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.
Showing posts with label factual. Show all posts
Showing posts with label factual. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 07, 2015
Wednesday, December 24, 2014
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.
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.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
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.
Wednesday, September 07, 2011
Speak To Me
Nothing like going abroad to make you think about languages. And nothing like going to Holland to think about the English language.
Dutch is apparently halfway between English and German. Simple example ... "straat" is halfway between "street" and "strasse". You can read the signs above the shops (well I can tell what Wijn means anyway, lots of others).
So where did the English language come from?
French, Spanish and Italian are all obviously derived from Latin. Yet not all the same ... but when you get used to how they differ you can predict to some extent what the word will be ... verb conjugations and constructions etc. (I used to know all this stuff, not now.)
We assume this was because the Romans conquered all these places ... but the Romans conquered England. The pre-existing language was not English, but Welsh (Cornish, Celtic?). English, from the Angles, came afterwards surely? How did it supplant the Romano-British language? Why was it different from Dutch/German (Flemish)?
Expert on the history of language, someone?
Dutch is apparently halfway between English and German. Simple example ... "straat" is halfway between "street" and "strasse". You can read the signs above the shops (well I can tell what Wijn means anyway, lots of others).
So where did the English language come from?
French, Spanish and Italian are all obviously derived from Latin. Yet not all the same ... but when you get used to how they differ you can predict to some extent what the word will be ... verb conjugations and constructions etc. (I used to know all this stuff, not now.)
We assume this was because the Romans conquered all these places ... but the Romans conquered England. The pre-existing language was not English, but Welsh (Cornish, Celtic?). English, from the Angles, came afterwards surely? How did it supplant the Romano-British language? Why was it different from Dutch/German (Flemish)?
Expert on the history of language, someone?
Friday, June 24, 2011
Hitsville UK
Am watching Top of the Pops 76 repeated on BBC4 weekly (well nearly, come to that in a minute).
It really did use to be the must-watch pop programme on TV. Well, there wasn't much else. You could see what the people looked like who'd made the records you'd bought or were thinking of buying ("stockmarket for your radio", thank you the Rezillos).
Well ... up to a point.
I hadn't seen the ones that are now showing because in May and June 1976 I was at University and the TV room (singular) was not comfortable and usually somebody wanted to see something else - although not usually during TOTP, admittedly, even the intellectuals who posed as not being interested had to watch. Room always busy.
Blimey, TOTP was in a dire state in 1976, reflecting the charts and the state of British pop music in general. We really did need punk - which was just on the horizon. When the Number 1 progression goes Brotherhood of Man (weeks on end), Abba, (OK that was a good one, Fernando, but it hung on for ever, several weeks at number 2 before the top and still at number 4 "currently", JJ Barrie (appalling piece of schmaltz) and the Wurzels (fun once, but then really tiresome, comedy record without any comedy), then the charts are in trouble.
But that isn't TOTP's fault (although they probably take some blame for who they publicised).
So this is about the programme itself. They were clearly in trouble getting people on, groups go on tour, I know but TOTP was breaking its own rules consistently. In short, it was no longer a chart show.
So all right the first one on was always a new release, fair enough, this week the Surprise Sisters (who?) with Got To Get You Into My Life, which never troubled the Guinness Book of Hit Singles compilers. Last week the G Band (renamed even though Paul Gadd had not yet been found out) with Don't Make Promises (You Can't Keep) which I bought although clearly no-one else did.
And then seemingly every week several not actually in the Top 30 - and some which didn't make it there at all - although "bubbling under" probably, all right they were going up and so in a sense if it's next week's chart, well OK. Prediction is difficult.
But "this" week (now I'm getting to that), a classic. No less than 6 acts not on the chart performing on the 13 June is a new record (groan). (Because BBC4 is not actually showing it every week, it is already slipping in the schedules. They started together at the beginning of May and are now two weeks adrift. By the time we get the 1976 Christmas chart, it will be February here, at this rate. Henceforth we shall regard 13 June as "this" week. "How much does BBC4 care about this show?" is a question worth asking though.)
So apart from the Sisters, we had on the show but not in the 30, Bryan Ferry on film (was a big hit in a week or two and it is a fantastic film), two of Ruby Flipper dancing to Maureen McGovern (don't see the excuse for that one, can't they dance to something in the charts, the alleged point was to cover for acts that couldn't make it into the studio) which did make No 15 eventually, the Sensational Alex Harvey Band, good value but not there right now, Flintlock (no never heard of them either) who struggled up to No 30 in time, and Osibisa's follow-up to Sunshine Day which statistics indicate hit the dizzy heights of number 31.
And then ...
There used to be a rule that once a record had gone down, it didn't get on again even if it started going up again. Now that was a shame sometimes when some yo-yo records were still quite popular or if there were a one-week blip, but a rule is a rule.
But clearly this rule did not always apply ...
