Friday, 12 October 2012

Author, Author

Glorious evening yesterday. We invited Niall Griffiths and Horatio Clare to read and discuss their Mabinogion retellings.

Horatio Clare

We started with a panel discussion (including yours truly) to explore the nature of mythology and its relevance, the practice of writing and a range of other subjects, went into the reading, and then opened the floor to questions from the students and colleagues massed (ahem) for the event. We talked about mythology being the history of the oppressed, resistance, the experience of reading PhD theses about your own work and a whole range of other subjects.

Horatio Clare

Horatio Clare and Niall Griffiths

Horatio Clare and Niall Griffiths listening to a question


Niall and Horatio are extremely good value as guests. They're thoughtful, relaxed, opinionated and ridiculously well-read. They also demonstrate the quality I think is essential in a writer: they're interested in people. Little details or events catch their attention and become material.

Niall Griffiths reading from The Dreams of Max and Ronnie

If you've not read their work so far, read their Mabinogion stories (Horatio's is The Prince's Pen and Niall's is The Dreams of Max and Ronnie), then all their other work, but don't expect them to be much like the mythical stuff. Niall Griffiths' might lazily be likened to Irvine Welsh: novels in full dialect (Liverpool in his case), low-life characters etc. Actually, there's a lot more to him than this: below the rush of violence, drugs and dark, farcical misadventures, his characters and plots draw on a rich hinterland of mythology and half-forgotten origins. Frequently set in Liverpool and/or its hinterland North Wales, the legacies of the population's Irish and Welsh roots locate and inform Griffiths' often disturbing presentation of a hand-to-mouth existence. Start with Stump (never has a Morris Minor seemed so menacing) and its semi-sequel Wreckage, Grits or the Welsh Straw Dogs novel Sheepshagger. Kelly and Victor, his novel about a desperate, existentialist dysfunctional relationship is about to be released as a film, and Wreckage is in production now.

Niall Griffiths

Niall's a gruff, scruffy, warm bloke – tattoos, cap and fascination with everything: he found the concept of Bilston Chips hard to swallow. He is Liverpool personified, boasting the full range of Irish and Welsh grandparents and an openness to the world rather than merely to England. Horatio's a different model of a writer: suave and sophisticated but just as warm. His work ranges more widely than Wales, and covers more genres - he's a journalist, a radio drama writer and a memoirist as well as a novelist. Running for the Hills recalls his rocky childhood amidst divorcing parents, expulsion from exclusive schools and the difficulty of being a borders Welshman with an aristocratic English accent: intriguingly, he wavered between 'we' and 'they' when talking about the Welsh. Truant: Notes from the Slippery Slope covers his wild 20s: the escapades an intelligent and privileged young man gets into when he tries to escape his origins - he discovers that slumming it can rapidly descend into squalor and futility. He's also a highly accomplished travel writer - particularly on Africa.

Horatio Clare and Niall Griffiths

Sadly, the audience only got a taste of Horatio and Niall's wit and wisdom. I got the lot, as we headed to the pub, then to Tipton for dinner at Mad O'Rourke's World Famous Pie Factory. If it isn't world famous, it should be. The pies were massive and delicious, and the conversation slipped easily between banter, teasing and erudite discussions of books. As usual, we all came away with a list of more to read… I also loved Niall's description of one great unwritten Welsh novel by Richard John Evans (author of the stunning Entertainment) as 'Don DaiLillo'. Perhaps you had to be there.

A grand night. Be there next year.

Thursday, 11 October 2012

Welcome back, normality

Hello everyone. In my new spirit of achieving a degree of mental and emotional balance, I'm not needling lying Tory scum today. I've an idea that every single day will offer fresh opportunities, so I'm allowed a day off. Besides, there's more to me than sheer impotent fury. Really!

Today is a research day, a rare thing here in Vole Towers. I'm writing a joint book chapter proposal on the history of state attempts to suppress or counter underground media - the radical press in the 18th/19th centuries, and social media now. Then I'm going to do a bit more work on my travel writing in Wales paper, then drown myself go for a swim. The evening is also going to be fun: authors Horatio Clare and Niall Griffiths are coming to read from their contributions to Seren Books' stunning Mabinogion retellings series and talk about writing. It's open to all, and starts at 6 p.m. so do come. But you're not invited to dinner afterwards. One of them asked us to take him to Mad O'Rourke's World Famous Pie Factory in Tipton. Apparently you get pie served on a shovel. I'm genuinely excited.

Soundtrack today: A. R. Kane, Palace Music, Blueboy and the new Holst CD… Imogen Holst, that is.







Wednesday, 10 October 2012

Tough on crime… unless it pays.

I was very heartened by the Conservative Party's various policing and justice ministers yesterday. They're promising a new era of zero tolerance and swingeing sentences for criminals. 
Grayling… explicitly promised to be a "tough justice secretary"
The home secretary, Theresa May, reinforced the theme with her announcement of a new "pick a punishment" power for victims of anti-social behaviour and her promise that Conservative candidates in the first elections for police and crime commissioners to be held on 15 November will have a "laser-like focus on cutting crime". 
"Theresa used to say she locked 'em up and Ken let them out. Now Theresa locks 'em up, and Chris throws away the key."  
"I've made no bones about my intention to be a tough justice secretary. That means I want our justice system to be firm, fair and transparent," Grayling said. 
I'm delighted, frankly. Why? Because I know a group of people who are benefitting from the proceeds of crime, which is a crime in itself. They've received stolen money. The thief was a man named Asil Nadir, who ran a major corporation (Polly Peck) in the 1980s. He looted it of £29, 000, 000 and fled to Northern Cyprus. He returned last year to face justice and was convicted and sentenced to a minimum of ten years in prison. 

So which bunch of crooks took some of his stolen money? Why, it's the Conservative Party! They accepted a £400, 000 donation from Polly Peck, channelled through subsidiaries without the consent of directors or shareholders. 



Touche Ross, the administrators of Polly Peck, wrote a letter – widely reported four years ago – to the party's central office claiming that £365,000 came from money defrauded from the Polly Peck empire.
"It is the contention of the administrator that Mr Nadir is liable to repay the sums concerned as a result of his fraud and/or breach of fiduciary duty and/or malfeasance as a director," the letter concluded. "I would urge you to return the donations to Polly Peck so that the creditors can at least obtain some small measure of compensation from this unfortunate affair."

At the time, Conservative leaders promised to pay it back if it was found to be stolen. Now they're refusing to return it to compensate the shareholders and employees of the looted company. 


Clearly crime is something other people commit. 


