The Karl Heinz Stockhausen gig was a very curious experience. I have to confess to my finger being a considerable distance away from "the pulse" with regards to this particular music genre.
He's an avuncular 70 something German. He came on stage did a brief introduction, going on to explain the acoustic difficulties he had strived to overcome at the venue, (his sound is "octophonic").
Then the lights go off completely and he goes off to control events from his mixing desk.
The first piece didn't quite do it for me. I just felt like I was stuck inside a Space Invaders machine. I wasn't sure whether the piece was meant to have a contemporary relevance, or whether we were supposed to admire how ahead of his time the Composer was, in his innovative approach to electronic music, (it was composed in 1958).
The second piece after the interval was a lot longer (69 minutes), but much more accessible. There was more development of a theme with a bigger more symphonic sound.
I found it relaxing just shutting my eyes in the darkness and letting it all wash over me.
Of course, being the Queen's Hall, it was again suffocatingly hot, and I had severe numb bum syndrome from sitting on the ingeniously uncomfortably designed pews.
I'd say I enjoyed it overall though. 6.5/10.
I got a lift back from Dave. I was grateful for the lift, but became irritated at Dave's habit of ignoring the area designated for cycles at traffic lights, and driving right onto it.
This is just a token gesture by the Council to make Edinburgh's roads more "cycle friendly", as is their rather half hearted attempt to introduce the odd cycle lane here and there.
Dave justifies this slightly fascist tendency by citing the bad behaviour of cyclists ie going through red lights, cycling on the pavements, weaving in and out of lanes etc etc
This undoubtedly is a valid criticism of SOME cyclists' behaviour, but it is hardly fair to apply it to the whole of the cycling population.
If this logic were applied to car drivers by cyclists, they could be all categorised as anti-social, polluting, child killing (the UK has the highest rate of child mortality due to car accidents, in Europe), speeding, aggressive fuckwits.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Hey Jim - cheers for the mention. Nearly killed a red-light-running cyclist this morning (his fault not mine btw)....the council wastes tax payer's money on these road markings.... they are contrary to the Highway Code, encouraging cyclists to weave through the traffic to the front of the queue. When cyclists start paying road tax and displaying licence plates, I'll take their "rights" a bit more seriously....like many in our "society" today (eg schoolchildren) they need to learn that, with rights come obligations ;-)
Keep up the blog - most entertaining!!!
"Fascist" Dave
hmmm..I expect bus lanes are "contrary to the highway code" as well?
Cyclists wouldn't need to weave about if the Council weren't so half-arsed about doing things and established proper universal cycle lanes. They should be doing more to encourage people to leave their cars at home.
Being a cyclist and paying road tax aren't mutually exclusive as you well know.
It's telling that you put society in quotes. You obviously adhere to the "there's no such thing as society" discredited Thatcherite philosophy.
Thanks for the nice blog feedback though! :-)
My placing of society in quotes was meant to convey the opposite of Mrs Thatcher's quip. Everyone thinks we're part of a society which accords them rights - but they pay no heed to their obligations which go hand in hand with those rights
As regards your road tax/cyclist/mutually exclusive argument goes - if you have two cars you pay two sets of road tax - one car and one bike, you pay one set.
I'd just like to say I have only one car (and an exercise bike in my back bedroom)
ok to sum up , because you perceive that certain cyclists are not taking up their "obligations" to society, you decide to act against the whole cycling community. That's a very 1940's, World War 2, Nazi type of policy wouldn't you say?
You're likely to cause accidents by making cyclists less visible to other road users by taking up that area.
The road tax argument is bollocks anyway. Do you think that road tax is covering all the roadworks currently going on in Edinburgh?
It's council tax that's also paying for that.
If more people cycled there'd be less damage to the roads and less maintenance for everybody to cough up.
If they weren't encouraged to weave in and out of the traffic to get to their special areas, but instead waited their turn like everyone else on the road, they wouldn't need to worry about being more visible, because they'd be at the kerbside where they should be (unless they're turning right) and don't get me started on cyclists cycling other than in single file...
Anyway what harm does it do to sit at the lights in their designated area when there are no cyclists around for miles (or at that time of night, if there were we probably wouldn't see them anyway cos they'd be cycling along without proper lights...)
...and...if they did pay road tax, perhaps that, rather than council tax, could be used to pay for creating their spaces...ha
...and because some motorists are not taking up their "obligations" to society (by not paying enough heed to cyclists), the council decides to act against the whole motoring community by imposing safety areas at lights - which are more like danger areas as they encourage slow moving cyclists (that is if they can be bothered to STOP at the lights in the first place) to sit five or six abreast in front of two lanes of traffic waiting to speed off from the lights?....ha
I win
Dave Goebels
ah...so I can justify parking on a disabled car space by stating "There weren't any disableds around at the time!"
I think your reasoning has gone into freefall. Let's just agree to differ.
However, I retain the right to offer you a few choice profanities should I be cycling up to traffic lights and find you blocking off the cycle area...!
:-)
OK Jim, it's a draw. ...but re the Disabled jibe, there's a big difference between "Parking" and "waiting at the lights" - and between a disabled driver and a cyclist - although I'll always park in a "mother and child" space if available, their wider berth lessening the chance of my car being damaged by another driver unable to keep proper control of their doors....
Bitter & Twisted
It's a draw.
Jim, I think you are right to be chastising your friend Dave. This insecurity surrounding his personal space would be perhaps a sign of his insecurity. Could it be that he drives a sports car with a very big engine ? (if you get my meaning)
Sorry Urban Fox - my car is in fact a bit of a disaster at the moment, as witnessed in my blog -which is not as funny as Jim's...
it is neither big nor sporty - although it has recently sported nipples...
Sorry - it's the car, not the blog, which had the nipples...
Ah, CBQ, or is it David ?
I think you are too besotted with the smooth curves of your car. You treat the car, and the road as your own. It is as if you are in town with your trophy girlfriend... like I think you say "are you looking at my bird ?"
This car is not your girlfriend, and the road is not your dinner table for two. You should share the love. As Boogie Down Productions say "Love's gonna getcha"
Post a Comment