Wednesday, November 21, 2018

The Cult of Apple is now the Cult of Moleskine


The first stationary was, appropriately, immobile.  Early Man used cave walls and ceilings to record pictures of Woolly Mammoth hunts and other cardio activities.  The first cave painting was probably followed by the first scathing review, possibly followed by the first critic being chased from the cave, and being trampled to death by a Woolly Mammoth.
Fast forward a few thousand years to dawn on the Nile, where Pharaoh has gathered his architects for the latest tomb project management meeting.  Folk are still putting stuff on walls, although this being a more modern society they carve as well as paint.  That’s progress.  Papyrus is the latest thing but wait, one of the younger architects has papyrus that is somehow thicker, creamier and of a heavier weight than the sheets of papyrus used by the other architects.  Surely, this fellow must be cleverer.  He gets to speak first and suggests that if they cut costs by making the tomb pointy instead of a cube as was originally suggested, Pharaoh can afford to take another two dozen handmaidens with him into the afterlife.  Good help is hard to find and so Pharaoh agrees, meeting adjourned, Pharaoh goes off to stand in profile for the rest of the day for his official portrait, and the rest of the architects know two things, that they too must get this papyrus of authority, and that this cocky kid will be crocodile fodder by sundown.
Vegetable matter continues to be pulped for paper to this very day.  There have, of course, been a couple of diversions along the way.  Velum is the writing surface of choice if you want to record something for posterity and really, really, don’t like goats.
Today, despite technological advances such as the Apple Newton, stationary and paper is more popular than ever.
Indeed, it’s reached cult status.  When Apple were opening up their new stores all over the planet, they were likened to temples, with all the staff dressed like members of a religious order and Apple users showing a devotion to the company’s products that is surely more faith based than reasoned.  Like the Church, Apple continues to rely on the devotion of its followers to get it through scandals or, as Apple prefers to call them, iOS updates.  I’m not saying that changing the interface on my iPhone is as bad as diddling choirboys, I’m just saying that at least the Church has acknowledged that that kind of behaviour is a problem.
The analogue equivalent of the Cult of Apple is the Cult of Moleskine, or stationaryphelia.
Over the last few years, the Moleskine has made something of a comeback.  For all I know, or care, the brand was invented in 2005 but the thing looks as though it has been in the pocket of the combat jacket of war correspondents everywhere from the Normandy landings to the bars of Saigon.  It is, it has to be said, a fabulous product, having a cover thick enough to act as a reasonable writing surface on its own, and bearing paper that can take the ink of a fountain pen without blotching like a teen in a titty bar.  I don’t think it could stop a bullet, blade or broken bottle but I do think it’s sturdy enough to beat off an enraged artist who has read your piece on her latest exhibition and is trying to pummel you screaming, unaccountably, ‘to the mammoths with you!’.
The value in a decent notebook is twofold.  The first is that even if you are writing ‘eggs, milk, foot cream’ during a meeting, it looks like you are the sort of person who is writing ‘synergy’.  A good notebook is, in business or art or recreation, a commitment to a serious attempt to do something.  Once it’s in there, it’s there forever.  This is not thermal fax paper, this is a cave wall.
The second is an extension of the first.  If you treat yourself to a decent notebook, you make a commitment to yourself to be worthy of those who the advertisers would have you think used this brand before you.
Or choose a new brand, and be the one others will follow.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, October 27, 2018

The Right Tool for the Job


There is a school of thought that the medium makes, or helps make, the message.  For instance, a movie starring Tom Hanks released in ‘theatres’ (more likely multiplexes, places to buy cola and starch snack ‘meals’ with a projector booth or ten bolted on to the side, often located in a sort of leisure industrial estate) is better than a straight-to-video movie ‘starring’ ‘Tom Guttenberg’, which in turn is better than anything on Youtube, which in turn is oddly enough not better than your old home movies.
Which means good means film stock?  Maybe.  Just as the medium makes the message so there is a school of thought that the instrument making the message is important.  What else explains the continued existence of Mont Blanc pens in the age of the Bic?
Moreover, ‘stationary fetishism’ is a thing, and not the perverse desire to shag a statue you might think it is.  Rather, it’s the, in my opinion very reasonable, desire to use rather nice notebooks and so on for writing, well, notes on.
No doubt having a good notebook is important.  Anyone using one ‘in the field’ meaning surveyors, farmers, scarecrow spotters, appreciate a notebook with a good stiff cover that supports excited scribblings.
It’s when the notebook becomes a ‘journal’ that definitions become important.  A good stiff journal is invaluable if you are travelling somewhere that lacks wifi or Christianity.  You will need good quality paper that absorbs ink but repels damp, of sufficient weight to swat any winged pest but light enough to be portable and thick enough to stop a dart from a blowpipe.
Back in the day, foreign correspondents used to pound out copy on a vintage (or as they called it back in the day ‘a’) typewriter, and a manual one at that.  At least they did in the movies.  Hacks of all descriptions would hammer at the keys and the mechanical levers would pound the paper.  This, one thinks, is the sort of tool that you need to write about the rise of Hitler, the Blitz, the D-Day landings, the Moon landing, JFK’s rise and fall.  Not all such typewriters would come with optional ashtrays and beverage holders, but if they did it wouldn’t be a bad idea.  A serious instrument for a serious composer of prose, like a Wurlitzer of words.
The manual typewriter survived so long as field kit because, unlike its electronic cousin, it didn’t need to be plugged in.  And so things remained until the advent of the laptop.
Early laptops shared important characteristics with manual typewriters.  They weighed an immense amount and they could stop not just a dart from a blowpipe but just about everything short of a depleted uranium shell.
Laptops endured even beyond the advent of tablets, with their fairy-weight and their Methuselah-like battery life because as soon as you bring up the keyboard on the tablet screen, you have more keyboard than screen and the space left is fit only for the composition of postcards of Haiku.  Or modern news reporting.
However, you can now purchase clip-on keyboards for your tablet.  In fairness, you have been able to purchase lightweight and long lasting laptops for some time now, but they are so svelte that they barely pass the ‘stiff enough to lean on to write a note’ test, never mind the all-important blowpipe dart test which is not only important but also the reason I am not allowed in any branch of PC World in the possession of a length of bamboo.  Such keyboards are marketed as ‘robust’, meaning designed for angry bloggers who hammer at the keys like an enraged gibbon.  Is means that when attached to your tablet they make the ensemble a comforting weight, but still about 1/10th of that of a vintage laptop.
Ultimately, it’s probably not the instrument that’s important, but the message.  the instrument and the medium should not prevent the message being recorded, and that’s about it.
That said, ink on paper has more prestige than pixels on screens so, unless the museums of the future exhibit the flash drives of the famous, notebooks will always have a place.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 17, 2018

Man up


Dave Barry, the straight man’s David Sedaris, once wrote about the ‘Martian Death Flu’*.  A funny column I seem to recall, and an excellent example of the gender that does not have to give birth hugely over-reacting to minor health inconveniences.
Documentation of illness has, naturally enough, evolved over the years, like germs developing a resistance to Lucozade, a bubbling coppery liquid guzzled by wan tots in my youth and, if my colleague who told me this the other day is to be believed, loaded with caffeine, which would explain its restorative effect on the metabolism of a seven year old in 1970, if nothing else.
Dickens wrote movingly of poxes and ailments.  Operas trade in consumptive maids, oddly able to sing about their condition for three hours at a stretch.  In the 1970s there were a lot of films like ‘Love Story’, where a happy, handsome couple started a new life together, until he or she got something cinematic.  Luckily this trend ended with a bang in the 80’s when family members were killed not by a virus but by terrorists, enabling 110 minutes of bloody retribution by the Slow One, the Austrian One or the Balding One.
Journalism has cultivated a reputation for sensitively chronicling illness, and anyone that does so is to be applauded and rewarded, by getting better.  This is because when you feel under the weather, the last thing you feel like being is creative.  I’ve had a cold for the last two days and the only thing I have crated is a mound of crumpled tissues next to my bed that would put the floor of a bedroom of a teenager in a house with no parental controls on the internet to shame.
In the age of social media, people are able to share their experiences of being ill in the short, medium and long term and get support and sympathy.  A word of warning though, if you start reading any post titled ‘does this look normal?’ think twice before scrolling down.  Then don’t.
One of the worst things about being ill is that one cannot enjoy it.  Normally if somebody were to suggest to you that you should spend a few days in bed watching TV† and being brought sustaining broths, you might show an interest.  However, if the quid pro quo is a tickly cough that really gets going a few minutes after you want to get to sleep, you might be wondering if finally getting to see every season of ‘Will & Grace’ is actually worth the cost.
It’s not.  When you have a cold you suffer the double whammy of feeling ill, but not having the flu, the one everyone takes seriously.  Even the name ‘Common’, means that it’s undistinguished.  Best thing to do is hunker down and plot vile revenge upon all those bastards who still insist on soldiering on into work, on public transport, your public transport, instead of taking a couple of days to get better.
And frankly, anyone with the fortitude to successfully write about, photograph, paint, draw, etch, stain glass window or otherwise document their ailment deserves plaudits for being able to condense a cohesive thought in a medicated mind, even if that medication is simply caffeine and about 800% of the RDA of sugar for an adult, courtesy of ‘Lockets’.  This on top of the disturbance to the mental processes brought about by the constant consideration you are giving to spraying your hands with sanitiser, and the face of anyone who sneezes near you with CS gas, the next time you leave the house.
Having learned never to Google symptoms, the internet is, I suppose, a decent place for the snotty and the coughy to exchange supportive messages and a sure sign of mankinds’ advancement to a point beyond issuing anyone afflicted with anything with a pot of paint to mark their door and a bell to ring to advise others of their condition.  Insert topical joke about underfunding of NHS here.
Ironically, it marks a healthy relationship with illness that is very British, such as is not exhibited by tourists you see wearing surgical masks on London’s streets.  Not many haiku about snot.

* Don’t know where he wrote this originally** and for those who have not read the rest of the blog post before skipping to this footnote, can’t be arsed to research it.  However, I can tell you that it’s collected in the Pan paperback ‘Dave Barry’s Greatest Hits’.  This was published in 1988 when the only way to access transatlantic written humour was to go to the US or to buy collections such as this one, lovingly put together by an editor.  This was before the internet, and meant there was a lot of quality control.  The two conditions may not be entirely unrelated.
** Miami Herald most likely, just looked at the introduction to the book.
† Or as it’s known these days, ‘Netflix’.  Being in bed for a couple of days offered an excellent opportunity to catch up on all those documentaries that I have taped‡ and had hoped to catch up on when I had the time.  However, I have discovered that the perfect sickbed viewing is actually horror, specifically anything with a zombie in it.  I love a gory special effect as much as the next man, but nothing I’ve seen on screen compares to the contents of my tissue bin when it comes to biohazard.
‡ Should this be recorded?  Fuck it, I’m going to carry on using ‘taped’ until everyone stops using ‘dialled’.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, February 08, 2017

Typewriter 2.0


I am once again in a hotel, and I am once again thinking about journalism in general and war correspondents in particular.
It’s a rather pleasant hotel.  It’s in the centre of London, with a view out over the docks to the city (and there is almost everything you need to know about London, if you wrote that on the back of a postcard from the past anywhere else in the world, you would have the mental image of a place of transit smelling of desperation and mackerel, populated by wanton types with earrings, and that’s just the sailors.  The only boats bobbing in the dock here are Sunseekers and the city is the City, proud to leave all the lights on in their huge office blocks to create the impression that everyone is still hard at it after dark, shouting into telephones, Like In The Movies).
The air conditioning is hidden and efficient, there is no lazily rotating ceiling fan that can cross fade to become the rotating blades of a helicopter.  Maybe it’s stealth?
Nevertheless, there’s something about being in a hotel and not being on holiday that makes me think about journalism in general and war correspondents in particular.  I’d like to say it’s the mutual incompatibility of pool toys and AK47s that make any holiday hotel a haven, but sadly that’s no longer true.
So on the strength of my previous post about ambient soundtracks, I should probably be putting together the faux war correspondent soundtrack, era by era.  Let’s start with the 1970s.  Busy traffic, foreign murmuring, farting scooters, the occasional mooing of an ox, the whup whup whup of a Huey passing overhead and the clackity clack (‘don’t talk back!’) of the typewriter.
Vietnam was, I have read, the first televised war.
There have been plenty since.  I remember ITV reporting Afghanistan.  Film reports of Sandy Gall sitting in a cave somewhere in Afgan, breaking (unleavened) bread with the Taliban, who were off to beat back the Russians. 
And of course the Falklands.  ‘I counted them all out, I counted them all back’.  A Union Flag waving from the top of an aerial as a squaddie yomped to Port Stanley and Victory.
Gulf War I and Gulf War II.  Gulf War I was night vision cameras on tanks streaking across the desert.  Gulf War II took things to the next level, that next level being vertical as we were treated to footage of the nosecone cam of a bunker buster.  Not to mention the ‘shock and awe-shit there goes that little place that does great falafel’ of the opening night bombardment.
Gulf War II was the last television war.  Now, conflict plays out on snapchat and Twitter, barbarism on Youtube.
What the medium of the next Big One will be I’m not sure.  Possibly when the nukes start flying, the next war will be recorded by the cave paintings of the survivors but actually I think a more realistic prospect will be that the next major conflict will be reported by ABC when it’s a throw down between the Red and the Blue, rather than the Grey and the Blue.  I think Blue won last time?
Vietnam was certainly a reporters’ war.  It also produced memoirs and collections of reportage and, of course, a load of great movies (although the greatest war movie ever made is ‘Where Eagles Dare’, followed by ‘The Eagle Has Landed”, followed by ‘Heartbreak Ridge’.  Basically, if it has ‘Eagle or Clint, it’s all good).
As previously reported from the front line in Salisbury, I’m pretty sure that my ancient Powerbook could stop a .303 round that would take down a Decepticon, but I would rather like it if the keyboard sounds could be set to different themes.  Obviously ‘space’ and ‘rainforest’ or similar would be popular, but I’m attracted to the idea of ‘quill’ and, of course ‘Imperial typewriter’.
For the (written) record, I once owned an electric typewriter, a Brother, once plugged in and placed upon a table, typing generated a report like a fucking artillery barrage.  Hardly the sort of thing to write tender love poetry upon, that ladies could then read, and frot themselves senseless to.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Write on Beer II


I’m writing this in a hotel room.
It occurs to me that in my 2014 blog entry about writing on beer, I described the fiction writing process.  If I recall correctly, drinking ‘wifebeater’, as Stella is loving known, in a pub in the daytime drove me to outline a not-entirely-original idea of a series of books based on a martial family.  The idea has, ahem, never got beyond development stage.
But it did make me think that I was unjust in entirely overlooking a class of writers who drink, and drink beer.  Journalists, particularly, war correspondents.
This may not be entirely unconnected with the fact that I am currently drinking warm beer from a bottle in a hotel that is in a place I have never visited before and which I arrived at after dark.  If I had arrived in a Hercules transport firing off flares to distract surface-to-air missiles and then jumped from the tailgate thingy to a dusty desert airstrip, the picture could not have been more complete.  I am even toting my laptop, an ageing Apple Powerbook G4 that weighs about as much as a fucking manual typewriter (maybe even less because although those old Imperials may have been made out of steel and gravity, they didn’t have batteries that are apparently constructed from the same stuff they make black holes out of), in an canvas camera case.
An Imperial is probably better at stopping a WWII sniper round (other ballistic armour includes a notebook, but nothing beats a Bible) but I’m betting my Powerbook could be used to swat away incoming up to an including depleted uranium rounds.
As it is, I’m in Salisbury, but can assure you I am very much on the front line of civil unrest, as the town had its Christmas festival thingie tonight and there are loads of road closures and angry motorists.  Nobody has let rip a burst of AK47 fire from the back of their Toyota pickup, yet, but I noticed some pretty serious tutting going on in at least one Range Rover, which might sound innocent enough but to those in the know is as sure an indication that things are about to kick off as that fuse opening credit sequence in Mission Impossible.
Anyway, drinking warm beer (‘Brooklyn Lager’, got hooked on the stuff in NYC), is redolent of foreign correspondents.  That and secretly despising the locals, the warm beer selling fuckers.  Not really, big shout out to Salisbury, woo hoo! love your Tesco Metro).
Bars, back in the day before wars moved to places where the combatants don’t drink alcohol (hence, you know: wars), were places where you went to speak to the generals, the gun runners, the generals selling guns to the gun runners, also freedom fighters, terrorists, and other journalists.
Especially journalists.  Especially the Wall Street Journal correspondent shagging the local consulate girl, because he had great local information and because he was always, always, C.I.A. and hence could always afford to get a round in.
Also, anyone freshly arrived off the ‘plane who had British or American cigarettes.
Of course, that was back in the days when journalists stole stories off of one another and fact checked by getting in a jeep, and thought nothing of driving three days through swamp and minefields, rather than getting their stories off Twitter and their ‘fact’ ‘check’ off of Wikipedia.
A lazily rotating ceiling fan, so much like the rotor blades of a Huey, curling cigarette smoke (Christ, those were the days), cigar smoke, pipe smoke (Telegraph correspondent) and booze, and sweat.  Because the great thing about war in the tropics is that you sweat the stuff out as fast as you can drink it.  You could sit in the bar at the Choi Choi Mai from lunchtime to deadline and never have to go to the loo, thanks to the climate.
Not like now, tweeting ‘being shot at, LOL’ from the front while running like hell for the rear.
If being shot at in a war zone is an occupational hazard, but you are not a soldier and are hence allowed to booze, then who wouldn’t reach for a beer or two with lunch?

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, November 05, 2014

Write on cocktails


Famously, Laurie Lee, one of the nation’s most beloved novelists, wrote ‘on wine’.  Whether or not he was ever drunk in charge of a typewriter is unclear but one has to entertain the possibility that, as a poet, he typed without due care and attention.  He did his writing in the Greek Islands, presumably because in the days before bargain booze, affordable New World wines or even Blue Nun, this was the only way he could become sufficiently inebriated to welcome the Muse should she come to visit.  Also, proximity to Mt Parnassus may have helped.
Rock stars smoke, inject, inhale and presumably occasionally insert for inspiration.  Writers drink.  Christ alone knows why, as excessive booze normally leads to feelings of alienation from the world and a profound sense of being under-appreciated and misunderstood, all of which is achievable through the simple act of publishing a slim volume of verse.  Alcohol also inhibits early morning creativity, and certain writers famously were at their creative peak at first light.  Presumably this meant they could post the latest chapter of their novel off to their publishers at eleven in the morning on their way to the pub.
However, in the spirit of enquiry G&P is embarking on a five-part special to explore the effects of various types of alcohol on writing, beyond those of not being able to remember that fantastic idea for a novel you had last night (something about a boy wizard?) just before you passed out, or not being able to decipher the notes scrawled on a beermat that could be a poem, or somebody’s e mail address.
We conclude with...cocktails!
There are two types of cocktails, divided along gender lines, like the literature that they inspire.
First, let's deal with cocktails where alcohol is mixed with soft drinks and fruit drinks to the extent that the drinker can no longer taste the alcohol.  This is quite different to the drinker no longer feeling the effects of the alcohol, unless the drinker is the sort of person who lifts up her shirt to show the room her bra after three glasses of seven up anyway.  Fruity, or 'long' cocktails were invented with the express purpose of getting ladies drunk without their confronting the reality of downing hard liquor.  If Elizabeth Bennett drank cocktails, the woman would hammer Long Island Ice Teas.  It's fruity fun in a bonnet.
Honourable exception must be made for cocktails like Cuba Libre (rum and coke if you're an American), where liquor is mixed with a soft, often sweet, sometimes fizzy, drink.  If the drink is made correctly, that is equal parts spirit and mixer, then it's not for the bonneted classes.
Likewise, certain classics are exempt from appearing on the 'girls night out' two for one laminated (for easy cleaning) cocktail list at your local cocktail lounge or Wetherspoons.  These are gin and tonic because of its medicinal properties in warding off malaria and sobriety in an increasingly torrid world, and also Bloody Mary or, as many refer to it, 'ahh, thank God, breakfast!'.  The Bloody Mary is at the extreme end of the exemption scale, not only is it a famously tasteless spirit mixed with an overpowering and sweet juice (although vegetable, not fruit, so it's practically a smoothie) and then further disguised with a fish based condiment, but served correctly it also has half a hedgerow shoved into the glass.
Cocktails with things protruding from them are an indication that this is a ladies' beverage.  Again, there are exceptions, if the glass in front of you is home to, as well as something smelling alarmingly of strawberry, either a cherry or a lit sparkler, then you had better be wearing a sparkly dress when consuming it.  If it has an olive, olives or any other form of vegetation that nobody honestly eats for pleasure, then it's a mans' drink.
Which brings us to the second sort of cocktail.  This is where one sort of spirit is mixed with another sort of spirit and served in a special sort of glass, usually a small one, for the very good reason that knocking back three trebles in thirty minutes is something that is usually only done by on-duty darts players, yet when liquor is presented thus in a dainty glass, it's socially acceptable.
Mens' cocktails taste like petrol.  Although the second one always tastes better.  This is because the idea of what Matt Groening described as a 'sophisticated adult beverage' is to remind you that you, an adult male, are having a drink.  The taste is not unlike the first drink of beer you had as a child, awful.
That's why these drinks are often served chilled, if your tongue is numb enough then you may be able to drink your first one quickly enough to make more seem like a great idea, without feeling the need to rinse your mouth out with Irn Bru and move onto something with a cherry in it.
They are also served up with dashes of things.  This is to make something that tastes toxic taste even more toxic, but in an aromatic way.  Bitters are sophistication in a bottle.
The purpose of olives is to line the stomach.
Broadly, if you are drinking a strawberry concoction, you are likely to write, and read, literature either about feisty independent women who have social and sexual misadventures but manage to land the perfect relationship and job by the last chapter, gay friend optional.  Please note though a worrying trend of such female characters meeting for coffee rather than shots to discuss the state of their love life.
If you are drinking something that tastes like aftershave made from olives, then you are likely to write and read fiction about spies, honourable criminals or knight errant charming bastards.  These men also drink coffee, but only to shift hangovers the size of Mount Olympus, when on stake outs, or when in exotic foreign locations and the coffee has the taste and consistency of tar, in a good way.
Sweeping generalisations certainly, but the cocktail is no place for subtlety.  For all that has been written about 'mixologists', sloshing together some booze like a toddler with access to a mini-bar is less the recipe for something to delight the senses and more like the precursor to a night of some poor life choices.
But it also produces fiction that, in different ways, hits the spot.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Write on red


Famously, Laurie Lee, one of the nation’s most beloved novelists, wrote ‘on wine’.  Whether or not he was ever drunk in charge of a typewriter is unclear but one has to entertain the possibility that, as a poet, he typed without due care and attention.  He did his writing in the Greek Islands, presumably because in the days before bargain booze, affordable New World wines or even Blue Nun, this was the only way he could become sufficiently inebriated to welcome the Muse should she come to visit.  Also, proximity to Mt Parnassus may have helped.
Rock stars smoke, inject, inhale and presumably occasionally insert for inspiration.  Writers drink.  Christ alone knows why, as excessive booze normally leads to feelings of alienation from the world and a profound sense of being under-appreciated and misunderstood, all of which is achievable through the simple act of publishing a slim volume of verse.  Alcohol also inhibits early morning creativity, and certain writers famously were at their creative peak at first light.  Presumably this meant they could post the latest chapter of their novel off to their publishers at eleven in the morning on their way to the pub.
However, in the spirit of enquiry G&P is embarking on a five-part special to explore the effects of various types of alcohol on writing, beyond those of not being able to remember that fantastic idea for a novel you had last night (something about a boy wizard?) just before you passed out, or not being able to decipher the notes scrawled on a beermat that could be a poem, or somebody’s e mail address.
We continue with…red wine.
In doing so, it would be wrong to ignore the role that red wine has played in art.  By art, I mean proper art, a man at an easel with some oil paints, a glass of thinners, a glass of red wine and, if he’s painting a nude, a semi.  I was once told that artists drank red wine to clear their sinuses, or something.  Knowing artists (as I don’t) it was more probably to stop the voices screaming at them to paint, paint, paint the sky green.
On first inspection, the literary associations with red wine appear obvious, it’s all about the horror novel.  Not only does it look like claret, (actually it sometimes is actually claret), but red wine and other red drinks (strangely never Ribena) appear to be the alcoholic beverage of choice for those who wear rings, have lace at their cuffs and have a LOT of vampire literature on their Kindles.
Let’s make this clear right now.  You only need one vampire novel.  It’s called ‘Salem’s Lot’ and after you read it, you will never want to read any vampire fiction ever again.  Front cover blurb quotes?  I’ve got one for the publisher right here “G&P: this book will FUCK YOU UP!”.
So, moving on…
If you are a writer, you can drink red wine to achieve success in a couple of genres.
The first is horror and, as previously pointed out, it might be cliché but damn if it isn’t good fun to read a ghost story with something red at your elbow.  A bloody good horror story has a sensation of creeping dread much like the way a good red creeps up on you.  It swills and swells and surrounds the senses until you feel a bit queer.
The red is the drink of the mystery writer, the murder, the whocaresdunnet, the red is as thick and as dark as the clouds of confusion in a novel or the fog that lends atmosphere (literally) to a story.
Why would you drink red if you were writing?
Well, it mellows things, flattens them out.  Ideal if, in your first draft, you had ‘FUCK ME, THE FANGS, THE FANGS!” as the opening line and then a separate paragraph with 227 exclamation marks.
Red wine builds up to stuff (see also, fortified wine).  It’s the wine people drink three to four decisions ahead of taking a decision, a light procrastinating wine, if you will, and so ideal for mysteries.  “I’ll check out that death threat tomorrow, but first, a glass of this lovely looking wine left on my doorstep!”
It’s also the perfect winter drink (you can stick Horlicks up your arse and, in the case of a recent Horlicks-botherer, actually can).  You’re by the fire, there may be a blanket, there’s certainly an armchair. You have three uninterrupted hours ahead of you, you are of an age when you pick up a paperback rather than a smartphone, what better than a bottle of something cheeky to the point of impertinence to enhance the experience.
The other genre associated with red wine is a niche one; the military biography.  There are three obvious connotations.  The first is blood, soaking into either sand, turf, water or snow depending on your theatre.  The second is the colour of a military man’s coat, either intentionally during the Nepolionic wars where a red jacket was just the thing, or quite unintentionally in any other era when a red jacket meant that you, or somebody near you, had just encountered something sharp.  Finally, red wine is second only to the pineapple as being an essential element of any military anecdote.  ‘This bottle here, these were the damned Frenchies’, that sort of thing.
And that’s that.  There’s a book for every sort of reader and there’s a drink for every sort of writer, some writers indeed (Kinky Friedman, I’m looking at you!) enjoy several types of drink.  Laurie Lee wrote on wine and wrote brilliantly, but sometimes it’s interesting to consider that, if he had written on beer or fizz, he could have left a lasting legacy of military yarns or even romcom.
Of course, what he’s most famous for is cider.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Write on spirits


Famously, Laurie Lee, one of the nation’s most beloved novelists, wrote ‘on wine’.  Whether or not he was ever drunk in charge of a typewriter is unclear but one has to entertain the possibility that, as a poet, he typed without due care and attention.  He did his writing in the Greek Islands, presumably because in the days before bargain booze, affordable New World wines or even Blue Nun, this was the only way he could become sufficiently inebriated to welcome the Muse should she come to visit.  Also, proximity to Mt Parnassus may have helped.
Rock stars smoke, inject, inhale and presumably occasionally insert for inspiration.  Writers drink.  Christ alone knows why, as excessive booze normally leads to feelings of alienation from the world and a profound sense of being under-appreciated and misunderstood, all of which is achievable through the simple act of publishing a slim volume of verse.  Alcohol also inhibits early morning creativity, and certain writers famously were at their creative peak at first light.  Presumably this meant they could post the latest chapter of their novel off to their publishers at eleven in the morning on their way to the pub.
However, in the spirit of enquiry G&P is embarking on a five-part special to explore the effects of various types of alcohol on writing, beyond those of not being able to remember that fantastic idea for a novel you had last night (something about a boy wizard?) just before you passed out, or not being able to decipher the notes scrawled on a beermat that could be a poem, or somebody’s e mail address.
We continue with…spirits.
Shall we mention ghost stories?  Let’s not.
Shall we mention Hemmingway?  Earnest, not Wayne.  Well, there’s a school of thought that spirits make one mean, and certainly EM appeared to have it in for bulls, fish, Big Game and many of God’s creatures that had never harmed him, but are we to blame that all on spirits?  Let’s not.
Spirits are a man’s drink.  Ignore those adverts that come on at Christmas featuring a girl in a glittery frock with a tumbler of some brownish liquid.  This is a game, but ultimately doomed, attempt to extend spirits sales past the saturated male market to women.  Does that advert also have the same woman, with perfect lipstick, pulling on a thick cigar?  Thought so, the famous and famously successful advertising company of Malefantasy and Wankjet (London, New York, Pontypool) strikes again.  The only spirit women drink is vodka, and that’s only because the makers of cranberry juice really, really know how to market that stuff.
No, spirits equal men.  Spirits, ingested, throw everything into sharp relief, including emotions.  That’s why gin makes women sad and why scotch, and any other spirit, at all, makes men angry.  The drinker of spirits writes about manly stuff.  Spies, war, sports, and of course, drinking.
The spirit drinker, one feels, is above all an adventurer.
Spirits are ideal when travelling to places where you need to take the maximum amount of drinkable alcohol for the minimum encumbrance.  When the first man lands on Mars, he’ll have scotch with him (this is after Scotland gains independence and launches a hilariously ambitious, but surprising successful, space programme).  If you need to go further, faster, spirits are your friend.
The same goes with drinking them.  If you don’t have time to faff around with beer, or enjoying your drink by droning on endlessly about the complexities of the nose, as you do with wine, then reach for the hard stuff.
Because drinking spirits is not enjoyable.  If it was, mixers wouldn’t exist.
Spirits also bring, as aforementioned, and depending on the spirit in question, a certain clarity of thought.
Gin.  Instant Hogarthian and Dickensian purity, being able to describe with absolute clarity the cruddy undersole of the human condition, be it sociatial or personal.
Vodka.  Ah, vodka.  The easy association would be with Russian novels so thick they look like normal novels that have fallen into the bath.  And that’s about right.  Always, always be suspicious of any alcohol that is clear.  Rule of thumb, if it looks like you could clean spark plugs with it, avoid ingesting it.
Bourbon.  Interestingly, not actually a drink in and of itself.  Bourbon is Scotch and sweetness, like the classic cocktail of Scotch and Irn Bru.  Bourbon is one of those wonderful drinks that foreigners make.  It’s like one of those ‘fuLl engliSH breaKFasts’ that you see advertised on Greek island tavernas, with an image of the Full English that the attempt on your plate bears little resemblance to.  The genius of bourbon production is this; just as Scotch is named for a geographical area which enables the purchaser to build brand loyalty based on faux clan association, so naming your beverage after a backwoods hillbilly, Confederate general or similar will enable your customers to decide whether they are Daniels or Beam, without realising that because of the amount of sugary syrup added to the booze required to make the muck drinkable, they are all Colas.
Scotch.  The associations are largely positive.  Spies (of the right sort).  Men with the right sort of beard.  The sort of chap who has an estate in the Highlands and who vacates London during August.
In fact Scotch is the only spirit to write on, and to read on.  Picture an author with a tumbler of scotch by his (lady authors are also available) side.  Pull back.  Typewriter?  Helicopter extract?  Very possibly, and more importantly, possibly not just on the page.
Spirits, never in the form of ‘shorts’ which in any civilized society are never a measure of alcohol and only ever the apparel of adolescent schoolboys, but rather served as the more manly ‘large one’, are also the preferred drink, or ‘lunch’, as the technical term has it, of journalists.  In particular, whisky is the go-to drink of foreign correspondents.  This is because it not only helps them blot out any horrors of war they may encounter, but, back in the day when wars had not yet migrated to the dusty arsehole of the world where people didn’t drink (hence: war), whisky was currency.  Apparently during the 1970s, it was standard practice to produce at any border crossing, in this order; a litre of Johnny Walker, a carton of 200 fags, your passport, your press credentials.
Single malt may be the tipple of choice for fiction writers and for heroic explorers who publish bestselling accounts of their travels (possibly posthumously).  For the journalist though, it has to be whisky and for the epitome of the journalist, the foreign correspondent, it has to be Johnny Walker, named for the famous Radio 2 DeeJay.  Classy.
Of course, today, a foreign correspondent today is more likely to be holed up in Costa sipping latte, weaving a story out of unsubstantiated tweets and blog posts, Wiki entries and Google Earth snapshots than actual reportage.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, October 08, 2014

Write on beer

Famously, Laurie Lee, one of the nation’s most beloved novelists, wrote ‘on wine’.  Whether or not he was ever drunk in charge of a typewriter is unclear but one has to entertain the possibility that, as a poet, he typed without due care and attention.  He did his writing in the Greek Islands, presumably because in the days before bargain booze, affordable New World wines or even Blue Nun, this was the only way he could become sufficiently inebriated to welcome the Muse should she come to visit.  Also, proximity to Mt Parnassus may have helped.
Rock stars smoke, inject, inhale and presumably occasionally insert for inspiration.  Writers drink.  Christ alone knows why, as excessive booze normally leads to feelings of alienation from the world and a profound sense of being under-appreciated and misunderstood, all of which is achievable through the simple act of publishing a slim volume of verse.  Alcohol also inhibits early morning creativity, and certain writers famously were at their creative peak at first light.  Presumably this meant they could post the latest chapter of their novel off to their publishers at eleven in the morning on their way to the pub.
However, in the spirit of enquiry G&P is embarking on a five-part special to explore the effects of various types of alcohol on writing, beyond those of not being able to remember that fantastic idea for a novel you had last night (something about a boy wizard?) just before you passed out, or not being able to decipher the notes scrawled on a beermat that could be a poem, or somebody’s e mail address.
We continue with…beer.
I am writing this in the pub.  It’s actually called ‘The Red Lion’, which might give an insight into the sort of place it is, at three o’clock on a weekday afternoon, which might give you an indication of my commitment to my research.  Pubs off hours are very different to pubs when civilians (those who drink at Christmas/anyone who orders a Guinness last when getting a round in) frequent them.  They are communities.  The barmaid (who doesn’t know me, I hasten to add, I’m not rich enough to make a habit of this) asked me how I was?  OK, this may be barcraft 101 but it’s also a loaded question.  I’m in a pub at three in the afternoon, chances are things may not be going well (I will need many drinks) or I am celebrating something (many, many drinks, you’re not found ‘not guilty’ every day).  Actually, I see why she asked.
It’s also got a priests hole, and once upon a time there would have been a humorous sign, but Yewtree has fucked that for us as well.
The drink of choice is Stella Artois.  If ever there was an advertising Big Lie, Stella is a prime example of it.  Marketed as posh lager, it even comes, Belgian style, served in its own glass, a goblet style thing.  Anyone who is familiar with this beer knows that it should indeed be served in its own drinking vessel, but that this should be a plastic pint glass.  Stella, you see, has a reputation for turning people into aggressive nutters.
So what should one write on Stella?  Well, I am typing one handed while I make notes for a series of books that will be written under the pen-name of ‘Jack Stroud’ and will follow the fortunes of the males of the ‘Fret’ family as they fight in every war since..,let’s see, yes, the English Civil War.  Titles so far include ‘Royal Fret’, ‘Fret in Tartan’, ‘Fret at the Front’, ‘Frontline Fret’, ‘Fret and the Ruby’, ‘Fret Pulls It Off’, ‘Fret of the Artic’, ‘Fret of the Antarctic’, ‘Fret of the Falklands’, ‘Frantic Fret’, ‘The Fret Files’ (short stories) and, of course, ‘Fret with Wings’ (possibly featuring a female Fret).
Obviously, these will take off (especially the last one).  At that point, I employ an army of ghost writers and project the story of the Fret family backwards, as the Fret family take on the French, the Dutch, the Romans and the Vikings.
A movie adaptation you say?  Ha!  Remember, I’ve been drinking.  Stick your movie option up your arse, along with your assertion that this entire idea is predicated on the plot line from the Forrest Gump movie that every male in Lieutenant Dan’s family line had fought and died in some conflict.
I’m thinking…cut out and dress doll line.  Right?  Right?  Remember those 2D dolls you used to get in the back of magazines, with cut out clothes and tabs and so on?  Well, how about a Fret…but with loads of uniforms, it would be a cross between a really crap and outdated effort to keep kids quiet and a cutting edge publishing phenomenon and, here’s the kicker, it would be fucking useless on Kindle, unless Kindle comes with a printer.
Also, I’d market the cut out and keep doll and costumes with a colouring book and crayons and bundle it with the latest book in the Fret series, subtitled ‘Last of the Frets’ but titled in Great Britain ‘Fucking Fret!’ and in the US or any other country that doesn’t speak English properly ‘Fret’s annoyed’.  The plot is, er, just like the other plots, Fret has a hard time in some conflict, considers leaving, thinks on his family, rediscovers his courage and fucks somebody over with a rusty bayonet that belonged to his grandfather, or a pottery shard that a distant relative left buried in the sand, or in the side of an enemy also buried in the sand…
…details are unimportant.  What’s important is that the story involves Fret, this Fret, finding a diary from a Fret, that Fret, who fought in some previous war that, and here we go, not only gives him the courage to fight on, but actually reveals a hidden path to outflank the enemy.
Fuckin’ YEA!  This is going to be the first colouring book ever to win a BAFTA.  Did I type BAFTA, I mean Booker.  Fuck it, they need to invent a new category of BAFTA, or merge them, the first BOOFTA winner is, me!
So.  That’s beer then.  I suspect bitter might, paradoxically, inspire one to write something bucolic, possibly involving a bicycle and a clergyman, maybe even a crime thriller. But lager?  Lager is a war story in a glass.  Goblet.  Plastic beaker.  Whatever.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, June 09, 2014

Iain Banks - ‘Troubled teens, turbulent atheists and really, really big guns’




It's been a year since Ian Banks passed.

Did he not get the memo?  His job was to turn out two books a year, one science fiction, the other of a genre of his choosing, until further notice.  Unfortunately it would appear that the universe had other ideas.

I bloody loved his books.  How does one judge what one’s favourite book is?  How about the number of times tou have re-read it?  Or how much you identify with it?  Or maybe you just happened to read it at a special or important moment in your life?  Or maybe reading the book was the special or important moment in your life.  Certainly, my copy of ‘Espedair Street’ looks well loved, as does my copy of ‘The Crow Road’.  Knowing that there are not going to be any new novels published, I’m going to have to slow down on the re-reading.

And god how I loved the sci-fi stuff.  Science fiction as it should be, with spaceships the size of, well, huge space ships, sardonic robots with loads of ordinance packed away in them, and proper aliens, and cool weapons and robots too.  There was probably some stuff in there about using the art form to examine the human condition but fuck that, I’ll save the introspection for the re-read.

I even loved ‘Raw Spirit’, where Banks essentially drives around distilleries, takes the tour, loads up his boot with scotch and, as far as I can work out, bills the lot to his publisher and writes it off against tax as ‘research’.  Cheers!  There’s probably more to it than that  but I’ll save it for the re-read.

I’ll miss Iain Banks.  I met him a couple of times at book signings and, despite the fact he was hugely popular and had probably been signing books for sweating fanboys like myself for days if not weeks, he had great charm and always seemed flattered that somebody was interested in his writing, and wanted a book signed.  And a hardback at that!

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, September 06, 2010

Writing and drinking

Laurie Lee wrote that he wrote ‘on wine’, that is, in order to get the creative juices flowing he would get the grape juice flowing first and, somewhere between the sobriety and being drunk enough to think a tattoo is a good idea, he’d churn out literature.

Being a pissed author is nothing new, Hemmingway drank, as did Amis. Of course, there are many more people who are not writers who drink, and plenty of writers who are successful and don’t drink. Something tells me that part of Dan Brown’s recipe for success is not working his way through a crate of special brew, although that’s how many of his readers would be better spending their time.

Journalists are famously boozy and I think that the best job combining getting paid for writing must be resturant critic. The problem is, of course, that you can’t actually get hammered while doing it. This is because you will come to the next morning well fed, but with a clanging hangover, no memory of what the food was actually like and three pages of indecipherable scrawl that you thought at the time was pithy witty notes on the state of the soup.

I’m drinking while I’m writing this, a glass of red. It’s rather nice but I know that I lack the vocabulary and talent required to describe it.

This is a feature shared by wine writers funnily enough, that’s why they make up things like ‘hints of grass’. What in the name of greek buggery is a hint of grass? Either that or the wine has ‘chocolate notes’. They have invented a whole new form of describing things by associating terms that have nothing to do with the product, it’s like describing fence panels using terms normally employed to talk about fish.

Why can’t there be honesty in the profession. ‘This wine tasted okay for a fiver and is ideal for consumption when slumped in front of the telly trying to work out whether or not you’ve seen this episode of Morse.’

If I were a wine writer, instead of a review I’d write a short story that, I hope, would express how first a glass, then a bottle of the stuff being considered made me feel.

Many of my stories would be set in a circus, wintering somewhere rural. The petty jealousies and bickering among the acrobats and the sad lives of the clowns would feature strongly. How refreshing it would be to review a wine and conclude that overall the effect was to leave you feeling just as Bobo the Clown did, as he watched Clarissa the trapeze girl walk off, laughing arm in arm with Carlo the lion tamer. She would never know it had been Bobo, not Carlo, that had sent the flowers. Bobo gave a plaintive honk on his red nose and wandered back to the caravan he shared with three other clowns. He thought he would seek oblivion in drink and this red wine is just the tipple for a broken hearted clown. And a bargain at a fiver a litre.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Vogue -part 2

Ever since I saw the film ‘The September Issue’, I’ve wanted to pick up an issue of Vogue.

‘The September Issue’ is a documentary about putting together the September issue (duh!) of American Vogue. It’s like ‘The devil wears prada’ but impossibly more glamorous, cruel and wonderful and it left me thinking that with a few more perfectionists, the Earth would be a better place, or a smoking cinder.

Essentially the editor of the magazine has to try and crush the defiance of lots of creative people while simultaneously bringing out the very qualities that make them creative. The whole place is like a beehive – full of poison, manufacturing something sweet and everyone serving the queen.

Favourite scene? The model wolfing down a tart. I have no love for any woman who is an anodyne waif…but the second she attacked that jam tart with gusto…bloody ding dong, you’re telling me she’s beautiful and real too? (And has access to free food? I mean it’s free right, and she could bring it home and it’s not like she’s going to eat all of it.)

Deal time…when they launch the 1,000 page issue – I’ll buy it. If only because I want to see what the writing is like. If they can firehose money on photo shoots then they should emulate Playboy in terms of writing. If Mailer and Hemingway used to write for Playboy, why aren’t Amis, Ford and Coe write for Vogue.

What I particularly liked about the documentary was the obvious passion that everyone had for the subject. But let’s not think that this is isolated to the world of fashion. Among the many magazines at the news stand are modelling magazines, not magazines with models being skinny women but rather the models being 00 scale. That’s right ‘Model Village World’, the rest of us might think that it’s ridiculous but these people have a passion for documenting an unobtainable beauty, like a 1950s perfect chocolate box English village (complete with sleeping cats and sleeping murder) but it’s less furiously ridiculous than seven pages of a glossy magazine devoted to the snood. Scale modelling. Remove the ‘scale’ and is there any difference? Come to think of it is there any difference even if you leave in the ‘scale’ – the models in Vogue are size 0 (if not scale 00) and real women are, what, size 16?

In establishing the fashion model industry we have created a breed of people who would otherwise perish in the wild or have to serially shag Premiership footballers.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Bukowski

I’ve avoided reading Charles Bukowski for years. I’d picked up his books in the book shop, read the blurb and then carefully replaced them. The last thing I needed was to read somebody that glamorised drinking. At the best of times I’m as impressionable as wet mud and as a role model or literary hero, an alcoholic was probably a bad bet.

Leave Bukowski for those who thought they were troubled but who, in fact, just had the same troubles as the rest of us, but who took themselves and their haircuts, tats and piercings far, far too seriously.

Then I saw that this year, one of the shows at the Edinburgh festival was ‘Barflies’. This, apparently, was to be site-specific theatre. In particular, it was set in a bar. FanTAStic. Surely this was the perfect distillation of the theatre experience, somebody had realised that many theatre-goers resented having to abandon their pre-theatre drink, then rush their interval drink, then scramble for a drink after the theatre let out and before the pubs shut, all for the sake of watching a load of thesps strut and fret. But a play where you were sat in the bar? Genius!

So to prepare I bought some booze and some Bukowski. To be honest, I had no idea what to expect (from Bukowski, I was fairly confident I knew what to expect from the booze). By the time I had finished the first page of ‘Post Office’ I was wondering why the hell I had not read this guy years ago. Was there some sort of conspiracy? Why had nobody simply pulled me aside and hissed ‘read this’? By the time I had finished the book, I was profoundly glad that I had not read this years ago.

Because Christ alone knows what sort of effect this would have on a teenager reading it. You’d probably form an opinion that you too can be a babe magnet, a legendary writer with an astonishing legacy, your own man uncorrupted and uncorruptable and, let’s not forget, an outstanding alcoholic.

Charles Bukowski, poet, writer, alcoholic, writes about a character called Henry Chinaski, a poet, a writer and an alcoholic. Obviously, Hank Chinaski is the alter-ego of Charlie Bukowski and by writing about Chinaski, Bukowski is free to (very) narrowly disguise the other characters in his book. This achieves two effects, firstly, it lends an air of authenticity and intimacy to the novel, the people that Bukowski writes about Chinaski encountering are real people. It also means that, like Waugh, he’s guaranteed at least a few sales of his book, as friends and acquaintances rush to acquire his new novel to see what the bastard has written about them or, even worse, to see if the bastard has not written about them.

For a writer writing about, basically, himself, Bukowski disappoints slightly by not giving Chinaski at least one super power. I mean really, not even X ray vision? He comes close though, as Chinaski is able to drink like a fish, screw like a weasel and still find time for more drinking, writing, poetry recitals and readings and, oh yea, more drinking. Chinaski drinks so much and so often that after reading one section of the book where he does not have a drink for three pages, I got the shakes.


Henry Chinaski’s youth is anything but untroubled. Early troubles are visited upon him and, in forming his character, he eventually learns to bring trouble upon himself and upon others. ‘Ham on Rye’ is a book to hurl at any sulking teen who thinks the world is ending because they can’t have digital telly in their bedroom. It makes ‘Angela’s Ashes’ look like ‘Anne of Green Gables’’. There’s beatings, from the father, the teachers, the other kids. There’s alienation and social cruelty, there’s hopelessness and desperation and envy and grim, grim, grim poverty. There’s also unexpected tenderness and occasional flashes of humour.

The other thing Chinaski does a lot, an awful lot, in his books, is fuck. Which is surprising at first, because early on in the book you formulate the idea that he doesn’t like women very much. Read on, and you discover that his ire is not confined to misogyny, he hates men too (mistersogyny), people in general (sodthelotofyousogyny) and, most of all and most deeply and bitterly, he hates himself (Isogyny).

In ‘Women’ Hank is a successful writer, giving readings and recitals and also, as a direct consequence, fielding star-stuck young women who want to screw a celebrity. Hank obliges. Being a writer is a respectable profession for an alcoholic and Hank is obviously a good writer (he supports himself doing it) and an outstanding alcoholic (on one sequence shaming the local liquor store into making a delivery because he spends so much money there). Alternative professions for alcoholics are the priesthood, medicine or, a far far more popular option, hanging around public transport hubs begging in clothes that reek of piss.

Make no mistake, if you’re reading his books book in public, on the bus or train, then you will feel at least ten percent shame at all times, and you will have a defensive line prepared in case somebody is reading over your shoulder and realises that you’re reading filth. And this is filthy stuff. They ought to make waterproof editions so that you can read it in the shower and so not finish a passage and consider that you need a good going over with a scrubbing brush and some disinfectant. The sex is grimy and gratuitous and continues for page after page after page (a different woman each time, rather than a remarkably long description or remarkable stamina).

Half way through ‘Women’ there’s a description of anal sex and one wonders if it was put there by Bukowski so that the reader is reading the description of sex while holding the book open at the half way point, the pages spread each side like pale white buttocks…covered in print, like somebody with a very detailed tattoo, or who wipes their ass with newspaper.

The sex is not always successful, but for somebody who drinks as much as Chinaski, it’s too successful too often. Maybe that’s Chinaski’s super power? I thought that it was slightly incongruous that, given the many women he sleeps with over the course of the novel, there are few, if any, bedroom disasters. (Christ, my big book of sexual disasters would be up to chapter five before it started to get into occasions when there was another person present).

His writing roars along, captivating and repulsive and compelling. Bukowski knows his craft. A poet as well as a short story writer and novelist, he has the poets’ sensibility for knowing just how to place a word, so, in a sentence and how to structure a sentence, just so, in a paragraph that makes the story stunning. He also makes free use of capital letters, WHEN HIS CHARACTERS ARE EXCITED AND FREAKING WELL TRYING TO GET A FREAKING POINT ACROSS YOU FREAKING FREAKERS!

There’s an odd incongruity about somebody who essentially drifts from job to job in his youth. For all the boozing and the hangover hells, Chinaski is hardly lazy or feckless. Nor is he stupid, indeed a reoccurring problem is that because the sort of jobs he consistently takes are pointless and menial, his ‘superiors’ are pretty pointless and menial too, something Chinaski is not afraid to point out, although this is inevitably followed by his looking for another pointless, menial job. Chinaski drifts in his youth, drifting into and out of different jobs, or at least different variations of the same job, and drifting from city to city, or at least variations of the same city or rather the same part of the city – the poor part, with the poor people in the poor bars and their poor rooming houses where the walls are too thin, the crush of humanity is too loud and escape is not on the first train out of Dodge but rather in uncorking lunch.

Chinaski gets away with turning up to work hungover – a maschocistic measure of his contempt for himself, he makes an unpleasant job unbearable – because he’s an eternal back-room boy, not let near any customers he might scare off, concealed in the half light of the warehouse with the other trolls and misfits.

Because what Bukowski really brings home in his work is that if you’re in a job that is chipping away at you, you have to fill that growing void with something and if it’s not something that’s generally accepted as wholesome, like family, or religion, or something that’s just accepted as bachelor pursuits, like enjoying internet pornography or making model sailboats and sailing them at the weekend, or, god help you, MMRPGs, then booze will do fine. As long as you leave time for the screwing and the gambling, and realise there’s never enough booze in the world.

But there is the occasional ‘wait a second’ moment here. Chinaski (and, by extension Bukowski), writes late at night, in his digs, using a typewriter. Initially I thought this was far too far-fetched. I used to own a typewriter, not even a mechanical job like Bukowski would have had (probably constructed of cast iron and solid gravity), but an slick electronic thing, made of plastic. And when the key was struck and the hammer hit the letter in the daisy wheel, the report was like something you’d expect to hear coming from the open door of the village blacksmith as he knocked up a horseshoe for a Clydesdale. When I lived in a shared house I learned how to write longhand after dark, for fear my flatmates would use the typewriter as a Frisbee and me as a football to eliminate noise nuisance. How the hell did Chinaski write, drunk, at night? Because the boy that starts the novel under a table ends it a young man staying in a rooming house with thin walls but in a part of town where the midnight banging of a typewriter is neither the loudest, nor most disturbing sound to be heard.

If you want low life, it’s here. Bukowski’s alter-ego, Chinaski, comes loaded with a full compliment of vices, he’s like a Swiss-army knife of immorality, alcoholic, a gambler, unfaithful. On the question of identity, you do wonder why change the name, to protect the innocent? It’s obvious that Hank is Charlie and there are no innocents in his books.

The writing’s almost as powerful as the liquor that spawned it. One thing this writer does is make you think about drinking. If you drink, it’s a cautionary tale. If you don’t you’ll wonder what all the fuss is about and maybe try a glass or two yourself, probably after watching the news. Because Bukowski’s revelation is this: if you drink because the world is such a terrible place, stop feeling guilty, open another bottle, but make sure it’s GOOD red wine. Because the world is a terrible place.

Labels: , ,

Friday, September 12, 2008

Gonzo publishing IV: On writing

Any attention-seeking approval whore will tell you that the greatest profession to stoke the ego is; writer. As soon as you have one book in print, you’ve made it, because if it sells a gazillion copies you can revel in your fame and wealth and, more importantly, really stick it to anyone you felt ever crossed you. Or even better, pretend not to be happy and want to be taken ‘seriously’, thereby driving anyone who every actually crossed you into a foaming peak of rage by having fame and wealth but not enjoying it while they have no fame, no wealth and are made miserable not just by your success but by your apparent ingratitude.

If your copy sells one to a dozen copies, (depending upon the size of your family), then you can develop a shell of bitterness that it would take a tactical nuke to crack and sit inside it, stewing in your own misery but knowing, though never actually telling anyone, that you will be hugely popular after you are dead. Then who’ll be laughing? Probably whoever handles your estate.

Anyone who has ever put pen to paper wants to be published. Now, you can be. If you can have photographs printed into hardback albums then presumably you can have text printed up too. It’s the ultimate form of vanity publishing, but there’s no moment when you have to face the fact that nobody is ever going to want to publish your seven volume history of the trans-Pennine cycling club because of ‘lack of interest’. (Fuck them, these are the books that make Britain great, with passages like ‘as he shifted down a gear, Chunky Stevenson didn’t see the sheep in front of him and swerved to late to avoid it. The sickening ‘bahhhhhhhh-thunk’ was the very herald of doom for Chunky. As I came upon the scene of blood, guts, derailer parts, torn cagoul, wool and 3 in 1, I knew this was going to be grim).

Why stop at photo albums? It’s time to take back the shelves of our bookstores. For instance, I fail to see how paying three quid for a little book is going to make me, in any way, shape or form, calm, unless it contains the addresses of all the doctors in my area who are relaxed about prescribing tranquilisers. So why not slip a ‘little book of serenity for the soul’ onto the shelves with helpful passages like ‘feeling stressed? Tried lager?’

Better still, target your audience. Inside the glossy, pink, sexy hardback cover of the ‘ultimate sex and the city companion’ are chapters like ‘why does Daisy (or whatever their f**king names are) have so many boyfriends? Well, it’s unlikely that she spends her weekends watching DVD box-sets and eating ice cream).

Best of all, what’s the one book you expect to see in hardback? That’s right, text books. Now, I’m a fairly easygoing bloke, but when I hear somebody expounding the myth of Creationism, I get a twitch above my left eye. This is followed by a stabbing pain, usually in the speaker’s throat but the chest will do if he’s tall and I can’t get the knife up above the shoulders in time. Chapter 1; ‘unicorns’, how they are real and how having people laugh at you in public makes you a better person.

The trick is, of course, to get somebody to pay you for your thoughts. This is insanely difficult, as so many people give their thoughts away for free, usually after two large gins. Even less people know how to structure their thoughts in such a way that, on the printed page they make a) sense and b) the reader have an emotional reaction. The people who can achieve this are called poets. The worthy poets try to put into words what seeing the sunlight reflected on the rippling lake water on a winter’s day while they suddenly realise that they always have and always will love their ex more than the lover currently holding their hand, feels like. The others work for Hallmark, go home at five and eat well. They can also rhyme 275 words with ‘birthday’.

Labels: , ,

Saturday, September 06, 2008

Gonzo Publishing Again

The best thing about making your own printed page is, of course that you write whatever you like, usually scurrilous and it looks, well, more real. Because whatever else the printed word might lack, it does not lack authority. If you came back to your car to find a hand-written note from a traffic warden informing you you had a ticket, you’d probably ignore it – handwriting has authority in only two circumstances, the first is when the message has been left in lipstick on the mirror in your bedroom and says something like ‘you are a crap shag. Have borrowed your car, hope you don’t mind, Trixie xxx’. The second is when the message is written in blood on the wall of the cabin in the woods you are staying in. In both cases justification, font and point size are not really relevant. In the latter case, let’s face it, not even the message is relevant, not even if it’s ‘enjoy your complimentary muffins’. You’re gone!

That’s why people buy newspapers. They are the voice of authority. Well, for people who can read they are, for people who can’t read, they are the source of partial nudity, celeb scoops (usually two scoops, out of a bikini top, on a beach in a fuzzy long lens shot (it’s hard to focus when you’re masturbating behind a gorse bush being scrutinised by curious goats) and footie news or, even better, speculation.

Increasingly, it’s speculation that populates the pages of papers. Or columnists. I don’t have a problem with traditional journalism, where some bloke, sometimes in a dirty mac, sometimes not, goes somewhere, finds out stuff and writes it up in a concise and amusing way. I do have a problem when they rely on unnamed ‘sources’ or simply on the sauce for inspiration. It’s opening up a twenty page paper and finding ten pages of ‘comment and analysis’ that shocks the hell out of me.

Comment and analysis is, I think, a slang term for bigotry and opinion. Read the pages long enough and the same people offer the same opinions – but about completely different subjects. It’s truly astonishing, from the situation in the middle east to the way that the economy is affecting sales of garden gnomes, these people will link to their pet subjects, usually something about their forthright views on immigration, which, being about as palatable as a turd sandwich (on brown) leaves you with a nasty taste in your mouth.

The worst thing is that these people have been paid for their sub-standard annoyance of a contribution. By you. Suckah!

Because no matter how insightful, how erudite and how informed any blog might be, whether it be on politics, gardening or cooking, it’s free and so, by today’s twisted value system, it doesn’t carry as much authority as a newspaper. This view might be changing slowly, but it’s up against some tough challenges, namely, that if you have paid for something, you are reluctant to admit that you could have got better for free elsewhere (prostitutes are the exception that proves the rule, if you want to have crap sex with somebody who is bored by the whole process, get married).

Newspapers mine blogs, reprinting swaths of them, but blogs rarely reprint whole sections of newspapers. This is because when a blogger makes it to print it’s the literary equivalent of being allowed to sit at the adults table (with the shock of seeing your work edited roughly the same as the shock experienced by children when they realise how dull adult conversation is, that you are expected to eat your peas rather than demonstrate your ‘nose cannon’ with them and that crayoning on linen tablecloths is a great way to earn a slap if you are lucky, or a steak-knife through the back of the hand if you’re unlucky enough to be sitting next to the great-grandmother who brought that tablecloth over from the old county).

Journalists and especially columnists are not happy to see their work appear in blogs. This is not just because of copyright, but because such blog entries often start ’72 fundamental errors in this piece of crap’.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, September 03, 2008

Gonzo publishing

People have known, pretty much ever since there were people rather than a group of hairy sorts using bones as spoons, about the power of the printed word. Primitive man knew all about making the word material. That’s why when Lug, Ogg and Dud were scratching and grunting about what a great elk hunt they were in for, Gug was busy drawing a successful hunt on the cave wall. If only Gug had used his imagination and painted a machine-gun, he could have really saved some effort then the whole tribe could have hunkered down for a winter of getting fat and watching the firelight flicker on the cave walls or, as we call it today, ITV.

So the printed word has power. For instance, you can spout crap all evening in the pub and nobody will pay any attention to you, but if you start handing out leaflets in the high street outlining your manifesto to burn down every Tesco in Britain, you’ll soon find yourself in a small room with no natural light being interviewed by a man with little hair and less humour who may, or may not, stamp on your dangly bits until you cough up your spleen or the names of your co-conspiritors, depending on how quickly you can make up some realistic sounding names.

Printing has evolved of course, but not really all that much and not nearly as much as, say, meat flavoured snacks. In printing, we moved from woodcuts to block printing to hot metal to today’s offset litho or whatever the hell it is – it could actually be done by magic for all I know, it makes about as much sense. How do the words get from the screen to the printed page? Toner cartridge maybe…but if somebody told me that toner is the ground up bones of fairies, I’d be hard pressed to prove otherwise.

(In the same timespan meat flavoured snacks have moved from small cubes of gristle on a platter to meat on a stick, cooked meat on a stick, meat in pastry, meat in cardboard wrapping, meat in Styrofoam containers that will still be landfill when the sun goes out, meat in cardboard wrapping again and, finally, meat flavoured crisps – an express way to get all the meat flavour you need without all that tedious having to digest protein or mop grease off your shirt. Compared to printing, meat snack technology is practically at the stage where the next step is opening a meat snack shop on Jupiter, or the past).

More impressive than the revolution in printing that has happened over the last few hundred years in the real world is the revolution in printing that has happened in the last two decades in boys’ bedrooms. It used to be that if you wanted to do printing, proper printing that looked real and everything, you used a John Bull printing set.

This incredibly fiddly process left you with a few lines of purple print and the nagging sense that whatever printer’s were paid, they earned it. Basically you had tiny rubber blocks with reverse letters on them, which you arranged on a wooden block, then pressed to a purple ink pad, which you then pressed to the paper and, tad dah, five lines of whatever juvenile crap you had come up with, unadulterated by the constrains of your shocking handwriting.

There were several shortcomings with the printing set. The first was the lack of fonts and point sizes. For any junior tabloid editor this was a real set-back, as it meant you were unable to get your screaming head lines (‘The Green Lane Gang Smell!!!’) into a suitably eye-catching front page splash. It’s also a shame that society missed out on a chance to identify future tabloid editors in their juvenile stage where, through gentle re-education and, failing that, depositing down a disused mine shaft, we could have been spared the damage done to the world when they reached their more destructive adult stage (if that ever truly happens).

Why the ink was purple I have no idea. Possibly to ensure that whatever was produced was not mistaken for, say, ‘The Times’.

Labels: , , , ,