soul so I have to make it clear I'm joking. Wonder if he'll correctly self identify after reading this post? I'll mention him by name if he does.

Music I enjoy #4

2010-08-23T09:04:00.001+01:00

Hawkwind

It's tricky to know how to sell a band like Hawkwind to someone. Their music is
so varied that most people just give up trying to find an entry point. It is worth getting into them though, my suggestion is you start with their first album then go from that to their fourth "Space Ritual Alive in Liverpool and London". This gives you an idea of what to expect. A bit.

Part of the beauty of Hawkwind is their inconsistency. Some of the stuff they've put out is of questionable quality. I do not yet own all of their albums, just most of them. This means if I ever fancy a bit of an odd new musical experience I can cop one of their CDs and see what happens.

I've also met and interviewed their lead singer Dave Brock. Back when I was a student radio presenter we went and interviewed him in his caravan. He was on tour with the band. I remember walking in through the door via a thick milky white cloud of marijuana smoke. There was a bong on the go but Mr Brock didn't look high. We had a really interesting and amusing chat.

In fact one of my questions was about how people listening might go about getting into Hawkwind. His reply sums the interview up rather well: "Mmm, good question. It's safe to say that most people would have to do an audition. Usually, unless they're already known to us. Most people have to audition."

I was so excited to be talking to him, and a little confused by the heady atmosphere, that I didn't notice we were talking at such cross purposes until I got the tape home and listened back to it.

I must have that interview somewhere on tape. If I find it, I'll podcast it if it's not too embarrasing.

NM

I'm a bit like Renton off of that film

2010-08-23T08:25:00.002+01:00

25th July

I'm day two into my attempt to go for a week without caffeine. I went a whole day yesterday without it and then today I've just managed to keep not drinking anything with it in. I obviously suffer badly from an addiction to the drug as the last time I tried to come off it I had serious problems. I went very wibbly!

I was around the time I first tried the Atkins diet. A listener suggested it* to me, it was long before it became fashionable. I read the book from cover to cover and was amazed. It is a diet that works but most people don't read the original book and so think all it involves is eating protein and nothing else. That's only part of it. It also tells you to quit caffeine.

No problem I thought...

Without exaggeration I almost collapsed during a dizzy spell brought on by lack of a cuppa! The high I got when I drank a coffee after a long spell without was unbelievable.

However, I currently feel fine. I think it's going to be interesting seeing how long I can manage.

NM

*I listen too much to my listeners. I always have done. I think one of the reasons I went so deep into conspiracy theory / UFOs is because you can't present a late night radio show without those ideas being put to you on a frequent basis.

I also blame a listener for my Tony Robbins addiction. Someone sent me one of his talks in the post, I never got round to thanking them actually. Maybe they read this blog? If so, hello and thanks.

And my managing to quit smoking. Allen Carr was first suggested to me by a listener. It's a book, you read it and you quit. Mad. Don't know how it worked but it did.

It was a very rare incident

2010-08-20T06:40:00.001+01:00

There's a lot about news reporting and media in general which is deeply absurd. The idea that you can get an account of something which has no bias is blatantly idiotic. Everything has a perspective to it. Photographs are defined just as much by what they are not as by what they are. The same is true of writing, film etc. However, when the already strange world of a newspaper piece collides with an actually absurd news story the consequences are poetic. Ladies and gentlemen I present to you the weirdest story I've yet read in a British newspaper:

'Transvestite had sex with a dog at English Heritage castle'

Now, before I get into the meat and veg of this one, so to speak, I want to just skip to the end of the article and point out the "spokesman for English Heritage [who] said: 'This was a very rare incident'". It's almost the punchline to the piece. After the harrowing story of a confused cross dresser who sexually attacked someone's pet dog you're reminded, in case there was any doubt, that this is unusual behaviour for people at English Heritage locations.

This puts the spokesman, who is not named, into the role of either someone who is a bit simple so states the obvious or as one who enjoys using this device, of stating the obvious, for comic effect. Almost like politicians who wait for their big moment to get a prepared joke into the conversation. "My cast iron guarantee has rusted, make sure you print that I said that, it's cast iron and it has rusted!".

Was the spokesman for English heritage really keen to point that out? Did he even exist? I'm getting more and more skeptical of these "spokesmen" who pop up, like 'bystanders' in tabloid newspapers, and say things a journalist might want them to.

Anyway the potted version of the story linked to runs like this:

A cross dressing man was wandering around the dry moat at Pendennis Castle in Cornwall at around a quarter to twelve on a Saturday. A couple of women were out walking their dogs. One of them chased the bloke and when the women had caught up with them they found him having sex with it. Castle staff restrained him and the police were called.

So there we are.

It was a very rare incident, apparently.

Irony and sarcasm: Lee Nelson's Well Good Show

2010-08-20T06:10:00.001+01:00


Lee Nelson in action

23rd July

Today I sat and watched "Lee Nelson's Well Good Show". It was a 'best bits' clip show. Good lord what absolute toss! Firstly, lets be clear here, it's a show about a "chav" called Lee Nelson. He is supposed to be a bit thick. There is therefore a level of irony to most of the things he says. A duality of meaning which the writers of this show didn't seem to consider when naming the show with the voice of their eponymous star. By putting the title into the language of the "chav" character they're mocking it doesn't seem to occur to them that this places the viewer in an odd conundrum. Do they presume this really is a "well good show" or do they take that description with the level of sarcasm which is implied?

If it's really the sort of show a stereotypical "chav" would like in what sense does that mean the general viewer should watch it? Who, precisely, is this show aimed at? Did the problems inherent in the title cause the people who made it to become a little jaded during the process? It's a BBC show, which part of the public is it a service to? Given that they are public service broadcasters you'd think they'd have some sort of answer to that one. I wonder what it is?

The reason that all these questions floated through my head is because whoever put together the "best bits" forgot to include any jokes or funny bits.

One of my twitter correspondents suggested to me that it's a character lift from those old Devvo sketches. I'm not sure how far I go along with that but there's certainly a similarity. Here's old blog entries about Devvo, who oddly enough, Kate Lawler, was a fan of: HERE, HERE and HERE.

I love Stewart Lee and his mad sense of integrity

2010-08-20T05:42:00.001+01:00

Stewart Lee is apparently livid that there is to be a "Foster's Comedy God" award which will be voted for by the public and then handed out by the new sponsor of what used to be called, the Perrier comedy awards*. His angry email to them is reproduced on the excellent Chortle website here.

Here's an idea of what to expect:

‘You should be ashamed, Nica Burns! It's not too late to try and change the way you will be remembered.

‘Corporate Whores. Morons. Illiterates.

‘There is so much good stuff you could use your corporate funding for, and instead, year in, year out, you make these crass decisions.

‘The whole thing will blow up in your face. Then, perhaps, we will see an end to your nonsense.

‘Your cynicism is breathtaking. Your Edinburgh Comedy God idea is banal. There are no comedy gods. Enjoy your Edinburgh Comedy Festival™.’

It's hard to know how much of it is tongue in cheek. I suspect probably less than you'd hope but given that I don't know him and have only ever spoken to him once** it's hard to say. Obviously, and quite rightly, you get a bit of free licence in our society if you're a comedian. I like the fact Stewart Lee uses this to good effect.