On this week's show were Slik with Requiem. Number 30 in the charts. Down from .. not sure, 24? And not the first time they'd broken the rule, two weeks ago, this classic yo-yo had dropped out of the 30 and still been on. I've counted 4 times Slik were on with this one, and I may have missed one. And 2 of those broke the rule ...
Now it's lovely to see the fresh-faced Midge Ure again so many times and I didn't mind the song, even though its wonderfully atmospheric beginning and original lyrics for what's only a lost-love song both get lost a bit in the poppy chorus ("This is a req, only a req, this is a requiem ..") but you have to ask "Just what hold did he have over the producer of TOTP in the mid-70s?" Were they really the only band he could get hold of at short notice on a Tuesday?
But while we ponder that one, one final question for BBC4. What are you doing with the editing?
Each week (...) there is a 30 minute version at 7.30 on Thursday - and a 40-minute "repeat" in the middle of the night. It's very amusing (well it's not really) when the V+ box preview and the BBC iPlayer give you a brief blurb including some of the acts who are on - and then you think afterwards "hang on, I didn't actually see Cliff, did I drop off in the middle?", but it's only because he got edited out of the shortened version (which is also the iPlayer version), although the preview/description clearly says he would be on. You wonder if you've got the wrong show (particularly given the dates thing).
Come on BBC4, don't get tied to this modern thing where every programme between 7 and 11 has to be 30 or 60 minutes. Can you be bold enough to plough your own furrow? BBC1 may have lost it, but you don't need to. And have some integrity of what you show.
It really did use to be the must-watch pop programme on TV. Well, there wasn't much else. You could see what the people looked like who'd made the records you'd bought or were thinking of buying ("stockmarket for your radio", thank you the Rezillos).
Well ... up to a point.
I hadn't seen the ones that are now showing because in May and June 1976 I was at University and the TV room (singular) was not comfortable and usually somebody wanted to see something else - although not usually during TOTP, admittedly, even the intellectuals who posed as not being interested had to watch. Room always busy.
Blimey, TOTP was in a dire state in 1976, reflecting the charts and the state of British pop music in general. We really did need punk - which was just on the horizon. When the Number 1 progression goes Brotherhood of Man (weeks on end), Abba, (OK that was a good one, Fernando, but it hung on for ever, several weeks at number 2 before the top and still at number 4 "currently", JJ Barrie (appalling piece of schmaltz) and the Wurzels (fun once, but then really tiresome, comedy record without any comedy), then the charts are in trouble.
But that isn't TOTP's fault (although they probably take some blame for who they publicised).
So this is about the programme itself. They were clearly in trouble getting people on, groups go on tour, I know but TOTP was breaking its own rules consistently. In short, it was no longer a chart show.
So all right the first one on was always a new release, fair enough, this week the Surprise Sisters (who?) with Got To Get You Into My Life, which never troubled the Guinness Book of Hit Singles compilers. Last week the G Band (renamed even though Paul Gadd had not yet been found out) with Don't Make Promises (You Can't Keep) which I bought although clearly no-one else did.
And then seemingly every week several not actually in the Top 30 - and some which didn't make it there at all - although "bubbling under" probably, all right they were going up and so in a sense if it's next week's chart, well OK. Prediction is difficult.
But "this" week (now I'm getting to that), a classic. No less than 6 acts not on the chart performing on the 13 June is a new record (groan). (Because BBC4 is not actually showing it every week, it is already slipping in the schedules. They started together at the beginning of May and are now two weeks adrift. By the time we get the 1976 Christmas chart, it will be February here, at this rate. Henceforth we shall regard 13 June as "this" week. "How much does BBC4 care about this show?" is a question worth asking though.)
So apart from the Sisters, we had on the show but not in the 30, Bryan Ferry on film (was a big hit in a week or two and it is a fantastic film), two of Ruby Flipper dancing to Maureen McGovern (don't see the excuse for that one, can't they dance to something in the charts, the alleged point was to cover for acts that couldn't make it into the studio) which did make No 15 eventually, the Sensational Alex Harvey Band, good value but not there right now, Flintlock (no never heard of them either) who struggled up to No 30 in time, and Osibisa's follow-up to Sunshine Day which statistics indicate hit the dizzy heights of number 31.
And then ...
There used to be a rule that once a record had gone down, it didn't get on again even if it started going up again. Now that was a shame sometimes when some yo-yo records were still quite popular or if there were a one-week blip, but a rule is a rule.
But clearly this rule did not always apply ...
On this week's show were Slik with Requiem. Number 30 in the charts. Down from .. not sure, 24? And not the first time they'd broken the rule, two weeks ago, this classic yo-yo had dropped out of the 30 and still been on. I've counted 4 times Slik were on with this one, and I may have missed one. And 2 of those broke the rule ...
Now it's lovely to see the fresh-faced Midge Ure again so many times and I didn't mind the song, even though its wonderfully atmospheric beginning and original lyrics for what's only a lost-love song both get lost a bit in the poppy chorus ("This is a req, only a req, this is a requiem ..") but you have to ask "Just what hold did he have over the producer of TOTP in the mid-70s?" Were they really the only band he could get hold of at short notice on a Tuesday?
