I'm Human

Invisible Children: or How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Jump on the Bandwagon.

2012-03-07T23:19:00.002Z

So, that viral Kony 2012 documentary that has started doing the rounds is pretty darn emotive, isn’t it? Made me want to get up out of my seat and go hunt the bad man down myself.

One of the few things that I have retained from my philosophy degree other than how to argue pretty much any point (if you ever need anyone to play devil’s advocate, then I’m your man) is a degree of scepticism.

When I watched the Invisible Children’s piece of propaganda, I couldn’t help but think that there must be more going on than what they have presented. And I was right. I spent probably as much time watching the video reading articles about their activities and the goings on in Africa.

Invisible Children want to raise awareness of what Joseph Kony and his Lord’s Resistance Army are up to. Which is a brilliant aim. This is an evil man doing evil things and hurting thousands upon thousands of people and forcing thousands more to live in fear.

People should be made aware of him and discussion should be had about the best way to stop him hurting people.

However, it’s not like the world’s political leaders didn’t know about him. This has been going on for 20 years. And it’s not exactly been a secret.

This viral video presents a very one-sided and simplistic view of the situation. I’m not going to attempt to go into the details fully because much more intelligent, well informed and eloquent people have done so and I have provided links at the end of this for you to read.

And I really hope you do read them to make you more informed about the situation. If you still want to go ahead and support this campaign, then that’s great. I love your enthusiasm and dedication to putting the world right. I wish I was more like you at times, in fact. And I love the fact that the film makers seem to be wanting to do that at well.

Deep down, I really just want everyone to get along. Whilst I tease my friend Ben about being a giant hippy, it's partly because I am one myself.

But before you jump on the bandwagon, please please please please make sure you are informed about what you are doing.

Sometimes it is actual possible to do damage by attempting to do good and one thing we should have learnt from recent history is that when the Western world goes into the non-Western world and attempt to change things by force then we can sometimes make things worse.

I am saying this predominantly because of the way that social networking works and how the video has gone viral today.

It would be entirely possible for someone to make a similar video and get people all angry and riled up about someone who doesn’t exist, for example. Please don't just have a knee jerk "we must fix this now!" reaction.

Invisible Children’s stated aim is to make people aware of Joseph Kony. As I’ve said, I think this is a great aim, but don’t just make sure you are aware. Make sure you are informed. Please read these:

http://justiceinconflict.org/2012/03/07/kony-2012-the-invisible-children-advocacy-campaign-to-catch-kony/
http://www.thabusiness.com/2012/03/kony-2012/
http://whitthef.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/kony-2012/
http://www.wrongingrights.com/2009/03/worst-idea-ever.html/
http://visiblechildren.tumblr.com.nyud.net/
http://ilto.wordpress.com/2006/11/02/the-visible-problem-with-invisible-children/
http://www.blackstarnews.com/news/122/ARTICLE/6586/2010-06-02.html

A person of no faith

2012-03-02T17:44:00.003Z

Dear Rachel Reeves MP,

I got annoyed watching Question Time this week.

This isn’t an unusual occurrence, it actually happens most weeks and I’ll just go into a rant on Twitter about and forget about. However, this week it wasn’t to do with some fundamental disagreement on a political matter, or annoyance that the Tory was the most sensible politician on the panel although this is happening a scary amount of times as I get older.

The thing that annoyed me most was when you used the term “people of no faith” to describe non-religious people.

Now, I am a devout atheist (more on that at some point maybe, although possibly not as I don’t like to force my opinions on others) and so therefore I would fall under your classification of “people of no faith.” However, I feel that this is a very misleading term.

Ok, maybe militant atheists might get offended at the term faith and openly embrace the idea of being someone without faith. I am not one of those people.

I may not have a religion – although saying it like that makes it sound like I am lacking something which I feel I am not – but I have a lot of faith. However, my faith is not faith in someone or something that you cannot see. I have a great faith in humanity. Sometimes, I wonder why, but other times mankind can show itself to be the most wonderful and beautiful thing.

The London riots last year showed me both sides of this. Initially I started to despair at what had happened to humanity but when everyone started to get together for the clean up action afterwards, my faith in people was increased.

I have faith in that people are underneath it all, generally good, moral and generous beings.

I also feel that this faith is stronger than many people’s religious faith as the object of it is tangible. The results are visible. But now is not the time to get into an argument about who is right or wrong on the matter of the big G.

In these days when people get offended by the silliest little slight on themselves or their beliefs and we often have to tip toe around issues, I call for greater acknowledgement and respect of my kind of people as we respect you and your kind (I'm talking about religious people not politicians as clearly politicians rarely get any respect from the public).

So, Ms Reeves, I am not a person of no faith. I am a person of strong faith, just not the kind of faith in invisible people who live in the sky. Please acknowledge this in future.

Many thanks.

Valentines day kettle love

2012-02-14T15:41:00.001Z

Roses are red

Violets are blue

I love my new kettle

More than I do you

I was going to write a blog about Valentines day being rubbish but then I realised that the majority of people probably think that way too. Or if they don’t, they probably don’t want me ruining their lovely romantic day by pointing out how silly it all is.

So, instead, I have decided to write about my new love.

We met on Sunday. It was my sister’s birthday and we went out to lunch at the Harvester. My sister is very much like my mother and enjoyed pointing out all the vegetarian options on the menu that I was able to have (All three of them, just in case I’d missed one. It was very helpful).

I had a go on one of those machines you get in the arcades where you try and grab a toy out. For the first time ever, I managed to actually make the grabbing device grab something. It picked up the Wario doll that I had my heart set on, moved it across to the left and then towards me.

I was already celebrating. My family and friends were looking at me with a look that said “you’re 32. Even 8 year old kids don’t get that excited about this.”

Unfortunately Wario is a bit bigger than I had anticipated and is he got to the hatch that he was about to be dropped into, the barrier knocked him out of the grabbing device.

I was distraught. Resolute, I had another go at getting him out but only succeeded in standing him on his head. “No problem”, I thought. “I’ll come back and win him after lunch!” Waiting for the bill, I was very impatient and as soon as it was dealt with, I rushed off to the machine. I was made distraught again to discover that some pikey kid had stolen my Wario toy.

