I still harbour a dream of humanity one day transcending arbitrary geographical barriers and working as one. Wouldn’t it be cool if we could forget our differences and came closer. That way, we could better organise ourselves: we could coordinate who gets what resources on a worldwide scale more easily. as Marx put it, ”from each according to ability, to each according to need.” I don’t mean getting too close: human diversity, and the uniqueness of each culture, must be cherished. Nor do I mean establishing a single world state, whose political structure and civil service, as I wrote here, would have to be so big and complex that it would be unmanageable. I just want humanity to take a more cooperative, less adversarial stance; to start seeing ourselves in terms of a species rather as members of distinct nation states. The world should be a place where everyone can contribute and has a voice irrespective of where you come from. Is that such a naive dream?

To me, the EU is working towards that goal. It’s about building a single framework we can all live under. Of course, outists do not share that goal: they seek a disunited, deregulated system where those who have are allowed to lord it over those who have not. Instead of cooperation and compromise, they value rivalry, greed and selfishness. Vote out, and this country becomes their playground. We’d become an irrelevant little island off north-west europe, where xenophobia is normalised, the welfare state is torn to shreds and the most extreme, perverse form of capitalism is allowed to dominate. I hope with all my heart that that does not happen.

I desperately hope anyone considering voting Out in the EU referendum watches this video by owen Jones. Called ”six reasons to remain”, it eloquently explains what is at stake, and why it is so vital that we don’t succumb to outist lies and xenophobia.

Top Gear is not dead. To be honest allowing it to die was never going to be an option for the BBC: it is, after all, one of their biggest shows and greatest worldwide exports. What we saw last night was not the flop I feared and was half expecting. As my dad said in his comment to yesterday’s entry, ”Chris Evans shouted too much, and did a poor Jeremy Clarkson impression, but apart from that the programme was OK. I did get a vague hint that they intend to sell the programme in the USA :)” I think dad hit it on the head: yes, there were spots of imitation; Evans often used Clarkson’s famous catch phrases, such as ”some say” when introducing the stig. But they were careful not to let it go too far or to let it slip into repetition or parody. They kept the essential formula the same but didn’t try to pretend nothing had changed. I thought Chris Evans acquitted himself well, binging in his own style but with a few nods to what went before. As David Sillito puts it here, ”The reinvention of Top Gear in 2002 by Clarkson probably owes something to the atmosphere and irreverent energy of a show like Evans’s TFI Friday.” Bringing in the presenter of the show which the new-look Top Gear was probably largely based upon was a good idea. Evans still has the energy to carry it off. As for Matt Leblanc, I’m not entirely sure why he was there, other than, as Dad says, to appeal to the american audience. What does Joey from friends have to do with cars? Then again, I saw sparks of promise in him last night – maybe he’ll come into his own in future shows.

Top gear, then, is far from dead. It clearly has a life beyond it’s original presenters. What we saw last night was, I felt, promising and encouraging. The question now is, where do they go with it, and can they keep it up?

Top Gear is back tonight. To be honest, Sunday evenings have not felt quite like sunday evenings without my weekly dose of car-related anarchism. Only, it won’t really be Top Gear, will it? I can’t help thinking that a large part of what made Top Gear Top Gear was it’s presenters, and without that slightly juvenile, slightly blokey, slightly fascist chemistry between Clarkson, Hammond and May, it won’t be the same show. They can get new presenters, and no doubt they will try to recapture the feeling which made the show so popular, but inevitably it will be an imitation, and we’ll all know it. No doubt Chris Evans et al will do their best; perhaps, conscious of the potential criticisms, they’ll ”take the show in a new direction” and ”make it their own”, but we’ll all know we are watching a show which should have been allowed to die. They are stepping into other people’s shoes, trying to make other people’s glory their own.

I have been wrong about such things before, of course. The show tonight could rule. But can Chris Evans really square up to Jeremy Clarkson? You could say he can’t win: if they try to do something too similar to the previous show, people will accuse them of imitation; but if they try to take the show in a new direction it would just feel too different to the show we all love. Either way, people will turn off. Perhaps the bbc should have just let Top Gear pass into history. Then again, I could be wrong and we could find ourselves watching something even better than it was before. It boils down to the question of how integral the original presenters personalities were to the success of the program. The radio times notes that Clarkson, Hammond and May now have a show going out concurrently on Amazon Prime. Which will be better received? We’ll just have to wait to tonight to find out.

