Last night saw me in lewisham for a gig featuring my friend Hugh. To be honest I didn’t know what to expect, and yesterday afternoon I was in two minds about going, but it turned out two be a great night. There were three performers/groups on: the first was Charles Hayward (not to be confused with Charles Hazlewood – a complexly different person), with a rather postmodern mix of singing bowls, percussion and mouth-keyboard*. Next on after a short break was Hugh, performing with a woman called Cevanne. Under the name Cewdson and Cevanne, they do a highly atmospheric form of electric music using harp, computer, and a truly unique instrument, created by Hugh and Jodie, worn on the head. They mix electronica with folk in a truly brilliant way. The third act of the evening was a group called The Remote Viewers: four saxophones and a double bass, it was wonderfully evocative.

In all, a great night then. Looking back, I should have dragged Lyn to it – I think she would have enjoyed it – but, as I say,, I didn’t know what to expect. Chatting with the guys after the gig, though, I mentioned Lyn to charles, who put the night on. I think he would like Lyn’s work, and it might be an idea to introduce them to eachother; the potential for future events is huge. I got home just before midnight, only having hd one beer as it was BYOB, really pleased I decided to go in the end.

*Not sure what the correct name for that thing he was blowing is.

As far as I am concerned, Stuart Rodger is a political prisoner, a victim of an increasingly oppressive government. According to this article, he has been ordered to carry out 100 hours of community service for shouting ”no public sector cuts” during a speech by CaMoron in glasgow. Since when was voicing an opinion a criminal offence in this country? This brave man tried to stand up for what he believed and was punished for it – to me that sounds like the actions of a vindictive, inceasingy totalitarian Tory government, willing to crush any dissent. Indeed, we can see another example in their plan to virtually ban public sector workers from striking. For goodness’ sake these unelected scumbags must get the boot this summer.

Lyn and I just spent a pleasant afternoon in North greenwich. She needed a new SIM card, and I relish the opportunity to go to the dome. Coming home, I thought I would pop into my favourite pub. The news is on in here, and I am getting wind of the horrific things in Paris. The situation there now appears to be over, but not without huge bloodshed. After a relaxing time with lyn, my blood is suddenly chilled. The odd thing is, I almost forgot this was happening.

Go to youtube and you can find plenty of footage of the old debates over the Life of Brian. It was, of course, a very controversial film, seemingly lampooning the life of Christ. It caused great offence to many, although it is one of my all-time favourite films. It was great to see it referenced at the London olympic closing ceremony. Yet events yesterday made me wonder: what’s the difference between Life Of Brian and the cartoons of Mohammed which appeared in Charlie Hebdo? Why does one result in debate, and the other in such cold blooded murder?

The second such questions are asked, of course, a truly monumental can of worms opens up. I was thinking about this last night: what to one person is satire, to another may be islamophobia. If I see a thug from the BNP, UKIP or the Front National making jokes about Islam, I take umbrage; but if I see it on the pages of a satirical magazine, might I take it differently? What if the situation was flipped, and a journal in the middle east chose to make fun of christianity? How might I react? On one level, I might not care – religion is all bollocks anyway. Yet part of me would probably see it as an external culture making fun of mine, and get angry, whether I believed or not.

What matters, then, is not just what is said but who is speaking. It was a group of white, middle-class Oxbridge graduates who made Life of Brian; they can probably be loosely termed Christian. Had that film been made by non-christians, however, would it have been so funny? If not, what is the difference? It seems one group of people are allowed to say certain things, while another group cannot.

That strikes me as odd. Yesterday I laid out my position on religion, beginning too to outline the complexities in trying to speak about it from the outside; but, perhaps because it was the one i’m most familiar with, I kept my criticisms to christianity: surely as an atheist I should be equally hostile to all religions. Surely they are all just as silly. Why, then, do I not feel I have the right to criticise Islam or Hinduism? Perhaps it’s because I don’t feel I can speak about something I know very little about, but it is also because I don’t want to seem xenophobic. And there lies the rub.

Part of me wants to say that it is high time someone made an islamic version of the life of brian; part of me strongly supports Charlie Hebdo; part of me wants to be as critical of islam as I am of christianity. Part of me wants to tell the thugs who perpetrated yesterday’s crimes to grow up, and grow a sense of humour. Yet I still don’t feel I can: I am gagged through a sense of respect, a sense that I don’t have the right. I fear that the second I do so, I become akin to the xenophobes I loathe. Yet if one has the right to criticise one religion, shouldn’t you criticise them all. Charlie Hebdo decided it had that right, that duty, and sadly paid a terrible price for it. Rather than the rather comic debates in the seventies between the Pythons and the clergy, yesterday we saw slaughter, the most extreme, barbaric and grotesque example of a person being denied the right to voice an opinion.

