Switzerland was the richest country in the world per capita in 1990.
Amazingly, it was one of the POOREST countries in Europe for centuries. Hence the Swiss Guards. Swiss people were so poor they became the great source of mercenaries
Then they decided to have a hundred years of total peace, democracy, watchmaking and clever if selfish banking, even as every other nation around them tipped into mayhem. Et voila
If you fancied a military career within Switzerland your options were rather limited.
The Nazis stashed all their gold and other plundered wealth there, and it's not been seen since?
There were loads of wars in Switzerland over the centuries with invasions from Austria, Savoie, France, Burgundians, and plenty of civil wars between cantons and cantonal groupings or religious wars.
The Swiss became valued mercenaries because they had so much practice and developed the specialist pikemen. Plentiful military career options.
A particularly fascinating campaign in the French wars with Suvurov leading a Russian-Austrian army up and down dale or rather alp all over Swtizerland.
Well I never, Leon is at home and I am not...mind you, it's quite cold here as well, but less so than at home
Nice!
Cold and French but also slightly Flemish-looking buildings, so I'm guessing somewhere in Picardy?
Or maybe the Jura?
I think it's Alsace. Those buildings look germanic.
Mulhouse
Top of the class, assuming no image search
My dinner is a hearty bowl of pasta, lightly smoked ham, fermented cabbage, all covered in melted cheese.
No image search. Clearly not Strasbourg, and too urban looking to be Colmar. Nice part of world. Beautiful wines including the best cooperatives in France, and you get to hop across the border where the Germans make their cheapest but nice plonk.
Bravo. I don't know Alsace that well, apart from Strasbourg
I am actually off to France myself, at the weekend. The frigging forecast there looks little better. COLD for April
Like many border zones that have swapped between very different cultures, Alsace is well worth a visit. Some charming towns and villages, mostly untouched by war, excellent wines often overlooked by the UK market, and its distinctive cuisine which is fine provided your heart holds out. Thoroughly Frenchified now, if with a lingering Germanic accent, yet most of the adults' grandparents would have been German speaking.
I have been to Strsbourg etc. And driven though a few times. I don't like the food much, because I really dislike German food, and you can detect the Teutonic influence (as you say)
The military history is fascinating. You can still tell it is THE border. France/Germany. Lots of barracks and forts and the like. Soldiers training. Cemeteries
Königsbourg is an astonishing sight, seen from a distance
You're not referring to the Russian's WWII booty in Kaliningrad, are you?
They effectively annexed the top half of what was East Prussia, depopulated it and filled it with Russians. The southern half was given to Poland, but at least they and Germany have a border treaty now with agreement on treatment of ancestors and families.
It should really have been given back to Germany after the Cold War or, at worst, Poland with some recognition that some of the German diaspora could return there.
Reunifying Germany *and* giving it a bit of territory stranded on the other side of Poland would have been a bridge too far for most.
Not much change with More In Common at 59-37 this evening. It's the only pollster now showing the Conservatives above 25%.
The R&W Red Wall poll this evening has Labour on 44%, Conservatives on 24% and Reform on 18%. For both Labour and the Conservatives, those are low figures in this polling series while it's a new high for Reform.
Among 2019 Conservative voters, only 46% are still loyal with 24% going for Reform (a post-Anderson lift?) and 17% Labour
Well I never, Leon is at home and I am not...mind you, it's quite cold here as well, but less so than at home
Nice!
Cold and French but also slightly Flemish-looking buildings, so I'm guessing somewhere in Picardy?
Or maybe the Jura?
I think it's Alsace. Those buildings look germanic.
Mulhouse
Top of the class, assuming no image search
My dinner is a hearty bowl of pasta, lightly smoked ham, fermented cabbage, all covered in melted cheese.
No image search. Clearly not Strasbourg, and too urban looking to be Colmar. Nice part of world. Beautiful wines including the best cooperatives in France, and you get to hop across the border where the Germans make their cheapest but nice plonk.
Bravo. I don't know Alsace that well, apart from Strasbourg
I am actually off to France myself, at the weekend. The frigging forecast there looks little better. COLD for April
Like many border zones that have swapped between very different cultures, Alsace is well worth a visit. Some charming towns and villages, mostly untouched by war, excellent wines often overlooked by the UK market, and its distinctive cuisine which is fine provided your heart holds out. Thoroughly Frenchified now, if with a lingering Germanic accent, yet most of the adults' grandparents would have been German speaking.
I have been to Strsbourg etc. And driven though a few times. I don't like the food much, because I really dislike German food, and you can detect the Teutonic influence (as you say)
The military history is fascinating. You can still tell it is THE border. France/Germany. Lots of barracks and forts and the like. Soldiers training. Cemeteries
Königsbourg is an astonishing sight, seen from a distance
You're not referring to the Russian's WWII booty in Kaliningrad, are you?
They effectively annexed the top half of what was East Prussia, depopulated it and filled it with Russians. The southern half was given to Poland, but at least they and Germany have a border treaty now with agreement on treatment of ancestors and families.
It should really have been given back to Germany after the Cold War or, at worst, Poland with some recognition that some of the German diaspora could return there.
Reunifying Germany *and* giving it a bit of territory stranded on the other side of Poland would have been a bridge too far for most.
Except that Russia is the one with a bit of territory stranded on the other side of Poland!
Well I never, Leon is at home and I am not...mind you, it's quite cold here as well, but less so than at home
Nice!
Cold and French but also slightly Flemish-looking buildings, so I'm guessing somewhere in Picardy?
Or maybe the Jura?
I think it's Alsace. Those buildings look germanic.
Mulhouse
Top of the class, assuming no image search
My dinner is a hearty bowl of pasta, lightly smoked ham, fermented cabbage, all covered in melted cheese.
No image search. Clearly not Strasbourg, and too urban looking to be Colmar. Nice part of world. Beautiful wines including the best cooperatives in France, and you get to hop across the border where the Germans make their cheapest but nice plonk.
Bravo. I don't know Alsace that well, apart from Strasbourg
I am actually off to France myself, at the weekend. The frigging forecast there looks little better. COLD for April
Like many border zones that have swapped between very different cultures, Alsace is well worth a visit. Some charming towns and villages, mostly untouched by war, excellent wines often overlooked by the UK market, and its distinctive cuisine which is fine provided your heart holds out. Thoroughly Frenchified now, if with a lingering Germanic accent, yet most of the adults' grandparents would have been German speaking.
I have been to Strsbourg etc. And driven though a few times. I don't like the food much, because I really dislike German food, and you can detect the Teutonic influence (as you say)
The military history is fascinating. You can still tell it is THE border. France/Germany. Lots of barracks and forts and the like. Soldiers training. Cemeteries
Königsbourg is an astonishing sight, seen from a distance
You're not referring to the Russian's WWII booty in Kaliningrad, are you?
They effectively annexed the top half of what was East Prussia, depopulated it and filled it with Russians. The southern half was given to Poland, but at least they and Germany have a border treaty now with agreement on treatment of ancestors and families.
It should really have been given back to Germany after the Cold War or, at worst, Poland with some recognition that some of the German diaspora could return there.
Reunifying Germany *and* giving it a bit of territory stranded on the other side of Poland would have been a bridge too far for most.
Doesn't mean the Russians had any right to depopulate it, wipe out (in some cases, blow up) its history and heritage and cling onto it as a permanent piece of annexed territory.
Interesting, Helmet Kohl was asking for this originally as part of reunification. By then I couldn't see a problem and still don't. And it's far better than Putin having it.
I thought it was massively overrated. The huge twist did not make up for a decidedly average novel
What twist? The Tiger fucks off at the end?
All I remember is a twist. It was so forgettable I have (honestly) forgotten what it was. I was bewildered by the praise
I have felt same about several Booker Prize winners and I gave up reading acclaimed literary fiction as a result, it was all so shit
The nadir was some massively hyped book by Richard Ford which consisted of no plot whatsoever. And, what's more, the writing wasn't even that good. Not beautiful, not funny, not clever, just mildly well shaped. The only thing I remember is a bit where the protagonist spilt a bit of rootbeer
I'm a bit of a reverse snob when it comes to acclaimed things. Critics tend to get a bit abstract in their praise as they hype it, or talk about how 'important' a work is, rather than if it is a good story or has good characters, adn that makes me naturally suspicious. I've even seen reviews for things I like that make them sound crap by doing that. Then you get stuff which is just perfectly ordinary, but because of who wrote it it's presented like some masterpiece of originality.
Of course, I don't mind many acclaimed things, some are indeed good, but if it is super insightful or culturally important or whatever, I prefer to figure that out for myself.
It's an affliction particular to literary novels, for some reason
What I mean is: if a movie is widely acclaimed and I go see it, generally I think: Yeah, wow, that's great, or I do at least see why people love it (even if I don't). Likewise good TV drama, or conceptual art
However the criticism of literary fiction commonly seems weirdly divorced from real merit. What is loved by a coterie of critics is often not just overpraised but actively mediocre or awful. It is a SURPRISE when I read an acclaimed novel and it turns out to be worth the hype
However this does NOT affect non fiction, history, biography. If a history book wins loads of awards, it's generally really good
This tells me that literary fiction is doomed, probably. As happened to modernist classical music. Sir Harrison Birtwistle, FFS
The ability to turn out a good sentence is overrated; and the ability to craft a good plot underrated. The latter is far harder and far more important to the enjoyment of a book. This is one of the reasons JK Rowling is a modern hero. Moderate writer, absolute genius storyteller.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
Well I never, Leon is at home and I am not...mind you, it's quite cold here as well, but less so than at home
Nice!
Cold and French but also slightly Flemish-looking buildings, so I'm guessing somewhere in Picardy?
