circle the wagons, we're under attack

hi there


it is not a particularly great revelation, look you see, to suggest that this (or any) post (article, think piece, what you like) might be confused, in instances incoherent, far from free flowing and mixing the non-linear with the non non-linear. but, for this one, i am quite aware of how it shall be so. giving some fair warning seems to be appropriate.

UPDATE : i watched Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me again, for the first time in 20+ years, after watching the below. as it happens, had i watched it before, the series would have made a lot more sense. i forgot loads and loads of what happened in the film, but David Lynch (predictably) did not, and if anything this series seems to be more of a sequel to the film than the TV series. and so makes a very great deal of by gibberish below even more gibberish, but publish and be damned.

the (not particularly) delicate subject here is Twin Peaks. specifically, it is the "new" (rather, recent) revival which they did, it apparently being called the (or a) "limited event series". having considered any which way there is to do this, it is clear there is no possible way to write of the subject without giving some, or a lot, of it all away. so, a *** SPOILER WARNING *** in a very real sense exists for this entire post, or at the least from here on out.

the owls are not what they seem

SPOILER WARNING

fire walk with me

exactly how many more warnings, or words of caution, would you like before you proceed? i suspect the above is sufficient, and yes, by all means feel free to just sit and admire that splendid bouncing text rather than read any more of this.

let me take a step back 3, maybe 4, years. when a return of Twin Peaks was announced, of course my interest was caught. yes, like many, i was a "big fan" of the original thing - all of it, be it both series (although in the UK we had it as one) and indeed the film, what had (and this is important for later) David Bowie in it. scattered across this blog are random elements which say i could feasibly called a "proper fan", what with me owning things like the board game, the Diane tape, books, etc.

i was, however, hesitant to get too excited. yes, Twin Peaks as it was in its entirety at this stage brilliant, innovative, much loved, cherished and fondly remembered. also, it felt complete. certainly, sure, a million and more stories were possible after the concluding episode, but essentially the whole thing felt satisfactorily finished, with the ending being a pretty much perfect blend of ambiguity and finality. the film was a nice bonus, rounding some things out but adding extremely little.

so, a return, or "revival", was announced. this was to much fanfare and excitement. and then that drifted away. problems kicked off early on, and thanks to absolutely everything needing to be on social media, it played out for all to see. without lingering on the details, there were some arguments between David Lynch and those financing it, which in a short version led to it all being cancelled, then being back on. alarm bells rang for me, and no doubt a few others. if a project of this presumed scope and size could be ditched then back on based on what seemed to be whims, perhaps this was all to be just a little to breezy and casual.

other problems (of sorts) kicked in. many of the original cast were happy to return. some were not, like for instance Lara Flynn Boyle. a couple of actors who did not return - David Bowie in particular - had David Lynch react in a way which seemed to suggest he felt betrayed by them for the casual reason of being dead when he required them not to be. but, he plodded on, and so all 18 episodes of his new vision came to be.

further alarm bells sounded when the series aired. it was launched with much fanfare, enthusiasm and excitement, with many people declaring the first episode or two being a triumph, the greatest thing ever to happen to television, etc, and so on. and then all conversation, coverage, celebration and mentions of it kind of drifted off, possibly around the third, forth or fifth episode. oh. maybe my assumptions or presumptions were correct, then, and the return to Twin Peaks was essentially a nice idea but not a very practical one.

then here we are. a couple of years after it was all broadcast, and a couple of years after it was released on what some of you and i would refer to as "home video", the price of the DVD (and indeed Blu Ray) box set dropped to somewhere slightly north of £10, making it tempting enough to go. i opted for the DVD variation, recalling that my Mum loved the original too, and so if it was any good then it would be easier to send her the DVD set i bought. this set shall not be posted to my Mum at any given time soon, or ever.

you wish for a plot overview? the fact that such does not exist on the back of the DVD box pretty much sums up your chances of this. in essence, or ostensibly, twenty five years after the final events we, the world, got to see of Twin Peaks, "good" Agent Cooper is commencing a journey to return from where he has been, presumably to stop and send back "bad" Agent Cooper.......

perhaps this is me having a hitherto unknown streak of millennial / snowflake sense of entitlement, but i had reasonably expected a series called Twin Peaks to - as a minimum - mostly be set in the town of Twin Peaks. further, i had taken it would mostly feature Agent Cooper, doing smart Agent Cooper like FBI things. but of course this is David Lynch, and a David Lynch in a time when "subvert audience expectations" is a thing, no matter how much damage such does to reputation (refer last series of Game Of Thrones) or box office (refer Solo and The Last Jedi). so, in one of these aspects of expectation, we seem to get Twin Peaks as a pan-American metaphorical, metaphysical "state of mind" thing rather than literal. as in, David Lynch goes right ahead and covers ground that he has not touched on before, except for the times when he hammered such a concept to death in Blue Velvet, Wild At Heart, Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire, etc.

