tape

who is and who isn't 

so, this is going live on my blog about two (2) weeks after the event, and likely a week or so after the entire matter has drawn to a close. the entire matter would be the Ian Brown tour of this year (2022), and the bit before references my attendance at one of the nights, look you see. 

as is customary, i went to see Ian Brown in a year what can be constructed only from using a 2s and 0s in Newcastle. previously this was 2002 (referenced here), and now we are here in 2022. to make a far from intended unusual pattern, i have ended up seeing him once every ten years, then. but, when a year can be made up from using 2s, 0s and 1s it is of course essential that one see him in Manchester, and further in what used to be his day job. oh so very much about that one written, here and here for a start, feel free to look at the rest if you wish. 

how was this third (3rd) witnessing of Ian Brown do a variation of his thing? interesting. those in the know shall know that there was some controversy around this tour. indeed i will get to that. but, up front, i would defy anyone to find evidence of any gig, alone or in a certain band, that Ian Brown has done which got reviewed or discussed as being ordinary and straightforward. for various reasons there is always a story when this man takes to the stage. 

oh, if you think the above picture, as well as the ones to follow, are not of the greatest quality, well, just you wait and see how poor the obligatory video (yes, we have got a video) clips are. 

for what reason was Ian Brown out on the road, touring? well, presumably money, and also that's what musicians, or if you like singers, kind of do. as in do when not recording or, in certain cases, not engaging in the indulgences offered by the rock and roll lifestyle. to be honest, yes, i had feared that he was out on the road to "promote" or "share" his views on certain matters, such as (and by that i mean quite specifically) a certain recent plague and subsequent vaccination drives. no, though, pretty much this appeared (based on artwork and set design) a rather belated tour to promote Ripples, being as it is his most recent solo album and his first of such nature since the wheels (once again) fell off of The Stone Roses. as they do. 

there is a particular emphasis on solo, then. as much of the media has picked up on, be it of a social nature or the actual fourth estate (the press), Ian Brown, in a surprise move, decided to go and tour, which is to say do gigs, with no traditional musicians as such. just Ian Brown and a tape deck, then. no, actually a lad with a laptop plugged into the sound system. oh. 

go on then, before i continue, a short bit of video of Ian Brown, accompanied by a tape (for it is easier to call it such), doing Be There. 

my reaction to the news of how the gig would go, and this information came to me some three or so days before i was due to see him, was very much "what the f***". it didn't immediately strike me as being a very good idea, which was a sentiment perhaps enhanced by the largely negative comments which accompanied the reports. but there was never any danger, any question of me not attending. this is Ian Brown. i am biased. yes, whatever i paid for the gig tickets would be money i would pay to stand there and just watch him standing there staring at us. further, and this could well be me just rationalising it all in my mind (where else, i wonder), but i figured no, i am going to see him anyway, and not really the session musicians he may (or as it turned out may not) have hired to go on tour. 

and how did that all work out? surprisingly well. no, not as good as seeing a band live. lost were the dynamics, the spontaneity and the improvisation one would usually get at a gig. yet, or but, also gone were missed notes, false cues, etc. which are also an important part of a gig. the very, very, very last thing i would ever suspect or expect of an Ian Brown gig (mindful of his infamous live singing track record) would be for him to seek it to be a precision run thing. maybe this is him being subversive, perhaps all of it is one big, gigantic statement concerning where he is in relation to a certain band that he used to be in. 

progressing, or moving on, then, the gig itself. but yeah i may mention tapes again at some stage. i have every confidence the support act were or was decent. they certainly sounded it. unfortunately, or wisely, my friend and i (yes will get there) decided that it was probably a wise idea to just head to the bar, and indeed the bathroom at Newcastle City Hall than it was to go and see what the support was like. so far as i am aware this is the first time i have "skipped" the support band at a gig. well, of course, sometimes i've seen (and heard) them but not paid attention, but was at least in the venue.  

the setlist, widely circulated from the three (3) gigs of this tour he gone done before i saw him this time around, was of course predictably "set in stone" (ahem) due to the technical nature of how everything was to be performed. and quite a satisfactory set, too. a particular emphasis was placed on the faster beat, higher tempo tunes off of the Ian Brown solo discography. high energy, if you will, if not quite in the realm of rave. one happy exception to this was Shadow Of  A Saint, which he did, as it is one of my all time top tunes by him. sadly, though, it meant another classic, Whispers, didn't make it on. 

with it being ostensibly a tour for the Ripples album, there was of course a fair few from that record. the most interesting aspect of that, for me, was hearing a (fairly) big crowd singalong to the tunes. as history shall forever testify, it was an album release adversely affected. when it got released HMV were in one of their "going bust" spells, so had no copies on the shelf. absolutely none of the supermarkets had it in. some independent stores had it, but only "to order", as in (as i found as i tried) you could not walk in and purchase a copy. not much (that i was aware of) radio play happened with the tunes, and i don't believe Ian Brown turned up or out for any interviews or television appearances. and then, as we know, there was the world in lockdown. so, after three years of listening to the record isolated from any idea of how others took to it, it was boss to hear such enthusiasm for some quality vibes at large. 

of late it is so that i have, by default or design, been to a few gigs on my own. which is a strange sounding thing to do, granted, but i have no quarrel with it. but no, no solo voyage or outing this time. as it was up in that there Newcastle place, i went along (as was the case with the Manics last year) with my good friend g-man. 

you certainly can have apologies for yet another picture of moi appearing in one of my posts, on my blog, again this month if it upsets you. but, don't concentrate on my looks (or lack thereof), rather just dig the smart Reni Hats (bucket hats) we have on. indeed they are more Stone Roses than Ian Brown, but there you have it. of course not, no, these were not bought off of the official merchandise store. whereas in the venue itself one could buy a Reni Hat (bucket hat in proper terms) with Ian Brown  on them for £20, an entrepreneurial chap just a bit down the road was flogging these for £10 a pop. 

concert merchandise has, on that note, apparently gone to sh!t. once you could get some really cool, unique shirts and things. now, not so much. my understanding is, in this brave new modern world, one of the few ways in which musicians can actually make money is off of gigs (especially when you don't have the cost of a band) and the merchandise at shows. the shirts and things on sale at the Manics last year were poor, well overpriced with little design, small sizes and that uber thin material. same here, really. and they (or Ian) were (was) asking £30 a pop for a t-shirt. make one my size, and of decent material, and perhaps with something other than the artists' name on it, and the money is right here to pay more than that for one, thanks. 

back to the gig, though. what was lovely and nice was to hear just how many excellent tunes Ian Brown as a solo concern has given unto us, the fans. sure, he has not done a record i didn't like, but to get a good cross-section over 20 tunes and ninety minutes rammed that home. and yes, of course, we got his very first solo single, and one of his biggest hits, My Star. here you go with a snippet from the end, which is and is not the song. well, just play.  

indeed there was, at the time, a suggestion (as in blatant accusation) of Ian "borrowing" a lot of the music for My Star from Dear Prudence off of The Beatles (from The White Album). not for the first time, then, Ian "nodded" to this in a live performance. should you be of a mind to do so, and let us be honest many shall, read into it what you will that Ian sang four (4) lines of a song off of The Beatles, and 0 (zero) lines off of songs off of The Stone Roses. 

