Batman V Superman AKA The ready meal of the comic book movie world

A few years ago I decided to learn to cook properly. At the time, the best I could do was beans on toast, or if I was adventurous, A curry jar with some chicken and rice. As with any learning curve, mistakes are made and it is these mistakes that you learn from and improve. My biggest faux pas was to throw in as many ingredients as possible, believing that the more flavours I had, the better it would taste. Add to this an inability to gauge the temperature, preferring to blast everything as I didn’t always have the confidence to cook on a low heat. This meant some parts of the meal were overcooked, whilst other parts were only cooked on the outside.

I was reminded of this as I sat and watched “Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice”.

And much like Jamie Oliver or Gordon Ramsay not having much to fear from me in the kitchen at that time, I don’t think the producers looking after the Marvel Cinematic Universe will have much to worry about either.

The movie has some great ingredients. A darker, ageing Batman, full of torment and anguish. A more real world setting with real politics. A natural and organic set up post “Man of Steel”. Some nice references to characters from the extended DC cinematic who will appear in future movies. An idea that a superhero from another planet, one with Godlike powers, may be as much a threat as a hero.

The problem was the execution was too much. Scenes seemed to just be thrown together. Pacing was incoherent and at times it was just plain dull - something even the worst superhero movies should never be.

For me, the mistake was made the moment it was decided the follow up to MOS was going to be the ultimate superhero battle - Superman V Batman. I always felt MOS wasn’t a bad movie, and in fact at times brilliant, but it felt like part 1 in a wider story, much like “Batman Begins” improved once viewed after “The Dark Knight”. The second movie should have been just about Lex Luthor trying to manipulate the world into believing Superman was a threat to the planet. It could and should have been a defining moment for Superman on the movie screen. One that brought the character into the modern world, yet still kept to his core values, and one who learnt that his actions in MOS were a mistake.

Adding Batman just for the impact of their battle made BVS feel like two movies shoved into one.

I get Bruce Wayne being pissed at Superman for having a hand in the deaths of many of his employees and so having a reason to want to stop him. But, the whole movie felt like filmmakers wanting this big battle, but not really being sure how to get to it. Worst, they didn’t really know how to then make them friends after so they could start the process of setting up “The Justice League”.

This was where the absurdity of the movie reached a record low for me. We spent an hour and a half being bored senseless watching as Bruce Wayne tried to get hold of a weapon that would kill Superman, having complete hatred for Kryptons favourite son, to then become his best friend in one minute because they happen to have mothers with the same name. Yes, if you haven’t seen the movie, that is exactly what happens. I could buy it if a greater threat (Doomsday) meant they had to join forces and put aside their differences for the greater good. But no, they shared mummy issues.

I’m of course not naive in thinking this was simply a gimmick, a way to sell the movie - who wouldn’t want to see Batman take on Superman? But they could have done far more organically, by having MOS2 which would establish Lex Luthor, carry on the idea of Superman as an alien with immense powers who could destroy Earth. Tease Batman, via a visit to Gotham, or have the scene with Bruce Wayne watching as his building get destroyed at the end via another battle. You could have a separate Batman movie that shows his descent into a murdering vigilante, possibly one that has the death of Robin, and also has a cameo from Kent before unleashing the Batman V Superman fight at the start of the Justice League, one that had been brewing over two movies.

Of course, its easy for me to criticise, I love the Marvel cinematic Universe. They built everything up slowly, established the characters, then unleashed them in one big event movie. DC/WB are trying to get to that point too fast, possibly for greed, possibly to not appear to be mimicking their comic book rivals. But as someone who grew up watching Christopher Reeves as Superman and falling in love with the character, whilst loving the darkness of the Batman character it makes me a little sad that it is being rushed like this. Good storytelling isn’t rushed, its organic and logical.

I will though add there is some good in BVS. Ben Affleck, after much derision, puts in a very good shift as Bruce Wayne/Batman. His performance as an ageing and tormented Batman could have been very pantomime-esque, yet his dials it back just enough. Wonder Woman was hyped a lot in the build up. It got to the point that I actually wanted her to be rubbish. But she wasn’t. In fact she was excellent and I will look forward to her solo movie.

The thing is, I know for a fact I will watch it again. its disjointed first act was perhaps down to trying to stay away from any kind of origin story for the new characters, believing that most people coming to the movie, know who Bruce Wayne is (only a small flashback showed the parents being killed so no overkill), who Lex Luthor is and his significance to them. Its just (in Luthors case more so) they just appear, like it was the second or third scene and not their first.

After all that I still haven’t mentioned the extreme darkness. The lack of any fun (or humour) needed in a comic book movie. The fact the two lead superheroes kill, either by choice or via the bad luck of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The death of a much loved character (Jimmy Olsen) happens with no knowledge it is actually him. The fact Lois Lane is just a damsel in distress and not the tough reporter we know she is. The fact the actual fight between Batman and Superman doesn’t make sense if we are meant to believe Luthor set it up, or those ridiculous dreams, and so on.

Yep, I’m changing my mind. BVS isn’t like my early attempts at cooking. Its like a cold, undercooked microwave meal. Which is a damn shame, as competition breeds success and Marvel need DC to have as good a shared Universe (or multiverse in their case) as them.

How to divide fans of Doctor Who - Clara and a female Doctor

Next week sees the return of long running British science fiction series Doctor Who, and with it two distinct splits between fans. Clara and a female Doctor.

Clara started out as “The Impossible Girl” and was a very interesting character and her ark had an heir of unpredictability with Matt Smith. However, whilst Peter Capaldi has been every bit as good as I believed he would, he almost feels like a supporting character in “The Clara show”. I have no issue with the audience viewing the Universe of The Doctor through the eyes of his companion, a formula that has existed since the first episode in 1963. However, when the focus turns to the relationship of the companion and their world, we move away from what the show is all about - a humanoid alien traveller who has adventures in space and time.

The other problem with Clara is that she is yet another everyday, mid twenties, good looking, white, contemporary human girl accompanying The Doctor. She is no different to Rose nor Amy. Why can’t we have someone of equal or near intellect? Osgood would have been fantastic, a nod to Liz from the early 70s, but she was killed in the last season (although she is due back in the new season, but will it be the Zygon double from the 50th anniversary show?). Frank Skinners character, an engineer on an interstellar train based on the Orient Express, would have been neither contemporary and a stereotype. Maybe someone from the past, struggling to cope with technology that would be like magic to him or her (there a fair number of companions like this in Classic Who).

The second split is of course a future casting of an female in the roll of The Doctor. Since The Master changed gender and became “Misty” in the last season, speculation has intensified that the next regeneration will bring a woman to the role. A feeling that Misty was a testing of the waters on how people would react, and also a way of making it possible that Timelords can become Timeladies, without setting it in stone (The Master is mad enough to force a change of gender to try and get one over The Doctor).

Now, as my boss puts it, I’m one of those “lefty Guardian reading do-gooders,” so naturally I like to see diversity in TV and in particular the genre I love. I don’t like what happened with the “Sad Puppies” at the Hugo awards as I believe diversity in Science Fiction is a wonderful thing and some of my favourite books contain a rich tapestry of diverse and interesting characters. However, I don’t agree with diversity being forced on canon and characters being changed for non organic reasons.