do we at least get Agent Cooper doing smart Agent Cooper things in this? no. i totes get why interest and coverage dropped off when it did as it was being broadcast, for if you have nothing nice to say about that which you love then it is probably best to remain silent. two (or three) episodes of "new" Twin Peaks in which the main plot is an Agent Cooper, quasi incarnated as a quasi deaf mute insurance salesman called Dougie, being unable to work out how to go pee-pee would be sufficient for a few to say "let me not punish myself by watching further".

the owls are not what they seem

SPOILER WARNING

fire walk with me

oh, sure, we get a fair (substantial) bit of "evil" Agent Cooper, for those who recall the conclusion of the original Twin Peaks, running about, generally doing evil things. you have noticed the repeat of the spoiler warning, yeah? much, or many, of his evil ways seem to be concerning ensuring that "good" Agent Cooper remains trapped in the place with the red curtain, or dead. one of the more interesting twists is when he (please see the spoiler warnings) turns out to be on a mission to kill one resident of Twin Peaks, a particularly nasty, vile and unpleasant character who seems to serve no purpose whatsoever but to upset viewers, who it seems to turn out is actually the son of "evil" Agent Cooper and no lesser a person than Audrey Horne. whereas this lurked as a story deeply in the background then ends up launched on an unsuspecting audience, the general sense it gives is that perhaps this line would have been a much, much, much (much) better story to have in place than a good deal of the irrelevant, red herring waffle that populates the slight majority of the 18 episodes. but, what do i know that David Lynch does not.

as far as i could work out as it went along, i, we, the audience, get Agent Cooper as Agent Cooper for, in total running time, a little north of one episode of the show. we are treated to significantly more of him as Dougie, and a fair bit of him as "evil" Agent Cooper. congratulations on subverting expectations, then - well done, you. but why, i wonder, is it all of a sudden so really bad and unacceptable to give audiences what they want from a show?

biggest disappointment for me? oddly not that most of Twin Peaks is set outside of Twin Peaks. nor the fact that, mostly, Agent Cooper is not Agent Cooper. the biggest groan, my "well that's just stupid" thought, came when they went right ahead and made Diane a "person", as such. played by Laura Dern, no less, showcasting the deft versatility David Lynch has always displayed when choosing to work with as wide a variety of actors and actresses as possible.

undoubtedly many were thrilled to see Diane "made real", as it were. equally they will be thrilled to see the part played by Laura Dern, who i have nothing against. a select few will have been even more delighted, wish come true stuff, to see Agent Cooper and Diane have something of a that sort of thing (sex) scene. for me it was all best left as a "great unknown". the idea that you never knew if Diane was real or not, if he was sending the tapes off or that was just his name for his smart cassette recorder, was part of the charm. a minor point, perhaps, but not without precedent. would, for instance, Pulp Fiction still be Pulp Fiction if the audience knew as fact what exactly was in the briefcase?

yes, indeed, i am quite aware of the "fan service" going on here. at many, or several, or two levels. there is probably a fanatical fan sect who always dreamed of Diane being real and Agent Cooper engaging in that sort of thing with her. but also there is possibly an unrelenting faction of Blue Velvet fans that have dreamed a dream of seeing Kyle and Laura do it; a dream they have not relinquished since the late 80s. here you go, then.

the most distressing aspect, for me, was without question the decision to recast the David Bowie (originally quite minor and very abstract) role as a massive kettle. no, i am not making this up. perhaps just rewriting the series so as not to need the David Bowie character might have been a better idea, but what do i know. making this worse is of course that they appear to have gotten someone to come along and do a (very) bad Bowie impression of Bowie doing his (extremely) bad Southern State drawl. not much in the world acts as a stark reminder that one of your heroes, your idols, is dead quite the same way as a respected director going "oh f***, he's dead? really? quick, get me the means to make a kettle, the biggest one ever, or i will use a regular one and some camera trickery".

make no mistake, for in this instance the owls probably are what they seem. above is David Lynch carving his vision of how David Bowie should be, a kettle, out of styrofoam. i have not seen American Gods, but i seem to recall reading that for the show they cast Gillian Anderson out of X Files for the Bowie role. that seems like a better idea, but i am loathe if not reticent to question David Lynch. except for the parts where i have here.

how about that last episode? i am assuming that if you have read this far, that you have heeded the lovely spoiler warnings and so on, you have no problem reading of this. whereas episode seventeen gives it all a "logical" conclusion, one gets an episode eighteen. for fans of such, yes, this is where one gets the Laura Dern / Kyle MacLachlan sex scene, so off you go. the only way i can think of to describe this episode (other than, or including, that sort of thing) is to say David Lynch went "hey. i have a great idea. i have seen those British shows Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes and i liked what i saw. let me just quickly turn this new series, and the one before it, and the film, into one whole bit massive ambiguous, time travel trap loop sort of thing.". no, i am not sure if i particularly liked it or not. certainly i found it interesting.

