Cutting Your Own Hair Part 2

View fullsize

Today my Panasonic ER-GB37 Wet & Dry Hair Trimmer arrived. As I suspected, once unpacked there was nothing excessively complex about this device or its operation. So I duly charged it for a couple of hours and then decided it was time to attempt to cut my own hair, as I haven’t had a haircut in over five weeks. The trimmer can cut to twenty different lengths between 10mm to 0.5mm. I opted for 6mm which equates to one quarter of an inch or Number #2 as some Barbers refer to it. I washed my hair and then went and sat outside at the garden table to make use of the natural sunlight. Rather than removing one of the various large wall mirrors that adorn our house, I opted to use a simple shaving mirror. This proved a sound choice as it comes with a stand. After a few deep breaths I began the process.

I am happy to report that this wasn’t as difficult a chore as I suspected. I am right handed and could reach most of my head quite easily. Naturally the back and the nape of the neck proved tricky and I had to request Mrs P’s assistance for these areas. There were a few moments where it felt a little awkward and trimming around my ears took the most attention. Overall it went well and I am pleased with the results. I took off the plastic guard from the trimmer blades to fine tune my sideburns and Mrs P then used a safety razor to tidy up my lower neck. I was glad that the good weather allowed me to do this outside as I wouldn’t have wanted the mess that was made to have occurred indoors. It looked like someone had set about a Badger with a strimmer. This entire process was observed by both my neighbours who seemed sceptical of its success initially.

View fullsize

Under the current “lockdown” conditions, I am glad that this enterprise went well. My hair may not be especially stylish at present but it is short and evenly cut and shouldn’t need another cut for three to four weeks. I will visit my 90 year old Father tomorrow and offer to cut his hair as he is currently sporting a what can only be described as a Worzel Gummidge look. A friend jokingly said that now that I’ve successfully cut my own hair is there any need for me to pay for a haircut ever again? Well as far as I’m concerned the answer is yes. Cutting my own hair is a convenient compromise but I much prefer my monthly visits to my local Barbershop. Getting your haircut is only half the pleasure of going. I enjoy the social interaction with the staff and find the entire process extremely relaxing. That’s not an experience I can duplicate at home.

Cutting Your Own Hair Part 1

Fuck this guy with his good looks and his “this is a piece of piss” attitude

I usually go to my local Barber’s every four weeks or so. It’s about fifteen minutes walk from my home and I’ve been going there since 1970. I like to keep my hair short and I enjoy the therapeutic benefits of relaxing and have someone cut my hair. The staff are great and there is a curious sense of continuity that comes from going to the same establishment for 50 years. The original Barber has retired and his son now runs the premises. In my youth I used to favour certain styles and was especially fond of a well cut flattop (Kurt Russel sported an absolute beauty in the 1994 movie Stargate). Sadly such a style is very labour intensive and time consuming. Hence many stylists don’t care to undertake such a cut and it’s a bitch to manitain. Hence in more recent years, I’ve favoured a straightforward clipper cut. This consists of Number 1 (one-eighth of an inch/3mm) around the back and side and Number 2 (one-quarter of an inch/6mm) on top. However, the Barber shop is currently closed and I’ve not had a hair cut for nearly 5 weeks.

Now although by other people’s standards my hair is still relatively short, it currently looks a mess (well I think so anyway). If I gel it up, it has reached the point of looking like a dilapidated paintbrush. And if I leave it naturally after washing, all the white shows at the sides (it seems to grow at a different pace to other hair) and I end up looking like a Badger. Neither of these are good looks. Hence I have concluded that it is time to grasp the nettle and attempt to cut my own hair. Oh what times we live in. Will I be removing my own appendix next? Now in theory, this shouldn’t be too difficult. Firstly, all I need to undertake this task is a decent cordless hair/beard trimmer. There are plenty to choose from on Amazon. Secondly, rather than try and cut my hair to two separate lengths and “fade” them in, it would be far more practical to cut my hair to one overall length. However, reality often proves to be a radically different experience. I suspect that lighting, space and copious use of mirrors are going to play a major part in this “project”.

View fullsize

So I’ve spent some time researching what make and model of clippers would be appropriate for the task in hand, along with watching copious amounts of YouTube videos as to how to cut your own hair. Some of the advice available is practical, whereas other videos seem to vastly oversimplify the practicalities of contemporary hair styling. I’ve managed to get a good deal on a Panasonic wet and dry hair and beard trimmer which can cut to 20 different lengths (allegedly). This model usually retails at £65 but I’ve bought it for £32. I already have a small beard trimmer but I don’t think it’s up to the job of cutting my entire head of hair, so I thought it best to buy the right tool for the job. If I fully recover from my current bout of COVID-19, I am hoping to attempt to cut my hair next Thursday or Friday. I have a suspicion that I may have to involve Mrs P, although she is far from enamoured by the prospect. Look out for a follow up post next week, where I discuss the results, be they good or bad.

COVID-19 Pandemic 2020 Part 3

View fullsize

May be he was right

I wasn’t expecting to write the next instalment of this “pandemic diary” so soon. However, yesterday morning (Sunday 5th April) I developed a headache and shortly afterwards a temperature and muscle pains. By midday I started coughing persistently and noticed what I will describe as a sense of tightness in my chest (it feels like I’m wearing a shirt that is too small for me). These symptoms persisted and I went to bed at an uncustomary early hour. I slept in the spare bedroom, which is also my office and have isolated myself as well as I can (we live in a bungalow) from Mrs P. As of this morning the symptoms have persisted and it now feels very similar to a bout of flu. I am sluggish and groggy but certainly not at the point where I need medical treatment. Napping is proving useful and I’m hoping I can mainly sleep through this, as I am now stuck in the office for the next 7 days. I am allowed access to the bathroom, although separate towels and rigorous cleaning of all handles and surfaces is now the rule of thumb.

This situation was inevitable. Staying indoors only reduces the risk of infection. But unless we all make like Howard Hughes, then sooner or later someone you know or yourself will catch COVID-19. Because I think it is important for the NHS and the various scientific institutions to have as much data as possible about infection rates, I completed the survey on the NHS website. There was also information for those who may need additional help with self isolation. Because not only am I now forced to stay indoors so is Mrs P. So neither of us can go to the shops for the next week and I can no longer go round to care for my parents. Luckily my sister is working from home but the situation now increases her work load. I also spoke to a local carers charity who have offered to assist with the collection of medication from the pharmacist and the provision of essential supplies such as bread and milk. We are fortunate enough at present to have a well stocked larder.

View fullsize

A sound message that bears repeating

Although I am not exactly happy about getting ill, at least myself and Mrs P are in a very fortunate position with regard to where we live and our personal situation. Neither of us work in the traditional sense (Mrs P has retired and I am a carer), so our finances are not in jeopardy. We have a garden so we don’t feel that we’re in a prison cell. Our neighbours are kind, decent people and everyone in the street is being more communicative than usual. Plus being quarantined in my office has its advantages. I have access to my PC so I can still write, speak to friends online, play games and watch Netflix and Amazon Prime. At least while I’m well enough to. If I feel too ill to do these things I can draw the curtains and sleep. Beyond this it is now just a waiting game. Hopefully my symptoms will remain mild and pass within a week or so. My main concerns lie with Mrs P as she has health issues. But there’s no point in panicking. This is a time for cool heads and patience.

COVID-19 Pandemic 2020 Part 2

View fullsize

It’s been one and a half weeks since my last entry regarding the COVID-19 Pandemic 2020. As I’m sure you’re all aware, a lot has happened globally in that time and many nations are currently coming to terms with the ramifications of dealing with this virus in their own “bespoke” way. Personally I think a global approach to the problem would be beneficial but the rise of nationalism and a diminishing of worldwide institutions such as the United Nations has made such a strategy very difficult. I was going to summarise my thoughts on the UK’s response to this crisis but I have decided instead to defer such a post for another week and instead focus upon a more positive theme. Because something has happened recently in the UK. Something I was doubtful about because I’ve been so jaded by contemporary politics. And yet despite my cynicism, I have seen a demonstrable increase in community spirit, solidarity and compassion in the last few days. And it has been a thing of beauty to behold.

Since 2016, the UK has been beset by a malaise of partisan politics and cultural tribalism. We’ve seen an increase in hate crimes, the Brexit debate has caused families to fall out and not talk to each other and the UK has teetered on the brink of an irreversible culture war, just like the one that besets the US. Or to put it another way “Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!” to quote Peter Venkman. But the current situation has suddenly pushed all of that to one side and suddenly we find ourselves confronted with a mass display of decency, civic mindedness and dare I say it, a sense of society. Something a infamous deceased Prime Minister claimed didn’t exist. Furthermore, the ongoing display of both common sense and public spiritedness raises questions as to whether there may even be a fundamental shift of perspective in the UK. Will certain jobs that have been branded low skilled and low paid and therefore bereft of any virtue (from certain quarters), suddenly be reappraised by a public who suddenly realise their inherent virtue?

View fullsize

The prophetic words of Peter Venkman

We live in a world that is incredibly interconnected and based upon just in time supply chains and numerous complex dependencies. Yet modern life often focuses on the superficial and we are enamored by wealth, tabloids perception of success and by nonsensical political dogma. And then along comes a problem of a global nature and gives everyone a very swift reality check. Suddenly the denizens of the gossip columns aren’t so important. Reality show celebrities, sportsmen and women, as well as popular musicians suddenly don’t seem so relevant. And as for Hollywood actors singing an ill conceived cover version of John Lennon’s attack upon consumerism, well it’s all been shown in stark relief. Because suddenly we’ve focused upon those we depend upon. With regard to some professions, some of us have only just learned how necessary they are to the functioning of a well ordered society.

