Get Off My Cloud

See when you belong to a "certain category" you are expected to sort everything out yourself, and someone will make that very clear to you. But when you are in "another category" you don't have to, you can tell that same someone who will tell someone else to send something on your behalf.

Equality? No.

We Don't Need No Education

I keep seeing children in supermarkets. Today it was the Scouts.

Not running about, but standing by the checkouts. They don't get in my way. They ask me politely if they can help me pack my bag and I say politely no I'm much better off doing it myself and they leave me to it and everyone is happy.

And I'm sure that some people are happy to have help packing their bags and it saves the cashier's time, and by knock-on, everyone's (except the children of course).

And I don't mind the Scouts being helpful, it's a voluntary organisation and they've always done it and it raises money for charity (they had other Scouts with large buckets). That's what the Scouts can choose to do. I still don't think it's much, y'know, fun, but hey.

But there has been a worrying trend, which is children in (smart) school uniform. There were some yesterday in Marks and Spencer and some the other day in Morrisons. In order:

What are these kids doing on December 23 in school uniform standing around in Marks and Spencer? If the term has finished, as I suspect it has, why have they been dragged out to the supermarket when they should be out playing (or inside playing, maybe, or playing with their phones at least)? (If it is the last day of term, it's not a very thrilling one. Teachers all run out of things to do?) Give them a break.

I was more concerned the other week. That was a Friday in term-time (unless the term finished very early, in which case the following arguments still mostly apply.)

Is it a good use of students' time to be spent standing around in supermarkets in preference to, ooh I don't know, take a random idea, being in lessons LEARNING stuff?

I didn't ask why they were doing it, I had to get on (and in truth I only thought about it properly later). I can't think of an answer I'd be happy with.

Were they raising money, for charity, or even worse, for their school? Not their job. That's for adults.

Is it some kind of PSE initiative to learn about money raising, about public service, volunteering? It seems at best desperately inefficient if it's not even counter-productive (who would want to repeat the experience?) I can't imagine what they got out of the experience. After 10 minutes, I think anyone would have got whatever point there was.

Is it about the new thing of "being responsible citizens"? Per-lease. Even I can't make a case for how that would work. Or "building links with the community". I'm struggling here, to find any reason.

Maybe it was so the teachers could do some Christmas shopping while they were there. Well at least something got done. Badly, and at a disproportionate cost, but something. Actually that seems to be the answer that makes the most sense and maximises usefulness of the activity.

If the children volunteered or "volunteered" then don't let them. If they weren't volunteers that's even worse.

Get the kids back in school.

Silence is Golden

Except it isn't available.

Used to be that libraries were quiet places. A respite to ponder, read, browse in peace.

My local library is more like Piccadilly Circus. Two assistants were having a conversation while sorting out the shelves. So all right, it's good to be sociable with your workmates and it must be difficult sometimes to be completely quiet all day. But there are lunch-breaks .... it's not as if they were talking about what they were doing. I went and stood by them to embarrass them into keeping schtum but it didn't seem to work for long.

The customers are no better. Seems like the library is a place to meet your mates for a conversation. Why not go to the coffee shop?

And when the assistants are helping customers, it would be good if the customers went up to the desk, particularly if they're a bit deaf, so that the conversation could be quiet? Rather than standing a few yards away, as they were doing? Mind you even when the young mum went right up to the counter the librarian wasn't so quiet.

We don't have to librarians in glasses glaring and shh-ing at the slightest squeak. But a bit of an effort?

Buy a few signs, Tameside.

Money (That's What I Want)

There aren't many upsides to having a not very active bank account, but at least you don't get phoned up by the bank all the time (actually I did the other day, but they haven't troubled to phone back). But my wife does.

Which is interesting. We haven't given them this phone number. And it's not in the book under the name they have. So how did they get hold of it? They have had to actively seek it out .... he doesn't know that we KNOW that.

My wife asked them. He didn't know (I didn't get the name clearly but I don't think it was James this time, it has been him several times before when we lived elsewhere). Or he wouldn't say. We'll call that a fudge rather than anything else. But the lies do come later.

We asked him to delete the number from his records. He said he would. I believe that to be a lie. Even if he wanted to or was able to, his managers wouldn't let him. Because then they couldn't pester us.

We tried the being nice "we know you've been told by your manager ... you've got a horrible job .... but we don't want phone calls" etc. No good. He persists even when it's clear we have no interest in what he wants to say.
He asks if we are satisfied with the service we get from the bank. We say no, the major problem being that they phone us up out of the blue when we do not want it. He doesn't take the hint.

