Bob

Some of my millions of readers may have noticed that most of the blog entries here for the last several months have been nothing but recycled letters to local press, pasted into the blog with a minimum of comment.

My legendary, never-appearing novel has been languishing almost untouched for literally years (I can’t believe it’s actually been so long, am I really such a stereotype?, I just have to finish it!).  And certainly since taking my new job in January I’ve written more words in letters to the Worcester News than I have on the book, because the latter is such a mammoth thing and it’s so hard to get into without significant available time.

(Also see my recent guest blog on the BHA Science Group site — why can’t I just write my novel?!)

»» CONTINUE READING »»

The debate continues.

For some reason the Worcester News apparently published two letters from me on the same day (written weeks apart), about this ongoing saga of the new consumer regulations about psychics.

They are both letters which pick up largely on individual counter0arguments used, somewhat desperately, in defence of supposedly non-fraudulent psychics and mediums.

First, there’s my letter which picks up on the argument that “it is wrong to critisie anyone’s belief”, which ironically is a belief which itself is a very good candidate for criticism.  Then there’s a letter in response to the argument that “Just because somebody does not believe in something [i.e. I don’t believe in psychics], it does not make it untrue, or indeed fraudulent.” Which is of course true, but is completely beside the point.

»» CONTINUE READING »»

The British Humanist Association (disclosure: they pay me) made mild celebratory noises about the introduction of new legislation (under EU Consumer Protection Regulations if you must know) which replaces the 1951 Fraudulent Mediums Act. The change in law should offer some protection to people who are duped by the more outrageous claims and/or prices of supposed psychics and mediums.

I mean, really, all their claims and non-claims are outrageous and every medium is “fraudulent” in the sense that none of them are actually speaking to your granddad, but it’s people who are most vulnerable and most ripped off who should have some recourse to the courts under the new rules.

I’ve had a little dialogue of letters in the Worcester News about this. One of the responses mentions — apparently as if it’s a good bit of evidence for their argument — that Jesus and Merlin were aliens and that the Celts came from the Pleiades cluster.

The Pleiades cluster (emphatically not where Celts come from):

Where “the Celts” actually came from:

Can you guess which side of the debate she was on?

»» CONTINUE READING »»

The interface between politics and ethics is utterly frustrating. In this letter, Nick Chance attacks Worcester MP, Mike Foster, for going along with the Labour whip (it may have been a largely “free vote” but we all know the pressure was on!) when it came to the Embryology Bill, calling him “craven and wicked”.

That Mike Foster MP toes the party line like a well-honed ballet dancer (… I’m imagining him tip-toeing up to the line in little pink shoes, if you didn’t get that) is a criticism I have made myself.

So how to respond when he actually votes the right way?

My letter was published this morning. Full text below, edited portions in bold.

»» CONTINUE READING »»

I have slated Kentucky Fried Chicken, and Worcester’s response to it, in another letter published today. My favourite bit is the phrase “the oil-soaked carcasses of force-fed chickens”…

The full text follows (sections cut from publication appear in bold).

»» CONTINUE READING »»

There are now widgets “for girls” on Netvibes.

According to the Netvibes blog post announcing this scrumptious news, girls (not women, note, but “girls”) are apparently interested pretty much exclusively — or so it would appear from the skipping, pied-piper, “This way girls!” tone of the annoucement — in the following things:

• “fashion news”
• “Glamour”
• “Portfolio”
• “Marie Claire”
• “New York Magazine”
• “Hint Fashion Magazine”
• “cooking”
• “fashion”
• “gossips” [sic]
• “love and dating advice”
• “Cosmopolitan”
• what to do when “you have a last minute dinner to prepare”
• or “you just want to stay informed of the latest “in vogue” cooking recipes”
• “healthy living”
• “healthy food eating ideas”

All this and more… “only and exclusively for girls!”

Yippee!

After delivering this excellent, sugar-sweet news, Netvibes asks the following inciteful and not at all patronising question: “Feel’s good doesn’t it?”

Because of course, that’s how women arrive upon all their opinions: their immeditate warm and fuzzy feelings.

Look at the picture Netvibes choose to illustrate this news with.

That’s right, “girls”. That’s you. You’re a bunch of mad, dumb-looking, goggle-eyed bimbos, and according to the thought bubble depicted, you are collectively obsessed with cakes, romance, marriage and/or jewellery (or probably both), heeled shoes, and last but not least, vibrators — or no, sorry, lipstick.

»» CONTINUE READING »»

What should you do when, following a previous exchange, a renowned but recently much-criticised minor local celebrity starts dissing you in the papers?

[Letter from George Cowley to Worcester News, 19th May]

SIR - I am a Christian agnostic myself, Helen Bate (May 10) [link]. If God is up there, benevolently looking down on us all, why the hell doesn’t he stop little girls of three dying in agony from cancer?

The reason I called Mr Churchill an “odd-ball,” is because, despite all his protestations of calm, dispassionate reason,’ he seems to relish putting the boot in to Christians, calling us “irrational.” He shows scant respect for religious people, but seems to consider himself more enlightened than we are.

You write back, obviously.

»» CONTINUE READING »»

I managed to skip right from the announcement about doing it, to a review of being in it, without saying very much about The Blue Room. And now it is fading into memory…

So here’s some filler: there are pictures up at the play’s page on the Swan Theatre Amateur Company site. It was good fun. I very much enjoyed doing a piece which - though funny in places - had a bit more seriousness and gravity than previous plays I’ve been in.

I am sad that my new working circumstances will probably mean I can’t do any more shows for the foreseeable future, what with being splitting my time between London and Worcester at opposite ends of the week. But it’s a satisfying and meaningful job (for me) and I can write more when I’m not distracted by perpetual guilt for knowing there are lines I should be learning.

If The Blue Room does indeed represent my theatrical swan song (for the time being) at least it felt to me very much like the pinnacle of the shows I’ve done since joining STAC; a slicker and more accomplished play overall, I think. Unfortunately I think part of the reason for this feeling is that people judge the quality of a show in large part not by the best moments and performances but by the worst, and it is easier to control and keep the quality up if there are only two actors. And yet since 80% of community theatre audiences are made up of friends of the cast and crew, and because actors who have other jobs to do often can’t commit to a massive schedule, two-hander casts are few and far between. This is a shame, because the involvement and the intensity of a acting a two-hander is an experience of a whole different character which I would go out of my way to re-capture in future.

All that said… there is an Oscar Wilde coming up. If only I could cram my schedule around that!

My slow metamorphosis into George Cowley — or a sort of opposite but nonetheless curmudgeonly reflection of George Cowley — is nearly complete.

Here is another Worcester News letter, spawned from my metaphorical pen.

The executive summary: Bob doesn’t get baby competitions.

(The full text follows below. Bold text was cut from the published version.)

»» CONTINUE READING »»

I’d like to think that if I saw a toddler, sat alone, riding a bus, on a 30 mile journey, that I would do something about it. Like say “Hey, is this kid with anyone?” Apparently no one in Lancashire thought to do this.

I mean, that is, I would say “Hey, is this kid with anyone?” if I wasn’t totally freaked out by the fact that he was just sat there (according to the report) “quietly”, probably all wide-eyed, like a little boy ghost. What if I said “Hey, is this kid with anyone?” and my fellow passengers replied “What kid? … There’s no one there.”

Slow turn back to the seat…

Holy fuck he’s gone!

»» CONTINUE READING »»