easily the most unexpected thing, for me, was the level of conversation Ian had with us, the crowd. after about twenty minutes he had spoken to us more than i had experienced him doing so in 2002 or 2012. not a bad thing, as such. also, the clear sign of him smiling, laughing and looking very relaxed. comfortable with himself, and what he was doing, if you like. full tilt loaded with confidence and arrogance, of course, but still. 

relating, or tying, that in with the performance of My Star, one lengthy "speech" he gave was how he was warned, when playing in China, against saying anything anti-Chinese, he asked if was all right for him to do a song about how America is filling space with nuclear weapons, and got a thumbs up. this, and a blink (or go to the bar) and you will miss it change to a lyric of another song to make it be a warning about "trusting scientists", was about as controversial as it got from him. except the bit about not having a band. 

but the rest of the songs? and, perhaps most importantly (this is Ian Brown, after all), how was the vocal performance? for the latter, quite likely the "best" i have heard him. sure, eventually his voice started to go towards the "classical" Ian Brown live performances we know and love, but for the first three or four songs he was ace, in top form. often he went off to drink some lemon and honey, so not sure if the performances have been taking the strain. with this set up, he is singing (or talking) for a lot more than he would with a band to just play on. distinctively him, though. 

oh yeah, the other songs what he gone done. easily the biggest "highlight" beyond the well known classics for me beyond Shadow Of A Saint was the performance of Marathon Man. i am not always aware of all Ian Brown songs all the time (regrettably), so it was kind of an out of the blue reminder of what a top tune it is. might as well list all of the songs, but Black Roses off of Ripples, Time Is My Everything, Dolphins Were Monkeys and Longsight M13 were ones i would add to a list of the stand out, or outstanding moments. for more of the "took me by surprise" stuff, i did go "wow" at the crowd reaction to Golden Gaze and Stellify. both top tunes, to be sure, but not ones i would have immediately placed on a list of "hope he does live". i mean, Stellify was always a top tune, and yes, after this live outing, i do have a new, more better appreciation for Golden Gaze. shout out for the person in the audience what had the Golden Greats artwork on the back of their hoodie and held it up for the duration of that tune. 

did he do F.E.A.R.? of course he did. arguably this is the song that "most" would hold up has his finest achievement as a single, coming as it does off of what i would argue is his greatest solo album, Music Of The Spheres. not to be confused (at all) with the recent Coldplay album of same name. how about a bit of video (yes, we've got a video) of a section towards the end of the tune. where Ian does not do the usual self-censor, so be warned, despite poor quality, you may hear Mr Brown use a rude, naughty word in the clip. 

and that, the performance of F.E.A.R., was that. no encore, as is standard. quite a bit of a longer cheers everyone, thanks for coming, goodnight than would be usual for him, which ties in with the relaxed vibe he was transmitting. an unexpected and inexplicably tight, precise 90 minute show closed. 

yes, is the answer. we, at this gig, did have "a few" seemingly or apparently walk out of the gig. it could be they did so for not "digging the vibe" of the tape show. maybe they just went to the bar or bathroom and did not come back to their original spot, or perhaps they were off to catch the last train home, before such went on strike. had i not booked in at a hotel then i, too, would have had to leave early for such a means of returning to my place of exile. whilst Stone Roses gigs were just about always (there was the odd incident) one generation under the same groove, for some reason an edge of tension always exists at an Ian Brown gig. no fights (that i noted) as such, but certainly (mostly empty) plastic pint pots were getting thrown around towards the end. 

ultimately, i am glad that i went. sticking with my pattern, not sure he or i shall still be doing whatever it is we do in 2032, but i could certainly be tempted by seeing him again. or, maybe not. a partial lament was that i was not all giddy with anticipation, excitement and what have you at the prospect of seeing him again, not even when he was just moments from being onstage. maybe this is me getting old, it could be that now seeing him, in one form or another, live more times than i have any other artist is that i have paid homage in enough instances for this existence of mine. 

the whole "no band", tape (laptop) for music stuff? well, i am an unapologetic acolyte, so anything i say in defence of the approach is going to sound like me simply being an apologist. his response was to simply say "haters hate, lovers love". a school of thought says that pretty much anything Ian Brown does is going to attract detractors and criticism, for it always has so. may it always be true that this is so, for it means he's still just doing his thing. 

however, that said, it is far from being a unique, and subsequently new, idea. granted it is of no real direct comparison at all, but let us not forget some 40 (!) years ago, one of the most celebrated performances in music history was David Byrne walking on to a stage, pressing play on a tape and doing Psycho Killer that way. more recently we have had that Ed Sheridan (or whatever), noted corrupter of charts and someone who is frequently asked about his "inspiration" for songs, turn up and play gigs with some backing tape that he controls by pedals, or something. i don't know or care. and let us not forget countless instances, involving the biggest names one can name in music, of lip-sync or if you will miming. none of it, arguably, matters if the people there enjoy the experience. which i did. 

right, then. phew, perhaps. that's likely more than i expected to write of it all, but it is done now. many thanks as ever for taking the time to read, or skim through and check out the (poor) pics and (even more poor) videos. dig what you dig. 

who is and who isn't

cuts10-01 timer set on and off

heya

one of those unusual posts of mine, which means done in the vague hope of helping someone out. basically, then, if you are on a two rate electricity supply and for some reason need to set or re-set (i don't think reset is right) the timer for off peak and on peak, it would appear to be more difficult and needlessly complex than you would think. so, some help, look you see. 

this is all specifically for the british general (bg) cuts10-01 timer, found on a consumer unit (fuse box for people of a certain age or upbringing) where a contactor is included. the contactor is the mechanism which switches an electric supply between "peak" and "off peak". i have this for my lodgings in place of exile has no gas, and so i rely on a storage tank thing for hot water. heating it during off peak hours is a great deal cheaper, and doing it then presumably puts less strain on the national grid. 

right, then. it was so that recently one of them fancy electrical safety checks was gone done on my place of present residence. during this it was decided to replace an aspect (an rcd) of the consumer unit (fuse box), which was fine. but this meant that the power supply had to be off, and thus the timer reset. this was a matter i discovered when i noted, whilst attempting a shower, i had no hot water. oh. 

not a problem, i thought (or rather assumed), i shall just look up the instructions on how one programs it, get it set up and have hot water, be it for showering, or doing dishes. this is (at time of writing) 2022, after all. surely the device itself would be straightforward and easy to use, and there would be a huge great abundance of information on the internet. no, and very much no. 

first off, then, i established what exactly i needed instructions for. this was the CUTS10 - 01 timer off of British General, to give a full name in the hope that anyone frantically searching finds this. doing a google or similar for this, with words like "instructions" and "how to set timer" drew mixed results. most of the results, as point of fact, were for people trying to sell me a new one of this bit of equipment. a lovely thing to do, but not really helpful. 

lots of the "instructions" links were for how to install the actual device, rather than how to use is. oh. right, well, very useful, i imagine, but also presently as much use as the sales offers i was getting for the thing. ultimately, or eventually, i found a "user manual" of sorts. if you have found this whilst looking yourself, let me help you out, here is the link to what seems to be the one and only version of the instructions to be online momentarily. 

if you are reading this after looking at the instructions, well, them instructions are not the greatest, are they? as is common for such things these days, it looks like (or appears that) the text has been translated into many languages before being finally translated into a variation of english. not good. 

yes, i tried (endeavoured) to follow the instructions. the important thing about the timer is that it be set to switch on at a certain point, and then off. for clarification, i only want the contactor to switch on during off peak times, which then activates the only off peak only thing switched on in my place, which is the hot water storage tank. a glimpse of the instructions below, which is optimistically entitled programming the switching time. 

