Yeah the people who make Pot Noodle.

This is becoming a bit of a pet issue of mine, as this is something I have personally run afoul of in the past. Two incidents come to mind. The first was when one of our listener meet ups ended up at FAB Cafe in Leeds, only to be thrown out because it’s “illegal” to take photos in a nightclub, it isn’t. And the conflict continued as I took photos of the bouncers from the street, also not illegal.

Then there was the incident just before Charistms when somebody thought you can’t take pictures in a public place so much that they got into my car and tried to take my phone off me.

For some reason we seem to be living in a world where those of us who lack the ability to think are under the impression that taking photos is somehow a bad thing and is therefore illegal. They also forget that when they’re in public, then they’re in public and have absolutely no right to privacy. If you don’t want to appear on camera then stay home.

And so in following the above video I put in a call to Golden Wonder and got a lesson in how not to handle questions.

First of all I was given the name and number of the security company that supplies the guards. It’s a very common thing for companies like Golden Wonder to not directly employ their own security guards. It’s much easier for them to out source it to a private security company. Such companies exist because it’s such a common practice. Nothing wrong there. However by directing me to talk to Kingdom Security, Golden Wonder are essentially saying that they accept no responsibility for this matter as they don’t employ the individuals in the video. That’s all well and good, but I’d personally say that if somebody is on your company grounds, and is being payed to be there, and is carrying out the instructions of the company, then the fact that Golden Wonder doesn’t directly pay their wages is irrelevant.

After pointing out to GW that simply directing me to a different company is the same as not accepting responsibility for what happened I was transferred to the HR department. Then it got even more crazy. Just like the security guards in the video, there were a lot of contradictions.

First of all it was made clear to me that GW don’t have a problem with people taking photos of their factory and have invited the man in the video back to take all the photos he likes. That’s very big of them considering that that have absolutely no legal right to have a problem with people taking photos of their factory. I was also informed that the two security guards have resigned. Note, not fired, resigned.

Apparently GW are doing nothing more about this matter and have left it to their security company to do an investigation. Given that the two people in the video have apparently resigned I do wonder what that investigation with involve and what any possible results could be. To GW I have to ask why they are so caught up with this security company? Personally as soon as the video hit YouTube I’d have been on the phone to any other security company to replace the one I was using. Isn’t it that simple? If a company is providing you with a service that is not up to par, you use a different company. Yeah, it’s that simple.

GW also said that the incident needs putting in context because we don’t know what happened before the video started. They suggested that the photographer might have provoked the security staff in some way, might have set foot on their property, or attempted to stop cars entering the car park. I asked what hypothetical events might have occurred before the video started that warrented the response the man got from the guards, and got no answer. If he was stopping cars entering the car park, why weren’t the guards talking about that? If he was actually trespassing, why didn’t the guards talk about that? If he had done anything other than take photos, why was none of it mentioned in the video?

GW also seemed annoyed that the faces of the guards were visible in the video. They said that the BBC had played the clip on the news and had blurred out the faces of the guards, so based on that it was obviously a legal requirement to do so, and if it wasn’t, why did the BBC do it? Well, it isn’t in any way a legal requirement, for the same reason that it isn’t illegal for the photos to be taken in the first place. If you’re stood on a public street in the middle of the day you have absolutely no legal recourse against somebody either photographing or videoing you. It seems they haven’t learned their lesson, but seeing as they’re doing nothing about it themselves, that isn’t hard to believe. Perhaps the security company will learn that rule.

So in conclusion I’d say that Golden Wonder handled this about as badly as it could be handled. Perhaps they could do an investigation in to that.

When you’re out and about taking pictures, you’re entirely allowed to do that. You can take photos of people and buildings, even police officers and that’s all there is to it. Ignore everyone who tells you that you aren’t allowed to do it. The only situations that I’m aware of where you could very well be moved on from, is if you’re trying to take photos of milatry

Lindsey Kalenborn (lindseykal on our forums & @lindseykal28 on Twitter) gets Simply Read something of an exclusive as she interviews Katy Pfaffl, one of the cast members of the Broadway smash, War Horse.

Everybody remembers the depth of feeling they had for their beloved childhood pet. The mere mentioning of said animal is enough to inspire nostalgia and a faraway look even in the most cynical among us. It seems that Broadway is not immune to this phenomenon, as the play War Horse won the 2011 Tony Award for Best Play and continues its successful run with no end in sight.

The West End import is based off the novel written by Michael Morpurgo and adapted by Nick Stafford. A movie version is due out this Christmas with none other than Steven Spielberg in the director’s chair, and should broaden War Horse’s already large fan base.

The story is about a boy, Albert, and his faithful horse Joey. When Albert’s drunken father sells Joey to the Calvary during World War I, Albert sets off on a dangerous journey to recover his cherished friend. War Horse has been praised for being able to walk the line of sentimentality without treading over it, and consequently is a favorite for children as well as adults. Meticulously-crafted and operated, the horse puppets give surprisingly life-like performances, all adding to the visual spectacle.

I was fortunate enough to be able to speak to one of War Horse’s cast members, Katy Pfaffl. Also known as “Mighty Kate”, she answers some questions about her role as “The Song Woman” and performing in the Tony award winning play.

Lindsey: This is your first Broadway role. Describe the casting process and your reaction to getting the news that you got the part.

Kate: Years ago I had a dream of being on Broadway, but I had given that dream up to teach and become a singer/songwriter, so it was very bizarre to go in and audition for War Horse. The show had been having difficulty finding a male accordionist (which is what the London version had always cast in my role), so a management company that represented some of my voice students called me and asked if they could submit me on accordion and violin.

I knew I wasn’t what they were looking for, so I didn’t think twice about it. But to my surprise, they called me in to audition and they thought I was interesting so they kept calling me back. The two directors were in London working on other projects so they flew me out for my final callback and they ended up deciding to change the role for me, making me the first female violinist to play the role. It was shocking and incredible… truly a fairytale experience.

Lindsey: War Horse won several Tony’s, including Best Play. That must have been an amazing night. Can you tell us about it?

Kate: The night of the Tony’s was an amazing night. Two of our cast members, Seth Numrich and Matt Doyle actually attended the Tony’s at the Beacon Theater, and the rest of us were at a bar near our theater that Lincoln Center had rented out for the night. We all dressed up and had free food/drinks all night while we watched the show on multiple flat screen TV’s located throughout the bar. Initially we were sad we weren’t able to be at the actual ceremony, but in the end, I think it was for the best because we were all able to scream, yell, jump up & down and be as ridiculous as we all needed to be. Our two cast members were texting me all night long letting me know when War Horse had won the smaller awards that were not announced on TV, so it was exciting throughout the whole night. After the Tony’s, the whole British Creative team came back to the bar with their awards in hand and we all got to take pictures and celebrate together. It was magical.

Lindsey: You’ve recorded several albums of your own music, my favorite being As She Stands.  Do you still find time with your busy schedule to work on your own music?

Kate: Being in War Horse has definitely made it a lot more difficult for me to perform my own music. Before being in the show, I was performing pretty frequently and touring the states as much as possible. Now, obviously, I’m not able to travel and am limited to playing a “Mighty Kate” gig of my own music to once every three months. However, they do sell my CD’s at the theater which has helped me gain new fans, and I’m in the process of writing/recording a new EP with my fellow songwriter Jody Shelton that I hope to be releasing this Christmas. I’m also in the process of scoring a short independent film, so I’m managing to stay creative while being in the show as best I can.

Lindsey: I heard that Hugh Jackman came to congratulate you on the show. That must have been exciting, what was that like?

Kate: I met Hugh Jackman outside of the theater because he is friends with one of our cast members, Peter Hermann, and he was the loveliest man. I also have met Alec Baldwin as well as Angela Bassett, who is the only celebrity that came backstage to personally say hi to the whole cast. She is as stunning and warm in person as she is on screen. There have also been a lot of celebrities who have come but not come backstage such as Meryl Streep, Glenn Close, Jon Bon Jovi, Richard Gere and Barbara Streisand just to name a few. It’s fun whenever we find out that there’s a celebrity in the audience – we all try and figure out where they are sitting to catch a sneak peak.

Lindsey: What are the future plans for the show?  Is a tour expected soon?

Kate: The Lincoln Center production of War Horse has an open ended run, so we plan to perform the show as long as people keep coming to see it. There will be a separate tour starting, as well as a Toronto production that will both be starting in 2012. The London production is still running and selling out as it has done for the past 5 years, so hopefully War Horse will continue to grow and thrive.

Lindsey: What has been the most rewarding part of being a participant of this project?

Kate: The most rewarding thing about being a part of War Horse has been the opportunity to meet and work with the 36 amazingly talented and wonderful people that are my cast mates. I have never before been a part of such an incredibly respectful, loving and supportive family as I have found within this cast, and having been through SO much together, I will cherish them in my heart always. Even though the show itself is amazing, this particular group of people is truly what has made this production of it successful and I am so proud to know them all.

CHECK OUT MIGHTY KATE’S MUSIC

Last weekend I had the pleasure and the privilege to interview the fantastic Gail Simone at Montreal Comic-Con.

Gail Simone is a prolific and fan-beloved American comic book writer most known for her work on Birds of Prey, Wonder Woman, Deadpool, Secret Six, and the recent Batgirl reboot. Before she worked writing comics, Simone was a fan who became known for her online initiative Women in Refrigerators, which documented the frequent use of violence against women as plot devices for male protagonists. This website caught the attention of many people in the comics industry, and Simone was hired to work as a comics columnist. She went on to write many runs and titles for Marvel Comics, DC Comics, Wildstorm. Simone is currently writing the Batgirl title for DC Comic’s “New 52” reboot of their universe. She has been writing professionally for ten years.

In my university Creative Writing course, we were assigned to interview a professional or long-term artist about their creative process, and I immediately thought it would be incredible if I could somehow finagle a meeting with Gail, who had a table and two panels at the con. Since Gail is so talkative on twitter, I dropped her an @reply, mostly expecting her to be too busy, but I was immediately replied to with interest and before I knew it I had an interview scheduled with one of my favorite comic book writers. Despite a few obstacles (such as two-hour convention entry lineups) I was able to meet her at her table in Artists’ Alley and we had a lovely chat, interspersed by other fans of hers. It was a wonderful experience.

Being a comic book writer wasn’t your initial career. How has creativity been an ongoing thread in your life? The relationship between art and income is always unpredictable, talk about your battle between creativity and needing to make a living?

“I was a hairdresser. Before that, I was and still am to this day, a big comic reader and fan. I did want to be a writer when I was a kid, but my family convinced me that there was absolutely no way I would ever earn a living as a writer, so I never pursued it. I needed to earn a living to support myself, so I decided to go to beauty school; it was at least something creative, and I thought it would be interesting, which it was, I did enjoy doing it. But I came to a point in my life where I just felt like something was missing; I needed more, I had some frustrations, and it was suggested to me that I do something other than hair that was creative. So I sat down and thought, ‘What can I do? I can’t draw, I can’t sculpt, and I can’t sing …’ and I finally thought, ‘Well, I used to write, I want to try that again.’

“First of all, I started with the Women in Refrigerators. I noticed that on the internet companies were asking why they didn’t have more of a female readership, and I started thinking about that and about how I felt as a female reader and what the trends had been. A lot of female characters had been de-powered, chopped up, put in refrigerators, murdered, solely for the purpose of the male character being able to have his revenge story. And it was happening a lot. So I just posed the question, could this be the reason we don’t have a very large female readership? Other people in the community and industry started contributing; I never really wrote much on the subject, I just posed the question, and it just turned into a big site that did its job, I think.

