some more images from my most recent of visits to that there london place, then, look you see. indeed, it was so that i was there for barely 48 hours (give or take), yet it would appear that my snap happy ways have made it possible to milk the journey for several posts.
for this update, or post, or simple inane meanderings, i thought i might bring together all the images what might show off what one could do on a night in london. or, in some cases, not do in london, for a couple at least appear to be remnants of that which are no more. should that make little sense, well, that i would think is standard for here, and perhaps it shall as we go.
be warned, though. predominantly it is so that i, me, moi, feature in these images, taken as they are in a "selfie" type of style. well, it was my trip and it is my blog, so such is surely expected. just don't complain that you were not given fair warning if you proceed. and since you are already here reading this i suppose you might as well.
yes, the Raymond Revue Bar. whereas one can say of the Electric Banana don't look for it; it's not there anymore, strangely the Raymond is there but it is not. whereas it closed down some 16 years or so ago, the signage remains, on day and night, acting if you will as a beacon or magnet for what was once and what may be again.
a respectful visit to the grounds that were once (and appear set to always be) the Raymond Revue Bar was made just south of five years ago, of course, to be sure. it was then and there (here?) where i made a very good friend indeed, with the details being just a click of this link away if for some reason you are interested.
what, exactly, for those who do not know, was the Raymond Revue Bar all about? in short, and to be blunt, that sort of thing. a big part of the English way of doing things is for the powers that be, the ruling classes, to create a woeful sense of shame and guilt about all things remotely sexual in nature, seeking to make it so that we, the people, believe that sort of thing, the pleasures (or sins) of the flesh being immoral and to be avoided. so of course we resist by seeking out all sorts of sexual odyssey adventure things as and where we can at any opportunity, since those in control seek to cease such.
for many, then, the Raymond Revue Bar was the personification of such resistance and retaliation. it was, i believe (correct me if wrong) the first such establishment where one could see fully nudie ladies on stage in any sort of legal capacity. you know, the kind of thing that most other "free", western countries have available with no particular thought or consternation. oh, no, not us English, about such we have to waffle and have a scene and decry moral bankruptcy and society falling apart when anything more fleshy than an ankle or the occasional wrist is on display.
there are several legends of patrons at the Raymond. i would have absolutely no idea how true any of what is spoke is, for i never had the pleasure of attending. tales i have heard include how in some instances admission was "free", subject to patrons agreeing to a two drink minimum purchase. with each drink costing at the cheapest, say, £50 a go. this legend is often followed with tales of patrons who felt aggrieved by such terms, and sought to remonstrate their displeasure. such was met with an informal but overall conclusive explanation of the rules by some of the most formidable door staff (there purely for the "safety" of guests) london has ever known, which in turn was usually followed by guidance on the nearest place to seek the medical attention now so obviously required.
just what ended the reign, or era, of the Raymond Revue? it is not quite so simple as to say "the internet", but this is a start. with the free flowing filth of the internet, and the considerably more "liberal" approach encouraged to matters of censorship by PM Tony Bliar in the late 90s, it was almost all of a sudden all right in England to confess that that sort of thing was actually not so bad.
so, a lot of posh, gentrified, "acceptable face" type of places which offered what Raymond Revue did cropped up, squeezing the market. for some reason people flocked to the flashier type of offering rather than the original classic. maybe it was important to members of the gentry to be seen as to not support the sordid past, just the sordid present respectability.
did i, on my trip to london, pop in (so to speak) at the platinum lace, or any such similar gentleman club? no. other than such having quite limited interest, my finances were not up to the requirements of such entertainment. also, at this stage, my kidney was proper knacked. i would have been uncomfortable as it was being out and sitting in such a place, and i do not believe getting a f*****g good kicking off of the staff when it was clear that i could not meet their (by london standards) agreeable pricing would have done it any good at all. or them, if we as humans have more than one kidney and it is so that not just one of mine is knacked.
what of the traditionally more acceptable public auditorium to see squalid, filthy things? as in, the cinema? yes, i did indeed stop off by "the big one" at leicester square.
that's the odeon, leicester square. so far as i recall, and i think the sign is saying such, when they have all of them big massive "royal premiere" of films and that, here is where it happens. actually, should i remember right, they even do the big premiere things here without members of the royal family present.
