Colette

The other night I drove from my half decent B&B to Boston town in the fens to go to the cinema. I was here about a year ago when I saw The Shape Of The Water. I’m not sure what I wrote about the area but having spent some more time driving around South Lincolnshire I can confirm that pretty much everywhere worries me. There’s not much traffic, it’s quiet and the roads are too straight. I drove six miles earlier and didn’t go around a single corner. The fact that Boston was really quiet at just before seven pm was really worrying and the roads were dead. I mean there was another car on the road but it was a good mile behind me and stayed there. This is country completely countryed up.

Straight Roads - Highlighted
Straight Roads – Highlighted

To give a sense of scale the runway at Coningsby is 2.7km.

After parking in Boston, where all the car parks seem broken and leave me in a state of worry for my car, I went to the Savoy cinema after a small excursion to a kebab shop for dinner. I went to see Colette and I rated the film on the IMDB website. There’s a communication nearly five years old that explains the scoring process.

Well, what did I think. I definitely enjoyed the movie. I think it portrayed many of the issues still facing our society today. Women’s place to make their own money, people to be gendered however they wish etc. I enjoyed all of it. I always like these historical films because once I’ve seen them I spend a little time learning more about the characters the film was based on and learn that the real story is much more real and interesting than the film version.

Much like the other historical drama I saw recently I was somewhat surprised at the level of lesbianism within this film but if I had bothered to know a little more before I went I would probably have understood what was going to happen. There wasn’t a use of the word “cunt” in this film unlike in The Favourite.

Overall I thought this film was well acted and the setting and story were good. A nice little film with a relatively nice ending.

He Said What?

Over the weekend I went to a chapel communion service and I did this voluntarily. I was away at the Armed Forces Chaplaincy Centre and while there one of the members of staff was going to deliver the chapel service. I went to the chapel service to support her and be a part of her experience. There is also the very slight possibility that one of these services might persuade me a little to partake in religion. It’s not happened yet and perhaps I secretly want this. I am, very slightly, jealous of those who have such faith, such comforting thoughts about the world.

As it turned out my friend couldn’t deliver the service because there are rules about who can touch certain parts of church paraphernalia and I guess you have to be a certain rank within the church before you are allowed to commit certain acts. I find it all rather confusing and very amusing. I think that every church has these man-made rules to govern who can do what within their made up system of belief. Everyone seems to take this very seriously.

I was once at Amport House and someone mentioned that although gay priests are allowed your vicar licence has to be approved by the local bishop and if that bishop is homophobic then you lose your licence to priest if you come out to the church. That seems utterly ridiculous that your ability to church is dependent on what your human boss thinks. But then again, the idea that a committee of humans can overturn the common ideals of a religion within a committee and change a religion’s view on a particular issue amuses me greatly.

The sermon on Sunday was interesting. The padre [I honestly don’t understand the terms for vicar/priest etc] spoke about Valentine’s Day and the love that we receive from partners on that day. He then linked this into the love that Jesus gave to us and also the love that God gives us. There was general chatter about two holy men who gave their lives for strangers. One of them was at Auschwitz and he sacrificed his life for another man. The other man went on to live to an old age and had many children. The other priest was a man who got entangled in another soldiers parachute on D-Day. The priest cut himself free to fall to his death and the other soldier went on to do his job. These stories were interesting and not ones I had heard before. While they showed a love for the stranger I do think they missed the point that they occurred within a time when there was great evil on the Earth and millions were dying in concentration camps and in battle. But religious people gloss over the problem of evil.

Within the sermon the padre talked about a passage from John. He mentioned words that Jesus said:

[side point: Jesus didn’t say these things. This was written about thirty years after Jesus died. Go back and think about any conversation, important or not, from thirty years ago and try to be convinced about how accurate you are. It amuses me just how much study is made from the EXACT words in the bible when it’s all translations and copying errors]

Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?”

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”

Hey, it’s only my way or no way. You must do as I say or you won’t get to heaven. Do as I say you muthafuckers because I will damn you if you don’t follow my exact words.

“But, Lord, why do you intend to show yourself to us and not to the world?”

Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.”

