Saturday, August 01, 2009
[saturday night live] something better change down in the sewer
Well, last night's Niagara with the French lady didn't go down all that well so, to redeem myself in your eyes, your humble blogger will run a boys' night tonight and who better to do that with than the Stranglers?
From the start they were controversial - the punks didn't like them because of a bassist and organist who could actually play, the women hated their supposed misogyny [and so Alison won't like this post] but they were a cut above as a group.
I don't know why I like groups like this and artists like Ian Dury - it appeals to something rebelling against the constraints of upbringing and education I suppose. Something Better Change [below] is one of the better live Strangler clips available on youtube at the moment and that famous bass line comes through.
I ran with the photo-collage version below with the studio track because the guy did a good job with the photos every two seconds. Yep - I saw the crosses - that's their cross to bear when they shuffle off this mortal coil - but the song is still a rock classic of all time and the change to the last movement at 5:23 lifts this way above the usual punk.
Here's the live version - though the sound quality is less [it was decades ago], the atmosphere is there and the shots of all the band are good.
Enjoy.
[saturday quiz] know your operette and musicals
1. Which G&S ran the following:
But though the compliment implied
Inflates me with legitimate pride,
It nevertheless can't be denied
That it has its inconvenient side.
For I'm not so old, and not so plain,
And I'm quite prepared to marry again,
But there'd be the deuce to pay in the Lords
If I fell in love with one of my Wards!
Which rather tries my temper, for
I'm such a susceptible Chancellor!
Chorus:
Which rather tries his temper, for
He's such a susceptible Chancellor!
2. Which R&H ran the following:
Your servant! Your servant!
Indeed I'm not you servant --
Although you give me less than servant's pay --
I'm a free and independent employé
...(sigh) employee.
Because I'm a woman
You think, like ev'ry woman
I have to be a slave or concubine.
You conceited, self-indulgent libertine! ...(sigh)
libertine!
3. How much did Eliza offer, take it or leave it?
An Englishman's way of speaking
absolutely classifies him
The moment he talks
he makes some other
Englishman despise him
One common language
I'm afraid we'll never get
Oh, why can't the English
learn to
Set a good example
to people whose English
Is painful to your ears
The Scotch and the Irish
leave you close to tears
There even are places where
English completely disappears
Well, in America, they
haven't used it for years
Why can't the English teach
their children how to speak
Norwegians learn Norwegian
The Greeks are taught
their Greek
In France, every Frenchman
knows his language
from "A" to "zed"
The French don't care
what they do, actually, as long
as they pronounce it properly.
Arabians learn Arabian with
the speed of summer lightning
The Hebrews learn it backwards
which is absolutely frightening
Use proper English
You're regarded as a freak
Oh, why can't the English
Why can't the English learn
To speak?
4. Opera and year please:
If I told you what it takes
to reach the highest high,
You'd laugh and say 'nothing's that simple'
But you've been told many times before
Messiahs pointed to the door
And no one had the guts to leave the temple!
I'm free-I'm free
And freedom tastes of reality
I'm free-I'm free
And I'm waiting for you to follow me.
5. Book by Stein, music by Bock - lyrics by?
Wonder of wonders, miracle of miracles-
God took the tailor by the hand
Turned him around and- miracle of miracles- Led him to the promised land!
When David slew Goliath (yes!), that was a miracle.
When God gave us manna in the wilderness, that was a miracle too.
But of all God's miracles large and small,
The most miraculous one of all
Is the one I thought could never be:
God has given you to me.
Answers
Iolanthe, The King and I, one shilling, Tommy [1969], Harnick
[editing of posts] it's a question of timing
There really must be some sort of room to move, some sort of breathing space to disagree with others on our blogs and to state what we feel. If someone is up to something nefarious, we have to be able to allege it, to fisk them and whether they are politicians [unable and not interested in coming back at us] or someone else closer to home, the principle is the same.
Attribution
I’ve always held – and this might be a prejudice from university days – that for every statement, particularly if that statement is negative, one must provide the evidence, [or a link to it], upon which the statement was made.
Too many bloggers, for example, might say Brown is a traitor but if you look at their blogs, the evidence is not there – they are trumpeting what some other blogger says, without attributing it.
Context
A good example of this was the Churchillian quote which spoke of an underground pack of malcontents who hold the world to ransom. One commenter pointed out that Churchill was referring to Communism. That needs to be made clear, yes but it can equally be argued that what he was referring to were the same forces behind the French Revolution and every other nefarious movement which has brought misery to mankind.
What I’m saying is – as long as it is all stated, all up front, to the best of our ability and not hidden, if there’s no sleight of hand involved, then it’s all right.
