The quote is right at the end but it's worth reading the whole thing.
Ooh, and there's a film of The Dark is Rising in post-production. I wonder what it'll be like? And I guess that means the books will be re-issued.
As a sign of how strange my life is sometimes, I present a list of the parcels on my desk when I got into the office on Monday:
a top from Lochers
a copy of the Newsletter of the * Research Society that had a paper I'd written in it
Susan Hill's "The Dark is Rising" (a nostalgia kick hit me at the same time I was browsing Green Metropolis and I'm curious to see how I'd read it now I've been to places like Wales)
Shirley Hazzard's "The Great Fire".
I thought of a good one: sequacious scumbag. Or for a direct Keating quote, 'mangy maggot'.
An old but still amusing story: Rolf escapes accordion blaze.
...is where I am. I'm visiting my brother who moved to Berkshire a few weeks ago, and I've (tragically) snuck time online to do some work, and check out what's on at the fair at Highclere Castle we were thinking of visiting tomorrow.
Their website promises 'two days of world-class clay shooting and gundog action', including the Lurcher Display Team and the Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever Club and some gundog scurries, whatever they are!
And if you don't like dogs or clay pigeon shooting, there's ferret racing, stick makers and 'bodgers'. Of course we can't resist all that and we'll be there tomorrow, rain, drizzle, hail or mist.
I can't remember if I've posted about this before, but if you had to think of a phrase to describe John Howard in his role as Prime Minister of Australia, a la miserable failure, what would they be?
Suggestions so far have included Recalcitrant Weasel, Duplicitous Bigot, Mendacious Throwback, Reactionary, Machiavellian Despicable Derelict Misanthrope and finally Myopic Fear-monger.
This is the ABC's take on Amnesty's report:
This year Amnesty's annual report into global human rights abuses focuses on the politics of fear, and argues fear thrives on "myopic and cowardly leadership".The Government is singled out for criticism for its portrayal of "asylum seekers in leaky boats" as a "refugee invasion", which Amnesty secretary-general Irene Khan says contributed to John Howard's election win in 2001.
...
Amnesty spokeswoman Katie Wood says Australia also failed to act strongly on claims of mistreatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay."Australia should have been fairly sceptical of the assurances given by the United States, given the amount of information about torture and other ill treatment practised by the US in Guantanamo and elsewhere," she said.
"It should have been enough to put them on notice to really insist upon an independent and proper investigation into all those allegations made not only by David Hicks but also Mamdouh Habib."
...
The London-based group also says it is seriously concerned about the low rates of prosecution for violence against women and the "lack of support services for Indigenous women"."The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women expressed concern about the high level of violence against women, and the low rates of prosecution and convictions in sexual assault cases," the report said.
"The committee was also concerned about the continued violence and discrimination faced by women in Indigenous, refugee and migrant communities.
Amnesty hits Aust on refugees, women's rights, ABC
I notice the headline and the focus of the story have changed since I first saw the article. I guess the SMH fears Howard more than they fear Amnesty.
Anyway, the headline is now 'Amnesty claims a shoddy caricature, PM says'.
And the lead in:
"Prime Minister John Howard has robustly defended his government against claims by Amnesty International that it is as divisive as Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe's regime.The human rights pressure group has accused Mr Howard of portraying asylum-seekers as a threat to national security.
In a report released overnight, it also criticised Australia's role in the war on terror and its treatment of female victims of violence.
Amnesty secretary-general Irene Khan said the fear generated by leaders such as Mr Howard "thrives on myopic and cowardly leadership".
Ms Khan lumped Mr Howard in with Mr Mugabe, US President George W Bush and Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir in a paragraph about leaders who used fear to suit their political agenda."
I like what Howard's done here:
"In statement today, Mr Howard rejected the way Australia was characterised in the Amnesty report."
But Amnesty weren't taking it:
Ms Khan stood by her comments today, accusing the Howard government of having an "appalling" domestic human rights record regarding its treatment of asylum seekers and indigenous people.These failures had undermined its good work overseas
Howard said:
"I believe many Australians will be as offended by this report as I am"
Not if they've got any sense, they won't. Living in Europe gives me far too clear-sighted a vision of the damage Howard has done to Australia's reputation overseas.
