...the passing of postage stamps.
"Have they passed?" I hear you ask, "I still use first-class stamps."
Indeed you do, as do I, but increasingly I'm finding (like today when I just popped out to the Post Office to mail a package to some friends in Canada) that our beautifully designed and colourful stamps with various face values are being replaced by boring white stickers, computer-generated and printed to the correct postage value in an unprepossessing light gray ink.
Yuk!
Where are the striking butterflies of iridescent hue? The celebrations of Britain's engineering heritage? The commemoration of Doctor Who's twenty-fifth anniversary?
One more step towards a colourless future of blighted bureaucracy and compromised culture.
Monday, May 15, 2006
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Someone's coming!
Whooot! Got a phone call from the estate agent yesterday - someone's actually coming to view the house next Saturday! Be still my beating heart. We called into the agents for the people we want to buy from too, to find out why they haven't sent us confirmation in writing that our offer was accepted. Turns out they mailed it to #159 instead of #195! Sheesh! Even worse, there were THREE other people booked in to view OUR house that day. Oh God, please don't let any of them like it. The kitchen is way too small!! You can't cope with it having a laundry in the fourth bedroom! You don't like the road that much, do you? Just give us a week until this guy comes to see ours and buys it, and then our dream house will be off the market and all will be well and all will be well and all manner of things will be well.
I'm not stressed at all by this. Oh no.
I'm not stressed at all by this. Oh no.
Sunday, May 07, 2006
Take the testosterone out of driving
Every day I'm out there on the motorways around the country, and Manchester in particular, there seems to be more mad-heads on the road.
Explain this to me:
When you're driving along a motorway behind a long queue of traffic all sitting in the right-hand lane (the OVERTAKING lane, note) and no-one is overtaking because they are all lined up behind each other; when the middle lane (also an OVERTAKING lane, note) is completely empty for at least five cars in front; when you decide to use that space and accelerate forward gently, not aggressively, and pass that queue of cars at no more than +1 or +2 mph faster than they are travelling; when you catch up with the last car in the middle lane having passed those five or so cars that weren't overtaking; when you continue to coast in the middle lane for at least another two miles; when you then indicate and pull out slowly into the OVERTAKING lane again, into a gap that is six- to seven-car lengths long and the person you are pulling in front of is at least two hundred metres behind you...
When all those conditions exist, as they did at approximately 12:00 on Saturday last, WHY THEN does that person you have pulled out in front of think it's a good idea suddenly to accelerate for all he's worth to try and block your entry into the OVERTAKING lane and, when it becomes obvious that he can't do that because there was just too much space to catch up (so WHY did it bother him so much, when he wasn't making much progress before?), WHY does he then think it's a good idea to overtake you on the inside at speed, cutting past you with only a foot or so room, and then PULL IN in front of you, into the gap between you and the car in front which is now only marginally longer than a single car's length?
Having behaved like a total moron, why does he then sit in front of you, occasionally touching his brakes to cause you to also brake, until he is less than 50 yards from the exit he needs at which point he heads at something less than a 45 degree angle for the exit, cutting across three lanes of traffic in the space of those 50 yards?
Does this make him a better driver than you? Does it make him more of a man than you? Does it alleviate some strange imagined attack on his driver machismo?
Well mate...driver of the rather sad looking black Mondeo, license plate that looked ALMOST like a private plate but one bought by someone with not much money so that you have to really struggle to understand exactly how it can be a private plate but it obviously is intended to be because it's a V-reg on an almost-new car...well, I don't think it proves any of these things.
But that's just me.
You might think I was in the wrong in the first place for overtaking on the inside, but this was a long queue of cars all travelling at the same speed all in the outside lane with nothing on their left. Why were they there? The fact that I could undertake them so slowly, wait a couple of miles and then pull into a massive space all adds up to a careful considered manoeuvre in my book. One that is perfectly acceptable in many civilised countries with roads a lot less congested than our own (America, Canada...). Why does it cause such hostile negative reactions from moronic Mondeo drivers?
It's a mystery.
Explain this to me:
When you're driving along a motorway behind a long queue of traffic all sitting in the right-hand lane (the OVERTAKING lane, note) and no-one is overtaking because they are all lined up behind each other; when the middle lane (also an OVERTAKING lane, note) is completely empty for at least five cars in front; when you decide to use that space and accelerate forward gently, not aggressively, and pass that queue of cars at no more than +1 or +2 mph faster than they are travelling; when you catch up with the last car in the middle lane having passed those five or so cars that weren't overtaking; when you continue to coast in the middle lane for at least another two miles; when you then indicate and pull out slowly into the OVERTAKING lane again, into a gap that is six- to seven-car lengths long and the person you are pulling in front of is at least two hundred metres behind you...
When all those conditions exist, as they did at approximately 12:00 on Saturday last, WHY THEN does that person you have pulled out in front of think it's a good idea suddenly to accelerate for all he's worth to try and block your entry into the OVERTAKING lane and, when it becomes obvious that he can't do that because there was just too much space to catch up (so WHY did it bother him so much, when he wasn't making much progress before?), WHY does he then think it's a good idea to overtake you on the inside at speed, cutting past you with only a foot or so room, and then PULL IN in front of you, into the gap between you and the car in front which is now only marginally longer than a single car's length?
Having behaved like a total moron, why does he then sit in front of you, occasionally touching his brakes to cause you to also brake, until he is less than 50 yards from the exit he needs at which point he heads at something less than a 45 degree angle for the exit, cutting across three lanes of traffic in the space of those 50 yards?
Does this make him a better driver than you? Does it make him more of a man than you? Does it alleviate some strange imagined attack on his driver machismo?