At present, an estimated 22% of all working-age individuals are in key worker occupations according to the IFS (Institute of Fiscal Studies). That is approximately 7.1 million working age adults across the UK, out of a total workforce of 32.90 million people, aged 16 years and over in current employment. So while over three quarters of the nation’s workers remain at home, just under a quarter continue to go to work, keeping vital services running. These range from the immediately obvious such as the healthcare workers, the police and other emergency services, to retail workers, the post office and local government. But when you think about it, the list continues to grow. Transport, freight and farming need to keep ticking over. And where there are people working, you need cleaners, caterers and security. The UK has an ageing population so this means a lot of vulnerable people need help at home. So the list then grows to include carers, charitable institutions and support groups. The bottom line is that without this very broad and diverse percentage of society, we’d all be up shit creek without a paddle, crying for our respective Mothers.

View fullsize

On average, a newly qualified nurse can expect to earn around £23,000 a year

What makes this reversal in opinion or epiphany if you’re feeling more charitable, so surprising is that it comes hard on the heels of a decade of tabloid hyperbole and negative briefing against many of these people and professions. The government recently released new immigration guidelines in which they set a financial value on peoples respective worth. Apparently earning under £25,000 was crassly designated “low skilled”, despite the fact that the UK average salary is only £36,000 which implies that a substantial amount of folk in this country are therefore “low skilled”, despite this including many people working in professions I’ve already mentioned. Too long we have extolled the virtues of industries that already have pots of cash and then make more pots of cash, as somehow being the summit of human achievement. I don’t believe that these folk will be able to offer any practical help when you need a respirator.

Tonight, I rather sheepishly went outside of my home, stood on the drive and clapped at 20:00 PM to show my support to all those currently working in healthcare. Us Brits don’t go in for making a fuss and I’m sure many people, like myself, would much prefer to write an upbeat letter to The Times. However, as more people emerged from their houses, waved, chatted and exuded sincerity, I suddenly felt quite emotional and part of something inherently good. Finally, there is something honest and dare I say righteous to get behind. Throughout the UK, young and old are putting themselves in harms way by going to work and just keeping the nation’s collective shit together. From what I’ve seen, many are doing this with a sense of pride and a smile on their face. Which is why we must continue to foster this positive civic minded feeling and ensure that those taking a calculated risk (because that is definitely what it is) feel respected and appreciated.

View fullsize

“No Roger you can’t have any Tramadol”

I went to the Pharmacist today to collect some outstanding medicine for my parents. I was greeted with a smile, and my enquiry speedily dealt with. I was also told that a controlled item would be dropped off later to my folk’s home address. Two hours later it was. I waved like a child greeting a train as the Pharmacist drove away. I can regale you with similar stories about the good natured staff who served me at my local supermarket. Many are in their teens and early twenties but they take all of what’s going on in their stride. And why not? Remember, young people have built nations if you know your history and Will Sampson quotes. So I ensured that I say thank you and offer genuinely supportive remarks to all I encounter. I was profoundly grateful to the hospital transport crew who brought my Mother home today after several weeks in respite care. I bellowed “cheers mate” to the courier who delivers vital supplies from Amazon. This list is ever growing and I urge everyone to be excellent to each other and spread this honest sentiment around.

The current state of affairs is unprecedented and many nations are having a crash course on what is important and what is not. The UK is certainly re-calibrating its opinions and preconceptions and I am delighted after years of scepticism to discover that we still seem to be a fundamentally decent nation. Not everyone is a card carrying member of the National Union of Assholes. People still volunteer, help others and care. Although this is a national crisis there is a great deal of scope to come together and become that tolerant and kindly country that we used to be. I hope we continue to do the right thing and maintain this positive mindset long after the problem that besets us goes away. We have collectively solved as a nation, more problems in the last month than we have in the last five years. The homeless have been found accommodation, the needy are being cared for and people are genuinely concerned for each other’s welfare, instead of bickering, and squabbling. Is it perfect? No. Is it a good start. Most definitely. Finally we’ve reminded ourselves that we can be a force for good and can live up to the values that all our dead heroes have extolled. Let’s not squander this moment.

COVID-19 Pandemic 2020 Part 1

View fullsize

The COVD-19 Pandemic is an unprecedented global event and the way day to day life has changed so rapidly over the last few weeks is deeply unsettling. Hence I’m writing this recurring post as a coping mechanism; a means to process what is happening and observe how society is reacting to the ongoing crisis. And first off, let me state that I’ve already spoken to two people today, who do not see a Global Pandemic as being a crisis. Yes because we live in a post truth world where some people labour under the delusion that all opinions are of commensurate value, there are still people who “feel” that this is all an overwrought brouhaha. I suspect “crazy people watch” may become a major part of my writing. So where to begin exactly? Well I guess the best thing to do is to explain what my personal situation is.

I live in South East London. Bexley Borough is your archetypal middle-class suburb. It grew over the first three decades of the twentieth century offering family homes, good schools and plenty of parks and recreational land. And it has continued doing this. It is a wealthy Borough with an ageing population. 17% of the 280,000 residents are over 65. Politically this is a Conservative Party safe seat and as you may expect, the electorate were predominantly in favour of Brexit. I have lived here for most of my life and am therefore very familiar with its facilities, resources and denizens. As of the time of writing (early morning on Saturday March 21st) there are 31 confirmed cases of Coronavirus in the Borough. It was 5 this time last week.

View fullsize

I live with Mrs P in a Bungalow. It is an ideal size for the pair of us and the lack of stairs suits her health needs. Mrs P currently has two fused vertebrae in her neck and has been in continuous pain for the last 3 months. She also has a heart condition and underwent triple bypass surgery in 2017. She had further heart issues this January and is still under the care of the cardiovascular clinic. Hence she is in a high risk group for COVID-19. My parents are similarly in a high risk group. They live one road away along with my Sister. She is currently working from home, so for the present I have reduced the time I spend tending to my 90 year old disabled Father. Despite the ongoing crisis he is still receiving two visits a day from the District Nurse and carers. Without their assistance he would get ill very quickly. I only recently discovered he is on the “critical medication” list with the Central Access Team. My disabled Mother is currently in Respite Care for two weeks at a local Nursing Home. 

For the present, I am restricting my journeys out to checking with my Father and Sister, essential shopping visits and collecting prescriptions from the Pharmacist. Mrs P may move in with my Son next week and provide childcare for our two Granddaughters, now that the schools are closing. This will be for no more than two weeks and then my Son, who is a “key worker” for TFL, should go on leave. However, for the last two weeks, shopping has proven increasingly difficult due to panic buying from certain quarters of the community. What started out as a run of toilet paper a week ago has now spread to a wider range of products. As of today my local Co-op supermarket looks like it has been robbed. However, as I tend to go shopping every day, I’ve managed to ensure that both households have adequate stocks of essentials. I’ve also ensured that all necessary repeat prescriptions have been filled or are pending at the Doctor’s Surgery.

View fullsize

And this is one of two issues that concerns me at present. I have no problem with the idea of eating less and rationing my food intake. If anything it will do me good as my weight has gone up of late. It is access to medical services and medication that plays on my mind. In the last week the Pharmacist no longer allows customers direct access to the entire shop. A reception area has been created and only 4 customers are allowed in at a time. They either drop off or collect their prescription. If they want anything else the staff have to get if for them as access to the shelves is now prohibited. This is a necessary precaution but it greatly slows down the flow of customers. Due to increased pressure on staff, the turnaround time on repeat prescriptions has gone from 3 to 5 working days. Furthermore, the local Doctor’s Surgery has suspended the booking of all appointments and the walk in clinic. Calls are screened to focus on priority patients and telephone triage is used for intermediate conditions.

Finally, my second concern at present is my Mother. As I mentioned she is currently in a local Nursing Home for two weeks respite care. Since she was discharged from hospital at the start of February it has been intensive work caring for her. Her lack of mobility means she needs continuous care throughout the day. Hence my Sister and I were most grateful to have a reduction in our caring duties with her being away. At present she is scheduled to return home on the 30th of March. This presents some problems. I shall have to break my scaled self isolation to visit her on a daily basis. My Sister is working from home and due to the nature of her job, will be genuinely working 9 to 5. So it will fall to me to do as much as I can. My Mother’s return will also mean the reinstatement of 4 daily carer visits. Effectively the increase in people coming to the home will put all concerned at greater risk. There’s a possibility that if events get worse, the Nursing Home may go into lockdown with all who are currently there, staying put. This would keep my Mother safe in a secure environment indefinitely but I cannot count on this.

View fullsize

This is an initial summary of how the current crisis is impacting upon my extended family. As ever, it quickly becomes apparent while watching the news that others have it far worse. I intend to continue to write about all aspects of this situation as it unfolds. For the present, I’m monitoring what happens in France, Germany and Italy as they are broadly comparable nations to the UK. Please feel free to comment and share your thoughts on how this situation is affecting your day to day life. In the meantime stay safe and use the internet to check on those who may need help. We may well all be incarcerated to a degree but we can use our social networks to direct potential help to those who need it. And just staying in touch with online friends is good for everyone’s collective moral.

Restricting Player Representation in Video Games

View fullsize

Belghast wrote a succinct and personal rebuttal today regarding the iniquities of restricting player representation with video game characters. Escape from Tarkov creator’s Battlestate Games, are currently involved in a rather tired and predictable controversy over the lack of playable female characters in the aforementioned title. If you want chapter and verse about this sorry state of affairs then visit The Verge who have all the salient information. Part of me can’t help feeling that it’s 2020 so shouldn’t we all be done with kind of bullshit? Apparently that’s not the case and some parts of society and indeed the world, still think its the 1950s. Sadly the video game industry seems to be a habitual offender when it comes to these sorts of debacles. Their desire to self flagellate and elect to be continuously on the wrong side of history is perplexing. So once again it is time to counter yet another false narrative and shed some light via the medium of facts, rational thinking and logic on that increasingly lonely place known as reality.