Final word to Amnesty:
Ms Khan also urged Australian voters to think about giving others a "fair go'' at this year's election.
I must be soppy because I was really touched by this: 'I have never been better loved'.
"Thirty years after a boycott of Nestlé products was launched to highlight its unethical marketing of baby formula in developing countries, baby formula manufacturers are still failing in their responsibilities towards the world's poorest mothers and babies, Save the Children claims today.
It says around 1.4 million children die each year of illnesses such as diarrhoea that could have been prevented if they were being breastfed. But - despite the dangers of mixing infant formula with dirty water and using unsterile bottles - food companies continue to use aggressive marketing techniques to keep their share of a multi-million pound market.
Since 1981, baby milk manufacturers have been bound by a World Health Organisation-ratified code which bans direct marketing to mothers and free samples, which can undermine successful breastfeeding. But, the report says, "manufacturers are still flouting the code by heavily promoting manufactured baby milk and food".
A Guardian investigation in Bangladesh found widespread use of "prescription pads", where Nestlé reps give health workers tear-off pads, with pictures of their products, for them to pass on to mothers. Nestlé spokesman Robin Tickle said he did not believe the pads equated to promotion of the company's formula milks. The device was "a safety measure", to help mothers to be sure the milk they were buying was the right kind for their baby."
Guardian, Tuesday May 15, 2007
My bold, above. I don't even particularly like kids, but it's incredible that a major corporation could have so little respect for humanity. I wonder what the difference between the baby formula market profit and the amount they'd gain back if people could stop boycotting them is.
And a 2003 BBC article for more background on the baby milk marketing code: Baby milk marketing 'breaks rules'.
Mars bars get veggie status back
"Mars has abandoned plans to use animal products in its chocolate, and has apologised to "upset" vegetarians."
Hooray!
Now if only Nestle would sort it out, I could eat Milo again.
I have been greatly cheered by the fact that the building opposite contains the offices for 'Beaver Management Services'.
Also, David Brent said hello to me.
Randomly, some choice insults from AWAD: "Ignorant blackguards, illiterate blockheads, besotted drunkards, drivelling simpletons, ci-devant mountebanks, vagabonds, swindlers and thieves..disgraceful gang of pettifoggers"
The .Net course goes on, and time crawls. The lab sessions are really annoying because they spoon feed you everything. The exercise might say, create a new instance of blah, declare an array of whatever, call this method, set properties, la la la... and then it gives you all the code, right there on the page. Fair enough some people might not have all the syntax to hand, but surely they could provide a primer and refer to it - how are you meant to learn if you're just typing in someone else's code? No wonder Microsoft certification doesn't mean anything in the real world... ignorant blockheads. The instructor is quite good and I suppose I'm learning some useful stuff but overall, bring on Friday.
I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion but it's something I've been thinking about a lot lately. I think the key word is 'identities' - it's not 'identity'. How do we manage our multiple identities when the barriers that kept them apart - the separation of work and home life, the discretion of friends who might meet family, the discretion of family who might meet friends - are falling? I have a 'real name' and an online name - a queer identity, and a neutral one (though it's not hard to guess when you meet me, it's not the first thing I want you to know about me if I'm presenting a conference paper) - a trashy side and a respectable one. I don't want them all present for all people. But is that a 20th century idea? I could maintain two identities - a professional and a personal one, but that seems dishonest. But on the other hand, I can be a deeply private person and don't fancy letting go of that.
Finding myself through online identities
"...the nature of my engagement with the online world is changing in a very significant way.
Until now my online presence has been carefully managed and controlled, and although you can find out anything you care to ask about my views, politics, lack of religious belief and opinions on technology and the internet the persona that emerges from the last twenty years of online activity keep as much hidden as it reveals.
I rarely talk about my personal life, and reveal few details of my family or close relationships.
...
