Standing room only: the 18:14 from Kings Cross to Kings Lynn

Get to the train at 18:10, 4 minutes before its departure, and for only the third time in 3 months I don’t get a seat. I’m immediately relegated to third class status, as like a tramp looking for food out of a bin, I scan the train for a seat.

For the next 45 minutes, as the train speeds through the Hertfordshire countryside from King’s Cross to Cambridge my backside will be parked on an uncomfortable luggage rack. Then when 90% of the passengers on this train get off, I’ll take my pick of the seats, like a tourist in front of an all-inclusive buffet.

Fortunately for me this is not a regular occurrence but the reality is that this fate is shared by millions of commuters every year across the country. With that in mind train companies should perhaps make their luggage racks more comfortable, however they will of course never do this, as doing so would be to admit that their trains are overcrowded.

Perhaps all commuters should carry their own portable seat as part of an emergency kit that would cover all elements of travelling on a train in Britain in the 21st Century. Also included would be alcohol gel, wet wipes and tissues (in case you have to go anywhere near one of the train’s toilets), an inflatable pillow (because even if you manage to get a seat they are often very uncomfortable) and earplugs (to block out the noise from neighbouring passengers headphones).

Britain’s trains should be a pleasure to travel on. However, for me and countless others they are often a pain in the arse.

4 attempts to get my pre-paid train ticket from the station today:

1. booking reference not valid

I had been given the wrong one, so I eventually got the right one and went back but...

2. The ticket office was closed temporarily

So I went back a bit later and...

3. Was told that the ticket hadn't been paid for

So I made some calls confirming that it had been paid for and went back but...

4. A very unhelpful new ticket office person said that the reference didn't come up on his system

So I made some more calls and it turns out the original ticket office person managed to print it off after I left for the 3rd time. He locked the ticket in the safe and took the key with him.

Hopefully 5th time lucky tomorrow!

London Loves Lunchtimes: 2-13 August: From the Houses of Parliament to St P...

London Loves Lunchtimes: 2-13 August: From the Houses of Parliament to St P...: "A fortnight ago I found out that with immediate notice I was going to be working full-time in London. I was naturally both excited and nervo..."

The State We're In

"The people have spoken and we don't know what they've said"

- Ed Miliband

We are used to results in Britain. We are used to winners and losers - glorious victory or heroic defeat. That is why nobody, especially not the politicians themselves, is sure what to make of the results of the 2010 UK General Election. Six months ago the Conservatives were expected to walk the election and win a massive majority - all they had to do it seemed was to turn up and they'd win. Then Nick Clegg was being lauded as the new Churchill after a good performance in the first TV debate and some predicted that the Liberal Democrats might even win. Labour were expected to suffer a humiliating defeat and many high-profile MPs were expected to have a 'Portilio moment' and loose their seats.

But none of the above predictions happened. Instead every party lost, yet they also won. The Conservatives lost because despite Lord Ashcroft's millions, despite backing from nearly all of the UK's media, despite Labour's 13 years in government, despite Gordon Brown's unpopularity, despite the expenses scandal and despite a supposed national apathy with politics they did not win the outright majority that they expected. Yet they won because they gained 97 new MPS and got more votes and seats than any other party. Labour lost because after 13 years in power they lost their majority in the House of Commons. Yet they won because they didn't do as badly as was predicted and the Conservatives did not do as well as was predicted. The Liberal Democrats lost because despite the 'Nick Clegg effect' they had 5 fewer seats than in 2005. Yet they won because more people voted Liberal Democrat than ever before and they are now in unique but agonising position where they hold the balance of power - do they accept David Cameron's deal or support a losing Government?

It is a tough choice because whatever the Liberal Democrats decide it will affect the whole country. If they back the Conservatives and the Tories pass through unpopular cuts to public services then they will bear the brunt of a large part of the public's anger. If they take Gordon Brown's carrot of electoral reform then they will be propping up a losing government and not delivering the change that they promised to the 6.8 million people who voted for them. Perhaps the best thing for them to do would be the most Liberal Democrat thing to do - sit on the fence and don't back either party. Because if the Conservatives form a minority government and start trying to pass unpopular cuts to public services then there will soon be another General Election and the outcome may be very different. Indeed, some have predicted that because of the cuts to public services that will be made, the party that forms a government may be out of power for a generation.

But whatever happens there is still hope for Britain. Turnout at the election was higher than expected, electoral reform is now a serious national issue and everyone seems to be interested in politics again, which can only be a good thing. For years apathy has ruled Britian, this is dangerous because it gives minority parties like the BNP the chance to influence people. Thankfully we are finally realising that politics is important and it is an issue for all of us. This is important because it is only when this happens that ordinary people can start having an influence in politics again and make the politicians do what they're paid to do - work for us.

Brown vs Cameron (vs Clegg) Round One

“The purpose of politics is to give people tools to make the most of their lives.”

- Bill Clinton

And so it begins. Today Gordon Brown confirmed the worst-kept secret in British politics by announcing that the next General Election will take place on Thursday May 6 2010. All political parties will now spend the next 4 weeks trying to convince us that they will be the ones who will give us the tools to help us to make the most of our lives.