But while we ponder that one, one final question for BBC4. What are you doing with the editing?
Each week (...) there is a 30 minute version at 7.30 on Thursday - and a 40-minute "repeat" in the middle of the night. It's very amusing (well it's not really) when the V+ box preview and the BBC iPlayer give you a brief blurb including some of the acts who are on - and then you think afterwards "hang on, I didn't actually see Cliff, did I drop off in the middle?", but it's only because he got edited out of the shortened version (which is also the iPlayer version), although the preview/description clearly says he would be on. You wonder if you've got the wrong show (particularly given the dates thing).
Come on BBC4, don't get tied to this modern thing where every programme between 7 and 11 has to be 30 or 60 minutes. Can you be bold enough to plough your own furrow? BBC1 may have lost it, but you don't need to. And have some integrity of what you show.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Shopping
This blog hasn't had a magazine review for a while, so here's a new one. It's the Morrison's supermarket Jan/Feb issue and it's a classic.
"January is a month for looking after yourself and enjoying lots of healthy food ..." are the first words you come across in the editorial. It's not just the editor who thinks so, either.
"January is a good time to cook nutritious meals that taste great and make you feel great, too", says Aldo Zilli on page 31.
Well that's all right then. I'd like to know though which are the months when I shouldn't be looking after myself, and when it is a bad time to cook nutritious meals (or maybe just ones that don't taste great, there's a logical conjunction in there that needs analysing). Should I start on Feb 1 with a big pile of chips? (Actually you can treat yourself to some "moreish" Morrisons chocolate which is much cheaper if you buy two bars*, but I'm not sure when you're allowed to get started on that.)
We know what they mean. We didn't get the Nov/Dec issue but I bet it was all about treats for Christmas (I'd have money on the phrase "long winter nights" turning up, too, no cliche unspoken) and adverts for lots of chocolate. So having persuaded you into all that, now they can press on with ".... lose those extra festive pounds ... how do you cut back without feeling you're missing out?" (I'm back in the editorial again).
If you think I'm cynical, I'm sure I'm not the only one, the Morrisons' (and others') marketing department is there too. Oh, I beg your pardon: "Editorial opinions expressed ... are not necessarily those of Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc ..." Maybe Morrisons don't think I should look after myself in January and Jenn Cooper will get a rocket for saying so? Who can say?
While we're being healthy, Michelin-star chef Paul Rankin "tells us why he loves chip butties". Er, mixed messages? He's got a favourite ingredient .. how cheffy is that? The temptation to put extra-virgin olive oil in his butty must be overwhelming. Or not.
Now some things to put in your diary, I hope you've got plenty of space:
23-29 January is Farmhouse Breakfast Week. No you don't have to go out into some wild cottage in the country thankfully, but it's a campaign to start the day with this important meal. There's a picture of a boiled egg and French bread but otherwise I don't have a clue what a Farmhouse Breakfast is, so you'll have to go to the website www.shakeupyourwakeup.com to find out the events in your area (maybe there is a farmhouse to go to, wouldn't that be fun?) and "inspiring" breakfast ideas.
February is National Heart Month, including Wear Red day on the 25th. The British Heart Foundation is 50 so is having lots of celebrations to raise money (sic).
Bramley Apple Week starts on February 6. It's the best apple for cooking and it's grown only in Britain. I think we should stop being so mean to other countries and export them some trees.
And Feb 3 is Chinese New Year (celebrations on the 6th in Leicester Square) so there are some "healthier" recipes to celebrate. Do you think the Chinese will mind this insult to their culture? I wonder if they produce healthier Christmas dinner recipes for us and what Morrisons would think of them?
(Helpfully, all the recipes in the magazine tell you how much salt, fat etc there are in "one serving", whatever one serving is. I feel a spreadsheet and lots of graphs coming on.)
And don't forget Burns Night on January 25. Start the day with a Farmhouse Breakfast and finish with haggis, neeps and tatties and a whisky sauce (now you're talking).
And the Brighton Half-Marathon on 20 February. I think it's a bit late for me to sign up now though.
There is helpful advice too.
"Wrap rhubarb in plastic and store it in the coldest part of the fridge for up to a week." (Paul Thornton). I wonder if he means to say " ... no more than a week"? Perhaps it's the other way of looking at it.
Now one piece of advice I don't understand though. They give in five categories (energy, sugar, fat, saturated fat, and salt) a Guideline Daily Amount (GDA). This is a new one to me. Is it a recommended amount, a maximum, or a minimum? And why not call it one of these?
The sugar one is called total sugar so that one's clear but the other's aren't so-called, suggesting rather that they're what you should have or work towards - and 2500 calories for a man seems on the low side?
Why's it matter?
