Internet Holiday, Censorship and Resposibility.

I am a dinosaur of the internet. I was there when it was still a world of hobbyists, undiscovered by advertisers or pornographers. I was in college, studying 'media', we were the only course allowed the passwords to access this exciting, yet slow moving, world of text and low resolution images. Time in this world was strictly metered, and with the limitations of the technology, this meant that most of your visit would have been spent in the online equivalent of an abandoned bus station, waiting for a clapped out Number 7 to take you to the next destination.

I missed the really early days, the days of usenets and newsgroups, purely by virtue of not having the requisite nerdiness to pursue these incomprehensible exchanges. My brother did though, bringing back dispatches from this unusual world and displaying them with a joy I could just about understand. So, computers can 'talk' down phone lines. How could we know how earth shattering that would become?

Now I immerse myself almost totally in the online world. It is where I do most of my work, how I communicate with most of my friends and where I get virtually all of my news. My mobile phone is no longer a phone, more a handheld 'net portal. I know email address's in the way I used to know phone numbers.

I guess that's why I decided to take last week off. Entirely. No Twitter, Email, no News... Oh god... No News... How would I cope with no news and No Twitter... What would happen if I thought of some piece of disposable wit about a political decision? Who would I tell? My girlfriend doesn't actually find me that funny... On the 'net I can usually get a few 'LOL' messages if I fire a good one... Where would I get that pathetic little ego massage that comes with the magic words "... Has retweeted you"

As it was it turned out to be no big deal. Not like an alcoholic saying that they will take a 'month off to prove they don't have a problem' it was more like stopping watching a particular TV show. You find something else to do. You fill the time. You notice, but that's all... I didn't miss it. I read a lot of books, I went out to dinner with my girlfriend (who, now and again, reads this thing - Hello babe!) I hardly thought about Right V Left, or which SPAD had set what stupid thing on Twitter or any of that...

So now I'm back... And it seems I've just missed a Twitter Blackout... Well... I technically took part in it, without really having any intention to do so, or any knowlege of the background. Seems Twitter may censor certain words in certain territories, a plan that certainly fails to acknowledge the creativity of those with 'hidden' messages. Codes and Cyphers stretch back thousands of years, they are a technology as old as the written word.

I have difficulty seeing how they would implement such a scheme, but no difficulty seeing why. After last year, with the Arab Spring, the U.K 'Riots' and subsequent clean-up, the Superinjunction fiasco amongst other events, the pressure on Twitter to take some responsibility for the 'content' must be immense.

Should it be though? Are Nokia responsible for what I blog? How about Apple? I might want to edit this later... Perhaps it's Vodafone's responsibilty... Or even my electric company?
No... It's my fault... Not the fault of those who enable. In the same way that Google are no more at fault for piracy than the street map that directs you to the Market that sells pirate DVDs. The fault, or more precisely the responsibility lies with the originator of the 'content'

Of course I believe that Twitter should not filter content based on region, then again, neither should telephone or Text services... (witness the amazing recent campaign in Pakistan to forbid various words from SMS use... A list which made it round Twitter in about 5 seconds and introduced me to a lot of novel curses, both in Urdu and in English)

That said, the originator should know that free speech always has a price. It may be government harrassment if you disagree with them, or social alienation if you contravene the 'norms'. Every idea worth espousing comes up against some resistance. To be truly brave a person has to put their name behind their opinion.

I, for one, have hid behind the Twitter Hive Mind to voice opinions that I would have felt uncomfortable about otherwise, to engage in debates that I would otherwise excuse myself from either to avoid personal attack (abortion and Religion being the major points that just seem to attract the internet nutters to your door) or to engage in some Spartacus style Streisand-ing and add my voice to a (sometimes illegal) groundswell or meme.

Is it wrong for Twitter itself to want to excuse itself from becoming the mouthpiece for any and all 'anonymous' forces?

