Out of the Mouths of Babes

I wrote a few weeks ago about Richard Dawkins' Faith Schools Menace? TV programme. I have my doubts about his concerns that it is possible to make children believe in God against their better judgement. With our children, at least with the oldest boy, I have never tried to push him one way or another. If he has asked about God and religious matters I have always responded in terms of this being what some people believe and trying to point out how various beliefs and rituals are a normal part of people's daily lives. In short, I have tried to leave him to make up his own mind whilst hoping that he will become a tolerant and thoughtful individual. At school, they tend to present various religious beliefs in a matter-of-fact way and he has been to religious services on odd occasions as well. None of this is forced but he does get the opportunity to learn about religion.

During the week I was watching an old Horizon documentary about astronomy and the origin of the universe. Out of the blue he came out with the statement: "I don't think God exists". I was a little intrigued by this and so I asked him why he thought that. "It's because if God was out in space he wouldn't be able to breathe," was the reply. Now, I do think that this is rather a naïve interpretation of the concept of God but I really can't fault his logic. If God really was a person floating about the heavens, He really would be knackered on the oxygen front.

However, I think this does confirm what I suspected. Children are not that gullible. If they believe something it's because it makes sense to them. Their logic may not be perfect as, being children, they don't have as much experience as adults; but you can't make someone believe something they don't want to. After all, insincere belief is no belief at all.

BOGOF Yourself

I'm all for a decent bargain at the local supermarket but one thing that is really starting to get on my nerves it's the BOGOF - or "Buy One, Get One Free" to the uninitiated.

On the face of it these look like great offers: Something for nothing. But it doesn't take a genius to work out that the price for one item has been over-inflated, so if you only wanted one of a thing you either get ripped off or you are forced to buy a second item that you didn't really want. If this is bog rolls or soap it doesn't really matter as long as you have somewhere to store it. But if it's something edible there is always a good chance that the thing is going to go off before you have chance to eat it. We are then told that food waste is a big issue and it's all our fault.

The latest variation of this scheme is even more perplexing. This is where items like coffee are priced as "2 for £4" on a small 100g jar of instant coffee. Where this starts becoming senseless is that it works out cheaper to buy two small jars of coffee on the offer than one big 200g one at the usual price. As I work in IT and am, essentially, a caffeine based life form, I drink huge amounts of coffee and could really do with buying the big jar. However, I don't want to be ripped off by the supermarkets and this means that a lot more waste packaging is produced. Apparently, this is all our fault as well.

In conclusion, all supermarkets are bastards and I'm going to take up crofting or live off road-kill instead.

Road Humps

The BMW X5 is one of those cars I've never really seen the point of. They are huge and yet the interior space is rubbish. You can sit four adults inside but the boot is no bigger than the luggage space on a Honda Jazz. It weighs far too much so even though it has an engine with the cubic capacity of an aircraft carrier it doesn't feel that sprightly and it ends up with the fuel consumption of a Saturn V rocket. Even then, it's like a super-tanker to manoeuvre and the slightest over-enthusiasm with the steering lets you know that this is a seriously top-heavy beast. It looks like some sort of off-road vehicle and it does have four wheel drive but here's the stupid bit: it's rubbish off road. They fit very slick looking low-profile road tyres as standard so if the owner doesn't change them they are generally to be seem being hauled off a muddy field by the local farmer in his Massey Ferguson. I got to drive one this week.

I had to pick someone up from the airport and was told to take a company car (one of the salesmen's rep-mobiles) as my Yaris wasn't big enough (or, reading between the lines, not posh enough). Now, I generally enjoy driving other people's cars but I really wasn't looking forward to this. It was even worse when I switched on the engine to discover that, rather than some V8 roar, I was met by a diesel clatter. However, I have changed my mind a little and it all has to do with road humps.

Road humps are really the bane of my life when driving. They are meant to slow the traffic down, which is fair enough, but regardless of how slowly I drive over them I get a nasty jolt which, as I am prone to a bad back, really annoys me. Driving over them in the Yaris is even worse as it's a small car and the wheels don't stretch far enough to miss the worst - I get a full blown thump every time I go over one. This is where the X5 really came into its own. I couldn't feel a thing. This was not just at 20mph but at any speed you like to choose. First at 25, then 30, 40 even 50. I just had to blast the thing up and down the same bit of road to make sure it went over them - it just floated over the things.

So I picked up my passenger and dropped them back at the office. The car park was full so I parked the X5 on the grass verge - the bugger sank into the mud. It's probably still stuck there.

