According to some the world will come to an end at 6.00pm GMT today Saturday 21st May 2010.
This morning got me thinking about songs that reflect the end of the world. The following list is by no means a definitive one. These are just songs that I happen to like. And although I have used the traditional top 10 format, there is no real order. No reflection of popularity or record sales. Although I will say that the number 1 is my favourite.
So in the time honoured reverse order...
10. A Hard Rain is a-Gonna Fall - Pete Seeger - written by B Dylan.
Dylan captured the concerns of possible nuclear armageddon and general global woe in this great and classic 60s protest song. A bleak political poem that we could still do with heeding. I pick the Seegar version because it wasn't until I saw him perform the song live in a documentary about folk music in the late 70s that I realised that Roxy Music weren't the original artists. oh the ignorance of youth.
9. Here Comes The Flood - Peter Gabriel
Nuclear armageddon plain and simple. Taken from the former Genesis frontman's long awaited first solo album. It is a dark tale of post nuclear attack misery. "as the nail sank in the cloud, the rain was warm and soaked the crowd". Great imagery from Gabriel including the equally gloomy chorus:
"Lord, here comes the flood
We'll say goodbye to flesh and blood
If again the seas are silent
and any still alive
It'll be those who gave their island to survive
Drink up, dreamers, you're running dry."
8.The End - The Doors
A no-holds-barred tale of things not just ending but not ending pretty. Superbly chosen to feature in Francis Ford Coppola's nearly ill-fated 'Apocalypse Now'. Not a great fan of The Doors myself but this track is great.
7. Rapture - Blondie
An ever-so-slightly more upbeat tune to go screaming into oblivion to. But if I am honest, I have to say I haven't a clue what Harry is gibbering on about. This song is only in there because of the 'Rapture' reference. Still, it got me on the dance floor anytime it was played.
6. Two Tribes - Frankie Goes to Hollywood
Reagan's and Gorbachev's political posturing and chest beating led to this fun-packed pop anthem. Back in the days when there was still a cold war on.
5. 1999 - Prince
Written before anyone knew what a millennium bug was. Prince as usual in dancing mood. Prince's dark but 'what the hell' shrug to global catastrophe. Lets face it, if we're all gonna die then let's die partying.
4. The Downward Spiral - NIne Inch Nails
oh dear. Sorry about that. The dancing is over. This is about as bleak as you can get. You could receive news of a multi-million pound jackpot win and still be depressed by this..er...tune.
3. The Eve of Destruction - Barry McGuire
Yes, back to the 60s. So it's another protest song. Again a no-holds-barred onslaught on humankind's obsession with killing itself mainly by using the weapons of its choice - bigotry, guns and missiles.
2. The End Of The World As We Know It - REM
According to Michael Stipe it starts with an earthquake. We have been hearing a lot about them lately haven't we? Earthquakes that is. Less so about REM.
1. When Man Comes Around - Johnny Cash
Genius. A roller-coaster ride through Old Testament imagery. One of the finest performers of his generation and country music legend Cash plunders his gospel-ridden childhood and his own religious fervour in this stirring but dark anthem.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Monday, May 9, 2011
Why I love: The Royal Albert
I love pubs. But I particularly like The Royal Albert pub in New Cross, South East London. The Royal Albert reverted back to its original name after its former incarnation as The Paradise Bar closed down. Having used the bar when it was in its 'hey day' I often wondered if the word 'Lost' was mistakenly missed from between the words Paradise and Bar.
I started drinking in the new and improved The Royal Albert (sometimes referred to as the RA or The 'Bert by my mate and I) regularly when our usual local in Greenwich was sold and the new owners decided that Royal Hill needed an hideously expensive wine bar instead, The new owners also decided that their new swanky enterprise should be void of atmosphere and in turn empty of customers thus ultimately also making it a non money making enterprise.
We customers scattered far and wide. Well not that far or wide to be honest. For starters The Royal Albert is closer to where I live in Deptford. But the pub also offers a vibrant atmosphere, fine wines, great ales and lagers. They also offer very tasty food.