There's no doubt it's a banal idea. There's also no doubt he's right to slag it off. The question is, was there any point***?

NM

*It had a different sponsor as well, for a bit. The Iffy awards or something. Can't even be bothered to google it. If they want a mention they can sponsor this blog.

**Interview which we put out on the old radio show. Might podcast it soon. Will not start podcasting stuff without a bit of fanfare here.

***I don't know the answer to this bit. Unlike with the previous two sentences there might be some doubt.

Obviously problems at Tesco

2010-08-19T16:25:00.000+01:00

21st July

It's about ten to eight and I'm just about to go through yet more nonsense regarding my £500 chav sized telly which regular readers may remember me purchasing then blogging excessively about in previous entries: CLICK HERE, AND HERE, AND THEN HERE, AND FINALLY HERE

I'm on the phone to the Tesco customer service technical helpline* explaining the situation "I've been told to ring you and arrange for a technician to come out and have a look at my telly. I don't have a receipt so I've been told to get a bank statement, I've got one of them now but apparently I need to arrange for a technician with you because I can't arrange instore."

"What's the problem with your telly?"

"Its got an intermittent fault on it, it's flickering in the top right hand corner."

"Have you tried switching it off and on again?"

"Err, yeah. Obviously yeh."

"Have you tried leaving it on a blank screen for twenty minutes to reset the pixels?"

"Look there's something wrong with my telly, I want it fixed. I've been through all this stuff already I shouldn't need to fanny about with my new telly to get it to work."

"So you've done all the diagnostic checks have you?"

"Yes, can you just send a technician round to pick it up?"

"Well, I'd hardly call it fannying about. So do you have a reciept?"

"I just mean it feels like it's fannying about when this is the third time I've spoken to someone on the helpline and I've been into the store as many times. It's just getting a bit stupid really."

"Well we need to know what sort of fault it is, sir, these checks are more than just a formality. I wouldn't call them fannying about."

"Right, now as regards a receipt, I've got my bank statements from the time after the woman in store told me they were the next best thing."

"I'm sorry sir but that's not something we can help you with."

"Eh?"

"You'll have o go to the store and have those authenticated before we can send a technician out to you."

"But ... oh no! You're telling me I've got to drive to the store, again?"

"I'm afraid so sir yes."

"But how do I know that I'm not just going to go back to square one again? I'll be doing diagnostic checks and fannying about for the rest of my life at this rate."

"I'm sorry sir but that's just how it is, a technician will need to see your recepit. The only way round it is for you to validate the receipt in store."

"But, wait a minute, just try to see this from my perspective here, I've been up to that store, it's over 40 minutes away, over three times now** and I keep getting bounced back to you guys..." LONG PAUSE

"click"

"Hello? Hello? He's hung up on me!"

My girlfriend chipped in here with the fact it was two minutes past eight. He'd hung up knowing the call centre closed at 8pm. I was stunned. I've not encountered that sort of calculated rudeness in years.

NM

*This may not be its exact title. I've been bounced from helpline to in store customer services so much I've lost track of what's going on to be honest.

**At one point, in store, I rang the helpline and allowed Tesco customer services in store to speak directly to them. They had a little argument about who exactly was supposed to sort these things out, right in front of me on my mobile phone. Madness.

At time of publication (19th Aug) the whole thing is still not sorted.

Wax on wax off!

2010-08-17T15:57:00.001+01:00

20th July

Me and my girlfriend watched The Karate Kid today. We watched the original version. There's no way the new one is ever going to be better than this. It's an awesome 80's classic. It even has the line "hey it's the 80's" in it.

I remember the first time I watched it was at my parent's house for my birthday. I must have been about 11 or 12 because we had it on video from the rental shop and it was released around 1984. As I remember it was my birthday party or something and we were transfixed. The video got watched and re-watched into the night. Awesome!

1984 was an unusually great year for films. The list of genius put out on celluloid that year is almost never ending ... Beverly Hills Cop, Ghostbusters, Indiana Jones and The Temple Of Doom (not quite as good as the first one but still a great film), Gremlins, Police Academy, Splash, Nightmare on Elm St, Terminator and Spinal Tap.

There's an excellent article on this topic here: Was 1984 the greatest year in movies ever?

Imagine the above list was all you had on your DVD collection. You'd never be short of classics if someone popped round wanted a night in front of the telly.

NM

Big beefy bloke shoots people, morons love it!

2010-08-17T14:53:00.000+01:00

19th

If you were listening to my weekend overnight show on LBC you'll have heard me taking calls from Raoul Moat "fans". Yep, that's plural, he has more than one.

Largely this has been seen as a story confined purely to the online world of Facebook pages and social media. The reality, in my opinion, is that the internet has merely allowed us to see aspects of human nature which have always been there. We are, as a single organism, looking childlike into a mirror for the first time. Spotting both the good and bad aspects of our own appearance.

The tendancy to hero worship agressive male figures without question is not new. That's not to say it has lost its power to shock when you come face to face with it. I still can't get over the fact we had women who called in to support this bloke and try to blame his girlfriend. Nor the idiocy of the woman who set up the Raoul Moat facebook page and with whom the tabloid newspapers are currently having a field day*.

At school I remember that always, after a fight, people would try to frame events in favour of the victor: "Oh yeah, but Stinky Steve** was asking for a kicking though wasn't he?". The victims "must have done something" to provoke the random violence they'd been on the recieving end of. An unprovoked attack from 'Dangerous Dave' would, when retold by his fellow pupils, become an act of redistributive justice. Dave would become a hero who "did the right thing".

I remember once being punched in the stomach by some goon and then a couple of girls running up and asking me what I'd said to 'Cruncher' to provoke him. I was still trying to get my breath back and wondering if the troll like bloke (who was a few years above me) was coming back or not. "Uh, I didn't say anything, I don't even know him," came my reply as they both agreed with each other that I must have looked at him funny. "He hates that," they cooed as they scurried off behind him.

All these opinion pieces in the papers arguing that mass media has encouraged Moat fans or that we've become less sympathetic as a society are missing the point. In this instance the net really is just a mirror which is being ever polished and improved by the march of technological progress. It's simply allowing us to see our own ugly natures more clearly than before. The picture it reveals may at first seem unfamilliar but it's just humanity without the usual grooming we subject it to prior to inspection. As we look we've got the option of either trying to get used to what we see or take drastic steps to change it.

NM

*Story here about a woman who set up the facebook page calling him a legend. Another one here about T-shirts you can buy to pledge your support for 'Moaty'.

**If you went to school with me or not it's worth knowing these names are fictional. My school had more than its share of random violence and agressive characters but they all had equally silly nicknames.

Freaky book

2010-08-15T23:46:00.001+01:00

18th

I'm making some serious progress through all the books I've got on the go at the moment. Yesterday I finished the follow up to "Freakonomics". You may have seen it advertised around London, it's called "Superfreakonomics" and it's aces.

The chapter on global warning was great as was the one at the end about monkeys. It's weird to notice how some of the books I read dovetail into each other. Malcom Gladwell's book "Outliers" has a link to one of the chapters as does a book I read ages ago by Frans de Waal called "Our Inner Ape". The latter is all about a colony of Bonobo chimps, I think.