Favourite Words

I caught a conversation on the radio today about a subject I've never given much thought to (I think it was on Radio 4 but it might have been BBC Scotland - it was one of those shows where they talk very meaningfully about nothing in particular). Anyway, it was on the subject of "favourite words". Now, I can understand why someone may have a favourite book or play or poem - or even a favourite verse or lyric from a song - but I'm puzzled as to why someone might have a favourite word. It just strikes me as atomism gone mad.

In fact, on having searched the internet it looks like it's quite a popular subject. There is a whole website dedicated to it. Actually, after looking through the site it appears that they are planning to write a book on the back of it. I'm unsure as to whether this is an intriguing way of carrying out research or a cheap trick to get everyone one else to write their book for them! But having thought on, I possibly do have a favourite word; and that word is: Darkness.

Why Darkness? Well, I think it appeals to my sense of musicality. It's onomatopoeic: a tone poem in miniature with it's long opening vowel, hard and unexpected middle consonants leading to a whispering sibilant at the end. Just like an owl swooping down and disappearing into the night. For greatest effect, it should be pronounced in a markedly South Wales accent - think Anthony Hopkins. Maybe I like the word because I tend to have a dour , gloomy nature; I'm not sure but Lord Byron was inspired enough to write a poem called Darkness.

Of Cores and Crowns

Knowing very little about jazz music it's rather difficult to know where to start. One of the leading reference works is The Penguin Guide to Jazz Recordings; a rather heavy volume which I managed to find in the reference section of our local library. Even then, it's difficult to know where to begin as there are literally thousands of reviews. However, the authors of the guide have provided a handy little scheme for the novice. Those recording which they (reasonably) objectively regard as being essential to a jazz collection are marked as being a "Core". Those CDs which are personal favourites they mark as a "Crown". Now, assuming that the authors know what they are talking about, and they do seem pretty knowledgeable, I have been picking out my latest Amazon purchases on the basis of interesting sounding CDs which are both Cores and Crowns. The results are interesting...

The first disk to arrive through the post was The Sidewinder by trumpeter Lee Morgan. I have to say that I had never heard of him and was more intrigued by the title of the album. It doesn't refer to the snake but is a term used to describe a kind of wide-boy. It's described as Hard Bop, although I'm still struggling to get to grips with all the jazz sub-genres, and I can only describe it as absolutely brilliant. It starts of with the jauntily funky title track and carries on at much the same pace from there. This was a great start, as was the second disk: Art Blakey's A Night at Birdland Vol. 1, a live recording from 1954 of the drummer's band. This is not a million miles away from the Sidewinder album in style and there isn't a duff track on it either - although the introduction is a little weird. There are, apparently, a Vol. 2 & 3 and I may go for them on the basis of this.

The next disk was A Love Supreme by John Coltrane. This often appears in lists of "Greatest Albums of All Time" which I'm always a little suspicious of. It's not that the albums which feature highly are no good it's just that, often, I don't even rate them as the best albums of those artists. For example: The Beatles' Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, The Rolling Stones' Exile On Main Street, and Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. All good albums but I'd personally go for Revolver, Let It Bleed and Wish You Were Here. Anyway, I gave A Love Supreme a listen and I liked it. I couldn't say it was the best Coltrane as I haven't heard them all but I liked it. I then listen to it again and I could really start to see what the fuss was all about. It's not just four tunes, it works as a whole and this is what has inspired the "Greatest" tags. It's a work of art in it's entirety - even down to the poetry in the sleeve lining.

The forth CD was one I was really looking forward to: Herbie Hancock's Head Hunters. Actually, I was a little disappointed with this at first; not with the music, which is wonderful, but by the fact that I had a couple of the tracks on a compilation CD. It doesn't really matter as the whole thing is worth having and the opening track, Chameleon, is very much extended from the version on the Best Of album. The other nice thing about this CD is that it marries up my new found liking for jazz with my long-standing passion for electronic music. It's surprising how innovative much of this was and it's not a million miles away from experiments that the keyboardist Vangelis was doing at the same time.

The last CD was another shot in the dark: Eric Dolphy's Out to Lunch. I had heard of him as he had played with Charles Mingus and given the Crown and Core backing it seemed to be worth a shot. I have seen this described as either Free Jazz or Avant-Garde Jazz. After my first listening I described it as "What the Hell was that?" It's rather "Out There" - in fact I discovered that he had previously recorded an album with that title so I should have been forewarned. One Amazon review stated that "If you only buy one Free Jazz album, it will be this one." I took that as a recommendation, not a warning. I don't give up that easily and I gave this another couple of listens; I think I can get what he is doing. Every track paints a picture and it's worth finding out what they were trying to achieve as this is intellectually fulfilling stuff - but it certainly isn't music for pleasure. I suppose I listen to some fairly weird stuff in the classical world - John Cage and György Ligeti, for example. But, whilst I can appreciate the intellectual achievements of Cage, I listen to Ligeti because I enjoy it.

