Election update: Last night the deputy leader of the opposition went on national television to conduct a staring competition with a garden gnome. This is what passes for serious political debate in my country. A series of intimate leaks from the heart of the government have so infuriated our prime minister that for a short while during a press conference she actually looked alive. Hopefully she can ride this newly discovered pulse registration into an election victory. Tony Abbott the leader, for want of a better word, of the opposition (again, for want of a better word) has been making great play with the fact he has a wife and several daughters to try and dispel the belief that women don't like him.
It has been accepted as a fact that women don't like Abbott. That is to say the media have repeated it so often that even they believe it. Tony's support does seem to be down among women but its always possible that his support is simply higher among men. Possibly men don't like Julia Gillard, nobody seems to have thought of that. I used to like Julia Gillard until she launched her election campaign, now I'm largely indifferent but I suspect that the media witchdoctors surrounding her would prefer us to be indifferent to having a strong opinion either way. The fewer opinions we have the less likely it is that we will notice that neither of our political parties seem to have any either.
In lighter news a man in Austria has been eaten by maggots. Seriously, he went to bed one night and got seriously chewed up by the chitinous little beggars and died in an ambulance on the way to hospital. His partner is being questioned by police. What exactly are they going to ask her?
"Did you see which way they went?" Apparently the man had had a stroke some years ago and had got out of the habit of washing.
Still on things carnivorous, Austrian style, a fisherman in the south of the country caught a piranha the other day. It was the second piranha to be caught in the last couple of weeks. Obviously the Austrian strain of piranha is somewhat stupider than its South American cousin. The only other explanation is that the waters of Austria are swarming with devil fish. If so then the maggots have serious competition. The next headline out of Vienna will be "Man eaten by piranha while he sleeps".
They do things a little differently in Austria; they are German but not really, they had an empire but a very silly one and the cleverest police officer in the country is a dog. Although perhaps this doesn't matter too much if the most important cases he has to investigate are the Mystery of the Hungry Maggots and the Case of the Seriously Lost Piranha. We do things a little differently in Australia too but the truly surreal stuff we leave for election campaigns. Like staring competitions with garden gnomes. How can you not vote for someone like that.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Maybe Wikileaks Can Find an Election Policy
Wikileaks has got their hands on ninety thousand documents proving that the war in Afghanistan is kinda screwed. Who knew? Apart from everybody that is. Seriously while these leaks may provide depth and intimate detail of the exact way in which the war is screwed the essential screwedness of the war should surprise nobody. The Americans made their big mistake when they decided to hold it in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is not a place anyone should hold a war.
If one looks at the history of Afghanistan over the centuries it becomes increasingly obvious that the place is the military equivalent of an elephants graveyard. It's where the armies of various empires crawl away to die. The British invaded Afghanistan (three times, so much for them being fast learners) and on each occasion left faster than they went in. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan with horrifying results. Take Rambo III for example. The Iranians have invaded Afghanistan at various times with no good result and even Alexander the Great didn't hang around very long after proclaiming his dominance of the area. Invading Afghanistan is something you should only do if exercises in futility are a hobby of yours.
I read a book on one of the British invasions of Afghanistan (I forget which one) which had an interesting quote from an Afghan tribal leader of the nineteenth century. His British interlocutor had been expounding on the benefits to be gained from living under Britannia's benevolent sceptre and in response the Afghan said, "it is true that we can gain much from British rule but we will never tolerate a ruler who can tell us what to do". That last bit should be written in gold in letters ten feet high. Afghanistan is a lawless chaotic mess principally because a goodly number of Afghans prefer it to the alternative. People with degrees in sociology and civilisation building need not apply.
Eventually the Americans and their various hangers on (I mean us) will leave and Afghanistan will carry on as before until next time. Oddly, there probably will be a next time as people just can't seem to keep away from the place. Why? There are nicer places to invade. There are countries where a state of war would be safer than peace in Afghanistan, most of them actually. But people keep coming back to Afghanistan.
In a way its flattering. The current invasion has really put Afghanistan on the map. People are flying in, earning huge salaries (paid for by aid euphemistically described as going to Afghanistan) and leaving again. While there they can dabble in drug smuggling, resource plundering, office buying and various other traditional pass times. Once this invasion is done of course Afghanistan will drop off the map again and the Afghans will have to smuggle their own damn drugs.
The other thing that wikileaks discovered is that the Pakistani ISI has been bankrolling the Taliban. Again, who knew? I did. Anybody else with half a brain did as well. For ninety thousand documents this latest release is surprisingly short on interest. I may not have been across all the particulars but so far nothing that has been revealed has surprised me in the least. I wonder what people expected? Do they hope that buried in the documents is an admission that the United States intended to invade Tajikistan but took a wrong turn at Albuquerque?
