Meditation, mindfulness and my naughty chimp

I am a dreadful procrastinator.  By which, I suppose, I should mean I'm a really good procrastinator.

A bad procrastinator, when faced with any given task, would completely fail to get distracted or sidetracked.  They wouldn't put off any difficult tricky jobs in their life, but instead would just get on with them.  Completely failing to waste their time - a woeful performance if you want to be a pro level procrastinator.

I, however, am excellent at wasting my time.  Before writing this blog, for instance, I have spent at least 30 minutes on Facebook clicking on random links to funny videos, etc.  I've checked my emails, completed the washing up, lots of things that are not on my 'to-do' list.

And I enjoy writing my blogs.  The key though, is that it is a task that takes some effort, and my mind is desperate to distract me.  It wants to distract me for a number of reasons, one of which is that if I put a piece of creative work out there for people to view, I open myself up to criticism.

A part of my brain is there to try and help me, to protect me from harm.  The problem is, it doesn't know the difference between me publishing a blog and me going up to a Tiger and tapping it on the nose with my wang.

It senses danger and it wants me to flee.  Another part of my brain knows this and is fighting against it.  Concepts like this are covered in the book The Chimp Paradox by Prof Steve Peters.

Prof Peters is a consultant psychiatrist whose clients include Ronnie O'Sullivan, Victoria Pendleton and Steven Gerrard.  He has helped them understand the relationship between their 'chimp' with is the part of you that reacts emotionally, to their 'human' part, which is the part that reacts logically.

The sports stars he has seen have stated how much help he has given them.  It's just a shame Prof Peters never suggested to Gerrard that he could do with investing in less slippy boots!

The ideas he puts in the book is that you can't win by fighting your chimp, you have to learn to manage it.  You recognise in what ways you worry or feel bad.  You exercise your chimp, listen to it, and only then can you start to reason with it.

Chimp Mangement

When my chimp says "you shouldn't do a blog.  There are professional writers out there blogging who can do it a lot better, you'll just show yourself up.  People won't like it."  I shouldn't try to ignore it.  It is part of how I feel, of my worries.

What I can do is recognise how I feel in that sense and have space to think.  I can respond with "I've worried about that in the past, but I have published a number of blog posts and they get hundreds of views, and a number of people share them on social media, so they must enjoy reading them."

I believe mindfulness and meditation come within that same realm of thinking.

Mindfulness is focussing on how you are in the present moment.  It isn't dwelling on the past or worrying about the future.  The part of your brain that works when you worry or are stressed cannot work at the same time as the part of your brain that deals with the senses (sound, touch, smell, etc).

The brain can fluctuate between all those things of course, but if you take time to focus on the senses, this can help with mindfulness.  Taking time to sit and focus on your breathing for instance, or by taking in the sounds around you, this can all help.

Your brain will fight to go back to worry mode, but if you focus on those senses it can help alleviate the sensations of stress.  To anchor yourself.

This is essentially what meditation is as well.  I don't want to appear like a preachy expert here, because I'm not.  I've only recently taken up meditation, but I have found it beneficial.

Most people have a concept of what meditation is, but it's interesting the view points I've found from friends who haven't experienced it yet themselves.  Many have a tendency to think it isn't for them for a number of reasons.

Something that has come up a number of times is they think that in meditation you have to clear your mind completely, and they cannot imagine doing that.  Meditation isn't about clearing your mind and 'not thinking'.

There are various methods of doing meditation, but for the most part the main focus is that you spend time with your eyes closed and focus on your breathing.  Thoughts will come and go, and if you find yourself distracted, you pull your focus back to your breathing.

It isn't about denying thinking at all, but it is about focusing on your body, on your senses.  I find through doing meditation it helps me reach a clarity in my thought.  It helps me strip away some of the worry, and get to the root of what I am actually feeling.

Sometimes I find I'm having thoughts keep coming in to my head that I didn't even realise were there.  Say for instance I had a bad gig during the week (which happens to all comics at times).

