Posts Tagged ‘journalism’

on siblings

Posted 15 Sep 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Music, Observations

This article in the Guardian today is really really fascinating; after a shared childhood which was both mutually-supportive and unsettling, the Kaczynski brothers became estranged. And one, David, gradually realised that the other, Ted, was the Unabomber, the American murderer who carried out a campaign of mail bombings over almost two decades in protest at the encroaching influence of technology on society. His victims – thankfully only three were killed – ranged from University Professors to airline passengers, from lobbyists in the Timber Industry to a computer rental shop owner. Most suffered because of a sometimes only minor connection with technology. David, noticing similarities between the Unabomber’s manifesto and the furious letters he sometimes received (a key recurring phrase was ‘cool-headed logicians’), notified the FBI.

I’m always powerfully attracted to stories about siblings, and intrigued by the relationship between them. It’s common I think for only children to be interested in this concept – and people often ask me if, when I was young, I wanted a brother or a sister. The answer is that I never, even for one moment, considered it a possibility. I never imagined having a sibling, never felt that my position as an only child was under threat – which is testament I suppose to how loved my parents made me feel. It’s only since I’ve been an adult that sibling relationships have started to interest me – not in such a way as to induce any feelings of envy or regret; but as a powerful spur to my imagination. I often find myself, when I write, returning to the idea of siblings, which is probably a bad idea as I’m not in a position to write with any authority on the subject.

The other day, working on a new song, I was struggling with finding lyrics for the vocal harmony I had in mind. Just as I was at the point of giving up, I invented a completely different melody and grabbed a piece of paper, and wrote a very quick, almost stream-of-consciousness lyric about waiting to be collected from some kind of meeting or event in a village hall. Without thinking, I included the verse:

“I collect up the bodies,
I fold down the chairs,
I wait for my brother.
I whistle a tune,
And our mother – she gave us new clothes to wear”.

Flicking through song lyrics I’ve written, I often write as if I’m one of a pair of siblings. How strange. Another song opens with the line,

“Oh Catherine… I know you’re not my sister”.

Dr Freud? Any thoughts?

the papers laud blur

Posted 29 Jun 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Music

I’ve been having laptop troubles this week, so I’ve lost the Blur review I’ve been working on, so it’ll be a little while before I get a write up posted of last week’s Southend gig. In the meantime, you’re probably up to speed with how effective and moving a reunion their return is proving, courtesy of last night’s (annoyingly brief) Glastonbury highlights on the BBC. Today’s papers seem to echo my view; that although the band started ever so slightly slowly, before long they gelled perfectly, and played pretty much the perfect festival set. Here’s a quick run-down on the reports I’ve been reading in the Nationals…

Tim Jonze from the Guardian was fabulously impressed, choosing to contrast Blur’s hi-energy performance with the workmanlike sets of Neil Young and Bruce Springsteen. He writes:

“Tonight Blur are sticking their fingers up to dad-rock by falling in love all over again with the dumb art of playing pop music – and playing it loudly. Girls and Boys literally throbs with sordid energy, Song 2 sees the crowd threatening to pogo themselves off the earth’s axis, and Parklife turns every man, woman and anarcho-crustie into a cockney geeza. It’s hit after hit after hit. From She’s So High to the Universal, via Popscene, For Tomorrow and Country House, it’s nothing short of relentless.

(…) But for all their energy, it’s the sad songs that work best: To the End, The Universal, This is a Low. Weirder still is the reaction to Tender, a song never really rated (at least by me) as a classic, transformed into a joyous hug-a-long that reverberates around the crowd after the first encore and the second encore.
It’s at this point – when previously dismissed tracks acquire a new life of their own – that you realise something truly magical is going on. Because tonight’s headline slot is not just about the music. It’s not even about nostalgia. It’s about friendship – and the truly heartwarming sight of two best friends throwing aside their differences and starting afresh.”

Nick Hasted, writing for the Independent, noted the emotional undercurrent in the band’s performance, too:

“When Damon Albarn starts to grin five songs into their great Glastonbury comeback, Blur start to look like a band again. And when he breaks down weeping near the end, you know how much it meant. “Beetlebum” is the song where Albarn’s errant guitarist and childhood friend Graham Coxon fizzes up his effects pedals, bassist Alex James starts to spin, fag dangling, and you remember Blur were the 1990s’ great psychedelic band. (…) It is just before “This Is A Low”, the best of Albarn’s often deeply personal songs, that he sits on the stage and weeps, utterly overcome by all the times that have just been unstopped. Getting up to sing it is almost heroic.”

Here’s Pete Paphides in the Times.

“As for Blur, a simple “Wow!” from Damon Albarn hinted at the scale of their reception. The love their music continues to inspire was measurable in countless moments: the sight of four fans who had gone to the trouble of dressing up as the sad-faced milk cartons in the video of 1999’s Coffee and TV; the spontaneous communal “Yesss!” that greeted Girls and Boys; the way almost everyone present continued to sing the “Oh my baby” refrain of Tender — even after a hair-raisingly beautiful seven-minute performance of the song — so that Blur eventually had to start Country House over it.

If there was one thing that the group’s warm-up gigs of the previous weeks had lacked, it was a fitting arena for Britain to show how much it had missed them.
Not here though. Not a chance. A guesting Phil Daniels came on for Parklife and 100,000 people absolutely bellowed the chorus into the night sky. It was perhaps at this point that our memory of how good they were intersected most dramatically with their readiness to confirm it. Had we just witnessed the greatest headlining set in the festival’s history? The eno-o-ormous sense of wellbeing that swept through Worthy Farm suggested we most definitely had.”