unsure if you can make it out in the above picture, but it sets out how you switch the timer to go to being on. i followed these, with success, but got to a point where i said no, hold on, this is not telling me how i set it to switch off. which is to say if i followed these instructions as presented, at one point of time set the off peak would go "on", and then simply remain on. which would mean running expensive off peak stuff during on peak billing times. not good. 

eventually i worked it out. perhaps i am thick, or slow, but if you don't know something then you simply don't know it until someone shows you or teaches you. whilst the instructions make much fuss of how excellent the timer is, for it can store "up to" 44 programmes, what it does not tell you is that you have to do a minimum of two (2) programmes, one which tells the timer when to switch on and one to switch off again. oh. yes, i did an experiment during (very much) on peak times for a minute or so, and this is how it works. 

let me clarify somewhat then. to set the timer for "on", be it for select days or just the one, follow the instructions as set out (here, once again). of importance is to repeat this for a new programme, but setting it to go off. and this is what the instructions miss out. on the part where it says "Select On by pressing + or -", on this new program set it to the "off" time. ensure that you select the corresponding days to your "on" selection, otherwise it shall go on one day and just stay on. 

hopefully this helps, at the least, one person who wrestled with it a bit like i did. let my plight be the easier learning for someone. and oh my word yes, it is f*****g stupid that in this day and age someone goes and makes a "timer" that isn't really a timer, since on and off is not one programme. that's an on switch or an off switch, by definition. 

as to when "off peak" and "on peak" times actually happen in the UK, but of course this is not equal over the entire nation. why would it be easy and simple when they can make it complex? please do not take this as a standard, but generally off peak runs from midnight to seven (7) am. however, variations see the start time sometimes commence 30 (thirty) minutes before or after midnight. check with your energy supplier, if you can get through to them. playing safe i have just set mine to run from 1am to 5:30am, and this would appear to give me as much hot water as i can use. 

oh, yeah, it is highly unlikely that this timer thing will automatically switch time when we adjust clocks, because why would it be designed to do anything to help? best i have a look at when the clocks change, which i think is towards the end of october, and go adjust the settings then. again. 

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

moondust will cover you

greeting cinemagoers, howdy pop pickers

how very strange that i have not written of the subject of David Bowie for a while. feels like a few months and no, i am not going to check on that, look you see. i suppose there has not been all that much to say, except to complain about what they have, or rather have not, done in celebration of the 50th anniversary of albums of such stature as Hunky Dory and Ziggy Stardust. 

what they have gone done release, of course, is a new "film", and i am still not sure what to call it, exactly, called Moonage Daydream. certainly and surely it got released as September (2022) drew to an end, and that is when i saw it. just two (2) days after day of release, if you like, but it is only now i have managed to find the means to steal time to write of it. 

and is it any good? yes. for those in a rush, yes it is. beautiful is the word i find myself using to describe it. even though it is a struggle to describe what it is. something of an abstract work of art, which is all the same so very precise. perhaps allow me to waffle on, see if that makes it make any sense. 

the easiest, and most straightforward, thing to do is to make quite clear what Moonage Daydream is not. it certainly isn't a "biopic", and nor is it really a documentary, or if you will "rockumentary". overall, i suppose, it tells "a story" of David Bowie. linear, mostly, is the narrative. but it does not seek to go into the how, why, what immediately came next, what inspired this, why he did that. 

somewhere north of 90% of the footage here is (obviously) archive footage of Bowie. certainly there are bits of "previously unseen" or "rare" film, but perhaps (as in absolutely) nowhere near as much as the marketing people would have you believe. for sound, arguably the most important aspect here, it's an astonishing mix of Bowie's music, with some different edits and demos mixing in with rather well known tunes. for a narration, extremely north of 90% of that is Bowie himself, with soundbites and clips taken from here and there narrating "a story". the only variation is an occasional instance of hearing, and seeing, an interviewer posing a question, and a lovely borrow of the most famous line Rutger Hauer ever said in any film. you don't need me to tell you what that line is. 

fairly obvious to state that i had absolutely nothing to lose seeing this, as in a worst case i would witness and i would listen to two hours and fifteen minutes of David Bowie. which is likely what i would have done at home that sunday afternoon anyway, only without spending seriously inflated amounts on a drink and m and ms. but still, beautiful. yet flaws.

pictured above is a scene from the Ricochet documentary, available "online" and on the Serious Moonlight DVD. it is a documentary following David around the 'far east' (if that is what one calls Japan these days) on the tour of the same name of DVD in 1983. apparently him what made Moonage Daydream was a really, really big fan of this documentary (it isn't bad), in particular the scenes where we get to watch Bowie go up and down various Japanese escalators. i am assuming there is some symbolic reason this footage appears so often in Moonage Daydream, but by the 4th, maybe fifth, time i had seen it i felt that the point was being killed. 

let me continue with some views that are not precisely positive, but also i don't feel are entirely negative. quite a few have taken to the web to complain (moan) about certain songs, albums or what have you being included in the movie (or film, or motion picture, or work of art). as far as i am aware it did not set out to do such. but when the film is bookended (as in it starts and ends with) by Bowie musings on the subject of time, i was left a bit confused as to not a single note of his song Time appearing. the director totes had access to Aladdin Sane so must know of it. 

on the subject of online musings / reviews / moans / groans (which this, fair comment, could be), the most surprising one i saw was someone complaining that "Angie Bowie has been airbrushed out", and that Bowie's children do not feature. ahem. i wasn't keeping count, but Angie (in video and in photos) appeared probably more than Iman. for his children, in his life Bowie was always careful that no images of him with them would be in the public domain. so far as i am aware the only pictures ever to come out of such a nature were released by Duncan Jones (or Joe Jones, or Zowie Bowie) from the premiere of one of his films. again, this is not "Life of David Bowie". it's a work of art, celebrating his art. 

yeah, go on then, a selfie of me (moi) as a selfie would be, in the cinema, come to the show tonight, pray to the light machine. indeed, in my time of exile, i did go see it alone. well, that felt apt. also i knew full well that at least at some parts i would get all emotional and there would be tears. very much this was indeed the case. rather pleasing to see a reasonably significant number of people there watching it to, mind. for a film that one could argue has "niche" appeal, around over 20 of us had decided to share space and watch this on a sunday afternoon. 

moving away from anything likely to be "negative" and on to the sheer beauty of this. from the start it immediately hones in on any passion, love, devotion or whatever you may wish to call it for the subject matter, triggering joy and emotion at seeing Bowie in all his glory. a significant chunk of the first, say, ten or fifteen minutes is an avalanche of an onslaught to the senses used in watching a film quick cuts, sound manipulation, loads of flashing lights, all making you go "ooooh".

did i have a favourite element, or part? not really, not really, no, all of it was appreciated and embraced, just a few bits more than others. i wasn't really that fussed about footage previously unseen from gigs that have been marketed as "legendary", but still, interesting to see. certainly it seems there is an even bigger treasure trove of footage that i was aware of. mostly, then, the bits where it was doing "mix and mash", cutting footage in such a way that it suited the musical choice, and of course vice versa. 