Back to the editorial: " .... we've included a few more indulgent recipes to treat yourself to - 30 per cent or under your GDAs". Er, but should I be making sure I get somewhere near the other 70% too? Maybe the chocolate will help me get there? Or a swift couple of pints with the lads?
There are some good things. There are some nice recipes and some for children to get them cooking too. There's very little overtly from "nutritionists" (but I think we need to look at this GDA thing and just how much fat you should have) and the keep fit advice is sensible and practical and not overdone with encouragements for vitamin pills and whatnot. I note that Zumba is an "exiting" (sic) new dance craze. Maybe everyone leaves early?
You can forgive the adverts and it's interesting where the chickens come from (and that the correct weight is 2.25 kg).
Three heaped tablespoons of cooked lentils count as one of your five a day. Geez that's a lot of lentils.
One excellent piece of advice when going shopping. Make a list and "you'll be surprised how much money you save ... you're not tempted to buy more than you really need" I wonder how much the store managers approve of that?
Oh I have to report one piece of sexism before I finish.
The tasting panel (soup this month) has 4 members - all mothers. Not even a token man, far less a balance. Maybe men are thought to be incompetent? Or maybe it's laziness. Must do bettr, Morrisons. But then there's no male customers at all pictured; I suppose some of the letters could be from men. Oh there is Scott, 15, and the packed lunches his mum makes for him.
I wonder what March and April are good months for?
*£1.19 each or 2 for £2. Er, two please!
"January is a month for looking after yourself and enjoying lots of healthy food ..." are the first words you come across in the editorial. It's not just the editor who thinks so, either.
"January is a good time to cook nutritious meals that taste great and make you feel great, too", says Aldo Zilli on page 31.
Well that's all right then. I'd like to know though which are the months when I shouldn't be looking after myself, and when it is a bad time to cook nutritious meals (or maybe just ones that don't taste great, there's a logical conjunction in there that needs analysing). Should I start on Feb 1 with a big pile of chips? (Actually you can treat yourself to some "moreish" Morrisons chocolate which is much cheaper if you buy two bars*, but I'm not sure when you're allowed to get started on that.)
We know what they mean. We didn't get the Nov/Dec issue but I bet it was all about treats for Christmas (I'd have money on the phrase "long winter nights" turning up, too, no cliche unspoken) and adverts for lots of chocolate. So having persuaded you into all that, now they can press on with ".... lose those extra festive pounds ... how do you cut back without feeling you're missing out?" (I'm back in the editorial again).
If you think I'm cynical, I'm sure I'm not the only one, the Morrisons' (and others') marketing department is there too. Oh, I beg your pardon: "Editorial opinions expressed ... are not necessarily those of Wm Morrison Supermarkets plc ..." Maybe Morrisons don't think I should look after myself in January and Jenn Cooper will get a rocket for saying so? Who can say?
While we're being healthy, Michelin-star chef Paul Rankin "tells us why he loves chip butties". Er, mixed messages? He's got a favourite ingredient .. how cheffy is that? The temptation to put extra-virgin olive oil in his butty must be overwhelming. Or not.
Now some things to put in your diary, I hope you've got plenty of space:
23-29 January is Farmhouse Breakfast Week. No you don't have to go out into some wild cottage in the country thankfully, but it's a campaign to start the day with this important meal. There's a picture of a boiled egg and French bread but otherwise I don't have a clue what a Farmhouse Breakfast is, so you'll have to go to the website www.shakeupyourwakeup.com to find out the events in your area (maybe there is a farmhouse to go to, wouldn't that be fun?) and "inspiring" breakfast ideas.
February is National Heart Month, including Wear Red day on the 25th. The British Heart Foundation is 50 so is having lots of celebrations to raise money (sic).
Bramley Apple Week starts on February 6. It's the best apple for cooking and it's grown only in Britain. I think we should stop being so mean to other countries and export them some trees.
And Feb 3 is Chinese New Year (celebrations on the 6th in Leicester Square) so there are some "healthier" recipes to celebrate. Do you think the Chinese will mind this insult to their culture? I wonder if they produce healthier Christmas dinner recipes for us and what Morrisons would think of them?
(Helpfully, all the recipes in the magazine tell you how much salt, fat etc there are in "one serving", whatever one serving is. I feel a spreadsheet and lots of graphs coming on.)
And don't forget Burns Night on January 25. Start the day with a Farmhouse Breakfast and finish with haggis, neeps and tatties and a whisky sauce (now you're talking).
And the Brighton Half-Marathon on 20 February. I think it's a bit late for me to sign up now though.
There is helpful advice too.
"Wrap rhubarb in plastic and store it in the coldest part of the fridge for up to a week." (Paul Thornton). I wonder if he means to say " ... no more than a week"? Perhaps it's the other way of looking at it.
Now one piece of advice I don't understand though. They give in five categories (energy, sugar, fat, saturated fat, and salt) a Guideline Daily Amount (GDA). This is a new one to me. Is it a recommended amount, a maximum, or a minimum? And why not call it one of these?