My postal vote arrived this morning, and I’m very happy to report that I just put it back in the post box, having signed it, sealed it, and put a cross in the box marked ‘Remain in the European Union’.

I think I’ll flag this Guardian article up today. ”A strong warning that austerity policies can do more harm than good has been delivered by economists from the International Monetary Fund, in a critique of the neoliberal doctrine that has dominated economics for the past three decades.” Although part of me wants to cry ”I could have told them that!” it’s good to have what we on the left have long suspected officially recognised by an independent body. ‘ ”The benefits in terms of increased growth seem fairly difficult to establish when looking at a broad group of countries,” they said. ”The costs in terms of increased inequality are prominent.” ‘ Although the right are so wedded to their greed-based philosophy that I can hear their cries of ‘bias!’ and ‘leftist propaganda!’ already, a report by a body like the IMF is hard to argue with. This dispels the old lie that greed somehow benefits all, and exposes the truth once and for all that neoliberalism boils down to selfishness.

I just finished the first draft of my write-up of yesterday’s event for school. I think I might as well pop it on here too:

Communication Works 2016 was a great success. Around thirty exhibitors came to the annual conference at Charlton Park Academy, displaying the latest in communication equipment and technology. The special guest this year was Lee Ridley, aka Lost Voice Guy, a comic who performs using his Lightwriter. Ridley gave an opening address and then stayed throughout the day. He is fast becoming an ambassador for communication aid users, having been on Radio Four and increasingly appearing on television. Speaking personally as a communication aid user, having him there and getting to meet him felt quite an honour. This afternoon I watched a video of his opening speech, having arrived too late to watch it yesterday: His address was a thorough and well-informed discussion of his life as a communication aid user, how he got his first VOCA, the efforts he has to go to to communicate how he wants, and peoples’ reactions to him as a comic with cerebral palsy.

There were also several seminars throughout the day. One was about making a video, to be played on inset days, where students could tell teachers what they liked and did not like about school, and how to improve things from their point of view. Another seminar was by Paul Richards. Richards runs Stay up Late, a charity which enables people with disabilities – particularly learning difficulties – to have fuller social lives by ‘buddying’ them with able-bodied volunteers. Too often, he noticed, disabled people were being taken home early from shows, clubs and music venues because their personal assistant’s shift ended. I know from personal experience that this has caused many nights out to be cut short. Stay up Late introduces people with disabilities to volunteers who are prepared to stay out longer, even into the early hours, so that people with disabilities can enjoy the type of social lives everyone else has.

Another highlight was [insert name] who helped people visualise what was being said by drawing pictorial representations of it on large sheets of paper. She was constantly adding to her pictures throughout the day, creating images which were both expressive, fascinating an quite amusing. It was like a constant commentary in image form. The way that she was able to keep up with everything going on in the hall, translating it into such stunning imagery, was truly remarkable.

Communication Works 2016 was, then, a triumph. I think all who attended would have found it richly rewarding. It was good to see everyone discussing communication, something so essential to life yet something so often overlooked and taken for granted. This event brought the subject into focus, bringing together a diverse community of people, and getting them talking.

I was just chatting to Lost Voice Guy himself, Lee Ridley. Today is the annual Communication Works convention at school, and he was there to open it.

Unfortunately I missed his opening speech, but I had a brief chat to him after. It was great to meet a living legend of the disability community and a great ambassador for VOCA users. Anyway, having just popped home for swig of coffee and bite to eat (and, indeed, to blog) it will soon be time for me to get back to school. Expect a full review/write up on here soon.

I just have another Guardian piece to link to today. According to this article, over 300 prominent historians have signed a letter urging Britain to vote to stay in the EU, and warn that we risk becoming irrelevant in the world if we vote to leave. Needless to say, I wholeheartedly agree. We would have cut ourselves off from the world, and told it that the small-minded little people of this island are content to withdraw into their selves and no longer want to play on the world stage. The historians write: ”On 23 June, we face a choice: to cast ourselves adrift, condemning ourselves to irrelevance and Europe to division and weakness; or to reaffirm our commitment to the EU and stiffen the cohesion of our continent in a dangerous world.” I just hope that we heed their wisdom.

