Fifth Decade

Not often I comment on celebrities - in fact, this is the first time. But julia Roberts just happens to be one of my favourite actresses, intelligent, beautiful, and a great artist.

So, I was a little disappointed to see her on the TV at some event in today’s news with a very much thinner than normal face - just like she’d had cosmetic surgery. Too much cosmetic surgery. The Michael Jackson sort of too much cosmetic surgery. She just looked so thin. Much of her beauty had gone as her sunken cheeks stared out of the TV.

I blame a society in which image is considered paramount, but in which thinness is considered the main component of beauty. Well, by the image makers in Hollywood, anyway. I’m not convinced that they have realised that normal people don’t think quite the same anymore, after all, people are getting much bigger in Western societies and stick insects look spiky and unfriendly when compared to a woman with her natural curves and musculature fully intact.

Thing is, these actresses and other women who put themselves under the knife seem to be chasing a female view of beauty - to be thin because they think men want them to look thinner. But most heterosexual men do not. Sure, men aren’t after obesity, but the cosmetic surgery industry is just ruining too many faces of once beautiful actresses and entertainers.

Maybe the higher numbers of homosexual men in the fashion, glamour and entertainment industries skew the look of the average woman in such roles because they sub-consciously try to turn the women into boys and therefore select-out “normal” looking women?

Most men like curves, they like the natural swelling of a female stomach - they don’t want a woman with a six-pack. Men like a woman with a friendly and supportive looking face, one that offers softness that to them represents gentleness, not sharpness or thinness which represent meanness. I won’t even mention curves in other places.

Please women of the world, leave the cosmetic surgeons to people who really need them, like burns victims. And if a man tells you to go under the knife, ask if he is gay, or just married. Chances are, he won’t have your real interests at heart.

The nice thing about Formula 1 is its unpredictability. Well, this weekend, anyway. Never mind the unusual shenanigans happening off the track in Chelsea dungeons, on the track we are having quite a year. Quite rightly the Crown Prince of Bahrain insisted nothing would be allowed to distract us from the racing, despite all the salacious gossip in the press worldwide.

At Bahrain, there were one or two surprises. Swiss based BMW Sauber now lead the F1 Constructors Championship. Robert Kubica gained pole in a car that was clearly not the fastest at the event. Raikkonnen didn’t win. Massa did. Kovalainen beat Hamilton and got the fastest lap in not the fastest car on the circuit. Toyota actually beat their customer team, Williams. And the start was not chaotic. Presumably all that wind they experienced today - about 20 to 30 kmh gusting along the pit straight - distributed the sand fairly evenly and so the expected advantage of being on the racing line on the grid was not as great as it might have been.

OK, Hamilton cocked up big style at the start. He admitted to Autosport later that he hadn’t been able to put the mapping into “launch mode” quickly enough. I thought there were supposed to be no driver aids this year? So what’s all this talk about then?

Anyway, he was gobbled up by the pack quicker than you can crack a whip, falling from 3rd on the grid to 10th place by the end of the first lap. It didn’t help that he miscalculated just how slow the Renault was out of that corner and so ran into the back of the renegade in the Renault on acceleration, dropping himself down to 18th after pitting for a new nose. If he hadn’t have fluffed the start though, he wouldn’t have been anywhere near the middle of the pack. Looks like he’s having the kind of experience most other newcomers to F1 have in their first years in slower cars. For most of the race he was lucky to be racing with the Fisichella Force India over 13th place. 

Looking at the scores on the doors, McLaren have gone backwards since the beginning of the year scoring first 14, then 10 and now just 4 points as a team. Ferrari on the other hand has got better and better, with scores of 1, 10 and today top marks with 18 out of 18. BMW meanwhile have been more consistent, edging forward bit by bit with scores of 8, 11, 11 so far this season. BMW’s slow but deliberate progress clearly comes from the calm way that merry Mario Theissen runs things. More to come, I think.

So, now we have to wait three weeks for Barcelona, where we will see if any teams have made any leaps forward, or by standing still be going backwards. Up until now they have been away from home, and although teams as rich as Ferrari can ferry failed engines to their factory for analysis and problem solving in the week between the Australian and Malaysian GPs, most teams do not have such a $500 million budget. So, most changes - particularly to everyone’s aerodynamic packages - have had to wait until the return to Europe before they can be installed.