Thinking over the entry I made earlier, i seems face a slight contradiction. As a liberal (note the small l) I believe in tolerance, and that everyone should believe what they wish and respect each other’s views. At the same time, as a leftist (not sure what case that l should be), I believe in equality, that we are all equal, and that humanity should be coming together. We should be seeking to remove the barriers which divide us, one of which is religion. Both of these principals stem from the same broad idea – unity and equality – but are diametrically opposed. It is one of those paradoxes of liberalism I’ve touched on before: how can one seek equality and tolerance if it automatically means becoming intolerant? How can one seek to remove something which divides and oppresses if it means becoming oppressive yourself?

Just a quick note to say that my thoughts go down to Paris, to a city I adore. I have quite a few family members there these days – I hope everyone is ok. What the events of this morning mean is unclear, of course, but Parisiens should know that we Londoners stand with them.

I woke this morning feeling quite bad, and rather guilty. Late last night I got into a rather heated online discussion with my Australian friend Darryl. Dazz is a Christian, and we were arguing about the existence of God. As you may know, I have fairly strong views on this subject: I see no evidence of any creator, and think we should outgrow religion as a species. Religion causes division and hate. Indeed, as I type, I am watching reports of horrific shootings in Paris which appear to have a religious basis. I therefore get rather aggitated when talking about religion; I can become angry and arrogant. Part of me holds that religious people believe in an entity which, should it exist, causes or allows indescribable amounts of suffering; I don’t see how they can blind themselves to that fact.

I fear I offended a good friend last night. In a way it was through Darryl that I met Lyn. I may have strong views, and I may believe passionately that I am right, but that does not give me the right to insult a good friend or his faith. I used words Darryl did not deserve. Sorry old friend.

I feel rather guilty now. I should not have been there, but up in westminster with my comrades in DPAC. Truth be told, it was raining here at noon, so I decided I’d skip what I assumed to be just another protest over the closure of the ILF. What a mistake! the first footage of the event is just appearing online, and I now wish I went. It looks as if the guys had an amazing day, meeting MPs in the back rooms of parliament an so on. At the very least I would have loved to see what it is like in there. At least the guys showed the bureaucrats what for; if they hold such an event again I’ll definitely go – I’m kicking myself.

Yesterday saw me in lower sydenham with Luke, sally and Les. Luke had had a somewhat traumatic experience a few days ago, so I went over to see f I could cheer him up. While it would not be appropriate for me to go into detail here, by Sally’s description what her son went through was pretty damn horrific – disablist abuse in the highest form. I just went over to see if I could help.

It was a pretty cool afternoon and evening. I got there too early, but apart from that, we had a lot of fun. Sally wants Luke to be more independent, and seems to think – somewhat bizarrely – that I could be an excellent rolemodel. If I can help of course I will. Yesterday, though, was more about fun, and I’m pleased to report we spent a merry couple of hours in the Railway Tavern, talking, drinking, and watching Turkish Football.

[img description=”undefined image” align=”centre”]/images/tory poster 1.jpg[/img]

I suppose I’m growing rather curmudgeonly in my old age, or too proud. It’s a bright afternoon here in se7, and L and I are off out soon, but suddenly I feel rather grumpy and cynical. One of my online associates has called me up on my use of language, saying that I should use the term ‘disabled people’ rather than ‘people with disabilities’. The argument goes that, as society puts up barriers which hold me back, I am a disabled person, as you would disable a component on a computer by switching it off. A more-or-less valid point, I suppose. As a writer, though, nothing irritates me more than folk telling me what language to use: I like variety, and, given that there are arguments for and against both forms, see no reason not to interchange between the two. Indeed, you could say that to disable something on a computer is to switch it off, make it obsolete, and I am very much still on. Moreover, things like this come and go with fashion. Of course, I know enough about Lacan to know how important language is, but it just seems like certain members of the crip community like to show their mastery by calling you out on language, rather than dealing with the actual arguments. After all, when one is at full speed writing about how the current government is oppressing us, such trivialities barely enter your head.