Overall, I think the Cores and Crowns idea works well although I am finding that there are certain sub-genres that I like more than others. I'll have to wait for another Amazon voucher to show up although I've noticed that their recommendations seem to think I have a thing about jazz.

Merlin

Yesterday saw the return of Merlin to our screens. This is the BBC's third major Saturday teatime TV drama after the success of Doctor Who and the updated Robin Hood. Robin Hood didn't really work for me. The kids seemed to enjoy it but I couldn't quite get into it; it wasn't the anachronisms, which I usually enjoy, but it felt like variations of the same story every week. Merlin, on the other hand, has just gone from strength to strength. I've always enjoyed the Arthurian legends and this is an original take on the old medieval tale by focusing on the early years of the characters - even if it does take some astonishing liberties with the original texts.

The start of the new series is a two-parter and I'm assuming that they are setting up the themes for the series as I found it rather dull. It struck me that much of the character development in the second series had been undone and that the relationships between the young protagonists had been reset to the start of series one. This is a pity as I had hoped it would move towards the darker romantic overtones of the original stories and approach the fantasy and philosophy of the film Excalibur - in my opinion the best adaptation of the story of King Arthur, although it would have to be toned down to suit a family audience. Of course, that would probably raise the ire of David Mitchell.

David Mitchell has caused some controversy with his latest Guardian soap box in which he criticises adults for watching what he classes as "children's programmes" by which he means the likes of Doctor Who and Harry Potter. Personally, I think he misses the point. These are family shows; aimed at a general audience and suitable for both younger and older family members to watch together - or on their own if they so desire. That explains the broad appeal and high viewing figures of dramas like these and general entertainment shows such as X-Factor. There are plenty of adult orientated shows on the TV but these invariably seem to focus on cops, doctors or the tawdry affairs of dull middle class people.

Part of the problem with adult drama is that the producers believe that it means "contains sex, violence and bad language". It doesn't and, in fact, this makes what could be perfectly decent dramas quite juvenile. What I would like to see as adult drama is something that can engage the mind; something that would appeal to Freud's das Über-Ich rather than das Es. These seem to be rather thin on the ground which explains why many people would rather watch teatime telly rather than the lazily written post-watershed programming.

I suppose this does raise the question of exactly what is a children's programme. It certainly shouldn't mean dumbed-down and I do get annoyed at people who feel the need to constantly patronise children in this way. I think the giveaway is when a story is told from a child's perspective. The popular CBBC children's drama Tracey Beaker is about children and is told from the perspective of a child whereas something like Oliver Twist is about children but has greater themes of good versus evil with a great dollop of social satire to boot. That's not to say that Oliver Twist cannot be enjoyed by the whole family or that Tracey Beaker wouldn't provide amusement to their parents - it didn't get a BAFTA for being crap. Harry Potter probably falls somewhere in-between: it's not something I would choose to read but I found the films entertaining enough - if a little formulaic.

As for Merlin, it should stay firmly with it's family audience in mind - I just hope this series picks up soon.

Frankie Boyle

I like Frankie Boyle. His dark, pessimistic, sometimes surreal and peculiarly Scottish sense of humour appeal to me. However, we saw his live show a couple of years ago and, whilst it was funny, it wasn't as hilarious as I had imagined. I couldn't quite put my finger on it. He certainly didn't die on stage, I've seen that happen on more than one occasion in Falkirk and I don't know who it is worse for: the comic on stage or the audience feeling embarrassed for them and wishing they would produce a belly laugh or get off ASAP. Although he had me laughing I felt there was something missing from Frankie's show. Having just read his book My **** Life So Far I think I've put my finger on it.

What his show was lacking was a common thread. On stage his barbed comments seemed like a series of non-sequiturs as he jumped from one subject to the next - sometimes seeming only to shock his audience. His book, meanwhile, is an alleged autobiography but, in effect, it is his stand-up routine built around his life story: growing up in Glasgow, going to college, working in a psychiatric hospital, some time as a teacher, becoming a stand-up comic and his progression into a broadcasting and writing career. All this is filled with personal asides and topical observations. It often had me laughing out loud - which is a little embarrassing in the staff canteen.

Interestingly, he did mention the 2008 tour in the book. He seemed to think he was missing his natural audience. Most of the tickets were bought over the internet which meant that only well organised people like accountants and lawyers bought them rather than the usual flotsam and jetsam of Scottish society (which, in all honesty, is where I fit in). He may have a point as I don't recall much that banter with the audience. Still, I could very much recommend the book - Frankie Boyle at his best.