Or maybe the Jura?
I think it's Alsace. Those buildings look germanic.
Mulhouse
Top of the class, assuming no image search
My dinner is a hearty bowl of pasta, lightly smoked ham, fermented cabbage, all covered in melted cheese.
No image search. Clearly not Strasbourg, and too urban looking to be Colmar. Nice part of world. Beautiful wines including the best cooperatives in France, and you get to hop across the border where the Germans make their cheapest but nice plonk.
Bravo. I don't know Alsace that well, apart from Strasbourg
I am actually off to France myself, at the weekend. The frigging forecast there looks little better. COLD for April
Like many border zones that have swapped between very different cultures, Alsace is well worth a visit. Some charming towns and villages, mostly untouched by war, excellent wines often overlooked by the UK market, and its distinctive cuisine which is fine provided your heart holds out. Thoroughly Frenchified now, if with a lingering Germanic accent, yet most of the adults' grandparents would have been German speaking.
I have been to Strsbourg etc. And driven though a few times. I don't like the food much, because I really dislike German food, and you can detect the Teutonic influence (as you say)
The military history is fascinating. You can still tell it is THE border. France/Germany. Lots of barracks and forts and the like. Soldiers training. Cemeteries
Königsbourg is an astonishing sight, seen from a distance
You're not referring to the Russian's WWII booty in Kaliningrad, are you?
They effectively annexed the top half of what was East Prussia, depopulated it and filled it with Russians. The southern half was given to Poland, but at least they and Germany have a border treaty now with agreement on treatment of ancestors and families.
It should really have been given back to Germany after the Cold War or, at worst, Poland with some recognition that some of the German diaspora could return there.
Reunifying Germany *and* giving it a bit of territory stranded on the other side of Poland would have been a bridge too far for most.
Except that Russia is the one with a bit of territory stranded on the other side of Poland!
No doubt Putin blames the independence of the Baltic states for that.
Something might be lost in translation here but it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron came across quite pompously to Bibi (without meaning to do so) and what he articulated back was straightly asserting Israel's freedom of action from a former colonial power (largely for a domestic audience, whilst acknowledging the point at the margins) but which very easily translates in British ears to "go fuck yourself".
Pavon and Tom Kim (aka Joohyung Kim) are massively priced on BF Exchange for the RBC Heritage golf IMO.
Not a tip, as such. Golf is betting for masochists.
I had a good Masters. Sometimes that short priced fav should be shorter.
Apparently the Racing Post's golf tipster had to be heavily edited after originally advocating your biggest ever bet on Scottie Scheffler. Incompatible with responsible gambling or some such!
I am a liberal. I think people should be free. Sunak's smoking proposals are a restriction on people's freedoms to buy cigarettes. So, why support them?
Most people who smoke want to give up. That's because nicotine is astonishingly addictive. Most people smoking are doing something they would rather not be doing, because they are compelled by their addiction. That is a restriction on people's freedoms. We increase liberty by banning an addictive drug.
Social media is also astonishingly addictive. Maybe it also needs to be banned.
Why are ecstasy and mushrooms banned? There could be huge social and economic benefits to regulating them.
Less likely from mushrooms (as long as you pick the right ones)
Drug testing in the Netherlands seems to have eliminated Ecstasy related deaths - which were associated with contaminants, wildly varying dosages and pills simply being other drugs.
Which strongly suggests that legalised and regulated sale would have a similar effect.
I think you are probably right with this, however I think ecstasy is still a pretty dangerous drug to take.
David Nutt's point about horse riding is germane. Plenty die or are paralysed riding horses each year but we don't ban it. Should people be allowed to take the chance on regulated, QC passed ecstasy? Probably. Mushrooms I'd argue definitely.
A pretty dangerous drug on what basis? Toxicity, risk, harm to others? And compared to what, alcohol, caffeine, paracetamol?
As @Malmsbury has shown, ecstasy deaths have been effectively eliminated where quasi-regulation and decriminalisation exists.
No time to go into much depth but a cursory flick through web of science suggests enough to be concerned (even if only for safety doing other things after taking MDMA).
Er, so like booze, mushrooms or, erm, most other drugs. True, one shouldn't drive or work on building site when loved up, but I guess most of us knew that.
Its not just that. Hyperpyrexia seems to be a danger too. As I said, I don't think ecstasy is 'safe', and there would be risks associated with it.
Nothing in life is safe. The question is about finding the appropriate balance of risks. Right now prohibition and placing the supply of a relatively harmless substance in the hands of criminals who cut it with far more dangerous substances is clearly creating more risk than is necessary. It is costing people their lives, mostly young people with much to live for. The stupidity and cowardice of our political caste on this issue is one of the few things in politics that makes me genuinely angry.
I've posted studies that suggest MDMA is not completely safe. It is probably a lot safer than many things out there, and certainly its use is being looked into for psychotherapy. I'd be worried about legalisation because young people do stupid things.
I don't think governments handle drug law at all well. The safety or not rarely matches the legal status. And horse riding.
Legalisation would presumably come with a minimum age limit and prescribed maximum dosage, as with drugs like Codeine.
Yep, and that would not stop a stupid 19 year old taking 5 at a time because he thought it would be cool.
But in the same way it doesn't stop 19 year olds (or underaged children) drinking a whole bottle of vodka or dosing up on their gran's legal tranquilizers.
True. I doubt its going to come about anyway - most politicians will not touch it with a barge-pole - double finger number of dead people each year from MDMA does not lend itself to a legalisation campaign.*
*And yes, I know that almost all, if not all, will have been down to impure, illegal MDMA.
I am a liberal. I think people should be free. Sunak's smoking proposals are a restriction on people's freedoms to buy cigarettes. So, why support them?
Most people who smoke want to give up. That's because nicotine is astonishingly addictive. Most people smoking are doing something they would rather not be doing, because they are compelled by their addiction. That is a restriction on people's freedoms. We increase liberty by banning an addictive drug.
Social media is also astonishingly addictive. Maybe it also needs to be banned.
Why are ecstasy and mushrooms banned? There could be huge social and economic benefits to regulating them.
Less likely from mushrooms (as long as you pick the right ones)
Drug testing in the Netherlands seems to have eliminated Ecstasy related deaths - which were associated with contaminants, wildly varying dosages and pills simply being other drugs.
Which strongly suggests that legalised and regulated sale would have a similar effect.
I think you are probably right with this, however I think ecstasy is still a pretty dangerous drug to take.
David Nutt's point about horse riding is germane. Plenty die or are paralysed riding horses each year but we don't ban it. Should people be allowed to take the chance on regulated, QC passed ecstasy? Probably. Mushrooms I'd argue definitely.
A pretty dangerous drug on what basis? Toxicity, risk, harm to others? And compared to what, alcohol, caffeine, paracetamol?
As @Malmsbury has shown, ecstasy deaths have been effectively eliminated where quasi-regulation and decriminalisation exists.
No time to go into much depth but a cursory flick through web of science suggests enough to be concerned (even if only for safety doing other things after taking MDMA).
Er, so like booze, mushrooms or, erm, most other drugs. True, one shouldn't drive or work on building site when loved up, but I guess most of us knew that.
Its not just that. Hyperpyrexia seems to be a danger too. As I said, I don't think ecstasy is 'safe', and there would be risks associated with it.
That's the interesting thing, isn't it? Unless it's impurities or a dose issue, there is perhaps a risk of rare but extreme adverse outcomes with MDMA that are not present with alcohol at sane doses.
One would need to establish whether such adverse reactions are due to taking the equivalent of a couple of bottles of whisky (or a methanol-based drink) of MDMA or whether it's possible from taking the equivalent of a clean pint of session IPA.
The increased risks for those with CV disease are probably less of an issue for 18 year olds at Reading Festival, but maybe more so for the ageing rocker types (PB members) at Glastonbury.
The problem with making it legal (or one of the problems) is the deaths from taking MDMA. It doesn't matter that they were almost certainly mostly due to contamenents, You can imagine the campaigns from mothers of deceased kids all over BBC breakfast...
Yes, that's why it will never happen. There's little political upside and masses of potential downside - even if regulated, pure and 'safe' some kids will get off their tit and fall off something/crash a car or something.
I can think of two upsides *if* you're brave enough. Tax revenue and pressure off policing/prisons. But you have to be brave enough. Possibly much more feasible in 20 or so years - the generations for whom drug use was a big taboo (rather than a choice they wouldn't make) are beginning to disappear. Plus there's odd allies on all parts of the political spectrum where it could end up party policy if the faction that buys into legalisation is in the ascendant.
I wouldn't bet on it, but it's plausible that in 20-30 years a Tory leader who's emerged from what you might call the 'techbro' right, puts it in a manifesto in a bid to convince voters his or her party has changed and is modern.
I'd love a think tank to do a proper line by line ranking of all narcotics, legal and illegal, based on 4 variables:
1. Risk of harm to user 2. Risk of harm to others 3. Non-health costs of making / remaining illegal 4. Non-health benefits of making / remaining legal
Actually I probably wouldn't because it would have alcohol high up on 1 and extremely high up on 2.
I think David Nutt did that for Blair. IIRC he got sacked for his troubles.
Indeed so. He discovered that alcohol is the most dangerous drug out there and hippy shit like ecstasy and shrooms are pretty safe.
The establishment didn't like it and said: "on your bike."
Not much change with More In Common at 59-37 this evening. It's the only pollster now showing the Conservatives above 25%.
The R&W Red Wall poll this evening has Labour on 44%, Conservatives on 24% and Reform on 18%. For both Labour and the Conservatives, those are low figures in this polling series while it's a new high for Reform.