I think I better flag this excellent Guardian piece up today. By Aditya Chakrabortty, it explains that tory ‘austerity’ is essentially about flogging off everything the public owns. The tories want to put everything into private hands: every school, swimming pool and post office. Chakrabortty writes ”Privatisation is the multibillion pound centrepiece of Osborne’s austerity – yet it rarely gets a mention from either politicians or press.”

[quote=”Chakraborly”]Austerity is far bigger than that: it is a project irreversibly to transfer wealth from the poorest to the richest. It’s doing the job very nicely: while the typical British worker is still earning less after inflation than he or she was before the banking crash, the number of UK-based billionaires has nearly quadrupled since 2009. Even while he slashes benefits, Osborne is deep into a programme to hand over much of what is still owned by the British public to the wealthiest.[/quote]

Thus, far from being an economic necessity, austerity is entirely ideologically driven. These people believe poor people deserve to be poor, and that rich people have a natural right to lord it over everyone else. Thus government should do nothing to level the playing field, but instead slash high-rate tax and reduce the welfare state. It’s a sickeningly selfish worldview based on greed and arrogance. In public hands, things are run for the good of all; in private hands, things are run for profit. They say, of course, competition pushes up standards, but that is bull: competition means you cut corners to minimize costs. Publicly owned assets can be centrally, democratically planned with some kind of strategy in mind, whereas in private hands the only motive is profit. The result is everything gets worse, and we all suffer while those who own the assets get richer.

Although I’m not entirely sure which side it’s on, I really must flag this delicious piece of star Trek related satire up. ”In a stark warning issued today, the Klingons cautioned that if Earth leaves the United Federation of Planets – a move widely referred to as ‘Trexit’ – it could plunge the galaxy into an economic recession, or even worse, all-out war.” Of course I must point out that, as a founding member of the Federation, the people of Earth surely would not be so stupid. It would render it irrelevant in the alpha quadrant; alone in the galaxy, just as it was before first contact. The only way we escaped the chaos that existed before then was by uniting, and the only way we can ensure a prosperous quadrant, for ourselves and for others, is by remaining part of the federation.

One month to go. Only time will show weather we stay or go.

‘Till then, who’s to know?

***

Stay or leave?

They’ll lie and deceive.

Oh, who to believe?

It’s hard to conceive

***

of a more brutal bout:

how they all scream and shout hurling insults about.

Are you in or out?

***

It’s all so tight in this vicious fight.

But come what might Will we do what’s right?

Lyn and I had a very nice day yesterday. We didn’t go far: as I thought, we just had a walk around charlton in our chairs. We went to the park, where L had a big late breakfast and I managed to catch some of the cricket match. Having watched quite an impressive win for the mighty eights, and Lyn having got some groceries, it was back home for a lovely evening of music, eating and drinking. Paul, who has just returned from Brazil, made a delicious kind of stew. I had got a great big chocolate cake to follow, but realised too late that we didn’t have candles. I don’t think that mattered too much though: Lyn seemed to have a lovely time, and it was great dancing around our living room to one of her awesome mixes.

After dad’s yesterday, Lyn’s birthday has come again. She just opened the presents I got for her. I’d been worried that I didn’t get her much, but she seems pleased with what I got. Mind you, after getting her a new cat last year, I don’t think I could have topped that. (Guy is very much still alive and well, by the way). This afternoon, we’ll play things by ear, and perhaps go out in our chairs. Well, here’s wishing the most incredible woman in the world a very happy birthday.

I was up at Guy’s hospital yesterday. My last visit to the local dentist didn’t go well, basically: she thought she saw a hole, but I couldn’t stop moving my head, so she sent me up to the specialist dental unit at guy’s to discuss ‘sedation’. The meeting went well, and I left feeling a lot more comfortable with the idea than I did before. As I was leaving, the point came when we had to discuss when I’ll be going up there for the treatment. The lady at the reception desk read out a list of possible times for me to choose, one of which was half past two. When she said that, I chuckled and said ”two-thirty! Yes, then!” The receptionist looked slightly confused, though, clearly not understanding what I found so amusing.

”Get it?” I asked. She shook her head. ”Two thirty, tooth hurty?” I elaborated on my Ipad. She still didn’t get it. I tried again to explain the joke, but again she didn’t see it. I think it may have lost something because I was using a communication aid; either that or she had no sense of humour. I went away feeling tickled, however, knowing I had been able to reference one of the great comedic puns in real life, even if it had fallen slightly flat.