I know logically that I should take lessons from such gigs, but that I shouldn't dwell on the negative.  Through meditation I will realise that I am in fact dwelling on one bad gig.  Having that at the surface helps me to deal with it better, otherwise it would be left buried, which is never a good thing.

After a while through meditation you get to control your mind and achieve a level of Zen.  With dedication you then begin to develop Shaolin Monk level kung-fu skills, and can learn to shoot a fireball from your stomach.

HADOUKEN!!

Well... maybe not.  It isn't a magic trick that makes everything right in your life, but it can help you to cope and manage your emotions better.

If you're interested in meditation I have used Head Space.  It's a website which provides guided meditations.  You pay to subscribe, but you can do 10 free sessions to try it out first.  There are also plenty of guided meditations available on YouTube.

If you live in Greater Manchester I have also done group sessions with Sadhana Yoga which have been very good.  Having an instructor you can actually talk to about your experiences of meditation can be very helpful.

As I say, meditation can help, but it doesn't automatically solve everything.  Last week I did a guided meditation in the morning before work.  I set it to be a 10 minute session, but it ran for 20 minutes without me realising, and that meant I was late for work.

There is nothing more ironic than suffering road rage as you race in to work knowing that it's meditation that has caused you to be so stressed in the first place!

Of course, I haven't let that put me off.

My diet and "Eat to Live Forever"

GIllian McKeith next to a cracking buffet.

The idea of wanting to live forever is pretty horrific.  Carrying on in to your hundreds whilst everyone you've ever cared about has already passed away.  As with the Tom Hanks character in 'The Green Mile', it would feel like a punishment (even if you did have an immortal pet mouse to keep you company).

In his documentary aired last week, "Eat to Live Forever", food critic Giles Coren found plenty of people whose very aim was this.  If not live forever exactly, a desire to live until at least 150.  A very old age, no doubt, but certainly not one that would make as catchy a title.

In his quest to find entertaining television weirdos he of course heads to America.  I've always found there to be quite enough weirdos in the UK myself, so I'm not sure why documentaries always have to head across the pond to find them.

Maybe this is something UKIP could take up as a cause.  Nigel Farage being interviewed saying "this is a waste of license fee payers money travelling to find strange foreigners.  What we say is British nutters for British TV shows!  I suggest that if the BBC are struggling to find any unhinged lunatics, they should just come down to our next party conference".

In America the first people Giles meets are Paul McGlouthin and his wife, of the CR Way (a.k.a. the calorie restriction way).  They believe that to live a long and healthy life the secret is to eat a calorie restricted diet.  The average man is recommended to eat 2500 calories a day, but they say it should be 1800 instead.

This is not an idea that is new to me.  Many started to understand this concept following another documentary on the BBC back in 2012 - "Horizon: Eat, Fast and Live Longer".

Presented by Dr Michael Mosley, this documentary looked at the health benefits of fasting.  What attracted me to the findings of this program was that everything discussed was done through a scientific process.  This wasn't just hearsay.  It was this documentary that really launched the concept of the 5:2 diet.

To give you an idea of my own dieting, I started making a conscious effort to look after myself around 5 years.  Following my partner at the time I started doing Slimming World.

To boil it down to it's basics, the concept behind Slimming World was that you have 'free food' (lean meats, pasta, rice, legumes, etc) and 'super free food' (most fruit and veg).  You had to aim to have at least one third 'super free food' to two thirds of the 'free food'.

The key to this was that there was no weighing or points counting, you basically ate as much as you wanted until you felt genuinely full.  If you ate within these limits you could eat as much as you wanted and you would lose weight.  The group 'weigh-in' session I went to each week showed that this was genuinely true.

Not to say it was easy of course.  All the naughty food, like chocolate and booze, was given a 'syn' rating.  You could only have up to 10 syns a day.  Or, like me, you could save them up over the week, then on the weekend do a murder.

Seriously, after no biscuits for a week you would be ready to stab someone, so that's barely even a joke.