“The only thing to do, “ I thought to myself, “is to go home and have a cup of tea,” because as everyone knows, there is nothing that cannot be fixed by a cup of tea.

I then remembered that my kettle had broken. Fortunately there was a Sainsburys nearby so I stopped off there* and looked at kettles. Within my budget range, there was a black Sainsburys own for £15 or the Presitge 1.7l cordless in sexy white which claimed to light up when boiling for £20.

Anyone who knows me well will know that this was a no brainer for me. Anything that has promises a flashy additional gimmick for a small additional charge will be bought, no questions asked.

Upon getting her home, I noticed not only how well she fits in with her surroundings (see image). She also boils quickly and efficiently, and best of all, when she does, she provides me with her interpretation of the Northern Lights (see below video). She knows how much I want to go see them but also how poor I am and so unlikely to be able to afford to go in some time.

She also makes a damn good cup of tea. I don’t think there’s anything more that I look for in a woman.

So, Presitge 1.7l cordless, will you be my valentine?

* The order of these events has been altered for dramatic effect. I actually bought the kettle before lunch. It was a Sunday and Sainsburys would have been shut by the time we had finished eating. I apologise for any harm caused by this.

I hate running

2012-02-06T21:49:00.001Z

I hate running, I really do. I’ve never really seen the point. It’s just transporting yourself from one place to another.

I'm happy to put in the effort to run if I'm playing a sport but on it's own... I just don't get it.

OK, when I was a kid, I wanted to be the fastest in my class. There was something cool about that, like you had a super power or something. The best I achieved was third in what I assume was about a fifty metre sprint on sports day in primary school. When I went to big school and realised that about 50% of the other kids there were better than me, I lost all interest.

But running now, as a grown up, I just don’t get. Why would you get all excited about going out in street and letting everyone see how unfit and out of shape you are?

So the fact that I have signed up to run three miles for Sports Relief might confuse you. It certainly confuses me.

I’m a walking paradox.

I think it’s partly because I know that other people – some of whom I think are less fit than me – can do it. Another thing I am is very competitive. I don’t like thinking that other people are better than me.

I think it’s partly because I am still the least fit member of my football team even after two years of playing and training. I have been putting this down to being the oldest outfield player but that excuse doesn’t really wash when you see players like Ryan Giggs still playing at the highest level.

Ok, I might not be quite as good as him but the fact that he can keep playing at the very top level when he is six years older than me puts my levels of fitness to shame.

For a while I have been saying that I want to do a big run to challenge myself and to prove to myself that I can do it. And then a few weeks ago my friend called my bluff.

I know that three miles isn’t much in the grand scheme of things, when other people are running 26 in one go and there’s a dude I just read about called Dean Karnazes who can literally run forever.

But for me, this will be a great achievement. I tried road running a couple of years ago but struggled as I kept getting shin splints and therefore I concluded that I was never going to be able to do it and gave up. I could just about manage a mile before I had to give up.

Now, my body is a bit better conditioned due to playing football and I have managed to overcome this. I am still physically unfit though, and three miles is a challenge to me. I can manage it on a treadmill but basically fall down dead afterwards however every small milestone brings with it an amazing sense of accomplishment.
This is something I really wish I’d done sooner.

Although that’s partly because I would have a younger body and it would therefore be easier for me.

-----

I also hate asking people for sponsorship. It’s obvious that you’re going to do whatever I’m sponsoring you to do with or without my money. Well I am anyway. So I feel uncomfortable just going up to people and asking them to give to my charity of choice. But should you wish to sponsor me in my attempt to drag myself along Folkestone seafront without dying, you can do so here.

I wish I was Sherlock Holmes

2012-01-21T13:10:00.000Z

When I was a kid I wanted to be Sherlock Holmes. I still do.

It was only after watching the first series of the BBC’s Sherlock in anticipation of the second series which aired earlier this month that I was reminded of this. I then subsequently downloaded the Complete Sherlock Holmes onto my shiny new kindle (only 77p on Amazon – bargain) and started re-reading some of the stories that they were based on which really hammered it home.

I had never struck me before how much of an influence over my life he has had. I always wanted to be as smart as him. I’m not sure I have come anywhere near close but his pursuit of knowledge - albeit in a very specific area - and the truth probably had some factor in my choice to study philosophy at university.

My second favourite board game as a child was called 221B Baker Street: The Master Detective (my favourite being Monopoly because I was born to be an a capitalist). The game is essentially Cluedo but with actual clues rather than a process of elimination. My brother dug this game out a couple of years ago and we became obsessed with it again for a short period of time. I also became extremely competitive and refused to acknowledge his victory when he got one tiny detail wrong. Well, Holmes wouldn't have got anything wrong.

In my mind, it is a vastly superior game to Cluedo because of it’s intellectual requirements that I didn’t play Cluedo again until a few months ago round a friend’s house. My desire to be Holmes led to me taking extensive notes on who appeared to be showing whom which card so that I could not only win but reveal to everyone else that I knew exactly which cards they had. Unfortunately my powers aren’t quite up to Holmesian standards and I didn’t win. I did have fajitas though which I consider a sort of victory.

Holmes embodies everything that I value.

He has a Stephen Fry-esque encyclopaedia of knowledge and incredible powers of observation (which I totally lack as my concentration span is basically non-existent). He has a good sense of right and wrong although he isn't afraid to bend this on occasions for the greater good - a sense of utilitarianism which is something I developed during university. He is a master of disguise and I love dressing up and make pretend (yes, I am still a child - more on that at another time).

On top of this, Holmes is able to hold his own in a fight and is a keen boxer. This is not me at all. I used to go kick boxing. I threw up for the first two weeks and then on the third week they told me to take it easy. I didn't go back. I still wished I'd been good at it tough. Excitement and adventure is also never far away for Holmes and I love seeing and experiencing new things.

Along with the fact that he gets paid for doing something he loves, this makes him my hero.

He has had a profound effect on my life. More than I realised and possibly more than anyone else outside of my immediate family.

