About Me

My Photo
Andrew Brinded
Vauxhall, London, United Kingdom
Welcome to my blog. May you enjoy reading about my frustrations
View my complete profile

Sunday, 25 October 2009

At the centre of time
By Lucy Rodgers
BBC News

Without it international travel would be in turmoil and calling friends in faraway places at the right time impossible. Exactly 125 years after the Greenwich Meridian line was drawn, how and why did Britain become the centre of time?

At longitude 0° 0' 00", the arbitrary stroke on our maps that passes from pole to pole and bisects the UK, France, Spain, Algeria, Mali, Burkina Faso and Ghana divides the Earth into east and west, just as the Equator splits it into north and south.

This imaginary line now known as the Greenwich Prime Meridian not only allows us to navigate the globe but also keeps the world ticking to the same symbolic 24-hour clock.

But it has not always been so.

Until the 19th Century, many countries and even individual towns kept their own local time based on the sun's passage across the sky and there were no international rules governing when the day would start or finish.

However, with the rapid expansion of the railways and communications networks during the 1850s and 1860s, setting a standard global time soon became essential.

"The world was in a very big mix-up," explains Dr Avraham Ariel, author of Plotting the Globe. "People had lots of prime meridians. Earlier in Europe there were 20 prime meridians. The Russians had two or three, the Spanish had their own and so on."

And so, 125 years ago this week, 41 delegates from 25 nations gathered in Washington in the US for the 1884 International Meridian Conference to decide from where time and space should be measured.

By the end of the difficult summit, which, according to Dr Ariel dragged on until "smoke came out", Greenwich had won the prize of longitude 0º by a vote of 22 to one, with only San Domingo against and France and Brazil abstaining.

The meeting also agreed Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) would be used as the standard for the world, with the day beginning at midnight at Greenwich and counted on a 24-hour clock.

Political opponents

One of the main reasons for British victory over key rivals Washington, Berlin and Paris, was that 72% of the world's shipping already depended on sea charts that used Greenwich as the Prime Meridian, explains Dr Rebekah Higgitt, curator of the history of science and technology at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich.

Greenwich's reputation among seafaring nations and the wide range of maps and charts using Greenwich as the Prime Meridian meant those at the conference "could see that was the way it was going," she says.

Another factor in Britain's favour was that the US had already plumped for Greenwich as the basis for its own national rail time system, she explains.

But, as the San Domingo, French and Brazilian votes showed, the choice was not without its opponents.

There remained some desire, particularly among Britain's European competitors, for "something more neutral" - a location that did not have such national ties, Dr Higgitt says.

"France suggested using an older idea of a meridian running through the Canaries - and even after the 1884 conference, Jerusalem was suggested as a site, particularly by Italy."

Opting out

Yet, while the conference's Greenwich decision has stood until this day, the ultimate aim of some of those at the conference - a simple centralised system of 24 uniform time zones for 24 hours - never came into being.

LONGITUDE
  • All points on the Prime Meridian are at 0° longitude
  • All other points on the earth have longitudes ranging from 0° to 180°E or from 0° to 180°W
  • The international date line lies along the 180° meridian
  • Meridians of longitude and parallels of latitude together form a grid by which any position on the earth's surface can be specified
  • Unlike the parallels of latitude, which are defined by the rotational axis of the Earth, the Prime Meridian is arbitrary
  • Over the years, many countries have opted out of the system to demonstrate national independence, keep in time with neighbours or maintain standard days within their borders.

    As recently as 2007, Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez shifted the entire country back half-an-hour, while other countries operate similar fractional zones - half-hour or quarter-hour deviations. Yet more, such as China and India, use single time zones even though their territory extends across many hours.

    "These things come up. Sometimes it's popular will or sometimes it is government choice," says Dr Higgitt.

    "France and Spain should be on the same time as the UK, but it is more convenient to be in sync with those they are attached to by land."

    And while such political and practical considerations have caused time zones to change in relation to Greenwich over the years, scientific and technological advances have also challenged Greenwich's role as the centre of time and space.

    Leap seconds

    Since the 1960s, atomic clocks rather than astronomy have been keeping the world's time and have forced GMT to adapt.

    The combination of atomic clocks' super-accurate measurement and the fact that the rotation of the Earth is irregular and slowing mean atomic time and Earth time - and therefore GMT - slowly drift apart.

