A Bruce Springsteen song comes to ear, Heavy Heart and a commercial featuring a clever conjurer, Paul Daniel and heavy heart and conjuring trickster sum up my feeling this morning.
My level of incredulity has been stretched over several decades but it reached a new high or low, I cannot be bothered to work out which by two events yesterday evening through till 4 am, after what had been a reasonable day.
However I begin by talking about two films experienced over the past twenty four hours while I collect my emotions to find words appropriate to express anger on one hand and disbelief at the black being described as white at the Republican Convention and the departure of Kevin Keegan as Newcastle Manager, the club issued a statement which has fooled no one and I only have one word to say but I cannot write it for to do so could provoke litigation.
The first film sums up one aspect of the British character and humour, the love of words which have more than one meaning, usually connected with sex and other bodily functions. Carry on Behind could have been also titled Bottom up or Upskirts, if it the intention was a soft porn production, whereas Carry on Behind is more about words than visual treats. Then film opens as Archaeology Professor Kenneth Williams introduces a film of his work at what appears to be a village hall and he describes his latest finds under mounds and penetrations at lower levels at the same time as a film of a young woman in a two piece bathing costume is shown prior to stripping off further clothing, by mistake. The double meanings are never subtle, always full frontal and in your face and the visual humour appears to be aimed at five year olds. Sadly this was one of the Carry On films in which Barbara Windsor did not display her twin charms.
The second film is intended to be a more serious drama showing cause and effects as members of small community disintegrate into killings and cover up after a different kind of archaeology explorers comes to a small Spanish village shortly after the sexually assaulted body of a young girl is found in a field of sun flowers after going to a disco, having had a row with her father over where she was going and when she would return. The night of the Sunflowers (La Noche De los Girasoles) was not an enjoyable or very engaging interesting film but its theme is a good one. A man in the village discovers a cave and the explorers are called in to investigate if there is anything original or valuable below ground. While the husband and colleague investigate, his wife goes to wait for them to come out, with the car, taking a book to read. An aging randy commercial traveller tries to pick up a girl walking at the roadside, who we quickly learn has walked away from the car driver by her boyfriend after a row, and then he, the boyfriend persuades the girl to rejoin him. Later the men meet at a bar and the boyfriend tells the industrial vacuum cleaner salesman of a quarry business near a village where he is sure there will be interest in the product. The man follows the instructions against his better judgement and finds he has been sent to a deserted village and a deserted quarry. On his return he spots the wife of the explorer, assaults and attempts to rape her, but she manages to stab him in the hand and locks herself into the car until her husband and his colleague returns. They come across an old man who lives in the deserted village and mistaking him for the attacker he is killed in a fight and then their car breaks down as they set off to tell the police what has happened.
The village policeman is married to the daughter of the local chief of police who is due for retirement when he hopes they will be free to move to a better place, and then his wife reveals that she does not want to leave nor does her father, so when he comes across the explorers who own up to the mistaken killing he decides on a plot to hide the body of the man and pretend that he has left the village but to do so in exchange for their life savings. However the plan does not work out as the father in law's suspicions are aroused and he also decides to go along with the plot swearing everyone involved into silence and burning money that was used as a bribe. The film is shot in a different way to this chronological account of what webs we weave when we deceive and where justice is sometimes best served through silence.
The greater part of the day was spent at cricket after preparing a lunch of salmon and cucumber sandwiches and a flask of orange fruit juice. Alas there had been torrential sheeting rain the night before with pools of water all over the ground so the start was delayed until after lunch at 1.40. This provided opportunity to have a good haircut in Chester Le Street and to buy some fruit and vegetables. I had a very good afternoon of cricket with some excellent company, a regular member to one side and economist from Newcastle University on the other. The cricket was also first rate as William Smith got another 100 and captain Blenkenstein 50 before tea time and rain clouds assembled. Before leaving I enjoyed a large plate of freshly cooked chips, having earlier had a coffee and a chunky Kit Kat. On returning I went to Sunderland to Staples to buy a replacement desk chair as the existing one was falling to bits because of my weight and hard handling, however although I commenced dissembling this to fit into the car I left assembly of the new one until the following day. I had a pasta bake with a glass of wine later and some snap crackle and pop cereal before going to bed for the second time in the early hours after listening to the acceptance speeches of the Republican Party choices for the President and Vice Presidency.
Before then I attempted to grapple with the news that Kevin Keegan had found the situation impossible to cope with and had left of his own accord, apparently having negotiated a situation where he was not required to pay the club compensation. According to the Football manager's Association the main concern had been the recruitment of players he had not wanted. Because this is a company and because of the usual restrictions on non disclosure of circumstances by the parties concerned all we were given were formal statements.