Now though, I must pop to the shops. We just realised we need four candles.

Although you can’t deduce much from it, I think I better just direct you here. I just came across the new ‘trailer’ for the new Star Trek series, and it’s not much to go on: just a few shots of space and the usual male american voice over. Having said that, the graphics look rather un-trek-like, and rather too Abramsverse for my liking, and I have a feeling it’ll just be called Star Trek as no sub-title was used in the clip, so I’m slightly worried. Nonetheless, I could be wrong, so we’ll have to wait and see how it turns out. Mind you, that’s assuming we get to watch it at all, given it’ll be on American cbs pay-per-view, but at least it shows one of my favourite franchises has life in it yet.

The moment we open our mouths, the moment we put pen to paper or finger to keyboard, we begin making decisions. Any utterance any human produces is bound up in a complex range of factors, both conscious and unconscious, personal and social. It occurs to me that the current debate over europe, as with all political debates, boils down to who one believes. The remain camp say x while the outers say y. If one sides cites a source of information, the other side respond with an accusation of bias. The inners point to what Obama says, and the outers accuse Obama as being biassed, part of a new world order and so on. One side says the EU is a rich man’s club which exploits people; remain says it protects people from exploitation. And then both accuse the other of working for those who want to exploit. Thus we reach the absurd point where both sides are using the same argument, saying they want to protect us from exploitation while saying the other side is biassed and just wants to stand up for those doing the exploiting. Given that there is no escaping bias, no way to establish an objective truth, the situation is becoming farcical.

As someone who sees no evidence for a new world order, I advocate staying in to protect people from unfettered capitalism. An outer might respond by saying that it is they who want to protect our rights by escaping a body they see as just as sinister. Then we both accuse one another of being biassed: they might accuse me of being influenced too heavily by the mainstream media, with it’s vested interest in maintaining the status quo and under government control; while I might accuse them of listening too much to people on the web, who essentially promote a right-wing, nationalist agenda, and play directly into the hands of those who would have us do away with all regulation in order to exploit us. It is a total mess of claim and counter claim, each accusing the other of basically the same thing. The stupid part is, we both come from the same, sceptical, rights-protecting position.

Although Lyn has stepped back from the Paraorchestra to focus on her own compositions, I am still quite interested in news about them. I’d like to flag this up: they are now based in Bristol, where this June they will be performing at Coleston hall. From what I read, they will be playing Terry Riley’s seminal work In C, a piece which consists of 53 short melodies which performers can chose to play as and when they want. It seems to me a perfect piece for a group like the Paraorchestra, both in practical terms as it allows for the flexibility the players need due to their various disabilities, and as a metaphor for the group itself: a diverse group of people coming together to form a unified, beautiful whole. It’s great to see the group doing so well: it seems to me to be becoming quite preeminent on the disability arts scene; something of a major player showcasing what musicians with disabilities are capable of.

I am fast beginning to wish this referendum had never come about. Not because I fear the result, but because it seems to be tearing the nation apart. We are all in one camp or the other, and we are beginning to hate each other. I’ve always been hot tempered when it comes to politics – a mixture of my greek genes and cp, I think but at the moment whenever I see an outer on tv, I feel a searing hatred towards him. I care passionately about this country and it’s future. I care about people, especially those with a disadvantage. What I see is a bunch of nationalists trying to mislead people into voting for a future where inequality will become more overt and the strong will dominate the weak. Their lies, their crass insincerity, their selfishness, appall me.

The debate has descended into the lowest form of discourse. Insults are being openly hurled on both sides, like two groups of football fans, half drunk on cheap larger, chanting vileness at each other. I can’t help but get caught up in it. Is this what we have become? A load of brutes, hating one another simply because we see things differently? The european referendum is tearing us apart: brother against brother, father against son, husband against wife. The hatred is building, and I worry where it will lead us.