The sugar one is called total sugar so that one's clear but the other's aren't so-called, suggesting rather that they're what you should have or work towards - and 2500 calories for a man seems on the low side?
Why's it matter?
Back to the editorial: " .... we've included a few more indulgent recipes to treat yourself to - 30 per cent or under your GDAs". Er, but should I be making sure I get somewhere near the other 70% too? Maybe the chocolate will help me get there? Or a swift couple of pints with the lads?
There are some good things. There are some nice recipes and some for children to get them cooking too. There's very little overtly from "nutritionists" (but I think we need to look at this GDA thing and just how much fat you should have) and the keep fit advice is sensible and practical and not overdone with encouragements for vitamin pills and whatnot. I note that Zumba is an "exiting" (sic) new dance craze. Maybe everyone leaves early?
You can forgive the adverts and it's interesting where the chickens come from (and that the correct weight is 2.25 kg).
Three heaped tablespoons of cooked lentils count as one of your five a day. Geez that's a lot of lentils.
One excellent piece of advice when going shopping. Make a list and "you'll be surprised how much money you save ... you're not tempted to buy more than you really need" I wonder how much the store managers approve of that?
Oh I have to report one piece of sexism before I finish.
The tasting panel (soup this month) has 4 members - all mothers. Not even a token man, far less a balance. Maybe men are thought to be incompetent? Or maybe it's laziness. Must do bettr, Morrisons. But then there's no male customers at all pictured; I suppose some of the letters could be from men. Oh there is Scott, 15, and the packed lunches his mum makes for him.
I wonder what March and April are good months for?
*£1.19 each or 2 for £2. Er, two please!
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Autobahn
What comes next in the series: 3, 2, 1, 2, 1?
Well it's arguable if that is the right series, I suppose. Technically it's either 3, 1, 2, 1 or 3, 3A, 2, 1, 2, 1. The first is what you see and the second is what is actually the case.
The answer of course is 27.
It is a sequence I've got to know well.
Well it's easy if you live round here. They are the junctions you come to if you drive past Manchester Airport toward the M62 (or M67 if you like).
You come to J3, then the next is 3A (but you skip it; technically it's after J3 but you only come to J3A if you don't go off at J3 in which case you don't get to J2, you eventually finish up at J5 heading toward 6, if you know when to turn left), then J2 (which you don't see since you can't come off at it from an anticlockwise direction) and J1 are on the M56. Then you come to J2 and J1 on the M60 - and then you come to J27 on the M60 and start going down again. (Circular road, geddit?)
But it is a bit of a surprise when you're looking for J2 and you have to go 3, 1, 2 and it's the wrong one. Wha'appen? as you might say. Well it took me a while anyway.
And you come down off the Kingsway and want to go West and you can only go along the M56 although you can practically touch the M60 so then you come off at J2 and along the A560 and up the A5103 (I think) and that does take you on to the M60 at last but you've skipped 4 junctions.
And don't get me started on J18. Nightmare.
But I guess it does actually work. I thought Bristol was bad there you only get in the wrong lane, not the wrong damn motorway.
Well it's arguable if that is the right series, I suppose. Technically it's either 3, 1, 2, 1 or 3, 3A, 2, 1, 2, 1. The first is what you see and the second is what is actually the case.
The answer of course is 27.
It is a sequence I've got to know well.
Well it's easy if you live round here. They are the junctions you come to if you drive past Manchester Airport toward the M62 (or M67 if you like).
You come to J3, then the next is 3A (but you skip it; technically it's after J3 but you only come to J3A if you don't go off at J3 in which case you don't get to J2, you eventually finish up at J5 heading toward 6, if you know when to turn left), then J2 (which you don't see since you can't come off at it from an anticlockwise direction) and J1 are on the M56. Then you come to J2 and J1 on the M60 - and then you come to J27 on the M60 and start going down again. (Circular road, geddit?)
But it is a bit of a surprise when you're looking for J2 and you have to go 3, 1, 2 and it's the wrong one. Wha'appen? as you might say. Well it took me a while anyway.
And you come down off the Kingsway and want to go West and you can only go along the M56 although you can practically touch the M60 so then you come off at J2 and along the A560 and up the A5103 (I think) and that does take you on to the M60 at last but you've skipped 4 junctions.
And don't get me started on J18. Nightmare.
But I guess it does actually work. I thought Bristol was bad there you only get in the wrong lane, not the wrong damn motorway.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Blinded me with Science
A very good programme on Horizon on Tuesday in which David Baddiel explored education. The hook was that he wanted as a parent to know if you could balance attainment with, well I suppose being "normal", emotionally healthy or whatever. It did rather turn into the usual travelogue of 10-minute pieces and opinions which were not summarised let alone compared and contrasted but at least it was an attempt to do some science ie examine a few theories and the evidence provided rather than a weak form of sociology which is normally what you get.