“I wasn’t writing comics at the time, just goofing around with these little parody pieces about comics and pop culture, which led to a weekly column, and I’m surprised they even let me into the comics industry after that column. I really lampooned a lot of people and characters and styles. Eventually, that led to me being asked to write Simpsons Comics.

“I still had my salon, and I still didn’t feel like writer. I think it’s only been in the last three years that I actually said, “I’m a professional writer!” As I got more writing assignments I’d cut back a day in the salon, and I’d cut back another day, and eventually I was on the phone so much with editors and they offered me to go to conventions and DC offered me an exclusive contract so I sold the salon and went fulltime writing, because I wasn’t scared anymore about the insecurity about [the job] and I lost the stuff in my head about my family saying I’d never make a living out of it. It wasn’t until I was offered money that I finally told my husband that what I was doing on the computer at night was writing. And I still think about it today, ‘wow, I’m making a living writing. I’m living my dream. Can’t believe it!’

Do you have a usual process that you can describe step by step? Do you work according to a schedule, or in sudden bursts of inspiration?

“The process is a little chaotic – I don’t have working hours per se, but I do work all the time, whether it’s thinking or actually in the office… It takes me about a week at least to think about what I’m going to write in an issue of a comic book, planning and thinking, tone-wise, what characters are going to be in there and how the story’s going to go, before I ever sit down to write it.”

How far in advance do you write and plan?

“As an industry, we try to have six issues planned ahead, about six to eight months. The script won’t be complete but we try to have a basic plot.”

How far in advance do you plan a story? When you’re taken on as a writer, do you know how long your run will be?

“In the case of Wonder Woman I think I was thinking about it for about eight months before I started actually writing, and researching and thinking about what I thought the book needed and what tone we were going to go for, and those kinds of things. So that part of the process is actually what takes me the longest.”

How do you get past a creative block?

“Usually I want to be running multiple projects so that I can work on another project if I’m stuck on one. But if that’s not the case then I’ll read a history book or something like that, because I’m almost always inspired by reading something that I can bring into the story. It gets my brain into a different place.”

What kind of environment do you prefer to work in? A quiet study? With music? Outdoors? In a café?

“When I sit down to write, I have to have complete quiet, I can’t work to music, especially if there’s words. If anybody’s talking outside my office I start typing the words that are being said. I just really get distracted and so I have to have complete silence. Even when I’m traveling – I do work a lot on the road – in the hotel rooms and such, everyone has to have their own headphones on if they’re in the room with me. I can’t do it if there’s TVs going, all that kind of stuff.”

How do deadlines affect your creative process?

“The deadline affects it in terms of I know what has to be done, and I stay up all night and do it if I was maybe stuck for a day and all of a sudden it’s due. It doesn’t affect the quality or my actual thinking processes. It’s more of a ‘this needs to be done now, so let’s get it done.’”

Do you always write alone? Do you also collaborate with other authors?

“I have [collaborated] a couple times. I really do prefer to work alone. I’m a control freak when it comes to story and writing [laughing] but I did work with John Ostrander… we have the same philosophy as far as writing goes, it’s the story first and egos don’t enter into it. I really enjoyed working with him. And now I’m collaborating with Ethan Van Sciver on different projects… we’re collaborating on Firestorm and also on a secret project that hasn’t been announced yet. And I do enjoy that, because we sit down, we go over the ideas, we go over the basic plot, and then in the one that’s not announced yet he goes to the art duties and I go to the scripting… with Firestorm he’s doing covers and art designs and things like that. It’s a really wonderful collaboration. But those are really the only two times, two people.”

How do you react to negative feedback? Positive feedback?

“I like both of them in a way – and I’ll explain that, because I feel like if you’re not getting any negative feedback then you’re probably just doing the same old thing. So a little bit of negative feedback I almost take as a compliment. But the truth about the positive feedback is it took me a really long time to be able to accept it. I had a hard time being thankful – like, ‘I don’t know if people like it, I hope they like it’, wrestling with that internally a lot.  When people would tell me how much they liked it at first, when I still had my hair salon, I didn’t feel like I was a professional writer for a while. It was a weird adjustment for me, internally. I would say I had a little more trouble getting used to the positive feedback than I did to the negative. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, and I’m fine with that.”

Is knowing that you have enthusiastic support from fans encouraging or pressuring?

“I don’t think I felt pressure, I didn’t feel like ‘oh my gosh these people are being so complimentary now, I better not disappoint them’. I’ve always approached the writing the same way: trying to tell a really good story that will connect with people. And hopefully I will succeed. That’s always been on my mind, when I was starting and when I’m writing now. I felt a little pressure writing Wonder Woman just because the legacy has gone on for so long. After traveling around the world and seeing what Wonder Woman means to a lot of different people, particularly women in countries that don’t have equal rights… Seeing through those eyes made me realize how huge of a character she is – she’s bigger than me, of course, bigger than any writer; she’s really bigger than the company at this point, as far as what she represents. So I felt that a little bit, but I never felt pressure from the fans.”

Growing up as a reader and now as a writer, who have you learned from, who inspires you, and how?

“I’m inspired by a lot of writers inside and outside comics. Inside comics I would say Alan Moore, particularly when he was writing Swamp Thing, that really grabbed me; the George Perez Teen Titans, Elfquest, Grant Morrison’s Animal Man… In the visionary quality, I admire Steve Gerber a lot. He was a forward-thinking visionary. With Elfquest, I really loved the character interactions, and how she got into the culture of the elves, and how they interacted with each other.”

A hallmark of your writing has been the presence of minorities that are very under-represented in comics: Female characters, LGBTQ characters, disabled characters, etc. What kind of research or preparation do you do before staring a new project?

“I research heavily… it is all going to depend on the type of project I’m doing. I did a lot of research on world prisons when I was writing Secret Six… when I wrote the Agent X Deadpool issue I did a lot of studying on King Ludwig II, and I’ve done a lot of studying on people with disabilities. Right now I do a lot of studying of psychology to try to get into the heads of these characters – heroes and villains.”

What is your creative relationship with the artists who draw the comics you write? How much input do you have in each other’s work? How does what you write get translated into panels and speech bubbles? How much description do you give to background characters/locations and how much is the artist responsible for?

“I’ve read comics since I was a young girl, so I was familiar with comic art. But of course I didn’t write comics. I’ve learned a lot about that process since I started writing, in terms of how to best communicate with an artist, to get them to understand the story and what we’re trying to get through, understand coloring notes, and to get the letterer to understand if there’s a different weird font. I’ve learned those technical things a bit at a time. I write in full script, and give information on new characters to the artist so they can start right away trying to design the character. I write in a ‘Page 1, panel 1, this is what happens, page 1, panel 2, this is what happens’ structure. A 20-22-page comic is about 48-50 pages of script, so there’s a lot of description. I’ve learned to put special notes to the colorists up front, because they don’t always read the script. I always want the artist to feel free to do what he or she thinks gets the story across in the best way visually, because that’s his or her expertise and talents, so I leave that to them. Working directly with an artist like Ethan Van Sciver it’s much more of a collaboration, we do a lot of talking upfront about what we’re doing, where we’re going, plotting, ideas, scope of the story. Then we go to our separate corners and I script and he does the art.”

What has been your most challenging project, and how?
“I think I would say that Wonder Woman has been the most challenging project, because, as I said earlier, the legacy of her character, what she means to people of all ages and sexes and sexual orientations, people from all over the world. It really was tough, and also to figure out how to keep the things that people responded to in the first place when she was created, but to update her enough for a current audience in terms of what we believe is a strong woman nowadays, compared to the 30s when she was created. Bringing out the tone and trying not to make her too precious or too much up on a pedestal. I really loved working on her character. She was the most challenging and most rewarding.”

Since you started out as a voice in the fan community it’s awesome to see that you still have an active presence among fans. How does your online interaction with the fan community online and at conventions affect what you write?

“[Connecting with the fan community] doesn’t affect how I write. Some people probably may assume that if I asked a question about, say, who’s your favorite Bat character, I might be fishing for ideas, but I’m really not. It’s questions as a fan. It affects the way I communicate with people as a fan and a comic reader myself, joking around and finding out what people have to say, but it does not affect the actual storytelling or writing at all.

“What’s great about conventions – all my work is done in a little lonely office, and with a computer, no human contact whatsoever. So when you go out to the conventions, you get to see how people respond and reacted to your stories. And you see it a little bit on the internet, but it’s different in person, how it touched them, what made them angry…”

How does writing for a pre-existing character/universe affect your writing process? How much of other in-universe storylines do you have to be aware of when you’re writing? Are you given any guidelines by DC or Marvel when you’re writing for them? How much do you work with canon or add to it?

“I like the big events, and in the industry it’s just a matter of time when it’s going to happen. They can derail plans, which is why I started creating characters, because if I create it, they don’t know it’s there yet, and they can’t change it. But I like being part of the larger universe. The hardest thing is when you’re in the middle of something and they want you to do something that ties in, you’ve got to figure out how to make it all work together. It’s like solving a 3000-piece puzzle in one week. It’s about making it fit together as a cohesive story so that when the reader reads it, they don’t know that this was thrown in in the middle, and it seems organic.

“Sometimes I want to use characters and I can’t because they’re being used elsewhere at that time.

“I’ve never been told not to write gay characters. I’ve never been told to take them out or make them straight. I don’t always say that they’re going to be gay in my pitch, because I don’t want them to shut the doors down before they get to know the character. There have been numerous gay characters that have not been done properly, and the company doesn’t want that, so if you say you’re going to write a gay character they might get ideas about avoiding being offensive before they know what you’re going to do.”

What has been the highest compliment paid to your work?

“That people care about the characters I write. As a writer, it’s a form of communication with other people, and if they’re just not getting it and don’t care, that’s one thing, but to have someone tell me that they’re having a really crappy day and they read a comic I wrote and they started laughing and decided they really didn’t care about whatever was upsetting them, that’s amazing to hear. Or someone say that my Wonder Woman book helped them get out of an abusive relationship. Or that they were afraid to try writing or drawing comics but that I inspired them. ­­I think a lot of that comes with my honesty as a writer, and having been a hairdresser for a number of years I met a lot of people and got to know them… clients dealing with illness and death and birth and marriage and divorce… I got to know people closely, and it’s helped me get the deeper characterizations and try to be in touch with people on a deeper level rather than just plot.

Which existing characters would you most like to write?

“The first thing that popped into my head was Deadpool. I’ve written Deadpool, and I love writing Deadpool. I’d definitely do it again. If I had to pick a character I’ve never written, I’d make some overlooked female characters deeper and more fleshed out and interesting. Kitty Pryde, Storm, Black Widow.”

Who is your favorite character, and what attracts you so much to them?

“Black Canary. I think she’s beautiful and her design is beautiful. I’ve always liked that abut her. Growing up I was extremely shy and I loved the fact that Black Canary, at least when I was writing her, she always wore her heart on her sleeve, she wasn’t shy at all, she would go out and kick butt, and she had a certain wit about her. I find her a really fun character to write. I always felt that in the DC universe that after Wonder Woman she should be the #2 character and I felt that she never got a fair shot at that, and I couldn’t understand why, so the more I wrote her and the more I got to know her as a character, the more she got a fully-fledged persona, the more I fell in love with her.”

What are the similarities and differences between writing for an original project and a serial?