The war in Afghanistan surfaced briefly in the leaders debate we had last week for our increasingly wretched election campaign. It took both leaders about thirty seconds to state that we are there, would continue to be there until the job was done and they supported our troops. It must be nice for our troops to know that their presence in Afghanistan has the support of the people who sent them there, at least in general terms. After that the war sank beneath the radar again. The rest of the debate seemed to be a competition to see which leader could say the least in the most boring way possible. The debate was televised and was actually rescheduled and cut short so that it didn't clash with the final of Masterchef which was on immediately after it. This gave the debate more respect than it deserved. The networks should have refused to broadcast it at all out of respect for their audience. I watched the whole damn thing and I can't remember a single thing about it except that nothing much happened.
The media generally agreed that our current prime minister won the debate more or less but that the opposition leader gained a boost because he didn't swing from the overhead lighting while hooting like a gibbon. Honours pretty much even I'd say. Now that the debate is over, thank god, the politicians have returned to saying even less than they did at the debate. This would be all right except that they refuse to shut up while not saying anything. Normally a government can run on its record, unfortunately the currently leader of the government knifed her predecessor a few weeks ago because of the governments record. Normally an opposition can point to chaos and instability in the government as a bad sign however we are currently on our third opposition leader since the last election and the current incumbent is working very hard trying not to say what he thinks. This is made more amusing by the fact that he released a political autobiography only a few months ago in which he made it very clear what he thinks. He is now desperately hoping nobody has read it.
Having made huge commitments and screwed them all up the government is now avoiding committing to anything at all while at the same time trying to come up with a reason why we should vote for them. At the moment their slogan seems to be "At least we're not the opposition". The oppositions slogan is "Vote for us we're not the government". Both of these messages are resonating with those sections of the public who would have voted for them anyway, except when they're not.
A plague on both their houses, I hope that whoever wins will show more courage, personality and even interest in governing the country than either of them are displaying at the moment. You could get a more vibrant display of competition and interchange of ideas in a chook raffle. Immigration seems to be some sort of issue although its difficult to tell as both sides are trying to say they want to reduce it without actually having to reduce it or something along those lines perhaps. Global warming gets a lot of airtime thus contributing to the problem without bringing us any closer to a solution. The prime minister has announced that she will summon a citizens assembly of a hundred and fifty or so people to advise the government on what it should do. We already have one of those; its called the government. A more wretched abdication of responsibility would be harder to find. The opposition seems to think that asking polluters nicely will make them stop, or reduce or something but they don't really care because they don't believe its a problem anyway but they haven't got the guts to say so. The opposition leader did say so but several months ago before the election was called and I suspect that his media advisers have kidnapped his wife and family in an attempt to keep him on message.
As Australia limps towards its democratic expression like a mortally wounded deer I find myself with a strange paradox. How can something so bland be so nauseating.
If one looks at the history of Afghanistan over the centuries it becomes increasingly obvious that the place is the military equivalent of an elephants graveyard. It's where the armies of various empires crawl away to die. The British invaded Afghanistan (three times, so much for them being fast learners) and on each occasion left faster than they went in. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan with horrifying results. Take Rambo III for example. The Iranians have invaded Afghanistan at various times with no good result and even Alexander the Great didn't hang around very long after proclaiming his dominance of the area. Invading Afghanistan is something you should only do if exercises in futility are a hobby of yours.
I read a book on one of the British invasions of Afghanistan (I forget which one) which had an interesting quote from an Afghan tribal leader of the nineteenth century. His British interlocutor had been expounding on the benefits to be gained from living under Britannia's benevolent sceptre and in response the Afghan said, "it is true that we can gain much from British rule but we will never tolerate a ruler who can tell us what to do". That last bit should be written in gold in letters ten feet high. Afghanistan is a lawless chaotic mess principally because a goodly number of Afghans prefer it to the alternative. People with degrees in sociology and civilisation building need not apply.
Eventually the Americans and their various hangers on (I mean us) will leave and Afghanistan will carry on as before until next time. Oddly, there probably will be a next time as people just can't seem to keep away from the place. Why? There are nicer places to invade. There are countries where a state of war would be safer than peace in Afghanistan, most of them actually. But people keep coming back to Afghanistan.
In a way its flattering. The current invasion has really put Afghanistan on the map. People are flying in, earning huge salaries (paid for by aid euphemistically described as going to Afghanistan) and leaving again. While there they can dabble in drug smuggling, resource plundering, office buying and various other traditional pass times. Once this invasion is done of course Afghanistan will drop off the map again and the Afghans will have to smuggle their own damn drugs.