    To keep them in sync "leap seconds" are added and produce a compromised version of GMT called Coordinated Universal Time, which keeps atomic time tied to the Earth's rotation.

    On top of such changes to GMT, the advent of GPS technology and its ability to precisely track location has also had its impact on Greenwich as the zero point of longitude.

    GPS's World Geodetic System 1984 system now places the Prime Meridian 100 meters to the east of Greenwich Observatory - away from the line defined by its large "Transit Circle" telescope and its corresponding brass strips straddled by tourists eager to have one foot in the East and one foot in the West.

    Dr Ariel argues this renders the historical Prime Meridian no longer meaningful. But Dr Higgitt believes it simply highlights the fact it is not a scientifically-determined line and simply the result of global agreement.

    "People stand on it because people think it is a predestined place," she says. "But it has never been official. It just exists in terms of habits and international usage. It is just something that has happened over a period of time."

    The 125th anniversary of the Prime Meridian will be celebrated with a talk by Graham Dolan at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich at 1900 BST on Tuesday 20 October.

    What is the future of music online?

    By Ian Youngs
    Music reporter, BBC News

    For years, the music industry has, in the words of Bonnie Tyler, been holding out for a hero.

    For the industry, this hero must come up with an idea that is great enough to tempt fans away from illegal file-sharing sites, while simultaneously making money for artists, songwriters and record labels.

    Spotify and We7, the music streaming services funded by adverts and subscriptions, have come closest so far.

    And for a while, it looked like Sky and Virgin would save the day. They planned services offering unlimited downloads for an extra fee on top of an existing broadband and TV subscription.

    But both are believed to have stumbled because major labels did not think they would generate enough cash. Sky launched a watered down service on Monday.

    The struggle to offer unlimited downloads on a subscription is seen as a missed opportunity by many observers.

    So other than being punished, how will fans be tempted away from illegal services, and how will artists, songwriters and labels make money in the future?

    A range of industry executives and commentators offered their visions of the future at the In the City music conference in Manchester.

    ANDREW ORLOWSKI, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THE REGISTER

    Virgin's planned all-you-can-eat subscription download service was "the best British piece of technology I'd seen in the last 10 years", Mr Orlowski says.

    "Virgin spent millions of pounds and it would have been the world's first legal P2P service, with no DRM restrictions. Virgin hasn't cancelled it but they've stood the teams down because the music business is so hard to deal with.

    "It was going to be an amazing-looking social network, the first social network with music attached. And it would have completely changed the debate.

    "You could stream and share files, put them in a locker in MP3 format and play them later. It used the music that's already on people's computers, and would have allowed the music business for the first time to have an offensive weapon rather than a defensive one.

    "It would have made people on Facebook think, 'I don't get music on this social network - why am I on it?' It would have completely changed the dynamic in a positive way."

    MIKE SMITH, HEAD OF COLUMBIA RECORDS UK

    The first step to making money from music is ensuring the current copyright laws are enforced, Mr Smith believes.

    "We've got a perfectly good strong copyright system in place. The law exists. That law needs to be enforced.

    "And if that law is enforced then I think the opportunities for the future of the music business are enormous, whether that be a streaming model, a subscription model, the sale of MP3s, the sale of albums, the sale of deluxe fabulous edition specialist albums.

    "I think we've got a great future as an industry, as long as government has got the strength to step up and support copyright."

    No all-you-can-eat download services have yet been approved because they do not offer enough money back to the artists, he says.

    "If there is a way of properly being able to remunerate the songwriters and recording artists, then there is the potential for that. But I haven't seen a business model where that looks especially strong.

    "Those are being examined all the time and there are opportunities for the future but I don't think a particularly great business model has been brought together yet."

    MARC MAROT, SEG MANAGEMENT, EX-HEAD OF ISLAND RECORDS

    The young generation are prepared to pay subscriptions for mobile phones, broadband and pay-TV, Mr Marot says - so why not music?

    "I feel the subscription model is the way forward for the music industry. The Sky and Virgin initiatives are a really promising start. But they are a little bit tame.

    "The concept of every household in Britain that has a Sky subscription also paying, for argument's sake, £9.99 per month that is going into the coffers of the music industry - that's going to be a vast improvement in the music industry's health.

    "I personally would like to see an all-you-can-eat for a higher price, say £19.99. The major labels have been so excruciatingly slow in coming to the inevitable conclusion that these initiatives have got to be taken.