It's a difficult question. I love free speech, I'm even able to divorce the concept from the content when some idiot uses it to justify their small minded 'hate Speech' or nonsensical religious bullying. I do worry for it though... I worry that enough people will use it as a shield that it will take on the same perceived tarnish as those once beautiful words 'Human Rights'

Maybe... maybe all of that...
but maybe I've just been reading too much Christopher Hitchens and I need to get myself back on the newstrain... pronto...

Opinion: Glitter Not on Twitter...

Oh all bow down and praise to the great God, Twitter... Yet again... The Hive Mind has provided...
Right... I was genuinely >< that close to doing a ranty style blog about the 'New' (to me) 'Wrestler Style' introductions to Snooker matches on the television. I soon realised a few things, A) I don't actually care about Snooker enough to raise that much ire and B) This could have been going on for years by now, and since I rarely watch snooker, you could all be battle hardened to it (despite it's near Criminal inappropriateness)

So I begged Twitter for some News... And unlike all other totems of worship she hath provided.

A few days ago, a Twitter account was set up, purporting to be the 'Official Garry Glitter' account. It announced a comeback tour and hinted at 'New Material'. This was of course shocking enough to nearly bring Twitter to it's knees, collapse the internet and perhaps send the world spinning of it's axis to plunge, Space 1999 style, into the depths of the cosmos.

Now, I am proud to say I called spoof immediately (Have to boast about that, as I was taken in by the fake Wendi Deng, and thought the new Nadine Dorries account was a spoof... Although I still believe I am half correct on that and she is a 'Spoof Human')

Today it has been revealed that I was right... Or at least that the account is not real. However instead of saying it's a 'spoof' they are using the word 'social experiment', releasing a statement explaining their actions.

Now there were a few 'tells'. The 'new Material' and Tour stood out. It just didn't wash... When convicted child molesters release 'new materiall they tend to do it in less open ways. Honestly, just look on youtube for Johnathon King's more recent output to see 'how it is done' by such a creature... Oh and prepare to have your jaw dropped through the Earth's crust.

So yeah... A spoof account, albeit linked to a campaign for online safety... So far, so admirable... I do have one reservation, the use of the word 'Experiment'. Maybe this will come out later, but I don't see from the information revealed so far what the experiment actually is.

For me the word 'experiment' has quite a specific meaning, not obviated by the preceeding word 'social'. An experiment 'measures' something, there are controls in place. Maybe he plans a statistical breakdown of supportive/negative tweets. But even then there is nothing to contrast it against.

If I was less forgiving I would call it a specialised 'trolling' campaign, as the public reaction was never in question. The best part of people were always going to be understandably outraged, whilst some people who want to be considered 'Dangerously alternative' (or perhaps also clocked him as a spoof) were 'Supportive'... Maybe some of them just really liked Glam Rock.

So hats off to him for an audacious attempt to raise public awareness of online predators, even if the reveal seemed a bit shrill and sanctimonious. (Having a go at 'edgy' jokes made about your 'spoof' account... Please...)

But until I see some results, results that actually say something, I will not accept the word 'experiment'. It was a campaign to raise awareness of an issue, predetermined by it's creator, it was not an attempt to find out anything new about human behaviour.

(Oh and to clarify for anyone who thinks that just because I am questioning the 'experimental' aspect of this campaign I am somehow pro-Glitter. He's fucking lower than the germs in a syphilitic rat... And his music was always shit.)

Nice Dream... if PMQs saw #PMQs

Ok... I accept it... I'm pretty much pathological about Twitter, (I've even found myself using #hashtags in text messages) so this has quickly become a Blog about 'Stuff on Twitter'

Today's big 'stuff on Twitter' is two-fold.
#Leveson has gone all light hearted... Sort of a Levity-son if you like that kind of strangled, kicked and beaten into shape pun. While they do their best impersonation of the 'And Finally' bit of a news broadcast it leaves me to Gawp at the Twitter 'Comedy Gold-a-thon' that is the #PMQs hashtag.