We explained that we know that they phone up because they want to interest us in new "products". He says they don't. So that is lie number 2. Much as it would be lovely to believe what he says - that he sits around thinking about us and worrying that we are not happy with our bank account - it is difficult to believe that the bank would under-employ him in that way. We know he has to make a certain amount of phone calls to show that he is trying to sell some new product (God help him if he has a target quota of positive responses, he's on a loser at this house).

At least this time he didn't try to say - as James once did - that it is not secure having money in their bank and we should move it (over the telephone, for goodness' sake, who the hell is this man, what proof of who he is can he give us?) to an account in which we can't just get at OUR money, we "just" have to phone up to organise it, how is that an improved service?, when the clear answer to insecurity is we should take the whole lot out of this insecure bank. We like having our money on call without having to phone up and all the identity checks that would involve. Oh that time we had "too much" money. He'd sharp complain if we had too little - oh no that's right he'd actually love it as then he can charge us for an overdraft; no we're not falling for that one. We will keep a sufficient float, thank you, he doesn't know our circumstances and we aren't telling him.

Even his own words don't make logical sense, we are doing well he says, so why do we need something different? There was a lot more that was self-contradictory but mercifully I've forgotten it.

Apart from the bloody cheek of the banks trying to advise us how to manage our money, when they can't manage their own. Socks under the bed full of money have never looked so attractive.

Let There Be More Light

The salesman from npower came round again to the doorstep, promising to save us money again. What does he think he's doing?

1. He can't possibly know that he can save us money unless he knows things he shouldn't. So he's a liar or he's invaded our privacy. He hasn't done any research, he doesn't know who's not got gas and he doesn't know who owns their house and who doesn't. He doesn't know anything.

2. All the companies say that. Therefore at least all but one are lying or deluded. Or their salespeople are which is just as bad.

3. He expects you to take his word for it! If you ask for a leaflet or something with information to work it out, he hasn't GOT any, let alone any to give out.

4. Who buys off the doorstep like that? You need time to think about it.

5. He's on commission. OK some people on commission really do have a good product, but you still have to have an element of caution. He doesn't care whether you get the right product or if the price will go up as soon as they've locked you into a contract. His money's made.

6. He's got a rotten job. That's no excuse to go around making stuff up. And what confidence do you have in someone if that's his best shot? He's not interested in providing a service (like putting in a gas pipe).

7. Why isn't the pricing simple so you can understand it? Because then you'd see if you had a good deal or not. The power companies aren't competing on price like supermarkets. They couldn't reliably promise to if they wanted to, because of the speculators and the international situation. The point of privatisation was stated to be that competition would drive prices down and thereby be better for consumers. Balderdash and piffle exposed.

Money (That's What I Want)

Two classic quotes from Shakespeare.

The first is from Henry V (I think, willing to be corrected):

"First thing, let's kill all the lawyers".

The second is from Hamlet:

"Neither a borrower nor a lender be".

There speaks a man who had a mortgage.

Which is unlike me, since two weeks ago today. Brave new world?

Remember Me

I am not a big shopper. I don't have many store cards. In fact, now I have one less. I used to have one with a clothing store, name begins with B, you know them.

So I was going past the other day and they had an offer on of 20% off for all card holders. Well that had to be worth a look. The only problem was that when I found something and took it to the desk, the card wasn't recognised. Yes, it's all paid off, not missed a payment.

Phoned up. (Call centre in India, possibly. Certainly no-one who could do anything, of course, been there with npower yada-yada and others.) It had been cancelled 3 weeks before. (Nobody bothered to tell me, warn me.) Hadn't used it enough.

OK, I know it's a loyalty card. It's supposed to encourage "repeat business" in the jargon. But if it gets cancelled - no warning, remember, no "if you want to keep your card active, let us know", no offers "as a valued card member, we'd like to suggest ..", nothing, not even a note "it's 20% off next Thursday" (I happened across it, recall), you know that might have produced a sale, I think, then what is it?

It's the second time it's happened (I went back once and filled all the forms in again for a new one - but you don't want to keep doing that) and therefore what I have now is a disloyalty card. Which is surely no good to anyone?

(And all this in the middle of the worst recession for ages - do they want to sell?) Really.

This Old House

There used to be a recurring sketch/character on one of Paul Whitehouse/Harry Enfield's shows, about an estate agent who knew nothing but could only state the obvious (eg "this is the kitchen") and answered every question with "I don't know".