This part was read out and the message was meant to be that if you love Jesus you will get to heaven. My problem is the bit IN THEIR OWN BOOK which clearly shows signs of an abusive relationship. This part wasn’t talked about in the sermon and it’s interesting the bits of their own book they are willing to gloss over. You see that little bit in there which is along the lines of:

Follow my rules or else. Follow my rules and I will love you. Don’t follow my rules and you are damned to everlasting hell.

Do as I say or you will be burnt and suffer in indescribable pain forever. This section of the reading was glossed over in the sermon but it screamed in my head and really bothered me. If christians take this book so seriously and believe it is the word of god then why don’t they see these parts. The parts that require complete submission or else. They don’t see them because they are either glossed over or they think it is a good thing. That passage has really bothered me for a few days now.

Follow my rules or get fucked.

It’s not like following the laws of the road or those at work. This is referring to eternal damnation and the only path to heaven is through following the rules of Jesus. Well, screw that. This book has been used to justify hatred and murder for the last two thousand years and probably will be used for another millennia. I do hope that one day we grow out of following a book written by men about two thousand years ago which is demonstrably wrong about so much.

You don’t need Jesus to understand that being nice to people is the best way to go. You don’t need Jesus to believe that treating people as you would wish to be treated is a good maxim for life. These things are self evident and don’t require a god or his naughty boy. It’s easy to use the principle of BE NICE to inform all your choices and decisions. If only more people realised you don’t need god [or the threat of hell] to be good.

Gloria in Excelsis

Once again I feel so privileged to have been able to spend time at Amport House in Hampshire. I was there helping to deliver a weekend of sessions for cadets who were learning about:

  • Unconscious bias
  • Listening
  • Expressing views
  • Morals and ethics
  • Self perception

This is held at a listed house in the tiny village of Amport. The house and the [grade I listed] gardens really make this weekend a special event. There now follows a few pictures showing how lovely this place is.

Arrival - The Moon
Arrival – The Moon
Foggy Morning at Amport
Foggy Morning at Amport
Just Before Church
Just Before Chapel

I did go to the chapel service on the Sunday morning but there were important reasons which will be discussed in a future Fooyah.net communication.

Racing The Mountain

I raced a race the other night and I really enjoyed it. The car was a lovely little Renault Megane Sport and the track was Mount Panorama in Australia. The circuit is amazing and I’d love to see some real racing there one day. The car performed well and was remarkably balanced for that circuit, the braking was sharp and there wasn’t much under-steer, I didn’t notice any over-steer. I sent the video to YouTube and you can watch it below:

I like the way the red rims on the wheels make it look like I’ve got proper glowing brakes. A reason for publishing this video was to bump a band video down my list a little, it wasn’t a good performance.

RAST Heats

I have spent some time recently at an Army Training Camp with a team of CCF cadets whilst they trained to compete in the Royal Air Squadron Trophy. They worked very hard and won the South East heats and so now move on to the national finals in a month’s time.

I can’t show you any photographs of that because they all contain the cadets. What I can show you are two pictures of Crowborough in the lovely sunny snow.

Crowborough Snow
Crowborough Snow

Another:

Glimmer Of Sun
Glimmer Of Sun

I’m very proud of the work the cadets put into the competition.

Also, while at the defence training area I found an old safe. I thought it looked particularly picturesque and so here it is:

Abandoned Safe
Abandoned Safe

Vice

It’s taken a couple of days to calm down after a trip to the cinema to see Vice. This film is from the same director who gave us The Big Short which again made me angry for a long time. Also, I watched The Big Short quite close to seeing “Spotlight”, that’s not a combination to be taken lightly.

I went to the cinema at Rochester on the west bank of the river Medway. In this area the Medway is still tidal and so possibly brackish although I would need to look that up. I’m slightly fascinated by the idea of where along the river does the salinity change to make it more sea water? It has to be between Sheerness and Allington lock but where? Also, I imagine it depends on what the tide is doing and how much rain we’ve had. There must be a mathematical model somewhere.

The tide was pretty high when I went to the cinema. I remember looking to make sure I could report it on these pages. Although it was dark I could see a shimmering reflection of lights across the valley in the lapping water close to the wharf.