Deciding between content creation or gender representation is often presented as some sort of Hobson’s choice by some developers. The argument being that if you divert resources into creating “female” character models, you’ll bankrupt the game studio, they’ll be no more regular content and all the staff’s children will go without shoes. This is the sort of spurious bullshit argument that second rate politicians trot out when trying to defend cuts to vital services. The most simple and obvious question is why do we have to choose? Why can’t we have both? Plus if you really are pushed for resources and have to choose, which I seldom believe to be a legitimate reason, I’d take representation first and foremost as it will bring more players to your game, thus increasing revenue that can then go towards creating new content. Where is the business sense in alienating 50% of your potential customers? Plus, as a business, if your revenue is so low that such decisions are having to be made to begin with, you may want to reconsider what industry you work in.

View fullsize

Putting aside the respective moral and ethical rectitude of such ideals as equal representation and diversity in video games, let us consider it from alternative perspectives. Social issues do not always have to be examined through the prism of what society perceives to be right or wrong. Representation as a marketing and business angle is now a very real thing. One could go so far as to say it is becoming a financial imperative. Disney after years of eschewing this concept, have now come full circle and embraced it. Compare the white Anglo-Saxon princess of Sleeping Beauty (1959) to the likes of Moana (2016).  We now live in an era of unparalleled diversity and representation with popular, multi billion dollar franchises such as the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Would Black Panther have been made two decades ago? Of course not. I’m sure this change may not be purely driven by a sense of altruism but more through business acumen. However, what is important is that the change has happened and continues to do so.

Now objection on lore grounds can hold water on occasions but many examples are just spurious. I’d argue that this is the case in this instance and that Battlestate Games are either too lazy or too institutionalised to do or say otherwise. Too often resistance to social change simply come downs to an unreconstructed worldview by parts of the existing customer base and the male dominated video games industry. They simply don’t like social progress and anything that differs from their mindset is seen as an assault upon them personally. This highlights wider societal ills, like the fact we don’t as a society universally teach critical thinking. Or the fact that criticism of an idea that you may personally hold, isn’t a personal attack on your character. Plus people these days don’t want to be held to account for their actions. The growth in societal cognitive dissonance is worrying. But I digress. Essentially, all of this is “just too bad” for the usual suspects. Identity politics doesn’t appear to be going away. And from a business perspective, just take a look at the success of the PG-13 film rating. There is a financial sweetspot when it comes to making a movie accessible to a wider audience. The same is true of video games with regard to representation.

View fullsize

As for those individuals over at Battlestate Games, all I can really say with regard to their recent Twitter statement and current stance on this issue, is that that they’ll “pay the price for your lack of vision”, if I may quote the Emperor Palpatine. This is not a moral threat but simply a prediction that you’ll suffer financially by being on the wrong side of this particular debate. Players like to see themselves represented in the virtual worlds that they inhabit. Happy players are more disposed towards staying in-game and spending money. Furthermore, the modern gamer often wants the companies that they support, to act in an ethical fashion and reflect contemporary values. As previously pointed out, it ultimately doesn’t matter if developers do this pragmatically, as long as they just do it. Failing to do so just sends a very clear message that certain potential customers are not welcome. Since when has that been a recipe for financial success?

Goodbye 2019

View fullsize

Last year I tried to write a measured and balanced post about the passing of the year. Sadly this time round my attitude toward the departing 12-month period is somewhat binary. Yes there were a couple of highlights to 2019 but most of it was an uphill struggle and therefore not worth celebrating. It can frankly sod off and won’t be missed. The two high points were my son’s wedding in August and my renewed enthusiasm for blogging that came about due to the Blaugust writing event. But overall 2019 was a repetitive and somewhat depressing grind having to continuously deal with multiple family illnesses, numerous hospital visits and then at the end of the year a bereavement. Yes, these are things that happened to us all eventually and there is no escaping them but I appear to be trapped in this facet of the “circle of life”. Furthermore, until certain situations resolve themselves, I cannot make or implement any long-term plans. 2019 has been in many ways about just treading water.

Sadly, I have no reason to think 2020 will be any different. My personal situation is still complex and filled with trepidation. Both my parents are disabled with deteriorating medical problems. The most one can hope for is to maintain the status quo. Other members of my family are also unwell with conditions that do not have a good prognosis. Beyond my own life I am far from happy with the political situation in the UK at present. I’ve been politically homeless for a while now and it’s very frustrating to be continuously offered a Hobson’s choice at elections and then forced to endure the iniquities of the First Past the Post voting system. As for this nonsense about the country coming together and healing, well that is most certainly not going to happen any time soon. People will have to endure the consequences of Brexit and a majority Conservative government. I do not expect things to go well, nor do I expect any sort of national reconciliation. If anything things will get more partisan and acrimonious.

View fullsize

I will therefore deal with 2020 as I did the previous year and just take it one week at a time. And just because I’m not especially enthused for the coming decade and my personal situation is not exactly how I’d like it to be, that doesn’t give me a license to be a full contact malcontent. There is no need to add fuel to the fire of assholery that abounds in Western culture at present. If anything quite the opposite is true. It is incumbent upon me to be civil, measured and flexible. Not just for the practical reason of greasing the wheels of society but to ensure that I maintain my own state of mental wellbeing. An existential approach to life may well indeed highlight the falsity and futility of so much of what we do but in recognising this there is a degree of peace and freedom. Plus I take great comfort in writing and conversing with my wonderful online friends who hail from all over the world including Purley. So upon reflection although I may not jubilantly declare “Happy New Year”, I am at least prepared for 2020 and ready to repel boarders, so to speak.

What's My Age Again?

View fullsize

Before I start, let me clarify that this blog post is about the subject of age, as opposed to the song by Blink 182. Now that we have that out of the way, today is my birthday. I am 52 years old. It is a source of constant amazement to me, that I have been kicking about this mortal coil for over half a century. When considered in such terms it does give one pause for thought. I also find it interesting that I according to The Office for National Statistics, at present the average life expectancy for men in the UK is 79.2 years. I could therefore be around for at least another 27 years. As I’m in relatively good health at present and both my parents come from hardy stock who have propensity for longevity, maybe I’ll live beyond that statistic. I could make it into my nineties like my Father and Aunt. And let us not forget how medical science is continuously improving which further contributes to greater life expectancy. The UK has an ageing population and at present nearly 12 million people are aged 65 or above.

However, due to my personal philosophy and world view, I do not agree with the concept of “life at any cost”.  For me it is all about the quality of one’s life. Therefore, I do not fear aging as long as it goes hand in hand with good health. My worst fear is to be debilitated by illness and robbed of my mobility or faculties. The idea of having to endure decades of diminished life where I am unable to be independent, utterly terrifies me. Which is one of the reasons I had an NHS Health Check earlier in the year. I felt that if I had any potential issues, I’d rather get on top of them now. Thankfully, that was not the case. Sure, like most people it wouldn’t hurt to shed a few pounds, but my heart, lung, liver and kidney function are doing okay. However, although it is often considered a cliché, I have developed some minor ailments in recent year. My joints ache and I find bending down as well as getting up and down off the floor is more of an effort. I also get cramp in my feet and calves, often for no discernible reason. Getting older also brings the indignity of an increase in superfluous body hair. Something I abhor.

View fullsize

Yet conversely, despite age bringing a degree of physical diminishment, I have never felt more robust mentally and emotionally. I have a sense of measured confidence that I sorely wish I’d had when I was in my twenties. I try to keep calm in stressful situations, think before I speak, endeavour to be patient and generally not contribute to the ongoing stupidity that abounds in the world today. I am happy to speak in public, share my thoughts if asked to do so, praise others when it’s due and admonish those who are thoughtless and inconsiderate to others. I can still learn new skills quite quickly and I’m happy with my writing abilities. Being in my fifties, I have shed a lot of concerns and worries that plagued me in my youth. For example, I don’t feel the need to worry about my appearance or the way I dress. Clothes are now chosen on grounds of convenience and practicality, rather than style. I keep my hair short as such a length is low maintenance. Overall, I am comfortable in my own skin and not unduly concerned by other people’s opinion about me or how I lead my life.

I certainly think that when it comes to ageing, men get a much easier ride than women. According to the tabloid press, when a man’s hair goes grey or white, it is “distinguished”. Sadly, such a thing is not deemed favourable for ladies, who are continuously judged by the cult of youth and pressurised to fight against any signs of age. I am also aware that at 52 I am perceived differently by various age groups. My parents finally see me as an “adult” which amuses me no end. To young people in their teens I’m just another parent; neither threatening nor venerable. And some of my peers who are of a comparable age to me, still think that they can conduct themselves exactly as they did two decades ago. I sincerely hope that I don’t do this. As the saying goes “there’s no fool like an old fool”. Overall, I do not think we should be totally defined by our age. Yet it is a mistake to write it off as “simply a number”. For me, the compromise is to maintain a contemporary outlook, move with the times and something about being “young at heart”. But if your body tells you to take a break after a long walk, then it is wise to listen. Also Gin cures a multitude of ailments

Taxation and Wealth Distribution in the UK

View fullsize

There was a rather angry man on BBC Question Time on Thursday night who was somewhat upset over the tax proposals set out in the Labour Party manifesto. Labour intend to increase the higher rate of tax from 40% to 45% if they are elected. The person in question by their own admission earns £80,000 plus a year and he didn’t believe he was in the top 8% of UK earners. He therefore objected to the fact that under a Labour Government he would face a tax increase. Unfortunately this individual was mistaken. According to figures from HMRC, he is clearly one of 4.3 million people in the higher tax category. Perhaps what he found incongruous was the fact that he falls into a demographic that includes people on his salary all the way to multimillionaires. However, at a salary of over £80,000 a year, he is earning way above the UK average. I think this is what flummoxes people so much. There is an assumption that wealth is evenly distributed throughout the working age UK population and that any graph showing salaries is a gentle curve. Sadly, this is not the case as a little research will show.