My favourite five bands you’ve probably never heard of*

2012-01-13T21:47:00.001Z

I like to think that I've got awesome music taste. Actually scrap that. I know I've got awesome music taste. Sometimes the best music isn't the popular music. And a lot of the time, the popular music isn't the best music.

I used to be a bit precious about "my" music and didn't always like it when it became popular and wasn't as special any more because everyone liked it. However, feel privileged that today I have decided to share some hidden gems with you. These are my favourite five bands that only a handful of people have probably heard of, how I discovered them and why you should like them.

1. Evil Superstars

I'm an undercover pedestrian, spreading the love germ

Evil Superstars are the third best band to come out of Belgium in the last twenty years and hold a special place in my heart. I was writing a music column for our local newspaper almost 14 years ago and randomly got sent the single for B.A.B.Y. I was blown away. Bands of the time weren't making music like that. This was a time when the Manic Street Preachers were turning mainstream and when boybands and girl bands were the flavour of the month.

I remember the exact time when I first listened to the song. A friend from school had popped round to pick something up and I'd just put the single in. It was just so dirty and completely unlike anything else I'd heard in a while - dirty both in the sounds of the music and lyrically.

Not all of their songs are like this. Like their contemporaries dEUS who I can't help comparing them to, they are also able to produce beautiful music. Singer Mauro Pawlowski now plays guitar for dEUS and I was fortunate enough to interview him on the phone after the release of Boogie Children-R-Us. He sounded like a man who genuinely loved making music and realised how lucky he was to be able to make a living from doing so. He promised me he would make music "until I fucking die."

2. Quasi

Love was a problem for our ancestors, it's not such a problem any more

Sam Coomes and Janet Weiss show the White Stripes what ex-husband and wife two pieces should sound like. In fact, I'd go as far as to say they're the best ex-husband and wife two piece that has ever existed. Although I have just discovered that they now have a full time bassist, so I should probably change the tense in that last sentence although I can't be bothered to do so now.

I saw them when they were supporting Elliott Smith. Sam and Elliott used to be in Heatmiser together and Elliott occasionally helped out by playing bass for Quasi. Janet was the drummer in Sleater-Kinney and it seems that these along with some of their other projects were always due to overshadow Quasi.

Sam plays a rocksichord - an instrument so rare that I remember something happening to the one Sam used to play with (either stolen or broken) and him struggling to find a replacement for it. It makes the band's sound completely unique, especially with the way Coomes jumps on and clings off his instrument.

With intelligent lyrics and poppy melodies, Quasi should be way more popular than they are although with so many side projects, the band's releases and touring schedule is quite sporadic.

3. Freedom For King Kong

Des maux contractés à force de trop marcher, même les poètes en ont mal aux pieds

When I first visited Paris, I went into a couple of record shops while the girl I was seeing at the time did some clothes shopping. My French has been poor ever since I somehow scraped a C in my GCSE but I did manage to work out where the ska-punk section was and randomly picked up a couple of compilation CDs.

On one of these there was a live version of song called Babylone by Freedom For King Kong. I'd struggle to call it ska-punk but I was hooked. In fact, I have often struggled to define the sound of the band. My attempts usually end up something like "electro-rock.... awesomeness with a guy rapping over the top.... in French" but the band's Myspace (remember that?) has them down as Alternative/Metal/Rap so we'll go with that.

The band went on a permanent hiatus in 2007 are so obscure now that even their own website doesn't appear to work any more.

Having just translated the lyrics to this song through Babelfish, it appears to be about dreams in dreams, so the band also have a good case for having written one of the most lauded films of the last few years.

4. The Pecadiloes

You say you've lots and lots of money, I'd get down on my knees to get some

The Pecadiloes are another band that I got sent a CD of when writing for the local paper. They qualify as the most obscure band on this list by virtue of the fact that they don't have a website or a Wikipedia page. They are however mentioned in passing in the first chapter of the novel Kill Your Friends by John Niven which I read last year. That made me excited to read the rest of the book but I wouldn't bother if I was you - it's just American Psycho uprooted and dumped down in the music industry.

I missed the chance to see them when they played at the Penny Theatre as I had no-one to go along with as I hadn't convinced anyone else how awesome they were which I have always been a little bit disappointed about, especially as the band seemed to split after just the one album - Caught on Venus.

Again, they sounded different to anything at the time, so I can see why their label found it not to be commercially viable to keep them around (I am assuming that anyone making music this amazing wouldn't split up of their own accord after just one record) but it has always made me a bit disappointed that the record industry revolves around sales rather than talent.

5. Ed Harcourt

If you need to kiss me then you'll most definitely miss me when I'm gone. God you make me sing funny things about you.

Ok, so technically, Mr Harcourt isn't a band but his music is too beautiful to leave off this list.

I first saw him at V2001 and then saw him for only the second time at Glastonbury 2010. Both times I just stared in awesome. He's got an incredibly unique voice and uses it to great effect crafting lovely melodies over lovely music.

I can't really say anything else without just repeatedly gushing and using the words "beautiful" and "lovely" over and over again. All I can say is check him out and thank me later.

*Unless I’ve forced you to listen to them or your tastes are as awesome as mine.

The Only Way Is Stereotypes

2012-01-02T09:27:00.000Z

As a scientific experiment, I spent the afternoon of New Year’s Eve watching an episode of each of the following shows: The Only Way Is Essex (henceforth known as TOWIE), Made In Chelsea, Geordie Shore and Desperate Scousewives. Coincidentally, this was also one of the worst afternoons I spent in 2011. The idea was that I couldn't criticise these sorts of shows without watching them. That’s the sort of attitude which really annoys me when I set it in others.

Now, I don’t claim to be terribly up to date on modern television and it’s been 14 years since I studied media studies, so please forgive me for any inaccuracies in what follows although feel free to criticise my views.

I would liken all four shows to being stuck on a bus with some annoying loud people with an accent which varies depending on the show being unable to avoid their inane conversations about who has recently fornicated with whom.

Common Themes

There are some common themes which can be seen in all of the shows and a few – but not a significant number of – differentiating features. This was actually the thing that annoyed me most, that after a while they sort of blend into one show.