and, to be fair, this was set up right in the first episode (of this "new" series) with the variations of the 'glass box' scene. indeed, you could argue it was set up in either the original series or the Fire Walk With Me film. i do not remember which, but there was, i am sure, a scene where Agent Cooper clocked he could time travel, if only slightly, on a point on a particular stretch of road. unless i am quite confused and that was in X Files.

maybe that (possible) influence speaks of the "issues". whereas Twin Peaks broke incredible ground by what it did within the constraints of television, things have changed. this is a Twin Peaks very much informed by how television shows now simply ignore the constraints. it is a Twin Peaks informed by many shows, with Game of Thrones and Breaking Bad being the two very big and obvious ones. essentially, where once Twin Peaks broke ground and showed what could be done with television, now Twin Peaks is just another example of how television meant for mature audiences are made. that is perhaps the greatest sin, under no circumstances should Twin Peaks have been made to be "just another show".

none of the particularly graphic or (highly) disturbing scenes in the show ever felt like they were "pushing boundaries", or relevant to the concept, or anything but "this is now what is expected in shows like this". following the pack rather than setting the pace is not something i would have wished to befall either Twin Peaks or David Lynch.

it would be wrong to say i "hated" this new Twin Peaks as there was much good and interesting. and yet, i counter, it would be quite wrong to say i "liked" this new Twin Peaks because, well, see most of the above i guess. fairness, i believe, would be to say that i experienced it. which, knowing and admiring David Lynch's work over the years, is in all likelihood exactly what his ambition was.

yes, that Angelo Badalamenti theme remains. indeed yes, it remains haunting, beautiful, seductive and inspiring goosebumps in those touched by the show who hear it.

should you have read this far, then it is likely you have either already seen this revival, or have absolutely no interest in doing so. meaning that there is less point than usual (which is not much) in me making any suggestion as to if someone else not me should or should not watch it.

going through what i have written, and going through the discs to grab images to compensate for the (poorly written) waffle endured, i think i have changed my mind. often i looked at scenes of what i saw and went "oh yeah". perhaps, like life itself, this "new" Twin Peaks must be endured and confused progressing forward, understood and appreciated going back.

this has been a very strange experience. i am not sure, but i suspect i want more.




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

and they can't wait for their fifty first to roll around

hey there


whenever someone specifically (or pacifically) requests that i put something up here on this blog, look you see, generally i embrace the request. for no reason would i not, in truth. it is of much merriment and delight of heart when it turns out that someone reads this and wishes to "engage".

to say "life is full of moments" is, superficially, to put out there one of those phrases that people quite like to put in a lovely font, maybe have placed (superimposed) over an inspirational picture, and place on the wall at home (or similar). do not let that distract, for it remains true. so grab as many moments as you can that make memories, which make life what it is supposed to be.

our family has a couple (two) of moments and memories associated with the day today. sorry Katie, yes thinking of you but this one is over to the other memory of the day, since quite the milestone has reached.

indeed, that is Mum & Dad, today (or close to it), celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary. an all too rare, very special achievement. one that has seen them all around the world, or as good as, and of course having to put up with me for a significant percentage of it. 92%, stats fans. if i remember how to do percentages, it has been a while.

how about a nice flashback picture? making this one of them "then and now", rather than "now and then" sort of posts. yes, absolutely.

many super excellent wishes and a whole lot of love from all of us as you celebrate this special day! yes, we very much wish we could be with you celebrating!

hopefully the next 50 are just as wonderful and as interesting!



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

return to reading

hello reader


it feels like a particular while, look you see, since i done some book "reviews" (or comments) here. time to read has evaded me somewhat, or so it seems. no matter, as i have only recently finished reading two (not three, or five) books (novels), time for some speculative commentary.

by chance, as in this certainly was not planned, it is two "old" books that i read. which is to say ones not published within the last couple of years. no, i had no idea before i picked either up. also, i kind of subscribe to a view that a dear friend once shared with me in respect of films. in his view, a movie was "old", as in "not new", only when you saw it. if one sat and watched a motion picture made fifty or so years ago that they had not seen before, then it was very much new to them.

anyway, a look at what i read.

Dark Side (or possibly Darkside) by Belinda Bauer turned out to be her second novel, and is a quasi-sequel to her (superb) first, Blacklands. it was rather good, very good indeed. perhaps not quite so good as Blacklands was, but certainly a better read than the recent one off her, Snap. meanwhile, The Gun Seller is off of Hugh Laurie, yes that one. rather like the Steve Martin novel i read a while ago, it's a breezy, whimsical thing, seemingly published more to indulge the stereotypical fragile ego of the author rather than for literary merits. as such, your enjoyment is limited or expanded by how much you care for the person what wrote it. generally speaking, Hugh Laurie is someone who i have on a list (not short but not extensive) of people that yeah, sure, if it came to it i would take a bullet for them, so i rather enjoyed it.

right, with that "just the basics" overview in place, do take note of, and pay attention to, a *** SPOILER WARNING *** being in place for the rest of this post. obviously i shall try not to have such in, but these things happen.

starting where i started would be to start with Darkside or Dark Side by Belinda Bauer. also, this is the "most recent" of the two in respect of publication date.