The other thing that wikileaks discovered is that the Pakistani ISI has been bankrolling the Taliban. Again, who knew? I did. Anybody else with half a brain did as well. For ninety thousand documents this latest release is surprisingly short on interest. I may not have been across all the particulars but so far nothing that has been revealed has surprised me in the least. I wonder what people expected? Do they hope that buried in the documents is an admission that the United States intended to invade Tajikistan but took a wrong turn at Albuquerque?
The war in Afghanistan surfaced briefly in the leaders debate we had last week for our increasingly wretched election campaign. It took both leaders about thirty seconds to state that we are there, would continue to be there until the job was done and they supported our troops. It must be nice for our troops to know that their presence in Afghanistan has the support of the people who sent them there, at least in general terms. After that the war sank beneath the radar again. The rest of the debate seemed to be a competition to see which leader could say the least in the most boring way possible. The debate was televised and was actually rescheduled and cut short so that it didn't clash with the final of Masterchef which was on immediately after it. This gave the debate more respect than it deserved. The networks should have refused to broadcast it at all out of respect for their audience. I watched the whole damn thing and I can't remember a single thing about it except that nothing much happened.
The media generally agreed that our current prime minister won the debate more or less but that the opposition leader gained a boost because he didn't swing from the overhead lighting while hooting like a gibbon. Honours pretty much even I'd say. Now that the debate is over, thank god, the politicians have returned to saying even less than they did at the debate. This would be all right except that they refuse to shut up while not saying anything. Normally a government can run on its record, unfortunately the currently leader of the government knifed her predecessor a few weeks ago because of the governments record. Normally an opposition can point to chaos and instability in the government as a bad sign however we are currently on our third opposition leader since the last election and the current incumbent is working very hard trying not to say what he thinks. This is made more amusing by the fact that he released a political autobiography only a few months ago in which he made it very clear what he thinks. He is now desperately hoping nobody has read it.
Having made huge commitments and screwed them all up the government is now avoiding committing to anything at all while at the same time trying to come up with a reason why we should vote for them. At the moment their slogan seems to be "At least we're not the opposition". The oppositions slogan is "Vote for us we're not the government". Both of these messages are resonating with those sections of the public who would have voted for them anyway, except when they're not.
A plague on both their houses, I hope that whoever wins will show more courage, personality and even interest in governing the country than either of them are displaying at the moment. You could get a more vibrant display of competition and interchange of ideas in a chook raffle. Immigration seems to be some sort of issue although its difficult to tell as both sides are trying to say they want to reduce it without actually having to reduce it or something along those lines perhaps. Global warming gets a lot of airtime thus contributing to the problem without bringing us any closer to a solution. The prime minister has announced that she will summon a citizens assembly of a hundred and fifty or so people to advise the government on what it should do. We already have one of those; its called the government. A more wretched abdication of responsibility would be harder to find. The opposition seems to think that asking polluters nicely will make them stop, or reduce or something but they don't really care because they don't believe its a problem anyway but they haven't got the guts to say so. The opposition leader did say so but several months ago before the election was called and I suspect that his media advisers have kidnapped his wife and family in an attempt to keep him on message.
As Australia limps towards its democratic expression like a mortally wounded deer I find myself with a strange paradox. How can something so bland be so nauseating.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Of Course the Chameleon Speaks French
I was watching television a short while ago. This is something I do periodically when I don't feel like thinking too much. Mostly its ok but I do sometimes get irritated with all those programs they feel they have to slip between the ad breaks. There is a commercial at the moment which is doing the rounds for an iced tea called Nestea. It features a chameleon with a French accent. Let's just think about that for a moment. A Swiss company is selling iced tea in Australia by using an animal from Madagascar with a French accent. It's either a triumph of multiculturalism or a subtle protest at exploitative French colonial practices in south east Africa. Pick whichever one seems the least ridiculous to you.
That nestea gets everywhere, they even sell it in Mongolia (in peach or green tea with lemon flavours). Tea is not the first thing that comes to mind when I think of refreshing Mongolian beverages. Horse milk and gallon jugs of vodka seem more appropriate but things are changing in Mongolia. Apparently the capital now has buildings that don't fold up and get slung on the back of a horse when grazing gets poor. There is a new up and coming Mongolian elite and they drink peach flavoured iced tea.
I suppose things could be worse, the last time there was an up and coming Mongolian elite they upped and came as far as the Danube river leaving a trail of devastation behind them. Now the only trail of devastation comes from poorly maintained aircraft. While we're waiting for the hordes of Ghenghiz Khan to come galloping across the plain leaving a scattering iced tea bottles and condemned aeroplane parts in their wake we can sit back and enjoy the antics of chameleons with improbable French accents on tv. Sometimes I wonder if anybody in this country would actually recognise a genuine French accent if they heard one. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't.