if it is still on at a cinema as and when you are reading this, and to go slightly not overtly positive once more, a tip for you. should you, at around an hour in, feel the need to go to the bathroom (or for a cigarette), then do it when you start seeing footage (like the above) from The Man Who Fell To Earth. i get that it was an important thing, but really? out of character with the rest of the motion picture (or work of art that Moonage Daydream is), we seem to get what felt like 8 - 10 minutes of a montage of footage from it. halving that might have let for some other key works to get a brief look in. no, there is absolutely no mention of Tin Machine, but i didn't expect it. 

considerable thought, and effort, has gone (mostly) into what "soundbite" and/or piece of music accompanies the footage. perhaps that is stating the obvious, but with a bit of awareness that feels rather more pertinent than you might think. at one stage, when addressing "pop hit superstar 80s" Bowie, there's a comment from someone about him "settling for mainstream pop" and not being daring, or something to that effect. that plays over a very brief glimpse of the Loving The Alien video, a song which i would suggest features some of the bravest, boldest things he ever recorded. 

glimpses of what one might call "David Bowie in private" are given. the subject of his hobbies comes up, and thus an exceptionally rare glimpse of his paintings and sculptures are showcased. i am not art critic, but it was fascinating to see what his mind compelled him to produce away from music. but, mostly, this, Moonage Daydream is an artistic expression of his main art, and a tacit yet overt look at how it impacted people, what it did for them. us. me. 

just another still from Ricochet there for you. including only two (2) from it feels like i am short changing all of you in giving an idea of what the experience of Moonage Daydream is like. well, like for quite a few moments. 

ultimately, i think, Moonage Daydream is a bit of a "mirror" for fans. let me try and word this correctly. it wasn't that people loved what David Bowie did, it is that he was loved, held in affection, and valued because of what he did. he was a great big giant magnet for people who felt isolated, displaced, in some way not feeling like they belonged. he said oh no, love, you're not alone. he beckoned us to give us his hands, because we're wonderful. he told us we could be safer, that we could be us, even if just for one day. none of his background, biography or inspirations really mattered in the face of that. something felt by millions over the decades, around the world, was something he felt. he had the gifts and skills to, but most importantly he had the courage and compassion, to simply stand up, expose his sense of it, and sing it to the world. we did tune in. 

watching Moonage Daydream to see what got "left out" is a pretty pointless experience. rather appreciate, indulge or plain embrace the sense and sentiment selected here. i have absolutely no idea how someone not quite so devoted to the subject matter would take to this film, but it must surely be worth giving it a go. 

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

elephant of donington

hello there

pretty much what it says right there in the title. well, kind of, look you see. no, so far as i am aware, there are not real, life sized (or "proper") elephants wandering around donington as such. but there is a service station there, with one of them vending machine arrays what fascinates me so. 

on one of my most recent expeditions, being travels for verk related concerns, i was blessed enough to be able to (once more) stop off at donington to make use of their services. whereas for the most part i have come to accept my continued acceptance is merely forfeit of payment for sins presumed or real, every now and then momentarily it feels like some great reward dawns, presumably in exchange for some good deed i did somewhere. being able to visit donington falls within the explicit remit of the latter. 

routine and regular readers of this blog shall be well aware of my proclivity to engage in transactions, financial rather than the broader fiscal in nature, with select vending machines on offer at service stations. mostly, indeed exclusively, this is so when what is on offer in return for my money is an effigy, or other such representation, of a hedgehog. adventures of this nature can be further explored here, and indeed here. yes, the frequency with which i indulge this appears to become ever more frequent. 

before considering my latest acquisition, more on the subject of donington services. and this is indeed due to how the pictures (of which there are many) have been added. from what i recall it was so that last year donington won the prestigious "best service station of the year" award, and i have no reason at all to doubt that those who determine this will do so again this year. it would be no act of folly to do so. 

any questions about why it is so magnificent are likely answered in the image above. but, for clarity, so far as i can determine, it is the closest one can get to stopping off near castle donington, the fabled and cherished land where monsters of rock once happened, without actually going over to castle donington itself. yes, certainly, i would wish to visit the place directly. but to do so simply is not practical when well within the midst of several hours of driving. it is sufficient for me to be reasonably close to where legends once tread the grounds to perform their art. 

my main reason, or motivation, for stopping off at donington services was for a comfort break. to make use of the facilities. spend a penny, so to speak. or go for a p!ss if you prefer a more direct approach to such subjects. but also taking a break is prudent and wise when driving for long spells, and it also a kind of contractual obligation for me. whilst doing some of that i, of course, had a look at the vending machines, so as to see if they had any further predominantly plastic based tributes to the magnificent splendor of the hedgehog. 

not directly, so to speak, or not of a guaranteed nature. i would like to think the majority of you reading this know exactly what tribute to what animal (or creature) i got, but let us go through the motions. 

donington services has about four (4) of them vending machine things, but none (zero) are dedicated purely to effigies of hedgehogs. the closest i could find was, as pictured above, one offering squishy animals. it was a random factor or game of chance as to which animal in squishy form you might end up with, in exchange for £1 in the form of a (new) one pound coin, but as you can see there was the suggestion of every chance of getting a hedgehog. 

elephant was what i got, then. oh. well, it's not bad, as you can see, above, with it presented in an animated variation of the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. yeah, the green things in the background are the casing (or shell) what it came in, out of the vending machine. 

certainly i of course wished for a hedgehog, but no, i am not displeased or distressed by that which i have ended up with. elephants are, of course, rather smart. in a very specific, pertaining to actual, real elephants, and of course things like the album Elephant off of White Stripes. once upon a time i could also do a really smart elephant impression, but i believe doing it now would get me arrested for lewd behaviour. 

it feels like a fair bit of time since i have thrown one of them "selfie" things on here, so there's one above, featuring, as is the nature (if not definition) of such a thing, moi. yes, i am looking all reflective, pondering and what have you, enjoying the last throes of summer whilst in, or rather on, the hallowed and celebrated grounds of donington. 

just about everything to do with the picture and paragraph above says yes, i have not a great deal to say on the subject of my latest squishy animal related toy. except, yes, a non-Commodore 64 mode image for those interested. 

hmn. quite like the purple (lilac?) colour of the elephant. not sure on the decidedly, if not distinctly, overtly priapic nature of the trunk, mind. i reasonably believe, or assume, these toys, if they are such, are mostly intended for children, and not people on long, boring drives looking for a slight distraction to break the monotony of it. 

for those of you who have read this far, or simply scrolled down to the end, something of a bonus. quite a while ago i found this video on the internet, but have not really had reason to add it on here. to be honest it remains so, since there is no direct reason to add it here. but then it does have an elephant in it, so here you are, yes, we have got a video.  

also has Commodore 64 in it, too. which is just an added plus if you were only interested in elephant videos. 

right, that's just about that for this. not sure, at this stage, if me purchasing these things off of service stations shall become any more frequent, or in some way come to replace my weirdly popular updates on using car wash facilities. if you keep looking at this site and read future (as well as past) posts, you will find out, truthfully. 