I've tried watching the live broadcast along with the #PMQs 'commentary'. Unfortunately seeing a large number of grey looking, be-suited twonks, 'Harrumphing' whenever they deem their side to have scored a point is far less interesting than reading all the incredulous, snarky and sometimes hilariously insulting comments hurled at those same Twonks.

Maybe it's because this is the 'spectacle' bit of politics that makes it so unappealing. it seems to be the let-off-steam 'naked wrestle' the leaders have to go through before swanning off to brief the press about how they: "Utterly disagree with each other, despite the fact they both plan to do the same thing, although we had the idea first... Honest"

Now imagine how much better this spectacle would be if they could see the #PMQs Twitter feed... On a huge screen... So big they have to bow to the all knowing hive-mind GOD that is Twitter...

Well... Maybe I went overboard a bit there, but it would be nice for them to be able to see all the Labour supporters Tweeting:
"For God's sake Ed, stop doing that thing with your face, you look like a cartoon octopus posessed by the Ghost of Gordon Brown"
For Cameron to see:
"Lay off the Smug... Really... lay off the smug. You look like a Vacuum salesman who has just discovered the auto-erotic joy of the suction hose"
For Clegg to see:
".........."

Ok, fair enough... Nobody says anything about Nick Clegg anymore, funny or otherwise.

But there could be a genuine benefit to this idea (after you'd manage to find a filter that would keep out all the 'Pricks' 'Bellends' 'Wankers' etc)

A lot of decisions are passed through 'Focus groups'. Small bands of 'representative' people supposed to stand for all of us. But with currnt technology we have a massive Hive Mind, just waiting to be consulted like an all seeing oracle.

Imagine if Gove had jurned to the Twitter Deity and asked "Erm, should we give the Queen a Massive Yacht as a present?"
The Hive mind could have then immediately answered: "Fuck off, she can try and win one through a rigged competition like everyone else"

Then Cam could dash in and bluster. "Not with your money... Honestly... We'll get it sponsored... It will be the Royal and Compare The Market.com Yacht and floating museum of pictures of Meekats that have suddenly lost all their 'cute' appeal and are now seen by most as vermin to be stamped on"
...which is kind of what happened in real life anyway... Although we didn't get to see it on #PMQs

Opinion: Go #TeamBozier!

Last night, the E-campaign chap for the Labour party became the 'Ex' E-Campaign chap for the Labour party with the view that he will probably be switching to the Conservative Party... although I'm sure he'll be angling to something that swings a bit more weight than 'E-Campaign' chap...

I heard about this on Twitter, which is unsurprising as it's how I get most of my news. What was surprising was that, for some time it existed ONLY on Twitter. The announcement was on Twitter, the reaction was on Twitter, and when news and Bloggers started to report it, the crux of the story was the Response on Twitter. If you weren't on Twitter last night, it Literally hadn't happened.

Now, whether you agree with his principals in question, you have to accept that he was correct to follow them to the party that he feels best represents them... That's a good thing. In fact, it's kind of what democracy is... It's best for everyone, Conservatives have a convert and Labour lose someone who doesn't really believe in the parties direction and probably wouldn't be putting their heart into the job. Maybe both parties would be better if they got rid of a few 'career coasters'.

Despite this fairly simple story, Twitter went alight. Ludicrous Pitchforks from some of the 'Left' outstanding exaggeration from some on the 'Right'. He was either Utterly non-existant, or the final pin holding Ed Miliband's leadership together, depending on who you read. It didn't help that the first 'Article' on the subject (In something called 'Kernel') looked exactly like a spoof, possibly written by Charlie Brooker...

I spent some fun hours equating the hype to the teenage tribalism that overcomes Twitter nearly every day. #TeamBieber or #LittleMonsters or whatever. Political debate turms into mere 'Name Trending' and the side that gets the most Retweets can declare themselves the arbitrary winner and go to bed happy.