    "But anti-competition laws mean they're not really allowed to talk to each other very much, so they've had to come to their individual conclusions. Largely speaking, the record industry is getting its act together very quickly now."

    JON WEBSTER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, MUSIC MANAGERS' FORUM

    A system to grant innovative new companies licenses to use music should be introduced - and the government may have to force record labels and publishing companies to take part, Mr Webster says.

    "I think that has to be done on a compulsory licence basis, where everyone just puts all their music in. Licensing seems to be the issue at the moment.

    "If the industry can't solve the problem, the government should step in to try and impose it if necessary. It's not a popular view but it's one of the things we've got to do to break the logjam."

    Spotify is a good start at offering attractive new services, he says - but there are doubts about whether it will generate enough money to survive.

    "It would be a dreadful shame if it failed because the costs of the music being supplied to it were too high. The great conundrum is - should the music industry be supporting models that compete with free and therefore drive the price of music down? Unfortunately I think that's the way we're going to go."

    ANTHONY VOLODKIN, FOUNDER, THE HYPE MACHINE

    The future will revolve around finding innovative ways to use music, especially on the web, according to Mr Volodkin.

    "One example is music games - they've created value where there was nothing like that before. People suddenly pay for Rock Star or Guitar Hero. That came from out of nowhere and is a use that people couldn't envision just a few years ago.

    "More of that will happen. For that to happen on the web, though, the way people work with rights on the web needs to ease up."

    Record labels and music publishers demand too much money from new services, he says. "Currently you need to spend several million dollars in advances to get some of these licences for content.

    "It's all about making it easier to create services that let people interact with music online, and then I think smart people won't settle for just letting people play stuff. They'll come up with interesting ways that you can interact with music and money will start changing hands."

    SEAN ADAMS, FOUNDER AND EDITOR, DROWNED IN SOUND

    Licences to use music for digital services should be easier and cheaper to obtain from record label and publishers, Mr Adams believes.

    Each new digital service should be given a two-year licence to sink or swim, he says.

    "I think 95% of music that's downloaded illegally could be turned into music that's downloaded in legal means if things are licensed in the right way."

    Drowned in Sound has stopped running a podcast because each episode would cost £20,000. "I don't have £20,000. But Laura Marling signed a record deal on the back of us playing her in a podcast. And various artists said they were selling hundreds of records on the back of us playing them."

    He adds: "Instead of cutting people off the internet, I'd much rather they sent the worst offenders into studios for a week to do community service to understand exactly what goes into the process of making music.

    "I don't think for a second they'd consider not paying something towards the creation of that content."

    Wednesday, 9 September 2009

    Attitude Column

    They are Beyonce’s, Sharika’s and Alexandra’s go-to guys when they need a remix so there’s not a homosexual in the land who hasn’t shimmied to the freemasons unmistakable brand of euphoric dance music
    Popstars have many marketing resources but what they don’t have generally, is focus groups. They do not have gangs of ordinary citizens who they pay 50 quid a day to sit around and describe what they like and don’t like about Battlefield and which La Roux remix would entice them away from the bar and onto la dancefloor. If pop stars did have focus groups, they would uniformly tell them that the surefire way to ignite a flabby flop of a single is to stick a Freemasons’ remix under it and watch the bugger go. Said focus group would point the popstar to evidence of the Freemasons effect in Beyonce’s Ring the Alarm (heck, the whole bloody B*Day album reknobbing) and Kelly Rowlands Work – where frankly flat pop gets turned into mega floor filling turn-it-up-to-11 tunes. Further evidence if needed is in abundance on the latest Freemasons compilation, a collection of 28 pop stormers including their latest with Sophie Ellis Bextor on regulation ice maiden form for Heartbreak (Make Me a Dancer). As much as one can love a Sophie, sustained chart success has not been hers but Heartbreak keys into the kind of music that really works for her and feels like a perfect progression from Groovejet’s If This Ain’t Love.