I didn't use to find it very funny, like most of their sketches it's a one-joke concept and it very quickly gets boring. (Tangent: Funny characters are one thing, but you have to do something with them, it seems to me. Whatever happened to jokes and wit?)

Anyway I now realise it wasn't intended as a joke or even a parody. It's a vicious expose of the real-life case.

When an estate agent takes someone to see a house, and that house is literally round the corner from the estate agent's office (one minute's walk), then you might expect the estate agent to know that the street that the house is on is a one-way street (has been for 10 years) and you might expect her not to bring the prospective buyers through a no-entry sign and drive their cars the wrong way up that one-way street.

You would apparently be wrong.

The first rule of selling is "know your product". Not "turn up with no knowledge or information and find out about it along with the people you are trying to sell to".

I despair.

Silence is Golden

Speech is only silver.

















The more words you use, the less you say.

Holiday

I was challenged to write about my holiday, so here it is. One of the places we went to was New Lanark, where we learned about Robert Owen.

Robert Owen founded the community of New Lanark and invented primary education, the Co-op (originally the Co-operative Wholesale Society) and thereby ethical trading, and trade unionism, and his son founded the Smithsonian Institute. Not bad for one lifetime.

He believed the job of the wealthy was to help the poor (which he did), to help them to better themselves by education (which he did) and not to exploit them (that may depend on your current point of view, but for the time he was very enlightened). He believed that workers could be encouraged without the threat of sacking and that to improve their behavious it was only necessary to note it (and it worked, by all accounts). He was attacked in the newspapers for his ideas by those too cowardly to give real names.

He believed that education was the key to living in harmony and he foresaw a New Millennium when all would be able to live together without discord. He campaigned against child labour and did not use it in his mills - when everyone else did. He eventually got a Bill passed, even if it was so watered down by the vested interests that it was nearly useless.

Why is he not better known (Scotland does better in this regard and he has been on postage stamps.?

Maybe because:

1. He was Scottish.

2. He didn't see any benefit in religion.

3. His ideas are still unpopular today.

Take your pick.

Hanging on the Telephone

The telephone is ringing off the hook with calls from beautiful blondes, and when it's not then I'm calling out, selecting from options, being re-routed to the person who actually knows something (sometimes) or can do something (less often) or can actually sort out the problems caused by other people (very rare). It takes three or more goes of course before someone answers and even then "your call is very important to us" well why don't you bloody answer it then is the sort of response you might give "our lines are very busy" I'm not surprised with the standard of service you generally get.

I've been threatened with debt recovery procedures by npower, Darlington Borough Council and Carlyle Finance, notwithstanding the fact that the first two of these don't actually know how much I owe them (or indeed whether they in fact owe me) and the last has a different figure to me and can't explain why in a way that I can understand. Certainly none of them can provide accurate statements of account, invoices, receipts or any of the documentation that you might expect from a company that knows what it's doing day-to-day. Oh and Angela had a letter threatening to cut off the gas, don't know who that's from, but it's because they can't get the address right or realise that sometimes people move house (I'm not making this up).

In addition there's the banks. There was a man (true story, this, it was on Radio 4 and everything) who got so pissed off with the Yorkshire Bank that he changed his name by deed poll to Yorkshire Bank Are Fascist Bastards plc and got it put on his Yorkshire Bank cheque book. He was wrong, of course, in that he should have changed his name to All Banks are Fascist Bastards plc especially Northern Rock (and you'd think they were into customer service lately having made all our shares worthless through unadulterated greed). When they realise what a balls-up they've made of everything, who ends up bailing them out? You and me. It's enough to make you go back to keeping it in a sock under your bed, at least it might be safer there. So the rules on mortgages have all been switched even when you've been promised that everything will work out. The canard that the banks are there to help the customer (and it looks like it is all banks) has been well and truly found out.

Anyway back to the telephone. Most of the time you get through to a very nice Customer Service Assistant who explains very politely that no he/she can't do anything about it, the computer's in charge and he/she can't override it, but he/she can explain exactly what the computer is thinking (no-one else there does any, obviously) and if you're lucky he/she says "oh don't worry about the gas getting cut off" which is all very well for him/her and James in fact couldn't say that this time despite what the previous girl (Fiona?) had said last month. So you have to do their work for them because clearly they can't get anyone to read the meter (they're all on the phone instead) but 250 miles is quite a long way to go just for that.