And lastly, back in the Guardian, the most lyrical, evocative description of the lot, courtesy of Laura Barton.

“The audience, elated, even a touch delirious, wills them on; when Albarn’s voice gives way a little in Beetlebum, the crowd rushes to catch it. Tender, one of the set’s many highlights, is greeted with a warm rush of approval. “I’d forgotten they’re a singalong band!” says the man to my right, as the band stops and starts, revs up the chorus once more and then falls silent, the sudden quiet filled by several thousand festival-goers softly singing the song’s chorus: “Oh my baby,” they lilt, “Oh my baby. Oh why. Oh why.” It is one of the sweetest moments of the festival. Their efforts are duly rewarded with an ebulliant rendition of Country House, a song which acquires greater resonance here tonight for the muddy-booted masses. And for Alex James of course.

They haul out the hits: Parklife, This is a Low, To the End, to an increasingly enthusiastic reception. Returning to the stage for a rousing rendition of Song 2, and then again for The Universal, the band looks genuinely delighted as they look out over the flags, over the crowd with its sunburned noses and glitter-smeared faces, and peacock feathers in its hair, and far off to the countryside of Somerset and the floating candles flaring up into the sky. There is a pause as they seem to take in the magnificence of what they have done. And then comes the guitar, and the great singalong continues.”

who will rid of us of this ridiculous prince?

Posted 17 Jun 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Uncategorized

There’s a super article by Roy Hattersley in the Guardian today; I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels frustrated by Prince Charles’ intervention in the Chelsea Barracks architecture debate, and Hattersley takes my thoughts to their logical conclusion with a stinging, thoroughly enjoyable assault on our hopeless heir to the throne.

“Prince Charles is clearly a philistine – a quality which would not be a handicap in his line of work were it not for the presumption that prompts him to believe he is an expert on subjects about which he is ignorant. He knows nothing about architecture”

reluctant heirs

Posted 02 Apr 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Politics

Articles about the Royal family are rather more the preserve of the Daily Mail than the Guardian, but there’s a genuinely fascinating article in the paper today, in which Patrick Barkham looks at the two young Princes and attempts a serious study of their respective characters and prospects. When I was younger I was a fervent anti-Royalist, to the extent that I affected to loathe them, using their privilege and position as excuses to wish them ill. I didn’t feel the slightest sense of loss when Diana died.

I’m still not a royalist by any means – I’d go for a republic in a heartbeat; but I have to admit that I now reserve my loathing for the institution, rather than the people within it. I suspect they live sad, lonely lives to be honest, and probably do a reasonable (even good) job of coping with the duties along the way.

Barkham’s article is fascinating and well worth a read. It ends thus:

“William is nice but I can’t help hearing him ask, ‘Do I have to do it?’” [Judy]
Wade [, a royal reporter of 30 years] says. “You’re a prisoner, not just of
the palace but the Foreign Office – telling you where you can and can’t go. You
walk round all day talking to awestruck people who can’t string two sentences
together. It’s a terrible life. That’s why William and Harry don’t want to do
it. They want to put it off for as long as possible.”

What a strange life.

corden and horden

Posted 01 Apr 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Uncategorized

In the last couple of weeks I’ve read an absolute mountain of sniping articles about Horne and Corden (the stars of BBC3′s Gavin and Stacey, who have recently launched a very poorly-received sketch show), and I find myself getting quite annoyed by the relentless critism. I don’t doubt for a moment that their new show is poor (most TV sketch shows and sitcoms are) but there’s something off-putting in the way that TV reviewers have gone for them so aggressively. I’d much rather read a review of a programme that the critic rates, so that I might find something new to watch – especially in the days of iPlayer when catching up on last night’s TV is a realistic possibility for an evening’s entertainment.

Everyone seems to have back-dated their criticism, too, deciding that Gavin and Stacey was over-rated, too; that it was sentimental, cloying, unfunny. It certainly was a gentle comedy, a million miles from, say, Stewart Lee, but I thought it was beautifully judged – charming and good-natured, witty, silly and believable by turn. I know I am a renowned wimp, but it regularly used to make me cry, too. It may well be fashionable to decry such family fodder – but I don’t like the trend.

Over at the Guardian, Mark Lawson is wondering how the pair will revive their nosediving careers. It’s a ridiculous article. Cordon is perhaps a bit full of himself, but he’s funny and a talented writer, and Matthew Horne is a promising actor. They’ll never be conventional comics, perhaps – but writing off their careers at this very early stage is plain daft.

on carol thatcher

Posted 06 Feb 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Politics

I am disgusted with the fashion in which the Queen has capitulated to the Golly-hating Nazis at the BBC. I used to admire the Queen till she started pushing the diversity agenda of the lefties, signed the Lisbon Treaty which gave over the country to EU control. The Queen took a coronation oath to serve her country but it seems now she serves herself and the Marxist Government! I urge everyone to complain to the BBC and Buck Palace. Carol Thatcher should not be fired over a private comment about a well-loved toy!
- Pat, Dublin, Ireland, 5/2/2009 22:48

If I write about Carol Thatcher and the fact that the Daily Mail are orchestrating yet another public campaign to influence the perception of, and activities of, the BBC, I know that I am just falling into a helpless trap; giving yet more oxygen to a spurious subject and allowing myself to become enraged by myopic prejudices which are, despite the amount of coverage they generate, largely on the wane.