First of all, here are the current UK Tax Rates for financial year 2019-20.

• Personal allowance         Up to £12,500                     0%

• Basic rate                            £12,501 to £50,000          20%

• Higher rate                         £50,001 to £150,000        40%

• Additional rate                  Over £150,001                    45%

In 2018-19, an estimated 26.4 million individuals (82.4%) are Basic Rate taxpayers, 4.3 million individuals (13.8%) are Higher Rate taxpayers and 393,000 (1.3%) are Additional Rate taxpayers. That is a total of 31 million people paying taxes in the UK. However the working age population of the United Kingdom is 52 million. That means around 21 million people (43%) earn less than £12,500 a year and are below the Basic Rate tax threshold and therefore do not pay income tax. With these numbers in mind it then become very clear why the median annual income in the UK is £28,677 for full-time employees. There are many jobs that the public perceive as being well paid that in fact are not. Nurses, Policemen and Teachers are classic examples of public servants that fall into this category. The starting salary for all of these professions is between £22,000 and £24,000 per annum.

View fullsize

Once you start looking into subjects such as earnings, taxation and the distribution of wealth in the UK, it becomes very clear that there is a high level of economic inequality. One’s political perspective upon such matters is both personal and subjective but the facts are undeniable. Wealth in the UK remains primarily in the hands of the top 20% who have an income more than 12 times the amount earned by the poorest 20%. Those who are the least financially compensated for their work often find themselves having to supplement their income with such government benefits as Tax Credits. Sadly due to the increasing cost of living, especially with regard to rented accommodation, many families find themselves in poverty. Yet paradoxically the UK is sixth-largest national economy in the world measured by nominal gross domestic product (GDP), ninth largest by purchasing power parity (PPP), and twenty second largest by GDP per capita, comprising 3.3% of world GDP. It’s all very sobering and food for thought. Perhaps the irate man on BBC Question Time should reflect upon all this.

The Importance of Voting in the December 12th 2019 UK General Election

View fullsize

The UK is having a General Election on Thursday, December 12th. The third in five years. Due to the current volatile state of national politics, existing party loyalties are not in anyway guaranteed. The European Election in May of this year showed that many of the UK electorate where voting tactically. Furthermore the shadow of Brexit looms ominously over the forthcoming General Election and will further impact upon existing voting patterns. Simply put, this is an election unlike others we’ve seen in recent times. The outcome will have far reaching consequences. If there is a majority Conservative government, then the UK will leave the EU with the current deal. Trade negotiations will ensue and the country will face a period of transition. There is also scope that the deal on offer is rejected by hard-line Conservative MPs and there could be a “No Deal Brexit”. Alternatively, a majority Labour government could lead to a second referendum on both leaving the EU and Scottish Independence. A hung parliament should also not be ruled out, leading to potential coalitions or a National Unity Government.

Voting in December’s General Election is therefore very important. The next parliament will shape the United Kingdom’s long-term social and economic future as well as our relationship with the rest of the world. Yet research by the Electoral Commission has found that 17% of eligible voters in Great Britain, as many as 9.4 million people, are either missing from the electoral register or not registered at their current address. Major errors affect up to 5.6 million people. The Commission also highlighted substantial differences in registration levels between younger people, renters, low-income and black and ethnic minority people, compared with older white people who own their homes. Furthermore, analysis clearly shows that older and wealthier members of the electorate are far more likely to go out to the polling stations to vote or utilise the postal ballot service.

View fullsize

Earlier this year, voter ID was made compulsory in 10 voting districts despite voter impersonation making up just 3% of all alleged electoral offences at the previous local election. This experiment could become a national policy in the UK under a Conservative government. Presented as a means to tackle voter fraud, it has been seen by some as a deliberate way to disenfranchise specific groups of voters. Voters who are perceived not to be traditional Conservative Party supporters. The two specific types of personal ID required are a current UK Driver’s License or a UK Passport. Both of which have a significant cost associated with them and are statistically not so commonly held by certain socioeconomic groups in the UK. The same socioeconomic group that also tends not to vote regularly in elections and who are usually identified by pollsters as “leaning” towards the Labour Party.

View fullsize

The UK has an electorate of 46,843,896. The turnout in the 2017 General Election was 68.7%. However, 14,662,139 registered voters did not participate and chose not to vote. To put this significant number into context, the amount of uncast ballots is greater than the number of votes that any single party received. 13,636,684 people voted for the Conservative Party. 12,877,918 voted for the Labour Party. Simply put if these members of the electorate decide to vote in the forthcoming General Election it could significantly change the outcome. Since the 2016 EU Referendum, the UK electorate has become increasingly politically engaged. Current data doesn’t reflect to what level or how well-informed voters are but certainly people are more disposed towards adopting a political stance and acting upon it. Perhaps polling day on December 12th will have a larger turnout than usual, despite the time of the year. Or will voter apathy play a major role? If you wish to vote in the General Election then you must register by 11:59pm on 26th November.

"Good Company"

View fullsize

A metaphor for friendship and good company

I have been ruminating upon this writing this post for a long time. One of the reasons I’ve deferred it many times, is that it’s extremely personal and I have strong views on putting such information in the public domain. Another reason is that there is scope for what I’m going to express to be wilfully misconstrued. What I hope to explore is a legitimate point and ongoing aspect of my life. But if it’s not framed in an appropriate manner, it may well come off as snobbish and judgemental. So I shall try to be as succinct as possible. Since 2016, I have been a full-time carer for both my disabled parents. I know longer work in the traditional sense. Therefore, I no longer experience the social dynamic of the work environment. For better or ill, work does offer interaction with others and scope for wider social activities. I now experience a different variation of these. I speak and make small talk with nurses and carers. I go to the shops and quip with the pharmacist along with the staff in the supermarket and newsagent. Due to the litany of doctors and hospital appointment I take my parents to, I spend a lot of time waiting and interacting with “older people”. People the same age as my parents. IE forty years my senior.

I make no claim to be “lonely” in the classic sense of the phrase. I live with Mrs P and we have a good relationship and do things toegether. But by not having a traditional work life, I am not mixing with people of a comparable age, nor am I spending time with those from the same academic discipline. I don’t miss the bullshit that is endemic to office politics but I do miss the company of likeminded people, as well as the problem solving that goes hand in hand with complex network infrastructure. I no longer speak with other about the news, science, philosophy or even fandom. I just make superficial small talk with strangers. Chat about the weather or the state of the bus service. I also nod politely but say nothing when someone decides to share their ill-conceived opinion on the latest contentious political issue. Plus I have to endure the cultural entrenched prejudices of the older generations. Something I find particularly unpleasant.

View fullsize

[Insert punchline about entrenched racism here]

I have a small circle of good friends, people I’ve known since college. But they’ve moved, had families and have done all the regular stuff that people do and as a result, we only see each other about three or four times a year. I don’t begrudge this in anyway. It’s all part of life’s rich pageant. So to address this social and what I would define as an “intellectual engagement” gap, I listen to a lot of podcasts and YouTube videos. Digesting the thoughts and musings of Richard Dawkin, Robin Ince, Brian Cox and Mary Beard is great for stimulating the grey matter. I also like to know the back story behind the current news and social talking points. I don’t mean lazy partisan arguments and simply taking a side. I like to understand the complexities that so often underpin all major debates. It’s an unfashionable position but that’s how I’m programmed. But although all these things can provide a great deal of mental stimulation, there can also be a downside. Pondering weighty matters makes me less disposed towards the mundane.

Now I have no intention of abandoning small talk and light weight social interactions as I go about my daily business. Courtesy is hardwired into my personality. Plus some of the old people I share a word with, may not have a great deal of contact with other people and I think it’s important to reflect upon this. It’s an utter cliché but it is still true that a “kind word goes a long way”. However, if I find myself circulating among guests at a family gathering it is often a struggle to find any robust conversation. Some people like to keep it simple because they know certain hot topics are contentious. Others, often those who are the least informed, seem to be the most confident and willing to share their “perspective”. Hence such social occasions are often a chore for me and I tend to avoid them unless I know specific people will be there, with whom I’ve had positive engagement in the past.

View fullsize

This man is clearly an expert

Without getting too much into “armchair expert” territory, let’s embrace a couple of broad universal truths. People are tribal by nature and usually seek company of those who are broadly similar to themselves. That’s not to say that we don’t sometimes have friends who are radically different than ourselves but usually there is a kind of social and intellectual parity within our peer group. To be removed from such a social mechanic is frustrating. As I stated initially, I don’t feel lonely. However, I do feel at times unengaged and like I’m stagnating. That I’m not testing my mettle or using my brain enough. I miss the company of those who can cogently challenge my viewpoint or make me laugh with a well-conceived joke or quip. There’s a Sherlock Holmes quote that springs to mind. I hasten to add I do not consider myself to be in anyway like the great detective but the point made is a good analogy. “My mind is like a racing engine, tearing itself to pieces because it is not connected up with the work for which it was built”. As to what the solution is to this problem, I’m not sure. I believe I have to make things happen and go and seek out some mental stimulation. Exactly what that will involve I cannot say at present. In the meantime, I shall continue to look to my online friendships to fill this gap.

Taking What You Don’t Need

View fullsize

Another free game courtesy of the Epic Store

Every couple of weeks, I log into the Epic Store to see what free games they are giving away. As they’re really trying to secure their share of the market and establish themselves as a clear alternative to Steam, there are plenty of exclusives games and freebies to be found. The ethics of this business approach is a separate issue and not one that I shall address in this post. Let it suffice to say that the concept of the “Loss Leader” is a long standing business tactic. When I logged in today, I saw that both Alan Wake’s American Nightmare and Observer were available for free. The latter interested me because it features voice acting by the late Rutger Hauer. So I duly added them to my game library. The same game library that currently consists of 30 games but only one of which I have paid for. A library that despite its size and wide variety of genres, I’ve only played two of the titles therein. Furthermore, there’s a similar story to tell with regard to Twitch Prime. I log in and check to see what freebies are of on offer, so I can also add them to another redundant library.

I’ve been playing video games since the eighties when I used to spend too much time playing the arcade version of Asteroids at the local swimming baths. I made the transition to PC gaming in the early nineties. Back then this meant buying a boxed copy of a game from a retail outlet, such as WH Smiths. The pricing at the time and in relation to how much I was earning, meant that I didn’t buy multiple games at once. I’d read reviews meticulously, weigh up the pros and cons for each game and then make a decision based upon what would be the most entertaining experience and offer some degree of longevity. Making purchases within such a framework made the acquisition of a new video game a very exciting process. Video games were from my perspective a luxury. Hence it took a while to build a library of games and due to the size of hard drives at this time, it’s not as if you had every game you owned installed at once. PC gaming was a hobby that required management both financially and logistically. Perhaps that was one of the aspects that made it special.

View fullsize

I was bought Starfleet Academy in 1997 as apart of a leaving present from a job

Twenty years on and the video game market has gone digital. Furthermore that market is now saturated and the premium price model, along with the short lifecycle of games, means that there’s only a limited window of time before prices are slashed. The ubiquity of video games, along with the fact that you can buy them on a whim, has substantially changed our relationship with them. You can purchase a game that you want, download it and play it at any time of day. You don’t have to wait for the store to open to get your hands on it. A new game is no longer a luxury; something to be saved for, then sought out and installed via multiple CD-ROMS. I may even go so far as to say I no longer imbue a new game with any great sense of value. They are transient pleasures, some of which can be bought for pocket change and then dispensed without regret, if they fail to entertain. Effectively some PC games remind me of those items you find on display at your local supermarket, as you queue for the checkout. Indulgence items such as snacks, designed to get you to spend a few extras pounds on something superfluous.

We currently live in the century of “me”, in the midst of a most decadent consumer society. Everyday we’re actively told that buying something will fill the gaping, empty void in our lives and assuage those feelings of loneliness, fear and utter despair. We are culturally conditioned to “like a bargain” regardless of its practicality. “Look what I got. A great deal on this alabaster dog kennel inlaid with depleted uranium”. The fact that you don’t have a dog is irrelevant it would seem, because you got a “deal”. Furthermore, I’m not saying all this from some position of moral superiority. Because I’m also logging on to the Epic Store and claiming all this needless free stuff, just like everyone else. But to be utterly candid, I really don’t need any of this stuff and I really should stop doing this. It reminds me of the “buy one, get one free” culture that leads to terrible food wastage. Something I didn’t realise was so damaging and problematic until recently. I suspect that the ubiquity of games and giving them away for free in this fashion, does more harm than good in the long run.

We Are Our Own Worst Enemy

View fullsize

Over the last five years, there has been an ever-increasing degree of monetisation in mainstream video games. The situation has sparked debate not only among gamers but also in the mainstream press. Loot boxes and the entire business model of “pay to start” has finally reached the scrutiny of several national governments. Furthermore, the triple A video games industry has been held to account and pressed to justify such practises. Yet despite the public attention and a degree of pushback from some gamers, the situation doesn’t in anyway look like it’s going to be resolved. In fact sales data seems to show that despite some negative coverage both in the video games media and the traditional press, games with egregious business models are far from being rejected by customers. Quite the opposite. Ironically two of the worst offenders that have recently been held up as games that exploit gamers financially, have just achieved record sales. Both Mario Kart Tour and NBA 2K20 have proven to be massive hits.

For those gamers who are looking for change, this is a sad situation. Most reasonable and measured individuals recognise that the video games industry is a commercial endeavour and that developers and publishers needs to make money. The bone of contention is that excessive monetisation is actually spoiling games by impeding gameplay and progression. A game built around monetisation has different priorities to a game primarily designed just to be played. Ultimately there is a contradiction between a game in the traditional sense and a “live service”. Is it therefore unreasonable to try and seek the middle ground where a company can make a healthy profit, without compromising the game or the experience of playing it? We’ll it would appear that the answer is “yes, it is unreasonable” and sadly, the point of failure and source of blame is ultimately not actually the video games industry but gamers themselves. We are our own worst enemy.

View fullsize

It is naïve to expect big corporations to act ethically and sensibly when it comes to accruing wealth. If you want a companies such as Activision Blizzard, 2K Games or Ubisoft to moderate their financial strategy when it comes to video games, you must compel them to do so by law. As for any concerted effort by gamers to “school” these publishers through the old cliché of “voting with your wallet”, it is doomed to failure. Because gamers are not a homogeneous group. For every gamer that thinks that monetisation of gaming has gone too far, there is one who thinks the opposite and yet another who simply doesn’t care. Also, cognitive dissonance seems to be the default setting for most people when it comes to social issues these days. We all too often notionally agree with an ethical principle up to the point where acting upon it requires us to make a sacrifice or go without. Another factor that also impacts upon one’s attitude towards microtransactions, season passes and lootboxes is the generational difference in our attitudes towards money.

Naturally there are gamers with large disposable incomes who don’t concern themselves with the reality of game related monetisation. Any obstacle to enjoyment can be overcome by the application of money. However, in my lifetime there has been major changes in the regulation of consumer borrowing. Simply put, credit is easily accessible (despite the financial crash of 2008) and consumers are encouraged to spend. To put this in perspective, UK credit card debt was at £72.5 billion at the end of July 2019. So when video gamer publishers talk about “whales”, who exactly are they talking about? Those who can genuinely afford too throw money around or those who feel obliged to do so, with money they don’t really have? Over the course of my life, I’ve learned the esoteric and unfashionable act of living within my financial means. I would say that this is a social norm more pertinent to the over fifties. But for many people half my age, they have grown up in a world where ownership has been supplanted by paying for a service and the entire point of credit is to use it to try and live the lifestyle, you think you deserve.

View fullsize

So regardless of the “selective gamer pushback” and a degree of negative PR that is mainly driven by a moral imperative, the video game industry has had its monetisation policies 100% validated by recent sales figures. Hence it is highly unlikely that we shall see any major change in business practises in the immediate future. As a result, I shall continue to avoid many major triple A titles such as Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Breakpoint (a franchise I had previously enjoyed) and will continue my blanket boycott of mobile games. But the rather unpalatable reality is that future games development is going to be determined by those who are currently enabling the monetisation practises of the video games industry. However there’s a chance that even the most ambivalent gamer may eventually be inconvenienced by some future iniquity of the video games industry. Yet I suspect that even if this tipping point is achieved, many gamers would refuse to acknowledge their involvement in creating the problem in the first place and their respective blame.

The Cost of Doing Business with China

View fullsize

The moment Chung “blitzchung” Ng Wai made his protest

In the last few days, a great deal has been written about Activision Blizzard and their subsequent banning of a Hearthstone player who expressed support for the Hong Kong protestors during a competition live stream. The US-based game developer and publisher has also chosen to withhold the prize money he would have earned from competing in the tournament. As a result of this media coverage, I do not feel obliged to address the rectitude of Blizzard’s decision. It was never going to be anything different than what it was. They made their choice regarding ethics and morality the moment they decided to expand their business operations in mainland China. Because once you decided to enter into a business partnership with a totalitarian regime that actively runs “re-education camps”, you’ve pretty much nailed your colours to the mast and chosen a side. It’s not just business, despite what apologists may tell you. Judge a man or a business by the company they keep.

However, there are two wider issues that have arisen from this situation that perhaps can be seen as broadly positive. Firstly, parts of the gaming community have finally had the scales lifted from their eyes regarding the true nature of the video games industry. Secondly, people are now becoming more aware of the extent of Chinese business influence both in the US and other countries and to what extent Western business is happy to appease them. Let us take a moment to consider the first of these. I have been banging on for years about how so many gamers erroneously think that the companies that make their favourite games are somehow their friend. In many ways Blizzard has been the embodiment of this fallacious and specious notion. Although there are some developers or community managers who are genuinely reasonable and measured individuals, these are not the people driving the company. Corporate policy is decided at a much higher level by people such as Bobby Kotick. And like a lot of other modern CEOs, ethics, morality and generally being a decent human being are not top priorities. In fact they’re a major hindrance. Do some research of your own on Mr Kotick (or ask Jim Sterling) and decide for yourself what sort of man he is.

View fullsize

Bobby Kotick. Personally worth about $1 Billion plus

So a lot of gamers have suddenly got wise to the fact that the company they used to think was cool because staff don’t wear suits to work and can unicycle around the office, is in fact just another corporate behemoth striving to make as much money as possible, irrespective of the consequences. Blizzard is tainted and now some gamers are worried about guilt by association. It’s an odd situation to be honest. Some gamers are obviously staggeringly naïve but there again, that’s hardly surprising as people are surprisingly politically illiterate these days. I don’t mean this is a pejorative sense, it’s just a simple truth. A lot of people are not in any way credibly informed about domestic politics, let alone the complexities of international relationships. And then there’s another element to this. The gamer who suspects that there’s an unethical wider picture to the video games industry but chooses to not “know about it”. I heard similar arguments regarding eating meat, which go something like this. “I choose to remain wilfully ignorant of the iniquities of the meat industry. I suspect that livestock are treated appallingly but if I choose not to know, I can enjoy eating meat without any moral burden and maintain my claim that I’m a good person”. Yep, gamers have their own version of this, too.

Moving on to the second potentially positive point that’s come out of this whole sorry affair; people have now realised that it is not just Activision Blizzard who are happy to self-censor and generally side with China whenever there’s a conflict of interest between West and East. Over the last few days, several websites and subreddits have compiled substantial lists of companies towing the political line to appease China and keep the revenue flowing. Furthermore, because China is such a big market for mainstream Hollywood movies these days, it’s come to light that a lot of screenplays are being tailormade for its specific “political and social” requirements. And irrespective of the need to “accommodate” China for “business reasons”, people are now beginning to become aware of the scope and reach of Chinese business in the West per se. This isn’t really the place for an in-depth dissection of what they do and do not own but if you do some research, you’ll find China is involved with key US and UK industries such as farming, logistics and utilities. And then there’s the issue of land banking. All of which can be used for political leverage if required.

View fullsize

You get the idea?

Now as a result of this debacle, there has been a plethora of tediously predictable kneejerk reactions. As usual some gamers have been calling for a boycott of Blizzard products. There’s also been the “restless lynch mob” mentality on social media and moral outrage has been turned up to 11. Such hastily contrived bandwagons often fizzle out and can do more harm than good. However, a measured campaign of publicly questioning the cognitive dissonance inherent in being an American business that consorts with a dictatorship, may yield results in the long term. Raising questions via your political representative can take time but the wheels do turn. Now it has been pointed out by the “usual suspects”, that it’s a bit rich getting all “high and mighty” about the ethics of this one issue, when our consumer lives are rife with Chinese products. But I refute the intellectual bankruptcy of this faux argument that seems to think that one can only have an ethical position of worth, if you are 100% morally pure. Bullshit. Yes, we are all to a degree complicit in bolstering China by our consumer choices but that doesn’t mitigate the worth or rectitude of beginning to make a stand. It takes time to inform people and then get them to change their views and habits.

And as for those people who think that this whole situation is just business doing what business does, please stop assuming that your lack of morals and empathy is also the default position of society. It isn’t. People do actually expect a degree of ethical behaviour from corporations. Now that may be foolish but it remains a valid view. And as big business has shown time and time again that it doesn’t have a shred of human decency, the only way we are going to get companies to act in a vaguely appropriate fashion is to legally compel them to do so and sanction them when they do not. Doing business with China is not the same as doing business with any other democratic country. It is a Faustian arrangement which comes with caveats. Caveats that may put a company at odds with the inherent principles of their own country. There is a price to pay for such an arrangement and that is your “corporate reputation”. I still find it odd that people and business that act appallingly try to cultivate an image of “be nice”. I have far more respect for the “bastard” that’s content to be one.

View fullsize

The fate of Tank Man remains unknown to this day

For those who still remain unconvinced that the censoring and sanctioning of Chung “blitzchung” Ng Wai by Blizzard is anything to worry about, let me remind you of what China’s top broadcaster, government-run CCTV, stated recently about the concept of freedom of speech. That it should not be extended to points of view counter to the ruling Communist Party’s. “No comments challenging national sovereignty and social stability fall within the scope of freedom of expression”. Reflect upon that. Blizzard and many other companies are in a business relationship with a regime that is at odds with Western values. Furthermore, these international companies choose to actively collude with a government in its acts of oppression, because of the financial opportunities available. At the very least that is immoral. At the worst they are benefitting from blood money. If you thinks that’s hyperbolic please remember the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests when China mobilised 300,000 troops on the streets of Beijing and fired upon student protesters. A historical event that is still supressed in China itself. And considering the current events in Hong Kong, one that may be soon repeated? Blizzard and many other companies need to reflect upon this, although I suspect they won’t. I’m not sure if they are capable.

Fear of Missing Out

View fullsize

According to Wikipedia Fear of Missing Out (or FOMO) is “a pervasive apprehension that others might be having rewarding experiences from which one is absent". Now that may sound to some as a somewhat trivial concern. One that encapsulates the concept of “first world problems” and “Generation Me”. Yet for many, it is a genuine concern. “Fear of missing out” is a not too distant cousin of “fear of being excluded”. Something that is a common part of bullying culture. FOMO plays to human insecurities and we live in times where people feel increasingly vulnerable. If you want further evidence of the veracity of FOMO, consider how it is something that marketing departments now actively seek to play upon and uses for leverage. A recent leaked document for the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) outlined how they wish to streamline and revitalise the ailing E3 trade show. One suggestion is to make "exclusive/appointment only activations for select attendees who will create buzz and FOMO”.

For good or ill, it would seem that FOMO is now facet of twentieth century culture. Much like reaction videos, shit posting and the most intellectually bereft member of society being allowed on national television. Furthermore, I cannot claim to be impervious to this malady. I have discussed in the past how I was an avid “early adopter” of technology two decades ago. Something I cannot simply chalk up to just enthusiasm and zeal. FOMO did play a part in this. And then there has been times when fandom has become a job, rather than a leisure activity. I have a friend who still likes to remind me of the numerous times I got up at some ridiculous hour to watch videos that I had to return to Blockbusters, later that day. As a movie fan, it has always been difficult to try and keep up with all the new releases as well as older classics. It’s something I take a far more measured approach to these days but again in the past, FOMO was a factor driving the mentality that I had to “do it all”.

View fullsize

Recently, I took stock of my interests and pastimes. I decided to recalibrate my expectations and aspirations and that meant making some changes. Subsequently, I took to Twitter and spent some time reflecting upon who I was following. I believe the maximum number of people you can follow realistically is about 150. I’m currently over that number by a sizeable amount but I did prune about thirty of so accounts I was following. I based my decision upon how often an account tweeted and whether they were big on interacting with others. I did feel the occasional pang of guilt but ultimately you have to be realistic about what you can and cannot do. Following an excess of people on Twitter just leads to having your timeline swamped and increases the chance of missing something important amid all the white noise. There were also a few people who I couldn’t remember as to why I was following them.

I carried out the same exercise on Feedly and removed several blogs that didn’t seem to be producing any content on a regular basis. As predicted, the drop off rate after Blaugust was noticeable. I also had several blogs on my list that have been dead for a long time and it was merely nostalgia on my part keeping them there. I am also getting somewhat tired of commercial video gaming websites. They have a tendency to regurgitate the same company press releases where it is only the think pieces and long form articles that really interest me. So I have purged many of these. I’ve also shed some of the movie news websites I was following, as these aren’t really broad enough and tend to be too focused on “superhero” movies. And while I’ve been “downsizing” the extent of my online content consumption, I also unsubscribed from numerous YouTube channels. The commercial ones were exceedingly predictable and many of the “non-professional” content creators seemed to have ground to a halt. May be this medium is no longer the cash cow that many assumed it was. And then there’s my gaming “wish lists”. They got kicked into touch as well after a healthy dose of realism.

View fullsize

Here are some fun facts about the “average persons” lifespan. We spend about a third of our lives asleep. That’s 30 years plus. Joe public also spends about five years on the phone during the course of their life. A human brain can store up to a quadrillion separate bit of information in its longterm memory during our “three score years and ten”. Then add to that mix, time spent working, raising children and perhaps most importantly, procrastinating. The bottom line is you’re never going to fit in everything that you want to do. Nope. Not going to happen. The reality of the situation is that FOMO should be logically replaced by AOMO; acceptance of missing out. It’s a mindset I’ve eased myself into over the last decade. Pick what you want to do wisely. Be realistic and honest with yourself about what you can and cannot fit into your schedule. As for FOMO, isn’t it better to do several things well and enjoy them thoroughly, rather than attempting to do too many things at once and doing them badly? You’d think so. But then again people are seldom logical.

Gaming and the Language of "Them Versus Us"

View fullsize

Language is an evolutionary thing. It changes over time, reflecting the needs of the culture that use it. Furthermore, each unique sub-set of society seems to create and utilise its own bespoke lexicon. From business, science, politics, religion, to sports and other leisure activities, all use terminology that is unique to their own group. Overtime some of these terms’ crossover from one niche to another to eventually find broad mainstream acceptance. It is a fascinating process and one I think has accelerated in recent years due to the growth of social media. 

I have written before about the subject of gaming semantics and the fact that some terms are so ambiguous and not clearly defined. This subsequently leads to skewed debates and discussion, as there is not a mutually agreed frame of reference of definition. This time I want to focus on another linguistic issue that it currently blighting the discourse surrounding games. That being the proliferation of pejorative terms and ill-conceived labels, which are used not to describe but to discredit. It sadly adds to the increasingly bi-partisan nature of all public debates these days and reinforces my current stance of not defining myself by a pastime that I pursue. The gaming community is becoming increasingly intolerant and I don't wish to be associated with such things. 

View fullsize

Something that often comes up in discussions about PVP, is the term "carebear". Initially this was a term that was jokingly employed to describe players that preferred the social interaction of PVE content and avoided player versus player gameplay. Now it seems to be a routine epithet to negatively label anyone who doesn't advocate any of the competitive aspects of gaming. If you do not like PVP, or end-game raiding, warzones, skirmishes or the like you are a "carebear". The implication being that caring and compassion are negative things and potentially a sign of weakness. It is a blanket term design to be besmirch and standard ammunition in ad hominem attacks.

During the seventies, UK national politics was extremely binary. The right was focused on privatisation, small government and the free market with the left advocating the welfare state, social responsibility and equality. It was during this period that I first became aware of the term "do gooder"; a term broadly meaning a well-meaning but unrealistic or interfering philanthropist or reformer. Yet overtime it simple degenerated into a pejorative label for anyone who's politics were not sufficiently right wing enough. Any sort of policy that advocated fairness or parity was lambasted with this term, to the point where it became nothing but a vacuous buzz word. The reason I mention this is because the exactly the same thing is happening today with the trite label "social justice warrior". 

View fullsize

In recent years games discourse has sunk under the weight of these sorts of terms. Any sort of meaningful and mature discussion is obscured under a swath of pointless and ultimately meaningless terms. "Feminazi", "delicate snowflake", "filthy casual gamer" and other such names are bandied about, dragging the debate away from a level playing field and into the playground. Combine this sort of rhetoric with the prevailing mindset that eschews reason, critical thinking and scope to disagree in a civil fashion and all rational discussion ends. The winner is simply those who shout loudest. History has shown us that such groups are seldom the best informed.

When this sort of philosophy prevails it ultimately does more harm than good. Sadly at present, too many gamers are busy indulging in territorial pissing that they are oblivious to the fact that they are befouling their own waterhole. It's only a matter of time before the well is truly poisoned. If gaming culture genuinely wants to improve for everyone's benefits then it needs to start thinking. That begins with the language that we use towards each other. The alternative is to continue down the current road and let those who want to watch Rome burn, do so to the detriment of all. In the meantime there will be those that disassociate themselves from the mainstream and set up isolated safe havens for likeminded gamers. However that doesn't really fix the long-term problems. Are smaller more fragmented markets and communities ultimately good for gaming?

Gamers, Ethics and Boycotts

View fullsize

When I’m at my local supermarket with Mrs P, buying our monthly groceries, we often try and purchase fair trade products. This tends to be fruit, vegetables and wine. It’s a nominal gesture towards ethics, done in good faith. However, I suspect we cancel out any collective good we may do by making other consumer decisions, which aren’t so considerate. It’s a curious paradox that consumerism, something that is couched in untrammelled capitalism, can be tempered by the moral proclivities of customers. Some would argue that this is just an afterthought, lip service or virtue signalling (although the latter is an intellectually bankrupt concept to begin with). I just see it as people trying to do something vaguely decent, within the confines of a system that is rife with dubious practices and unethical tendencies. It is virtually impossible to be morally pure while living in a contemporary democracy. Comedian Frankie Boyle best summed this up when he said, “If you get offended by any jokes, by the way, feel free to Tweet your outrage on a mobile phone made by a ten-year-old in China”.

Moving on to video games, once again commentator Jim Sterling has highlighted how some quarters of the industry are just a complete mess. In the latest episode of the Jimquisition, he explores allegations made against indie developer Chucklefish. To cut along story short, it would appear that this company has not financially compensated all of it staff and taken advantage of the “passion” that younger gamers often have for video games and the wider industry. It’s a familiar story, only this time its an indie developer rather than a big, triple A publisher. It shouldn’t come as a shock that greed, along with manipulative and exploitative behaviour are everywhere. It’s just a shame because the indie scene often positions itself to be the moral opposite of the big corporations. Yet here they are having the same vices. Naturally, as this story has blown up, there has been a degree of pushback from fans who have supported Chucklefish over the years. As I’ve stated in the past, rightly or wrongly, a lot of gamers have an odd relationship with game developers and publishers. Many do not view it within the confines of the traditional consumer/vendor dynamic.

View fullsize

Which brings me to my point. I personally have not yet experienced a situation where I have boycotted a specific publisher or developer on the grounds of their business ethics. There are games that I have chosen not to buy because of their business model and monetisation strategy but I have not yet shunned a company that I have previously done business with. I always find statements such as “I’ll never buy one of your games ever again” or “you’ll never see another penny of my money” from gamers on subreddits and forums, to be somewhat melodramatic and unverifiable. However, Jim Sterling’s video has highlighted the fact that unethical business practises are potentially everywhere. I think it likely that sooner, rather than later, I’m going to find a scandal associated with something much closer to home. If for example, Standing Stone Games were tainted by the iniquities of their publisher Daybreak Game Company, how would I react? Would I abandon LOTRO? Or simply stop paying SSG any money? The latter would impact upon my enjoyment of the game but that is the consequence of protesting. Voting with your wallet denies something from all parties.

View fullsize

Considering that most companies do not like negative publicity and like to maintain a “good guy” image irrespective of whether its deserved, is critical press coverage potentially more effective than player boycotts? Or do player communities have more clout than we think. It certainly appeared that player power was responsible for the removal of “pay to win” microtransactions from Star Wars Battlefront II in January 2018. Yet that story was everywhere and even found its way into the mainstream press. Did either side provide the tipping point for EA or was it a perfect storm of both? In the meantime I’m going to continue to monitor the decline in ethics in the video game industry, as it now seems to have become yet another front upon which the ongoing culture war is being fought. If I do, as I have predicted, find myself in a position where I may have to countenance a moral decision to boycott a company or some similar situation, perhaps discussing it as a blog post will provide an easier solution. But as the old adage says, “I’ll cross that bridge when I come to it”.

Gaming Addiction and the World Health Organisation

View fullsize

The World Health Organisation (WHO) is a specialised agency of the United Nations that is concerned with international public health. It was established on 7th April 1948 and is based in Geneva, Switzerland. As a body it has been instrumental in the eradication of smallpox. Its current priorities include communicable diseases, in particular HIV/AIDS, Ebola, malaria and tuberculosis; the mitigation of the effects of non-communicable diseases; sexual and reproductive health, development, and ageing; nutrition, food security and healthy eating; occupational health; substance abuse; and driving the development of reporting, publications, and networking. Recently, unlike other health institutions, WHO has chosen to address the thorny issue of gaming addiction; a condition that is still heavily disputed and lacks a universally agreed definition.

WHO formally listed gaming addiction as a mental health condition in May 2019. According to their criteria based upon extensive research, gaming addiction it as a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behaviour so severe that it takes "precedence over other life interests". This definition, as stipulated by WHO, correlates with several other countries that have already identified this addiction as a major health issue. There are already private addiction clinics that “treat” this condition and the actions of WHO have certainly brought this particular health issue to the wider public’s attention. By adding gaming addiction to the latest version of the International Classification of Diseases, it removes some of the incredulity that the condition has met from certain health bodies.

The WHO guide contains codes for diseases, signs and symptoms and is used by doctors and researchers worldwide to track and diagnose disease. The guide suggests that abnormal gaming behaviour should be in evidence over a period of at least 12 months "for a diagnosis to be assigned" but has stipulated that period might be shortened "if symptoms are severe". At present the symptoms for gaming addiction include impaired control over gaming (frequency, intensity, duration), increased priority given to gaming and continuation or escalation of gaming despite negative consequences. Some healthcare professionals have welcomed the decision to recognise the condition. Dr Richard Graham, lead technology addiction specialist at the Nightingale Hospital in London said “It is significant because it creates the opportunity for more specialised services. It puts it on the map as something to take seriously”. However, he also stated that he would have sympathy for those who do not think the condition should be medicalised because he did see scope for misdiagnosis at present. "It could lead to confused parents whose children are just enthusiastic gamers."

View fullsize

It is this point that seems to be the biggest stumbling block for the universal acceptance of a medical condition of this nature. How exactly do you verify that the alleged addiction is actually taking up all available “neurological real-estate” and dominating thinking and becoming a total preoccupation for the patient? Because fandom per se can at time mirror these qualities. Subsequently, many psychiatrists currently refer to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), in which internet gaming disorder is listed as a "condition for further study", meaning it is not officially recognised. Because of this reasoning and prevailing attitude, it is clear that WHO may find their perspective challenged for the present. However, irrespective of the medical and semantical disputes, the field of game related addiction is still being scrutinised around the world. South Korea has introduced a legislation banning access for children under 16 from online games between midnight and 6:00 AM although effectively enforcing such regulation is difficult.

There has also been a degree of pushback from those in the video games development and retail industry. Naturally, as interested parties they are concerned about misdiagnosis and scope for ill-conceived legislation that may be rushed to address public concerns and tabloid campaigning. The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) trade group released a statement downplaying the WHO's concerns about addiction to video games and stated "Just like avid sports fans and consumers of all forms of engaging entertainment, gamers are passionate and dedicated with their time. Having captivated gamers for more than four decades, more than 2 billion people around the world enjoy video games. The World Health Organisation knows that common sense and objective research prove video games are not addictive. And, putting that official label on them recklessly trivialises real mental health issues like depression and social anxiety disorder, which deserve treatment and the full attention of the medical community. We strongly encourage the WHO to reverse direction on its proposed action."

It is clear that the video game industry is concerned about regulation and the potential impact the public perception of gaming addiction may have on sales. The problem lies in how to reconcile the positions of both WHO and bodies such as ESA. Both groups have genuine concerns. However, self-regulation and consumer concerns can often conflict with corporate interests and we have seen in the past several industries that do have harmful side effects fight tooth and nail to refute such claims. There is also the issue of once a universal definition for gaming addiction has been established, exactly what needs to be done to address the matter. So far, the most practical ideas are based around labelling and providing health warnings both on physical media, its packaging, as well as via digital platforms. Automated messages based upon time spent in-game as well as FAQs on logon screens are other possible avenues. Raising public awareness through labelling and media campaigns has proven beneficial with other health issues such as diet and alcohol consumption.

View fullsize

Another concern regarding gaming addiction is the creation of yet another “label” that can be either misdiagnosed, appropriated incorrectly or used pejoratively by the tabloid press. The symptoms of gaming addiction according to the WHO as they currently stand, could be ascribed to many children. Yet there are those who would argue such behaviour may be down to poor parenting which is theoretically a lot easier to correct. Using handheld devices and consoles as surrogate babysitters is no different from using the TV thirty years ago. There is also the possibility that gaming addiction could become the new “darling” of compensation culture and personal accident claims. I don’t think it is outside the realm of possibility that we could see a substantial class action against a game major publisher at some point. Then of course there is a risk that the average gamer could find themselves tarnished by fear and prejudice associated with gaming addiction, regardless of whether they personally are or not. Many gamers already do not include gaming as a hobby or pastime of their CV, for exactly that reason. It isn’t too much of a stretch to imagine certain quarters of the press trying to label all gamers as potential addicts and an employment risk.