All this book consumption is of course distracting me from my true calling: writing my own.

"Writing is 1% inspiration and 99% procrastination" - R.Herring.

NM

Too clever for his own good...

2010-08-15T23:34:00.000+01:00

Nowadays everybody thinks they are a media expert. Clever manipulation of TV interviews is not beyond the ken of people like, Zac Goldsmith. On the contrary, it's easy. Or at least, so he thought.

I wonder, does he still think that? Did he leave the Channel 4 studios with his cronies patting him on the back as they chortled to themselves "ha ha that showed that scruffy little oik!".

Or does he realise that he made an absolute twunt of himself by failing to answer the questions which were being put to him? Who is his media advisor? Who told him to persue the tactic he did in this awful performance?

It takes him a good five minutes to get to the issue after boring people with some nonsense about who did or did not send him an email about booking him for the show. Then he points out that he read on the internet that someone who writes a blog likes him. I mean seriously, "WTF?".

CLICK HERE.

He begins with the attitude of one who is going to put Jon Snow straight and during the ordeal slowly acquires the aspect of a schoolboy trying to explain why his homework is late.

Oh dear.

NM

Getting a bit shirty.

2010-08-15T23:21:00.000+01:00

16th July

When I got to work yesterday I was sweating through my purple shirt. There were big thick patches of damp on it in all the usual places and under my man boobs! This is not a good look.

The thing is, no one could fail to notice and so there's a temptation to sort of defuse the situation by making a joke about it and going, "phew, I'm really hot, look I'm sweating". But it's so disgusting that I thought it best to just pretend it hadn't happened.

I like my purple shirt I've got but if it's going to let me down like this I might have to dump it and buy a new one. Black is always a good colour. It can hide a multitude of sins and stains. Apart from toothpaste. Set against a black background that is unmissable and can look like one of the worst stains it's possible to have.

I think today I will wear a black shirt. Leave the purple one for cooler weather later in the year.

NM

My new polytheism defence...

2010-08-15T21:42:00.000+01:00

15 July

I can't help but talk to people who are religious about their beliefs. It's amazing to me that, in theory, there are some of us who really believe all the mad stuff written down in things like the Quran and The Bible. I've not read the former, its just too boring but I have ploughed through the latter in its entirity.

This means I'm able to point Christians in the direction of 'profound spiritual messages' in their religious texts. Or, as other people would call them, blatant contradictions. Such as the fact there are two mutually contradictory lines of descent for Joseph, Jesus's step Dad. Two different creation myths in Genesis and two very different versions of The Ten Commandments. I kid you not!

Google "contradictions in The Bible" to find these and more. Same thing works for the Quran.

Anyway, I'm sat in a taxi and the driver starts talking to me about his God. I explained I didn't believe in that stuff and he asked me if I was Christian. I told him that I wasn't and then an odd idea popped into my head: "I'm a polytheist, I believe that all the Gods exist at once".

He looked confused and told me there was only one God. I said that is exactly the sort of thing Gods do, "they tell their followers there's only one of them". "It's obviously not the case though," I explained, sort of wondering how far I was going to take this, "there's clearly more than one, that's why there are so many religious wars".

I got quite into my explanation here and went on to expand on the idea with the theory that anyone who believes in a God gives that entity power. So Allah certainly exists. He just might not be as honest as you think, given that he's not the only one who claims to have created the world in seven days.

In my enthusiasm for the idea, which isn't my own*, I failed to notice how it was effecting the poor bloke. I think it made more sense to him than it does me and he got a bit upset. When he dropped me off he took my sleeve in his hand and looked me right in the eyes, "but what if all that's true?".

"Err, I dunno ..." came my reply. I realised I was now a little out of my depth. "It's, uh, usually about £7, is that alright?" I asked, trying to change the subject. "What did you say you were?" he asked. "A dickhead who accidentally upsets people," came my internal monologue's reply as I muttered: "a polytheist, it means you religious people are all correct, uh, all at once".

In future I think I'll stick to telling people I'm an atheist.

NM

*It's a mix of occultism and Gnosticism.

Discordian Poetry

2010-08-15T20:28:00.002+01:00

14th July NB// Most people will not like this entry.

The Discordian's "Great Work".

Part I

"Learning is remembering"*
And the intellectual advancement of our species
Is like the change in consciousness
One feels when waking in the morning.

Gradually we are remembering the future.

This is odd when you consider the fact that
We intuitively think of memories
As something to be made, rather
Than to acquire.

Is it possible therefore,
That time is going backwards?

"Which time?"
That time.

Writing is an attempt at consciousness transforming alchemy.
Adding new bricks and holes to the reality tunnels of your fellow humans.
"All art is propaganda!" and "Words are thought control!"
"All truth must filter through your mind!"

Magic is words and spelling is the key to a spell.
Demons exist in the form of powerful memes.
Some ideas develop sentience like a parasite drains life.
Thusly all active deity's are 'alive' in worship.
The Gods are real if you think it so.
Yaweh, Allah, Jesus and Thor.
Eris, Xenu, Set and Horus.

Taking this logic further provides the key to ascension.
One wholly enters the divine mind
Through the heaven or hell of praise or condemnation
Once dead.

The longer you are spoken of and remembered,
Or even imagined,
The longer will be thy "afterlife"**.

These transmissions provided by The Divine Goddess
Praise Discordia!
The sacred Chao!
"True communication is only possible"***
When addressing yourself.
I'm the only true Discordian, all the rest are liars.
You're the only true Discordian, all the rest are liars.
Hail Eris!
23.

"I remember being confused and thinking people could read my mind. I felt it was a terrible invasion of my privacy. You know, for the way in which the rules had changed. What right had they all to use use their new powers and slant the universe so contrary to my favour? Then, I'm afraid, I realised that I had begun without cease to speak my thoughts and write them all down! Those around me had only done as I'd asked: crept into my head and stolen my soul".

NM

*Plato's Socratic dialogues.
**With deliberate reference to Sartre "No Exit".
*** "between equals" - Principia Discordia.

Reading Illuminatus

2010-08-15T19:55:00.000+01:00

13th July

As I've mentioned before, my raw enthusiasm for the world of conspiracy theory has declined somewhat in recent times. However I'm still very keen on Robert Anton Wilson* so I'm giving "The Illuminatus trilogy" a go.

It's a satire on conspiracy theory. What I like about it is that it gets into some of the nitty gritty areas which are true. It also rakes through the bits which are clearly false and then those that lie somewhere inbetween. What more could you want?

The book lay the foundations upon which Dan Brown has built a career but it did so with a wry smile.

That said I'm only about one third of the way through it so perhaps this review will change. It seems a little early to offer my thoughts. There might be a really dull chapter coming up in a minute. Then I'll have wasted everybody's time. That's exactly the sort of thing you do not expect when writing or reading a blog: timewasting!

I wonder if Illuminatus will ever be made into a film? If it is will they wear their masks?

NM

*Or "Pope Bob" to give him his informal but correct title. He's one of the officially recognised Episkoposians of the fifth Pope Of The High Church.

right, I am now going to press on with the illuminatus trilogy . . . starting to really enjoy it. 11 July 2010 09:43:49 via mobile web

Comedy, it's funny isn't it?