“Everything I write, my approach is similar in that I develop a character from ground up. In my mind, I know the details about their life, I know their past, so I know how they’re going to react to different situations. Most of my time is spent building a character and the tone and attitude of the book. I loved writing it because I could really let myself go – with the DC stuff it has to be all ages and appropriate.”

How do you define creativity, or a creative person?

“I believe that a creative person thinks individually, they don’t take what they’re told as law. They’re gong to creatively solve problems, they’re creative in that way as well, not just art or storytelling. I believe that most creative people are great observers; you need that toolbox of observing the world and people to be able to know how to communicate with them, even if you’re doing something complete bizarre that’s not on this earth, you still have to have something [for readers] to grab onto. I believe that they come up with new ways to come up with things and look at thing and tell stories, constantly coming up with something new. Most people I feel are creative are not stagnant.

Thank you so much for your time, Gail!

– Ari

In what seemed to be kismet, Channel Four’s recent “Street Summer” season of programming coincided with the rioting that blighted Britain in early August. The vandalism perpetrated by a significant portion of the country’s working-class teenagers was probably not the ideal backdrop to launch of series of programmes focusing on the environs that produce many of these same teenagers. It seems that while in the planning stages, Channel Four set out to show the other side of inner-city culture that you seldom see in the red-top newspapers. And the timing of the rioting blitzkrieg proved a telling social counterpoint. Here are three programmes from the series that stood out for me:

GRAFFITI WARS:

This documentary focused on the rivalry in the graffiti scene between artists “Banksy” and “Robbo”. Banksy has become something of a minor celebrity in recent years. His subversive street art has made headlines, and has been much sought after by celebrities. However, many people embedded in this sub-culture have little time or respect for Banksy. Most of all, his bete noire, Robbo.

Robbo had been a graffiti artist throughout much of the 1980′s, retiring after deciding that the risk of being prosecuted was too high – especially as he had a a wife & child to support. He was lauded as the best graffiti artist in the country, often referred to as “King Robbo” (funny enough, I remember seeing his signature “tag” on buses and trains when I was growing up). In his absence from the scene, his work gradually disappeared from view, cleaned up and painted over by local councils, with one exception. In a section of Regent’s Canal, his tag remained untouched, almost as a memorial to his legacy. In the graffiti world, this was hallowed ground.

While Banksy has achieved mainstream appeal, many sneered at him for his techniques. Often using stencils to complete his work, it was regarded as cheating; a shortcut to creating his incendiary and provocative images. The criticism put me in mind of the hilarious exchange at the beginning of the film, Chasing Amy, when a fight breaks out during an argument over whether a comic-book inker is essentially nothing more than a tracer.

Robbo himself was of this mindset; to be a true artist, you should do all your work freehand. Eventually the froideur between the two reached a tipping point, when Banksy painted over Robbo’s one remaining tag with his own image. Regarded as heresy, Robbo came out of retirement, and a tit-for-tat battle broke out on London’s streets between the two. If Banksy created an image on a street wall, Robbo would deface it with his own artistic bon mot, and vice versa. Fans of both men also became embroiled in this dispute. Soon everyone who had an interest in this conflict were either “Team Robbo” or “Team Banksy”.

There were a number of things that made this documentary so interesting. First, it reopened the debate around graffiti itself. Is it art or senseless vandalism? All the artists featured generally go out under the cover of night to avoid detection from the police. They work under the constant threat of being arrested. And while they are defacing public property, does it make it easier to countenance if the images they create have artistic merit? The ambiguity of the term is problematic in itself. And why do councils paint over graffiti in London as a matter of course, yet they leave Banksy’s works untouched?

But underneath the crime vs art debate, at its core Graffiti Wars is an old-fashioned tale of bitter rivalry. Both men want to prove themselves as the other’s superior. It’s Moby Dick transferred to London’s inner-city.

LIFE OF RHYME:

This is presented by the UK rapper, Akala. As the title suggests, it looks at the musical genre of hip-hop. But it’s not about the genre superstars such as Jay-Z, 50 Cent or Kanye West. Life of Rhyme focuses on hip-hop in Britain, and how it has developed, from the second generation West Indian & African immigrants to the UK, right up to the present day. Rather than just be a highlight reel of chart-toppers like Dizzee Rascal or Tinie Tempah, it methodically picks apart the elements that make up this form of music, particularly its etymology. Tracking how the culture and speech patters of these aforementioned immigrants has been updated by the current generation of inner-city youths, it gives a clearer understanding of not just how, but why many of today’s teenagers speak & communicate the way that they do.

Hip-hop in Britain is still a relatively nascent form of music, and it’s unlikely to convert anyone who wasn’t a fan originally. What Akala sets out to do, is to clear some of the fog around the music. The connotations of hip-hop, such as misogyny and materialism are put to the side, and the focus is squarely on the lyrics. The words. Something that everybody should be able to relate to.

One of the documentary’s best scenes is in a school in Kent, where a Year 9 English teacher educates his class on narrative in poetry, comparing the rapper Devlin, and the poet William Butler Keats.  Using the phrase “rapper” here in reference to Devlin is actually quite insulting, as there is no doubt that what he does is also poetry. You could argue that it’s bad poetry – that’s a subjective viewpoint – but what is not in debate is that rappers are latter-day troubadours, the same as various musicians of other genres.

What really stood out for me was the way the documentary was presented to the audience. Akala never made his points in an aggressive or egocentric fashion, but more in the manner of an excitable teacher who was desperate to share an unfamiliar part of society with people who would normally shy away from young people. He encouraged us to look past the hooded tops, and low-hanging jeans to see that there is a person. A creative person. Something more substantial than a societal statistic. Hip-hop may never be your cup of tea, but its denizens are just as valid a cross-section of society than any other.

RANDOM:

The final programme was Random, a television drama from Debbie Tucker Green. Adapted from her acclaimed stage play, Green tells a story of a day in the life of three generations of a West Indian family. Giving them the monikers Mum, Dad, Brother and Sister, it is a compelling and, for me, recognisable slice of life drama. It’d be stupid of me to ignore the fact that I probably fall in the target demographic for such a programme, but what adds an extra layer of interest is that Sister – played by Nadine Marshall – voices every one of the four characters. While in a studio she changes her intonation and mannerisms for each member of the family. While the camera follows the rest of the actors around throughout the day, it’s Marshall who fleshes each character out. And she does a blinding job. She transfers from a middle-aged West Indian matriarch to a cocksure teenager on his way to school with absolute seamlessness. It is a stunning piece of acting, that will probably be overlooked when awards season comes around.

Marshall makes each member of the family distinctive. Mother is anxiety-ridden. She complains about having to clean up after her children, but secretly loves doting on them. Father is the strong, silent type, and spends most of the time asleep as he works nights. Sister is on the verge of a quarter-life crisis, but likes to pretend she has herself together. While brother is the typical teenage boy; carefree, sanguine and hormone-driven. Mother warns both her children that they think they’re “invincible”, due to their relative youth.

Random is executed with heft, precision, and no little skill. Green is definitely a talent who deserves a bigger canvas on which to tell her stories, while the best compliment I can give the cast is that I felt that I was looking at people that I grew up with, rather than a company of actors. It’s one of the finest pieces of British television this year, and should be recognised as such at next year’s BAFTAS.

The reason I was so compelled to write a blog post on these series of programmes, is that they were more than just good television. They had a lasting and profound impact on me than just entertaining me for a few hours. Watching youths cause havoc in England made it easy to resort to depicting anyone who grows up on a council estate as a menace. Knowing that in the past how I have indulged in mocking people from a social and financial standing that I myself was once a part of made me feel embarrassed and disgusted. I, of all people, had no right to turn up my nose and act condescendingly when there but for the grace of God go I.

It got me thinking about all the people I know who denounce hip-hop as “not even music, just noise”, or mock particular speech patterns because it’s not the Queen’s English. Who is anyone to pass judgement on what someone wears, or how they speak, or the kind of music they listen to. These programmes helped remind me that there is a world of difference between those criminals who looted their country’s streets and those who wear baseball caps with flat peaks. If we’re going to disparage the cadence of urban youths, then I suggest we do that for all the multifarious uses of language in Britain. Using the phrase “you get me” as a suffix is no more a barometer of someone’s intelligence than the idiom, “that’s the badger” or “Get a chuffin’ move on!” There’s no difference between any of them, as they’re all part of the multicultural make-up that Britain is supposedly so proud of.

The quality of Channel Four’s programming has dipped alarmingly over the past few years. But their “Street Summer” series re-educated me to a part of the country – and myself – that I had turned my back on. It was a return to Channel Four’s halcyon days; making challenging and rousing television that puts a spotlight on a part of society that had been hitherto ignored. And with so many of the nation’s youth currently being depicted as prison fodder, it’s timing couldn’t have been more apposite.

Sure, it embarrasses the ol’ wifey. But that’s part of the fun.  This summer, we hit the Cleveland MetroParks Zoo twice. It’s not bad, and it’s only 25 minutes away, so we end up there several times a year. This time around, we spent lots of time at the new Elephant Crossing exhibit, where trainers bring elephants just a few feet away from the crowds.

So since I had the photos and a little free time, I decided to throw them out there… and included a pinch of trivia.

Trivia: Elephant herds are matriarchal, which means the womens are in charge. OH NOES!

Trivia: Orangutans are the largest arboreal (tree-dwelling) creatures on Earth. Males can grow up to 220 pounds, but females usually only weigh half that amount.

Trivia: The smallest of all marine mammals, otters can stay underwater for up to four minutes before resurfacing for air.

Trivia: Clouded leopards (of southern China and Malaysia) cleverly break up tree branches to build their own sleeping nests.

Trivia: This deer wasn’t part of an exhibit. It was actually wandering through a shady wooded area near the primate habitat in the middle of the Cleveland Zoo.
Trivia: Some deer, such as a specific species found on an island off the coast of Scotland, are carnivores.

Trivia: The most fearsome creature of them all is the pregnant human female while overheated and mobile. Above, a particularly beautiful wifely specimen cools off in the mist machine. However, the female is still deadly and should be avoided at all costs, despite her apparent calm demeanor.

The following post is from Greg Blanchard (a.k.a. GAB on our forums). He can also be heard on the “Inappropriate Conversations” podcast, which can be found at http://inappropriateconversations.podbean.com/ or on iTunes.

As many of you know, I grew up in America’s, “Bible Belt” where the reddest of the so-called “red states” can be found. One of the great things about our current internet age is that it is possible to interact conversationally with people from across the country and/or across the world pretty freely. That can also be one of the more disturbing things.

Laura, an old friend of the family who moved west around the time that I moved east, commented online that she was so tired of all the hate-filled talk about the definition of marriage. Expressing exasperation, she suggested that government just back away from marriage decisions altogether, leaving the concept to churches or individuals to define.

She got a response from someone that I’ve never met, a guy called Bill, who lives in Oklahoma. I’m comfortable suggesting that he was speaking for a majority of Christians that he knows. I responded to Laura as well, which ended up also being a response to Bill. Here are some highlights of that online conversation:

Bill:

- No government agency can make marriage what it isn’t. Government can only give legal backing to real marriage or create a legal mockery of it. But laws don’t change what marriage really is; one man + one woman for life.

Me:

- For my wife and me (and, truly, I suspect everyone else), our marriage cannot be re-defined by what anyone else calls their relationship, with our without government support or blessing. Never let anyone else’s relationship – loving or otherwise – interfere with the way you value and esteem your own loving commitment. (Too often, as Christians, that’s a message we send – that our marriages are only meaningful in the context of how they compare to others.)