For the first time in a generation the Conservatives are favourites and they certainly have the financial backing - notably the millions from tax-exile Lord Ashcroft, enabling them to spend millions on advertising. They also have the backing of The Sun, the best selling newspaper in Britain, who infamously 'won it'  for the Tories with their anti-Labour headlines and stories in 1992.

But it's not just the traditional mediums of billboards, leaflets and tabloid newspapers that will influence the result of the General Election. For the first time the online world is set to play a big role as voters discuss the pros and cons of all parties across the social media of Twitter and Facebook. And in the 21st Century it's not just media-savvy 20 and 30-somethings who use the web to discuss and debate the issues of the day. Political parties are aware of the influence that sites like netmums.com can have and political activists have even been rumoured to have tried to infiltrate the message boards of such sites to try and influence voters.

The 2010 General Election will also see TV debates for the first time. An idea borrowed from American politics in an attempt to help reconnect the nation with politics again. Whether it will work will remain to be seen - the many rules and regulations are likely to prevent any real excitement over these political debates. But if  X-Factor, I'm a Celebrity... and a whole host of other reality TV shows have told us anything, it's that people love to vote - if you give them enough encouragement to do it. Perhaps Ant and Dec should be hosting the election - "If you don't want your favourite politician to loose the chance to win the keys to the Number 10 house then vote now. Gordon really doesn't want to leave the house. Remember every vote really does count!" 

Whilst they won't be enlisting the help of two Geordie TV presenters, because the election is set to be so tight, all political parties are likely to try almost anything to get us to vote for them. The Conservatives may be ahead in polls but it doesn't mean that a Tory victory is inevitable. The Lib Dems were once seen as wasted vote but the prospect of a hung parliament means that they may have important role to play in the next parliament. But at the end of the day it will be up to us to decide. That's the beauty of democracy and that's something that we seem to have lost touch with. Hopefully the prediction that this election will be genuinely close will help to get us, the apathetic docile masses, to be interested in politics again. Because whatever the outcome of the next election, a national reconnection with politics can only be a good thing.

My Dreams of Being in a Band

"If you don't have a dream, how you gonna make a dream come true?"

- Happy Talk, South Pacific

The 1990 World Cup was when I fell in love with football - as a young boy I was captivated by the emotion and the magnitude of the achievements of Linker, Gazza, Platt and co. I called Chris Waddle a dickhead when he missed the final penalty in the semi-final against West Germany, screwed up my poster of the England team and cried. Essentially I had the experience of being a football fan condensed into a few weeks. From that summer onwards I wanted to be a footballer. Like many young boys I played football all the time and believed that this would be what I would be doing for the rest of my life.

I wasn't exactly a child prodigy when it came to the Beautiful Game - a few seasons at left-back for the 3rd Ipswich Boy's Brigade Junior team was the highlight of my footballing career. I can't remember much from the games, only that I tended to kick the ball out of play when it came near me. What I enjoyed most were not the games themselves but the act of being a footballer. I felt immense pride in pulling on my team's shirt, great enjoyment in singing songs in the minibus on the way to and from games, pleasure in banging the mud out of my football boots and satisfaction in admiring my mud-stained legs in the bath at home. Then I broke my arm and missed my final season playing for the team.

I continued to play football whenever I could but never again played for a representative side. My passion for football was as strong as ever but then I found a new love in life - music. If Italia '90 was my football awakening then the 1995 Brit Awards marked my musical epiphany. Blur cleaned up and what struck me about them was how much fun it looked like they were having - from that moment on I wanted to be in a band. The following Saturday I went out and purchased my first album - Parklife - bought on cassette from WH Smith for £10. I started off by listening to the hits but the rest of the album quickly grew on me and I was hooked. Not only had I discovered a great album but I had found what felt like a key to a whole new world - the world of the music fan. Melody Maker, NME, Steve Lamacq and indie club discos all became important influences in my life.

Like the child who dreams of being a footballer because he plays football all the time, I dreamed of being in a band because I listened to and read about music all the time. Whilst I couldn't play a musical instrument I felt that if I listened to as much different music as possible then I was bound to absorb some of it. Whilst I wanted to write songs, what I dreamed about most was actually being in a band. I watched Starshaped (early 90s film about blur) repeatedly and what I loved the most were not the live performances themselves, but the footage of the band just being a band. Singing on the tour bus, messing around at service stations, jumping into rivers together - that was I wanted to do.

My icon for who I wanted to be when I was 16 was Alex James. I studied every word of his tales of drunkenness and Soho life in the mid-90s - it was the template for how I wanted to live my life. I had 2 pictures of Alex on my bedroom wall - one was the above one of him looking like the coolest person in the world, the other was of him drinking champagne out of a bottle. It was the champagne one I liked best - highlighting how I wanted to be in a band as opposed to wanting to be a musician. I first saw blur live at V97 and my first thought was 'oh my god I can see Alex James'. Damon was great, leading the performance, but Alex was faultlessly cool throughout.