    According to the Freemasons’ Russell (the bald one is James, Rusell helpfully informs us down the phone from his pad in Brighton) the Sophie track happened by accident in the way the weirdly divorced world of producers and the popstars they service works. The Freemasons sent a rough demo of a backing track to Biff Stannard (most recently worked with Little Boots), who eight months later was writing with Sophie and had added to the demo. The Freemasons have since contributed another track to the Sophie record, which is going to be electronic dance in sound. The Freemasons first worked together on Love on My Mind in 2005 (Russell also works under the guise of Phats & Small while James under the name Jimmy Gomez) but it was their work on Beyonce’s Déjà Vu in 2006 – turning her RnB into dance stormtrooper that got them international notice. Their version of Beautiful Liar, on which Beyonce duetted with Sharika went number one in several countries. Their painstaking attention to the detail of a remix means at present they are only committed to doing one a year. “We spend a month doing a remix,” says Russell. “Three or four weeks we spend on it. I have got a lot of friends that spend like three days on their mixes. There’s a lot more in our mixes than you would think – layers and layers... That’s why a friend of mine said to me, ‘your remixes are so thick with sound there’s always a lot of depth to them.’ There’s stuff you can’t even hear that just bolsters it out and makes it sound really big.”

    They listen to a song thousands of times so obviously, as Russell points out, they have to love it to take it on. “It’s pointless otherwise. If someone had asked me to do David Guetta & Kelly Rowland, I would have said no, because it would have driven me mad. Even though it is what it is – a big hooky record. But I’ve got to say after a thousand times I think I would have gone and killed myself.”
    If popstars did have focus groups, they would uniformly tell them that the surefire way to ignite a flabby flop of a single is to stick a freemasons’ remix under it and watch the bugger go.
    Speaking of La Rowlands, the Freemasons are signed up to work with her later in the year and are currently holed up with a certain X Factor winner Alexandra Burke. They did submit one track for the Leona album, but Russell confides that this has gone elsewhere “to America by plane” and that Leona is going down a more rock ballad route. And their work with Alexandra? “It sounds fantastic to us, but at the end of the day it’s down to Simon Cowell. She’s been in America and done like 30 songs. Then they are going to be dwindled down to the final 12 or 13 tracks so it’s going to be interesting. Everyone thinks which direction she should be going in, so everyone’s trying to guess what kind of album it’s going to be but the only person who knows that is Simon Cowell.” And if it’s a no from Simon for the Freemasons tracks? Russell is a mason with a plan. “I hope the couple of tracks that we are doing make it onto her album. Otherwise they’ll be making it onto ours. Or somebody else’s album. Because effectively we were writing for ourselves, because that’s what we do at the moment. We write it ourselves and if somebody else wants it like Alexandra then you’re not really going to say no are you?” Despite their reputation, a Freemasons’ remix means a one off payment or a couple of percentage points, even if you turn a record’s fortunes around. Equally surprisingly, the Freemasons do turn down work with some of the biggest names. Most recently, they declined a go at the new Shakira record. “I mean they actually couldn’t believe we said no but we did,” laughs Russell. “It just wasn’t us. Me and James have always said we won’t do things that aren’t 100%. We don’t want to have the second best remix on the track we want to be the best.” They also turned down a chance to work with Dizzee Rascal even though they love his material. The key to a great Freemasons remix is the ability to take a track up a dozen notches or so without diluting the pop hooks of the record in the process. So the music is both ramped up but not so re-nosed that it’s not what it was. Russell describes it as “funky electronic dance music”. “We’re not into that one note electro music. We do bridges, choruses, and key changes and that’s really us, that’s what we’re all about.”

    “Lots of people are good at it and you know they‘ll take vocals out and use a little bit and make the track ride for ages and ages and they just add a little bit, then a drop and we tried that and it doesn’t work for us. People ask for dubs and it’s very rare that we do a dub. We don’t get into it. Because you’ve taken the song out it’s lost interest to us.” It’s perhaps this mix of taking a familiar track to dizzying new heights – Beyonce’s Ring the Alarm is so monstrous it sounds like its fit to burst with righteous lady anger – that makes the Freemasons such a perfect fit for the gay clubbing experience which at its best is about drama filled pop hooks. Russell agrees: “I think it is that whole thing about big gay parties, everyone loves a sing along and we keep the songs intact. It’s funky and uplifting, we love strings, pianos, we’re loving everybody.” Neither Freemason is gay but both have been gay clubbing since they were teenagers, love pop music and live and work in Brighton, home to quite a few club friendly gay men. Does living by the seaside affect what the Freemasons do? “It’s all a state of mind, where you are living, your surroundings and how you are feeling. Brighton is nice and you walk out. It’s nice to wake up to and I walk along the sea-front to work. It does give you a good feeling, and it makes you want to make great feel good music.” CC Freemasons Shakedown II is out now on Loaded Records.