The food has been excellent since I have been using The Royal Albert regularly. Now considering it has had a few kitchen staff changes over the past 3 or 4 years it has kept up a remarkable degree of consistency. I have never once had the need to complain about the food or service there and neither has anyone else that I have know. Mind you, I did find the gravy a bit thin on a Sunday roast I had recently, but that would seem a tad harsh to pull them up on that. All the food is prepared in an open kitchen and as far as I know most of the food is sourced from local grocers, butchers and fishmongers.
The menu changes on a fairly regular basis and the food on it is always reasonably priced. Not to mention there are always very nice vegetarian options as well. I believe there is always at least one item on the menu that caters for vegans specifically, however, I am sure they will alter one of the vegetarian dishes for vegans accordingly whenever they can.
The Royal Albert does great food but unlike most modern food conscious pubs I have been to, it isn't secretly (or not very secretly in some cases) trying to be a restaurant. It is a pub first and foremost but has a nice area which you can eat especially if you have a party of 4 or more.
For real ale drinkers they have a selection of guest ales as well as the old standards. The staff are usually very clued up as to what is what so they obviously take their real ale seriously. I don't drink real ale myself but my partner does, and having gone into another Deptford pub not far from the RA recently and asked what ales they did, the bar staffer at first pointed to the lagers, then after some coaxing from us offered some Newcastle Brown. So even I appreciate that ale drinkers like to have confidence in the bar person knowing their onions, to coin a phrase. The staff in the RA certainly know theirs. Being a lager drinker I mostly drink Amstel in the Albert but they recently got in a lager I hadn't heard of before called Camden, which I have to say is pretty good. Always willing to give us a new drinking experience.
The staff are always welcoming and friendly. Happy to pass the time and chat if required and appropriate, and they never appear to be scared of some hard graft. I suspect this is because the manager Richard happens to be very good at his job as are the senior staff. There is also none of that aloofness I have experienced in other busy pubs that are mostly staffed by young people. I think it is this pleasant attitude that adds to the warm atmosphere that is aways present in the pub. There is always (ok, mostly) great music playing, in fact they have even let me plug in my own iPod into their system. Like many successful pubs Thursday - Sunday are always busy and on Monday evenings they have a quiz night which always seems to be well attended.
They show live premiership football games on the tv but the sport they show in there isn't particularly intrusive. They often have the volume at a level that doesn't drown out everything else. And being quite a large pub you can get away from the tv area if you so wish.
So there you have it. A successful pub that serves great food and drink, retains its *pubness, shows football, doesn't marginalise those that don't like football, has wonderful staff and music. What more can you ask for.
*Yes I appreciate this word doesn't exist as I only just invented it.
I started drinking in the new and improved The Royal Albert (sometimes referred to as the RA or The 'Bert by my mate and I) regularly when our usual local in Greenwich was sold and the new owners decided that Royal Hill needed an hideously expensive wine bar instead, The new owners also decided that their new swanky enterprise should be void of atmosphere and in turn empty of customers thus ultimately also making it a non money making enterprise.
We customers scattered far and wide. Well not that far or wide to be honest. For starters The Royal Albert is closer to where I live in Deptford. But the pub also offers a vibrant atmosphere, fine wines, great ales and lagers. They also offer very tasty food.
The food has been excellent since I have been using The Royal Albert regularly. Now considering it has had a few kitchen staff changes over the past 3 or 4 years it has kept up a remarkable degree of consistency. I have never once had the need to complain about the food or service there and neither has anyone else that I have know. Mind you, I did find the gravy a bit thin on a Sunday roast I had recently, but that would seem a tad harsh to pull them up on that. All the food is prepared in an open kitchen and as far as I know most of the food is sourced from local grocers, butchers and fishmongers.
The menu changes on a fairly regular basis and the food on it is always reasonably priced. Not to mention there are always very nice vegetarian options as well. I believe there is always at least one item on the menu that caters for vegans specifically, however, I am sure they will alter one of the vegetarian dishes for vegans accordingly whenever they can.