Time for a letter to my local MP Paul Uppal and to the chairman of the Tory Party… one Grant Shapps! Just sent this:



Dear Mr Uppal and Mr Shapps, 
I am heartened by the Conservative Party's crackdown on crime. In that spirit, can I ask you to confirm that the Conservative Party will return the money donated by Asil Nadir via several subsidiaries in the 1980s, as promised by Sir John Major?  
According to Touche Ross, the liquidators, at least £365,000 was illegally donated: "It is the contention of the administrator that Mr Nadir is liable to repay the sums concerned as a result of his fraud and/or breach of fiduciary duty and/or malfeasance as a director," the letter concluded. "I would urge you to return the donations to Polly Peck so that the creditors can at least obtain some small measure of compensation from this unfortunate affair." 
If this money is not returned, I'm afraid the only conclusion one can draw is that the Party's attitude to crime is contingent on its own financial health. 
Yours,

Back to Shapps

Note for new readers: a summary of my dealings with the ASA and Shapps can be found here.

A final note with regard to Grant Shapps. Despite officially having nothing to do with HowToCorp, he seems to know an awful lot about the company's dealings with the Advertising Standards Authority.

That indefatigable reporter, Michael Crick, is still pursuing Mr Shapps, who is still insisting - despite my research and that of many others - that all the company's testimonials were genuine (despite his business selling material including 'How To Solicit Testimonials Easily, Quickly and on Autopilot'. He's telling all and sundry that the ASA has accepted that they are real too. This is a flat-out lie. According to my letter from the ASA, they agreed not to investigate my suspicions after HowToCorp promised not to run the offending material any more. This is, of course, a tacit acknowledgement of guilt.

Obviously I'd like to know why the ASA decided not to investigate, but for some reason it's exempt from Freedom of Information legislation. They won't show me the assurances HowToCorp sent them, nor any other material - despite the company seeing my complaint and personal details. It stinks, frankly. Mr Shapps could of course release all these documents, but he certainly won't.

So to be completely clear: Grant Shapps is a liar. HowToCorp's adverts have not been cleared: they've been withdrawn without investigation.


Tuesday, 9 October 2012

Why… er… thanks!

A belated birthday gift has arrived from one of my wittiest and loveliest colleagues. She has, in her wisdom, given me a pair of voluminous Y-fronts. Not just any old Y-fronts: Boris Johnson Y-Fronts.



Needless to say, I disapprove of Boris Johnson: under the clown is a very unpleasant right-winger of the worst sort: like Cameron and Osborne, he's a hereditary millionaire fond of telling people that a bit of hard work will drag them up from the gutter.

If they're anything like Boris Johnson's own pants, these would spend quite a lot of time on the floor of somebody else's bedroom. As it is, they'll keep me amused for years, and when he's Prime Minister of England (I can't see Scotland, Wales or even the NI Unionists sticking around for Boris), I'll donate them to the People's History Museum, along with my 2001 election lollies depicting Tony Blair, Michael Howard and whoever the Lib Dems had in those more innocent times.

Desperately seeking Moby

Ploughing up and down the pool today, I tried to distract myself from the sheer misery. After musing on the decadence of a society which requires artificial exercise to keep us fit (i.e. sedentary lives, excessive food, powered transport), I comforted myself with the thought that one day, I'll be able to stop swimming, once I reach a theoretical level of fitness.

That thought kept me going for about 3 metres before I realised that given the rest of my life, I wouldn't actually be stopping other than for Death. Who isn't much good at the backstroke. Then I took to contemplating how many lengths I'd have to complete before I visit the Undiscovered Country (that's Hamlet, folks, and also the subtitle of Star Trek VI, not one I'd recommend).

So here goes. If I stick to my current diet of 50 lengths twice a week for roughly 46 weeks of the year, that's 2300 lengths per year. At a guess, I'll live until 85 unless Grant Shapps and Paul Uppal send the boys round. So that's another 48 years, or 110, 400 lengths to go. Multiply that by 25 to get 2, 760, 000 metres, and divide by 100 to arrive at a grand total of 27,600 kilometres left to swim. By TOUTATIS I want to give up now.

So how long will it take? I'm getting a bit faster, but soon I'll decline into senile decrepitude, so I'm averaging out my speed at 38 minutes per 50 lengths. That's 72 minutes per week or 55 hours twenty minutes per year. So basically I spend over two days per year doing something I entirely detest. Over the rest of my life, I'm going to spend just over 2649 hours or 110 days mindlessly dragging my pasty, bulging carcass up and down through other swimmers' urine in fruitless pursuit of a youth I never actually had.

Still, at least nobody will shout 'you fat bastard' at me on the street anymore.

Bright-eyed and bushy-tailed (!?)

Morning everybody. My new determination to greet the world with a sunny disposition had lasted an evening's Newsnight and the 250 yard commute from my flat to work, and it's paying off. I've deleted 350 emails without a care, and now I'm actually doing some research (though the dread prospect of actually doing some writing is looming: I've two deadlines in the next week and another coming soon). At the moment I'm reading K. L. James's chapter on 'Meeting Kate Kearney at Killarney, 1850-1914' in a friend's anthology about Romantic travel writing. Kearney was a legendary Irish beauty who plied tourists with poitín in the Gap of Dunloe - for generations afterwards unwitting travellers were separated from their cash by the charm and cunning of her supposed granddaughters. You can still visit, though the Cottage's charms are more legal and doubtless more expensive these days.

For musical accompaniment, I'm listening to Jonathan Harvey's new Bird Concerto With Pianosong. Obviously anything with birdsong is automatically compared to Messiaen's work. I have to say I haven't a critical opinion on this piece yet - bits of it are pretty, bits of it are ugly, but I haven't quite got hold of it as a whole, so far.

There's no online footage of the Concerto, but here's Harvey's tribute to Messaien:

Monday, 8 October 2012

Away from the Tories and Jew-haters…

After taking a seminar in which one lad matter-of-factly stated that press campaigns against Jews should be allowed because 'Jews run the world', I want to smash my head repeatedly against the desk, or think about other things.

Like books. I want to blog a little more often about the books I'm reading if only to demonstrate that there's more to my life than coping with anti-Semites and making malicious complaints about innocent Tory MPs. So here goes.

This weekend, I read Claire Kilroy's The Devil You Know. It's a fast-moving satire of the insane Irish property-and-debt boom. The principal characters are Tristram, an alcoholic representative of impoverished Anglo-Irish Old Money, and Dessie, a fast-buck local builder. Aided by M. Deauville, Tristram's AA sponsor and mysterious financier, they rapidly move from being cowboy builders to international speculators, with the inevitable and familiar result.

