Brace yourself for something I never expected to say: Thandie Newton is the best thing about this film.
(Perhaps unfairly, she had attained the unfortunate distinction of being my least-favourite actor, and one of two who would actively drive me to avoid a film - the other being Patrick Dempsey. (Okay, technically, there's Russell Brand as well. But I've always considered him a comedian rather than an actor. Well, 'comedian'.))
"Solo" is actually an entirely fine film. The cast is pretty good, the performances are decent, the action is as thrilling as you expect in a prequel (where there can be no tension, since you know how things are going to turn out for most characters, and can be pretty sure about the rest). Granted, it also has Emelia Clarke in it, who I'm afraid I also don't rate, but she's okay here. And Donald Glover is excellent, so makes up for a lot of ills.
Unfortunately, though, "Solo" is also a rather pointless film - firstly because we really didn't need to have Han's backstory filled in, secondly because much of it is a box-ticking exercise working through almost everything we know about the character, and thirdly because it is, as noted, a prequel... and prequels suck.
So, um... if you're looking for something to kill a couple of hours in an inoffensive way, "Solo" will do it. But, to be honest, I think I'd recommend seeing "Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom" instead, and I'd certainly recommend "Avengers: Infinity War" over this one.
(One last thing. In terms of the Star Wars films, I'd rank "Solo" on a par with "The Last Jedi", placing it above the prequel trilogy but below "The Force Awakens", "Rogue One", and the original trilogy. It's actually rather more enjoyable than "The Last Jedi"... but TLJ gets considerable credit for at least trying something new, even if it didn't work out. "Solo" really doesn't, playing things very safe, and so while it's the film I'd rather see again, it's also not something I'd encourage.)
#29: "The Magic Faraway Tree", by Enid Blyton (a book from The List)
Monday, June 25, 2018
Friday, June 22, 2018
Bumblebee
I've just seen the trailer for the new Transformers spin-off film, "Bumblebee". On the one hand, it looks really quite good - certainly better than the other films in the series.
On the other hand:
On the other hand:
- Prequels suck.
- Bumblebee is, frankly, the least good of all the Transformers.
- It's part of a series that hasn't exactly covered itself in glory thus far.
Thursday, June 21, 2018
Trump Must Go
I really don't like sounding off about the internal politics of another country. But sometimes you just can't keep quiet.
Due to where we were on our visit to the US, most of the people we met while we were there were Republican voters. And they were, almost without exception, perfectly nice, reasonable people. (There was one very nasty homophobic comment I overheard while at Barefoot Landing. As I said, almost without exception.) So I'm very well aware that there are plenty of perfectly nice, reasonable Republican voters.
But.
When the current US government implemented their "zero tolerance" policy towards immigration, and started forcibly separating children from their parents, they crossed a point of no return. Traumatising children to deter their parents from seeking asylum is unconscionable. Even attempting to justify it shames the person who tries. And it's not good enough simply to row back from that policy and carry on as if everything was now okay. As I said, it's a point of no return.
(Horrifying as it already is, it really looks like we're only just seeing the tip of the iceberg, and that it's going to get much, much worse. It is estimated that, due to bureaucratic incompetence, it will now be impossible to reunite some hundreds of those children with their parents, ever. I have seen reports that, in order to keep those traumatised children quiet and docile, they have been given very strong anti-psychotic medications that will damage them permanently. And where are the girls?)
In an ideal world, all those responsible for this - from the man at the top who ordered it right down to the people at the bottom who implemented it (who, no doubt, were "only following orders") would face trial for their actions. Alas, I'm not naive enough to believe that that will ever happen, so we'll have to be satisfied with them being driven out of office.
Which brings me back to those "perfectly nice, resonable" Republican voters. Because if Trump and his administration are to be removed, it must be at the ballot box. If the judiciary step in to impeach and remove him, that will be painted as the "liberal elite" taking action to defy the voters and prevent him "making America great again".
So, from now until this regime is swept away, it comes down to this: any vote for any Republican will be taken as a vote to endorse this regime and their actions - both by that regime and also by the watching world. They need to be starved of those votes.
(Now, I understand that, for various reasons, lots of people could never bring themselves to vote Democrat. Fair enough. But in that case, the choice is simple: don't vote. And don't be taken in by the argument that it is your civic duty to cast a vote. Sometimes, it's your moral duty to refuse.)
It must be made very clear to the powers-that-be in the Republican party that Trump and those who follow him, those who would adopt his tactics, and those who would adopt his policies are not acceptable to those nice, reasonable Republicans. That this must never happen again.
You need to reclaim your party.
Due to where we were on our visit to the US, most of the people we met while we were there were Republican voters. And they were, almost without exception, perfectly nice, reasonable people. (There was one very nasty homophobic comment I overheard while at Barefoot Landing. As I said, almost without exception.) So I'm very well aware that there are plenty of perfectly nice, reasonable Republican voters.
But.
When the current US government implemented their "zero tolerance" policy towards immigration, and started forcibly separating children from their parents, they crossed a point of no return. Traumatising children to deter their parents from seeking asylum is unconscionable. Even attempting to justify it shames the person who tries. And it's not good enough simply to row back from that policy and carry on as if everything was now okay. As I said, it's a point of no return.
(Horrifying as it already is, it really looks like we're only just seeing the tip of the iceberg, and that it's going to get much, much worse. It is estimated that, due to bureaucratic incompetence, it will now be impossible to reunite some hundreds of those children with their parents, ever. I have seen reports that, in order to keep those traumatised children quiet and docile, they have been given very strong anti-psychotic medications that will damage them permanently. And where are the girls?)
In an ideal world, all those responsible for this - from the man at the top who ordered it right down to the people at the bottom who implemented it (who, no doubt, were "only following orders") would face trial for their actions. Alas, I'm not naive enough to believe that that will ever happen, so we'll have to be satisfied with them being driven out of office.
Which brings me back to those "perfectly nice, resonable" Republican voters. Because if Trump and his administration are to be removed, it must be at the ballot box. If the judiciary step in to impeach and remove him, that will be painted as the "liberal elite" taking action to defy the voters and prevent him "making America great again".
So, from now until this regime is swept away, it comes down to this: any vote for any Republican will be taken as a vote to endorse this regime and their actions - both by that regime and also by the watching world. They need to be starved of those votes.
(Now, I understand that, for various reasons, lots of people could never bring themselves to vote Democrat. Fair enough. But in that case, the choice is simple: don't vote. And don't be taken in by the argument that it is your civic duty to cast a vote. Sometimes, it's your moral duty to refuse.)
It must be made very clear to the powers-that-be in the Republican party that Trump and those who follow him, those who would adopt his tactics, and those who would adopt his policies are not acceptable to those nice, reasonable Republicans. That this must never happen again.
You need to reclaim your party.
Wednesday, June 20, 2018
Echo of a Silenced Voice
Until his untimely death in 2006, my favourite author was David Gemmell. By that point I had read everything that he had written, or so I thought. (After that point, I had three favourite authors: Terry Pratchett, Conn Iggulden, and Bernard Cornwell. I'm now down to two.) So it was something of a surprise, late last year, when I learned that there were not one but two 'new' books by Gemmell coming out this year!
The truth is that one of these two is actually a reprint - "White Knight/Black Swan" was originally published under a pseudonym and has recently been republished under Gemmell's own name. The other, "Rhyming Rings", was recently discovered having never been published.
I read the latter book on the way back from the US, and it was good. It clearly wasn't his best work, and also was a murder mystery rather than my preferred fantasy, but still...
(That said, it does have one huge weakness, and it's very similar to Rowling's "The Cuckoo's Calling" in that regard - the revelation of the person who was responsible for the murders just doesn't work. More than that I can't really say without spoilers, and I'm inclined to think the book is worth reading even with that flaw. Which, actually, is also true of "The Cuckoo's Calling".)
Anyway, it was really good to revisit an old favourite, and equally good to find that the writing still holds up. Bring on the next book!
The truth is that one of these two is actually a reprint - "White Knight/Black Swan" was originally published under a pseudonym and has recently been republished under Gemmell's own name. The other, "Rhyming Rings", was recently discovered having never been published.
I read the latter book on the way back from the US, and it was good. It clearly wasn't his best work, and also was a murder mystery rather than my preferred fantasy, but still...
(That said, it does have one huge weakness, and it's very similar to Rowling's "The Cuckoo's Calling" in that regard - the revelation of the person who was responsible for the murders just doesn't work. More than that I can't really say without spoilers, and I'm inclined to think the book is worth reading even with that flaw. Which, actually, is also true of "The Cuckoo's Calling".)
Anyway, it was really good to revisit an old favourite, and equally good to find that the writing still holds up. Bring on the next book!
The Promised Land
So, LC, FS and I had made it to America for the family wedding. Yay!
Our first adventure was simply getting from the airport to the condo we had hired for the week. This involved picking up our hire car (which was easy); fitting the child seat we had hired (which was definitely not easy, especially when the assistant said he couldn't even advise on how to do it, for liability reasons); and fitting six people, six cases, six sets of hand luggage, and a stroller all into a seven-seater car (which was just barely possible).
And then the drive. Here, we'd made a crucial mistake - I had decided not to pay for GPS in the car, on the grounds that we'd print directions and, if necessary, we'd switch on our phones' data and use that (and pay through the nose for it). However, on making our way out of the airport we immediately went in a different direction from that indicated by the directions, rendering them useless, and proceeded to drive five miles in the wrong direction!
Getting turned around, we then drove for a while in the right direction before starting to wonder just how much further we had to go. We'd turned on data on one of the phones, and discovered that it didn't connect properly, and was consequently useless...
At this point, we noted that the road parallel to the one we were on was the one we wanted*, so we turned right and then left, and started looking for numbers. It became clear that the numbers were higher than we wanted, and increasing, so we turned around and drove for a while, looking for the place. And then, "Aliens"-like, we discovered that we'd passed the number and had gone too far...
Well, it turned out that we were in Myrtle Beach while the place we were looking for was in North Myrtle Beach, where all the streets had exactly the same names but independent numbering. (* So, not really the road we wanted after all...)
Naturally, by this point everyone was tired and ratty and starting to snap at each other. Fortunately, FS took this opportunity for a highly-strategic cry and demanded to be fed. So we had to pull in to a car park to let LC do this.
I say 'fortunately', because the place we stopped at had a group of people clustered around the entrance. So I went and asked for directions, whereupon they promptly pulled out their phones, pulled up the map, and we were all set - three steps, 23 minutes, and we'd be there!
And, sure enough, we were.
(The other crucial mistake we made: Google Maps does of course allow you to download maps for offline use. Since the condo had wi-fi available, we were able to do this later, and so never got lost again. Still, we should probably have done it before we went. But then, I know that now...)
The condo was really nice - three large bedrooms, each with some sort of en suite facilities, and a vertigo-inducing balcony. We were on the top floor, which gave really good views, but enforced a "stay back from the railing" policy.
The focal point of the week was, of course, the family wedding on the Saturday. So, on the Thursday I unpacked my pipes and practiced briefly, mostly to make sure they'd come through okay. They had indeed, though playing in the heat was pretty intense - the pipes actually sounded great, but it was exhausting. Still, it was good fun looking out from the balcony and seeing everyone walking around coming to a halt and looking around in puzzlement. Plus, the applause I got at the end was rather nice.
The rest of day one was mostly spent getting groceries for the week and going to the beach. Which was fun, but a bit of a blur - we were all still pretty worn out from the journey.
Day two was dominated by the wedding rehearsal and rehearsal dinner, where I learned what I was actually doing on the big day. It turned out I was doing more than expected - in addition to the normal 20 mins before the service, I was doing a processional for the mothers and grandmothers of the bride and groom and a second processional for the entrance of the bridesmaids/matrons of honor/maid of honor (of whom there were 9 - it was a big wedding party). Then I was playing a recessional for the full weddding party. But that was good - having come all that way, I might as well be useful!
The rehearsal dinner was great - a good chance to get to know a lot of the bride's family and to mingle, plus some really great food. I especially liked the mac & cheese, and the garlic bread rolls were amazing.
And then came the big day, and with it came the usual nerves.
The day started with me taking LC to get her hair done for the day - she had decided to wear it up that day, and the stylist did a really good job. (More than that I'm not qualified to comment. Sorry!) Then back to the condo for a very quick lunch, then a flurry of getting ready (with a strategic meltdown by FS, who of course demanded to be fed and changed just as LC really needed to be getting herself ready). And then to the car, and on to the church.
The service was lovely. The bride wore a white dress (tee hee), off the shoulder, with a long train and a veil. Surprisingly, the only singing in the service was from one of the bride's matrons of honor, firstly for the entrance of the bride and then again as they lit the "unity candle". The service was really quite touching.
The piping went well. I was happy with that.
Then we went to a nearby hotel for many pictures and the wedding breakfast. That was all pretty standard stuff. There were also speeches, and dancing - the first dance, a father/daughter dance, a mother/son dance, a dance of the bridesmaids, and then more dancing during the evening.
All in all, it was a really great day. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
The rest of the holiday is a bit of a blur, as the tiredness really started to catch up with me. There was a visit to a nearby town (that, sadly, turned out not to be particularly interesting), a little shopping, a massive thunderstorm (including a walk home in very heavy rain... damnit, should have taken the car!), more rain, a visit to a mall, and then to an alligator park. That was fun.
And then we came home. All in all, a thoroughly enjoyable time.
So... why "The Promised Land"? Well, that stems from a discovery that I made while we were waiting in the airport in Charlotte - the US haven't joined in with this made crusade against sugar in all their soft drinks, which meant that Sprite doesn't use artificial sweeteners (technically, they use high fructose corn syrup instead of actual sugar, so it's not the same as it was over here... but still). It was a massive pleasure actually having a choice of things I could drink. And, incidentally, it really puts the lie to the notion that you can't tell the difference between the drinks.
#28: "Norse Mythology", by Neil Gaiman (sadly, not his best book...)
Our first adventure was simply getting from the airport to the condo we had hired for the week. This involved picking up our hire car (which was easy); fitting the child seat we had hired (which was definitely not easy, especially when the assistant said he couldn't even advise on how to do it, for liability reasons); and fitting six people, six cases, six sets of hand luggage, and a stroller all into a seven-seater car (which was just barely possible).
And then the drive. Here, we'd made a crucial mistake - I had decided not to pay for GPS in the car, on the grounds that we'd print directions and, if necessary, we'd switch on our phones' data and use that (and pay through the nose for it). However, on making our way out of the airport we immediately went in a different direction from that indicated by the directions, rendering them useless, and proceeded to drive five miles in the wrong direction!
Getting turned around, we then drove for a while in the right direction before starting to wonder just how much further we had to go. We'd turned on data on one of the phones, and discovered that it didn't connect properly, and was consequently useless...
At this point, we noted that the road parallel to the one we were on was the one we wanted*, so we turned right and then left, and started looking for numbers. It became clear that the numbers were higher than we wanted, and increasing, so we turned around and drove for a while, looking for the place. And then, "Aliens"-like, we discovered that we'd passed the number and had gone too far...
Well, it turned out that we were in Myrtle Beach while the place we were looking for was in North Myrtle Beach, where all the streets had exactly the same names but independent numbering. (* So, not really the road we wanted after all...)
Naturally, by this point everyone was tired and ratty and starting to snap at each other. Fortunately, FS took this opportunity for a highly-strategic cry and demanded to be fed. So we had to pull in to a car park to let LC do this.
I say 'fortunately', because the place we stopped at had a group of people clustered around the entrance. So I went and asked for directions, whereupon they promptly pulled out their phones, pulled up the map, and we were all set - three steps, 23 minutes, and we'd be there!
And, sure enough, we were.
(The other crucial mistake we made: Google Maps does of course allow you to download maps for offline use. Since the condo had wi-fi available, we were able to do this later, and so never got lost again. Still, we should probably have done it before we went. But then, I know that now...)
The condo was really nice - three large bedrooms, each with some sort of en suite facilities, and a vertigo-inducing balcony. We were on the top floor, which gave really good views, but enforced a "stay back from the railing" policy.
The focal point of the week was, of course, the family wedding on the Saturday. So, on the Thursday I unpacked my pipes and practiced briefly, mostly to make sure they'd come through okay. They had indeed, though playing in the heat was pretty intense - the pipes actually sounded great, but it was exhausting. Still, it was good fun looking out from the balcony and seeing everyone walking around coming to a halt and looking around in puzzlement. Plus, the applause I got at the end was rather nice.
The rest of day one was mostly spent getting groceries for the week and going to the beach. Which was fun, but a bit of a blur - we were all still pretty worn out from the journey.