Night falls over the city, as this new year dawns.

Looking forward to what life brings, in all its viriety and forms.

In the air outside there is a distinct chill:

Feels as if it will snow soon, but still…

Spring will soon arrive, and with it the warm

Summer will soon follow, as night precedes dawn. So an exciting new year beckons, full of action and fun

A marvellous new year! Bright as the sun.

Another year is drawing to it’s end, and it has been a great one. This was the year I completed and graduated my masters; the year I watched Monty Python perform live, something I had once discounted as impossible, yet happened just round the corner at the O2 arena. Even more special – and part of me still cannot believe this actually happened – was meeting Sir Patrick Stewart: words cannot describe how significant those few moments back in October were for me, after spending so long writing about the Ahab scene from First Contact. I feel truly lucky, truly privileged. This was also the year Lyn performed at the liberty festival, and that my nephew Oliver was born. This year has indeed been special.

Yet to my right, tacked to the wall, is a list of everything coming up in 2015. It is quite extensive, and packed with things I almost cannot wait for. An amazing year beckons. It is hard to see how 2014 could possibly be topped, but somehow, glancing at my still-growing list, I have a feeling it could be.

I might need to reappraise my review of Marvellous. Lyn and I are currently rewatching it. A glitch with Iplayer has caused a hiatus, but we are near the end, and I find myself much more impressed this time. Fool that I am, I did not realise it was based on a true story; I didn’t spot the switching between fiction and real footage; I did not pick up upon it’s self-knowing, ‘did this actually happen’ aspect. I am now really into it – it is a very interesting film, if you realise what is going on. It just goes to show that you must never watch a film just once.

I just stumbled over something truly, truly remarkable. The BFI has restored the first ever british science fiction film, A Message From Mars, dating from 1913. It can be viewed online here. I was just doing so, and it blew my mind: The picture seems aged, but somehow still crisp. What excites me are the backgrounds and peripheral details: you can see all sorts of things like vintage cars and trees blown by the wind. It is like looking into a world long passed. Another cool thing about this film is the sound track: I don’t know what happened to the original, but the BFI commissioned Matthew Herbert to create a new soundscape for the film. I think it works wonderfully. Excitingly, my friend Hugh Jones, Charlotte’s brother, worked with him, which is how I came across the news of this film. I think they did a great job – excellent stuff indeed!

I’m afraid this is another relatively short link-based post, but I really must draw attention to this rather nice article about Viktoria Modesta, probably the world’s first amputee pop star. The way she chooses to put her disability so overtly on show is truly great, especially in an age obsessed with the perfect image, but the article does well to tease out one or two of the more problematic sides to it, too. Definitely worth a read.

It is so weird and fascinating that I really must flag this up. The phenomenon of the jumping beads was only recently discovered, and nobody fully understands what is happening or why yet, but I find it completely hypnotic and wondrous. I have always had a sort of casual interest in science, and this reignites it. If you haven’t seen the bead chain experiment yet, trust me, it will blow your mind.

Huge applause must go to the beeb for airing The boy in the Dress yesterday. While some of the characterisation struck me as a little obvious and heavy-handed, I thought it was a nice little film which broke some ground on the transgender front. It was brave of the bbc to make it – you can almost hear the narrow-minded conservative types tutting about political correctness going mad, and multicultural liberalism being rammed down their throats. I love it!

Smeg knows how I forgot about it, but we had been there before – I even blogged about it. Yet yesterday, as we went into Dominik’s place for christmas dinner, I had no memory of ever visiting the place. That worried me slightly, but Lyn showed me the picture, and I read my blog entry, and it all came flooding back. Coincidentally enough, Lyn had given me a light like the one in the picture as a christmas gift.

We were there, of course, for christmas dinner. To be honest I felt a little overdressed, as Dom had told me to wear a suit and everyone else except Lyn was in casuals; but then, it always rules to wear a suit. It turned out to be a marvellous evening: rather than turkey, we had all kinds of delicious vegetarian polish delicacies. There was plenty of it, and plenty to drink too. After dinner, we got some music going; Lyn did a mix, and we had a jam. While it wasn’t quite a traditional christmas dinner, sat there so smart, I felt really happy…I just hope I remember it.