2010-08-15T07:14:00.001+01:00

One of the producers at LBC went to see Chris Addison, the bloke who plays Olly in The Thick Of It, doing stand up. He came into work full of praise. I saw him doing stand up years ago, pre-fame, in Sheffield and he absolutely stormed it. He dished out loads of local material and won over the whole club. It was at The Lescar, man I miss that club. One of the best things about Sheffield.

The Edingburgh Festival is coming up soon and I'm getting a little down about it. Me and my girlfriend have been going there for years* but this time round we can't really afford it. We might be able to make it up for a day but we can't do our usual week there. Even with the mates rates accomodation we always use.

Here's a list of good acts who may or may not be there but if you go and get the chace make sure you go see...

My mate Tom Binns' new character. He's called Ian D Montford, I think. The character is a satire of these earnest psychics you get plying their trade in working men's clubs. I've heard some of the jokes he's written over the phone and I'd although I've not seen the act from the sounds of it this character is even better than Tom's famous (and hugely successful) creation Ivan Brackenbury.

Stewart Lee - he's always good but he's better live than on DVD. There's sometimes a weird tension in the room when he does his stuff. Or at least there used to be, perhaps less so now he's seen as a comedy God. Still brilliant though. Possibly the best.

Simon Munnery, his AGM is essential if you go to the festival. If me and my lady only pop up for a day Munnery will be on our itinery. That weird tension Lee occasionally has is always present when Mr Munnery is involved. It makes for an electric performance. Hugely quotable. Great.

Brendon Burns. Used to call the old Kerrang show on occasion. He's in the boring 'shock-comic' archetype but don't let that put you off, unlike most of his peers there's an enormous intelligence here and this guy is for real. Well worth it.

Also - make a point of spending some time enjoying The Free Fringe. It's often capable of matching its more expensive peer.

Also don't miss Josie Long, Robin Ince, Richard Herring.

Arrgh! I'm making myself miss it even more.

NM

*Blog entry from one of occasions when I went up there. Aaah, happy days. I love comedy. I still dream about trying to do stand up again. It was fun, on the one occasion it actually went well.

It's wrong to shout "hey Alf!" at strangers, right?

2010-08-15T06:45:00.001+01:00

London is weird. First thing in the morning, finished my show at The LBC. Wandering about in Leicester Square and there we are, Alf off Home And Away. Wandering about, on his own. Now, I'm part of the generation who grew up with Neighbours and Home and Away. Alf has been part of the latter show since day nought. I did more than a double take when I saw him. It took me every fibre of my being to stop from shouting "f___ing hell! It's Alf!".

I'm amazed at how 'starstruck' I get in situations like that. It's not something I'm proud of, in fact I'm a little bit ashamed of this side of me. I really really wanted to talk to him. More so, oddly, than when I saw Gollum recently.

I mentioned it on twitter and someone asked me "do people ever shout out "blimey, it's Nick!" in London? Don't live in London any more, but if I did, I'd like to shout it"

Obviously it doesn't happen often, I'm by far the least high profile of LBC's presenters. In fact, it's only ever happened once in relation to London's Biggest; there was a chap who pointed at me and went "aahh - LBC!". I was just pleased and went "hello".

I wonder what Alf's reaction would have been? He'd have probably gotten annoyed like his character and told me to "rack off". Then I'd have been forced to say "fair dinkum".

Alf... that's exciting.

NM

Say cheese!

2010-08-15T06:24:00.000+01:00

The theory goes that a picture is worth a thousand words. That is of course nonsense. It can be worth more, or less, than that. All you need to do to prove this is take a photo of a page with 1,001 words on it or 999 words depending on which point you want to prove.

Digital cameras can take loads of pictures, unlike in the old days when you only got about 30 in a roll of film. I read recently that this has made pulling a funny face when being photographed more common. However it still remains a dangerous tactic. Particularly when the people you're pulling a funny face at represent the UK's media and you're about to confront a dangerous psychopath in your role as a taser wielding policeman.

The poor bloke in this photo must regret his moment of creative gurning even more so, now we learn there's to be an inquiry into taser misuse in connection with the death of Raoul Moat.

Poor bloke.

That said, the lack of any other pictures of him leave the possibility open that this is his normal expression. That might sound absurd but my mother (who has never lied to me) used to often warn that gurning can become permanent "if the wind changes". Maybe the poor sod suffers from this fate. Perhaps he's midway through explaining this to the photographer.

More "proves it"...

2010-08-14T17:06:00.000+01:00

Me and my old producer Alex Baker had a little catch phrase we'd often use in relation to UFO stories. In the event of one occurring in the news we'd point and shout "prooooves it!!".
This story about a sighting in China would have merited a good solid "prooves it!".

It caused a Chinese airport to shut down when it was sighted by hundreds of people over Zhejiang's provincial capital Hangzhou. "Xiaoshan Airport was closed [...] at around 9 pm and dozens of flights had to be diverted." - source Daily Mail story.

Apparently an announcement is to be forthcoming from the Chinese government. I expect it'll be another weather balloon. I was so convinced we were on the brink of Extra Terrestrial life being disclosed to the world only a couple of years ago that I still get a twinge of excitement whenever I read a story like this.

The most likely "truth" behind the ET/UFO cover up, if you presume there is one, from my perspective runs like this:

The "orgasmatron" theory.

1, Someone somewhere found something which they do not understand. Lets call it "the orgasmatrion".

2, The "orgasmatron" is of alien origin, probably, and sits in a safe room somewhere.

3, People who have seen it are non the wiser.

4, They don't tell us because they don't quite know what to say.

Who exactly is in on "the orgasmatron" is debatable because in truth no one is. No one knows what to make of it. How substantial the "orgasmatron" is as proof of intelligent extra terrestrials is again open to speculation. My only evidence to support the theory is the vast numbers of people who are prepared to step forward with testimony that there really is something to the UFO cover up.

As a theory I think it's the best you can manage with the available evidence.

Is this UFO spotted in China an "orgasmatron"?

NM

Brand Russell Ltd

2010-08-14T08:41:00.000+01:00

08 July

I spent the evening watching Brand Russell re-creating 'On the road' with my girlfriend. I want to like this bloke but I've not managed to yet. Everything about him is bang on target for me and my peculiar tastes. He likes David Icke, he's mates with Noel Gallagher, he looks cool, he's clearly into half arsed mysticism. I think I'd probably get on with him*. He just irritates the crap out of me and makes me want to shout "oh just f___ off you unfunny b_____d!" over and over again until my throat turns itself inside out.

I think I'd be able to get behind him more if he wasn't billed as a comedian. He doesn't make me laugh, at all. Apart from once on some clip show or other where he'd clearly had someone write him a funny joke or something and I laughed. I'll be honest with you, I was as surprised as anybody else when it happened.

I think there's an element of jealousy in the way, I'm man enough to admit that. My girlfriend clearly fancies the pants off him and he has ploughed his way through a lot of very keen ladies aside from Andrew Sachs' granddaughter**.