Day two was dominated by the wedding rehearsal and rehearsal dinner, where I learned what I was actually doing on the big day. It turned out I was doing more than expected - in addition to the normal 20 mins before the service, I was doing a processional for the mothers and grandmothers of the bride and groom and a second processional for the entrance of the bridesmaids/matrons of honor/maid of honor (of whom there were 9 - it was a big wedding party). Then I was playing a recessional for the full weddding party. But that was good - having come all that way, I might as well be useful!
The rehearsal dinner was great - a good chance to get to know a lot of the bride's family and to mingle, plus some really great food. I especially liked the mac & cheese, and the garlic bread rolls were amazing.
And then came the big day, and with it came the usual nerves.
The day started with me taking LC to get her hair done for the day - she had decided to wear it up that day, and the stylist did a really good job. (More than that I'm not qualified to comment. Sorry!) Then back to the condo for a very quick lunch, then a flurry of getting ready (with a strategic meltdown by FS, who of course demanded to be fed and changed just as LC really needed to be getting herself ready). And then to the car, and on to the church.
The service was lovely. The bride wore a white dress (tee hee), off the shoulder, with a long train and a veil. Surprisingly, the only singing in the service was from one of the bride's matrons of honor, firstly for the entrance of the bride and then again as they lit the "unity candle". The service was really quite touching.
The piping went well. I was happy with that.
Then we went to a nearby hotel for many pictures and the wedding breakfast. That was all pretty standard stuff. There were also speeches, and dancing - the first dance, a father/daughter dance, a mother/son dance, a dance of the bridesmaids, and then more dancing during the evening.
All in all, it was a really great day. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
The rest of the holiday is a bit of a blur, as the tiredness really started to catch up with me. There was a visit to a nearby town (that, sadly, turned out not to be particularly interesting), a little shopping, a massive thunderstorm (including a walk home in very heavy rain... damnit, should have taken the car!), more rain, a visit to a mall, and then to an alligator park. That was fun.
And then we came home. All in all, a thoroughly enjoyable time.
So... why "The Promised Land"? Well, that stems from a discovery that I made while we were waiting in the airport in Charlotte - the US haven't joined in with this made crusade against sugar in all their soft drinks, which meant that Sprite doesn't use artificial sweeteners (technically, they use high fructose corn syrup instead of actual sugar, so it's not the same as it was over here... but still). It was a massive pleasure actually having a choice of things I could drink. And, incidentally, it really puts the lie to the notion that you can't tell the difference between the drinks.
#28: "Norse Mythology", by Neil Gaiman (sadly, not his best book...)
Tuesday, June 19, 2018
Funsize Goes Intercontinental
LC and I recently spent a week in the US attending a family wedding. Naturally, Funsize came with us. (Long-time readers may choose to point out my hypocrisy at this point. Guilty as charged.)
We had a total of six flights, three each for the outbound and return journeys. Fortunately, FS came through all of these with a minimum of fuss. Indeed, she travelled rather better than many of the adults in our party - she slept through most of the journeys, and when she was awake she was mostly happy throughout. Certainly, there were no screaming fits on the plane, though there was one wobble when we were waiting in Charlotte on the way out.
That said, our journey was not entirely stress-free.
We had booked our tickets about six months ago, prior to FS arriving on the scene (but after we knew she was coming). At that time, the airlines had said they couldn't book her in without a name, but that we should get in touch after she arrived to update the records, which we duly did. We then paid for an infant ticket, which included a full luggage allowance - one checked bag, one piece of hand luggage, and the ability to check a stroller at the gate for each flight. This may become important later...
So, we arrived at Edinburgh airport at a ridiculously early time in the morning, having not been able to check in online because we were travelling with a small child. We waited in a painfully slow queue before finally getting some of our boarding cards - some others we would need to get printed in Heathrow because of... reasons. Oh well, at least we got our bags checked...
Security in Edinburgh was fine, although my bag was pulled for a double-check due to the bagpipes raising some eyebrows. That's an occupational hazard when taking pipes abroad, and something I had expected. It was easily resolved.
We got to Heathrow, and made for our transfer to Terminal 3 for the next flight. And here we ran into our next difficulty, because only half of our party had the required boarding cards - the rest we'd been told we needed to get printed. Eventually, after a fun venture into "computer says no", we managed to transfer from one Terminal to another. (Annoyingly, all this took place outside the secure areas.) Anyway, we got to Terminal 3 and went to security, and got to enjoy the next bureaucratic failure.
We went to the ticket desk and explained that only half of our party had been issued with the boarding cards for the next step in our journey, so could they print out the remainder please? This, naturally, was met with incredulity - how was it even possible that some of the cards hadn't been printed? And wasn't it utterly amazing that a small child would be travelling with her mother? Apparently, such a thing could scarcely be imagined.
Well... eventually, after having been shuttled from the person at the desk to her supervisor (who, as far as I could tell, was actually the same person standing at a different desk), we were given a boarding card for FS for the flight to Charlotte. Those of the rest of our party who didn't have them received two boarding cards, one each for the next two flights. (Apparently, FS didn't need one for the final flight as she wasn't using a seat. Bet you can't guess where that's going, can you?)
Meanwhile, another member of our party was randomly selected for enhanced screening, which meant there was a need to unpack his hand luggage for checking. But that's fine, I guess. And so Flight Two was done.
We had a few hours to kill in Charlotte, which was fine. I may mention more about that in a later post. At length, though, we were getting closer to our final flight. At this point, LC said I should go and check at the gate that FS really didn't need a Boarding Card.
So, I asked, and sure enough that was the case - LC's own Boarding Card should indicate that she was travelling with an infant...
Which it didn't. Yes, there was another cock-up in the system, such that FS actually didn't appear on the booking at all - she wasn't associated with LC's ticket (as at Heathrow), she wasn't associated with the lead passenger's ticket (as at Edinburgh). "Computer says no", again.
Well, we got that sorted out - they basically re-issued LC's boarding card to note that there was an infant with her, and that was the job done. Phew!
(I'll also note that at Charlotte I was told that I had to check in my bagpipe case. This was intensely annoying, given that the case was specifically designed to be the right size for hand luggage, and given that they don't do well with the change in pressure that being checked in implies. So I had to take them out of the nice, sturdy case and instead carry them in a fairly flimsy backpack that I then had to carry carefully for the last flight. I wasn't best pleased by that, especially after everything else.)
Anyway, that was the journey out. It was okay, I guess.
For the journey back, we of course knew that we'd face all the same problems...
At the first airport, we went to check in only to find that FS, once again, seemed to be missing from the booking. Only this time it wasn't just as simple as adding her to LC's boarding card - she had a full set of luggage with her, and with no clear record of a ticket we would need to pay to check in that additional case - an extra $80 charge (that we'd already paid for, of course). So there then began our next journey through "computer says no"... only to finally discover that FS did indeed have a ticket. It wasn't (as you would expect) associated with LC's ticket, nor was it associated with the lead passenger's. Instead, she had her own, entirely separate record in the system. Apparently, she's very independent-minded.
There then followed an inquest - did this record entitle her to a checked bag, or should we be paying $80 for that privilege? This time, the computer said yes, but of course you can never trust computers...
Anyway, that was that, and then we were off to security. Again, my bag got stopped, but was checked and found to be bagpipes, and we were able to proceed. And so we got to Philadelphia. So far, so good.
And, miraculously, the only issue in Philadelphia was that our tickets had us scattered about the plane, so we had to arrange a switch - LC and I ended up sitting together, with everyone else scattered.
In Heathrow, we found ourselves waiting about an age for the stroller to re-appear, only to discover that it had been delivered slightly closer to the plane than where we were waiting. Oh well.
We then found ourselves with a dilemma - do we go right to "Transfers" or straight on to "Baggage Reclaim", given that half of our party had already gone ahead, and given also that at our first airport we'd been told both that our bags were checked to our final destination and that we'd have to pick them up in Heathrow. Because of course we had.
Anyway, we went to Baggage Reclaim, and sure enough that was the wrong choice - we'd get our bags back in Edinburgh. Still, that was fine, we just needed to use the shuttle to Terminal 5 rather than walking. But given that the other route apparently had much longer queues, we probably got the better end of the deal there.
In Terminal 5 we then needed to get boarding cards for about half of our party printed. Once again, FS was recorded somewhere different - this time she was associated with the lead passenger, rather than with LC. Sigh. Anyway, we got the cards, and off we went to security.
On presenting my Boarding Card, the assistant took one look at it and declared that it wasn't the right thing. Which left me at a bit of a loss - that was the card I was given back at our first airport, it had the words "Boarding Card" printed on it, so, um... Fortunately, she was persuaded to at least try it in the scanner, and the computer said Yes! Amazingly, the Boarding Card I had been given, with the words "Boarding Card" printed on it, was indeed a Boarding Card.
I was truly stunned.
After all that, and having been awake for 24 hours, we finally got the final plane, got back to Edinburgh, and everything was fine.
Ha ha. No.
On the night before we travelled, there had been a crash between a bus and a tram at Edinburgh, and when we arrived back they were busy clearing the vehicles away. This meant massive delays in the traffic in and around the airport - it took us 90 minutes to get from our space to the car park exit, and that was a relatively short delay. There was then another 40 minutes or so, and we were finally home.
Huzzah!
(In case you're wondering - I will post about the rest of the trip at some later point. But the journey was enough of an ordeal that I thought I'd best post about it separately. In case it wasn't clear: I really wasn't impressed.)
We had a total of six flights, three each for the outbound and return journeys. Fortunately, FS came through all of these with a minimum of fuss. Indeed, she travelled rather better than many of the adults in our party - she slept through most of the journeys, and when she was awake she was mostly happy throughout. Certainly, there were no screaming fits on the plane, though there was one wobble when we were waiting in Charlotte on the way out.
That said, our journey was not entirely stress-free.
We had booked our tickets about six months ago, prior to FS arriving on the scene (but after we knew she was coming). At that time, the airlines had said they couldn't book her in without a name, but that we should get in touch after she arrived to update the records, which we duly did. We then paid for an infant ticket, which included a full luggage allowance - one checked bag, one piece of hand luggage, and the ability to check a stroller at the gate for each flight. This may become important later...
So, we arrived at Edinburgh airport at a ridiculously early time in the morning, having not been able to check in online because we were travelling with a small child. We waited in a painfully slow queue before finally getting some of our boarding cards - some others we would need to get printed in Heathrow because of... reasons. Oh well, at least we got our bags checked...
Security in Edinburgh was fine, although my bag was pulled for a double-check due to the bagpipes raising some eyebrows. That's an occupational hazard when taking pipes abroad, and something I had expected. It was easily resolved.
We got to Heathrow, and made for our transfer to Terminal 3 for the next flight. And here we ran into our next difficulty, because only half of our party had the required boarding cards - the rest we'd been told we needed to get printed. Eventually, after a fun venture into "computer says no", we managed to transfer from one Terminal to another. (Annoyingly, all this took place outside the secure areas.) Anyway, we got to Terminal 3 and went to security, and got to enjoy the next bureaucratic failure.
We went to the ticket desk and explained that only half of our party had been issued with the boarding cards for the next step in our journey, so could they print out the remainder please? This, naturally, was met with incredulity - how was it even possible that some of the cards hadn't been printed? And wasn't it utterly amazing that a small child would be travelling with her mother? Apparently, such a thing could scarcely be imagined.
Well... eventually, after having been shuttled from the person at the desk to her supervisor (who, as far as I could tell, was actually the same person standing at a different desk), we were given a boarding card for FS for the flight to Charlotte. Those of the rest of our party who didn't have them received two boarding cards, one each for the next two flights. (Apparently, FS didn't need one for the final flight as she wasn't using a seat. Bet you can't guess where that's going, can you?)
Meanwhile, another member of our party was randomly selected for enhanced screening, which meant there was a need to unpack his hand luggage for checking. But that's fine, I guess. And so Flight Two was done.
We had a few hours to kill in Charlotte, which was fine. I may mention more about that in a later post. At length, though, we were getting closer to our final flight. At this point, LC said I should go and check at the gate that FS really didn't need a Boarding Card.
So, I asked, and sure enough that was the case - LC's own Boarding Card should indicate that she was travelling with an infant...
Which it didn't. Yes, there was another cock-up in the system, such that FS actually didn't appear on the booking at all - she wasn't associated with LC's ticket (as at Heathrow), she wasn't associated with the lead passenger's ticket (as at Edinburgh). "Computer says no", again.
Well, we got that sorted out - they basically re-issued LC's boarding card to note that there was an infant with her, and that was the job done. Phew!
(I'll also note that at Charlotte I was told that I had to check in my bagpipe case. This was intensely annoying, given that the case was specifically designed to be the right size for hand luggage, and given that they don't do well with the change in pressure that being checked in implies. So I had to take them out of the nice, sturdy case and instead carry them in a fairly flimsy backpack that I then had to carry carefully for the last flight. I wasn't best pleased by that, especially after everything else.)
Anyway, that was the journey out. It was okay, I guess.
For the journey back, we of course knew that we'd face all the same problems...
At the first airport, we went to check in only to find that FS, once again, seemed to be missing from the booking. Only this time it wasn't just as simple as adding her to LC's boarding card - she had a full set of luggage with her, and with no clear record of a ticket we would need to pay to check in that additional case - an extra $80 charge (that we'd already paid for, of course). So there then began our next journey through "computer says no"... only to finally discover that FS did indeed have a ticket. It wasn't (as you would expect) associated with LC's ticket, nor was it associated with the lead passenger's. Instead, she had her own, entirely separate record in the system. Apparently, she's very independent-minded.
There then followed an inquest - did this record entitle her to a checked bag, or should we be paying $80 for that privilege? This time, the computer said yes, but of course you can never trust computers...
Anyway, that was that, and then we were off to security. Again, my bag got stopped, but was checked and found to be bagpipes, and we were able to proceed. And so we got to Philadelphia. So far, so good.
And, miraculously, the only issue in Philadelphia was that our tickets had us scattered about the plane, so we had to arrange a switch - LC and I ended up sitting together, with everyone else scattered.
In Heathrow, we found ourselves waiting about an age for the stroller to re-appear, only to discover that it had been delivered slightly closer to the plane than where we were waiting. Oh well.
We then found ourselves with a dilemma - do we go right to "Transfers" or straight on to "Baggage Reclaim", given that half of our party had already gone ahead, and given also that at our first airport we'd been told both that our bags were checked to our final destination and that we'd have to pick them up in Heathrow. Because of course we had.
Anyway, we went to Baggage Reclaim, and sure enough that was the wrong choice - we'd get our bags back in Edinburgh. Still, that was fine, we just needed to use the shuttle to Terminal 5 rather than walking. But given that the other route apparently had much longer queues, we probably got the better end of the deal there.
In Terminal 5 we then needed to get boarding cards for about half of our party printed. Once again, FS was recorded somewhere different - this time she was associated with the lead passenger, rather than with LC. Sigh. Anyway, we got the cards, and off we went to security.
On presenting my Boarding Card, the assistant took one look at it and declared that it wasn't the right thing. Which left me at a bit of a loss - that was the card I was given back at our first airport, it had the words "Boarding Card" printed on it, so, um... Fortunately, she was persuaded to at least try it in the scanner, and the computer said Yes! Amazingly, the Boarding Card I had been given, with the words "Boarding Card" printed on it, was indeed a Boarding Card.
I was truly stunned.
After all that, and having been awake for 24 hours, we finally got the final plane, got back to Edinburgh, and everything was fine.
Ha ha. No.
On the night before we travelled, there had been a crash between a bus and a tram at Edinburgh, and when we arrived back they were busy clearing the vehicles away. This meant massive delays in the traffic in and around the airport - it took us 90 minutes to get from our space to the car park exit, and that was a relatively short delay. There was then another 40 minutes or so, and we were finally home.
Huzzah!
(In case you're wondering - I will post about the rest of the trip at some later point. But the journey was enough of an ordeal that I thought I'd best post about it separately. In case it wasn't clear: I really wasn't impressed.)
Time Please!
Well, that's it - as of last weekend I have now replaced the last of my Region One DVDs. I still have those last few films to watch, just to verify that the new disks work correctly, but otherwise that task is now done.
I am left with a handful of disks, as discussed previously, but I have decided to hang onto these - they're not readily available in Region Two (in some cases they were never released, in some others they are long out-of-print). I purchased an external DVD drive for my PC which I've set to Region One in case I ever want to revisit these.