People will argue it isn’t canon that the Doctor is male, however I would counter argue that there have been thirteen actors who have played the character since 1963 and all have been white and male. Regenerating to a female form would feel forced and wouldn’t be organic. It simply wouldn’t be logical. We as the audience would ask why hadn’t it happened during his previous regenerations?

If a more diverse show is needed, then go back to my points on Clara, and have a less generic companion? Or bring in a Timelady who isn’t a villain (Romana perhaps)?

Besides, I’m still waiting for a ginger Doctor.

There is no borders in Space between us

Today, I came home and I gave my little boy a hug and played chase with him. Nothing unusual with this. Depending on the day of the week, he may have been with his grandparents, my wife, who works part time, or at the childrens nursery he attends. Today it was a day with his one Granddad. What was different, was the extra long hold of him, the extra kiss on his forehead and the feeling, that I truly am a lucky man, and he himself is also truly lucky. Why? The image of the three year old Syrian refugee laying dead on a beach having been washed up, has hit me on a personal level.

Like many parents who will have seen this photo, I saw my own boy laying down

We are all made of atoms and for a quirk of fate I was born in a first world country and should never have to live in fear because of war near my home, or because I believe in an alternative version of the same religion, or my ethnicity is traced back to a rival tribe. That quirk of fate has meant my son was not born into that world. A World, we in the west, in our protective bubble, simply will never understand or experience. Imagine, for just a moment how it must felt, to spend your life savings, getting on a boat for a dangerous journey just to ask for help what you hope are loving human beings? The risk is huge, yet it is still safer than staying in their homeland for these poor people.

Yet, there are those, who believe they are only coming here for handouts and benefits. Logically, this is a load of rubbish. Morally, this is disturbing. Why would someone spend thousands of pounds just to get a few measly benefits? Why would someone risk the lives of their families just for a few measly benefits?

Yep, it doesn’t make sense to me neither.

Or, maybe, they are so desperate, so fearful of their lives, they simply want to go somewhere where they are safe. Just safe. Nothing else. Just safe. The basic human instinct is survival and this is all these poor people are doing. Surviving, even if the risks are huge.

Even if they do make it over to a country in the EU, they become pawns in a bigger political game where the countries of the EU, play a game of “I’m alright jack” and “its not my problem”. The actions of the UK government have left me embarrassed to call myself British. I look at Germany and the help they are providing and I feel pride that I live on the same continent as them. I see the #refugeeswelcome and I feel pride that there are hundreds of thousands more Brits who feel the same way.

This isn’t about borders, and immigration controls and statistics. Its about helping our fellow human. Its about not allowing another poor child, parent and families to die as they flee wars and oppression.

I am reminded of a quote from an astronaut on the ISS when discussing working with someone from a country with political differences and he said ‘There is no borders in space between us.’

Maybe, all our problems can be traced back to the moment we moved from a nomadic society to one of ownership of land and borders.

So, if you’re a parent, give you son or daughter an extra special hug and be thankful.

Even if Manchester United won every game six nil, they would still come under scrutiny and critism.

For most teams and their fans, three wins out of three at the start of the season, with only one goal against, would be reason for some optimism for the upcoming season. But for Manchester United, their fans, rival fans and the many so called experts that litter the media, on TV, radio and in the written form, this is still a poor start.

Apparently, its been too boring or just enough, efficient without exciting, any negatives highlighted, whilst positives are ignored. Coupled with an ongoing transfer window where nobody appears happy. This despite finally finding a solution to the weak midfield that had plagued the club for nearly ten years, no longer having to use a winger or volatile player at right back and bringing in one of the most exacting up and coming forwards in Europe to add the much needed pace and goals to attack. Yet, because a Spanish substitute signed for Chelsea having been linked to United for the past couple of weeks, it is now a disaster. Forget that the only true part of the interest was Van Gaal saying Pedro was a player that fit the profile he was looking at, and that everything else was based on the usual bullshit you read in the newspapers and via “Sky Sources” on Sky Sports, this has meant it is a disaster.

Then of course there is the much maligned defence, a defence that, from November last season, statistically let in the least amount of goals in the English Premiership. A defence that due to injuries, hardly had the same set of players playing more than two or three games in a row, allowing them to build up the understanding a good defence needs. A defence that at times was left exposed by an unbalanced midfield with attack minded players pushing forward, meaning De Gea, having a season to remember rescuing them. Now a dominant centre back in the mould of Stam or Vidic would be great, but there aren’t many about who can also play the ball out of defence and are available. And they also need to upgrade on what United have. Its no good bringing in a new centre back if they are equal or worst than what they have. The other criticism appears to be levelled at the use of Blind in the middle of defence - a man with seemingly no pace and no height. Yet, the modern defender needs intelligence and the ability to use the ball well. Something Blind brings to the team. Intelligent players don’t need pace, as they are tactically aware of where they need to be at any given time and in a day and age where the big strong striker is a dying breed, height isn’t important if you have someone tall next to you - and this is where Smalling comes in, who appears to have woken up and realised he could be the dominant centre back people seem to think United need.

The goalkeeper situation is a little more awkward though and again is very much drawn from hearsay and the usual newspaper bullshit. The only facts we know are, De Gea has one year left on his contract and he is out of the matchday squad until September and the transfer window has closed. We assume that United want more than Real Madrid are offering, assuming they have actually bid for him as neither club have made a statement regarding bids. Nothing else is fact, and the blur between fact and fiction is very much evident in the De Gea story. Will he end up at Real Madrid? Probably, but until this happens he is a United player and although he very much may have been the most important player at the club last season, with a more stable defence and a midfield joining in with defencive duties, he can be dropped whilst the situation is being resolved.

With most in agreement midfield is very much okay, it is the attack and upfront that is also a problem for a lot of people. Even though United are now only playing one up front, three strikers is not enough and a reliance on Rooney is too risky. Forget his recent form, we all know, as captain he is playing, so its best to accept it and move on. Which means unless he is moved to another position or the system is changes, bringing a top quality striker is redundant, as the only top strikers who would come would be ageing ones or mercenaries happy to sit on the bench. I understand Rooney gets injured, United will be left with Wilson or Hernandez, but what happens if Aguero is injured or Costa? They are replaced by players like Wilson or Hernandez - good solid backup strikers willing to do that job.

Rooney’s form, has though been worrying, but I can’t see him being dropped. But, it is is getting tiring reading another ex pro, now turned media pundit, saying he should be played in the number ten position (the fabled hub linking midfield and attack and main focal point of all great teams). Watching him misplace simple passes in recent games should be enough to prove he is not good enough to be the focal point, and with better players to choose from he shouldn’t even be considered. If he plays, it is as the main striker. Having been made captain and having heard Van Gaal describe the captain as the only player almost certain to be played, we know he will still be played (unless Van Gaal and his reputation for dropping main players comes back, but I doubt it).

Now, I’m not for one minute saying United can win the league with the squad they have. But I don’t think its all doom and gloom. If there are no more major signings then so be it. I am confident that the players they have will be good enough to make a challenge and be there or thereabouts come the end of the season. But, as Van Gaal has repeatedly said, if a player comes along who can improve what they have then great. And this, as a United fan, I would rather have than sign second rate players just for the sake of it.