The novel's strengths are its boldness in (almost) naming names: the corrupt builders, financiers and politicians are identifiable to anyone who has read a recent copy of the Irish Times; its clear-eyed analysis of the cultural path which led to Ireland's current state, and its beautiful writing. The passage of a pint of Guinness from the table to Tristam's lips is a virtuoso exercise, and there are uncountable funny bits too. I liked the line that to be a local 'your mother had to be from your father's side of the family'.

The novel's weaknesses are primarily those of the plot. The title and M. Deauville's name rather given everything away from page one, and I'm not sure this twist does anything other than proclaim that it's more than a 'state of the nation' novel, it's a work of Literary Fiction. The quality of the writing does that: this weak and obvious twist actually subverts the author's otherwise firm grasp of narrative - as though she's ashamed to be writing in a realist form. Relax, Claire.

It's well worth reading - as are all her others.

The other book I started is one of Ben's rejects, I, Vampire by Jody Scott. He didn't think much of it, but I'm enjoying it, despite having zero interest in tales of the undead. The strapline ('Can a Seven Hundred Year Old Transylvanian Find True Love With A Revolutionary Rysemian Fish-Woman?') and cover artwork are enough: a stylish vampire and a freshly-bitten Virginia Woolf, not a standard horror approach. There's also an introduction by Theodore Sturgeon, a thoughtful and interesting critic and SF reader himself.



So far, our unapologetic vampire (who is also unapologetically turned-on by both the human Virginia Woolf and the fish-alien currently posing as the gloomy modernist) has explained that the roots of modern society is capitalism's penchant for preying on the inadequacies, loneliness and desperation of humanity in a way that is in fact less honest and straight-forward than her own need for a few ounces of blood now and then. It's a genre send-up, but it's also thoughtful, political, witty and very stylishly written. Recommended (so far).

Rights: now a commodity

George Osborne's big idea to save the economy: Share for Rights:
the chancellor unveiled a £100m "employee-owner" scheme that will allow shares worth £2,000 to £50,000 to be exempt from tax if employees give up certain work rights, such as the right to claim unfair dismissal.
Obviously there's a minor and immediate objection: the economy is not screwed because too many people exercise their rights not to be treated like shit by their employer. Far from it: you can be unfairly dismissed for 2 years before your rights even kick in.

There's another obvious rejoinder to this argument too: if settling unfair dismissal, bullying and harassment suits is costing your company a lot of money, don't lobby government to abolish the right not to be bullied, harassed or unfairly dismissed. Just stop bullying, harassing and unfairly dismissing people. You might find that your organisation improves. That's not all either: it includes further restrictions on maternity and paternity leave too.

No. The real reason why this is such a typically terrible idea is that it reveals a deeply unpleasant conception of humanity at the heart of Conservative discourse. To George Osborne, all interactions between human beings are transactional. Somebody - and often both - gets something out of each exchange. Under his proposals, the right not to be harassed, bullied or unfairly dismissed has a cash equivalent. Clearly the right to look forward to a working life in which you're not humiliated or fired is worth somewhere between £2000 and £50,000. I suspect that a cleaner's mental health is worth £2000 and a lawyer's £50,000 (actually, given that high-earners will have lawyers and out-of-court settlements just like now, this scheme is aimed at drones like you and me).

Accepting the deal is like the kid in the playground making a little extra pocket money by allowing other kids to kick him in the balls. In fact, it reminds me of private schools until recently: you paid them to have the right to physically beat you. Osborne's offered a small cash prize to the greedy or simple to give employers the cast-iron right to duff you up for the rest of your working life.

Still, it gives us some guidelines. If you apply for a job with this kind of contract, you know that the company expects you to be bullied, harassed and discriminated against. If you accept the money, you'll get what you deserve. If you're considering a relationship with someone who sells their dignity for £2000 or £50,000, you know they have no self-respect and that they are probably functioning sociopaths with no higher concept of humanity than material exchange.

Who will accept these contracts? The kind of people who want to appear on The Apprentice. It's my job, as your friend, to say: 'don't be that guy'.

The Great Escape

With a single bound, Grant Shapps is (relatively) free:


Further to my letter of 27 September, we have received a response from HowToCorp.  They have explained that the advertising is no longer appearing and have provided assurances related to any future advertising that we consider address your concerns.  We consider that this will resolve the complaint without referring the matter to the ASA Council, and will consequently be closing our file.

In a formal investigation, if the ASA Council decides that an ad is in breach of the Code, the advertiser is told to withdraw or amend it.  Because HowToCorp have already assured us that the advertising you complained about has been withdrawn and will be amended if it is used in future, we consider there is little to be gained from continuing with a formal investigation, which would achieve that same outcome.

Although we will not publish full details of your complaint on our website, www.asa.org.uk, basic information including the advertiser’s name and where the ad appeared will appear on Wednesday 17 October.

Thank you for taking the time and trouble to raise the matter with us.  If you would like more information about what we do and the ads we have found in breach of the Code, please have a look on our website.
Obviously this looks like a victory for Grant Shapps: he's avoided an investigation and the embarrassing revelation that HowToCorp's personnel and satisfied customers were fictional - proof that he and his wife (who succeeded him as the company's owner) actually lied would have finished him off. Now he keeps his job and the company carries on, though it's non-existent on Google and presumably will struggle to attract business. 

But as it is, a nasty smell hangs around Mr Shapps. The ASA has folded very weakly - I suspect under pressure from Mr Shapps - but he's fixed in the public consciousness as a spin, rather than as a statesman - today's Guardian cartoon portrays him at the Tory Conference naked but for three delegates' passes. He fobbed off Michael Crick of Channel 4 News this weekend with the claim that an ASA investigation was under way - he'd have known by that point that it wasn't. Folding so early looks very, very like a guilty conscience: rather than asserting that Fox, Green and these testimonials were genuine, the company agreed never to use them again. Now we just need a customer to take him to court for fraud…

How do I feel about this? Disappointed, of course: the Establishment has found a loophole through which he's escaped. But I'm also pleased: despite the sneering about bloggers, this has been an instructive exercise in active citizenship. What next? Back to Paul Uppal, the egregious and invisible local MP. 

Update: I asked to see HowToCorp's response to the ASA:
I’m afraid we are, however, unable to pass copies of correspondence between an advertiser and the ASA to complainants.
Which seems a bit odd: HowToCorp saw my correspondence to the ASA. Does it have a duty of confidentiality to offending companies? Why?

It's not just Shapps!

Thanks to a combination of electronic media and time on my hands, I've become a serial letter-writer and complainer. It's a terrible stereotype, and I'm always watchful in case I start reaching for the green ink. On the other hand - it's what active citizens should do, holding authority to account.