    Thursday, 16 July 2009

    I'm purple apparantly

    You are probably an emotional, deep person. You tend to be a mix of red and blue - passionate and a dreamer. Your life is probably a bit of a rollercoaster, but you wouldn't have it any other way. You love the drama! You love easily, laugh easily, cry easily, hate easily, and are probably a bit emotional all around. Not to say that you're "emo" or anything, you are just more emotionally inclined than most. You can be strong and determined...and more than a little hard headed. Intelligence may come easily to you, or maybe you're just very determined. Either way, you probably do well in most things (whether it be due to natural talent or hard work). You can be a total perfectionist. You love your friends sooo much. You probably have many acquaintances, but few real friends. Once you find those real friends, however, you devote yourself to them completely. You are also very courageous and loyal, and you aren't afraid to take risks. You're not always so deep and emotional, however. Sometimes, you love to just kick back and have a good time with your buddies. You, in a nutshell: Emotional, deep, loving, determined, hard working, adventurous, loyal, dramatic, passionate, dreamer. PURPLE! .

    Sunday, 14 June 2009

    Election Idol: MAY 2009 BRIGHTON REVIEWS

    THE BRIGHTON FRINGE PRODUCTION REVIEWS






    THE HUSSY: www.thehussy.co.uk

    Election-Idol is an all singing, all dancing satire on this countries fascination with reality TV shows and its ambivalence towards politics. The premise is that due to falling election turnouts, the government decides to re-hold the election as a Pop Idol style TV show with various celebrities putting the case for each party. So you have Shilpa Shetty for the Conservatives, Sharon Osborne for Labour, Matt Lucas for the Liberals and Michael Moore as the compare.

    From the off, the show contains a stream of song and dance numbers that parody the celebrities and the parties they represent. It is all dry ice, high kicks and jazz hands to a thumping eurovision style beat. As you would expect, it is more about the songs than the politics and Shilpa and Sharon (or should that be Shirley Bassey) come across best. The audience does however get to text their vote in at the end with the most popular winning the show.






    FRINGE REVIEW: www.fringereview.co.uk
    THREE STARS *** Reviewed by Benjamin Carr 23/05/09

    Low Down: The world of politics and The X factor collide as we the audience decide on the fate of the nation.

    Review: It was only a matter of time before theatre took our nation’s obsession with reality talent shows to the next level. In Puddle Productions’ ‘Election Idol’ the competition is for the premiership. It is general election day and only 17,000 votes have been cast. Fearing for the legibility of leadership, Gordon Brown, under the advisory of Peter Mandelson of course, decides to create a new game show, ‘Election Idol’. Fronted by celebrities each political party would gain votes through their chosen celebrity’s performance. Unfortunately for Brown and co. the contestants prove so popular that the Queen demands the resignations of all in government and for the votes on the game show to decide who would be our next Prime Minister. It would be left for us the audience to text in our favourite for the post – cue improvised final speech and winners song.

    Luke Sheppard, director of 2008 Edinburgh hit ‘Jet Set Go’ once again shows assured direction. His choreography is simple yet effective and he rarely lets slip an energetic and lively pace. Performances throughout are good. Special mention must go to Lisa Kerr who’s wild Kelly Osborne (daughter of Sharon) showed a depth of character that was both moving and amusing. Having said that a few of the numbers lacked a slickness and togetherness that should be expected on the last night. The production design by Mike Lees was extremely effective as a typical X Factor style staging. Silver lining around the walls and glitzy lighting gave it the cheesy factor that these shows tend to excel in.

    Unfortunately the script was obviously still in development. Attempting to challenge us on the state of our society, ‘Election Idol’ brings to light the ridiculous nature of celebrity. Here is a world where all confidence is lost in the government and all hope lies in the spotlight. But for very real issues we need very real characters and by simply mimicking celebrities who we see plastered all over the papers, ‘Election Idol’ fails to really make us care.

    Where it does succeed is in creating questions. Why do we vote in these competitions? What attracts us? Why do we vote for a Prime Minister or President? What makes us cross that box? In ‘Election Idol’ the boundaries are blurred. Are we voting for the actor, the celebrity or the person underneath? Does the fact that they are running for government change anything? Surely what touches most deeply is realness, truthfulness and a lack of façade and spin. Unfortunately ‘Election Idol’ simply doesn’t give us this.