I've also had the dubious honour of watching him do stand up pre-fame. From the description he gives of his work it's clearly him I remember dicking about with hunks of meat in a comedy club years ago. He was rubbish but gave the impression he thought he was a genius. I then watched him just before the whole thing took off in Glastonbury. He still had long rubbish curtain hair and was still unfunny but the audience dug him more.

Like I said, I actually do want to like him. It's just never quite clicked for me. I think the fact he's a football fan puts me off as well. It makes me think all the other stuff which makes me want to like him is naught but a carefully planned pose and that I on the edges of a demographic web.

Also there are enormous stylistic simmilarities between him and the comedian Paul Foot with whom Brand Russell is friends. One significant difference between them is that Paul Foot is hilarious and a genius whereas Brand Russell seems a bit contrived. I'm not saying one has copied the other but I am saying Paul Foot strikes me as wholly original.

NM

*I worry about things like this nowadays. It's unlikely we'd ever be friends but imagine if a strange series of odd co-incidences actually conspired to allow that. Then play the scenario out further and the two of us get along so famously that a real bond is forged. Then one day he discovers his new great mate Nick Marwhatchamacallit has a blog. "Oooh - might have a read" he thinks. Lands on this entry. Friendship over.

**She came on our Kerrang show with her mates, The Satanic Sluts. I think I dished out a bit of criticism towards Brand Russell during that show. Can't remember. Perhaps that's one for the podcast?

Made some changes to the blog format

2010-08-14T08:13:00.000+01:00

Got a text off a mate who isn't keen on the slight changes I've made to the format of the blog where you've got to click to see the full entry. It makes it easier to manage my end and I can see how many of the people who log on are actually reading the thing. However, if you don't like it post a comment at the bottom of this entry and I'll change it back.

Turns out we've got quite a few readers now: about two to three hundred every week. Almost a mini community. Soon we'll be able to stage a revolution. I'll give the word when our numbers have swelled to five hundred or more, after all that's almost an army!

Also - it has come to my attention that there's a good chunk of people who read this blog and maintain their own section of the internets which is simmilarly blog shaped. If you're one of them and want me to direct people to you via my blogroll put a comment in the bottom of this entry and we can do a link swap. Can't promise you'll gain any more readers from it but there we are.

Keep yer powder dry and your mudflaps down!

NM

Grim world at the moment

2010-08-13T06:55:00.001+01:00

July 6th

Man, I had a conversation today with yet another friend who has lost their job. This guy, unlike the others, doesn't work in radio but it's all part of a wider trend which I'm sure has touched you as well. Add to that a recent disturbing spate of burglaries in my girlfriend and my social circle and it's all looking a bit bleak at present.

I'm turning more and more to blind optimism in these situations. I might not have religious faith but I do believe that things always works out ok in the end, and if it hasn't worked out yet, it's not the end*.

I was drawn into a conversation recently with a friend of mine who was almost relishing the fact we're, as a nation, are heading for some pretty serious economic troubles over the next few years. His reasoning was that it will force people to take stock of problems that have been left to slide for too long. I'm not sure I follow his logic personally but he's not the first person I've heard articulate that viewpoint.

I suppose I sort of argued that in microcosm regarding the radio industry (in the previously linked to post) but even there I make it clear that knowing trouble is on the way doesn't make it any easier to bear. Sometimes it only makes it worse.

My mind keeps coming back to the awesome film '24 Hour Party People' which uses the idea that life is like a wheel. You have your good times and your bad. Salvation during the bad times comes with the realisation that you're only passing through, just as discomfort in the good times is brought on by the anticipation that positive moments must also only ever be temporary.

Obviously these ideas were not first articulated by a quirky Steve Coogan vehicle, they're rooted in early classical philosophy but they're nicely put by the film. I recommend watching it if times are getting on top of you.

NM

*For years I laboured under the impression that this was one of my lines. I had it scrawled on a piece of wood I used to keep in my bedroom as a teenager. Turns out that a quick google search shows you it's quite a common saying. Pesky google ruining my ego.

£50 extra a month!

2010-08-12T22:45:00.004+01:00

My new house has no designated parking. Also, next door we have a nice young couple with a baby and a piano. The baby frequently cries with enthusiasm. To calm it down they play the piano to it. This rarely works and the resulting cacophony is tragi-comic.

That said I'm slowly starting to like this new place. It's more modern than where I was previously and we're gradually getting rid of all the boxes in the front room.

I had a little fit at one point when I thought I'd lost a mate of mine's antique book which he lent me a few months ago with the warning that it was irreplacable. I was flapping about wondering where it was, turned out it was in a 'special' box.

Still irks me that we haven't got our own parking spaces though. Tsk.

And it costs £50 more a month in rent. That's a lot of money*.

NM

*My girlfriend says I go on about this "all the time".

Fat football loving advert watcher

2010-08-12T22:37:00.004+01:00

July 04

I don't like football, I don't generally like adverts, I do like this one though: http://tinyurl.com/2v97cuy

It's the one for a credit card where the bloke watching telly cheers because his team score a goal. He's all fat at the start but when his team score he jumps up, runs off and gradually gets into shape as he runs to the football game.

A listener sent me an email to point out that the star of the advert and me have a bit of a resemblance to each other. Hard to disagree.

Unlikely that I'll be slimming down any time soon though. I'm not looking after my weight at all currently. Its been left to slide a bit recently. Oh dear.

NM

Always wear the mask.

2010-08-12T13:27:00.004+01:00

One of my most vivid memories as a child is the gradual realisation that I'd been ripped off by The Judge Dredd film. When I went to watch it with my friends I tried to keep a brave face on but I knew a little part of me had just died forever when, within the first few minutes, it became clear Sylvester Stallone was not keeping his Dredd helmet on.

For those of you without a geeky past I'll just explain. Firstly Judge Dredd is a bit like Batman but it's set in the future and he's a policeman. He wears a helmet and never takes it off. This gives the character a beautiful mystique. As a future cop he can dish out on the spot justice to those he encounters. This seemed like a crazy idea back in the 70's but today with on the spot fines and so forth it's less far out.

I must have been about 14 when I went to see the film and had been a fan of the comic book ever since I'd grown bored of The Beano. I'd heard rumours that Arnold Schwarzenegger was going to play the role but his agent had problems with the fact Dredd wore his helmet so much. I was so anxious to see the film that I'd ignored warnings that Stallone's agent had arranged for some valuable face time. It was only after watching it that the true horror of what had happened started to sink in.

They'd ruined the character!

The Hollywood fame and money machine had chewed up and spat out something which was important to me. It was a really strange experience. Up until that point I'd thought that when people complained about book to film adaptions they were just showing off: "ooo - I read books, get me everybody!". Now I was one of those people but there's no kudos in having read a comic book is there?

Recently I ended up ranting about this in relation to the recent Spiderman films. They deteriorated in quality as Spiderman spent less and less time in his mask. Again, I'll bet, because of agents and valuable facetime.

It's amazing that I still get angry when I think of the Judge Dredd film. Genuinely angry.

NM

Demographics.

2010-08-11T23:42:00.003+01:00

2nd July

Last night I watched a whole episode of Skins. It was as rubbish as you think. My excuse is that I was flicking between normal telly and HD to see if I could spot the difference. In the end the telly went off and I landed on LBC where the pictures are rubbish but the audio more than makes up for it*.