A few weeks ago, Newsnight featured Peter Lilley MP. He was presented as an expert who'd written 'a report' on climate science. The report itself wasn't scrutinised at all, and nor were his credentials. Instead, he launched into a bizarre diatribe, a torrent of abuse which basically said all climate change science was lies (at the start and from 5.50):



Fair enough - some people believe this stuff. But what really annoyed me was Newsnight's failure to mention that Mr Lilley is the director of Teuthys Petroleum: an oil exploration company, and might be thought to have a vested interest in promoting fossil fuels and damning climate change science. So I fired off an email to Newsnight asking whether they knew this, whether they should routinely check for conflicts of interest, and if they did know, why they didn't mention it. No reply. So I went through the BBC Complaints procedure, which turns out to be run by Capita.

A few weeks later, I get a reply:

In order for us to look into your concerns, we would need a transmission date. If possible, please write back using the complaints webform.
Thanks again for contacting us.
Kind Regards
Gemma McAleer
BBC Complaints
www.bbc.co.uk/complaintsNB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided.
Which is bollocks. The complaints website consists of a series of drop-down boxes to be filled in. If you don't fill it in, you can't move to the next page and the next question. So they do have the date. Furthermore, I cannot believe that the combined forces of Capita and the BBC lack the resources to find out when a particular guest was on a particular edition. I'd assume they have a list. Failing that, how about checking Newsnight's website, or good old Google? But no: they mail me. And not, I notice, via an e-mail to which I can reply: that would be too simple. Instead, I have to go through the whole complaint again - 20+ questions (including the original one asking for the broadcast date) simply to provide them with information they a) already have and b) can easily find. 

It feels, frankly, like a delaying tactic. Not just for me, but a way of fending off most people's complaints by making it as difficult as possible. 

The Thick of It… come to life

I may have mentioned in passing that my complaint about HowToCorp's shady business practices (pseudonymic business gurus, testimonials from - ahem - elusive customers of rather unethical products)  has hit the national press, due to Conservative MP and party chairman Grant Shapps' involvement.

Imagine my delight when the indefatigable Michael Crick of Channel 4 News pursued Mr Shapps through a rabbit warren of corridors, all the while asking Shapps about his happy customers. The answer is, I suspect, that none of them are real: I spent a happy few hours trying to track them down, and came up with precisely NO actual people.

I love this clip: it's straight out of The Thick Of It, particularly Shapps' increasingly demented hope that the next door will be the one that gets him away from Mr Crick. At one point, we glimpse the backstage fruit machine room - no doubt where Mr Osborne tries to reduce the deficit.




I'm profoundly depressed by the calibre of politicians we have now. In a functioning democracy we'd be able to respect even those whose policies repulse us. No longer: cynicism, individualism and careerism have combined to ensure that only the selfish, spineless, unthinking and vicious rise to the top, with a few exceptions. Idealism, altruism and public service are alien concepts to such a large contingent of our politicians.

I find myself thinking that even I could do it better, which is a terrible thought. We're really in trouble.

Friday, 5 October 2012

Shappocalypse

I was out of the office for a whole 11 hours overnight, but what an 11 hours they've been.

If you buy The Independent (no, seriously), you'll have noticed that their front page ('Exclusive: Tory Chairman Rocked by 'get rich quick probe'' despite the Guardian diary printing the story a few days ago) 'reveals' that Grant Shapps is under investigation by the Advertising Standards Authority for his pseudonymic business activities, after a complaint by a blogger. There's also an editorial calling on Shapps to go. The story is also reported in the news section of the Guardian, the New Statesmanby Sky News and of course the Welwyn and Hatfield Times.

That blogger is me. I'd like to make some simple points.

Here's my original post about the curious triple lives of Grant Shapps ('he's three of the sharpest business brains in the Conservative Party') and the frankly seedy and cynical material published by HowToCorp. Click here for my follow-up piece about the ASA agreeing to undertake an investigation. The full story of Shapps' chequered any multi-monickered life is summarised here.

'Friends of Grant Shapps' (which always means Grant Shapps) have made two points to the news organisations. The first is that 'any blogger' can make mischief by firing off a complaint. Very true. The joy of blogging and new media is that an amateur can devote time and resources to stories which a news organisation may not have the patience for. That doesn't make any complaint any less valid. A blogger is firstly a citizen: the tools employed are beside the point - and for a man whose business involved stealing other web-writers material, it's a bloody cheeky point.

The second accusation is that my complaint is 'politically motivated'. This is a bit strange coming from a politician. The Chair of the Conservative Party, no less. And from a man who deleted details of his funding from Wikipedia and posed as a Liberal Democrat to disrupt their party business, it's very rum indeed. One would have thought that any sign of political engagement would be welcomed in a cynical age…

I'm not sure why Grant Shapps thinks my complaint is 'politically motivated'. Indeed, I don't know why he has any comment to make at all. My complaint to the ASA did not mention Mr Shapps. It drew the organisation's attention to a company whose supposed leaders may not have existed, and questioned the veracity of the company's testimonials from satisfied customers. This last, I suspect, is where the real dirt is, by the way. Mr Shapps tells us he has no connection with HowToCorp any more - it's his wife's company now. Furthermore, he's not asked me what my motivation is. I think I'd complain about any organisation which behaves like this, whether connected to a Tory or a Labour representative.

However, I will make one political point. Go back to my original post. Read the 'How To Get Out of a Recession' and compare it to the government's programme. While Shapps ran the company, he made a fortune from plagiarising web material and from publishing frankly ridiculous get-rich-quick guides. We are in the middle of one of the deepest recessions in modern history. To have a prominent Member of Parliament recommending and practicing sharp practice, voodoo economics and flaky schemes is a disgrace. The country requires fundamental, structural economic change. From my perspective, it needs leftwing policies: from the government's, hardline monetarist and free market solutions seem attractive. Neither side recommends the kind of quick-buck hucksterism Mr Shapps and now his wife promote. His ability to maintain a double economic life does him no credit.

Mr Shapps has now spoken to the Welwyn and Hatfield Times.

But Mr Vole has since published the letter on his personal blog The Plashing Vole – even though the ASA explicitly asked the correspondence be kept private.
The point was made by Mr Shapps himself, who said he thought the ASA would take a “dim view” of the leaked letter.
Now the ASA has said it could close the investigation if it chooses to.
An ASA spokesman told the WHT: “We are aware that the complainant has published our correspondence despite requests to keep it confidential.
“The ASA reserves the right to close the investigation if the complainant does not respect our request.”

I declined that request. No mention was made to me by the ASA of closing the investigation if I publicised the investigation - the right has not been reserved. If Mr Shapps is trying to close down an investigation on these grounds, it shows a distinct lack of enthusiasm for examining the substance of the matter. Considering Mr Shapps posed as a Lib Dem to infiltrate one of their online forums, you'd think he'd approve of low-down dirty tactics… Although frankly I'm bemused as to why he's getting involved at all - I complained about a company he neither owns nor controls. What's his interest?