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

album of the year

howdy pop pickers

some of you might be in a bit of a rush, or what have you, so to clarify it is so that the title of this post pertains to the album autofiction off of suede. it is far better than any other released this year, look you see, and for the life of me i cannot see anything coming out for the remainder (or duration) of this year what will come close to it. full and true is it that i am well aware my declaration of what is the best or greatest of this (or any) year is of little consequence, but should one ask, there is the answer. 

right, then. i suppose a bit more detail to substantiate this claim, of varying value, may well be wanted by anyone prepared to read on, and thank you for doing so. there is, of course, every chance of me simply being biased as an unashamed suede fan. but then i am a proud fan precisely because they, inexplicably, keep releasing albums like this one. 

a slight history then. suede commenced, at least as a well known band, some thirty (30) years ago. they unleashed three albums which were an astonishing, breathtaking statement of intent, brandishing sexuality, indulgence, vice and assorted emotions as all which should be at the forefront of life. which got followed by two albums not quite so great, the band effectively ending, them coming back after a decade or a dozen years, and making incredible music. addictions, departures and many other last names have somehow not ever stopped suede from being suede. 

for what reason, or why, is this album so good? in essence there's not a single moment of a single song wasted, it is brilliant from start to finish and my inclination thus far has been to play it two or three times in a row, rather than listen once and move on to something different. and that's been happening for well over a week now, and is likely to continue. sure, oh yes, there are songs here which are "more better" than others, but there isn't a weak moment here, not a single "this will do to fill time" song. 

in interviews and what have you (well, interviews) the band have spoken of this being their "punk" album. not for me to argue or disagree with. certainly it is as some dramatics and theatrics have gone, this is the band (almost) alone, no fancy orchestrations or studio trickery. such didn't feature too much in all that many suede albums, but the one prior, the blue hour, yeah, i suppose so. without doubt an unexpected, and very welcome, turn is the predominance of some really heavy bass on a few of the songs. slightly out of character for the "suede sound", whatever that may be. at times the bass is so awe inspiring one could imagine Mani hearing and going "f*****g hell", in instances the bass is so downright dirty one could imagine, and oh if he were still here with us, Prince would blush. 

writers tend to write best when they write of what they know. coming off of a spell of autobiography typing, brett anderson sings of such writing. kind of. again, in interviews and things it is spoken of as to how this, he (and the band) feel this is their "most autobiographical" work yet, but autofiction as a title tells a story too, does it not. however much is truth absolute, or a truth any would prefer, really doesn't matter. this is a band playing and singing with an unmistakable, cannot quantify belief in the music. not unusual, but rare (in this or any other day) for it to come across so stark and so bold as one finds in this record. 

not sure what to write of select songs which wouldn't simply be an echo of comments the band have made themselves. and they have gone into a bit of a promo overdrive with this one, not that they were ever particularly aloof or inaccessible. the three songs most routinely spoken of (and i think they were issued as modern day equivalents of singles) are easily the most identifiable as brett autobiography or partial autofiction, which are she still leads me on, 15 again and that boy on the stage. each is as good a representative of the album as any, but then so are all the other songs. 

my struggle would be to name a clear favourite track. except maybe black ice, for reasons of bass outlined earlier. wow. also some lovely symbolism, or metaphors in the song. or you know, whatever the fancy term is for f*** that sounds good and makes sense. similar true of personality disorder about which brett has been suspiciously vague sounding about, except he is actually right when he says it doesn't matter what the words mean, it's how they sound and make you feel. 

should it be so that i were to list, or name, one "regret", then it is that what am i without you is on this album without its natural partner. go back a couple (or so) albums to bloodsports, which featured the incredible opener barriers. that song was a beautiful, inspired homage to just what it is to love and follow a band, a kneeling worship at the altar of what music can do for you. here is the natural bookend, or other side of that, which is the artist responding in kind. it may be a bit too melodramatic for some, but should i ever make a mixtape (disc) of suede, it will start with bloodsports and end with what am i without you. 

being mindful of the way music works in this modern world, i suppose anyone with an immediate interest in suede purchased this the week, if not the moment, it came out. this album warrants a braver and bolder fate than the disposable ways vibes are treated these days. quite simply autofiction has the markings, the sounds, the brilliance and sheer passion to stand as a classic. it is an album i shall play long beyond the calendar year in which it was released, it is an album i hope people will come to discover in tales of future legend. 

right, well, anyway, off i go to listen to it some more, then. never quite sure if i get across in words all proper how i feel about records like this one. i probably should have written "this record is f*****g amazing go listen to it" and left it at that. 

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

portsmouth telephone box

heya

blimey, already, then, we are in that final quarter of a year where the month takes a double digit numerical form. this is true, at the least, at the time of composition, look you see. should you be reading this in a month dignified numerically in (or of) a singular nature, apologies from the past to your present for any confusion caused. 

so, more observations from the place they call portsmouth. or where it is called portsmouth. actually there are several things i could write of from there, but mostly they concern the roads. specifically their peculiar, unexpected adaptations of standard traffic laws. those are things what i cannot illustrate though, as one is not permitted to take pictures as they drive. which would be a silly and dangerous thing to do. 

when walking around, though (or mind), one is relatively free to take pictures. i mean, yes, all actions have a consequence in some form or another. but i doubt any immediate distress, or concern, would have been caused by my documenting a telephone box ('phone booth' if for some reason american) that provided an impromptu canvass for one or two locals (i assume) to beautify. 

obviously it as the upper (top) aspects of art which attracted my attention. my that is one splendid stencil of Chuck Norris in what one could argue was his prime, being as it is clearly from his 80s days of cinema. sure, indeed and certainly many would suggest his finest work came later, when doing all that quite class Texas Ranger television show. but i prefer Delta Force and Code Of Silence, thanks. what a pity, though, that they couldn't spell 'Chuck' right, unless of course one spells it 'Chuk' down there. or maybe they believed they were evading copyright infringement issues by this slight change. 

i don't really have any wish (or intention) of doing regular sightings of things in portsmouth, but let us see the hand the dealer of live gives me. up to now, mindful of this post, i suppose it's not so bad doing one every now and then, if limited to even number months. 

for the other bit of graffiti, or "street art", if you will, no idea.i mean, no idea if it is connected to the above, or just random. actually, saw a few things with 'scud' added to them with paint, or some form of marker. going on memory, the "scud missile" was formidably popular as a subject of discussion during the first so-called gulf war. perhaps it was painted by an enthusiast of that military device who(m) is reluctant to progress to modern weapons, or maybe it is just a nickname for someone. neither know nor care, really. so, probably best to leave it as is. 

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

more reading

hello reader

and once again i commence a post of this nature with an observation of benefit to no one in particular. it really, or truly, does feel like my book related activities (reading) have fallen away of late. by of late i suppose i mean the last couple of years, look you see. whereas i retain if not maintain a passion for reading, just feels like life, or what have you, gets in the way. distractions, mostly. 

so yes, then, i have read some more novels. no, not just one, and nowhere near so many as three or more, just the two (2). as has become my custom to do here, here we go with a brief look at them, followed by whatever comments come to mind. 

before progressing, if you have not scrolled down yet, indeed that is my smart new bedding on display in the background. yes, it's 'baby yoda', or grogu for the pedantic. indeed i am quite close to one half of one century of age, but never stop liking what you like; dig what you dig. 

first, of course, a 'spoiler free' overview, as it were. starting in the order as they are above and of how i read them, The Nameless Ones by John Connolly is - and is not - the latest in the series of Charlie Parker, who no longer gets called Bird so much, novels. i had reluctant and limited expectations going into it, and yet it turned out to be quite excellent. my second choice of reading is the "much anticipated" third novel from Paula Hawkins, A Slow Fire Burning. whereas no, not of the huge, immediate impact on a reader that her debut novel had, it seems (or feels) certainly closer to it than her second, which in truth i cannot on the spot recall much of other than i read it. 