All across the world people are watching tv commercials and sniggering at accents that have been pretty much invented on the spot. Eventually there will be an entirely new language; Commercialese which will unite the world in mutual incomprehension. We will sit there with our iced tea and try to work out whether the chameleon is speaking English with a bad French accent or possibly Finnish with a bad Iranian accent. One thing I'm sure of; it won't have a Malagasy accent. Not even in Madagascar.
That nestea gets everywhere, they even sell it in Mongolia (in peach or green tea with lemon flavours). Tea is not the first thing that comes to mind when I think of refreshing Mongolian beverages. Horse milk and gallon jugs of vodka seem more appropriate but things are changing in Mongolia. Apparently the capital now has buildings that don't fold up and get slung on the back of a horse when grazing gets poor. There is a new up and coming Mongolian elite and they drink peach flavoured iced tea.
I suppose things could be worse, the last time there was an up and coming Mongolian elite they upped and came as far as the Danube river leaving a trail of devastation behind them. Now the only trail of devastation comes from poorly maintained aircraft. While we're waiting for the hordes of Ghenghiz Khan to come galloping across the plain leaving a scattering iced tea bottles and condemned aeroplane parts in their wake we can sit back and enjoy the antics of chameleons with improbable French accents on tv. Sometimes I wonder if anybody in this country would actually recognise a genuine French accent if they heard one. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't.
All across the world people are watching tv commercials and sniggering at accents that have been pretty much invented on the spot. Eventually there will be an entirely new language; Commercialese which will unite the world in mutual incomprehension. We will sit there with our iced tea and try to work out whether the chameleon is speaking English with a bad French accent or possibly Finnish with a bad Iranian accent. One thing I'm sure of; it won't have a Malagasy accent. Not even in Madagascar.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Scotch of the Antarctic
I seem to be scrutinising the Antarctic a fair bit lately. Perhaps its because the Antarctic is ground zero for quite a bit of the human stupidity that I like to make fun of when I'm not indulging in it myself. The latest news from points frosty? A museum in New Zealand is planning on thawing out some bottles of scotch which were left behind by Shackleton's unsuccessful attempt to reach the South Pole in 1909. When they left the Antarctic they abandoned the whisky.
Imagine taking a crate of scotch to the Antarctic with you? Since I am of a kind nature I will spare you the inevitable "Scotch of the Antarctic" jokes. You can just imagine Shackleton passing glasses around in his wretched, snowbound hut and apologising because there wasn't any ice. This is the difference between adventurers in days gone by and those we have today. Nowadays anybody going to the Antarctic for so much as a sight seeing trip would have enough survival gear to start a colony. In Shackleton's day preparations seemed to consist of "wear your heavier shirt and remember they don't have a bottle shop down there."
Shackleton was actually a member of one of Scott's Antarctic missions (not the one where everybody died) but was sent home due to illness. Refusing to take the hint he spent a good deal of the rest of his life finding excuses to go back. I find it difficult to understand the fascination that a frozen wilderness seems to have for certain people. Here is a description of the Antarctic; cold, windy, icy, penguins. The penguins (and of course the Weddell Seal) might be a reason for a quick look if your country is poorly provided with zoos but for the rest there seems to be no real point. The great explanation for these things is, of course, "because its there". Fine, when you can deliver it to "here" I might take a quick look.
Explorers have always captured the human imagination. We read the stories of these daring travellers wandering through the more desolate parts of the world and are impressed with human endurance, curiosity, courage and desire for knowledge. Or at least most of us do. I read these stories and wonder how they managed to go to the toilet when the weather was cold enough to freeze their piss before it hit the ground. A centrally heated port a loo would be part of my Antarctic equipment should I be silly enough to go there. It's not just the Antarctic either, Australia has its own fine tradition of explorers staggering through the desert dying of hunger and thirst while the local Aboriginal population who have lived there for millenia politely try to hide their smiles. It almost seems as though a place isn't worth finding unless something ghastly happened to the people who found it.
Imagine if you could catch a train to the unknown wilderness. Shackleton would just get out at Antarctic Junction walk a couple of miles and shout "hey I'm an explorer". Nobody would be very impressed. Similarly if you travelled through the untracked parts of the world and on your return commented "actually it was very easy, the weather was lovely, the natives friendly, food fell into your lap without asking for it and we managed to catch taxis most of the time so we didn't have to walk too far." I don't think anybody would be very interested even if you did discover an entirely new continent. No, you have to stumble back to civilisation wild eyed (and bearded) thin from hunger, carrying a couple of new diseases and with an arrow head or spear tip in a portion of your anatomy otherwise people just aren't interested. If you think your expedition might lack for this grisly form of glamour you can take steps to ensure that it does, like Shackleton.