I note that Sony has changed it’s mind and released The Interview, albeit in a limited way. Good news for free speech and so on, but here’s a thought: what if the shoe was on the other foot? What if North Korea, or some other authoritarian state, produced a film depicting the killing of the president of America and making the CIA and FBI out to be a bunch of bungling fools? Wouldn’t america try to have it banned immediately? Wouldn’t they brand it ‘hate speech’ or ‘propaganda’? Of course they would! They’d pounce on it and make sure it never saw the light of day. Free speech, it seems, only applies if america or it’s allies are speaking.

On that note, merry christmas everyone.

Merry Christmas, one and all

As we go to bed tonight. Excited at what Santa may bring

Come the morning light.

For me, I’m happy to be here

With the one I love

Soon cuddled beneath a duvet

With the Stars above.

Relish this, one and all

For time passes too fast.

Listening to music as evening falls,

Wanting this Christmas moment to last.

As a lifelong fan of star trek, I am now deeply upset and angry. Today I got wind that the thirteenth Star Trek film will be directed by justin Lin. I had never heard of him, but he apparently Directed a few Fast and Furious films and some tv shows I’d never heard of. Just when I thought Paramount couldn’t wreck my favourite franchise any further, they hire a hack who creates cartoonish, meaningless films about stealing cars to direct the next film. Do they have no respect for the franchise or it’s fans?

A few week ago my hopes were raised when I heard a rumour that Jonathan Frakes was going to direct: Frakes, of course, knows and understands Star trek. He directed arguably the best film of the series, First Contact; a film which I adore and describe my relationship with in my Masters. Frakes could have rescued the series from the car crash of the last two films, restored the proper timeline, put everything right. Was that too much to ask?

Yes, apparently. Instead I fear we trekkies have another insult to look forward to. Something which takes characters and themes we grew to love and totally distorts them from Gene Roddebery’s original conception. His vision was liberal and left wing; of an earth unified, working together as one people to explore the galaxy. I fear that, like so much hollywood output these days, it has been perverted into something crass and base, focussed on competition, greed and the self. I might be wrong, but my hunch is the next film will be a car crash based along those lines, saturated with lens-flairs and a derivative, greed-based plot. How I miss proper star trek, and how can they keep insulting Roddenbery’s vision?

I am just on the way home from visiting my grandma. She lives on the other side of london to us, and it takes a good two hours to reach her, so I rarely make this trip. Yet, as Dominik pushes me through the dark of this vast metropolis, I reflect on the fact that I just sat at the table I first sat at thirty years ago, and that the old family house has barely changed. It makes me feel warm, visiting that place we so often visited during my childhood. A place of toys and chocolate, of visiting selfridges Father Christmas, and of the unconditional love of grandparents. And suddenly it feels like Christmas.

I just came across this little gem. It seems Mike Myers has waded into the Sony/North Korea debacle by ‘hijacking’ Saturday night Live, in character as Dr. Evil, and taking the piss out of the entire affair. As serious as some say it is, in a way it is also quite farcical, and definitely worth lampooning. This is one of those fiction-into-reality moments I like too, and the speed at which Myers filmed and put this out is also rather impressive.

I think I better flag this highly salient film-related piece up. By Will Gompertz, it discusses Selma, a forthcoming biopic of Martin Luther king, demonstrating it’s relevance today. In the sixties, a black president was unthinkable; yet despite Obama being in the white house, racism is still a major problem, both in America and here. As Gompertz points out, events in Furguson this year made the timing of the film’s release quite uncanny, bringing the question of police racism front and centre once again; the situation is as tense as it ever was. We also have the issue of censorship and free speech cropping up this week in relation to North Korea: I don’t quite know what to make of that row, but Gompertz makes a link, stating that, given freedom of expression is enshrined in the American Constitution, Sony’s decision not to release that film is quite staggering. I think I agree; sony seems to be kowtowing to despots, effectively setting a very worrying precedent. Are all American film houses going to have to restrain themselves for fear of offending someone from now on? That would blunt this sharpest of tools. What would Dr. King have said?

I am currently in a pub full of men of either Jamaican or African ancestry. It’s fairly brusque; the rap music, which I do not recognise, is loud. The atmosphere is very male, very competitve. Yet, as I sit here in this south London pub, I cannot help wondering what would happen if these highly masculine men ever found out that the guy in the wheelchair is wearing a pair of knickers with read heart-shaped polka dots. Oh how I love this irony.