Among 2019 Conservative voters, only 46% are still loyal with 24% going for Reform (a post-Anderson lift?) and 17% Labour
Reform on 18%? Bloody hell. There was I thinking they had peaked and were on the way down.
We now have Reform on between 9 and 18% across pollsters. That’s a big spread, worse than even the Greens.
Well I never, Leon is at home and I am not...mind you, it's quite cold here as well, but less so than at home
Nice!
Cold and French but also slightly Flemish-looking buildings, so I'm guessing somewhere in Picardy?
Or maybe the Jura?
I think it's Alsace. Those buildings look germanic.
Mulhouse
Top of the class, assuming no image search
My dinner is a hearty bowl of pasta, lightly smoked ham, fermented cabbage, all covered in melted cheese.
No image search. Clearly not Strasbourg, and too urban looking to be Colmar. Nice part of world. Beautiful wines including the best cooperatives in France, and you get to hop across the border where the Germans make their cheapest but nice plonk.
Bravo. I don't know Alsace that well, apart from Strasbourg
I am actually off to France myself, at the weekend. The frigging forecast there looks little better. COLD for April
Like many border zones that have swapped between very different cultures, Alsace is well worth a visit. Some charming towns and villages, mostly untouched by war, excellent wines often overlooked by the UK market, and its distinctive cuisine which is fine provided your heart holds out. Thoroughly Frenchified now, if with a lingering Germanic accent, yet most of the adults' grandparents would have been German speaking.
I have been to Strsbourg etc. And driven though a few times. I don't like the food much, because I really dislike German food, and you can detect the Teutonic influence (as you say)
The military history is fascinating. You can still tell it is THE border. France/Germany. Lots of barracks and forts and the like. Soldiers training. Cemeteries
Königsbourg is an astonishing sight, seen from a distance
You're not referring to the Russian's WWII booty in Kaliningrad, are you?
They effectively annexed the top half of what was East Prussia, depopulated it and filled it with Russians. The southern half was given to Poland, but at least they and Germany have a border treaty now with agreement on treatment of ancestors and families.
It should really have been given back to Germany after the Cold War or, at worst, Poland with some recognition that some of the German diaspora could return there.
Mercifully the past cannot be taken away from that unfortunate place. Kant, the greatest philosopher since Aristotle and never surpassed lived the whole of his life in Konigsberg.
Something might be lost in translation here but it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron came across quite pompously to Bibi (without meaning to do so) and what he articulated back was straightly asserting Israel's freedom of action from a former colonial power (largely for a domestic audience, whilst acknowledging the point at the margins) but which very easily translates in British ears to "go fuck yourself".
I’m sure Cameron was very diplomatic but his appeals have fallen on deaf ears .
Netenyahu should remember the alliance that was there to help defend Israel. Next time “ let them eat knishes “ !
The numbers for Reform show that there's a big gap in the market for a 'proper' right-wing party with working class appeal, but it would take someone with remarkable political skills to translate that into a viable electoral vehicle. Farage is the closest thing they have at the moment to that person, but he's also yesterday's man and has too much baggage.
Pavon and Tom Kim (aka Joohyung Kim) are massively priced on BF Exchange for the RBC Heritage golf IMO.
Not a tip, as such. Golf is betting for masochists.
I had a good Masters. Sometimes that short priced fav should be shorter.
Apparently the Racing Post's golf tipster had to be heavily edited after originally advocating your biggest ever bet on Scottie Scheffler. Incompatible with responsible gambling or some such!
The numbers for Reform show that there's a big gap in the market for a 'proper' right-wing party with working class appeal, but it would take someone with remarkable political skills to translate that into a viable electoral vehicle. Farage is the closest thing they have at the moment to that person, but he's also yesterday's man and has too much baggage.
Though none of the Reform leadership are remotely working class. They feel more Howard’s way / golf club membership than working class. Lee Anderson is more of an exception.
Furious European Union officials have demanded talks with the British Government over a new fishing regulation, which has sparked anger among Eurocrats.
The European Commission wants an explanation three months after leaders in London and devolved Scotland announced the end of industrial sand eel fishing.
This announcement, dating back to the end of January, was made on environmental grounds and was welcomed by, among others, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB).
But the decision to ban the industrial fishing of sand eel in the English waters of the North Sea and all Scottish waters respectively has sparked anger in Denmark.
This has led leaders in Brussels to trigger on April 16 the dispute settlement mechanism in the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). When triggered, this mechanism asks the EU and Britain to try to reach an agreement on the matter within 30 days - or more, if they agree to extend talks.
If the parties can't strike a deal, Brussels may request an arbitration tribunal adjudicate on the "compatibility of the UK's measures" with provisions in the agreement, which the EU executive said called for an "evidence-based, proportionate and non-discriminatory" approach to marine conservation.
Can it be true? There are now 12 police officers in manchester looking at the Raynor tax issue?
Madness. Utter madness.
All because of that arsehole Daly . Why do you need 12 police officers for this case . It all seems very strange given tax offenses would go to the HMRC , they then provide a dossier of info and the CPS then decide whether to prosecute .
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
The numbers for Reform show that there's a big gap in the market for a 'proper' right-wing party with working class appeal, but it would take someone with remarkable political skills to translate that into a viable electoral vehicle. Farage is the closest thing they have at the moment to that person, but he's also yesterday's man and has too much baggage.
Though none of the Reform leadership are remotely working class. They feel more Howard’s way / golf club membership than working class. Lee Anderson is more of an exception.
Exactly. That's why they struggle to be coherent beyond being a respectable option to the right of the Conservatives.
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
Can it be true? There are now 12 police officers in manchester looking at the Raynor tax issue?
Madness. Utter madness.
All because of that arsehole Daly . Why do you need 12 police officers for this case . It all seems very strange given tax offenses would go to the HMRC , they then provide a dossier of info and the CPS then decide whether to prosecute .
Low productivity in the public services in a nutshell.
I thought it was massively overrated. The huge twist did not make up for a decidedly average novel
What twist? The Tiger fucks off at the end?
All I remember is a twist. It was so forgettable I have (honestly) forgotten what it was. I was bewildered by the praise
I have felt same about several Booker Prize winners and I gave up reading acclaimed literary fiction as a result, it was all so shit
The nadir was some massively hyped book by Richard Ford which consisted of no plot whatsoever. And, what's more, the writing wasn't even that good. Not beautiful, not funny, not clever, just mildly well shaped. The only thing I remember is a bit where the protagonist spilt a bit of rootbeer
I'm a bit of a reverse snob when it comes to acclaimed things. Critics tend to get a bit abstract in their praise as they hype it, or talk about how 'important' a work is, rather than if it is a good story or has good characters, adn that makes me naturally suspicious. I've even seen reviews for things I like that make them sound crap by doing that. Then you get stuff which is just perfectly ordinary, but because of who wrote it it's presented like some masterpiece of originality.
Of course, I don't mind many acclaimed things, some are indeed good, but if it is super insightful or culturally important or whatever, I prefer to figure that out for myself.
It's an affliction particular to literary novels, for some reason
What I mean is: if a movie is widely acclaimed and I go see it, generally I think: Yeah, wow, that's great, or I do at least see why people love it (even if I don't). Likewise good TV drama, or conceptual art
However the criticism of literary fiction commonly seems weirdly divorced from real merit. What is loved by a coterie of critics is often not just overpraised but actively mediocre or awful. It is a SURPRISE when I read an acclaimed novel and it turns out to be worth the hype
However this does NOT affect non fiction, history, biography. If a history book wins loads of awards, it's generally really good
This tells me that literary fiction is doomed, probably. As happened to modernist classical music. Sir Harrison Birtwistle, FFS
The ability to turn out a good sentence is overrated; and the ability to craft a good plot underrated. The latter is far harder and far more important to the enjoyment of a book. This is one of the reasons JK Rowling is a modern hero. Moderate writer, absolute genius storyteller.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
JK Rowling is extraordinary in one respect. She is a superb storyteller, and can do it at length; except when she doesn't.
Huge chunks of vols 5-7 of H Potter are turgidly dull, while 1-4 are a very decent read. Her detective series is on the whole outstanding (and no bloke can fail to warm to Robin Ellacott, her young female tec), but get longer and longer, and she reaches one called The Ink Black Heart which is about a million pages long and completely unreadable.
Dickens was the same. When he is bad he is both interminable and unreadable.
Can it be true? There are now 12 police officers in manchester looking at the Raynor tax issue?
Madness. Utter madness.
That much can’t be true. Tax issues are a matter for HMRC. The police are looking at electoral registry fraud.
They'll need to arrange some fact-finding trips to locations where Angela Rayner holidayed during the period in question.
"The police are looking at electoral registry fraud."
Why does it take 12 police officers to read the relevant Act and see that there is a time limit of 12 months?
It's a very complex business with a case like this. They need a media relations specialist, a political communications specialist, an event manager, a legal liaison officer and a PR agent for starters.
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
That would be smart of them. Mr Sunak is regarded as out of touch, incompetent and very thin-skinned. You can argue that is wrong but most people still believe it. For Lab to play to those existing public opinions only makes sense. It also seems quite easy to get under his skin on this theme and in a debate the average Sunak tetchy response will come across very badly. I'm not sure that can be coached out of him.
The numbers for Reform show that there's a big gap in the market for a 'proper' right-wing party with working class appeal, but it would take someone with remarkable political skills to translate that into a viable electoral vehicle. Farage is the closest thing they have at the moment to that person, but he's also yesterday's man and has too much baggage.
Though none of the Reform leadership are remotely working class. They feel more Howard’s way / golf club membership than working class. Lee Anderson is more of an exception.
Exactly. That's why they struggle to be coherent beyond being a respectable option to the right of the Conservatives.
Respectable is an interesting term, when you are THAT far right.