BBC doesn't seem to do transcripts any more now, it's just "33 days to watch it again on I-player" so pending me doing that I'll have to go from memory.
Very struck by the teacher who reckoned there was a 3-word weasel phrase you should never use - "you're so clever". See the point; you lock the child into a success-oriented pattern where they can't try anything new or challenging in case they suddenly look not-clever. Hard to avoid, but David at least found "I can see you've worked really hard" which looks OK. I guess "you've done really well" is borderline acceptable.
But then paying kids who do well seemed pretty successful too. Blow delayed gratification, get them started on reward now (money!) and they'll see the benefits immediately and get them into a pattern. Note the reward is for consistency - full attendance - and effort put in. There would have to be some allowance for kids who get sick?
Slightly concerned about the two lads 8 and 10 who have respectively GCSE and A-level Maths and want to be actuaries - just what their dad wants them to be. Still they seemed happy and friendly and to have a secure home life. I wonder if they'll still want the same thing at 14 and at what age anyone will actually let them be an actuary, which seems to be a pertinent and unexplored point. David did say the proof was in the eating.
And have we learned to teach reading at last? Don't hold your breath. Phonics (or phonetics?) is still in but the research evidence is still a bit thin (admittedly really difficult when you can't have a control group, but still no attempt at really proving why it works). Some interesting ideas on dyslexia that it is really about sounds and not shapes. More to say there. And a proper mention of dyscalculia and an an experiment that seemed to replicate it? Now that is science.
No-one really knows how anyone learns anything though.
BBC doesn't seem to do transcripts any more now, it's just "33 days to watch it again on I-player" so pending me doing that I'll have to go from memory.
Very struck by the teacher who reckoned there was a 3-word weasel phrase you should never use - "you're so clever". See the point; you lock the child into a success-oriented pattern where they can't try anything new or challenging in case they suddenly look not-clever. Hard to avoid, but David at least found "I can see you've worked really hard" which looks OK. I guess "you've done really well" is borderline acceptable.
But then paying kids who do well seemed pretty successful too. Blow delayed gratification, get them started on reward now (money!) and they'll see the benefits immediately and get them into a pattern. Note the reward is for consistency - full attendance - and effort put in. There would have to be some allowance for kids who get sick?
Slightly concerned about the two lads 8 and 10 who have respectively GCSE and A-level Maths and want to be actuaries - just what their dad wants them to be. Still they seemed happy and friendly and to have a secure home life. I wonder if they'll still want the same thing at 14 and at what age anyone will actually let them be an actuary, which seems to be a pertinent and unexplored point. David did say the proof was in the eating.
And have we learned to teach reading at last? Don't hold your breath. Phonics (or phonetics?) is still in but the research evidence is still a bit thin (admittedly really difficult when you can't have a control group, but still no attempt at really proving why it works). Some interesting ideas on dyslexia that it is really about sounds and not shapes. More to say there. And a proper mention of dyscalculia and an an experiment that seemed to replicate it? Now that is science.
No-one really knows how anyone learns anything though.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
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?
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?
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, September 05, 2008
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.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
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?
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Don't Take Away My Music
People have different things that they consider important in a car. It can be the engine power and the 0-60 time. It can be a go-faster stripe and alloy wheels. It can be space in the boot and leg-room in the back, or a packet of sweets in the glove compartment and air-conditioning. It can be enough headlights to light a film set. I like to have a heated rear window for cold mornings and a sound system for every morning.
Well the heated rear window still works.
But tomorrow we shall again be able to play Ensiferum so that the windows rattle. Happy is the man who has a warranty.
Well the heated rear window still works.
But tomorrow we shall again be able to play Ensiferum so that the windows rattle. Happy is the man who has a warranty.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Sing When You're Winning
Yesterday's chess match was one of the most thrilling ever. This is my report on it.
Background info: we are second bottom in the division. Our opponents, Clevedon, are second top, relegated last season from division 1. Promises to be a toughie. However our captain, Steve, points out that there are a lot of teams in the middle very close together and that if we win, we go third. I point out that actually we go fifth on board count. We compromise on "equal third" not worrying that other teams will also be playing tonight and some of them have to score points ...
Our team is:
Board 1: Andy, most improved player last season, stepping up to the mark again
Board 2: Steve, with no wins this season
Board 3: me, undefeated but mostly draws
Board 4: Glen, currently with the best grading performance in our club this season
Board 5: Phil, who gets into and out of positions you wouldn't believe
Board 6: Anthony, the smart one (but not today)
Odd board numbers are playing black, as usual.
I get to watch quite a few openings since my opponent is really taking his time (and seems to have had a tough day at work, given by his yawns). Glen has a strong centre, Andy seems to have a loose kingside, a shortage of space and no desire to castle; his opponent's king is also remaining in the centre, with an h-pawn advance. I play the usual Caro-Kan but in response to Nf6 I get not NxN ch doubling my pawns (I of course would play gxf6 like Miles against Karpov) but the retreat Ng3. Which seems to leave my white-square bishop a problem. I lock it in with e6 and start thinking about a Q-side fianchetto.