Finally, much has been said about the way these first games have been won. This isn’t the united way. Its too slow and efficient. I say so what. Haven’t all the great sides adapted for the current footballing climate? Its evolution. Football is a changing game and the old United way of attacking with speed and wingers, may not have a place in the modern game. I am actually enjoying watch them pass the ball around with confidence, controlling the midfield.

Van Gaal is building a team who control the game with high possession and fast closing down - the opposition can’t score if United have the ball. This is what he started at both Barcelona and Bayern Munich, arguably the two most successful club sides in Europe over the last decade. They owe their success to the foundations he put down when in charge. He may have a reputation for upsetting players, but it seems to me that for every player, bitter at being dropped, complaining in the press, there are more who talk highly of him. Besides, would Fergie have stood for the stunt Victor Valdes pulled but not playing in a reserve match? Of course not. So lets embrace Van Gaal and his philosophy, and remember how bad it was under Moyes.

Game of Thrones.

Writing about the TV series Game of Thrones and its fantasy book series and source material A Song of Ice and Fire, has been on my ‘to do list’ for a few weeks now. During the controversy of the last few episodes of the recently broadcast season 5, I held back commenting via this blog, preferring instead to post the odd tweet and share online articles on my Facebook newsfeed, whilst waiting for the season to finish, so I can then write about it with knowledge of any any organic resolutions to those controversial moments.

But as always is the way of a writer, both published and non-published, other stuff got in the way. Work on a novel took importance, whilst a pause from that has led me to a short story.

However, having received the last edition of ‘Interzone’, and started by reading the regular feature ‘Time Pieces’ by the excellent Nina Allan (check out her story ‘Marielena’ in Interzone #254 for a wonderful example of her writing), now seems as good a time as any.

Unfortunately I have no link, so you will need to read the feature yourself - and if you love diverse and interesting science fiction and fantasy, yet don’t regularly read Interzone, why not?

She admits that she hasn’t read any of A Song of Ice and Fire, saying, quite honestly, that she can’t justify the time commitment. I myself, have gotten four books in - well three books as the third is a two volume set. Her reasoning is the same I used up until last summer when I decided to give it a go, having been an avid watcher of Game of Thrones since it first begun. It is a series that at times drags, and I made the conscious decision to dip in and out of it, so I didn’t miss out on other genre novels that caught my eye. Nina also admits to only being halfway through season 2, so skipped ahead to see what the fuss was all about in regards those controversial season 5 episodes and in particular the scene involving the rape of Sansa Stark by Ramsay Bolton (whilst Theon/Reek was forced to look on).

Some would argue, that she perhaps needed to invest in the entire series before commenting on it. This though would be a weak argument but I am sure she did her research via the many online spoilers for all series before writing her piece.

The main criticism of that scene is the violence towards women. In fact it is in some ways the straw that broke the proverbial camel as this isn’t the first rape scene in the show and in the books. It is a very difficult scene to watch, less because of what you see, and more that we, as the audience, are viewing it through the eyes of Theon/Reek (I assume anybody reading this will have knowledge of why I use both names). Which is why, I believe Nina is missing the point when she argues that “Sansa is currency.” Theon/Reek is also being used as currency. Having watched the past three seasons, where Theon goes from arrogant, misogynistic lord to quivering wreck; tortured and belittled, manipulated and having the symbol of his sexuality removed from him. It was just an organic step to see him so frightened, yet so submissive to sit there in fear watching it happen, not having a single ounce of strength, both mentally and physically, to help her. This whole process of turning Theon into Reek has hardly been mentioned at all by critics of the show - dare I say it, but would the reaction have been more angry, if Theon has have been a woman and not a man being tortured by another man?

But of course, it is also difficult to defend the rape of Sansa, any rape is difficult to defend in a form of entertainment. The whole purpose of Ninas’s article was due to the writer of A Song of Fire and Ice, George R R Martin defending the use of rape in his series and subsequently the TV series. He argues that this was what life was like in the medieval world, and he has chosen to create a fantasy world based on that same medieval world, so he feels it would be dishonest not to include rape. Its an argument that on the face of it, makes perfect sense. However, there is a feeling that with the Sansa rape scene, it wasn’t particularly organic. Yes, Ramsay is a monster, and he’s hardly going to be all lovey-dovey with his new wife on their wedding night - so the rape made sense. However, its seems to me, Nina may very well be onto something, when she refers to Sansa as “currency”. There was no real logical and organic reason why she was sent to marry Ramsay in the first place? Was she a pawn of master manipulator Littlefinger? Or as I suspect, was it a device to get her into a situation, where Theon/Reek finally finds the strength to rise up against his tormentor (see final episode of Season 5). If this is the case, then the criticism is justified.

My main issue at the time, and still is an issue was the reaction. What made this particular scene so wrong in the eyes of many watching it, yet other equally shocking scenes didn’t register on the moral compass? One must remember that as early as the first two episodes in Season 1, Daenerys, a young bride is raped by her new husband on their wedding night. And who can forget ‘The Red Wedding’, where a number of important characters are slaughtered in a brutal and violent fashion, including the pregnant wife of one major character being stabbed in the belly - try watching this scene with a heavily pregnant wife, understandably upset.

So why wasn’t there such uproar after those scenes? Why didn’t viewers switch off in disgust two episodes in when Daenerys was raped? Was the real issue, less with rape, and more simply that Sansa is a popular character (I believe Nina has at least made her argument with no bias towards the character - unlike others)?

Which is one of the main points and reasons for my liking of the seried. No one is safe. There are no ‘main characters’ to cheer on. No Frodo to overcome great odds. No Luke Skywalker to realise his destiny. In all honesty, apart from Daenerys, it is quite difficult to pinpoint who will win the Game of Thrones at the end, and even then she isn’t far from reaching a grizzly end. It may be, that the final resolution will be, that the Boltons, the brutal and sadistic family win.

That is the beauty of the show. Its unpredictable. It has its flaws, nothing is perfect after all. Nina, could do with watching season three and the development of Brienne as a woman knight in a world dominated by males, when she attacks Martin for “suggesting that the number of intelligent, freethinking women in any given society is mainly dependent on the extent to which men are prepared to allow and encourage their wives and daughters to be those things.” Brienne is a knight, because she wants to be one, and she will fight with every ounce of strength to be one and carry on being one. Here is a a strong woman and perhaps a role model for young women, and equally me, who wish to see some equality in their genre fiction. Like all characters in the series, she has moments of weakness and moments of strength, much like any other strong male character, and it could be argued, in a world with a lot of male characters dying, her survival is a small victory.

Before I finish, I will go back quickly to the Sansa rape scene. What was lost in a swirl of controversy and anger, was the superb acting from the three actors in the scene. The anguish and torture on the face of Theon/Reek or the fearful duty of Sansa, or the sadistic brutality of Ramsay, all three deserve plaudits, not to be mere currency in a different game of thrones - that of the anger from those opposed to it going up against the writers trying to justify a potentially unjustifiable scene.

TFI Friday and my era - the 90's

Having been born in 1980, the 80’s nostalgia fad that seemingly comes around every couple of years, always never felt right for me. I was just too young to have truly lived it. Yes, I can click “Like” on those many Facebook posts that go around proclaiming how wonderful your childhood was if you were born before 1985 (or whatever 1980s year the creator of said post goes with), but the naivety of childhood meant I was only aware through my mum, and my grandparents, of more grownup things the 80s was remembered for. And at that age, I didn’t have any choice in what 80s fashion to dress in - my mum decided.