with that being pretty much all you would need to know of the books (both were good, very much so), next comes some abstract musings. do take caution if you were to wish to read either (or both), though, and you should consider one of them *** SPOILER WARNINGS *** in place. 

to begin where i did, and indeed where the picture commences, is to have a look at The Nameless Ones off of John Connolly. many of you would consider the provenance of my copy of any novel to be quite important. in this instance, for those in the UK the tell-tale, distinct £5 sticker gives every indication of both cost paid and that it was off of Morrisons. purchased on sight, it was. sure, i could have waited and probably got it for 50p less, or fewer, at Tesco, but see it, get it, bought it. 

plot? revenge. long time friends (guardians, really) of Charlie Parker, Louis and Angel, get quite cross when a trusted contact in Europe, along with his family, get(s) brutally slain, viciously so, by notorious Serbian ganglords. and so, with a suspiciously large amount of assistance from the authorities, off they go to extract the revenge they see fit. 

it has been an interesting, or curious, spell for us Charlie Parker fans. we are, and i dare speak for a majority, all keen to see how the usual protagonist's story progresses. and yet prior to this we had The Dirty South (or The Reckoning, which i believe it got called in some place) which was a prequel, and now a set in present day sort of "spin off". indeed Charlie does feature and is somewhat pivotal, but this is predominantly Louis taking the lead. leaving the disappointment aside, i read anyway, and was soon rewarded with a brilliant, yet dark (at times close to unbearably so) read. 

make no mistake, John Connolly has not lost any of his penchant for being brutal and upsetting with how he presents, well, how it is. one can imagine, if he indulges such, a stiff drink by his typewriter as the words to describe some sections needed to be typed. stating the obvious, routine and regular readers of his work will know to expect no softening, and yet here all seems to go darker still than before. that said, in persevering, one gets a really, really good, gripping and indeed exciting thriller. 

as something of an aside, there does appear to be quite a subtext on the go here. in describing the horrors of the Yugoslav war and subsequent rise of Serbia (and the Serbian criminal gangs), particular disdain features for how much of the rest of Europe simply shrugged and elected not to trouble themselves too much with what was happening. for some reason (i shall confess ignorance to the specifics of history) it is the Dutch who get singled out as, to be as brutal as Connolly, the "most guilty" in this regard. perhaps this is an obvious thing to draw attention to, how Europe tends to do this, but then also quite timely with the current events happening not so much on the doorstep as right in the hallway. 

from what i can make out the next novel, the name of which i keep forgetting, shall indeed return us to what is wanted, the ongoing tales of Charlie Parker. although these last two novels have been superb reads, bring it. so much so in terms of bring it on, i nearly bought the hardback of it a month or so ago, but relented, for i am happier reading a paperback, thanks.

going on to the next book, then, and that would be A Slow Fire Burning off of Paula Hawkins. to get the issue, or question, of provenance out the way, surprisingly WH Smiths. they had it at a straight "half price" offer, which they generously rounded down, making it available for £4.48. lovely. also, or as an aside, this is a 'Richard & Judy' exclusive edition, whatever that means. looking at the back, some sort of interview by them with the author, and looking at the front some comments off of them. i think they do some daytime show. 

the plot? for risk of needless spoilers i am reluctant to draw it down to a word or two. as short as i can, a young man is found murdered on one of them canal boat things. witnesses alert the constabulary to some potential suspects, with their reasons being (of course, this is a thriller mystery) somewhat shrouded. the novel progresses in telling of numerous interconnections, motivations and reasons for actions. yeah, which again is kind of describing how a novel works, isn't it. 

no, to be honest or upfront, it isn't quite so jaw-droppingly brilliant as The Girl On The Train. being fair, asking any author to top or equal that would would be something. still, it feels close to it in some ways, and certainly a more better, more involved read that the previous. whilst i "get" why this novel has the name it does, from about halfway through i could not but help thing Stolen Stories would have been a more direct, symbolic and perfect title for the work. oh, well. 

plausibility of probability mindful of the suspension of disbelief when reading fiction, then. indeed that is rather a convoluted statement, but a pretty straightforward measure. at no stage did anything i read here feel "outlandish", or contrived, and nowhere near preposterous. one who lives a life where they encounter others shall certainly sense familiar themes, if (hopefully) not actions. 

how do i, following on from the above, word this carefully? the "twists" which are somewhat obvious tend not to be disappointing when they are revealed, whereas the ones one (at least i) did or do not see coming are plausible (oh for a better word). overall, a highly engrossing, most excellent read. i do indeed look forward to her 4th novel. 

so, a bit of a lucky streak there, what with me reading two (2) books which did not disappoint. true, going into them with slightly lower expectations than what i would normally have possibly, or even potentially, assisted that. but, still, these books "jumped the queue" of the dozen or so i have at any one time sat ready to read. there was a level of enthusiasm for reading.

where next for my reading exploits? i have that one by that bloke who writes of the copper what sits in a pub to have a little think on any particular crime, usually ending with the culprit handing themselves in and confessing for no apparent reason. although the last couple of novels have seemed to be less and less (or fewer and fewer to use a popular word randomly) about the usual protagonist. from there, who knows, but i see a former president (of the america) has had another bash at co-writing (ahem) a novel, and the first one was surprisingly very good indeed. 

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

still on the trail of the thirteenth

hello there

well, a bit of a "throwback" to a post i did five or so years ago. perhaps more of an update, look you see. the idea, or notion, that a thirteenth episode of Fawlty Towers secretly exists is one that has always fascinated me, even if only on an "on and off" kind of way. oh yeah, the original post, looking at some of the best theories around it, is found by clicking here. 

a recent "find", or rather something i have stumbled upon, has given me reason to write more on the subject. no, there is nothing "new" as in new new here; undoubtedly many are aware of this one. i, however, was not, and so there is every chance others didn't know this existed. well, others that are as interested in the whole notion as i am. 

oooh, some might say (you know what some might say), a familiar yet unfamiliar image of Basil Fawlty at reception, with the telltale timecode in the corner. with the latter suggesting an unfinished, unreleased and thus unaired bit of footage. of the three, unaired is technically correct. this isn't from an episode of Fawlty Towers as such, but rather the unaired (yet somehow made it out) pilot episode for Not The Nine O'Clock News. which, if you are unaware of it, was a brilliant comedy show. 

someone somewhere posted a link to the episode on that there you tube thing. i thank who(m)ever that was very much indeed. let me pass on that link right here. from what i can work out, or ascertain, it was an intention (or idea) to have the new comedy show (Not The Nine O'Clock News) broadcast either before or after Fawlty Towers. so, in a bit of surreal, unexpected fourth wall breaking kind of move, and this would have been not the norm in the 70s, they had the pilot episode "bookended" with the Fawlty Towers credits and a couple of scenes. 

in the footage, which i would rather encourage you to watch than just read here, Basil can be seen apparently talking to someone in control of the BBC, flat refusing to do another episode. during this he makes reference to the strike action which was disrupting shows at the time. going back to my original piece, and looking at the various plot details of the "thirteenth" episode most commonly shared, this would tie in (a bit) with the idea of the one called The Blackout. 

perhaps some people saw this unaired pilot and, over the course of time, had memories clouded, leaving them absolutely convinced that they saw a tape of a secret Fawlty Towers episode. once more, going back to my earlier (rather than future) post on the subject, most who claimed to have knowledge of the thirteenth were linked with claims that "someone that worked for the BBC smuggled a video out". certainly someone smuggled a video out of this Not The Nine O'Clock News, for i doubt very much that the BBC themselves uploaded it to the internet. 