Today is a very good day for disability and comedy – I have some great news. Lost Voice Guy, a comedian who uses a communication aid, lat night won the prestigious BBC Radio Two New Comedy Award. To my knowledge, this is the first time a VOCA user has won an award for stand up comedy. I have been aware, albeit fairly vaguely, of Lost Voice Guy for quite a while, having seen bits of his act on Youtube and so on, but now I really want to go see him live. It’s great to see one of ‘us’ being so prominent. The good thing is, his material is genuinely funny; this is not about tokenism but true comic talent. His star is rising, too, so with any luck we will be seeing a lot more of Lee Ridley from now on. Who knows – in a few years, maybe Lyn and I will go see him at the o2. For now, though, it’s great to see voca users being taken seriously.

Is it me, or is this article just a string of disability-related cliches tagged on to one another? By RJ Mitte, who plays a character with CP in Breaking Bad, no doubt it is intended to sound inspirational: I just scanned through it, an was struck by how little it actually says. While I of course think it’s terrific that through him we at last have a character with a disability on mainstream tv – albeit american – I think he could do better than trot out such pukeworthy phrases as ”It’s time to show people that disability has ability in it. People look at a disability as a weakness but it should be seen as a strength”. Oh well – on the whole I suppose it’s a step in the right direction. Mind you, even more concerning is that the article mentions that, in an upcoming program, Mitte will be playing a character with Muscular Dystrophy. Do they not realise that cp and md are two very different conditions, or do they just think physically disabled people are all the same?

Dominik just sent me this fascinating short Polish film. Teija Gumilar comes from Indonesia, as a country that touts several thousand islands. He has lived in Poland for thirteen years. Teija teaches advanced equipment designs at the Adam Mickiewicz University . To understand the world of people with disabilities, decided to adopt our point of view by using a wheelchair for extended periods. Frankly, I think that is an experience any architecture or design student should have: even these days, far too often I come across things and spaces obviously designed by people with absolutely no idea what life is like on four wheels. Thus this great, uplifting film is worth a watch.

My thoughts today go back to Sydney, to that wonderful bright city I visited seven years ago. Of course, I know as much about this as anyone else, but it appears that the siege there has now come to an end. I was shocked to learn of it when I turned the computer on this morning – I immediately contacted my friend Darryl, who lives in Adelaide: naturally he knew about as much as I did. This is a very worrying event, and what it means I know not; but given that this gunman, lone though he seems to have been, appears to have aligned himself to so-called Islamic State, this may be a sign of something much wider and more violent. That is truly worrying, yet that aside, tonight my memories go back to a city I love – it is truly heartbreaking to see such horrific violence there.

Mostly because I saw it yesterday, Tonight I’ll flag this mashup of The Hobbit and the Office up. I usually like the stuff Saturday Night Live do: most of it is well made and very funny, and indeed this little sketch did make me laugh. Yet it seems more parody than anything – an attempt to laugh at rather than with the source material. I can’t help but worry that this is what Tolkien’s epic creation has now been made into – another mainstream narrative; fodder for programmes like SNL. It was to be expected, I suppose, and certainly stands as testimony to the breathtaking success of Peter Jackson’s adaptation. Yet, having loved Tolkien’s books for most of my life, I can’t help feeling that they have now been changed. Something once personal has been made universal, and has been altered for me in the process.

I a am just on the way back from watching the Battle of five armies, and I don’t think I have ever felt in two minds so much about a film before. On the one hand it just seemed like one battle sequence tacked on to another, while Jackson plays fast and ,loose with Tolkien cannon. On the other, this is a tale I love, and characters I grew up with. To see this film cycle come to an end, after so long, makes me feel rather sad. What I need to do now is sit down with the DVDs and watch them all in order. Think what an entry that will make,

Last night’s question time was the best edition I have ever seen; I mean, I found it truly entertaining. To see Brand and Farage duke it out was a spectacle to behold. To tell the truth, though, I’m not sure who came off the better: Brand laid into Farage, and got some very good points in, yet at times he seemed like a one-track record, too eager to score points and go on the attack than to deal with the questions at hand. This irritated me slightly, and I think he could have been better – he gave his detractors too much ammunition. Farage was, of course, classic Farage: arrogant, assuming a superiority he does not deserve, and dissembling his head off The way he tried to neutralise a report proving his views on overcrowding wrong by simply attacking it’s author tells you all you need to know about this puerile little man. But he didn’t say anything to make me too angry: at no point did I feel the urge to throw anything at the tv, or leave the room enraged, as usually happens hen that p’tahk is on. In all, then, quite an awesome episode, and one I’m sure we will be hearing quite a bit spoken about in the coming hours and days.