The next step is to remove the multi-region DVD player from the cabinet entirely. This isn't strictly necessary, but it is my intention in the very near future to replace our surround sound Receiver with a new unit, and the newer units tend not to support very old connection methods (read: SCART). Plus, I'm quite keen to reduce the number of devices in general - having three devices set up mostly for disk playback seems excessive, by about two.
#25: "Pathfinder: The Twilight Child", by Ron Lundeen
#26: "The Algebraist", by Iain M. Banks (the last of his sci-fi novels I hadn't read)
#27: "Rhyming Rings", by David Gemmell (the new candidate for Book of the Year)
I am left with a handful of disks, as discussed previously, but I have decided to hang onto these - they're not readily available in Region Two (in some cases they were never released, in some others they are long out-of-print). I purchased an external DVD drive for my PC which I've set to Region One in case I ever want to revisit these.
The next step is to remove the multi-region DVD player from the cabinet entirely. This isn't strictly necessary, but it is my intention in the very near future to replace our surround sound Receiver with a new unit, and the newer units tend not to support very old connection methods (read: SCART). Plus, I'm quite keen to reduce the number of devices in general - having three devices set up mostly for disk playback seems excessive, by about two.
#25: "Pathfinder: The Twilight Child", by Ron Lundeen
#26: "The Algebraist", by Iain M. Banks (the last of his sci-fi novels I hadn't read)
#27: "Rhyming Rings", by David Gemmell (the new candidate for Book of the Year)
Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Experimental Cookery 2018: Pear & Gorgonzola Farfalle
Tonight's Experimental Cookery was unfortunately another of the rare failures. Fortunately it was quick and easy to put together, and indeed cheap. But the combination of flavours just didn't work for us at all - the pasta was bland, the cheese really didn't come through, and the sweetness of the pear was off-putting.
So I won't be trying this again. (I'm also starting to think that that book was itself a mistake, given that that's now two failures out of only a small number of outings. Still, we'll see.)
#24: "The Enchanted Wood", by Enid Blyton (a book from The List)
So I won't be trying this again. (I'm also starting to think that that book was itself a mistake, given that that's now two failures out of only a small number of outings. Still, we'll see.)
#24: "The Enchanted Wood", by Enid Blyton (a book from The List)
Day 150: Update on... Stuff
It's day 150, so time for another update. It's going to be a really short update this time, as there's really not much to say on most of the topics:
Books: By day 150, I 'should' be at 24.66 books read. At the time of writing, I'm currently about halfway through book 24, so I'm a little behind.
In terms of the actual goal I set, I've made no progress since last time. That's mostly just a consequence of just not getting as much reading done as you might expect. I think it's still possible to catch up, but I'm not terribly confident.
One thing that's of note here, though, is that I now have copies of all of the required books in stock. It actually amounts to ten more books to read, as "The Complete Works of Shakespeare" and "Hamlet" only count as one but "The Faraway Tree Collection" has four individual volumes. Of course, that means I'd need to do more than one a month to get through them all this year.
Band: There's nothing to report here - we've been practising through the winter, and on Saturday we have the first of our Gala Days for the year. However, this is, deliberately, a much lower-stress environment than the competition season, so I won't be blogging about it in detail.
Gaming: I'm still involved in the work game, which is going fine, and have done a very small amount of blogging over on the Imaginarium. However, I'm increasingly leaning towards thinking of myself as an ex-gamer.
Perhaps one thing of note: I've decided to abandon my notion of a 30th Anniversary game - after a very brief burst of enthusiasm, almost nobody actually signed up, and I found that finding the time to prepare something was turning into a real pain. So unless there's an outcry in the next two months (that is, by the start of August), I'm going to let that slide.
Weight: Mixed fortunes here - I've continued at the gym, which is good, but not really lost any weight.
Blogging: I slipped behind my preferred rate of blogging, both here and on the Imaginarium. In the last month I've made up a little ground here, and so am just a few posts behind my preferred target of an average of 10 posts a month. On the Imaginarium, there was nothing at all in April and not a great deal for most of the rest of the year. Mostly, that's just a consequence of not actually being involved in any serious gaming.
And that's everything. Not much to report this time, but that's no bad thing!
#23: "Walking on Glass", by Iain Banks
Books: By day 150, I 'should' be at 24.66 books read. At the time of writing, I'm currently about halfway through book 24, so I'm a little behind.
In terms of the actual goal I set, I've made no progress since last time. That's mostly just a consequence of just not getting as much reading done as you might expect. I think it's still possible to catch up, but I'm not terribly confident.
One thing that's of note here, though, is that I now have copies of all of the required books in stock. It actually amounts to ten more books to read, as "The Complete Works of Shakespeare" and "Hamlet" only count as one but "The Faraway Tree Collection" has four individual volumes. Of course, that means I'd need to do more than one a month to get through them all this year.
Band: There's nothing to report here - we've been practising through the winter, and on Saturday we have the first of our Gala Days for the year. However, this is, deliberately, a much lower-stress environment than the competition season, so I won't be blogging about it in detail.
Gaming: I'm still involved in the work game, which is going fine, and have done a very small amount of blogging over on the Imaginarium. However, I'm increasingly leaning towards thinking of myself as an ex-gamer.
Perhaps one thing of note: I've decided to abandon my notion of a 30th Anniversary game - after a very brief burst of enthusiasm, almost nobody actually signed up, and I found that finding the time to prepare something was turning into a real pain. So unless there's an outcry in the next two months (that is, by the start of August), I'm going to let that slide.
Weight: Mixed fortunes here - I've continued at the gym, which is good, but not really lost any weight.
Blogging: I slipped behind my preferred rate of blogging, both here and on the Imaginarium. In the last month I've made up a little ground here, and so am just a few posts behind my preferred target of an average of 10 posts a month. On the Imaginarium, there was nothing at all in April and not a great deal for most of the rest of the year. Mostly, that's just a consequence of not actually being involved in any serious gaming.
And that's everything. Not much to report this time, but that's no bad thing!
#23: "Walking on Glass", by Iain Banks
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Polystyrene
Almost a year on (I know!) I'm still working through my to-do list from when we moved into our house. One of the key tasks is to clear out a lot of stuff from the garage, perhaps even in the hope that one day a car might be parked there (nah). Which involves numerous trips to the council recycling centre to get rid of things, which is fine.
However, I've discovered the latest in a long line of minor annoyances: apparently, the council don't take polystyrene, as it's just not cost effective for them to recycle. Consequently, such material should be disposed of in general waste.
Which is annoying on three counts:
However, I've discovered the latest in a long line of minor annoyances: apparently, the council don't take polystyrene, as it's just not cost effective for them to recycle. Consequently, such material should be disposed of in general waste.
Which is annoying on three counts:
- Polystrene is annoyingly common as a packing material. Even having only received relatively few deliveries of things packed in it, we've gathered a substantial amount.
- It's something that is eminently recyclable. And given the quantities involved, and the environmental impact, it's something we really should be recycling.
- There are several businesses in the area offering recycling of polystyrene. Unfortunately, they seem to be offering their services to local businesses, so they're not really of any great use to us.
Tuesday, May 22, 2018
Lukewarm
Ten (!) years ago, I wrote a blog post entitled "Concerned about the church" in which I expressed a concern that the way things were going, the church would die out simply of old age. This week, I'm now reading reports that the church has lost some 20% of attendees in the last five years, probably for exactly that reason. Those reports indicate that at the same rate of decline, the Church of Scotland will be effectively extinct in 30 years. Worryingly, I expect that rate of decline to accelerate rather than remain steady.
(Incidentally, I was recently told that Funsize's baptism was the first in about a decade or so at the centre we attend, although the same parish has had a few at their other location. Similarly, there have been no weddings at our centre in that time, and precious few at the other, but there have been plenty of funerals at both.)
Now, there are several reasons why church attendances are in decline, and plenty of reasons why the Church of Scotland is having problems attracting young people in numbers. (It should be noted that there are some denominations, even in Scotland, that are growing among young people - but they're growing from a very low base.) However, one thing that really doesn't help is that, for an organisation that is supposed to provide moral authority, the church is publicly very bad at taking a stand.
Here's the thing: the Church of Scotland makes the news approximately once a year, when the General Assembly is held. For people who don't attend, that may be the only time in the year when the church gets even the briefest thought from them.
And for as long as I can remember, the coverage of the General Assembly has been dominated by the ongoing controversy concerning homosexuality - whether it's the ordination of gay ministers, same-sex marriage, or whatever other flavour of the issue is under discussion that year. And every year, the outcome of the General Assembly is a fudge, a bad compromise... and then the issue rears its head again the year after.
In the meantime, attitudes in secular society have shifted very significantly, and the issue of same-sex marriage, at least, has been resolved pretty conclusively. And young people in particular are very comfortable with that. There are still some details to work out (such as the continued need for, and access to, civil partnerships), but basically the issue is dealt with. (I should note that here I'm referring specifically to gay marriage - I'm well aware that equality is still a way off.)
The upshot of that is that, for many young people, their only exposure to the church consists of (mostly) old men arguing over an issue that, frankly, they thought was resolved years ago.
That's not an image of an organisation that's good at things. It's not an attractive image for the church. And, for an organisation that should be providing moral leadership, that's very poor.
And since both sides in the debate base their arguments on competing verses in scripture, here's one (Rev 3:14-16, edited):
And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth."
Now, I do understand that the church is in a hard place, since there are very strong views on both sides, and since both sides back their arguments with scripture. (And I'm willing to accept that, for the most part, their arguments are based on a sincere belief in that scripture, rather than other motives.) And I therefore understand that taking a firm decision, either way, is likely to cause a split.
But here's the thing: there is a very real possibility that even the least-damaging decision will lead to the effective end of the Church of Scotland. It's probable that the more-damaging decision will lead to that end. But I'm certain that failing to take a decision at all will lead to that end. The clock is ticking; you can't take forever.
The church is called on to be salt and light. If it can't make a clear decision, whether that means going with the zeitgeist or standing against it, then what is the point of it?
(Incidentally, you'll note that I haven't at any point stated what I think that decision should be. I know where I stand on the issue, and I'm also well aware that I'm at odds with a number of people I know, and some whom I respect a great deal. But we're at the point now where I think it's critical that the General Assembly makes some decision, even if it's one I disagree with.)
(Incidentally, I was recently told that Funsize's baptism was the first in about a decade or so at the centre we attend, although the same parish has had a few at their other location. Similarly, there have been no weddings at our centre in that time, and precious few at the other, but there have been plenty of funerals at both.)
Now, there are several reasons why church attendances are in decline, and plenty of reasons why the Church of Scotland is having problems attracting young people in numbers. (It should be noted that there are some denominations, even in Scotland, that are growing among young people - but they're growing from a very low base.) However, one thing that really doesn't help is that, for an organisation that is supposed to provide moral authority, the church is publicly very bad at taking a stand.
Here's the thing: the Church of Scotland makes the news approximately once a year, when the General Assembly is held. For people who don't attend, that may be the only time in the year when the church gets even the briefest thought from them.
And for as long as I can remember, the coverage of the General Assembly has been dominated by the ongoing controversy concerning homosexuality - whether it's the ordination of gay ministers, same-sex marriage, or whatever other flavour of the issue is under discussion that year. And every year, the outcome of the General Assembly is a fudge, a bad compromise... and then the issue rears its head again the year after.
In the meantime, attitudes in secular society have shifted very significantly, and the issue of same-sex marriage, at least, has been resolved pretty conclusively. And young people in particular are very comfortable with that. There are still some details to work out (such as the continued need for, and access to, civil partnerships), but basically the issue is dealt with. (I should note that here I'm referring specifically to gay marriage - I'm well aware that equality is still a way off.)
The upshot of that is that, for many young people, their only exposure to the church consists of (mostly) old men arguing over an issue that, frankly, they thought was resolved years ago.
That's not an image of an organisation that's good at things. It's not an attractive image for the church. And, for an organisation that should be providing moral leadership, that's very poor.
And since both sides in the debate base their arguments on competing verses in scripture, here's one (Rev 3:14-16, edited):
And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth."
Now, I do understand that the church is in a hard place, since there are very strong views on both sides, and since both sides back their arguments with scripture. (And I'm willing to accept that, for the most part, their arguments are based on a sincere belief in that scripture, rather than other motives.) And I therefore understand that taking a firm decision, either way, is likely to cause a split.
But here's the thing: there is a very real possibility that even the least-damaging decision will lead to the effective end of the Church of Scotland. It's probable that the more-damaging decision will lead to that end. But I'm certain that failing to take a decision at all will lead to that end. The clock is ticking; you can't take forever.
The church is called on to be salt and light. If it can't make a clear decision, whether that means going with the zeitgeist or standing against it, then what is the point of it?
(Incidentally, you'll note that I haven't at any point stated what I think that decision should be. I know where I stand on the issue, and I'm also well aware that I'm at odds with a number of people I know, and some whom I respect a great deal. But we're at the point now where I think it's critical that the General Assembly makes some decision, even if it's one I disagree with.)
Monday, May 21, 2018
Assembling the Barbecue: And in Under a Decade!
On Saturday, in between not watching the wedding and not watching the FA cup final, I took the opportunity to not watch the Scottish cup final and instead built my barbecue. This was the usual exercise in frustration, with the instructions appear to have been written by an engineer, probably as the last "I don't really want to do this" task in the list of things to do. So we had text that didn't quite make the process clear coupled with diagrams that did - or would have, had they not been printed at a tiny size.
Still, I managed to assemble the barbecue without resorting to industrial language, so that's good. And, what's more, it took less than a decade to achieve this feat!
I should probably explain that one.
Shortly after I purchased the flat in Falkirk, it was pointed out to me that Asda had a really good offer on barbecues - if I recall correctly, it was a then-£150 barbecue for £75 - and that I shouldgo buy one. So I did. (In fairness, that was a pretty good deal. But maybe not the best use of funds.)
Anyway, I purchased this barbecue, put it into my lock-up, and then did nothing with it. For eight years. Amongst other things, I didn't actually have anywhere to have a barbecue, what with it being a top-floor flat, and with the bit of common ground being strictly reserved for drying clothes and nothing else.
It's possible I didn't quite think that one through.
So the barbecue sat in the lock-up, untouched, for all that time. Then it went into storage with the rest of our belongings, and then into the garage at the new house. And, finally, it came out of its box on Saturday and is now sitting, assembled, in our garden.
But at least there's now some chance of it actually getting used...
Still, I managed to assemble the barbecue without resorting to industrial language, so that's good. And, what's more, it took less than a decade to achieve this feat!
I should probably explain that one.
Shortly after I purchased the flat in Falkirk, it was pointed out to me that Asda had a really good offer on barbecues - if I recall correctly, it was a then-£150 barbecue for £75 - and that I shouldgo buy one. So I did. (In fairness, that was a pretty good deal. But maybe not the best use of funds.)
Anyway, I purchased this barbecue, put it into my lock-up, and then did nothing with it. For eight years. Amongst other things, I didn't actually have anywhere to have a barbecue, what with it being a top-floor flat, and with the bit of common ground being strictly reserved for drying clothes and nothing else.
It's possible I didn't quite think that one through.
So the barbecue sat in the lock-up, untouched, for all that time. Then it went into storage with the rest of our belongings, and then into the garage at the new house. And, finally, it came out of its box on Saturday and is now sitting, assembled, in our garden.
But at least there's now some chance of it actually getting used...
Surviving the Dragon
Technically, the first book I read to Funsize was not "The Hobbit", but was in fact a poorly-selected "I know my..." book. However, it's certainly true that "The Hobbit" was the first story I read to my daughter, so that counts. We started about a week after she did, and finished this weekend. It took us rather longer to get through than might be expected, largely because she was scared of the dragon - and who can blame her?
Probably my biggest impression from reading the book to FS is that it reading it aloud is a very different experience to reading it myself. The simple act of vocalising the words means that the whole story proceeds more slowly. But, also, it changes the nature of it all - rather than just describing the thing, it becomes important that the words fit together well, that the sounds go together. This is especially true of the songs, of course, which are easy to skim when reading to yourself but which are much more poetic aloud.
My second impression, as this was my first re-read since the films came out, is that this novel is probably unfilmable. Which is an odd thing to say, but I'm now more than ever convinced that the films called "The Hobbit" aren't films of this book (or story) at all - they're quite another thing. (To the extent that you can't edit down the films to excise the added material and thus arrive at the story in the books.) But I don't think that simply filming the story as presented works either - too many of the dwarves amount to a name and a colour for the hood, with no other character to speak of. I don't see any sensible way to resolve that problem, especially as the stated motive for Bilbo going on the quest is to avoid the company having thirteen members!