To be fair to Darlington Borough Council and their James (there's two, keep up) he did phone back with a much reduced figure which might even be claimable back at some unspecified point in the future (still no invoice, but hey I can get a receipt) and even Alison is a person in her own right who can make arrangements on the spot and is not a mouthpiece for the computer, even if letters arrive somewhat unexpectedly when you thought a Direct Debit would naturally keep things under control. (I'm still waiting for an invoice from Social Services which doesn't seem to be forthcoming.) On the other hand, to sort anything out you have to speak to a minimum of three different people in three different offices with different phone numbers (and not the one they tell you to ring on the letter) because they don't communicate with each other. It's called division of responsibilities, at least that's the polite name for it.

And I still have to ring back the Management Officer of Rockwell House (promise unfulfilled) - so that I can ring npower and go round that loop again - and Carlyle Finance haven't come up with a receipt to show that yes it is all paid off despite the best efforts of Northern Rock. Oh and where's my cheque from BT? (This time I do have a letter saying they owe me, strewth, talk about small mercies.) So it's back to more Vivaldi how much can one man write?

Do You Feel Like We Do?

I'm feeling vibrant today. This is a good thing. We should all feel vibrant and we should be vibrant in what we do. I hope you are all vibrant and that the things around you and the places you go are vibrant.

I hope that you know when you are vibrant and when the things around you are not vibrant and that you can be vibrant despite not everything being vibrant and that you can help everything to be vibrant because then everything will be all right.

And when you know that you are vibrant please find out what it means to be vibrant and why that is not just the same as thrilling (which is the poor old dictionary's best attempt, unless you want to feel resonant or vibrating, which I think are completely different things) and then be sure that you want to be thrilled all the time and not be old and tired once in a while.

And then come and tell me - but when trying to tell me what vibrant means you are not allowed to use words that don't mean anything or mean all different things to all different people.

Bicycle Race

On the news today, a story about how Britain's cyclists are to be helped in their Olympic efforts (sigh) by technology designed for the Eurofighter. A helmet will give them a Heads Up Display while they are competing, showing info to help them in their quest for a medal. Mentioned was the power they are producing so they can find the "sweet spot" behind the leader. Other details I didn't catch, or possibly they didn't want to name.

Hang on. Is anyone else a bit disturbed by this?

Surely the Olympics are about the best athletes not about who has access to the best technology? (I leave aside the area of drugs for the time being.) There's already sufficient technology in the fact of the equipment available - the bike - to make competition an uneven playing field. (Compare motor racing: the best drivers are the best - but they have a huge technological advantage, everyone knows it, and the sport is diminished by it.)

I daresay there is an uneven playing field in the area of training facilities, nutritional advice (I'm still not talking drugs but I might be) and I daresay that the athletes of some countries which are poorer than GB are already at a disadvantage. And we are adding to this?

Now if the cyclists by training discover the sweet spot, fine, more power to them. If training improves their skills on pacing themselves and whatever else, good. The pursuit of excellence.
If the technology helps train them to know the sweet spot, well maybe, they still have to do it themselves to some extent, I suppose. (Thinks: this might have been the intention. Not clear.)

But if this is to be used in a race, no. Unless it is freely available for all athletes to use (or not, if they prefer not to).

I call on the British Government to put pressure on Team GB (or whoever is organising this initiative) to make this technology available to anyone who wishes it. In the interest of fairness.

We don't want to be a nation of cheats, do we? Oh.

Chalk Mark in a Rainstorm

Oh Lord why have you abandoned me?
You have cast me aside.

Why do you allow my enemies to prosper?
They have influence and power.

Where are you hiding?

I looked to the hills but I did not see you there.
I went to the end of the motorway but I did not find you.
I wander along the hedgerows and you are not there.
I do not see you in your temple.

I know you are there, but you are not here. I cannot hear you.

What have I been doing?

I went to the library and they showed me some books but they didn't teach me how to read.
I went to art college and we built a sculpture because they assumed I knew how to paint.
I went to football academy and we talked about the offside rule but I had to go and practice taking penalties by myself.
I went to a driving instructor and he showed me the highway code but he wouldn't let me drive.
I went to the chess club and we played draughts.
I went to a beauty parlour and they sold me a lipstick but it didn't make me beautiful.
I went to ballet school and they danced for me.
I went to church and they gave me bread and wine but didn't show me how to pray.
I went to the circus and they painted a face on me but I didn't feel like a clown.

So now when I go to the opera I can't sing and when I go to the races I can't ride and when I go shopping I don't know what to buy.