Three years later I finally made the leap into the world of the band when I started creating music with my 2 closest friends. I played keyboards because they seemed like the easiest instrument to play - all the notes are in order and you can create interesting sounds relatively easily. Like many unsuccessful bands we spent far to much time arguing about unimportant things - band names, what type of record label we'd sign to, would we write credits on our first album sleeve - than doing the important things - learning how to play our instruments better and writing more songs together. Looking back it was because I was trying to live the dream rather than make the dream a reality. The band disbanded after just over a year and while I spent the next few years dreaming that we'd re-start our musical careers, it never happened.

Last year I found the original 4-track recordings of our demos. Listening back to them I'm immensely proud of what we did create - 10 years on the songs haven't aged and if anything they sound better than I could remember. It's because of this that I regret that we never pursued it further - if we had applied ourselves better, practiced harder and more often, then something might have become of it. The Stone Roses and Blur are two of the best bands of the last 25 years and are packed full of once-in-a-generation musicians but they only achieved their success by being incredibly dedicated and practicing constantly.

In the early 2000s my brother was the drummer in a pub-rock band and his band did practice hard - to the point where they could perform most of the pub-rock classics to perfection. I was frustrated with them because they had the talent that I lacked but did not have the ambition that I had. Looking back they only had the talent because they practiced at it. Still I was proud to be associated with them and took great pride in loading and unloading his drum kit from the car before and after gigs and practice sessions. However small it was, I enjoyed the 'I'm with the band' feeling that all roadies must get - that's probably why they hang about on stage so much.

My brother's band eventually went their separate ways and he gave up drumming - something I have had a go at him about ever since. Last November he finally said that he'd take up drumming again if I learnt to play the guitar - something that I had never managed after 2 unsuccessful attempts in my teens. So I bought the best value beginner's guitar on the market and now I practice whenever I have some spare time. I can only play few chords clearly, but it's more than I could do before. Whether I get to the standard that I could actually play in a band will depend on how much time I devote to it but just playing a musical instrument again will do for now. It won't stop me dreaming though.

Why I Write

"We are what we repeatedly do, therefore excellence is not an act but a habit."

 - Aristotle. 

I started this blog in 2006 when I was halfway through a Communication Studies degree and wanted to write for the web. I took a module which was taught by a Cambridge web design company and called, appropriately, 'Writing for the Web',  and this blog was born. My last post was over 2 years ago when I was unemployed and had just lost my first paid writing job - I was unsure of my future but used my frustrations with the job interview process as a creative force for writing something that many job applicants could relate to. I was fortunate enough that my endeavours paid off and I got another writing job - just like my first, it was for a website. While I'm incredibly grateful to be get paid for something I like doing, I seem to have lost the enjoyment of writing and have lost touch with why I wanted to write in the first place.

Like many writers I write because I want to communicate what I think about the world and writing is the most effective means I have found of doing this. I would love to be a musician  - to write thought provoking songs that have an emotional impact on people. I would also quite like to be an artist and to be able to communicate without rules. But I'm not skilled enough for either. However, I can write and I haven't been doing it enough lately.

When I was an aspiring writer I dreamed of writing for NME or a Sunday broadsheet and writing the odd best selling non-fiction book about society - the brand of writing I would specialise in would be what I call social commentary. But you don't need to have a contract to be able to record, create or write anything. The web has democracised creativity. Anyone can record a song, create a piece of art or write an article and publish it to an audience of millions. That's why I was so interested in writing for the web in the first place.

The best way for a writer to improve is to read lots, write lots and share their writing with other writers. I haven't had much time for any of these lately and as a result have lost confidence in my writing ability. I have also lacked inspiration - nothing has driven me to force myself to write something, anything. But I have missed writing creatively and recognise that is something that I need to do.

I think of the writers who inspire me most and I can only marvel at the dedication they had to their craft - they all became excellent writers because they wrote all the time and were completely obsessed by it. I love the passion and sheer bloody mindedness of Charles Bukowski who never compromised his artistic integrity. I love the creativity, horror and dark humour of Irvine Welsh, who for me is the best fiction writer of the last 25 years. But for sheer writing ability, structure and effectiveness I admire George Orwell - creator of 2 masterpieces of fiction and countless excellent observations of the world he lived in - from The Road to Wigan Pier to Down and Out in Paris and London. For me, there is no better writer.

Poetry is not a form of writing I have particularly explored but Paul Sarrington (a writing friend of mine) is, in my opinion, a very good poet. I would like to end this article with one of his poems about writers:

 
I’m a writer.

Writers write,

Fighters fight,

Losers fight,

Fighters lose,

Losers win,

Winners fight,

Fighters write,

Writers fight.

Temporarily Vacant

“I don't work 'cause I don't have to, I don't have to work there's no work to do.”

– Nite Club, The Specials.

Ah, the joys of doing nothing. Get up when you like, get dressed when you like, drink when you like, do whatever you like. There is much to say for being unemployed; not working does everyone the world of good – that’s why weekends and holidays were invented.