I must say though, this diet did work well for me.  Over about 6 months I ended up slowly managing to lose about one stone in weight.

But then I watched the Michael Mosley program and discovered the 5:2 diet.  The concept is simple.  On 5 days in the week you eat normally, and on 2 days in the week you can only consume 600 calories (500 for women).

Having never been a dieter that counted calories, it took me a bit of effort to work out what I could eat that would fit in to these limits.  After a process of weighing foods and using MyFitnessPal to check on calorie levels, this became my meals on a fast day:

Skip breakfast

Lunch - A tin of Mackeral in tomato sauce with spinach leaves

Dinner - fillet of cod with steamed brocolli and cauliflower

What I discovered was that with using veg you could have quite a plateful within the calorie limits.  Other than that I was having fish so I had a source of low cal protein, as protein tends to fill you up more.

It seems that for everyone who does this diet they have different good and bad points for them personally.  For me, the bad points were a lack of energy in the afternoon, and, I'm reliably informed by my girlfriend, a tendency to be a little snappy in the evening.  No surprise there, I am literally starving!

Another problem was dehydration.  I would drink plenty of fluid and feel fine throughout the day in that sense.  At night though, I would either end up having to get up in the middle of the night at least once for the toilet because of how much I had drunk, or if I stopped drinking long enough before bed time, I would end up feeling really dehydrated in the night.

It was like my body wasn't able to keep hold of the water like it would normally.  Again, I'm sure that's part of the starvation process.

The point of the diet though was mainly in the overall health benefits.  When Dr Micheal Mosley did it he found he went from being overweight and bordering on diabetic with very high cholesterol to having very good blood levels and losing weight.

The weight loss is the by product of fasting rather than the point really, although without doubt this is why most people give it a go.

In terms of my own health, a recent blood test showed that my cholesterol was 2.9 - very good.

Also, combining the 5:2 intermittent fasting along with my normal diet conscious of the Slimming World ethos and regular exercise meant that in total I went on to lose 2 and a half stone in weight.  I went from being overweight at over 15 stone to going down to 12.5 stone.

So, with everything combined, I've done pretty well.  I don't want to live forever, but hey, I want to have a good go at it and not be ill or in excessive pain whilst I'm at it.

Spot the odd one out

Back to the documentary and Giles Coren is on his calorie controlled diet.  One thing you notice about Paul McGlouthin and his associates from the 'CR Way' is that, frankly, they don't really look healthy.  Unsurprisingly, they are pretty skinny.

At one point McGlouthin congratulates Giles Coren on how good his skin looks, a way of saying how well the calorie restricted diet is working for him.  All you can think while he says this though is 'well, Giles might look well, but your skin looks awful!'  And it really did, unfortunately.

Writing them off as nutters isn't really fair, lets just say they are a little eccentric and a bit overpowering in their interpersonal skills (well, he was anyway, not so sure about his wife...).

Giles went to visit various other groups, including fruitarians (or just 'Fruits', really) and a Doctor who promotes the idea of 'faecal transplants', which involves squirting a healthy persons poop up your own backside to get all the good bacteria from it.  It looks like there might be something in that, but hey, maybe not for me quite yet.

What did look interesting though was the 'paleo' lifestyle.  The paleo diet is essentially a caveman diet.  You only eat what a caveman might have done.  So that means no cultivated food such as those containing flour or oats, and instead eating meat, fish, fruit and veg.  Anything processed is out, including sugar.

So this means no sweet snacks at all, no sugar in drinks, etc.  The main thing really, is no carbs (so no pasta, rice or bread).  That's the tricky part.

Yes, in the documentary the paleo community do come across as something of a cult, even with their own 'Jesus' leader figure.  The fact that you can call people linked only by a diet a 'community' seems extreme enough in itself.

Also, a drawback is that there seems to be very little science in understanding the true benefits or flaws of the paleo diet.  If I had one major criticism of Coren's documentary it's that the whole thing is a bit 'science lite'.