PS. Paul Uppal: I've not forgotten about you, by the way.

Thursday, 4 October 2012

How I learned to stop worrying and love the… genre

A genre’s landscape should be littered with used tropes half-visible through their own smoke & surrounded by salvage artists with welding sets, otherwise it isn’t a genre at all. 


says M John Harrison. He goes on to discuss the supposed death of science fiction and fantasy - a claim made every three weeks, as far as I can tell. Which genres aren't permanently dead or in the ambulance? It's a matter of perspective. From where I'm standing, romantic fiction is dead, killed off by celebrity journalism, porn culture or exhaustion, but I'm sure on close inspection you'd find signs of re-birth: different sexualities and new formations, for instance. Look at Fifty Shades of Grey: its melding of the worse features of romance with the limpest emulation of BDSM porn will no doubt inspire a generation of cynical hacks, and maybe even some genuinely exploratory writing. Science fiction certainly isn't dead: from the corpse of the previous generation spawns the maggots of the next - every genre sprouts sub-genres. Perhaps the term 'science fiction' should be retired, however - we have the New Weird, Speculative Fiction, Steampunk, Alternative History, Alternative Futures, Cyberpunk, Space Opera, Hard SF and many others. Saying you're an SF fan is like saying you like music - tantamount to announcing that you're an ignorant know-nothing bum who likes a tune you can whistle. I'm guessing the same applies to all literary genres. 

However, what does happen to popular fiction sub-genres is exactly the same as what happens to any sub-group: appropriation. Once punk music emerged from the gutters, every major label told its house bands to grow mohicans and add naughty words to their songs. Result: punk was dead the day it hit Top of the Pops and mohican wigs appeared in Camden Market for the tourists. Away from the media gaze, real punk bands sneered and worked on whatever came next. I'd say the same thing has happened with SF: once almost every Hollywood movie is an adaptation (Watchmen, Green Lantern, X-Men), a disaster movie (War of the Worlds, Cloverfield) or any other vaguely sciencey presentation, it becomes just another popcorn kernel to momentarily distract the mainstream before going back into hibernation for a few decades - like the Western before it. Which is a shame, because most genres respond to the cultural needs of the climates in which they exist. But as I say, it's a matter of perspective. Out there in school playgrounds, comic stores and - above all - the internet, new texts and new variations on genres are arising, and what we think of as the defining characteristics of the genre are scorned as hopelessly outdated by those in the know. 

Paul Kincaid, whom M John Harrison references, thinks that inadequate boundary policing is at issue: SF is fading into literary fiction, he thinks. I think: brilliant. They'll revive each other. Literary fiction is a weird and indistinct genre, if it is one at all, and it's too often the preserve of authors who think they can see past all those proles busy tweeting each other rude jokes, whereas SF has been variously the preserve of techno-fascists, techno-determinists, techno-utopians, militarists, and a whole host of others who could do with some literary skills and perspectives. Besides, Kincaid is probably just looking in the wrong place: no doubt the borders between SF and porn, SF and romance, SF and poetry, SF and travel and all the other genres are being over-run. See, I'm slipping into imperialistic language: it's a common problem with genre discussions, especially the traditionally masculine ones: men are so concerned with purity, resistance, autonomy. 

Let's abandon the idea of genres as distinct territories and consider them as tendencies or characteristics instead. That way, we can focus on the genuinely creative work instead. Returning temporarily to the border metaphor, it's my feeling that the work which exists on the borders with other genres is the interesting stuff. A text situated right in the middle of a generic expanse, equally distanced from all other genres, is likely to be boring and over-familiar. There are exceptions, of course: Die Hard is a masterpiece because it's a summation of it's genre's best aspects - the same goes for lots of Westerns. But at the same time, it's the weird stuff around the edges that is often more interesting in a cultural and literary sense: the revisionist Westerns, for example, which evoke a sense not that the Western is a dying genre (though it was) but that the ideological underpinnings of the classic Western were rotting - and had perhaps always been rotten. 

Kincaid knows this. As he says: 
Within any art form there are individuals or movements that attempt to push the boundaries in various ways. They are concerned with seeing what new can be done, what more can be done with the form. Often, though not always, they are initially viewed with dismay or disdain by aficionados of the art, though in retrospect they are generally viewed as being the innovators who mark an important developmental stage in the history of the form.
What Kincaid and Harrison have discerned is not the exhaustion of science fiction as a genre, but the exhaustion of the institutions which foster and propagate science fiction: publishers content to promote the profitably familiar. It's the same in music: Classic FM is the epitome of the embalmer's art because it only plays music which has been on adverts, or sounds indistinguishable from what's been on adverts. In the process, it's cheapened the genuinely interesting music is does scatter amongst the dross: Vaughan Williams, for instance, who has been transformed from spiky iconoclast into twinkly English Grandfather. 

But I don't despair. Where there's a Classic FM or a mainstream SF publisher, there's a Radio 3 and a range of pirate stations. By the time Jeff Noon, Cory Doctorow and China Miéville attract major-label imitators, they'll be doing something else, and a new generation will be distributing supposedly un-popular work underground. Some publishers and some readers are conservative - but enough aren't, and literary movements operate on a timescale long enough to bring about gradual change. 

So don't stress about genre. It's only partly in the hands of the author, the publisher, the bookseller and the jacket artist. It's also in your hands. If you think Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go or certain Jeanette Winterson is in or near SF - read it like that and ignore their self-serving denials. Don't just browse the SF shelf - you'll find weirdness and science and far-flung settings and fear of/fascination with technology and social change in plenty of other places. Genre's like that: it shapes your expectations but your generic expectations dictate your readings. Take this sentence from Pride and Prejudice:
IT is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife.
I used to ask my students to write down the tone of voice they imagined seemed appropriate. Then I'd ask one person to read it romantically, one to read it sarcastically, and one to read it 'neutrally'. The way in which you read that one sentence determines the meaning of the rest of the novel to you - and it will differ to the meanings acquired by the person next to you. For me, it drips with satire: my Austen is the one who disguises horror at the encroaching dangers of Regency womanhood with sharp, sharp humour. Her women face social abysses: only a few survive. But it's equally easy to read the texts as lovely sparkling romances in which nice intelligent demure girls are rewarded with the right man by being good judges of character. 