The most amusing thing about Shackleton's scotch heavy Antarctic sojourn is the reason for its failure. They ran out of supplies. At some point while trekking through the icy wilderness Shackleton stopped guzzling scotch for long enough to realise that no one had packed the cheese and biscuits. There was nothing for it except to go home and be knighted by King Edward VIII who always managed to have a reasonable supply of whisky despite never getting closer to the Antarctic than the Isle of Wight.
Imagine taking a crate of scotch to the Antarctic with you? Since I am of a kind nature I will spare you the inevitable "Scotch of the Antarctic" jokes. You can just imagine Shackleton passing glasses around in his wretched, snowbound hut and apologising because there wasn't any ice. This is the difference between adventurers in days gone by and those we have today. Nowadays anybody going to the Antarctic for so much as a sight seeing trip would have enough survival gear to start a colony. In Shackleton's day preparations seemed to consist of "wear your heavier shirt and remember they don't have a bottle shop down there."
Shackleton was actually a member of one of Scott's Antarctic missions (not the one where everybody died) but was sent home due to illness. Refusing to take the hint he spent a good deal of the rest of his life finding excuses to go back. I find it difficult to understand the fascination that a frozen wilderness seems to have for certain people. Here is a description of the Antarctic; cold, windy, icy, penguins. The penguins (and of course the Weddell Seal) might be a reason for a quick look if your country is poorly provided with zoos but for the rest there seems to be no real point. The great explanation for these things is, of course, "because its there". Fine, when you can deliver it to "here" I might take a quick look.
Explorers have always captured the human imagination. We read the stories of these daring travellers wandering through the more desolate parts of the world and are impressed with human endurance, curiosity, courage and desire for knowledge. Or at least most of us do. I read these stories and wonder how they managed to go to the toilet when the weather was cold enough to freeze their piss before it hit the ground. A centrally heated port a loo would be part of my Antarctic equipment should I be silly enough to go there. It's not just the Antarctic either, Australia has its own fine tradition of explorers staggering through the desert dying of hunger and thirst while the local Aboriginal population who have lived there for millenia politely try to hide their smiles. It almost seems as though a place isn't worth finding unless something ghastly happened to the people who found it.
Imagine if you could catch a train to the unknown wilderness. Shackleton would just get out at Antarctic Junction walk a couple of miles and shout "hey I'm an explorer". Nobody would be very impressed. Similarly if you travelled through the untracked parts of the world and on your return commented "actually it was very easy, the weather was lovely, the natives friendly, food fell into your lap without asking for it and we managed to catch taxis most of the time so we didn't have to walk too far." I don't think anybody would be very interested even if you did discover an entirely new continent. No, you have to stumble back to civilisation wild eyed (and bearded) thin from hunger, carrying a couple of new diseases and with an arrow head or spear tip in a portion of your anatomy otherwise people just aren't interested. If you think your expedition might lack for this grisly form of glamour you can take steps to ensure that it does, like Shackleton.
The most amusing thing about Shackleton's scotch heavy Antarctic sojourn is the reason for its failure. They ran out of supplies. At some point while trekking through the icy wilderness Shackleton stopped guzzling scotch for long enough to realise that no one had packed the cheese and biscuits. There was nothing for it except to go home and be knighted by King Edward VIII who always managed to have a reasonable supply of whisky despite never getting closer to the Antarctic than the Isle of Wight.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Choosing a Pizza is More Important Than Choosing a Government
"A day off". Is there any more pleasant phrase in the English language? Well possibly, "its on the house" and "I'll let myself out" run it close but still I think "a day off" is pretty good. Its night on the second and last of my days off, rain is pouring down and amazon.com has just deposited their back catalogue of books on my doorstep. My neighbour believes I'm opening a library. In actual fact I'm opening parcels.
It's slightly pathetic but I get quite excited at opening parcels even when I bought them and I know what's in them. Actually I get more excited in that case because I know I'm going to like the contents and I know how much the purchaser spent to get them. There was a time in my youth when a letterbox was a persons connection to the wider world. Now all that comes are bills and flyers for local pizza delivery stores despite the presence of not one but two "no junk mail" stickers. The little cards from the post office telling me I have something too big to fit in the letter box are always a pleasant addition to my opportunity to get an anchovy and echidna gizzard pizza at half price if I buy two.
Gourmet pizzas give me the shits. Why must people take something as intrinsically boring as a pizza and try to make it interesting. If I was interested in gourmet food then the chances are pretty high that I wouldn't be buying a pizza anyway. This is what goes on a pizza; tomato paste, mozzarella, ham, onion and capsicum. If you want to be a little fancy you can add pepperoni and pineapple. Anything else on a pizza is simply trying to put lipstick on a pig, and that makes the pig taste funny.