It really gets my goat when europhobes try to liken the aims of the EU to the goals of people Hitler. They say that the european union is just another way to achieve Hitlers ambition to unite europe under one government. It is a very disingenuous scare tactic, either designed to mislead people or betraying a severe lack of understanding. The EU is not about totalitarianism; it is about forging a single framework of rules which people across the continent can work under. It is about safeguarding people’s rights, not taking them away. It’s about working together towards common goals, not imposing the will of one over the many. And nobody is interested in imposing some paneuropean monoculture upon everyone. Thus I ask, how dare people like Boris Johnson try to invoke hitler to further their goals? They are the ones seeking to impose their will over many: to conservatives like him, european rules get in the way of unfettered neoliberalism; it gives people – especially members of minorities – rights which people like Johnson and farage would rather they didn’t have. For people who want the rich to be able to exploit the poor and the strong to dominate the weak, of course a body like the EU would be a hinderance. It was founded, in part, to safeguard rights across europe which they would rather they did not have. Thus for Johnson or anyone to try to liken the EU to the goals of hitler is utterly hypocritical. The reverse is true: they are the ones who seek to dominate, who think that social darwinism should be unleashed, who think that minorities are a burden to society. Outers have far more in common with hitler than the EU does.

Not far from Charlton Village is Maryon Park, a small, quiet park relatively out of the way (inasmuch as anywhere in London can be called out of the way). Lyn and I were out in our chairs again yesterday, getting to know two potential new PAs. We went through Maryon Park, and I noticed something interesting. I go through that park quite a bit, usually on my way to Woolwich. I’ve always ignored the large wooded mound on one side of the park, but yesterday, Lyn leading, we followed the path the other way, up and round. Something piqued my interest quite soon: that mound was too round and steep to be natural.

I went down there again this afternoon, quite curious. My limited knowledge of archeology made me wonder whether it was some kind of ancient fort – it certainly looked like one to me. I had a little scout around, but didn’t see much. Of course I had to keep to the path, and the place is too overgrown to make out anything like ruins. However, getting back home I googled it, and found I was right: Maryon Park (who’s other claim to fame is that Antonioni filmed a part of Blow Up (1966) there) contains Cox’s Mount, a roman hill fort. That really appeals to the archaeologist in me – I wonder if anyone has ever excavated it. How cool to have such a fascinating, ancient thing so close.

I would just like to state my support and respect for drugs company Pfizer. The bbc reports that the american company no longer wants to supply the drugs for lethal injections. ”We strongly object to the use of any of our products in the lethal injection process for capital punishment” the company has stated, ” stressing that its products were meant to save the lives of patients, rather than killing people. Of course, as someone who finds execution under any circumstance utterly abhorrent and barbaric, I applaud this decision. All other pharmaceutical-related politics aside, drugs are supposed to help people. If I made drugs, I would not want my product used to kill people. Good move Pfizer.

Something truly awesome happened yesterday evening. We had just got back from Asda, having done our weekly shop. We had ‘walked’ there and back, and lyn was still in her powerchair. It had been a nice little outing: shopping, and then a coffee. L is still getting used to handling her chair, so we had been together, Dominik with us; but yesterday, Lyn suddenly said she wanted a walk out on her own. That had never happened before: she has always needed someone to push her in her manual chair, and someone’s always been with her when she’s been out in her electric. Last night was a first. Of course we let her go; Dom and I stayed home. Truth be told, I was a bit nervous.

I need not have been: Lyn returned about half an hour later, safe and sound, having just been to a local park and back. Lyn is actually pretty competent driver. Yet, the special thing is, it was her first solo trip out I’ve ever known her to take. In fact, I asked her after she got home, and it was her first trip out by herself since 1992, when she was living in Cardiff. That struck me as pretty damn awesome: she’s only had it for two or three weeks, but her new chair is already changing her life: she seems more confident and independent. One can only imagine the sense of newfound freedom she must feel. I could tell from her eyes when she got home, that was just the first of many such trips – I better get used to it. As I joked with Lyn when she got back, now I know how she feels when I go out on one of my little jaunts.

I know it sounds a bit pathetic on my part, given I’m supposed to be commenting on such things, but I hadn’t heard of the bbc’s change of governance until late last night. Of course, I knew it’s charter renewal was coming up, and I was a bit worried about it, but I didn’t know when it was or what would happen. Now that it has, I’m not sure what to make of it: last night, the beeb were putting a brave face on, saying it could be much worse and that the Tories had watered down their ambitions for it’s complete (figurative) destruction. On the other hand, the fact is they are going to impose a external regulator and government appointed DG upon it. While you could say that increasing links with he government makes the bbc more democratic and accountable, the only other places with such a relationship between government and broadcaster are north Korea and China.