I haven't picked Jane Austen as a random example. Amongst my extensive collection, I have editions repackaged as 'chick-lit' (pastel handwriting, dresses, pink) and Austen mash-ups, including two Austen-porn novels and two Austen/Zombies and Austen/Sea-Monsters novels, plus P D James's Death Comes to Pemberley, which is far more offensive and disgusting than either Pride and Prejudice with Zombies or Jane Austen: Hidden Lusts. Most of these novels aroused utter fury amongst the Janeites because they're resistant both to generic miscegenation and any tinkering with their heroine's work (weird, really: Victorian Shakespearians liked tacking happy endings onto his tragedies without concern for purity)Both PPwZ and JA:HL have tried to do something bold, and they've done it with some panache and charm. Both authors also know how Austen's dialogue and plotting work: you have to understand the wiring before you put up the Christmas light. PD James, on the other hand, grafts a murder mystery on to Jane Austen without giving a second's thought to Austen's interests or literary style: James appears to think that it's easy, and drops massive clanger after massive clanger. The genre-mashers, on the other hand, have taken the key elements of different genres and welded them together to considerable effect. 

Take your chainsaw to your genre of choice and weld it to something else until you can't tell which bit originated where. 

Seder-Masochism

This is an extract from the yet-to-be produced Seder-Masochism by Nina Paley. I think its animated history of Palestine/Israel should infuriate pretty much everybody.



I think I recognised 75% of the tribes/nations/states featured. Feeling pretty good about that.

Poem for National Poetry Day

I don't read as much poetry as I feel I should. Which is a complex cultural position in which to be, especially for someone who once ran the Introduction to Poetry module. Why do I feel I should read more poetry? Perhaps because it's the oldest genre, and therefore privileged. Perhaps because it used to be the mode for high-achieving gentlemen (failed again…). Maybe because it's the premier literary field as far as the canon goes. Or is it because poetry is held to be the genre which gives the greatest access to the emotions? Being 'emotionally dead', as I was once described, perhaps spending some time with Rossetti, RS Thomas, Spenser and co will resurrect me? 

All bollocks, of course: a lot of poetry is vicious, forbidding and bitter: the idea that it's some kind of well of human kindness is a post-Victorian attempt to make literature 'nice' and tidy - probably for 'the kids', an entirely misguided effort given that a lot of children and vicious, forbidding and bitter, and like to read novels which offer them similar joys. I read a fair amount of poetry: RS, O'Donoghue, Millay and plenty more, and it's singularly failed to make me a nicer or more caring person. I read poetry for its reflective qualities - I don't often read plot-driven work, but go for those which take short-cuts to the core of an issue, and those which make me think about the complex relationship between language and thought. I don't read poetry for therapy, or for 'answers' - that's the kind of rubbish you get on birthday cards. I do think poetry's special because it's a way of making sometimes quite ordinary things strange, which is very necessary in a culture which has hijacked pretty much everything for the purposes of making us consume more stuff. 

As it's National Poetry Day, here are a couple of my favourites. First, Edna St Vincent Millay's 'Sonnet XLIII'. It's a female incursion into the previously masculine sexual history of the sonnet - but also a plangent reflection on a sexual life which has drawn to a close. 


What lips my lips have kissed, and where, and why,
I have forgotten, and what arms have lain
Under my head till morning; but the rain
Is full of ghosts tonight, that tap and sigh
Upon the glass and listen for reply,
And in my heart there stirs a quiet pain
For unremembered lads that not again
Will turn to me at midnight with a cry.
Thus in winter stands the lonely tree,
Nor knows what birds have vanished one by one,
Yet knows its boughs more silent than before:
I cannot say what loves have come and gone,
I only know that summer sang in me
A little while, that in me sings no more.

Although Simon Armitage stood up the Map Twats on his supposed perambulation of the Pennines, here's 'Poem', which was always received well on my Intro to Poetry courses. It's so deceptively shallow - inviting you to dismiss the narrator as a self-regarding young man - until the final couple of lines, when you realise (I hope) that he - and we (or men at least) - are brought face to face with mortality and our emotional denial. (A 'Sony Walkman', kids, was what rich kids had before iPods existed). And no, I don't know why the stanza breaks are there either. 


Frank O'Hara was open on the desk
but I went straight for the directory.
Nick was out, Joey was engaged, Jim was
just making coffee and why didn't I

come over. I had Astrud Gilberto 
singing 'Bim Bom' on my Sony Walkman
and the sun was drying the damp slates on
the rooftops. I walked in without ringing

and he still wasn't dressed or shaved when we
topped up the coffee with his old man's Scotch
(it was only half ten but what the hell)
and took the newspapers into the porch.

Talking Heads were on the radio. I
was just about to mention the football
when he said 'Look, will you help me clear her
wardrobe out?' I said 'Sure Jim, anything.'

Oddly enough, my colleague Paul McDonald has just won the John Clare poetry prize with a poem about another ageing Jim:


John Clare Poetry Prize 2012
Lucky Jim
Paul McDonald
1st Prize: Adult Category

I went to Brenda’s house for dinner
She’s clearing out the fridge which meant
A first course of fishcakes and yoghurt
Lucky they’re compatible, she said.

Main course prawns, peas
And croquette potatoes;
Angel cake with ice-cream for afters.

She’s clearing out her cupboards too: Jim’s stuff.
I scored a pair of Argyle socks.
Lucky they’re in fashion, she said.
We debated widow’s pensions

But weren’t sure of the details;
She plans to pick a booklet up from Age Concern.
She’s terminating Sky – making do

With Free View and knitting.
Lucky I’m a reader, she said.
She’s cancelling the Racing Post,
Arranging for collection

Of his hearing aid, tablets, and orthopaedic bed.
His Lotto numbers will survive: I just have a feeling, she said.


And finally one to puncture the rather smug jollity of National Poetry Day: RS Thomas's 'Death of a Poet':


Laid now on his smooth bed
For the last time, watching dully
Through heavy eyelids the day's colour
Widow the sky, what can he say
Worthy of record, the books all open,
Pens ready, the faces, sad,
Waiting gravely for the tired lips
To move once -- what can he say?

His tongue wrestles to force one word
Past the thick phlegm; no speech, no phrases
For the day's news, just the one word ‘sorry';
Sorry for the lies, for the long failure
In the poet's war; that he preferred 
The easier rhythms of the heart 
To the mind's scansion; that now he dies
Intestate, having nothing to leave
But a few songs, cold as stones
In the thin hands that asked for bread.

Wednesday, 3 October 2012

Physics 101 for Mitt Romney

Ahead of the Presidential debate tonight, I thought I'd help Willard Mitt Romney out a little. 

He recently said this, after his wife's plane had to make an emergency landing due to smoke in the cabin:
"When you have a fire in an aircraft, there's no place to go, exactly, there's no – and you can't find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don't open. I don't know why they don't do that. It's a real problem. So it's very dangerous.