The numbers for Reform show that there's a big gap in the market for a 'proper' right-wing party with working class appeal, but it would take someone with remarkable political skills to translate that into a viable electoral vehicle. Farage is the closest thing they have at the moment to that person, but he's also yesterday's man and has too much baggage.
Though none of the Reform leadership are remotely working class. They feel more Howard’s way / golf club membership than working class. Lee Anderson is more of an exception.
Exactly. That's why they struggle to be coherent beyond being a respectable option to the right of the Conservatives.
Respectable is an interesting term, when you are THAT far right.
How far right are they really? The Danish Social Democratic Party has policies on culture and immigration that are more hard line.
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Backbenchers watch it. IDS was ousted because he lost PMQs every week. The party actually did quite well at the ballot box while he was in charge.
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
That would be smart of them. Mr Sunak is regarded as out of touch, incompetent and very thin-skinned. You can argue that is wrong but most people still believe it. For Lab to play to those existing public opinions only makes sense. It also seems quite easy to get under his skin on this theme and in a debate the average Sunak tetchy response will come across very badly. I'm not sure that can be coached out of him.
You wait til you see Sir Keir in a non soft soap interview - pure Partridge
Something might be lost in translation here but it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron came across quite pompously to Bibi (without meaning to do so) and what he articulated back was straightly asserting Israel's freedom of action from a former colonial power (largely for a domestic audience, whilst acknowledging the point at the margins) but which very easily translates in British ears to "go fuck yourself".
There's history between those two*.
Bibi's mentality is that any Brit that criticises Israel is an antisemite and he's never forgiven Dave for calling The Gaza Strip as the world's largest open air prison.
I mean Bibi thinks the continent that gave the world The Holocaust should never tell Israel what to do.
*There's history between Bibi and a few past Foreign Secretaries from Douglas Hurd to Boris Johnson to Phil Hammond.
Can it be true? There are now 12 police officers in manchester looking at the Raynor tax issue?
Madness. Utter madness.
That much can’t be true. Tax issues are a matter for HMRC. The police are looking at electoral registry fraud.
According to the Telegraph, police are also looking at whether Angela Raynor falsely claimed the single occupant council tax discount (or presumably whether she claimed it at all). It is all a bit GOP vs Hunter Biden. A lot of smears but no clear allegation, let alone evidence.
Can it be true? There are now 12 police officers in manchester looking at the Raynor tax issue?
Madness. Utter madness.
That much can’t be true. Tax issues are a matter for HMRC. The police are looking at electoral registry fraud.
According to the Telegraph, police are also looking at whether Angela Raynor falsely claimed the single occupant council tax discount (or presumably whether she claimed it at all). It is all a bit GOP vs Hunter Biden. A lot of smears but no clear allegation, let alone evidence.
Government officials have been accused of using “threatening and cruel” tactics towards unpaid carers by saying they could face even greater financial penalties if they appeal against “vindictive” benefit fines.
This month a Guardian investigation revealed that thousands of people who look after disabled, frail or ill relatives have been forced to pay back huge sums after being chased by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over “honest mistakes” that officials could have spotted years earlier.
Dozens of unpaid carers have said they feel powerless to challenge the penalties, which often run into many thousands of pounds, even when the government is at fault.
Now the Guardian has learned that the DWP is warning carers that their fine may increase if they appeal against a repayment order.
On topic - I wouldn't want to be backing Lab in the WM on those odds. Street won by 10% in 2021 when the WM has swung hard away from the Cons since then so he is obviously in trouble. The fact the Con candidates in WM, Tees and the EM are all frantically trying to disassociate themselves from the Con brand tells you what is happening on the doorsteps and in their own surveys.
If candidate quality in the mayoral elections helps at all then it should help Street. However, his bowing the knee to No10 on HS2 may have dented that. That R&W poll is very poor for him but turnout in these elections could be very mixed and patchy.
It looks 50-50 to me so the value must be on backing Street. Had he gone Independent I think he might have been better off but who knows. Perhaps Reform's second preferences will save him. What's that? Oh...
Can it be true? There are now 12 police officers in manchester looking at the Raynor tax issue?
Madness. Utter madness.
That much can’t be true. Tax issues are a matter for HMRC. The police are looking at electoral registry fraud.
According to the Telegraph, police are also looking at whether Angela Raynor falsely claimed the single occupant council tax discount (or presumably whether she claimed it at all). It is all a bit GOP vs Hunter Biden. A lot of smears but no clear allegation, let alone evidence.
As above.
Rayner.
R-A-Y-N-E-R.
F-F-S.
You mean there's two of them? No wonder it needs 12 coppers.
Government officials have been accused of using “threatening and cruel” tactics towards unpaid carers by saying they could face even greater financial penalties if they appeal against “vindictive” benefit fines.
This month a Guardian investigation revealed that thousands of people who look after disabled, frail or ill relatives have been forced to pay back huge sums after being chased by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over “honest mistakes” that officials could have spotted years earlier.
Dozens of unpaid carers have said they feel powerless to challenge the penalties, which often run into many thousands of pounds, even when the government is at fault.
Now the Guardian has learned that the DWP is warning carers that their fine may increase if they appeal against a repayment order.
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
That would be smart of them. Mr Sunak is regarded as out of touch, incompetent and very thin-skinned. You can argue that is wrong but most people still believe it. For Lab to play to those existing public opinions only makes sense. It also seems quite easy to get under his skin on this theme and in a debate the average Sunak tetchy response will come across very badly. I'm not sure that can be coached out of him.
Without wishing to be cruel at least one of those attributes appears to be incontestable, one has a lot of evidence to support it, and the other is simple opinion.
I thought it was massively overrated. The huge twist did not make up for a decidedly average novel
What twist? The Tiger fucks off at the end?
All I remember is a twist. It was so forgettable I have (honestly) forgotten what it was. I was bewildered by the praise
I have felt same about several Booker Prize winners and I gave up reading acclaimed literary fiction as a result, it was all so shit
The nadir was some massively hyped book by Richard Ford which consisted of no plot whatsoever. And, what's more, the writing wasn't even that good. Not beautiful, not funny, not clever, just mildly well shaped. The only thing I remember is a bit where the protagonist spilt a bit of rootbeer
I'm a bit of a reverse snob when it comes to acclaimed things. Critics tend to get a bit abstract in their praise as they hype it, or talk about how 'important' a work is, rather than if it is a good story or has good characters, adn that makes me naturally suspicious. I've even seen reviews for things I like that make them sound crap by doing that. Then you get stuff which is just perfectly ordinary, but because of who wrote it it's presented like some masterpiece of originality.
Of course, I don't mind many acclaimed things, some are indeed good, but if it is super insightful or culturally important or whatever, I prefer to figure that out for myself.
It's an affliction particular to literary novels, for some reason
What I mean is: if a movie is widely acclaimed and I go see it, generally I think: Yeah, wow, that's great, or I do at least see why people love it (even if I don't). Likewise good TV drama, or conceptual art
However the criticism of literary fiction commonly seems weirdly divorced from real merit. What is loved by a coterie of critics is often not just overpraised but actively mediocre or awful. It is a SURPRISE when I read an acclaimed novel and it turns out to be worth the hype
However this does NOT affect non fiction, history, biography. If a history book wins loads of awards, it's generally really good
This tells me that literary fiction is doomed, probably. As happened to modernist classical music. Sir Harrison Birtwistle, FFS
The ability to turn out a good sentence is overrated; and the ability to craft a good plot underrated. The latter is far harder and far more important to the enjoyment of a book. This is one of the reasons JK Rowling is a modern hero. Moderate writer, absolute genius storyteller.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
JK Rowling is extraordinary in one respect. She is a superb storyteller, and can do it at length; except when she doesn't.
Huge chunks of vols 5-7 of H Potter are turgidly dull, while 1-4 are a very decent read. Her detective series is on the whole outstanding (and no bloke can fail to warm to Robin Ellacott, her young female tec), but get longer and longer, and she reaches one called The Ink Black Heart which is about a million pages long and completely unreadable.
Dickens was the same. When he is bad he is both interminable and unreadable.
Isn't that just standard mega successful author problems when editors can no longer get them to trim things down a bit?
Many a great piece of work has been made better by someone else reining the creator in a little, they even acknowledge as much in countless acknowledgements, but once you are so big is it so easy to accept that same approach?
Not much change with More In Common at 59-37 this evening. It's the only pollster now showing the Conservatives above 25%.
The R&W Red Wall poll this evening has Labour on 44%, Conservatives on 24% and Reform on 18%. For both Labour and the Conservatives, those are low figures in this polling series while it's a new high for Reform.
Among 2019 Conservative voters, only 46% are still loyal with 24% going for Reform (a post-Anderson lift?) and 17% Labour
Reform on 18%? Bloody hell. There was I thinking they had peaked and were on the way down.
We now have Reform on between 9 and 18% across pollsters. That’s a big spread, worse than even the Greens.
That's 18% for Reform in a poll of "Red Wall" seats - some of their stronger areas.
Always set a target which is impressive but easily attainable. Ambition is all very well, but set too high and even if you pretty well it will look like failure.
The Scottish government is to ditch its flagship target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 75% by 2030.
The final goal of reaching "net-zero" by 2045 will remain, but BBC Scotland News understands the government's annual climate targets could also go.
Ministers have missed eight of the last 12 annual targets and have been told that reaching the 75% milestone by the end of the decade is unachievable. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68841141
Well I never, Leon is at home and I am not...mind you, it's quite cold here as well, but less so than at home
Nice!
Cold and French but also slightly Flemish-looking buildings, so I'm guessing somewhere in Picardy?
Or maybe the Jura?