    As a trail of pop numbers it works extremely well but as a more ambitious piece there is much work to be done in establishing a world in which we actually believe. What we are left with is another quick fix of entertainment and nothing that really stays with us. In a World that craves and demands the easy life, package deals and bite-size highs, surely theatre has a responsibility and an ability to give us something a bit more. Entertaining, yes. Enduring, no.




    4/5 published: Jun-2009 Xenia Macaulay

    A democratic parody, 'Election Idol' satirically stages a reality TV show in which the winners represent the three main political parties – or at least, that’s how it starts. Showcasing a level of slick professionalism unusual in the Fringe, the show is of a high standard, from lighting through the accomplished and effective multi-media elements, imaginative original songs, smooth choreography and indeed amazing singing voices and acting talent. Only brought down by the occasional seemingly rushed ultra-topical joke, and a distractingly naff bald-cap, this was an otherwise well thought out and well realised show. Treating the audience as a studio audience for a live broadcast was especially good, as were the many resonances with the recognisable reality show format which, juxtaposed with political issues, made it clear through song and dance just what a mess we’re in.






    Thursday, 28 May 2009

    Election Idol: MARCH 2009 READING

    I thought the reading was a fantatic experience, and much cheaper and effective than I thought. However, I was saddened by some of the feedback we received.

    We asked for feedback via two methods, the first being an immediate respone, answering questions we prepared on a feedback form, and the second was adhoc e-mail comments which filtered through a couple of weeks after the reading.

    IMMEDIATE RESPONSES:
    • Which elements of the show stick in your memory?
    The elements which were mentioned more than once in the feeback were Matt Lucas vs. zombies of his Little Britain characters; Shilpa Shetty's Way; Mother Knows; the ongoing
    commentary from Simon the swingometer (excellently delivered by Adam Hills); the Gordon Brown and David Cameron sketch and Hail The Celebrity which sums up the shallowness of the political/celebrity TV status cult very well.

    • What elements of the show do you think could be improved?
    What was interesting here was that there was no consistent element that the audience thought could be improved, although everyone had an opinion on something.

    • Was there anything you did not understand or felt was confusing?
    What is the point? What’s the message? Why would we want to vote in the characters without hearing any political policies? It is Pop Idol with celebrities rather than Election Idol. Who is the target audience? Sharon – was she originally a candidate? Didn’t explain her taking over Michael’s role as presenter. Setting up the scenario a little more would be beneficial. Kelly – she should maybe have more of a purpose to be President. Just felt she was there because Sharon was. Why did the Little Britain zombies appear? Michael Moore being American – needs explaining or called(?) out. Context is a UK? Resident election – why have an American “presenter”? UK and USA characters and styles were an uneasy mix. Michael Moore is not so “mainstream” in UK. Simon Cowell plot did not seem to be going anywhere much. Kelly’s ideological volte face felt a bit unexplained but I think I got it in the end. I don’t think I understand why Sharon appears on a screen – is she on stage too? (I know she is at the end – I just mean during the 1st half).

    • Do you have any comments on the lyrics?
    "Great, Love ‘em! Made me laugh lots, Clever lyrics- hilarious at times, Could do with some tightening, I think that the songs do not always advance the action"

    • Do you have any comments on the music?
    "Very Catchy, Nice and Tuneful, Quite Varied without a particular theme, Songs needed trimming, Felt I'd heard all the songs before, Particularly loved the more bluesy and jazzy numbers as the show progressed."

    • Which parts of the show are you interested to see in production?
    The multi-media, The Little Britian Zombies, Shilpa and Sharon sketches, Matt's song and the Swing-o-meter.

    E-MAIL RESPONSES
    1. What was the tone and how did we want the show to be taken? A panto? Vaudeville? Spitting Image or Revue Stuff? Quirky, but character-led light musical comedy or something with a specific coherent political/philosophical statement?

    2. The backstory is underdeveloped for a book show (but fine for revue). In particular, it's very unclear what Sharon is up to and what she is trying to achieve. Does she want Kelly to win? What is her stake in the outcome?

    3. Likewise, why would MM be fronting a show of this kind? Surely this is a character who is more like Hughie Green or Jerry Springer at first, a jobbing non-idelogical presenter, who then becomes aware of what he feels about the contest as it proceeds, rather than someone who comes in with his ideology already formed/known, like MM?