Hopefullly, the ITV commentary team will learn to observe and talk about what is actually happening next time, and not bore us with inane tales of gossip picked up around the paddock while something interesting is happening on the track. The usual character is of course to blame - Martin Brundle is, as always, superb. If only his colleague would watch the monitors while he is talking we might get some synchronisation between what he is saying and what we can see happening for a change.

BMW are the surprise of the year so far. Yes, everyone thought they would do well, and certainly be in the top three teams (ie 5th and 6th places) but they are instead nearly leading the Formula One World Championship. OK, that’s a bit like being “nearly pregnant” but it is a Boolean variable. Off and on.

And that’s exactly what Kubica has been. Off and On. In Melbourne he was on when he qualified second on the grid, but fell off in the race. In Sepang in Malaysia he actually finished second showing that his team-mate’s second place last week was no fluke. It is also a warning that Kubica is the main danger in the BMW camp, not Heidfeld (although Nick is no slouch).

Heidfeld has been out-qualified by Kubica at every race this season, much like last season. If Kubica had finished in second place last week, not Heidfeld, he would now be the one leading the Formula One World Championship, not his age-sibling Hamilton. They are both just twenty three years old.

Robert Kubica could be the 2008 World Champion if McLaren and Ferrari keep on screwing things up like they have so far shown themselves to be most adept at doing.

But how the heck do you pronounce Robert Kubica’s name? I cannot rely on the people commentating at ITV as anything remotely Continental to them seems to be unpronounceable. I guess James Allen would even have a problem pronouncing Cafe. Oh dear, I’m being naughty again. Well, some people are easy targets. But that’s no excuse. It isn’t his fault. I shall try harder next time.

As for pronouncing Robert Kubica, my best guesses are:

1. Kubicha (as in Charlie)
2. Kubitsa (as in bits o’ this and bits o’ that)
3. Kubika (as in bicker)

I am assuming the “Ku” bit is pronounced like “Coo” as in a dove’s cooing, but I guess it could also be pronounced like “Queue”. Let’s face it, Poland uses a strange spelling system: you only have to see the TV ads for Lodz to understand that (it’s pronounced “Wudge” or something similar). Yes, I know, it’s very weird - but they are lovely friendly people, really. I like them.

Anyone got any ideas? Are there any Poles out there who can tell us, please?

Dobri wieczur…

Is Spooks one of the best TV series ever?

BBC1’s immensely fascinating insight into the world of counter espionage, as carried out by Her Majesties Secret Service in the guise of MI5, has an edge of reality that is both believeable, and reassuring at the same time. Certainly it makes one proud to be British, knowing such people carry out such tasks in such a selfless way. And relatively unthanked too.

Well, maybe they get an MBE here, a CBE there, maybe the Directorship of a QUANGO or so - or even a career in politics, as the last head of MI5 has only recently embarked upon.

Whatever, the program catches the reality of life as a spy in the same way that the Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister series’ both did for the civil servant/elected representative dynamic.

You get the feeling that these stories really happened, or could have happened. Strangely, it makes me like the US more too. Sure, they have an iffy President at the moment, but I don’t believe for a moment that all US secret service people think like he does. First of all they are far more patriotic (they served their country, George Bush never did) and secondly, they are far more intelligent. They just have to carry out some rather stupid orders at times.
Same for the MI5 staff. They aren’t stupid. And Spooks really shows that.

So, if you know someone from the secret services, pat them on the back for me. Tell them the public do appreciate their sacrifice, even though we cannot understand their burdens. We may even criticise the outcomes of their actions from time to time, but mostly, we are so glad they are there, protecting us.

The only thing I wonder about though, is when Harry says he believes in protecting “this country” which exact idea of this country does he mean? Does he mean the current Government (whichever one is in power right now) or does he mean the system of Parliamentary democracy with a Monarch as Head of State, or some private ideal?

Makes you think, doesn’t it?

It isn’t often I’m surprised these days. But just occasionally, every now and then, it suddenly hits me.

This evening I was watching as I often do “This Week” hosted by Andrew Neil, ex-editor of the Sunday Times, with regular participants ex-MP Michael Portillo and current MP Diane Abbott. The guest I found most interesting was surprisingly Katie Melua, a singer whose CD I coincidentally bought recently without knowing anything more about her (I’d heard her played on one of the ad-free, talk free, Swiss radio stations, either Radio Swiss Jazz or Radio Swiss Pop and so bought the CD online there and then).

No, this isn’t some fan mail about some sexy, good looking young singer who’s on a roll, after all, This Week is a politics show - and a good one for the most part. Although of course, she is all of the above too.