The immediate response from someone regarding my apathy towards Skins would probably be that I don't like it because I'm too old for it. I'm probably too square to deal with underage sex and drugs. I'm not sure if that excuse really washes with me. I remember it being used when Radio 1 went rubbish in the 90's and I was straight in the middle of its target audience's age range. It seemed like an excuse back then and it still does now.

Demographics have a lot to answer for in this day and age. The laws of demographic profiling make interesting things bland and turn out the sort of popstars you see going through the sausage factory that is X-Factor.

Good creativity is not led by a target market. I remember as a kid wanting desperately to see a Watchmen prequel or sequel. The Watchmen is a comic book written by the genius Alan Moore. At the time I didn't understand his logic, which he often put forward in interviews, "give them what they need, not what they want"**. Over time I've come to see that he was right. I needed to grow up a bit and read some of his other (possibly better) work.

Demographics produce Star Wars prequels and Karate Kid remakes. People like, Alan Moore, produce something worthwhile.

I strongly suspect Skins was belched out of the mouth of pie charts, surveys and focus groups. Maybe I'm wrong, I only watched one episode.

NM

*It's a cliche these days for people to say the best pictures are on the radio. They're not of course. The TV does better pictures. As does a cinema. They've even got something called 3D these days. That's ace!

I wonder how many readers were fuming as they read the above note? "He's totally missed the point, the pictures are better because you can imagine them". If you did a bit of fuming I suggest you give this blog a miss in future. I do occasionally dick about here, for my own amusement.

**I don't think this is his quote but I can't find whose it is.

Legalise drugs.

2010-08-11T23:28:00.004+01:00

I've never understood why our taxes are being pumped into wars which we can clearly never win. The war in Iraq is one good example. The war on recreational drugs is another.

It costs us a fortune to pursue and jail drug users every year. Surely jail should be for violent criminals only? Surely the police should be mainly concerned with catching people who threaten us physically or steal our property. Not some dozy twunt who wants to jack up on heroin in his bedsit at the weekend. Nature will take care of him in the end. Why involve the police?

If the guy wants help to get off the drug why put the possible threat of legal action in his way?

I'm totally at a loss as to why we're in the mess we are regarding the drugs laws in this country. The prisons are full. Our public purse is empty. Now is the time to end the war on drugs.

Or at least call a truce.

Concentrate on people who harm others, not themselves.

Years ago I read a book called Emperor of Dreams which explained the legal history behind drug legislation in the US and the UK. It was tragi-comic in its detail. Doctors who needed the authority to prescribe drugs and paper merchants who wanted to crush the hemp industry all coalesced into the current miasma we encounter in 2010. Common sense needs to prevail here but there is not the political will to make that happen. I wonder when it will? Probably not in our lifetime.

Nick Clegg's Freedom website crashes under the weight of potheads: http://tinyurl.com/3aeb28s

NM

Ticking by.

2010-08-11T22:09:00.005+01:00

30th June

I'm starting to become genuinely concerned about the time I'm letting slip by at the moment. I only really work weekends currently, aside from the occasional extra cover work which comes my way here and there. Initially I got stuck into writing a book but gradually this has gone by the wayside.

The book is about UFOs, conspiracy theory and the occult. It starts with a pretty well written chapter detailing the Edgar Mitchell incident. However, after that point it's a bit difficult to gather my thoughts on matters such as David Icke, occultism and other related topics. I've still not really worked out what to make of my David Icke period. He's an interesting guy but I never wholly bought into what he was saying. This is hard to explain to people without either seeming like you're knocking an easy target, a bloke who thinks shape shifting lizards control the world, or appearing as if you agree with him.

Furthermore I do not think looking into what he's got to say is an entirely fruitless escapade. I found it really beneficial to put on the paranoid conspiracy theory glasses for a bit. It's worth testing your beliefs like that.

That said, while I was wearing those spectacles I noticed people around me who were allowing that world view to damage them. It's a dangerous brew and intoxicated conspiracists still email me to this day with their unproven theories about weather control devices and Illuminati plots to destroy them via the local council.

As an example, the recent BP oil spill is, according to some people who sent me a barrage of emails last week, a big hoax designed to bring about World War 3. Surely logical thinking needs to come in somewhere?

The roots of conspiracy theory are deeply embedded in religious thinking. The oldest conspiracy of them all was that The Devil had the King's ear and he was pushing him to do evil. This figure of The Devil is then, over the years, replaced by Jews, communists, Catholics, Freemasons, the list stretches on to include extra terrestrials and ultimately Icke's shapeshifters.

This debt to religion is important because it accounts for the faith people tap into when confronting the lack of evidence for their particular conspiracy narrative. Without faith you can't really get behind Icke's lizards or indeed any of the other suggested conspirators.

With faith you rarely ask the question: what would prove this to be wrong? For example, even a full autopsy on The Queen (one of Icke's alleged Lizards) which revealed that she is in fact an old lady of human ancestry would not disprove claims to the contrary, in the mind of a true believer. The autopsy would be suspect, it's a trick, shapeshifting lizards don't work like that, it wasn't actually her body, etc, etc, etc. This lack of any potentially falsifying evidence is meat and bread to a religious mindset. You can only prove there is not a God to someone who lacks faith.

Also, thanks to religious thinking, the conspiracy theory mindset is able to condemn whole groups of people by association. This is common to someone who follows one of the Abrahamic religions (Christian/Jewish/Muslim) and so sees everyone who is not one of their number as being automatically condemned by God, regardless of their worth as a human being. You're in the wrong club, you fail!

How this works in conspiracy theory is as follows: all Freemasons/Jews/Catholics/Jesuits/whatever are guilty by association. If you discover, for example, that I'm a Freemason (which I'm not), or Jewish (which again, I'm not), everything I say is suspect because I might be in on it. You only need a little poison in the cup and the whole drink is a deadly toxin. People who do not have religious faith find it harder to think in this way than those who do. However, if you're deep down the conspiracy theory reality tunnel it might help you to notice how easily you are suspicious of someone simply because they're pictured with an occult symbol on their T-shirt.

Despite vacating the building (and a radio show which gave air time to some of these very far out ideas) it's impossible not to notice that belief in conspiracy theory is on the rise. Only recently I saw a privately produced newspaper left in a pub which claimed to expose 'the truth of 7/7' and the various nefarious plots which are allegedly playing out around the world. Recent stories about Muslims being upset by security cameras planted in Birmingham are fuelled, in part, by inflammatory leaflets which owe a debt to conspiracy theory rhetoric*. I also believe the recent rise in antisemitism we've seen is a further unpleasant symptom.

This brings me to my main concern, although I still believe that it's a good idea to question the people who are in power and those behind them who pull the strings I'm not sure it's a positive path for most people. For example, it's worthwhile to ask questions about 9/11 and conclude that it is not quite as it was reported. However, to go on to make the claim that this proves a secret cabal within the American Government organised it as a self inflicted wound to fuel a crazy agenda is beyond me and, more importantly, the available evidence. Furthermore, what do you do about it if that is your conclusion? How do you turn that into something positive?