I don't know what fallout this will have, maybe none, maybe lots. Suffice to say there is really no political dimension to the story at all. He was a Labour chap who frequently had to dismiss claims he really wasn't, and then decided he really, REALLY wasn't... On Twitter.

It was Twitter itself that lifted this decision onto the News Platter, subsequently turning him into one of those magnets for that glorious Twitter venting that is oh-so-satisfying...

There are rumours that all of this is a publicity ruse to assist in gaining publicity for a business he's starting up. If so, good for him... He's played the system well. He knew exactly what to say, and when to say it... (Sunday night... If he'd started it today it would have beenburied in Leveson and Yacht talk amongst others).

Really everybody wins here.
Conservatives get a convert, who looks the part (i.e. Like a guy from the Apprentice) and knows how to work the system.

Labour have lost someone who doesn't really agree with them anyway and who looked custom designed to irk the Left.

The public have had a chance to get all worked up and frothy (on both sides of the political sphere), despite there being very little to actually say on the matter. Jokes have been made, exaggerations exchanged, challeneges of 'who cares the least/most' even some (Less amusing) 'Threats' flew from side to side.

It's a catharsis, like a mini election with no outcome, allowing Twitter folks (Like me) to feel they are participating in politics without really having to do fuck all.

... And Luke Bozier? Well whatever happens he will come out of this more important and better known than he went in...

David Cameron... Movie Mogul.

David Cameron has today revealed another impressive bow to his string. Not only is he a 'Visionary Leader' (tm) Steering our country through 'Tough times' (tm) left 'by the previous Labour Government' (T-Fucking-M). No... He is also a genius of the film industry.

Well I never.

Ok... I'm about to do a hideous simplification here, but what do you expect from a blog? Rigorously researched unbiased reportage? If so, go to the science/skeptic blogs. This is a political/opinion blog and since I recently decribed Ed Miliband as moving like: 'Two Octopus's wrestling in a man suit' I think D-Cam is fair game for some ribbing.

His tip for the British film industry seems to be: Try to make more Mainstream, successful films.

Genius eh? Nobody ever thought of that did they. Who knows what other, life changing ideas may follow?
England's football success? Score more and Better Goals!
The problems of Industry? Make better products, faster and cheaper!
See... This politics lark is simple.

Perhaps most amusing to me is the film that has been used to illustrate the point: The King's Speech. Basically it follows the 'classic' structure for a 'Sports Movie', except with speech impediments to overcome rather than a big game to win (and thus save the community centre from the evil developer who wants to knock it down and etc etc etc)

Now... On paper NOBODY on the planet would have that pegged for the British Success story of the year. No. If you were looking at easy Mainstream Success you'd threaten Hugh Grant with the tower if he refused to be in 4 weddings part 2 (4 weddings, a funeral, a hacking inquiry and a terrified new-mother perhaps?)

Speaking as an artist. (Which means speaking a bit like a twat, which I also am) You always angle for some kind of 'popular acceptance'. I compose electronic music, I accept it has a fairly niche appeal. (you can listen by clicking the buttons somewhere on this blog. Go on... Be the first)

That isn't how I conceive it. Every album or track I've produced I've fully wished (if not entirely expected) to set the commercial world alight, to win 'nuff awards and see me set up with lucrative advertising contracts for life. It has yet to happen, but that isn't because I'm ruthlessly avoiding the mainstream or the commercial. It's just because I don't fit that ever changing picture. I probably never will. I'm not a good enough composer.

There is no formula for mainstream success, and that goes double for cinema. Look at Heaven's Gate. That had Oscar winners, Epic scope and a huge publicity machine. It sunk an entire studio.
Conversely, look at Shallow Grave, or Reservoir Dogs. Essentially little more than (Admittedly beautiful) one set, Movie-Plays both changed the cinema landscape forever and brought us maverick talents on small budgets, and with no nod to the 'Fashion' of the time.