Thirdly, regarding the choice of "The Hobbit" for a week-old child: well, why not? At that age, it's not actually as if it makes much difference what is read to her, since it's mostly about hearing our voices anyway. So it might as well be something the reader can enjoy. Plus, it has the great advantage that her geek credentials are now unimpeachable. So there.
Next...
Well, LC is apparently reading "Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls" to FS. Meanwhile, I've made a start on a storybook Bible - we received two copies of this as gifts, and narrowly avoided a third, so it comes highly recommended.
#21: "The Hobbit", by J.R.R. Tolkien (a book from The List)
#22: "O.L.D. Fantasy Heroic Role-playing Game", by Russ Morrissey
Probably my biggest impression from reading the book to FS is that it reading it aloud is a very different experience to reading it myself. The simple act of vocalising the words means that the whole story proceeds more slowly. But, also, it changes the nature of it all - rather than just describing the thing, it becomes important that the words fit together well, that the sounds go together. This is especially true of the songs, of course, which are easy to skim when reading to yourself but which are much more poetic aloud.
My second impression, as this was my first re-read since the films came out, is that this novel is probably unfilmable. Which is an odd thing to say, but I'm now more than ever convinced that the films called "The Hobbit" aren't films of this book (or story) at all - they're quite another thing. (To the extent that you can't edit down the films to excise the added material and thus arrive at the story in the books.) But I don't think that simply filming the story as presented works either - too many of the dwarves amount to a name and a colour for the hood, with no other character to speak of. I don't see any sensible way to resolve that problem, especially as the stated motive for Bilbo going on the quest is to avoid the company having thirteen members!
Thirdly, regarding the choice of "The Hobbit" for a week-old child: well, why not? At that age, it's not actually as if it makes much difference what is read to her, since it's mostly about hearing our voices anyway. So it might as well be something the reader can enjoy. Plus, it has the great advantage that her geek credentials are now unimpeachable. So there.
Next...
Well, LC is apparently reading "Good Night Stories for Rebel Girls" to FS. Meanwhile, I've made a start on a storybook Bible - we received two copies of this as gifts, and narrowly avoided a third, so it comes highly recommended.
#21: "The Hobbit", by J.R.R. Tolkien (a book from The List)
#22: "O.L.D. Fantasy Heroic Role-playing Game", by Russ Morrissey
Thursday, May 17, 2018
Competition Season Begins
Camelon & District Pipe Band had their first competition of the season last weekend, at Dunbar. According to the RSPBA website, they did rather well, which is nice.
Personally, I'm finding that I miss the competition season not at all. I was never particularly keen on that aspect of the band - I always preferred the social aspect, and really didn't need the stress. It was just that that was the local band, and they competed - so if I wanted to play, that was more or less a pre-requisite.
So, I wish them the very best of luck for the season ahead. But I'm also quite glad to be able to look on from the outside!
Personally, I'm finding that I miss the competition season not at all. I was never particularly keen on that aspect of the band - I always preferred the social aspect, and really didn't need the stress. It was just that that was the local band, and they competed - so if I wanted to play, that was more or less a pre-requisite.
So, I wish them the very best of luck for the season ahead. But I'm also quite glad to be able to look on from the outside!
Space: Above and Beyond
As part of my effort to phase out my Region One DVDs, I made a list of films and series to replace, and somehow "Space: Above and Beyond" made the cut. This was due to some fond memories of the show, and led to me finally purchasing a new, Region Two, set and re-watching the show over the past several weeks. That re-watch concluded last night.
It turns out that it was a mistake to replace that set, with the new disks now immediately finding themselves as prime candidates to be purged next time we have a clear-out.
I've watched "Space: Above and Beyond" four times. The first time was back in the 90's, when I caught the latter half of the TV transmission (if I recall correctly, this was late at night on either BBC 2 or Channel 4 - back when terrestrial TV was five whole channels!). When it was released on DVD I would have watched the series then, and I re-watched it a few years ago.
My recollection of the show was that it starts out pretty weak, but somewhere around halfway through it suddenly gets much better, and that it ends very strongly.
Well...
It's true that that trajectory is broadly accurate, but it rather exaggerates how good the second half of the series is. In fact, there are a couple of very good episodes, and a number that are pretty much okay. As a whole, though, the series really doesn't hold up. And given how far TV storytelling has advanced even in the last six years, it's no longer really worth considering.
That said, there is one potential point of interest in the show. "Space: Above and Beyond" does have a pretty strong concept, and several of the character do have stories that are worth telling (though it's rather unfortunate that the 'main' character is actually the least interesting of the bunch - a fact that the writers seemed to realise pretty early on). The show just doesn't manage to fulfil its potential.
What that means is that "Space: Above and Beyond" is probably a prime candidate for a reboot - especially if looking for something to fill the niche once held by "Battlestar Galactica". That said, I'm not convinced that it has enough name recognition to make such an effort worthwhile... and BSG itself now ended a fairly long time ago, so maybe that niche no longer exists.
(In related news, I'm now within touching distance of the end of my cull of Region One disks - my 'replace' list is down to four entries, none of which is a TV series. With luck, I'll get that done by the end of next month.)
It turns out that it was a mistake to replace that set, with the new disks now immediately finding themselves as prime candidates to be purged next time we have a clear-out.
I've watched "Space: Above and Beyond" four times. The first time was back in the 90's, when I caught the latter half of the TV transmission (if I recall correctly, this was late at night on either BBC 2 or Channel 4 - back when terrestrial TV was five whole channels!). When it was released on DVD I would have watched the series then, and I re-watched it a few years ago.
My recollection of the show was that it starts out pretty weak, but somewhere around halfway through it suddenly gets much better, and that it ends very strongly.
Well...
It's true that that trajectory is broadly accurate, but it rather exaggerates how good the second half of the series is. In fact, there are a couple of very good episodes, and a number that are pretty much okay. As a whole, though, the series really doesn't hold up. And given how far TV storytelling has advanced even in the last six years, it's no longer really worth considering.
That said, there is one potential point of interest in the show. "Space: Above and Beyond" does have a pretty strong concept, and several of the character do have stories that are worth telling (though it's rather unfortunate that the 'main' character is actually the least interesting of the bunch - a fact that the writers seemed to realise pretty early on). The show just doesn't manage to fulfil its potential.
What that means is that "Space: Above and Beyond" is probably a prime candidate for a reboot - especially if looking for something to fill the niche once held by "Battlestar Galactica". That said, I'm not convinced that it has enough name recognition to make such an effort worthwhile... and BSG itself now ended a fairly long time ago, so maybe that niche no longer exists.
(In related news, I'm now within touching distance of the end of my cull of Region One disks - my 'replace' list is down to four entries, none of which is a TV series. With luck, I'll get that done by the end of next month.)
Wednesday, May 16, 2018
Two Mistakes - and a Lesson
On Monday, I got to work nice and early, reached into my pocket to move my mobile phone onto my desk... and discovered I had LC's car keys with me. Oops. Fortunately, we have a spare set, so she was able to manage without me having to rush home to return them, but it was rather a pain.
Today, I walked to the gym (as is now my wont). It being a nice day, I left my jacket in the office, since I didn't need it. However, when I got to the gym I suddenly realised that my membership card, without which I can't get in, was still in my wallet, which was in the aforementioned jacket in the office. Oops.
The lesson from these is about keeping things in the right place - both those car keys should have a place where they live, and neither of them was in that place. After I drove LC's car on Sunday, I should have taken the keys out of my pocket and put them where they lived. As for the gym membership card, it was simply living in the wrong place - since it will only ever be used when I'm using my bag of gym kit, it should be stored in that same bag (and not in the wallet I carry with me all the time). That way, when I get to the gym I either have the card or I have bigger problems.
Of course, neither of those are truly revelatory. But I figured they might be amusing. Slightly.
#19: "William Shakespeare's Star Wars: The Force Doth Awaken", by Ian Doescher
#20: "Pathfinder: Songbird, Scion, Saboteur", by Crystal Frasier and Richard Pett
Today, I walked to the gym (as is now my wont). It being a nice day, I left my jacket in the office, since I didn't need it. However, when I got to the gym I suddenly realised that my membership card, without which I can't get in, was still in my wallet, which was in the aforementioned jacket in the office. Oops.
The lesson from these is about keeping things in the right place - both those car keys should have a place where they live, and neither of them was in that place. After I drove LC's car on Sunday, I should have taken the keys out of my pocket and put them where they lived. As for the gym membership card, it was simply living in the wrong place - since it will only ever be used when I'm using my bag of gym kit, it should be stored in that same bag (and not in the wallet I carry with me all the time). That way, when I get to the gym I either have the card or I have bigger problems.
Of course, neither of those are truly revelatory. But I figured they might be amusing. Slightly.
#19: "William Shakespeare's Star Wars: The Force Doth Awaken", by Ian Doescher
#20: "Pathfinder: Songbird, Scion, Saboteur", by Crystal Frasier and Richard Pett
Tuesday, May 08, 2018
The Handmaid's Tale
I'm a little surprised that I've never actually blogged about this...
I read "The Handmaid's Tale" way back in 2010. My reaction at the time was that it was exceptionally well-written, and quite disturbing. However, I took considerable comfort in the consideration that not only was it not the world we lived in, but also that it wasn't realistic - too many people would have to operate in a manner contrary to their own interests for that to happen. (And I don't mean that women could stop it. We have four entire industries (fashion, cosmetics, diet, and glossy magazines) whose entire business model is based on women spending lots of money. They would be the ones to stop it.)
That said, I've since watched the electorate in both the UK and the US voting contrary to their best interests, so maybe there's something in it after all...
Anyway, we watched the first season of the show last year. It's not exactly fair to say we 'enjoyed' it, since we didn't, but it was extremely well made. That said, the quality wasn't uniform. In particular, there was a clear divide between the bits that were in the book and those areas where it was changed or expanded - with the new material being markedly weaker.
The first season, of course, adapts the whole of the book. Which leaves them in a position where everything in the second season is going to be new material. Which doesn't bode well.
But there's also a big problem. The end of the book (and also the first season) is delightfully ambiguous - things really don't look good for Offred, with her being bundled into a van for... some purpose. We're also told that, at some point, Gilead will fall, but there's no clear indication as to the time-scale involved.
So, this leaves a big question: where does the show go from here? And I don't find any of the answers particular satisfying...
The 'realistic' answer is that Offred is in for a world of hurt. A society such as that depicted would have all manner of control mechanisms in place, such that Offred's various rebellions would not be tolerated. And given the issues with the other handmaids in the last episode, they would be coming down with a hammer blow. So the likely outcome isn't good - here come ten episodes, essentially, of torture porn followed by her giving birth and then, probably, a rather nasty public execution. I have no desire to watch that.
The other possibility, which is the one I rather expect them to go with, is much the same for the first several episodes, followed by a heroic rescue, the tide turning, and Offred spearheading a fight against Gilead. With the season ending in one of two ways: either Offred is reunited with her husband or, more cruelly, them being reunited some time earlier followed by his dying at the end of the last episode. The problem with that is that it's too fantastical - if Gilead is so easily defeated (in that it pops up and falls all in a single generation), that rather undercuts the menace of the series. I have no desire to watch that.
The third possibility, of course, is TV stasis - because they want to run the show for the indefinite future they'll move the pieces around a bit, but ultimately the second series will end up pretty much in the same place as the first one did. Only with Offred now having two children to search for, rather than just one. And given that I didn't enjoy the first season that much, I think I'll give that a miss, too.
The bottom line: I'm not going to be watching the second season of "The Handmaid's Tale". And, frankly, I'm reasonably sure that they'd have been much better to just leave it at one.
I'll still recommend the book, though. Because it's very good.
I read "The Handmaid's Tale" way back in 2010. My reaction at the time was that it was exceptionally well-written, and quite disturbing. However, I took considerable comfort in the consideration that not only was it not the world we lived in, but also that it wasn't realistic - too many people would have to operate in a manner contrary to their own interests for that to happen. (And I don't mean that women could stop it. We have four entire industries (fashion, cosmetics, diet, and glossy magazines) whose entire business model is based on women spending lots of money. They would be the ones to stop it.)
That said, I've since watched the electorate in both the UK and the US voting contrary to their best interests, so maybe there's something in it after all...
Anyway, we watched the first season of the show last year. It's not exactly fair to say we 'enjoyed' it, since we didn't, but it was extremely well made. That said, the quality wasn't uniform. In particular, there was a clear divide between the bits that were in the book and those areas where it was changed or expanded - with the new material being markedly weaker.
The first season, of course, adapts the whole of the book. Which leaves them in a position where everything in the second season is going to be new material. Which doesn't bode well.
But there's also a big problem. The end of the book (and also the first season) is delightfully ambiguous - things really don't look good for Offred, with her being bundled into a van for... some purpose. We're also told that, at some point, Gilead will fall, but there's no clear indication as to the time-scale involved.
So, this leaves a big question: where does the show go from here? And I don't find any of the answers particular satisfying...
The 'realistic' answer is that Offred is in for a world of hurt. A society such as that depicted would have all manner of control mechanisms in place, such that Offred's various rebellions would not be tolerated. And given the issues with the other handmaids in the last episode, they would be coming down with a hammer blow. So the likely outcome isn't good - here come ten episodes, essentially, of torture porn followed by her giving birth and then, probably, a rather nasty public execution. I have no desire to watch that.
The other possibility, which is the one I rather expect them to go with, is much the same for the first several episodes, followed by a heroic rescue, the tide turning, and Offred spearheading a fight against Gilead. With the season ending in one of two ways: either Offred is reunited with her husband or, more cruelly, them being reunited some time earlier followed by his dying at the end of the last episode. The problem with that is that it's too fantastical - if Gilead is so easily defeated (in that it pops up and falls all in a single generation), that rather undercuts the menace of the series. I have no desire to watch that.
The third possibility, of course, is TV stasis - because they want to run the show for the indefinite future they'll move the pieces around a bit, but ultimately the second series will end up pretty much in the same place as the first one did. Only with Offred now having two children to search for, rather than just one. And given that I didn't enjoy the first season that much, I think I'll give that a miss, too.
The bottom line: I'm not going to be watching the second season of "The Handmaid's Tale". And, frankly, I'm reasonably sure that they'd have been much better to just leave it at one.
I'll still recommend the book, though. Because it's very good.
Avengers: Infinity War
Friday saw LC and I take FunSize for her first trip to the cinema. For this purpose, we had purchased a set of noise-reducing headphones for her to wear, which led to two slight concerns - firstly, that she might simply reject them entirely; and secondly that they might not be enough. (Seriously, what's with the volume control at the Vue these days? They have the volume set considerably higher for the adverts and trailers than for the film itself, to the point where it's frankly painful. While the trailer for "Mission Impossible: Fallout" was playing, I was concerned we'd have to give up, given how FS was responding to all the noise, and that despite the headphones.)
Anyway, we made it through the trailers, and in to the film itself. And it's good - "Infinity War" is very much the culmination of everything they've been building for 10 years, and it therefore benefits greatly from all that lore. Don't go unless you've seen a good portion of the films leading up to this (seriously, why would you jump in at chapter 20 of the long-running series?). But if you have, and you've enjoyed most of the entries, you'll probably enjoy this one.
That said, while it's good, it's not great - this isn't on a par with the first "Avengers" film, and it's certainly not in the same league as "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" or "The Dark Knight". There's just too much crammed into too little space (and that despite a 2 hour 40 mins run-time), and too many characters.
From here on out, there are spoilers. So if you don't want to know, skip to the next post. You know the drill by now. :)
I think the thing I liked most about this film was the way it really did sum up everything we've seen so far - the film didn't waste any time re-introducing characters or locations, but just got on with things. We saw (or heard referenced) all the locations we've seen to date (Asgard, Knowhere, Zandar Prime...), caught up with pretty much everyone we'd seen thus far.
Although, having said that, the thing I actually liked most was the tiny moment where Bruce Banner finally reunites with Natasha Romanov - there's barely any dialogue there, with everything communicated in silence. It might seem strange, but that's probably the best character moment in the whole film.
The big weakness of the film, though, is that it does just try to cram in too much - too many characters, too many locations, too much story. Everything is therefore compressed and urgent, skipping from one thing to the next just to get the pieces into place. And then there's the big CGI showdown (yawn). We do eventually come out on the other side of the CGI showdown, and get back to the characters, and that's good... but I'm just not sure it's enough.
Also, I'm afraid the tone is inconsistent. Partly this is inevitable - whereas in the first Avengers film they did a good job making the Iron Man bits feel like an Iron Man film, the Cap bits feel like a Captain America film, and the Thor bits feel like Thor; here they're trying to do that and add Spider-Man bits and Doctor Strange bits and Guardians of the Galaxy bits... and given that the latter, in particular, is quite at odds with the seriousness of everything that's going on, it just didn't quite come together. Which is a shame.
And then there's the ending. Which would have been very powerful... if we didn't know that most of the dead characters have sequels in the works. We know Doctor Strange and Spider-Man and Black Panther are coming back, so their deaths are immediately undercut.
Incidentally, it's worth noting that Thanos' master-plan is absurd. That's fine, since he is after all "The Mad Titan", but it's really rather depressing watching various supposedly-intelligent people seriously discussing it. But that's not a problem with the film...
So, the upshot is that this is a good film, but not a great one (as I said above). It's probably a film I'll rewatch a few times, notably just before "Part Two" comes out, but I don't expect to rewatch it too often - certainly less often than any of the Captain America films, the Guardians of the Galaxy films, or "Thor: Ragnarok".
(I was going to sign off by noting that it was still probably the best new film I've seen this year. But it occurs to me that that's not true - "Black Panther" has it well beaten.)
Anyway, we made it through the trailers, and in to the film itself. And it's good - "Infinity War" is very much the culmination of everything they've been building for 10 years, and it therefore benefits greatly from all that lore. Don't go unless you've seen a good portion of the films leading up to this (seriously, why would you jump in at chapter 20 of the long-running series?). But if you have, and you've enjoyed most of the entries, you'll probably enjoy this one.
That said, while it's good, it's not great - this isn't on a par with the first "Avengers" film, and it's certainly not in the same league as "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" or "The Dark Knight". There's just too much crammed into too little space (and that despite a 2 hour 40 mins run-time), and too many characters.
From here on out, there are spoilers. So if you don't want to know, skip to the next post. You know the drill by now. :)
I think the thing I liked most about this film was the way it really did sum up everything we've seen so far - the film didn't waste any time re-introducing characters or locations, but just got on with things. We saw (or heard referenced) all the locations we've seen to date (Asgard, Knowhere, Zandar Prime...), caught up with pretty much everyone we'd seen thus far.
Although, having said that, the thing I actually liked most was the tiny moment where Bruce Banner finally reunites with Natasha Romanov - there's barely any dialogue there, with everything communicated in silence. It might seem strange, but that's probably the best character moment in the whole film.
The big weakness of the film, though, is that it does just try to cram in too much - too many characters, too many locations, too much story. Everything is therefore compressed and urgent, skipping from one thing to the next just to get the pieces into place. And then there's the big CGI showdown (yawn). We do eventually come out on the other side of the CGI showdown, and get back to the characters, and that's good... but I'm just not sure it's enough.
Also, I'm afraid the tone is inconsistent. Partly this is inevitable - whereas in the first Avengers film they did a good job making the Iron Man bits feel like an Iron Man film, the Cap bits feel like a Captain America film, and the Thor bits feel like Thor; here they're trying to do that and add Spider-Man bits and Doctor Strange bits and Guardians of the Galaxy bits... and given that the latter, in particular, is quite at odds with the seriousness of everything that's going on, it just didn't quite come together. Which is a shame.
And then there's the ending. Which would have been very powerful... if we didn't know that most of the dead characters have sequels in the works. We know Doctor Strange and Spider-Man and Black Panther are coming back, so their deaths are immediately undercut.
Incidentally, it's worth noting that Thanos' master-plan is absurd. That's fine, since he is after all "The Mad Titan", but it's really rather depressing watching various supposedly-intelligent people seriously discussing it. But that's not a problem with the film...
So, the upshot is that this is a good film, but not a great one (as I said above). It's probably a film I'll rewatch a few times, notably just before "Part Two" comes out, but I don't expect to rewatch it too often - certainly less often than any of the Captain America films, the Guardians of the Galaxy films, or "Thor: Ragnarok".
(I was going to sign off by noting that it was still probably the best new film I've seen this year. But it occurs to me that that's not true - "Black Panther" has it well beaten.)
Experimental Cookery 2018: Jamaican Goat Curry
Some time ago, I became aware that there's a stockist of goat meat between home and the Grand-parents', and since then I've been wanting to give it a try. Following a visit down South at the weekend (that was sadly unsatisfying), and despite my phone's best efforts to auto-correct 'goat' to 'boat' I was finally equipped. And so, Sunday's main meal was a true experiment, with a new and exciting ingredient (and, indeed, a case where the main ingredient was new and exciting).
The recipe comes from the Hairy Biker's "Great Curries". I make no claim that it is even remotely authentic (of course) - not that that has ever stopped me!
It was quick and easy to prepare. The meat came ready-diced, so all that was needed was to cover it in the spice rub, mix, and let it sit for a while; then fry up some spiced onions; then combine these, along with some water and other additions. And then it baked for two hours.
The result was... interesting. This meal wasn't like anything I've had previously, although the goat meat was only really a small part of that. The spices were pretty strong - almost overpowering.
But it was nice. I liked it. Perhaps more importantly, LC liked it, polishing off her whole meal. So that's a win, not least since there are four other portions now waiting in the freezer.
We'll certainly be having this again, even after those four portions are going. And we'll probably have goat in some other meals at some later stage. However, I will have to investigate other stockists, since I can't be tied to that particular trip in order to get it...
All in all, that's a win.
The recipe comes from the Hairy Biker's "Great Curries". I make no claim that it is even remotely authentic (of course) - not that that has ever stopped me!
It was quick and easy to prepare. The meat came ready-diced, so all that was needed was to cover it in the spice rub, mix, and let it sit for a while; then fry up some spiced onions; then combine these, along with some water and other additions. And then it baked for two hours.
The result was... interesting. This meal wasn't like anything I've had previously, although the goat meat was only really a small part of that. The spices were pretty strong - almost overpowering.
But it was nice. I liked it. Perhaps more importantly, LC liked it, polishing off her whole meal. So that's a win, not least since there are four other portions now waiting in the freezer.
We'll certainly be having this again, even after those four portions are going. And we'll probably have goat in some other meals at some later stage. However, I will have to investigate other stockists, since I can't be tied to that particular trip in order to get it...
All in all, that's a win.
Wednesday, May 02, 2018
The Gym Shower Rant
So I went to the gym at lunchtime, which was fine. Afterwards, I went for a shower, of course. And there my woes began...
As discussed previously, getting a good temperature setting on a shower is an exercise in frustration. But today that wasn't the issue.
On most home showers, there's some sort of on/off control - press a button when you want to start a shower, press it again when you're done. But for gym showers that doesn't work: inevitably a minority of customers will fail to stop the shower, and huge amounts of energy and water will be wasted. So there has to be some sort of automatic cut-off. (That of course means that a minority of selfish muppets have ruined it for everyone else. Which basically describes the whole world.)
In every gym and swimming pool I've seen, the solution to this has been to have a button that switches on the shower for a limited time, before it then cuts off again. And that's okay, I guess... most of the time.
Where it doesn't really work is when that cutoff time is set to about 3 seconds. Or, more accurately, the exact amount of time it takes to get your shampoo lathered up so that you can't open your eyes to see the button to press it again.
Honestly, is it really too much to ask that the cutoff be set to a decent length of time? Granted, setting it to 1 minute would lead to an average of 30 seconds of wasted time, but is that truly so terrible? (And if it really is, I could accept a 30 second cutoff, leading to an average of 15 seconds of waste.)
Better still, of course, would be to fit the shower with an automatic sensor, just like the toilets in the same gym use to control their auto-flush - press the button to start, and then it will detect when you move away and stop the shower automatically.
As discussed previously, getting a good temperature setting on a shower is an exercise in frustration. But today that wasn't the issue.
On most home showers, there's some sort of on/off control - press a button when you want to start a shower, press it again when you're done. But for gym showers that doesn't work: inevitably a minority of customers will fail to stop the shower, and huge amounts of energy and water will be wasted. So there has to be some sort of automatic cut-off. (That of course means that a minority of selfish muppets have ruined it for everyone else. Which basically describes the whole world.)
In every gym and swimming pool I've seen, the solution to this has been to have a button that switches on the shower for a limited time, before it then cuts off again. And that's okay, I guess... most of the time.
Where it doesn't really work is when that cutoff time is set to about 3 seconds. Or, more accurately, the exact amount of time it takes to get your shampoo lathered up so that you can't open your eyes to see the button to press it again.
Honestly, is it really too much to ask that the cutoff be set to a decent length of time? Granted, setting it to 1 minute would lead to an average of 30 seconds of wasted time, but is that truly so terrible? (And if it really is, I could accept a 30 second cutoff, leading to an average of 15 seconds of waste.)
Better still, of course, would be to fit the shower with an automatic sensor, just like the toilets in the same gym use to control their auto-flush - press the button to start, and then it will detect when you move away and stop the shower automatically.
Tuesday, May 01, 2018
On The List
While I'm at it...
Generally speaking, I'm rather impressed with the system used for elections to the Scottish parliament - a number of constituency MSPs elected via First Past the Post, followed by a further number elected via lists to top it up, on a proportional basis.
However, there is one very significant weakness to the system: if a particular individual gets themselves into a position at the top of one of the 'big' party lists (SNP, Tory, Labour), they're pretty much guaranteed a seat, and it becomes effectively impossible to get rid of them. That's really not democratic - the electorate really should have a meaningful ability to elect or reject a candidate.
(There's a case in point here: one of the Tory MSPs has been in the parliament on the list for 17 years. In that time, he has stood for a constituency several times, and been unsuccessful every time. And yet, despite that explicit rejection by the voters, he remains in place.)
I'm inclined to think that this quirk of the system should be closed, if it is practical to do so. And, fortunately, there's an easy fix: institute a one-term limit for MSPs serving on the list.
That is, if an MSP enters the parliament by winning a constituency, they should be free to stand for re-election and continue in their role. If, however, they enter parliament by virtue of their position on the regional list, they then become ineligible for a place on a regional list at the next election. If they want to continue in the parliament, then they must fight a constituency and allow the electorate a say on them specifically.
(This doesn't entirely eliminate the possibility of a party playing the system. But it's enough of an improvement that I think it's worth doing.)
(I should note that this also hits the Green party harder than any other - since they don't have any constituency MSPs, all of their incumbents would become ineligible for a second term (unless they did happen to win a constituency). Even then, I'm not convinced that that's too terrible, as the main effect would be to expand their range of people with parliamentary expertise. Which is surely no bad thing?)
Generally speaking, I'm rather impressed with the system used for elections to the Scottish parliament - a number of constituency MSPs elected via First Past the Post, followed by a further number elected via lists to top it up, on a proportional basis.
However, there is one very significant weakness to the system: if a particular individual gets themselves into a position at the top of one of the 'big' party lists (SNP, Tory, Labour), they're pretty much guaranteed a seat, and it becomes effectively impossible to get rid of them. That's really not democratic - the electorate really should have a meaningful ability to elect or reject a candidate.
(There's a case in point here: one of the Tory MSPs has been in the parliament on the list for 17 years. In that time, he has stood for a constituency several times, and been unsuccessful every time. And yet, despite that explicit rejection by the voters, he remains in place.)
I'm inclined to think that this quirk of the system should be closed, if it is practical to do so. And, fortunately, there's an easy fix: institute a one-term limit for MSPs serving on the list.
That is, if an MSP enters the parliament by winning a constituency, they should be free to stand for re-election and continue in their role. If, however, they enter parliament by virtue of their position on the regional list, they then become ineligible for a place on a regional list at the next election. If they want to continue in the parliament, then they must fight a constituency and allow the electorate a say on them specifically.
(This doesn't entirely eliminate the possibility of a party playing the system. But it's enough of an improvement that I think it's worth doing.)
(I should note that this also hits the Green party harder than any other - since they don't have any constituency MSPs, all of their incumbents would become ineligible for a second term (unless they did happen to win a constituency). Even then, I'm not convinced that that's too terrible, as the main effect would be to expand their range of people with parliamentary expertise. Which is surely no bad thing?)
The House of Lords
Looking back at the blog archive, I don't appear to have ever posted about what I think should happen with the House of Lords. So...
I'm inclined to think that the House of Lords has now gone beyond the point where it cannot be meaningfully reformed; it needs to be replaced entirely. I'm also persuaded of the argument that simply having it be elected in the same manner as the House of Commons is a bad idea - partly because that leaves us subject to the same broken duopoly that has subverted our democracy, partly because it's better if only the HoC has the legitimacy of the democratic mandate (so that a conflict can be clearly resolved), and partly because of the purpose of an upper chamber: the scrutinise and revise laws.
The thing is, to get the best scrutiny for laws, your ideal body is not, in fact, one constructed via a popularity contest. Rather, you're better off with a body comprised of subject matter experts.
Therefore, I would propose replacing the Lords with a 300-member Senate. Every 5 years, 100 of those members would be nominated for a single 15-year term (a different third each time, such that once 15 years have passed all the members have been replaced). As noted, once an individual has served a single term, they cannot be nominated again.
The nominations, meanwhile, should be divided among appropriate bodies: the various political parties should each nominate some (based on their proportions in the Commons); the Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Ireland governments should each nominate some (with a further group nominated by the PM to represent England, unless and until an English assembly is convened); the universities could nominate some, the NHS, the Armed Forces, the business community... and so on. The idea is to get a wide range of experts from across the nation so that they can provide expert input and proper scrutiny.
(Needless to say, I haven't thrashed out all the bugs. But that's the broad outline of the idea. Not that I think it matters anyway - we've been talking about House of Lords reform for at least a century, and the only changes we've managed to make have been to make it even worse. There's about as much chance of proper reform as there is of federalism. That is, none.)
#18: "Dangerous Women", edited by George R.R. Martin and Gardner Dozois
I'm inclined to think that the House of Lords has now gone beyond the point where it cannot be meaningfully reformed; it needs to be replaced entirely. I'm also persuaded of the argument that simply having it be elected in the same manner as the House of Commons is a bad idea - partly because that leaves us subject to the same broken duopoly that has subverted our democracy, partly because it's better if only the HoC has the legitimacy of the democratic mandate (so that a conflict can be clearly resolved), and partly because of the purpose of an upper chamber: the scrutinise and revise laws.
The thing is, to get the best scrutiny for laws, your ideal body is not, in fact, one constructed via a popularity contest. Rather, you're better off with a body comprised of subject matter experts.
Therefore, I would propose replacing the Lords with a 300-member Senate. Every 5 years, 100 of those members would be nominated for a single 15-year term (a different third each time, such that once 15 years have passed all the members have been replaced). As noted, once an individual has served a single term, they cannot be nominated again.
The nominations, meanwhile, should be divided among appropriate bodies: the various political parties should each nominate some (based on their proportions in the Commons); the Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Ireland governments should each nominate some (with a further group nominated by the PM to represent England, unless and until an English assembly is convened); the universities could nominate some, the NHS, the Armed Forces, the business community... and so on. The idea is to get a wide range of experts from across the nation so that they can provide expert input and proper scrutiny.
(Needless to say, I haven't thrashed out all the bugs. But that's the broad outline of the idea. Not that I think it matters anyway - we've been talking about House of Lords reform for at least a century, and the only changes we've managed to make have been to make it even worse. There's about as much chance of proper reform as there is of federalism. That is, none.)
#18: "Dangerous Women", edited by George R.R. Martin and Gardner Dozois
Autopilot
A few years ago, I went through a process of making sure my finances were all under control. (Not that they were ever out of control, particularly; it was more a question of taking stock rather than cutting back.) At that time, I set up a number of charitable donations to come out of my account on a monthly basis, in order to set a level of giving with which I was comfortable.
And then I promptly forgot all about it (mostly). The great beauty of setting these things to run automatically, after all, is that then I don't need to worry about them.
However, as a consequence of LC and I finding a new church and transferring our membership is that I've been compelled to look again at those standing orders. Which has left me shocked at just how easy it is to let things run on autopilot...
(The good news is that it's going to be a matter of increasing my charitable donations to reflect the fact that I'm making more now than I was five years ago, rather than that I've built up a lot of expenses that have run amok. Still, it would be better to be keeping track of everything that bit more closely.)
And then I promptly forgot all about it (mostly). The great beauty of setting these things to run automatically, after all, is that then I don't need to worry about them.
However, as a consequence of LC and I finding a new church and transferring our membership is that I've been compelled to look again at those standing orders. Which has left me shocked at just how easy it is to let things run on autopilot...
(The good news is that it's going to be a matter of increasing my charitable donations to reflect the fact that I'm making more now than I was five years ago, rather than that I've built up a lot of expenses that have run amok. Still, it would be better to be keeping track of everything that bit more closely.)