for a further theory, for all anyone knows it is possible that some variations or messing about in character turned up on one of the BBC VT Christmas tapes. what's that, exactly? a kind of open, yet dirty, secret. you can find a decent documentary on the subject here. effectively, and in short, both the video tape (VT) departments of the BBC and the regional ITV stations made 'Christmas tapes', exclusively for those in the industry, to be shown at end of year parties. whilst featuring outtakes and mock news reports, they invariably featured nudity (accidental, deliberate and sometimes, it is said, dubiously obtained) and obscenity. getting your hands on those tapes, particularly the early ones (late 70s or pre-84) might be more exciting and explosive than a thirteenth episode of Fawlty Towers. my presumption (or assumption) is that they are all long since destroyed, for by all accounts a lot of footage would destroy entire careers, reputations and legacies. 

ultimately, and with regret, all of this kind of strengthens my view that, really, there is no such thing at all as a thirteenth episode of Fawlty Towers. really hope i am wrong, though. were it to exist, then surely it must do in a way that The Day The Clown Cried did (or does), where the only complete copy of it was on a tape Jerry Lewis had firmly locked away. on that note, or as an aside, apparently that notorious (infamous) film will be screened, in 2025. yet, also, no. at least that film is known to exist, or its existence is confirmed. for John Cleese to have done similar, to have the only copy locked away, and absolutely no one ever confirming it actually exists, well, that would be some story. 

to clarify, i in no way present myself as an "expert" on this subject, nor do i profess to have any firm knowledge. just a simple, curious fan intrigued by this wonderful myth. 

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

decades after day of release

howdy pop pickers

quite the lovers of paradox, be the Manics. for just about their entire existence, or at least not long after, they have always categorically stated that they shall never, ever release a live album, for they view such releases as being "a bit of a con" and a means to rip off fans, look you see. yet they absolutely do not get tired of repackaging, reshaping or re-imagining their albums. which is how we are here, with a traditional in life yet unusual for the record industry non-decimal 21st anniversary release of Know Your Enemy. 

being fair - and honest - in the majority of cases when the bad do re-issue an album it is well worth the purchase. the 10th anniversary editions of two landmark albums (in a career filled with records which could be described so) of The Holy Bible and Everything Must Go were particularly superb. the few which have been less superb are easily avoided. it was easy, for instance, for me to say "thank you, no" to a 2 disc and book reissue of Gold Against The Soul (my least favourite anyway) for an alarming £50. i skipped the reissue of This Is My Truth Tell Me Yours for it felt like i had 90% of it already. and Send Away The Tigers was a no as the reissue still included Autumnsong like it was an actual, proper song. 

this one, though, was far too intriguing to say "no" to. well, kind of. a sort of "luxury" or "deluxe" 3 tape (disc) set looked overpriced for what you got and, as we shall get to, kind of self-defeating in the aim of revisiting the album. but the two tape (disc) set, for just south of 40% of the cost of the three variation, looked like a wise purchase. 

why, exactly, do we, the world, have a "new" version of Know Your Enemy? seems a strange move, in particular when the band have, within the last year (give or take) had a number one album out. it would appear they, and this is perhaps more Nicky Wire, took a decision that now was the time to put the record out kind of as how the band debated doing it at the time, which is to say two albums, rather than the one we got. 

for the most part the linear notes do a rather understandably better job than i could in explaining this. but as we are here, the band (at the time) had two records worth of material, one being mostly of the reflective sound of their previous (This Is My Truth), one being closer to their much more aggressive, confrontational style from debut onwards. names were to be Door To The River and Solidarity, respectively. the record label were keen, sensing double money. ultimately the band opted against it, but this does explain why, presumably as a compromise, we got two (2) singles on one day, with So Why So Sad and Found That Soul respectively representing the sound of each album. 

understanding the temptation to release two albums on one day is kind of straightforward. all of the band were huge Guns N Roses fans, and of course they did this trick with Use Your Illusion I & II, about ten years before. however, the band clocked that selling one record was going to be tough. this was 2001, where CD record technology made home taping easy and of quality, and also this new thing called "the internet" made it even easier. rather than release one record straight off and then the next some 14 to 18 months later (which in retrospect would have been wiser for GNR), which is what, say, Bowie would have done in the 70s or Prince in the 80s, they simply sliced and diced the tracks to create the lengthy Know Your Enemy tape (album). 

provenance of my copy was, on day of (re)release, HMV. all sorts of fancy "preorder" versions of the record were available on their website, most of them signed. being a regular Manics purchaser, however, means i have stacks of things signed by them, which is lovely but still, enough is enough. in the end, the ludicrous postage costs for their online store was the defining factor. as in, it was 50% cheaper to get a bus to town and buy it than it was pay their postage costs. no, the bus has not got cheap. 

right, so, anyway, the actual album(s). admittedly this was kind of an autopilot purchase, even when the last two or three (four?) re-releases were not. i was not expecting that much from it all, being reasonably happy with how KYE sounded in its original form, and yet the idea of hearing an original, or initial version of a "rough draft" was intriguing. two previously unreleased tracks (which the band had thought had come out as b sides) was also a slight selling point, but not much of one. 

stressing, or emphasising, that i had no quarrel with the original release, this was a welcome, surprising and interesting thing to listen to. maybe this is stating the obvious, but this "split" into two records of vaguely same style music does create a really enjoyable, smooth listening experience. after a week of playing this new version at home, i loaded the original up as i drove around (for verk) and now cannot hear anything but how disjointed it all is. which was actually a complaint from many at the time, even though they had no real idea or sense that it was two records welded into one. 

i am not too sure there's much value in spelling out what song from the original has ended up where, what's been omitted (Royal Correspondent, though, on the two disc set) and what has come in, well, nit in detail. biggest surprise was the two mentioned singles appearing here in remixed forms, with at least the So Why So Sad one featuring in a few other releases. my understanding is that a lot of the tracks here have been 'remastered / remixed" or what have you, but them singles having their (decent) album versions replaced entire was a surprise, to be sure. further, the inclusion of previously standalone (and first new number one of this century) single The Masses Against The Classes was unexpected. as was the ace cover of We Are All Bourgeois Now, which previously was a hidden track on the CD. 

exactly what caused me, other than the obvious (and initial) economic argument, to go with the two tape (disc) version rather than the 3 (three) disc one? frankly, the three disc version seems to defeat the purpose of the exercise. assuming that the third disc, all demo versions, would get played two or three times at best, tapes (discs) one and two had four or five extra tracks on them. which is nice, but also rather going against the idea of presenting the album(s) as originally intended? 

my favourite tape (disc) of the two? slightly tricky, this. oddly i quite like the "Sean Penn Mix" of So Why So Sad included on (in) Door To The River. also on that one is probably the best of the at least two new(ish) songs, Rosebud. further, now isolated as the closing track of an album (technically), one is aware of just what an incredible song Epicentre is, with this more than most probably being unfairly drowned out by the chaotic nature of the original release. 

yet it is Solidarity which is probably the closest to the Manics i love. well, i really love all Manics, except of course Autumnsong, but i really, really love the Manics on this one. although Solidarity does have Wattsvile Blues on it, the rest is superb. things like My Guernica and Freedom Of Speech Won't Feed My Children are the precise reason why Nicky Wire once, when dismissing critics, said he believed the band were "a bit too clever" for some. plus, my favourite song off any version of the album, the brilliant, damning Baby Elian, resides on this one. 

normally it was quite rare for Bowie to speak of "regret" for any album. yet he spoke of how he wished he released 1.Outside (link) as a double disc, as it was "too much" in one go. that's pretty much what the Manics have clocked, or rather addressed, with this variation of Know Your Enemy. also, the new artwork feels less like someone shouting at you. for the surplus of music, well, i would suggest (if not argue) they had learned the lesson, as about ten years after Know Your Enemy they did indeed release two new records not much more than a year apart, Rewind The Film and then Futurology. 

depending on what, exactly, the record industry throws my way for the Christmas market, and indeed on how the Bowie Moonage Daydream gets classed (probably soundtrack), this is realistically likely to be the "best re-release of the year". although i am tempted (but economically momentarily stopped) by this Toyah Anthem re-release, mind. believe me, there is a lot more to the story of this particular re-release, but you are better off buying the tapes (discs) yourself and reading the linear notes. 