I think it's Alsace. Those buildings look germanic.
Mulhouse
Top of the class, assuming no image search
My dinner is a hearty bowl of pasta, lightly smoked ham, fermented cabbage, all covered in melted cheese.
No image search. Clearly not Strasbourg, and too urban looking to be Colmar. Nice part of world. Beautiful wines including the best cooperatives in France, and you get to hop across the border where the Germans make their cheapest but nice plonk.
Bravo. I don't know Alsace that well, apart from Strasbourg
I am actually off to France myself, at the weekend. The frigging forecast there looks little better. COLD for April
Like many border zones that have swapped between very different cultures, Alsace is well worth a visit. Some charming towns and villages, mostly untouched by war, excellent wines often overlooked by the UK market, and its distinctive cuisine which is fine provided your heart holds out. Thoroughly Frenchified now, if with a lingering Germanic accent, yet most of the adults' grandparents would have been German speaking.
I have been to Strsbourg etc. And driven though a few times. I don't like the food much, because I really dislike German food, and you can detect the Teutonic influence (as you say)
The military history is fascinating. You can still tell it is THE border. France/Germany. Lots of barracks and forts and the like. Soldiers training. Cemeteries
Königsbourg is an astonishing sight, seen from a distance
You're not referring to the Russian's WWII booty in Kaliningrad, are yo They effectively annexed the top half of what was East Prussia, depopulated it and filled it with Russians. The southern half was given to Poland, but at least they and Germany have a border treaty now with agreement on treatment of ancestors and families.
It should really have been given back to Germany after the Cold War or, at worst, Poland with some recognition that some of the German diaspora could return there.
There were some vague muttering about it. Bit that died when the new government of United Germany pledge their adherence to the post 1945 borders. They very much saw (and see themselves) as the Post War Germany. Prussia is not what they want or want to be.
There’s nothing to go back to. The ethnic cleansing in the area removed all the landmarks, cultural and otherwise, with the people. A few old people could have gone back to find the farm gone. Under an apartment building…
Plus, the locals are now Russians. Germany had no interest in acquiring a piece of land occupied by people who don’t want to be German.
SSI2 - Disturbing because it is more evidence that far too many voters are locked into their choices, months before election. We aren't listening to each other, as much as we should.
The government has agreed to have an independent expert review of a Post Office IT system predating Horizon, amid claims dozens more sub-postmasters may have been wrongly convicted.
The Capture software was rolled out across branches in the 1990s, years before the notorious Horizon system was introduced.
Post Office minister Kevin Hollinrake has met with a former sub-postmaster and a lawyer representing 35 people who believe they were wrongly accused of stealing.
Steve Marston, 68, believes he was wrongly convicted of theft and false accounting after errors caused by Capture accounting software.
Auditors found shortfalls of £79,000 at his branch in Greater Manchester in 1998. He subsequently pleaded guilty to theft and false accounting.
I think part of the problem with "literary" fiction is the snooty attitude to "genre" fiction. There are a bunch of very good writers who are completely overlooked by the literary fiction world because they're writing genre fiction, and so it creates a much more restricted pool of ideas and people for literary fiction to operate in.
It would be like the Oscars restricting itself only to "arthouse" style films and ignoring films like Avatar and Lord of the Rings.
Government officials have been accused of using “threatening and cruel” tactics towards unpaid carers by saying they could face even greater financial penalties if they appeal against “vindictive” benefit fines.
This month a Guardian investigation revealed that thousands of people who look after disabled, frail or ill relatives have been forced to pay back huge sums after being chased by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over “honest mistakes” that officials could have spotted years earlier.
Dozens of unpaid carers have said they feel powerless to challenge the penalties, which often run into many thousands of pounds, even when the government is at fault.
Now the Guardian has learned that the DWP is warning carers that their fine may increase if they appeal against a repayment order.
I thought it was massively overrated. The huge twist did not make up for a decidedly average novel
What twist? The Tiger fucks off at the end?
All I remember is a twist. It was so forgettable I have (honestly) forgotten what it was. I was bewildered by the praise
I have felt same about several Booker Prize winners and I gave up reading acclaimed literary fiction as a result, it was all so shit
The nadir was some massively hyped book by Richard Ford which consisted of no plot whatsoever. And, what's more, the writing wasn't even that good. Not beautiful, not funny, not clever, just mildly well shaped. The only thing I remember is a bit where the protagonist spilt a bit of rootbeer
I'm a bit of a reverse snob when it comes to acclaimed things. Critics tend to get a bit abstract in their praise as they hype it, or talk about how 'important' a work is, rather than if it is a good story or has good characters, adn that makes me naturally suspicious. I've even seen reviews for things I like that make them sound crap by doing that. Then you get stuff which is just perfectly ordinary, but because of who wrote it it's presented like some masterpiece of originality.
Of course, I don't mind many acclaimed things, some are indeed good, but if it is super insightful or culturally important or whatever, I prefer to figure that out for myself.
It's an affliction particular to literary novels, for some reason
What I mean is: if a movie is widely acclaimed and I go see it, generally I think: Yeah, wow, that's great, or I do at least see why people love it (even if I don't). Likewise good TV drama, or conceptual art
However the criticism of literary fiction commonly seems weirdly divorced from real merit. What is loved by a coterie of critics is often not just overpraised but actively mediocre or awful. It is a SURPRISE when I read an acclaimed novel and it turns out to be worth the hype
However this does NOT affect non fiction, history, biography. If a history book wins loads of awards, it's generally really good
This tells me that literary fiction is doomed, probably. As happened to modernist classical music. Sir Harrison Birtwistle, FFS
The ability to turn out a good sentence is overrated; and the ability to craft a good plot underrated. The latter is far harder and far more important to the enjoyment of a book. This is one of the reasons JK Rowling is a modern hero. Moderate writer, absolute genius storyteller.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
JK Rowling is extraordinary in one respect. She is a superb storyteller, and can do it at length; except when she doesn't.
Huge chunks of vols 5-7 of H Potter are turgidly dull, while 1-4 are a very decent read. Her detective series is on the whole outstanding (and no bloke can fail to warm to Robin Ellacott, her young female tec), but get longer and longer, and she reaches one called The Ink Black Heart which is about a million pages long and completely unreadable.
Dickens was the same. When he is bad he is both interminable and unreadable.
Isn't that just standard mega successful author problems when editors can no longer get them to trim things down a bit?
Many a great piece of work has been made better by someone else reining the creator in a little, they even acknowledge as much in countless acknowledgements, but once you are so big is it so easy to accept that same approach?
Yes.
See Ann Rice’s rant when someone suggested that her work needed editing.
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Backbenchers watch it. IDS was ousted because he lost PMQs every week. The party actually did quite well at the ballot box while he was in charge.
IDS never lost a General Election while he was Leader!
That said, I've read a few books from the Booker prize longlist from last year, and they were interesting enough. I don't remember whether any of the ones I read were shortlisted or not. I'd definitely say they were flawed books, but they weren't dreadful, and I didn't feel like I wasted my time reading them.
Just had an email from the Jazz Café in Camden advertising, among many shows of their own, one at Koko (also in Camden) by a band I've mentioned a few times on here
They're called Scary Pockets and are a funk band from LA. They do funk covers of well known songs really, really well
The songs they cover are chosen by their Patreon followers, and the band leader (and keyboard player) is Patreon co-founder Jack Conte
He's the only constant in the band; there are different singers and musicians for almost every video
Their last two shows at Koko sold out and I expect that this one will too
Government officials have been accused of using “threatening and cruel” tactics towards unpaid carers by saying they could face even greater financial penalties if they appeal against “vindictive” benefit fines.
This month a Guardian investigation revealed that thousands of people who look after disabled, frail or ill relatives have been forced to pay back huge sums after being chased by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over “honest mistakes” that officials could have spotted years earlier.
Dozens of unpaid carers have said they feel powerless to challenge the penalties, which often run into many thousands of pounds, even when the government is at fault.
Now the Guardian has learned that the DWP is warning carers that their fine may increase if they appeal against a repayment order.
The DWP seem to have recruited their management from the Post Office.
After the Second World War,
1) The Russians got the engineers who built the V2 2) The Americans got the engineers who designed the V2 3) The French got quite a few aeronautical engineers from Germany. : : X) The UK seems to have got… parking wardens, policemen and border guards.
I thought it was massively overrated. The huge twist did not make up for a decidedly average novel
What twist? The Tiger fucks off at the end?
All I remember is a twist. It was so forgettable I have (honestly) forgotten what it was. I was bewildered by the praise
I have felt same about several Booker Prize winners and I gave up reading acclaimed literary fiction as a result, it was all so shit
The nadir was some massively hyped book by Richard Ford which consisted of no plot whatsoever. And, what's more, the writing wasn't even that good. Not beautiful, not funny, not clever, just mildly well shaped. The only thing I remember is a bit where the protagonist spilt a bit of rootbeer
I'm a bit of a reverse snob when it comes to acclaimed things. Critics tend to get a bit abstract in their praise as they hype it, or talk about how 'important' a work is, rather than if it is a good story or has good characters, adn that makes me naturally suspicious. I've even seen reviews for things I like that make them sound crap by doing that. Then you get stuff which is just perfectly ordinary, but because of who wrote it it's presented like some masterpiece of originality.
Of course, I don't mind many acclaimed things, some are indeed good, but if it is super insightful or culturally important or whatever, I prefer to figure that out for myself.
