Taxonomy for 3 year olds

My 3 year old daughter is starting to take an interest in natural history - which is nice. Largely, this consists of looking through books with pictures of animals and naming them: or at least attempting to name them, often with comic results. These are a few of my favourites:

The Hopper (Hoppitus Hoppus)

The Hopper is an extremely bouncy animal which lives in a field and jumps over trees and people. As far as I can tell it includes a wide variety of sub-species including Hoppitus Bunnius and Hoppitus Whippetus. I did enquire as to whether this includes Tigger from the Winnie the Pooh books but apparently that is silly.

The Snapper (Tarsus Nippus)

The Snapper is one of three types of animal to be found in the sea - the other two being fish and sharks. Again, the snapper comes in a variety of sizes from the microscopic through to the sort of thing that spends its spare time chasing Sigourney Weaver around a spaceship - not that I would imagine that my daughter has any idea who Sigourney Weaver is or why she should be residing in a spaceship.

Buzzy Bees (Insectus Notawaspus)

Buzzy Bees are very useful animals who live in flowers and are not as troublesome as wasps. They spend their time producing nice things such as honey and pizza. (I have no idea where that last bit came from.)

Scary Spiders (Arachnus Petrifius)

Scary Spiders are the largest and most fearsome of the order Creepius Crawlius. Their usual habitat is down the bath plug hole or under little girls' beds. Their diet consists almost entirely of small children.

Fluffy Ducks (Sillius Madeupbydadus)

Fluffy Ducks are a silly animal that Dad made up. They consist of a teddy bear with a duck beak shoved on. I did try to explain that they are mammals that lay eggs and sweat milk but that didn't really get me very far. In fairness, when the British Museum was first sent one they initially thought it was a hoax from someone who had attached a beak to a mole. I'm surprised that Creationists haven't used it to "disprove" evolution - but that would probably involve them having to admit that God came up with it shortly after the creation of the magic mushroom.

Glasgow Riverside Museum

It's coming to the end of the school's summer holidays. My children have been off for eight weeks in total which is a long time to keep them entertained. It can be a struggle to keep them amused but a few days out can break the routine quite nicely. One of my favourite trips out used to be Glasgow's Transport Museum. It had a fascinating collection of transport related exhibits and it appeals to a wide age group from the very young to very old - it was also quite handy to get to, being located across the road from the Kelvingrove Museum. However, this was closed down a year ago to move to bigger and better premises - it has reopened this summer as the "Riverside Museum" on the banks of the Clyde. I took the boys there on Friday.

First of all I had to get there - there have been rumours of the car park being full to bursting due to the popularity of the museum. It was very full when we got there although there did appear to be a few spaces free. As it was, I decided that we would take the train to Partick and walk the rest of the way. The museums website said to follow the signs to the museum: however, there aren't any - at least not in the station itself. I'm reasonably familiar with that part of Glasgow so I did find my way around but I think it would be quite possible for a new visitor to take completely the wrong exit. I also thought the "10 minutes" walking time with children was a tad optimistic and, even then, I didn't think it was the most pedestrian friendly route with crossings over several major roads. Anyway, we did get there and I did stop griping - there is an awful lot to see.

I suppose I would have to make comparisons with the old museum. The first thing to notice is that it is a lot less cramped. The exhibits are given much more space to themselves and this works especially well with the trains and trams which need to be seen at a fair distance to be fully appreciated. The other thing to notice is that this is a thoroughly modern visitor attraction with many of the exhibits having interactive displays and games to go with them. In one way, this does take a bit away from the displays themselves as I noticed the boys were more interested in pressing buttons on the screens than actually looking at the cars and bikes. However, the displays with the subway trains and trams actually gave a good impression of what they would have been like to travel on.

One thing I didn't think worked as well was suspending some of the exhibits high above view. The Bicycle Velodrome might have been a cute idea - a circular track suspended from the ceiling with the bikes "racing" around - but it actually prevents close inspection of the bicycles' working parts: it's quite surprising how little they have fundamentally changed in the last 100 years. This habit of hiding from view was particularly noticeable with the "wall of cars" - curious models such as the Messerschmitt and BMW Isetta bubble cars were far from view and this really prevents one getting any idea of their scale. In fact the Isetta was so high up it was not actually visible from the floor. I also noticed that a few interesting exhibits from the old museum were missing, such as Jackie Stewart's F1 car and the old Glasgow trolley bus. I seem to recall that they varied the old museum's exhibits so it's possible that these may be shown again in the future.

I think one thing that worked particularly well was the reconstruction of old streets from the late 19th Century through to the 1970s. Some of these are themed - the collection of toys was fascinating although, in a way, also rather depressing - the manufacturers included the likes of Triang, Hornby, Meccano and Dinky. As I said to someone at the time, I don't just remember the toys, I can remember people who worked in the factories making them (and they weren't Chinese!) The other shops are themed for their period and so we have saddlers, furniture makers and even a collection of prams over the years - every type of transport is considered. There is a tall ship moored at the back which can be viewed at extra cost but we gave that a miss as we were running out of time.

The boys really enjoyed it - being able to get up close to fire engines and trains, and to actually see what the drivers cab is like when these are normally hidden from view is a real experience. I also think they learned a few things - both in terms of how our transport system came into being and also how people used to live in the past: even if this is only back as far as my own childhood. Given the scale of the building I think it would be quite possible for us to go back in a year's time and still find it new and interesting.

So maybe a couple of minor gripes but I think Glasgow Museums have done a great job with The Riverside - it's a facinating day out and genuinely educational. What's more, it's still free to go in.

Death of the Cinema

I'm seriously thinking of giving up on the cinema for good. I have been twice in the last week and my enjoyment of the thing has been spoilt on both occasions. This wasn't by the films, which I actually enjoyed; or by the 3D effects, which I now just avoid; but by the other patrons in the theatre. Cinema used to be a cheap night out. Not so long ago (and I am only talking 10 years ago) it was possible to buy a couple of tickets for the film, with an ice-cream and a drink before the show, for less than £10. The full price adult ticket for a 3D film at our local mutiplex is now more than that and the price for the 2D shows are not that far behind. With drinks around the £4 mark and ice-cream at £2.40 a scoop it becomes a major financial consideration. For this kind of money, I expect a really good experience - but the mutiplexes are just not providing it.

The films themselves have been fine. I took my eldest son to see Cars 2. I'm a fan of Pixar but I though the first Cars film was one of their weakest. I wasn't expecting too much but was pleasantly surprised by finding a half-decent James Bond spoof with enough colour, action and humour to keep both adult and child amused for two hours. The second film was the Steven Spielberg produced Super 8. Again, I'm a fan of Spielberg and I found director JJ Abrams Star Trek to be one of the most enjoyable films of the last few years. I wasn't disappointed either with what was almost a Spielberg greatest hits film, touching lots of bases with Spielberg's 1970's and early 80's blockbusters and providing a touching performance from the film's young actors.

What spoilt the films on both cases is technology. Specifically, the must-have gadget of the day, the iPhone. With Cars 2 I expected some disruption from the younger members of the audience but, aside from a couple of trips to the loo and one young chap who found it all a bit too much, the behaviour of the children was immaculate. It usually is - despite the popular image of Saturday matinee mayhem, young children do know how to behave themselves at the cinema. It is the behaviour of their parents that was left wanting. Maybe they didn't want to see Cars 2? Fair enough, but it is not beyond reasonable expectations to sit still and pay attention for the duration. Similarly, with Super 8 it was teenagers/young adults that seemed incapable of allowing the audience to enjoy the film without having iPhone screens lighting up all the time. If they don't like the film or are bored, they can leave. It is a free country and no-one is forcing them to watch the film. However, it is not beyond reasonable expectation to allow other audience members to enjoy the film in peace. To make matters worse, the cinema did not fully dip the theatre lights which is really annoying when watching the screen whilst wearing glasses.

As much as I do enjoy a trip to the pictures I'm beginning to think it is time to give up. My TV is on its last legs and large screen replacements are really quite cheap. My 32" CRT had a recommended price in excess of £1000 when I bought it 11 years ago. Now plasma sets in excess of 50" can be bought for half that much. Combined with a decent speaker set up, that can offer an experience which is at least as good as the cinema but with the cost of DVDs being far less than a family cinema ticket.

