easter ritual

welcome

usually, or normally (generally at the very least), i endeavour to stick to a kind of etiquette (or "rule", look you see) of avoiding discussing politics, religion or money in polite company. whereas i appreciate, yes, i am of an age where i should have staunch, inflexible views which are to be expressed frequently, the notion of such holds no appeal. for this post, however, i am going to have to possibly doing a bit of bending with one of them, depending on how one differentiates between religion and faith. 

ever since i have been in my era of exile i have found a quasi-tradition has emerged. ritual, i suppose, hence the title of this post. for possibly obvious reasons i, on each annual (for it is once a year) instance of easter i, in one way or another, revisit The Last Temptation Of Christ. the pattern has been a sort of, or very much, rotation thing, where one year i will watch the film again and then the next play Peter Gabriel's soundtrack tape (disc). should it be of any interest, this year (2026) is the turn of the soundtrack. 

describing The Last Temptation Of Christ as the most controversial film "of all time" is going a bit too far, for such a (possibly pointless) accolade or title is going to be subjective. that said, off the top of my head something like Salo or Cannibal Holocaust could claim to be that with little debate. without doubt, though, it was highly controversial on release, and has vaguely retained a level of infamy if not notoriety. i have always been fascinated by this. no, it certainly is not a film for everyone, but i've never quite grasped the dismissal of it as "blasphemous". sure, i can fully appreciate - and have had experience of - people not being comfortable with how this telling of the (for want of a better word) story of Jesus in this way, but ultimately i find it is an affirming, positive presentation of faith. 

for those who have read this far and are at a loss when it comes to the controversy surrounding this film, well, apologies for my standard lack of structure here. in essence the film, based on a novel, presents the story of Jesus "as known" in a more layered, complex way. not sure that sound right. the film explores the dilemma, the debate, the inner turmoil and spiritual challenge of the man. what if Jesus was not at all accepting of his "fate", as would be the general depiction. is it not possible that he resisted, that he fought a destiny (or calling), and further was tempted to reject it all, to be "just" a man. the temptation to spurn it all is what is presented here, and it is laced with levels of sex and violence which had not been present in any serious film of this subject before. 

 

i did indeed get to see The Last Temptation Of Christ at a cinema. a very dear friend, also curious about the film, sneaked me in despite being about two (2) years below the then BBFC certificate of 18, which i note on my fancy video (blu ray) has been re-classified as a 15. we went to an independent cinema to see it, for as i recall (and please don't accept this as fact) most of the "big name" chain cinemas declined to screen it in the face of the controversy it was causing, at least here in the UK and outside of that there London (innit). an early brush with "fame" of sorts happened as a consequence, for after the film there was a news crew from a provincial radio station, asking people why they saw it and what they thought about it. can't remember what i said, to be honest. hard to imagine any film in this day and age provoking such interest, really. 

why have i been frequently drawn to this film for close to 40 years? mostly, i would think, because it's a compelling, damned good work of cinema. quite the struggle to get it made, as has been documented by much more better writers than me, and some curious casting decisions with the least of those not being Harvey Keitel giving a Brooklyn/Bronx hoodlum heavy portrayal as Judas. a very obvious draw is the astonishing portrayal of Jesus by Willem Dafoe. he makes a compelling teacher, preacher, orator and what have you, with his presentation of the inner turmoil, the challenge, the conflict being, to be as honest as i can, something i have always found inspiring. 

being as it is a year that i shall play the soundtrack tape (disc) this easter, some comments on that, then. i did find it interesting at the time, and still do (i suppose) that the soundtrack got released as Passion rather than feature the name of the film directly. my assumption was that this was done in the vague hope the music would not get dragged into the "controversy" of the film, which is kind of underlined by the liner notes featuring a statement from Peter Gabriel explaining why he elected to use the "working title" for the film instead of the eventual one. 

as has been showcased here frequently i may very well be passionate (sorry) and enthusiastic about music but not always the best when it comes to writing of it. yes, true, i am probably not all that good at writing of anything. i just find it rather uplifting music, enjoyable to listen to and just basically giving one a good sense of feeling having heard. undoubtedly this in some way stems from the eclectic mix of world musicians Gabriel brought together for the construction of it, but i am just nowhere near clever enough to explain the how or why of that. 

over the years i have indeed (and this sounds rather more dramatic than it is) held screenings of the film for friends curious about it all. this will have been the actual video (VHS) as well as the DVD when i upgraded it. possibly more screenings of this than (ahem) a certain Stanley Kubrick film i somehow managed to procure a video (actual) of whilst still withdrawn from release. no, probably not quite as cool or interesting as the tales of British musicians visiting New York and dropping by John Lennon's place to watch his (at the time new and rare) video of The Exorcist. 

mostly, as far as i can remember, friends were impressed with the film, yet not really sure they understood why it was all deemed so controversial. the film does treat the audience like adults in telling the story, after all. however, one exceptionally dear friend was possibly upset by it. it was a friend that did not hide their devout faith, who(m) wished to watch it to see if it was as "bad" as they had been told. whilst they didn't overtly state that they were upset, it was clear that they were not too happy when handing the disc (actual) back, with the comment being that they "didn't understand why anyone would want to tell the story in this way". 

so no, it is not that i shall ever rant or rave that The Last Temptation Of Christ is a film everyone and anyone must or should watch. far from it. very doubtful, i would think, that the initial controversy which greeted the film on release still lingers today, but that's not to say it will cause upset for some people. 

yes, certainly, i am indeed aware of another film with an easter related title. i would suggest that there's only so many times, however, one can watch Bob Hoskins as a quite cross, shouty swearing east end gangster, but who knows perhaps i will give it another play. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

thirteen bar bexley boogie

hello there

lost art, or perhaps rather media (for art is by definition subjective, look you see), is certainly not a new phenomenon. ever since the first variations of "humans" expressed themselves in a variety of formats so it has been lost, destroyed or supressed, be it for good and bad reason. in this brave new world often called, correctly, the "information age" it seems unlikely that anything of this nature would ever be "lost" again, yet so it is that such happens. 