Another friend of Laura’s offered an insight that Bill and others ignored. She wrote, “When the government and firms connect things such as health benefits, legal rights, and taxation to the definition … well, it doesn’t seem right to let religious context define the term.”

Here is my position, which perhaps typically reflects my “radical moderate” political views. I do endorse a traditional definition of the word marriage based on our conventional (and perhaps too simple) understanding of gender. I prefer the concept of civil partnerships and reject any notion that this idea is either threatening to conservatives or disappointing to liberals.

On the other hand, Jesus would NOT stop a person on their deathbed from seeing the person they love more than anyone other human … and that’s what our laws too often do today. Can we do the heavy lifting of ensuring the rights of everyone on issues of insurance and inheritance? Or, as Laura said, are we just going to squabble over definitions?

I must have used some of the magic words because Bill responded: “Yes, but all of that can be accomplished now through wills and directives executed between any two people. There really doesn’t need to be a special legal category created.”

I called his bluff. You want to use existing laws? Then Christians must stand up as a political majority and push to change every one of these individual laws in every level of city/state/federal government as simultaneously as possible across more categories than just health care and insurance.

So, as Christians, are we ready & willing to do the heavy lifting to make things right, and quickly? Or do we mistakenly believe that the answer to “What would Jesus do” slogans is “nothing”?

I ask because if we cannot change all of those laws in a way that will be recognized by the federal government, then “civil partnerships” is the way to go. Oh, and if we don’t want to do this Christ’s way, to ensure that people who love each other don’t need a briefcase of paperwork and lawyers on speed dial just to function as parents (divorce, adoptive or otherwise), or make medical decisions on each other’s behalf, etc., then we’ll be stuck with “gay marriage”, and it will be at least partly our fault as believers.

Most of the time when you call someone’s bluff, you aren’t really expecting a reply. That’s what we’re seeing more and more from the Tea Party movement. If a question comes up that requires thought and discourse, you are very likely to see a Tea Party proponent walk out of the newsroom. Bill didn’t back away, and I found his answer quite discouraging.

He said, “That’s an odd conception of Jesus; that he would want us to voluntarily re-order society to favor a group engaged in immoral behavior because we might have it imposed on us by a branch of government. I would think he would rather us lose doing what is right, than gain some dubious victory. Beyond that, those pushing “gay marriage” have made it clear that anything short of everything – including calling it marriage – is unacceptable. They want everyone to accept what they do and see state recognition and the force of the state as means to that end.”

To her credit, Laura quoted chapter and verse to her friend with multiple examples of Jesus’s consistency in showing compassion for those his society shunned. “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her” was one example, for the woman caught in adultery.

“He did save the woman from stoning,” Bill replied, “but after he did, he told her to go, and sin no more. He didn’t say, go and tell the temple priests that adultery is OK and they need to change the commandments so as to be nice to everybody. Compassion for the sinner doesn’t require moral laxity.”

Now I knew what I was dealing with, and suddenly my response no longer seemed optional. I had to speak, if only because his version of Jesus was very different from mine, and mine was positively Biblical.

So, I replied:

- If it was so easy to address these legitimate human rights concerns, then why haven’t we fixed them? It would change the tone and direction of this issue. It isn’t easy. In fact, it requires more hard work and discussion and even compromise than anyone in any corner of this “debate” wants to put in. I’m concerned that a directly Biblical description of Jesus would seem odd. You are speaking for millions of Christians, Bill, but Jesus believed in saving people from immorality through relationship and interaction, not through vilification and marginalization.

I’m ready to disappoint all the political activists, giving them everything they need (if possible) but nothing that they want. That means no to gay marriage but yes to all the rights implied by civil partnership. I can’t “sin no more” without Jesus. And, truth is, Jesus would rightfully condemn me for thinking I’m doing his will by condemning “his lost sheep.” Let’s answer gay rights activists’ objections on issues, then trust the Holy Spirit to convict and restore – if that is God’s will.

Now, how is that Biblical? Romans 13 tells us that we can’t expect the government to reflect our Christian values and it is OK. That same chapter also reminds us that loving our neighbors is how we fulfill ALL of the Law. I agree with Jesus on the definition of marriage – of course! – in Matthew 19: 4-6 and the parallel passage in Mark 10:5-9.

Please share with me the chapter and verse where Jesus speaks about homosexuality. I want to hear from my savior; I want to follow His priorities rather than man’s pet list of peeves. Yes, Paul has some things to say (he also wrote Romans 13 about loving our neighbor being the end of the law). I’m not talking about Paul, Peter or Moses. I’m asking about Jesus.

Perhaps our Lord used emphasis as a technique to let us know, in our current age, where he wanted our focus. What must we do to enter the kingdom of heaven? Is it keeping the “bad people” in their place … or forgiving our neighbors even as God has forgiven us? We all have persistent sin in our lives. I know I do. I know I have things that I struggle with. I know the Holy Spirit isn’t done with me yet. How did homosexuality become such a big issue to “Christianity” when it wasn’t a big issue to Christ?

Where my Lord is silent, I will not shout … especially not in Jesus’ name.

I mentioned earlier what tends to happen when you call someone’s bluff. There hasn’t been a response to my question for several days. It’s easily been long enough for a true believer to re-read the Gospels and cite chapter/verse.

The following will contain plot spoilers:

When David Tennant took to the stage in 2008 to play fiction’s most famous Dane, Hamlet, it was the biggest story in the theatre world. Tennant’s performance was largely praised, but he came in for some criticism for getting the part due to his fame. Sir Jonathan Miller lambasted the West End for having, “an obsession with celebrity” & dubbed Tennant as “that man from Doctor Who.”

Well Mr Miller must have been less than pleased as Josie Rourke’s Much Ado About Nothing contains not only Tennant in the cast but his former Doctor Who companion, Catherine Tate. They play the leads of Benedick and Beatrice, whose cynical attitude to love is balanced out by Tom Bateman & Sarah MacRae’s Claudio and Hero, who have a much more idealised view of such matters.

Rourke’s production has a deliberately 1980′s flavour, with Benedick & his companions arriving in Messina dressed as pilots. Tennant is later seen in a Superman T-shirt, and the props range from a Rubik’s Cube to a Casio keyboard, which is used to hilarious effect.

While I often struggle to find the humour in Shakespeare’s ostensible comedies, I’ve never had such difficulty with Much Ado, and Rourke & her cast make sure that they extract every possible moment of mirth from the original text. The demands on acting in the theatre are different to those inherent in the world of television & film. The stage requires a broader level of performance which not only suits the styles of Tennant & Tate, but also the rest of the cast. Bateman undoubtedly has the gravitas required to act in other mediums, but he seemed a natural fit for the unabashed, highly-strung Hero. Adam James (who also appeared in Doctor Who in the Planet of The Dead episode) was never anything but magnetic as Don Pedro, from his jovial matchmaker at the beginning, to his loyalty to Claudio in the second-half, and finally in the happiness he feels for his friends mixed with pangs of loneliness in the play’s conclusion.

The first-half crackles along at a rate of knots. The antagonism between Benedick and Beatrice is proficiently embodied by Tennant & Tate, which is unsurprising as anyone who watched their episodes of Doctor Who will know that their on-screen chemistry gels ideally with their characters. The highlight being the two sequences where Don Pedro orchestrates the plan to get Benedick and Beatrice to fall in love with one another.

Rourke’s staging is key here. She has the actors performing on a revolving stage, with four pillars positioned between the front and rear, therefore allowing for the swiftest & smoothest of changes of set & cast. Pacing is crucial to the story and the staging is a key component of this. No sooner are we done laughing at Benedick’s hapless attempts to avoid being seen by Don Pedro, Claudio & Leonato – which ends in him covered in white paint – than we see Beatrice being involved in an even more farcical situation as Hero puts the second part of the plan into operation. It culminates in Tate being caught onto the end of a harness and sent soaring above the stage as if in a hot air balloon.

The production does have a few minor shortcomings. The pace dips slightly in the second-half begins as the material becomes more serious. Also, I felt that Elliot Levey’s Don John was lacking in the requisite insidious menace. Given that he is the Machiavellian mastermind who sets out to wreck Don Pedro’s best laid plans, Levey manages to achieve a good level of duplicitousness, but comes across more as man hanging with the school bully, than the story’s bete noire. If anything, Levey is upstaged by Alex Beckett’s portrayal of Borachio.

While some traditionalists may be maddened by Catherine Tate’s comic delivery, which includes impressions of Frankie Howard and Albert Steptoe, the fact is that there’s no one right way to perform Shakespeare. And any time she showed glimpses of contemporary comedy, including from her own eponymous sketch show, the crowd howled with delight. The same goes for John Ramm’s scene-stealing turn as a cockney version of Constable Dogberry. He walks a tightrope with his ostentatious, camp display. But he manages to stay just the right side of corny, and gives arguably the most memorable performance of the cast.

The production only serves to show just how pervasive & enduring Shakespeare’s influence is. Much Ado About Nothing is oft regarded as one of his weaker stories. And yet, screwball comedy, high farce & couples who use sarcasm as a defensive mechanism can all be tracked back centuries to this play. Moonlighting, La Regle De Jeux, It Happened One Night, Annie Hall; all of them owe a debt to Much Ado and Rourke seemed to be fully aware of this. Her production and cast make this a thoroughly enjoyable way to spend 3 hours.

Sugar Lake, Wright County, Minnesota

By Tony Pucci (host of the Pollyanna Cowgirl Records Podcast)

The air had ceased moving. It hung like a weight around the afternoon’s shoulders, a viscous syrup to be swum through. The sun brushed the ground with a transparent honey, and flies buzzed lazily, if they buzzed at all. The grass stank with a humid sweat as I raced across our cabin’s backyard. I was ecstatic; my grandmother had just given me two dollars to spend at “The Resort”!

My pace then slowed as I stepped onto the dirt road that roller-coasted behind the row of cabins. Typical of any kid during summer, I wasn’t wearing any shoes, and the road had many rocks anxious to become acquainted with the soles of my feet. I kept my stride between the edges of one of the two strips of smooth, worn-down tracks made by years of cars passing through. Filtered by a canopy of trees, rays of sunlight dappled the ground, seemingly dancing with the stream of dark, pungent motor oil spots which had dripped off the boats being charioted on trailers to and from the lakeshore. My excitement grew as I passed the familiar fish-shaped signs, each with a name on it marking another family’s driveway and cabin; they told me I was getting closer.

The road now veered left and entered the sunlight at the same time. A row of rusty mailboxes stood to my left while a white fence bordered me on the right. Up ahead I saw the Sugar Lake Resort, a peeling green shack that the locals called “The Resort”. I walked up its weathered concrete steps and opened the screen door. As I entered, to my left I saw an old jukebox in the corner of the dance floor; to my right was the bar along with a collection of tables. Next, I went over to the bar and bought a Slim Jim, getting my change in quarters. I knew these snacks had likely been sitting on the shelf for as long as I had been alive, but I didn’t care; I had a higher purpose. Turning my attention to the main reason I had come here, I now went into a small room to the right of the bar. Before me stood one of the most beautiful sights my ten-year-old eyes had ever seen: two ancient pinball machines, a pool table, and a foosball game.

