Tag Archives: comedy

Day 28: Literary Influences

Hello again!

Right now, as most of my friends would vouch, I’m on a bit of a cultural island, with no permanent resident other than me and Ed, though he lives in a particularly remote corner of this island (no offence Ed, of course *wink*). Of course, I share interests with many of my friends, whether it be playing classical guitar with Qesser, singing Frontier Psychiatrist with Yusuf, or sharing Gianina’s interest in indie film. This has led to the question of how I actually ended up here. Nobody in my family shares my musical interests (except, to an extent, my grandma, who introduced me to the wonders of such eras as the Greenwich folk scene), I am the only one who has ever taken an interest in biology, and when I tried to describe Birdman to them, they just burst out laughing.

So in this post, I thought I’d talk a little about literature, because I’ve not really done that in a while…

Except for trains, reading must have been my first ever real interest. I had watched Sesame Street from an early age, a TV programme I still swear by, and therefore was a competent reader before most of my friends had even begun to try. My dad used to always read to me and my sister before bed, probably my most avid memories as a kid, and these books were awesome.

Of course, Roald Dahl was always an idol of mine. I’ve read most of his books, and enjoyed all of those I had read (except The Witches. That was some scary stuff right there.) I remember the excitement I experienced of first reading the descriptions of the wacky Willy Wonka, and the sadness of watching the BFG get picked on by the other giants, or the confusion of the virtuoso grasshopper in James and the Giant Peach. However, none of these books had such a profound effect on me as Matilda.

I still recall all the emotions I felt whilst reading this book: from the novel events of the Wormwood household, to being creeped by the evil Agatha Trunchbull, to affection for Miss Jennifer Honey. It’s also suitable, given my situation, that Matilda found peace and inspiration by reading. This masterpiece is so typical of Dahl’s famous style too. Whilst his books are mainly children’s books, each still contains a moral, even if it means applying it in a rather R-rated fashion. The disrespectful and sickly Twits end up being crushed by their own weight. Fantastic Mr Fox leaves the three psychopathic farmers to die of starvation whilst waiting for him to emerge from a hole. Four children die in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory for being greedy and selfish. Even Tim Burton didn’t go that far!

A similarly named literary influence as a kid was the Irish writer Roddy Doyle who, whilst bagging himself a Man Booker Prize for his inventive and unique novel Paddy Clarke Ha Ha Ha, wrote some pretty good children’s literature too! My main memory of his work was the incredible Meanwhile Adventures, which track the story of the Mac family, all undertaking various tasks, whether it be running up stairs, taking short cuts to Las Vegas or avoiding a big pile of poo. In fact, this book was such a revelation to the Jacobson household that, upon returning this book to the library, my dad declared it as the best children’s book he had ever come across. To which the librarian agreed.

However, at some point I did have to grow out of Dahl and Doyle, and this was when I became embroiled in series. This was a fairly dark period of my literary life spanning from Year 4 to about Year 8. By Year 8, the only books I was bothering to read were books in the Cherub series, which were all a load of rubbish, and I’m disappointed i my 12-year-old self for immersing himself so forcefully in them. There were also the Diamond Brothers books by Anthony Horowitz, which were/are amazing, and the Alex Rider series by Anthony Horowitz, which was not. However, the pinnacle of my series reading had to be Caroline Lawrence’s Roman Mysteries.

It may be the only series in which I am proud to have said that I read so many of them. This is because they were more than just a plot (which, admittedly, never really changed): they were faction. This meant that whilst the plots were fictional, the scenario was real. Thus, I was able to learn al about the port of Ostia and the gladiatorial games and Roman imperialism, all from the comfort of a book for teenagers. These books inspired me to study Classical subjects at school, something that continued from the age of 11 to October 2014 where, in the light of university applications, I was forced to drop A-Level Classical Greek. My study in Classics has opened so many doors, whether it be reading Homer and Sophocles in the original Greek, to analysing literary techniques in tragedy, to being able to say I did A-Level Greek. And it’s all down to Caroline Lawrence.

As a result of all of these inspirations, I have now found myself on my own little literary island. This includes everything from the beautiful poetic techniques of Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita to the plain mad Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut to the classic Jane Eyre. Even works that aren’t considered masterpieces, such as Alan Bennett’s The History Boys or David Nicholls’ Starter for Ten, are books without which I don’t know where I would be. Honestly, Brian Jackson from Starter for Ten is 18 (almost like me), a student of Bristol University (where I received my first university offer), has people make fun of him for his taste in music (like me), is clumsy (like me), is blissfully clueless about politics and philosophy (like me), loves University Challenge (like me), is hopeless around girls (like me), is socially clueless (like me) and has an issue with spots (like me). Genuinely, if any book was a biography of my own life, it would have to be Starter for Ten.

And on top of that, it is absolutely hilarious.

So if there was to be a conclusion from this huge tangeant, it would probably be to make your kids read Roddy Doyle, avoid Cherub and READ STARTER FOR TEN! You will not regret it.

Day 7: Film – St Vincent

As part of my essential January/February cinema haul, I will probably be writing rather a lot of film reviews. Whilst cinema is not exactly my favourite art form, I’m hoping that excessive film-watching could open some doors regarding film, so I hope you’re looking forward to them…

St Vincent was a film I’d been really looking forward to watching, mainly because of Bill Murray, but also due to the fact that it seemed to be one of those feel-good films that, whilst you don’t have to think too hard, is still enjoyable. It follows Vincent MacKenna, a broke, drunken Vietnam-war veteran who starts to look after the small, yet well-spoken son of his next door neighbour, sparking an unlikely friendship. This storyline, upon writing it out in full, seems to share obvious similarities with films such as Intouchables, a French film regarding the friendship between an aristocratic paraplegic and his poor, unemployed immigrant carer. That happens to be one of my favourite films of all time, so I had high hopes for St Vincent.

It’s not like the film was exactly bad, just that I didn’t really feel any requirement to pay attention (so luckily, it was quite short). Of course, there is the evolution of Vincent’s character which you can watch out for, but I felt that his faults (the drinking, the gambling, the language, amongst many others) were rather overstated. It seems like director Theodore Melfi wanted to give the impression of Vincent being this terrible human being, and whilst he obviously isn’t the ideal role model, it was too easy to spot his pros, even from the film’s beginning. As a result, the evolution of everybody’s realisation to his inner character was predictable, and maybe even somewhat delayed.

Of course, Bill Murray plays his role very well, though the character of the “nasty drunk” seems something that would be a particular speciality to Murray, especially given his roles in various Wes Anderson movies, including Rushmore and The Royal Tenenbaums. This character, however, is more diverse than it would seem up front, which adds a little bit of validity to Murray’s acting abilities. He happens to be up for a Golden Globe this evening, where he will be competing against Michael Keaton, Ralph Fiennes and Joaquin Phoenix, in Birdman, The Grand Budapest Hotel and Inherent Vice respectively. As a result, unfortunately, he doesn’t stand much of a chance. I’m not sure if a grumpy drunk could compete against a camp, colourful hotel concierge. Or a superhero.

The other, rather surprising, addition to the main body of this cast was Melissa McCarthy, who is most commonly known for her slapstick, laugh out loud comedy. I was interested to see how she would react in a more down-to-Earth environment, especially given Murray’s presence alongside her who, as I have mentioned, is not exactly ‘slapstick’. This wasn’t exactly the film in which McCarthy could demonstrate her skills as a proper actor, given that she did seem to exist in the shadow of Murray and Jaeden Lieberher, her son, who are the dominant forces in the film. This does, however, show the world that McCarthy could potentially be a force to reckon with on the, more indie, comedy stage, something which is rather exciting in my opinion.

I guess the only extra thing to add about this film is that, to be honest, it’s pretty standard. Standard music. Standard cinematography. Standard script. All of which contribute to my struggle to produce anything interesting to say about this film. But maybe that is exactly what we need? This film can’t compete with some of the other films which have just been released, but it wasn’t exactly designed to, even if it did feature Bill Murray as the main actor. If it did, then I would have something else to write about. But I’m not complaining…

In conclusion, this film is not a complete waste of time, but in tonight’s Golden Globes, where it will compete for Best Film (musical or comedy) along with BirdmanInto The Woods, The Grand Budapest Hotel and Pride, I’d just be hoping they feel fortunate even for a nomination.

Also, it is nowhere near as good as Intouchables, so you could always watch that instead…(and the trailer plays my favourite song ever)

Day 5: Summer Reading 2014

Hello everyone!

Yes, I am very much aware that I should be on Day 10 by now. However, pre-mock Daniel seemed to think it to be a good idea to start this challenge beforehand, just to make it even more of an inconvenience for him. So here we are! Day 5 on the 10th day. I’d hope that Day 30 was still scheduled for the 30th…

Anyway, this post is extremely delayed, as you can probably infer from the title. I had a pretty uneventful Summer, giving me plenty of time to do lots of reading, so I hope there will be some juicy reviews here for you guys to get your teeth stuck into.

I have included a couple of books I read as a kid and decided to re-read due to sheer boredom, so I hope they will provide some light relief throughout this post.

But let’s crack on!

Firstly, some science-y books.

Apostolos Doxiadis – Uncle Petros and Goldbach’s Conjecture. This novel, written by a Greek mathematician, tells the story of a young man with aspirations to become a mathematician, like his mysterious Uncle Petros, who dedicated his entire life to solving the elusive Goldbach’s Conjecture. Unfortunately, this is a prime example of academics thinking they can write academic fiction, and then completely failing. Whilst this book is quite interesting for those who want to learn a little bit about maths, this is quite a quick, easy book. For anybody else, you will be struck by Mr Doxiadis’ inability to actually write. However, I would recommend Logicomix, a graphic novel which he wrote about the life and work of the British philosopher Bertrand Russell. Much more interesting for anyone, plus you don;t have to suffer the painful prose.

James D. Watson – The Double Helix. This book is widely considered to be a must-read for any medic, biologist, dentist, biochemist, vet or indeed anybody interested in biological research (okay, so maybe not the dentists then). The reason for this is because it doesn’t involve much thought, and so you can read it before your university interview to seem ‘interested’. If you actually want to learn about genetics, there must be better books out there. This is much more of a memoir which, though interesting in its own right, doesn’t make a great book for the scientist.

Ian Stewart – The Mathematics Of Life. This is the book which I had been looking for ever since I decided to pursue biological sciences: a book quantifying the importance of maths in biology. This, therefore, is a book every single biologist must read, in order to get it into their heads that biology can no longer exist separately to maths. Ian Stewart, a maths professor, whilst spending more time discussing novel cases of numbers in biology rather than practical cases, still convinces the reader that maths is a necessity which, for me, is all that is really important.

Paul Davies – The Origin Of Life. This was probably the best science book I read all Summer, as it has the makings of a great science book. The topic, how life originated from mere chemical reactions, is one that has never ceased to amaze mankind. It’s author is a respected scientific professor. And he engages in the links between all the sciences, discussing everything from astrobiology to thermodynamics to microbial physiology. A fantastic book for any scientist, or anyone simply looking to expand their intellectual horizons.

I even took the time to read some classic books…

Xenophon – Anabasis/The Persian Expedition. I had to study a part of this book for my Classical Greek AS-Level, so thought I may as well finish it off. It sets itself up for an epic, a few thousand men, trapped deep into enemy territory, who must fight to return home. Great! Except what most often happens with classical literature is that the writer’s intentions get lost in translation. Thus, even if Xenophon wrote the most thrilling. Hollywood-esque epic of all time, his stories of bravery and heroism still force my eyelids closed.

Sophocles – Oedipus Tyrannus. Okay, so what I said earlier about ‘lost in translation’? I take that back regarding Sophocles’ tragedy Oedipus Tyrannus. This play is the perfect tragedy, because a tragedy is about more than everybody dying at the end. It’s about emphasising the pain of the characters, and not a word in this play is used for any purpose other than to convey the extent of Oedipus’ tragic, unfortunate life. I really don’t want to give too much away, so I’m going to stop writing. But, if you want to read a piece of classical literature right now, for the sake of your sanity please read this.

Fyodor Dostoevsky – The Double. Given the fact the most works from Russian authors are the size of a small country, this 150-page novella seemed like a walk in the park. And with the release of the new remake of it, starring Jesse Eisenberg and directed by Richard Ayoade, I was rather looking forward to reading this, until I actually started. This book was the heaviest, slowest-going piece of literature I’ve ever read. Literally, it took me two months to get through it. I don’t normally say this, but please, just watch the film.

JD Salinger – The Catcher In The Rye. I feel like I missed something after I read this book. GoodReads seemed to imply that this was the most beloved piece of literature since the Bible, but I couldn’t quite understand why. If anybody could explain this to me, please comment below. I’d be more than interested to hear…

…and now for the lighter stuff.

Nigel Slater – Toast. This award-winning autobiography tells the story of beloved TV chef Nigel Slater, but in a rather original way: in terms of food. Whether it be his mother’s inability to cook anything, including toast, or Slater’s love of grapefruit. This book describes the way of life growing up in 60’s Britain in a surprisingly evocative way, whilst simultaneously emphasising Slater’s fascination with the world of food which, of course, has shaped his entire life.

Michael Faber – Under The Skin. Until this book, I had never actually been creeped out by a piece of writing (even that of Ray Bradbury), but this book was completely sickening, thought in a way more fascinating than negative. It’s about an alien in a human’s skin, which is normally a pretty good start to a creepy novel, and it doesn’t get much better as the novel goes on. I would really recommend this book, though, even if you watch enough horror stories for this not to be much of a threat to your sleep. (Also, I should mention that there is a film for it…)

Stephen Chbosky – The Perks Of Being A Wallflower. I don’t normally read much YA fiction, even if the blogging/social/entire world goes completely crazy for it. This book, though, is really magical. Even though the language is simple (maybe too simple, which did annoy me a little), the characters are so tangible and thorough, resulting in a beautiful, empathic read. Whether you are laughing, crying or slightly confused, Chbosky seems to be so consistent in ensuring that quality is never compromised, so much so that it almost convinced me to read more YA…

John Green – The Fault In Our Stars…and then I read this. It’s not that this book was inherently ‘bad’, but it seems to epitomise everything people find annoying about the YA genre. It supports the idea that you can only be cynical and thoughtful about everything around you if you are tormented, and that you aren’t a real person unless you are, somehow, broken. I detested the cynicism which was fundamentally associated with this book, and is now being treasured, especially amongst the 14-year-old girls who went crazy for this novel and film. However, if this book does encourage 14-year-old girls to read, then I will do nothing but support it.

Sara Shilo – The Falafel King Is Dead. Despite being half-Israeli, this was the first time I’ve ever immersed myself in Israeli literature, and now I understand why. This book was essentially a list of character’s say “I have 99 problems, and my mum is all of them”. By the end of it, my sympathy for any of the characters was as dead as most of the character’s in this book wished they were, and that can never be a good thing.

E. Lockhart – We Were Liars. I hate E. Lockhart. I don’t hate her because she’s a bad author. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. I hate her because she officially broke me. It took me less than a day to read this book, even though the whole thing was completely heartbreaking. I simply couldn’t put the book down and cease the pain which E. Lockhart had stirred in my heart, and for that I don’t know whether to laud her or loathe her.

Anthony Horowitz – The Falcon’s Malteser. Yeah, this was the kids’ book I decided to re-read, and my god it was hilarious. Horowitz may have no idea how to read teen fiction, but I have to urge every 10-year-old to read this book. It isn’t overly simple, but the plot is still just about mad enough to maintain the attention span of its reader (quite a feat when, more often than not, that attention span is equal to that of a spanner). It also happens to be based on the classic 1941 film The Maltese Falcon, starring Humphrey Bogart, which can’t be a bad thing!

Alan Bennett – The History Boys. Without a doubt, this was by far the best thing I read all year, never mind all Summer. It is brilliant, not just because it is witty, thought-provoking and starring James Corden, but also because it is so relatable, especially for all of my friends in the process of university applications. I wrote a post about this a while ago, but I’m not sure you even need to read that to be convinced to read this play. It is only a play, and I promise that your day will become much better as a result of it.

Alan Bennett’s ‘The History Boys’: This Summer’s Analogy

It is not very often that I read plays, especially modern plays. Being a Classics student, I have often revelled in the great works of Sophocles or Euripides, and I have also ‘revelled’ in Shakespeare’s The Tempest. However, theatre has almost become a thing of the past, becoming replaced by film and major Broadway productions. Even The History Boys was made into a film, starring the original cast from the stage production. Now we are reliant on playwrights, such as Alan Bennett or Tom Stoppard (Rosencrantz and Guildenstern) to redefine the theatre as an art form.

Of course, the success of The History Boys was in no way hindered by the film created post-stage. Yet its poignancy and message have been designed for the theatre and, having both read the play and seen the film, I can in some way confirm this.

That is not to say that the film is bad by any means. With the cast (including James Cordon and Dominic Cooper) achieving their successes from the stage, the film almost feels like a play. I’ve noticed that on the stage, an emotion can only be conveyed in an exaggerated fashion, so as to be conveyed to a far-off viewer. For a film it is the contrary, where techniques such as camera angles or complex body language can do this successfully. Whilst this way is just as, if not more, powerful, it almost seems lazier. However, the exaggerations are not compromised in the film, with suitable annunciation in most cases and the overly-witty responses, which only represent the theatrical nature of the film.

The quality of the actors is one huge selling point of the film, but of course, it ain’t the only thing. It was also Bennett’s job to create a production which conveys the message which he intends to convey, but also make the production simultaneously inquisitive, hilarious and heart-breaking.

And on his part, it is a huge success.

The History Boys revolves around eight working class students who, intending to study History at Oxbridge, have returned for a term to prepare for the examinations and interviews. This is done with the aid of three teachers with radically different teaching viewpoints and techniques: Hector is a veteran who believes that words and culture are most important in defining a young man. Mrs Lintott believes in teaching a curriculum to the best understanding. Irwin is a young supply teacher who wants to make History an exciting discipline again. And the Headmaster is obsessed with league tables.

This play, through these three teachers, addresses a long standing issue of viewpoints on education. What is it really there to offer? How important is it really? Of course, there are many answers to these questions, all possessed by these teachers, and also the students of our day. It has taken me almost three years to not complete my Bronze Duke of Edinburgh Award due to sheer boredom and riotous behaviour against the bureaucratic nature of everything. However, some people have lapped it up. In this case, when university entry is the overall prize, these things are done solely for the purpose of university entry. D of E was created in order to allow less privileged students to have the opportunity to help the community, learn a new skill and have some general fun. Now, it is used to get into university.

It is claimed that programmes, such as D of E, are necessary as they allow you to obtain UCAS points. These are supposed to get you into university, however its nature still eludes me to this day. This has given me a lot of comic relief in quizzing the sorts of people doing D of E concerning the nature of a UCAS point.

Does reading give you UCAS points?

What is the books are really small?

What is they contain lots of pictures?

What if you are blind in one eye?

This has allowed me to come to the conclusion that, in fact, nobody knows what they are talking about. Apparently I have UCAS points. And that is lovely. But I’m not sure why…

This idea is not much expressed in The History Boys, given that these sorts of ideas only came into play recently. However, teachers such as Irwin are fixated by teaching the boys how to ‘stand out’ amongst the other prospective History students from more privileged backgrounds. He does this by branding their essays as ‘dull’, and telling them to stand out by arguing on the contrary to their actual stance which, if you ever try it, is extremely fun.

However, the viewpoint taken by the more naive of our community is that you can partake in activities in order to broaden your character INSTEAD of in order to get into university. This stance is stressed by Hector, who encourages the students to study French, recite poetry and watch films that no one else has heard of. This has set up some of the most hilarious scenes of literature I have ever read (though sometimes a decent knowledge of French is helpful).

Being potential Oxbridge candidates ourselves, many of my friends will be using this Summer to cram their heads with enough co-syllabic knowledge to get them an interview at a good university. This action, and its consequences, are perfectly displayed in Bennett’s The History Boys. Is it the correct thing to do? I guess it depends on who you are and your own reasons for going to university in the first place. But The History Boys is a witty, subtle, moving and immensely funny ode to what our lives seem to have become, and is undoubtedly worth a read.

Reasons People Have To Hate Me…

Do you ever get the feeling that you really feel like writing but exams finished last week and you’ve spent the last three days researching Venus fly traps, so absolutely nothing new has happened?

No?

Just me then?

Fine…

Now, when I first typed the title of this post, I felt like I was going to embark on an epic adventure of sorrow and self-loathing, building up to a huge conclusion where I promise myself to change my ways, lest I end up living alone surrounded by numerous cats. And that’s a real problem. Because I hate cats.

But fortunately for everybody, I will not be taking the self-reflective path. Instead, I’m going to play a bit of a controversy card. This may not seem to be that wise a decision, given that it is implied that people already have good reasons to hate me already, but I still consider this to be quite a compulsive and prevalent issue today, amplified by the fact that we live in a society that likes to define itself as ‘multi-cultural’. So here it is. I have found that people are very easily offended.

Generally, this will not be the result of a slip-of-the-tongue or not thinking before talking. This is a result of people being extremely touchy and defensive about issues that they like to brand as big deals for the sole purpose of becoming the most offended and ‘oppressed’ of all minorities. I’ll explain later why that is some sort of evolutionary advantage.

Here’s an example: In 2011, actress Sharon Horgan was hosting Have I Got News For You, an extremely hilarious SATIRICAL news show, when she made a pretty tasteless joke about Islam and suicide bombing. Here is what happened:

Luckily, the comments have been disabled, but when I last read it, it was full of hate comments against Horgan, saying that she should be thrown in jail, that Have I Got News For You should be taken off the air, and that the BBC would have to make a formal apology and pay compensation (to who???). I will agree, the joke made was tasteless at its best, but firstly, Horgan did not make the joke, so much as she said it, and secondly, this show is SATIRICAL. That means it is designed in order to make fun of people, not just Muslims, but every group of people, from football teams to CEOs to Mormons to Swiss people. If there was this kind of uproar whenever a politician was insulted, there would be riots.

Of course, it isn’t just Muslims who react in this way. All to easily, somebody may say something which barely qualifies as ‘derogatory’, yet they will be approached with hate, and the accuser going on about how ‘offended’ they were, and running away crying.

But it only gets worse. Not only can you easily offend somebody by saying something, but even being something can incite hatred. Obviously, this ain’t news to anyone who has appreciated that oppression has occurred before. But this annoys me. Does that make it impossible for me to not offend you? What do you want from me?

So as a result, I am going to break down my character for you all, and analyse why this may incite the rage of someone. Writing that, it only occurs to me now how depressing it seems. But ah well, it’ll be interesting!

1. Straight, white, male.

I’ve decided to group these three aspects, as they seem to represent the majority of this discussion in the world now. Despite not being on Tumblr (thank god!) I have heard about what is on it, and it seems to be one of two things: memes created by crazy fans of some sort of TV show, and rants about how brilliant gay/coloured/women are.

This seems very narrow-minded and shallow, but its not just Tumblr where this seems to be happening. Concerning the development of my most recent artistic interest, spoken word poetry (I must be turning into some sort of hipster thing…), I’ve noticed that three of the most common themes for poetry are homophobia, racism and sexism.

Whilst I have tremendous admiration for both of these poets, I find it sad that they feel that the only way in which they can express themselves creatively is by talking about ‘hate’ and how awful life is for these people. Why can’t they talk about jollier things, like friends, or funny things? That way at least some sort of beneficial viewpoint of the world is generated to an extent.

2. Jewish/Pro-Semitic/Zionist

Again, despite these characteristics being very different, I have again decided to group them due to inextricable links.

I’ve always said that the Israel-Palestine conflict is an extremely complicated subject, involving deep knowledge of the political history and affairs concerning the region as a whole. As a result, very few people really know what this conflict is all about. However, everyone likes to think that they’ve got the entire thing sorted out.

Frankly, the reason why I am Zionist and all is not because I have read, analysed and formed my own conclusion. My mother is Israeli. My cousins are Israeli. My mother, aunt, uncle and grandfather have all been part of the Israeli army, with my granddad fighting in the Yom Kippur War in 1973. I’ve been many times and it is a wonderful country. The food is awesome. My decision was essentially made for me.

However, I have taken to ignoring any conversation that may possibly arise concerning this topic, for fear that I may lose some of my closest friends. I find it greatly unfair that something as common as an opinion can cause so many problems among friends.

But yeah, that still represents another group of people who may have found another reason to dislike me…This is fun isn’t it!

3. Private School

I am currently in the strenuous and soul-corroding process of university applications, and the stress has not been dissolved considering the multitudes of news articles reporting that universities must accept a certain proportion of students from state schools, or that they must discriminate against private school students, as they are more ‘privileged’. I find this ridiculous, given that the only decision the family made was that money, hard-earned money, would be spent on gaining a particularly good education instead of holidays, cars, what not.

There have also been recent articles stressing how amongst poor families in the UK, the proportion of poor White students underachieving is much higher than that of racial minorities. This is because racial minorities take a totally different perception on education. These groups consider a good education as something to cherish. Something to take pride in. Hard work is both required but rewarded. However, white families seem to have fallen into the illusion of the infamous British class system. Good education is seen as something inherently ‘bourgeois’, and so is frowned up, which is a huge shame in my humble opinion.

So yeah, I’d say that jealousy rules this group.

4. Northern

I never realised that this was a prominent factor until last Summer, when I spent a month with five Mancunians, like me, and about 40 Londoners. It just seemed like we were ‘outsiders’ with weird accents. And that makes me proud, so take that Southerners!

5. Feigns ignorance about Anime/Manga

I wouldn’t say this is a major issue outside of my immediate friend group, but a lot of my friends love this sort of stuff. Having only seen one anime ever (last week. It was Spirited Away, and it was awesome!), I used to be genuinely ignorant about the topic (eg forgetting the difference between anime and manga, going on about manga being cartoons). Now I just do it for fun. So if my mates do see this post, and are genuinely pissed off, then I am sorry. So very very solly…

Is that to far?

Moving on!

6. Haven’t seen Star Wars

Thought this was only an issue inside my friendship group. I was wrong…

7. Not a fan of My Chemical Romance/All Time Low

The TFIOSs of the music world for me. I used to keep hearing about them, about their stories, their crazy yet kind-hearted and ‘awesome’ band members, what they stood for, how they revolutionised music and how they are the best things to happen to music since a caveman decided that hitting things was fun.

Then I listened to them.

Eeeeeehhhhhhhhhhh…………

8. Bring Statistical Hypothesis Testing Into Every Single Conversation

Regular Person: Haha look! England have lost both of their games! Doubt that was supposed to happen?

Me: Well…

Regular Person: Oh god…

Me: If we assume that the probability of England losing both games is the same in each case, say 0.4…

Regular Person: Shut up, Dan…

Me: and as n is 2, X¬Bin(2, 0.4), so at the 5% significance level…

Regular Person: SHUT UP DAN…

Me: We can find P(X=0) as…where are my stats tables?

Regular Person makes better friends…

Yeah, I think I’m beginning to stray off topic…

Now for me, at least the majority of these ideas are not really something to get all touchy-feely about, but that’s only because I am not touchy-feely about all this stuff. For people who are, thus stuff is super important.

But as I’ve said, people do get offended far too easily, and they do fuss about the tiniest little things to give the impression that they are hated by a society that wishes for them to die in a hole or something. But why?

It is simply because this gives them more weight in terms of argument.

Here’s an example from a wonderful skit by Ed Byrne, discussing annoying parents.

This is true of many people. And it’s the most annoying thing in the world. Because I believe that in this world, you are allowed to have an opinion on homosexuality if you are straight, in the same way that you can have an opinion about Arcade Fire without physically being in the band. If an argument only concerns a group of people, are they the only ones who should have an opinion, even if their connotations can have an effect on the wider audience?

Anyway, I’m going to go ahead and finish with that question, because I have an Open Day tomorrow, and I don’t want to end up even more groggy than I would be otherwise on the train journey southwards (the South, again…)

Thanks for reading thus far!

 

Thom Yorke: Our Favourite Front Man

Recently, I am sure that at least for most teenagers revision/procrastination has taken over our lives. And this thoroughly depressive state means that it seems like quite a good time for something to laugh at. Therefore, I am making a post of my favourite quotes from Radiohead front man Thom Yorke. A brilliant musician, and his quotes are almost as brilliant as his music (in my opinion). They may not be true, but frankly, who really cares. So Enjoy!