I'm not sure why I started raving about pizza, I intended this to be an insightful, nay visionary, entry about Australia's upcoming election with shrewd analysis and witty banter to lighten my undeniable political points. Hmm, screw this, let's have a pizza.
For most people in this country making a decision on the type of pizza they're going to eat is likely to have more impact on their future lives than their voting decision. I live in a safe Labor seat which means I can cheerfully vote for anyone I like confident in the knowledge that it won't actually matter. How people who live in marginal electorates deal with the responsibility I don't know. This relative handful of people will decide which coterie of politicians will mismanage the public weal for the next three years (give or take). In the meantime the airwaves are flooded with advertising and the media attempt to give some brightness to what is essentially a long winded festival of the bland by chasing politicians all over the country on the off chance that they might actually say something.
Fortunately it will all be over in a few weeks. Unlike America where they essentially conduct a months long autopsy of their political leaders while they're still alive our election campaign will be over before Winter becomes Spring. When the green shoots sprout we will have a new government to lead us confidently forward into a future that will probably look very much like the present. This is the wonder of democracy, millions of people get up, vote, select their government and nothing changes very much. Which is good because when politics gets interesting it is generally a sign that things have gone horribly wrong.
It's slightly pathetic but I get quite excited at opening parcels even when I bought them and I know what's in them. Actually I get more excited in that case because I know I'm going to like the contents and I know how much the purchaser spent to get them. There was a time in my youth when a letterbox was a persons connection to the wider world. Now all that comes are bills and flyers for local pizza delivery stores despite the presence of not one but two "no junk mail" stickers. The little cards from the post office telling me I have something too big to fit in the letter box are always a pleasant addition to my opportunity to get an anchovy and echidna gizzard pizza at half price if I buy two.
Gourmet pizzas give me the shits. Why must people take something as intrinsically boring as a pizza and try to make it interesting. If I was interested in gourmet food then the chances are pretty high that I wouldn't be buying a pizza anyway. This is what goes on a pizza; tomato paste, mozzarella, ham, onion and capsicum. If you want to be a little fancy you can add pepperoni and pineapple. Anything else on a pizza is simply trying to put lipstick on a pig, and that makes the pig taste funny.
I'm not sure why I started raving about pizza, I intended this to be an insightful, nay visionary, entry about Australia's upcoming election with shrewd analysis and witty banter to lighten my undeniable political points. Hmm, screw this, let's have a pizza.
For most people in this country making a decision on the type of pizza they're going to eat is likely to have more impact on their future lives than their voting decision. I live in a safe Labor seat which means I can cheerfully vote for anyone I like confident in the knowledge that it won't actually matter. How people who live in marginal electorates deal with the responsibility I don't know. This relative handful of people will decide which coterie of politicians will mismanage the public weal for the next three years (give or take). In the meantime the airwaves are flooded with advertising and the media attempt to give some brightness to what is essentially a long winded festival of the bland by chasing politicians all over the country on the off chance that they might actually say something.
Fortunately it will all be over in a few weeks. Unlike America where they essentially conduct a months long autopsy of their political leaders while they're still alive our election campaign will be over before Winter becomes Spring. When the green shoots sprout we will have a new government to lead us confidently forward into a future that will probably look very much like the present. This is the wonder of democracy, millions of people get up, vote, select their government and nothing changes very much. Which is good because when politics gets interesting it is generally a sign that things have gone horribly wrong.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
What's That Beyond the Cathedral End?
I am currently inhabiting a strange netherworld, a gap if you will between times. Specifically it is the gap between when the tv guide says the cricket is going to start and the time when they actually start playing cricket. This shadowy void is a terrifying place, twisted shadows lurch, hunch forward and provide commentary on a game that hasn't begun yet. The previous days play is brutally, even sadistically, dissected and its entrails flung about for the amusement of the fell beings looming over microphones. In mocking contrast to the ghastliness the camera pans around the empty ground, a stretch of healthy living green that will soon grow white splotches as of some disease when the cricketers are finally unshackled and herded into the light. One crazed, fecular being after another babbles words of seeming reason into the microphone, the whole gathering into a mindless cacophony of sound that boggles the mind and causes the ears to bleed.
You might think from the above that I'm not really a fan of cricket commentary but actually I love it. There is a craftsmanship to cricket commentary that really isn't possible in other sports. Sure tennis and football commentators are semi articulate imbeciles spurting inanities and banalities in about equal number but these games are fast and the commentators have to think quickly to keep up. This is not easy when thinking at all is likely to cause the dust in their heads to catch fire. Cricket on the other hand is a languid, elegant game. It takes a long time for anything to happen and when it does it can be fruitfully discussed for hours. It is worth remembering when cricket commentators say something stupid, outrageous, self evident or just plain crazy that unlike their colleagues in most sports they have actually had time to think. The sort of gargling lunacies that football commentators come up with on the spur of the moment are from cricket commentators the result of leisured and reflective thought. I love cricket commentary. There is something about hearing a solemn and articulate man saying something outrageously stupid in a polite and reasonably well educated voice that amuses me.