All you workers out there are invariably suffering from one or more of the following ailments: tiredness, overweight due to poor quality lunch, microwave dinners and lack of exercise, and bored because you never have time to do what you want to do. Not working gives you the chance to have as many hours sleep as you bloody well like, spend more time cooking a meal than it takes to eat it, and doing everything else that you have been putting off for months.

Sounds great but there are a few problems with the being a new member of the UK’s 1.65 million unemployed. Firstly, not having a job essentially means that you are your own boss. Whilst this is undoubtedly a good thing, it is quite likely that your first decision as your own boss will be to give yourself the day/week/month off. Why bother doing all the things you’ve been wanting to do today when you can sit on the sofa and drink beer and eat crisps instead?

Secondly, once you’ve got off your lazy arse and worked your way through your list of things to do, doing nothing suddenly becomes a bit boring. All of a sudden working and all the pains that it may bring seems very appealing. And of course the most appealing thing is being paid for your labour. Not working means not earning, so before you get to the point where you have to sell your kidney on the internet, it is time to look for work.

So there you are ready and willing to return to the world of work and the rigours of job hunting. You have a quick look and there’s nothing there; thousands of jobs, but nothing suitable for you – depressing. So you have a better look and find a few promising vacancies – exciting. You then wait for weeks and hear nothing from the jobs you have applied for – depressing. And then it happens – the scariest and most exciting part of the job application process – the job interview.

Freshly cut, shaved, showered, laundered and polished; you arrive ahead of time at the mystical address of the interview. You are promptly greeted by a banal greeting such as ‘thanks for coming’, before being ushered into a room where your fate will be decided.

It is hard to know what goes through the mind of an interviewer but surely the only thing they should be thinking is ‘can he do the job?’ To determine this they have the habit of asking awkward questions such as ‘you’ve told us about your strengths, now tell us about your weaknesses’. What are they expecting you to say? How about ‘yes my weakness is that I am a compulsive liar, everything that I have told you in the last 30 minutes is not true’. It sums up the unnecessary inconvenience of the job application process.

At the end of the interview the candidate is asked if he has any questions. Perhaps he should say ‘yes you’ve told me about the strengths of the company, now tell me about your weaknesses’.

Don't Judge A Book By Its Cover

They say don’t judge a book by its cover; so why do the Harry Potter books have separate child and adult covers?

The phenomenal success of J.K. Rowling’s boy wizard series has meant that the Harry Potter debate is no longer relevant. The books are now read by such a large audience that they have become as much a part of contemporary popular British culture as Big Brother.

The debate was that Harry Potter is clearly a children’s book and therefore should only be read by children. ‘Aah, but adults can read it too!’ cried the slightly embarrassed legal drinking age fans of the series. This in itself was a baffling statement; because of course adults can read children’s books. An adult can read Spot Says Woof perfectly easily but it doesn’t make it OK for them to shamelessly display it in public. ‘Well, Harry Potter’s quite dark you know’ they responded. As if to legitimise its adult readership, each book is heralded as being ‘the darkest one yet’. Of course this is all relative – get a Harry Potter fan to read a chapter of American Psycho and them let them say which one is darker.

However, the merits of reading Harry Potter are no longer debatable. Despite a large part of its (mainly young) audience seeing the series as an escape to another world and a symbol of individuality; it is conversely a symbol of conformity. This is why so many readers of the book proudly display their copy of the novel in public. There they sit, on trains or on park benches, proudly holding copies of their new book, like a teenage boy wearing his club’s new home shirt. It is a statement that says ‘I am part of something popular, I am part of something that is now, I am part of IT’.

So why are there separate adult and child covers for the book? The reason for there being alternative covers is, quite frankly, baffling. Yet at the same time it is a stroke of marketing genius. The buyers of the adult cover are, unsurprisingly, adults; keen to display to the surrounding public that what they are reading is an acceptable adult’s book. This of course, totally misses the point.

Everyone knows that it is a children’s book and almost everyone (including this once cynical writer) accepts that it’s perfectly OK for adults to read the novel. Yet the marketing people at Bloomsbury know that the general public cannot help but to judge someone/something on its appearance and this is why the adult covers are published. So buyers of the adult cover are arguably buying the book for its status as much as they are for its content. The very fact that the adult cover may actually outsell the children’s edition says something about our society. It says that it seems that millions of people, quite literally, do judge a book by its cover.

Music as a Commodity

The latest indie rock compilation has declared itself ‘the only album you'll need to buy this year'. So just where does music stop being an art form and start becoming a commodity?

Art and commerce have a very intimate yet separate relationship with each other. Like illicit lovers there is a feeling of wrongdoing, yet they rely on each other for their own existence. Artists pour their creative heart and soul into making an object of art; yet that object (and the future creative life of the artist) is essentially worthless unless someone wants to buy it.

Essentially creativity is measured in terms of commerce; for artists it is the monetary value of their work; for musicians it is record sales. Without a product to sell the music industry wouldn’t be able to function. Without record companies to finance their musical creations, bands would not be able to exist; not in a full-time rock ‘n’ roll way, anyway. Therefore a delicate balance has always been struck between the artists and the companies that bankroll their creativity. Artists naturally want creative freedom and likewise record companies want a large return for their investment.

