I don't think that many people will read this blog because I confess I deserted the blog for the video camera and my regular readers will have drifted off. Thoughts and tricks now turn up on my channel on YouTube rather than on here. That is a terrible confession from someone who, when teaching magic, recommends reading rather than DVDs. Times change, sometimes not for the better.
In real life terms I am afraid I haven't had much to blog about. Most of my time has been taken up with plotting and planning and making sure my Mother is OK. She is doing amazingly well considering what she has been through and had to put up with. At 96 it can't be nice to be pestered by nurses and carers when all you want is peace and quiet and your independence.
As some of you know I have been hosting Magic Days (see elsewhere on this web site) and they have been wonderfully successful with great responses from those who have been to the sessions. Yesterday, however, the Magic Day took a different turn.
After being pestered by so many people I said I would do a day for absolute beginners. It was great, not just for those who attended but also for me. I had to go back to my own beginnings and found that those so called 'basic' tricks not only worked but baffled and amazed and entertained. OK, I am no longer the raw youth (except in my head) and the basic effects were embellished with knowledge of how to turn them into entertainment pieces but I was constantly so pleasantly surprised by the reactions.
Magicians, I think, tend to forget that stuff and the magic life gets more and more complicated as we seek so called better methods. As an example, yesterday I did a very old mind-reading trick using what is technically known as the Centre Tear. Simple. Easy. It blew their minds. Stunned amazement was the reaction.
I did a Book Test that uses no technology or added gimmicks at all, just two straightforward books. Same reactions.
Magic is a great hobby and it is a pleasure to pass on the knowledge.
Blog? It's nice to be back
Sunday, 24 February 2013
Tuesday, 29 January 2013
EU or not EU
The big political chat for the last couple of weeks is all
about the Prime Minister’s in and out of the European Union speech. Of
course the Opposition said it was a terrible thing to talk about in that
way. Of course we all know that no matter what he had said the Opposition would have said it was a terrible
thing, which makes a nonsense out of that attitude. Non sense in the proper sense, of course, in that if Opposition NEVER agree with anything the Government says, it becomes meaningless.
What the politicians don’t seem to be aware of is that the
vast majority of us outside the political world have no idea what the EU does,
certainly not for this country, or why we ‘need’ to be in it at all, or why we
went in to it in the first place. I
suspect it only exists to increase the number of jobs available to politicians,
or am I being ingenuous?
Some might think it’s so that we can do business with
Europe, and indeed we did vote for a Common Market so that all the countries of
Europe could trade back and forth across borders. I don’t know when we voted for anything else
OR why we need anything else.
We trade with the rest of the world anyway, don’t we? Nope, the more I think about it, it exists
to keep politicians thinking they are doing something.
So I guess that IF I am going to vote for it, if ever that
happens, they are going to tell me what good it does, what use it is… and at
the moment that is going to take some doing.
As I write I am sitting in candlelight. Romantic.
People in the old days must have had very good eyesight. I have 14 candles around me and I am
squinting. We do take things for
granted, don’t we? Like electricity for
example.
One night on a long drive home I focused on the number one
purpose of government and came to the conclusion that way ahead of defence,
education, and all that jazz, it came down to fresh water. Without that absolutely everything else
doesn’t exist. We have plenty of that
at the moment, a bit too much in fact, so the government must be doing a very
good job in that department. Forgive my
laughter…
Tuesday, 18 December 2012
Newtown and the Gun Laws
It has now been a couple of days since the horrors of adults and children being gunned down in a school in the USA.
Rational people, not just in the USA, but around the world, have been begging and discussing the need to change the gun laws of that nation and I have been listening to arguments against change that to me and many others are feeble and backward looking.
Thanks to a world in which new news comes at us so quickly and in such volume, the loss of life in such situations is quickly forgotten by the world in general, leaving only those who suffered a loss of a close relative to remember the horror.
What I am not hearing is any other argument FOR changing the gun laws. I grow weary of 'it's part of our constitution - the right to bear arms.....'. That constitution was written at a time when the world was a lot more primitive. That constitution was written at a time when the majority of the populace had very little access to a good education. That constitution was written at a time when there was no alternative in the defence of a home. The gun, which KILLS, was the only way.
Nowadays science has provided us with weapons that do not kill. Taser guns and other 'stunners' for example. Why not change the law to allow such devices to be kept in a home or business but to make it illegal to keep/own weapons that KILL.
What about me? I am a member of a gun club. Fine, I say. By all means have a well controlled gun club with a person RESPONSIBLE for seeing that all weapons are secured at the end of each day.