Then again, maybe David C DOES have a secret formula. Somehow I doubt it. If he did, Hollywood would have 'done a Kim Jong Il and had him kidnapped to LA, where he would be forced to make massively successful movies forever, thus becoming the most powerful and wealthy man who ever lived for taking the gamble out of what is famously the most risky of industries...

Or maybe it was just a soundbite to connect him in voters minds with The Kings Speech, a genuine British Success story and something to be very proud of.

Specially since they were asked to do a less-sweary version and answered with a Great British: Fuck Off!

Rationality.

I have a rationality 'Blind Spot'... I've had it for years... And it effects my behaviour...

Ok... First things first. I am very firmly in the 'Rationalist' camp. Starsigns? Bunk. Homeopathy? No evidence beyond Placebo. Afterlife? Nonsense, I have no fear of the worms or beetles that await me.

But, I have fallen foul of a self created 'Mind Trap'... And if that has penetrated myself to such a degree, it does make me wonder about how 'Beliefs' work.

Ok... Here's my trap. When walking down the street, I avoid things on the pavement if they come in threes. You know what I mean, those morlock hole style hatches into the underworld that litter our pavements. I link this in someway to some unspecified bad luck 'points system', which can be cancelled out if I walk on a two-er or a oner. But those pesky Threes.

Ludicrous I know. Uttely stupid. I know this.

I can trace it back to a story I heard about two friends. The first shared this belief, the second didn't... and to prove it, ran and jumped on the last hatch of a three-er, which collapsed beneath his weight and sent him thigh deep into the ground, with somewhat of a bruised ego.

Now, at first I didn't take this seriously. I saw it more as a game, you get 'Good' points for a Two-er and Bad points for a Three-er. It was like a collect-em-up game in real life.

Them I noticed something strange. Without thought I was veering towards Twos and away from Threes. My body was taking me there automatically. I'd noticed I'd gone off course, look back and there was an Unlucky three-er, that my legs had decided to avoid, seemingly of their own volition.

This both interested and horrified me in equal measure. Nobody likes to think they are susceptible to mental traps. So I decided I would stop it. Cease the game. Reset the behaviour back to 'Zero'

...but of course I can't. I can intentionally walk on three-ers, I can laugh at myself for avoiding them, I can even try 'Not to Notice' them. But it can never go back to how it was, I have elevated these utterly inconsequential pieces of the pavement to significance and although I know they have no influence over my life, they do have a tug on my thoughts. I will always notice that I've walked on them and either congratulate myself for overcoming the thought trap, or chide myself for even noticing that it was there...

The useful upshot of this is I have been given an insight into the formation of supersticious/religious beliefs, and in particular, how hard they are to completely dispense with. I am an atheist (perhaps an antitheist, but that is for another day) and have never knowingly had to rid myself of an ingrained 'belief'.

It is hard. Very hard. The body doesn't want to do it... After all, a high percentage of our learning is by association, so breaking that down with merely with evidence and facts, when it seems the cells of our own bodies want to cling to it is a courageous act. It is to be applauded.

I am still trying to develop a system where I can render this thought process 'never formed' in my own head. If I crack it I'll let you all know here...

Getting rid of unhelpful beliefs in ourselves might well prove more and more important as rationality comes under increasing attack.

I'll keep you posted.

(Side note: a quick hello to my girlfriend who has threatened to start reading this blog. Hello! She can confirm that the above is all true)

What connects the Republican Primaries to a UK obscenity case?

It's been a strange day on Twitter.

I spend a lot of time on the site over the course of the day, I use it to keep up with instant news, check in on friends and read amusing little snippets from strangers. I am used to it's oddities now, but sometimes it really throws you a curve, today was one of those days.

It started out with results from the Iowa Caucas and the surprising result that Mitt Romney had been victorious by the slenderest of margins, despite it being called for another candidate several times during the night (I'm on UK time). I'm not going to get in on my opinions of the Republican candidates, suffice to say that their policies aren't exactly designed for me. What interested me is the reappearance of a name I hadn't seen for many years: Rick Santorum.

