Fabulously British?

Brits, stand up for your country! We are losing our national identity and losing our class. With the onset of a modern, muticultural, overly-politically correct Britain, we are fast forgetting the values that made these islands what they were. Fight back guys, be PROUD to be British (a rarity, since most Brits almost seem apologetic about it all), keep the old traditions alive. Welcome the new of course, but do not forget the old! Here's how.

Drink
But not too much. Us Brits have got a knack for binge drinking into all sorts of trouble, while the rest of Europe/the world looks on appalled. There is nothing wrong with drinking, but take it easy, and above all drink proper drinks. No alcopops. No cheap wine. No Jack Daniels and coke (if anyone tells you it's whisky, point the fool in the direction of Scotland). Any true Brit will drink Port, Whisky, Sloe gin, gin and tonic in the winter, and (proper) cider, real ale and Pimm's in the summer.

The Royal Family
Being a royalist has gone distinctly out of fashion, but the royal family are something we ought to be hanging on to dearly. The royal family and aristocracy link us back in time, and remember our heritage is one of the best things about Britain, so do not dismiss the monarchy on the basis of fairness. Yes, it's unfair that the Queen is so rich, and you are not. Deal with it, getting rid of the monarchy will not change that. At least the Queen draws in thousands of tourists (and their money). What about the Big Brother contestants? Or Pete Docherty? Or Posh Spice? What use are they? Why on earth are we so willing to hand these worthless idiots money then, but not the Queen? If you're going to complain about taxes and how we pay too much, don't blame royalty. Blame VAT. Blame that bloody NHS money blackhole. Blame the ailing state schools. Blame the fact that we are on an island and separated from Europe. It's not all down to the Queen.

The Pound
True Brits do not denounce their national currency, especially one that has been around in various forms for over a millenium. The Euro is for traitors.

Wear Tweed
Nothing says British like tweed. Wear it. Oh and on the subject of tweed....

...Dress properly!
London is a world fashion centre, we are one of only a few countries host to international fashion shows. Our fashion identity is entwined with our cultural identity. This is why we cannot hope to compete with the Italians or New Yorkers for sophistication, nor the French for chic style. In fact, our fashion identity sets us completely apart from the rest of the world, and that's why it's such a winner. Other countries can't understand quite what we do, which is nifty because nor do we- eclectic is our look, fabulously put together but without all the priss and hous of planning that other countries go for. Our look is almost accidental style, something we just "put together", even if we didn't. I am not talking about average Joes wearing tracksuits down the high street, or northern lasses wearing the shortest of dresses in the coldest of weather. I'm talking about Lily Allen teaming ball gowns with trainers. Kate Moss (yes I said it) making ladies waistcoats fashionable. British fashion breaks the rules, often teaming old and new together, and it's not just for celebrities, everyone can do it. Try wearing an old Barbour wax jacket with a pair of skinny jeans. Instant festival cool. Here is my breakdown of the key British brands:

Barbour. Duh.

Sadly, this has become fashionable with the Wall St. types in NY, especially the Berwick Tweed (the Queen's favourite) which I think is a shame. Shooting jackets were meant to hold cartridges and keep off the driving weather, not look cool over a 3 piece suit.

Mulberry

Forget Louis Vuitton. It's crass. It's common (despite the price). It's footballer's wife-y, and no longer synonymous with wealth, but with a lack of taste. Instead, go for Mulberry. Understated, classy, and you will be handing these luggage bags down to your children. Timeless British classics.

Burberry

Sadly this brand has had to fight hard to keep customers, after their signature plaid pattern became a method for identifying "chavs". Happily, you can still enjoy this brand, as it was meant to be, without aligning yourself with these stereotypes- the easiest way is to own one of their trenchcoats. This is considered a staple for many people, and there is no hint of that pattern except for a slight flash on the inside brand tag. Most people will never know what you are wearing. So what's the point then...? That IS the whole point, and exactly what I am driving at. Brits should not be showing off how rich they are. That is the fastest way to look poor and desperate. It screams new money, lack of money, "look I just got some money and I want eveyone to know about it!". So keep the logos simple please.

Jack Wills

This divides people like Marmite, but one thing you can be sure of is that public/private school kids will want it. This brand has become THE thing to wear at university, automatically disguishing you as "a certain type". Some people wear it for exactly that reason. Some people hate it for that reason. Who knew clothes had such power? Most people just wear it because they're very nice clothes. I know I would much rather buy one shirt that will last me a few years and has quirky attention to detail (just take a look at the washing instructions! Or if you buy a pair of jeans, reach into the pockets... Oh my god someone left me a note!) than several cheap versions from Next. But there are some who take the Jack Wills thing too far, so tone it down to avoid looking like one of them...