Now the internet is changing that balance as artists are free to give their music away and promote themselves online. A popular example of the MySpace music revolution is Lilly Allen; yet she was only able to properly play the game by signing for Parlophone, a major record label. Today it seems like everyone has a copy of the Lilly Allen album; her modern and cool take on catchy pop music appeals to NME teenagers and Q reading dads alike.

In the recent and excellent final episode of the Seven Ages Of Rock series, Noel Gallagher admitted that it wasn’t until ‘the squares’ started buying (What’s the Story) Morning Glory? that he became seriously rich. ‘The squares’ are the people who buy one record a year. Lilly Allen has sold so many copies of her debut album because her music has appealed beyond the music magazine reading fans; last year her album was the one that people who only buy one album a year bought.

For the single album buying public there is a hole in the market. If they just buy one album by the year’s biggest “alternative” act then they end up missing out on all of the songs that they hear on mobile phone and car adverts. This hole is filled by the compilation album; the major record label executive’s wet dream: a collection of hits that is directly aimed at the Chris Moyles listening masses.

The latest in a long line of indie rock compilation albums is the simply titled Just Great Songs. Now there’s a product that promises to do what it says on the tin; a collection of 40 songs that all the family can listen to. On the promotional advert Jamie Theakston enthusiastically exclaims that it’s ‘the only album you’ll need to buy this year’. Not that this is a collection of great songs, but it’s the only album that you (the annual solo album buyer) will need to buy this year. Essentially it is a perfect example of music being a commodity; something that is produced on a large scale in exchange for money. Therefore by packaging a song with a group of others as an item for monetary exchange, it ceases to be a work of art. Compilation albums therefore represent the ultimate example of the commodification of music.

But their large sales mean increased funds for the artists on the album, thus meaning that they can carry on creating music that will be potentially loved by an audience of millions. And at the end of the day that’s what every musician wants. 99% of the unsigned bands on MySpace Music aren’t on there so that they can give their music away for free. Like Lilly, they hope that their music will reach a large audience and they’ll get a record deal. Being on a compilation album might not be an aim, but it does signify that you’ve made it.

Guns Kill People

Yes it's true...

Like many non-Americans, I find the USA's obsession with the right to own a lethal weapon quite baffling.

Whilst the merits of gun ownership have been widely debated elsewhere, I would like to take this opportunity to share with you the wisdom of Bill Hicks.

In the following ironic statement the dark poet prince of darkness perfectly answers all those who naively believe that "guns don't kill people, people kill people".

Over to you Bill:

"There's no connection between having a gun and shooting someone with it, and not having a gun and not shooting someone."

I rest my case.

Don't Blame the English Supporters

Fed up of hearing 'Football violence once again rears its ugly head' stories, I ask: can we have all the facts for a change please?

This morning my peaceful slumber was once again broken by the annoying chimes of the brash breakfast television program GMTV. Whilst I’m not a fan of morning television, 'Europe’s biggest breakfast show' is my girlfriend’s getting-ready-for-work-program of choice. This morning’s mundane mutterings dressed up as ‘news’ included a story about Edwina Currie complaining about rude service from a well know baby store. This is a typical GMTV news article (i.e. it’s not news) and one which usually sends me back to sleep.

However, just as I was about to re-enter the half-awake/half-asleep zone, I was suddenly alerted by the show’s reporting of the violence that occurred prior to Manchester United’s emphatic 7-1 victory over Roma. The disturbances were compared to the ugly scenes that took place in Rome during the first leg and the troubles that were witnessed during Tottenham’s recent defeat in Seville. The conclusion: English football has a problem with crowd violence and once again it has ‘reared its ugly head’. Admittedly, GMTV’s reporter did not say these words exactly, but it was clear that this was the spin that the program had put on this story.

It is a sentiment that was clearly repeated by the Italian politicians who blamed the violence in Rome on the English fans. Let’s make things clear: English football does not have a problem with football violence anymore. Or at least no more than any other country in Europe does. Through crowd control measures, all-seater stadiums and intelligent policing, English football grounds are amongst the safest and most hospitable in Europe.

It is no coincidence that the most violent scenes witnessed in Europe this season have occurred outside England. Manchester United fans were nearly crushed to death in France in their match against Lillie, and were attacked by baton-waving police in Italy in the game against Roma. Meanwhile Tottenham have accused Spanish police of hitting a disabled fan during their match against Seville in Spain.

I was beginning to worry that these facts were being ignored in favour of the lazy journalism conclusions of media such as GMTV. Thankfully UEFA no less, have criticised European policing and highlighted the good work of the English police and football authorities. Will this story be reported by GMTV? Of course it won’t.

And whilst the show’s target audience probably won’t be interested in such a story, I just wish that people were presented with all the facts for a change. Biased reporting is what causes the general ignorance of millions. Perhaps I’d better go back to sleep next time: ignorance after all, is bliss.

Everything Must Go

“Imagine no possessions, I wonder if you can.” - Imagine, John Lennon.