Fool Me Once Shame on You, Fool Me Twice Shame on Me

Aphorism quoted by Captain James T. Kirk but I don't remember the episode title (any geeks listening?). Kirk was not shamed, as he recognised the bluff the second time, but I was. Oops.

Situation is advertised as having character X with (perhaps) a small element of Y, but the reality is rather the other way round - large amount of Y is expected and is in truth the primary objective, while character X is subsidiary, possibly political, and cynically looked at might be a way to give a gloss, a superficial attractiveness, to the otherwise ordinary dullness (and financial rewards) of the tasks demanded in fulfilling element Y so that a better class of applicant might be interested, or so that it might be presented that way. Scent of fish abounds.

The point is that it has happened before (with the same elements X and Y) to me, almost identically. The second time, the bluff has to be more plausibly constructed - quite plausibly, in fact, good job etc - but should I have spotted it? There were some clues that should have been more closely scrutinised (well I was sick).

Any third attempts will be regarded most carefully if they appear to come from God himself.

I did at least find out the true situation, albeit very late in proceedings, and endeavour was not without value. Still somewhat of a disappointment from a seemingly august body of men and women of supposed integrity, not to say faith. But I'm happy not to have got the job (if you can ever say that).

Recipe for Disaster

Ingredients:
1 bushel of ambition
3 rivers of frustration
2 beating hearts
1 streak of defiance
1 cupful of salvation
2 fishy tails
1 flash of anger
1 well of tears
Lifetime's supply of love
Large dollop of forgiveness
Spark of creativity
Dash of hope
Large quantity of naivety and ignorance

For a really fiery mixture, marinade in a sense of history

Preparation Time: Long

Method:
Beat the ambition, love and frustration together until the skin is tender. Break the hearts and fold in.

Separate the mercy and discard (this can be fed to swine).

Chop the rest of the ingredients into small pieces, carefully remove the peace and add haphazardly.
Stir and stir again. If it does not settle, disinformation may be added.
Important: no respect should be included.

The confusion should be visible on the surface. Don't worry if it's a bit lumpy, it adds relish.

Roast the mixture under a high heat and grill on one side until flaming.
Warning: the mixture may spontaneously combust during this process. That is to be expected and quite normal. If it remains cool, boil the distressed mixture in ashes.

Strain.

Turn out.
Cover up with artificial sweetener.

A mock garnish may be added.

Do not serve.

What Do You Want From Me?

Sweettalkinhandholdinsoftwalkin
hairgoldencoolprayinsafeleadin
homestayinmilkfeedinloudswearintrashshoutin
sloganwearinbringoutinsmartmouthinlovegivin?

Books For Men

If you go into [name of famous Christian bookshop deleted] you will find a section on feminist theolgy. A large vibrant challenging section at a convenient browsing height.

Tucked away on the bottom shelf (Freudian?) you will find a tiny, rather apologetic, "men's section".

Well it's right to be apologetic about it.

Whereas the feminist section is full of affirming, inspiring, provocative, positive stuff the books for blokes are appalling.

They fall into two types.

The first type is about sex. Not having any, to be precise. How it's a real problem, how you have to pray harder and harder every day and how you can never truly succeed because the danger of falling away is always present and defeat is always round the corner (there's probably a witty turn of phrase here, but it won't come). Even Stephen Fry would find them hard going. Dispiriting, insulting, repetitive, strident books. Who writes whole books about this? Yes it's an issue, men are obsessed by sex, but come on, give us a break, change the record, can't you say anything uplifting, a whole book?

Still the feminists may say there is a need for such books. They won't say that about the second type. They'll do more than that - if they knew they existed they probably would want to burn the shop down.

For the second type says that the man is the head of the household and it's all his responsibility to keep his wife from falling into sin, for she can't do it herself, she's too weak and it's only to be expected that if he relinquishes control, the household will go to hell (literally). He is to be her teacher, her instructor, her example and yes her disciplinarian. I kid you not. Woman can only be saved one at a time by her strong man, who shows no weakness.

Per-lease. The first type is insulting to men, the second type to women.

So, can someone try and write us a truly masculinist theology book, please? Just one?

The Green-Eyed Monster

So I've been trying to do what I challenged the folk at Badminton Road to do, to look at one Deadly Sin every day and see how I'm doing.

And I've got to Envy. Which I thought wasn't a problem.

Except that some people have really interesting creative asignments which inspire and enthuse them, and some of us have really dull essays to do which no-one could be interested in writing, or reading, unless they have to.

Hmph.