Well mate...driver of the rather sad looking black Mondeo, license plate that looked ALMOST like a private plate but one bought by someone with not much money so that you have to really struggle to understand exactly how it can be a private plate but it obviously is intended to be because it's a V-reg on an almost-new car...well, I don't think it proves any of these things.
But that's just me.
You might think I was in the wrong in the first place for overtaking on the inside, but this was a long queue of cars all travelling at the same speed all in the outside lane with nothing on their left. Why were they there? The fact that I could undertake them so slowly, wait a couple of miles and then pull into a massive space all adds up to a careful considered manoeuvre in my book. One that is perfectly acceptable in many civilised countries with roads a lot less congested than our own (America, Canada...). Why does it cause such hostile negative reactions from moronic Mondeo drivers?
It's a mystery.
Sunday, April 23, 2006
War of the Worlds - MEN Arena
We went to see Jeff Wayne's War of the Worlds tonight at M.E.N. Arena.
Wow.
I've been a fan of this since its release in 1978 but to see it live on stage for the first time was an experience I'm sure everyone in the audience tonight will be talking about for years to come. One of those concerts where those who missed it will never forgive themselves.
While there's still a chance to see it, I wouldn't want to give anything away to spoil the show. Suffice to say the original artists are just as good as they were 30 years ago, and the replacements every bit as good as the originals (with apologies to David Essex and the late great Phil Lynott). The CGI was amazing, the real-life scenes totally believable and the lighting simply awesome, especially the red pencil-spots that swept the audience in imitation of the heat rays.
A stunning sensory feast in every way.
See http://www.thewaroftheworlds.com/ for more on how the live show is being received.
Wow.
I've been a fan of this since its release in 1978 but to see it live on stage for the first time was an experience I'm sure everyone in the audience tonight will be talking about for years to come. One of those concerts where those who missed it will never forgive themselves.
While there's still a chance to see it, I wouldn't want to give anything away to spoil the show. Suffice to say the original artists are just as good as they were 30 years ago, and the replacements every bit as good as the originals (with apologies to David Essex and the late great Phil Lynott). The CGI was amazing, the real-life scenes totally believable and the lighting simply awesome, especially the red pencil-spots that swept the audience in imitation of the heat rays.
A stunning sensory feast in every way.
See http://www.thewaroftheworlds.com/ for more on how the live show is being received.
Monday, April 17, 2006
Doctor Who - the second series kicks off
And suddenly, there it was at last: Series 2, episode 1.
Long awaited, much trailered and perhaps the most hotly anticipated start to a TV series since .. well, since Series 1.
All in all, it was a good start, but for those of us who have been watching since the real Series 1, since the dark and distant days of 1963, I can't help thinking that it's all a bit quick. You know, we used to have entire stories spread out over four, six, or even eight episodes. A cliff-hanger at the end of every one.
The Doctor lands, and spends most of episode 1 scoping out the terrain of the new place. You might catch a glimpse of the resident alien right at the end of that first episode, or even (gasp!) have to wait until episode 2 to really get a clue what's going on.
Now?
He lands, pretty assistant by his side (some things don't change, thank God!) and within 45 minutes he's arrived at the right location, discovered the problem, avoided the bad guys, worked out what's wrong, fixed it and left again. A kind of scientifically-enhanced emergency plumber.
This isn't even a virtual 45 minutes, you understand. We get no clues about extra time passing by. There's no "later that day" or "fade into next week." He really does do the whole bit in 45 minutes. Frankly, it stretches credibility.
You'll probably say that today's audiences demand instant gratification. They need the pace to be break-neck. They have no patience or attention span for anything above the level of the Playstation. Is that right, though? Isn't it a self-fulfilling assumption? Isn't it worth at least giving longer stories a try?
Last season included some two-parters, as will this season. I found them much more satisfying and rounded. Two 45-minute episodes is equivalent to three episodes of the old show and is long enough to flesh things out a bit. I wonder what three episodes would be like? Even better, I'd suggest. More demanding on the storyteller, to be sure. Harder to keep the interest up. But worth it, IMO.
Long awaited, much trailered and perhaps the most hotly anticipated start to a TV series since .. well, since Series 1.
All in all, it was a good start, but for those of us who have been watching since the real Series 1, since the dark and distant days of 1963, I can't help thinking that it's all a bit quick. You know, we used to have entire stories spread out over four, six, or even eight episodes. A cliff-hanger at the end of every one.
The Doctor lands, and spends most of episode 1 scoping out the terrain of the new place. You might catch a glimpse of the resident alien right at the end of that first episode, or even (gasp!) have to wait until episode 2 to really get a clue what's going on.
Now?
He lands, pretty assistant by his side (some things don't change, thank God!) and within 45 minutes he's arrived at the right location, discovered the problem, avoided the bad guys, worked out what's wrong, fixed it and left again. A kind of scientifically-enhanced emergency plumber.
This isn't even a virtual 45 minutes, you understand. We get no clues about extra time passing by. There's no "later that day" or "fade into next week." He really does do the whole bit in 45 minutes. Frankly, it stretches credibility.
You'll probably say that today's audiences demand instant gratification. They need the pace to be break-neck. They have no patience or attention span for anything above the level of the Playstation. Is that right, though? Isn't it a self-fulfilling assumption? Isn't it worth at least giving longer stories a try?
Last season included some two-parters, as will this season. I found them much more satisfying and rounded. Two 45-minute episodes is equivalent to three episodes of the old show and is long enough to flesh things out a bit. I wonder what three episodes would be like? Even better, I'd suggest. More demanding on the storyteller, to be sure. Harder to keep the interest up. But worth it, IMO.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