It's an affliction particular to literary novels, for some reason
What I mean is: if a movie is widely acclaimed and I go see it, generally I think: Yeah, wow, that's great, or I do at least see why people love it (even if I don't). Likewise good TV drama, or conceptual art
However the criticism of literary fiction commonly seems weirdly divorced from real merit. What is loved by a coterie of critics is often not just overpraised but actively mediocre or awful. It is a SURPRISE when I read an acclaimed novel and it turns out to be worth the hype
However this does NOT affect non fiction, history, biography. If a history book wins loads of awards, it's generally really good
This tells me that literary fiction is doomed, probably. As happened to modernist classical music. Sir Harrison Birtwistle, FFS
The ability to turn out a good sentence is overrated; and the ability to craft a good plot underrated. The latter is far harder and far more important to the enjoyment of a book. This is one of the reasons JK Rowling is a modern hero. Moderate writer, absolute genius storyteller.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
JK Rowling is extraordinary in one respect. She is a superb storyteller, and can do it at length; except when she doesn't.
Huge chunks of vols 5-7 of H Potter are turgidly dull, while 1-4 are a very decent read. Her detective series is on the whole outstanding (and no bloke can fail to warm to Robin Ellacott, her young female tec), but get longer and longer, and she reaches one called The Ink Black Heart which is about a million pages long and completely unreadable.
Dickens was the same. When he is bad he is both interminable and unreadable.
Isn't that just standard mega successful author problems when editors can no longer get them to trim things down a bit?
Many a great piece of work has been made better by someone else reining the creator in a little, they even acknowledge as much in countless acknowledgements, but once you are so big is it so easy to accept that same approach?
Yes.
See Ann Rice’s rant when someone suggested that her work needed editing.
SSI2 - Disturbing because it is more evidence that far too many voters are locked into their choices, months before election. We aren't listening to each other, as much as we should.
But isn't the change in AZ 2024 prognostication due to many voters UNLOCKING their previous choices, precisely because they ARE listening to what different sides are saying AND doing?
Well I never, Leon is at home and I am not...mind you, it's quite cold here as well, but less so than at home
Nice!
Cold and French but also slightly Flemish-looking buildings, so I'm guessing somewhere in Picardy?
Or maybe the Jura?
I think it's Alsace. Those buildings look germanic.
Mulhouse
Top of the class, assuming no image search
My dinner is a hearty bowl of pasta, lightly smoked ham, fermented cabbage, all covered in melted cheese.
No image search. Clearly not Strasbourg, and too urban looking to be Colmar. Nice part of world. Beautiful wines including the best cooperatives in France, and you get to hop across the border where the Germans make their cheapest but nice plonk.
Bravo. I don't know Alsace that well, apart from Strasbourg
I am actually off to France myself, at the weekend. The frigging forecast there looks little better. COLD for April
Like many border zones that have swapped between very different cultures, Alsace is well worth a visit. Some charming towns and villages, mostly untouched by war, excellent wines often overlooked by the UK market, and its distinctive cuisine which is fine provided your heart holds out. Thoroughly Frenchified now, if with a lingering Germanic accent, yet most of the adults' grandparents would have been German speaking.
I have been to Strsbourg etc. And driven though a few times. I don't like the food much, because I really dislike German food, and you can detect the Teutonic influence (as you say)
The military history is fascinating. You can still tell it is THE border. France/Germany. Lots of barracks and forts and the like. Soldiers training. Cemeteries
Königsbourg is an astonishing sight, seen from a distance
You're not referring to the Russian's WWII booty in Kaliningrad, are yo They effectively annexed the top half of what was East Prussia, depopulated it and filled it with Russians. The southern half was given to Poland, but at least they and Germany have a border treaty now with agreement on treatment of ancestors and families.
It should really have been given back to Germany after the Cold War or, at worst, Poland with some recognition that some of the German diaspora could return there.
There were some vague muttering about it. Bit that died when the new government of United Germany pledge their adherence to the post 1945 borders. They very much saw (and see themselves) as the Post War Germany. Prussia is not what they want or want to be.
There’s nothing to go back to. The ethnic cleansing in the area removed all the landmarks, cultural and otherwise, with the people. A few old people could have gone back to find the farm gone. Under an apartment building…
Plus, the locals are now Russians. Germany had no interest in acquiring a piece of land occupied by people who don’t want to be German.
The HOL should absolutely refuse to pass the Rwanda Bill unless the government accepts the amendment which gives an exemption to those who supported the British army in Afghanistan.
Only one Tory MP supported that amendment today , the rest showed zero humanity . Absolute scum the lot of them .
People who disagree with you on politics are not “scum”
They just disagree with you.
Your approach is part of what is wrong with modern politics and society as a whole: it is course and uncouth: aggressive and unpleasant.
Your post would have been just as (if not more) powerful without the last sentence
I'm surprised by the details coming out about the proposed Ukraine funding bill from Mike Johnson. It looks like if it does go to a vote on Saturday as he promised that it will (a) pass, (b) pass the Senate, (c) be signed by Biden, and, (d) include everything that would have been sent since November if he hadn't wasted time.
So, what's the catch? Why did he delay so long and why has he apparently stopped delaying?
I thought it was massively overrated. The huge twist did not make up for a decidedly average novel
What twist? The Tiger fucks off at the end?
All I remember is a twist. It was so forgettable I have (honestly) forgotten what it was. I was bewildered by the praise
I have felt same about several Booker Prize winners and I gave up reading acclaimed literary fiction as a result, it was all so shit
The nadir was some massively hyped book by Richard Ford which consisted of no plot whatsoever. And, what's more, the writing wasn't even that good. Not beautiful, not funny, not clever, just mildly well shaped. The only thing I remember is a bit where the protagonist spilt a bit of rootbeer
I'm a bit of a reverse snob when it comes to acclaimed things. Critics tend to get a bit abstract in their praise as they hype it, or talk about how 'important' a work is, rather than if it is a good story or has good characters, adn that makes me naturally suspicious. I've even seen reviews for things I like that make them sound crap by doing that. Then you get stuff which is just perfectly ordinary, but because of who wrote it it's presented like some masterpiece of originality.
Of course, I don't mind many acclaimed things, some are indeed good, but if it is super insightful or culturally important or whatever, I prefer to figure that out for myself.
It's an affliction particular to literary novels, for some reason
What I mean is: if a movie is widely acclaimed and I go see it, generally I think: Yeah, wow, that's great, or I do at least see why people love it (even if I don't). Likewise good TV drama, or conceptual art
However the criticism of literary fiction commonly seems weirdly divorced from real merit. What is loved by a coterie of critics is often not just overpraised but actively mediocre or awful. It is a SURPRISE when I read an acclaimed novel and it turns out to be worth the hype
However this does NOT affect non fiction, history, biography. If a history book wins loads of awards, it's generally really good
This tells me that literary fiction is doomed, probably. As happened to modernist classical music. Sir Harrison Birtwistle, FFS
The ability to turn out a good sentence is overrated; and the ability to craft a good plot underrated. The latter is far harder and far more important to the enjoyment of a book. This is one of the reasons JK Rowling is a modern hero. Moderate writer, absolute genius storyteller.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
JK Rowling is extraordinary in one respect. She is a superb storyteller, and can do it at length; except when she doesn't.
Huge chunks of vols 5-7 of H Potter are turgidly dull, while 1-4 are a very decent read. Her detective series is on the whole outstanding (and no bloke can fail to warm to Robin Ellacott, her young female tec), but get longer and longer, and she reaches one called The Ink Black Heart which is about a million pages long and completely unreadable.
Dickens was the same. When he is bad he is both interminable and unreadable.
Isn't that just standard mega successful author problems when editors can no longer get them to trim things down a bit?
Many a great piece of work has been made better by someone else reining the creator in a little, they even acknowledge as much in countless acknowledgements, but once you are so big is it so easy to accept that same approach?
The Ink Black Heart was a bit of a dud in the series because it bites off more than it can chew. There's a reason novels are yet to truly get to grips with the form of social media and online discourse, it's tedious to wade through (no offence to fellow PBers). Still quite compelling in its own way though and clearly there to make a point, which it makes fairly well.
The newest one, The Running Grave, is also long but also may well be the best in the Strike series. It's like she needed to experiment a bit with the previous book then absolutely nails it in this one.
I'm surprised by the details coming out about the proposed Ukraine funding bill from Mike Johnson. It looks like if it does go to a vote on Saturday as he promised that it will (a) pass, (b) pass the Senate, (c) be signed by Biden, and, (d) include everything that would have been sent since November if he hadn't wasted time.
So, what's the catch? Why did he delay so long and why has he apparently stopped delaying?
That said, I've read a few books from the Booker prize longlist from last year, and they were interesting enough. I don't remember whether any of the ones I read were shortlisted or not. I'd definitely say they were flawed books, but they weren't dreadful, and I didn't feel like I wasted my time reading them.
If you look at the entire list of Booker winners (and shortlisted) from 1969 onwards it feels mostly like a retirement home for lost causes and forgotten dreams. There should be a competition for the most obscure, most forgotten, most unread etc.
Having said that, over 40 years ago I developed a random liking for the now wholly forgotten and unread Stanley Middleton and I am still amazed that he won the Booker prize in 1974 for 'Holiday'. Which is OK, but Wuthering Heights it ain't.
That said, I've read a few books from the Booker prize longlist from last year, and they were interesting enough. I don't remember whether any of the ones I read were shortlisted or not. I'd definitely say they were flawed books, but they weren't dreadful, and I didn't feel like I wasted my time reading them.
That said, I've read a few books from the Booker prize longlist from last year, and they were interesting enough. I don't remember whether any of the ones I read were shortlisted or not. I'd definitely say they were flawed books, but they weren't dreadful, and I didn't feel like I wasted my time reading them.
If you look at the entire list of Booker winners (and shortlisted) from 1969 onwards it feels mostly like a retirement home for lost causes and forgotten dreams. There should be a competition for the most obscure, most forgotten, most unread etc.