defining "lost" is a requirement here. the most high profile "lost" art (or media) in the present day, which i would argue is the Beatles' Carnival Of Light song, is known to exist, with Sir Paul perpetually being thwarted in his efforts to get it released. on a similar note other "lost" music is likely right in front of us, and here i am thinking the near-mythical status afforded to Bowie's The Man Who Fell To Earth soundtrack, which was probably all just used for Low and "heroes".

of all the days of the year it is today that i can "reveal" some information on a supposed "lost" piece of media, being in the form of a song that few (if any) knew existed. the song in question is purported to be called Thirteen Bar Bexley Boogie, with a claim that it's a long lost and (as i have been requested to make clear) infamous number by  Chas & Dave. 

initially, which is to say on first learning about this, my thoughts were this probably wasn't a "lost" song at all. whenever they went into the studio Chas & Dave were, after all, prolific to a legendary level, with dozens of songs being crafted in every session. rather more likely, then, that this Thirteen Bar Bexley Boogie was just a remnant of such; a song they had gone done but either didn't feel was worth releasing or, as was the case with the Stones and some gems, they had simply forgotten about it. one only needs to consider the seemingly perpetual quest to correctly catalogue the tapes (actual) Prince left behind to understand this is a good deal more common than one may think. 

no, however. a series of messages, prosaic to the point of being sketchy, assured me that something very different was behind the why and the how it was so the world had never heard Thirteen Bar Bexley Boogie off of Chas & Dave. pressing for clarification (and more information) in this was a frustrating thing, with various ad hoc responses being ever more sketchy and prosaic. 

eventually - and i am prepared to admit i was close to the point of using certain profanities to the person messaging - there came an offer to meet and discuss it all further. despite, i confess, a level of disinterest in it all (i mean yes, i like Chas & Dave, but not obsessively so) i agreed to go and meet someone i was told was a "representative" of a concern called BFBA&R. an address was provided. 

having checked on the address given i was quite surprised to find that what i had assumed to be the offices of BFBA&R (which, admittedly, is a pretty good bit of branding) was rather close to Peckham Library. quite a legendary site, offering next to no parking and thus generating millions in parking fines each week, which would appear to be the main economic activity in that there London (innit) these days. 

on arrival it became clear fairy (or reasonably) quickly that Peckham Library was the place this in part reluctant meeting (of sorts) was going to be held. a vaguely familiar figure was lurking about outside. when they saw me they made all sorts of supposedly discreet yet overt "psst" noises and gestures, beckoning me over. taking as a given that "artists and repertoire" (or whatever the correct words are) was the last bit of the name, it soon became clear what BFB was for. yet again i found myself in the presence of the somewhat notorious Bertrand "Bertie" Fettlebottom. 

for those of you not all that familiar with this character, well, let me provide a brief background. with some links for those all really interested. other than being a "person of interest" in several instances of fly tipping and impersonating a resident of Silton, Fettlebottom has some questions to answer concerning the rise of gang culture in America, an attempted insurgence in Portsmouth and a bizarre attempt to sell a Spalding body of water to the United States. one cannot but help wonder why, exactly, he can't just settle for a normal, quiet life. 

we took seats in what passes for a secluded area of Peckham Library, mostly surrounded by people more bothered about how they were going to afford the parking fine they had obtained by being there than they were anything to do with Chas & Dave. still, Fettlebottom insisted on going all "hush hush" as and when someone was in earshot. curiosity got the better of me, so yes i did indeed ask why (exactly) we were meeting in Peckham Library. the frank, if not blunt, answer was that there had been something of a misunderstanding about his use of the wifi at Southwark Heritage Centre to visit what he described as being "perfectly legitimate" websites of a niche nature. 

moving on, and since i was there, i asked for more information about the supposedly "lost" recording of the song Thirteen Bar Bexley Boogie he had (somehow) procured. not lost, he said, but buried in an effort to supress it. all of this sounded most peculiar, for one could would not readily associate Chas & Dave as ever doing something all that controversial, depending on your stance on snooker. 

before any further (vague, and undoubtedly distressing) conversation could take place Fettlebottom rummaged around in his spacious tracksuit pants. ones that appeared to be secured by some old rope. just as i was on the verge of asking if he wouldn't care to do whatever he was doing rather more privately he produced a rudimentary "walkman" style cassette player. he made a "sssssh" motion despite my overt silence and pressed play. 

it was only to be a few seconds of the tape played before an employee of the library came over and remonstrated with Fettlebottom, advising him to turn it off at once or face being barred from the premises once (or yet) again. he made some part apologetic, part "whatever" gesture to the employee and turned the cassette player off. of what i heard it was (most decidedly) so that whilst a distinct boogie existed, it didn't strike me as being either "thirteen bar" or particularly "Bexley". 

not being too interested in how he reacted meant i had no hesitation in asking why, exactly, he had played me some of the song Turn That Noise Down rather than the supposed "lost" Chas & Dave song he claimed to be custodian of. this appeared to throw Fettlebottom somewhat, going on the largely silent and partially stunned moments which followed. eventually he muttered something or other about how it should be "obvious" that he wasn't going to go wandering around with such a valuable tape, and the point (if not purpose) of playing what he did was to prove that he was "serious about Chas & Dave". 

remaining steadfast and resolutely not interested i asked, for the sake of something to write here (if nothing else), for more details about the lost or quasi "banned" Thirteen Bar Bexley Boogie. unfortunately this appeared to wake him up, invigorating him some. and so i felt obliged to listen to what he had to say. 

long had been the dream, apparently, of the people of Bexley to be deemed, classified or declared as being a "Royal Borough". usually (normally) such a title is only awarded for a significant connection to the monarchy, be it that a coronation took place there or someone in the line of succession had been born there. as it was unlikely either of those would happen in a legitimately recognised way, stated Fettlebottom, there was an idea of swaying public opinion to force the issue.