So its ok for that Jo Brand to make jokes about women and their times of periods and the BBC consider it comedy to be broadcast, also Ross and his twisted idea of filth, but to use the word Golliwog is a sacking offence. I hope the tories when they get in purge the BBC of all the freaks who staff it-
Stephen H Print, Thailand, 5/2/2009 6:35

Yet at the same time it’s incredibly hard not to be exercised – and incredibly frustrated – by the whole kerfuffle. The facts as they stand are reasonably straightforward. Carol Thatcher, in conversation with a number of colleagues in The Green Room after a recent appearance on BBC’s One show, made a comparison between a black tennis player and a ‘gollywog’. Several amongst the number present were upset at this remark, which they interpreted as racist, and the BBC, after failing to extract anything but a very half-hearted apology from Thatcher, decided to terminate her contract with the show.

So all those Enid Blyton books I grew up with will have to be edited now, since golliwog is soooooo offensive?
- nell, sydney, australia, 5/2/2009 5:16

Now, as the comments above demonstrate – which are taken from the Daily Mail website – the right-wing media are swinging behind Thatcher (and most importantly, against the hated BBC) by declaring this a victory for political correctness and a defeat for common sense. So far, so very predictable. Just as the Mail occupied a position of moral authority when it decided that Jonathan Ross (the personification of the vulgar, liberal Briton they deride) had gone too far in his merciless teasing of Andrew Sachs, now they decide that Thatcher has been a victim of the same, ultra-liberal forces. Never mind that Thatcher’s comments were arguably much more offensive. In the minds of the Mail, there is no connection between Ross’s offensive language and Thatcher’s. Far more important is that they hate him, and are like her.

If political correctness means anything, it is that those that practice it believe it important to take care, when using language, not to gratuitously cause offence to others. Ross was scapegoated by the Mail because they considered his words gratuitous and offensive (as indeed they were). Yet nowhere in their coverage was any mention given to the fact that what they were in essence asking him to do was think about what he said and not say things likely to upset others; a classic argument for political correctness. Although their intentions were undoubtedly malicious, and borne out of a hatred of both Ross and the BBC, one couldn’t help wondering if the Mail was at last becoming alive to the importance of not abusing, denigrating, offending others.

The Thatcher debacle proves they have learned nothing. Their argument is not for sensitivity, care, thoughtfulness and good manners, but rather for the promotion of their own, highly traditional, values, and the disavowel of any beliefs which contradict them. One can say whatever one likes, and offend whomever one likes, so long as one doesn’t depart from little-England prejudices. That Thatcher’s colleagues were offended by her words is deemed irrelevant. Much is made of the fact that the racist term was used ‘in private conversation’, but in fact it took place in the workplace, where no conversation can be considered truly private.

So – I admit that getting worked up about all the above is largely pointless. The Mail will continue to pursue it’s agenda, and I will continue to either avoid it, or read it in a fury. What I think is relevant, however, and worthy of conversation, is the increasingly importance being afforded to public complaints and online petitions, and the way that media is able to manipulate stories by encouraging reader participation, and along the way turn minor stories which fit their agenda from trivia into headline news.

If I were asked to name one positive thing about the Daily Mail, I’d say that it’s always been a good campaigning paper. It has the ability to flag up bellweather issues and make headway with them, and it’s certainly the case that over the years it has been a powerful – if not always positive – lobbying tool. I admired it for its coverage of the murder of Stephen Lawrence and its decision to give away energy-saving lightbulbs to readers.

Nevetheless, its influence in the last six months has been deeply pernicious; by encouraging outrage and fermenting dissatisfaction with the BBC, it’s whipping up a frenzy which actually puts the reputation and future of the corporation in some doubt. It’s a deeply cynical move driven not purely by this simmering, inconsistent moral outrage, but by the fact that the paper’s owners have a vested interest in the demise of its most significant media rival.

More broadly, I’m starting to worry that the Mail, with a reach which far outstretches most of its rivals, is using this sequence of media stories to try to encourage some kind of moral revival, akin almost to religious fundamentalism in the US. Its aims are not journalistic, or even strategic, but rather political – it’s putting together a coalition of deeply conservative, disaffected readers (not limited to these shores) who are feeling bold enough to decry not just political correctness but the very notion of anti-racism.

I don’t mean to say that the Mail is starting a political party, or stoking the fires of revolution, but just as the arrival of Tony Blair and the revitalised Labour Party turned the nation gently leftwards in the mid-90s, there seems a risk that the right is attempting a similar trick. Unless the Mail’s petty concerns and prejudices are combated, there’s a risk that this mini-moral revival will drag the country to the right – and that would be a disaster.

I am sick of forever walking on egg shells in case some wimp gets offended by something I inadvertently say or do that they chose to misinterpret so they can play the victim card. I cannot believe all the fuss over an innocent toy and it is a repeat of the Sootygate episode! Golliwogs are not illegal and are found in many homes and I for one still have my old Golliwog from childhood. What next? Will this petty. toy-obsessed Government appoint Golliwog inspectors to break down doors and confiscate all the Golliwogs and Sooties?
- Elaine Worthington, East Sussex, UK, 5/2/2009 21:24

john martyn

Posted 30 Jan 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Music

Ah, sad to hear that John Martyn has died. ‘Solid Air’ is a beautiful record.

There’s a nice tribute to him over at the Guardian, where Erwin James recalled the time when Martyn played a Prison show which he saw. Like all of James’ writing, it’s rather beautiful.