1. Fires need oxygen. So adding more isn't a great idea.
2. Air in a plane is pressurised. Air outside is very thin. So if you open the window, all the air inside will want to go outside to equalise the pressure. 

Here's a diagram of what happens if Mitt Romney opens the window of his executive jet: click to enlarge. 

Tuesday, 2 October 2012

Books in… and it's only Tuesday.

Oh dear. A bit of an avalanche this week.

Hayden White, Tropics of Discourse - after a recommendation by a Twitter contact. It's a set of essays on cultural criticism, mostly exploring the relationship between history and other literary forms - Vico, Croce, Derrida and Foucault make significant appearances.

Brian Baker, Masculinity in Fiction and Film: Representing Men in Popular Genres 1945-2000. My PhD was about masculinity in 1930s Welsh novels, so I need to catch up on subsequent developments.

Eric Linklater, The Impregnable Women. It's an invasion novel and a re-telling of the Lysistrata story (women go on sex-strike to end a war). Unfortunately for Linklater, he published this tale of a French invasion of Britain in… 1938. So much for foresight.

Ben Goldacre, Bad Pharma: more good quality scientific muck-raking from the good doctor.

Jonathan Meades, Museums Without Walls: another blast of polemic from one of the best cultural and architectural critics in the business.

Barry England, Figures in a Landscape. Ben said it was good. It won the Booker in 1969 and it's a 'horrors of war' novel.

Philip Pullman, Galatea. Pullman's rather deranged-looking fantasy novel for adults. Nazis! Zombies! He doesn't like to talk about it. He also doesn't like to talk about 1972's The Haunted Storm, but I don't have £750 spare to buy a copy of that. My friend Mark has it though, picked up for pennies in a charity shop as usual…

Finally, two new Moomins reprints: the comic strips Moomin's Winter Follies and Moominvalley Turns Jungle. Because they're charming and wise.

O Brave New World

As you may know, I'm very leftwing, a voracious reader of science fiction, a skeptic and a huge fan of techno-idealism, of the kind peddled by BoingBoing, Ben Goldacre, Cory Doctorow, Richard Stallman and the Makers. Out there on the web, at Maker Faires (with Arduino we can change the world!) and similar events, one can exist in a bubble of altruism, creativity and kindness. Obviously I don't contribute to these in any way because I'm a crabbed and bitter man. But I can envy their optimism: to them, the radically decentred post-industrial networked world will empower the fundamentally-decent majority of humanity. We'll help each other. We'll find ways round our current unequal, resource-hungry and unjust political and economic structures, shorn of the need to seek profit and advantage in our dealings with each other. It's a kind of utopian techno-libertarian communism and it's massively attractive.

Being suspicious and (against my will) cynical, I was therefore far less surprised by the emergence of the dark side of the Makers than many others. I don't know if you've come across 3-D printers yet: essentially they use powdered plastic heat formers to construct pretty much anything once you've downloaded the schematics. They hold the promise of networked, on-demand manufacture. Once they're cheap enough, for example, you won't have to hunt for a new toilet stop-cock, replacement door handle or toothbrush holder. You'll download the blueprint and your printer will extrude a new one. Delightful.

Or so we thought…

Enter Defense Distributed. They're radical idealists of a sort. An American sort. They think the world will be a far better place if everybody is armed to the teeth. And they have - or rather had - a solution to America's most pressing problem: not enough guns. Why not print one out at home?



It might (at the moment) be single-use, but you can always print another one. You won't have to present any pesky ID, have a sanity check or criminal records review. Your freshly-extruded gun won't have any history or identifying marks, and you can melt it down after you murder someone with it. Anybody can have a gun. State and legal oversight vanished completely - which is what both the idealists and the psychopaths want. O Brave New World!

Unfortunately for them, their leased printer was confiscated by the owner - though it's not at all clear that what Defense Distributed had in mind with the Wiki Weapon is illegal, given that American gun laws are utterly ridiculous. But this is only a temporary setback, caused by a rental hiccup (and some technical limitations). It won't be long before wholly-owned printers will be churning out Saturday Night Specials in LA, Manchester and anywhere else there's demand.

There are drawbacks to anarchism and libertarianism - this is a prime example.

Morning has thoroughly broken

Crawled into work late today, thanks to staying in the office until 8.45 last night. Though I should admit that 45 minutes of that was usefully employed watching Saturday's Doctor Who - very satisfying. I'm glad Rory's dead, by the way. Acting requires more than the ability to look left, then right, quite quickly.

So, on to today's tasks. I'm about to see another final year dissertation student. I have no idea what she wants to write about, and fervently hope she does. Yesterday's wants to do a piece on Milton, CS Lewis and Pullman: familiar but should yield something decent. I've also acquired three MA dissertation supervisions. One is looking at classical music in popular culture, which could be very interesting. Another is writing about satirical versions of the interwar country house novel, which is exciting, and a third has just sent me a huge list of approaches to the later work of JG Ballard - so quite a variety.

Also on the agenda today - further research for my Welsh travel paper - the clock's ticking. More lecture-writing, and hopefully a swim. I'll also keep an eye on Ed Miliband's speech. I'll tell you a secret: I voted for Ed Miliband in the Labour leadership election. I wanted to vote for John McDonnell because he's a socialist, but he didn't get enough nominations to be on the ballot paper. I saw David Miliband as mini-Blair: he's got blood on his hands through his time in the Cabinet, and his subsequent life which involves him making principled speeches to political groups while taking fees from a range of repressive governments confirms me in my opinion that he's just another apparatchik of real-politik and neoliberal business as usual. Electable, perhaps, but what's the point of that if the result is continued injustice, political cowardice and intellectual limitation.

I don't see Ed Miliband as some kind of leftwing hero either, but I do think he's fundamentally decent, understands what the challenging issues are, and generally tends towards the right thing. I've met him too. He's a bit goofy but he's refreshingly uninterested in being slick. It's not caring about stuff like that which will make him immune to the ridicule. I'm actually looking forward to a geeky Prime Minister. Those who set themselves up as globe-trotting Maximum Leaders find themselves invading places just to maintain the image of decisiveness and masculinity. It might not suit the news agenda, but I'd quite like a PM who'll openly say that issues are complicated, need thought and might not lead to clear outcomes. Government's difficult and complex: distrust those who would reduce it to simple choices. If you haven't noticed, this is the Age of the Geek: Dawkins, Goldacre, Cox and Co.

No doubt Ed will tack with the wind from the Daily Mail and the pollsters when the time comes. He'll disappoint - of course. But I still think I voted the right way.

Monday, 1 October 2012

2018 - A Review

I don't always sit around in my pants shouting at the TV. Sometimes I read books. When nobody's looking, I read stuff most of my colleagues would dismiss as trash. Except Mark. He has 15,000 pulp novels in his house. So jealous.