The launch of Aubin and Wills...

At first I was really excited about this. Finally, a more grown-up version of the sloppy, loungey style that is Jack Wills. I was excited as I scrolled through the collections on the website. I was excited when the website informed me that the range was aimed at post-university 25-35 year olds. I was less excited when I saw the prices. Most of these items are virtually the same as Jack Wills clothes, yet they are more expensive?! Ok, even I will admit that Jack Wills is overpriced (but mostly I will happily pay it), but this is getting silly. Really silly. £29 for candles? £89 for a scarf? £300 for a blanket? No. I am not going to pay that much just to satisfy my urge to have something with the fox and top hat logo on it. No.

Though I will be looking for a part time job at Aubin and Wills when the flagship store opens in October. 40% discount anyone?

Lost in Translation

Oh god I love this film. Why has it taken me 5 years to discover it? Not only did I LOVE it, but apparently it's a hit with reviewers, since on Rotten Tomatoes it scores 95% making it the second most highly rated of my favourite films behind Citizen Kane (which, needless to say, scored 100%).

I don't have the time or energy to dissect this film as much as I would like at the moment, so I'll just post two photos that sum it all up for me (and shows Bill's acting talent perfectly):

1) He may be smiling and posing for a photo, but just look at his eyes- his heart is breaking :(. Just by raising the inside of his eyebrows slightly, he conveys this immense sadness. I never really appreciated what a great actor he is, but with the tiniest of facial expressions he manages to express something that words just can't.
2) To me, the funniest part of the film, for pure comedic timing and absurdity:

After watching Bob trying to have an impossible conversation with a frail man who doesn't speak English, we cut to Charlotte being diagnosed by a Japanese doctor who also does not speak English, then we cut back; Bob is suddenly sitting in the frail man's seat, holding this redonkulous owl, with no explanation. Perfect directing and dead-pan delivery (also, I want that owl).

Of course, I mustn't fail to mention the inaudible whisper at the end of the film, shared only between the two actors and the director. There are plenty of sites claiming to know what was said after various sound reworkings, but they are missing the point. It's open ended. What Bob says is for us to work out and differs for everyone. In this way, the film is personalised to each viewer, depending ultimately on how much we identify with either of the two characters. This is also reflected in the polarised reception of the film, dividing people into Bobs/Charlottes (who can empathise with the characters, become enthralled by the story and feel overwhelming emotion at the final hug) and... other people (who don't get it, who find the "missing dialogue" off putting, and think it's boring).

Throughout most of the film, despite their developing relationship, Bob and Charlotte behave quite asexually towards each other. They behave like best friends, soulmates, people with a deeper connection, who appear to be desparately avoiding physical intimacy despite both obviously wanting it. And it's not because they don't care for each other, but it's because they do, and the effect that would have on their marriages. For the same reason that Bob cheats on his wife with the singer, but cannot sleep with Charlotte- the singer is meaningless to him so it doesn't impact on his marriage. When they finally break that physical boundary and hug at the end... It's very powerful. For me, I see the whispered ending as an inevitable goodbye, a reluctant return to the mundane, unsatisfied, married lives that connected them in the first place. So based on that, I doubt Bob whispered anything like "leave your husband" or "see you soon" etc. It was probably more along the lines of "I had a great time", "I love you", something specific to them and their relationship; something conveying a lot of emotion associated with their connection and love, but simultaneously a farewell acknowledging it was over.

Actor of the day: Timothy Olyphant

Apparently I'm the only one who likes Die Hard 4. I'm not a huge fan of 2 or 3 (why watch them, when you could just watch the first one again?), but 4 was great. Not only for the awesome action scenes (parcour in the cooling tower? Fire hydrant vs a helicopter?? Bruce Willis vs an F-35????) but the bad guy was half way decent. And hot ;). I recognised him as the murderer in Scream 2, but I haven't seen him in anything else... He's very different in Die Hard 4. Still a bad guy, but less annoying. In Scream 2 he was quite camp and OTT, I was quite glad when he was bumped off to be honest... In Die Hard, he's slick and scary. I IMDBed him, he's 40?!?! How did that happen? Meh, anyway, obviously ageing is doing this guy a favour. How does that work? How is it that men tend to look better with age, but women don't (exception to this rule- Marlon Brando)? Back on topic, the only other film I know he's in is Hitman, and I'm not watching that. I had the game and that was bad enough. Let me give you an idea- there are two ways to complete the game 1) painstakingly creep around unnoticed, taking people out by stealth usually with sniper rifles or 2) killing absolutely every single person in sight and earshot so that no witnesses survive. I think the film went with the latter approach... Add to that the film only scores 15% on Rotten Tomatoes... No amount of fangirly obsession will make me watch something something so crappy*. I tried to find a decent photo of the guy to put up here, but it's hard to find any, or at least any of what I'm talking about. Virtually nil stills from LFODH. I wanted to show his scary eyes though, which is what makes his character so creepy in Die Hard, and so apart from his Scream 2 days. So this photo is a publicity shot for Hitman. See the scary eyes? Eeep.

*Unless it involves Ed Norton, Hugh Jackman, Christian Bale, Ryan Reynolds or Brad Pitt. But of course, nothing they are in would ever score that low.

Birdy bliss is...

...a tickle under the chin :).

If you met David Bowie and...

...he did this you would be destroyed!

Absolutely hilarious moment in Extras! Haha oh poor guy....

Get thee to a vet... STAT!

Just a quick post for any parrot owners. Parrots are quite hardy, they don't generally show that they are unwell. The reason for this is pretty clear- a sick looking bird in the wild is going to be an obvious target for a predator. So generally you won't have any idea that your bird is feeling unwell except for slight grumpiness or reluctance to leave the cage.

But if you start noticing any symptoms, start worrying. Not only does this suggest something might be seriously wrong, but after the onset of initial symptoms your bird can go downhill very fast. The sooner you act, the better your chances of saving them. Take my recent experience. My parrotlet Coco was acting strangely for a few days. He would frighten easily and fly into the walls and windows. He also seemed a bit wobbly and unsteady at times. Other than that his appetite and attitude were fine so I just kept an eye on it. Then in the space of a few hours on Monday, he went dramatically downhill. He couldn't perch on one leg without falling forwards. He was reluctant to fly to my finger because he couldn't get his balance and would fall. He couldn't walk properly along his perch or ontop of his cage, and instead took to sitting, legs splayed, lethargically. I saw this and wondered whether he had hit his head or had a fall, but he didn't snap out of it. I also noticed that his body felt cold and lighter than usual, and after weighing him noticed he had lost 2grams (which is lot on his usually 30g frame).

Cue me desperately searching online for a local avian vet (if you need one, look here). Now, I'm quite lucky. Living in the capital city of Scotland means I had a number of options. In the end I rushed him immediately to the exotic animal unit at the small animal hopsital in Roslin. This proved to be a good decision, as they had the experience and facilities to care for him. In the space of hour between noticing his symptoms and arriving at the vets, he had become noticeably weaker. His eyes kept closing and he slumped against the side of his carry box. He also didn't try to fly out when I opened the lid (highly unusual given that he hates it), and gave no resistance to having his mouth and wings checked (again, highly unusual, normally this results in getting bitten). They admitted him immediately and started treatment to get his strength back. He was in the equivalent of human intensive care. They put him in an incubator to keep his body temperature up, and also increased his oxygen and humidity. Then they administered saline injections into his legs, and liquidised food with calcium supplements directly into his crop (via gavage).

At this stage, they had no idea what was wrong. We ruled out the possiblity of any infectious disease (I have no other pets, and he is otherwise apparently healthy), and decided it was a neurological problem causing ataxia and general weakness, but we don't know the cause. Several things can cause this in birds: metal poisoning, general poisoning, liver failure, kindey failure, and tumours. At this point he was too weak to have a blood test, and I certainly wasn't going to risk anaesthetising him for an x-ray (to look for tumours and metal). That was 2 days ago. At the moment his is still at the hospital in an incubator, though he is much improved. His ataxia is better and almost gone, he has his energy back and he's eating well. Yesterday he seemed to crash again, losing all energy and alertness, so much so that the vet rang me and said I should prepare for the worst. 30 minutes later we was ok again. He's by no means out of the woods yet. They are going to try and turn off the oxygen this afternoon and see whether he can cope. If he does, and he's ok overnight, then I can bring him home tomorrow. As for what caused this- I hope it's something random that he ate or inhaled, and it's out of his system. Of course if it's liver disease or a tumour, it's likely this will all happen again and there will be no cure for him. But fingers crossed that isn't the case.

Moral of this story- get your parrot to a specialist avian vet immediately if they appear ill, even if you have doubts about whether or not they are ill. You might think that keeping them at home and nursing them will be the better option, but it isn't if your bird is genuinely ill. If they need antibiotics, they need them immediately. The saline injections and food supplements are essential for keeping your bird alive, and if they are weak like my Coco, they cannot feed and hydrate themselves. The injections and gavage feeding are also vastly superior to mouth syringing that you could do at home (since the bird can spit this out or regurgitate it quite easily). Additional medicine might be needed too, such as calcium or vitamins. Phone the vet and ask whether they have a small animal incubator, as this is lifesaving. Also aim to get your bird to an animal hospital, where there are lots of staff and people to check on him, even overnight. A smaller surgery may not be able to do this, and if your bird goes downhill overnight it might be too late by morning.

When you hand your sick pet over to someone else...

... it feels like the wrong thing to do. Even though they are avian vets, and will watch him every hour even overnight, and he will get the best supplements, and saline injections, and liquidised food straight into his crop. Even though he is being kept in an incubator like the one above which keeps him warm (his body temp is low and he has lost weight) and gives him extra oxygen. Even though he's in the best possible hands at the moment, it feels wrong. Because I know him best, and I want him home with me. If he goes downhill and dies, I can't stand the thought that he would be on his own away from me for that. I miss him :(.

The contradictions of Derren Brown

I'm sure you know who he is by now, and if you don't, go Google.

First, let me just say that I am a big fan and think his work is great. Though I think my appreciation of his work has "matured" over the years. At first, I was quite naive and readily enjoyed his "psychological magic". Then I started to notice certain things... Things that didn't fit.... Things that were repeated... Recurrences of mannerisms and phrases.... And I wondered which aspects of his work were psychology, and which were sleight of hand... Where does the magic and trickery end and the real psychology begin?

The reality

To explain what I'm getting at let me put it another way: it occurred to me out of the blue, when I watched one of my favourite "tricks" of his from an old series that seemed to show incredible skills of mind manipulation, that there was a simple method of doing it. No psychology, no mind control, no in depth knowledge of human thoughts (at least not in the sense he was stating), instead it was a simple trick. An example of this, which he revealed, was the trick in which he plays chess simultaneously with 9 people, which at first seems incredible, when in truth, the trick is very logical and straightforward. At first I was disappointed. The part of me that enjoyed his work for its implications in day to day human thoughts was lost. Partly. Mainly because I realised he has lied about his work. That's his prerogative of course, as a magician, but it's still an uncomfortable realisation. Then it started to get more interesting. Once you know that everything he does may be a trick and none of the psychology might be real, that he may not be doing what he says he is doing, you work harder and question more, to figure it out. I think this is what he wants.

Now we reach the contradictions. On the one hand, Derren seems to revel in revealing some of his tricks. As though by showing us how it's done, he is getting us to open our minds. If you have read his book, you will also see that he is very keen on encouraging people not to accept his work at face value. In his book, he goes from discussing psychology and methodology, to ranting about scientific thinking and rejecting irrational faith. The second half of his book is essentially all about how people should think and question more, and Brown's obvious frustration with people who don't. He is deliberately shady about whether his work is psychology or magic or both, and I think that in part he wants us to try and work it out. But therein lies the contradiction: he needs us not to work it out. His work, and the efficacy of his "tricks", relies on people taking what he says at face value. I won't go so far as to say his subjects are stupid... but he needs them to just follow his lead and essentially do as he says, otherwise it wouldn't work. Time and time again on stage, he seemed to get volunteers who accepted what he said. Who not only weren't previously aware of the trick (people were unfamiliar with well known tricks such as table spinning, even though they had been featured on his TV series), but weren't aware that he was lying to them to yield a particular result (such as fabricating an elaborate story about a "dead person" that they would then divine details about). Perhaps he can spot these people easily. On the flip side, perhaps he can spot the ones who are suspicious of his truthfulness too. Perhaps these are the people he sends back to their seats with a shake of the hand and a "sorry, this won't work with you". Or maybe he just does that for showmanship. Who knows but him and Andy (Nyman).

With the luxury of DVDs, figuring out his tricks gets easier with repeated viewings. This is because magicians use misdirection. They look at their left hand, you look at their left hand, meanwhile their right hand is palming the coin. So the first time you view the trick, you don't see it. So if you watch it a few times, you get past that, in theory. After watching his stuff and getting familiar with his work, you reach the limit of what you can garner from the DVDs, because they are edited. In the end, the clues you're looking for may have been cut out and you'll never work it out that way. So what better way to assess this man's skill than see him live? Surely it should be easier to figure out, if there's no editing or camera-trickery, and he's right there in front of you? Hmm... Nope.

The Showman

If you do decide to see him live, and I thoroughly recommend that you do, make sure you sit in the stalls. You are wasting your money if you sit anywhere else. I think you're wasting money if you're more than 10 rows back, actually. Although you might be lucky enough to get picked to go up on stage, no matter where you're sitting (though for the upper circle this is really unlikely). I have watched him from the front row, and there is nothing like it. You can see everything. You can lean forward and look up behind the stage curtain... As a suggestion. ;) When he lay down on some broken glass and got a man to stand on his head, he was staring straight at me with the most horrendous look on his face (though that might just be because he took an aversion to my face, heh), then when he got up I could see the blood on his cheek. That was seriously intense, and you miss it if you sit anywhere else (though if you're squeamish, perhaps that's what you'd prefer). Another bonus of sitting at the front is you get to be involved, even if it's only on a small scale. Derren often asks people in the front row for help (not as volunteers in his tricks, they are chosen randomly, but more general help). The downside of this is that you will not be able to relax throughout the show. You will be sitting there, and if you're anything like me, you'll be nervous that he is going to ask you to do something. Of course, if he does that's great! But he is intimidating on stage. He is very different to how he appears on TV, on stage he is manic, scarily sharp and dominates the entire auditorium. If you try to embarrass him he will cut you down! So don't even try to heckle him (a memorable moment from his show- a man behind me yelled out "Do you cheat??", to which Derren laughed and replied "Of course I do. What cheek, I could have you wetting the bed for the rest of your life if I so choose").

So how does he do it?

Now- on to the real question- can you figure out his tricks from the show? Yes and no. Some of them are rehashed versions of tricks from his TV series. So if you've already figured those out, then you're away (and you'll also be a bit disappointed by the show...). Some of them are simple psychology that we have seen before. But.. others are so incredibly impressive, and apparently complex, it was impossible for me to begin to work them out. With his tricks, I usually think "what would I do, to get that effect?", but he is very good at undoing that line of thinking on stage. He is a master of hiding what is really happening, and making you forget the actual events that have unfolded. In short, he is a very good magician. An added complication, which might melt your brain, is that at least with TV you can reassure yourself that he filmed the trick multiple times, and only aired the one where it worked. So how do you explain the fact that everything in the stage show works? Oh, it's simple. It's because, er, erm, he just, er... *sounds of brain melting*. One thing that I frequently wonder is whether or not Derren is offering us hints to his tricks all the time. For instance, showing us that he spent an afternoon flipping a coin to get a take of 5 heads in a row. Is that a hint that lots of his TV tricks are based on statistics? When he showed us how he beat chess grandmasters, is that a nod to how he deceives us with his other tricks? When he described memory techniques in his book (he has mentioned them throughout his career and certainly seems keen on them), is that a whopper of a hint I wonder? How about when he pickpocketed a man in plain sight, relieving him of his wallet, phone, keys and even his tie? Is that an allusion to how he tells people the contents of their wallets? I don't know at all. But sometimes I do wonder whether he is playing a game with us, and smugly revelling in the fact that the answers are right in front of our eyes.

Pants on fire

There is one thing that I noticed on stage. I have watched Derren from the beginning. I have seen all of his work (excluding the Devil's Picturebook, which is before he became famous), I have seen him live 3 times now and met him twice. After all this, you start to notice when the man is lying. Which is frequently. Derren professes to be an expert lie-detector, but when it comes down to it he is not so brilliant at hiding his own fibs. Of course, one should expect some level of fictionality in a stage show, and his are certainly no different. But after a long time of watching his work, it gets easier to see through some of his bull. I can't explain it, but it's as though a switch flicked in my head, and I realised he was lying. Of course, I don't always spot it, but it's great when I do. :) To spot the easy lies, just refuse to believe anything he says :P. That's a good start. If he is telling a story, he is lying. If he starts telling you about a book he read or a famous magician from years ago, he is lying. If he claims his act is dangerous and he might hurt himself or die, he is lying. If he claims you might hurt yourself or die, he is lying, though it's probably best not to try and disprove him at this point- just think back to the trick where he put large needles through Robbie Williams' arms- in that situation, you could try to prove it was a trick (i.e. a stuck on layer of synthetic skin) , despite the apparent pain and blood, by ripping the needles out, but if you're wrong you're in for some stitches. He might go to great lengths to show you he is telling the truth. But he is lying.

Anyone who disputes that, or who thinks that his work is purely psychological, needs to familiarise themselves with his past. His background is magic, particularly card magic. There is a reason why this man is banned from every casino in the UK! Then you have to remember that he gave that up, he left card magic behind, to do what he currently does.

A trick you can try at home

One thing I would like to say here, is that I tried his memory techniques from his book. I used them to get through my finals at university. They were a safety net, so I knew I had methods of retrieving the information, in case of exam-induced blank-mindedness. I absorbed an incredible amount of information in just a few days, and I can still remember it. That is more than a little intriguing to me. When I met Derren shortly afterwards, I thanked him for it. We had a very funny and charming conversation about... monkeys and sausages, during which, I kid you not, he giggled like a little girl. But that's another story. I never would have used those techniques to such a powerful extent had he not summarised them in his book. So, after my exams, I also decided to play with the techniques for fun. I memorised the order of a deck of cards. That itself is not a trick, not really (to learn how, check out his book). The trick is to get someone to pick a card, then multiple cards, and tell them what they are. The way to make that impressive a la Derren Brown is to make people think you couldn't possibly have learned the order of all the cards (they shouldn't even consider that as a possibility, if they do you're stuck), instead they are left with the impression that you divined the identity of the card from their mind. You can use showmanship to build on this. Get them to form a mental picture of the card in front of them (when you first start out, get them to put the card in their pocket so you can't see it, then ask them to close their eyes and form the picture, you can use this time to unknowingly look at the card below theirs in the deck ;) ). When they look up and left, gasp a little, pretend to notice something, say "I think.... it must be a red card!", and they nod. Do it again, pretend you're working really hard to notice some detail in their face or eyes. Once you're confident at this part, and at recalling the cards (which, under pressure, can be hard), throw in a little misdirection: ask the person to shuffle the deck. This can backfire, but you need to control the shuffle. Don't go handing the deck to a card connoisseur, who will proceed to riffle the order into oblivion and screw your trick. Certainly don't let them use a table. Keep your hands outstretched infront of them so that they only shuffle the deck a little, then take it back from them. This leaves the order intact for the most part, but there is now a possibility of your trick going wrong. Don't forget to say "now you know they're shuffled and in no particular order". For an added touch appear to shuffle the cards absentmindedly yourself a few times. This puts what is really happening out if their minds and leaves them with two options 1) you can read their minds/faces and 2) the cards are marked. One further point is that as you proceed with the trick and repeat it over and over, you need to keep track of the cards that have come and gone. This is because they are now missing from their correct places in the deck, so you will need to skip to the next card in the order. This is just down to memory in the end, but don't get caught out by it.

Now, I'm certainly no expert at magic, what I know about it is from watching lots of tricks, doing lots of reading, and trying various things out on my housemate. Heh. So of course plenty of his tricks are lost on me. But I really do love to work them out. His recent TV series have taken a different tangent recently. Although there still is the aspect of magic on some level, he explores psychology a little more. Of course, there is a lot of psychology behind magic, and that in itself makes fascinating reading/thinking, but what I mean here that he now openly uses NLP and suggestion to show their effects.

Who watches Derren Brown?

Finally then, Derren's popularity is as divided as Marmite. Some people think he's great, others
cannot stand him. True, he comes across as eccentric, "posh" (hate that word), smart and smug; qualities that a lot of people dislike. I think though, he is popular with two groups of people. Those who take his work at face value (despite his pleas for them not to) and enjoy his TV shows as entertaining fodder. And those who think outside the box and really question what he is actually doing, at every level. Which group you fall into depends on why you like his shows. Which do you enjoy more, being fooled by the magic, or understanding the trick?

To finish, one of my favourite "tricks" of his, along with an explanation. Works to spectacular effect:

Music of the day: a mixed bunch

Today I'll share some of my favourites that I saved to my youtube account.

More from Philip Glass first of all:



Sigh. Need to buy this soundtrack.

Secondly, one I've already mentioned- Where is my mind by The Pixies. Only listen to it in a happy mood though.



Finally- Milburn, What will you do?



Enjoy!