with not much else better to do, and figuring i might as well get value for money for the inevitable parking ticket waiting, i asked how, exactly, a song by Chas & Dave might help that. he looked at me like i was a moron (which is not entirely unfounded), expressing some disbelief that i even had to enquire of such a thing. according to Fettlebottom one had to remember that for some considerable time, roughly stretching from their celebrated Christmas Cockney Knees Up 1981 special to the release of the era defining Snooker Loopy single, Chas & Dave had the public "in the palms of their hands", or whatever the expression is. the thinking was that with Chas & Dave celebrating the place the then reigning monarch, HMQE2 (except Scotland) would have no choice but to award Bexley their long desired Royal Borough status. 

many questions came to mind about this, most notably ones of why (exactly) Chas & Dave would have the slightest interest in this, and just who "prevented" the song from being released. unfortunately they had to go more unasked rather than unanswered, as once more the same employee from earlier approached us. it seems they had been on the phone to their colleagues at Southwark, on their advice had checked the "internet logs" (their words) and told Fettlebottom he could either leave immediately and pledge never to return or otherwise the police would be contacted. not too much thought went into his decision to gather up his cassette player and leave. 

i don't rightly know if Thirteen Bar Bexley Boogie off of Chas & Dave counts or qualifies as a work of lost art. this, mostly, is down to the lack of evidence it even exists. a rudimentary search for information which might link them to the place comes up blank, as does any suggestion of them caring whether one particular Borough was "Royal" or not. still, it's nice to think that out there somewhere is a recording of the two of them for future generations to discover. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

history never repeats

g'day

just a bit more of that there sentimental hygiene stuff in this post, look you see. it is tempting to say that here will be "photos from the past", but there is no such thing as ones (photos) from the future. at least so far as i am aware the mysteries of time travel have not permitted them to exist yet. anyway, moving on, and i shall try not to get too busy with the melodramatic melancholy. 

these pictures are from 43 (!) years ago at the time of publication. more or less but yet not quite to the day, say three or four off in that respect. it's all at an airport which i am pretty sure is Newcastle, although it might be Teesside. as for what's going on, well, it's when my family (and i, for clarification that is likely not needed) moved back to England from fair dinkum Australia. 

as far as i am aware that, as in the one sort of centrally middle in the above picture, is the plane we were on. or indeed, to be specific, in. i would imagine that this was a "domestic" flight one off of if not Heathrow then another London airport. quite the journey back then, with it being well over a day, or if you will twenty four (24) hours of flying. no, you didn't have your own tele screen thing back then either. from what i recall we didn't change planes but i can remember landing for refuelling.

whilst no personal tele thing with a range of films and what have you there was in-flight entertainment of sorts. there was one large screen (by the standards of the plane) in each section of the cabin, and basically you watched whatever they put on. no, i don't recall what films we had, but none of them felt particularly memorable. somewhat obviously they had to be purely family friendly films. to hear the film you had to use some really uncomfortable, muffled sound headphones. they also had some music selections playing on a loop, but i likely just had my walkman along with Queen and Adam Ant tapes. yes, in this instance, actual tapes. 

it is entirely possible that the people walking from the plane towards the building are indeed if not me then part of the family. this would make some kind of sense in regards of why the relatives waiting took a picture here. no, it wasn't all fancy "arm tunnels" and what have you then, you walked down some steps they wheeled to the plane and walked across. i suspect "security" is a lot of why such has now changed. probably for the better, mind. 

lots of things like memories have been lost with the passing of time, but all the same i can distinctly remember some of life in England prior to moving to Australia. highly doubtful that it would have occurred to my younger mind that there was a chance of never seeing England again. i really don't have any memories of being homesick as such, rather more of just a wonderful place that Australia appeared to be. 

quite a lot of the family (or a lot of relatives) turned up at the airport to greet us, then. welcome us, if you like, and of course assist in getting us all where we were going to live for a start. in a pattern that one could suggest defines my life i did not have an awareness of missing them all as much as they had apparently missed me. that sounds a lot harsher than intended, but then also i have no great defence to those who(m) state i am selfish incarnate. more it being that i have never understood the idea that someone might actually wish to have me in their life, or care for me. indeed, cue the poor, poor, pitiful me music. the sense i have is more that people feel compelled, or obliged to tolerate me, or would just rather avoid the inconvenience caused by me not being there. 

on taking custodianship of these pictures, scanning them and sharing with family i did (indeed) ask Dad why, exactly, after what must have been at least 30 (thirty) hours of travel across a disorientating level of time zones it was decided that we should all just hang at the airport and have a cup of tea. the answer i was given was that it "was the done thing". international travel is quite different these days, then. well yes, giving it some thought, after so many hours in planes it would make a degree of sense to just stop for a moment and have a cup of tea. not that us kids got tea. 

my best guess, going on the paper cups, is that us kids got given orange squash, which i guess gets called cordial these days, rather than tea. doubtful we would have got anything as exotic as any fizzy drinks back then. things were indeed a good deal more basic, although that sounds bad when it isn't meant to for it certainly was not. yes, that is me to the left, proudly wearing a Jets jumper underneath a rather smart looking bodywarmer. 

i have nothing but fond memories of those first months back in England. some of it will, undoubtedly, that i was treated as something bordering on celebrity. you didn't get all that many people moving to England back then, or at least not as far as the north. there was a curiosity factor of interest to me, which as many will state does wear off. also i found fascination, mostly in the fact that there was now a whole four (4) tv channels, and a fancy new coin in the shape of a 20p. confusion at some things, too. particularly music, for i was baffled that no one had heard of Split Enz or Mental As Anything when they were basically all one heard in Australia. still, good to find that Adam Ant was well known. football seemed to be the be all and end all of sporting interest, which took some getting used to since it was just cricket morning, noon and night in the land that was home for a while. 

having grown up in all different parts of the world my main regret is not growing up in one place. whatever value there is to me (moi) is very much, i appreciate, a conclusion of how i got this far, and not for me to say if that's good or bad, better or worse. maybe that's why i have a sense of dislocated disconnection all the time, having no anchor in standing still. none of this, i suppose, and having gone to the trouble of writing it, matters. all is transient. 

righty-ho, that would be more or less it, i think. yes, indeed i do have hundreds of photographs that i have scanned in, but not too sure all that many would be interesting. which, i appreciate, is me assuming that these ones even were. 

be fair dinkum to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

to the laundry again then

hello there

fans of the mundane, or the innately dull, have been in for a right proper treat on this blog so far this month so far. after the hedonistic joys of a documented trip to a car wash once more, here we go with a visit to the laundry, look you see. 

not, be warned, the most exciting laundry visit i have ever made. although (now that i think of it) i would be somewhat hard pressed to state which time was actually exciting. possibly an instance where i had a slight conversation with a lady, when (or where) the exchange was fairly limited to suggesting i had a good idea bringing a book with me. nothing much in the way of anything "informative" to add here either, what with the "economies of scale" (or whatever) about using a laundry featuring here. 

certainly it is going to be (most decidedly) so that i have far, far too many pictures and videos here to go with whatever writing i can come up with around them. for some reason i have it in my head that a vague notion of "text to visual" ratio is a thing. in this day and age it is probably that people are more interested in pics and vids than the written word, which does indeed make me wonder why bother. but still i do, for what else would i do. 

regular readers (or viewers) will be aware that my primary, if not quite sole, reason for going to a laundry is to get bedding washed and (indeed) dried. my modest lodgings in this era of exile afford no space to successfully hang out (up) big bed things like fitted sheets and duvet covers to get dry. this was indeed the purpose i went on this instance, but also from a "why not" perspective i did indeed do a couple of towels too, mixing it all up and making it exciting.

since the most recent car wash visit post, and apologies for all the links, featured (by accident) some VHS style images in "negative" mode i thought it best to do the same here. hence, as you may well have worked out, the image above being in "negative" mode. perhaps this gives a kind of quaint symmetry to the posts, it really is not for me to say. 

how much did i spend on this visit? all in, or the complete cost, was £9. for the sake of completeness, or auditing purposes, the breakdown of that is £5.50 for the smaller size washing machine, followed by £3.50 for 35 (thirty five) minutes of dryer use. at least i think that was it. might possibly have thrown an extra £1 in the dryer, making it a round, decimal friendly £10. 

a video clip for you above, then, although you have probably (more than likely) worked such out before you read this. that one is in that "poster size" filter, or whatever it is called, on the VHS camera thing. still not sure how it is the size of a poster, but what it does to the colours, and indeed the fuzzy picture, is quite funky. i kind of like it. 

yes, i am aware i could make the laundry visits marginally more economical via washing bedding, and towels, at home and then going to use the dryer alone. there are issues with doing so. first off i have no car or similar vehicle, so that would involve a walk somewhere just south of a mile with a bag full of wet linen. there is no appeal to this. after that you have the politics (or if you will social hierarchy) in place in the laundry, where people using the washing machines have preferential ("first dibs") use of the dryers. so i could possibly end up labouring along for a miserable walk with a bag full of wet bedding and find myself needing to wait some time to use a dryer. i think the £5.50 to use the washing machine there is the preferential option. 

really don't like the "psychedelic" camera filter thing i procured but, as you can see above, every now and then i feel obliged to use it. from what i recall i paid £2 or so for it, perhaps i should have tested it first. yes, by the way, indeed that is an image of one of the much vaunted, in demand dryer units down, or rather up, at the laundry. as in it is up hill from (and thus for) me. 

was anyone else using the laundry at the same time as moi? not at first, no. about ten or so minutes into my wash cycle another chap came in, also to use the washing machines and dryers. no particular conversation, except at one stage he sneezed so i said "bless you" and he replied "yes". mostly he appeared to be studying options in the horse racing section of a newspaper and filling in betting slips which he had brought with him. this account, i suppose, will be rather handy if he needs an alibi, or some sort of evidence that he was there. 

dryer video action for you above, courtesy of that "split screen" option on the VHS camera mode. which i do like more than the psychedelic one, but yet i still (very much) miss the greater good and glory of being able to do stuff in Commodore 64 mode. not the best video i have ever added here, i shall readily admit, but still there it is. if that even makes sense. 

of course i did take a novel along with me to read, for one cannot ever count on conversation being available. it strikes me as a nice, quiet time to get stuck into a novel, so it does, being at the laundry. just sat scrolling through whatever on a phone feels like a wasted opportunity. as for what i read, yes, i took along the recently procured Jeremy Vine novel. believe i am 25% or so into it and, well, i shall press on in the hope it gets (considerably) better. 

just a "regular" VHS mode image of the washing machine to round off this post. for some reason i thought someone out there might wish (or want) to compare it to the "negative" mode one. can't actually really guess at any idea why, but there's the option. 

probably is, of course, the answer as to if i shall be heading the way of the laundry at least once more during the year (2026) ahead. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

make up is a lie

howdy pop pickers

assuming that the phenomenon that was "the Smiths effect" is still a thing then there's little validity in presenting views on a new Morrissey album with any suggestion of it appealing to someone who(m) is giving consideration to purchasing it. what, exactly, is this Smiths effect? the business perspective on devout fandom, look you see. it didn't take all that long into their career for a pattern to form in which any new Smiths release sold huge in the first week, then fell off to next to nothing. people, or if you like the demographic, interested in The Smiths wished to buy each and every new release immediately, which they did. i am going to take as a given that the same remains true for the Morrissey market. 

for fans of facts and provenance i think (or believe) this is his first album "proper" in 6 or so years, with some pretty well documented "challenges" in him finding a record label prepared to release his stuff. just checked and yes, six year ago it was that I Am Not A Dog On A Chain came out. in regards of where i got my copy of the album, in somewhat bizarre if not preposterous circumstances the most modest, and by that i mean cheapest, way to obtain a proper copy was from HMV via that ebay thing. exactly why, including postage, they make it cheaper to procure via a third party website is a curious mystery, yet one that i have no interest in investigating. 