Russel Brand goes on question time tonight with Nigel Farage. I’m really looking forward to it; it will probably turn out to be rather epic, even historic, although I better hold back from writing much about it ’till tomorrow. Let’s hope Brand humiliates farage, and the dissembling little xenophobe gets the arse-kicking he deserves. In the meantime, let me just direct you here, to a video of brand explaining exactly what damage the tories are doing to the NHS – it will make you sick.

It appears I may have been a bit too pessimistic in my recent entry about what I call ‘the bus wars’. The ruling was actually more accommodating than I/we first thought. A summary of it can be found here. In fact, if you look at the detail, some reasonable progress has been made on the issue. For example, ”The bus company MUST provide training for bus drivers and devise strategies that drivers can adopt to persuade people to clear the wheelchair space”. The problem is, how many bus drivers or pram pushers will realise this, and simply assume that prams can now hog the wheelchair space?

Marta, our PA, just caught me out. I had just come in from a walk and we were snacking on some bread and cheese, when she asked me ”Are you staying here or going home this christmas?” Before I could think, I replied that I was staying here. A second or so later, my mind went into gear, and I added ”But this is my home!” I felt slightly bad about it – part of me must still think of our family home in cheshire as home; as a northerner living in Londoner, I still feel a bit of an outsider. Yet that was her point: as somebody from Poland, Marta added, people ask her that very question all the time, yet she is now as much a Londoner as they are. It’s odd, when you think about it: what exactly is home, and why should London be more of a home to one person than to another? Why would one group of people get asked questions like that, ad not another, in this great maelstrom of the world’s peoples. London is my home, now, as it is Marta’s. We are both home for christmas.

Today, it seems, is not a good day for the disability community. As well as the abysmal news concerning busses I flagged up earlier – which was, by the way, just covered on the bbc lunchtime bulletin – we have also lost a major case which tried to save the Independent Living Fund. This is tragic, as it means millions of people who rely in the fund to live independently now have a very uncertain future; quite possibly it will mean institutionalisation for many. On top of that, it sees we have lost our excellent comrade Stella Young. Stella, who I had the good fortune to meet back in 2012, was a high profile disability rights campaigner. It is reported that she died unexpectedly in Melbourne on Saturday, aged 32. Not a good day for our community at all.

I was in a good mood this morning, but having just got back to my computer, this has suddenly muddied my temper. ”Bus companies are not required by law to force parents with buggies to make way for wheelchair users in designated bays on vehicles, senior judges ruled.” Are you zarking kidding me?! Do you know how many times I have had to wait out in a cold, wet bus stop because some selfish mum has refused to move? Prams can easily be folded, wheelchairs cannot; yet the Judge in question said ”It has to be accepted that our conclusion and reasoning in this case means that wheelchair users will occasionally be prevented by other passengers from using the wheelchair space on the bus.

”I do not, however, believe that the fact that some passengers will – albeit rarely – act selfishly and irresponsibly is a sufficient reason for imposing on bus companies a legal responsibility for a situation which is not of their making and which they are not in a position to prevent” How naive can he be? Mums will simply seize on this ruling and use it as an excuse never to move, even though they have an alternative we chair users do not. Believe me, some of those bitches can be vindictive and spiteful. Thus this ruling is an absolute travesty, and boils down to an act of gross, blatant discrimination.

As I noted here I am a bit of a Stephen hawking fan. His surprise appearance singing The Galaxy Song at Monty Python Live ruled, as did his appearances in Star Trek, the Simpsons and so on. I just think it’s good to see a communication aid user being so prominent. On the other hand, you could say he has become a stereotype, an absolute self-publicist keen to trot himself out whenever anyone needs a token crippled genius. Indeed, when I first read a couple of days ago that Hawking would like to be in a Bond film, I thought it was an excellent idea: he’d be perfect, say, making a cameo in Q-branch. But then I read on, and thought a bit more. In fact, Hawking would like to be a bond baddie, and that is highly problematic. Is the guy deliberately trying to reinforce stereotypes?! Does he like being used as a human cliche? It would be so crass, so obvious; no wonder the disability community hates the idea. A small, unobtrusive cameo would be fine, but please, prof, don’t degrade yourself like that – don’t become your own caricature!