With my calendar, my location, my friendships and my opinions all online to be read and remembered, there's little of me left to expose.
...
Those of us living in the west, with cheap easy access to computers and the internet and a sophisticated technological infrastructure surrounding us, are increasingly living our lives online.
This is no more frightening than any other vast social change, but it will be resisted by many who see in the loss of privacy something threatening, who believe it is dangerous or dehumanising or somehow against nature.
But we should never forget that we make human nature, it is not given to us, and we can therefore remake it.
Our modern conception of privacy and of the nature of the individual is a product of the industrial age that is now passing, so it should not surprise us that we are finding new ways of constructing an identity online. "
Chasing the Chicken-Eating Spider
But warning - do not read, and really, I mean it, don't read it if you're afraid of spiders.
But go right ahead if you think tarantulas can have cute furry legs.
"But perhaps the biggest advantages of being an archaeologist are that you get a tan, and are able to meet and impress girls ..." How to succeed in archaeology
"Some of the UK's best-selling chocolate bars, such as Mars and Twix, will no longer be suitable for vegetarians.
Also affecting brands such as Snickers and Maltesers, owner Masterfoods said it had started to use animal product rennet to make its chocolate products.
Masterfoods said the change was due to it switching the sourcing of its ingredients and the admission was a "principled decision" on its part."
I think the Vegetarian Society got it right:
"At a time when more and more consumers are concerned about the provenance of their food, Masterfoods' decision to use non-vegetarian whey is a backward step"
Oh, and the cleaner told me off for daring to try and use the toilet at the start of the lunch break.
She challenged me, "what do you want to do?" and I really meekly said, "use the toilet?" and she told me to bugger off.
Oh, and there's a guy who looks like David Brent. Deadset.
I can't access most of my email so feel free to leave comments to amuse, abuse or annoy me further.
I'm really quite bored. I'm on a week-long ASP.NET training course and since I don't particularly want to learn .Net, I feel like the bored rebellious teenager in the back of the room. By coincidence, I even have the dodgy leather jacket. I haven't fallen asleep so far but it's probably only a matter of time.
The training centre is full of tellingly over-cocky people with regional accents who've travelled in from the further reaches of the world outside London (it exists, apparently), and the 'coffee' is Nescafe but at least it's near Old St so I can pop into the office afterwards and keep the plates spinning there.
I'm already annoyed at some of the stupid things about Visual Studio .Net, like wtf is up with storing the project files in My Documents? What kind of idiot thought a development environment that stores config and header files in the login of a single user was a good idea? The worst part is I'll actually have to do some work with the damn thing when the course is over.
Actually, that's not the worst part - the worst part is they don't provide lunch or luncheon vouchers!
I know it does, but why does it matter? I like this:
"By dealing with art we are forced to plounge profoundly into depth. All art of importance is born here, in the depths of slow, careful and conscious thinking, where we again and again attempt to approach the essence of our existence. In these realms bullshit and fakery is left behind. Art matters.
Art versus entertainment, is gaining insight, versus seeking experiences. The one does not necessarily exclude the other, and sometimes they even mingle.
...
A society which does not accept nor enable its artists and thinkers to be a counterpoint to all its bullshit and bullshiting is, I would say, a poor, unhealthy and vulnerable society. It is an uninterested and, thus, uninteresting society because it is self-satisfied and self-contained. When a society starts to ignore its own intellectuals it is a serious sign of possible decay.
...
Therefore, art is opposition and art is criticism, art serves as our mental digestive system."
Last night I went to the Susan Sontag tribute at the ICA. It was an inspirational evening. The tribute made me realise how badly we need essayists who can crystallise ideas that remain troublesome but cloudy for the rest of us, and form a focus for effective agitation or action for change.
This is supercool (well, superhot really, I guess)
Power station harnesses Sun's rays
"A concrete tower - 40 storeys high - stood bathed in intense white light, a totally bizarre image in the depths of the Andalusian countryside.
...
It is Europe's first commercially operating power station using the Sun's energy this way and at the moment its operator, Solucar, proudly claims that it generates 11 Megawatts (MW) of electricity without emitting a single puff of greenhouse gas.