In short: it's good not to trust people in power but it's damaging not to trust anyone.

Trying to get all this down into a cohesive but interesting book is proving a bit tricky. The above is, I guess, part of that process. I hope you enjoyed reading it**.

NM

*I saw one of these leaflets before the news story broke, it asked how long until people in Birmingham would be asked to tolerate gun towers? Again, where are we headed if that's the path we choose to walk? The UK is many things but the Third Reich it ain't.

**I imagine there will be some people who will see this as further evidence that I have in some way sold out. Wish that were true. Maybe I'd have more money.

Radio anorak entry.

2010-08-11T18:36:00.005+01:00

29th

Being a radio presenter used to be an easy ride. Nowadays though, the industry is in dire straits. Commercial radio is shrinking at an astonishing rate. It seems that every six months or so there's another huge round of redundancies. This has been exacerbated by the recent digital economy bill which was whisked through parliament towards the end of The New Labour Project's reign. The details of this bill mean that there are now less legal obligations on commercial radio broadcasters to provide local content. As a consequence friends of mine who work for GMG Radio (Guardian Media Group) have been laid off up and down the country today as more radio stations are consolidated into single quasi-national entities.

Amusingly The Guardian's coverage of this story omits a comments section (http://tinyurl.com/23eqy4q) in stark contrast to their aggressively critical coverage of rival company, Global Radio's, similar decision a few days earlier (http://tinyurl.com/3ab26lv).

For people who work in commercial radio these are tough times and decisions like this are unfathomable to some. I wonder how many listeners will notice though? The role of the local radio disc jockey has been whittled down to near irrelevance over the past decade, to the point that I question these days whether or not they have become an anachronism.

Radio DJs gained their place in popular culture thanks to pirate radio, when new pop music could be heard in one of two ways. Either it was carried on a lorry, in the form of a plastic disc, to a shop near your house where you purchased it (or listened in one of the listening booths) or you listened to it via an illegal pirate radio transmission. If you opted for the latter choice then inbetween these musical treats you had to endure some goon rambling on about how great he was*.

This led to a lot of people thinking the bloke who advertised himself inbetween the popular music was actually interesting in his own right, despite the fact that this was rarely the case. There was a brief period (once this sort of radio had been patronised by the Government sponsored BBC) where these people became genuinely big celebrities. In many ways most of them (with only two or three notable exceptions**) were precursors to the 'famous for being famous' brigade everyone moans about today. You know, like Jordan or Peter Andre or whoever.

The uncomfortable truth which everyone in the industry ignores is that music radio was astronomically successful back then because it acted as gatekeeper between the audience and their favourite pop music. Only as you get into the 80's do genuine talents start to emerge and even then they're unpredictable, difficult to manage and frequently leave to work elsewhere. Talent is a lot harder to monetise when compared to a record player pumping out pop music all day.

Furthermore commercial radio is often staffed, at the middle management level, by people who don't understand the above dynamics. Many of them remain under the sway of the superstar DJ myth and believe that those early massive listening figures were down to their genius. This means that there are still some people in my industry who think there's some sort of skill behind making a success of having a licence to broadcast pop music in an uncrowded marketplace in the distant past.

The reality is that as access to pop music has changed its dynamic the business model upon which commercial radio was built has become less and less viable. Add to that the increased number of licences handed out during the 90s, which largely saturated the market, and you've got the current mire that the industry finds itself in. Consolidating these stations into bigger entities, to some, seemed inevitable.

I remember sitting in a radio studio shortly after 9/11 doing an afternoon show on Hallam FM and working out that I was providing just under 5 minutes of content an hour, on a good day. Most of the guidance I was given came in the form of being told to cut down the chat, play the hits and make my links nice and tight. There was little encouragement to do anything other than say as little as possible. This presented a dillema familliar to most people of that profession. Do you say "no, to hell with that, I'm going to make up my own rules," at the risk of losing your job, or do you toe the line and take the money each month? Those who survive usually follow the latter course of action. What else can you do?***

I remember having a deeply pessimistic vision of the future back in 2001. It seemed to me that radio presenters and their bosses were complicit in making themselves irrelevant to their audience. Rather than recognise the way things were changing for their industry people seemed, to me at least, to bury their heads in the sand, hide behind the music and hope for the best.

It became impossible to drink with friends in the industry and not hear the old familliar line that "they should let the personality back into local radio". Everyone knew there was trouble brewing. It doesn't make it any easier to deal with now that the most pessimistic of predictions have come true.

However, I personally believe that the changes being made now will, in the long term, be for the better. They are in many ways a vindication of all that pub talk. Content will make the difference in this new landscape as the big companies battle it out with their quasi-national brands. It'll just take time for things to settle down. Furthermore, all those talented people who have lost their jobs will adapt to the new shape of the radio industry and find work in it. I'm convinced of that.

Furthermore, creeping up on the horizon is the online world. It has yet to reveal its full potential but there will doubtless be radio professionals who will be part of that in the next few years.

All of this will take place in the shadow of the now debunked myth of the superstar DJ. The Smashy and Niceys of local radio who insisted that the way to do it was by talking as little as possible.

NM

*Obviously there were some people who were good. Kenny Everett is probably the person you were thinking of. John Peel? Who else though? Really? Don't get me wrong here I'm not just slagging people off for the sake of it. I'm just trying to make the point that Smashy and Nicey were a real phenomena and, what's more, there are lots of people who idolise their real life counterparts who work in radio to this day.

**It's not much more than one or two though is it? Really, can you imagine people downloading old shows of anyone other than Peel/Everett in the future. Oooh - let's listen to him introduce that song again!

***Obviously there are noble exceptions to all this. Many programmers tried to buck the trend here and there but it's a lot easier not to. Particularly if commercial considerations are taking preference.

You can choose your friends...

2010-08-11T16:51:00.005+01:00

28th Cheryl Cole, I just don't get it.

Cheryl Cole is all set to join Mini The Minx in one of my old favourite comic books The Beano. Here's a link to The Sun newspaper's story about it where they call the Beano a "long-running animated magazine". What on earth does that mean? It's a comic strip. The Sun used to have a very good grasp of clear plain English. How the phrase "long-running animated magazine" got past the copy editor I'll never know. Actually, do they even have copy editors anymore?

I don't have much time for Cheryl Cole so I'm dissapointed that Mini The Minx is going to spend time with her. I expected more from the female Dennis The Menace. Still, times are hard and poor Mini is just following the money. Ultimately I blame you, the general public, the ones who like Cheryl Cole. What is wrong with you? Why do you like her?* And just to clarify here, for those reading this who are not part of the 'general' public, she is VERY popular. These idiots love her. Sad eh?

Has everyone forgotten her savage and frenzied attack upon a black toilet attendant which, during the subsequent court ruling, was described by the Judge as "an unpleasant piece of drunken violence... [for which she has showed] no remorse whatsoever".

Perhaps it's just that I've spent time in my previous life cleaning toilets so I have a sense of misplaced empathy with the poor woman who was on the receiving end of Cheryl's uncontrolled savagery. I just remember seeing her pictured in the papers nursing a bulbous swollen eye as allegations were banded around that Cheryl had called her racist names as she dished out a bit of violence. In the end the court ruled that it wasn't a racist incident just an ugly one. It's clear from press statements at the time that Cheryl's people were very keen to play down any suggestion that she might harbour such prejudices.