Friday, April 27, 2018
Rangers Management Woes 2018
Rangers this year have done much like Jeremy Corbyn did in the 2017 election - they've done much better than should probably have been expected, but they've come second in a winner-takes-all competition, and they weren't ever really close to winning. I think they'll come second (just), but it's largely irrelevant - if Celtic win the Scottish Cup, as they probably will, then the teams that come second, third, and fourth in the league will all qualify for the Europa League.
Meanwhile, Rangers are an utter mess on and off the pitch, and are once again in the market for a new manager.
At which point I have to say: I am simply stunned that there is serious discussion about the possibility of Steven Gerrard as the next Rangers manager.
Just over a year ago, I wrote about the then-chaos after Mark Warburton left, at which point I said Rangers had two ways forward: if they had significant new investment lined up then they should get a top-quality manager and back him with significant funds to rebuild the team; if they didn't have such funds available then they should look for a cheap(ish) option to serve as a safe pair of hands.
Instead, the board took a massive risk on a largely unknown manager, Pedro Caixinha, and backed him with, frankly, more funding than the club could really afford. They didn't have the significant new investment that they needed, but they brought in many new players nonetheless...
And the result was disaster - Caixinha lasted less than a year, and left Rangers with a yet-more-bloated playing staff, a crippling wage bill, and almost no progress. For the second time, Murty was put in interim charge of the team, and then given the post until the end of the season. I think the board hoped he would be a revelation and they could appoint him long-term, but it was not to be.
Now, here's the thing: Steven Gerrard is not unknown, but he is known as a player, not as a manager. In management terms, he's even less well known than Caixinha was, and indeed has exactly as much experience in management as Murty - he's currently a youth coach looking for his first 'real' management position.
So Gerrard would represent a big risk at a time when Rangers can ill afford one. He also won't be a cheap option - given that he would also be taking a risk taking on Rangers as his first management job, he will demand significant investment in the team (as he should - it needs it), and given the significance of his name he'll also demand significant personal renumeration.
Now, it's worth noting that an inexperienced manager can work out - Souness did it, and Neil Lennon over at Celtic (and now Hibs) has done extremely well. But that's very much the exception, not the rule. And, frankly, neither Souness nor Lennon had a manager of the calibre of Brendan Rodgers to deal with. (That's assuming Rodgers doesn't leave for the Arsenal job, of course... but even if he does, Celtic may well replace him with another big name in a bid to do better in Europe.)
And after a sequence of risky appointments, going back to McCoist, and given their current state, the Rangers board really should know better.
Which brings me back to the same conclusion I reached a year ago. The Rangers board should take one of two courses, entirely dependent on whether they have significant new investment available.
If they do indeed have such investment available, they should look to recruit a big name manager (of at least the same calibre as Rodgers), and back him with something in the order of 20 million pounds for new players. In which case Gerrard just doesn't fit - he doesn't have the experience. (Of course, there is the possibility that the new investors want to pick their manager, and choose him. That's about the only scenario I can see where this appointment makes sense.)
If Rangers does not have significant investment available, they should probably keep Murty in the role - he has the same experience as Gerrard (or slightly more), he knows the club, and he's a cheaper option. They should restrict their recruitment to free transfers and loan players, and continue to do just enough to qualify for the Europa League, and run down the clock on the existing contracts until they can clear the wage bill. And then they can look to advance. (Or, if they're determined to replace the manager, look for someone who has a proven track record of getting the best out of an existing group of players, without worrying about the big name.)
I really can't see a scenario where appointing Gerrard makes sense without the major new investment - he'll need to bring in a lot of new players, who probably won't be good enough (since they'll be recruited without the money needed to do the job), they'll demand good money and secure terms of employment, and the likely result therefore is that this time next year Rangers will be looking for another new manager, with an even bigger playing staff packed with not-good-enough talent, an even more crippling wage bill... and one less year in which to stop ten-in-a-row.
On the other hand... maybe this is all about selling season tickets right now in order to keep the lights on for a few more months. So they need a manager with a big name, but are desperately pushing the consequences into the future because the crisis has become existential...
Meanwhile, Rangers are an utter mess on and off the pitch, and are once again in the market for a new manager.
At which point I have to say: I am simply stunned that there is serious discussion about the possibility of Steven Gerrard as the next Rangers manager.
Just over a year ago, I wrote about the then-chaos after Mark Warburton left, at which point I said Rangers had two ways forward: if they had significant new investment lined up then they should get a top-quality manager and back him with significant funds to rebuild the team; if they didn't have such funds available then they should look for a cheap(ish) option to serve as a safe pair of hands.
Instead, the board took a massive risk on a largely unknown manager, Pedro Caixinha, and backed him with, frankly, more funding than the club could really afford. They didn't have the significant new investment that they needed, but they brought in many new players nonetheless...
And the result was disaster - Caixinha lasted less than a year, and left Rangers with a yet-more-bloated playing staff, a crippling wage bill, and almost no progress. For the second time, Murty was put in interim charge of the team, and then given the post until the end of the season. I think the board hoped he would be a revelation and they could appoint him long-term, but it was not to be.
Now, here's the thing: Steven Gerrard is not unknown, but he is known as a player, not as a manager. In management terms, he's even less well known than Caixinha was, and indeed has exactly as much experience in management as Murty - he's currently a youth coach looking for his first 'real' management position.
So Gerrard would represent a big risk at a time when Rangers can ill afford one. He also won't be a cheap option - given that he would also be taking a risk taking on Rangers as his first management job, he will demand significant investment in the team (as he should - it needs it), and given the significance of his name he'll also demand significant personal renumeration.
Now, it's worth noting that an inexperienced manager can work out - Souness did it, and Neil Lennon over at Celtic (and now Hibs) has done extremely well. But that's very much the exception, not the rule. And, frankly, neither Souness nor Lennon had a manager of the calibre of Brendan Rodgers to deal with. (That's assuming Rodgers doesn't leave for the Arsenal job, of course... but even if he does, Celtic may well replace him with another big name in a bid to do better in Europe.)
And after a sequence of risky appointments, going back to McCoist, and given their current state, the Rangers board really should know better.
Which brings me back to the same conclusion I reached a year ago. The Rangers board should take one of two courses, entirely dependent on whether they have significant new investment available.
If they do indeed have such investment available, they should look to recruit a big name manager (of at least the same calibre as Rodgers), and back him with something in the order of 20 million pounds for new players. In which case Gerrard just doesn't fit - he doesn't have the experience. (Of course, there is the possibility that the new investors want to pick their manager, and choose him. That's about the only scenario I can see where this appointment makes sense.)
If Rangers does not have significant investment available, they should probably keep Murty in the role - he has the same experience as Gerrard (or slightly more), he knows the club, and he's a cheaper option. They should restrict their recruitment to free transfers and loan players, and continue to do just enough to qualify for the Europa League, and run down the clock on the existing contracts until they can clear the wage bill. And then they can look to advance. (Or, if they're determined to replace the manager, look for someone who has a proven track record of getting the best out of an existing group of players, without worrying about the big name.)
I really can't see a scenario where appointing Gerrard makes sense without the major new investment - he'll need to bring in a lot of new players, who probably won't be good enough (since they'll be recruited without the money needed to do the job), they'll demand good money and secure terms of employment, and the likely result therefore is that this time next year Rangers will be looking for another new manager, with an even bigger playing staff packed with not-good-enough talent, an even more crippling wage bill... and one less year in which to stop ten-in-a-row.
On the other hand... maybe this is all about selling season tickets right now in order to keep the lights on for a few more months. So they need a manager with a big name, but are desperately pushing the consequences into the future because the crisis has become existential...
My Favourite Time of Year
On reflection, I think the six weeks in the latter part of April and early part of May are probably my favourite time of year, closely followed by the equivalent weeks as we go into early Autumn.
The reason for this is simple enough: we often get a spell of pretty decent weather, sunny but not overly hot, with all the bright colours of the change of season.
This contrasts with the supposed Summer, which all too often is disappointing (and where it is not, the alternative can be that it is then far too hot - especially onerous when stuck in an office all day). And Winter these days seems to amount to six months of wind, rain, cold, and general misery (occasionally broken up with just the wrong amount of snow).
So, yeah, I think this week has been just about as good as it gets.
The reason for this is simple enough: we often get a spell of pretty decent weather, sunny but not overly hot, with all the bright colours of the change of season.
This contrasts with the supposed Summer, which all too often is disappointing (and where it is not, the alternative can be that it is then far too hot - especially onerous when stuck in an office all day). And Winter these days seems to amount to six months of wind, rain, cold, and general misery (occasionally broken up with just the wrong amount of snow).
So, yeah, I think this week has been just about as good as it gets.
Thursday, April 19, 2018
Hey Samsung...
Next time you update your phone software, how about adding a button that allows you to not only hang up a call but instantly add the caller to your block list? As it is, my daily annoyance with the "have you had an accident" calls (or sometimes the "have you checked your PPI?" calls) is then compounded by needing to go through a six-tap process to block the number (not counting unlocking my phone) - getting that down to just one would be a very satisfying addition.
Also: isn't it amazing how when technology improves to make everything hugely and immediately better (such as upgrading to a smart-phone), the level of perceived annoyance experienced as a result of the remaining irritations jumps as a consequence?
Also: isn't it amazing how when technology improves to make everything hugely and immediately better (such as upgrading to a smart-phone), the level of perceived annoyance experienced as a result of the remaining irritations jumps as a consequence?
So What Am I Supposed to Drink?
To my horror, I discovered about a week ago that Robinson's "Fruit and Barley" has now reformulated to remove the added sugar and replace it with artificial sweeteners. With the net effect that that's another thing I now can't drink. (Rather naively, I had assumed that diluting fruit juices were sweetened with, you know, fruit, and so wouldn't include masses of additional sugar. I guess not.)
Anyway, this caused me to go have a look at the various brands that are available... and the results are not good. Pretty much all of the big brands and all of the 'own' brands loudly trumpet that they have "no added sugar", which translates as "added sweeteners", which translates as "you can't drink this". There are a very few more obscure brands, mostly the very expensive niche brands, that are still not using sweeteners but there's no indication as to how long this will last.
I also learned yesterday that San Pellegrino had also reformulated to reduce sugar and added artificial sweeteners. So that's another thing I can't drink.
I'm rapidly coming to a point where there is very little I actually can drink, and those options are significantly flawed: either they include huge amounts of caffeine (Coke and Pepsi), or they're hugely expensive (Fentimans), or they're very much niche products and so not widely available. Or, of course, there are alcoholic drinks, but they don't work when I often have to drive.
So I'm left with a question: just what am I supposed to drink? Is the answer seriously going to be water and nothing else?
Anyway, this caused me to go have a look at the various brands that are available... and the results are not good. Pretty much all of the big brands and all of the 'own' brands loudly trumpet that they have "no added sugar", which translates as "added sweeteners", which translates as "you can't drink this". There are a very few more obscure brands, mostly the very expensive niche brands, that are still not using sweeteners but there's no indication as to how long this will last.
I also learned yesterday that San Pellegrino had also reformulated to reduce sugar and added artificial sweeteners. So that's another thing I can't drink.
I'm rapidly coming to a point where there is very little I actually can drink, and those options are significantly flawed: either they include huge amounts of caffeine (Coke and Pepsi), or they're hugely expensive (Fentimans), or they're very much niche products and so not widely available. Or, of course, there are alcoholic drinks, but they don't work when I often have to drive.
So I'm left with a question: just what am I supposed to drink? Is the answer seriously going to be water and nothing else?
Monday, April 16, 2018
Days Like These Are Far Too Rare
Yesterday was the baptism of Funsize, which took place at our new church in Livingston. This is another of our Great Days, joining the Wedding of Kilt/Man and Lady Chocolat and the Epic of the Cakes.
We had been planning the baptism for some time, indeed pretty much since Funsize was born. This shouldn't come as a shock, since our faith is rather important to us, and baptism is one of the key sacraments through which that faith is marked. So we spoke to the minister, and made it so.
It was a gloriously sunny day, at least for the morning and early afternoon. This paired well with the baptismal gown that FS was given to wear - the same gown that LC wore back when it was her turn. The gown was gleaming white, and in the sunlight it was radiant.
The church service itself was a fairly simple affair, as is appropriate to the occasion. We had selected the first two hymns, before and after the event - "Great is Thy Faithfulness", which featured at our wedding, and "Shine Jesus Shine", which ties into the name. (We were also lucky enough that the reading, which we did not select, fit neatly into the same theme. And the cake likewise bore an appopriate inscription.)
For the baptism itself, LC and I stood at the front together with FS's god-fathers, who are two of her uncles (my brother G and LC's brother A). One other nice touch was that the minister had invited the children forward for the all-age talk (as they had been displaced from their normal scenes), and he had them stay at the front so they could easily see. All in all, it was a really lovely occasion.
Afterwards, there was a buffet lunch and the aforementioned cake. This was really another highlight of the day, as it was a great opportunity for our families to mingle, for the many nephews and nieces to play together, and to catch up with friends - including some we hadn't seen since FS arrived, and some I hadn't seen since my 40th birthday. It was all a really positive event, with good feeling all around.
There are many thanks that should be given: to the church for allowing us the use of their hall after the service, to the caterers and the cake-maker for providing the food, and most of all to LC for arranging both. And to so many friends and family for their well-wishes and for the pleasure of their company.
Hopes For Our Daughter
One of the things we were given by the church was a storybook Bible, and for this we were asked to contribute some words of hopes for our daughter. I had somewhat expected these to be read out as part of the service (or, indeed, to be asked to read them out myself), but it was not to be. That being the case, and since we gave quite some thought to them, I thought I'd add them here:
First and foremost, may you always know that you are loved and that you are treasured.
As you go through life, may you make friends easily. May you know that words may be a balm and also a weapon, and therefore may you have the wisdom always to know the right words to use. May you always have the courage to be whoever it is that you decide to become.
May you be a light for others, even when all other lights go out. And may God go between you and harm, in all of the dark places where you must walk.
#16: "Coruscant and the Core Worlds", by Craig R. Carey, Chris Doyle, Jason Fry, Paul Sudlow, John Terra, and Daniel Wallace
#17: "Espedair Street", by Iain Banks
We had been planning the baptism for some time, indeed pretty much since Funsize was born. This shouldn't come as a shock, since our faith is rather important to us, and baptism is one of the key sacraments through which that faith is marked. So we spoke to the minister, and made it so.
It was a gloriously sunny day, at least for the morning and early afternoon. This paired well with the baptismal gown that FS was given to wear - the same gown that LC wore back when it was her turn. The gown was gleaming white, and in the sunlight it was radiant.
The church service itself was a fairly simple affair, as is appropriate to the occasion. We had selected the first two hymns, before and after the event - "Great is Thy Faithfulness", which featured at our wedding, and "Shine Jesus Shine", which ties into the name. (We were also lucky enough that the reading, which we did not select, fit neatly into the same theme. And the cake likewise bore an appopriate inscription.)
For the baptism itself, LC and I stood at the front together with FS's god-fathers, who are two of her uncles (my brother G and LC's brother A). One other nice touch was that the minister had invited the children forward for the all-age talk (as they had been displaced from their normal scenes), and he had them stay at the front so they could easily see. All in all, it was a really lovely occasion.
Afterwards, there was a buffet lunch and the aforementioned cake. This was really another highlight of the day, as it was a great opportunity for our families to mingle, for the many nephews and nieces to play together, and to catch up with friends - including some we hadn't seen since FS arrived, and some I hadn't seen since my 40th birthday. It was all a really positive event, with good feeling all around.
There are many thanks that should be given: to the church for allowing us the use of their hall after the service, to the caterers and the cake-maker for providing the food, and most of all to LC for arranging both. And to so many friends and family for their well-wishes and for the pleasure of their company.
Hopes For Our Daughter
One of the things we were given by the church was a storybook Bible, and for this we were asked to contribute some words of hopes for our daughter. I had somewhat expected these to be read out as part of the service (or, indeed, to be asked to read them out myself), but it was not to be. That being the case, and since we gave quite some thought to them, I thought I'd add them here:
First and foremost, may you always know that you are loved and that you are treasured.
As you go through life, may you make friends easily. May you know that words may be a balm and also a weapon, and therefore may you have the wisdom always to know the right words to use. May you always have the courage to be whoever it is that you decide to become.
May you be a light for others, even when all other lights go out. And may God go between you and harm, in all of the dark places where you must walk.