Yes, he has a Harley Street Doctor on call to discuss each diet, but she is only able to give the conventional scientific response.  As we know of the fasting diets, conventional medical advice would be to definitely avoid fasting, but the science definitely backs it up.

All this said though, I am attracted to the paleo diet.  The main reason was seeing so many people talking about how fit and healthy they feel.  Full of energy throughout the day, no problems sleeping, looking great and burning fat.  Even with looking online I have struggled to see evidence from people who have tried it and suffered.

But still, the Science is not conclusive.

What I have decided to do then is give the full paleo diet a go for a full month, to see how it effects me.  My bloods are already very good and I could have them tested again after the month has passed.

I'm even considering setting up a new blog to keep a diary of how I get on.  If you have any thoughts on this, please let me know.






EDIT - Well, I have indeed decided to try going paleo for a month.  My first day was today and I've set up a dedicated blog so I can keep a diary of how I get on, which you can find here - paleochallenge30days.blogspot.co.uk

Nigel Farage and Jeremy Clarkson - 'Common assault' not 'common sense'

Right wing populists are rarely out of the news in Britain, but this week has been dominated by them much more than usual.

On one hand you have UKIP party leader Nigel Farage getting in to trouble for essentially calling for equality legislation to be scrapped in an interview

Whilst at the same time Jeremy Clarkson has been suspended for allegedly punching his producer on Top Gear.  For both of them the same pattern has emerged - those who like them will defend them to the teeth, those that dislike them call for their heads.

I know that sounds obvious, but it's still irritating.  As a Socialist I'm far on the left, so you can guess my opinion on Farage and Clarkson - I'm not exactly a fan.

But you soon realise that when you espouse an opinion about either of them that mocks them you are only playing to the choir, you will only have people respond who completely agree with you already.  It seems impossible to actually effect, let alone change, anyone's opinion on these two.

Same thing the other way round.  Clarkson has been accused of punching a colleague at work.  As such he has been suspended following an investigation.  Because of the suspension the BBC are considering cancelling the rest of the current series of Top Gear as he wouldn't be available to film and, frankly, it would be weird to just go ahead without him.

So far, so clear.  I think we all know that if you're accused of assaulting a colleague at work you will be, at best, suspended as the allegation is investigated.

And yet there is a (currently) 600,000 signatures strong petition calling for Jeremy Clarkson to be immediately reinstated.  WHAT??

There are many arguments that can made to suggest that Jeremy Clarkson shouldn't be on TV.  He has a rich history of controversy already.  But all that to one side for now, as it stands at this time, he has been accused of punching a colleague at work and so has been suspended.

WHAT IS THERE TO ARGUE AGAINST?  Without making comment about his guilt or otherwise, how can anyone argue against him being suspended?

And yet, here we are, with a petition signed by over 600,000 people who have decided, with no need for any form of evidence whatsoever, that Jeremy Clarkson should just be reinstated.  The reason why?  Because they think it is all a conspiracy.

Right wing blogger Guido Fawkes started the petition, and wrote in The Sun on Thursday explaining why.  Now, someone like Guido Fawkes is very hard to satirise because his language is so absurdly reactionary that he himself appear to be an ironic joke.  But he's not, he's very real.  To give you an example, he said he loved Clarkson for all the reasons:

"...a bunch of Left-wing pinkos at the BBC have been out to get him for ages"

Seriously, "left-wing pinkos"?  What is this, 1950's America?  McCarthyism on the march once again?  What a bizarrely archaic term.  But then this comes from the same lexicon in which Tory Ministers also pluck the term "pleb" from (allegedly/probably), so maybe not that surprising.

The BBC Trust meet to discuss Clarkson, yesterday

The point is they think Clarkson is subject to a conspiracy where the liberal-lefties at the BBC are out to get him.

Top Gear, in it's current form after being revamped in 2002, has been a massive success for the BBC.  The programme is estimated to have around 350 million views per week in 170 different countries.  Do we really believe that the BBC would want to kill off this cash cow?

Of course not.  Yes, Clarkson can cause them all manor of headaches, but the figures speak for themselves.

I suppose the reason they might have suspended him, and I don't know if I've mentioned this, is because he is accused of punching a colleague whilst at work!!

Meanwhile on the other side of the green in this village made up entirely of idiots lives Nigel Farage.  A man who is pure Marmite, both because he divides opinion but also because he is the by-product left over from a process, in this case mainstream politicians stoking up racism and anti-immigrant sentiments.

In an interview that has just come out with Trevor Phillips, the former head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, Farage was questioned on his views regarding the existing Equalities legislation.  His response:

"I would argue that the law does need changing, and that if an employer wishes to chose, or you can use the word 'discriminate' if you want to, but wishes to chose to employ a British-born person, they should be allowed to do so.  I think you should be able to chose on the basis of nationality, yes.  I do."

So he suggests that discrimination in employment should be allowed.  Unsurprisingly, there are many who didn't take well the suggestion of rolling back legislation that we have had in place in one form or another since 1965.

Sadique Khan, Labour's shadow justice secretary, said:

"when my parents moved to London they frequently saw signs saying 'no blacks, no dogs, no irish' and what UKIP is suggesting would take us back to those days"

The bizarre thing is, that since the contents of the interview became public causing Nigel Farage to do some backtracking, he and others in UKIP have presented data in interviews that are indeed sympathetic to those suffering from racism.

One UKIP candidate interviewed on the radio gave the statistics about how much harder it was for young black men to find employment than young white men, but still went on to say that the equalities legislation was unnecessary because "people can just use common sense instead".

In practice they're saying is "we know that racism exists, but we think the best thing to do is just get rid of the legislation designed to stop it".

Now, I tried to find the exact details of that radio interview I heard, but it's impossible to find.  Trying to goggle phrases like 'UKIP candidate defends Farage' throws up so many stories from soooooooooooooooooo many gaffes, it is impossible to wade through.

I might as well have goggled 'pieces of hay that look like needles'.

But again, there are so many that will jump to his defence even though the position seems indefensible, and they will say it's 'common sense' whilst they do it.  That's the most egotistical thing of the populist right.  I can argue my politics quite vigorously, but I still realise that I am putting across a certain political point of view.

They believe that they are not merely arguing a position, but that what they say is what 'everyone is thinking'... it's common sense.  How egotistical is that?

When asked about his views after that interview Nigel Farage said that UKIP as a party was 'colour blind'.  As they are still arguing that jobs shouldn't go to foreigners, can we call that 'blind prejudice'?

At least he doesn't wear jeans and a jacket...

As a caveat to this piece I suppose I should point out that Nigel Farage has not himself signed the petition to reinstate Jeremy Clarkson.  When asked about it he said:

"It seems to me that as boss of Ukip, if I punched one of our press office – it’s tempting at times, I have to say – but I’d be in very, very hot water indeed and I would without doubt be suspended for a period of time pending a disciplinary hearing.

So I think people signing up online saying Clarkson should be re-employed are doing so really without any knowledge of what went on or whether there’s any history there, so as far as I’m concerned the jury’s out, but I’m not going to worry too much for Jeremy Clarkson."

So to everyone who has signed the petition calling for Jeremy Clarkson to be reinstated, you are potentially being more reactionary then Nigel Farage.  That should be a sobering thought for you, but I don't suppose it is unfortunately.

Book review and podcast

Hi folks

I haven't had the time to write a full blog this week, but here are a couple of things that I've been up to instead.

First up is a podcast I was a guest on called 'The Cock Inn'.  A mix between a topical comedy panel show and a pub quiz, we discussed 'that' dress, plucky woodpeckers and the pitfalls of being santa.  You can listen at:

https://www.mixcloud.com/TheCockInn/the-cock-inn-episode-6/

You can also find it on iTunes.

Also, I provided a review of 'Jebel Marra' by Michelle Green for the latest online edition of Now Then magazine, which is an arts and culture magazine for the Manchester area.  Don't worry if you don't live in Manchester though, because the book is collection of short stories set in Darfur during the civil.