the provenance of my copy is unmistakably Tesco, for one of their "2 for £8" stickers beautifies the cover. however, i would not have purchased it as part of that deal, since i am still very much boycotting it, such is the underhand way they added £1 to the price. most likely i bought this as either their £3 or even £3.50 book of the week, or got it for £2.50 on condition that i spent a further 50p on The Sun, which will have gone directly into recycling.

plot? a small, sleepy village is somewhat disturbed by the death of an elderly resident, but then becomes rocked with it just so happens that the death turns out to be via murder. the local copper sort of tries to do his best to handle it, but soon the "big guns" of them there London coppers are called in, led by a particularly obnoxious and unpleasant type. whilst the obnoxious type seems more interested in making life hell for the local copper, and every one else for that matter, all of a sudden a few more dead by murder bodies start to appear......

make no mistake, the "twist" in this novel, as in who is responsible for the dead by murder bodies, is clinically obvious very early on. the pleasure in reading stems largely from watching it all unfold, but mostly (if that makes sense) from the superb written style. so, if you are looking for something complex that will have you trying to work it all out before any revelations, no, not here.

on, then, to The Gun Seller, by Hugh Laurie. yes, that Hugh Laurie. as in the talented, actually more intelligent and very much by some distance best one out of A Bit Of Fry & Laurie, and he was the lead (titular) character in that House show too, which was quite good.

provenance of my copy? i had no idea at all that Hugh had gone written a novel in the 90s, not until in came up in one of them auction site searches i was doing to see if there were any comedy audio books or what have you featuring he and his (considerably) lesser partner. as the all in (as in postage included) for a (exceptionally well looked after and good quality) used copy was only very slightly north of £2, i figured surely, certainly, why not.

does The Gun Seller have any sort of discernible plot? yes, in part or if you like partially. the book has what might be called am unspecified fraction of a third of a quarter of a whim of an idea for a plot. essentially, and in many respects, it is a quasi semi parody of Glamorama, only written and published some two years prior to Bret Easton Ellis publishing that work. which, i like to think, showcases just how brilliant Hugh Laurie is. yes, i like him, and would forgive him all.

so, anyway, plot. our narrator (a former soldier somewhat down on his luck, constantly) is approached to do a murder. not only does he say no, but he elects to become an unsolicited protector of the proposed assassination target. from there he goes off on a whimsical adventure, involving but not limited to the arms trade, traitors, MI5, helicopters, the American diplomatic core, terrorism, sex, lawyers, guns, money, motorbikes and skiing.

basically, or in short, maybe best described quickly i suppose, or as an overview even, The Gun Seller features many allegorical, metaphorical, sharp sarcastic or self depreciating witty lines sellotaped together with a tenaciously sticky semi link. so, if you find the dazzling, talented, handsome, brilliant, all around genius of Hugh Laurie entertaining, you will very much enjoy this "novel". if you don't, then go away, you silly person, until such a time as you do.

my suspicions are, or i have every reason to suspect that, this particular episode of "reviews" shall have been of no practical use to anyone, anywhere. except maybe those who really, really like seeing the covers of novels presented in Commodore 64 mode. with that being the most probable case, thank you all the more for reading, then.

yes, indeed i am reading further novels, and i have every reason to be confident that comments on them will appear here as and when they are read.




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

oh how i lied when they asked if i knew his name

hello there


we have curiously cultivated our society so that there is indeed a saying somewhere which is relevant to just about all situations and scenarios you can think of. and indeed some of us can think of a lot. to this end, then, there is a saying, look you see, which states that if a battle cannot be won, then do not fight it. one variation of this also comments that if it is not worth winning then also one should not really opt (or elect) to fight it.

to be honest, i suspect, or i have an opinion that, or even i am a mind of this saying being one which gives far, far, far too much gravitas to the subject, or if you like topic, of some rebranding of a chocolate bar. yes, friends in America, that would translate into what you, so far as we understand, call "candy". but, some would take this quite seriously - in fact i seem to recall that a few did indeed. it is a subject to be taken seriously, then. or treated with a modicum of respect.

yes, this is all about how they changed the name, in the UK if nowhere else, of a "marathon bar" to a "snickers", and now seem to have reverted to "marathon".

please note my correct use of "revert" or "reverting". the word (and variations) means to restore or put back something to how it was. whenever you hear or read someone using the phrase (and it makes me physically ill to even do it in an example) "revert back", then you know they do not understand the word and are just using it to try and sound all posh and clever. should we have lived in a world in which justice always truly prevailed, then it would be perfectly legal to punch people who used this, in the face. but we do not so do not.

getting on point - and granted, there is not much of one here - at some stage what we in the UK came to know and not really care for as a "marathon" had a name change. they, the manufacturers or the marketers, decided that it would be a jolly good idea (a step forward, maybe) to rebrand it as a "snickers", for such was what it is, what it is called, in America and beyond.