I went to see Vice and as is customary I gave the film a score on the IMDB site. I use the iPhone app to score these films and then the application then tweets the result. It’s interesting how the language around computing had changed over the years. I would still call these things programs along with calling folders directories. I do come from the generation that understands most about computers and such. Younger generations, on the whole, don’t have to worry about the mechanics of these things as they tend to work straight out of the box. Who in the future will know the delights of messing around with config files? The nerds and geeks.

To understand the rating system used you should read this particular communication as it explains how a 1-10 system doesn’t work. Here’s the tweet:

Angry. that is what this film does to me. It makes me angry and raging inside at a political system that doesn’t care about people. It shows how people claim to be doing the right thing even though the evidence is clearly not there to prove that is what happens. I’m still angry and I watched this film about three days ago. It highlights the motivations of people in power and how much they are happy to screw over the little people.

This film is great. The acting is brilliant and the make-up is amazing. I really enjoyed it and the few moments of humour within. What I don’t like is the republicanism [USA type] that it shows. These right wing religious zealots have controlled the government for so many years trying to transform their own society into one that they think is the best. This is largely about making themselves richer and maintaining power to keep themselves rich. They don’t give a shit about the poor or the fact the people exist.

Things to be angry about and keep moaning about:

  • George W Bush STEALING the election in 2000.
  • Antonin Scalia being a religious zealot who did his best to remove rights from all people.
  • The complete fucking lack of evidence for the justification of the Iraq way.
  • How the UK bent over backwards to follow the USA into the Iraq war.
  • How military intervention in Gulf War I wasn’t enough and caused the next 50 years of stability.
  • The complete power vacuum in Iraq.
  • The EMAILS for fucks sake. [Republican emails from 2000s]
  • The religiosity of the leaders which means they already think they are supreme [Blair – catholic, George W – religious, Cheney – right wing religious]
  • Why the right-wing appeals to the poorest when that is who they mess up.

The Iraq war WAS illegal and no evidence existed for it. What a sham. I’m angry. I’m coming around to the idea of a revolution to remove the existing power hierarchies. I’m not completely stupid to understand that another thirty years or so after we smash the institutions we’d have to do it again but maybe that is how you make society as fair as possible.

Sleepless Night

Every now and then over the last nine years or so, since I’ve had an iPhone I’ve been trying to find the audio of a song called “Sleepless Night” by Dokken. It had to be the live version from the album “Beast From The East”. I’ve reviewed this album elsewhere on this site and you can read that here. It looks like I wrote that review in 2013! So, this morning, I once again did a search for the audio of the song Sleepless Night (live from Beast From The East).

I found a version! This song wasn’t on the CD release version of the album when I bought that and so all I had was the record version and the tape I had made of it. I found the song on YouTube and I have no idea if it is there legally or not but now at least I can listen to it while it remains on that site. I’ll just have to figure out how to find a decent CD copy of the song for quality ripping purposes.

You can listen here for now if you want, until it gets taken from YouTube. Listen for the pause just after the solo and then wonder at the screech as George Lynch re-enters the main riff. I love that bit.

Unsightly

Scanning down the BBC News headlines page I came across a few headlines that bothered me and I think they show a disconnect between what the public think and what is correct. This has always been the case but social media and the ease of connectivity now means that people who are wrong can gather together and think that being in a community of like-minded people means that their views are correct.

Holocaust Denial
Holocaust Denial

Apparently 5% of the population do not think the holocaust happened. Whether this is the same as denial I am not sure. Perhaps they just haven’t appraised the evidence. Apparently 45% of people polled didn’t know how many people were killed in the holocaust but I think that is more forgivable. To know something happened is one thing but to know numbers about it is another. As long as they all know it was a bad thing then we should be ok. There were 17 million victims in total.

What this news article seems to be pointing out is that we clearly are not learning from the mistakes of the past. We are also pretty poor at appraising evidence. Too many people don’t understand how to read articles critically and to appraise their sources of information. Too many people can easily be swayed by group-think and the idea that many people saying the same thing over and over must be right.