Rick Santorum had been known to me for some years through a fantastic campaign led by a Dan Savage. It was one of those things that became vaguely legendary on the internet, passed from inbox to inbox with sniggering commentaries. For those not up to speed, the short version is: Santorum is LUDICROUSLY anti-gay... to the level where it becomes slightly suspicious (He recently said 'Sodomy Law' should be decided at state level,  fairly transparent euphemism there). Savage had the idea of running a competition to find an unpleasant, sexually led meaning and attach it to his name. They decided that Santorum would henceforth be: "The frothy mixture of lubricant and fecal matter that sometimes results from anal Sex" (Which is a phrase that has stuck with me for years)

A site was launched, http://spreadingsantorum.com/ and it quickly became massively popular, and to this day is the top result for searching his name. I remember reading about it back then and laughing at what a jolly wheeze it was, seeing his name today brought all that back and, in the UK at least, my Twitter time line was awash with frothy lube gags.

As the day went on this faded into the background, dovetailing neatly with the live-tweeting from a UK obscenity trial. This is a rather interesting case as it basically poses the question: At what point does the portrayal of, perfectly legal, sexual practice become obscene. (Full details are here: http://obscenitylawyer.blogspot.com/2012/01/obscenity-trial-of-decade.html)

The case basically revolves around someone selling porn on DVD (Yeah yeah, may as well have carved it on stone tablets in this age of instant internet gratification) Some of which was BDSM, with Homosexual, Fisting, and 'Watersports' elements. Now laying aside the obvious 'You can get all of that in seconds on the net' argument this has thrown up some fascinating legal ideas. It is potentially fine to wee in your partners mouth, but not to film it and show it. Fisting is fine in the home and on screen, but as long as it only goes so far in... Hearing this discussed in dry legal language was utterly hilarious and bewildering...
(For those interested, it seems to be ok to show fisting that doesn't go past the wrist... but in order to make sure they aren't crossing the line, pornographers seem to operate a 'four-finger' rule... apologies to anyone enjoying a Kit Kat)

Despite the humour of this there is a serious side. Both this case and the Policies of Ricky boy seem to revolve around there being a 'Normal' kind of sex. A 'good' kind that we can all agree on, and anything outside that circle can be legislated against. Homosexuality tends to get the most severe bashing in these cases, but it doesn't stop there... Maybe you do like to wee on your partner... Or be branded.. or.. or whatever... and you can, at the moment, as long as you don't film it... which you might not intend to... but then again you might... and you're then potentially straying into criminality.

There is a danger that as soon as the law gets to decide what is right and wrong sexually, between consenting adults, who is to stop them extending... perhaps into more 'mainstream', but equally 'unproductive' habits? Oral sex isn't 'productive', it is pretty damn enjoyable though... but on this logic, why not do away with it?

Well... because you can't, people will do these things any way. Driving sexual practices underground isn't logical, it isolates people from education and health services and drives us back to a time best left buried in the sands of history... As long as you're both old enough/not 'vulnerable' nobody should have the right to tell you how you should fuck... even if that means one wearing the other like Sooty... and if you want to film it and sell it, that's also your business.

So, what connects the Republican Primaries to a UK obscenity case?
Basically, it's HELL of a lot of lube...

Opinion: ....as bad as each other?

This morning I noticed a strange thing on Twitter. A lot of people were posting disappointed messages that a Twitter rumour about an old Man meeting his demise were untrue and wishing upon him various painful outcomes.

I also read back through the 'Greeting' messages sent to another older gentleman who has very recently joined Twitter. There was a lot of artless abuse, much of it excitedly discussing the older man's death.

The interesting thing about these two unconnected tales of Twitter bile is that they generally split down political lines. Those who regretted the survival of an old man tended to be on the Right, those wishing death upon the old man tended to be on the Left.

Ok... Explanation time, and how you feel about this will probably place you somewhere in that Left/Right spectrum.
The man who was rumoured to have died was Fiedel Castro. It was a false rumour.
The Man who joined Twitter and was artlessly flamed is Rupert Murdoch. It is a verified account.