So the 90s were more my era, having lived my entire teenage years in that decade, had greater understanding and appreciation of the music, popular culture and fashion (although I failed there too). As I write this, the funny thing I keep thinking, is that until last night, I always thought I missed out on being part of an “era”. As mentioned earlier, I was too young for any of the many 80’s eras, I was born after everything from punk to disco to rock n roll. The 90’s always felt not so great or memorable.

Yet it was. Certainly more so than the decade that followed, where I was in my twenties, and saw the explosion in tech from MP3 players to mobile phones to the beginnings of reality based TV and talent contests giving potential pop singers a jumping of the queue to success (but only if the producer of the show wanted them to win).

I now realise, I had a great era. The time of cool Britannia, a pre war criminal Tony Blair, Britpop and the explosion in 60s influenced indie music. A premiership football league on the cusp of an explosion in high money and foreign imports, yet still with the feel of a game for the working class person.

It was also a time when TV was at least entertaining. No reality shows, no talent contests with people desperate for a nano-second of fame. And non typified this more than TFI Friday. So it was a pleasure to sit down and watch last nights anniversary show, or as host Chris Evans described it, a chance to have a final show.

If the Internet broke due to Jeremy Clarkson and his dinosaur ways, it would have regressed back to its pre 1995 state, if TFI Friday was a regular series now. It was loud, brash, sometimes sexist - okay nearly always sexist. It typified the lad and laddette culture of the 90’s. It was dangerously close to the edge, with risque guests swearing three hours before the watershed - it would never be broadcast live at 6pm nowadays.

Of course, I’m not selling it very well. This was unashamedly anti-PC at a time when political correctness was just starting to develop. However, it was clever and of the times. Host Chris Evans was at his very best, almost ready to tip over the edge and go too far (the show ended abruptly, when in his words ‘went a bit mad’).

As a teenager on a eager quest to find new and exciting bands, ones who were at their best in the live arena, TFI Friday was the show to watch with all the cool bands of the 90s playing live on the show. I remember Faith No More appearing, a band I only knew by name, yet the next day I went out and brought their latest single that had been performed on the show.

Its also easy to pin the success on Chris Evans who by being host on this show could play to his strengths. Yet its also easy to forget one of the greats of TV Danny Baker was the writer on the show.

This was more than a talk show, or a music show, it also had its silliness. From Freak or Unique, to Its your letters, to the constant cooing of ‘Wiiiiiillllll’ to its producer Will MacDonald, who was in some ways more than just a sidekick to Chris Evans, he was very much a man who should be knighted for always remaining calm during the hurricane effect of Chris Evans. By the way, whatever anti-ageing cream Will is using, should be the biggest seller of that kind.

The issue with comebacks like this, are that watching it again with the same people twenty years on, sometimes ruins the memory. We’re all grown up now with families, jobs and the show could have seemed almost embarrassing now. Yet it wasn’t. It is what TV light entertainment should be, entertaining. As a friend put on Facebook after five minutes, ‘TFI Friday is already better than 99.9% of whats usually on TV’. Yes, it may struggle to fit in to a culture where you can’t say anything in case you offend someone, but maybe that is needed.

A run in the park.

The word phenomenon is one that can be overused. Innovation is another word often overused when it really isn’t warranted. However, when it comes to Parkrun, they are most certainly not overused. Put simply, Parkrun is the biggest phenomenon in running today and its biggest innovation for decades, if not of all time.

Parkrun is simple. At 9am, each Saturday, in parks across the country (330 and counting and many more dotted around the globe), runners turn up and run a 5k run with other runners for free. Yes, for free. All they have to do is is register at www.parkrun.org.uk and print off a barcode which they bring with them. This gets scanned, along with a finish token, at the end of the event and later that day they find out what time they did, and what position they came, via a text and email. Simple process really.

The beauty of this event is that it can be whatever the individual running it, wants it to be. From the fast club runner looking to race to the person running their very first 5k, everyone is catered for, and no one is looked down upon for being slow or for walking. Runners run with friends, family, their children or just on their own to clear their head - I once read a lovely story where a man who was dealing with mental health problems sighted Parkrun as a big help for him.

I also once read someone describe Parkrun as the perfect example of socialism and a fairer society, with every runner applauding each other and socialising with friends in this little community that will inevitably grow as each parkrun grows organically. I would go one better and say its an example of a community that carries the best from both the left and the right, as Parkrun also rewards its runners for hard work and loyalty, by issuing T-Shirts to any runner who runs 50, 100, 250 and if you are a junior runner, 10 runs. There are now going to be T-Shirts for those who volunteer 25 times - a reward for helping to put on the event.

I myself attend the Kingsbury Water Parkrun and have done so on a regular basis since it started in July 2013. Well it is only 10 minutes from my house! I have run there often and I also volunteer a fair bit, so my wife can also run it (I have our son). We have made a lot of good friends and look forward to it each and every Saturday.

Of course, as we anything in life, there will be detractors, which in the case of Parkrun are the very rare breed that is the snobby club runner, that feels clubs should be the hub of the running community and paid up races should be the event they come to race. Luckily, most in clubs don’t think like that, and see the bigger picture - thousands more are running who may not have without the accessibility of Parkrun, and these people may go on to look at the local club scene and have the confidence to run longer and harder events thanks to Parkrun.

Not bad for an event started in London, by a runner who was out injured and wanted to keep being involved in a sport he loved, so organised a small time trial that anybody could take part in.

Now, if only my son could hurry up and grow up so we can take him to Parkrun to run it.

My reaction to the UK General Election 2015

The dust has settled, and the fallout has been loud and split. Somehow, the Tories managed to defy seemingly large odds, and get enough seats to win a majority. Social media isn’t the best indicator, but is probably just as good a snapshot of what the voting public are thinking as the traditional polls are, and based on my own Facebook feed and the various re-tweets and tweets from people I follow, the Tories were almost seen as the party of the devil in the lead up to the vote.

As I joked this morning on Facebook, it is clear Tories don’t use social media! This was said in jest as of course its difficult to truly get a snapshot of society via social media - much like in real life I will choose who I am friends with and who I follow on twitter. This will mean they follow the same politic idealism as I do.

However, this isn’t entirely true. I know some of my friends are people I went to school with, a time when our political views haven’t quite been shaped. Others will be, in my case, people I have met in the running and triathlon scene, and again political opinions aren’t important. Add to that people I have worked with and family members and again, political opinions aren’t important. Personally, I have no problem with someone who has different political views - I just draw the line on the extreme left or right, which would have been very blatant when that person first entered my life.

Looking at my friends list and those I follow, its a mixed bag of political opinions and I like that. Yet I can only think of one, maybe two people who were very pro Tory in their posts in recent weeks. So does this mean, the traditional Tory simply stays quiet, or is even slightly ashamed to vote due to the big vocal left representation that may attack them from every angle?

Its very interesting and has felt almost bizarre. At best I felt that whoever gained the most votes would not win enough for a majority and it would be very close. At first I felt another coalition would be the only option. However, it was clear, the Tories had no support from other parties so would struggle to form a coalition this time around, and Ed Miliband would commit career and political suicide if he formed a coalition, especially with the SNP after making it perfectly clear he wouldn’t do so. This meant at best I thought the winning party would attempt to form a government even without the majority.