On the assumption that the club is not immediately sold or Alan Shearer confirms his spokesman's comments that this is not the time for him to express an interest, I anticipate that around half the usual number of spectators will stay outside ground even though a good percentage of these are season ticket holders, particularly because it is a game against Hull. How many will protest outside the club on the day of the next game or enter and make their protest that way remains to be seen. My concern is the risk to public order that is likely to arise. The concern is that any trouble will not only affect the lives of those participating but could affect the position of the club's long term, if there is trouble within the ground. In the eyes of the majority of those who support the club and I speak with the experience of being involved in the community and with football clubs in the region for over thirty years, the Owner, the Chairman and Mr Wise will be regarded as traitors and enemies of the people. They are yet to reveal whether they are also cowards.
I am unsure what to make of the two acceptance speeches at the Republican convention. I have already expressed concern at the organised tribal behaviour of the crowd which would have made Hitler, Goebbels and Stalin proud, although it is of a similar order to partisan nature of football crowds or those attending a rock concert. and although the Republicans have controlled the White House for eight years and there was a sense they some were trying to out do the Democrats in displays of fervour and enthusiasms for the party's choice of candidates. I have two general observations to make in terms of policies and performances The approach of most of speakers at the Republication Convention was similar to that of the National Front and the United Kingdom Independence Party, with both Labour and Conservatives polices considered as being to the far left of the Democratic party. The great slogan of the two nights was USA, USA, USA, and the proposed change advocated by Senator McCain was back to right wing conservatism of Ronald Regan, and down with all liberals.
So given this back cloth what did the Governor of Alaska have to say apart from describing her family and rise to power? She was anti corruption and had taken action in this respect. She wanted political leaders to set an good example and she demonstrated this by defeating a leader in her own party who she did not believe had set a good example, selling the governor's private jet on E Bay and dispensing with paid help in the Governor's Mansion. She had declined the offer of Federal money to pay for a bridge which went nowhere, adding that if the state need a bridge the state would fund it. She was also clear on her position regarding abortion, on government expenditure and taxation in general. She would reduce both as much as practical. She was not sympathetic to the traditional ways of politics and her one objective was to serve the people of her country rather than set out to gain the support of the left wing media which appeared to cover everyone except Fox TV. On the issue of energy she was in favour of off shore exploration to reduce the period of dependence on overseas imports but which also recognised that it was essential to focus on other energy sources. She came over as strong and purposeful although a little nervous, inexperienced and overawed. I was not convinced by attempts to make her out to be an ordinary hockey mum although I have no doubt that she was one, along with hunting with her dad and the other aspects of being an ordinary person growing up in the culture of Alaska. This changed when she became Mayor and even more so when she became Governor and would change even more so when she became one heart beat away from being President.
Last night I was also up to hear what Presidential nominee John McCain had to say, and because I was tired and had to doze I watched again during Friday. So what did I make of what he had to say?
First I liked his own definition of Maverick as someone who goes their own way and I had little quarrel with most of his sentiments and beliefs about how human beings should behave and take responsibility for their own lives and of any dependents. It was also evident, as he has demonstrated in the past, that he sits uncomfortably in the adversarial political party system with his memorable statement, "I would rather lose an election than my country lose a war." No one is in a position to question his personal courage, demonstrated as a long term prisoner of war in Vietnam, My personal problem is that his political views are similar to the Conservatism of Margaret Thatcher two decades ago, before Britain became a multi culture grappling with the problems of finding its place in the ever complex world of today. Senator McCain also demonstrated his party to be hypocritical in presenting themselves as a Christian based God fearing party and then stated the new administration would cut their overseas aid to countries who did not like America very much. So there you have it, you get money not because you need it, not because it is the right thing to do, or even because it is also in the best interests of the USA, but on the basis that you pass some test of appearing to like the USA according to the defined test of a Republican Administration. Put this another way you get money if you then do what we say.
I had the impression that the Democrats were going through the obligatory motions of finishing and ending everything proclaiming that America was God's chosen country and the best in the world. This approach is not only unchristian but demonstrable nonsense and shows confusing power with moral righteousness. What was evident over the last two nights is that the Republican delegates actually believe this.
What was also evident from the filming of delegates is the disproportionate numbers of whites compared to the position of the Democratic party. However also evident is that the Republican Party represents a vast chunk of opinion in the USA which is what a democracy is all about and that there are major differences between the policies of the two parties on major issues such as the level of taxation and public expenditure, instead of the manufacturing of differences here in the UK and where moral issues and matters of conscience are not treated on party political lines. There is still some two months to go and I conclude that the outcome is still too close to call and therefore the party creatives will be desperate to find some dirt to give to the media.