The gold standard of course is to come up with something that can beat this effort from an occasion when English batsman Peter Willey was facing the bowling of West Indian Michael Holding. The quote from the commentator... "The bowler's Holding, the batsman's Willey" You couldn't script that stuff. If you tried nobody would believe it. Australian efforts aren't quite so good but I still remember watching a game where the commentator said, "And beyond the cathedral end you can see the..." and he stopped there for a second as he realised exactly how stupid what he was about say would sound but had no choice but to continue "err the cathedral".
I'm not a crazy sports fan but I quite like watching it when I have a moment and I frequently wonder why such fantastic displays of physical virtuosity have to be narrated by people who can't string a sentence together. I wouldn't change it though, not for the world. Cricket is interesting but the commentary makes it hysterical. If it weren't for football commentary all you would hear are the players screaming obscenities at each other. Seriously the football is on at 7.30 on a Friday night and you will hear the word "fuck" broadcast more often than in a French art film (or woeful American sex comedy) that airs at midnight. No wonder footballers are role models for our kids.
I would like to write more but I think the preview is over and actual cricket is about to start. Australia is playing Pakistan and due to minor death issues they are playing at Lords. Technically this is a home game for Pakistan, possibly they should have played it in Bradford.
You might think from the above that I'm not really a fan of cricket commentary but actually I love it. There is a craftsmanship to cricket commentary that really isn't possible in other sports. Sure tennis and football commentators are semi articulate imbeciles spurting inanities and banalities in about equal number but these games are fast and the commentators have to think quickly to keep up. This is not easy when thinking at all is likely to cause the dust in their heads to catch fire. Cricket on the other hand is a languid, elegant game. It takes a long time for anything to happen and when it does it can be fruitfully discussed for hours. It is worth remembering when cricket commentators say something stupid, outrageous, self evident or just plain crazy that unlike their colleagues in most sports they have actually had time to think. The sort of gargling lunacies that football commentators come up with on the spur of the moment are from cricket commentators the result of leisured and reflective thought. I love cricket commentary. There is something about hearing a solemn and articulate man saying something outrageously stupid in a polite and reasonably well educated voice that amuses me.
The gold standard of course is to come up with something that can beat this effort from an occasion when English batsman Peter Willey was facing the bowling of West Indian Michael Holding. The quote from the commentator... "The bowler's Holding, the batsman's Willey" You couldn't script that stuff. If you tried nobody would believe it. Australian efforts aren't quite so good but I still remember watching a game where the commentator said, "And beyond the cathedral end you can see the..." and he stopped there for a second as he realised exactly how stupid what he was about say would sound but had no choice but to continue "err the cathedral".
I'm not a crazy sports fan but I quite like watching it when I have a moment and I frequently wonder why such fantastic displays of physical virtuosity have to be narrated by people who can't string a sentence together. I wouldn't change it though, not for the world. Cricket is interesting but the commentary makes it hysterical. If it weren't for football commentary all you would hear are the players screaming obscenities at each other. Seriously the football is on at 7.30 on a Friday night and you will hear the word "fuck" broadcast more often than in a French art film (or woeful American sex comedy) that airs at midnight. No wonder footballers are role models for our kids.
I would like to write more but I think the preview is over and actual cricket is about to start. Australia is playing Pakistan and due to minor death issues they are playing at Lords. Technically this is a home game for Pakistan, possibly they should have played it in Bradford.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
It's True: Global Domination Does Go Better With Coke!
What is the most wretched day of the month? Answer: the day before payday. Fiscal comfort is so close I can smell it but when I go to the cash machine there is nothing but a tumbleweed blowing through the post apocalyptic wasteland of my bank account. Faced with such a grim reality I did the only thing I could, I went out for dinner. I dined on beef, cheese and an assortment of vegetables and grains. Or to put it another way I went to McDonalds.
Cultural imperialism rocks! I frequently see posters and various other poor mans internet sites decrying the pervasive nature of American cultural dominance. I, myself, have a t-shirt which says "Global domination goes better with Coke". Indeed it does, I choose to wear the t-shirt non ironically.
When people complain about somebody else's cultural dominance all they're really doing is having a sulk because the other people are better and more successful than they are. Let's face it, if your culture was so great the Americans would be copying it. Instead these sad and savage cultural warriors are reduced to snivelling about their own impotence and demanding that their government provide funds to sustain them. There can be no greater proof of a culture's essential irrelevance than the need for taxpayer dollars to keep it alive. If people wanted it they would pay for it themselves.