But this has not been the case at all and somehow the Tories have won with a majority. Now this is where things get interesting. They won the most seats and reached the number of seats needed to get the majority. But the share of the vote was 36.8% - hardly what you call a majority. It means just over a third of those who voted did so for the winning party. 12.1% voted UKIP who somehow got only 1 seat - not a bad thing I might add. 4.7% voted SNP who got 56 seats and understandably UKIP are probably feeling this is unfair. I can not stand their politics and firmly believe they have a far right agenda that they are pushing behind the scenes, but they should have won or lost fairly.

This is our own fault. We had the chance to change the voting system and voted to keep the standard “fast past the post” system. A proportionate representation voting system would have meant 80 plus seats for UKIP, 24 for Greens and the Tories would have won by only a few votes. http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-parliament-proportional-representation/20893 shows this. However I must be quick to add, that page is based on the current votes, some of which would have been the tactical kind often seen in FPTP voting. Its also worth noting that FPTP is not going away - why would the new Tory government change a system that puts them at an advantage?

As people who read my last blog a week ago will know, I changed from being a Tory to a green voter this year. I can say, hand on heart, I am pleased I made that decision. I am proud to have joined the one million plus who voted for them (a 400% increase from 2010) and my conscious feels clear today. I have no regret and will be supporting the Green Party for the foreseeable future.

One thing that has irritated me today are labour voters complaining that the Tories will now privatise and destroy the NHS. This may very well be the truth, however the Tories are only doing what Labour started when they were in power. Labour are basically the Twin Tory Party but in red. They are now as right wing as the Tories and can thank Tony Blair and his legacy. New Labour pandered to the right to get votes from the Tories. For Labour to truly be an alternative they will need to have a change in ideology and become a real alternative to the Tories. Maybe a return to their socialist past? Maybe a very clear centre left agenda?

As for the Lib Dems, well they took a right kicking, and probably paid for forming a coalition government and bending over to take a shafting on issues they were very much against in the build up to the election in 2010. Which is a shame as Nick Clegg in particular is a very likable politician in a world of backstabbers and sharks. As a Green voter the time is right for them to take off where the Lib Dems were and be the liberal voice of the UK.

Whatever happens next, it will be an interesting five years and one I hope will see further rise in support for the Greens, a good strong Labour with good leadership to be a good opposition, one that will push the Tories on everything, and a UKIP that will slowly die off.

Why I'm voting Green

I’ll be honest from the start; I am traditionally a Tory voter. I was brought up a Tory, and remember going to visit the Houses of Parliament as a child and being somewhat disappointed that Maggie Thatcher wasn’t there, leading to a friend of her private secretary arranging for a signed photograph from the PM to be sent to me.

I did go through the “New Labour” phase that so many in my generation did regardless of their usual political opinions (I’m pretty sure Tony Blair utilized the same tactic as The Master, as played by John Simm, in Dr Who).

Yet, I still came back to the Tories and have voted for them in the last two general elections, believing that they were the right party to form a government. I believe in good conservative values of hard work being rewarded. Of people striving to make a go of it, and not relying on others.

Now, I have that out on the table, you are probably wondering why I would go from the right to the left? Why would I vote Green?

Truth be told, I can’t really pinpoint a moment when I started to look at them as a viable option. I can’t really recall when I became, what can only be described, as a disgruntled Tory.

Was it their push for the high speed rail link that will destroy local countryside, including a lovely waterpark I use on a daily basis, and benefit no one but those that will be able to afford the high ticket prices - and in the 21st century, business people need high speed broadband to make conference video calls, not fast travel to get to meetings?

Could it be, the mismanaging of the public spending cuts? As someone vehemently against striking I have found myself supporting the fire service strikes. Cuts to the frontline are not good. Changes in pensions are not good. When a company goes through a cost cutting exercise, it does so using marginal cuts and by stopping wastage. If cuts were needed, then look at the wasteful bureaucracy of middle-management in the various public departments.

Having friends in teaching has meant I've seen first hand what happens to good teachers driven almost crazy by changes in education in the last five years. As a parent of a child who will be school during the next term of government, I want him to be taught but happy teachers, not teachers under constant pressure. I also want him to develop at his own pace - the zero tolerance the Tories are proposing for children not meeting certain levels in maths and English by certain ages is disgraceful.

If there was one certainty on my switch to Green, it is simply because when you become a parent, that what is important to you changes and you start to think in terms of what the world will be like for your child when he or she is your age. Yes, I am better off under the Tories, but will my boy be better off living in a world they want? I think the answer is a big no.

Do I want him growing up in a world where we as a nation we spend billions on a nuclear weapon system that belongs in a time where the nuclear threat came from other nations, but groups with no fixed abode? No, I don’t.

Do I want him growing up in a world, where the divide between rich and poor gets bigger year by year? Where food banks become the norm for more and more people year by year? Where corporations cheat the tax system? Where people who are rich lose sight of their basic humanity?

Do I want him growing up in a world where non-renewable energy sources are not replaced with cleaner, renewable energy sources?

Do I want him growing up in a world where the science and research budget is cut, leading us to slow down development of new technologies that could progress us as a culture?

Do I want him growing up in a world, where humans are treated differently, just because they come from another nation, or because they were plain unlucky to be born in one with extreme poverty and war as norm? A world where we don’t want to help our fellow human being?

No to all the above.

Am I wasting my vote, especially when I live in a constituency that swings from Labour to Tory (Tories won by 50 odd votes last time)? I don’t believe a vote is ever a wasted vote. People throughout history have fought and died for the simple right to vote in elections, so we should all vote in my humble view. However if anybody reading this is considering voting for someone not expected to win, do so. If we all do this, that so called safe seat may not be so safe after all.

So, with all the above, it is clear Green is the party for me. They won’t win. They won’t get enough to help form a coalition, but if they can add to the one seat they have, it will be a massive victory and will help them grow in the coming years.

Society needs to change for the better. We’ve swung between Tory and Labour for decades now, one messing up the country, with the other promising to sort it out, before messing it up again to restart the viscous circle. Russell Brand has his detractors (as well as a very big thesaurus), but he is spot on when he asks for a change in the way our politicians are elected. He is wrong to not vote, but he has that right. Voting green will help that change get implemented.

For my son and for all our sons and daughters futures, I will vote Green. 

Consistent Writing and latest history of SF TV series.

Its safe to say that I have had my most productive week to date, which on Sunday morning saw me write 1400 words to complete the first draft to a short story I had been working on last week.

Most writing manuals will advise writers to write every day and to read every day. Now I have had no issue with the reading every day. I get an hour lunch at work which is always spent reading. Writing though, thats a different ball game. I know this is very wrong of me, especially if I want to be serious about my writing and be taken seriously about my writing. Not making excuses, but fitting in my running, work, family time and writing can be tricky. But when I comes to my writing, I need to treat it like my running. Don’t put myself under pressure to do large amounts every day. Just be consistent.

I read an excellent blog by a guy who simply aimed to write 500 words a day. He may have the odd day where he didn’t make that target or even start it. But he knew there would be days where he would do much more than that target. So I followed suit and have found it works. My average is more than 500 words and I’m enjoying it.