The Royal Albert does great food but unlike most modern food conscious pubs I have been to, it isn't secretly (or not very secretly in some cases) trying to be a restaurant. It is a pub first and foremost but has a nice area which you can eat especially if you have a party of 4 or more.
For real ale drinkers they have a selection of guest ales as well as the old standards. The staff are usually very clued up as to what is what so they obviously take their real ale seriously. I don't drink real ale myself but my partner does, and having gone into another Deptford pub not far from the RA recently and asked what ales they did, the bar staffer at first pointed to the lagers, then after some coaxing from us offered some Newcastle Brown. So even I appreciate that ale drinkers like to have confidence in the bar person knowing their onions, to coin a phrase. The staff in the RA certainly know theirs. Being a lager drinker I mostly drink Amstel in the Albert but they recently got in a lager I hadn't heard of before called Camden, which I have to say is pretty good. Always willing to give us a new drinking experience.
The staff are always welcoming and friendly. Happy to pass the time and chat if required and appropriate, and they never appear to be scared of some hard graft. I suspect this is because the manager Richard happens to be very good at his job as are the senior staff. There is also none of that aloofness I have experienced in other busy pubs that are mostly staffed by young people. I think it is this pleasant attitude that adds to the warm atmosphere that is aways present in the pub. There is always (ok, mostly) great music playing, in fact they have even let me plug in my own iPod into their system. Like many successful pubs Thursday - Sunday are always busy and on Monday evenings they have a quiz night which always seems to be well attended.
They show live premiership football games on the tv but the sport they show in there isn't particularly intrusive. They often have the volume at a level that doesn't drown out everything else. And being quite a large pub you can get away from the tv area if you so wish.
So there you have it. A successful pub that serves great food and drink, retains its *pubness, shows football, doesn't marginalise those that don't like football, has wonderful staff and music. What more can you ask for.
*Yes I appreciate this word doesn't exist as I only just invented it.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Religion and the Liverpool FC myth
Posted by Blue Barney from the Chelsea Chat page
Let me try and explain Liverpool Football Club and why they have so many representatives in the media, why they seem to get away with anything, why they are so distressed about Torres leaving and why this all leads to Chelsea being openly hated.
It's quite simple and fascinating. Liverpool (the "club", which is like any other football club, no more than an abstract concept built on concrete facts like past records, a stadium and supporters), the fans and many of their former players show the same behaviour traits displayed by followers of major religions. Once you begin to understand this and how it manifests itself, the anger dies down.
The closest comparison is with the Catholic Church and Islam. Both powerful religions obsessed with being big. Obsessed with the number of followers they have and obsessed with preserving their beliefs even when faced with evidence that disproves or just challenges their long-held assumptions.
Ritual, as we know, is a key element to religious behaviour. "You'll Never Walk Alone" is an incredible example of this. It is sung with religious fervour and is about surrendering individuality for the group. It is a defining moment for all Liverpool followers. No other football chant comes close. And they ask everyone who hears it to comment on it. They ask us to confirm that it is the loudest, most awe-inspiring, most spine-tingling, most religious moment we have ever experienced. And it is repeated word-for-word, note-for-note before every match as a gospel choir would sing in church. It does not behave like a football chant. There is no humour, no taunting the opposition, no jolly lads getting ready for 90 minutes of support and abuse. It is born-again, wide-eyed fervour.
Repetition is, of course, a central factor to the belief system and that is why every Liverpool follower (I choose this word above supporter), is primed to say exactly the same as every other Liverpool follower. There can be no deviation from the true path. Have you ever met a Liverpool follower who would dare to say that YNWA is a dreadful chant or that talking about "history" is a load of bunkum? This kind of deviation is not allowed and if someone dared to say such a thing then the simple answer would be that he is not a true follower because a true follower would not say such a thing.