John Martyn was on top form – he seemed to go into his own dream world as he played through his set, many of the songs the majority of us were hearing for the first time. And then something magical happened. He put down his Strat and called for an acoustic six string. The band slunk back to the shadows. “Some of you may know this song,” he said. Then taking a deep breath he steadied his voice and sang, “May you never lay your head down without a hand to hold, May you never make your bed out in the cold…” His signature song, the classic made famous by Eric Clapton’s Slowhand cover, but most truthful when sung by Martyn himself. Until that moment we had been a rowdy bunch, revelling in our entertainer’s onstage revelry, relaxing in the ambience of the music, chilling, dreaming. But suddenly Martyn was singing directly to each and every one of us: “Well you’re just like a great strong brother of mine and you know that I love you true/You never talk dirty behind my back and I know there are those that do/ Won’t you please, won’t you please, won’t you bear in mind, love is a lesson to learn in our time/Won’t you please won’t please won’t you bear in mind for me … “

Those lines meant so much to us, among us the down, the defeated, the betrayed and the betrayers – an anthem for relationships, a hymn to friendship and love. “And you’re just like a good close sister to me and you know that I love you true/You hold no blade to stab me in the back and I know that some do…” The words could not have been written for a more needy audience. As he sang, the depth of our exposure was near tangible. Even Crusher looked like he was going to cry. When he finished we stomped, yelled, whistled and cried for more. But with lock-up upon us there was no time for encores. Martyn bade us farewell with a giant, rasping, “Keep on rockin’ brothers!” And then we filed calmly out of the gym and back to our cells, feeling for a while like members of the human race once more.

The next day the gym cleaner found Martyn’s big mineral water bottle. It stank of vodka – that made us howl. No wonder he was on such good form. Thank you John. Wherever you are now, I hope you have a hand to hold.

Over at his website, Graham Coxon recalls Martyn fondly, too:

i last saw john martyn at the mojo awards when i gave paul weller an award. it was a mass photo of all awardees and awarders (?) backstage somewhere in front of a big sheet of backgroundy paper and it was hilarious. i was next to paul who wouldnt stop having his beer in shot and was talkin in swear words to jerry dammers who was grinning and answering in swear words and not taking the slightest bit of notice of the photographer who was trying in vain to get all these tipsey musicians to pay attention and watch the birdie.. i was leanin on john’s wheel chair which was under the control of phil collins and trying not to stare at him. every time john held out his hand a boy would appear and slap a drink in it. john was laughing his head off and swinging his head around to everyone and chattin the fraff…
i saw him in real life around 3 times and each time he seemed to be red faced and out of control with glee and mischief and making everyone else the same way. he was very funny indeed..
well the last time i saw him i thought “christ this man is amazing, how long will he be around for?…logic says he shouldnt even be here now!…how does he have this much energy?…..will i ever see him again?….will i ever see him play again?… no one plays the guitar like him…..he is a one off, like davy graham and jeff beck and nick drake and pete townshend…i have to shake hands with him and say something…like…”

“hi john just want to shake your hand and say how much…i…er..just how much…i…” by which point john has taken my hand in his huge and very warm hand, shaken it heartily and has continued to fall about in his wheelchair laughing at me like a loon…..amazing….lovely…

when i talked to danny thompson, who plays upright bass on many of the songs on my new album, about john he said that when they went to pubs together in the 70s before they drank a drop they would give the barman £200 and say “ok..thats to pay for the damage we are going to cause tonight”

Click here for one of Martyn’s characteristically marvellous performances.

gordon brown’s worst enemy

Posted 27 Jan 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Politics

The measure of a good politician is often that his decency shines through whatever he says and does, even if one is minded to disagree with him. Frank Field is a public intellectual who is frequently on the opposite side of the argument to me, a politician whose dogged principles mean that he is often infuriating and counterproductive, undermining fellow Labour politicians and siding with political enemies, backing free market policies or supporting immigration caps, but I’ve always found it hard not to respect him, even where it’s been hard to listen. A religious man, a moralist, a believer that the 1950s represented a golden era, Field is nevertheless exactly the sort of man we need in politics; someone to raise unwelcome arguments, to air grudges, to fight for the underpriviliged – something he is always prepared to do.

There was a fascinating, irritating, inspiring interview with him in the Sunday Times magazine this week – it’s worth a read. I particularly liked this section:

As we settle into our seats, Field tells a bizarre story, speaking volumes about the singular and eclectic nature of his career. Two nights before Mrs Thatcher lost office in 1990, Field — convinced few Tories had the guts to tell her the game was up — decided to visit Downing Street and tell her himself. “For some extraordinary reason, I used to have — and still do — a good relationship with her.”

Informed that the PM was busy, he settled in a waiting room. After a while Norman Tebbit entered: “Frank, what do you want?” “I’ve come to tell the PM she’s finished. I suppose you won’t let me see her.” Shortly afterwards, Mrs T herself appeared, “trembling”, recalls Field, “as I imagine people do when told they have inoperable cancer.”

Field found her a chair. “Frank, why have you come?” she asked in quavering tones. “I’ve come to tell you that you are finished. I’m not discussing fairness, Prime Minister, I’m discussing the options. You cannot now go on a top note, but you can go on a high note.” He told her that Michael Heseltine, who was leading the drive to unseat her, was vacuuming up MPs’ support in the race to be her successor. “Oh, Mr Heseltine is a dreadful bad man,” she said wearily. Field urged her to get her candidate in the race, and when she asked who that would be, said: “It’s obvious, Prime Minister. It’s the person you’ve promoted to all these offices — John Major.”

Elsewhere there’s lots of other interesting things. Try as I might, I can’t help but admire Field.