This of course is also helped by the support I get by my wife. We are both spiritualists. Not trying to sell it as a religion/faith - its simply our belief. She went to a medium we go to who told her, my late dad said I need to have a kick up my ass and get writing. I’m good at it but have become lazy! So even the spirits are telling me off! My wife said, she will tell me every day to get writing. This gave me a huge lift.

The draft I completed is basically rubbish. Now to non writers this would seem a very pessimistic comment to make about one’s writing. But every writer creates a rubbish first draft. Its in every writing manual worth its salt. The good writing comes with the countless re-writes and editing that follows. I have a story, it even has some logical structure and I am optimistic there will be a very satisfactory story at the end of the process.

Although, whether it passes my late dad’s critique is another thing!  

**********************************************************************

Over the weekend I watched the first part to a brand new BBC TV series called ‘Tomorrows Worlds - The Unearthly History of Science Fiction’.  Its a five part series with each episode a different part of the genre.  Episode one covered space and science fictions relationship with it. 

I was very wary of it, wondering if it would be just the usual popular culture bullshit  that is viewed as SF.  And by starting with Star Wars and Star Trek, my worries were confirmed.  Nothing wrong with either, but to a non SF fan, this is what they believe the genre to be.

However during the episode, it started looking at the high concept of ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’, the non gender specific aliens of ‘Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula Le Guin’ and the sociological politics of ‘The Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson’. 

This is a series of great promise, that realises the genre is so vast and every fan has their own view of it, that you simply can’t cover it all.  So recognise the popular culture side of it but also pass tribute to the deeper more meaningful commentary of real life found in the genre.

Next week is all about alien invasion in SF.

Interstellar - epic science fiction at its grandest level.

It may just be a coincidence, or planned, but it is interesting that the release of Interstellar came only a few days before the landing of a robot on a comet. Both show humanity's thirst for exploration, to find our position in the Universe, with Interstellar using the medium of film and the ESA using the very real world of science.

I’ll get this out of the way straight away, I loved Interstellar and the only reason I am not calling it my favourite movie of all time, is simply that I want to see it again.

There I said it.

It is the science fiction movie I have been waiting for since I first started reading hard science fiction novels and short stories. This is a high concept movie, full of ideas, themes and very real scientific theories. It is not science fiction for someone who simply wants to be entertained by big fighting robots or huge space battles (nothing wrong with this form of escapism, I hasten to add). You need to be prepared to become emotionally tied to the movie, and think a lot more. Luckily you don’t need to have a degree in physics to understand the theories involved, but equally, you can’t let your mind wonder.

I won’t go over the plot and the premise of the movie, due simply to the assumption you are reading this having watched the movie. Its not a critical review. I love the movie too much to be objective, so its more of a tribute. Any quotes from the movie will be very much a case of paraphrasing.

I first became aware of Christopher Nolan as a filmmaker with Batman Begins. I was blown over by his gritty realistic take on one of my personal favourite comic book characters. The sequels helped create, in my mind, the finest movie trilogy. After Batman Begins, I discovered his skill for creating huge and interesting visuals in Inception - the bending of the city is a shot that will stick in my mind for a very long time.

So, when I read he was going to try his hand at science fiction, I was very pleased. When I heard he was planning to use real theoretical physics (by Kip Thorne), I became very interested. When I heard this involved wormholes and a huge journey across time and space, I became very excited. Add in a black hole and a story using the time dilation effects of interstellar travel and I was completely sold.

Already it was sounding like a film version of a novel by Alastair Reynolds (he uses real physics theories, issues with time dilation and in Revelation Space, a Neutron Star).

It turned out, I wasn’t far wrong in my prediction. It also contains a far more plausible Dystopian future than The Hunger Games, shown both frighteningly, and in an eerily possible way, in the teacher-parent scene, when we discover the children are being taught that the Apollo moon landings were faked for propaganda purposes so as to bankrupt the USSR into a space race they could never afford.

The movie is an emotional journey of sacrifices and survival. As humans we have always looked to expand, from leaving the valley in caveman times, to Christopher Columbus sailing to prove the world was round to sending probes out into the solar system. Whilst other life on Earth evolved due to their surroundings, we have changed those same surroundings to meet out needs. Much like the dinosaurs, we will reach our end one day on this planet, and be but a fossil, a minor memory in the vast history of this planet. Interstellar explores this as we look to other worlds to colonise and stop our inevitable extinction. “Mankind wasn’t meant to die on this planet,” one character muses.

The future, as depicted in the movie, is one of backwards thinking, of returning back to our hunter/gatherer past. We no longer worry about technical leaps, or engineering skill, only basic survival and not running out of food. I’ve never been a huge fan of how a dystopian future is depicted in a lot of movies and books, it always seems too over the top and too out of line with todays society to have a believable and logical link between the two. Hence my earlier comment on The Hunger Games. Last years Elysium did it wonderfully by having the rich and powerful living in a huge Iain M Banks style orbital habitat with the poor living on Earth. Stephen King, writing as Richard Bachman, examined this style of a future society in both The Long Walk and The Running Man (a far better story than the movie). Interstellar may not have the large rich/poor divide, traditionally found in Dystopian fiction, but it is a bleak future with no optimism. One big reveal admits that the whole plan is to populate another world with fertilised eggs and leave humans on Earth to die out within a couple of generations. Luckily, as with all dystopian futures, there are a few who won’t give up and will find a way to understand the physics needed to save mankind.

This is lead by Murph, the daughter of Cooper, the pilot on board the ship travelling to far away worlds. As a parent myself, the movie does a very good job of dealing with the relationship and bond between a parent and their offspring. I simply couldn’t imagine having to leave my son at home, to go off and explore new worlds, knowing that he will have aged a lot faster than I will have when I hopefully return. But Cooper has to do this for the good of humanity, and for himself, a man born to explore, “born forty years to soon or too late” as his father in law puts it. He has to make that sacrifice.

One criticism I have read on more than one online post, is that Cooper uses love as a mystical force to resolve matters. The reason for the criticism is simply that this is a hippy way to resolve the issues in the movie, and that trying to make out love can be explained in scientific terms is incorrect. It is almost as if these posters have not even seen the movie. Yes, love is a huge theme. Yes, love is the motivating factor to keep Cooper going. But it isn’t love that allows him to move books, or hands on the watch from inside the Tesseract. It is gravity. These posters must have nodded off when Brand was describing how time could appear to a “higher being” - going back in time would be no more different than us climbing down a mountain. They must have also been asleep when we discover that it isn’t some alien civilisation that have been trying to help us, but a future version of us that transcends both time and space, who created the Tesseract as a time portal and a way to move backwards in time, among other things.

Interstellar is on hell of an emotional roller-coaster ride. Due to the time dilation effects of being on a planet too close to a black hole, what feels like a couple of hours for Cooper and his team, is actually twenty three years on Earth. It is very hard to grasp how that must feel for a parent, knowing your children have lived almost a quarter of a century in a blink of an eye. This sequence is shown via videos sent from Earth via the wormhole and we see as Cooper does what any father would in this situation - he breaks down in tears.