certainly it is so that i appreciate, or understand, that present day (2026) Morrissey remains a divisive, indeed "controversial" figure. the latter has been the case for pretty much his whole career, however. many are those that loved The Smiths, indeed (arguably) also the first few years of his solo career, only to tune out when the perception of his (forever "outspoken") views lurched to nationalistic and, unexpectedly for a man who wrote (and was questioned by the police about) Margaret On The Guillotine, somewhat right wing. although by all accounts he does get quite cross if you say to him that he is a "right winger", as he does not see himself as such at all. for me the appeal of The Smiths and then Morrissey was genius, brilliant lyrics, awesome music and his lack of fear in speaking his mind. there has never been a sense of needing to agree with what he uses the third for to appreciate the first to. as an example of this, well, for his most longstanding expressed view no, i am not vegetarian. 

so is it any good? well, it's not bad as such. there's a few really good songs, with one in particular being musically excellent yet featuring the most "controversial" set of lyrics. more on that as we go. picking the default (or if you will ostensible) worst track it's very easily the cover of Amazona off of Roxy Music. i am sure he had reason and intention for doing it, alas the end product is kind of plodding, repetitive and, predictably enough from that, dull. 

the one i wish to love (and in essence do) but possibly can't due to some "controversy" is Notre Dame. it is the musical sound of it which captivates me so, being a most stylish, 80s style soundtrack landscape. lyrically it appears not to be the outright statement many have claimed it is, believing it states exactly who(m) Morrissey believes was responsible for the Notre Dame fire, but rather questioning just how quickly it was announced "no no this was an accident, no terrorism, nothing to see here". whilst not really a question i would have asked it is not an unfair one, but with perceptions of the person asking being what they are, well here we are. 

easily the "safer" song to say is a favourite, then, would be Lester Bangs, which is indeed a homage, an ode or just flat out love letter to the celebrated rock journalist of that name. sure, or in a sense true, is it so that the world wonders if it needs another such tribute with one existing in the form of the film Almost Famous. yes, as it turns out, for the song features Morrissey at his self-depreciating best. musically and lyrically it's brilliant, and if you were wondering is there a present day Morrissey song you can give a spin to "safely", then this is probably it. 

reassuringly Morrissey still sounds very much like Morrissey. one may find that a strange thing to celebrate or to clutch to, but it feels like it is coming to be ever important. listen, for instance, to the recent "surprise" return of U2, where one has to be told yes, actually, that is Bono singing, that is what he sounds like now. oddly both singers (and neither would care for being referenced with the other, i know) have had well documented if not fully revealed medical "scares", yet the vocals of Morrissey would appear to have escaped damage. 

quite possible (or probably) that i am reading too much into one song, which would be the closing one, The Monsters Of Pig Alley. yet it is so that Morrissey (very much) has used the last (or intended last) song on albums to address anything in particular out there concerning him in a "covertly direct" way, if that makes sense. this was most famously done on Speedway off of Vauxhall & I, and absolutely most infamously on Sorrow Will Come In The End off of (the generally disappointing) Maladjusted, with that song being considered "legally threatening" and thus initially removed from the UK release. 

what do i think (note think) Morrissey is responding to here? there's been one or two songs of late about him, oddly, with one being Dear Stephen off of the Manic Street Preachers on their last (for now) album. my suspicion is that The Monsters Of Pig Alley is, at least in part, a reference to that. essentially much of the Manics song is Nicky Wire asking Morrissey to be the Morrissey he remembers or at the least the one not so "divisive". and here we have the lyrics "why don't you give it a rest and come back home? we're drab and we moan but we're all your own and we love you". all i really have to link the two is the further lyric, which cannot be accidental, "we're overweight and dated", which sounds very much to me like a direct reference to the "overweight and out of date" line from Elvis Impersonator Blackpool Pier. could well be reading too much into it. 

having little or no social circle means that i don't particularly need to concern myself with any sort of sense of doubt about continuing to like, and support, Morrissey. a counter argument to that would be for me to just wait for him to hit something that will upset me. such already exists. i am relieved, having heard the titular track, that Bonfire Of The Teenagers remains an unreleased album. whatever the validity of some of the things he has to say on it, declaring those who opted to deal with grief in the wake of the Manchester bombing by singing Don't Look Back In Anger as "morons" is way, way too far. not comfortable with that at all, and it will be a challenging decision if the album ever does get a release. 

not a masterpiece, then, but Make Up Is A Lie has been a decent few listens. it shall remain the case that if i fancy playing some Morrissey my choice of tapes (discs) will be, in this order, Vauxhall & I, Your Arsenal or You Are The Quarry. or maybe just any compilation or what have you with Last Of The Famous International Playboys on it. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i read a couple of novels

greetings reader

 

apologies for the (rather abject) lack of imagination for the title of this post. i am just a bit out of steam, if not out of sorts, for such things, look you see. surely, though, no harm can come from having a telling it like it is, or "does what it says on the box", title every now and then. 

it does feel quite some time since i had finished reading two (2) novels to go right ahead and document here for no immediate reason. true, one of them took quite some time to get through, with that being mostly the length of it but in part there wasn't too much of an inspirational rush to read it as quickly as possible. no matter, we are here now. 

so, as usual, a look at the 2 (two) what i gone done read, a brief, executive summary like overview and then each in some more detail. not, granted, all that much more detail, but all the same you may wish to skip that part if you're interested in reading either and want to avoid them "spoiler" things. 

going from left to right, which is (indeed) the order what i gone read them, Fairy Tale off of Stephen King was surprisingly, and to be honest, disappointingly pedestrian to the point of being average. this was, in 40 or so years of off and on reading his books, the least enjoyable experience doing so. after that it was The Pilgrim's Revenge off of Scott Mariani, which was to my surprise a really good read. 

quite likely that a further spoiler warning is excessive and (possibly) an insult to your intelligence, but all the same from here on out there are likely to be one or two (or more) "key plot details" or similar revealed. so, with that, read on with caution. 

putting out a novel which is north of 500 (or half of one thousand) pages in this disposable "blipvert" era which features limited attention spans is quite a move. all the same that is precisely what Stephen King has done with Fairy Tale. those of you who(m) for some reason get all interested in the provenance of my novels will not, i suspect, be too surprised to learn i picked it up as a Tesco clubcard "book of the week" thing for all of £4.50. 