The other day I picked this one up very cheaply.



I bought it because a) it's by James Blish who is rather interesting; b) I can't resist books which pick a specific date in the future and c) I liked the cover.

Turns out that it is an interesting book after all. It was published in 1957, and was also known as They Shall Have Stars. Blish was a highly trained biologist who worked in the pharmaceutical industry and also for the Tobacco Institute. Due to Cosmic Justice, he died of lung cancer, but not before publishing a wheelbarrow load of Star Trek novelisations, the Cities in Flight masterpieces and many, many other novels.

Year 2018! is much more than a pulp novel. It's not very well-written, to be honest. I assumed Blish was a British author trying to sound American, given the mish-mash of British terms scattered throughout the novel's otherwise cowboy-hero discourse, but no, he was American so that doesn't explain it. The plot doesn't really hang together - it's a book which wants to communicate a couple of ideas rather than tell a story - and the characterisation is barely more sophisticated than charcoal stick men on a cave wall.

However, the book is interesting in other ways. Primarily, it expresses very clear contempt for Joe McCarthy's anti-Communist witch-hunts - pretty brave in 1957. I don't know if the American edition was more cautious, or whether pulp SF was below the radar of the security state and therefore free to say what it wanted. By 2018, the US is indistinguishable from the Soviets: repressive, security obsessed and moribund. The security state ensures that free-thinking politicians and scientists are hunted down, so that scientific and social development is impossible. The Soviets will soon take over Earth - not that life will change very much - but (and this is where the plot comes in), it turns out that 'Pfitzner' (Blish was employed by Pfizer) has developed an immortality pill.

Blish is pretty happy to accept that Earth's political systems will be wrecked by the development. But there's a solution! Thanks to the subversive activities of a Senator who understands the value of research science for its own sake (now there's a bit of real fantasy), the Americans have also developed an anti-gravity drive ('spindizzy') which enables intergalactic colonisation when allied to the immortality pill. All this is bundled up with the construction and decay of a massive pointless Bridge on Jupiter (yes, in 2018) which exists as the space version of Moby Dick in, well, Moby Dick - they build it because they (just about) can.

So off they go… but if you're thinking that this ends up being yet more Into the American West in space, you'd be mistaken: the chronology at the end depicts a future in which humanity eventually becomes enfolded into a higher race's universal civilisation: Blish's concerns are science, reason, skepticism and a fairly healthy degree of cynicism about human society.

OK: next book up is probably Claire Kilroy's satire of the Irish Celtic Tiger. Very little scientific fantasy, a lot more people saying 'fock', 'howya' and 'story, bud?'. Probably.

"We Proudly Serve". Ugh



That's the slogan in my building's coffee outlet. It's accompanied by the logo of a well-known American firm, though interestingly the name doesn't appear anywhere other than on the copyright notice printed on the piece of cardboard that's meant to stop you burning your hands on the cup.

So somebody's more 'ashamed' than 'proud'. Which is curious in itself.

But the phrase itself is curious. 'We Proudly Serve'. It's vaguely militarist of course - I could imagine the Marine Corps adopting it. Serve is ambiguous: it means at once to furnish us with a particular brand of coffee, but also forces the workers and franchisee to smile through gritted teeth as they become the bonded labourers of coffee capitalism.

It's part of a new phase of capitalism too. Remember the 'choice' agenda? It moved from the service industries into public services. We're told that 'choice' will now ensure good schools and hospitals rather than concentrating on making all of them good. Instead, Virgin and Serco will compete to give you a choice of straitjackets and catheters, just when you may be wishing you could just dial 999 and go to the nearest hospital.



Conversely, business has rediscovered what governments are abandoning: monopolies. 'We Proudly Serve' is part of a re-branding of monopoly. This summer, thanks to a commercial deal, only Visa card holders could buy Olympic tickets. Once at the venues, the cash points were covered in decals reading 'We Are Proud To Accept Only Visa' and the shops refused all other cards. Rather than the rhetoric of choice covering the grim reality, the single word 'Proud' now works as two fingers up to the consumer. Use our product or get out. It shows us exactly how valued we are as customers, of course: 'proud' is just an extra little insult that reminds us that our wishes are at the very bottom of the list.

It's humiliating for the workers too. I suspect the Olympics shop workers were on the minimum wage or near. Our catering staff are on zero-hours, low-pay contracts. They don't, quite frankly, give a shit about branding. Why should they be 'proud' to serve one particular corporate behemoth's product? Why, come to think of it, are we 'branding' our café at all. Why not have some self-pride and name it 'Hegemon University Café' rather than importing some second-hand glamour from GloboCorp?

Anyway, back to work at my university. Motto: 'a university to be proud of'. Though every time I see it I mutter 'a university of which to be proud'.

Monstrous Monday

Morning everybody. Lots to do today in my new guise as a fully-functioning researching and teaching machine. Ahem. Never mind that both this morning's dissertation supervision students are late for their appointments…

The plan for the day is a) finishing taking notes on Alan Plater's Beiderbecke trilogy for a joint paper. Done! Then I'm going to be reading more on nineteenth-century travel writing for a paper I'm doing on George Borrow and O M Edwards - must stop reading and start writing at some point. I'm also teaching Media, Culture and Society, though it's tempting to think that one new concept is probably enough for some of these students. I also have to contact all my union members, organise a class trip to a reading which may or may not collide with some visiting speakers, and and and there's definitely something else, but at this point my brain is leaking out onto my corduroy shoulders so, you know, whatever.

However, I do recall the weekend with some clarity, which for me is quite an achievement. Firstly, the nearest (in age, of five) sibling got married in New Zealand. I'm assured by text messages that everything went ahead so congratulations to them both. Secondly, I went to a concert by the magnificent CBSO in Symphony Hall. On the programme was some Weber (fun short overture), Bruch's First Violin Concerto, and Tchaikovsky's 5th Symphony. The Bruch was glorious 19th-century virtuoso stuff - new to me as I tend towards the 20th century, but lovely.

Here's Yossif Ivanov, the soloist. His playing was magnificent, and the tone of his 1699 Stradivarius (the Lady Tennant) was just stunning. Though I have to say that when he turned up with a goatee, a Mao shirt and long waistcoat, I was strongly reminded of Little Britain's deluded hypnotist ('look into the eyes, not around the eyes, into the eyes; and you're under').



Then after the interval was the much more substantial Tchaikovsky - aside from a slightly drifting third movement, it was stunning: powerful, moving and beautifully played.

Here's Joshua Bell playing the Bruch:



and the Bolivar Orchestra playing the fourth movement of the Tchaikovsky: