All entries for February 2006
February 28, 2006
Ohh, a personal entry. Don't worry I only indulge once every few months. And a Belle and Sebastian lyric too, go me (the song has nothing to do with this but that one line seems appropriate).
It's been a weird year as regards people – with 90% of people I knew at uni graduating, it was defiantly a year of transition, and in such times it's always surprising which friendships endure (Lewis & Rach, Liam), which ones fade a little (I should keep in touch with Jim more), and which just vanish completely.
But one of the down-right weirdest things that happened in this regard was one friendship just appearing suddenly out of nowhere, from the most unlikely place, from someone I barely knew for a few years, then had a massive falling out with for a few more, then remained pretty indifferent towards for a few after that.
Somehow, out of this, and I've really no idea how, a really strong, close friendship developed. And then a month or so ago it all vanishes again into nothing, as any of my messages go un-returned. I've no idea why, or what I did or didn't do.
Now this might sound like some "poor me, look how sad my life is, look how the bad other people treat me" but anyone that knows me will know I'd never be that indulgent on here – that sort of self-indulgence is for quiet brooding in bed with chocolate.
The fact is, this was a really cool friendship that vanished into nothing, and I should be pretty upset and using my blog in a shameless attempt to garner sympathy.
But I'm not.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not rapturously happy about it either, in fact I'd go as far to say that life probably was slightly better with her in it than not, but I'm really not all that bothered. And I'm finding this rather curious.
The rational parts of me are telling me I should be upset, but the emotions arn't kicking in. Now this to me seems a little backwards, it's meant to work the other way around surely? One is meant to know they shouldn't be upset and get upset anyway.
I'm at a loss to explain it – did I just expend all my anger towards this person a few years? Did I subconsciously expect it given that big black mark on our history? Did the friendship just come about so suddenly that it disappearing the same fashion was somewhat expected? (I have to admit, as someone who loves symmetry almost as much as irony, I find it sort of cool in a perverse fashion) Did all the years of indifference towards this person make it simple to just slip back into that mindset again?
As I say, I don't know.
The more astutely cynical of you will likely by this point want to notify me that "Even though you say you don't care, you've just written this sprawling blog entry on the subject so evidently you have issues you're just no acknowledging". But that's not the case – or rather if I do have an issue, it's the much less significant one, that harkens back to the title of this entry – is it bad to not be bothered? Is it wicked not to care?
Up listeing to Dan Kitson's radio show so figured I'd catch up on blogging about some random stuff while I listen.
Like most people who are sensible, we lock our front door before we go to bed of a night. To not do so could well be folly. But some nights I'll be out somewhere and when I get back the door will be locked. There's a lovely implication there.
I'm not the sort of guy that can go out and pick up a random woman every night – but even though the chances of me pulling some girl and going back to hers are remote, as I'm sure my housemates are aware, they're not so remote that they'd risk thier personal security on those odds. Which is nice.
February 15, 2006
Writing about web page http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-17526Simply the best actor to grace Babylon 5, his portrayal of G'kar was always one of the highlights of the show, you could see the quiet dignity supressing an inner rage of a character in great torment.
May he rest in peace.
…not being single on valentines day.
See, everyone who knows anything about me knows that I'm a total cynic and can guess my attitude on the issue: the whole thing is a horrible commercialised enterprise that now lacks any true meaning.
I am, however, a fan of the big romantic gesture, but believe it shouldn't be tied to one day, chosen arbitralily.
Problem is, even if I were seeing a girl that shared these views, in the vast majority of cases, I'd still get bollocked if I didn't make an effort. Because even if they're as cynical about the day as me in theory, most women still find it very very important in practice.
Which is interesting, as it's that one day that cynical men detest just as much as any other, but somehow captures the heart of all but the most cynical ladies.
February 14, 2006
So I spent sunday afternoon writing this piece on the saab elections for the comedy soc newsletter, only to finish it 2 minutes too late and miss the bus on to campus.
Then I failed to run fast enough to catch it at the top of town, so ended up standing around for an hour waiting for the next one.
Once I finally got to campus, there was a total lack of paper in Union North, so I ended up only being able to print out 6 copies with the few sheets of paper I had in my bag (which our society will now be charged for, bastards).
This was dissapointing, as I quite liked the article, it's reproduced here for those interested, though it's not exactly current anymore:
If you were on campus at all the past week you can’t fail to have noticed that it was that time of year again—or if you were a first year, can’t fail to have wondered what the fuck was going on. Yes, it’s the Warwick Students Union Annual Popularity Contest! Candidates carefully produce their policies, making sure they’re as nebulous and as much like the others as possible, before sticking up hundreds of posters coating every notice board in campus, pissing off anyone else that wants to use them for more constructive things, and eventually pissing off everyone else as they become sick of their fucking faces.
After all this effort you, the student body, voted mainly on three attributes:
1) Largest friends network: how many people did the candidate know that would vote for him and then tell their friends to vote for him too, as they don’t really give a shit anyways.
2) Largest poster campaign: people feel more confident voting for someone whose name they recognise. It allows them to kid themselves into believing they considered the issues at hand and voted with their head.
3) Largest… well lets just say dressing in a tight-fitting superman top might help garner some votes from the shallower, male, rugby playing demographic.
Looking through the candidates manifestos before voting (because I’m an exception to the rules I’ve laid out above, naturally) there were some rather interesting claims. A certain presidential candidate’s short manifesto was followed by the immortal phrase ".. I'll update and expand it later :)". Considering I voted about an hour before the polls closed, I’m guessing they didn’t.
The ‘Vote For Chips’ campaign was clever, but I’m still trying to get my head around the name ‘Faraz Shibli’ can be punned into the word ‘Chips’. Nor do there appear to be any fried potato related policies in her manifesto. Perhaps iBen’s campaign would have gone better if he to dropped the pretence of keeping his name in it and just went for: “Vote iPod, they’re great”. Or perhaps Damian King could have run on a “Vote For Sex, it’s ace (Damien King) ticket. Chips did however have the most sensible policy of the whole campaign: stopping the printers in the computer rooms printing out a pointless cover sheet for every single print-off, even if you have no credits. It’s environmentally sound, but also hypocritical, as current estimates say that the production of the posters and flyers for the elections campaign has infact consumed 60% of the worlds natural rainforests.
Super Sal’s manifesto had me convinced up until the point where she used the word ‘shizzle’, then went on to claim “Wo0o, tall order guys, but I will bust my ballll predominant ly have tangibl e outcomes. “ I don’t know about you but if I wanted to be President of the Students Union, I’d probably proof read my manifesto first.
Nic Warrington won the position of CDCO, responsible for events held in the union, worryingly, she’s also a member of RAG, so will presumably be bringing a RAG theme to all events next year—by this I don’t mean more money will be given to charity, rather that drunkenness and making out with random strangers will at first be encouraged, before being made compulsory in certain areas of the union, in preparation for a union wide mandatory debauchery policy at all union events. Any attendee’s that fail to either: sleep with one or more random members of the opposite or same sex, throw up at least 3 times, or streak naked on the marketplace stage, will be banned.
Al Green had a number of sensible policies, including limiting societies to a maximum of two posters per event on each notice board. I read this policy on all nine of the posters outside L3. Such commonsense is rare in a union elections candidate, so imagine my disappointment when getting ready to vote to discover he is, in fact, a Christian (and thank the gods I can still say that without being arrested, MPs have some sense after all).
The winner of the Presidential election was, of course, Brian Duggan. He did a Kat Stark (insert your own joke here, perhaps incorporating the phrase ‘trying out different positions’) by becoming union president after holding a previous sabbatical position last year.
Katie Chevis is the new Welfare officer, and wants to install condom dispensers around campus where you can use your NUS card for free access. Again, you can write your own jokes for that one, I just thought it was funny.
Another CCDO candidate claimed: “ I will aim to introduce later door times, to ensure more people are in the Union earlier” – and I’ll aim to publish more copies of this newsletter, so less people will read it.
Ali Daya was the only person standing for his part-time post, and received the dubious honour of having the closest run race with RON (ie. ‘find someone else, they’re all shit) – I’d like to think this was because he failed to correctly differentiate between ‘accept’ and ‘except’ in his manifesto. Further more he’s a second year Maths student—and he can’t even differentiate!
Interestingly before voting I was asked if I defined myself as female or LGBT, as that would determine whether or not I could vote for certain positions like ‘Woman’s Campaign Officer’. Oddly enough, I was not asked if I was a racist before being allowed to vote for the Anti-Racism Campaigns Officer. Clearly double standards there.
As I reached the 23rd vote I was swiftly losing the will to live, and clicking wildly in the hope that it would soon be over, but there was one final amusing thing, as Doug Kelly cropped up again, a current sabbatical officer running for a part time post next year. He claimed on RaW that he was doing so as ‘he wanted to be involved in some way next year’, but the true is he did so to fulfil the government regulation that every students union election have at least one candidate stand purely on the strength of their stupid hair. I’d say bring back John Lumley and the Equal Opps punk rock band, but there’s probably no-one left here that remembers them.
Finally a shout out to Ayesha Parikh, who’s slogan was “Making it about You” and not “Making it about U” – thanks for the resisting the temptation and saving my sanity, and to Stephen Lovelady, who didn’t base his campaign on his name at all! Maybe there’s still hope.
February 08, 2006
So I meander downstairs to get my dinner from the oven on monday night, around 8.40pm. As I walk past the lounge I see my two housemates, Dan and Dave, sat down with a look of slight despair coupled with disgust and resignation. Across from them on the couch sit thier respective girlfriends.
On the television: Coronation Street.
It's nice to be reminded why being single is good.