Eagerly, I half-ran over to a pinball machine called “Solar City”, almost as if someone might get to it before me, even though I was the only person in the room. As usual, the machine was not turned on, but years of hanging out up here during the summer had taught me where the on/off switch was. I got down on my hands and knees and crawled underneath the game, running my fingers along its inside right edge until I found a small hole at the back of the machine. Reaching up inside the hole with my index finger, I felt a mixture of satisfaction and excitement as I heard the familiar bells, pops, and the spinning “click-click-click” of the counter resetting itself as I turned the machine on.
I crawled out from underneath the machine and fed it my first quarter. The game sang to me a percussive “duh-duh” in order to tell me that it too was ready to play. After the steel pinball had slid into the starting gate, I pulled back on the spring-tensioned pin and sent it shooting onto the field of play. As the ball struck the initial bumper and flashing lights and ringing bells announced my first points, I mentally shouted an intense “yes!” I was in heaven.

I spent the next hour working my way through my supply of quarters and taking tiny nibbles out of my Slim Jim, slowly savoring its flavor. It was a memorable if not a monumental afternoon. At a time when a child is supposed to be free from worry, it was exactly as it should be.

The road behind my parent's cabin...

With the Edinburgh Festival drawing ever closer, this is the time of year when the nation’s stand-up comedians try out their new material in preparation. Yesterday at the Soho Theatre, one such stand-up, Stewart Lee trialled his latest set of material, appropriately titled, “Work In Progress”.

For those not in the know, Lee isn’t your average comedian. His BBC show, Stewart Lee’s Comedy Vehicle, was cancelled after one series of good reviews but not so good ratings. The show was only re-commissioned after an impassioned e-mail appeal (of which I was a contributor) from his fans. However, rather than try to make his comedy appeal to a broader audience, Lee used the second series to take constant jibes at the BBC. 

However, he is most notorious for co-penning, Jerry Springer: The Opera. The lampooning of the show & its host was screened on the BBC in 2005. It received 62,000 complaints, which is one of the highest totals in the history of British television. The religious publication, Christian Voice tried to prosecute the BBC director-general Mark Thompson for blasphemy over the show. It’s remains a hot-button topic when controversy in television is discussed. Speaking about the furore later Lee said “It did make me feel there was not much point ever trying to reach a mass audience with anything interesting and provocative. You just run the risk of being misunderstood on a large scale.”

And much of the show last night was taken up with Lee reconciling his place in the firmament of comedy and celebrity. He states that while he is periodically recognised, most people struggle to put a name to the face, and often end up giving him the backhanded compliment, “You’re funnier than you are on the telly.”

He opened the show by reading out some choice quotes from Americans, who revelled in the capture of Osama Bin Laden on May 1st, and ended the routine with the punchline, “It’s unfair to sum up a whole country from these quotes, but if I was to do so…” Just to make sure he couldn’t be accused of bias, he followed up the skewering of America by saying, “And now for balance, I’m going to make fun of a Muslim.”

As you can see, this wasn’t your average night out at Jongleurs watching five acts who are ostensibly different but ultimately anodyne and forgettable. I can’t think of many comedians who would go from bashing the extremes of America & Islam to doing a routine on the dilapidated state of rope bridges in the jungle, and how it’s further evidence of public spending cuts by the current government. Cuts which can be traced all the way back to Margaret Thatcher.

Now the fact remains is that Stewart Lee’s comedy isn’t for everyone. While some think he is the world’s premier stand-up comic, he also one of the most divisive. Don’t take my word for it. Part of the show was taken up by Lee reading out what other people had written about him on various Internet forums and social networking sites. Gems such as, “Smug elitist liberalism. Who is this c***?”, or “Its just another over-educated, middle class man getting pointlessly angry about a lot of things that aren’t very important in the great scheme of things” and the charming, ”I hate Stewart Lee with a passion. He’s like Ian Huntley to me.”

As vitriolic as these comments were – and trust me, that was only the tip of the iceberg – Lee found a way to mine them for some incisive laughs. It helps if you go into one of his gigs with the knowledge that he’s probably a lot smarter than you are. He’ll make mirth from the most obscure metaphors that don’t become clear until halfway through the routine. And if it doesn’t work, don’t worry. He’ll simply critique how well the routine is going and make you laugh that way instead. Like most of the best stand-ups, he doesn’t say what everyone else is thinking. He says what nobody is thinking. The average stand-up puts themselves in the consciousness of their audience. Lee transports the audience into his.

For what was essentially a warm-up for his tour that begins later this November, this was a thoroughly enjoyable hour worth of entertainment. And whether you like Lee or hate him, comedy will remain a relevant artistic medium as long as people like him stick around in it.

Shane Thomas – Greatest Events In Sporting History

One author whose books I have often read and purchased over the years (including audio books) is Jack Higgins.  He is most well-known for THE EAGLE HAS LANDED in 1975.  I do like a good spy novel, and starting in 1992 with EYE OF THE STORM, Higgins began a series of books featuring the character of Sean Dillon, originally a member of the IRA, becoming something of a super gun-for-hire (he is referred to in the books as being second only to Carlos the Jackal), and eventually (and ironically) starting in the second book THUNDERPOINT, ending up in the service of the British Empire in exchange for his freedom.  The Queen can use a man with Sean Dillon’s talents, of course.  Think James Bond, minus the fancy toys.

Thanks to that fountain of knowledge, Wikipedia, I discovered there are now 18 Sean Dillon books from Jack Higgins, there were considerable gaps in my Sean Dillon reading, and what I had read was very out-of-order.  Being a sucker for linearity, loving the Dillon stories and wanting something comfortable to begin an effort to read more, one of my new reading resolutions is to read the Dillon novels in order.  Heck, I already owned 12 of the books!

So, what of EYE OF THE STORM itself?  I really enjoyed it.  The Dillon stories are quick reads, they suck you in and you are ever-thirsty for the next plot development.  Having listened to several of the audio books, I can hear Dillon’s Irish accent in my head as I read, and that makes it even more enjoyable.  All of the Dillon stories I had been exposed to already featured the man in the service of the Crown, so to go back to book one and find him a mercenary ultimately in the hire of Saddam Hussein during Desert Storm was a bit of a trip.  EYE OF THE STORM is centered around the real mortar attack on British PM John Major and the War Cabinet at 10 Downing Street on February 7, 1991, the events of the book prefaced as “one possible way the attack could have taken place”.

I think what I really am attracted to with Jack Higgins’ writing is two-fold.  One, these books fill my need for testosterone-laden manly adventures.  Two, and more importantly, I am attracted to Dillon’s confidence, even when he seems to be a socio-path without remorse.  He’s always come off as a hard man with a heart of gold, certainly with his own unique sense of honor.  Others must get this feeling as well, as Higgins has pretty much written nothing but Sean Dillon books for the last 20 years and they are very popular.

Tony Pucci, host of the Pollyanna Cowgirl Records Podcast

Buy EYE OF THE STORM at Amazon

I do believe it. I do believe it’s true.

Lisa and I scuttled into Cleveland this weekend to see the new elephant exhibit (it’s been rebuilt this year). We do the Cleveland MetroParks Zoo usually twice a year, and it’s old hat. But this time around I got some good shots:

This post was made by Jason, ringleader and evil general in the Atomic Trivia War 9000.

The first time I saw Opera Australia’s ‘The Mikado’ was on a VHS recording broadcast by ABC TV in the early 90’s. That production was recorded in 1987 and featured Heather Begg and Graeme Ewer, I immediately fell in love with the show and Opera.

For years I’ve wanted to see The Mikado live. Luckily, not so long ago, I took a trip to see The Mikado at the Sydney Opera House starring the all so great Anthony Warlow. I had worn out the VHS and DVD for years re-watching and re-watching. I never thought the updated version with Anthony Warlow could upstage the original 1987 version. I was mistaken. My first impression of the updated Mikado was “the stage looks so different compared to the DVD.” However, overall I thought that Stuart Maunder and co breathed some fresh air into the operetta, while not tarnishing the original Christopher Renshaw production.

Now we find ourselves here, in 2011. I’m thinking “how are they going to top the previous two?” Well, they did it again!

Mitchell Butel’s fresh take on Ko-Ko is pure genius. He makes the role his own, Butel relishes every minute of the spotlight. Butel’s quick delivery of one liners, witticisms and personalised sound effects as he moves to one side of the stage to the other are truly unique. A highlight was the ‘Little List’ song; it poked fun at Andrew Lloyd Webber’s ‘Love Never Dies’. Also, I never imagined I would have heard the word “vagine” in a G&S show. I loved it! Nice touch with the iPad towards the end of the song. Modernisations of jokes were welcome to make it relevant to what’s happening today, while keeping to the true spirit of The Mikado. Mitchell Butel does a great Julia Gillard too.

Kanen Breen’s flamboyant portrayal of Nanki-Poo had the audience in stitches and was a joy to watch. He was perhaps the happiest, most positive character in the entire show, even when his character was in peril. Breen was having great fun with the role, and it was transparent to the audience too. I take my hat off to you, sir! A true juvenile who upstages Mitchell Butel at every turn!

Warwick Fyfe played no nonsense, straight-faced, unsmiling and grossly overworked Pooh-Bah (no wonder he was born sneering) was hilarious.

Jacqueline Dark was something terrific as the delightfully evil and wicked Katisha. Her Alice Cooper-like tongue moves had the younger audience members hiding behind their seats. The audience felt for Katisha’s plight but at the same time felt petrified by her mighty whip. Dark’s excellent portrayal of Katisha was only reaffirmed when I heard a kid seated 4 seats down say “Oh no, she’s all alone. What’s she going to do, I feel sorry for her” during the ‘The Hour of Gladness” solo towards the end of Act 1. Jacqueline Dark had great, yet creepy (in a sexual predator type of way) chemistry with Mitchell Butel.

I send high praise to Orchestra Victoria and conductor, Brian Castles-Onions, or should I say “Bri-Bri”? Brian gave the audience an unexpected, great little jump in the air and clicked his heels together in curtain call. Oh, and on a side note I couldn’t stop thinking that Brian Castles-Onions looked a lot like American character actor, John Billingsley (search Google Images).

Being in front row, behind orchestra pit has many advantages. The music seemed a lot louder than it probably was to everyone else. The music went through you like a speeding bullet, specifically: introduction of the Mikado. The overture was upbeat and very fun to sit back and listen to. I was focusing all my attention on the orchestra pit as much as I was watching all the action on stage. This was my first time at sitting behind the orchestra pit; I won’t be forgetting it anytime soon. The orchestra sounded even better than the big orchestral scores they put together for a big Hollywood movie soundtrack. Very special and should be heard by everyone. I wish I had Orchestra Victoria and Brian Castles-Onion follow me around and play music appropriate to what mood I’m in and feeling at that time. My hat goes off to you, ladies and gentlemen!

Being about five feet away from the performers, you tend to notice more details in costumes and sets. The design is breathtaking! So much detail in costumes, make-up, props and set that the keen-eyed couldn’t detect. It is a very bright, very lavish, very colourful and upbeat production. By the end of the show the audience were clapping along to the catchy and whimsical songs & leaving with big grins on their faces.

As we approach the end of this enormous review (perhaps too long), I want to thank Jacqui Dark very much! I’ve been talking to her over Twitter for the past couple of weeks; she was lovely enough to wave to me at curtain call. Being such a huge fan of this particular operetta, watching and watching for 20 years, you have no idea how much that meant to me. I would go as far as saying: I wish I were a chorus member, at the very least, a fly on the wall during rehearsal.