for the most part this was roundly and routinely ignored by the masses. i, like a great many people, was not arsed in any way, shape or form, in truth. one rarely had any sensible reason to purchase a marathon as such. the thing was, is, after all, a poorer, inferior, dryer and not as sweet as the king of chocolate bars, the mars bar, with some peanuts thrown in for no apparent reason. when news came of the name change, my interpretation of it was very much how i imagined it would have been if they had announced that they were to cease making it. this would be an awareness of the information, but not at all sure what it was that anyone wanted me to do with it. indifference, i presume.

some, of course, kicked off. perhaps they were avid and enthusiastic marathon eaters, maybe not. a special disposition of person takes any disruption or change as an attack on the world they knew. for those this name change was further evidence of "broken Britain", or another (in their view) sorry step in approach of a complete Americanisation of our society.

for them, then, you would have to imagine this "retro edition" of the marathon branding is a strike very much in favour of the resistance; it is a step back to the world they want and the life they knew. good luck to them, and may it be all that they wished. indeed i have purchased one of these "throwback" packets, and had one of them. as primarily expected, it was the exact same mediocre, far removed from satisfactory experience that such had always been, irrespective of name.

or, maybe, but of course, this is all some long played out marketing experiment, devised by bored advertising executives with absolutely nothing better to do with account slush funds than this. it is why such exists, i suppose. making someone care about something that isn't worth caring about is quite a skill, in truth.




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

...and the gods made love

howdy pop pickers


on pretty much of a whim, look you see, and because i just plain felt like it, recently the eloquent vibes of Jimi Hendrix has been beautifying my stereo and purifying my ears. and why not.

for the purposes of hearing some (mighty fine) Hendrix, i rather picked up one of the dozens (hundreds, perhaps) of compilations on the go. this one was particularly pleasing (might be called Ultimate Hendrix or similar) for it features one disc of select studio recordings and one disc of most agreeable "live" recordings. although for the most part it is the studio recordings which remain on repeat play.

listening to the discs (even if one more than the other) reminded me what a totes amazing musician he was. not for me to band around words such as "genius", but it is also not for me to disagree with them. everyone has different tastes and preferences, of course, but it would take, for me, someone rather unusual to like music and not at the very least appreciate all what Hendrix had gone and done.

another reminder, with it again being a happy one, was a familiar bit in all of the scarce, sadly limited footage of him performing his art. that is the bits in gigs when he was about to let rip, knew it was going to be something formidable, and so encouraged members of the audience to take protective measures in respect of their hearing.

here, with thanks to whoever filmed it, then "made it digital" and then made it available for all of us to see, admire and enjoy on the internet, is one such interlude.

magnificent, that. the only way i can think to word it is as an expression of his "loose, beautiful freedom", really. it's like he knew he was going to deliver something awesome, a few remarkable vibes to all for all to enjoy. all had to remain freedom, beautiful and love, however, so it was vital that none were harmed. as for himself, well, i just have to assume that any damage he gone done to his own ears was a price he considered most agreeable and reasonable in order to deliver the tunes as he did.

do i have, to follow a predictable path, a favourite Hendrix tune? it is all but impossible to select one. a special mention, however, for the way in which one particular tune, Manic Depression. was used in this one specific film. that would be Shampoo, a motion picture which is generally quite good but ultimately feels as though it exists just to show off how good Warren Beatty believed he was at doing a sex and that.

never mind that part, just concentrate on the soundtrack of the film. when a confused and partially emotionally torn Warren Beatty is running around at a party towards the end of the film, the way they mix in Manic Depression on the soundtrack to reflect his turns and turmoil is absolutely superb.

to be honest no, i really do not have much else to say here. sure, i could go on for some time about how class Hendrix is, but ultimately i would just be repeating how class Hendrix is. rather go and listen to his vibes, man. all i wished to do was put up some footage of him telling the fans to protect their ears.

but, since we are here, why not, another image.

right, let me get on with stuff. stay cool, be groovy.




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

bula

bula reader


whereas the may Fijian readers this blog has will know, look you see, for those not blessed with a knowledge of the intricacies of the Fijian language, i am quite happy to confirm that "bula", as you may have assumed or blindly guessed, means hello. or, at the very least, close enough.

the world, or realm, of translating words, phrases and general texts from one language to another is complex. it is a tricky, spooky, murky business. it is very rare indeed that one word in a language translates directly as the same in another. consider the result of 2+2 and 3+1 to illustrate - same basic result, or meaning, but contextually a rather different approach and implication.

but, let us not get distracted by the (limited) infinity of philosophical consideration of such. instead, here is a rather splendid card what i, or rather my family, got off of Fiji.

yes, that's in Commodore 64 mode and no, it did not arrive in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode, rather all more conventional. also yes, the card was indeed sent by my sister and her family, off of their most recent reconnaissance, or fact finding, trip to Fiji. well, it is not like they would randomly purchase me Fijian cards in New Zealand. that i am aware of.