Now I do tend to veer left slightly, but I do not agree with Castro's method of rule, and his lack of transparent government is likely to cover shocking abuses of power. Still I would not gloat in his death.

Despite my politics I love some of the things Murdoch has brought us, not least the Simpsons. That said I still hate his other policies, his systematic attacks on the BBC etc... But still I would not wish death on him...

They have undoubtedly committed acts that are sickening to the sensibilities of those outside the 'circles of power'. But is 'death' even a good punishment for this... How about loss of staus? Intelligent mockery... Loss of the respect they so obviously craved.

Now looking back at that you may think I am attacking one group more than the other. 'Oh but he deserves it for......'
...and I'm sure they both do... Is it my place to give it to them?

I have made jokes on Twitter about Murdoch, and would undoubtedly do some 'Castro material' if I knew enough about him to be funny, that's the jocular, if slightly cruel egalitarianism of Twitter (Something Murdoch should love, given his mistrust of 'elites')

Wishing death on someone, or to someone, is a bad argument. Being rude is bad argument. Twitter is place for discussion, and even insults, but why so thoughtless, dull and vicious?

If you find yourself about to tweet 'I hope you die' to an old tycoon who you disagree with, or 'I wish you'd died' to an ageing statesman you'd rather hadn't gained power, here's a helpful hint.

Lefties: say to yourself, I'm not like those 'Righties' mocking the death of an old man, I will not post that, instead I will post something a lot wittier, that gets my point across without veering into the artless spite of 'The Enemy'

Righties: say to yourself I'm not like those 'Lefties' wishing death on an old man, I will not post that, instead I will post something a lot wittier that gets my point across without veering into the artless spite of 'The Enemy'.

...this advice is free... You're very welcome.

2012 thoughts

Today I bought the Christopher Hitchens Autobiography. I started to read it in a fine pasty shop, where I consumed an excellent pasty, a passable coffee and sheltered from an entirely unexpected downpour.

I know little of Christopher Hitchens. I admit I'm somewhat late to this party. I was aware of him mainly through his association with Professor Richard Dawkins, but having read the various raptures of grief and glee at his tragic death I decided to seek out his works, beginning with Hitch-22.

From the first words, the most imperative Idea I was impressed with is the assertion that life has a deadline, the time we are on earth is finite, a fact you have to agree with even if you disagree with his stance on religion. Whether our death is preordained by a deity, or is the result of natural cellular deterioration, or an errant cyclist, we all have a fixed time in which to achieve the things that we desire.

I am reading this on New Years Day. That I have extrapolated this particular lesson from barely 20 pages of text may reflect as much on my mindset at the text itself, but either way the lesson, although sounding something akin to the tolling of a funeral bell is also liberating. You have a finite allocation of time, it is a duty to use it to achieve and enhance your dreams and desires.

I have already decided to devote a bit more time to the blog this year, hopefully the practice of writing about myself will keep the 'New Novel' free of such intellectual bum-gazing. This is the place for that.

For 'Intellectual Bum-Gazing'

In my malarial New Years Day imaginings I will write a blog every day. Of course this one won't be going up on the right day as Nokia phones don't interface with this particular blogsite, so ho-hum... I wonder when a New Years Blog ceases to be topical.

Nontheless I will endeavour to contribute to this as frequently as I can. If only as an exercise. My other ambitions are the same as every year. Get a novel published 'properly' (i.e. In a way that actually allows people to read it without you having to knock on doors, drag people from their homes and staple the pages to their foreheads... That or spam emailing). Write and release another album. Maybe work up a live show.

Sounds easy doesn't it?

Ok... For anyone thinking 'what a prick'... I also have a job. I'm not Nathan Barley... Although give half a trust fund, I would be...

Is it self obsessed to write a blog?

Not as much as expecting anyone to read it...

I have so far managed to immunise myself against this eventuality...