Mrs T (it’s interesting how often her name crops up) once told him her main regret was that the very rich in Britain had not become philanthropists on the scale of America’s super-rich. Field would tax them “till the pips squeaked” unless they “voluntarily” gave away chunks of their fortunes. He believes both rich and poor have been sapped by the collective nature of British society. Leave it to “them” has become a crippling national watchword.

beautifully mannered

Posted 16 Jan 2009 — by Jonathan
Category Politics

This article, by Andrew Roberts, is a wonderfully bonkers bit of writing, and well worth a read. Titled ‘History will show that George W Bush was right’, it’s an incredible, fawning tribute to the outgoing President, by a historian whose reactionary ideas have been well-documented. It’s no surprise to find him so keen on Bush, and the arguments he makes in the first few paragraphs are familiar, even plausible in places, although I fundamentally disagree with most of his conclusions. Whatever, the article only really flies off into the stratosphere when Roberts describes Bush as a:

“charming, interesting, beautifully mannered history buff who, were he not the most powerful man in the world, would be a fine person to have as a pal”.

Extraordinary.

the whole shebang

Posted 01 Aug 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Music, Reviews

Shebang is a fanzine put together by Liv Willars and Lynsey Woods, and it is one of the most beautifully designed and carefully constructed fanzines I’ve seen. Much effort has clearly been put in on Lynsey’s part putting together an attractive, cohesive page design and the team have commissioned an attractive selection of line-drawings, collages and paintings to illustrate their articles, which themselves demonstrate a satisfying breadth of content.

Although a majority of the features relate to pop music – with decent interviews with the excellent Peggy Sue and the young, eager Poppy & The Jezebels – Liv has been careful to commission articles on photography, art and travel, and it’s in these respects that the fanzine really excels. I’d much, much rather read an article about Berlin or Ghent than I would another indie band, and Tilly Stasiuk’s description of her Geisha makeover is fascinating stuff. When the fanzine dips into popular culture territory to talk about the Mighty Boosh, it takes an unexpected and welcome approach, talking to the prop master who worked on the first series of Julian Barratt and Noel Fielding’s show. It provides for energetic anecdotes and a view of the duo we’re not familiar with.

Some of the features are possibly under-written, and would benefit from more detail, but the overall feel is impressive. It’s a cleverly curated and beautifully executed effort, and hopefully the first of many. Feeling a bit inspired, I dropped them an email a month or two ago asking if they wanted any contributions. I’ve had no reply, which is probably for the best – it points to the fact that they’ve got plenty of stuff lined up for future editions. This is a fanzine definitely worth keeping your eye out for.

What I don’t know, unfortunately, is how to stress the title. Is it shebang or shebang? I don’t know, but I’m guessing it’s an ambiguity that Liv and Lynsey are happy with; both emphases seem equally appropriate.

You can buy the fanzine at http://www.shebang-mag.co.uk, or find it for sale in the following Falmouth shops: Jam, Here&Now and Babahogs, as well as in Brighton’s Resident Records and Stand Out Records in Salisbury! There’s even, wonder of wonders, a Facebook group, here.

waste not want not

Posted 08 Jul 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Politics

Oh, I wish I wasn’t as guilty of inefficient shopping as I am, but sadly I’m useless, always misjudging food quantities and either running out of stock almost immediately, or else opening my fridge and finding food which has passed its sell by date.

With Gordon Brown asking the nation to consider cutting back, the Guardian spend some time thinking about food wastage. Laura Barton writes:

“There is something slightly irritating about the prime minister’s insistence that it is down to us consumers to cut our food waste. Less than half of the food thrown away each year comes from households. To suggest that the average householder is to blame for our colossal national wastage is to ignore the way that the food industry has been allowed to develop in this country, from the relentless rise of the supermarket to the flourishing of the fast-food outlet, the decline in farming and the death of the local shop. All of these affect why we buy the wrong things, and why we buy so much of what we do not need”.

All of which is undoubtedly true – but the fact remains that a lot of people (including, for the most part, me) could do with developing stategies for efficient food consumption. So the article’s tips, put together by Ms. Barton and John Henley, make sound advice and a surprisingly good read. I’ll certainly be trying to think this stuff through more.

A few of their best tips:

Don’t be afraid of an empty fridge

“I think that goes back to the rise of the big American fridge,” notes Blythman. “It’s an aspirational thing.” You do not, therefore, need to buy acres of food each week to keep it chock-full.

Learn how to use leftovers

The lovefoodhatewaste.com site has a huge array of recipes contributed by celebrity chefs, nutritionists and members of the public, including a large number dubbed “rescue recipes” – in other words, how to put that bit of leftover chicken or half courgette to delicious use. There are also websites out there (leftoverchef.com and kitchen-scraps.com, to name but two) that, one you’ve typed in the primary and secondary ingredients you have spare, will go away and search their databases for recipes to use them up. Bit of fish left over, and some broccoli? Try, for example, Chinese steamed fish. And a couple of books may help: Second Time Around: Ideas and Recipes for Leftovers by Pamela Le Bailly, and The Use It Up Cookbook: Creative Recipes for the Frugal Cook, by Catherine Kitcho.


Take sell-by dates with a pinch of salt

As a general rule, only “use by” is worth taking seriously; “sell-by” and “display-until” dates are merely stock-control devices for food retailers, and “best before” is simply the producer’s estimate of when the food will stop tasting good, which is fairly subjective anyway. Rather than slavishly observing these date labels, we’d be far better off understanding the kinds of foods that could actually be harmful if they go off, such as ready meals (including sandwiches), soft cheeses, pates and cooked, processed meats and seafood. Eggs with a Lion Quality stamp can be kept for weeks in the fridge; chicken, raw meats and fish will all look and smell unpleasant long before they’re actively unsafe (as long as you cook it thoroughly, chicken, for example, is good for at least a week past its sell-by date). Apples last for months; potatoes are fine as long as you chop the green shoots off before cooking; tins and jars will last decades if not centuries; hard cheese is indestructible; and dry foods will last for years too. “Ignore sell-by dates,” insists Swannell. “They’re not relevant. And best before is just what it says on the tin; it doesn’t mean the food is toxic the day after that date.”