The fact is, the tories hate the bbc, which they see as too left wing. They hate anything funded by the state. Like four-year-olds who haven’t learned to share, tories think they should only fund themselves and don’t see the point of everyone contributing to a general pot so other people might benefit. Hence the moron currently calling himself culture secretary (what a joke – the fat p’tahk wouldn’t know culture if it hit him on his arse) has likened the licence fee to the poll tax. Had he had his way, the license fee would have been scrapped and the beeb gutted. As it is, we’re now going to have to pay for Iplayer, which I’m not happy about.

While part of me says it could be worse, and that the bbc basically survived, another part of me is angry that these nonces in government think they have a right to try to remake the bbc in their own image. Like the nhs, the bbc is one of the best parts of the uk. On a personal level, now that I come to think about it, I owe a lot to the beeb: where else did I first encounter Star Trek but bbc2? Who showed Michael Palin or David Attenborough documentaries? Where did Monty Python begin? Who produced Happy and Glorious? I owe so much to the bbc; we all do. That the tories think they can push it around and do as they please with such a valuable thing is yet another reason why I loathe them. It belongs to us all, something we grew up with to be cherished; yet CaMoron and co think it is theirs to remake, dictate to and meddle with. Their arrogance is astounding.

Tonight I feel something I haven’t felt in quite some time. It has been a wile since I had the sense of achievement one gets knowing one’s done a good day’s work; probably not since I was doing my master’s. Today, though, I was back in the fold, trying to work out how to add audio to a presentation. I’m not due to do it until September, but I’m worried about how I’m going to present it. The problem is, trying to get a computer to say the words as the slides are shown. Recording everything into mp3s was easy enough; the problem was trying to embed them into the presentation file, then transferring it onto my Ipad. I must have spent the last four hours on it, first on my own, then with Lyn helping. The odd thing is, the time flew by: it was sort of fun to ty to solve such a problem.

This might be slightly irrational, but Gareth Malone is really getting on my nerves. You might have noticed that the Invictus Games are currently on in Florida. It is an Olympic-style sporting event for wounded service people, set up in 2014. To be honest I’m not sure what to make of it: it reeks a little of deifying wounded soldiers, trying to cast them in the same light as olympic and paralympic athletes; sort of like the gladiator-worship of Rome. On the other hand, if it helps in their recovery and rehabilitation, who am I to criticise it?

However, the thing that has me particularly irritated about it is ‘Gareth’s Invictus Choir’. Not ‘Gareth Malone’s Invictus Choir’ or ‘The Invictus Choir’, but ‘Gareth’s Invictus Choir’, as if he thinks we should all automatically recognise who he is. This is a show where Malone goes around creating a choir of wounded service people to sing at the Invictus ceremonies. Now, that sounds rather familiar! Charles Hazlewood did near enough exactly the same thing in 2012 with the Paraorchestra, so it strikes me that Malone has stolen the idea in a way. Both projects concern the gathering of people with disabilities into a musical group, who then go on to perform at a ceremony. Unlike Hazelwood, however, Malone seems to want us all to look at him, and say how great he is for working with the service people to overcome the trauma of combat, rather than at the singers. Indeed, much of the show concerns Malone teaching choir members to sing. Almost every shot in the show was of Malone or included him, giving the impression that Malone is the star of the show and originator of the entire concept. Nowhere as far as I could tell was the Paraorchestra referenced, yet the concept is almost identical. Moreover, whereas in the documentary on the Paraorchestra, the contributions from Hazlewood focussed on the participating musicians, in this, Malone focusses on himself and how the process is effecting him, as if he wants to use the show to boost his profile rather than the singers’. Sorry, but such egoism is nauseating. They could at least allude to the Paraorchestra, or say they took their cue from it. But no: Malone obviously wants the concept to be presented as entirely his own, as if he wants us all to say how great he is. Of course it’s great such a group has been set up; I just wish malone would recognise what others have already done rather than try to take credit for a concept he essentially stole, and that he would not blatantly use the talents of disabled people as a means of boosting his public profile.

Lyn and I went out on another epic walk yesterday afternoon. We explored Severndroog Castle and it’s surrounding park, before getting dinner in a pub on the way back. Even though I go past that park in a bus each time I need to go get cash, I had never been into it before yesterday. Now that I have, however, I’ll certainly be going back: the views from up there, atop Shooters hill, are stunning. We must have been able to see ten miles at least, southward across London and into the countryside beyond. With the woman I love by my side, still obviously relishing her new mobility, it was a truly wonderful moment.

Being out meant that I missed the beeb’s tribute to sir David Attenborough. Predictably, I caught up with it this morning on the Iplayer. It struck me as a terrific show, and a fitting tribute to probably the greatest broadcaster who ever lived. Highlights for me were the interview with Michael Palin, and, of course, this gem of a Nick Park animation showing the gorillas giving their take on Attenborough’s most famous moment. It was a fine comic touch, encapsulating the deep affection we all have for a truly great man. The show closed with a rendition of What a Wonderful World; with the view from the top of Shooters Hill still fresh in my memory, I certainly agree with that sentiment.

Just to follow up on this entry, for the record I still quite passionately support the bbc. It is currently coming under all sorts of attacks from both left and right; you have to feel quite sorry for it. The rightists say it’s too left wing, and those on the left fear it’s shifting towards the right – it cannot win. The problem is, the tory scumbags currently running the country are trying to control what the beeb says: they try to stop the bbc presenting them too negatively, or covering the real effects of the cuts. Fearing for it’s survival, the bbc has no choice but to watch what it says. It’s instincts are to be impartial and objective, but those on the right see that as having a left-wing bias. The result is that it swerves right. It’s editors probably know the shit it’s currently being forced to spew is just that, but it has no choice. Thus we should be defending the bbc against tory interference, not attacking it or calling for the end of the license fee. To do so is to simply do the bidding of it’s commercial rivals like Sky, who’d like nothing more than to see the bbc out of their way so they can ram their inane free-market bullshit down out throats.

One of my all-time favourite memories is still watching Monty Python Live. To be able to say that I have watched the greatest ever comedy troupe in the flesh is a great privilege. I had thought Python belonged to the past; as something over, gone, ex, and which could only be seen on youtube. Thus that night in 2014 was special to me beyond words. Yet it would never have happened had it not been for one man; the great, great man who commissioned Python in the first place.

Monty Python is just one of innumerable things we have to thank Sir David Attenborough for. Today is his ninetieth birthday, so I was just reading about him. Of course, I’ve read his autobiography, Life on Air, but that was a while ago and my memory needed refreshing. The number of experiences the man has had, the things he has seen and done, is staggering. On top of that, he has done more to educate people about the wonders of the natural world than anyone else. Forget Coustau, forget Irwin, Attenborough is without peer. As a broadcaster the man is a colossus. I also love the fact that, like the queen, he seems to have always been there – a gentle authority figure, a part of life in Britain since before my parents were born. Yet, not only that, but the programmes he has made and continues to make are utterly fascinating: most of them are stunningly shot, and have a gentle, knowing narration we all remember from childhood. They have educated us all about the natural world, about life outside our windows, bringing it into our lives and inspiring us like no other program. I am in awe of David Attenborough, and honestly feel that we, as a civilisation, owe him a debt of gratitude.

I just turned my computer on, and it’s already becoming quite a good day. Sadiq Kahn has just been announced as Mayor of London. That means that, not only are we now rid of that absolute arsehole Borris Johnson, but we also don’t have that even bigger arsehole, Zac Goldsmith, replacing him. Both were absolutely loathsome tory p’tahks with clear xenophobic tendencies. At least now we have a decent Labour mayor who’ll hopefully make London a bit fairer and who’ll pay a bit more attention to the needs of members of minorities, rather than just sucking up to the millionaires in the City.

Link

I know it’s only about a ship’s name, but reading this story has really put a smile on my face. Instead of Boaty McBoatface, the name the public famously voted for, the UK’s new polar research ship is to be named RRS Sir David Attenborough. While I must admit I liked the public’s choice, it was a bit childish and not really fitting. The new name is far more fitting, and what better tribute could there be to a truly great man? The RRS Sir David Attenborough will launch in 2019.