Some might argue that without government funding a good deal of cultural variety would vanish from the world and perhaps they're right but I wonder how many people would notice. I was aware of the existence of the Sydney Opera House for thirty years before I really knew what they did inside it. It took me another ten years before I actually went there. Even so I didn't see an opera (Bell Shakespeare's production of King Lear, excellent). Do we need funding for things most people wouldn't miss and why are things like opera and ballet considered more important culturally than the Wiggles or Walker Texas Ranger?
Much of our cultural heritage wasn't considered so when it was genuinely popular. It was just the latest show to go and see. If it's still popular people will still pay to see it. Ballet flourished in Britain because members of the aristocracy were banging the dancers. Shakespeare wrote unashamedly for the money and to hell with class, historical accuracy and believable scripts. While we're at it why don't we have funding for such lost cultural exploits as bear baiting and public executions? Artists up until quite recently acquired themselves a patron and created to order. If they didn't they tended to starve. Nobody sets out to create a culture. At some point in time a group of people look back at the various methods we've created to amuse ourselves and start writing arts theses about them,that's all.
In Australia we subsidise our film industry as part of an attempt to keep our culture alive. I don't think I'm the only one who suspects it might be kinder to let it die. In Spain culture is inextricably bound up with sticking sharp things into cattle without turning them in McHappy Meals. Both cruel and pointless. When you hear a country praised for its rich cultural traditions you can generally be pretty sure that a large proportion of its population would swap the lot for a cleaning job in America or Australia. Australians and Americans don't need to think too much about their culture or their glorious past because we have a future. At least Australia does, I'm getting a little unsure about America.
Of course it could be pointed out that I have selected a few isolated and dubious "facts", patched them together with a bit of invective and presented them as an argument. To which I would simply reply; this is a blog. It was designed solely to make the half baked theories, stupid ideas and degenerate rantings of obsessed and none too clever people available to a wide audience. In short it is a perfect expression of our culture. And it cost you absolutely nothing.
Cultural imperialism rocks! I frequently see posters and various other poor mans internet sites decrying the pervasive nature of American cultural dominance. I, myself, have a t-shirt which says "Global domination goes better with Coke". Indeed it does, I choose to wear the t-shirt non ironically.
When people complain about somebody else's cultural dominance all they're really doing is having a sulk because the other people are better and more successful than they are. Let's face it, if your culture was so great the Americans would be copying it. Instead these sad and savage cultural warriors are reduced to snivelling about their own impotence and demanding that their government provide funds to sustain them. There can be no greater proof of a culture's essential irrelevance than the need for taxpayer dollars to keep it alive. If people wanted it they would pay for it themselves.
Some might argue that without government funding a good deal of cultural variety would vanish from the world and perhaps they're right but I wonder how many people would notice. I was aware of the existence of the Sydney Opera House for thirty years before I really knew what they did inside it. It took me another ten years before I actually went there. Even so I didn't see an opera (Bell Shakespeare's production of King Lear, excellent). Do we need funding for things most people wouldn't miss and why are things like opera and ballet considered more important culturally than the Wiggles or Walker Texas Ranger?
Much of our cultural heritage wasn't considered so when it was genuinely popular. It was just the latest show to go and see. If it's still popular people will still pay to see it. Ballet flourished in Britain because members of the aristocracy were banging the dancers. Shakespeare wrote unashamedly for the money and to hell with class, historical accuracy and believable scripts. While we're at it why don't we have funding for such lost cultural exploits as bear baiting and public executions? Artists up until quite recently acquired themselves a patron and created to order. If they didn't they tended to starve. Nobody sets out to create a culture. At some point in time a group of people look back at the various methods we've created to amuse ourselves and start writing arts theses about them,that's all.
In Australia we subsidise our film industry as part of an attempt to keep our culture alive. I don't think I'm the only one who suspects it might be kinder to let it die. In Spain culture is inextricably bound up with sticking sharp things into cattle without turning them in McHappy Meals. Both cruel and pointless. When you hear a country praised for its rich cultural traditions you can generally be pretty sure that a large proportion of its population would swap the lot for a cleaning job in America or Australia. Australians and Americans don't need to think too much about their culture or their glorious past because we have a future. At least Australia does, I'm getting a little unsure about America.
Of course it could be pointed out that I have selected a few isolated and dubious "facts", patched them together with a bit of invective and presented them as an argument. To which I would simply reply; this is a blog. It was designed solely to make the half baked theories, stupid ideas and degenerate rantings of obsessed and none too clever people available to a wide audience. In short it is a perfect expression of our culture. And it cost you absolutely nothing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)