What was particularly interesting was what Miss Melua had to say. She’s a very bright girl with some very good ideas. Well, she’s a Doctor’s daughter. She also happens to be Georgian, an immigrant of 15 years into the UK which she arrived in at the age of 8. Her English is now perfect, and she has just taken on British Citizenship, which she is clearly very proud of. Her praise of Britain was great to listen to. If only more Britons spoke like that about their country!

The discussion was on immigration, Britishness, and integration. Katie said there was not enough teaching of or resources for, the teaching of English to older and younger new immigrants but perhaps too much political correctness in England when she arrived compared to her home country Georgia - or even to her first British home in Northern Ireland during the troubles where she had to learn Irish dancing and how to play the tin whistle, a complete contrast to England where nothing specifically British or English was required of her; Diane Abbot said the British tend to be most British when they are showing everyone how little British they actually are; Michael Portillo said in the fifties Britons were last proud to be British, while Andrew Neil in turn egged them on, or over-egged things as the flow demanded.

Then it hit me: none of these commentators, talking about Britishness, were actually English! Well, not completely. Katie Melua is a first generation immigrant from Eastern Europe. Diane Abbott’s parents came from Jamaica. Michael Portillo is half Spanish. And Andrew Neil is a Scot!

Now I’ve seen it all. Britain clearly is a most cosmopolitan society. And do you know what? It’s a lot richer because of that. The discussion was interesting, well-argued, stimulating and well researched. People with real experiences and relevant ideas came together without any particular cross to bear or chip on their shoulders, and although the discussion was short, it was very satisfying to listen to.

Well done the “This Week” team. Now I really have seen it all…

Murdoch: I decide Sun’s politics

This has got nothing to do with taxes or immigration issues. It’s a lot more important than that - in fact it’s a completely fundamental flaw in Britain’s current system of government and explains a lot of the negative culture that so holds Britain back from its true potential.

I don’t want this to appear to be an attack on Rupert Murdoch either, since the system we have isn’t his fault, he just knows how it works and how to benefit from it. You have to actually admire him for that. But he does make a good illustration of what is wrong with the system.

In the US, no foreigner can own a majority share of any media business. That’s why Murdoch changed his Nationality from Australian to American. So he could own an American media network.

However, Britain has no similar rule, and that’s surely wrong.

Any foreigner can own a British newspaper, and with the multi-million issue selling tabloid press can then influence huge swathes of the electorate. Mr Murdoch has even said, to a House of Lords committee investigating media ownership that he “exercises editorial control on major issues - like which party to back in a general election or policy on Europe.”

Pardon me? He does what?

He persuades people, through the editorial slant his tabloid newspapers take, the stories and photographs they publish, exactly which party to back in a general election!

Not because the binmen don’t come often enough to his house, or because he pays too much tax, or has to wait too long for an NHS Doctor’s appointment, or because his kids’ school is under equipped. No, instead he is far more likely to be influenced by what is happening in his adopted country. What is good for the US? Or just as dangerous perhaps, what is good for sales?

Foreign media owners cannot feel the things British residents or Nationals feel, they may have some idea, or an ideology they follow, but the less British they are the less it will be likely to benefit Britain. They are far more likely to be biased against British interests than they are to be biased against the foreign interests they see, feel and hear, day-to-day, back home.

As a puppetmaster, a foreign owner’s audience are the people in their adopted and original lands. To them, Britons are no more than the players on the stage, controlled by the strings in their hands.

The influence they exert may be very subtle. But how can it be in Britain’s best interests? Shouldn’t British owners living in Britain control the press? After all, foreigners are not welcome donors to political campaigns financially, so why are they allowed to make or break Prime Ministers through the use of ongoing campaigns to undermine them or their policies?

Not all Fifth Columnists are shady men from Russia or China in back alleys. Some foreigners influence our way of life for their own ends and most of us don’t even think about it, we do what we are led to believe is right. Just not for us.

Ban foreign ownership of the British media now!

I like the Haka, I think it brings an extra dimension to TV, but let’s have it at the end of the match, not at the beginning. The dance now performed isn’t even the traditional Maori form.

The All Blacks do obtain significant biological advantages at the beginning of each game from performing the Haka. From a physiological standpoint, all the shouting and posturing the Haka brings with it causes enhanced levels of adrenalin and testosterone to be released into the blood stream. These in turn boost Oxygen and energy levels in the blood and muscles, warming the body up generally, and making it ready for action in a biological sense that any team that has to stand and watch, quietly, without moving, are completely deprived of. Even worse, the fight or flight responses of the non-performers produce different hormones, ones that a boxer would recognise before entering a fight he fears he will lose and one which so many battle displays are designed to create in one’s opponent. Not for nothing are war cries used even today by modern armies and soldiers.