Having said that, over 40 years ago I developed a random liking for the now wholly forgotten and unread Stanley Middleton and I am still amazed that he won the Booker prize in 1974 for 'Holiday'. Which is OK, but Wuthering Heights it ain't.
Kazuo Ishiguro winning in 1989 was arguably the high point of the prize.
Government officials have been accused of using “threatening and cruel” tactics towards unpaid carers by saying they could face even greater financial penalties if they appeal against “vindictive” benefit fines.
This month a Guardian investigation revealed that thousands of people who look after disabled, frail or ill relatives have been forced to pay back huge sums after being chased by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over “honest mistakes” that officials could have spotted years earlier.
Dozens of unpaid carers have said they feel powerless to challenge the penalties, which often run into many thousands of pounds, even when the government is at fault.
Now the Guardian has learned that the DWP is warning carers that their fine may increase if they appeal against a repayment order.
The HOL should absolutely refuse to pass the Rwanda Bill unless the government accepts the amendment which gives an exemption to those who supported the British army in Afghanistan.
Only one Tory MP supported that amendment today , the rest showed zero humanity . Absolute scum the lot of them .
People who disagree with you on politics are not “scum”
They just disagree with you.
Your approach is part of what is wrong with modern politics and society as a whole: it is course and uncouth: aggressive and unpleasant.
Your post would have been just as (if not more) powerful without the last sentence
Up to a point.
Is Putin scum? Has Trump gone far enough beyond the norms of democracy to be scum? There's a line where "disagree with what you say but respect your right to say it" doesn't cut it any more.
Now, there's no question that some on the left throw around abuse like that too casually. But some wrongness does go beyond disagreement. And Rwanda Max (which, remember, has zero democratic mandate from the public)... if it doesn't cross the line, it comes blooming close.
I'm surprised by the details coming out about the proposed Ukraine funding bill from Mike Johnson. It looks like if it does go to a vote on Saturday as he promised that it will (a) pass, (b) pass the Senate, (c) be signed by Biden, and, (d) include everything that would have been sent since November if he hadn't wasted time.
So, what's the catch? Why did he delay so long and why has he apparently stopped delaying?
If you think that legislative process in US is a straightforward matter of shortest line between points A and B, then I have a very nice bridge over the East River that you might be interested in purchasing?
Furious European Union officials have demanded talks with the British Government over a new fishing regulation, which has sparked anger among Eurocrats.
The European Commission wants an explanation three months after leaders in London and devolved Scotland announced the end of industrial sand eel fishing.
This announcement, dating back to the end of January, was made on environmental grounds and was welcomed by, among others, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB).
But the decision to ban the industrial fishing of sand eel in the English waters of the North Sea and all Scottish waters respectively has sparked anger in Denmark.
This has led leaders in Brussels to trigger on April 16 the dispute settlement mechanism in the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). When triggered, this mechanism asks the EU and Britain to try to reach an agreement on the matter within 30 days - or more, if they agree to extend talks.
If the parties can't strike a deal, Brussels may request an arbitration tribunal adjudicate on the "compatibility of the UK's measures" with provisions in the agreement, which the EU executive said called for an "evidence-based, proportionate and non-discriminatory" approach to marine conservation.
Something might be lost in translation here but it wouldn't surprise me if Cameron came across quite pompously to Bibi (without meaning to do so) and what he articulated back was straightly asserting Israel's freedom of action from a former colonial power (largely for a domestic audience, whilst acknowledging the point at the margins) but which very easily translates in British ears to "go fuck yourself".
There's history between those two*.
Bibi's mentality is that any Brit that criticises Israel is an antisemite and he's never forgiven Dave for calling The Gaza Strip as the world's largest open air prison.
I mean Bibi thinks the continent that gave the world The Holocaust should never tell Israel what to do.
*There's history between Bibi and a few past Foreign Secretaries from Douglas Hurd to Boris Johnson to Phil Hammond.
Reminds me of the old saying:
If you meet one arsehole a day, you meet an arsehole.
If you only meet arseholes then you’re the arsehole
That said, I've read a few books from the Booker prize longlist from last year, and they were interesting enough. I don't remember whether any of the ones I read were shortlisted or not. I'd definitely say they were flawed books, but they weren't dreadful, and I didn't feel like I wasted my time reading them.
Rave reviews:
"Definitely flawed!" - Guardian
"Wasn't dreadful!" - London Review of Books
"Not a complete waste of time!" - Bognor Bugle
Too many reviews are too positive.
People have only been mean about the Truss book, probably fairly, because she's a politician.
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
Several hours later, I've caught up with PMQs. Rishi was surprisingly good when answering questions rather than reciting his scripted attack lines. Has there been a change of personnel in his PMQs prep team?
Yes, I watched it for the first time in a year or so. It was clever to contrast his attitude with Truss (telling her, correctly it seems, she was wrong on economics) with Sir Keir’s to Corbyn (make him PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Shame nobody watches it apart from political junkies like us in here.
Yes, actually Times Radio said that people made that point, but countered that it does give you a taste of how the leaders will go in the debates/which policies they’ll be looking to attack
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
That would be smart of them. Mr Sunak is regarded as out of touch, incompetent and very thin-skinned. You can argue that is wrong but most people still believe it. For Lab to play to those existing public opinions only makes sense. It also seems quite easy to get under his skin on this theme and in a debate the average Sunak tetchy response will come across very badly. I'm not sure that can be coached out of him.
The difficulty for Sunak is that unlike Cameron, Osborne or Johnson, who in their own way played down their privileged backgrounds, Sunak is clearly very proud of his wealth, schooling and the trappings of getting to the top. Which is fine as a person. He's done well for himself and I'm sure many of us would be the same if we were so fortunate.
But as a PM in a country that for 14 long years has been told we can't have nice things because the cupboard is bare or some other Tory tilt at windmills is needed, it's a very bad look.
Government officials have been accused of using “threatening and cruel” tactics towards unpaid carers by saying they could face even greater financial penalties if they appeal against “vindictive” benefit fines.
This month a Guardian investigation revealed that thousands of people who look after disabled, frail or ill relatives have been forced to pay back huge sums after being chased by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over “honest mistakes” that officials could have spotted years earlier.
Dozens of unpaid carers have said they feel powerless to challenge the penalties, which often run into many thousands of pounds, even when the government is at fault.
Now the Guardian has learned that the DWP is warning carers that their fine may increase if they appeal against a repayment order.
I'm surprised by the details coming out about the proposed Ukraine funding bill from Mike Johnson. It looks like if it does go to a vote on Saturday as he promised that it will (a) pass, (b) pass the Senate, (c) be signed by Biden, and, (d) include everything that would have been sent since November if he hadn't wasted time.
So, what's the catch? Why did he delay so long and why has he apparently stopped delaying?
A) party politics - he liked the job of speaker and didn’t want to upset the nut jobs
B1) once they announced plans to sack him he didn’t have any reason to try and keep them sweet
B2) he realised that if Ukraine lost on his watch history would not be favourable to him
That said, I've read a few books from the Booker prize longlist from last year, and they were interesting enough. I don't remember whether any of the ones I read were shortlisted or not. I'd definitely say they were flawed books, but they weren't dreadful, and I didn't feel like I wasted my time reading them.
Rave reviews:
"Definitely flawed!" - Guardian
"Wasn't dreadful!" - London Review of Books
"Not a complete waste of time!" - Bognor Bugle
Too many reviews are too positive.
People have only been mean about the Truss book, probably fairly, because she's a politician.
The HOL should absolutely refuse to pass the Rwanda Bill unless the government accepts the amendment which gives an exemption to those who supported the British army in Afghanistan.
Only one Tory MP supported that amendment today , the rest showed zero humanity . Absolute scum the lot of them .
People who disagree with you on politics are not “scum”
They just disagree with you.
Your approach is part of what is wrong with modern politics and society as a whole: it is course and uncouth: aggressive and unpleasant.
Your post would have been just as (if not more) powerful without the last sentence
Up to a point.
Is Putin scum? Has Trump gone far enough beyond the norms of democracy to be scum? There's a line where "disagree with what you say but respect your right to say it" doesn't cut it any more.
Now, there's no question that some on the left throw around abuse like that too casually. But some wrongness does go beyond disagreement. And Rwanda Max (which, remember, has zero democratic mandate from the public)... if it doesn't cross the line, it comes blooming close.
Nah - thug, crook, evil: all legitimate statements of opinion. “Scum” is just an ugly word about people who are some way off being as bad as Putin
Has he worked out a way to separate our shit from our rainwater?
If you slow down rainwater runoff - as people have been advocating for ages as a flood avoidance measure - then you also reduce the peak flow in sewers, which should have the added benefit of reducing sewer overflow into rivers.
That said, I've read a few books from the Booker prize longlist from last year, and they were interesting enough. I don't remember whether any of the ones I read were shortlisted or not. I'd definitely say they were flawed books, but they weren't dreadful, and I didn't feel like I wasted my time reading them.
Rave reviews:
"Definitely flawed!" - Guardian
"Wasn't dreadful!" - London Review of Books
"Not a complete waste of time!" - Bognor Bugle
Too many reviews are too positive.
People have only been mean about the Truss book, probably fairly, because she's a politician.
I thought it was massively overrated. The huge twist did not make up for a decidedly average novel
What twist? The Tiger fucks off at the end?