I am the greatest thing to happen to black music.’ – Thom Yorke

‘Aim for the stars and even if you don’t reach them you’ll land on the moon. Also you’re really ugly.’ – Thom giving advice to some young children

‘Hurrah! Encore! Encore!’ – Thom at a funeral

‘Metaphorically I am made of chairs. It’s a metaphor though. That means I am not actually made of chairs.’ – Thom Yorke

‘You ate my pet escargot you ***hole.’ – Thom Yorke

‘Get in the goddamn time machine or perish!’ – Thom shouts at a snowman

Turtles are, actually quite sexy, if you think about it. I’m getting an erection just thinking about turtles. No, not a stripper named turtles, that’s not funny. Actual turtles.’ – Thom Yorke

I wear lampshades on my head and stand in people’s living rooms. They’re like ‘Billy can you go turn on the light?’ and I whisper ‘you mean turn on the thom yorke’ *chortle*.’ – Thom Yorke

I once got hit with a taser at a concert and everyone thought I was dancing. Now I have to do that dance, at every show for the rest of my life, or admit that a taser can damage the Thom Yorke.’ – Thom whispers to himself

One person can’t change the world. But Thom Yorke can, because he’s two people. Both of them are Thom Yorke.’ – Thom Yorke

‘Leave me alone I want to go to bed!’ – Thom shouts at a gnome

Can you imagine a world in which the letter O does not exist? My name would be Thm Yrke. Think about that.’ – Thom Yorke

‘I’ll regularly just burst out into laughter at funerals, at the expense of the dead. What’s the difference between a dead person and Thom Yorke? One is talented and the other is dead. Fuck you grandma *laughs*.’ – Thom Yorke

‘The society, is, a dishwasher, where all the water, is, dead chipmunk blood. God I’m brilliant.’ – Thom Yorke

And then everyone died, their souls pulverized in the giant blender that is life.’ – Thom telling his children a bedtime story

‘I’ll never forget you *sighs*.’ – Thom flushing the toilet

Packt Like Sardines is about how if you were sardines you’d be packed…like sardines. Get the shit out of my house.’ – Thom Yorke

Anybody can make ‘good’ music. I make terrible music, which is what makes it so different, and therefore better.’ – Thom Yorke

Yes I usually make my kids eat their veggie chops and watch my concerts in dead silence. If they ask to watch Spongebob Squarepants I usually do something volatile like make them eat a yellow sponge with googly eyes on it.’ – Thom Yorke

If Radiohead were a fruit we would be apples, because apples are festive.’ – Thom Yorke

‘2+2=5 was not intentional. I thought you carry a 1 every time there are two 2s in an equation. I’m not stupid. The mathematicians are stupid.’ – Thom Yorke

‘OK Computer? More like No Thank You Computers. They killed my father, and I hate them.’ – Thom Yorke

Salmon Fishing In The Yemen – An Overall Review

My interest in this book/film began after the release of the film in 2011, starring Ewan McGregor (Star Wars) and Emily Blunt (The Adjustment Bureau, an extraordinary film). Being a private school student with an interest in literature and maintaining this studious stereotype, I decided to read Paul Torday’s novel before watching the film. Unfortunately, for some reason or another, I never got round to watching this film, so I decided to rent it for this holiday and watch it then.

When I asked the librarian at the school library if I could borrow the DVD, she described it as a ‘very jolly film’. This was interesting as it countered the somewhat demeaning and depressing ending to the novel, and this difference made me curious, so of the five films which I removed from the library, this was the first to watch, thus leading to my ability to make a comparison.

One thing that interested me in particular, more specifically in the film, was a focus on a religious and philosophical element. Dr Fred Jones (McGregor) is a fisheries expert who is hired by Harriet Chetwode-Talbot (Blunt), who works on behalf of a wealthy Sheikh, to manage a project to introduce salmon fishing into the Yemen. It is known from the beginning that Dr Jones is a man of science, and he even refers to himself a ‘a facts and figures man’. However, this viewpoint is countered by the Muslim Sheikh (played by Amr Waked), who has a total trust in the ideas of faith and theism, and throughout the film, the Sheikh begins to instill an air of faith within Dr Jones. When asked if he was certain that farmed fish would run in these waters, having lived in tanks all their lives, Dr Jones replied, ‘I just know it.’ Here is an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQvVOT_gSfE

This theme made me think quite a lot about my own viewpoints on life. Being a mathematician, I am fully aware of the philosophy of logic and Karl Popper’s theory of ‘critical rationalism’, where he states that nothing in this world is certain unless it is proven by the laws of mathematics. Science itself relies entirely on empiricism (the gain of knowledge through the use of the senses and physical analysis). For example, according to empiricism, when a metal is heated, it expands. Despite the fact that we now know why this happens, how can we be absolutely 100% certain that in every single instance where a metal is heated, it will expand?

Nonetheless, I have always maintained an interest in philosophy (having read the book ‘Sophie’s World’ by Jostein Gaarder, which I recommend to everyone), and this film made me rethink my own ideas. In our society today, it seems very hip and fashionable to possess a character of cynicism and pessimism, and to have a negative view of the outside world. When asking someone why they are being pessimistic, they often reply by saying ‘I’m not a pessimist; I’m a realist’. But why does realism need to be pessimistic? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP3VJfAzuQI

To conclude, whilst ‘Salmon Fishing In The Yemen’ provided an overall positive and enjoyable experience, I would also recommend it based on its more eye-opening attributes. Ann Hornaday, film critic for The Washington Post, said, ‘Salmon Fishing in the Yemen is less a classic fish-out-of-water tale than a fish-in-strange-waters tale, a study in diametric opposites that finds unexpected synchronies and moments of almost mystical harmony. Viewers who take the Sheikh’s advice and suspend their disbelief, even for a moment, may well find themselves hooked.’ Despite the repetitive fishing analogies, I believe that she has got it exactly right. What this series will do is make you rethink your views of the world; and most of the time, one will emerge with a happier and more satisfactory view of the world, and what harm can that do?

This Is The End

An introduction to the world of film, having submerged from my previous two months of stress, sleepless nights and Biology textbooks, offered a seemingly variable range of films for me to absorb, which made me pretty excited. There have been thrillers (Now You See Me), comedies (The Internship) and even cartoons (Monsters University) which have been eagerly awaited since my last exam. However, since no schools have officially finished, at least not for another week at least, I have been kept to an unfortunately narrow view of the awaited Summer that will soon arrive. So choosing a film was particularly tough.

How about Superman? Ooh, that could be a good idea. Last year’s superhero film industry graced us with a fantastic finale to the Batman trilogy, and the effects of the Amazing Spider-man and the skill of Andrew Garfield made said film a treat. So what’s Superman about? Well, a schoolboy saves his whole class by lifting the bus out of some water with his brute strength, and then… . Hang on; schoolboy lifting a bus? Not particularly interested any more to be honest.

After Earth? Just because the Karate Kid has been placed in the same film as his dad doesn’t make a good film. And to be frank, I’m glad I decided against this film. The film critic for the Wall Street Journal, Joe Morgenstern, opened his review by saying, ‘Is After Earth the worst film ever made?’. He concluded his report by saying, ‘Maybe not; there’s always Battlefield Earth to remind us how low the bar can go.’ Admittedly, I’ve never seen Battlefield Earth, but the lack of positive vibe is thrilling.

So, unfortunately, we weren’t given much choice, and this explained how we ended up in Screen 5 at the cinema in Bury, in a crowd of 15, watching a film with this trailer. http://www.youtube.com/user/SonyPicsUK?v=8_QWSSHkn0w.

Immediately, I wasn’t impressed.

And this thought wasn’t aided by the fact that it was, probably, the worst film I’ve ever seen.

Now some of my mates may recall the fact that on a previous blog, I (wrongly) claimed that Godspeed You! Black Emperor’s new album ”Allelujah! Don’t Bend! Ascend!’ was the worst album I’d ever listened to, only to have a change of heart during a thorough second listen. But I assure you that no such mistake was committed in this instance.

Firstly, let’s get something cleared up. This film (don’t worry, I won’t include spoilers, but it probably doesn’t make a difference as you ought not to pay a good £6.00 to watch it) concerns a house party including such celebrities as James Franco (127 Hours), Seth Rogen (Knocked Up) and Jonah Hill (various other awful films). Here, the apocalypse occurs (okay, maybe there are a few spoilers) and the actors are forced to fend for themselves inside Franco’s mansion whilst they escape oncoming death and attempt to reach heaven.

I’ve only seen one apocalypse film that I’ve thoroughly enjoyed, which was Armageddon, but these sorts of films always seem very over the top concerning their fanciful and imaginative ideas on how the world will end. And I declare that their decision to base the end of the world on the Bible was pretty ineffective.

The humour was something that also caused great confusion for me. Granted, my humour seems to be very British and nostalgic, such as Blackadder, Monty Python and Have I Got News For You. So I wasn’t expecting to gain much fun. But what struck me especially roughly was the basis around drug use, Hollywood satire and masturbation when finding jokes, what I would consider the sign of a failing comedian; the idea of making something funny through swearing and sex rather than context.

Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly said, ‘You could sit through a year’s worth of Hollywood comedies and still not see anything that’s genuinely knock-your-socks-off audacious. But This Is the End truly is. It’s the wildest screen comedy in a long time, and also the smartest, the most fearlessly inspired, and the snort-out-loud funniest.’ And the film currently has a rating of 84% on the film website Rotten Tomatoes. I think it’s amazing how something so mediocre could potentially achieve something so satisfactory. So all I can say is, don’t watch this film, and I’m glad it’s all over. 0.5/10.

Hang on, what’s this?

‘On June 26, 2013, Evan Goldberg announced ideas for a This Is the End sequel.’

Shit.