This is probably why each of the shows will have captions pop up to tell you the names of the characters on a regular basis. They don’t trust the viewer to remember who the characters are, what their names are or in some circumstances what their relationship is to the other characters. We are told at least twice in the episode of TOWIE the name of Arg’s nan and their relationship.

This is an indicator of the lowest common demoninator marketing strategy for the shows. The language in the shows is also very simplistic and I think any 8 year old watching the show shouldn’t need to grasp for a dictionary at any point.

All the shows appear to have a focus that looks being more important than personality. In Geordie Shore, it is claimed that “looking this good is a full time job.” Desparate Scousewives has several shots of people preening themselves before a night out although there appeared to be less discussion of appearance than on the other shows. This is made up for with the presence of a fashion blogger who was critical of a “local celebrity”’s appearance at an awards show.

As a consequence of this, fake tan features predominantly throughout the shows. In Geordie Shore one of the characters claims that it’s “Geordie law... you gotta have a tan.” The only show that appears to contradict this is one of the characters in Made In Chelsea saying “fake tan is probably the most offensive thing in the world” but there is still at least one character with a fake tan.

This emphasis on appearance and tans is obviously the sort of forced fashion agenda that is usually the realm of women’s magazines and I would imagine that the markets for the two products overlap somewhat. It’s obviously not a great message to be putting across and could be a negative influence if children grow up with the impression that what matters is how they look.

The shows also promote a lack of individuality. In Geordie Shore, one of the men who just wanted to be himself was was excluded from the group, although all he wanted to do differently from the others was not spend all his time in the gym working on his six-pack. He still had in general the same attitude towards women and life as the other male characters. He was finally accepted into the group when he jumped into a fight that one of the other characters had got themselves into.

The shows have a tendency to claim to be the authority on the area which they represent. I can’t work out whether the characters in TOWIE believe that Essex is the name of the town they live in or whether it is generic so that they don’t offend the residents of any one part of the county. I also can’t work out how they've managed to turn Essex into a verb. I Essex, you Essex, he/she Essexes, we all Essex. I can’t imagine it’ll be long before that somehow wangles it’s way into the OED.

This is most predominant in Geordie Shore when one of the characters expresses the xenophobic statement “if you’re from Middelsborough then you might as well be from Mars.” They are adamant that Geordie’s must do this or that otherwise they don’t fit in. This ties back to the lack of individuality that the shows seem to prescribe.

I would be interested to know what people from the areas depicted in these shows feel about the way that they are represented. I know people from all of these areas except for Chelsea (I’m not that posh) and they are nothing like the people on these shows. Obviously the producers have handpicked these people to be on the shows to be the most entertaining but they also seem to have picked them for their lowest common denominator appeal. I’m sure there must be doctors, lawyers or nuclear physicists from all of these towns but for some reason they are not represented. I would like to hope that it’s because they don’t want to be on the shows rather than that they are being excluded but I feel it might be both.

With the exception of Geordie Shore which is more fly on the wall, the shows all have high production values. But the image they attempt to convey varies slightly. Desparate Scousewives is attempting to give itself an Americanised glamour image for example, and Made In Chelsea appears to use a filter to give itself a different look to the other shows.

In general, these shows appear to have forced conversations due to the semi-real situations that are engineered for the benefit of the show. It’s obvious not “real” because some of the scenes have 3 or 4 cameras in use which would be in shot if it wasn’t being acted out. The thing is, these people aren’t trained actors, so they are often stumbling over their improvised words aware that whatever they say might be broadcast, which can make look like a primary school nativity play at times.

Unique Selling Points

The main differenc e in the shows is the focus of the characters. In Geordie Shore, the focus is hedonisitc and the characters rarely talk about anything that is not in some way directly related to sex. One of them describes being a Geordie as “going out, getting trashed, not caring about what people think of you.” When asked to do some simple promotional work handing out leaflets another states that she is “still not overly thrilled about having to work at all, like.” Anything that takes them away from their hedonistic lifestyle is an annoyance.

In TOWIE, the focus is more on the relationships of the characters, whether two characters are going to get together, whether an ex will be an issue and problems of that ilk. The characters in TOWIE also seem to have jobs although in the episode I watched this was not obvious which I assume was due to it being a Christmas episode. The representation of the characters seems to fit in with the traditional Essex stereotype of regular but dim-witted people.

Made In Chelsea is a much more aspirational show. This can be seen even before the program starts when advertisers Rimmel tell us we should “get the London look.” The characters are keen to emphasise how high class they are as one character mentions he went to Eton and then in the same breath tells us that “Top Shop is a turn-off.” To be caught at the wrong place or in the wrong outfit seems to be the worst crime that one can commit.

The language used is also less common. I was shocked when the word “suitor” was used. It’s not uncommon but after having watched the other three shows my brain had switched off and I had to reboot it to remember what it meant.

The characters – or at least some of them – are shown not to be as highly educated as they claim to be when one of them says “Charles Dickens wrote Winnie the Pooh. No, Pride and Prejudice. Dickens wrote Victorian books like Pride and Prejudice.” Thus it can be inferred that by and large, what the characters are trying to get across to us is just a facade. Had the show discussed this and tried to investigate why this is, it would have been a much more interesting viewing experience.

In Chelsea, there is also a higher level of discussion about relationships. Two of the male characters discuss what to text a girl in order to give the right impression. This might not seem like much but again, after watching the other three shows, it was a breath of fresh air.

There is also more facial hair. I don’t know what the significance of this is but as a bearded man, I’d like to think they are conveying the message that facial hair represents intelligence and style.

In Desparate Scousewives, they claim to be “loud and proud” although this is in a much more refined way than the characters from Geordie Shore. In the opening sequence, they claim that Liverpool invented music but I couldn’t pick out any Liverpudlian bands in the episode I watched. I do remember hearing Oasis (Manchester) and The Cure (Crawley). If you’re going to make these sorts of claims, you should follow through on them.

As I mentioned earlier, it is attempting to give itself an Americanised glamour image right from these opening titles to the mini-sequence just before the ad break which features half a dozen ladies all dressed up and walking towards the camera in front of a view of the Liverpool shoreline that appears to be trying to pretend to be Manhattan.