Why do we collect things? There is a basic human need (at least in the western world) to surround ourselves with our possessions. We all do it and as Mr Lennon says, life without possessions would be hard to imagine.

Why do we feel the need to amass a collection of CDs, DVDs, books, records and magazines? I have been an avid collector of all of the above for the last ten years but now – through necessity as opposed to any Zen-like pretensions that I may have – I have decided that everything must go – for a price.

I have decided that two life changing purchases – a first car and a dream holiday to Kenya – far outweigh my collection of stuff. Because that’s what it is: stuff. It may have given me hours of solitary pleasure over the years but it’s all just stuff. Stuff that I don’t use; stuff that I don’t need; stuff that is gathering dust but some reason I have decided to hold on to until now. Why have I been so inclined to keep hold of this stuff?

Well, it’s the same reason as anybody else – the things we own become a part of who we are. Think about it – why on our MySpace pages do we write what music/books/TV programmes/films we are in to? It’s because all of these different interests make up part of who we are.

But it’s not enough to say that you like something – if you’re really serious about it then you buy it. It doesn’t matter if you’ve seen every episode of your favourite TV programme, you’ll want to watch it again but most importantly you want to HAVE IT. You don’t need it but you certainly want it – it’s capitalism in full effect.

Why else do DVD box sets of television series like Lost or The Sopranos sell so much? So if I was to sell all of my stuff would I lose a part of who I am? Or would I simply be creating more space on the canvas that is my life in order for something new to be painted?

I’m hoping the latter. It would be a great shame if at the end of this sale of the century I felt hollow and meaningless. That highlights how much emotional attachment we give to our possessions: It goes back to when you were at playschool and you wanted all the toys to yourself.

This Life, Take That & the Retro 90’s

So it has begun: the 90’s, the decade of my adolescence has now become retro cool.

Double episodes of cult favourite This Life are being re-run on BBC2 in anticipation of a Christmas special. Take That have reformed, and judging by the amount of supposedly credible TV personalities salivating at their performance on An Audience With…, much to the delight of many.

(By the way, I just happened to be transfixed to the first few minutes of the show in the same way that people stare at a car crash – I was shocked by what I was seeing.)

There seems to be genuine delight, not just by soap actors, but by thousands of (mainly female office workers) people at a certain age (25-35) throughout the country. Fair enough, people want to re-live their youth, but however hard they try surely it is never the same the second time around?

When I was 15 I was a big This Life fan. Staying up after 11 (on a school night! ;o) to watch the 20-somethings drama seemed to add to the edgy nature of the show. I was pleased when I saw that it was being re-run in its entirety on BBC2, and enjoyed the first few instalments of the drama. However, as the series wore on, something struck me: Although it can be enjoyable to re-live your past, it is never as good the second time around.

Nothing is ever as good as you remember it to be. It never can be as the rest of your life has changed. So I stopped watching the re-runs, and to be honest, I really don’t see the point off the Christmas reunion special. The show was very much of its time: when scenes sex, drug taking and alcohol consumption can now be seen on any soap opera, they loose the edge that they had 10 years ago.

As far as Take That are concerned, they have just seen an opportunity to make some money and be celebrated for a while and they have grabbed it with both hands. Which is fair enough, but don’t think for a minute that they are ‘Back for Good’, because they’re not. A new album, best of and a tour and that will be it. Not through lack of trying, but because even their fans will have had enough.

Because although it can be fun to re-live your past, it is only fun for a while. Soon the excitement wears off and you realise why your life changes, why you don’t stay the same forever.

They’re not alone though: Even Oasis have released a best-of this Christmas, after Noel Gallagher once vowed that the only time the band would do such a compilation was when they split.

There clearly is a market for nostalgia and surely it won’t be long before we see an advert on the television along the lines of:

“NOW! THAT’S WHAT I CALL THE 90’S! – BLUR! OASIS! TAKE THAT! THE PRODIGY! BOYZONE! THE SPICE GIRLS! ALL ON ONE DOUBLE ALBUM!”

It won’t be long, because it will sell shitloads. But amongst the best-ofs and the ‘complete series’ DVDs, remember that there are plenty of exciting media around today.

I loved a lot of things about the 90s: of course I did it was the decade of my adolescence. And if I was to hear a track off Parklife or watch an episode of Game On, for example, then I’d still love it. But it doesn’t mean that I want to re-live these experiences for the rest of my life.

So, as enjoyable re-living your past can be, it can be even more enjoyable to discover new bands/TV shows/films etc. And while the marketing machine knows an easy few million can be made repacking our past and selling it back to us, I’d rather live in the present.

ARU: A Change For Good?

(My University is getting hard on students. These are my thoughts on the matter).

Returning ARU students will have witnessed many changes to their University in the last few years. Although these changes have given the University a more professional edge there is a danger that they will not all be beneficial for students.