One can selectively quote but the quote must be in context and attributed as far as one can know it to be so.
Right of reply
Blogger provides a mechanism whereby you can arrange it so that the front page posts stay there for, say, two days, after which they disappear off the front page but are accessible through the chronologically arranged Archives in the sidebar.
All those older posts might have comments on moderation, pending approval. Moderation might also be used when a troll or stalker is sniffing around. Sometimes, we shut off a comments thread when things are getting out of hand.
Most bloggers do not have too much trouble with a fellow blogger’s policy of no ad hominem, within the thread, towards other commenters although the target of the post can get a right pasting, backed up by evidence.
The bottom line here is the Right of Reply within a time frame.
It is essential for the blogger to allow right of reply on that post within a given time, maybe a week but most bloggers work on a fortnight, this reply sticking to the issue, introducing no new thread unless it is connected and if making allegations, backing them up with evidence.
Time frame for the editing of posts
Look, you might be a perfect editor, able to have everything crisp and ready to go at the point of publication. I’m not and I cannot.
We all know that it goes through these phases – collect material, collate, write, edit, see preview, publish but the problem with:
1. my mind;
2. the Blogger mechanism;
3. my computer
… is that I have to see the post in place, on the blog front page, in order to make my final adjustments. There may be typos, grammatical non sequiturs, it might be that the intent of a statement, when seen in “the cold light of day” might be construed differently from what was originally intended.
I like my post to be "right".
Whatever the reason, there needs to be a period of grace, during which time a blogger can make adjustments, a reasonable time, say 30 minutes.
Unfortunately, with the advent of RSS, we have a murky situation where one’s detractors who are seeking anything they can against one, can seize a post at point of publication and insist that that is the blogger’s post. Fini. Full stop. Period.
Rubbish. That comes under the heading "unreasonable". If the blogger makes adjustments within the first 30 minutes or removes the post to Draft again, then clearly he/she’s not happy with it and wants to make it right.
There must be a short period of grace.
On the other hand, a blogger who comes back in later in the day or the next day or a a week or a month down the track to cover himself is an entirely different thing. For example, there was a blogger I knew who posted a picture of a fellow blogger as a spider. When the substance hit the fan over that, he went back and altered the post so that it looked as if he’d never done that.
That was wrong and it was dishonest.
If he’d removed it within the 30 minute period of grace, I’d have said, “Well, he realized that it was wrong and removed it. Hey, anyone can make mistakes.”
We have original RSS of many posts that blogger put up and months later he went through and sanitized them. That does not fall within this “period of grace” I’m referring to.
When later editing is acceptable
It is entirely acceptable to edit later if you acknowledge on your blog that you have done so and the mechanism I intend to use after this is to put a little “Amendment, when and why” at the foot of the relevant post or else the word “Update” and to state when and why as well.
The circumstances in which I’ll “later edit” are:
1. If I see typos or grammatical errors and here I see no need to acknowledge these alterations in the post;
2. If someone has pointed out that he/she is quite unhappy with something stated plus [and this is a big plus] if it is clear that the statement was factually incorrect. Under those circumstances, there are no time limits and I’ll alter it, with the Amendment, when and why;
3. If I see a logical inconsistency in the argument. Again, this needs to be explained at the foot of the post under Amendments, when and why.
This logical inconsistency in the argument is a tricky one because the “spider” poster mentioned above might argue that he saw a logical inconsistency and thus removed the picture. Therefore it needs to be in response to a situation at the time, within that two week period most bloggers interpret as being “current”, not as a response to threatened legal proceedings.
Take it easy
If you make a statement about me, then provided you gave me ample opportunity at the time to reply or, if I was OTT, you gave my supporters ample opportunity, then that’s that.
I can’t suddenly start applying strictures to you which I don’t observe myself and demanding saint status of you when no one expects anything of that kind in the normal course of blogging.
There has to be some sort of space in which to blog, free of Big Brother tactics – that’s what blogging is all about. That’s why we do it. If you can’t take criticism, then you shouldn’t be dishing it out.
You can say what you like about me and the likelihood is that I’ll put it on my testimonials page.
Editing policy on this blog
Please take the whole of this post as constituting the editing policy on this blog. This post will subsequently be linked to from the About page.
Disclaimer and note
1. I reserve the right to find a good picture and later add it to this post, as well as applying the 30 minute rule now for typos and grammatical errors.
2. Please don't refer to any specific person by name or blogname in comments - those comments will be deleted to prevent a bunfight over a particular person, whereas I'd like comments to stick to the principles brought up here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)