Monday 29 April 2019

Less is more

I had the good fortune to pop into a friend's house yesterday to sample a quiet ale. 
Sitting around his dining table, he asked how the writing was going.
  "Okay," I said.
  "Good," he replied, before adding.  "I enjoy your blog."

There was a moment's hesitation that preceded the inevitable 'But'.  I encouraged him to continue.
  "Well," he said, fumbling for the kindest way to frame it.
  "Go, on, just say it as it is."
  "Okay.  They're a bit... long."

So, in the interests of brevity.





Twitter: @GOMinTraining
Copyright © Craig Brown, 2019
29 April 2019

Saturday 27 April 2019

Kids these days


Chapter one of the GOM 101 text book is titled “The Good Old Days”.  It points to glorious times in years gone by and provides fuel for grumpy old men everywhere to bemoan the lamentable state of the world today, harking back to a time when life was simpler, happiness was a more abundant commodity and politicians were much better at fiddling their expenses.

The second chapter, “Kids These Days”, somewhat controversially flips the theme from the first chapter on its proverbial head and reminds us that young people today don’t know how lucky they are.  Clearly things are better for them than they were for us.  The definition of ‘kids’ is quite broad.  In the world of a GOM, qualification is granted to a younger sibling of one of your mates, or anyone that harbours an opposing view who has a less faded birth certificate.

Unbelievably, there are Millennials today that are taking their first tentative steps on the GOM ladder, who have realised that it’s no longer all about them; Generation Z is stealing their thunder.  They, and the Generation Zedders, should shut their mouths; they’re all too young to know any better.

Despite living in ‘The Good Old Days’, GOM training dictates that we must pronounce upon the hardships we faced.  According to the text book, we wore clothing made from hessian sacks and had to walk fifteen miles to school, backward through the snow, with bare feet.  The stock phrase to use at this point is that “Kids these days have no idea how lucky they are,” with the rejoinder that not only did we experience deprivation, but school days were much longer; we started lessons at 6am, had no lunch break, and left school at 6pm before cleaning 15 chimneys on the way home to pay for the gruel that would be slopped into the enamel plates that also served as our bed pans.

We must pretend that we didn’t have a trouble free, safe and carefree environment in which to live, where the greatest concern was whether the sun would continue to shine when the holidays ended, and we’d have to suffer in a hot classroom.  Of course, if we complained about that, or inadvertently removed a fingernail using the belt sander during Woodwork, there was the danger that our teachers would take a bamboo cane to our hides, but we’ll suggest it toughened us up.

It’s not the same for kids these days.  Some would argue that their biggest concern is having to keep abreast of the latest acronym, but, WTF, is it really?  In my day, we knew our place, which although most of us didn’t know it at the time, was to grow up and not challenge the status quo, because life was pretty good.  So, it has come as something of a surprise to the GOM generation to acknowledge that we have been, and continue to be, a bunch of tossers by maintaining the belief that we should keep things as they were, because things were so much better way back when.

I mean, really, what do kids these days know?  What could Malala Yousafzai possibly teach us with her advocacy for girls’ education and women's equality?  Subjects that were so threatening and challenging to the Taliban regime’s oppression and misogyny, that they would choose to shoot the 15-year-old Malala?  Clearly, she’d have been much better off keeping her mouth shut to human rights abuses and be much safer by ignoring the 130 million girls out of school today or the injustice faced my millions of women around the world.  It might not have got her shot.

And whilst we’re on the subject of shooting, what do the children of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School know about gun violence?   Seventeen of their peers were gunned down in an unprovoked attack by a former student, earning the “Thoughts and Prayers” refrain from mostly GOM politicians.  Why, when we live in a society that enables a 19-year-old to legally purchase a semi-automatic rifle, would we want to sit up and listen to the students and the 1.2 million they inspired with the March For Our Lives (MFOL) movement, rather than the NRA who espouse gun ownership as a means to make society safer and their advocates wealthier?

Back in Britain, why should we bother trying to find a solution to the US gun-crime epidemic?  After all, our kids aren’t wielding guns – they’re too busy carrying knives in increasing numbers in their misguided attempts to keep themselves safe; often becoming victims of knife crime when the very weapon they’re holding is used against them.  On Thursday, the BBC reported that there were 732 killings involving knives in 2018, up 12% from the year before, with 20% of knife crime perpetrators under the age of 18.  As well intentioned and intelligent adults, our political elite have been spectacularly unsuccessful in developing a solution to the problem.  Maybe we should ask the kids.

Alternatively, the youth of today should perhaps find something better to do, like go to university, a place that was largely free to the GOMs of today and which is still affordable to anyone willing to take on the mantle of £15,000 per annum of debt that grows at a rate of 6% per annum from the day they begin their studies and which they will be saddled with for only the first 30 years after they graduate, as they futilely try to repay the average loan of £50,000 they rack up during their Bachelors degree.

Of course, that assumes that they’re from a background where they have that opportunity, where they have parents that actively encourage them to further their education rather than parents who are spending their time queuing for one of the 1.6 million emergency food parcels that were given out across the Trussell Trust’s UK food bank network last year – nearly a third of which went to children.  How fortunate we are that, here in the UK, we have such a great social security system; without it, think how much greater the 19% increase in annual food aid distribution would have been.  What’s even more troubling is that those numbers largely exclude the meals served from volunteer soup kitchens to the nearly 5,000 people that sleep rough every night in the UK.

A lot of GOMs attribute the surge in homelessness to a breakdown in the societal values that they hold so dearly and are quick to decry the absence of moral values in teenagers today.  I did a Google search using “moral values of teenagers”.  The first page of search results provided plenty of material evidencing the decline of ethical standards in our youth and other articles exercised the literary equivalent of hand-ringing at the deplorable sense of right and wrong that teenagers demonstrate.  It wasn’t until I got to the second page of results that I found an article from the Irish Times that, to my mind, pointed to the underlying cause – us!

“… teenagers are influenced by the double standards that are widely accepted in our society. If a child's parents do not respect or blatantly reject traditional moral values, the child is likely to do the same.”

Perhaps we should exercise a little less outrage and adopt a shade more support for the actions of children such as Greta Thunberg, who displays higher values and moral courage than most with the 'School strike for climate' movement that she inspired.  Not enough of us are hearing or acting on what she and others are telling us and that’s not just the climate change sceptics.  She’s calling upon all of us to fulfil an obligation to leave our environment in a fit(ter) state for future generations.

Sure, we can point to the good old days when life was better than it is today, but we cannot do so without taking a significant degree of responsibility for the parlous state in which we find our society and environment.  It doesn’t make me particularly proud to be a member of the GOM tribe.  We’ve manufactured a crisis and stewarded closeted communities of which we should be ashamed.

When we try to tell our kids how great things were or how good they have things, we should remember that they’re going to be the first generation in the industrial world that will be worse off than their parents; that the legacy we’re leaving them is a pile of shite and that perhaps, when they tell us to STFU because we’ve messed up their lives, we should acknowledge that they may just have a point.


Twitter: @GOMinTraining
Copyright © Craig Brown, 2019
27 April 2019

Friday 19 April 2019

Where are you from?


At 6.45am each weekday morning, Mrs GOM and I find ourselves in the sports hall at a local secondary school attending a Dawn Breakers HIIT* class.  It’s my attempt to keep in some form of shape.  Unfortunately, that shape is usually bent double, gasping for breath and trying not to lose the previous night’s supper, but nevertheless, it’s a great way to start each day and has benefitted me hugely (although my Chiropractor would likely disagree).

Not only does the class serve to improve my fitness, but it’s an excellent way to meet others and there is a great sense of community amongst the group that I attend.  We come from an array of backgrounds and we’re all different ages, shapes and sizes – united by the common goal of improving our health.  We complete a six-week programme that sees us having our photos taken on the first day of the course, for comparison with photos from the mid- and end-points.  As we lined up to have the first day’s photo taken, I found myself behind the newest member of the group, Joni, and introduced myself and Mrs GOM.  After a short exchange, Joni asked where I was from.
  “Oh, we’re local,” I said.  “About three streets up the road from here.”
Adopting a look that suggested she was dealing with a simpleton, Joni tried again.
  “But, I thought I heard a New Zealand accent.”
Huge kudos to Joni for a) rephrasing the question so that I’d understand it, and b) correctly detecting the provenance of my dulcet tones.  I mumbled some absurd justification for misunderstanding the question; about having lived here for nearly 30 years and that my accent had softened.  What I realised immediately though, was that it was the first time I had been asked that question and responded as though I was a local, rather than the immigrant that I am.

I have always identified as a New Zealander and I always will.  It’s a heritage of which I’m proud.  I come from a beautiful country where people are largely open, friendly and welcoming.  I only left for a three-month holiday in 1990 and fully expected to return; circumstances and choices meant I did not.  Equally, and with all those years under my belt, I also identify as a Brit, and now, as Joni can attest, call England home.  I was made to feel welcome here when I arrived and continue to feel a part of the wider community.  I suspect that may have a lot to do with being an English speaking, white, middle-class, male, so my integration into society was without the challenges that other ethnic and social groups face.

We can do so much to make others more comfortable and feel a part of our communities.  When I was 10, my family was invited to a wedding by the owner of our corner store, an Indian immigrant.  His daughter was getting married and the wedding was a grand affair, held at the Lower Hutt Town Hall and there were hundreds of guests.  Dressed trestle tables were lined along one wall of the hall, groaning with food.  As we were queueing with the other guests for the wedding feast, the bride’s father came to us and took my mother by the arm.
  “Not those tables Mother of GOM.  These ones,” he said, escorting her and the rest of us to another part of the room.  “I think you might prefer the cold buffet,” he said.

On the row of tables before us stood steaming curries, samosas, rice and other Indian delicacies.  My mother, noting that he’d said ‘cold buffet’ questioned the presence of the hot food.
  “This table’s for you whiteys,” he said with an absence of malice and a cheeky grin.  “They’ve gone easy on the spices.”
The gesture was unexpected and hugely considerate.  His arrangements had led to adjustments to the traditional Indian fare, to make it more agreeable to the palates of those unaccustomed to spicy foods.
  “Perhaps for the children,” my mother responded somewhat magnanimously.  “We’re thrilled to be invited, and I would rather share what you are having.”  Our guest lost his smile and concern etched his face.
  “Really?” he said.  “It may be a little hotter than you’re used to.”
  “I’m sure it will be fine,” my mother assured him.
It was not.  I was dispatched to find her the iced water.

Our host saw that my mother’s attempt to enjoy the full experience had left her somewhat flushed and he brought her a lassi, a sweet yoghurt drink.  “This will help,” he said, handing it to her and she accepted it gratefully.
With over 400 guests to consider, our host was particularly attentive to us, to ensure that we felt comfortable.

Despite his best efforts though, he couldn’t cater to the will of a bored and stubborn 10-year-old.  I had decided that hunger was the preferred alternative to the exotic spread before me and failed to take the opportunity to indulge in what I now know to be delicious cuisine.  I leveraged my age, pleaded boredom and was allowed to head to my Grandmother’s who lived nearby, where I had one of her delicious white bread, single-slice-of-ham sandwiches and a pickled onion.

Mr Patel and his family had welcomed us into their community, and we were blessed to experience a part of their culture and feel the warmth of their generosity.  My mother’s attempt to fully embrace the experience, whilst misguided from a culinary perspective, demonstrated a willingness to accept difference.  The wedding serves to highlight that we are richer as a community by engaging with other cultures when the opportunity presents itself – we get to see a different side of life, which can be enriching.  What it also shows is that we are not compelled to adopt the culture (just as surely as I didn’t in my partiality to Nana’s ham sandwich), but if we do, we may expand what we like and enjoy, as the plethora of Indian restaurants in this country will evidence.  We are still very much permitted to continue our own practices, but we can be open to difference.  Whilst at it, why not invite others to experience ours, without having an expectation that they will adopt our way of life?

We have more to gain and very little to lose by accepting others, no matter their background or status.  In the main, immigrants contribute positively to the economic fortunes of their adopted countries and if ever you need to find an argument to support that case, I present as my first witness, the United States of America.

We lived in the US for a couple of years and had the chance to meet a wide variety of people.  What was telling was how many of them described their ethnicity by prefixing their nationality with that of their ancestors, “I’m Italian-American, I’m Irish-American, I’m Polish-American.”  I’ve yet to hear anyone say, “I’m American-American”, although that would not be a bad thing, but you get the picture; so many of them identify with their immigrant past.  Even the current President, who some might term the “racist-in-chief”, is of immigrant stock.  Mary Anne McLeod Trump had Gaelic as her first language and hailed from the Outer Hebrides.  Curiously, Wikipedia suggests that she “was the mother of Donald Trump”; presumably she disowned him.

But I digress…  Wherever we go, be it to another country or community, we will meet and face others who have the capacity to welcome or not.  When faced with the former, we have the choice to accept or spurn the invitation.  Like my mother, my preference is to accept with grace; there’s usually the equivalent of tea and biscuits that comes with it, and now that I’m working out regularly, I can wander ‘off-plan’ and indulge a little.

But when we’re faced with the opposite, when the welcome is absent, and you’re greeted with disdain, hostility or worse, the choices are very much more difficult – do we tolerate or fight what we experience?  It’s a decision I am fortunate not to have faced and, I hope, it’s not a choice I have ever caused others to make.  What I need to do more of though, is support others that do have to make the choice, to stand up and be heard when I witness that failure to welcome.  I’m ashamed to admit it, but frankly, I find that a terrifying prospect even though I’ve got the benefit of a privileged background.  If there’s a part of the body that the HIIT class can’t help with, it’s the moral backbone.  It’s something that I need to strengthen, to become more of an advocate for others that could use a hand.

We improve whenever we do something regularly and consistently.  Just as regular exercise serves to improve health and strengthen the body, it is the same for developing moral courage.  We should extend ourselves by leaving our comfort zones, by calling out when we hear a slight, by supporting those that deserve better, and as we do, we make wherever we choose to call home a much better place for all of us to live.


Twitter: @GOMinTraining
Copyright © Craig Brown, 2019
18 April 2019

* High intensity interval training

Sources:

Friday 12 April 2019

Mind your language

In the GOM household, there is a shared dislike that relates to the popular misuse of the word “like”.  Mrs GOM and I are not terribly fond of the Daughter of GOM’s repeated use of the word to punctuate her sentences and the D of G’s dislike manifests in being greatly irritated at our constant call for clarification on what she means.  A common exchange over supper might go along the following lines:

D of G:   … and I was, like, so annoyed
GOM:     Like so annoyed, what’s that like?
D of G:   [eye roll, ignore father and carry on with like-infused diatribe]

On rare occasions, the offensive article can be deployed with such regularity that there is insufficient time over supper with which to seek clarification, so Mrs GOM and I will simply hold up our hands and raise a finger each time another instance occurs.  Mrs GOM begins, and I continue when her digits are exhausted.  On one highly effusive outburst, we even had to remove our slippers.

Our point is beginning to land and the unnecessary punctuation is thankfully diminishing, but I was reminded of it again when reading Mark Manson’s thoroughly splendid book “The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck” (his asterisk, not mine, although he does dispense with them in the book).  In one paragraph, he used the word ‘like’ four times, once, in my opinion, correctly, the next three times in the form of usage that is becoming increasingly common.  Only when faced with its use in written form, and analysing his use of it more closely, his adoption of the word “like” fits the language that he was using.  Like, it actually worked.  It’s a reflection of our ever-evolving language and one of the great things about English; bastardise it often enough and eventually, it’s standardised.  That’s not to say that I won’t continue to bemoan what I consider to be the irrelevant use of the word, but perhaps I should take the advice of Mr Manson.

In fairness, there is a great deal of hope for the D of G.  When entering the car during a school pick-up, she complained to Mrs GOM about a fellow student who had said “Yo G, shall we have a burn, I’ve got some baccy.”
  “Why,” commented the D of G, “can’t he just say, ‘Shall we have a cigarette?’”  A statement from our daughter that makes me immensely proud.

However, D of G’s language is evolving along fresh planes as we periodically discover from Tourette-like outbursts.  When mentioning to Mrs GOM that my friend Adam was cycling again in Italy, D of G involuntarily cried out “ADAM!” proffering no explanation or further contribution to the conversation.
There are times when we might say or do something that elicits an equally baffling comment:
  “Stoooop, I could’ve dropped my croissant” might be triggered if they’re an option for breakfast.  It’s wise at that point not to ask if she’d mind laying the table, as that might inspire the inexplicable “Let’s do the fork in the garbage disposal – ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding”.  And when we hear the phrase “On all levels except physical, I am a wolf – ruff,” it’s possibly time to make ourselves scarce.

The source of these pearls, we discovered, is Vine.  The now defunct video hosting service on which users shared six-second-long video clips (not the eight I suggested that prompted an eye-roll-inducing correction).  Vine was acquired by Twitter in 2012 and placed in an archive state in 2017, but its content flourishes in endless compilations on YouTube, to which we were recently introduced, and which D of G and her friends are able to recite verbatim.  We visited Center Parcs at the weekend and had a blackboard in our accommodation on which D of G and her friend wrote many of their favourite quotes before asking me to read them out as I thought they might be expressed.  This induced much giggling at my failed nuances or misplaced inflexion and it was clear to them that on no level am I “down with the kids”, which of course is not a Vine, it’s just what we old people say when we want to appear cooler than we are and achieve the contrasting aim.

Granted, many of the clips that we were subsequently shown were quite amusing, and I can understand why some of the proclamations might stick in the mind, just as Rowan Atkinson delivering Blackadder’s “I’ve got a plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel” has remained in my head for over 30 years.  It’s often these memorable clips that cause our language to evolve and whilst most of the protagonists on Vine lack the talent of Blackadder’s writers, Richard Curtis and Ben Elton, in some instances, their six-seconds of fame may lead to changes in our language and, I would suggest, not for the better, which is why it irks me so much.

They’re hardly Shakespearean utterances that will have a profound effect on our language and provide us with an ample store of clichés for future use.  They may serve to debase our language and leave grammarians wringing their hands (Shakespeare) and GOM up and down the country lamenting falls in the standard of education.  However, what’s done is done (Bill again).  The internet and social media have made all the world a stage (stop it!) and like it or not, the Queen’s English (!) will be tinkered with and adapted forevermore, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.

I could go on, and whine interminably on the subject, but honestly, should I really give a f*ck?


Twitter: @GOMinTraining
Copyright © Craig Brown, 2019
12 April 2019


Disclosure: For the sake of domestic harmony, I confess to exercising poetic license with the D of G’s language.  She really does speak much more eloquently than I’ve suggested.

Friday 5 April 2019

You’ve got to be kidding me!

"The Rock and Aquaman sign for NZ Rugby"

My initial feeling was one of righteous indignation; the apparent devaluation of the world’s most successful sporting franchise left me incensed.  That was closely followed by a wry smile as I contemplated the welcome that a couple of Hollywood icons might receive from the opponents of Ngati Porou East Coast and the Thames Valley Swamp Foxes when Dwayne (The Rock) Johnson and Jason (Aquaman) Momoa donned their respective club colours.  I imagined that some of the tackling they might experience would be a little more robust than the ‘People’s Elbow’ flim-flammery demonstrated on The Rock’s WWE showreel.

By the time I’d arrived at my early morning exercise class my position was shifting, as I considered the impact to the profile of the game in the US by the All Blacks signing such recognisable names.  Might it be a clever marketing ploy to bring Rugby to a much greater audience?

Cue the post-exercise dog walk, and I had returned to my original opinion.  My rising ire had restored the outrage I felt at Steve Tew, New Zealand Rugby’s CEO, for selling out the All Blacks.  By the time I was home, this week’s blog had largely written itself.
It must be stressed that Mrs. GOM’s patience was being stretched as I launched into yet another invective.  “When did you read this?” she asked.
  “Today.”
  “And the date is…?”
  “Ah.”
If NZ Rugby wonders whether anyone was fooled by its April 1st wheeze, they need look no further.  The blog in my head began to fade but was not entirely extinguished.

To set out my stall, I don’t like to see people represent a country unless they were born there.  I know that athletes the world over want to perform at the highest level and that, sometimes, the adoption of another nation may be their best route to achieve that aim.  I also appreciate that circumstances may render my stance ridiculous; an infant being taken by his or her parents to settle in a new country before they’ve started on solid foods is a fair example, but that doesn’t lessen my pig-headedness.  There are times when folding one’s arms in a pub debate and being intransigent is the very essence of the bliss that stems from ignorance.

Don’t mistake my view for fervent patriotism or rabid nationalism.  That said, challenging my heritage as a New Zealander may earn you a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, unless you happen to be a Customs official at Heathrow examining my passport, in which case, I’m a little less jingoistic and delighted to be British thank you very much.  I simply like the ideal that a country is represented by the very best that it has to offer and cannot be enhanced by imported expertise (although if Semisi and Hepi Lomu had had their boy Jonah in Tonga, I’d perhaps bend my rules just a smidge).

What NZ Rugby’s wee jape has brought up though, is the issue of imported players which has long niggled me.  For years I have had to endure taunts about the composition of the All Black team, putting up with jibes from countless Brits and Irish telling me that NZ Rugby steals babies from the cribs of Pacific Island households to improve the national side.  Granted, there have been some brilliant Pacific Islanders that have pulled on the All Black jersey over the years, and there are a few in the squad even now, yet after listening to a commentary during a recent Six Nations match, I could be forgiven for thinking I was listening to a match between Samoa and Fiji.

So, before the next person tries to have a poke at me about the number of Islanders in the All Blacks squad, let me put things into perspective.  In the Autumn international between Ireland and New Zealand, of the 30 players that started that match, 16 were born in New Zealand.  That comprised New Zealand’s entire starting line-up and Ireland’s Bundee Aki who hails from Auckland.  For good measure, South Africa and England were also represented in the Ireland team in the forms of CJ Stander and Kieran Marmion.

But Ireland are hardly the worst transgressors when it comes to not representing the country of one’s birth, the English (or not as the case may be) take a leadership role in adoption.  A look at their squad reveals seven foreign born players: a couple of Aussies (Alec Hepburn and Billy Vunipola), a couple of Kiwis (Brad Shields and Ben Te'o) and the South Pacific is further represented by Manu Tuilagi from Samoa and two Fijians, Joe Cokanasiga and Nathan Hughes.

It doesn’t stop with England though, the top prize goes to the Italians, whose squad of 31 players includes 10 that were born overseas, including one from that powerhouse of world rugby, Germany.
No wonder they’re doing so well.
It’s understandable why they might wish to add a foreign contingent to their side; the pool of local talent isn’t too deep and the game’s heritage and experience, on which other countries are able to draw, doesn’t exist for the Italians, so they have fewer options.  However, countries that are well established such as England, Ireland and, dare I say it, New Zealand, should be doing everything to develop home-grown talent and allow the foreign-born players to rise to their potential in their home nations.  By recruiting players into a national side after a qualifying period, the international game is fostering a transfer market that will see the wealthier nations acquire their squads rather than giving birth to them, which compromises the ethos of international sport.

I admit to ignoring the subtleties of the argument completely and my arms are firmly crossed on this subject.  Counter arguments can be thrown at me ad infinitum, my position won’t change, so it’s as well that New Zealand Rugby was messing with us with their announcement on Monday, which is a great shame, I was rather looking forward to seeing the footage of The Rock being hammered in a bone-crunching tackle by a sheep-shearing loose-forward on the battlefields of rural Ruatoria.

Twitter: @GOMinTraining
Copyright © Craig Brown, 2019

http://www.allblacks.com/News/33913/dwayne-the-rock-johnson-and-jason-aquaman-momoa-sign-with-nz-rugby



The Lady's for Turning

  With more spins than a child’s gyroscope on a Christmas morning, Liz Truss’s premiership is looking decidedly revolutionary, but only in r...