alexsarll: (crest)
[personal profile] alexsarll
Sparks have spent 35 years making music, much of which still sounds like it comes from at least that far in our future. Bands who've been around that long should still be able to play the classics - Rolling Stones in Rio this weekend sounds like quite an experience, but to begin by playing the new album in full? For most veterans, that would be madness. Not here, not when Hello Young Lovers is album of the year so far. Were it not for Russell's inadvisably indie haircut, you really wouldn't think they'd aged in all that time. Ron still looks like Hitler as a robot accountant, leaving him perfectly able to play off his deadpan image by punching out his duplicate or rock rock rocking like a mother. It is, by any sane standards, an extremely good show.
Then, after a brief interval, they play a selection of songs from the other 19 albums. No disrespect to the new material, but after all, here they can cherrypick, so this easily eclipses the first show. I think I've already seen the concert of the year.

If you've found yourself in a slightly eerie place after reading a very good Alan Moore interview in the new issue of Mustard* while listening to Errors' 'How Clean Is Your Acid House?', and then watching the excellent BBC4 adaptation of MR James' 'A View From A Hill', an episode of The Avengers should be just the thing to help you sleep soundly, yes? Well not if it's the one with Jim Hacker as an adult baby, it won't. Still nothing like as unsettling as Innocence, though. French arthouse or no, I'm amazed this film wasn't the subject of a tabloid Paedogeddon witch-hunt - especially since part of what makes it so alarming is that you can never quite tell if it's the film's fault or your own that it seems so wrong. The Angela Carter and Dario Argento links have been noted before, but the other reference for me was The Prisoner, reworked as a girls' school play.
(Last night's South Bank Show wasn't unsettling, though, just deeply annoying. Instead of the usual mainstream media portrayal of comics, contrasting how they are now with a simpleton's half-remembered view of how they used to be, this contrasted manga and anime with said simpleton's view, thus implying that all Western comics still are like that, and all manga is ace. Yeah, right)

When the economist Amartya Sen was installed as Master of Trinity, I was among a number of those present quietly humming the Imperial March from Star Wars. Even then, I had no particular beef with the man - it was just something which seemed amusing at the time. But having read his eminently sensible policies on religious tension - policies which are not mine but not cowardly either, policies which may well be more pragmatic than mine and are certainly less aggressive - I feel rather ashamed.
(Of course, the Guardian, being the Guardian, had to print that piece on the reverse of this - an article so bad I can't quite decide whether it's pernicious or meaningless)

I know I often applaud news items simply for sounding like science fiction, but when it's people dying because oxygen has been privatised, it's another matter. Likewise the child with two heads - if the second head has a brain, and shows independent volition, then how the blazes can it be a parasite? Or rather, how can it be any more of a parasite than any other baby?

*One of the less spooky details being that he's a huge fan of Viz's Drunken Bakers.

Date: 2006-02-20 11:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hospitalsoup.livejournal.com
Cry Me A River - Julie London

Is one of my favourite songs of all time.
Er, that was all.

Date: 2006-02-20 11:39 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
A fine choice.
I now own that, and 'My Funny Valentine', through the freebox acquisition of Sunday Morning Songs - even though I'd call both of those late night songs. And some of the other stuff on there, like Coldplay and Richard Ashcroft, shouldn't be listened to at any time of any day!

Date: 2006-02-20 11:42 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hospitalsoup.livejournal.com
I really don't understand why people make compilations of new, rubbish songs with old, classic ones. It just shows them up.

It's the "told me love was too plebeian" that gets me every time. I learned a rather OTT flourishy sheet-music version of the song once and used to play it with a singer at school, but we were too green to do it justice in those days.

It just shows them up.

Date: 2006-02-20 11:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
Agreed. I think it's Norah Jones who ends up sandwiched between Julie London and Kate Bush. And I mean, I don't even mind Norah Jones normally, but that's not even a contest, is it?
Though Richard Hawley holds his ground pretty well.

Date: 2006-02-20 01:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cappuccino-kid.livejournal.com
The Nico version of that is, er, funny.

Date: 2006-02-20 01:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
I own a bit of solo Nico but, as with the Flying Pickets or Weird Al Yankovic, I find that the joke does wear thin rather quickly.

Date: 2006-02-20 11:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] beingjdc.livejournal.com
Hmm. I do tend to wish there were a smaller choice of better things, mind. Particularly in Tesco. I don't need over a hundred varities of cooking oil with nothing but marketing puff to tell me which is best, I need twelve and some information.

if the second head has a brain, and shows independent volition, then how the blazes can it be a parasite?

Presumably in modern liberal morality it is analogous to a well developed foetus. Brain - check. Independent volition - check. Yup, there we are then. Is it more or less alive than the conjoined twin we are usually in favour of killing for the benefit of the stronger one. Less, I'd wager.

Date: 2006-02-20 11:56 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
If you don't have a preference, close your eyes and point - or just guess and choose one which is cheap but not the cheapest. It's simple to narrow a choice if you're not that bothered, while leaving the full choice for those who are.