indeed, now it is appropriate for Grant enthusiasts to get all delighted if not quite as extreme as excited, for there is a picture of him. the whole family, for that matter, as well as a couple of random strangers. well, i could not be bother to edit them out, and in my view it is so that if they had no wish to be in the picture then they should not have been on the plane.

consider that a bit of an early Christmas gift, then, Grant enthusiasts. unless, of course, you are only reading this on or around Christmas, which would be at a time appropriate to get such a gift. going further, should you be reading this slightly after any given Christmas, then you would be reasonably right to assume this is a belated gift. apologies, if so, and if you feel are required.

for what reason are they off fact finding in Fiji? Gillian insists on it. i believe that she believes it is entirely possible that, one day, Grant shall be approached with a view to taking on an ambassadorial, or potentially consular, role in Fiji, for and on behalf of an unspecified nation. in order to best fulfil this curious destiny, it is then important for them to visit every year or so, ensuring that they are familiar with customs, traditions and various processes. such as lying on the beach, for instance.

after some contemplation i can think of no reason why you would wish to see my (our) most splendid postcard off of Fiji not in the greater good and glory of Commodore 64 mode. but, then, i have been wrong in the past, and look forward to being in error in the future, so for the above there you go, just in case, as it were, or so to speak.

is there any chance of me every visiting, which is to say setting foot on or in, Fiji? a quick, somewhat rudimentary "google" search thing gives every indication that cigarettes, in particular Marlboro, are most agreeably priced there. so, provisionally, yes. however, i suspect that if it is the case that my travels gave it loads in that direction, then it would be more likely i would visit family and friends, if i have any of the latter left, in New Zealand and Australia. where, i believe, cigarettes are most disagreeably priced, but there you go.

well, anyway, enough. many thanks for the postcard, all of you but in particular Daniel, for the fine penmanship scribe displayed across the card.





dau uasivi sara vei ira!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you can't see me drowning, i don't see you swimming

howdy pop pickers


a little while ago - a couple of years, perhaps - i, look you see, suggested that i was going to stop doing celebratory posts to mark the anniversary of sensational gigs what i had witnessed. this i did partially because i suspected those who know me and read this regular would be bored of it; mostly as it felt that i had said all i could possibly say.

but, now that i think on, to not mention it just doesn't feel like me. whereas i do appreciate the fact that random strangers come along here looking for their own entertainment, ultimately this blog thing is kind of my "online diary" (or dairy, even). to thine own self be true.

so, with that in mind, today, the date this post is published, marks 28 years to the very day that i was blessed and fortunate enough to see Tin Machine perform, live and in concert, at the Newcastle Mayfair.

instead of me waffling on, how about a (reasonably and comparatively) nice bit of video from the actual gig? sure, i have uploaded some of it before, and the whole thing is probably on one of them sites what does video and that, but you are here now.

yes, that is indeed them performing You Can't Talk, a track off the band's second album, the creatively and imaginatively titled Tin Machine II. no particular reason for picking this one, i was just skipping through my DVD of it and thought yes, that looks quite decent and suitable to go here.

indeed i know the quality is not that great. blessed be those of us who remember how difficult bootlegs were, once upon a time. have you seen the size of camcorders that bootleggers had to smuggle in and covertly use at gigs in 1991 and before?

absolutely, is the answer to the two pictures shown thus far. that is indeed David Bowie smoking Malboro at the gig. he smoked quite a lot. on stage, beside Hunt's boss drums, he had a whole carton of ten packs, equating to two hundred cigarettes. my understanding, or impression, was that it was his intention to try and smoke them all before the gig was done. and why not.

for the most part, yes, i was stood hypnotised at the gig, thinking or maybe vocalising "f***ing hell, f*** me, i am very f***ing close to David f***ing Bowie here, the closest i shall ever f***ing get and closer than many millions ever shall". or something along those lines.

of course it is possible to overthink these things. like, for instance, if i speculated that at some stage not long after this gig and at some point recently, in the last week or so, say, someone has lived a life far more interesting and better than mine, and lived it to the end. entirely feasible that such has happened and it probably has, but that is overthinking it.

well, anyway, that's that. as ever i can but hope that this has been of some interest to someone somewhere, maybe either those who were at the gig too, or those who but can wish they had been.



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

shopping trolley

hey there


a most decidedly British predilection, look you see, is a quaint, historical obsession with shopping trolleys. or trollies, if that is how you are supposed to spell the plural (to me such makes sense), but the spelling thing here does not (doe snot) agree in the slightest. what do i know, i have hardly any degrees in the english language, certainly less than a handful.

for years - decades, perhaps - the simple shopping trolley has been at the heart of our society, industry and economy. if there is no such thing as a poor, financially struggling scrap yard merchant, that is because there was a potentially limitless supply of raw materials in the forms of shopping trolleys. the money entrepreneurs who brought the trollies to scrap yards were paid was in turn spent once more at shops where another shopping trolley was provided, thus providing a perpetual economic success story.