the plot? one that feels vaguely familiar and so surprising that it does not already exist. a troubled teen with a tragic past inadvertently befriends a mysterious, apparently quite scary hermit like gent and, of some importance, his ageing dog. the teen (Charlie) helps the gent in his hour of need and, as more or less ("fewer") a consequence, ends up becoming the custodian to a magical secret. which is a secret he must embrace and become both the saviour and guardian of. or the other way around. 

it, the novel Fairy Tale, is not bad as such. took me quite some time to read, but that would mostly be due to limited time reading whilst waiting for various creams to dry on my feet (don't ask). at no stage, other than taking it along to the laundry, was i tempted (or, yet this sounds blunt if no harsh interested) in picking it up to read at other times. 

enjoyable without being all that engaging is probably the best way to describe my overall feelings on it. there was much to appreciate, if not love, here. by some distance the first third or so, when Charlie comes to care for the old man and forms a bond with the dog, Radar, is the better read. as and when he enters (you had spoiler warnings) the magical "hidden world" things tend to get a bit, surprisingly, dull and drawn out. maybe this was a deliberate, clever "subvert your expectations" thing, like when they reduced Luke Skywalker to milking a space cow in Star Wars, and i am simply too think to comprehend or appreciate it all. 

risking sounding repetitive and the major issue with Fairy Tale is that it feels all too familiar, and dare i say predictable. indeed i appreciate there is some "point" to that, what with it being heavily alluded to that this "secret world" is where writers have visited and written of as what we know as fairly tales over centuries. still, at no point was i prepared to "give up" on it so there is that. 

 

a novel i kind of not so much put off reading as went "oh go on then" would be The Pilgrim's Revenge off of Scott Mariani. some of you will be aware that this is the author of some 30 or thereabouts novels featuring Ben Hope, with quite a few being really good, or if you will, rollicking good adventures with various levels of preposterous. on electing to "retire" the protagonist of his novels for somewhere north of 20 years there was some interest in what he would write next. 

this, it turns out, is a whole new series, set in the (i think) 12th century. an era of crusades and what have you. in this novel we are introduced to his new protagonist, Will Bowman. with the second novel in the series sat here waiting to be read there are limitations on spoilers regarding what happens to him in this one. 

we get, for plot, introduced to Will Bowman as a man living an if not simple then humble life. this comes to an abrupt end when his pregnant wife is killed, his home burned down and he himself left for dead. on recovering he discovers the barbaric act was done by supposed knights heading off to join King Richard on his crusade. so, as the title suggests, he pledges revenge and, with nothing else to live for, sets off on a quest for vengeance. 

my concerns (for fears sounds too harsh) before reading this was that it would simply be the more outrageous, implausible aspects of the Ben Hope novels set a thousand years (or so) ago. delighted to find out this was not the case, allowing for one or two moments of stretching plausibility. it was really rather good, as in entertaining and genuinely fun to read. unlikely this novel will ever be given any serious study, but all the same i noted with interest the "clever" pacing - when Bowman is walking it is all slower, but picks up progressively as he moves in travel from horse to ship. nice touch. 

oh yes, as in no, provenance fans, you have not been forgotten. this is one of the more convoluted arrangements they have down at Tesco. it has come to be that some authors, and Scott Mariani is one, get selected for a "book of the week with newspaper" deal. effectively, armed with a clubcard, you get the book for £3 on condition you buy the Daily Mail newspaper at the same time. so i think the whole cost comes in at £4.10. 

it is with some caution i say that, after this solid start, i look forward to the rest of the series. let me qualify this, for i (really) doubt that Scott Mariani is going to be able to help himself with some truly absurd novel with his new protagonist (hero). remembering fondly that one Ben Hope novel where the plot was someone trying to cut the planet in half with a laser and, well, one suspects dragons or similar mythical creatures shall crop up at some point. for now, though, i shall merrily take what comes. 

 

righty-ho, that's about that. neither of these were "bad" reading experiences, but i do long for something as engrossing and remarkable as Project Hail Mary once more. unlikely that such will be the Jeremy Vine novel i showcased in a post not so long ago, but that may (very well) be the next one i go ahead and have a read of. 

my thanks, as ever, to you for stopping by and reading this. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

for i hear them on the rails

سلام

ostensibly this post was going to be a sort of (kind of) quasi standard one that i would do on the subject of cigarettes, look you see. well, yes, it more or less remains so, but not quite so how i had intended. things, as they are so prone to doing, change. but first the usual, standard disclaimer (or warning) in that smoking, in particular cigarettes, is really bad for you and you should either never ever start the habit or, if you are someone what does it (smokes) right now the jolly wise advice is to look at the ways and the help available to cease doing so. 

so, to get to a vague point, not so long ago i happened to find a packet of what i quickly worked out as being a packet of cigarettes off of Iran. or Iranian cigarettes, if that is more better wording. as for the specifics of "find", they were literally sat on a street as i made my way through the world. this struck me as a rather happy result mostly for two (2) reasons. first would, of course, be the insanely high price of cigarettes in the UK, a matter which has been well documented here on this blog and elsewhere. second, and of likely more interest, the novelty factor of trying new cigarettes from a part of the world what i had never ever had them before. well, trying them was the intention. 

for those of you who(m) are for whatever reason regulars here (thank you) and have an interest in my ongoing medical plight (much appreciated), it is so that the most recent appointment had the various medical professionals being quite insistent on smoking no longer being a thing for me. yes, i would say that one of them was quite cross about my abject lack of effort in this regard. i believe that they believe i have not taken onboard the whole "here is some new medication you need to take as we suspect your heart may be failing" statement (and subsequent prescription) they made. oh. so i have taken the decision to not actually try smoking there, because also the idea of just igniting and inhaling something i am not certain of the provenance of could be deemed very silly. doesn't prevent a look at them, mind, as such might be of (vague) interest to anyone fascinated by cigarettes of the world. 