#16: "Coruscant and the Core Worlds", by Craig R. Carey, Chris Doyle, Jason Fry, Paul Sudlow, John Terra, and Daniel Wallace
#17: "Espedair Street", by Iain Banks
Friday, April 13, 2018
Ready Player One
G and I went to see the film of "Ready Player One" on Monday - LC and I had hoped to go together, but the timing with Funsize didn't really work out. As I mentioned on the blog, I had read the book last month, so I was curious to see how they'd translated it to film. I was also somewhat doubtful - with the book fresh in my mind, and given that the book is always * better, how would the film stack up?
* Not always - the actual rule is that the first version is always better. But since, these days, I'm much more likely to see a film that has been adapted from a book, rather than reading the book of the film, that effectively means the book is better. Anyway...
I didn't like RP1.
From here on out there are major spoilers for both the book and the film. So, if you want to avoid them, skip the rest of this post - there's nothing at the end to come back to!
The truth is that the book of RP1 is basically a piece of lightweight fluff, with an extremely basic plot. The only real reason it is so well regarded is that 80's nostalgia is big right now, and the book wallows unashamedly in it. And that's fair enough - there's a place for lightweight fluff, and there's a good reason that particular plot is retold again and again. And there were a couple of really quite clever moments... in addition to some quite lame ones.
In theory, the film version should be much the same. Indeed, they took the wise step of replacing most of the geek references from the book with other geek references in the film. Which means that it's fundamentally the same, but should also be different enough to stand on its own.
Unfortunately, it really felt to me like all the things they'd changed were for the worse, and all the things they kept were weaknesses in the book. Mostly, then, it made me nostalgic for other, better films - and knowing that I have many of those films on DVD, and many of the others are shown fairly regularly on TV, I'm left wondering why bother with RP1 - just watch those other films instead!
The problems start pretty much right away. One of the big changes between the book and the film, at least in gamer circles, was the replacement of the "Tomb of Horrors" with an unwinnable race. On the face of it, that's wise, since the book both gets the Tomb wrong and then has the protagonist play against Acererack at "Joust" which is, frankly, lame. So switching to something more cinematic and being able to introduce all the characters very quickly should be a good thing.
Except...
One of the few genuinely clever parts of the book is the placement of the Tomb on the school-planet of Ludus. Which is a Latin pun, but also shows one of Halliday's key values - you don't need money to win at his quest.
Switching to the unwinnable race removes that. Suddenly, you do need money, for vehicles, fuel, etc, in order to meaningfully compete.
Unfortunately, it also makes everyone in the setting an idiot. The notion, in the book, that nobody found the Tomb in five years of searching is a stretch, but it's just about feasible - it's hidden in plain sight, but somewhere nobody would really think to look.
But faced with an unwinnable race, coded by someone who is known to have a great delight in Easter Eggs, and in five whole years of searching, we're expected to believe that nobody thought to look for secret doors?
Hell, there's a real good chance that somebody's grandma would find that one entirely by accident!
But, okay, I guess.
Then we come to the next problems in the film: the supporting cast. Specifically, Art3mis and Aech. In the book, these are very much peers of our hero. Indeed, both are actually much more established Gunters than Parzival - if anything, Aech is the mentor figure, while Art3mis is actually better at it all than Parzival, but has missed one lucky guess.
In the film, Art3mis is introduced almost immediately as needing Parzival to rescue her. Then, when they decamp to Aech's workshop, he proceeds to inflict on her a test for "fake geek girls" (where the supposed geek girl must prove her credentials by recognising each and every reference the gatekeeper can muster - and yes, it's exactly as offensive as that sounds). Why they thought that was a good idea to include, I'm not sure.
Aech, meanwhile, is recast mostly as comic relief, and notably in the middle section of the film. On the face of it, this section is really good, transporting the characters into "The Shining". It's really well done, except for one thing - we're supposed to accept that Aech has never seen the film (because he "doesn't like scary movies"). When pretty much the sole qualification to be a Gunter is to immerse yourself in the culture loved by Halliday, and when that's one of his top films, that rather negates Aech's claim to competence.
Most of the rest of that middle section is absolutely fine - sure, they bring together the "High Five" in the real world rather more quickly than in the book, but that's fairly harmless. And, frankly, they should have killed off Daito (as in the book), as again that was one of the few things that gave it any weight. Oh well.
One other big change to the film is the means by which Parzival comes by his Extra Life. In the book, he stumbles on another Easter Egg, 'wastes' quite a lot of time on what seems a red herring, and so comes by a priceless artifact. In the film, he is basically given the Extra Life on a whim by another character... just because. But, I guess, in a 2 hour 20 minute film they can't include everything.
But then we come to the end, where it all proceeds to fall apart.
In another change from the book, Art3mis is captured by the enemy and sent to one of their "Loyaly Centres" (because, of course, the female character is the one who should be captured and need a rescue). The bad guys then proceed to show their massive incompetence - they put her to work inside the impregnable shield. For the main reason that if they didn't, the plot would come to a screaming halt.
So, of course, the heroes get Art3mis out of her prison, but she stays within the Matrix in order to bring down the shield. The bad guys, realising that she must still be inside, proceed to run around desperately trying to locate her. You'd think they'd have mechanisms to determine which of their rigs is currently using her unique login ID, or at the very least a mechanism to lock her out of the system, or something. (Also, see below...)
While Art3mis is busy bringing down the shield, Parzival and the others whistle up an army. In the book, this takes some time - they make the announcement, set a date, and wait to see who shows up. In the film, Parzival makes his speech and the army shows up seconds later. This highlights something really quite important - it takes very little time to get around in that setting.
So, they have the big fight. It's standard stuff these days - a mess of CGI fighting it out, with very little ability to actually see what's going on. It's all very pretty, but mostly just a waste of time. Especially since we've seen it all before.
Anyway, the good guys win, leading to the bad guys using their Ultimate Weapon - a bomb that kills all avatars in Sector 14. Except Parzival, of course, since he has the Extra Life. This therefore gives him a free run to the final challenge, and since he knows how to solve it, he can do so in a few minutes.
Except...
For those few minutes, he has to stand right there out in the open. And as we've just discussed, it takes little to no time to travel to his location. So it's a matter of a few seconds of one of the bad guys' reserve forces to go there and shoot his avatar dead. And the bad guys win.
(The book addresses this point - when you engage with the final challenge, you get shunted into a pocket dimension where you can't be interfered with. So Parzival gets a few minutes' head start, but can't be stopped by a simple bullet. The film omits this, to its cost.)
Anyway, our bad guys don't bother with any of that. Instead, they rush around in the real world trying to stop our heroes. Which is nicely cinematic but hugely inefficient. Especially as they've been shown to have drones that are quite capable of delivering an explosive package. So it would be nice and easy for them to find the van, drop off some explosives. And the bad guys win.
Anyway, they don't do that. Instead, they get themselves defeated, their agent gets himself arrested, and our heroes win the game. Yay!
Except, again...
When Art3mis was imprisoned in the "Loyalty Centre", she wasn't being detailed illegally. Instead, she had been assessed as owing the company some thousands of dollars that she needed to work off. And while working it off, she would be charged for any failure to do her job, any damage to company equipment, and pretty much anything else they felt like charging her for. And, indeed, they company had been shown to be utter bastards about that - indeed, that was exactly what they had done to her father.
Now, Art3mis wasn't an observer in the final battle; she was very much an active participant. And, indeed, she triggered the battle by disabling a priceless one-use artifact.
So, being utter bastards, and given that they had just lost the contest directly as a result of the actions of someone who (a) has just been given a fifth of the prize and (b) who represents significant leverage on the other four winners, the bad guys would surely not simply take that lying down. Sure, a couple of their agents had just been arrested, but corporations have rogue employees all the time, of course, so they can be easily disavowed.
Our bad guys, therefore, should just levy absurd charges to Art3mis' account, potentially charging her for everything that was lost in the final battle, including the priceless one-use artifact. At the very least, that gives them a 20% control in the system; most likely, it leads to the other winners buying her out. And the bad guys win.
The upshot of all this, I'm afraid, was that I was unimpressed.
Ultimately, the film is very pretty, but it's also pretty dull - a very basic plot, very thin characters, and a requirement that the bad guys make really bad mistakes at key times just left me cold. It reminded me too much of better films, and didn't have enough in itself for me to recommend it. Which is a shame, though maybe something I should have expected.
* Not always - the actual rule is that the first version is always better. But since, these days, I'm much more likely to see a film that has been adapted from a book, rather than reading the book of the film, that effectively means the book is better. Anyway...
I didn't like RP1.
From here on out there are major spoilers for both the book and the film. So, if you want to avoid them, skip the rest of this post - there's nothing at the end to come back to!
The truth is that the book of RP1 is basically a piece of lightweight fluff, with an extremely basic plot. The only real reason it is so well regarded is that 80's nostalgia is big right now, and the book wallows unashamedly in it. And that's fair enough - there's a place for lightweight fluff, and there's a good reason that particular plot is retold again and again. And there were a couple of really quite clever moments... in addition to some quite lame ones.
In theory, the film version should be much the same. Indeed, they took the wise step of replacing most of the geek references from the book with other geek references in the film. Which means that it's fundamentally the same, but should also be different enough to stand on its own.
Unfortunately, it really felt to me like all the things they'd changed were for the worse, and all the things they kept were weaknesses in the book. Mostly, then, it made me nostalgic for other, better films - and knowing that I have many of those films on DVD, and many of the others are shown fairly regularly on TV, I'm left wondering why bother with RP1 - just watch those other films instead!
The problems start pretty much right away. One of the big changes between the book and the film, at least in gamer circles, was the replacement of the "Tomb of Horrors" with an unwinnable race. On the face of it, that's wise, since the book both gets the Tomb wrong and then has the protagonist play against Acererack at "Joust" which is, frankly, lame. So switching to something more cinematic and being able to introduce all the characters very quickly should be a good thing.
Except...
One of the few genuinely clever parts of the book is the placement of the Tomb on the school-planet of Ludus. Which is a Latin pun, but also shows one of Halliday's key values - you don't need money to win at his quest.
Switching to the unwinnable race removes that. Suddenly, you do need money, for vehicles, fuel, etc, in order to meaningfully compete.
Unfortunately, it also makes everyone in the setting an idiot. The notion, in the book, that nobody found the Tomb in five years of searching is a stretch, but it's just about feasible - it's hidden in plain sight, but somewhere nobody would really think to look.
But faced with an unwinnable race, coded by someone who is known to have a great delight in Easter Eggs, and in five whole years of searching, we're expected to believe that nobody thought to look for secret doors?
Hell, there's a real good chance that somebody's grandma would find that one entirely by accident!
But, okay, I guess.
Then we come to the next problems in the film: the supporting cast. Specifically, Art3mis and Aech. In the book, these are very much peers of our hero. Indeed, both are actually much more established Gunters than Parzival - if anything, Aech is the mentor figure, while Art3mis is actually better at it all than Parzival, but has missed one lucky guess.
In the film, Art3mis is introduced almost immediately as needing Parzival to rescue her. Then, when they decamp to Aech's workshop, he proceeds to inflict on her a test for "fake geek girls" (where the supposed geek girl must prove her credentials by recognising each and every reference the gatekeeper can muster - and yes, it's exactly as offensive as that sounds). Why they thought that was a good idea to include, I'm not sure.
Aech, meanwhile, is recast mostly as comic relief, and notably in the middle section of the film. On the face of it, this section is really good, transporting the characters into "The Shining". It's really well done, except for one thing - we're supposed to accept that Aech has never seen the film (because he "doesn't like scary movies"). When pretty much the sole qualification to be a Gunter is to immerse yourself in the culture loved by Halliday, and when that's one of his top films, that rather negates Aech's claim to competence.
Most of the rest of that middle section is absolutely fine - sure, they bring together the "High Five" in the real world rather more quickly than in the book, but that's fairly harmless. And, frankly, they should have killed off Daito (as in the book), as again that was one of the few things that gave it any weight. Oh well.
One other big change to the film is the means by which Parzival comes by his Extra Life. In the book, he stumbles on another Easter Egg, 'wastes' quite a lot of time on what seems a red herring, and so comes by a priceless artifact. In the film, he is basically given the Extra Life on a whim by another character... just because. But, I guess, in a 2 hour 20 minute film they can't include everything.
But then we come to the end, where it all proceeds to fall apart.
In another change from the book, Art3mis is captured by the enemy and sent to one of their "Loyaly Centres" (because, of course, the female character is the one who should be captured and need a rescue). The bad guys then proceed to show their massive incompetence - they put her to work inside the impregnable shield. For the main reason that if they didn't, the plot would come to a screaming halt.
So, of course, the heroes get Art3mis out of her prison, but she stays within the Matrix in order to bring down the shield. The bad guys, realising that she must still be inside, proceed to run around desperately trying to locate her. You'd think they'd have mechanisms to determine which of their rigs is currently using her unique login ID, or at the very least a mechanism to lock her out of the system, or something. (Also, see below...)
While Art3mis is busy bringing down the shield, Parzival and the others whistle up an army. In the book, this takes some time - they make the announcement, set a date, and wait to see who shows up. In the film, Parzival makes his speech and the army shows up seconds later. This highlights something really quite important - it takes very little time to get around in that setting.
So, they have the big fight. It's standard stuff these days - a mess of CGI fighting it out, with very little ability to actually see what's going on. It's all very pretty, but mostly just a waste of time. Especially since we've seen it all before.
Anyway, the good guys win, leading to the bad guys using their Ultimate Weapon - a bomb that kills all avatars in Sector 14. Except Parzival, of course, since he has the Extra Life. This therefore gives him a free run to the final challenge, and since he knows how to solve it, he can do so in a few minutes.
Except...
For those few minutes, he has to stand right there out in the open. And as we've just discussed, it takes little to no time to travel to his location. So it's a matter of a few seconds of one of the bad guys' reserve forces to go there and shoot his avatar dead. And the bad guys win.
(The book addresses this point - when you engage with the final challenge, you get shunted into a pocket dimension where you can't be interfered with. So Parzival gets a few minutes' head start, but can't be stopped by a simple bullet. The film omits this, to its cost.)
Anyway, our bad guys don't bother with any of that. Instead, they rush around in the real world trying to stop our heroes. Which is nicely cinematic but hugely inefficient. Especially as they've been shown to have drones that are quite capable of delivering an explosive package. So it would be nice and easy for them to find the van, drop off some explosives. And the bad guys win.
Anyway, they don't do that. Instead, they get themselves defeated, their agent gets himself arrested, and our heroes win the game. Yay!
Except, again...
When Art3mis was imprisoned in the "Loyalty Centre", she wasn't being detailed illegally. Instead, she had been assessed as owing the company some thousands of dollars that she needed to work off. And while working it off, she would be charged for any failure to do her job, any damage to company equipment, and pretty much anything else they felt like charging her for. And, indeed, they company had been shown to be utter bastards about that - indeed, that was exactly what they had done to her father.
Now, Art3mis wasn't an observer in the final battle; she was very much an active participant. And, indeed, she triggered the battle by disabling a priceless one-use artifact.
So, being utter bastards, and given that they had just lost the contest directly as a result of the actions of someone who (a) has just been given a fifth of the prize and (b) who represents significant leverage on the other four winners, the bad guys would surely not simply take that lying down. Sure, a couple of their agents had just been arrested, but corporations have rogue employees all the time, of course, so they can be easily disavowed.
Our bad guys, therefore, should just levy absurd charges to Art3mis' account, potentially charging her for everything that was lost in the final battle, including the priceless one-use artifact. At the very least, that gives them a 20% control in the system; most likely, it leads to the other winners buying her out. And the bad guys win.
The upshot of all this, I'm afraid, was that I was unimpressed.
Ultimately, the film is very pretty, but it's also pretty dull - a very basic plot, very thin characters, and a requirement that the bad guys make really bad mistakes at key times just left me cold. It reminded me too much of better films, and didn't have enough in itself for me to recommend it. Which is a shame, though maybe something I should have expected.
Tuesday, April 10, 2018
Day 100: Update on... Stuff
It's day 100, so time for another update...
Books: By day 100, I 'should' be at 16.44 books read. I'm currently at 15 and a bit, so I'm some way behind. I had actually caught up last month, but "A Fine Balance" took me ages to get through.
In terms of the actual goal I set, I'm just about on target, in that I've read 3 of the remaining books, leaving a further 8 (or 7 - "Hamlet"). But given that "A Fine Balance" was one of them, and they're getting harder...
Band: Things have been going well, but there's not much to report since last time. We do have a heavy schedule of gala days and similar events for the summer, but I won't be doing them all. In fact, unless they sort out what they're doing with getting me a uniform, I might not be doing any of them!
Gaming: Nothing to report since last time.