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

curse of transformers

greetings

some time has passed, even at time of writing. but i am not sure it has all sunk in, look you see. i speak, or rather write, of the passing of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, or as i would be prone to compose HMQE2. now we live with a new reigning monarch, His Majesty King Charles III, or HMKC3. unlike as was the case with HMQE2, one suspects no (valid, let it be said) concern of the numerical value across the entirety of the United Kingdom. whereas Scotland had no Queen Elizabeth I, this was not so with Charles I and II. just in case such arrives in conversation. 

it is odd how the mind works, here with particular regards to association of things. the avalanche of news, be it from the wireless, the television or various written forms, can be and indeed has been overwhelming. one would simply need to consider, for instance, the coverage - and indeed phenomenon - of The Queue, which i certainly hope them what do wikipedia delete. 

my assumption is that all exposed to this news do, at some point, latch on (for want of a better term) to an incident or aspect, and let it be so that they are taken, in mind, to their own thoughts. this certainly happened to me when, in passing, someone somewhere (likely the BBC) brought a report of Royal Mail, who do the post and that (sometimes), confirming that no further stamps featuring HMQE2 would be produced. 

which means that the last, or final stamps of the UK to feature HMQE2 are the most recently issued special edition ones, which so happen to feature - or if you will, celebrate - Transformers, them imaginary robots what turn into cars, or vice versa. sure, undoubtedly they will produce some specific stamps to honour and commemorate HMQE2, but then they had also just done ones to mark the Platinum Jubilee. and any further stamps shall surely be marked with the distinct silhouette of HMKC3. 

the "curse" of Transformers, then. i would like to think i am not the only one to have made such an association, and perhaps you have already too. but yes, indeed it was the case that the last credited cinematic performance of Orson Wells was Transformers The Movie. he passed away shortly after he had completed his role in the movie. 

anyone looking for some deep, symbolic meaning to all of this are likely best doing so searching somewhere else. really, i just kind of had this association in mind, and for catharsis thought it best to get it all out, here (as usual) rather than keeping it within. maybe, after all, someone else made this curious association, and sought affirmation. if this is such, then here it is. 

not really, not really. no. that would, one could reasonably presume, be an answer to the question of whether either Mr Wells (since he was associated first) or HMQE2 wished it to be so that one of their last acts was to be indelibly, historically liked to Transformers. i have no issue or quarrel with anything to do with Transformers, for clarity. from what i recall the Commodore 64 game of it was quite class. i just find it peculiar that one of cinema's most celebrated artists, and certainly one of the most admired monarchs the world has know, would share such a seemingly unexpected final(ish) act. 

yes, pedantic fans, i am quite aware that someone somewhere "edited" and released a motion picture in the 21st century featuring Orson, but that, some 30 years after his passing, surely does not count? much like, i dare to state, that the inevitable tribute stamps to HMQE2 won't replace these being the last produced with Royal Mail, in theory based on the name, being in her service. 

one recurring subject (that i can recall) here on this (my) blog is, the "ownership" of swans. well, so far as i can answer that one with precisely no (as in zero) research, it is indeed the case that to all intents and purposes yes, the reigning monarch of the UK does "own" them all. messing about with one, then, would presumably be a crime against the crown. also very silly, as they are as vicious as they are strong as they are uber defensive. 

does it make the slightest bit of difference to the swans who their current custodian, or if you will protectorate, is? one could very easily go off on a perhaps whimsical, partially metaphorical and certainly philosophical diversion on this subject. except, of course, the answer is reasonably no, probably not. 

from what i recall, the image above (which yes, is in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode) and the video below (yes, we've got a video) were taken on the first weekend of these swans finding themselves under the protection of HMKC3. this is, as intimated as recently as the previous paragraph, likely a change which they have adapted to faster than anyone else. 

change comes, then, to the ultimate symbol of stability. just now we shall have all new banknotes, coins and, of course, stamps. as far as i am aware, all current variations of these shall remain perfectly valid, with them being phased out "naturally" or over time. if i remember how it was reported a few days ago, at the instance of HMQE2 acceding to the throne (if that is the correct term) one in their pocket would likely have perfectly "legal tender" coins featuring two, possibly three, different monarchs. 

realistically, and absolutely, none of this post was intended as any sort of tribute, or mark of respect. also it is true none of this was intended to spark distress or debate. just letting out various associations which came to mind, that's all. 

UPDATE oh. it turns out Royal Mail are issuing further stamps with the silhouette of HMQE2 on, a set celebrating (or in celebration of) our armed forces. well, a booklet i got said so, at the end of this month, which is September. 

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

flush

good day

believe me, no, i do not go looking for specific bathroom or lavatory related things to write of or post here. yes, true, my chum Spiros would have me write of nothing else. well, so long as it all addressed such intended for the gentry alone, look you see. but here we are once more. 

not really, i suppose, directly pertaining to the usage of such facilities, and certainly not of how Spiros uses ones open to members of the public to meet like minded men. instead, something of an unsolicited and possibly slightly interesting insight into my housekeeping efforts, now of course in my place of exile. 

actually, or as it happens, i have absolutely no idea what the 'proper' name is for this. even allowing for how it is presented in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode above (but not below), the name of the item - product, not brand - is absent. what it is, and many will know this anyway, is something what you latch onto the "business end" (inner circle, so to speak) of your lavatory, where the water ushers out upon operating the mechanism. the purpose of this, presumably, is to both enable a level of hygienic cleanliness, and emit a pleasant fragrance. 

figuring that one of these is pretty much the same as any other, normally i would simply purchase the most modest priced variation. which is to say the cheapest. as i stood considering the variations, engaging in some mental arithmetic (or mathematics) to establish the best value one, i noticed this one; a unicorn edition. magic unicorn, no less, looking again at the packaging. 

these, i was pretty sure, were going to get bought (purchased) irrespective of the cost. but i did do the working out of numbers, and most satisfactorily it turned out this double pack was the most agreeable to get on the pure economics of it. and to clarify, indeed, one gets used at a time, with the other being retained for when the initial is exhausted.  

indeed i do, presently, or at time of writing, have one of these installed, or in place. should you be expecting a video, or even an image, of it in place then i am afraid you are quite mistaken. that, i believe, would be a bit too much. 

how does it perform? seems to be doing that which it was bought for, really. the scent released is subtle yet distinguishable. generally (or strictly) speaking i would not have a clue as to how unicorn is supposed to smell; certainly not in a bathroom environment. let me trust that it does smell of so. 

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