History. What is this fascination with history? Football is really only about the present and memory. It is not about history. Most supporters know all about their team. They know the great players, cups won and disappointments along the way. But history? This is something that religions do in order to create a back story on which to build a myth. Liverpool has no more history than Crewe Alexandra or Queens Park Rangers, although it has certainly had more success. Success can be measured and although Liverpool's followers like to quote their successes (and fear being surpassed), it is something that is ultimately too risky to build a belief system upon. In fact, this season Manchester United could become more "successful" than Liverpool in domestic league titles. For this reason Liverpool's belief system is built on an abstract concept (history) rather than something that is scientifically provable (league titles). In fact, the more Liverpool stopped winning things, the more "history" became the currency for their beliefs.
Only recently have we heard commentators say on television that even with all Chelsea's money and recent success, they will never have Liverpool's history. Of course that is true because nobody knows what it means to have another club's history and nobody could ever be anybody else anyway! This is a trick that religions have been using for thousands of years and why it is practically impossible to debate with "true believers".
As an aside, an interesting comparison can be made between Liverpool and Everton and one that a football anthropologist would do well to study and report on in detail. The followers / supporters of these clubs display very different traits even though they may come from the same families, live in the same streets, go to the same schools. Everton play the theme tune from Z Cars when the team runs out and talk about the School of Science. They support their club and leave it at that. I would love to see some genetic research on those who choose to be a Blue and those who opt for the Reds in Liverpool. If, as neuroscientists are attempting to locate at the moment, there is a "god gene", I would imagine it is more prevalent in Liverpool followers than Everton supporters. (This doesn't mean they are closer to god but more disposed to believing in one).
It is often remarked that there are more ex-Liverpool players in the media and on football programmes than any other club. Match of the Day is a good example where the definition of a balanced view is to listen to Alan Hansen first and then Mark Lawrenson. But why does this happen? Again, the answer lies in religion or how Liverpool displays all the traits of religion at its worst. There are not more Liverpool representatives because they have history or had success. That would be ridiculous. And statistically Liverpool has had the same number of players in the last 40 years as any other club and they are only one of about 45 teams that have been in the top division during this period, which makes it unlikely that any club would be represented by more than a couple of ex-players on television. But, like religious followers, the ex-players are believers and believers want to be heard. (Evolutionary biologists describe the meme theory where beliefs are transmitted by individuals or a group. This may be how religions survive and so the analogy holds in this case). It is essential for the Liverpool story to be told over and over again and therefore it needs storytellers. This subconsciously propels ex-players from Liverpool to become spokesmen and storytellers and thus perpetuate the myth. The only other club that does this is Arsenal, where it has convinced its own followers first and then the wider public that it has a "way of doing things". But we can leave Arsenal for another day.
And all this brings us up to Fernando Torres. He is a footballer. He played for Liverpool. He is a good footballer. He decided he wanted to move to another club (in much the same way he decided he wanted to move to Liverpool four years ago). This happens all the time. Footballers either stay at one club all their career or move. These are the only two things they can do. We are all used to it. But something very different has happened here. In fact, something religious has happened.
Fernando Torres was loved at Liverpool. He had a special status like a saint or a leader. And he became an apostate. In religious terms, this is as bad as it gets. No matter how big or how powerful a religion is, the "church" is rocked to its foundations when someone chooses to leave or step outside the line. In Islam, apostates are killed. Think of Salman Rushdie. He wrote a book where he imagined some scenes that involved the prophet having sex. This led to death threats, book burning, flag burning and the incredible scenes of followers of an enormous religion feeling threatened by the words of one man. The lesson is simple. When you are in the club, the church, the movement you do not criticise and you always follow the party line. You'll Never Walk Alone. The Biggest. History.
Fernando Torres angered his followers by becoming an apostate and daring to say that he was moving somewhere else that might be bigger. And just like across the muslim world the same reaction happened on Merseyside. Book burning, shirt burning. And to back up the meme theory, this was transmitted through the media. It was considered a subject for debate even though the conclusion was never in doubt (as it never is with religious followers). TORRES DID NOT MOVE TO A BIGGER CLUB. HE IS A BAD MAN. HE HAS LIED.
