Geoff Coupe's Blog

Reflections on life at “De Witte Wand”…

Year: 2007

  • You’re Hired

    The third series of The Apprentice drew to a close last night. Lucy Mangan sums up the finale very well. I see that the same thought struck her about Simon’s design for a building – as soon as I saw it, I said out loud: "Er, excuse me, but the new iconic building landmark for London appears to be a set of dancing dildoes…" Shows what little appreciation Lucy and I have of the finer points of architecture.
     
    I really thought (again, like Lucy) that Kristina was going to win. She managed her team far better, and the building design was less unfortunate than Simon’s. But Sir Alan didn’t get to where he is today by being predictable – for some unfathomable reason he still picked Simon.
     
    Although the Wicked Witch of the West, a.k.a. Katie Hopkins, wasn’t present in the teams helping the two finalists, she was present in the studio audience in the post-mortem programme afterwards. Somehow, given the strong whiff of sulphur that attends her presence, I don’t think throwing a bucket of water over her would be efficacious in the slightest, much as I would like to do so. She was as unrepentant as ever. I still can’t make out whether she’s acting, or whether she really is a psychopath. Whatever; I never, ever, want to be in the same room as her.
     
    And so, the circus has left town. But never fear, The Apprentice will be back for a fourth series. Already, the hopeful candidates are signing up. Human nature never changes.

  • Kinetic Horse Sculpture

    I’ve mentioned Theo Jansen’s windpowered sculptures a couple of times. Here’s a paper sculpture that’s taken its inspiration from Jansen’s work.
     
     
    (hat tip to Shelley Noble, over at Paper Forest for the link)

  • Downtime

    The LibraryThing web site is having a spot of bother at the moment – the system is down. The silver lining is that the LibraryThing folks have challenged its members to create a bookpile that illustrates the downtime. Here’s my submission.
     
    20070613-1658-54 

  • Homes of the Rich

    Geoff Manaugh, over at BLDGBLOG, ruminates on examples of the homes that extremely wealthy people create for themselves. I find it difficult to avoid becoming judgemental when I see examples such as these.

  • Fry on the Internet

    Stephen Fry, national treasure, talks about the Internet.

  • Whose Lights Are Out?

    London is having one of these fashionable "Lights Out" events next week. Lights Out London:
    aims to prove that we can all make a difference to the future of our planet. On Thursday June 21 – Midsummer’s Night – we are inviting the whole of London to turn off all lights and non-essential appliances between 9 and 10pm.
    Well, OK… And then what? Well, for instance, the web site suggests:
    Look upwards – the more lights go out he better view we’ll all get of the stars.
    Spot the bats – it will be dusk during the event, exactly when the bats come out to play!  
    And that’s the point when you realise that it’s not just London that will have its lights out – there clearly haven’t been any lights switched on in the brains of the event organisers either. As Diamond Geezer witheringly points out:
    the hyped-up PR gibbons have forgotten one very important fact about next Thursday – the longest day of the year. It won’t actually be dark at 9pm. Brilliant.
    Go and read the rest of his rant, it’s good. As he says:
    Is it just me, or are there more stupid people than usual working for London-based PR projects at the moment? 
    No, DG, it isn’t just you…

  • A Masterstroke

    The Guardian reports on a stunning idea by the US Military. What can possibly go wrong?

  • Food For Free

    The Elder bushes are in full flower at the moment. I keep meaning to get out there and pick some Elderflowers for making fritters and perhaps have a go at making Elderflower cordial (something I haven’t tasted for nigh on 50 years).
     
    Gastronomy Domine has recipes for both the fritters and the cordial if you’d like to have a go yourself.

  • Unaccustomed As I Am…

    Oh dear. Some time ago, a meme was released onto the internet over at the thinking blog. It’s purpose is to give recognition to bloggers who make you think. The rules are:

    1. If, and only if, you get tagged, write a post with links to 5 blogs that make you think and
    2. Link to the original post so that people can easily find the exact origin of the meme. Winners get to display the award logo.

    It’s a rather nice idea, but to my surprise and consternation I’ve found that I’ve been tagged for the award by Dr. John Carter Wood, over at Obscene Desserts. What ratchets up my consternation to a whole different level is that he lists my poor little effort of a blog alongside such heavyweights as Notes and Comments over at ButterfliesAndWheels, Pharyngula and Fisking Central. Not only that, but the good Doctor has thus ensured that I can’t tag them in return. Curses!