Irrespective of whether you personally agree with the definition of gaming addiction as stated by WHO, I believe that the very fact that they’ve tried to address the issue is a positive thing and that there will now be a lot more research into the condition. In the fullness of time, we may finally arrive at an agreed and succinct set of criteria or we may find the complete opposite is true. That gaming addiction ultimately stems from an addictive personality per se, and that playing games is merely a conduit. Under such circumstance, addiction may occur via any leisure activity, thus exonerating gaming. Either way it is important that such matters are properly understood so appropriate treatments can be established. Also, fully understanding the situation means that the industry can work to accommodate addiction, rather than ignore it or exploit it directly. We may see some governments implement impractical knee-jerk rules and regulations, but we may also see the matter tackled in a mature and measured way by more progressive administrations.

Separating Art from the Artist

View fullsize

In recent years, the #MeToo movement has made it abundantly clear that the film, TV and video games industries are far from idyllic work environments that pop culture implies that they are. Allegations of rape, sexual assault, bullying and general bullshit abound. There have been convictions and such matters are slowly being given the scrutiny they deserve. But it’s an uphill struggle for the victims because vested interests will always resist potential changes to the status quo. There are wider discussions to be had about many artistic and creative industries being glorified “boys clubs” and then there is the culture of “blaming the victim” but those are for another day. I don’t think they’re going to resolve themselves over night, sadly. On this occasion, I would like to reference the composer Jeremy Soule, because he is the latest artist to have serious allegations made against him. Naturally, this has caused a great deal of discussion among his fans. Soule’s work on The Elder Scrolls and Guild Wars franchises is very well regarded. Hence a common refrain that stems from these sorts of situations is “I now feel conflicted about this individual work”. It raises the old chestnut about separating art from the artist.

We can all write a long list of disgraced artists if we think about it. People who at one time produced outstanding music, made great films, staged plays or were great philanthropists and benevolent charitable benefactors.  Consider Michael Jackson, Woody Allen, Kevin Spacey and Louie C.K. The list sadly keeps growing. It’s a very rude awakening when you discover that people you admire and revere are in fact monsters. Furthermore, this is not a modern problem. Charles Dickens, William S. Burroughs and Charlie Chaplin all had very chequered pasts. So what are we supposed to do when we discover that something that we enjoy is created by a such a person? Well a common answer is that you must take the art and effectively remove it from the context of the artist that created it. But like many notional concepts, trying to put in to practice is harder to do. It is something that requires a willing sense of cognitive dissonance, as well as being able to govern your passion. That is not going to be easy for many people. And then there’s the issue of fandom, which muddies the waters even further. Fans are not always the most self-aware or emotional literate societal group.

View fullsize

I first encountered the concept of separating art from the artist when at school, studying English literature. T.S Eliot stated, “I have assumed as axiomatic that a creation, a work of art, is autonomous,” in 1923. There subsequently followed a new way of appraising literary work, which attempted to make analysis more like a science. The focus was on the words, their meaning and context and the authors relationship with their work was sidelined. This method and variations of it have prevailed for a long time and where still used when I was being educated in the eighties. French literary theorist and philosopher Roland Barthes declared in 1967 that authors doesn’t create a text. The reader does, by reading it. Each new reading effectively reinvents it. Therefore texts have no fixed or definitive interpretation. Oh and it gets even deeper. I have read arguments that film and music are not owned commodities but cultural gifts bestowed upon society. The viewer or listeners opinion has to trump that of the artists, because they have been solicited to give a personal subjective opinion. This theoretically will negate the auteurs ability to control the interpretation of their work and will therefore tempers their institutional power.

But these ideas tend to mainly exist within the confines of the classroom and academia. They are both abstract and cerebral which therefore limits their practical application. Plus there is another issue that stems from our revulsion against fallen artists. There is an inherent cultural assumption that we expect our artists to be virtuous by default. That is not to say that we should be advocating for them to be the opposite but it reveals a societal propensity to put artist on a pedestal by dint of being an artist. Musicians, actors, writer and film makers begin their careers as everyday people, like you and me. Therefore they will have the flaws and failings that we all share. In fact some would argue that their creative abilities draw upon their flaws, vices and failings. Yet the moment success, fame and personal validation are achieved we seem to give artists a cultural free pass. We cosset them and make excuses. Are we actually contributing to the creation of monsters?

View fullsize

Upon reflection it would appear for many people there is no easy way of separating art from the artist. Because our relationship with art is deeply personal, it seems perfectly reasonable to take it personally when someone you admire transgresses. So if you no longer wish to support an artist, then don’t buy any more of their work. If you cannot bring yourself to listen to their music then purge your CD collections. We are not purely rational beings. Art is emotive, so are artists and so are we. But I believe that we have to confine out emotional responses to the likes of Jeremy Soule and Michael Jackson, to just ourselves. I do not advocate that as a society we try to erase the art of those who are in disgrace, due to some perceived collective moral outrage. Hiding from awful events and the things that they touch does not address them. Also it is usually the art we encounter first and not the artists. Hence, we do not know in advance their human failings. And irrespective of what we may know after the fact, if a piece of art touches you can that truly be retrospectively refuted?

So where do I stand on all this? Well I do strive to separate art form the artist. However, that does not mean that I’m an apologist for their crimes. If you want me to write 2,000 words on the films of Roman Polanski, I will do so and focus purely on that. If you also ask me to write a comparable amount of text on his failings as a person, then I can accommodate that as well. When I’m listening to Billie Jean, watching Manhattan or Jeepers Creepers, I do not by default immediately focus upon the creative artist and their iniquities. Nor do I totally banish them from my thoughts. I find my own personal point of emotional and ethical equilibrium. Because although a singer, actor or director may be tainted, that doesn’t have to transfer to my relationship with their work, which was pure initially. If you allow the artist to spoil the art, it negates the contributions of all of those who were also involved in the creative process, which is inherently unfair. The truth is the myth of an auteur is exactly that. But this is my philosophy and my means of coping. We all have to find our own. Ultimately if this dilemma makes you angry, then that is something else that you can lay at the door of the artist that has gone rogue.

Cheap Beer

View fullsize

Cheap and cheerful or a surprisingly good bargain?

I often trot out the old adage “you get what you pay for”. However, upon reflection I think it’s a saying that should be used carefully. If employed when referring to buying a shirt, then it carries weight. I recently bought a double cuff shirt from Hawes & Curtis and the high price reflected the quality of the stitching and material. I could have bought another shirt for a tenth of the cost from Primark but it simply wouldn’t have been comparable. So on this occasion, the phrase was relevant. But if employed with regard to products like biscuits or laundry detergent then it doesn’t always hold up. Because the adage implies that a cheaper product is inferior by default, yet that is patently not the case with the examples I’ve given. Many supermarkets range of store brands can provide good alternatives to well-known premium products. It can be a process of trial and error to discover them but they do exist. Also even though attitudes are changing, there is still a lot of snobbery and brand loyalty associated with grocery shopping. In the UK the is a clear hierarchy of supermarkets.

So where is this all going, I hear you ask? Well, I want to discuss cheap bear. Actually, I specifically want to discuss one particular brand but we’ll come to that in a moment. First, a few words about my drinking habits. I enjoy a wide variety of alcohol and drink several times a week. I’m a bit of a seasonal drinker favouring heavier red wines and stout in autumn and winter, then moving to lager and white wine during the warmer months. I also like gin, vodka and brandy. I have a personal drinking hierarchy. For example I will sometime buy an artisan beer and drink it to savour its flavour. Alternatively, if I’m drinking socially at a barbecue or some similar event, the alcohol consumed tends to be more generic. I’ll happily add lime to a standard mid-tier lager. But I wouldn’t bastardise a fine malt whiskey. And then there’s very cheap alcohol. Strong beer or cider that is specifically manufactured for the purpose of rapid intoxication. I tend not to buy these products.

View fullsize

Michael Caine only drinks beer “in a thin glass”…

Now I was in Aldi today. If you are not familiar with the supermarket, it’s a German chain. They are rapidly increasing their share of the UK market. They sell predominantly their own range of products or have exclusive contracts with European suppliers that are not so well known in the UK. Hence you avoid the mark up associated with premium brands but that doesn’t mean that the quality is inferior. Over time Aldi has managed to swim against the tide of cultural snobbery and now enjoys a very eclectic cliental that straddles several socio-economic groups. As the weather is pleasant at present and looks to stay that way for the bank holiday weekend, I thought I’d buy some beer. So I ended up buying 12 cans of Rheinbacher Premium Pilsner. Each pack of four 500ml cans cost £3, so I spent £9 in total. 500ml fills my favourite pint glass with just a centimetre or so gap at the top. The beer itself is a pale lager in the North American style. It pours with a pale gold body with a light white head. It has a fruity aroma and a mild, sweet malt taste. It’s doesn’t reinvent the wheel but it’s surprisingly pleasant and makes for solid evenings drinking if you stick with it.

View fullsize

Is this man a beer snob? Who knows?

Out of idle curiosity, I did a little digging online and discovered that there are numerous beer aficionados running review websites. Rheinbacher Premium Pilsner scores surprisingly well, although you quickly ascertain that a percentage of beer drinking community are utter snobs. And like most snobs, their prejudice is founded in irrationality. Because the main criticism of this particular beer is its price and where it is sold. Factors that have zero relevance regarding its taste. However, despite the garrulous inanities of the idiot brigade, there were plenty of positive reviews. Which brings me full circle back to my opening gambit and getting what you pay for. Sometimes, something can be inexpensive without compromising on quality. Today’s purchase was a nice reminder to look beyond traditional brand loyalty and try something new. Cheap does not necessarily mean poor quality. I suspect that there are “hidden gems” in all supermarkets. I shall certainly be doing some further experimenting next time I go to Aldi.