Just to go back to the merging of cinephilia and fandom, the fusion of the discourses is further illustrated here, in Brows Held High’s review of F for Fake. It displays precisely the fusion of the intellectual engagement of cinephilia, with it’s reflections on authorship and the status of the author as exposed in film, with the textual playfulness of fandom I’m talking about. It is a reaction to a film in which the guy says something about film and art. Thus there is a rhyzomic element to it; it’s both a display of filmic love and an analysis of film and the love of film at the same time. As I said in my entry on his appraisal of Klingon Hamlet, this guy displays a deep intellectual engagement with film – he uses film to say things about film, just as the cinephiles did/do – but with all the playfulness of fandom. By examining Welles’ film about forgery in art, he teases out ideas and arguments surrounding Auterism in film and the status of the artist, using the film to say something about art and film as an art: He uses film as a vehicle to reflect on the nature of film itself, just as the Cahiers group did, but does so in snappy Youtube videos. This is precisely the hybrid of the two discourses I speculate about in my masters thesis. You can probably tell, I’m quite fascinated by the videos he makes.

There is growing skepticism online about the impartiality of the bbc, and I’m beginning to agree with it. While they go on and on about Labour’s problems, they say very little about the election fraud committed by the tories. At least we have online sources like The Canary, which is reporting that the tories are being investigated by the police for illegally overspending on battle busses in last year’s election. That is a criminal offence; if found guilty, ‘dozens” of tories could face fines and/or jail sentences. Yet we hear virtually nothing about it on the mainstream news. It’s pathetic!

I have a tendency to procrastinate. I’ve always had it. When faced with something I don’t quite know how to deal with, I put it off ’till the very last moment. Then I suddenly feel a surge of energy when I decide I want everything sorted and out of the way, and resolve everything in one ultra-productive flurry. Today has been that type of day: I’ve had a couple of things I needed to do hanging over me for a week or so, and today I decided to get off my arse and get them done. They weren’t that big – just a dental appointment and train tickets to arrange etc – but I wasn’t sure how to go about them. Today, however, I came up with a plan, and in a burst of energy lasting about three hours got everything done. Sometimes, it seems, procrastination works, although the gentle rhetorical kick up the arse Lyn gave me last night (”Just go and get it sorted!”) may have had an effect too.

I know it has been bouncing around the internet for a couple of days, but I think I’ll flag this up today. Truth be told, I don’t really know what to make of it: President Obama has made a ‘retirement video’, a sort of self-referential spoof of himself planning what he’s going to do after leaving the White House. The americans seem to think it’s hilarious. I think it was an attempt at rereading formal hierarchies, much the same as we brits did with Happy and Glorious. But it doesn’t quite work for me: perhaps I’m not as familiar with american politics as I should be, so I don’t get a few of the jokes. It is not clear to me what this film is trying to do or say, or whether it’s supposed to be comic or straight; it just leaves me cold. I realise Obama is talking to the opposition leader, which, given how acrimonious American politics can get, is pretty cool; but I still think the Queen parachuting out of a helicopter with 007 is cooler. Granted, the two films were made for entirely different audiences; rather than trying to make the entire world’s jaw drop, this film is a gentle satire made by a retiring president trying to poke fun at himself. On that level, I suppose it’s okay, just not quite as awesome as the Americans seem to think. If they were trying to break ground in terms of playing with their national codes, conventions and structures, they get second prize. We brits set a high bar for this sort of self-referential spoof in 2012, and the yanks have yet to meet it.

Just a quick note to say that I now heartily recommend The Grain Store, near st. Pancras. Lyn and I are just on our way back from having met my parents there for lunch, and I can honestly say I’ve rarely had a better meal. While I only had a main course, the tastes I experienced were amazing. If you can check it out, do so you’ll struggle to find a better meal in London, I suspect. The food, together with the fascinating conversation about the EU referendum between dad and Lyn, means it has been a most entertaining afternoon.

Yesterday afternoon was wonderful. Lyn and I went for a long, long walk together over to Greenwich. We left Dominik at home and set off, Lyn leading the way. I couldn’t help thinking about the shots of Bond and his wife Tracey riding together on horseback in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service as we rode through the great park, now in it’s spring glory. I have long loved going out and exploring the city, but often felt slightly guilty about leaving L at home. Now she can come with me, and judging by yesterday, she’s just as keen for such voyages as I am.

In Greenwich park, Lyn texted Dom, and we waited for him to catch us up. Then we went down into Greenwich together, where we got a drink. Sitting there with the woman I love in one of the coolest parts of London felt incredible; and after that we followed the river back round and then headed for home. We must have gone ten miles at least. I really hope that was just the first of many such trips. Sharing my wanderings with lyn, following our noses as we discover more and more of the city together, will be amazing. But, of course, there’s no hurry: we have all the time in the world.