It works by focusing the reflected rays on one location, turning water into steam and then blasting it into turbines to generate power."
And speaking of women, wtf?
"British TV standards are deteriorating because the BBC is "run by women", astronomer Sir Patrick Moore has said." BBC
Does your e-mail make you sad?
"An e-mail has a way of making us impetuous. As S&S say, "It actually eggs us on. On e-mail, people aren't quite themselves: they are angrier, less sympathetic, less aware. ... E-mail has a tendency to encourage the lesser angels of our nature."
...
Men and women seem to express themselves differently in email. According to Deborah Tannen, the Georgetown University linguist, women look for a personal element in any communication and expect a pleasantry or two before getting to the matter at hand. Men may use aggressive language because they find it funny. Women, not amused, can be offended. Men think teasing is funny. Women don't. Men can get in trouble when using the style that comes naturally to them."
I'm always interested in how online communications can be affected by seemingy unrelated things. I'm pretty sure I've startled, possibly even offended, people who expect me to use all the 'womanly' softeners and general fluffiness that can precede a request or statement, but if I'm in the middle of a long or on-going email conversation I'd rather skip all that.
I was going to resist posting but look at their little faces!
I really liked this description of the difference between gay and homosexual from gay.com:
"However, there is a difference between being homosexual and gay. As you say yourself, you’re “not straight”…but you’re not gay. Yet.
‘Homosexual’ is a hard-wired hormonal tendency to be turned on by your own sex and not the opposite sex.
‘Gay’, however is not (just) about sexuality, it’s about identity. It’s an achievement, not a predisposition. It’s a label homosexual men initially chose for themselves and it’s still an identity you have to choose – or refuse – to embrace. That’s the stage you’re stuck at right now.
Because gay is a social identity, people piece it together out of a string of stereotypes. That can feel oppressive. Will I have to be camp? Will I have to like Eurovision/give a flying f*** about Big Brother/get a tattoo/take ecstasy/take it up the bum?
The answer to all those is NO, not unless you want to.
More importantly, there are questions about giving up things too. Will I lose my family’s love? My circle of friends? Being a dad? Getting married?
The answer here is also NO, not necessarily – but that yes, being gay may make some of these things harder to achieve."
And also, Moldovan gays defy pride ban
"It also contravenes a recent decision by the Moldovan Supreme Court, which robustly defends the right of all Moldovan citizens, including LGBT people, to freedom of expression, assembly and peaceful protest.
...
The mayor’s [Ken Livingstone] statement was in response to the municipal authorities of Chisinau banning an event planned by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) organisation GenderDoc-M for 27 April as part of the 6th Moldovan LGBT Pride festival."
I wish I'd known closer to the time, I would have sent an email in support.
"A quarter of the world's oceans will be protected from fishing boats which drag heavy nets across the sea floor, South Pacific nations have agreed.
The landmark deal will restrict bottom trawling, which experts say destroys coral reefs and stirs up clouds of sediment that suffocate marine life." BBC
I've been following this issue for years, from back in the days when I still ate seafood. Good news on a lazy Sunday.
"An Australian senator has caused a storm of protest for describing a female politician as "deliberately barren" and therefore unfit to govern.
Bill Heffernan said Labor Party deputy leader Julia Gillard did not understand the public because she had no children." BBC
If I didn't need it I'm so tempted to hand back my Australian passport at times like this.
From the OddSpot: "A woman's email to Telecom New Zealand's help desk was rejected because the company's filter system found her name, Gay, "inappropriate for business-like communication". The woman, Gay Hamilton, is herself gay."
I've only just came across this entry about geek companies/conferences producing t-shirts in sizes and shapes that suit women. It's all true, dammit:
This is partly tongue-in-cheek, but still...the t-shirts are a metaphor for--or at least a reflection of--the way the company feels about users as individual people. The shirts matter, and they speak volumes about your company.
"We're trying to go from comfortable to scary. We're sadistic I suppose," Mr Cockburn said.