Perhaps it is simple that politicians who claim to care, are only truly afraid of losing some votes and not brave enough to find out if the people of America are happy with their children, husbands, wives and friends being gunned down in cold blood.
Guns are designed to KILL.
Rational people, not just in the USA, but around the world, have been begging and discussing the need to change the gun laws of that nation and I have been listening to arguments against change that to me and many others are feeble and backward looking.
Thanks to a world in which new news comes at us so quickly and in such volume, the loss of life in such situations is quickly forgotten by the world in general, leaving only those who suffered a loss of a close relative to remember the horror.
What I am not hearing is any other argument FOR changing the gun laws. I grow weary of 'it's part of our constitution - the right to bear arms.....'. That constitution was written at a time when the world was a lot more primitive. That constitution was written at a time when the majority of the populace had very little access to a good education. That constitution was written at a time when there was no alternative in the defence of a home. The gun, which KILLS, was the only way.
Nowadays science has provided us with weapons that do not kill. Taser guns and other 'stunners' for example. Why not change the law to allow such devices to be kept in a home or business but to make it illegal to keep/own weapons that KILL.
What about me? I am a member of a gun club. Fine, I say. By all means have a well controlled gun club with a person RESPONSIBLE for seeing that all weapons are secured at the end of each day.
Perhaps it is simple that politicians who claim to care, are only truly afraid of losing some votes and not brave enough to find out if the people of America are happy with their children, husbands, wives and friends being gunned down in cold blood.
Guns are designed to KILL.
Thursday, 6 December 2012
The Coldest Journey on Earth
It's the 6th December 2012 and I am putting off going out into the frost to clear the driveway of mud and debris left behind by it being covered when the river water came over the garden. That, by the way, is no big deal, it happens every few years and lasted less than a week. The lawns in particular love it.
Anyway, it's freezing out there so I have put on two pairs of socks, the thermals, the shirt and a sweater in preparation for the cold. Then I switch on the TV and the BBC morning news programme, after promoting an ITV prime time show (why do they do that?) had a reporter on a boat that is going to take Sir Ranulph Fiennes and his team down to the Antarctic where he and a co-nutter are going to walk on skis across that continent during the winter at temperatures down to MINUS 90 DEGREES.
Two things leapt off the screen and neither of them was discussed so once again I ponder upon TV journalists NOT asking the questions that I want answered. I can't be alone in thinking 'Why?' and 'What's the point?' and 'Isn't this all a waste of money?' and 'How will the world benefit from this?'
The second thing that hit me, after what I thought was an obvious set of questions to ask was, 'Who the hell is daft enough to pay out the millions that this must be costing?' It's not just the cost of the supplies, it's the total package of ship and crew, the special tractors and driver(s) that pull the supplies behind the two guys who are walking/skiing, the special sleds that take the three shipping containers in which they will live on the 'walk' across.
Surely the adventure is diminished by the knowledge that you can get into a container and be pulled to the other side?
Sorry adventurers, I just don't get it.
Anyway, it's freezing out there so I have put on two pairs of socks, the thermals, the shirt and a sweater in preparation for the cold. Then I switch on the TV and the BBC morning news programme, after promoting an ITV prime time show (why do they do that?) had a reporter on a boat that is going to take Sir Ranulph Fiennes and his team down to the Antarctic where he and a co-nutter are going to walk on skis across that continent during the winter at temperatures down to MINUS 90 DEGREES.
Two things leapt off the screen and neither of them was discussed so once again I ponder upon TV journalists NOT asking the questions that I want answered. I can't be alone in thinking 'Why?' and 'What's the point?' and 'Isn't this all a waste of money?' and 'How will the world benefit from this?'
The second thing that hit me, after what I thought was an obvious set of questions to ask was, 'Who the hell is daft enough to pay out the millions that this must be costing?' It's not just the cost of the supplies, it's the total package of ship and crew, the special tractors and driver(s) that pull the supplies behind the two guys who are walking/skiing, the special sleds that take the three shipping containers in which they will live on the 'walk' across.
Surely the adventure is diminished by the knowledge that you can get into a container and be pulled to the other side?
Sorry adventurers, I just don't get it.
Saturday, 1 December 2012
The Leveson Report
Even though the vast majority of the country couldn't care less about the Leveson Inquiry, the media is full of it, probably because they are the subject of the inquiry.
Politicians are bending over backwards to avoid any suggestion that they are trying to interfere with the press, but we all know that they pander to the journalists and editors in fear of bad 'reviews'.
Ages ago I wrote about changing the system, which they are apparently not going to do, merely using different words to justify the very expensive investigation, in which I stated something that I thought was pretty damned obvious. I fully support the freedom of the press; I fully support free speech. We were all brought up to believe we had such a principle and that made us believe they were telling the truth.
We equated 'free' with 'truth'. Oh boy were we wrong. Then they made them self-regulating. Good idea... not. Since when did we let the criminals judge the criminals?
I believe in the right to privacy above the right to free speech. This does not just apply to the world of celebrity/politicians. My father, many many years ago when I was a boy, had a full interview printed in a newspaper. He had never been interviewed at all. So many times I have read of 'so and so' being accused of something long before it ever gets to a court. Whoever that may be is tarred with a bad reputation because he has been found guilty before being PROVED to be guilty.
So, dear politicians, to me the law has always been wrong. If someone breaks into our properties we can have them arrested. Why can't we do that with interfering nosey parkers who break into our private lives, uninvited, without our permission, when we have committed no criminal act.
I would take that one stage further and even prevent publication until the person is PROVED guilty.
Years ago a woman in the audience asked the great American comedian Jackie Mason whether he thought the (her words) 'womaniser Bill Clinton should be allowed to run for President'. As we have had so many people's reputations ruined because of similar reportage, Jackie's answer has lived with me for a long time.
"Imagine that you have root canal problems. Your face is throbbing; the pain is the worst you have ever experienced. Every dentist is fully booked for months ahead. You are suffering and there seems to be no end to the pain. Suddenly you get a phone call. One dentist has had a cancellation. Immediately you jump into a taxi and get to the surgery in record time. The receptionist shows you through and a nurse puts you into the chair. The dentist approaches you with the needle that will take all the pain away. Do you say 'Stop! Are you having an affair?' The question should not be 'Are you having an affair?' The question is, Can he do the job?" Brilliant.
I could not care less if a politician, a footballer, or anyone else for that matter is having an affair. It's their business, not ours. I have heard all the goodie goodie moral arguments and they don't mean a thing. To be honest it's boring AND it is their PRIVATE life.
So, I think the law should be changed to only allowing ANY form of media to write about anyone who has not committed a crime, provided that journalist/editor has the permission of the subject to print the article/photograph.
Should this law be broken then the newspaper/radio/TV/internet would be banned from publishing for three months and the owners not be allowed to create another newspaper/radio/TV/internet prog, in that time.
Self regulation does not work. These people have proved time and again that they think they are above the law and that they don't CARE about anyone else's feelings. All they care about is making money.
Politicians are bending over backwards to avoid any suggestion that they are trying to interfere with the press, but we all know that they pander to the journalists and editors in fear of bad 'reviews'.
Ages ago I wrote about changing the system, which they are apparently not going to do, merely using different words to justify the very expensive investigation, in which I stated something that I thought was pretty damned obvious. I fully support the freedom of the press; I fully support free speech. We were all brought up to believe we had such a principle and that made us believe they were telling the truth.
We equated 'free' with 'truth'. Oh boy were we wrong. Then they made them self-regulating. Good idea... not. Since when did we let the criminals judge the criminals?
I believe in the right to privacy above the right to free speech. This does not just apply to the world of celebrity/politicians. My father, many many years ago when I was a boy, had a full interview printed in a newspaper. He had never been interviewed at all. So many times I have read of 'so and so' being accused of something long before it ever gets to a court. Whoever that may be is tarred with a bad reputation because he has been found guilty before being PROVED to be guilty.
So, dear politicians, to me the law has always been wrong. If someone breaks into our properties we can have them arrested. Why can't we do that with interfering nosey parkers who break into our private lives, uninvited, without our permission, when we have committed no criminal act.
I would take that one stage further and even prevent publication until the person is PROVED guilty.
Years ago a woman in the audience asked the great American comedian Jackie Mason whether he thought the (her words) 'womaniser Bill Clinton should be allowed to run for President'. As we have had so many people's reputations ruined because of similar reportage, Jackie's answer has lived with me for a long time.
"Imagine that you have root canal problems. Your face is throbbing; the pain is the worst you have ever experienced. Every dentist is fully booked for months ahead. You are suffering and there seems to be no end to the pain. Suddenly you get a phone call. One dentist has had a cancellation. Immediately you jump into a taxi and get to the surgery in record time. The receptionist shows you through and a nurse puts you into the chair. The dentist approaches you with the needle that will take all the pain away. Do you say 'Stop! Are you having an affair?' The question should not be 'Are you having an affair?' The question is, Can he do the job?" Brilliant.
I could not care less if a politician, a footballer, or anyone else for that matter is having an affair. It's their business, not ours. I have heard all the goodie goodie moral arguments and they don't mean a thing. To be honest it's boring AND it is their PRIVATE life.
So, I think the law should be changed to only allowing ANY form of media to write about anyone who has not committed a crime, provided that journalist/editor has the permission of the subject to print the article/photograph.
Should this law be broken then the newspaper/radio/TV/internet would be banned from publishing for three months and the owners not be allowed to create another newspaper/radio/TV/internet prog, in that time.
Self regulation does not work. These people have proved time and again that they think they are above the law and that they don't CARE about anyone else's feelings. All they care about is making money.
Tuesday, 27 November 2012
Floods
Right across the UK there are flood warnings and the like. The government speakers prattle on about how many houses are now protected and how flood barriers are now coming into place whilst at the same time reducing the amount of investment in flood protection. Actually, I do feel sorry for them because they did inherit an unbelievably large debt from the last government and it must be very difficult to balance the books and decide where money is to be spent.
Insurance companies are refusing to insure properties in flood areas.
Hmmmm.... I wonder if we are looking at this in the right way? I know dredging rivers is expensive and a long continuous process but we have had a lot more flooding since they stopped doing it. I heard an Environmental Agency representative saying that the difference is 'marginal' but I think every 'margin' helps, doesn't it?
We also have 'flood plains'. Could we dig them out and make them into Summer Parks/picnic areas and let them flood in the winter to take a greater amount of water?
Is anyone looking at the runs and flows of the water and where it breaks its banks? Could we not do what I have seen in other countries where they have large concrete runs for when the rains come?
Could we not use the weirs and locks to lower the water in, say, October, in preparation for the coming rainy season?
I'm sure others can come up with diversion systems or other ideas rather than rely upon the ever inefficient barrier systems we have now?
As for insurance, we have a postal service that charges the same amount right across the board for mail. The densely populated areas subsidise the remote country deliveries by averaging out all the costs. Couldn't the nation do the same with insurance premiums, spreading the cost across ALL the buildings?
One person said it's all caused by the ice melting and all the global climate changing. Really? Perhaps I could believe that about coastal areas, but upstream in non-tidal waters? I think not.
On a final note can someone explain to me why successive governments, who have decreed that there can be no development in Green Belt, have not decreed that there must be no building development in flood plain areas? Madness.
Insurance companies are refusing to insure properties in flood areas.
Hmmmm.... I wonder if we are looking at this in the right way? I know dredging rivers is expensive and a long continuous process but we have had a lot more flooding since they stopped doing it. I heard an Environmental Agency representative saying that the difference is 'marginal' but I think every 'margin' helps, doesn't it?
We also have 'flood plains'. Could we dig them out and make them into Summer Parks/picnic areas and let them flood in the winter to take a greater amount of water?
Is anyone looking at the runs and flows of the water and where it breaks its banks? Could we not do what I have seen in other countries where they have large concrete runs for when the rains come?
Could we not use the weirs and locks to lower the water in, say, October, in preparation for the coming rainy season?
I'm sure others can come up with diversion systems or other ideas rather than rely upon the ever inefficient barrier systems we have now?
As for insurance, we have a postal service that charges the same amount right across the board for mail. The densely populated areas subsidise the remote country deliveries by averaging out all the costs. Couldn't the nation do the same with insurance premiums, spreading the cost across ALL the buildings?
One person said it's all caused by the ice melting and all the global climate changing. Really? Perhaps I could believe that about coastal areas, but upstream in non-tidal waters? I think not.
On a final note can someone explain to me why successive governments, who have decreed that there can be no development in Green Belt, have not decreed that there must be no building development in flood plain areas? Madness.
Sunday, 25 November 2012
France and Flooding
It has taken someone on Twitter to make me realise that I forgot about blogging. Sometimes my life is so full that I don't think about time whizzing by. This past month has been such a time.
I've done a few shows, been to a few parties, and added a few videos onto my YouTube channel. Added to that I've done a zillion Tweets and done some more teaching/advising on my Magic Days. That's another thing I have left slip, sorting out the future dates, which I must get round to... very soon.
The Grand Adventure this month was to head off to Macon in France to do some more teaching/advising so Debbie and I decided to have a mini break and drive instead of fly. Great decision. We booked to go via the Chunnel but I thought my claustrophobia might come thundering back when the sides of the coach closed down so we made a last minute booking on the P & O ferry. Great decision.
We drove to the dock, got a ticket, and drove straight onto the ship which left immediately. The crossing was calm and fast and suddenly we were trying to remember to drive on the 'wrong' side of the road. It became a running joke as we alternated the job of driving.
At home I had decided that we should travel roads that took us around Paris, not through it, and that certainly on the way to Macon we would avoid the toll roads. Great decision. We meandered through small country roads and through the Medieval villages and towns of France. We stayed in a lovely hotel that had at one time been a monastery in Arras.
The next night found us in Troyes, pronounced Twahhh... or similar. Can I recommend that you all go there and visit their 'old town'. Wow Factor Plus.
It was a little bit worrying the next day when the Satnav took us into a farm. Hmmmm.... BUT then we discovered why we were both so relaxed about it all. We had no immediate deadline. All our normal lives we have to be somewhere by a fixed time and this trip we had PLENTY of time. We got to Macon by teatime and then the mayhem began.
Debbie drove off the next morning facing a 5 hour drive south whilst I was faced with four days of the most intensive convention in which I have ever been involved. The days started early and simply never stopped. I talked, lectured, demonstrated, advised, watched, laughed and generally really tired myself out. When Debbie came back she had to do most of the driving whilst I recovered.
The last night of that convention was a Gala show in a great theatre. Unbelievably the sequence of the show and who was doing what was left until the afternoon of the day. It worked and I was the penultimate act, doing a routine with onions and lemons, red peppers, boiled eggs and a pumpkin. The audience was in hysterics and BIG thanks to Gaeton Bloom for helping me out with the language.
The last act produced a (no kidding) helicopter. I laughed when one young man pointed out that you can either spend $60,000 on an illusion or, like me, you could go to the supermarket and get an act.
The year before, apparently, a famous French magician had done a lecture about ME! He edited together a video of bits I have done over the years, which included quite a few singing routines. Hey.. the French think I'm a SINGER!!! A new career beckons on foreign shores.
The drive home was uneventful and the ferry crossing back was as good as when we went and SO much less stressful than an airport.
Right now I am home. It's raining and there are flood warning everywhere. Our river is rising fast but if they will not dredge the rivers and/or create 'flood canals' like they have in other countries what do they expect?
I wonder what the morning will bring....
I've done a few shows, been to a few parties, and added a few videos onto my YouTube channel. Added to that I've done a zillion Tweets and done some more teaching/advising on my Magic Days. That's another thing I have left slip, sorting out the future dates, which I must get round to... very soon.
The Grand Adventure this month was to head off to Macon in France to do some more teaching/advising so Debbie and I decided to have a mini break and drive instead of fly. Great decision. We booked to go via the Chunnel but I thought my claustrophobia might come thundering back when the sides of the coach closed down so we made a last minute booking on the P & O ferry. Great decision.
We drove to the dock, got a ticket, and drove straight onto the ship which left immediately. The crossing was calm and fast and suddenly we were trying to remember to drive on the 'wrong' side of the road. It became a running joke as we alternated the job of driving.
At home I had decided that we should travel roads that took us around Paris, not through it, and that certainly on the way to Macon we would avoid the toll roads. Great decision. We meandered through small country roads and through the Medieval villages and towns of France. We stayed in a lovely hotel that had at one time been a monastery in Arras.
The next night found us in Troyes, pronounced Twahhh... or similar. Can I recommend that you all go there and visit their 'old town'. Wow Factor Plus.
It was a little bit worrying the next day when the Satnav took us into a farm. Hmmmm.... BUT then we discovered why we were both so relaxed about it all. We had no immediate deadline. All our normal lives we have to be somewhere by a fixed time and this trip we had PLENTY of time. We got to Macon by teatime and then the mayhem began.
Debbie drove off the next morning facing a 5 hour drive south whilst I was faced with four days of the most intensive convention in which I have ever been involved. The days started early and simply never stopped. I talked, lectured, demonstrated, advised, watched, laughed and generally really tired myself out. When Debbie came back she had to do most of the driving whilst I recovered.
The last night of that convention was a Gala show in a great theatre. Unbelievably the sequence of the show and who was doing what was left until the afternoon of the day. It worked and I was the penultimate act, doing a routine with onions and lemons, red peppers, boiled eggs and a pumpkin. The audience was in hysterics and BIG thanks to Gaeton Bloom for helping me out with the language.
The last act produced a (no kidding) helicopter. I laughed when one young man pointed out that you can either spend $60,000 on an illusion or, like me, you could go to the supermarket and get an act.
The year before, apparently, a famous French magician had done a lecture about ME! He edited together a video of bits I have done over the years, which included quite a few singing routines. Hey.. the French think I'm a SINGER!!! A new career beckons on foreign shores.
The drive home was uneventful and the ferry crossing back was as good as when we went and SO much less stressful than an airport.
Right now I am home. It's raining and there are flood warning everywhere. Our river is rising fast but if they will not dredge the rivers and/or create 'flood canals' like they have in other countries what do they expect?
I wonder what the morning will bring....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
