Life must be understood backwards … but it must be lived forward.
[Soren Keirkegaard]
Life must be understood backwards … but it must be lived forward.
[Soren Keirkegaard]
I’m not long home from an interestingly nostalgic weekend — I’ve been to a school reunion for those of who left Cheshunt Grammar School (Hertfordshire) in 1967-68-69. I was the youngest of these years as I left in ’69. The reunion (arranged by one of the ’68 leavers on his own initiative) was in the Red Cow pub, Windmill Lane, Cheshunt — about 5 minutes walk from the site of the old school, which is sadly no more, the site now being houses! Yes, the Red Cow was one of the pubs frequented by the 6th form at lunchtimes — except when we were banned, or the headmaster found out, when we went across the road to The Maltsters or into the town to the Rose & Crown.
We had a great time with about 40-50 people there (including some non-CGS partners) — not bad from an audience of probably 200, especially as many of us have lost complete touch with our school-friends. Being today there wasn’t as much beer being sunk as there would have been a few years ago — people were either being good or driving, or both! The pub laid on a good array of finger food. Having arrived about 4.30 we left soon after 9pm and the group was still going strong — if they were true to form they continued well into the night!
There were several people there I was quite friendly with at school as well as many I didn’t remember. Our deputy head (who unsuccessfully taught me History) also came along; I guess Kate must now be around 80, but she looked extremely fit and well, remembered us all and was interested to know what and how we’d all done. Richard who did the organising had arranged for our “all school” photographs from 1963 and 1968 to be printed up and displayed, so fun was had by all identifying the people (pupils and staff). Someone else brought their scrapbook of school memorabilia — I must look mine out! — which was another good conversation piece.
Everyone there seemed to be retired or on the point of retiring. Sadly I have a few years to go yet, unless I can magic together that big lottery win!
The reunion, plus a couple of drives around some parts of the town, turned it into a really nostalgic weekend, especially as I’ve not visited the area at all for 20 years. Indeed I left with quite a pang of home-sickness in my stomach — something I’m not used to and was quite disturbing. Let’s hope we can all meet up again sooner than another 40 years! We certainly should have a big bash for our 50th anniversary!!
Those were the days — the happiest days our our lives! Maybe an overstatement but they must certainly come close.
(Maybe some photos later.)
Sponsor a duck and raise money for charity – that’s what the Great British Duck Race 2008 is asking us to do. It’s British, it’s wacky, it raises money for all sorts of charities and it might get in the Guinness Book of Records.
In 2007 GBDR smashed Singapore’s world record by racing 165,000 yellow plastic ducks down the River Thames and in the process raised over £100,000 UK charities.
This year the aim is to go even bigger and better by attempting to race a quarter of a million little yellow plastic ducks down the 1 kilometre race course. If successful this will break the record GBDR set last year.
When is it? Sunday 31 August.
Where is it? The ducks take to the water at Moseley Lock, near Hampton Court Palace.
Can I go and watch? Yes, absolutely you can. It looks like a fun family day out.
How much is it? It’s just £2 to adopt a duck and this includes a donation to GBDR’s three nominated charities. Added to which you can choose to make additional donations to any of over 500 participating charities. And there are 30 prizes for the winning ducks with a first prize of a “whopping” £10,000.
It’s just a shame the course isn’t the length of the Thames from Hampton Court to (say) Tower Bridge. Now that would be fun!
Today’s Quotation of the Day is quite brilliant. It is Jon Stewart commenting on George W Bush:
He treats reality like it’s out to get him.
The same could have been said of my father; everything was a plot against him. Sad.
This week’s self-portrait: 52 Weeks 16/52 (2008 week 24).
Yes it’s horrible, and I’m seriously over-weight … but not as much as I was; I’ve lost 28kg (almost 4.5 stone) since October. That’s not fast, but it is fast enough considering I am diabetic and while controlling calories also have to be careful to keep my blood glucose stable. Actually losing the weight has helped a lot with my blood sugar levels and my blood pressure, so although it isn’t easy it is worth doing; I do feel lots better for it. But I really need to get rid of at least that much again if I possibly can.
Oh and yes, the tile effect is a shameless abuse of Photoshop – just to save the worst of the blushes of the innocent. Being nude, anywhere, anytime, bothers me not at all ‘cos I was brought up as a nudist! But I know it does bother others, so out of respect for them there is nothing here that you wouldn’t see in a swimming pool.
I recently came across a weblog posting by Jonathan Fields over at Awake at the Wheel where he suggests “Six timeless rules for my 6-year-old daughter“. Never having had children, let alone a six-year-old, I’m not going to discuss the merits or otherwise of Jonathan’s rules. But they set me thinking: What rules for life would I commend? And I came up with these seven.
I do try to live by these rules myself, although I have to admit I didn’t always; I’ve had to learn them for myself, the hard way. I don’t always succeed, but that’s part of learning: if you’re not failing occasionally then you’re not taking enough risks to move “the business” (whatever that is; read “life”?) forward.
I would commend these to anyone. OK maybe not in this form until that someone is in their teens, at least, but I’m sure they can be packaged in suitable words for people of any age.
This week’s self-portrait: 52 Weeks 15/52 (2008 week 23)
Don’t try this at home folks!
There’s an interesting article in last week’s issue of New Scientist in which Hazel Muir questions why it is that governments (indeed whole societies) ignore scientific evidence when making policy. Of particular interest to me was the comments on federal funding of sex education programmes for teenagers. As the full article isn’t available to non-subscribers, I give you a couple of telling paragraphs …
Among other requirements, the [abstinence-only sex education] programmes must teach “that sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects”. A 2004 report commissioned by a Democratic congressman concluded that four-fifths of the curricula contained false or misleading information, such as hugely exaggerating the risk of pregnancy or HIV transmission when condoms are used.
“The origin of this programme was not in science or research by any means, but in an ultra-conservative, ultra-religious ideology,” says James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth, a non-profit organisation in Washington DC that champions informed decision-making about sexual behaviour. “You could almost see the abstinence-only movement as the sexual health equivalent of creationism.”
Several studies, including a Congress-funded randomised controlled trial involving more than 2000 teenagers, showed the abstinence-only programmes were no more likely than conventional sex education to prevent or delay teenagers having sex, or reduce their number of sexual partners. Yet Congress continues to fund the programmes. Peer-reviewed studies of more than a dozen well-considered programmes for scientific sex education show these programmes can both make teenagers delay having sex and increase contraceptive use if they do have sex: “But how many of these would be eligible for federal funding? Zero,” Wagoner says.
Now why does the US have the highest rate of unplanned teenage pregnancy in the western world? Makes you think, doesn’t it!?
I’ve posted before about the need for a paradigm shift in agriculture policy (see here and here). There is an article by Jeffrey D Sachs in the June 2008 issue of Scientific American which picks up on this theme – although to my mind he doesn’t go far enough. As the article isn’t (yet) online, here is an edited version:
Surging Food Prices and Global Stability
Misguided policies favor biofuels and animal feed over grain for hungry peopleThe recent surge in world food prices is already creating havoc in poor countries, and worse is to come. Food riots are spreading across Africa, although many have gone unreported in the international press. Moreover, the surge in wheat, maize and rice prices … has not yet fully percolated into the shops and … the budgets of relief organizations … In early 2006 a metric ton of wheat cost around $375 on the commodity exchanges. In March 2008 it stood at more than $900 …
Several factors are at play in the skyrocketing prices … World incomes have been growing at around 5% annually in recent years … leading to an increased global demand for food … The rising demand for meat exacerbates the pressures on grain and oilseed prices because several kilograms of animal feed are required to produce each kilogram of meat. The grain supply has also been disrupted by climate shocks …
An even bigger blow has been the US decision to subsidize the conversion of maize into ethanol to blend with gasoline. This wrongheaded policy … gives a 51% tax credit for each gallon of ethanol blended into gasoline. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandates a minimum of 7.5 billion gallons of domestic renewable-fuel production … overwhelmingly … corn-based ethanol, by 2012. Consequently, up to a third of the US’s Midwestern maize crop this year will be converted to ethanol, causing a cascade of price increases … (Worse still, use of ethanol instead of gasoline does little to reduce net carbon emissions once the energy-intensive full cycle of ethanol production is taken into account.)
The food price increases are pummelling poor food-importing regions … Several countries … have cut off their rice exports in response to high prices at home … Even small changes in food prices can push the poor into hunger and destitution … some of the greatest famines in history were caused not by massive declines in grain production but rather by losses in the purchasing power of the poor.
… measures should be taken in response to the food price crisis. First, the world should … fund a massive increase in Africa’s food production. The needed technologies are available – high-yield seeds, fertilizer, small-scale irrigation – but the financing is not. The new African green revolution would initially subsidize peasant farmers’ access to better technologies [… and …] help farm communities establish long-term microfinance institutions …
Second, the US should end its misguided corn-to-ethanol subsidies … Third, the world should support longer-term research into higher agricultural production. Shockingly, the Bush administration is proposing to sharply cut the US funding for tropical agriculture studies … just when that work is most urgently needed …
Ten more questions to ask when the going gets boring …
[With thanks to Chris Palmer]