Elsewhere, over at B4L, Andrew asks an interesting question:

“Would the Government have been brave enough to suggest that people might save money by using less petrol, or that by borrowing less they might insulate themselves from rising interest rates? People inevitably realise this and adapt accordingly, but the reaction to a politician stating it would be furious.”

the pace of things

Posted 08 Jul 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Technology

From Michele Hanson’s column in the Guardian today:

“People are forever coming round here glaring crabbily at my computer because it isn’t fast enough. It takes one whole minute when it ought be taking a nano-second. They sit there, desperate to get online, and to them the huge seconds trundle by, each like the passing of the longest night. Unbearable. “You need a new computer,” they complain rattily. “This is ridiculous.”

No it isn’t. It is heaven. I switch it on, it has a little warm up, I go into the garden and deadhead a few daisies. Clip, clip. I count the froggies in the pond. I come in, I press connect, I turn to the piano, I practise a fragment of sonata, I return to the screen, I press mail, I give the dogs a kiss, I come in, I arrange my coffee and biscuit, and voilà – the computer is ready. It has taken a few brief minutes.”

Great stuff.

chlorine, bromine, resistence swimming

Posted 17 Jun 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Observations

I’ve always been more of a splasher than a swimmer; when I was a kid I just couldn’t get rid of the panic-tendency which meant that as soon as I put my head under I opened my mouth and gasped, getting a mouthful of salty (or chemical-flavoured) water for my troubles. I hated school swimming-lessons, hated every texture and fibre; lycra skull caps, goosebump-effect vinyl, hard towels and rubber locker-key bands. Snorting up water, particularly, wanting to retch.

I hated diving, racing, treading water. I hated getting out of my depth. I hated the coach-journey to the local grammar school, whose posh pool was rented out to the local comprehensives, but I liked the way we used to walk through their playground and sneer at the fact that they were playing cricket not football.

I hated too-tight inflatable arm-bands, compulsory showers. I never had a veruca. I skipped class the day they told us to bring our pyjamas.

Once, long after I’d dropped PE and stopped going swimming, my grandmother told me she hated Wednesdays, and when I asked why, she said “because you always go swimming on Wednesdays, and you hate it”.

I do actually like swimming, so long as no-one is making me do it. But even then I lounge round the edge of the pool or, if I swim out to the centre, eschew straight lines in favour of broad arcs and slaloms.

Here’s how I learned to swim: Not at school, I don’t think, although my primary school did have a pool. I remember swimming for the first time in the sea on holiday with my parents, somewhere warm. I hadn’t summoned up the courage to swim properly, so I used to play a game in the water instead, which consisted of walking out well within my depth and half-running, half-bouncing along the sea-floor, playing an imaginary, slow-motion game of football. I’d pass the ball, turn, and pound slowly through the water to my position by the goal, anticipating the cross, which I would meet with a diving header carefully calibrated to leave me back in the shallows, still dry from the neck up.

One day I was scooting along on my hands and knees where the water was warmest, and hence only a foot or two deep, when I looked up to find my father pointing his camera at me. On the rare days the photo album comes out, he always points out that was the day I learned to swim – he doesn’t see how my arms are tense, supporting my weight and keeping me anchored. There wasn’t a moment on that holiday when I decided to take the plunge, but I think my strides got longer and my body relaxed more, until it seemed I wasn’t touching the floor at all any more.

And then I noticed I wasn’t.

I suppose I always associate the ability to swim with the process of growing up; the inability to do so is something you throw off, like the inability to walk, or ride a bicycle. We get to the age of, I dunno, three or four or five or six, and learn how to be comfortable in the water. Then I read this weird thing in the Guardian today, an archived article from 1919, and it really surprised me and made me think, and the idea posited within – that we are an island people scared of water – really captured my imagination and made me think about the things we take for granted about modern Britain; including the ability to swim.

“At Ashton on Sunday a crowd stood on the banks of a canal and let a two-year-old child drown.

They even held back a spirited lad who was about to dive to the rescue, and delayed his effort until it was too late. The Coroner yesterday censured the crowd for their cowardice, but we doubt if he touched the root of the trouble.

It needs little or no courage to rescue a child from a canal. If courage were the only essential, no average British crowd would be found to lack it. But the prime factor in courage is confidence, and the paralysis that falls too often on the spectators of drowning accidents is born of a pitiful and needless fear of water.

We are an island people. None of us lives more than half a day’s journey from the sea. Water is our natural element, our strength lies on it. Yet the majority of our whole population still dare not trust themselves in it.”

The article goes on to declare support for the 1919 Education Act, which made special provision for a new subject; the teaching of swimming. All of a sudden I think back to my childhood swimming lessons and feel a touch of gratitude, rather than remembered horror.

they always let you down…

Posted 06 Jun 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Music

…if it’s true.

The Guardian report today that John Lydon – a musical hero of mine for his heroic PiL records – has been accused of punching Roxane Davis, assistant producer on a TV show Lydon is making, in the face because he didn’t like the hotel room he’d been allocated. Stunningly unimpressive stuff, and bewildering too. I hope it isn’t true, but it might be.