they are called, as you can likely ascertain in the unusually clear (as in "mode free") images what i have gone done used, Bahman. nope, no idea what that is in "Iranian", which some research suggests would be the Persian language. don't think you can make it out but along the side it does state that they are for sale within the Islamic Republic of Iran only, which likely means someone brought them all of this way and managed to drop them. unless one wishes to take a view that they were deliberately left for some hapless type (moi) to gather them up and give them a go.

generally i like to keep the tone here somewhat flippant, although the intention is humorous, light hearted and not to be taken too seriously. whimsical, i think, was the word that one of them "AI" things used to describe it, which was (inexplicably) quite flattering. now is not really the time to be such on the subject of Iran. yes, i (certainly) had some things in mind here to write as an attempt at being funny, but none of that seems (or feels) in any way appropriate. so no, no comments here beyond expressing a quasi hippy like idea that i really had thought by this point in human history we might have worked out away to just all get along. 

moving a long and these are indeed a "soft pack" of cigarettes. can't really recall the last time i had a packet of this nature and i (irrationally) miss them. flimsy and of no discernible practical use would be the best way to describe soft pack, with a reality being one or two cigarettes in a packed of them are going to end up crushed if not snapped. yet they look really cool. perhaps, or maybe, this is all down to a consequence of how soft pack cigarettes were presented in American films and, when they could broadcast such, television shows. kind of interesting to observe such packaging is in use somewhere. 

bit of a (genuine) sensitivity or "trigger" warning for some of you, as the next picture features a comparison of warning images and one of them is really quite graphic. not pleasant at all. 

please look at the above warning thing before proceeding. 

last warning, then. also a link to a set of links on my medical plight, somewhere in that post. 

as you can see these Iranian cigarettes (or cigarettes from Iran) are most decidedly smaller than the standard size ones. it says that there are the usual 20 (twenty) in the packet, so they will be both shorter and thinner than the regulation "king size" ones. 

regarding the obligatory warning image and they clearly taken a different approach to such things over in Iran. whilst i have (absolutely) no idea what the text says the image is clearly saying "stub it out", meaning quit rather than ensure cigarettes are extinguished when finished. substantially different from the "shock factor" on display for "western" cigarette warnings, with the dire (potential) medical consequences of smoking being given a stark showing. 

i do (very much) appreciate that comparing one packet of cigarettes to another is not all that much use to some of you who are for some reason interested. further it is my understanding that "banana for scale" is something of a "thing" on the internet, but i just don't have access to as many of them as you might think. whereas i had absolutely no overt intention to write of U2 as often as i have thus far this year (2026), here you go with a range of "for scale" things. 

going from (i think) left to right, that's the video (actual) of U2 live at red rocks (Under A Blood Red Sky) in a standard VHS box. then you have the first pressing CD of The Joshua Tree, which i have only now realised is a pre-barcode one so is likely a bit rare. rounding things out is the tape (actual) of the same album, just because. hopefully this lets you grasp, if you really wish to, the actual size of the packet of Iranian cigarettes i found. yes, true, i could have just got a ruler or tape measure out, but here we are, it's done this way now. 

right, well, since i have declined the option of actually smoking one there is not (alas) all that much else i can tell you about these Iranian cigarettes. still, quite a nice (and unexpected) random find out there in the wild.

با هم خوب باشید!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

another film magazine

greetings

well, another one from the 80s that is. a few months ago i wrote of a (poorly written yet) boss film magazine i found down the market. that one can be found via clicking here, look you see. that said, or if you will linked, should you be enthusiastic about all things chronological then you may wish to read this one first, for it is an even older edition of a publication (periodical) what i gone done found. 

be warned, though, for i am going to showcase precisely none (zero) of the things depicted on the cover of this magazine. a magazine, by the way, called Movie Star. the April 1981 edition, which with how they date such will have come out in March 1981, so that makes it just about on the button 45 years old at the time of this being published here. cost was 40p (forty pence), which was about half the price of a packet of cigarettes then. indeed that will be of some relevance. 

so yes, the cover selling point was an interview (of sorts) with John Hurt. around this time he will likely have been one of the most successful British actors, after Alien and i would have imagined The Elephant Man was around then. also Champions, but i rather suspect that was a few years later. quite a hefty article on Popeye too, which was being given a hefty push as likely being the biggest film ever made. didn't quite turn out like that. 

rather than post any of them articles though, and as warned above, i am just putting up a few adverts from the magazine. truth be told i think the magazine is a 50-50 (perhaps 52-48) split between articles and adverts anyway, and i suspect the adverts were the reason people bought this. you have to always bear in mind we had no "internet" or similar then, going to the shops or mail order from adverts in magazines and newspapers was jolly well it. 

no doubt i am going to repeat myself with some comments here, so deal with it in your own mind now. or, you know, skip my writing anyway and just look at the pictures. like the one above, for instance, which is interesting for all sorts of reasons, one of them being renaming The Deer Hunter as 'Deerhunter'. 

people of this century (the kids, etc) won't understand a time when you could not watch (within reason) whatever the heck you wished in your own home. that there "internet" thing has made it a bit of a free for all, with absolutely nothing "banned" or unavailable. 1984 onwards saw all (official, legal) videos have to have a BBFC certificate. before that legislation it was a touch of a free for all. hence you being able to get The Exorcist on video, when it was declined a certificate for cinema release. Warner had no problems issuing it on video in the UK as there was no requirement for a certificate. with great interest i see Project Video, along with others in the magazine, offer Babyface. a rather explicit slice of adult entertainment (as in that sort of thing) which happens to be very funny and certainly would not have been given a certificate by the BBFC. oddly it features the song Chicken Man, which would famously get used a few years later as the theme for the kids tv show Grange Hill. 

just what, exactly, is (or was) an E180? that's a three hour (180 minutes) blank video tape. by the end of the 80s you could get them for a couple of pounds, but that's not too bad an early 80s price. 

if in 1981 you had what might (in a respectful way) be called a niche interest or hobby then you had very little chance of seeing documentaries about it on the three (3) tv channels available. home video was quite the game changer, as you can see in the above advert. back then if you were interested in something like airships or sea disasters it was most likely your only way of indulging was books down the library. sure, yes, £40 for a video on one of these subjects seems rather steep these days, but realistically that was the only choice you had. 