    4. In general, I think you are hamstringing the show by referencing real people. It has already dated somewhat as the Shilpa/Jade spat fades into the past. Obviously you've considered the idea of creating your own characters and rejected it, but I questioned that decision. It also gives you fewer chances to be inventive with the characters, because it adds the constraint that these characters are already known by the audience and there are expectations around what they'll do or want, which may or may not be useful for your purposes with the show.

    5. Kelly's first number is all about rebellion and bringing down government structures, which doesn't set up the premise as well as Matt's first number. Matt has a plan for the country, and that's ostensibly what the TV show is about, at least to begin with. I'd like to hear a straight manifesto song earlier, so the premise is established clearly before different characters start to undermine it with 'alternative' ideas.

    6. Shilpa's song is completely apolitical, which I guess is partly the point, but what she sang about seemed so far off the track so early on that I didn't have any basis of comparison between the contestants, which made me care a lot less about who got the votes in the first round. I think you need some sense that the three contestants are at least addressing themselves to the same question, whether that's a political question or not. The obvious one is "how would you make this country better?". Shilpa's song isn't really about this question in more than the most tangential way. Her song is an answer to "why are you so fantastic?" which makes it a straight Pop Idol song, not an Election Idol one like Matt's.

    7. To put all that another way, I needed to understand the regular formula of the competition much earlier on, so I could judge whether each contestant was performing well or not, cos winning the competition is the one high-stakes objective I completely understand about each character from the get-go, and therefore being able to sense their success or failure in the moment of their song is crucial to my getting engaged with them. I also felt I needed to understand more about why winning was important to them.

    8. In the X-Factor final, the audience has the advantage of having grown familiar with the format in previous weeks. I don't think we have enough of that context here to know what the characters should/could be doing to get ahead in this competition (also, in X Factor the audience have the jury to tell them what to think about the performance, if they're not quite sure).

    9. What is the relevance of Shilpa's oven going wrong? My immediate thought was "sabotage!", but it turned out not to have significance, or an effect on her chances of winning (and she seemed fine a few lines later). So was there a character point there?

    10. If the idea is that the competitors are totally incoherent in their approaches, and that's the point you're making, then I felt I needed that framing for me, maybe thru a character who questions proceedings on my behalf talking to an insider who can explain it. "But all she did was talk about cooking!" / "So, cooking is popular! People like eating!" / "Is that all it's about, popularity?" / "Yes, what's new?" etc.

    11. I wasn't sure (in Act I) why there were two anchors, Sharon and MM (plus the swingometer). They seemed to not have distinct functions.

    12. At moments (see above), I thought I'd like more interactivity and more chances for audience involvement. Definitely so if it came down on the panto side. I wanted to be able to chant along with catchphrases and do call-response and be allowed to act more like a brainless TV Studio Audience member.

    13. MM making his pitch (great tune). I couldn't make sense of the facts that
    (a) he suddenly pitches to be a contestant (is this because he believes in the competition and thinks it worth winning, or because he doesn't, and wants to subvert it? I didn't find it clear enough)

    (b) He wasn't pulled off the air by Sharon/the TV company as soon as his song got started (isn't this song something that starts out as a private thought he has, before blossoming into a plea for public support – it didn't seem like it should be one continuous on-air oration)

    (c) What mechanism allowed him to collect votes anyway (OK, this is pedantic, but it crossed my mind! Someone must've flipped a switch, and had a reason for doing it! – it's not like I wanted this explained in every detail, I just needed to not go "huh?" when it happened. Did the computer do it? Why?)

    14. Complimentarily, I couldn't work out, re: Sharon's opening Act II song (also musically very enjoyable, altho arguably not an obvious Act II opener)

    (a) whether she is in fact an evil dictator

    (b) if she is, why is the competition a good idea from her POV (it seems to involve her handing over power)

    (c) what is the relevance of the plastic surgery stuff?

    I put it together in my head as: She's a dictator, but she has to hand over power because she's falling bodily apart, and the competition is a charade to get her chosen candidate in, one that shares her big brother ideology.

    15. The "I Believe" song was great, and I was surprised we didn't have this earlier as a way of framing the competition. The only line I didn't like was "I will sing off-key" – I couldn't work out why the characters would admit that. It sounded like an authorial intervention!

    16. The Canadian Song and the Cameron/Brown song were definitely vaudeville moments. The Canadian song was funny in itself, but hard to place in the context. Michael Moore is in Britain, not America at this point. I couldn't see why being Canadian would help him specifically in this context, or what it said about the competition.

    The Cameron/Brown song seemed to be a moment where you have a reason to switch from the frame of the story into a direct commentary on the themes (a la Loveland), but I wasn't completely sure what statement the song was making about the old politics versus the new. Again. the worldview underlying the song didn't really become explicit.

    17. My final, big question, as we reached the final vote, and MM made his protest (hey, why doesn't he shoot someone, does he have anything to lose at this point?), was what hangs on the outcome of the competition.
    If "nothing much", then the vote can't really be the climax of your story. Something else should be.

    18. Who is it for? Target audience. In this case it does matter more than usual. It seeks to tap present concerns and sentiment and so must know exactly who to speak to.?

    19. Swingometers came with Peter Snow and may go with him. However steeped in the Classics his son may be, I doubt he would use this particular device. But, the role of the scoreboard, the use of the panel is crucial - I think. I see it/them swing round in a large seat to harangue the audience/performer...

    20. Does the use of 'real' celebrities really work? You must borrow their created characters and their mannerisms and so put a burden on the actor/singer to make us believe those personifications and you are limited to a rather small range of characters. With more anonymous, non specific characters, you have anyone you wish to take-off.

    21. As they say, 'A week in politics....'. and you set yourself up for changes in the scene. You don't really want the piece to be untopical and that makes for obvious probs for you. Brown and Cameron number needs, almost , to be, 'I've got a little list...', with welcomingly simple rhymes??

    22. I think that there is a lot of work to do and if I were still in charge of anything, I would be nervous of putting it in this year's programme without seeing that work done.

    Sunday, 5 April 2009

    Up

    I can't wait to see this movie!

    Saturday, 28 March 2009

    Me and my Fluoxetine



    Today marks the day when I know I no longer need to take Fluoxetine.

    For those of you who don't know what Fluoxetine is, well - here's the definition:
    Fluoxetine hydrochloride (trade names Prozac, Fontex, Ladose, Sarafem, Solax, Lovan) is an antidepressant of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class. Fluoxetine is approved for the treatment of major depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bulimia nervosa, anorexia nervosa, panic disorder and premenstrual dysphoric disorder.
    If you had asked me a year and a half ago, would I ever have told anyone or discussed openly me taking this medication. The answer would be a strong "NO", but now, a year and a half on, I feel as though I should talk about it and share my experience with anyone who is interested.

    I would describe myself as moody, a character who has extreme highs and extreme lows and no middle ground. However, there were a couple of events that pushed me to the limit and forced me to realise that I wasn't just being moody anymore.

    The first event was switching on my work computer first thing one morning and finding 2,000+ e-mails waiting for me in my inbox. I just cried and panicked. Looking back, it was a silly reaction, but nevertheless, it was my reaction.

    The second was being struck with what was diagnosed as a very severe case of gastroenteritis, which caused me to lose so much bodily liquid that my kidney's failed for a couple of a hours and I was told by one of the nurses that I almost died.

    The third was my Grandpa dying, I had never had anyone I was really close to die before.

    At the same time, I was also going through the realisation that I was almost 28 and had never had a serious relationship; I was spending more than I was earning and was in debt; I was frustrated that I would never be able to buy the things I wanted and I would get angry that I would exercise religiously, eat like a pig but somehow stupidly feel confused as to why I wasn't lighter.

    Combined with seeing a CBT (Cognitive Behavourial Therapist), the fluoxetine did make me feel a lot better. However, I felt very uneasy when the family, my GP and I had discussions about taking it in the first place. I felt I owed it to myself to let me feel how I naturally felt. I feared that the medication would trick or fool me as to how I felt about things. A year and a half on, I no longer think this.

    I still have extreme highs and extreme lows (and no middle ground). I still feel the same. But I know now that I can deal with things. In non-medical terminology, the fluoxetine gave my batteries a re-charge!

    What I find interesting is that I still haven't had a serious relationship; I'm the heaviest I've ever been; I occasionally have an IBS/Stomach related illness and I'm still in debt. The fool in me did think that this pill would sort that stuff out, but now the pill is no longer necessary I do feel totally re-energised and confident to sort my life out. I'm actually incredibly excited about it, and I'm looking forward to seeing where I'll be and what I'll look like in a year or so from now so watch this space! :)

    Tuesday, 24 March 2009

    When I knew I was gay....

    This would be sheer perfection if someone had shot the hamster looking girlfriend, and silenced Harold :P

    Saturday, 21 March 2009

    No God