My level of incredulity has been stretched over several decades but it reached a new high or low, I cannot be bothered to work out which by two events yesterday evening through till 4 am, after what had been a reasonable day.
However I begin by talking about two films experienced over the past twenty four hours while I collect my emotions to find words appropriate to express anger on one hand and disbelief at the black being described as white at the Republican Convention and the departure of Kevin Keegan as Newcastle Manager, the club issued a statement which has fooled no one and I only have one word to say but I cannot write it for to do so could provoke litigation.
The first film sums up one aspect of the British character and humour, the love of words which have more than one meaning, usually connected with sex and other bodily functions. Carry on Behind could have been also titled Bottom up or Upskirts, if it the intention was a soft porn production, whereas Carry on Behind is more about words than visual treats. Then film opens as Archaeology Professor Kenneth Williams introduces a film of his work at what appears to be a village hall and he describes his latest finds under mounds and penetrations at lower levels at the same time as a film of a young woman in a two piece bathing costume is shown prior to stripping off further clothing, by mistake. The double meanings are never subtle, always full frontal and in your face and the visual humour appears to be aimed at five year olds. Sadly this was one of the Carry On films in which Barbara Windsor did not display her twin charms.
The second film is intended to be a more serious drama showing cause and effects as members of small community disintegrate into killings and cover up after a different kind of archaeology explorers comes to a small Spanish village shortly after the sexually assaulted body of a young girl is found in a field of sun flowers after going to a disco, having had a row with her father over where she was going and when she would return. The night of the Sunflowers (La Noche De los Girasoles) was not an enjoyable or very engaging interesting film but its theme is a good one. A man in the village discovers a cave and the explorers are called in to investigate if there is anything original or valuable below ground. While the husband and colleague investigate, his wife goes to wait for them to come out, with the car, taking a book to read. An aging randy commercial traveller tries to pick up a girl walking at the roadside, who we quickly learn has walked away from the car driver by her boyfriend after a row, and then he, the boyfriend persuades the girl to rejoin him. Later the men meet at a bar and the boyfriend tells the industrial vacuum cleaner salesman of a quarry business near a village where he is sure there will be interest in the product. The man follows the instructions against his better judgement and finds he has been sent to a deserted village and a deserted quarry. On his return he spots the wife of the explorer, assaults and attempts to rape her, but she manages to stab him in the hand and locks herself into the car until her husband and his colleague returns. They come across an old man who lives in the deserted village and mistaking him for the attacker he is killed in a fight and then their car breaks down as they set off to tell the police what has happened.
The village policeman is married to the daughter of the local chief of police who is due for retirement when he hopes they will be free to move to a better place, and then his wife reveals that she does not want to leave nor does her father, so when he comes across the explorers who own up to the mistaken killing he decides on a plot to hide the body of the man and pretend that he has left the village but to do so in exchange for their life savings. However the plan does not work out as the father in law's suspicions are aroused and he also decides to go along with the plot swearing everyone involved into silence and burning money that was used as a bribe. The film is shot in a different way to this chronological account of what webs we weave when we deceive and where justice is sometimes best served through silence.
The greater part of the day was spent at cricket after preparing a lunch of salmon and cucumber sandwiches and a flask of orange fruit juice. Alas there had been torrential sheeting rain the night before with pools of water all over the ground so the start was delayed until after lunch at 1.40. This provided opportunity to have a good haircut in Chester Le Street and to buy some fruit and vegetables. I had a very good afternoon of cricket with some excellent company, a regular member to one side and economist from Newcastle University on the other. The cricket was also first rate as William Smith got another 100 and captain Blenkenstein 50 before tea time and rain clouds assembled. Before leaving I enjoyed a large plate of freshly cooked chips, having earlier had a coffee and a chunky Kit Kat. On returning I went to Sunderland to Staples to buy a replacement desk chair as the existing one was falling to bits because of my weight and hard handling, however although I commenced dissembling this to fit into the car I left assembly of the new one until the following day. I had a pasta bake with a glass of wine later and some snap crackle and pop cereal before going to bed for the second time in the early hours after listening to the acceptance speeches of the Republican Party choices for the President and Vice Presidency.
Before then I attempted to grapple with the news that Kevin Keegan had found the situation impossible to cope with and had left of his own accord, apparently having negotiated a situation where he was not required to pay the club compensation. According to the Football manager's Association the main concern had been the recruitment of players he had not wanted. Because this is a company and because of the usual restrictions on non disclosure of circumstances by the parties concerned all we were given were formal statements.