Maybe it is multiplexes I need to give up on. The MacRoberts cinema at Stirling University is a highly civilised affair and the Bo'Ness Hippodrome can offer a real nostalgia trip. Aside from that I may finally see my dream of turning my living room into the local Odeon.

Top Of The Pops

I'm starting to lose track of modern music. I couldn't tell you what the top selling songs are or even what the current releases are like. To some extent this is oldfartism. I think when every single pop record featured Autotune (to the extent that it sounded like "Sparky's Magic Piano" had staged some sort of coup) I gave up. However, I still like to keep up with current music trends - it's just that I am increasingly finding I don't get to hear modern music. I blame some of this on the PRS whose general greed at stopping shops and business playing the radio or other music has done much to prevent me hearing new music in the first place. I've ended up buying many records over the years just by a chance hearing. It wasn't home taping killing music but the Performing Rights Society!

I used to listen to the Radio quite a bit. In fact, I still do but the channels I listen to are either spoken word or play classical or middle of the road (i.e. middle age) music. I did used to listen to Radio 1 quite a bit but, in the daytime, this seems to be dedicated more to the aimless ramblings of vacuous idiots than playing contemporary tunes. Commercial radio has far too may adverts or, like Real Radio, they decide to have a phone-in talking pish about football when I have time to listen. Of course, I used to have one great source of contemporary modern music - nicely wrapped up into a half hour of TV on a Thursday night. Unfortunately, that little gem has been taken from me. I speak, of course, of that old institution: Top Of The Pops.

TOTP was much derided. It was generally considered to be naff. It certainly had its share of awful teeny groups, faddish fashions and nauseating novelty records. It never really made an effort to be cool (at least in its heyday). It didn't have to. The whole point is that it played those songs that were the most popular that week and the general publish has very little taste. In that respect it was very much a mirror of the times. It's very easy to look back with hindsight and say what the most important social and musical trends were but, at the time, the reality is very different. BBC Four have recently been showing old episodes of Top Of The Pops from 1976. This is seen as a landmark year for music as the whole Punk Rock scene was taking off with the likes of The Damned and The Sex Pistols releasing their first records. So how did this affect TOTP? Well, not much...



Ground braking music doesn't usually sell that well - at least not to begin with. The Beatles first single in 1962 only managed a lowly number 17 peak and there are many recordings now considered as classics which didn't even grace the lower reaches of the top 100 singles. Top Of The Pops in 1976 reflected this with a typical listing including The Brotherhood Of Man, Robin Starstedt, Our Kid and The Wurzels. Groovy, baby! Yet people bought these records in their thousands and this is what I really miss about TOTP. Most of the songs were crap. In fact, I can recall a number of occasions that the only thing I did like about it was the theme tune - Led Zeppelin's Whole Lotta Love (or at least an instrumental cover of it). The popular image of TOTP is the family gathering around the TV with Dad going on about the rubbish that kids listen to and Mum commenting that "that lad would look quite nice with a proper haircut." In truth, it was young music fans, like me, cringing at the sheer awfulness of 90% of the acts and hoping that whatever my favourite record was that week would get a look in. It was often car crash TV - and that's why I loved it.

In truth, Top Of The Pops had to change. Technology meant that record sales were not going to be driven by kids spending their money on 7" singles at Woolies. However, I do believe that there is a case for a popular music show on at peak-time on a main-channel TV station. The BBC would be the prime candidate to do it as they are our national broadcaster and shouldn't be concerned with commercial considerations. I think it would need new criteria for which records qualified to appear. The "singles rising" rule was fine when the programme was introduced in the early 1960s but music consumption has moved on. It's not even just sales but access to the likes of Spotify or You Tube that count. I think Top Of The Pops does have a future - it's just up to the BBC to realise this and bring it back.

If nothing else, it would give me the opportunity to sit in my armchair and say, "Who listens to this rubbish? It's not like in my day when you had a decent tune - like Motörhead..."