There is also a psychological component, but this can be managed to a large degree through the use of mind control techniques. The main effect is the same as taking an injection of chemicals just before a match begins. It could be argued that it is cheating.

Are the All Blacks so insecure about their playing abilities that they can’t play without this extra advantage? Or do they know it gives them an extra boost just before kick off that helps them score first, thus changing the flavour of the rest of the game so the opposing team is always fighting an uphill battle?

Traditionally, most Rugby matches at club level end up with both teams’ players having beers together in the clubhouse until the early hours. Performing the Haka at the end of the match would then be seen as a real welcome, more akin with the traditional origins which have somehow been lost in the modern form. Remember, to a Maori the Haka is traditionally not a war dance performed before physical battle, but it is a welcome dance performed before two groups socialise together, a challenge to identify any warlike intentions the “foreigners” may harbour. Moving the dance to the end of the match would also show respect for winners or losers - winners because they played well, losers because they gained the respect of the victors through the character and nature of the way they played.

That would meld together the two traditions, the Maori and the Rugby joined as one. Leaving it as it is only gives the team who perform it an unfair advantage. Rugby isn’t supposed to be like that.

Last time, in Indianapolis, only the TV direction was particularly awful, but this time in France both the direction and the commentary were absolutely terrible. James Allen, did you leave your brain at home and then have to borrow one from the local butterfly farm?

For instance, at the end of the final qualifying session, we saw the Ferrari of Massa and the McLaren of Hamilton emerge from the pits - usually referred to as an out lap - but we immediately had Allen talking about the lap as if it were a hot lap… normally it is the second lap (the first flying lap) that is the hot lap. But maybe Nevers Magny Cours is a different circuit. After all, Ayrton Senna once qualified on pole here by spinning at the last corner so that he crossed the line travelling backwards.

That wasn’t the only mistake though. Maybe Allen thinks to be as liked as Murray Walker he needs to make a lot of silly mistakes during his commentary, but sorry James, you are not in the same league as Murray. Murray’s mistakes made him sound more likeable; yours make you sound more and more like an idiot.

The TV Director was atrocious. Button had just done his slow out lap, and had started accelerating for his hot lap - and the director switched to some mechanics standing around in the pit lane. At the end of the session, Martin Brundle (who in my opinion is far and away a better commentator than James Allen and really should replace him) was getting quite agitated by the fact that a pack of cars were still just about to cross the line and give us the final positions which we were all tensely waiting for - and the bloody idiot director switched to showing us the Ferrari cars parading slowly around on their in laps after they had crossed the line and recorded their times.

Then he switched to showing us the Ferrari pit wall team looking at their monitors and Michael Schummacher ineptly trying to disentangle himself from his communication cables. The cars on the track were still racing! So the director then switched to a picture of the backs of some Ferrari mechanics standing by the railings in the Park Fermee area, waiting for the parading front row cars to return - but the other cars were still out on the track racing for a time!

Qualifying sessions this year have been normally much more exciting than in previous years, but you do need a director who understands the sport at least. One of the main advantages for TV is that there are two breaks in the hour when no racing actually takes place - these have been designed in specifically for ad breaks. But, in Qualifying 1 we had Wurz on his hot lap, about 15 seconds away from completing it - and they broke for an ad break! Huh?

Steve Rider is a big improvement over Jim Rosenthal, but someone please tell him how disconcerting it is for him to give the impression of watching a game of tennis when he is talking with someone else on screen at the same time: he ends up looking like Noddy! Just concentrate on teh other person or commentator please, Steve, you’re supposed to be a professional for heaven’s sake (of course, this might be the director’s  or the producer’s fault for asking you to eyeball the camera more of course, but this just doesn’t work on British TV, even if it is standard US practice, but I’d hardly hold US TV up as an example of what looks either professional or watchable).

Please, ITV, fix these problems before the race tomorrow. Bring back the director you used for the races up to Canada! The current one is useless. And for next year, please promote Martin Brundle and sack James Allen: James just can’t cut the mustard.

For some reason (no Newsnight on tonight according to the BBC2 website which showed the Newsnight Review program twice) I watched ITV News tonight, straight after having already watched BBC News, my standard. What a difference - and not a good one. Of course, ITV is a commercial station, but I had not idea it was quite so sensationalist.