The reason I mention this is because right under the article in The Sun is a comment from some chuff who writes:

"For crying out loud for the last time. People who hate Cheryl PLEASE DO NOT LOOK OR READ THE ARTICLES. PERIOD.
We love her and want to hear and see more of her. She has done no harm to anyone or bad mouthed anyone. She is one of the few who keeps her mouth shut about everyone one else. Leave the poor girl alone.She is the prettiest face on any paper these days."
Lion74
(my emphasis)

Lion74 of course has either forgotten (or was never informed) of this incident. Partly this might be because she changed her name not long afterward making it a bit harder to google. This was when a husband had been found, Ashley Cole. His ethnicity helped to quash any suggestion that she was racially prejudiced and her femininity helped him to drive a nail into the rumours he took one newspaper group to court for: COLE SUES OVER 'GAY ORGY' STORIES LINK HERE.

Now, I'm not saying their marriage was a sham designed as a mutually beneficial PR move but I am saying that Mz Cole is clearly a brand which has no problem with spin. An example of this would be the recent controversy surrounding the L'Oreal adverts she did where she showed you how nice your hair could look if you used their shampoo. Turns out she was using shampoo AND hair extensions worth over £1,000. The ASA cleared the company of any wrong doing but it's a nice metaphor for her brand; fake, plastic covering up reality.

And yet you swallow it up, wholesale, swill it down with a pint of BS and then wonder why you feel empty. What's wrong with you people?*

It's no wonder religion is still so powerful a force in today's world. People actually like supping lies. I'll lose my mind thinking about this one day.

Bleugh. I just suppose I expected more of Mini The Minx. That was my overall point here. Now get lost*.

NM

*It's pretty easy to work out if you're one of the people I'm ranting at here. If you like Cheryl Cole you're one of them. If you don't, you're not. In fact if you like Cheryl Cole how are you managing to read? That's not possible. Ach! I wasted my time here.

I'm an excellent boyfriend

2010-08-10T19:08:00.006+01:00

27th

For her birthday I bought my girlfriend The MicroCube. And a guitar.

Of the two things it is The MicroCube that has impressed me the most. There's loads of lovely effects you can get out of it. Echo, delay, chorus, flange. I've always enjoyed a bit of flange on the end of my instrument. I'm sure you can relate to that.

Is it a present if I'm the one who uses it most?

I did used to be in a band when I was younger. I was in a few. In many ways I'm a classic example of the failed rockstar. It's an archetype which you usually encounter in music shops, presenting radio shows or as the leader of a religious cult.

I wrote a good 50 songs of which only one, was actually any good. My one good song is best described as average in fact. The sort of thing which a good band might use as a filler on an album.

Still, now I've got the cube I'll be able to re-live those dreams for a bit.

Ahem, little freudian slip there. Now my girlfriend has the cube, I can borrow it and be able to re-live those dreams, for a bit.

NM

Food glorious food...

2010-08-10T19:01:00.003+01:00

I was thinking recently that the cornerstones of my diet are as follows:

Baked potatos with tuna, mayonaise and sweetcorn. A dab of mustard on the side. Excellent.

Baked beans with pataks curry sauce dropped in. Couple of rounds of toas with that and I'm in food heaven!

Or, if I'm eating out - GBK and their fantastic Blue Cheese burger.

On special occasions I have Ken Hom's ready meals at home.

Other than that I don't think I eat much else... weekends I mix it up with a ready meal from M&S.

Is this a healthy diet?

I think it's exactly the right diet for someone who would like to look podgy. So long as you add lots of crisps. Monster munch, mainly.

NM

Prejudice can be fun!

2010-08-10T15:16:00.004+01:00

25th

Going through a real Alan Moore period at the moment. I'm watching loads of interviews with him on YouTube and have inevitably been drawn towards this website: www.dodgemlogic.com.

It's a magazine which Alan Moore is the editor of. I've swallowed all the hype and am now really excited about it. I'd almost say it was the best magazine I've never read. If it weren't for all the hype I've consumed that surrounds Oz. And that weird mag The Process Church Of The Final Judgement brought out. That always sounded pretty good.

And Time magazine. I've never read a copy of that but it looks pretty neat.

And Rolling Stone.

And Vanity Fair.

This Alan Moore one would certainly be in the top 5 best magazines I've never read.

NM

PS - This is a fun game with films and albums. What's your top 5 best films you've never watched? Or top 5 best albums you've just not got round to yet?

Podcast

2010-08-10T15:06:00.003+01:00

24th

I have a huge unused archive of old radio shows. I've discovered whole boxes of stuff which is not currently online but might be of interest to people. I'm deciding what to do with it all. I think I'm going to start podcasting it. I guess there'll be a couple of hundred people out there in webland who might like to hear some of it. It includes bits from old forgotten radio shows, some student radio, some from Hallam FM (my first talk show), a lot from Kerrang and bits of other stuff.

Not sure when I'll crack on with this but I'll use this website here I think. So, if you're interested you might want to work out how you can subscribe to that feed.

Meh - back to the grind.

NM

House about that?

2010-08-08T22:01:00.004+01:00

23rd

We're moving house. It's a big, long, boring task.

My girlfriend has, as usual, done the Lion's share of the work. I think without her I wouldn't actually do anything. As mentioned earlier, my laziness is potentially Olympian in its reach.

The place we're moving to is more expensive than where we were before (£50 a month!) and looks a little smaller. My girlfriend loves it but I am currently unconvinced. The parking situation looks like a nightmare, no driveway, no designated spaces. The only obvious advantage it has is that it is warmer inside the house than it is outside. I kid you not, the previous house had an almost supernatural cold. For me this was a bonus, I prefer cold to hot. Most normal people though, were not so keen.

Man, I'm going to miss my driveway though.

And my open fire.

NM

Frank Sidebottom.

2010-08-08T21:46:00.005+01:00

22nd

I'm more than a little depressed by the news of Frank Sidebottom's untimely demise. He was only 54 and his creative spark was far from out. What a downer.

Previous blog entry where I describe him as a genius a few years ago: click here.

I think he was more famous in the North West than down south.

I found out about it through twitter and it was odd to see him as a trending topic.

I'd been following his feed and he did mention that he was ill but I just presumed he'd get better.

Urrgh.

Poor bloke.

NM

Famous people pretending to be normals

2010-08-08T21:30:00.005+01:00

21st

Yesterday I saw the actor who plays Gollum in The Lord Of The Rings, wandering about, in the London, like a normal person. He didn't fool me. I knew he was probably hatching yet another evil plan to get his finger in Frodo's magic ringpiece again. Either that or wondering how he could reprise his excellent performance as Martin Hannett in 24 Hour Party People, one of my favourite films of all time.

I wanted to go up to him and say "hey, you're one of the greatest actors of your generation and you feature in two of my favourite films". I think that'd be bad manners though. He doesn't know me.

I'm still getting used to seeing famous people wandering around. It's an odd aspect of The London.

NM