Oddly, having recorded this sad story, the Guardian’s Sean Michaels decides to close his news piece by turning the article into an advert for the latest installment of the Sex Pistols tour. It’s strange and dispiriting to encounter an article about a pop star punching a woman in the face should end with the line “You can admire Rotten’s new teeth and nasty demeanour at the following gigs…”

(un)fashionable

Posted 27 May 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Music

Weird how things come back around; five years ago you’d have been laughed out of town for liking The Boss. So I kept my mouth shut. Now Springsteen is back in fashion, and I confess all. Nice Drowned in Sound feature here.

As ever, I defer to Laura Barton, who can explain better. She says:

“One of the things I love about Springsteen is his ability to build a song out of such simple, small-town materials. His words are the linguistic equivalent of mere bricks and mortar, sand and cement – cars and girls, highways and factories. So by rights his songs should be plain, four-square houses with neat lawns and jolly red chimney pots. But instead he manages to construct extraordinary towers”.

Which is true.

when i believed in ghosts

Posted 24 Apr 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Daft, Observations

I can’t quite remember what the spur was – I don’t think it was a film or a TV programme, so it must have been a book – but when I was about 12 or 13 I became suddenly, passionately and fleetingly interested in paranormal activity. In the way you do when you’re a precocious, too-serious teen, I quickly dispensed with any associated elements which seemed to be too childish or unscientific (the ghost who appears before you, wailing, or alien abduction) and concentrated my efforts on becoming an authority on the two phenomena which I felt unaccountably sure did exist: poltergeists (which seemed to me as certain as memories) and – a bit weirdly, in retrospect – stigmata, the spontaneous bleeding from hands, head and feet which recalled Jesus’ crucifixion, although I think I weirdly ruled out any religious connection on the basis that I was an atheist – and too grown up for all that rubbish…

In order to facilitate my developing expertise, I began working my way through the ‘Supernatural’ shelf in my local high street book store – which mostly consisted of discounted paperbacks with titles like ‘The World’s Greatest 100 Mysteries’. I even went so far as to steal from the library a copy of Colin Wilson’s then out-of-print classic ‘Poltergeist’, a well-respected book which I subsequently found terrifically boring. Although, being a nice middle-class kid, my method of ‘stealing’ was to borrow the book then report it lost, incurring a sizable replacement fee in the process, which my mother wearily paid.

Wilson’s book was particularly interesting to me and my friends because, amongst other famous hauntings, it documented the case of the Enfield Poltergeist, which had occurred in our neighboring borough. It opened my eyes to the possibility – no, the fact – that I was lucky enough to be living in a hotbed of lurid paranormal activity.

Looking back, me and my friends – James, Iain and Richard – were ludicrously unadventurous. It would have been very little trouble, even in those pre-internet days, to find out the address, get the bus over there and stake the place out. But I don’t think we even considered it. As it happens, we had a more solid lead, anyway.

I grew up in a house filled with cats. Not literally, obviously, but my parents supported a linear line of cats from their early twenties onwards – a non-genetic chain of cat-children. And of course the cats, whichever one we had at the time, were always getting spooked by something or nothing – leaping up from their repose as though prodded, wailing ghoulishly at some imagined presence. I was familiar with this and thought nothing of it; a quirk in the feline brain. But when Iain told me that his dog – a representative of a species I was at that time completely unfamiliar with – would regularly bark at thin air, there was only one conclusion I was going to reach. Iain’s house, a modern semi-detached in New Barnet, was occupied by a poltergeist. It would be our first assignment to, in the most scientific way possible, prepare case notes, document its existence and ultimately identify it as either well-meaning or malevolent.

We took care not to pre-judge.

Of course, when I say we, I really mean I. I should have realised that my peers didn’t share my dedication to science when I arrived at Iain’s house – clipboard in hand – for our first investigation to find my friends sprawled around the living room, unwilling to start ’til they’d finished discussing a new movie, ‘Silence of The Lambs’, which was nearing its release date. Trying to take charge, I organised a sweep of the property, concentrating on the hearth area, which Iain had reported emitted occasional ‘wailing sounds’. Eventually it occurred to someone that we were taking the wrong approach, and that what we really needed was Iain’s dog, who would act as our eyes and ears and lead us to the part of the house where supernatural vibrations were at their most intense.

“Where is he?”, I asked.

“Oh, he’s in the kitchen”, Iain replied. “Go and get him”.

I shrank back a little – I had no experience of dogs at all, and was just a touch scared of them. “Can’t someone else get him?”

Everyone was suddenly very busy.

“OK”, I said, and made my way to the kitchen. Just before I opened the door, I heard Iain shout over.

“Say ‘squirrel’ when you see him”.

I shrugged, and opened the door, closing it behind me. Lying in the middle of the floor was a dog I can probably now identify as something broadly sheepdog sized, and rather friendly-looking, but which also seemed pretty huge and unknowable at the time. I inched towards it, and it rose to meet me, sniffing gingerly as it approached.

“Can you help us find some ghosts?”, I asked it, feeling a bit stupid. “Come on”. I turned towards the door, and then remembered.

“Squirrel”, I said, turning around.

I heard a key turn in the lock, and was knocked off my feet. Iain’s dog was reacting to the word ‘squirrel’ in exactly the way my friends – no, captors – had anticipated, and was charging round the room barking, jumping and attempting to recruit me to its game. I was absolutely stricken, beating a path to the door and yanking the handle in terror. The dog was upon me by now, clearly making some concerted effort to kill me, and this – combined with the tense, paranormal vibe resonating through the house, and the sound of ecstatic laughter from the other side of the kitchen door – heralded the precise moment when I began to lose interest in the supernatural world. A couple of months later I’d forgotten all about it.