Of course the movie allows Cooper to answer the one question, asked of parents with more than one kid, who is your favourite? Cooper blatantly decides who his favourite is! But joking aside, his almost blase approach to his son, is simply that he knows and trusts his son is now a man and that he can let him go to make a life of his own. His daughter though is younger and in need of a fatherly figure. She also doesn’t understand that he is leaving. One moment, via the video, she pleads with him to return due to now being the same age as he was when he left, a promise he gave her. Of course, they do eventually meet again, when at the end of the movie, Cooper returns to find his daughter is an elderly woman on her death bed. When asked how she knew he would return, she simply replies, “my daddy promised me.” Again, as a daddy myself, the promise made to your son or daughter is legally binding. It is also another case of love, keeping both Cooper and Murph alive, feeding the basic survival instinct we all have. As Dr Mann says, “the final thing you see before you die is your children.”

As a movie, Interstellar is as near perfect as possible. It is probably the best chance, we as genre fans have, for a science fiction movie to win best picture at the Oscars. In fact it could quite conceivably clear up with acting awards going to Matthew McConaughey as Cooper & Ann Hathaway as Brand, both exceptional performances.

Finally, nothing is perfect, and my one gripe was the very end. When Cooper launches from the new home of Earth, Nolan missed a great opportunity for a “money shot”. He could have mirrored the ending to Pushing Ice by Alastair Reynolds, when we realise just how immense the structure the humans are in. But Nolan does like to leave some things to the imagination of the audience, especially at the end of a movie, so I can see why he resisted. This though is minor. The exploration of what makes us human is handled beautifully.

Survival, love and the need to explore and further ourselves are big parts of what makes us human.

Dr Who latest season thoughts

I’ve been pretty busy at present, training for a half marathon this weekend, being a father and husband, writing and working so the blog has kind of been shoved to the back yet again. If it helps I have read some very interesting blogs over the last few weeks.

I have looked in to whether it is a good or bad idea to transfer over to Wordpress. Partly due to the future possibility of having a proper grown up website as well as the blog. But at present I am happy with Blogger due to being linked to my other Google apps.

Completely off track, but my near 14 month old son has just farted. Well I hope thats all it is! (only parents will know the fear that goes through you when you hear an infant fart)

I was very excited by the landing of Philae on to a comet. The technical and engineering skills required to land an object on a lumpy, unstable piece of rock, minute in cosmic terms, travelling at 36000 miles per hour is nothing short of profound brilliance. Forget what we learn now. Its the potential of mining on near Earth comets/asteroids that excites me. The mining of these objects has long been a passion of mine and one that will help us to take the tentative steps into expanding the Human civilisation into outer space. We have an ever increasing population and resources on Earth are not going to be here for ever - we need to look at space to ease both problems.

Of course critics look at the public money being spent, and point out it could be used elsewhere. But look at what technological advances have been made by NASA (funded by US tax payers money). Besides I believe large multinational corporations will finance the future of space exploration.

I’m fairly confident it was just a fart.

Finally some thoughts on the latest season of Dr Who. I’ve spoken in the past about both my love for the show and of my confidence in Peter Capaldi.

Capaldi himself was nothing short of brilliant. Everything I thought he would be. Arrogant, , judgemental, quirky, eccentric, wise and childlike at the same time. However, I had to keep checking I wasn’t watching “The Clara Show”, as yet again the companion becomes the main character. I get that the original premise was that we the audience experienced the show through the eyes of the companion. But when the companion (Clara) starts becoming the moral compass for the Doctor, acting very childish and arrogant herself, it gets too much. I actually enjoyed her “impossible girl” story ark with Matt Smith, and this may be another issue - she suited Matt Smith, but just doesn’t work with Capaldi. She is supposed to be leaving at Christmas, so hopefully they will find a more suitable companion.

They had a good ready made one in Osgood, the UNIT scientist. But she was killed off. It would have made a change to have had a companion who was his intellectual equal. Hopefully it wasn’t a “fixed point in time” so we can have some timey-whiney stuff!

A female Master was certainly a nice surprise (I kind of guessed, but also thought The Rani may be a good option). I can buy this. The Master is always looking to get one over The Doctor, so changing gender would definitely be up there with fooling our hero. Besides, Michelle Gomez was wonderful as the iconic villian, bringing the right mix of over the top campness, insanity (well bananas in her case) and megalomania. Just a shame her “death” was a little underwhelming. We all know she isn’t dead but The Doctor would normally react a lot more than that (see John Simm refusing to regenerate).

The Brigadier was back! And he was saluted by the Doctor. He may have been a zombie cyberman, but it was still very cool.

I would have loved to have had a “Thick of It” reunion between Chris Addison and Capaldi, but at least we got a reference with The Doctors pyscho paper being full of swear words.

We will never mention the Robin Hood episode again.

There is only one Mr Pink.

Hopefully with a new companion and Capaldi fully in the swing of things the next season will be back in track. 

Falling in love with, moving apart, rekindling a love for U2

Although expected to be released this year, it came as quite a surprise that U2 released their latest album “Songs of Innocence” free of charge via ITunes. In fact there was no waiting - the announcement was made, then it appeared in all 500 Million Itunes users’ “Cloud”. There are arguments for and against the almost forcing of users to have an album by a band that separates many music fans and are possibly the most marmite of bands (fans worship them, others hate them for various reasons). But thats for another day. This is more about my love of the band (no I won’t try to sell you into the cult of U2 where we all worship at the feet of our God Bono)

I have been a fan for almost 20 years. They weren’t the band that got me into music. That was Queen and Status Quo (I can’t quote remember whose greatest hits my mum got me as a 10 year old in 1990 first). My first taste of the band was my mum having a rather childish strop when their song “Desire” knocked a song by her then favourite band “The Hollies” from the number one spot. Then in 1992 I watched as they played the Freddie Mercury Tribute concert (albeit live via satellite) but there was still no inkling to discover more about them. But in 1995 I was looking for new and different music to listen to. I’d missed grunge, although I loved my Pearl Jam and Nirvanna cassettes (showing my age somewhat!), and Britpop, although fun, never quite pushed me musically.

In that same summer that brought us the big Blur V Oasis debate, U2 quietly released “Hold me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me,” a song used for the “Batman Forever” soundtrack. I randomly purchased the single (again, hard copy CDs is showing my age!) and instantly fell in love with the cyber punk/rock n roll/techno fuse of 90s U2. It must be said that I learnt not long after that this isn’t a typical U2 sounding song - but what is? After that, I became an instant fan, obsessing over them like other big fans. Over the coming years I purchased their back catalogue and old concerts on VHS (there I go again!) and was lucky to see them at Wembley on the 1997 PopMart tour. I was even more lucky to see them in Dublin in 2005 (having seen them in Manchester 2 weeks before) and again in Cardiff in 2009. But then I seemed to have lost a little interest in them.

For long periods of my life, U2 were a constant companion. If I was feeling down, they were there musically for me. They represented the single me. Yes, I had relationships during this time, but hindsight being what it is, they were never going to last for one reason or another. And guess who were there to pick the pieces up like the musical mates they were? U2.

In 2009 I met the girl that I went on to marry and start a family with me. I took her to see them in Cardiff, making her a fan in the process - as she says, the haters need to see them live before giving a music opinion on them. And this is the thing. They were no longer needed emotionally. The married me didn’t need to lean on U2 musically. My musical tastes changed somewhat. I’d always been a Metal fan, but now I was actively seeking out Metal acts. Although earlier this year I rediscovered Bruce Spingsteen after a long absence and this should have given me the inkling of a return to the Dublin band I loved for so many years.