This year returning students in Cambridge may have noticed that there have been significant changes to the rules regarding the submission of assignments. Previously if students missed the 3pm deadline, then their essay would have received a LATE stamp and an automatic 10% deduction. Now students who miss the deadline, even by one minute, will receive an automatic mark of 0% for their work. Yes that’s right; hand in your essay at 3.01pm and you will receive a mark of 0% for all your hard work. Obviously the University wants all students to comply with the hand-in regulations, but surely these new rules are going a step too far?

If you walk around campus on an assignment hand-in day you will witness hundreds of students frantically trying to finish their work, struggling with those last 100 words and the temperamental nature of University printers. Go to the Student Information Centre and you will see students desperately trying to find module codes and completing their hand-in sheets in time. Clearly, the University wants to see the end of this hand-in day chaos, but knowing the nature of students it will be interesting to see the number who receive a 0% mark because they miss the deadline.

Another significant change to the rules and regulations at ARU is the new 15/30 curriculum, which has been backed by both students and staff alike and is now in force. However, this streamlining of subjects has meant that many degrees that final year students are taking will not be available to future new students. There have also been rumours about the restructuring of degrees. For example, it has been rumoured that the practical modules on some degrees may be moved to other degrees. Whilst these are rumours, it remains to be seen the full impact that this restructuring will have on student’s education.

It is clear that that the University is becoming more professional: streamlining degrees in an attempt to become a more efficient, cost-effective university. However, whilst many of these changes are welcome, there is a danger that they may have a negative impact on student’s education. The University is now being run more and more as a business, rather than a centre for learning. This may just be the hard facts of the modern education system, but it is important that the University takes into account the affect on student’s university life that any future changes may have.

Music: The Future of the Music Industry

When I started this bog I stated that the Arctic Monkeys were the future of the music industry because of how they generated a huge online fan base. Ten months later and with Google's acquisition of YouTube, the power of the Internet to promote music has stepped up to the next level.

This year has seen massive breakthroughs in the UK music scene by the Arctic Monkeys, Sandi Thom and Lilly Allen. The connection between these artists: The Internet has been a key part of their rise to success.

For the Monkeys it was a case of building a huge online community who had posted copies of their demo CD on the Web. Despite these demos and their subsequent debut album being available online to download for free, the band went on to have the fastest selling debut album in UK chart history. This proved how the distribution of music online can actually increase CD album sales.

For wannabe punk rocker Thom, she was signed by a major label after 70,000 people watched her webcast gigs. Her rise to fame shows how, with internet users up taking faster broadband connections, the webcast gig is becoming an increasingly popular way for a musician to communicate with their audience. In a landmark move the BBC has streamed its Electric Proms concerts online.

Lilly Allen, meanwhile, has found success where thousands of other unsigned artists have failed so far; through the massively popular MySpace Music. Lilly's success shows how useful the Internet can be for promoting unsigned acts. For the huge amount of unsigned artists on sites like MySpace and Channel4 Music, they have a worldwide audience where before their only audience would be their local pubs.

But it is not only unsigned and breakthrough acts who can use the Internet to gain popularity, unfortunately many major acts and their record labels do not realise this. The Red Hot Chilli Peppers are possibly the biggest act in the world at the moment selling millions worldwide. But they reacted angrily when their much anticipated Stadium Arcadium album was leaked online.

What the Chilli's and many other major artists and labels do not realise is that people who share music are promoting an artist, not harming them. This is only my theory, but I believe it is a very plausible one. For an artist to be successful there needs to be an element of hype about their latest release. This is the case for established artists as well as breakthrough artists.

People who download or copy music illegally are likely to share this music with their friends, who go on to recommend the music to their friends; and so the interest in the artist spreads. This trickle effect continues until there is a level of hype about the artist that reaches the national media. When this happens the sort of people who buy their albums in Woolworths are aware of the band and are likely to then go and buy their album.

But even if this is not the case, the actual financial harm to the artist is negligible. Stadium Arcadium is likely to sell millions worldwide, so the Chilli's have hardly gone out of pocket thanks to those who 'stole' their album.

The point is this: The Internet, like music television or radio is a medium for music. In that sense there is not much difference between a downloaded track and a video or song taped from television or radio.

YouTube users who watch, say, a video of Eminem are causing no harm to the artist. In fact is the opposite: the people who watch the artist's video are likely to want to buy the artist's new album or pay to see them perform live.

If a record label knew that 500,000 people had watched their artist's video on MTV or listened to it on Radio1 then they would be very happy. So they should not be scared of their artist's videos being viewed on YouTube.

The real problem for the industry is the issue of copyright. If an artist's song is played on Radio1 or the video for their single is shown on MTV then they get a royalty paid to them. Google are planning to remove thousands of videos from YouTube because they are scared that the copyright holders may sue. Clearly artists and the music industry needs to realise the potential of free sharing of copyright material. But also the law needs to change in order to reflect this sharing of music online.

Sharing music on the Internet for free, whether as a downloaded track or a live webcast or the streaming of a music video, only helps to promote music. It does not harm the artist financially, in fact if they embrace it, it can increase their sales. The sooner the record industry realises this the better it will be for them and also for music fans worldwide.

Sport: Do You Support England?