Meanwhile Andy has played Qxb2 and declines to play Qxa2 in response to Rb1. I can't see the trap ... still a pawn up is a good start.
I get in c5 and cxd4 rather easily and have to think what to do next. Nc5 looks good, forcing Bc2. What now? Develop the Q-side what a good idea. Nh5 really forces g6 but seems to do no harm - he doesn't even force off the dark bishops.
However Nc5 seems to lead inevitably to a threat of a rook on the seventh. Just as he's about to achieve it though, after a bit of swapping off, he offers the draw that I hadn't expected. I accept with alacrity. I wouldn't have offered one there, even with opposite bishops. This time it wasn't the Draw Specialist making the running in splitting the point. All done by half-nine and time to watch some others.
Andy is still a pawn up with a George Crockart-type structure and rooks going to be doubled on the c-file. Still squashed but looking like breaking out. Anthony is dominating the board with a massive space advantage but as pieces get swopped the defence looks easier and counter-play seems easier. Phil wins a pawn and looks comfortable. Steve has a nice-looking centre, but what to do? Is the sacrifice playable? Oh, there go a pair of bishops, perhaps not. Glen's opponent refuses a draw offer, quite a fair one I thought what with Glen's passed pawn securely blocked.
Richard is watching with me and I say prophetically "we could win this with four and a half or lose by the same" and he agrees. The match is heating up nicely. Anthony still looks like he is winning but if that passed e-pawn moves there will be mate threats (after some Q manoeuvres it does and there are, but he has it covered). 1-0.
Phil and Andy both have opposing Qs in their defence. Andy gets rid of his but Phil has to play very delicately, not taking a pawn until the second opportunity, but this seems to be his opponent's last desperate throw and suddenly Phil is a knight up with only rooks on in addition. Careful play and he closes it out. 2-0.
Andy is short on time. He's broken out, bits everywhere, particularly the knights look to have had sone fun, but he's repulsed although his opponent seems relieved. 2-1. Steve is losing. The sacrifice didn't work although I thought he missed a chance to win the piece back (surely Qe5+ works?) and he's got not just a Q in his defence but a rook too. So I go to watch Glen.
I'm not sure where it came from but his opponent misses some tactics and Glen goes a pawn up in a same-bishops ending. That pawn secures the sacrifice of the bishop so it's two v two all on one side but Glen has a bishop. Slightly behind in the race to the Q-side he plays the B to a3 where I would have gone to f6. But it seems to work - I don't think I would have advanced the black pawns, I think Kb1 was the way to go - and when Black resigns against a lone pawn and bishop with his K stranded I say "You've just won us the match, Glen." "Have I?" he says when Steve says "Excuse me, but I won it a few seconds ago". And he did too. Apparently there wasn't the mate his opponent thought and Steve has won with sixteen seconds left on his clock. A captain's performance. Even he can't quite believe his first win this season. Four and a half to one and a half against one of the strongest teams in the division.
So we are third. Or fifth. Or third equal. Or somewhere. And as Richard points out, if we lose next week we'll be back to second bottom. Still that's another day.
Background info: we are second bottom in the division. Our opponents, Clevedon, are second top, relegated last season from division 1. Promises to be a toughie. However our captain, Steve, points out that there are a lot of teams in the middle very close together and that if we win, we go third. I point out that actually we go fifth on board count. We compromise on "equal third" not worrying that other teams will also be playing tonight and some of them have to score points ...
Our team is:
Board 1: Andy, most improved player last season, stepping up to the mark again
Board 2: Steve, with no wins this season
Board 3: me, undefeated but mostly draws
Board 4: Glen, currently with the best grading performance in our club this season
Board 5: Phil, who gets into and out of positions you wouldn't believe
Board 6: Anthony, the smart one (but not today)
Odd board numbers are playing black, as usual.
I get to watch quite a few openings since my opponent is really taking his time (and seems to have had a tough day at work, given by his yawns). Glen has a strong centre, Andy seems to have a loose kingside, a shortage of space and no desire to castle; his opponent's king is also remaining in the centre, with an h-pawn advance. I play the usual Caro-Kan but in response to Nf6 I get not NxN ch doubling my pawns (I of course would play gxf6 like Miles against Karpov) but the retreat Ng3. Which seems to leave my white-square bishop a problem. I lock it in with e6 and start thinking about a Q-side fianchetto.
Meanwhile Andy has played Qxb2 and declines to play Qxa2 in response to Rb1. I can't see the trap ... still a pawn up is a good start.
I get in c5 and cxd4 rather easily and have to think what to do next. Nc5 looks good, forcing Bc2. What now? Develop the Q-side what a good idea. Nh5 really forces g6 but seems to do no harm - he doesn't even force off the dark bishops.