yes, indeed, as you can sort of see in the reverse image above, the major motion picture, or main feature, what they had on at my time of visit was the superb 1917. if for some reason you want my thoughts on the movie in some detail then go right ahead and click here. the short version would be yes, 1917 was a truly excellent and astonishing movie, and this Parasite thing what battered it at the Oscars must be incredible.
for those who would prefer to seek entertainment to be enjoyed at home, well, in this glorious new age that is rather tricky. sure, you can "stream" various services, but in my experience of the london, internet speeds are woefully slow, so i would imagine that is quite frustrating. one cannot pop out and rent a video no more, yet where you once could still remains.
i find it fascinating that the people cry and complain of how overcrowded london is, how there is no space, and yet there still stands a former Blockbusters store. on chiswick high street, no less, which i am assured is one of the single most desirable places in the london. nothing i personally saw convinced me of this being the case, but if someone has spoken such then it must be true.
this particular former Blockbusters holds a special place for my chum Spiros. it was here he met (and befriended) a chap who had opted for the homeless lifestyle. his approach to life, one of drinking cheap cider, fighting with people and soiling his trousers, was one that Spiros yearned for. wanting to do something to assist, Spiros gave his chum a pair of scissors, and encouraged him to offer to cut people's hair for them, for £1 a go. so far as i am aware this was a success, and the chap is now a multimillionaire stylist, with many of the rich and famous seeking his services.
of course that was back in a more innocent time, prior to london becoming "stab central" under the current, incompetent mayor. back then people were free to carry around scissors and other such sharp objects, gifting them as they saw fit, with no fear of recrimination. that all changed, for the worse, the moment london replaced a proper mayor in the form of boris with the current one, who got the job on the sole basis of not being zac goldsmith.
many thanks indeed to Private Eye for the well known summary of just how little an achievement it is to go right ahead and win an election where all you have to be is not be zac goldsmith. perhaps the standard in place for the next mayoral election will be somewhat higher, and the result better for all concerned.
but, enough of that, for now, and back to kind of what was the point of this post. if, indeed, or as point of fact, there is some sort of point.
yes, there i am, stood before one of the many famous "west end" venues that have all them posh, fancy shows and what have you on. no, i did not go and see one. it would have been nice to, certainly, but such entertainment tends to be expensive, and requires one to book many weeks, if not months or years, in advance.
have i ever experienced the thrill, the buzz and the excitement of a show in london? most assuredly. on school trips i went and saw Chess and Time, and both were great. favourite of all, though, was Buddy, what i went and saw with Dad. a most excellent show, and one i would love to see again. with Dad, if possible.
one thing that all can agree on, perhaps (maybe), is that london is both gifted and blessed in having many, many opportunities by which one can rid themselves of all their money. whereas spending it, or using it, for anything related to that sort of thing mostly remains frowned upon, strangely gambling is quite normalised, both in london and across the land.
there i am outside the famous and celebrated hippodrome, a casino where undoubtedly one or two have coined it in, whereas several hundreds (thousands, maybe) have gambled away money which they could either ill afford to, or was not theirs to do such with.
saying there is a "gambling culture" across England (maybe the whole of the UK) is a bit of an understatement. normally, on evening television, all of the commercial breaks are dominated by adverts for gambling concerns, often featuring endorsements by what counts as "household names" these days, making it all seem quite normal.
with some wisdom, a friend once said to me in passing that "gambling is perfectly fine, so long as the only money you use to do it is money you are happy to lose". simple but true. to this end, my life as a gambler is limited to that one pension scheme called the "national lottery", supplemented every now and then with a 25p bet on getting 20 football scores right. maybe i am part of the problem, then.
no, i did not go in the hippodrome, or this casino at the Empire in leciester square, or any casino, thank you. my instinct would be to absolutely baulk at the presumed minimum stake one could lay out in such a place, no matter how many shiny things were waved as being possible to win.
from what i recall, it was the Empire pictured above where me and my mate Payney went and saw Cape Fear, quite a few years ago now. 28, i suspect is the total. my memory is not to be trusted on such, but i do not recall them having the imax and the casino at the time. it was an era when cinemas just showed films, in truth, and did not seek to relentlessly "upsell".
right, then. it would appear that what i have done here is show you moi stood before some places that i did not actually enter, or become a patron of. oh. well, anyway, maybe some of it has been interesting to someone, even if just in passing or by accident.
be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment