The Princess Di Effect

Emotion is a deep well. It rises from inside and has as its foundation, who we are, and who we are is a complex gestation slowly kindled by our personal experiences.
Watching replays of the funeral of Princess Diana one is struck by the pathos in the crowds outside the Abbey and the spontaneous applause after the speech of Lord Spencer within the Abbey.
The scene as usual, in these choreographed events,  a gathering of the great and the good inside the Cathedral. Arrayed in terms of rank and importance, sprinkled by the "outlanders", specially invited as a sop to the people (at the insistence of the Spencer family), friends from the music industry and the charities in which Diana was involved.
Protocol is always the cement that binds an event like this together but protocol was stretched to the maximum with the sight of Elton John seated at a piano singing a modified single of his about the emotionally taught Princess.
Then came the bombshell of her brothers eulogy. His words ringing clear, he criticised the press for hounding her, and, more importantly, his criticism of the Royal Family and the Establishment.
They sat and twisted in their pew until the moment, when he finished and the sound of the 'People' applauding outside the Abbey was heard by the congregation. A ringing appreciation for what he had said brought applause from those seated on the grass outside and slowly the congregation were hesitantly drawn into it and clapping within the Abbey started to accompany the folk outside.
Can you imagine having been given a slating by Spencer, (one of them or so they thought) - to then acknowledge the truth, with their own applause.
Why people were so effected by her death has been the subject of many books. The nation needed an icon but why a princess from the upper classes, why someone who was flawed by courting the publicity machine. Very beautiful and in some way very fragile, she represented the time old curtsey, women at risk have to be rescued(the gallant knight on horseback) or at least given a sympathetic hearing.  But the emotion of the crowd was something else it was contagious. It caught people in their sitting rooms who themselves began to cry for someone, something which was missing in their lives.
It was a collective grief which bound us together, the catalyst was Diana but the real grief was for ourselves in this union with our fellow man and women who for once were united without rancour.
It was a moment of humility, in and amongst humanity that touched everyone.                    

Squaring the circle

What is the difference between living and dying. On the one hand you breath, on the other you don't. There must be more to it than that?

Whilst you draw breath you use your mind to imagine yourself doing things. The things you do should be memorable, that is you should remember them as part of your character, a part of your history, part of who you are.
But what if "who you are" becomes to seem inconsequential, what if, as you simplify your existence as you grow old, the substance of what you do diminishes to a trickle even to the act of breathing, have we not therefore squared the circle ?
The older I get the less I do and the less I can be bothered to do.
It's not that I am lazy, I still work bordering 74 and I still find great contentment in reading and writing. I still get a buzz from thinking, from reflecting on the commonplace and visualising the elements that make up the world about me.
But the "grand event", the holiday to far off places, the immersion in new cultures visiting those grand monuments, marvelling at the architecture, wide eyed at the Lions kill, all of this I have had my fill through the medium of the telly.

What more can I comprehend of the incomprehensibly fascinating animal kingdom than the BBC's wildlife series or the stroll through the ancient city's of Cambodia or the majesty of St Peter's in Rome, what would two weary feet add to my knowledge. 

And so I draw myself in, not encouraged by others who rightly busy themselves with plans for a trip here and a visit there. I am more interested in the mundane,the minutia of my own life with it's never ending revelations which are important to me. 

Party Conference Season

We have just finished the Parliamentary Party Conference Season where each party sets out its political platform which is even more important this time around since we are soon approaching the next General Election.
One of the changes that has occurred over the last decade or two is the power of the personality to capture the voter through the television debate. There has always been a significant personality at the head of government. Disraeli, Lloyd George, Churchill, Harold Wilson, Margaret Thatcher, Tony Blair,
but there have also been periods when rather grey technocratic people have risen to be PM and we seem to be in just such a period now.
The arrival of the TV debate has popularised the image rather than the content of the manifesto and as the public seems to be heading for shorter and shorter attention spans, the thought of studying a political concept and weighing it against other concepts from other political persuasions seems past its sell by date.
The coalition between the Liberal Party and the Conservatives has meant that politics has changed, we now have to evaluate the limit a party can bring on another to understand the impact and therefore the implicit value of that party.
The other fundamental thing which colour our view is the Political Journalist, the Pundit who gets hours of viewing time on the TV screen and whose job it is is to make the politician uncomfortable.
The black art of sarcasm is honed by these people who lampoon each party politician irrespective of the weight and the importance of the subject matter. Its a 'game' to impress the viewer who enjoys the gladiatorial conflict for the conflict its self and misses the importance of the actual subject matter which we should be interested in, since its actually the subject matter which effects us.
The Liberal Democrats have taken a savage beating by the media. They are lampooned and criticised daily by most of the press and TV media, no wonder that people who take their written/spoken fodder feed as gospel and have turned in droves away from Nick Clegg and his party.
The fact that no junior party in a coalition can contribute very much in the way of political reform without getting the say so from the larger party seems to me the weakness in coalition government since the party is scarred by events of which they have little in common. Through strength of argument some of the more extreme issues that the Conservatives would foist upon us have been watered down through the political term but we see now, after the Conservative Conference just how right wing and irrepressibly protective of the wealthy the Chancellor and his mob at the Treasury are. The only inroads into Britain's deficit will be through a greater purging of the Welfare State and the poor who draw on it to extract a living wage.
Commerce having found a way to drill down on their costs by not increasing the take home pay for their employees for up to four years in a row (in total contrast to the directors remuneration which has seen a 25 to 30% increase over the same period) the self same employee now has to turn for "state help" to survive. No wonder our Welfare bill is rising, the tax payer is contributing to the bottom line of many business enterprises who pay less than a living wage. When the subject of controlling the deficit with increased taxes particularly on the rich who have seen their incomes rise so substantially their is a total denial.
For most of us it would seem fair and sensible but then politics was never the art of sense or sensibility.             

http://twocents2012.blogspot.com.au/          

Termination of a dream.

Often it is only in moments of great loss do we truly consider our own lives and the fickle nature of this life we lead.
The Buddhists call it "impermanence", and warn against the natural conclusion that our lives somehow have a sense of permanence into which we project our very existence, setting the rules by which we live and the dreams which fulfil us.
Death, especially the death of a young person seems so meaningless, the meaning being in the loss of potential of the person who has died as well as our own lost opportunity to engage in it.
Life at least in the West has a path and a time scale. There is no reason to doubt our implicit belief in the continuation, each day following the last, each triumph and disaster enacted within the prism of a life cycle which is taken for granted. There is little else to expect, but that we grow old, hopefully without pain, without becoming an invalid perhaps with some success, perhaps with a little love but that our time is a given we assume to be fact.
Why do the young die. I am not talking about accidental death but death from seemingly natural causes. In the very question lies the answer of course. we question an early death because we do not question life its self. We are engrossed in the daily "activity" of living, each event proceeding the last like a chain that is joined together. Stretching behind and in front, or at least we presume so and of course we have a right to do so except that there is no surety and, in retrospect we should re-examine our presumption, minute by minute.
Of course life would be unbearable if we thought along these lines but in their philosophical way Buddhists  abstract ourselves as individuals and establish themselves as part of the human condition, they accentuate the importance of disengaging from our tendency to project into the future, of losing  ourselves in believing that each day is owned by us,  that each month, each year is 'in the bank' for us to spend at our leisure and pleasure. Their investigation reveals a hidden self, hidden under the fold of desire and acquisition of envy much of it based on the assumption that there is time and there are things which we don't have but which having would make us happier.
Death explodes all this with its finality, with its blunt termination of the dream.           

http://twocents2012.blogspot.com.au/          

After dinner

Having finished dinner the conversation settled on the values we attach to the way we live and the suggestion that we place an unnecessary burden on ourselves in the choices we make as to the standard and the social conformity we aspire to.
On the one hand is our slavish concern with work and the benefits we obtain in earning a decent living.
Of having what most people would equate to modern conveniences, of having the spare cash to meet the needs of our family, be it education or a trip to where ever.
The other side of the table, as it were was a stout proclamation of the need to reassemble our perspective on what we should  value and consider that the capitalistic ethos of working hard to be able to consume more and more goodies has made us a slave to consumerism, distorting family life and values and ruining the social fabric so necessary for a balanced life.
Underlying this was an argument that as human beings we have an implicit  right of passage within the economic structure of a country to be able to demand things as 'the norm' within the civilised structure which should filter down from a balanced and successful economy.
The argument that we don't have a balanced and successful economy and therefore must stop believing in the fundamental rights to rather get on our bike (in

NormanTebbits memorable phrase) to look for better prospects (a Dickensian phrase) should lead people to take action and not be caught when inevitable change comes.
The "alternative way of life", is more radical and needs a more radical evaluation of what we call normal standards of living. If we can cut into our concept of what our basic needs are and identify greater cohesion between people because one is not running the rat race, (largely determined by others), one has a greater sense of 'self achievement' in this mode of self determination.
Of course it comes at a cost, not only the lack of amenities but also a measure of alienation with society at large but of course if society at large is seen to be in hock to the crazies then there's no harm done.   The argument became heated, one side was accused of not listening but its often my experience that the accuser,  is often the frustrated one, since they themselves are evoking a theme into which they have invested too much emotional baggage !!       

http://twocents2012.blogspot.com.au/          

Choosing our evils

The hypocrisy we have to accept on behalf of our leaders makes our own sense of what is right and wrong difficult to come to terms with.
Many of the countries we seek alliance with are clearly very dodgy in terms of the rights they offer their own citizens. The Middle Eastern block who we are currently aligning ourselves with in the fight against ISIS treat their own citizens with as little respect as the Jihads treat their hostages. Wholesale executions, stoning and other forms of mutilation are the norm in some of these bedfellow countries but expedience limits the reports in our own media, other than in exceptional cases, we are fed the output of many Hooray Henry's    .
This is not to say that action should not be taken against the extremist Jihad  groups but we should always be open to question the motives of our leaders. It is rare that there isn't another agenda, which once the immediate objective is completed the actual needs of the people are left to wither.
History is full of events that resemble the atrocities of the Islamic Caliphate which the West seems hell bent to punish but who in their judgement do not seem to feel to have the same opprobrium.
The horrific murder of their western captives quite rightly raises the ire of government heads across the nations but where was their condemnation of General Sisi when he condemned over 500 Muslims to be executed (yes 500). Where has been the condemnation of the 7 year sentences handed out to 3 journalists for doing their job of reporting the upheaval in Egypt.
Of course its not in the interest of the West to censure Sisi since they need him in their fight against the unrest in the Middle East and so the deception goes on and on and on !!!            

http://twocents2012.blogspot.com.au/

What is dialogue

What is dialogue.
Its not a speech its not an argument its not a rant, it is based on listening !! If we listen, we hear another opinion, another viewpoint, another persons experience can become ours in the sense that in part we start along the path to understanding.
Of course our own opinions cloud the opinion being proffered but if we can peer through the mist of our prejudice and clear the way to listening with the same intensity we put into projecting our own opinion we might make some headway
Music has an enduring influence, cutting through the 'individuals' perspective, uniting people in the beauty,  the soothing or the exciting effect that musical harmony has on our emotional inner self. 
Dance, couples the human ego with the liberation that music brings.  The Zorba stamp, the Somali shuffle,  Hip Hop, even the Waltz have the magic of a special kind, a language which humans merge into 'without prejudice'.
The rhythm of dance music is infectious it draws people in to exhibit a part of themselves which is often locked up in apprehension, a fear of making a fool of themselves.  With others its a liberating event, expressing themselves without commitment, making a splash without getting wet.
Locked away in our cerebrum are a whole range of opportunities/persona needing the space to explore being someone who is not represented by the person others see. How cloned we are by our upbringing and the life we have lived. A life of conformity, a life of satisfying others, in many ways a trade off to bridge a gap which will always remain.