When it comes to sport, even non-sports fans will admit to supporting England during events like the World Cup. While many people in England would not consider themselves particularly nationalistic, there is something in all of us that is brought out during events such as the World Cup.


A couple of weeks ago a colleague of mine wore an England football shirt to work; apparently he had run out of clean clothes. He was asked by another colleague if he supported England; he replied “no not really, I just got caught up in the hype during the World Cup”.

I wasn’t sure what was more strange: him being asked if he supported England or his reply. Because doesn’t everyone who considers themselves English support England by default?

It’s not like club teams; you can’t pick and choose (although I think you should support your home team, but that’s another matter). What if an English person walked around wearing a Brazil shirt, saying they supported Brazil? Well, it probably does happen, but that’s not the point.

The point is if you consider yourself as English then surely it is only natural that you support England? This is proven by the interest that non-sports fans have in their national team during international tournaments, in particular the World Cup.

This is because when we are cheering on the England football team during the World Cup, what we are celebrating is England the nation, not England the football team.

Witness the plethora of St George crosses hung from cars, homes and workplaces during the last World Cup: You do not see this kind of nationalistic fervour during St George’s day.

There is something about sport, and football in particular that brings together people from all ethnicities and backgrounds and unites them in a way that nothing else does.

Some may say that supporting England is solely a white male activity. But amongst the drunken white males over Parker’s Piece during the World Cup this summer, there were many families including Asian children wearing England shirts with ‘ROONEY’ on their backs.

Sport is something that can unite people in a way that nothing else can. And in an increasingly fragmented world, surely this is a good thing?

Life: Passenger Announcement

Regular commuters are likely to have experienced various things on their travels; from signal failures to drunks on trains. But one of the more peculiar aspects of being a commuter is listening to the variety of passenger announcements.

Standing at a desolate train station in the middle of nowhere recently, under a temporary shelter that was struggling to protect me from the driving rain, I had the pleasure of hearing an automated announcement. It went something like this:

“This is a passenger announcement. Please do not ride skateboards, bicycles or use rollerblades along the station platform. It is dangerous and is illegal.”

I looked around: apart from me, both sides of the platform were empty. Nobody was rollerblading and it certainly did not look like anyone was going too soon.

So why the announcement? I know that it was an automated message, but consider this: What is the likelihood that anybody would actually be skateboarding, bicycling or rollerblading when the announcement happened? Highly unlikely.

So there I stand; a bemused commuter waiting at an empty platform struggling to shelter from the driving rain, to be told that I mustn’t ride my bicycle along the platform.

Perhaps automated announcements should be more relevant to the commuter’s experience. In my case it could have been something along the lines of:

“We would like to apologise for the poor quality of the temporary shelter at this station. The old waiting room was unfortunately burnt down by vandals, but we will not be replacing it this year as it will not help us to reach our yearly profit forecast.”

However, sometimes messages that are too honest are more unpleasant to hear. Upon arrival at Cambridge station recently I heard an announcement over the station tannoy by an actual person apologising for the late arrival of another train. The announcement was surprisingly frank:

“We would like to apologise to customers arriving at platform two for the late arrival of their train. This was due to a suicidal person in the Shepreth area.”

The starkness of this announcement was increased when I thought of the automated message I had heard previously and I wondered what sort of announcement I would prefer to hear.

Do I want to be told as I stand at an empty platform not to use a skateboard? No. But at the other end of the spectrum, would I want to know that a train had been delayed because someone had committed suicide? Probably not. There’s no real link between the two, but I’d rather have to hear pointless automated messages for the rest of my life in exchange for someone taking their own life.

Music, Sport, Life: Relaunch

Music, Sport, Life was originally set up for an English module called 'Writing for the Web'.

As you can see, I haven't been writing much of late, but I am about to relaunch M.S.L as a personal blog.

The relaunch will see a new template for the blog and three 'special' postings.

More to come...

World Cup Fever

The sun is out and the World Cup is almost here. There is a real feeling of excitement and expectation amongst millions of people across England. The St George cross is being proudly flown from cars, homes, pubs and workplaces. This is the power of sport; and the climax of the greatest sport of all. Nothing else, not Big Brother, not X Factor or any other 'reality' television show that is meant to provide water-cooler moments can compare.

This summer promises to be a spectacular celebration of England. It will unite people from all backgrounds in a way that we haven't seen since the funeral of Dianna and will provide a feel-good factor not seen since the election of Labour in the glorious summer of '97. Imagine if England actually win the World Cup: the levels of hysteria and insanity will be unprecedented. I have no idea what the V.E celebrations were like but that is the only comparison I can think of. Obviously there is a massive difference between the end of a war in which millions died and a football tournament, but that will be forgotten by the red tops if England goes all the way. As glorious as the Rugby World Cup and Ashes triumphs were, if England win you can multiply those celebrations by a hundred and you won't even be close.

But even if England don't win, it is still set to be a fantastic tournament. One and a half billion people are expected to watch the opening ceremony. People from every continent on the planet will be experiencing the same pictures at the same time. And thanks to Australia's participation it will be a truly global event. Bring it on...