It also appears to be the most liberal or metropolitan of all the shows with 3 openly gay characters whereas there were none in Geordie Shore and just the one overly camp chap in TOWIE. I thought there was one in Made In Chelsea but he was dating a woman so I assume he must be one of these “metrosexuals” I’ve heard so much about.

Desperate Scousewives also has sections where the characters talk directly to the camera in an attempt to enhance the impression of the reality of the show. As an artistic measure I can appreciate this as it gives us an insight into the characters thought process, however I do think that in this case it makes the representation of Liverpool that the show portrays even worse. It is attempting to present the show more as a documentary than as a semi-scripted show which therefore might lead the viewer to believe that Liverpudlians are as this show presents whereas they are obviously an exaggerated version of reality.

Who can we blame for these shows?

Back in the day when MTV still predominantly played music videos, there was a documentary show called The Real World. This is credited as launching the modern reality TV genre although was itself inspired by a 1973 documentary called An American Family. The Real World featured about 8-10 young adults who haven’t met living in a house share for a period of time with cameras following them around this whole time.

This seems to be an obvious inspiriation for Big Brother where a similar number of people move into a house for a length of time but are not allowed to leave (in The Real World the participants were just getting on with their lives) and are given challenges to earn rewards. Big Brother is more of a divergence from the route of the shows that we are considering here and instead leads us down the path of shows such as I’m A Celebrity.

As an aside, Peter Bazalgette, one of the men responsible for the creation of Big Brother received a knighthood in the New Year’s Honours list. A knighthood! For a man who locks people in a house! We generally give people who do that prison sentences!

MTV’s Jersey Shore is an extension of The Real World but is location and ethnicity specific and it is from here that I think the current crop of shows takes its lead. MTV has a wide range of reality shows including The Hills, Cribs and Pimp My Ride. So I think we can place the blame on the fact that some wise guy at MTV decided to ignore what the letter M stood for.

Why are these shows popular?

I really struggled to find anything within these shows that would keep me watching beyond the episode. They are obviously popular though, otherwise they wouldn’t keep spawning imitations.

I can only think that they are the modern equivalent of soaps for the iGeneration. At least they’re not as depressing as Eastenders. We can just thank our lucky stars that as we all pay for the licence fee, at least the BBC remains exempt from shows of this ilk. At least for the moment.

Soap operas have often been heralded as a good form of escapism which allows people to relax, learn from – when Eastenders and Brookside introduced homosexual characters it could be said to help them gain acceptance in society – and to reflect on their lives in some way by comparing it to those of the characters in the soap.

I am not a fan of soap operas as they often keep creating more and more exciting storylines to keep the viewers entranced and I think this undermines the sense of realism that is created. Soap operas are also open-ended and I like stories which have a beginning, a middle and an end as I feel they are in general better crafted than a soap which is written on a rolling basis as the writers will inevitably not know where they are eventually going with their characters.

Having said this, I can understand why shows such as those I have discussed above are enjoyable to some in the same way that soap operas are. However, I feel that the messages portrayed in TOWIE et al are more damaging that the positive messages that generally run through traditional soap operas and I hope that these are addressed in the future to make them more of a positive force in the lives of their viewers.

Bibliography:

For the first time, I feel I can legitimately have a bibliography on a blog. This makes me feel like a pro.

The Only Way Is Essex – The Only Way Is EssexMas
Geordie Shore – Season 1, Episode 1
Made In Chelsea – Season 1, Episode 1
Desperate Scousewives – Season 1, Episode 1

I’m an atheist but I love Christmas

2011-12-08T22:33:00.002Z

I have just finished writing my letter to Santa. I write one every year. For anyone thinking of doing the same, please note he appears to have moved according to Royal Mail. He can no longer be reached in Lapland, but in at Santa’s Grotto, Reindeerland, SAN TA1.

Now, I am well aware that Santa doesn’t exist (I hope there aren’t any kids reading this) but there is something cathartic and beneficial in trying to explain why you have been good enough over the past year to justify getting what you want from Christmas.

One year I got a response with some stickers. I am a bit worried that they’ll think I’m five. Or special. Or both. It’s totally worth sending the letter though.

I probably won’t get what I want anyway. I don’t like telling people what I want usually. I’d much rather they got me something that they think I’d like but probably wouldn’t have thought of buying. Although this year, I know I’ve got what I want as I have bought it for myself.

As mentioned in the title, I am a devout atheist – perhaps more on that another time – and I have no sentiment for the fact that some dude called Jesus was allegedly born a couple of thousand years ago. He never invites me to his birthday parties anyway.

What I love about Christmas is I guess what is often referred to as Christmas spirit. I love the way that everyone seems to be a little bit happier. I first noticed this when I was working in a newsagents and on Christmas Day everyone was a bit chirpier and nicer. Customers who wouldn’t really speak to you would wish you a merry Christmas or ask you your plans or smile when they wouldn’t usually.

The fact that for a short time each year, everyone is a bit more considerate of each other and buys presents for the important people in their lives is just fantastic. I wish that people bought each other presents more often and didn’t have to be told to do so but in the absence of that, Christmas fills the hole nicely. It doesn’t matter whether the presents are good or bad, either. It matters that people are doing something nice for others.

I love everything that comes along with Christmas as well. I love the pretty lights and decorations (and Folkestone has some really lovely lights this year). I love Christmas films. Muppet’s Christmas Carol is my second favourite film of all time and when watching other versions I get confused that there is only one Marley. I love Christmas songs. I know they’re just like normal songs, but just a bit happier.

The thing is though, I like happiness. I love people, I love the world, I love life and when I’m down then I get down about being down. Christmas is full of happiness and cheer and it’s the most wonderful time of year.

Why I am vegetarian

2011-11-30T19:43:00.002Z

I was thinking about writing this yesterday lunchtime as I munched on my sandwiches in the canteen as it’s a question I get asked on average probably every other month. Low and behold, one of my colleagues asked me that very afternoon. It was almost as if it was a sign.