I only have two negative feedback points – 1) It ended too soon 2) There was a scene missing from ACT 2; “See How The Fates There Gifts Allot”

It has become a tradition for Opera Australia to bring back The Mikado every three to four years, to which I say: I can’t wait until it comes back! I’m also glad Opera Australia has made the move to cinematic releases of (I think) all their Operas. I also can’t wait for The Mikado (2011) to be re-released on DVD; it’s very much needed. As much as I love the 87’ VHS/DVD release, the sound quality is a bit poor, considering it was filmed in the 80’s without lapel mics. So in conclusion, VERY HAPPY JAPAN!

Thank-you to the cast, crew, Brian Castles-Onions, Orchestra Victoria, Opera Australia, The Arts Centre Melbourne and the wonderful Stuart Maunder for bringing the joy and excitement back for another year. A huge standing ovation for another fantastical performance!

This post was submitted by Mike Carson, who’ll you’ll find on the web at http://www.carsonphotography.co.uk.

The recent “burqa ban” controversy in France has sparked huge debate among people all over Europe.

There have been many points raised with French politicians in favour of the ban falling back on it as being a measure to liberate women who are forced into wearing these oppressive garments meant to subjugate them to their husbands, fathers and brothers. The response to this is that most Muslim women wear it by choice, not obligation, as either a cultural norm or a religious symbol, and that it is probably only a small percentage of female Muslim population who are actively forced into it either directly or passively. It’s also been said that it may just be racism or xenophobia on the part of the French government, or a shot at Islamist extremism.

The political response in turn is that sometimes the greatest good can be done for the minority. Black slave owners in America were certainly the majority who were put out by the emancipation, should their economic rights to low paid human labour have superseded the basic human rights of a minority? Certainly not, and bringing in allegories to slavery certainly shows how weighty an issue this is.

For my part the debate has brought to mind a more subtle issue; The concept of “Liberation”. I’m not especially well versed in the politics of either France or Islam, and so can’t really weigh in on the issue with any authority, much like the average tabloid newspaper columnist, but the concept of liberation interests me.

In my mind it is a word often linked to war or upheaval. The aforementioned emancipation of black people and subsequent civil rights movement in America was certainly very violent at times, and history can sometimes look like the chronicles of different groups of people fighting for equality or even supremacy over another. In almost every conflict on earth one group is labeled the oppressed, the underdog stepping out from under the jackboot of the oppressor. More and more it is a term used by politicians whenever conflict arises and they must stake their claim to moral superiority. Iraq wasn’t about oil, it was about freeing the Iraqi people from their dictator, the current Libyan situation having the same argument rolled out.

Whatever you opinion on these separate conflicts, the issue I find odd is “Bringing” liberation to a people. Can you really do that? My mind harks back to the old “Give a man a fish and he’ll eat for a day” saying. Doesn’t true liberation have to come from within. When Lincoln freed the slaves there is evidence that it didn’t make a huge amount of difference to the black population, slavery basically continued until those people stood up on their own, said enough was enough, and demanded equality.

It’s incredibly pompous to think you can deliver Liberty to someone. The very saying implies superiority and labels the recipient a weaker person, who should be grateful for your benevolence. Bringing it back to Iraq, every news report with people on the street has shown the removal of Saddam Hussein has been polarizing at best. Some see the Americans as just another Imperialistic force imposing their own values while others talk of the USA as some glorious deity come to deliver them from strife.

My point is that I believe Liberation has to come from within a group. It can’t be packaged and dropped from a bomber or drawn up and delivered as a new outfit you have to wear. I’m not saying society should turn a blind eye to oppression either, but perhaps the best we can do is create an atmosphere of acceptance and safety, an environment of choice where you can go with your inherited cultural beliefs, but don’t have to fear repercussion from stepping outside of them if you want to.

Instead of “We will save you!” isn’t it better to say “We accept you as you are and chose to be”.

Hello everyone, it’s me again! In the spirit of FUCK CANCER I’m going to be ever so slightly more crazy than usual. I’ll be taking off in a plane, flying up to 13,000 feet (about 4,000m or 2.5miles if you prefer), and stepping outside. Now, I may have to dissapoint you all, I *will* be wearing a parachute…

This is in aid of Macmillan Cancer Support, this is a UK charity that provides practical support for people living with cancer, helping fund nurses, building cancer care centres and supporting families dealing with cancer.

If you have the chance could you foray along the link below, have a read, and if you agree with what I’m doing, spare a few pounds? There’s no such thing as too little to bother!

If everyone who reads this just gave a quid then I’d be well on my way to getting to my target of £3000 – if you can afford to give more then brilliant! So, please support me if you can, help me to FUCK CANCER!

http://www.justgiving.com/Ian-Pope

I couldn’t think of any comment to put on this that wouldn’t start an argument or upset somebody. Instead I will just recommend that you watch this video.

The ostensible enmity between the two dates back to the premiership of Margaret Thatcher. Now whether the BBC truly loathe the Conservative Party, or whether the Conservative Party is itching for the day that it can scrap the licence fee and end the channel as we know it is a separate debate.

What is clear however, is that with David Cameron ensconced in Number 10, the BBC is under increasing scrutiny to make sure it gives its licence fee payers value for money. And while programmes like Strictly Come Dancing, Eastenders and Match Of The Day are firm fixtures in the schedules, it’s the BBC’s reputation for strong dramas which is its best shield against those who would rather the channel become reliant on advertising to garner revenue. And in 2010, they gave us some superb stuff to keep the wolves from the door. Bear in mind the following reviews will be free of plot spoilers but not tonal ones. So if you’ve missed these dramas and want to experience them as fresh as possible, note down the titles, stop reading this and get purchasing yourself some DVD’s:

LUTHER:
Despite its setting, ‘The Wire’ proved a fertile ground for some of the UK’s best acting talent. And it was one of said talent, Idris Elba, who was given a starring role in the cop drama, Luther.

As a show itself, there’s not a great deal new about Luther. But it’s a style of police show that we hadn’t seen for a while in this country. It was commonplace back in the 1990’s, with shows like ‘Cracker’ and ‘Prime Suspect’. And maybe this will begat a new slew of British crime drama that’s been missing from our screens.

Elba proves himself to be a star as the eponymous anti-hero, and was ably supported by Steven Mackintosh, Ruth Wilson and Dermot Crowley.

What was most pleasing about this six-part series is that as it was in danger of veering into anodyne predictability, it takes a sharp turn that grabs you by the lapels, just to make sure it has your full attention. Well ‘Luther’ had my full attention, and returns with two episodes (maybe the last two) in 2011. And it seems that the show wasn’t ratings focused as it was on at the same time as ‘Britain’s Got Talent’ on ITV1. This is how it should be – leave the cultural trash on the commercial channels, but make sure there’s a more nourishing alternative elsewhere. I look forward to being nourished even more next year.

DIVE:
The surprise of the year for me. And an extremely pleasant one. This was a drama about teenagers that was…well, good. Aisling Loftus & Jack O’Connell (who is better known from the show ‘Skins’) star opposite each other. I have to be careful what I write here as to avoid spoilers. Most teenagers in British TV are cookie-cutter caricatures – the slutty one, the nerdy one, the one who self-harms, the one who’s still a virgin, the one who…yawn, yawn, yawn! I think I’ll end up self-harming if I continue.

‘Dive’ eschews all of this. You don’t watch caricatures, you watch people. The script is quite stark and simple, and trusts its actors to tell the story with nuance. Imagine that, treating teenagers with responsibility? Well it works. Both Loftus & O’Connell are excellent (what O’Connell is doing on Skins is beyond me). It also takes the time to tell the story from the perspectives of both leads.

‘Dive’ is a drama about young people, but is unlike the shows aimed at the demographic that assume that they have the attention span of a goldfish. I only hope that this is first of many programmes of this ilk.

DOCTOR WHO:
This is the show that remains the one of the strongest arguments for the licence fee. Whether you’re a fan or not, ‘Doctor Who’ brings in large audience figures, is liked by a large proportion of TV critics, and I can tell you from first-hand experience, it also inflames the imagination of our nation’s children in the most joyful way (although I feel for the parents who had to deal with their kids demanding a dish of fish fingers & custard for their dinner from now on).

It seems absurd now, but Doctor Who was in real danger of losing its place in the hearts of many this spring. Russell T Davies, who performed the most miraculous piece of televisual CPR to bring the show back, was now gone. As was David Tennant, who was possibly the most beloved Time Lord of them all.

And while many agreed that the show was in safe hands with Steven Moffat, he seemed to have taken a punt on an unknown in Matt Smith. Well Mr Smith is an unknown no longer. My younger sisters were devastated when Tennant left. But now they could not imagine anyone other than the man with the bow-tie in charge of the TARDIS.

From the scriptwriting, to the casting, to the decision to turn the show into a fairy-tale that whizzes through time and space, Series 5 of re-booted ‘Who’ barely missed a step. Enthralling, vibrant and just a little bit bonkers – much like The Doctor – Gallifrey’s most famous resident thrilled both children and adults alike. And this may only be the start.

Early indications are that Moffat was just easing us into his era as the showrunner. A bit like a step-father who’s now been accepted into the family home by the kids, he and Smith have earned sufficient grace to take the character places we haven’t seen before. After all, they have an entire universe to explore.

SHERLOCK:
If ‘Doctor Who’ is the jewel in the BBC’s crown, then ‘Sherlock’ may actually be the crown.

When working on Doctor Who, Moffat and Mark Gatiss discussed their love of Sherlock Holmes. This discussion evolved into an idea to do a contemporary version of the character for television. Now in any sensible universe, the conversation would have ended like this, “Yeah, it’s a good idea but I’m busy with Doctor Who, it’s pretty much a full-time job. Not to mention being a husband and father. And you’re busy with that horror documentary Mark, let’s not bother.”

Well it’s clear that they don’t live in a sensible universe. And what a good thing for us that they don’t.

They took one of the most iconic characters in fiction, and had to go against the newly re-booted movie franchise, but it seems that Moffat and Gatiss’s mindset is “why” rather than “why not”.

Simply put, ‘Sherlock’ was magnificent. For me, it was the finest piece of television Britain produced in 2010. Bristling with sardonicism, wit and gripping storylines, it’s clear that Moffat and Gatiss are at the top of their game. It also goes some way to explaining why Gatiss’s episode of ‘Doctor Who’ was a let-down. His effort on Sherlock was as brilliant as his effort on Doctor Who was ropey.

Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock is now one of the biggest stars in the UK, while Martin Freeman is no longer “Tim from The Office”.

In an interview to promote the show, Moffat explained the fundamental difference between writing for Sherlock and writing for Doctor Who, “The Doctor is an angel who aspires to be human, where Sherlock is a human who aspires to be a god.”

It’s an altar that I’ll be back to worship at when Series 2 returns in 2011.

SINGLE FATHER:
While no longer behind the controls of the TARDIS, David Tennant hasn’t been idle. He stars as the titular single father, coping to keep his children together after their mother and his partner dies (I know I promised no spoilers but come on, look at the title of the show).

Throughout this four-part mini-series, I was struck by how much I have accepted Tennant as one of the safest pairs of hands in the acting fraternity. From being unsure about this floppy-haired, gurning exhibitionist who first uttered the word, “Barcelona” back in 2005, he’s now one of the most accomplished actors currently working.

While ‘Single Father’ was guilty of lapsing into mawkishness on occasion, it had a lot more good to show for it than bad. It’s never easy to find child actors who come across as genuine rather than annoying, but the programme’s casting director managed to find four. Also, it’s extremely common to have families that contain step-children due to vagaries such as parental separation and adoption, which these days mean that family trees contain branches leading off branches. This is neither good nor bad, it just is. But it’s a facet of life that is nowhere near on our screens enough, and when it is, it tends to be a precursor to child abuse.