What’s more these people also probably don’t care that they are wrong. They are going to believe what they want because they can. They also probably think that there isn’t objective truth. They probably struggle to cope with the idea that they can be easily manipulated and are possibly being used by other forces or that they are just stupid. The reason we have experts in certain fields of human endeavour is so that not everyone needs to be an expert about everything. People should be accepting of allowing us to defer our human knowledge to people who have spent their lives pursuing the best-as-we-know-it truth in these matters. We also need to understand that it’s not just a single expert we should trust but the consensus view of the world of experts.

This is what science does. Science changes its views with evidence and sometimes it changes quickly and sometimes its a more gradual change but over time the direction of scientific knowledge is to getting things correct. In terms of history we should listen to the consensus view of academics while we learn more and more. In terms of economics we shouldn’t really listen to anyone because it’s not a science, more a dark art. In terms of Brexit we should listen to the lawyers, the economists and the scientists. We should not be listening to the MPs because they aren’t experts in those fields. They are people elected by us to represent us whom, we would think, have the best interests of the country and its citizens as a whole. But we should also recognise that they are human and so fundamentally flawed individually.

We also need to understand that sometimes we just won’t know and answer to a particular problem or that the question isn’t a valid question. Think about something from history, something like what Masham said to Queen Anne. We can’t know what was said but we can use the best evidence we have to try and build a picture. Think about the start of the universe, we have a pretty good idea of what happened and asking “what” is a very legitimate question. The problem with that one is asking “why”. Although why something happens is a legitimate question the answer is unknowable and this makes the question reasonably void. It is these gaps in answers to questions that humans don’t seem to like and in those are inserted many stupid theories along with the concept of god.

Education is how we get out of this. We need to educate the country in particular matters so that people understand why and how. This is not an easy process. To allow a decent explanation to the country on matters of importance with a series on TV or radio or the internet somewhere. Mind you, you can’t make the horse drink. Some people will choose to be willfully ignorant and others are just ignorant. Personally I think this is correlated to good effect with empathy, but that is something I haven’t investigated.

Holocaust
Holocaust

This is how it is done. We educate people. We let them understand the experiences. We talk to them. We hope they are willing to listen and learn. I do think, however, that there is an awful lot of the Dunning-Kruger effect going on with people who choose not to learn.

Asstrology
Asstrology

Two more headlines next to each other on the very same BBC News front pages as the others in this communication. I did not read each article and that may be the start of the problem but I want to point out the following:

Astrology is bollocks and, unfortunately, people fall for its charm and simplicity. Perhaps if we could educate people more about appraising evidence and understanding a little more physics we could kill off this bollocks and other religious bollocks too.

Finally, putting a question mark at the end of a headline does not good journalism make. It is really lazy. It implies that the answer is yes but also shows that the journalist doesn’t really have any proper evidence to answer the question because otherwise the question mark wouldn’t need to be there. If you have evidence then it is fact and you can write something like that as an indictment of underfunding of our roads. But if you are just using “anecdotal evidence”, or to give it its proper name; “anecdotes”, then you are just a lazy piece of shit and you shouldn’t be a journalist.

Always remember when your aunt starts telling you that she took activated carbon tablets and that cleared up her cancer that the plural of anecdotes is not evidence. People are flawed and terrible at understanding evidence. That is why science and experts exist.

Things Change

I watched Raiders Of The Lost Ark yesterday. It’s still a great film if you ignore the glaring inconsistencies and “Indy” problem. I think it’s one of those things you should just enjoy rather than tear it apart. Having said that I have an issue with it, something that had never struck me before but bothers me now.

Indiana Jones is a university lecturer who has young women swooning over him in lectures. This is made clear by the number of women in the lecture theatre when he is lecturing, this is 1936 and women weren’t commonly at university then, and the young lady with “Love You” written on her eyelids.

Later in the movie Indiana travels to Nepal to meet with his ex-girlfriend Marion. After an initial greeting she hits him [wrong thing to do]. This is the exchange just after that:

MARION: You son-of-a-bitch! You know what you did to me, to my life? This is your handiwork.

INDY: I never meant to hurt you.

MARION: I was a child!

INDY: You knew what you were doing.

MARION: I was in love.

INDY: I guess that depends on your definition.

MARION: It was wrong. You knew it.

Quite clearly in this situation we have a college lecturer taking advantage of his position of influence over a younger female student. She has every right to be angry at him. He’s even quite dismissive of her feelings in this situation.