Let’s begin at the beginning. When I was growing up, I wasn’t particulary keen on many meats. There would be some that I’d like, some I’d like occassionally and some I just couldn’t stand (primarily chicken and turkey).

I went to university and studied philosophy. I hated doing exams because I wasn’t very good at them, so I opted to take two dissertations in my final year. Perhaps not what everyone would do but trust me, I was really bad at exams.

One of the dissertations I wrote on the ethics of killing in a variety of settings – war, euthanasia, self-defence and also for food. The conclusion that I came to was that if I could survive without having to force another living creature to die in order for me to do so, then this was an ethically preferable stand point.

It took me a while to become a vegetarian. A couple of months after uni finished, I made myself a lentil shepherd’s pie. It turned out that I’m not really keen on lentils and basically eating a plateful of them put me off going veggie. My housemate got a free meal out of it though.

A while later, I started going out with a vegetarian and this made the transition quite a natural process. I gave up foods one by one, starting with fish and finishing with pepperoni which if anyone still asks, is the thing I miss the most. Although as I’ve been veggie for around 8 years, I can’t say I’ve actually missed it in a long time.

One thing I think about as possibly the most important thing is where I personally draw the line. Some cheese, beers and sweets are not vegetarian because of the way they are produced.

I tend not to be overly fussy about checking which are and are not. The reason for this is that I am fairly sure that the animals weren’t killed for the specific purpose of creating these products. They almost certainly died for other reasons and these products are the offshoot of the fact that a dead animal is available to create them with.

The way I see it, everyone has a point beyond which they won’t eat animals or animal products. There are people like Freddie Starr who are willing to put absolutely anything in their mouths. Others set the line at not eating animals which are pets (e.g. cats and dogs) or perceived as horrid (e.g. snakes, tarantulas) which in other cultures would not be an issue.

I see an individuals stance animal product eating as being somewhere on the line between vegan and Freddie Starr, although admittedly it’s not exactly a straight line. I know exactly where my limits are and I am comfortable with them.

Some answers to freequently asked questions:

Q: Do you eat fish?
A: No. Fish are animals. People who eat fish but no other meat are called pescatarians. Or, as I prefer to call them, cheats.

Q: Do you eat meat substitutes?
A: Yes, but it took me a while to get into quorn chicken pieces because the reason I didn’t like white meats was due to their texture. I tend to only eat meat substitutes when they really form an essential part of the dish, for example mince in spaghetti bologonese or chicken pieces in fajitas.

My Top Five All Time Most Favourite Computer Games Ever

2011-11-26T10:06:00.000Z

1 Arkham City. Playstation 3.

So this list in my favourite games, but I think this would probably top a list of the games that I think are the best games. You can be Batman. And it feels like you are Batman. The game is so superbly designed.

I finished the game last night (except for the Riddler’s Revenge challenges which to be frank, I’m a bit pants at) and I can say it’s the best designed game I’ve played. As in Arkham Asylum, there were a few of the Riddler Trophies that I couldn’t work out and had to Google but this is partly due to my stupidity and partly due to being a boy and not reading the instructions on some of the gadgets I was given.

Also, I have an inexplicable crush on Harley Quinn.

2.Micromaniacs. Playstation.

My second favourite game would have been Arkham Asylum if I didn’t think it’d have been a more boring list. So instead, it is Micromaniacs on the old school Playstation.

For those of you that didn’t play it, it’s basically the Micromachines game that was on the Megadrive but instead of micromachines, you control little characters who run around the track and all have special powers. My favourite was Maw Maw whose special powers were farting in his opponents faces and extending his tongue (he was some sort of mutant creature) and biting off other player’s heads so that their controls got reversed until their head grew back. Genius.

Probably my all time favourite gaming experience is when there were 8 of us playing this on the Playstation in teams of 4 and my team was so awesome at the game that we won the race before we got to the first corner.
I discovered a while ago that you can play original playstation games on the PS3 and I’m looking forward to giving this a proper run out sometime soon.

3. Goldeneye. N64.

This is the game that prompted me to buy my first console of my own. There probably isn’t anyone of my generation who doesn’t look back on this game fondly. It was the first first-person shooter game that finished. Come to think of something, that probably also makes it 50% of all the first-person shooter games I have finished.

The single player had great replay value by encouraging you to complete levels on certain difficulty settings in a certain time in order to get amusing or fun cheats for the multiplayer game which – frankly – was what the game was all about.

Getting 3 mates around to run around one of the brilliantly designed levels shooting at each other was brilliant fun at the time – as long as no-one cheated and went for Odd Job – and is one of the reasons why I don’t want to taint the memory by setting up my old N64 and seeing how much it has ages or playing one of the undoubtedly unfaithful remakes that have come out on recent consoles.

4. Freddy Hardest. Amstrad CPC 464.

This gets in the list as both the first computer game my family ever owned and the first computer game I ever finished. I don’t expect many of you will be familiar with it. It doesn’t even have a Wikipedia entry. From what I recall, it’s a 2 level platform game which involves running along and smashing up aliens.

Freddy had an amazing blonde quiff and a giant chin and to be honest, I think I probably thought I was going to grow up to be him. The game was in two parts and when you finished the first one you got a code so that you could put in the tape to load up the second game which usually took around 5 minutes and then you could type in the code and complete the game.

This reminds me of a quaint time when I wasn’t entirely sure if the game was going to load or not. If the tape had a bit of fluff on it, or had got twisted or fallen some similar fate, then you could be waiting around only to find that you weren’t going to be able to play the game after all. This is the reason I never finished Taipan. Kids these days don’t know how hard they’ve got it when they have to spend 20 seconds cleaning a bit of dirt off a CD.

5. Dead Rising. Xbox 360.

I love smashing up zombies. I love smashing up zombies with a chainsaw or a sword or a sickle. But I also love putting toy heads on them or throwing teddie bears at them. This game is possibly the most fun way I’ve killed zombies or indeed human beings or aliens or anything else.

This game gets the nod over the second game as I think it was more novel at the time and perhaps even a little more fun, especially as the second game didn’t really expand the concept as much as perhaps I would have liked.

One of the novel things about this game is that you had to attempt to take pictures of zombies which would score points based on the content of photos being gruesome or amusing. The fact that there was an on screen zombie kill count is great motivation to keep playing and smashing.

Why I didn't like Dead Island

2011-10-03T22:34:00.000+01:00

I have just finished playing Dead Island. I would not recommend it and I am going to tell you why.

The main reason for doing this is because the game got almost universally positive reviews with the notable exception of Edge who I will now be using exclusively for game reviews.

I felt like I should pre-warn anyone who is thinking of buying the game so they can make an informed decision, especially as the game looked so promising in the trailer which is a beautiful piece of cinematography but which bares minimal relation to the game itself.

Me and Dead Island didn’t get off to a good start. This is mainly due to a bug (now fixed) in the PS3 version which meant that checkpoints didn’t always save. I ended up playing the first 8% of the game three times in total.

There is no real in-game tutorial and so if you want to know what the controls are then you would need to read the manual. Who does that in this day and age? I was three quarters of the way through the game before I accidentally learnt that my character was actually able to run. Compared to Assassin’s Creed which I started playing this evening and which seems to be explicitly forcing me to learn every single control, Dead Island seems poor.

I can’t help comparing it to other games either, and almost every time it comes up short. Want a more fun zombie-smash-em-up? Play Dead Rising. Want a better RPG? Play Oblivion. Want a better shooter? Play just about any other game with guns.

The guns... ah the guns. Guns in Dead Island are basically rubbish. I wanted to shoot shotgun bullets through zombies and see giant holes in their bodies. I never got to even hold the shotgun because by the time I got there, I hadn’t levelled up enough. I hadn’t levelled up enough because I got bored and started racing through the game as fast as I could hoping to get my stinking mitts on a shotgun. Lesson learnt.

The weapons expert however, very rarely got to play with any. I guess probably just as much as any of the other characters although I can’t stomach playing through the game again to find out. Guns only came into play when you encountered human enemies who had them. You then had to kill them, take their ammo or guns in order to use them against the other human enemies. If you were lucky you might have a few bullets left over afterwards to shoot a zombie or two.

There was a Fury system whereby if you got angry enough – I’d be pretty angry that there were zombies there anyway – then you could activate your special power which in my case (I don’t know if it’s different for other characters) was a gun that was automatically aim and enemies and do substantial damage. So if you could save it up for a bit bad guy, you could get past him without any real challenge. I never did figure out why the fury meter didn’t seem to be in any way related to when you could actually use the power.

The melee system initially seems well thought out. After a few attacks with a weapon, you will have to take a breather to regain your stamina. That’s pretty logical. However, your other attack is to kick zombies. When you run out of stamina and zombies are continuing to attack you, you will end up kicking them to death because for some reason, kicking doesn’t use any stamina. I’m not sure the games designers have played football but I can tell you for a fact, kicking can be a little bit tiring. When you’ve got an array of exciting weapons in the game, the fact that you spend half your time booting a zombie in the face is a bit frustrating.

The aiming system is also lacking. It’s very difficult to select which part of a zombie to attack, even when you have a them on the floor. So your amazing machete that you’ve just picked up will end up hacking away at a zombie’s arm rather than attempting to slice clean through their neck as any sensible zombie hunter would attempt to do.

It was also very annoying that you could create awesome weapons like turning a machete into a shock machete, manage to shock a zombie (which happened randomly and I never fathomed why) and watch them have a fit for about 10 seconds only for them to come back at you. If you have a weapon that awesome, the zombies should die. I don’t care if they’ve still got health left. You’ve done something fucking cool and they should be gone. End of.

The map itself is just too big. You keep going back and forth on yourself. They have a fast travel and vehicle system which wouldn’t have been needed if they didn’t put everything so far away in the first place. Eventually, I ended up just running past zombies to get to where I was going rather than fighting them which should be the most enjoyable part of the game but provided me with a minimal amount of fun.

The fact that you could by and large run past enemies, coupled with the poor health system which would not penalise you for dying but instead spawn you extremely nearby with full health meant that you could essentially charge through the game without having to take part in any fights.

As you would respawn with no consequences when dying, there was very little need to have energy drinks and food around to replenish your health or medical kits to take with you. I think I ended up using med kits three times, and one of those was by accident.

You may ask why I finished the game when I didn’t really enjoy it? There’s a few reasons. It did actually look awesome, especially on the occasions when you managed to slice a zombie’s head clean off. As previously mentioned, I was hoping to eventually come across a shotgun, and finally, I’ve developed slight OCD about video games and from now on will probably have to complete every one that I play.

It may well be that this is the type of game I am not built for and that thousands of others are genuniely loving the game, in which case I am pleased for them. However, I for one will not be playing it again and shall be trading it in or selling it at the ealiest possible opportunity.

Why politics mustn't die out

2011-08-20T10:01:00.000+01:00

There was an article on the BBC website yesterday which stated that more people are members of the caravan club than of all the political organisations in the country. This is a shame. Partly because I find caravans really dull and partly because I believe that politics and all the social issues surrounding it is one of the most important elements of our society.

However, I'm aware that my views and those of the people I associate with are very different to large parts of society. In the AV referendum earlier this year, I think 98% of the people I know voted in favour of change while the actual percentage was closer to one third of the population. So I can only assume that I don’t have my finger on “the pulse” and that the large majority of people don’t share the view that politics is important.

To be honest, I did had absolutely no interest in politics until I was at university and did a module in social philosophy, so I can completely understand that others would have no interest as well. This is a shame and I think should be addressed by making politics compulsory at GCSE level to prepare you people for voting as the current citizenship syllabus obviously isn’t working enough.

Although it has picked up recently, voter turnout has been substantially lower since Labour took power in 1997. Lack of preparation of young voters is probably one cause of this.

More prominent though must be the disillusionment and distrust of the government.

“No matter who you vote for the government always wins.” – The King Blues

When politicians tell you one thing and then do another, it’s no surprise that the public at large becomes disillusioned with them and feels like their vote is irrelevant.Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats forming a coalition with the Conservatives may turn out to be the death of their party. After making promises on issues such as student fees and then backing down to get their share of the power, voter confidence in the party dropped and they will struggle to regain it.

If you feel like you are going to vote for someone who will then change their policies, what would incentive you to vote at all? The fact that voters see little change from voting and often between the political parties is what gives them this view.

There’s a great South Park episode about voting (people who know me well will know that I reference pretty much every debate to a South Park episode) where Stan is being asked to vote to choose a new school mascot. His choice is between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. The conclusion – or at least my interpretation of it - is that every election is a choice between a douche and a turd but you have to go for the one which is least dumb.

There is also distrust at the way the government acts. The expenses scandal and the way they have treated the banks have meant that the public views them predominantly as selfish and self-serving.

The government is obviously interested in keeping democracy in place. What other reason can there be for giving 40% longer sentences than if they had committed their crimes at another time. The government seems to be scared that rioters will become political activists and attempt to overthrow the democratic system. I think this is an overreaction as revolutions need a leader and a poliical focus – something that the riots seemed to lack.

Britons also feel their voices aren’t heard. When a million people march against a war but have no effect, they will feel that their protests are in vain. When Climate Camp is heavily policed despite the fact it is basically just a bunch of hippies sitting in a field, they will start to feel that the police have a Big Brother presence and that they will soon be forced to believe that 2+2=5.

When there are harsh sentences for the discontented who riot but the bankers who plunge the country into crisis, the media who hack telephones and the politicians who illegally claim on expenses generally just receive a slap on the wrist, it is hard not to feel that the political structure is geared to looking after certain sections of society.

We need politicians, even when we take all of the above into account because they are intended to be there to take a considered view of all the arguments (even if they don’t always). If we didn’t have politicians in place but instead resorted to mob rule than anyone who is accused of crimes deemed most horrid in society, e.g. peadophilia, would get lynched regardless of whether or not they were guilty.

Without a ruling body, we would be forced to go with popular opinion which is often reactionary. We would have removed benefits from anyone who rioted recently, which in effect would incentivise them to riot further. We would have Jeremey Clarkson as Prime Minister and be killing off the planet quicker than we already are and several other such ridiculous things that the public have created e-petitions for.

We need our democracy and therefore politicians because there is no genuinely viable alternative. I know several advocates of anarchism but I feel that we are not ready to move into this sort of state with the way that our society currently thinks. Our society would need to be much more liberal and tolerant of others for anarchism to stand a chance of not descending into a chaotic dystopia.

Having said that, the governement does have too much power over us, and doesn’t speak for all us. Something needs to change, although I am not sure what.

The difference between reasons and excuses

2011-08-10T18:05:00.000+01:00

When I was at school, one of my best teachers once told me: “There’s no such thing as a good excuse, only a good reason.” Or words to that effect. I wasn't really paying attention.

I was struck by the words again when reading several of the reactionary comments that people have beening posting on Facebook over the 4 days since the riot in Tottenham kicked off what basically appears to be the end of civilisation as we know it. Or so some people would have you believe.

In my opinion and, I’m sure, the opinion of over 99% of the country, is that there is no excuse for what has been happening. Theft, arson, destruction, mugging and murder. These have been directed at members of the public and not at the target that would be most obvious if the motivation for all of this was political, if it was a protest at the death of Mark Duggan.

There is no excuse for these acts.

The explanations that have been given by rioters when they have been approached by the press have ranged from completely illogical (“getting our taxes back”) to honest (“because we can”).

Sure, some of these people are just nicking trainers and TVs because they are able to and they think they’ll get away with it. However, at the heart of this, there has to be some general underlying discontent which first caused these people to act in this way, even if they don’t know themselves what it is. This is what we need to uncover and fix.

Obviously, the first priority is to prevent further riots and make the streets safe for everybody. Beyond this, we need to address the sociological issues which have caused the discontent. This will not be an easy task, as there is likely to be a myriad of complex reasons why everything erupted and indeed, the reason why one individual rioted may be completely different to the person standing next to them as they steal iPhones from Currys.

There has been a lot of reactionist calls to arms, which is the wrong approach. Several suggestions put forward will actually inflame the situation and potentially cause more and even worse riots. The petition to remove the benefits of any convicted rioters (The petition to remove the benefits of any convicted rioters) is one such example.

There are a number of flaws with these suggestions, aside from that fact that our prison system is founded on reform and not punishment (which is also one reason why we don’t have the death penalty.)

The possibility of catching all of any one rioter is so small as to be almost laughable. The sheer numbers involved in the riots, the fact that most of them are hiding their faces and also the amount of work involved in identifying them render it practically impossible.

This proposed solution will actually make any individual who is caught even more impoverished and is therefore likely to make them even more likely to riot in the future.

Many suggested solutions, including this one, as to what the government should do are based solely on punishing those involved, rather than reforming these people and tackling the underlying causes in order to prevent any future riots.

Any reaction to these riots needs to be a fully thought out and reasoned solution and not based on the emotions that we have all been feeling as we have been watching our country burn to the ground.

Why Ryan Dunn's death is sad but not tragic.

2011-06-22T18:54:00.000+01:00

Jackass Star Ryan Dunn died on Monday by driving his Porsche 911 at 130mph (almost three times the limit) into a tree whilst seemingly drunk.

After countless years of anti-drink driving and anti-speeding campaigning, there is no excuse for any adult human being to think that there is no risk involved to themselves and others and as such, to attempt to call this tragic - when it is frankly just idiotic - is in my mind unacceptable.

I am not attempting to claim that his death is sad in the way that the death of every human being is sad - the repercussions on their friends, family and dependants - because the death of any person is sad in these respects.

Dunn's death instead is sad in the way that we as a society have encouraged him to behave in this manner. This is a man whose employment was through putting toy cars up his anus, from jumping off balconies or onto moving cars.

We (and I include myself in this) have been paying this man - and handsomely so, I would imagine - to take risks with his health and his life, and so it is only natural that he along with the rest of the Jackass team live their lives on the edge.

Whilst the act that killed Dunn and his companion was an idiotic one, some of the blame must lie with the culture that pays people to act in this way.