I've no particular objection to killing conjoined twins, or indeed infants in general (I think the Greek limit of 30 days after birth was a fairly good one, when it comes to abortion). I just object to the doublethink.

Date: 2006-02-20 11:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] darkmarcpi.livejournal.com
I neglected to thank you for the ticket upon our sudden departures on Saturday: thank you again.

Date: 2006-02-20 11:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
That's quite alright!

Date: 2006-02-20 11:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] freakytigger.livejournal.com
I have cited Barry Schwartz' "The Paradox Of Choice" at work - it's useful for making clients think a bit about the stuff they're launching. That article though is taking the ideas to somewhere ridiculously general and ignoring two fairly obvious truisms viz.

- people like choice when it's something they're interested in and engaged with, and become irritated when it's something they consider trivial (Barry S. is talking about kinds of toothpaste, not sexual partners!)

- the problem isn't 'too much choice' but 'too little differentiation between choices', a range of 30 choices with 1% noticeable difference between them is likely to get consumers more annoyed than a range of 10 with 10% difference between each. (Again this only works for consumer goods - seems to me that even most clever and thoughtful people's music taste is based squarely on the 30-similar-choices model.)

Date: 2006-02-20 12:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
I remember once describing Swervedriver as 'a band I might like, if there were only a tenth as many bands on offer as there actually are'. Similarly, I think in times of dire need people will select potential partners from the reduced options available - hence the concept of 'officeliciousness'. But to argue, as this loon does, that such adaptability is not a handy survival mechanism, but something we should encourage - retrograde lunacy.

Date: 2006-02-20 12:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] publicansdecoy.livejournal.com
I don't understand Fletcher's article. He seems to want 'just the right amount of choices', but who does he suppose decides what that amount should be? What rot.

-x-

Date: 2006-02-20 12:18 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
It's the clueless, illiberal 'Something Should Be Done' mindset, isn't it? I mean, yes, I sometimes notice there's a lot of different toothpastes for sale, but I get over it, just like sometimes it rains when I don't have my umbrella, and I get over it. This tool would doubtless prefer weather control as well as a Department of Choice Limitation.

(TBH I was expecting any comment from you to concern the Drunken Bakers)

Gin, yes

Date: 2006-02-20 12:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] publicansdecoy.livejournal.com
Oh, I haven't bought Viz in over a year now. I just sort of got bored with it. After I saw the first ever Sid The Sexist cartoon I realised they would never be anywhere near as funny again.

-x-

Re: Gin, yes

Date: 2006-02-20 12:30 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
Alan Moore, who's been reading it pretty much since the beginning, is of the opinion that it has actually improved. I paraphrase slightly: "It's not as funny as it used to be? No, *you're* not as funny as you used to be".

Re: Gin, yes

Date: 2006-02-20 12:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] publicansdecoy.livejournal.com
But I'm a hoot. Also, I don't really know or care who Alan Moore is.

Viz is still funny, but I just can't be bothered to make time to read it. At the moment I'm reading a dictionary of playground insults and games etc. and may produce an LJ poll from it at some point this week.

-x-

I don't really know or care who Alan Moore is.

Date: 2006-02-20 12:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
Get out. Go on, just leave.

Is that dictionary anything to do with [livejournal.com profile] wardytron-endorsed phenomenon Playground Law?
From: [identity profile] publicansdecoy.livejournal.com
I believe they are one and the same, yes.

-x-
From: [identity profile] katstevens.livejournal.com
Did you watch Total Recall again last night as well, Baz?

"Consider that a divorce." Hee hee!
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
I didn't, though I am a great fan of it - but coincidentally enough, this morning I did listen to something which quoted "Consider this a divorce." (http://www.drwhoguide.com/who_bf64.htm).

Further to this morning's comment...

Date: 2006-02-20 12:48 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
...and a message for Dr Williams
16/02/2006
By Daniel Finkelstein
Dear Archbishop of Canterbury,

Please excuse me for writing to you out of the blue. I hope you don’t mind. It’s just that I had the television on, and I found myself thinking of you.

I was watching demonstrators burning something that I’ve only recently been able to identify as the Danish flag. This may seem a frivolous thing to say, but at first, I’m afraid I found it all rather comic. Hysterical people hopping from one foot to another shouting “Death to Norway” seemed like something out of Monty Python.

I sobered up quickly enough when embassies were razed to the ground and people started being killed. Then I began to ask — why are they doing this? And that’s when I thought of you.

I work on a newspaper, so I know that people can get upset about the slightest of things. I once received a furious email from a reader incandescent about my dislike of retaining till receipts from shops (I’ll go into this another time, you’re a busy archbishop). We published a cartoon recently that showed a horse dying, and we spent a week responding to complaints. So I wasn’t surprised that the Danish publication drew some heat. The cartoons were in some ways rather tame, but they were undeniably insulting and stupid.

So a stiff letter or two to the editor was certainly in order. I wouldn’t have blamed one or two people if they had cancelled their subscription to Jyllands-Posten. Personally, I won’t have it in the house. But when people start running around boycotting Lego and burning things, one has to wonder — have they gone mad?