All I remember is a twist. It was so forgettable I have (honestly) forgotten what it was. I was bewildered by the praise
I have felt same about several Booker Prize winners and I gave up reading acclaimed literary fiction as a result, it was all so shit
The nadir was some massively hyped book by Richard Ford which consisted of no plot whatsoever. And, what's more, the writing wasn't even that good. Not beautiful, not funny, not clever, just mildly well shaped. The only thing I remember is a bit where the protagonist spilt a bit of rootbeer
I'm a bit of a reverse snob when it comes to acclaimed things. Critics tend to get a bit abstract in their praise as they hype it, or talk about how 'important' a work is, rather than if it is a good story or has good characters, adn that makes me naturally suspicious. I've even seen reviews for things I like that make them sound crap by doing that. Then you get stuff which is just perfectly ordinary, but because of who wrote it it's presented like some masterpiece of originality.
Of course, I don't mind many acclaimed things, some are indeed good, but if it is super insightful or culturally important or whatever, I prefer to figure that out for myself.
It's an affliction particular to literary novels, for some reason
What I mean is: if a movie is widely acclaimed and I go see it, generally I think: Yeah, wow, that's great, or I do at least see why people love it (even if I don't). Likewise good TV drama, or conceptual art
However the criticism of literary fiction commonly seems weirdly divorced from real merit. What is loved by a coterie of critics is often not just overpraised but actively mediocre or awful. It is a SURPRISE when I read an acclaimed novel and it turns out to be worth the hype
However this does NOT affect non fiction, history, biography. If a history book wins loads of awards, it's generally really good
This tells me that literary fiction is doomed, probably. As happened to modernist classical music. Sir Harrison Birtwistle, FFS
The ability to turn out a good sentence is overrated; and the ability to craft a good plot underrated. The latter is far harder and far more important to the enjoyment of a book. This is one of the reasons JK Rowling is a modern hero. Moderate writer, absolute genius storyteller.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
I agree with a lot of that except a good plot is not absolutely essential for a great novel. Austen's Emma for example doesn't really have much of a plot but is a masterpiece. Having said that, Austen could get away with it, most authors can't.
Comments
https://x.com/morecrazyclips/status/1780573926998810686?s=61
Features video of said corpse being entreated to sign the forms.
Not much change with More In Common at 59-37 this evening. It's the only pollster now showing the Conservatives above 25%.
The R&W Red Wall poll this evening has Labour on 44%, Conservatives on 24% and Reform on 18%. For both Labour and the Conservatives, those are low figures in this polling series while it's a new high for Reform.
Among 2019 Conservative voters, only 46% are still loyal with 24% going for Reform (a post-Anderson lift?) and 17% Labour
Interesting, Helmet Kohl was asking for this originally as part of reunification. By then I couldn't see a problem and still don't. And it's far better than Putin having it.
If you are a writer who can write entertainingly but can't plot, why bother with fiction at all? Find something you're interested in and write about that. Like Hugh McIlvanney or Bill Bryson.
The establishment didn't like it and said: "on your bike."
Funny old world.
We now have Reform on between 9 and 18% across pollsters. That’s a big spread, worse than even the Greens.
Madness. Utter madness.
Netenyahu should remember the alliance that was there to help defend Israel. Next time “ let them eat knishes “ !
PM)
His first answer, (read Rayner’s tax advice rather than Truss’s book) was pretty good too. Times Radio (Matt Chorley & Tim Shipman) said it was his best PMQs
Rishi the billionaire for instance seems to be where Labour are going
Why does it take 12 police officers to read the relevant Act and see that there is a time limit of 12 months?
Huge chunks of vols 5-7 of H Potter are turgidly dull, while 1-4 are a very decent read. Her detective series is on the whole outstanding (and no bloke can fail to warm to Robin Ellacott, her young female tec), but get longer and longer, and she reaches one called The Ink Black Heart which is about a million pages long and completely unreadable.
Dickens was the same. When he is bad he is both interminable and unreadable.
R-A-Y-N-E-R.
One of the great mysteries of PB is why, for all their degrees and PhDs, PBers still cannot spell the names of leading politicians.
On a site dedicated to... politics.
Bibi's mentality is that any Brit that criticises Israel is an antisemite and he's never forgiven Dave for calling The Gaza Strip as the world's largest open air prison.
I mean Bibi thinks the continent that gave the world The Holocaust should never tell Israel what to do.
*There's history between Bibi and a few past Foreign Secretaries from Douglas Hurd to Boris Johnson to Phil Hammond.
Rayner.
R-A-Y-N-E-R.
F-F-S.
Government officials have been accused of using “threatening and cruel” tactics towards unpaid carers by saying they could face even greater financial penalties if they appeal against “vindictive” benefit fines.
This month a Guardian investigation revealed that thousands of people who look after disabled, frail or ill relatives have been forced to pay back huge sums after being chased by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) over “honest mistakes” that officials could have spotted years earlier.
Dozens of unpaid carers have said they feel powerless to challenge the penalties, which often run into many thousands of pounds, even when the government is at fault.
Now the Guardian has learned that the DWP is warning carers that their fine may increase if they appeal against a repayment order.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/17/dwp-accused-cruel-tactics-unpaid-carers-appealing-fines
If candidate quality in the mayoral elections helps at all then it should help Street. However, his bowing the knee to No10 on HS2 may have dented that. That R&W poll is very poor for him but turnout in these elections could be very mixed and patchy.
It looks 50-50 to me so the value must be on backing Street. Had he gone Independent I think he might have been better off but who knows. Perhaps Reform's second preferences will save him. What's that? Oh...
Many a great piece of work has been made better by someone else reining the creator in a little, they even acknowledge as much in countless acknowledgements, but once you are so big is it so easy to accept that same approach?
https://x.com/johnrentoul/status/1780672953216053478?s=61
The Scottish government is to ditch its flagship target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 75% by 2030.
The final goal of reaching "net-zero" by 2045 will remain, but BBC Scotland News understands the government's annual climate targets could also go.
Ministers have missed eight of the last 12 annual targets and have been told that reaching the 75% milestone by the end of the decade is unachievable.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68841141
There’s nothing to go back to. The ethnic cleansing in the area removed all the landmarks, cultural and otherwise, with the people. A few old people could have gone back to find the farm gone. Under an apartment building…
Plus, the locals are now Russians. Germany had no interest in acquiring a piece of land occupied by people who don’t want to be German.
https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/status/1780662412255072451
The Capture software was rolled out across branches in the 1990s, years before the notorious Horizon system was introduced.
Post Office minister Kevin Hollinrake has met with a former sub-postmaster and a lawyer representing 35 people who believe they were wrongly accused of stealing.
Steve Marston, 68, believes he was wrongly convicted of theft and false accounting after errors caused by Capture accounting software.
Auditors found shortfalls of £79,000 at his branch in Greater Manchester in 1998. He subsequently pleaded guilty to theft and false accounting.
https://news.sky.com/story/review-ordered-into-another-post-office-it-system-amid-claims-of-more-wrongful-convictions-13117435
It would be like the Oscars restricting itself only to "arthouse" style films and ignoring films like Avatar and Lord of the Rings.
Have you heard why certain police officers are called Eternal Flame? Because they never go out on duty, just work from the office.
Except when they are trying to find missing children in Portuguese holiday areas Then they are on the plane, every summer, like tramps on chips.
See Ann Rice’s rant when someone suggested that her work needed editing.
They're called Scary Pockets and are a funk band from LA. They do funk covers of well known songs really, really well
The songs they cover are chosen by their Patreon followers, and the band leader (and keyboard player) is Patreon co-founder Jack Conte
He's the only constant in the band; there are different singers and musicians for almost every video
Their last two shows at Koko sold out and I expect that this one will too
https://thejazzcafelondon.com/event/scary-pockets-at-koko/
I love their version of Mmmbop
https://youtu.be/fiShsfvbFUA?si=V4as8S3G6Sbzk0Cs
Friday 12 July
1) The Russians got the engineers who built the V2
2) The Americans got the engineers who designed the V2
3) The French got quite a few aeronautical engineers from Germany.
:
:
X) The UK seems to have got… parking wardens, policemen and border guards.
:: fetches "I love 'Allo 'Allo" coat ::
Real Madrid 1
29 mins
They just disagree with you.
Your approach is part of what is wrong with modern politics and society as a whole: it is course and uncouth: aggressive and unpleasant.
Your post would have been just as (if not more) powerful without the last sentence
So, what's the catch? Why did he delay so long and why has he apparently stopped delaying?
The newest one, The Running Grave, is also long but also may well be the best in the Strike series. It's like she needed to experiment a bit with the previous book then absolutely nails it in this one.
Having said that, over 40 years ago I developed a random liking for the now wholly forgotten and unread Stanley Middleton and I am still amazed that he won the Booker prize in 1974 for 'Holiday'. Which is OK, but Wuthering Heights it ain't.
"Definitely flawed!" - Guardian
"Wasn't dreadful!" - London Review of Books
"Not a complete waste of time!" - Bognor Bugle
Not the way I'd want to be remembered.
Is Putin scum? Has Trump gone far enough beyond the norms of democracy to be scum? There's a line where "disagree with what you say but respect your right to say it" doesn't cut it any more.
Now, there's no question that some on the left throw around abuse like that too casually. But some wrongness does go beyond disagreement. And Rwanda Max (which, remember, has zero democratic mandate from the public)... if it doesn't cross the line, it comes blooming close.
If you meet one arsehole a day, you meet an arsehole.
If you only meet arseholes then you’re the arsehole
People have only been mean about the Truss book, probably fairly, because she's a politician.
But as a PM in a country that for 14 long years has been told we can't have nice things because the cupboard is bare or some other Tory tilt at windmills is needed, it's a very bad look.
Nobody gonna slow me down, oh no
I got to keep on movin'
B1) once they announced plans to sack him he didn’t have any reason to try and keep them sweet
B2) he realised that if Ukraine lost on his watch history would not be favourable to him
Has he worked out a way to separate our shit from our rainwater?