On the assumption that the club is not immediately sold or Alan Shearer confirms his spokesman's comments that this is not the time for him to express an interest, I anticipate that around half the usual number of spectators will stay outside ground even though a good percentage of these are season ticket holders, particularly because it is a game against Hull. How many will protest outside the club on the day of the next game or enter and make their protest that way remains to be seen. My concern is the risk to public order that is likely to arise. The concern is that any trouble will not only affect the lives of those participating but could affect the position of the club's long term, if there is trouble within the ground. In the eyes of the majority of those who support the club and I speak with the experience of being involved in the community and with football clubs in the region for over thirty years, the Owner, the Chairman and Mr Wise will be regarded as traitors and enemies of the people. They are yet to reveal whether they are also cowards.
I am unsure what to make of the two acceptance speeches at the Republican convention. I have already expressed concern at the organised tribal behaviour of the crowd which would have made Hitler, Goebbels and Stalin proud, although it is of a similar order to partisan nature of football crowds or those attending a rock concert. and although the Republicans have controlled the White House for eight years and there was a sense they some were trying to out do the Democrats in displays of fervour and enthusiasms for the party's choice of candidates. I have two general observations to make in terms of policies and performances The approach of most of speakers at the Republication Convention was similar to that of the National Front and the United Kingdom Independence Party, with both Labour and Conservatives polices considered as being to the far left of the Democratic party. The great slogan of the two nights was USA, USA, USA, and the proposed change advocated by Senator McCain was back to right wing conservatism of Ronald Regan, and down with all liberals.
So given this back cloth what did the Governor of Alaska have to say apart from describing her family and rise to power? She was anti corruption and had taken action in this respect. She wanted political leaders to set an good example and she demonstrated this by defeating a leader in her own party who she did not believe had set a good example, selling the governor's private jet on E Bay and dispensing with paid help in the Governor's Mansion. She had declined the offer of Federal money to pay for a bridge which went nowhere, adding that if the state need a bridge the state would fund it. She was also clear on her position regarding abortion, on government expenditure and taxation in general. She would reduce both as much as practical. She was not sympathetic to the traditional ways of politics and her one objective was to serve the people of her country rather than set out to gain the support of the left wing media which appeared to cover everyone except Fox TV. On the issue of energy she was in favour of off shore exploration to reduce the period of dependence on overseas imports but which also recognised that it was essential to focus on other energy sources. She came over as strong and purposeful although a little nervous, inexperienced and overawed. I was not convinced by attempts to make her out to be an ordinary hockey mum although I have no doubt that she was one, along with hunting with her dad and the other aspects of being an ordinary person growing up in the culture of Alaska. This changed when she became Mayor and even more so when she became Governor and would change even more so when she became one heart beat away from being President.
Last night I was also up to hear what Presidential nominee John McCain had to say, and because I was tired and had to doze I watched again during Friday. So what did I make of what he had to say?
First I liked his own definition of Maverick as someone who goes their own way and I had little quarrel with most of his sentiments and beliefs about how human beings should behave and take responsibility for their own lives and of any dependents. It was also evident, as he has demonstrated in the past, that he sits uncomfortably in the adversarial political party system with his memorable statement, "I would rather lose an election than my country lose a war." No one is in a position to question his personal courage, demonstrated as a long term prisoner of war in Vietnam, My personal problem is that his political views are similar to the Conservatism of Margaret Thatcher two decades ago, before Britain became a multi culture grappling with the problems of finding its place in the ever complex world of today. Senator McCain also demonstrated his party to be hypocritical in presenting themselves as a Christian based God fearing party and then stated the new administration would cut their overseas aid to countries who did not like America very much. So there you have it, you get money not because you need it, not because it is the right thing to do, or even because it is also in the best interests of the USA, but on the basis that you pass some test of appearing to like the USA according to the defined test of a Republican Administration. Put this another way you get money if you then do what we say.
I had the impression that the Democrats were going through the obligatory motions of finishing and ending everything proclaiming that America was God's chosen country and the best in the world. This approach is not only unchristian but demonstrable nonsense and shows confusing power with moral righteousness. What was evident over the last two nights is that the Republican delegates actually believe this.
What was also evident from the filming of delegates is the disproportionate numbers of whites compared to the position of the Democratic party. However also evident is that the Republican Party represents a vast chunk of opinion in the USA which is what a democracy is all about and that there are major differences between the policies of the two parties on major issues such as the level of taxation and public expenditure, instead of the manufacturing of differences here in the UK and where moral issues and matters of conscience are not treated on party political lines. There is still some two months to go and I conclude that the outcome is still too close to call and therefore the party creatives will be desperate to find some dirt to give to the media.
No comments:
Post a Comment