Here is how the two News programs ran the story about the unsuccessful car bombs left in London on Thursday night:

The flavour of the BBC News report

Last night two car bombs were successfuly disarmed by security forces in Central London. This evening it was already business as usual as Londoners went back to the West End intent on celebrating the weekend. Everybody was calm, those interviewed said it wasn’t going to bother them. The reporter said most people seemed to be treating it as just another inconvenience that delays the buses and tubes (which is probably exactly how we Brits do treat things like this).

The flavour of the ITV News report

Shock! Horror! Two unexploded Baghdad style car bombs disrupted London today. Police cordoned off the centre of London after the killer bombs were found near Trafalgar Square and Downing Street. If they had gone off hundreds could have died. Imagine how awful this could have been! This could have been London’s worst terrorist attack! Many people out to enjoy themselves could have died! Look at all the nails I have in my hands next to these petrol and gas canisters in a car that looks like the one the bombers tried to murder hundreds of people with! Imagine what the nails could have done, killing and maiming innocent people like you, and me! Every reporter they had on the story said exactly the same thing - about what could have happened rather than what did happen. (They forgot to add that an asteroid could have landed on the Capital today that could have ended all life on the planet, propelled by an evil Empire of insect like aliens who could have fed on the corpses of millions of victims and the few survivors who would be writhing in agony as they were eaten alive).

Well, I think ITV played right into the terrorists hands there. Terrorism only works when you allow yourself to be scared into ways of living that you would not choose if you were not scared.

The BBC on the other hand were calm, professional, factual, truthful, and didn’t embellish the truth with wild speculations and over-descriptive scaremongering as ITV had done. The ITV report was pathetic.

To be fair, the ITV London News report that followed the main ITV news was a lot better. In this they actually said much the same as the BBC had done, concentrating on the reality of people just getting on with life and not really being bothered. In fact they even said that while the terrorists had been unsuccessful in scaring people off the streets, a rainstorm that settled in for the evening cleared people from the streets later on in the evening. This provided the scenes of empty (but wet) streets that the main ITV news ran with commentary saying the emptiness had been caused by the terrorists. Most irresponsible.

ITV - Whoever the editor for the main ITV news was tonight should be sacked or sent to report from Gaza. Tonight’s ITV news was the worst piece of journalism I have seen for as long as I can remember. Not only was it unpatriotic, scaremongering and wrong, it was also untruthful and deceiving. Now that’s just not right.

BBC - you certainly have the best News service. Keep up the good work!

Note: I have tried to capture the flavour of the various news bulletins through parody and descriptive prose, rater than through quoting anything that was actually said. However, it is clear that the thrust of the ITV story was to cause fear and didn’t worry if such fear might create anti-muslim feeling (isn’t there a law against this?). The thrust of the BBC report was to report the actual events calmly and accurately, with no overlay of “we want to scare you”.

Of course it’s a fix. We always knew that. Scandinavia votes for Scandinavia. Moldova votes for Romania, Romania votes for Moldova. And the Eastern Block? It’s almost a block vote… Maybe they should call it the East-European Song Contest next time.

The (currently named) Eurovision Song Contest has always plagued me. When I lived with my parents it was one of the most important programmes of the year for my mother to watch. I managed to escape it for a few years at University, but now it’s my girlfriend who can’t miss it. So I sit there, suffering. But like Terry Wogan, I don’t do it silently. I mean, there’s just so many opportunities to take the piss out of the contestants!

This year there were no Western European countries in the Top Ten, so apart from Germany, France and Britain turning up in the final next time automatically (because they basically fund the whole thing) all the other Western European countries will have to qualify in the semi-final. Which means they won’t get through because of the large number of Eastern European countries who block vote - or even have the government owned media invent the votes, they’re so “politically correct” - in an East-European autocratic kind of way.

So, it looks like Western Europe will be frozen out of the running for the foreseeable future. Until the organisers have had as much as they can take of non-Western hospitality and change the rules that is. And they do need changing.

It’s improved tremendously since the BBC’s Terry Wogan’s been the compere though. His wit and charm have enlivened many an otherwise tedious and boring evening, although he was a bit tame this year I thought. Probably been warned about what he said about other countries’ entries. He summed it up well this year though “It’s been a great evening - not musically - but it’s been a great spectacle…”

Isn’t it amazing how many people are willing to make a spectacle of themselves?