I say all this only because there’s a terrific article about Robbie Williams, Jon Ronson and the strange world of Alien abduction up on the Guardian website, and it’s worth a read. It reminded me of my fleeting, humiliating obsession.

disorientated tourists

Posted 07 Apr 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Daft

Welcome to ‘forced analogy of the week’, courtesy of today’s Guardian:

“It was supposed to be a proud parade, the flame representing the Olympic ideal carried aloft through the Parisian streets on the latest leg of its global tour ahead of the Beijing games.

Instead, the Olympic torch resembled a disoriented Chinese tourist, hopping on and off the bus in several unscheduled stops during its tortuous and at times farcical journey around the French capital.”

Erm.

autechre, cross medium

Posted 05 Mar 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Music

I’m a big fan of what you might call ‘conventional’ music journalism, even though there’s plenty of rubbish out there. I grew up on Smash Hits and the Melody Maker, and am a big fan of several current music writers, although I’m pretty sure that the quality control on, say, the NME, has dipped alarmingly in recent years. So despite my interest in the web and blogging in particular, I still get the vast majority of my muso-journalism from the inkies, despite the presence of some excellent music blogs.

All the same – the following two reviews highlight how much potential there is either medium. For those who don’t know, the popular but extremely wilful Autechre are performing their latest tour in a pitch black environment, which can be rather hard to take. Of the two reviews, one is a traditional write-up from the Guardian (albeit one which is brave enough to go against orthodoxy), the other a short, unconventional review from Pete Ashton’s perennially excellent blog. It may not be music journalism per se, but it tells me as much as the first review.

Here’s an excerpt from Dave Simpson’s Guardian piece:

Stomach contents stay where they are, but their biggest prank is to mess with people’s heads, as their own music is scrambled and mashed-up beyond recognition. Vaguely danceable rhythms are suddenly destroyed by sonic screeches.

Some brave souls look po-faced as if this is something terribly important; others look baffled. One poor man is so disoriented that he walks into a door. When the duo start speeding everything up to comedy levels you start to wonder if this will be the first time “intelligent dance music” has given an entire audience black eyes. It seems less like a performance than a bizarre experiment in human behaviour.

And here’s Pete’s extremely short review – written via the medium of text message. He lists the ‘value of this review’ as ‘Slim’, but it’s not.

  • At a gig where the only thing to look at is a flashing green LED on the monitor speaker.
    Autechre on. Not convinced as to context of packed gig venue.
  • Music v good but I’m not getting it. Wanna be experiencing this elsewhere. Others seem happy tho.
  • Have moved to front. Makes a lot more sense now!
  • I think I need drugs. Or lots of coffee.
  • Well, that was out of my comfort zone. In a good way. Don’t think I’ve been to a gig like that before.

I’m glad I read both, and I think I’d quite like to see the band live, so looks like Pete’s done enough.

nepotism is hilarious

Posted 15 Feb 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Uncategorized

“Hello. I’m Max Gogarty. I’m 19 and live on top of a hill in north London.

At the minute, I’m working in a restaurant with a bunch of lovely, funny people; writing a play; writing bits for Skins; spending any sort of money I earn on food and skinny jeans, and drinking my way to a financially blighted two-month trip to India and Thailand. Clichéd I know, but clichés are there for a reason.”

Hello Max. Boy, you’re gonna get a lot of stick in months to come. Oh dear.

Read the comments, you’ll see what I mean.

Posted 14 Feb 2008 — by Jonathan
Category Music

I’ve read a bunch of really interesting reviews recently, so here are links to a few of them:

A downright mugging of Cat Power on the part of The Guardian’s Maddy Costa makes for fascinating reading. Chan Marshall’s live shows have been criticised (and celebrated) for many reasons, but this analysis is new to me. If it’s right, it’s very sad.

“In the past, Marshall has been diffident on stage, and she has been incompetent. She has been moving and exasperating. The keynote of this gig is an unpleasant aggression, a belligerence that taints even her repeated demands of the audience to “forgive me”. She seems no less nervous than in her depressed, chaotic past, but in stamping out the weak parts of herself, Marshall has also destroyed everything that was aching and haunting and beautiful in her voice. The transformation is horribly disillusioning to witness.”

Elsewhere, the boys (they’re always boys) over at Pitchfork deliver a horrifically unfair verdict on British Sea Power’s excellent ‘Do You Like Rock Music’. Saying it’s “an album that will either thrill or repel listeners depending on their taste for bombastic arena rock”, the review makes a series of fatuous references to U2 and refuses to give the record a mark out of ten. Pathetic. Here’s an extract:

“Curiously, these stadium-sized songs channel less passion, anger, or awe than their earlier work. Granted, emotion has never been the band’s strong suit, but here, British Sea Power speak the language of big feelings with little to back it up. Do You Like Rock Music? sounds empty at its core, with a rock where its heart should be.”

Rubbish, it’s a really good record.

A happier review, now. I watched the Wave Pictures at the End of The Road festival last year and was blown away by their tuneful, well-honed Hefner-pop, and in particular by singer/guitarist David Tattersal’s unbelievable playing. In Plan B this month they get several good notices, but this is the one that comes closest to summing up my thoughts. Courtesy of Meryl Trussler,

“and then the singer looks up at us….

He looks up, sways forward, and a sound begins to pour out of the guitar that is one of the least tedious solos I have ever heard. It is warm and unforced and earnest. It’s like listening to a thoroughly drunk but beloved friend insisting over and over their love for you – No, honestly, really, no, no, I mean this.

Excellent stuff – you can read the review here.

Got a feeling there were more reviews yet I wanted to comment on, so there may be more to follow.