Here is the answer — they haven’t. The apparently unhinged demos are not an outburst of anger and cannot be quelled by telling the placard wavers to lighten up a bit. The demos are one more example of a crude but effective tactic. It has worked before and they figure it will work again.

Can I recommend, Archbishop, that you read Paul Berman’s excellent book, “Terror and Liberalism?” Berman looks at the impact made on liberal opinion by terrorism. Common sense suggests that humane people would be revolted by violence against the innocent and would side with the victims. But this is not what happens. What happens is that liberals struggle to make sense of apparently senseless violence. They feel that a horrible act must have some reason. They search for the source of the desperation that drove the killers to kill. Instead of supporting the victim, they end up siding with the murderer.

And the worse the act of violence, the stronger the impulse to understand. That’s why suicide bombings — virtually incomprehensible crimes — have been so effective. They are potent not despite their horrendous nature, but because of it.

So, if you will forgive the apparent contradiction, the madness is the sanest thing about the demonstrations. By getting things completely out of proportion they have shown that their sense of proportion is intact.

Now, you’ve been very patient, Archbishop, wading through all this stuff. I am most grateful. But your patience is about to be rewarded, for, finally, I am getting to you.

Last week, the synod was presented with a resolution on the Middle East. It voted to “disinvest from companies profiting from the illegal occupation, such as Caterpillar Inc, until they change their policies.” I understand, correct me if I’m wrong, that while some bishops voted against the motion, you supported it.

Re: Further to this morning's comment...

Date: 2006-02-20 12:48 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
In a letter to the Chief Rabbi, you asserted that it was not the intention of the synod to question the legitimacy of the state of Israel and its rights to self-defence. I’m glad. But whatever the intention, the effect was clear. It sent out a message that good Christians wouldn’t defend themselves as the Israelis do. And it added the Church’s weight to the campaign to make Israel a pariah state, that should be singled out for its violations of human rights.

Did you ever wonder why you were voting on this at all? Why Israel, a tiny, tiny state with one of the best human rights records in the world, should even figure on your agenda? It’s for the same reason as we’ve all been scrambling around trying to be reassuring about the cartoons. It’s because we assume that anyone who feels as strongly as that must have a fair point. And if we can’t defend publishing a cartoon, what chance do we have explaining tough but necessary security measures?

Everybody knows, Archbishop, that you are good man, a kind man, a tolerant man. But you have fallen into a trap and lent your name to something that is not good, not kind, not tolerant. Many Jews, and I’m one, are deeply hurt.

Yours ever,

Daniel

Re: Further to this morning's comment...

Date: 2006-02-20 12:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
So I take it that leaflet didn't convert you, in the end?

An interesting article drew my attention to a previous iteration of Muslim outrage of which I'd previously been unaware - the 1970 furore over Auberon Waugh's disrespect for Islamist trousers. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoonprotests/story/0,,1711105,00.html)

Re: Further to this morning's comment...

Date: 2006-02-20 12:59 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
Amazingly, no! I expect the man will be very sad about that. I even went to Golders Green yesterday and bought KOSHER MEAT and a siddur also. (prayerbook).

Re: Further to this morning's comment...

Date: 2006-02-20 01:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
Well, it might just be the haircut - but I think she's quote-posting an open letter by a journo of that name.

Date: 2006-02-20 01:59 pm (UTC)
juliet: Avatar of me with blue hair & jeans (blue hair jeans avatar)
From: [personal profile] juliet
Parasite = incapable of independent existence, no? Distinguished from parasiticalness of normal babies (once born) by the fact that if you provide a normal baby with milk & oxygen & warmth, it will do OK, whereas in this case the 2nd head wouldn't survive however much of the necessities of life you gave it.

Foetuses are, of course, parasites, this is well-established.

I very much like the Sen article, thanks for the link. I may post something on it this afternoon.

Date: 2006-02-20 02:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
But then, there are premature babies being born now who wouldn't have survived even when we were born. And I survived an initial reluctance to dream which I imagine would have been terminal a few decades earlier than that. So 'capable of independent existence' is very much a sliding scale. With which I don't imagine anyone is particularly arguing; I suppose I just wish they could somehow have found ways to bolster the baby's system, because it'd be interesting to see whether a two-headed person had any interesting insights on the world.

Date: 2006-02-20 05:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] goodman-beaver.livejournal.com
it'd be interesting to see whether a two-headed person had any interesting insights on the world.

If you've ever seen this movie (http://www.alyon.org/generale/theatre/cinema/affiches_cinema/t/the_th-tin/the_thing_with_two_heads.jpg), your conclusion would probably be "no".

(This production still (http://www.cinemastrikesback.com/news/daily/twoheads-1000-1tb.jpg) shows that the effect is not quite as good as the poster would have you believe.)

Date: 2006-02-20 05:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] barrysarll.livejournal.com
Ouch, that does look pretty bad. But dude, ZAPHOD BEEBLEBROX!

December 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
1718192021 2223
24252627282930
31      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 8th, 2025 01:06 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios