Because of certain experiences in the early 1980's I came to the conclusion that human being would watch other human beings doing their every day things and that some human beings would be prepared to exhibit themselves in this way.
It touched upon the essential nature of us as children to be curious, to look at and to observe, Voyeurism has become a wholly negative word and yet it describes an aspect of the fundamental nature of human beings to enquire into themselves, others and all aspects of their immediate environment, the world, and the universe.
Similarly all children with a 'normal' upbringing like to make a show of themselves and the drive to display, and to look at, is natural, spontaneous and uninhibited. It becomes controlled, and sometimes sanctioned against, by parents, through religious and general education, and society, for good reason in terms of the rights and interests of others and the self protection of individuals.
This is necessary for a good social order, but it can also stifle and sometimes harm the development of individuals into creative, outward going and giving individuals.
It is the role of pre-school and primary education to enable the child to be free within bounds, and it is also a major part of creative education and when needed, through therapies to help individuals to become uninhibited and to learn to release their feelings, sometimes passionate feelings in socially acceptable ways.
In the mid 1980's I attended one of the great short international residential course for senior managers at Henley in which four weeks is devoted to self and observed assessment of roles and skills in the context of contemporary financial and commercial management and where one aspect was to consider future trends, opportunities and threats. Because of my experience, an interest in the internet and its development, and in film and television, I argued that this was an area to be exploited commercially and that people would pay to watch others go about their daily lives.
In part because I worked in local government which was regarded as bureaucratic, politicised and anti commercial, all substantially accurate, and because I did not communicate well in ways that my colleagues on the course were used to, my ideas were dismissed and ridiculed.
And then we had Big Brother House.
I was curious when it was first produced and while delighted that everything I had forecast had come to pass, was not impressed by the level of the participants or the direction in which the programme appeared to be taking. I sometimes watched live segments, often late at night, where what was shown on satellite channels fascinated from the days before Sky went Digital.
I cannot now remember what prompted me to begin to watch the 2007 series from the beginning and then to watch and study in a systematic way.
My interest was with the contestants and their interactions and how the programme was put together, especially the different levels, and the fact as with the talent competitions that vast amounts of revenue were achieved through public participation.
Each night there is a review programme on a terrestrial aerial as well as satellite main channels which summarised the previous 24 hours.
The highlight of the week was the eviction programme where over a period of several days the public decided which [participant would leave, thus reducing the number who would remain over the three months of the programmes and win £100000, plus personality appearances, endorsement, photo shoots and the like with a few achieving longevity as personalities or embarking of life changing new careers.
It had never to be forgotten that this was a competitive game show and that participants were selected and groomed for their celebrity potential and attracting, developing and maintaining the audience for the programme and in support of individual participants. Therefore there was an understandable tendency to go for young men and women able to exploit their situation through wild behaviour, using bad language, showing aggression and through physical exposure and interaction.
The weekly eviction programme was in two parts, the events leading to the eviction and the announcement of the eviction, sometimes with a twist such a fake eviction which the public knew in advance, so they were voting for someone who would return into the house.
After half a live break of 30 mins in which the individual says goodbye, the individual leaves to cheers and jeers from an assembled audience which includes a VIP area, such is the national interest in this part of the show, and something which participants fear in terms of will they be loved or hated, and which is also indicative if they are to have a financially successful future. They are then interviewed by a worldly female interviewer Davina McCall who reveals how the individual came to be nominated as well as playing back something of their highs and lows. They also get eh opportunity to have a go back at their former colleagues in the house and set their stall out for the future. In this instance of fake week the selected individual was consistently obnoxious, picking verbal quarrels of an aggressive and unpleasant nature often hurtful, using vile language and having been extremely manipulative and without any redeeming qualities. Her delight and being able to return into the house was only matched by the horror of those who had spoken honestly and open about her. She was evicted soon after and was given prominence in the media for a week or so but which added nothing to her standing or to the programme.
Each evening, or on the majority of evenings five or six times a week there were two other review, chat programmes each with a participating studio audience. The first Big Brother Little Brother was hosted by an intelligent bright and presentable young man who has progressed to becoming the front link man for the X Factor. Studio guests included personalities such as the actor who played Pauline Fowler in East Enders, and they were given a close up peek through one of the one way look-ins for cameras. Evicted participants reported on their week since leaving, who they wanted to win and who they did not. There were viewer phone INS and mobile clips and the audience were each able to have their say for a few seconds as well as get themselves on national TV. A second nightly programme had a guest presenter for the week in which they could indulge their interests with friends and other guests and these varied according the presenter.
The most interesting weekly programme on the house was the psychological in which a panel of psychologists with guest psychologists talking about the participants and how they interacted with each other and responded to the challenges thought up by the programme designers, sometime by viewers and sometimes by the contestants themselves.
The programme has developed from a Dutch TV experiment and one spin off lasted a whole year.
How do people behave when they are in competition to please the public and win £100000 and go on to further fame and perhaps fortune?
The starting off position is that the contestants are asked to nominate two others for eviction and to give their reasons aspects, of which are subsequently relayed to the evicted, given to the public and therefore available to the families and friends of the evicted and the nominees. The contestant will have undergone psychological profiling beforehand to ensure that they could take what they will be expected to take within the limits of the programme and voluntary participation with payment.
(See section on contestant contracts rules commitments etc)
Sometimes the programmers amend procedure so that individual may be deprived from making nominations, or nominations restricted to some contestants and this year twins were given the choice of being treated as one and therefore not split but with the price of being put up of eviction without nomination. T
The Threat of eviction and that fellow contestants decided who the public will vote for creates tension, the formation of alliances, the blatant canvassing for votes and the rounding on some individuals and the protection of others although not always for the disclosed reason. Sometimes individuals were supported against others because they would pose less of a threat in the long. This year four participants were brought into a half way house towards the end of the series and the remaining core many of whom has been presented from the first two weeks were rounded on although one managed to remain to the last rounds.
A major event week was the shopping list. The contestants ordered food priced from a manual and summarised on blackboard. There was a fixed time allotted and a budget. There was opportunity in most weeks to win a luxury budget by successfully completing tasks, although failure could mean a basic budget. One task which posed the greatest challenge was to dress up in a fish costume and then lay in a large sardine tin filled with smelly fish heads and goo for the required period. Some challenges were great fun to participate in and some required a mixture of skill and commitment. Participants who refused to participate in a particular challenged tended to lose the support of others while those who made a special effort were rewarded with congratulation and support although position would rapidly change.
Food and shopping brought out the worst of contestants and how the budget would be divided. Individuals undertaking cooking had considerable influence but could lose support if they did not take account of individual needs and inclinations. Two issues dominated the weekly purchases. Cigarettes and vanity requirements. However when one contestant who was generally supported was able to acquire one special item this was given up by the others when faced with options.
The programmers devised several twists this season. The first was to start with an all female household, then introduce one male who quickly started a relationship with one of the female and this dominated much of the first part of series in part because of the strength of their alliance and the problem of lining in close proximity with a relationship when without one. However, the relationship became a major issue for those within the house and the public because of its developing volatility and on off nature. In truth both had dislikeable qualities and used each other badly although the female who walked out of the programme has since appeared as a glamour truth revealing young woman on various covers and appears the most successful.
A second feature this year is that soon after the number of men in he House was increased it was decided that three participants should nominate one the others to receive £100000. The choice was generally proclaimed, and delighted the North East as it was nice lad from a good home in Country Durham.
The viewers knew but not the participants that the original £1000000 was retained.
This was won by Brian an inexperienced young black lad whose naivety and vulnerability endeared him to other contestants and obviously the general public. He was normal except for a piece of personal equipment which appealed strongly to several guests on the special programmes. He had watched the early series a youngster and had boxes of videos under his bed. When for one task he was invited to meet two previous series housemates he not only knew them, the house setting but also more about the series that they remembered. One wonders what the fame and money will have done to him or for him
Another feature this year was the introduction of two older participants from socially different backgrounds. One a head hunter tended to be a lifestyle and culture snob and I could not understand why she entered and it was understandable that she left prematurely.
Another candidate was revealed as a self made millionaire who also left prematurely when a grandparent died and decided he need to support his mother. He absented himself from the final.
Some had interesting aspects. One a gay Greek both aspects which he emphasised had three degrees and argued that he was an authority in a field of antiquity and worked in the commercial side if the trade, I think. His brand included a stuffed cuddly with clothes which he changed. A late arrival appeared to be able to fart whenever he wanted and did so. He also had stuffed creature with which he held conversations, constantly giggled and used grating voices and generally made himself disliked until he revealed a kind and thoughtful personality. Gay in outlook and behaviour he was said to be a virgin but who liked being spanked and spanking.
One young woman disgraced herself by using the wrong word to refer to those of black skin which was then seized on an exploited by the most obnoxious of the housemates.
She paid the price of being thrown off the series which much self righteous breast beating, because last season racial prejudice had been aired at length and appeared to have been accepted by the programme until there was a national clamour, and raised in Parliament.
A constant theme was whether the participants had a game plan to win public support. This was considered bad form. One could be an unscrupulous and unpleasant, devious and objectionable but to have thought it out before hand was unacceptable. Some were found out quickly but one latecomer who appeared to have a good background and just did what she thought would help her fit in as well as successfully setting her cap at the Durham lad was instantly disliked, when her biggest crime appeared to have been honesty.
This was also the problem with another giggly late comer who was nice enough but added little to the group dynamics. This contrasted with a pushy Scottish lad who appeared to know something the real rules of the game and insiders knowledge and was appeared genuinely flawed when he was nominated and departed
There was a similar fate for a single parent stripper from Wales who bared her top and apparently more, not shown unlike the male late arrival that did a full exposure with a female participant present. One suspects that this attempt to please was the basis of why she did her work. She was one of several entrants who appeared to have am advance sponsor/agent, wearing a crotch revealing dress for example which had been provided for the occasion of her entry to the house. This was regarded by the others as a step to far.
One woman in her thirties who liked cleaning and did so a private school for boys, living at the local village pub wore a pig ring on her face and had pink hair and a limited choice of inane catch phrases which other contestants took up, including programme presenter sand public participants.
Something of a loaner in the house but part a cultural group on the outside she was amazed to hear public support for her when she failed to be evicted more times than anyone else, and gaining confidence she started to appear a player for the prize which then lost her the support in relation to others.
There was one young man who liked to look at himself in the mirror a lot, subversive in a sly way that got his comeuppance. Another who arrived with day Greek and who also declared himself gay when all but one of the females were hoping for a full on encounter of some nature had a sense of humour but was equally shocked to the get the order of the public boot.
This leaves an interesting and attractive young woman who I thought would do well but perhaps became too friendly with the infamous one who it transpired had a good singing voice and recorded after leaving the show. There was also another young women who wined and wined that she had men and a lass from Wales who I also thought would hold her own but appeared to like doing nothing too much to gain support from the others.
And this bring me to the twins, frothy pink lasses who it was said were going to university but this transpired to be a child care course of some kind and certainly if their basic knowledge was anything by it would confirm worst fears and public sentiments about the quality of those enrolling for degrees these days and certainly one would hope mothers would be cautious about entrusting their infants with them. There were classical air heads who wanted to pool party, ooh pool party lots splashing and being thrown around by the men, drinking as much as was provided. They were harmless fun loving creatures but not a good advert for future community leaders, social contributors of the morrow.
This brings me to my favourite of all although she blotted her copy book from time to time, a grandmother who joined into whatever good cause need support. Who reminded the younger one how their parents would be reacting to their on screen behaviour. She organised and cajoled so that everyone was fed and the place was kept clean and that the community did not descend into anarchy. She joined in the most stupid and self ridiculing of tasks. She gave mini lectures on the reality of life and could spot a fake a mile away, having immediate suspicions about the arrival an alleged member of the Australian cast who was an actor with a separate room of her own and under constant programme direction. She through a wobbly from time to time and revealed bias and prejudices just like every other human being I've known. She was tempted to throw in the towel but was there nearly to the end. Hope you made it lass, you and your family should be proud of you.
Given my reservations about the nature of the he programme and the contestant it is legitimate to ask why I persisted in watching the full series often 24 24 except when I went to bed, usually in the background and included the internet connect which covered aspects which were held over to make the special programmes.
From the outset when I worked out what I wanted to do and how to do it I knew that to be consistent I should make my work available on line : That is the process of working as well as the output. The first obstacles was the lack of technical know how to create my internet, but mainly from how to do this without destroying the privacy to live and work which was core to be able to do the work and how I wanted to live. By nature I am a watcher observer than an exhibitionist and I admire those able to put them on the stage especially if they know they do not have special abilities or skills or something that others will appreciate.
It is also in my nature, to a fault, to want to complete tasks as planned although I am adaptable and flexible according to wider needs and changing circumstances. So having invested time in the programme I was determined to see it through to its conclusion.
However, as with much with I do I can then walk away onto the next thing which interests or is part of the master work programme. I do not need to watch the programme again which is just as well as it had been dropped for next year and there is a question mark about it return.
There was another level to my involvement. Going through group situations in my life. My early child hood household, the two school experiences, prison, college and university, work situations of which there right separate ones, and of course the management course when I understood myself more clearly since commencing work and going into senior management and then took decisions which have governed the rest of my life.
But this is another story for another time.
It touched upon the essential nature of us as children to be curious, to look at and to observe, Voyeurism has become a wholly negative word and yet it describes an aspect of the fundamental nature of human beings to enquire into themselves, others and all aspects of their immediate environment, the world, and the universe.
Similarly all children with a 'normal' upbringing like to make a show of themselves and the drive to display, and to look at, is natural, spontaneous and uninhibited. It becomes controlled, and sometimes sanctioned against, by parents, through religious and general education, and society, for good reason in terms of the rights and interests of others and the self protection of individuals.
This is necessary for a good social order, but it can also stifle and sometimes harm the development of individuals into creative, outward going and giving individuals.
It is the role of pre-school and primary education to enable the child to be free within bounds, and it is also a major part of creative education and when needed, through therapies to help individuals to become uninhibited and to learn to release their feelings, sometimes passionate feelings in socially acceptable ways.
In the mid 1980's I attended one of the great short international residential course for senior managers at Henley in which four weeks is devoted to self and observed assessment of roles and skills in the context of contemporary financial and commercial management and where one aspect was to consider future trends, opportunities and threats. Because of my experience, an interest in the internet and its development, and in film and television, I argued that this was an area to be exploited commercially and that people would pay to watch others go about their daily lives.
In part because I worked in local government which was regarded as bureaucratic, politicised and anti commercial, all substantially accurate, and because I did not communicate well in ways that my colleagues on the course were used to, my ideas were dismissed and ridiculed.
And then we had Big Brother House.
I was curious when it was first produced and while delighted that everything I had forecast had come to pass, was not impressed by the level of the participants or the direction in which the programme appeared to be taking. I sometimes watched live segments, often late at night, where what was shown on satellite channels fascinated from the days before Sky went Digital.
I cannot now remember what prompted me to begin to watch the 2007 series from the beginning and then to watch and study in a systematic way.
My interest was with the contestants and their interactions and how the programme was put together, especially the different levels, and the fact as with the talent competitions that vast amounts of revenue were achieved through public participation.
Each night there is a review programme on a terrestrial aerial as well as satellite main channels which summarised the previous 24 hours.
The highlight of the week was the eviction programme where over a period of several days the public decided which [participant would leave, thus reducing the number who would remain over the three months of the programmes and win £100000, plus personality appearances, endorsement, photo shoots and the like with a few achieving longevity as personalities or embarking of life changing new careers.
It had never to be forgotten that this was a competitive game show and that participants were selected and groomed for their celebrity potential and attracting, developing and maintaining the audience for the programme and in support of individual participants. Therefore there was an understandable tendency to go for young men and women able to exploit their situation through wild behaviour, using bad language, showing aggression and through physical exposure and interaction.
The weekly eviction programme was in two parts, the events leading to the eviction and the announcement of the eviction, sometimes with a twist such a fake eviction which the public knew in advance, so they were voting for someone who would return into the house.
After half a live break of 30 mins in which the individual says goodbye, the individual leaves to cheers and jeers from an assembled audience which includes a VIP area, such is the national interest in this part of the show, and something which participants fear in terms of will they be loved or hated, and which is also indicative if they are to have a financially successful future. They are then interviewed by a worldly female interviewer Davina McCall who reveals how the individual came to be nominated as well as playing back something of their highs and lows. They also get eh opportunity to have a go back at their former colleagues in the house and set their stall out for the future. In this instance of fake week the selected individual was consistently obnoxious, picking verbal quarrels of an aggressive and unpleasant nature often hurtful, using vile language and having been extremely manipulative and without any redeeming qualities. Her delight and being able to return into the house was only matched by the horror of those who had spoken honestly and open about her. She was evicted soon after and was given prominence in the media for a week or so but which added nothing to her standing or to the programme.
Each evening, or on the majority of evenings five or six times a week there were two other review, chat programmes each with a participating studio audience. The first Big Brother Little Brother was hosted by an intelligent bright and presentable young man who has progressed to becoming the front link man for the X Factor. Studio guests included personalities such as the actor who played Pauline Fowler in East Enders, and they were given a close up peek through one of the one way look-ins for cameras. Evicted participants reported on their week since leaving, who they wanted to win and who they did not. There were viewer phone INS and mobile clips and the audience were each able to have their say for a few seconds as well as get themselves on national TV. A second nightly programme had a guest presenter for the week in which they could indulge their interests with friends and other guests and these varied according the presenter.
The most interesting weekly programme on the house was the psychological in which a panel of psychologists with guest psychologists talking about the participants and how they interacted with each other and responded to the challenges thought up by the programme designers, sometime by viewers and sometimes by the contestants themselves.
The programme has developed from a Dutch TV experiment and one spin off lasted a whole year.
How do people behave when they are in competition to please the public and win £100000 and go on to further fame and perhaps fortune?
The starting off position is that the contestants are asked to nominate two others for eviction and to give their reasons aspects, of which are subsequently relayed to the evicted, given to the public and therefore available to the families and friends of the evicted and the nominees. The contestant will have undergone psychological profiling beforehand to ensure that they could take what they will be expected to take within the limits of the programme and voluntary participation with payment.
(See section on contestant contracts rules commitments etc)
Sometimes the programmers amend procedure so that individual may be deprived from making nominations, or nominations restricted to some contestants and this year twins were given the choice of being treated as one and therefore not split but with the price of being put up of eviction without nomination. T
The Threat of eviction and that fellow contestants decided who the public will vote for creates tension, the formation of alliances, the blatant canvassing for votes and the rounding on some individuals and the protection of others although not always for the disclosed reason. Sometimes individuals were supported against others because they would pose less of a threat in the long. This year four participants were brought into a half way house towards the end of the series and the remaining core many of whom has been presented from the first two weeks were rounded on although one managed to remain to the last rounds.
A major event week was the shopping list. The contestants ordered food priced from a manual and summarised on blackboard. There was a fixed time allotted and a budget. There was opportunity in most weeks to win a luxury budget by successfully completing tasks, although failure could mean a basic budget. One task which posed the greatest challenge was to dress up in a fish costume and then lay in a large sardine tin filled with smelly fish heads and goo for the required period. Some challenges were great fun to participate in and some required a mixture of skill and commitment. Participants who refused to participate in a particular challenged tended to lose the support of others while those who made a special effort were rewarded with congratulation and support although position would rapidly change.
Food and shopping brought out the worst of contestants and how the budget would be divided. Individuals undertaking cooking had considerable influence but could lose support if they did not take account of individual needs and inclinations. Two issues dominated the weekly purchases. Cigarettes and vanity requirements. However when one contestant who was generally supported was able to acquire one special item this was given up by the others when faced with options.
The programmers devised several twists this season. The first was to start with an all female household, then introduce one male who quickly started a relationship with one of the female and this dominated much of the first part of series in part because of the strength of their alliance and the problem of lining in close proximity with a relationship when without one. However, the relationship became a major issue for those within the house and the public because of its developing volatility and on off nature. In truth both had dislikeable qualities and used each other badly although the female who walked out of the programme has since appeared as a glamour truth revealing young woman on various covers and appears the most successful.
A second feature this year is that soon after the number of men in he House was increased it was decided that three participants should nominate one the others to receive £100000. The choice was generally proclaimed, and delighted the North East as it was nice lad from a good home in Country Durham.
The viewers knew but not the participants that the original £1000000 was retained.
This was won by Brian an inexperienced young black lad whose naivety and vulnerability endeared him to other contestants and obviously the general public. He was normal except for a piece of personal equipment which appealed strongly to several guests on the special programmes. He had watched the early series a youngster and had boxes of videos under his bed. When for one task he was invited to meet two previous series housemates he not only knew them, the house setting but also more about the series that they remembered. One wonders what the fame and money will have done to him or for him
Another feature this year was the introduction of two older participants from socially different backgrounds. One a head hunter tended to be a lifestyle and culture snob and I could not understand why she entered and it was understandable that she left prematurely.
Another candidate was revealed as a self made millionaire who also left prematurely when a grandparent died and decided he need to support his mother. He absented himself from the final.
Some had interesting aspects. One a gay Greek both aspects which he emphasised had three degrees and argued that he was an authority in a field of antiquity and worked in the commercial side if the trade, I think. His brand included a stuffed cuddly with clothes which he changed. A late arrival appeared to be able to fart whenever he wanted and did so. He also had stuffed creature with which he held conversations, constantly giggled and used grating voices and generally made himself disliked until he revealed a kind and thoughtful personality. Gay in outlook and behaviour he was said to be a virgin but who liked being spanked and spanking.
One young woman disgraced herself by using the wrong word to refer to those of black skin which was then seized on an exploited by the most obnoxious of the housemates.
She paid the price of being thrown off the series which much self righteous breast beating, because last season racial prejudice had been aired at length and appeared to have been accepted by the programme until there was a national clamour, and raised in Parliament.