And so Torres has moved from saint to apostate to sinner to Judas figure. And he has been replaced by a second coming, by a brighter future because religions don't like to lie down and admit defeat. They are never wrong. Every Liverpool follower is now saying exactly the same thing. They did best out of the deal. They got two for one. They traded in someone past his best. They are happy. The religion was challenged but it has come out on top. They will never walk alone.
And just like the Catholic Church has a history of murder, rape and massacre from the Crusades to the Inquisition, this history is irrelevant. Only good history is history. And no other football club has blood on its hands like Liverpool but this is also ignored in its history. Just like a religion, it creates myth and worries not a jot about the truth.
I could go on about how they have created a god out of Shankly. Someone who is often quoted, even though he didn't really ever say that much which is particularly illuminating or original. I could also mention the self-pity (another religious characteristic) and their desire to always be a part of every tragedy. In fact, once you start the more you realise how interesting it is that in England there are so many football clubs but only one that stands out for displaying the behaviour traits of a religion.
Religions do need other religions in order to survive. It may be argued that through memes they create other religions themselves along their evolutionary path (Judaism to Christianity to Islam as well as the different branches specifically within Judaism and Christianity). Opposition is a necessary factor for belonging. And, for another day, this is why the new Chelsea myth exists and why "pundits" (followers of Liverpool) are openly antagonistic towards Chelsea, something which they would not do to any other club. Chelsea is a threat and must be treated that way, according to the followers of the Liverpool religion.
But I don't want to linger on Chelsea, or why Manchester United has continued being successful without displaying the same traits as Liverpool or why nobody has ever considered if Bolton Wanderers, West Bromwich Albion or West Ham United have a history. I just want to show why we all find it so frustrating listening to the nonsense that is spoken about Liverpool and by their followers. And once we begin to understand that it is like listening to a Moonie talking about being saved or a theologian cloaked in mythology masquerading as fact "proving" that miracles really do happen that we realise that we will never be able to argue with Liverpool followers. They are too far gone. And quite simply, that means they are too far away from truth, reality and knowing how to have a good time.
Let me try and explain Liverpool Football Club and why they have so many representatives in the media, why they seem to get away with anything, why they are so distressed about Torres leaving and why this all leads to Chelsea being openly hated.
It's quite simple and fascinating. Liverpool (the "club", which is like any other football club, no more than an abstract concept built on concrete facts like past records, a stadium and supporters), the fans and many of their former players show the same behaviour traits displayed by followers of major religions. Once you begin to understand this and how it manifests itself, the anger dies down.
The closest comparison is with the Catholic Church and Islam. Both powerful religions obsessed with being big. Obsessed with the number of followers they have and obsessed with preserving their beliefs even when faced with evidence that disproves or just challenges their long-held assumptions.
Ritual, as we know, is a key element to religious behaviour. "You'll Never Walk Alone" is an incredible example of this. It is sung with religious fervour and is about surrendering individuality for the group. It is a defining moment for all Liverpool followers. No other football chant comes close. And they ask everyone who hears it to comment on it. They ask us to confirm that it is the loudest, most awe-inspiring, most spine-tingling, most religious moment we have ever experienced. And it is repeated word-for-word, note-for-note before every match as a gospel choir would sing in church. It does not behave like a football chant. There is no humour, no taunting the opposition, no jolly lads getting ready for 90 minutes of support and abuse. It is born-again, wide-eyed fervour.
Repetition is, of course, a central factor to the belief system and that is why every Liverpool follower (I choose this word above supporter), is primed to say exactly the same as every other Liverpool follower. There can be no deviation from the true path. Have you ever met a Liverpool follower who would dare to say that YNWA is a dreadful chant or that talking about "history" is a load of bunkum? This kind of deviation is not allowed and if someone dared to say such a thing then the simple answer would be that he is not a true follower because a true follower would not say such a thing.