Alas Poor Sarah...

I was going to write about the football on this posting. ITV1 often show England internationals live (at least, when they aren't showing commercials over the goals) but I don't receive ITV1. I get STV which, in some respects, resembles ITV1 except, if there is anything good on (like the footy), they choose to show unadulterated crap instead. I can understand that they may want to show something other than the England games in Scotland; for example the Scotland games might be a good idea; but instead they go for the most appalling rubbish and the internationals are hidden away on a pay-through-your-nose subscription channel. Anyway, for the first time in ages, the Scotland international game away to Lithuania was shown on terrestrial TV - BBC1 Scotland, in this case. The game ended 0-0. Scotland looked quite good except in front of goal. A bit like Falkirk, really. Not so much the Lion Rampant as the Lion Toothless.

Anyway, that's enough of the football. What caught my attention this weekend is that Sarah Kennedy has finally left her early morning Radio 2 show The Dawn Patrol. This is probably off the radar for many people unless, like me, you have Radio 2 set on the clock-alarm and you get up far too early. The funny thing is, most people seem to treat her show like me: It's a fantastic alarm clock because you really have to get up and switch the damn thing off after 5 minutes. Either that, or listen to her odd stories about weird cats, conniving dogs, her muddle England lifestyle and, failing that, right wing musings and reading stories from the Daily Mail as if they were actually true. Even then, she would read them as if she had left her specs on the bus. Having said that, she did seem to disappear for long periods due to various non-specified health issues and we would get Aled Jones or Lynn Parsons filling in. Apparently, we are going to get much more of them now!

The odd thing is, I really think I'm going to miss her.

I won't miss her as a presenter; she must be as oddly cast as a radio broadcaster as that bloke on Central FM news who stutters, or the entire surreal world that is Isles FM (and I bet you thought the Outer Hebrides Broadcasting Corporation was a joke). What I will miss is that she was one of the last distinctive voices on radio; rather like a mad old aunt who never quite gets their brain in gear. Radio has become more and more homogenised, risk-averse and frankly dull. At least with the likes of Sarah Kennedy there was always the chance of something genuinely outrageous happening - a bit like the Duke of Edinburgh being let loose in a Bradford clothes factory. Maybe non-politically correct musings are actually top entertainment when you aren't related to the person in question. I'm not sure, but I can see BBC radio becoming blander and blander - not unlike the commercial radio stations with their interchangeable presenters and predictable play listings.

I don't know who her permanent replacement is going to be. I think another female presenter would be nice: Lynn Parsons or Lisa Tarbuck would be my choices. One thing is sure: early morning radio is never going to be quite the same.

Residence and Inception

I was recently asked to fill out a security form and they wanted to know how long my wife had been living in Britain. I wasn't sure so Nina dug through some old diaries and discovered that she first moved here on 1st September 1990. She has been living here for exactly 20 years. I felt this was a cause for celebration and a night out was in order. The first thing I thought of was dinner out, but the only thing I could think of that would cover both German and Scottish cuisine was deep fried Bratwurst in batter. So on second thoughts we went to the cinema.

This also gave me a chance to try out "Orange Wednesdays". This is a 2 for the price of 1 film offer which Orange mobile offer to their phone subscribers. As I have an Orange phone from work I thought I would give it a try. After all, the mobile itself seems to have no use as a telecommunications device so I thought I should get some use from it. After brief deliberations we went to see Inception: Christopher Nolan's latest movie.

I've really enjoyed Nolan's films with the likes of Memento, The Prestige and the last two Batman films - that hen's tooth of the cinema: an intelligent comic book adaptation. The Prestige really impressed me, although I think it helps if you know a little about Nikola Tesla; at least his reputation as the cranks' crank. Inception was somewhat similar as it helps if you know a little of the central deceit: which is that groups of psychic spies can engineer a group dream to steal secrets from their intended victims. However, a Japanese businessman hires a group of these psychics to plant a thought in the mind of a rival - a process known as "inception".

That might sound a little far out but once you can accept this basic premise what follows is an intriguing, if rather confusing, thriller as the psychic architects weave an elaborate dream - in fact a dream-within-a-dream-within-a-dream - to carry out their task. I say it was rather confusing but in fact I was very baffled at the time. However, it seems to make more sense after thinking about it for a day. I suppose that's a sign of an intelligent plot: it makes more sense the more you think about it - rather like the actual aim of the psychics.

I'd give the film a 4 out of 5. I'd definitely like to see it again but I don't think it was quite as clever as The Prestige. I suppose I should start thinking of what to do for Nina's 30th UK anniversary.