A constant theme was whether the participants had a game plan to win public support. This was considered bad form. One could be an unscrupulous and unpleasant, devious and objectionable but to have thought it out before hand was unacceptable. Some were found out quickly but one latecomer who appeared to have a good background and just did what she thought would help her fit in as well as successfully setting her cap at the Durham lad was instantly disliked, when her biggest crime appeared to have been honesty.
This was also the problem with another giggly late comer who was nice enough but added little to the group dynamics. This contrasted with a pushy Scottish lad who appeared to know something the real rules of the game and insiders knowledge and was appeared genuinely flawed when he was nominated and departed
There was a similar fate for a single parent stripper from Wales who bared her top and apparently more, not shown unlike the male late arrival that did a full exposure with a female participant present. One suspects that this attempt to please was the basis of why she did her work. She was one of several entrants who appeared to have am advance sponsor/agent, wearing a crotch revealing dress for example which had been provided for the occasion of her entry to the house. This was regarded by the others as a step to far.
One woman in her thirties who liked cleaning and did so a private school for boys, living at the local village pub wore a pig ring on her face and had pink hair and a limited choice of inane catch phrases which other contestants took up, including programme presenter sand public participants.
Something of a loaner in the house but part a cultural group on the outside she was amazed to hear public support for her when she failed to be evicted more times than anyone else, and gaining confidence she started to appear a player for the prize which then lost her the support in relation to others.
There was one young man who liked to look at himself in the mirror a lot, subversive in a sly way that got his comeuppance. Another who arrived with day Greek and who also declared himself gay when all but one of the females were hoping for a full on encounter of some nature had a sense of humour but was equally shocked to the get the order of the public boot.
This leaves an interesting and attractive young woman who I thought would do well but perhaps became too friendly with the infamous one who it transpired had a good singing voice and recorded after leaving the show. There was also another young women who wined and wined that she had men and a lass from Wales who I also thought would hold her own but appeared to like doing nothing too much to gain support from the others.
And this bring me to the twins, frothy pink lasses who it was said were going to university but this transpired to be a child care course of some kind and certainly if their basic knowledge was anything by it would confirm worst fears and public sentiments about the quality of those enrolling for degrees these days and certainly one would hope mothers would be cautious about entrusting their infants with them. There were classical air heads who wanted to pool party, ooh pool party lots splashing and being thrown around by the men, drinking as much as was provided. They were harmless fun loving creatures but not a good advert for future community leaders, social contributors of the morrow.
This brings me to my favourite of all although she blotted her copy book from time to time, a grandmother who joined into whatever good cause need support. Who reminded the younger one how their parents would be reacting to their on screen behaviour. She organised and cajoled so that everyone was fed and the place was kept clean and that the community did not descend into anarchy. She joined in the most stupid and self ridiculing of tasks. She gave mini lectures on the reality of life and could spot a fake a mile away, having immediate suspicions about the arrival an alleged member of the Australian cast who was an actor with a separate room of her own and under constant programme direction. She through a wobbly from time to time and revealed bias and prejudices just like every other human being I've known. She was tempted to throw in the towel but was there nearly to the end. Hope you made it lass, you and your family should be proud of you.
Given my reservations about the nature of the he programme and the contestant it is legitimate to ask why I persisted in watching the full series often 24 24 except when I went to bed, usually in the background and included the internet connect which covered aspects which were held over to make the special programmes.
From the outset when I worked out what I wanted to do and how to do it I knew that to be consistent I should make my work available on line : That is the process of working as well as the output. The first obstacles was the lack of technical know how to create my internet, but mainly from how to do this without destroying the privacy to live and work which was core to be able to do the work and how I wanted to live. By nature I am a watcher observer than an exhibitionist and I admire those able to put them on the stage especially if they know they do not have special abilities or skills or something that others will appreciate.
It is also in my nature, to a fault, to want to complete tasks as planned although I am adaptable and flexible according to wider needs and changing circumstances. So having invested time in the programme I was determined to see it through to its conclusion.
However, as with much with I do I can then walk away onto the next thing which interests or is part of the master work programme. I do not need to watch the programme again which is just as well as it had been dropped for next year and there is a question mark about it return.
There was another level to my involvement. Going through group situations in my life. My early child hood household, the two school experiences, prison, college and university, work situations of which there right separate ones, and of course the management course when I understood myself more clearly since commencing work and going into senior management and then took decisions which have governed the rest of my life.
But this is another story for another time.
No comments:
Post a Comment