At its core, ‘Single Father’ is a simple story, held together by the skill of its actors.

And what links all of these strong shows together is that the BBC have empowered writers to tell rich and entertaining stories. Television has always been a writers medium, and it’s now increasingly important that they receive this creative freedom. It’s shows such as the ones above that are the best defence against the increasingly diversified television market, the Sauron-like eye of the Conservative Party, and the juggernaut of Simon Cowell carpet-bombing the public with his reality TV dross.

While some people will not have enjoyed the programmes I’ve focused on, their impact cannot be ignored. Yes, this year the BBC also gave us fantastic comedy like ‘The Trip’ and the brilliantly informative ‘Wonders Of The Solar System’.

But if they can keep their standard of drama as high as it was this year, then it’ll go a long way to us keeping our most famous television corporation for many years to come.

Shane Thomas – Greatest Events In Sporting History

And as such, it is important that I choose my words very carefully. As this is not about what I think of the government’s decision to increase fees. However, the fallout from the protests seemed to unlock a prejudice from some that is still tolerated in the UK. That is the prejudice towards the upper classes.

For those not in Britain, class is often a secondary social issue. For example, it’s said that most events in America are filtered through the prism of race – which given its past is not that surprising. Well in Britain, the same can be said about class. And this has only been magnified by David Cameron becoming Prime Minister in May.

Cameron & his Chancellor, George Osborne are both products of the public school system (that’s private school for those not in the UK). Essentially they were born with silver spoons in their mouths. And there are certain section of society that won’t let them forget it. In ‘Prime Minister’s Questions’ this week, one Labour backbench MP (Kerry McCarthy) took to the floor to call out David Cameron for his apparent liking of the British indie band, The Smiths. You see, both Morrissey & Johnny Marr had recently stated that they ‘forbid’ Cameron to be a fan of theirs.

Now this is such a non-event to barely justify a mention. But this relates to the perception of class. Whether Cameron is a genuine fan of The Smiths is irrelevant. But claiming that he’s a lover of a band that are regarded as working class – and were formed in Manchester (annoying as it is, the North of England is still regarded as ‘salt of the earth’) is an attempt to give him credibility with ordinary members of the British public who are not as privileged as himself.

And Morrissey, Marr & McCarthy pulling Cameron up on this is sends a clear statement, “You’re not one of us. Go back to your opera nights and your caviar.”

I’m still yet to comprehend what it is about being born into money that riles others less fortunate. But it does exist. For the most part, when I’ve heard criticism of Cameron or Osborne from the public, their upbringing is often mentioned rather than their policy decisions. I wasn’t publicly schooled myself, but I fail to see why it’s still used by some as a pejorative.

And during these protests in London, it became painfully apparent that those who hold such a prejudice have hijacked the issue of student fees from those who had a justifiable gripe. While many exercised their right to protest respectfully, others used it as an excuse to vandalise property, set off flares, and light fires in the street. The whole event was crystallised when people threw missiles at a car carrying the Prince of Wales & The Duchess of Cornwall. “Off with their heads” and “Tory Scum” was also shouted.

Now putting to one side the fact that we are in 2010 Britain and not pre-revolutionary France, the “Tory Scum” chant was telling. I don’t know whether Charles & Camilla are in support of the government’s financial policy, or even if they are supporters of the Conservative Party, but the actions of the vandals spoke volumes. “You’re privileged, the Conservative Party are privileged. You’re all the same!”

Now I’d think no decent person would condone the actions of these idiots. But what’s far worse than their rabble-rousing is that they’ve taken the actual issue out of the public domain. Read any newspaper or (if you can stomach it) the comments sections of the online editions of said newspapers. This has now turned into Rich vs Poor/ Working Class vs Upper Class/ Young vs Old. Anger (justified or not) is supplanting rational response and this not also causes polarisation but is also anathema to any kind of progress. The students who are going to be left in potentially crippling debt have been forgotten. And now the story focuses on The Prince of Wales and the moronic behaviour of those who attacked Nelson’s Column.

What saddens and frustrates in equal measure is that I fear Pandora’s Box has now been opened. The class war is back in the forefront of the public consciousness and while it makes great copy for journalists and causes plenty of heated debate online, what good does it actually do?

To be frank, I don’t care about any of it. I don’t care where George Osborne went to school. I don’t care if David Cameron is being disingenuous about his music tastes. I care about my three younger sisters deciding against going to university because they’re put off by the potential expense. I care about how the government are focusing on cutting spending while they seem uninterested in saving money by clamping down on benefit cheats or the millions of pounds lost each year in unpaid tax.

And while every person under the age of 25 is now being tarred with the same brush as the guy who hung off the Union Flag on the Cenotaph Monument, there has been minimal coverage of police officers who took advantage of the chaos to abuse their power and injure many innocent protestors. Personally I’d happily take the violent elements of both police and protestors, stick them in a cage and let them wipe each other out.

Because so much of what happened was wrong. The vandalism was wrong, the attacks on protestors were wrong. And the way the media has changed the narrative is wrong.

Some have said that a positive to come from this is that it has politicised a new generation. Well in and of itself, that’s not necessarily a good thing. Causing a generation to think that being born into money instantly disqualifies you from having morals is not good. Neither is thinking that violence is acceptable because you disagree with government policy. I see no positive coming from a Britain that turns into an absurd contest with the rich upper classes on one side and the poor working classes on the other. It’s both reductive and insulting to anyone with a brain.

Just look at America in the past decade. Watching conservatism in the U.S be plundered by Roger Ailes and his minions at Fox News is a clear warning sign to what can happen when the actions of the extreme swamp those who are genuinely irked by the actions of those in power. What many have neglected to mention is that university tuition fees were going to increase regardless of the result of May’s General Election. There was a reason why the issue was seldom mentioned during the campaign. Both Labour and the Conservatives had agreed to leave the subject of tuition fees off the table as they both knew that an increase was inevitable. It seems obvious that the reason Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats were so firm about not increasing fees was because they never dreamed that they’d actually be in a position to make policy decisions. It’s easy to promise the earth when you don’t think you’ll have to follow through on those promises.

I’ve always liked how in comparison to other countries, Britain is relatively restrained when it comes to political & social issues. Disagreeing without being disagreeable is a noble and decent trait. But because of a minority of idiots, I worry that this may no longer be the norm.

I dearly hope that those who take issue with the policy of this current government continue to protest and write to their MP’s. And I equally hope that the people who have a chip on their shoulder regarding someone’s upbringing are shut out of the debate. If you disagree with David Cameron, that’s fine – I consider myself to be one of those dissenters. But the second one decides to behave like a hooligan, they lose the right to have a say.

Because shouting louder doesn’t increase the clarity of your voice. It just causes others to want to get away from the noise.

Shane Thomas – Greatest Events In Sporting History

As I write this, I should make you aware that I feel completely exhausted. My legs feel like I’ve gone for a 5K run, my brain feels fuzzy and my mouth is parched. If I could I’d happily sleep for the next week.

The reason for this was that my Saturday night was spent at Bloomsbury Lanes in Central London. Now as a rule, I cannot abide going out in Central London; it’s expensive, it’s relatively awkward to get to & even more hassle getting back home, not to mention the likelihood of encountering people who spend their time copiously drinking and spoiling for a fight.

As I’m sure you’ve guessed by now, I did end up venturing into Central London. And I’m very glad that I did. My friends & I went out ostensibly for the funk music night that was taking place. But Bloomsbury Lanes is unlike any nightspot I’ve ever been to.

While it had all the standard trappings of any nightclub; dance floor, bar, me getting ID’d at the door (I’m almost 27, it’s just not funny any more) – it also contained smaller rooms with multifarious affectations. One room was designed for karaoke, another was a pizza parlour, there was a “Don Draper” (yes, that one) room for private movie screenings. Added to this was a couple of arcade game machines, as well as fussball & pool tables. It was a party arena and games room all in one. And as the name of the venue alludes, the reason the place is called Bloomsbury Lanes is that it also has eight lanes for ten pin bowling. And bowling while somewhat inebriated is, well… an experience.

However, this was all secondary to the highlight of the night. As well as a live band – whose name escapes me but they were very good – the lead DJ set was from actor Craig Charles. If the name doesn’t ring a bell, then allow the phrase “Lister from Red Dwarf” to ring that bell a little louder. Unbeknownst to me, he has a regular funk & soul set on the radio station BBC 6 Music. And it’s clear that he has a genuine love for the genres as I’m yet to see more energy from a DJ at work than I saw from Charles.

In short, he was a whirling dervish for his three hours behind the DJ booth. Supercharged with a manic zeal, he couldn’t have been more removed from the apathetic slacker that is Dave Lister. He was periodically having to reach for a towel to wipe the sweat from his brow. It was a bit like watching a gospel preacher at work.

But this was a gospel I could fully get behind. Thankfully Charles’s mania was coupled with a strong set of songs. As is to be expected from any night of funk music, you could hear songs from James Brown & Curtis Mayfield. But I also heard a brilliant funk version (at least I thought so) of Rage Against The Machine’s “Killing In The Name”. As much as I like the original I find it difficult to dance to any kind of music that is guitar heavy. This “funkified” version was a delicious dance-friendly twist on last year’s UK Christmas No. 1.

Ally all of this to an atmosphere that was devoid of an egocentric attitude and it was a recipe for a fantastic night out. The Fab Cafe in Leeds could learn some lessons here. While there was a strong presence of bouncers, unless you were making a complete nuisance of yourself then they left you to enjoy yourself. Unlike the aforementioned Fab Cafe, Bloomsbury Lanes is a place I’ll be happy to visit again. When I’m suitably recovered that is. The night (and early morning) has left me spent. So I wouldn’t even want to imagine how the 46 year old Charles is feeling today.

Shane Thomas – Greatest Events In Sporting History

Dear Kiki: I’m hearing all this talk about some kind of meet-up in Leeds on Saturday. What’s that all about? Where is Leeds? — Dave in Tampa

• Dear Dave: It’s a Simply Syndicated gathering of the physical kind, with the hosts and listeners hanging out in a pub called the Vic, named for this guy. Games on the schedule include musical chairs, Wrist Wrestling With Walli and Guess What Rich Will Tweet At 3 a.m.

Dear Kiki: You didn’t tell Dave where Leeds is. — Bumpo in Tampa

• Dear Bumpo: Sorry, I forgot to mention that Leeds is a small village in England, founded in 1970 by Lord Townsend, Baron Daltrey and John, Third Duke of Entwhistle.

Dear Kiki: Who will be at the Leeds meet-up on Saturday? — Ricky in Tampa

• Dear Ricky: A whole bunch of cool and fun people. And also Boz and Casey from Here Goes Nothing.

Dear Kiki: Uh, what? — Boz and Casey

• Dear Boz and Casey: Your cheque didn’t clear.

Questions about podcasting, Simply Syndicated, meet-ups or life and love? Email askapodcaster@britain.com and someone will eventually notice it.

This post is by Shane and first appeared on http://sportshistoryshow.blogspot.com

Anyone who has an elder sibling has probably had to go through the experience of feeling marginalised. Whether it’s when receiving the cheaper presents on Christmas Day, having to wear their ‘hand-me downs’ at the end of August – just in time for the new school year – or getting less pocket money at the end of the week (do parents even bother with pocket money these days and if so, is ‘pocket money’ even the correct term? Christ I’m old) it’s easy to feel like your parents have earmarked their affections for the child who came first. It’s not that they don’t love you as well but the elder sibling was always part of the plan. You were more of a alcohol-fuelled afterthought.