You can see that in the early 1980s when this was released this was an accepted form of abuse. We now recognise the problems with this behaviour and treat it accordingly. Let’s be clear, I am not asking for the film to be withdrawn, I’m not saying you shouldn’t watch it but I am saying that times have changed and we need to understand how society is generally self improving over time [or at least the last seventy years].

Given the way things are going in this country and the USA I am worried that society will regress in acceptance and understanding of moral codes over the next twenty years. I mean I’m optimistic about it, but I do worry.

The Favourite

Yesterday I took a saunter over to Rochester so visit the cinema. I’d been looking at what’s on during the week and there wasn’t a huge amount that impressed me. But, I decided to go and see an historical drama. I don’t really like any form of period dramas. The idea that someone has scripted what *might* have happened and been said really bothers me. It moves those imaginations into the common collective about what really happened. It seems that these sorts of things are really popular with The Crown on Netflix and other things always being watched on classic television. I don’t mind fiction period drama as much, although I’m still not keen, because you can say what you want, it’s your story.

I noted that the tide was pretty low as I arrived at the cinema. Lots of the mud bank on the west of the river was showing and the boats seemed below average protuberance. As is usual I rated the film on IMDB, there’s a system so perhaps you should read this communication which explains that.

While watching I normally fixate on three or four things and try to remember them to write here. This isn’t perfect and I often forget what I was going to say. I guess I could take a note book into the theatre but I’m quite convinced that would be rude and somewhat professional, I don’t want to raise these reviews of movies to a level where object criticism could be placed at me. These reviews are mine they don’t represent any form of global ratings. If you know me then they probably make sense, if you don’t then your experiences of a movie could be vastly different to mine.

For the first thirty minutes or so of this film I didn’t even think about what to write here. That probably means the film was pretty good. If it was terrible I would have been pondering my context of this communication for a long time. I wasn’t really sure where this film was meant to be set or when Queen Anne reigned over us. A quick Wikipedia reading left me to understand that the action takes place at Kensington Palace and she was queen at the start of the 18th century. I am slightly worried that this communication will descend into a rant about society, hierarchy and the feudal system but I will do my best. You can read previous film reviews to see what I mean.

My short summary about this movie would be thus:

More lesbianism than I was expecting.

There should be other things to say about this film and so I shall put them here. I had three main points to say once I left the environs of the cinema. Firstly, not knowing anything about the movie on the way in I was slightly surprised at the level of lesbianism contained within.

Next, there were quite a few establishing shots where a fish eye lens was used, which in itself is fine but then they moved the camera and it felt like watching a VR film somehow and if the shot had gone on much longer I think I would have felt slightly sick.

The next thing that surprised me, but I guess shouldn’t have, was the fair usage of the word “cunt”. I am not bothered by usage of this word and it is interesting knowing the general reaction of the populace now compared to what was probably common usage three hundred years ago.

This film was probably more “arty” than it needed to be. There were plenty of lingering, holding shots that could be different and I guess the director wanted to make a statement. I’m not sure what the intention was but a statement was made. At times the soundtrack consisted of quiet repetitive sounds that slowly increased and stayed in the scene minutes more than would normally be expected. This was slightly irritating and a purely artistic choice, possibly one that I would not have made. It made it feel quite “my first art film”.

A quick read of Wikipedia about Queen Anne and you can see how much of this film is fiction. How much of it is speculation rather than being a well sourced historical film. I would rather have an as-close-as-possible film than this, but I guess it made a good story. Queen Anne is a fascinating subject and more complex than could be shown on film. I will state that Olivia Coleman was stunning and her facial acting in one scene was outstanding, you can read the emotions and thoughts of this queen perfectly, it was all so subtle.

This is the second film with Rachel Weisz in period costume that I have seen in the last year. I don’t think that’s enough for a trend but given I didn’t know she was in the film I think I’m excused.

A lot of the filming was done at Hatfield House, which I have never been to see, but my mate’s mum used to work there so I’m claiming a personal connection to that. It turns out that Abigail Masham is buried in a village near where I grew up, High Laver, and so I think I will visit the grave and see the church as it turns out that John Locke is buried there too.