or rather, that is how it was. in a rather draconian, insensitive and harsh move, the majority of supermarkets (and what have you) in the UK decided that they were to be the enemies of the economy, that no more would they provide the complimentary gift of a free shopping trolley to each and every patron. this decision - which saw a pound coin being required to use a trolley, paid back only when you returned the four wheeled beast of the car park - was taken around 2007, maybe 2008. i will let you draw your own conclusion on exactly how much of the blame for that massive global economic crash rests with this decision.

there was of course a brief flurry of a return to the economic stability provided by free trolley dispensing by supermarkets. under chancellor george osborne, who worked out that properly measured suits were best, there was a change in the shape of the pound coin. during the transitional period of this being adopted, supermarkets were forced to make amendments to their pound deposit scheme, and so once again trolleys were free. streets, rivers, reservoirs and scrapyards were once again flowing with them. but then, under that loathsome phillip hammond and his ill fitting suits, the pound deposit scheme was brought back with requisite mechanisms, and once more we face financial ruin.

it was most splendid, and agreeable, then, for my good friend, Codename Magic, to have taken the above image and indeed the below video (yes, we have got a video) of a brief return to the idyllic, halcyon, opulent days when getting hold of a shopping trolley was no big deal at all, in fact it was all perfectly normal.

shall we ever experience a permanent, or at the very least extended, return to the class days of total freedom to do what we may with any shopping trolley that we care to claim as our own? i suspect not. whereas we are in a country now more politically divided than ever before, one thing that unifies the ruling classes and controlling powers is that never again must the general public ever be allowed to make any sort of decision.

if you are reading this in an area of the free world, one where you are trusted to do as you see fit with a shopping trolley, then know that we envy you. our eyes look on how you do things with a sense of wonder, shame, enlightenment, awe and regret. we watch as your economy flourishes, whereas ours stumbles and falls.

yes, why not, above is another image of some magnificent trolleys, bravely trying to escape the slavery of the pound deposit scheme. many thanks indeed to Codename Magic for this further image.  like i am sure is true for you, i am in particular pleased with the lighting in this one.





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

no sun, no dawn, no morn, no dusk, no sun, no moon, no shade, bees, no shade, bees, butterflies, no shade, bees, no shine, no birds

hello there


well, here we are. as the title makes clear, look you see, we are now in November. if you are reading this in November, of course. yes, indeed, the title stems from the lyrics to Opus 4 off of Art of Noise. as they borrowed the words from a Thomas Hood poem, i do not feel bad borrowing them here.

for those of us in England, the UK, and quite possibly lots of different places in the northern hemisphere, November tends to be a depressing month. as the words of the title of this post says, the only thing there is really an abundance of is darkness. it affects moods, to be sure. there is even a lack of imagination in the name - no Roman or Greek gods, or Emperors even, celebrated here, November simply derives from the latin for "nine", as once this was the ninth month.

yes, of course, this all means a look at my calendars. this is of particular interest, i imagine, to you who cannot be bothered with your own calendars, and so just use mine. surely, you are welcome.

do they have awards or special records for the most optimistically named (christened, perhaps) models of car? if so, well, i would speculate (suggest) (directly state) that the Hillman Avenger is a contender for such. avenging what, exactly?

from what i recall, Hillman specialised in making really, really poor cars that had really, really excellent names, such as Avenger and maybe a Hunter or similar too. no, nope, i have never had any ambition to own one, and so far as i am concerned never shall. mind, that said, a quick glance at the internet suggests these days they sell for north of twenty grand, so i suppose maybe they are not all that bad.

any dates of consequence or significance in November? quite a few, as it happens. many, as point of fact. but here are some for your consideration.

2 - over in Japan on this day in this year, England take on South Africa in the Rugby World Cup Final. a repeat of the 2007 final, just a different country and maybe a different result. further, let us all wish a most happy birthday to the genius composer and performer of Ricketts Theme. his many, many fine recordings can be found by clicking right here. well, no, left click as standard. i meant "right here" not "click right".

3 - a very, very happy birthday indeed to Prince Charming himself, the legendary Mr Adam Ant. don't drink don't smoke, what do you do, subtle innuendo follows.

5 - on this day in 1991 Tin Machine played one of the most celebrated and awesome concerts in the history of music at the Mayfair, Newcastle. hey, my blog, my decision on what's important.

8 - Donald Trump, best known for character actor performance in films such as Home Alone 2 and all them others, was elected US President on this day in 2016.

12 - and indeed 13. The Rolling Stones play Madison Square Garden in 1981. good bootlegs exist, as well as some of the shows featuring in official releases such as Still Life and Let's Spend The Night Together.

16  - well known Atari enthusiast and occasional musician Stevie Wonder released the album Down To Earth on this day in 1966.

19 - Queen's Jazz album debuts on the UK album chart at 28 on this day in 1978. the legendary "launch party" for the record, ostensibly a three day orgy featuring naked midgets with trays of cocaine strapped to their heads, really shows how dull music is these days. now we just get something like Ed Sheridan (or whatever) turning up at HMV in an Ed Sheridan t-shirt.