for a kind of quasi comparison, i seem to recall a documentary from somewhere around 81, 82 or 83, reporting on the "rising scourge" of pirate videos being sold at markets, in particular in London (innit). as such things stick in my mind i can recall someone selling videos of football matches taped off of the tele for £40 ago. one has to remember that football matches (with the exception of the FA cup final) were rarely show live. given a choice between paying £40 for a video of airships or the same on a video of West Ham vs Fulham, well, it would totes be airships, thanks. 

quite happy to leave a free plug (or shout out) for Bucks Video in the picture above, but of course it is the bottom advert which took my fancy. yes, if that sounds like it is an advert for video piracy that would be because it very much is one. that price, for what i am guessing is two RCA cables, doesn't strike me as all that bad for the time. especially not when it opened the door to you being able to make copies of videos you rented, back before "macrovision" copyright protection on tapes was a thing. 

at least i assume RCA leads, as this will be when it was all as simple as the European Economic Community (EEC) or even European Community (EC), long before it became the European Union (or EU). yes, this is all a go at the French, yet (as usual) a valid one. if you ever wondered why your fancy new TV has a preposterous, bulky "SCART" port, that's because the French invented it (hence it being useless) and they insisted all EU video equipment have a SCART port. effectively it's a way of connecting devices to produce a lower quality image than you get with RCA. not content with that the French also insisted on "inventing" secam, which is a poorer quality pirate version of pal. considering how they took the basic idea of a car and made it all worse i suppose it is no surprise that they looked at the wonders of home video entertainment and immediately sought a way to make it rubbish. 

just to add a bit of colour (so to speak) to this post and there's an advert for some "adult" entertainment for you. yes, very much that sort of thing. once again it does, mindful of the free for all of today, seem absurd that adults were prevented from watching whatever (legal) they wished in their own home from 1984 onwards. i mean yes, i get the point of certification, for that allows people to make their own decisions. but stopping adults entire from their own choices? presumably all it did was pump up prices for "black market" tapes of this nature. 

oddly, or as it happens, i think that i have one of the "preview" tapes advertised here for £15 tucked away somewhere. no, it's not the one advertised here, or even the same film studio (or whatever) but, all the same, more or less the same idea. and very much uncensored, from what i recall. 

my main point of interest for the above was that one had to pay £20 just to join this video rental club. at first that sounds rather staggering, but then again it was not uncommon. video rental tapes were not cheap at all, costing somewhere around £20 north or south of £100, depending on the popularity. you would have to rent it out at least a dozen times to make profit, so getting a deposit of renters was wise, as i am taking it as a given the idea was to prevent people renting a tape and not returning it. or if they did not return it at least you got some money off of them. 

indeed Mr & Mrs Jones have some interesting choices of films they are going to watch. particularly their wish to rent The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, which was very much refused a cinema certificate off of the BBFC, but up to 1984 could be rented on video. now you can indeed pick up DVD copies fairly easy at charity shops or from markets. print is a bit small but once again Babyface is proudly being advertised there. from memory "big" John Holmes is in it. haven't seen it in years, but i all of a sudden have an inkling to watch it again. 

further filth for you on offer in the bottom advert, then, all the way from Dorset (no less). or somewhat cheaper if you purchased all six (6) titles they had. yet it is the top advert of these two, off of Bolton video, that caught my attention. assuming The Alien is just Alien, it is that they are offering Straw Dogs what stands out. once again i am fairly sure that was one of the banned by the BBFC films which did not get a cinema release in the UK. indeed i am obliged to point out that, according to the full tilt version of The Parrot Sketch off of Monty Python, Bolton is (as point of fact) a palindrome, so Notlob.

partially interesting that Notlob Video Centre, like many others, were offering Jaws 2 but not, it would seem, the original (Jaws). nope, sorry, no idea why not, but there's a noticeable lack of any Spielberg films being offered. or Star Wars for that matter. why no Godfather Part II is easy, at least on a guess. it was 190 minutes long, to be sure, and i don't think a longer video tape than 180 minutes was in existence or wide use. still, from what i recall of it Jaws 2 was pretty decent. 

to move, with some regret, away from the filth and the banned, more niche interest stuff on offer in the above advert. once again (sorry) this must seem outlandish to anyone who(m) wasn't there at the time. i would be fairly sure all these kind of tutorial things are available online and for free on that internet thing, with it most probably being "you tube" that you can find these on. not too convinced that one could learn kung-fu off of a video, but then i have never tried. rest of them seem plausible. pricing for the language ones (£60!) seems steep, but then that was a revolutionary new way to get access to learning such. i would think the only alternate was a set of audio cassettes and books. yes, as overweight and out of date as i am, i would say this century i do not understand is "more better" in some respects. that we do sometimes use the internet to educate, to teach and inform is amazing. however, not sure £40 (or so) on a "video doctor" is much different from using google for medical symptoms. 

would i say the era covered by this magazine and its adverts was "better"? there is no direct answer to that one. just how home video revolutionised things remains, when you think of it, astonishing, and it is video machines in homes what paved the way for all the entertainment means you have now. if they were not popular (and financially lucrative) or hadn't taken off, no one would have spent any money looking at means of enhancing the home entertainment experience to make even more money. there was something special (magical, perhaps) about being able to watch a film of your choice, at whatever time you wished and irrespective of whether the BBFC believed you should be allowed to watch it or not. it has now all become taken for granted and feels rather disposable. 

 

sorry, sorry, but yes, i had to include the above advert, off of the back of the magazine. can't remember exactly, but pretty sure it was late 90s or early 2000s when all printed cigarette adverts got banned here in the UK. does feel quite strange seeing one again, for it has been some time since i saw one. 

right, that's that. many thanks to anyone who had a bit of a read of my waffle here, but yes i do (very much) appreciate mostly it's the adverts what will have been the bit of interest. there is no way i shall be around to find out, but the mind does wonder what, exactly, someone in 2071 is going to make of something published in 2026. doubtful they will even have magazines by that stage. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!