History. What is this fascination with history? Football is really only about the present and memory. It is not about history. Most supporters know all about their team. They know the great players, cups won and disappointments along the way. But history? This is something that religions do in order to create a back story on which to build a myth. Liverpool has no more history than Crewe Alexandra or Queens Park Rangers, although it has certainly had more success. Success can be measured and although Liverpool's followers like to quote their successes (and fear being surpassed), it is something that is ultimately too risky to build a belief system upon. In fact, this season Manchester United could become more "successful" than Liverpool in domestic league titles. For this reason Liverpool's belief system is built on an abstract concept (history) rather than something that is scientifically provable (league titles). In fact, the more Liverpool stopped winning things, the more "history" became the currency for their beliefs.
Only recently have we heard commentators say on television that even with all Chelsea's money and recent success, they will never have Liverpool's history. Of course that is true because nobody knows what it means to have another club's history and nobody could ever be anybody else anyway! This is a trick that religions have been using for thousands of years and why it is practically impossible to debate with "true believers".
As an aside, an interesting comparison can be made between Liverpool and Everton and one that a football anthropologist would do well to study and report on in detail. The followers / supporters of these clubs display very different traits even though they may come from the same families, live in the same streets, go to the same schools. Everton play the theme tune from Z Cars when the team runs out and talk about the School of Science. They support their club and leave it at that. I would love to see some genetic research on those who choose to be a Blue and those who opt for the Reds in Liverpool. If, as neuroscientists are attempting to locate at the moment, there is a "god gene", I would imagine it is more prevalent in Liverpool followers than Everton supporters. (This doesn't mean they are closer to god but more disposed to believing in one).
It is often remarked that there are more ex-Liverpool players in the media and on football programmes than any other club. Match of the Day is a good example where the definition of a balanced view is to listen to Alan Hansen first and then Mark Lawrenson. But why does this happen? Again, the answer lies in religion or how Liverpool displays all the traits of religion at its worst. There are not more Liverpool representatives because they have history or had success. That would be ridiculous. And statistically Liverpool has had the same number of players in the last 40 years as any other club and they are only one of about 45 teams that have been in the top division during this period, which makes it unlikely that any club would be represented by more than a couple of ex-players on television. But, like religious followers, the ex-players are believers and believers want to be heard. (Evolutionary biologists describe the meme theory where beliefs are transmitted by individuals or a group. This may be how religions survive and so the analogy holds in this case). It is essential for the Liverpool story to be told over and over again and therefore it needs storytellers. This subconsciously propels ex-players from Liverpool to become spokesmen and storytellers and thus perpetuate the myth. The only other club that does this is Arsenal, where it has convinced its own followers first and then the wider public that it has a "way of doing things". But we can leave Arsenal for another day.
And all this brings us up to Fernando Torres. He is a footballer. He played for Liverpool. He is a good footballer. He decided he wanted to move to another club (in much the same way he decided he wanted to move to Liverpool four years ago). This happens all the time. Footballers either stay at one club all their career or move. These are the only two things they can do. We are all used to it. But something very different has happened here. In fact, something religious has happened.
Fernando Torres was loved at Liverpool. He had a special status like a saint or a leader. And he became an apostate. In religious terms, this is as bad as it gets. No matter how big or how powerful a religion is, the "church" is rocked to its foundations when someone chooses to leave or step outside the line. In Islam, apostates are killed. Think of Salman Rushdie. He wrote a book where he imagined some scenes that involved the prophet having sex. This led to death threats, book burning, flag burning and the incredible scenes of followers of an enormous religion feeling threatened by the words of one man. The lesson is simple. When you are in the club, the church, the movement you do not criticise and you always follow the party line. You'll Never Walk Alone. The Biggest. History.
Fernando Torres angered his followers by becoming an apostate and daring to say that he was moving somewhere else that might be bigger. And just like across the muslim world the same reaction happened on Merseyside. Book burning, shirt burning. And to back up the meme theory, this was transmitted through the media. It was considered a subject for debate even though the conclusion was never in doubt (as it never is with religious followers). TORRES DID NOT MOVE TO A BIGGER CLUB. HE IS A BAD MAN. HE HAS LIED.