However Nc5 seems to lead inevitably to a threat of a rook on the seventh. Just as he's about to achieve it though, after a bit of swapping off, he offers the draw that I hadn't expected. I accept with alacrity. I wouldn't have offered one there, even with opposite bishops. This time it wasn't the Draw Specialist making the running in splitting the point. All done by half-nine and time to watch some others.
Andy is still a pawn up with a George Crockart-type structure and rooks going to be doubled on the c-file. Still squashed but looking like breaking out. Anthony is dominating the board with a massive space advantage but as pieces get swopped the defence looks easier and counter-play seems easier. Phil wins a pawn and looks comfortable. Steve has a nice-looking centre, but what to do? Is the sacrifice playable? Oh, there go a pair of bishops, perhaps not. Glen's opponent refuses a draw offer, quite a fair one I thought what with Glen's passed pawn securely blocked.
Richard is watching with me and I say prophetically "we could win this with four and a half or lose by the same" and he agrees. The match is heating up nicely. Anthony still looks like he is winning but if that passed e-pawn moves there will be mate threats (after some Q manoeuvres it does and there are, but he has it covered). 1-0.
Phil and Andy both have opposing Qs in their defence. Andy gets rid of his but Phil has to play very delicately, not taking a pawn until the second opportunity, but this seems to be his opponent's last desperate throw and suddenly Phil is a knight up with only rooks on in addition. Careful play and he closes it out. 2-0.
Andy is short on time. He's broken out, bits everywhere, particularly the knights look to have had sone fun, but he's repulsed although his opponent seems relieved. 2-1. Steve is losing. The sacrifice didn't work although I thought he missed a chance to win the piece back (surely Qe5+ works?) and he's got not just a Q in his defence but a rook too. So I go to watch Glen.
I'm not sure where it came from but his opponent misses some tactics and Glen goes a pawn up in a same-bishops ending. That pawn secures the sacrifice of the bishop so it's two v two all on one side but Glen has a bishop. Slightly behind in the race to the Q-side he plays the B to a3 where I would have gone to f6. But it seems to work - I don't think I would have advanced the black pawns, I think Kb1 was the way to go - and when Black resigns against a lone pawn and bishop with his K stranded I say "You've just won us the match, Glen." "Have I?" he says when Steve says "Excuse me, but I won it a few seconds ago". And he did too. Apparently there wasn't the mate his opponent thought and Steve has won with sixteen seconds left on his clock. A captain's performance. Even he can't quite believe his first win this season. Four and a half to one and a half against one of the strongest teams in the division.
So we are third. Or fifth. Or third equal. Or somewhere. And as Richard points out, if we lose next week we'll be back to second bottom. Still that's another day.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Rock Your World
According to New Scientist, researchers have been making recordings to show what sounds come out like on other worlds, in preparation for sending recording equipment there. Atmosphere density and composition changes the harmonics. So now they know what Smoke on the Water sounds like on Venus and Titan. ("I should have doen thunder, but I couldn't resist" says the producer.)
On Venus it's much deeper and punchier and on Titan it's much louder. So that's next holiday sorted.
On Venus it's much deeper and punchier and on Titan it's much louder. So that's next holiday sorted.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Communication Breakdown
Last time we went away for a few days we found the email had switched itself off and we lost 8 days of messages. This time we came back to the phone not working. At this rate next time we'll come back having lost the power of speech.
At least the glass has all been cleaned up.
At least the glass has all been cleaned up.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
It's Good to Be the Star not the Dummy
Now I've got that out of the way I can go back through the week.Yesterday, Woodpusher 3 was suddenly the hero of the night (in contrast to the first half of the season); with the scores tied and the last game lost, a swindle turned it around for an important win. Everyone played their part; playing a man down two wins and three draws gets a result.
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Seminar Day
Today I am going to learn about druids. Whether I shall learn anything about the Chalcedonian position vis-a-vis physicalism, I don't know.
Friday, March 09, 2007
Competition Time
I think I can blow my own trumpet for once (but not my own psaltery - cymbals or tambourine would do). Our team of three has just won the Fairtrade Quiz Night. Apparently there was great excitement in the marking booth when we overtook our main rivals in the penultimate round - the Bible round. In which it did help to get the 12 disciples, the three temptations, the greatest commandment, the last book of the Old Testament and the man with the talking donkey. Sadly we only got two of the instruments in Psalm 150. Can anyone confirm that the psaltery is a form of lyre? Nor did we get the Gospel with two feedings of the multitude or the number of times Paul was shipwrecked.
Particular kudos also to Rachel for the Number 1 single and recognising the Black-Eyed Peas and to Angela for knowing where Augusta is. A lucky guess got us when Nelson Mandela was released and we were close with the release of Tears in Heaven.
Particular kudos also to Rachel for the Number 1 single and recognising the Black-Eyed Peas and to Angela for knowing where Augusta is. A lucky guess got us when Nelson Mandela was released and we were close with the release of Tears in Heaven.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)