And this is a long(ish) way of saying, after a few listens, this album has made me re-fall in love with U2. It wasn’t that I no longer needed them musically because they represented the single me. It was that, like an old married couple we grew apart. But now we have rekindled that love.

The new album itself has also shown that U2 are still a innovative band. They could easily become a Rolling Stones style greatest act (Nothing wrong with that). But they still aim to be relevant both musically and commercially. I mentioned buying CD singles. Well this was back in the days when the usual cycle for a band was create the album, release a single and get plenty of air play on the radio, release the album and one or two more singles and finally go on a big year long tour. Then repeat. But with the onset of Itunes, Napster and Spotify (to name but a few), people get their music differently via downloads or streaming. The humble single and album is no more. Yes bands create albums, but now people decide the single themselves by downloading it (I know some bands still “release a single” digitally). Commercial radio hasn’t quite got the listeners it once had as people stream music from Spotify or Google Play. So bands have to sell their much differently to sell the tickets for tours and remain musically relevant. This is the genius behind U2 giving away the album free for a month via Itunes. Apple get exclusivity, U2 get the album out to people who wouldn’t even think of buying it and then they become fans. In theory of course. But to me its a great way for an established band to bring their music to new fans.

Musically it has hints of the classic U2 sound. If there truly is a classic U2 sound. It is 26 years since they last did a classic 80s U2 sounding album. And even in the 80’s their sound went from naive new wave punks to a more American sound. The 90’s brought them more to an electronic sound - dance fused with rock with more than a subtle hint of Madchester with clear Happy Mondays, Charalatans, Stones Roses and Primal Scream style music in there. The 2000’s brought a more commercially friendly U2. The big anthems were still there, but the flirtation with DJs was over. But even then, they showed hints with a return to that sound in 2005 and 2009. Now this new album seems a more updated version of the 90’s sound with one of the producers being Danger Mouse. Its Zoo TV/Actung Baby if they recorded that album now. And this is the thing, what is the U2 style of music, if not a look at what is current and putting their spin on it. At the most its the driving bass of Adam Clayton, the drumming of Larry Mullen Jr, the effects laden guitar work of The Edge, backing poetic emotion filled lyrics song with passion by Bono. All with the epic feel of a stadium friendly sound that could equally be intimate.  

The cold truth of the latest social media viral challenge

The Ice Bucket challenge has swept the world of social media like a plague of locusts through a cornfield. The basic premise being that you video yourself either throwing or someone else throwing, a bucket of ice water over your head. You then ‘nominate’ others to do the same. This is done to raise awareness for charity or people donate to the charity.

There is some debate over which charity ‘owns’ the challenge, but my understanding is that it started in America with the ALS, a charity that help sufferers of Motor Neurone disease. Macmillan (a UK based nationwide hospice) have also joined the MNDA (the UK version of the ALS) in being affiliated with the challenge. It was done by celebrities but has now swept everyday people and my Facebook feed is full of videos!

In theory, this whole viral social media based charity campaign does a world of good. It raises awareness for charities with people who may never have heard of the ALS and MNDA now fully aware of what they do. People are also donating to these great charities, which is a great thing.

However, there is a murkier side to the whole challenge. As I mentioned above, there is some debate over who the challenge ‘belongs’ too. Technically it doesn’t belong to one charity, but accusations have been flung the way of Macmillan for jumping on the bandwagon and stealing the limelight from lower profile charities who have used the challenge earlier. It can be noted that if you type ‘Ice Bucket Challenge’ into Google, the first result is a link to the Macmillan Ice Bucket challenge, which implies they have paid top dollar to ensure this number one search result. This is a shame as Macmillan are a fantastic charity and don’t really need to do that or even be involved in the challenge.

The ALS have also allegedly got links to animal testing with Pamela Anderson being the highest profile person to refuse the challenge.

It is also coursing harassment issues and at its worst cyber-bullying, with those not taking part after being nominated being made to feel guilty or boring. My wife turned down a challenge due to the animal testing links and was swore at on Facebook after explaining her reasons. For the record, me and my wife donate monthly to the NSPCC (A charity helping protect children from abuse). We also sponsor people where we can with a recent example being for a charity helping parents who are grieving due to a stillborn baby - a woman in our running club ran ten lots of ten kilometer laps at the Thunder Run 24hour event. How people choose to donate to charities and what charities they donate to, is their own personal choice. They shouldn’t be dictated too.

Finally, the Challenge is clearly a bandwagon. Its snowballed to the point that the original reasons for starting it have been diluted. People are now doing it purely for a bit of fun, enjoying nominating people to ‘wind them up’. If you say no, you are boring or too serious. Some people are introverts, others are extroverts, and the introverts may just feel awkward and uncomfortable taking part. Everybody has fun in different and varying ways. I find watching my 11 month old boy eating spaghetti hilarious. Others may see it as being silly.

People struggling in drought hit countries, may view the throwing of precious water over oneself/someone as being a waste of something they are in desperate need of.

Update.....

It has been a while since my last blog. However, for once I have tried to be a little more productive. After trying to work out in mind what I want to do with my writing, I decided to just bite the bullet and actually start working on a novel.

The idea had come to me after me and my wife looked after a stray cat before the owner came forward and like a huge alarm, the idea came to me! It is a simple idea, based on a real life situation, with a “what if” to keep the story moving.

Over the past few weeks I have been reading a lot of Stephen King, including his “One Writing” writing masterclass. It may be a little over the top to say this, but I believe in years to comes, I will look on it as the most important thing I did in my early writing career. It is that's good.

For anybody who has read it, you will know once of the key points he makes, is that the story is the most important part. He writes this many times, in many different ways. In fact he hammers it home so hard, I have probably started muttering to myself “its all about the story” over and over again, before smashing my way through a wooden door, shouting “Heres Johnny!”

Of course, having digressed a little from my original point, reading “One Writing” has given me the confidence to give my novel a go. Its early days, and its very much writing by the seat of my pants, much like Stephen King does, but I’m enjoying creating my story.

Finally, having used my laptop for 7 years, it has become clear, I am need of a new one. Its processor had one core in Silicon Heaven and its RAM was getting forgetful. The purchase of a new laptop was needed and typing this blog on a machine that doesn’t need a large cup of coffee to get it started is a joy.

My MS office 2000 also needed upgrading, and after looking at MS office 360 or 2013, I posted in one of the many excellent writing communities on Google +, asking a question on one of the T & Cs for Office concerning commercial use and writing. A reply came back, suggesting a piece of software called “Scrivener” which was created for writers in mind and allows the user to project manage their writing, be it a novel, script or an article. It sounded perfect and so did the cost. A fraction of MS office or Word as a standalone download (which was approx the same as Office it self!).

This small act confirmed my feelings when I joined Google +. Of the three main social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter etc) this was the best for me as a writer to utilise.

One last, final (this time it really is!), my wife did a great act and moved my desk into the conservatory to move me away from the distractions coursed by having it in the living room. Stephen King talks of his wife being very supportive so its good to know I also have that similar support. Now if I can write stories as wonderful as his, I’ll be a very happy writer.