22 -USA  President John F Kennedy killed by apparent assassination on this day in 1963, down in Dallas (the place, not the TV show). for a man often described as "America's best, greatest and most popular president", there sure is a long list of suspects who might have been behind his death.

23 - in 1970, the most controversial evening of commercial broadcast television in the UK took place. highlights, if that is the correct word, included an inflammatory episode of Opportunity Knocks and, for good measure, John Prescott speaking to non-croquet playing members of the public.

24 - the motion picture Terminator 2 Judgement Day is released on home video (VHS) on this day in 1993. which was 2 years after its cinema release. yes, we had to wait that long to watch movies at home.

26 - a very happy birthday to John McVie out of Fleetwood Mac, born this day in 1945. it is not everyone who gets to perform an incredible, art form defining bass guitar track on a song which their wife wrote about an affair they were having, let us not forget.

29 - since there is usually a slant towards the vibes here on this blog, it would be amiss for me to not mention that on this day in 1877 one Thomas Edison gave the first demonstration of his splendid invention, the phonograph.

for the rest, well, perhaps it would be best for you to make your own memories for the month. but these days are nice to give some consideration to, i guess, maybe.

the above is indeed the Winnie The Pooh calendar for November 2019, presented in something called 'hercules' mode, for the shading seemed to suggest the feel of the month. i do indeed accept that this means it is rather impractical to use the above as a genuine, actual calendar for the month, but hey, just dig the shading like i do.

what exactly does this calendar show for the month? basically Winnie watching on as Piglet engages in some speculative, philosophical diatribe about leaves. as, of course, baby pigs are well known for doing.

something generally lost in history is the (possible) fact that it was during one November, 1970 as point of fact, that Derek Nimmo delivered on his ambition to present Spanish cuisine to the wider British public. he was warned, by (partially) sinister forces, not to do so, but as you can see above he did. there are many, many wonderful reasons to be thankful for his bravery and courage in doing so. inspiring the creation of such TV comedy gems as Duty Free and, to a lesser extent, Fawlty Towers, are merely two.

for those of us in the northern hemisphere, perhaps specifically the UK, well, to repeat the start, November can be the most singularly depressing month. when it is not cold, wet and grey (gray) it is cold, wet and dark. the peaceful reflection of Christmas seems an ocean away. all i can say is hang in there, reach out, everything will probably be all right.



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

in such an early song

howdy pop pickers


not a great deal, look you see, to be sure. i've just noted (observed) that i have not honoured my commitment to not have something bowie related each and every month.

i'm uncertain if i like this, but all the same this caught my eye on my roaming of the internet. truly, it would seem to originate (in terms of provenance) from an American magazine (New York, maybe, specifically) published in 1981. and why not.

meanwhile, mindful of today ostensibly being halloween, or whatever, here you go. not sure who needs the credit for noticing this and putting this together, but whoever you are thank you indeed for placing it on the internet.

the great Kubrick appears to have "borrowed" something, then. or paid "homage". oh. well, in the words of Bono, every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief, all kill their inspiration, then sing about their grief. maybe.




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

sheet

greetings


and so halloween, look you see. quite a curious bone of contention this is here in the UK, for frankly baffling reasons.

there are one or two - and i attribute this to the short term nostalgia and limited reminiscing so popular in modern society - who claim that halloween is just "an American thing", and that, under the terms of the English way of doing things, this was not celebrated or marked in the UK until the last few years.

utter, utter nonsense. i was very much here, in the 70s and 80s, growing up. we absolutely went and did halloween, all that "trick or treat" stuff. i get that some in our society are anti-American (for whatever reason) and thus seek to blame anything they do not particularly care for on some American influence, but they are off the mark with this. true, yes, it probably was something of an American thing whenever it started being marked or "done" here, but that was 40 odd years ago. hardly a "new craze to follow" on these shores, then.

speaking of America (at least i was), behold the above, for the text around it is the excuse to show it off here on my blog. a quite new and i have a feeling good friend from America took the time and trouble to post this to me, which was most kind.

one (possibly) interesting aspect of this is that, so far as i am aware, we here in England (possibly the wider UK) do not have a range of halloween celebratory cards to send or receive. this is rather unusual, to say the very least, for if you to any relevant or suitable store for such things you would find a card available to buy for pretty much any other instance.

no, not halloween as such (per se), just something i noted (observed) (and documented, obviously) on my travels. who is it that can tell me who i am is a topic i have wrestled with for many years now, several i suppose. by chance i came across some wall art (graffiti) which apparently intended to tell me who or what i am. alas, i cannot work out the last part, so i still do not know. oh. bother.

for some reason there are one or two of you who like seeing images not in the greater glory and good of Commodore 64 mode. i, for one, cannot understand this. but, since you have taken the time to read whatever i put up here, well, go on then.

i am not sure, at all, if the friend who kindly sent this card to me is aware of this blog, or as a consequence seen this. yes, no, maybe would be my most clear answer. well, if the first of those answers, thank you once again!

no, not a lot else i can add here.



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