Archive for August, 2006

Some historical perspective on a present situation, methinks

If you consider the current conflict between Hezbollah and Israel to have erupted for no reason, other than perhaps the bloodlust of the primitive protagonists, then please drink some water, take a deep breath, curse yourself quietly for being so ignorant (and piggish), and read about an incident that happened almost six years ago, when Hezbollah — that’s right, our favourite terrorist organisation de jour! — kidnapped some Israeli soldiers for no really good reason. On that occasion (and many others since and before) Israel decided not to begin a full-out assault, but the twist that time was that the UN showed itself to be, at the very least, an incompetent organisation not fit to act as peacekeepers, and with a slightly more realistic appraisal, rather unwilling to deal fairly with Israel’s concerns about the murderous militia on its border that makes the actual Lebanese army look like a group of Boy Scouts.

Oh well. The world carries on as before. Something to do with Brownian motion, perhaps.

Leave a Comment

Pictures from a monogamous marriage ceremony

…can be found through here, splendidly. [They have been left deliberately uncaptioned for reasons of security and torpescence.] What is so special about this particular conjugation is that it involves people familiar to me (though not overly so, I beg you note), these people regularly going by the monikers of Ben and Frances, who now share a common surname. Well done you lovebirds! May you enjoy your newlyfound mutual surname, your enhanced tax status, and the warm, fuzzy feeling — not dissimilar to that experienced when quaffing really good hot chocolate — that comes with knowing you’ve found The One, and proceeding to bag them in style, only to find out they want you too. I await the arrival of sprogs with minted breath and my evergreen digicam, oh yes.

Is it only Tuesday? I hardly noticed.

Leave a Comment

Graphs of The Economist 2: Passport Costs

You were craving the next installment in this most timorously-coloured of series, I know it. So I tease you no more (and also take my finger out of the dyke, as the Dutch people once put it, but possibly don’t any more, and almost certainly not in English, at least initially) and present to you the second Excellent Graph of The Economist Newspaper:

Passport costs

[from Passport costs at Economist.com]

As they put it:

While immigration policies attract a lot of attention, emigration policies receive little. But it is hard and costly to leave some places, according to a study of 127 countries by David McKenzie at the World Bank. Obtaining a passport costs 10% or more of annual income per head in 14 countries, including Nepal, Laos, Tajikistan and 11 African states. In absolute terms, Turks pay the most: $334 for a five-year passport.

The staff writer behind this compact summary neglected to mention what I would consider the two most striking figures: that Armenians get free passports for some inscrutable reason, and that the poor (in terms of money and luck) Congolese had to pay more than the average year’s wages for one of their country’s passports. Why a passport should cost more than a day’s wages in any country is baffling, and the Armenians, assuming they haven’t changed their system, seem to have it the fairest way. If one is a citizen of a state, then surely one is entitled to a passport of that state, assuming one is entitled to emigrate [this issue will be passed over here]? This entitlement should not depend on ability to stump up an arbitrary figure, just as it should not be based on political belief, or colour of hair, say. (I could see why mullet-bearing plebs might be denied one, come to that, but that’s an anomaly. They should be shot in the first instance anyway so that one doesn’t need to, erm, mull over this question. Sorry. I’m really sorry. Please forgive me).

The argument that passports should be sold at least “at cost”, i.e. such that the producers of the passport break even, is specious. The “consumers” of the passport don’t have a choice over who to purchase their passport from, so that the cost of production is entirely at the discretion of the monopoly passport producer — invariably some Government department or quango. Witness how standard 32-page passports in the UK cost £42 in October 2005, the date of reference of the graph’s data, and now cost £51, and will soon cost £66, apparently in order to combat fraud or somesuch nonsense. If the Goverment wants to “upgrade” passports, it should do so with the taxes we already pay, or at least offer its citizens a choice of how ’secure’ they wish their passports to be (for everyone knows these ’security features’ are not worth the ink required to write about them, even if no ink is used).

If I insist on not having the courtesy to structure my diatribes properly I should at least make them funnier. Apologies.

Comments (1)

East Asian age reckoning [from Wikipedia, so caveat emptor, mutatis mutandis]

Trust those Orientals to have a mad way of working out people’s ages. Or maybe the Occidentals are the mad ones? I’m becoming more convinced so.

East Asian age reckoning – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
East Asian age reckoning is a concept used in East Asian countries originating in China. Several East Asian cultures, such as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese, share a traditional way of counting a person’s age. Newborns start at one year old, and each passing of a New Year, rather than the birthday, adds one year to the person’s age. This system is still widely used in China and Korea, but [is] less common in other countries.

Leave a Comment

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | 9/11 film criticised by families

While others contemplate the BBC’s coverage of the situation in the Middle East and its objectivity, or lack thereof, I shall present an exemplar of the BBC’s sloppy standards in obscurer news stories:

BBC NEWS | Entertainment | 9/11 film criticised by families

The headline to this article intrigued me — which film? and why would it be criticised by “families”? Do they mean, in the irritating and ambiguous dialect that is journalese, the families of the victims of 9/11, or people who are determined to shield their children from violent content, or what? — and so I felt compelled to read the whole story. I realised very soon into my reading that the headline is misleading, if not downright wrong. It is not the film that is being criticised, but the attitude of Paramount Pictures, the distributors of the film, and the director Oliver Stone, who had apparently refused to show some publicity films before every showing. It was not clear why they had refused. Good job BBC! The whole article is written in a very confused manner and leaves the reader not quite understanding what the point is, given how it mixes up reviews of the film into the same article.

There is also a strange quote from some Victim’s Relative that

“The best way for Oliver Stone and anyone in Hollywood to honour those who were killed in 9/11 is to make sure that it never happens again.”

Is she blaming them for making films instead of, say, engaging in espionage on al-Qaeda activities, or single-handedly assassinating terrorists and their ilk? A truly bizarre complaint.

On with my life. Yours too, I hope, but I’ll let you deal with that one.

Leave a Comment

Words for the Weekend 1

It might already be Sunday as I type this and that, but this should not diminish the value of these first entries in the exclusive-to-gfreeman.co.uk Words for the Weekend series. There are always other weekends to consider them. Don’t be so short-termist.

Eight words, all in English, first come first served:

  • inwrought [thank you von Mises, for the articles and the words they're composed of, even though you are dead. I guess that isn't your fault]
  • spoliation [ditto]
  • objurgate [ibid. He clearly used a big dictionary to create his works]
  • garnet [about as familiar a word to me as 石榴石, which is -- yes! -- the equivalent in Chinese]
  • miscegenation [a very useful word, and the demagogue in me can't help but notice how it's handily concorant with "misogynistic". Courtesy of the vixen]
  • margaritaceous [gracias wordsmith.org's A.Word.A.Day RSS feed! No gracias for the silly name]
  • pulchritude [ditto]
  • proceleusmatic [oh so ditto]

More to follow, if I can catch them and when I find the will to display them. Like butterflies.

Leave a Comment

Post-Bratislava (and much else) jangles

Despite a mere two months (and a couple of stray days, which are just as deserving of mention) passing since my return from that great, and coincidentally only, capital of the Slovaks, Bratislava, I am compelled by Providence — for it is she — to recount briefly my misadventures there, and thence to gabble on about theprofoundlearnings I gleaned from the experience. I can hardly wait either. It’s like needing to go to the toilet. I have not considered whether I actually need the toilet, so we will let history be the judge of that.

In short, necessarily relatively speaking, I highly recommend you — yes you, my shy, lurking friend — that you consider Bratislava as a future destination for your personal travels, and ideally as soon as possible. When I was there, I found it to be cosy (probably because I and my travelling companions stayed in and near the historic centre, though I argue that is not the only reason), pleasant, quiet, and most importantly of all, cheap. I am notoriously frugal, it is true — so much so that complete strangers recoil at my parsimony as I pass them in the street, strangers no more — but I was struggling to spend more than £15 a day there, not including accommodation. Oh no, for our accommodation was a rented, furnished, super-clean apartment, which cost a whopping… £17 each. I kid not. If you are a poor student-type (ie. poor and pretentious, possibly justifiably so [on both counts]), you must go merely for this reason. Pretty much anything you want to do as a tourist — drink, eat, sleep, look, don’t touch — is incredibly cheap, necessarily relatively so, of course. Just to drive the point to the point of tedium, you should visit the central (and massive) branch ofTesco just to compare their range of produce (wide) and prices of products (lower) to supermarkets in the UK, and wonder at the insanity of it all. And vow to leave the UK in the not-too-distant-at-all future.

You are unlikely to be enamoured of a place with only affordability to recommend it, I understand. I am a client-friendly blogger, so I will accommodate your needs, Sir. [This is also why I post so rarely, for your sanity]. Bratislava is, you should be pleased to find out, not only cheap-as-Slovak-beer, but a truly interesting place with its own unique atmosphere and culture, a good dose of picturesqueness, and hardly any other tourists. There is not an abundance of museums and so forth to go to, but certainly enough to cover in a few days. Food was, surprisingly considering everything I’ve said thus far, cheap and plentiful, and at best scrumptious in a wholesome way. The place was disappointingly quiet in the evenings, and the Slovak (and, I hate to say it, but entire Slavic) reputation for “Service with a Frown!”(tm) is intact, but overall there is little to fault if it is approached as an idiosyncratic and mostly uncommercialised weekend break rather than as a classic World City. The idea of living there for longer did intrigue me, but this was more likely due to my currently strong (if almost entirely unfulfilled) propensity to travel than the unique charms of the place. It is a fine city, though, and I again recommend it to you heartily. The crazy manhole cover certainly helps in this regard.

Pictures taken there have been uploaded to flickr, and some have even been commented upon by city residents (including an impish one who made it all the way to this blog). My heart swells with joy and blood.

I did go to Vienna on the train — very cheaply, of course — but the place had no appeal for me. It was too big, too loud, too grand, and ultimately too self-delusional to enjoy. It is much more in the mould of a Proper Capital City, and I’m sure there were far more tourists there, some of whom flew in to Bratislava with us [I know this because of the number of passengers clutching guides to Vienna in their disloyal hands as they walked treacherously to their seats], but this isn’t where my interest lies. If touristic enjoyment of a city depends more on seeing as many grand buildings as possible in one day while doing “normal” things like eating somewhere involves a choice between lots of indistinguishable and extortionate tourist-traps, then I’d rather not be a tourist. To make it clear: Bratislava seemed like a nice place to be, and Vienna did not. Sorry Österreich! I did find out, though, that Vienna was under occupation until 1955, which was, and indeed still is, a remarkable fact. Hence my remarking on it.

As I write about these cities, I am reminded of small details, small personal memories that no-one else shares with me and no-one ever will. Ideally, I would have liked to have written about those here too, but I am worried the result will be stale. I should endeavour to write down what I get up to and think of on my travels every day, at least in a private diary if not in the public domain. Thus I can be surer that I am basing my judgments on real events rather than my fallible memory. It is a good idea to write about past events after a substantial period of time has elapsed, in order to apply new wisdom to one’s uncertain past, but only if something was also written at the time. It is a habit I will need to learn, as I have needed to for much time. It isn’t easy living the perfect life, damnit. I should take more photos too. Goodness knows what I really need to do.

Gabbling over, I submit and submit and carry on.

(Shanghai is next, Guy fans).

Comments (2)