Weight: I got back to the gym just before going back on holiday, which was a good thing. Between that and carrying Funsize around, I've actually lost about half a stone, which is good.
Blogging: This has fallen way behind, with me not having posted anything on either blog this month. We'll see if that rate picks up any over the next while.
And leaving the most important until last...
Project Tadpole: As noted, this came to its end in February. Funsize is due to be baptised on Sunday. Beyond that, though, I won't be reporting on events in these regular updates, though I daresay I may mention her once or twice elsewhere in the blog!
Until next time...
#14: "A Fine Balance", by Rohinton Mistry (a book from The List)
#15: "Pathfinder: Crownfall", by Thurston Hillman
Books: By day 100, I 'should' be at 16.44 books read. I'm currently at 15 and a bit, so I'm some way behind. I had actually caught up last month, but "A Fine Balance" took me ages to get through.
In terms of the actual goal I set, I'm just about on target, in that I've read 3 of the remaining books, leaving a further 8 (or 7 - "Hamlet"). But given that "A Fine Balance" was one of them, and they're getting harder...
Band: Things have been going well, but there's not much to report since last time. We do have a heavy schedule of gala days and similar events for the summer, but I won't be doing them all. In fact, unless they sort out what they're doing with getting me a uniform, I might not be doing any of them!
Gaming: Nothing to report since last time.
Weight: I got back to the gym just before going back on holiday, which was a good thing. Between that and carrying Funsize around, I've actually lost about half a stone, which is good.
Blogging: This has fallen way behind, with me not having posted anything on either blog this month. We'll see if that rate picks up any over the next while.
And leaving the most important until last...
Project Tadpole: As noted, this came to its end in February. Funsize is due to be baptised on Sunday. Beyond that, though, I won't be reporting on events in these regular updates, though I daresay I may mention her once or twice elsewhere in the blog!
Until next time...
#14: "A Fine Balance", by Rohinton Mistry (a book from The List)
#15: "Pathfinder: Crownfall", by Thurston Hillman
Friday, March 30, 2018
Why the Return of Optimus Prime is a Bad Thing
This blog is never one to shy away from controversial topics, nor from addressing the burning issues of the day, and so we come to a blog post that may surprise some.
A few weeks ago, as part of my project to retire my Region One DVDs, I purchased a set of the Transformers DVDs for series 2-4. I'm now nearly at the end of my watch-though, with only two episodes in series 3 (plus the 3 episodes of series 4) to watch. Those last two episodes are the long-awaited "Return of Optimus Prime", where the producers responded to the massive backlash from the film by bringing back the most beloved of all Saturday morning heroes. (Indeed, so massive was the controversy that when the film was released in the UK they felt the need to add an epilogue in which that very return was promised! And they call this the Snowflake generation!)
But there's a big problem with the return of Optimus Prime - it's a really bad thing.
"Transformers: the Movie" is little more than yet another retelling of the Hero's Journey - Hot Rod starts as the brash young hope, gradually learns maturity and leadership, and eventually fulfils his destiny to release the power of the Matrix. (Incidentally, it's also something of a retelling of the end of the Exodus - Optimus Prime is Moses, the leader who is allowed to see, but not to enter, the Promised Land, Ultra Magnus is Joshua the warrior, and Hot Rod is David the promised king. Oh, and Unicron is Goliath. But I digress.) And the Hero's Journey is essentially the story of the transition to adulthood - the boy becomes the man.
One of the big themes of the third series of Transformers is Rodimus Prime's (Hot Rod's) struggle to live up to the legacy of Optimus Prime. He's constantly doubting himself, and needs reassured that he's doing a good job. Indeed, in two episodes ("Dark Awakening" and "The Burden Hardest to Bear") gives up leadership for one reason or another. But in both cases he eventually learns his lesson, resumes the mantle, and grows as a result.
Now, Rodimus Prime frankly isn't a patch on Optimus, partly because nobody could be, and partly because the character is really quite lame - right from the name ('Rodimus' comes from mashing up 'Hot Rod' and 'Optimus'); the fact that the toy is less good than Optimus, Ultra Magnus, or even Hot Rod; and that self-doubt makes for difficult storytelling. And yet, that character arc is actually one of the strongest parts of the otherwise very poor series 3 - having to overcome doubt and learn that you don't have to live up to an illustrious predecessor is a surprisingly mature theme for a children's TV show.
The problem with the return of Optimus Prime is that it necessarily reverses all that, and negates everything that has gone before. Rodimus is forces to give up the Matrix, and leadership. He reverts to the brash young hope that is Hot Rod. He ceases to be the adult he has become, and instead returns to being a child. Which, as life lessons go, just sucks.
The death of Optimus Prime is one of those things that I'm sure the makers of the series really wish they hadn't done, but it's also one of the biggest strengths of the movie, and one of the reasons that it still holds up where so much else from that time just falls by the wayside. And replacing Optimus with Rodimus was always going to be a really hard sell. But, from a storytelling perspective, it is really better to live with it and move on, rather than just negate the whole thing and pretend it never happened.
A few weeks ago, as part of my project to retire my Region One DVDs, I purchased a set of the Transformers DVDs for series 2-4. I'm now nearly at the end of my watch-though, with only two episodes in series 3 (plus the 3 episodes of series 4) to watch. Those last two episodes are the long-awaited "Return of Optimus Prime", where the producers responded to the massive backlash from the film by bringing back the most beloved of all Saturday morning heroes. (Indeed, so massive was the controversy that when the film was released in the UK they felt the need to add an epilogue in which that very return was promised! And they call this the Snowflake generation!)
But there's a big problem with the return of Optimus Prime - it's a really bad thing.
"Transformers: the Movie" is little more than yet another retelling of the Hero's Journey - Hot Rod starts as the brash young hope, gradually learns maturity and leadership, and eventually fulfils his destiny to release the power of the Matrix. (Incidentally, it's also something of a retelling of the end of the Exodus - Optimus Prime is Moses, the leader who is allowed to see, but not to enter, the Promised Land, Ultra Magnus is Joshua the warrior, and Hot Rod is David the promised king. Oh, and Unicron is Goliath. But I digress.) And the Hero's Journey is essentially the story of the transition to adulthood - the boy becomes the man.
One of the big themes of the third series of Transformers is Rodimus Prime's (Hot Rod's) struggle to live up to the legacy of Optimus Prime. He's constantly doubting himself, and needs reassured that he's doing a good job. Indeed, in two episodes ("Dark Awakening" and "The Burden Hardest to Bear") gives up leadership for one reason or another. But in both cases he eventually learns his lesson, resumes the mantle, and grows as a result.
Now, Rodimus Prime frankly isn't a patch on Optimus, partly because nobody could be, and partly because the character is really quite lame - right from the name ('Rodimus' comes from mashing up 'Hot Rod' and 'Optimus'); the fact that the toy is less good than Optimus, Ultra Magnus, or even Hot Rod; and that self-doubt makes for difficult storytelling. And yet, that character arc is actually one of the strongest parts of the otherwise very poor series 3 - having to overcome doubt and learn that you don't have to live up to an illustrious predecessor is a surprisingly mature theme for a children's TV show.
The problem with the return of Optimus Prime is that it necessarily reverses all that, and negates everything that has gone before. Rodimus is forces to give up the Matrix, and leadership. He reverts to the brash young hope that is Hot Rod. He ceases to be the adult he has become, and instead returns to being a child. Which, as life lessons go, just sucks.
The death of Optimus Prime is one of those things that I'm sure the makers of the series really wish they hadn't done, but it's also one of the biggest strengths of the movie, and one of the reasons that it still holds up where so much else from that time just falls by the wayside. And replacing Optimus with Rodimus was always going to be a really hard sell. But, from a storytelling perspective, it is really better to live with it and move on, rather than just negate the whole thing and pretend it never happened.
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
None of the Above
In light of the recent events in Catalonia, and especially the EU's silence on the matter (especially of elected politicians being jailed pre-trial by the Spanish authorities), I find I can no longer support the EU or our continued membership in it.
Unfortunately, I'm also in a position where I can't support the decision to leave, won as it was through outright lies (see: the bus), and fuelled by a mix of nostalgia for a golden age that never was (and an Empire that the world is better off without) and an unpleasant amount of xenophobia. (I should note: voting Leave doesn't make a person a racist, but unfortunately it does put you on the same side.)
Which means I now find myself in a position where, given a binary choice, my answer is "none of the above".
(Realistically, I would still vote to Remain, but it is despite the EU rather than because of it. Having seen the damage that leaving has caused already, and knowing that what's coming is going to be much worse, it's a no-brainer. But it's not a matter of self-interest, rather than of principle. Which is a lousy position to be in.)
Unfortunately, I'm also in a position where I can't support the decision to leave, won as it was through outright lies (see: the bus), and fuelled by a mix of nostalgia for a golden age that never was (and an Empire that the world is better off without) and an unpleasant amount of xenophobia. (I should note: voting Leave doesn't make a person a racist, but unfortunately it does put you on the same side.)
Which means I now find myself in a position where, given a binary choice, my answer is "none of the above".
(Realistically, I would still vote to Remain, but it is despite the EU rather than because of it. Having seen the damage that leaving has caused already, and knowing that what's coming is going to be much worse, it's a no-brainer. But it's not a matter of self-interest, rather than of principle. Which is a lousy position to be in.)
Fake News
The BBC Scotland website currently has an article, "Irn Bru sales go up after new recipe introduced", indicating that Barrs have just had their best-ever year of sales.
Specifically, the sales numbers referred to are those up to the 27th of January this year (see the twelfth paragraph). The problem with that being that the recipe change occurred in late January of this year - indeed, I purchased at least some original Irn Bru even in February of this year.
So, in fact, this is a story about Irn Bru sales going up before the new recipe was introduced.
Ultimately, this is a story that doesn't really matter - Barrs will no doubt be looking at the up-to-date sales figures and will make a decision based on the reality and not the friendly spin the media has chosen to give them.
But it raises (again) a question: if they're willing to lie to you about this, what else are they willing to lie to you about? (Well... I suppose it's possible that this is just gross incompetence on the person who wrote the headline. I'm not sure that's really any better.)
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Another Cause for Celebration
Today I received confirmation that I'm getting a promotion at work. Which is good - it's something that has been on the cards for quite some time, and that I've been working very hard to secure.
Later, there may be cake. Or ice cream. Or both.
Later, there may be cake. Or ice cream. Or both.
Monday, March 19, 2018
A Poor Substitute
It looks like my plan to switch from Irn Bru to Coke (or Pepsi) is a non-starter. Over the past several weeks we've been drinking fairly copious amounts of the stuff, largely because we've needed the sugar hit to counteract the extreme lack of sleep.
Unfortunately, the main effect of this has been to leave me twitchy and strung out, with a side order of not being able to sleep at night (though, of course, I could readily sleep during the day, when I ideally want to be awake...).
(I should also note: at one point, my go-to replacement would have been 7-up, that being another of the four drinks that didn't use artificial sweeteners. Alas, during the Christmas break I noticed that it, too, had changed over. Disturbingly, that change was made without any notice, which is rather concerning when you consider that a small number of people react to these things much more strongly than I do. Anyway, the net effect is that my choices are now Coke, Pepsi, or nothing.)
So it's no good. Once my stockpile of Irn Bru runs out, and unless Barrs come to their senses and bring back the original formula (which I'm losing hope of), I guess I really will have to just learn to go completely without.
(And, worryingly, I notice that some diluting juices (Ribena) are now also making use of artificial sweeteners. At this rate, I'll be down to water and nothing else.)
Friday, March 16, 2018
Two Thoughts About Russia
When considering the situation with Russia, I'm struck by two thoughts that I just can't get past:
Firstly, the case against Russia seems to be almost exactly as strong as the case against Saddam Hussein was prior to the Iraq War in 2003. Unfortunately, I'm also well aware of how that turned out.
Secondly, I find myself trying to think of anything our current government has done well and in the interest of the people of the UK. And I'm coming up with nothing - this is the most shockingly incompetent government in my lifetime, up against some very stiff competition. And, in particular, their handling of foreign affairs has oscillated between tragedy and farce.
Given those two, I can't help but be extremely worried by our current course of action. While I agree that Russia is the most likely culprit for recent events, and while I agree that if this is proven we'll need to take action, I'm deeply concerned that we seem to be rushing to judgement in order to appear strong. I very much hope we're not rapidly heading for another tragedy.
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
Back To Work
I've now finished up my Paternity Leave (and vacation) and so returned to work this morning. It's been pretty heard going so far! The morning was more or less okay, since I'm traditionally a morning person but, as anticipated, once we got into the afternoon I started the flag. And it didn't help that the various catch-up jobs I had to do, which were time-consuming but low-thought, have now almost run out. At some point, I'm going to have to actually think, which isn't so good...
Sleepy...
Tuesday, March 13, 2018
Pink
Funsize and I had a fairly important discussion the other night. Well, mostly I talked, and she rolled her eyes. Anyway, the reason for our conversation was that I was busy changing her into a bright pink sleep-suit, and it concerned the colour pink.
Ever since FS arrives and proved to be a girl, we have been given huge numbers of clothes for her to wear, for which we are very grateful. And I've been fairly stunned - I hadn't realised there was so much pink stuff in all the world - sleepsuits, dresses, tights, leggings, socks... This has caused some slight unease for me, and perhaps rather greater unease for LC - we're conscious of the dangers of pigeon-holing FS as a girly-girl, as "Daddy's Little Princess", or whatever else. On the other hand, we've received so many clothes that there's basically no need to buy FS anything else for some months, and it would of course be churlish and rude simply to dismiss those gifts.
And so, the need for the conversation. During which I pointed out to FS firstly that pink is a perfectly acceptable colour, and should not be considered in any way inferior. Equally, however, I pointed out that FS would be entirely free to determine her path - if she wants to play with dinosaurs and monsters, and pirates and robots then that's fine... as indeed if she wishes to play with princesses and dolls. And if she chooses to mix-and-match, then that will be just fine too. Really, it's up to her.
And as for her clothes... I expect there will be plenty of pink in her future. Hopefully, there will also be a whole rainbow of other colours as well.
#11: "Pathfinder: Beyond the Veiled Past", by Thurston Hillman
#12: "Ready Player One", by Ernest Cline
#13: "The Black Elfstone", by Terry Brooks
Saturday, March 03, 2018
Life Lessons for my Daughter
One of the great joys of parenthood (rather more pleasant than changing all those nappies - about a million so far), is the opportunity to pass on all of my great wisdom. Or, failing that, some stuff that sounds good that I've probably nicked from a book somewhere.
Funsize is now ten days old, and in that time we have passed on three great nuggets of wisdom...
- If you're frustrated, you won't get it. This one was from LC, and was in response to a feeding mishap - FS was struggling to find food and was getting annoyed and thrashing about. This, of course, was counter-productive, hence the life lesson.
- You've got to plan ahead. This one came this morning. I was in the shower and FS woke up demanding to be changed right now. That was fine, since LC was on hand to do the necessary. However, FS then decided it would be highly amusing to poo everywhere - her sleep suit, the changing mat, the carpet, LC... everywhere. Anyway, this was all fine, except that LC then proceeded to take her own shower immediately thereafter in order to clean the mess, leaving me with FS. And then FS realised that she was also hungry, with no choice but to wait. If, instead, she had planned ahead, she could have waited for me to get out the shower, and then I could have been the recipient of the amusing poo, leaving LC free to feed her. A classic blunder.
- Never start a land war in Asia. This is a bit of a niche lesson, but important to learn - it's the most famous of the classic blunders, after all.
As you can see, it has been an education, for both of us. (We've also been educating FS in all the cultural cornerstones - thus far being "The Hobbit" and "Transformers"...)
#10: "Only Dead on the Inside", by James Breakwell (an early candidate for book of the year)
Thursday, March 01, 2018
A Little Blog House-keeping
I've decided that the time has come to retire the old "happy?" tag for blog posts, and have instead replaced it with the more definitive "happy" tag.
That is all.
Snow Day! Oh... wait...
As a consequence of the bad weather, my work closed the office yesterday afternoon and sent everyone home. Which is as it should be: nothing that we do is truly essential, so far better to get everyone to safety and take pressure off the roads and other support services. (And while we're encouraged to take work home with us as possible, if circumstances don't allow for it then so be it.)
Of course, this all falls into the period while I'm on paternity leave anyway, so it makes little difference to me. Though I did have to walk two miles to Asda today to avert a toilet paper shortage. Which wasn't too bad, but considerably more tiring than that would normally be.
#9: "Feersum Endjinn", by Iain M. Banks
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)