And so Torres has moved from saint to apostate to sinner to Judas figure. And he has been replaced by a second coming, by a brighter future because religions don't like to lie down and admit defeat. They are never wrong. Every Liverpool follower is now saying exactly the same thing. They did best out of the deal. They got two for one. They traded in someone past his best. They are happy. The religion was challenged but it has come out on top. They will never walk alone.
And just like the Catholic Church has a history of murder, rape and massacre from the Crusades to the Inquisition, this history is irrelevant. Only good history is history. And no other football club has blood on its hands like Liverpool but this is also ignored in its history. Just like a religion, it creates myth and worries not a jot about the truth.
I could go on about how they have created a god out of Shankly. Someone who is often quoted, even though he didn't really ever say that much which is particularly illuminating or original. I could also mention the self-pity (another religious characteristic) and their desire to always be a part of every tragedy. In fact, once you start the more you realise how interesting it is that in England there are so many football clubs but only one that stands out for displaying the behaviour traits of a religion.
Religions do need other religions in order to survive. It may be argued that through memes they create other religions themselves along their evolutionary path (Judaism to Christianity to Islam as well as the different branches specifically within Judaism and Christianity). Opposition is a necessary factor for belonging. And, for another day, this is why the new Chelsea myth exists and why "pundits" (followers of Liverpool) are openly antagonistic towards Chelsea, something which they would not do to any other club. Chelsea is a threat and must be treated that way, according to the followers of the Liverpool religion.
But I don't want to linger on Chelsea, or why Manchester United has continued being successful without displaying the same traits as Liverpool or why nobody has ever considered if Bolton Wanderers, West Bromwich Albion or West Ham United have a history. I just want to show why we all find it so frustrating listening to the nonsense that is spoken about Liverpool and by their followers. And once we begin to understand that it is like listening to a Moonie talking about being saved or a theologian cloaked in mythology masquerading as fact "proving" that miracles really do happen that we realise that we will never be able to argue with Liverpool followers. They are too far gone. And quite simply, that means they are too far away from truth, reality and knowing how to have a good time.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Why?
Why has the world suddenly become so self obsessed? Blogs, Facebook, now Twitter. Never in modern times has there been such an frenzied desire to get our inner most thoughts out there for all our friends, family and followers to ponder. Remember when you were younger and kept a diary? Perhaps you still do keep one, but the last thing you wanted was for someone else to read it. But here we all are regalling the latest mundane trip to some local restaurant or pub. Some trips are so localised they are a description of the contents of their fridge or belly button. Well documented trips to off spring's schools, altercations with neighbours, bloody cricket scores, basically, nothing is too banal for inclusion for the world to read via the information super highway.
And there is bugger all wrong any of that. I have accounts with all the mediums above. After all blogs like this one are simply away of sharing opinions, passing on both local and global information. As for Facebook and Twitter sites, I do like to think that I use them sparingly. I don't feel the need to tell the world that I have "checked in at Waitrose" however, I do share gig or cinema trips which let's face it can be as equally mundane to those that read it as a routine trip to the shops. But let's face it, there are no rules. Well actually there are. The usual stuff, no stalking, racial, xenophobic, homophobic, sexist, etc, abuse. Quite right too.
And there is bugger all wrong any of that. I have accounts with all the mediums above. After all blogs like this one are simply away of sharing opinions, passing on both local and global information. As for Facebook and Twitter sites, I do like to think that I use them sparingly. I don't feel the need to tell the world that I have "checked in at Waitrose" however, I do share gig or cinema trips which let's face it can be as equally mundane to those that read it as a routine trip to the shops. But let's face it, there are no rules. Well actually there are. The usual stuff, no stalking, racial, xenophobic, homophobic, sexist, etc, abuse. Quite right too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)