I don’t know if Felipe Massa is the younger sibling in his family, or even if he has any brothers or sisters. But in the German Grand Prix yesterday, the family known as the Ferrari Formula 1 team have made it very clear who is the favoured son in this schism.

In what has been a compelling and closely fought title race was sullied by Ferrari’s shameless flouting of the sport’s laws. In ordering Massa – who had been leading the race – to deliberately allow his team-mate Fernando Alonso to bypass him on the track to victory is not only against all ethics of competitive sport but strictly forbidden under the laws of Formula 1. This ruling has been in place since the farce of the 2002 Austrian Grand Prix when Ferrari pulled a similar stunt in getting Rubens Barrichello to step aside to allow Michael Schumacher to take the chequered flag.

However while Ferrari received widespread and deserved condemnation for their actions eight years ago, I found yesterday’s events left even more of a nauseating taste. At least Ferrari made no attempt to hide their behaviour back then. It may have been brazen but they didn’t add the transgression of acting duplicitously to their blatant flouting of the rules. If you’re going to be a cheat at the very least own up to it.

As Alonso desperately tried to overtake Massa to get the win he needed to propel him back into the World Championship picture, the Ferrari team were conspiring to ensure that Alonso would be the Grand Prix’s eventual winner, by fair means or foul. As with most conspiracies, it was its subject who was the last to know. Knowing that directly instructing Massa to step aside would land Ferrari in hot water, on lap 47 his race engineer Rob Smedley said over the car radio, “Ok, so Fernando is faster than you”. But Massa had not deviated from his own plan to try to win the race, so a lap later Smedley appears on the open radio channel again with the following, “Can you confirm you understood that message?”

And for those of you who are yet to get the message, what Smedley was saying is, “Move your Brazilian behind out of the way and let Fernando win!” A lap later, the die was cast. Massa acquiesced to his team’s request and the rest of the race became a procession towards a Ferrari 1-2 finish. Just not the 1-2 finish we would have had in a fair contest.

Now seeing as Ferrari have clearly tried to cover their tracks by not explicitly asking Massa to allow Alonso to win, Smedley’s radio contact with the Brazilian on lap 49 was astounding as he tried to placate Massa, “Good lad. Just stick with him now. Sorry.”

Why apologise? If everything was above board what on earth do the Ferrari team have to feel so contrite about? Not only did they violate the sport’s laws, but they made a right Horlicks of doing so.

The pathetic charade continued in the post race press conference with Alonso responding to queries of cheating by stating, “I don’t know what happened, but at the exit of turn six I saw Felipe a little bit slow. Sometimes you are quick, sometimes you are slow, and in some parts I was quicker than him, so it’s very difficult to judge”. Massa, whose post race demeanour spoke volumes would only say, “I don’t need to say anything about that. He passed me.”

Now it seems that the bulk of the blame has shifted onto the shoulders of Alonso. And while you can count me on the long list of people that wouldn’t lend him £1 for the bus even if my pockets were bulging with spare change, it misses the point. I have repeatedly stated that the character of a person is circumstantial when it comes to the sporting arena. My only concern is professional. I’m not interested in whether Alonso gives him mum a call on Mother’s Day, what’s he like behind the wheel of a Formula 1 car? The Spaniard’s track record proves he is one of the best around (indeed, he was my tip to win the World title this year) but his petulance on the track not only shows him in a negative light, but it also emaciates the sport that has made him a star. And that is something I refuse to ignore. His appalling comments on lap 21 of the race must have left any fan of Formula 1 wanting to put their foot through the screen of their television. After a failed attempt to pass Massa, he was heard wailing on the team radio, “This is ridiculous!”

People should have sensed that something was rotten in Denmark from that moment. Ridiculous? What was Fernando? The fact that Massa and the other drivers were under the misapprehension that they were in a contest where the best man on the day wins? Well be thankful that the Ferrari pitlane gave your team-mate and all who follow the sport a ‘re-education’.

Now it is no secret that Alonso is Ferrari’s Number 1 driver. This is common in Formula 1 and is borne out by the main man getting the more extensive race preparation and the best use of the race equipment. And yet that wasn’t enough for Alonso. The fact that he not only demanded, but expected Massa to be a supporting player in his own personal one man show is obscene. When sporting events are not allowed to take their natural course, then they truly lose all meaning. We can’t even suspend our disbelief for the ‘mock-battle’ nature of it all, convincing ourselves for a few brief moments that what we are watching is the most important thing in existence. It’s like going to the cinema to watch ‘Inception’ already knowing that Leonardo DiCaprio…… don’t worry, even I’m not that cruel.

And also, if Alonso was going faster than Massa, (as Smedley claimed on the radio) then why on earth could he not have overtaken him without resorting to cheating? So you’re the faster driver are you Fernando? Next time, bloody well prove it.

The FIA’s immediate response was to find Ferrari guilty for issuing team orders, and fine them $100,000 (roughly £65,000). Given that Alonso earns that much in about a day, they might as well have written a disgruntled letter of complaint for all the good it’ll do. If this is the limit of the FIA’s punishment then not only does it make them look feeble but it is an ineffectual deterrent to another team in the paddock trying a similar thing in the future, or Ferrari – God save us – fixing the result in yet another Grand Prix before the season’s end.

But there is still hope. The FIA have launched an inquiry into the whole affair, and even though the organisation’s figurehead, Jean Todt, is an ex-Ferrari man and responsible for issuing the instruction back in 2002 that precipitated the whole “no team orders” rule in the first place, I dearly hope that justice prevails. At the very least Alonso & Massa should be disqualified from the German Grand Prix and be stripped of the points they accrued in Hockenheim. But I have will have no empathy with them (with the marginal exception of Massa) if more severe measures were to be taken against the Italian team.

In what had been a season that was restoring the credibility back into Formula 1, its integrity has taken another hefty blow, and it will only be exacerbated if the FIA’s final judgement on Ferrari is a callow one. Apart from anything else, if Alonso was to go on to win the World Championship this year, then the title & the sport would be so defiled that Formula 1′s days as a major sporting competition could be finished for ever.

Dear Kiki,

Scuse the geeky question here Kiki, but the podcast always sound sexy silky smooth, and I’m just starting to get into this whole recording business as a musician and was wondering which microphones you use mostly for the shows.

Jacob from Norwich

Dear Jacob

Different podcasters use different microphones. I myself prefer Shure SM-58 dynamic mics. Others like condensers; the Samson line is a popular choice. And then there’s that weird one they used in the Star Trek movie that looks like a ball on a stick. Beyond microphones, a key element is some sort of interface between the mic and computer, like a USB interface or a mixer. Not a food mixer, an audio mixer. I know someone who made that mistake once, but I’m not supposed to tell that story about Admiral Marius. Don’t tell anyone, but Admiral Marius uses a microphone he found backstage after a Lady Gaga concert, and now he keeps it under his pillow, and it has a special name.

Dear Kiki,

Can you send me an iPod Touch?

Ben from South Australia.

Dear Ben,

I put in the post and addressed it to “Ben from South Australia,” so it should arrive probably never. Thanks for listening!

Dear Kiki,

I am in the United States, so every time I go to order something from Simply Syndicated I have to convert dollars to pounds. Example: I need to send 15 pounds:

(15 * 9/5) + 32 = (15 * 1.8) + 32 = (27) + 32 = 59 dollars. This seems like an aweful lot of money. Can you tell me if I’m doing something wrong?

Scott in Orlando

Dear Scott,

Of course you’re doing something wrong. You’re living in Orlando.

Send your questions to askapodcaster@britain.com

Dear Kiki:

I like listening to Nerd Hurdles, but I have to wonder who would win in a fight, Igor or The Banana?

… Sam in Santa Carla, California

Dear Sam:

Igor would win, silly. The Banana is a cartoon, and Igor is a real guy.

Dear Kiki:

What happened to some of the other Simply Syndicated shows, like Craig Bevan’s Movie Minutes, Paddy’s TV Surprise, Books You Should Read and the Bollocks show? There are never any new ones.

Sean in Dublin

Dear Sean: I wish people would use their real names here, and not unlikely pseudonyms like yours. Anyway, Movie Minutes concluded its run so Craig could focus on his music. While fans hope he releases the whole run on DVD with the bonus lost episode (Date Movie), Craig is staying mum on the topic. Paddy’s TV Surprise went on hiatus when Paddy J. Forde woke up in a caravan in Doncaster with no idea how he’d gotten there. He wondered where his clothes had gone, then suddenly remembered he is actually Canadian. He now lives in Canada and is awaiting the government there to approve the installation of electricity so he can get back to podcasting. Books You Should Read is coming back this summer and will sound a little different, as it will now be presented solely in Spanish and will consist of reviews of cookbooks.

Dear Kiki:

¿Por qué son todos los espectáculos Simplemente Syndicato en inglés? Este no es justo para la gente que dice otras lenguas.

Raimondo in Buenos Ares

Dear Raimondo:

¿No leyó usted la última pregunta? Márchese y luche contra un toro.

Do you have a question for a podcaster? Email askapodcaster@britain.com!

Dear Kiki:

I have been listening to Simply Syndicated shows for a long time, but I have never signed up for the forums. I want to, because I hear them mentioned a lot on the podcasts, and they seem like an interesting place. However, whenever I lurk on them, I just see a lot of in-jokes that I don’t understand. Why are there so many inside jokes?

… Debbie in Cardiff

Dear Debbie:

Blame Kumar.

Do you have a question for a podcaster? Email askapodcaster@britain.com!

Dear Kiki,

I am a longtime listener of the podcasts on this site. I have a simple question: Do Simply Syndicated podcasters record their programmes in a fancy studio? Because the sound quality is better than most podcasts.

…Lisa in Delaware

Dear Lisa,

No, there’s no fancy studio. Most of the shows are recorded in home offices, living rooms, even bedrooms. There are exceptions, of course. Masters of None is recorded in the men’s room at a hockey rink, and For Those About To Rock is recorded on Whip Buffley’s tour bus, from under the groupies. Of course, Starbase 66 is made in space.

Dear Kiki,

I wuz gOin to post a sick pic of two homies nekkkkkked in the forumz, but they aint work? It made me say OMG WTF, U wuld of luvved it. And yo you needz a rap show.

…Jordyn in Essex

Dear Jordyn

The forums are currently being rebuilt for a fresh start. I would normally advise people to be patient and wait, but I suspect you would probably be happier at 4chan. Please move along, nothing to see here.

Dear Kiki,

I’ve been with this girl for about two weeks. How long should I wait before I tell her I think her sister is super-hot?

…Robbie in Glasgow

Dear Robbie,

Tell her right now, and make sure you get it on video, and make sure you email me your YouTube link.

Dear Kiki,

Why do you have a podcast about Star Trek with British guys on it? What do British people even know about Star Trek? Shouldn’t they be doing a show about Coronation Street or Eastenders or whatever the crap is they watch over there?

…JD in Buffalo

Dear JD,

British people love Star Trek because of Jean-Luc Picard. They like the idea that in the future, even the French are British. Old rivalry, you see.

Dear Kiki,

Who is the most awesome Simply Syndicated podcaster?

…RMS in Haworth

Dear RMS,

That one’s easy. Barclay.

Do you have a question for a podcaster? Email askapodcaster@britain.com!