    So here, in no particular order, are a further five blogs that make me think:

    • The Loom – a blog about life, past and future. Carl Zimmer writes about the Life Sciences, and he writes very well. He seems to have a special passion for parasites, which flowers in his brilliant book: Parasite Rex.
    • Not Saussure – mostly, but not always, delving into UK society and politics. He has a fine rapier-like analytical wit, with which he pricks pomposity, not to mention his occasional bludgeoning with the broadsword of invective.
    • Stephen Law – the eponymous blog of a philosopher. I must admit, I’ve always thought of philosophy as being a bit poncy, and much preferred hard science. But people such as Stephen Law are changing my mind. His book The Philosophy Gym, with such gems as "Is time travel possible?" "What’s wrong with gay sex?" and "Where did the universe come from?" is excellent.
    • Mind Hacks – a blog devoted to developments happening in the field of cognition, psychology and neuroscience.
    • Unspeak – the blog by Steven Poole devoted to analysing the way in which words are weapons. I learned at a very early age, by growing up gay, that words were subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) weapons.

    There are several other blogs that I’d like to list as well, but I’ve reached my limit of five tags. Obviously, as hinted at above, Notes and Comments, Pharyngula and Fisking Central are amongst the list of blogs that I would like to name. Perhaps I can sneak in one more, by reason of the fact that it’s already earned a Thinking Blogger award, so it’s not as though I need to name it as part of my list…

    • The Republic of T – a blog by an American man who describes himself as a black, gay, vegetarian, buddhist and left-leaning dad.  

    And now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ll go and see how I can add the little Thinking Blogger banner to my blog space. Thank you, thank you, thank you… Exit stage left, pursued by a bear.

  • Hell’s Hail

    I’m beginning to think that Martin’s idea of opening the garden is cursed. First, as I wrote in Elementary Physics, I fell off a ladder trying to get the garden neat and tidy. Second, last night’s thunderstorm was a real doozy. Not only did we have torrential rain, but we had a prolonged hailstorm, with hailstones the size of marbles.
     
    Poor Martin was totally despondent this morning when he inspected the damage. The hostas have been shredded to within an inch of their lives, and many of the flowers have been pummelled into the earth. He thinks we should put out a sign next weekend explaining that it isn’t our fault that the garden looks such a mess…

  • And The Answer Is…

    If you’ve ever wondered what the answer would be to the eternal question, then here’s your chance to discover the precise distance…
     
    (hat tip to the Bad Astonomy Blog)

  • Elementary Physics

    At the moment, I’m moving very slowly with a limp and occasionally emitting a whimper of pain. It’s all my own fault.
     
    The sequence of events was set in motion about six weeks ago when Martin decided that he’d like to throw open access to the garden to members of the public. He’s a keen gardener, and very proud of what he’s achieved in the garden here in just over a year. So he joined Groei & Bloei, the Dutch association of amateur gardeners; the local chairman came to inpsect the garden, and gave Martin the go-ahead to open the garden. Martin picked next weekend as the date, and thus the garden will be open to the public next Saturday and Sunday afternoons.  
     
    Of course, Martin wants the garden to look its best, so we’ve both been working hard to get it ready. My tasks are generally mowing and hedge trimming. This last week I trimmed all the box hedges and yesterday I started on the hornbeam hedge. This is a tall hedge, and requires me to use a ladder.
     
    You can see where this is going, can’t you?
     
    I’ve got one of those multi-purpose aluminium ladders that can be locked into a variety of shapes. I had it in the form of a raised platform, with a plank of wood laid across the rungs to form the platform. Standing on it, I could tackle the top of the hedge, using the electric hedgetrimmer.
     
    Now, I’ve always understood the elementary physics of fulcrums and levers, and I knew that it was important to have the plank of wood laid carefully across the rungs. The ends of the plank, in particular, had to be resting on rungs, otherwise the plank would tip up if I trod on the end section. I knew this. And yet, about halfway through cutting the top of the hedge, I moved to the end of the plank and suddenly had a very bad feeling.
     
    I looked down, and saw the the end of the plank was no longer resting on a rung. My right foot was standing on the ladder frame. However, my left foot was standing on the end of the plank that was now free to tilt downward through the ladder, which is precisely what it was doing. Everything progressed in slow motion. I remember thinking that I was still holding the hedgetrimmer, and that had to be jettisoned in as safe a manner as possible, and that I was, in all probability, about to experience for the very first time, what a broken leg would feel like.
     
    Fortunately, elementary phsyics saved the day once again. Since the heavy wooden plank was now falling through the rungs of the ladder, all that was left was the weight of the aluminium ladder itself. I was now falling face down off one end of the platform, with my left leg caught between two rungs on the top of the platform. My weight, and my trajectory, caused the whole platform to lift and pivot around the legs of the ladder at the end that I was falling from. Had that pivot not occurred, there would have been a very nasty snapping of both my tibia and fibula.
     
    I lay there for a few moments (going "ow-ow-ow-ow", "shit!" and variations on that theme) before I thought that I probably should check to see if I had broken my leg. Fortunately, I hadn’t, although there was a small gash where the flesh had got trapped between the tibia and the ladder rung. However, now I have a painful leg and currently reduced to hobbling around. The rest of the hedge will have to wait.
     
    What really makes me feel stupid is that I’ve always known this accident could potentially happen. I’ve spent hours standing on the plank on the ladder platform. All it took was one momentary lapse of concentration, and the laws of physics kicked in. However, it could have been worse.

  • Don’t Blink

    While the episode was entitled Blink, the operative command was clearly "Don’t blink!" Another superb episode. This series of Doctor Who has had some real crackers in it. While the "weeping angels" were, for me, almost a MacGuffin, there were some fascinating ideas on show. The time-separated conversation, for example, and the sequence at the end when the Doctor clearly doesn’t have a clue who Sally Sparrow is (yet).
     
    And Billy Shipton was terrific.
     
    Nicely directed, too. The shot where Larry Nightingale blinks certainly caused me to cry out involuntarily. Nicely done.
     
    And it looks as though next week’s episode will have the return of Captain Jack and an appearance by Derek Jacobi. I can’t wait.

  • Michael Tolliver Lives

    That’s the title of the next book in Armistead Maupin’s Tales of the City series. It follows the last book after a break of almost twenty years. The world it will describe has changed utterly, and I can’t wait to read it. If you don’t know Maupin’s or the Tales’ background, there’s a good article in today’s Guardian Review.
     
    Update: Oh dear, Philip Hensher gives it a stinking review in today’s Observer. Perhaps the love affair is over…

  • The Handmaid’s Tale

    Truth is often stranger, and more unsettling, than fiction.

  • Prospect Cottage

    A moment of pleasure when I learned from Diamond Geezer’s seaside postcard from Dungeness that the garden at Prospect Cottage is still thriving. Thank you, Derek. You are missed.

  • The Levers That Power Cults

    A couple of days ago, I mentioned a couple of thought-provoking articles in the current issue of Prospect. The first looking at the background to  the lead bomber of 7/7, and the second that highlighted the views of Mary Douglas on cults.
     
    In the comments to my entry, Coboró mentioned that he had found that the quotation from the article on Mary Douglas fitted the situation of Fred Phelps’ Westboro Baptist Church "chillingly".
     
    I have to say that I’m not surprised. The laws that determine whether cults succeed or fail seem fairly straightfoward. What is depressing is how often the victims fail to appreciate this.
     
    But today, I came across another blog posting that I found illuminating. It’s from Sean Prophet, who writes the Black Sun Journal blog. Sean grew up in a cult – his parents founded the Summit Lighthouse.
     
    And why did I find Sean’s posting illuminating? Because it makes the all-too-obvious-point-in-hindsight that cults derive their power not only from their leaders, but also from their persuaded followers. Well, hindsight may be a wonderful thing, but Sean’s point is nonetheless valid for that. And he provides a very useful checklist for identifying cults:
    What do all cults have in common, to varying degrees?
    1. A strong central leader or founder.
    2. Belief that the leader has access to special and exclusive information or has special authority. (In the case of financial cults, it’s the illusion the leader provides of freedom from the laws of economics. The “mark” is vulnerable because of their desire for a quick buck.)
    3. A demand for loyalty oaths and obedience.
    4. High initiation fee or other renunciative action geared toward making withdrawal difficult, such as a requirement to cut off contact from one’s family.
    5. Rings and rising levels of membership, which reward strong commitment.
    6. Intensive, often confrontational–yet uncommonly intimate social relationships.
    7. Reinforcement of in-group and out-group differences. External threats actually benefit the cult by amplifying and solidifying interior control.
    8. Make people feel special, loved, and accepted.
    9. Often attract lonely or confused people who need direction and may have trouble fitting into typical career paths.
    But the most important characteristic of cults, without which they could not exist is:
     
    THEY NEED MEMBERS
     
    Members provide the power. They are the cult’s life blood.
     
    Without members, a cult leader would be just another delusional nutjob or con man. Without followers, the leaders’ loyalty demands or financial claims would sound downright creepy or fraudulent. Their wacky extremist philosophies would be seen in the same category as a homeless person shouting on the street corner. Early members provide the opportunity to hone and polish a more skilled presentation, develop wider legitimacy, and an illusion of popular support to budding sociopaths.
    The first thing a burgeoning cult leader has to do is:
    1. Create a mythology or backstory. In the financial cult, it’s fake case histories and success stories.
    2. Create a mission to give the work a sense of exclusivity and desirability (the way Tom Sawyer got the other boys to paint the fence). Establish an inner circle willing to reinforce their authority (at least until the membership grows).
    3. Acquire the skills to fend off challengers (as soon as members of the inner circle see the power or money start to flow, they will begin vying for it).
    Most people don’t have the skills to manage a relationship with even one other person. We only have to look to the high divorce rate to verify this fact. Imagine what it’s like for a leader to meet daily challenges to his authority (without the normal reward/punishment system of money/loss of job). This is why a cult leader has to get used to saying “because I said so” with a straight face. He has to get used to doling out stern summary justice in the form of ostracism and outright dismissal. He has to learn to use member peer pressure to humiliate and corral troublemakers. It also helps to appeal to supernatural beings and endless divine missions. But it’s not absolutely necessary. The most important skill is an uncommon ability to connect with people (on whatever terms), and to attract and control members.  
    So a strong leader is the catalyst, but as Sean so rightly says: MEMBERS PROVIDE THE POWER. Read the rest of his post. It’s worth it.
     

  • Pot, Kettle, Black

    Oh dear, Theo Hobson has written another column that has me howling in frustration over its wrong-headedness. A Guardian sub-editor has helpfully titled it as "Atheism is pretentious and cowardly". To which the only possible response, dear Theo, is "pot, kettle, black".
     
    And please, can you not redefine the term "atheism"? It simply means "lack of a belief in a god". You might wish to believe that:
    Atheism is pretentious in the sense of claiming to know more than it does. It claims to know what belief in God entails, and what religion, in all its infinite variety, essentially is. And atheism is muddled because it cannot decide on what grounds it ultimately objects to religion. Does it oppose it on the grounds of its alleged falsity? Or does it oppose it on the grounds of its alleged harmfulness? Both, the atheists will doubtless reply: religion is false and therefore it is harmful. But this is to make an assumption about the relationship between rationality and moral progress that does not stand up. Atheism is the belief that the demise of religion, and the rise of "rationality", will make the world a better place. Atheism therefore entails an account of history – a story of liberation from a harmful error called "religion".
    And then you state:
    Some will quibble with the above definition. Atheism is just the rejection of God, of any supernatural power, they will say, it entails no necessary belief in historical progress. This is disingenuous. The militant atheists have a moral mission: to improve the world by working towards the eradication of religion.
    Well, yes, I do quibble, and I don’t believe that I’m being disingenuous. The conflation of the terms theism, faith and religion is not a helpful contribution to the debate.  
     
    Update: and Ophelia wasn’t impressed, either.

  • Homo Sapiens, Version 2.0

    I’ve mentioned a few times here that our brain’s operating system still appears to be at version 1.0, and that we are in dire need of an upgrade. I’ve just learned that MIT recently held a one-day symposium, wittily titled H2.O, devoted to discussing ways in which the human mind and body can be augmented by technology. Webcasts are available at the site. Excuse me while I go and watch them.

  • Two Peas In A Pod

    Jesus and Julia have a lot in common, apparently…