And yes, it is a right laugh!

Ok... clearly not.  But I did like it.  You can read my review at:

http://nowthenmagazine.com/manchester/issue-17/books/

That's all from me for now, I'll have a new blog at the end of the week.  Thanks for reading.

Creativity and fear - running from the fireball

A number of years ago, I saw the comedian Mark Steel at an event.  Instead of stand up, he was presenting one of his lectures at an event called 'Marxism', organised by the Socialist Workers Party.  'The Mark Steel lectures' had been a popular series on both radio and TV, in which Mark discussed leading figures from history, fusing the concepts of a factual lecture and stand up comedy wonderfully.

This particular lecture was about Einstein.  At one point Mark describes spending time in a cafe in Soho, trying to get his head around a particular theory.  Suddenly it clicks, and he wants to jump up and demand why everyone is just going about their normal day as if this theory didn't exist.

It was very funny, and I laughed.  After I laughed though, I realised something - this is what Mark Steel does with his days.  Whilst I was inputting data sat at a desk 9-5, Monday to Friday, he is sat in cafes in Soho considering theories espoused by leading historical physicists.  And I thought... that sounds brilliant!

Ok, I'm not particularly bothered about spending time pondering the theoretical sciences, but the idea that you could have your day free just to create was life changing.  I realised this is what I wanted to be able to do with my days too.

Since then I have spent a number of years as a stand up comedian, and in that time have also turned my hand to improvised comedy and writing (perhaps you've read my blog...).

Last week I took an improv workshop by the wonderful Jill Bernard.  One of the finest improvisers I have seen, Jill's workshop was titled 'Fireball theory'.  The workshop:

"offers exercises to help you improvise faster and harder than you can judge yourself. You will learn to metaphorically hit the scene running and outrun the explosion of self-loathing and doubt like an action movie hero outruns a fireball thus defying the laws of physics."

 The exercises taught us as a group to play big, play confident, and just go for it.  It was a real buzz.

The idea of outrunning the fireball was really interesting.  To me, that doesn't just apply to improv, but to all creative arts.

To many, creative expression can be terrifying.  There are people who potentially face the risk of death every day, like fire fighters, who can face going in to burning buildings that could collapse at any point but would hate the idea of having to stand on stage and say anything in to a microphone.

Honestly, I've spoken to people like that at gigs, and they say that I'm brave!!

There is fear, initially, but the buzz you get from making a room full of people laugh is amazing.  Your work and effort in writing and working on performing a set is paid off when people laugh.

But that's the thing... it is work.

It takes effort and it takes time.  And this is where the fireball comes in.  Through out the process, on stage and off, you have so many self-doubts.  Fears that creep in.  You have these fears because you give of yourself emotionally.

If you're doing data entry you have a certain rate you are expected to do.  As long as you do that, you're fine, and you keep your job.  Your awful, boring job.  Yes, it can be alienating, but you don't have to worry that the computer doesn't like you, or anything like that.  You are not giving yourself emotionally to the job.

Producing something creatively can be really scary.  You are saying to the world "hey everyone, here is something I've made.  Please judge me".

This fear can effect people in different ways.  For me, the biggest block I have is my procrastination.  That urge to do something, anything, apart from what I need to be doing.  Even whilst writing this blog I have had to resist the urge several times to check on Facebook or the BBC website for news.

I know this blog has a readership from the stats I get through blogger, and I know from feedback that there are people that enjoy it.  But I still get that fear.  Because this is all my own work.  it's not done in collaboration, it's all me.  As such, the belief I have in myself depends on work such as this.

This is the fireball.  It's a burning mass of self doubt.

Fear exists for a reason, it's your minds way of keeping you out of harm.  It makes perfect sense that you are cautious when crossing the road because if not you would get splatted.  Same thing if something suddenly jumps out at you.  Sure, it might turn out to be your cat, but if it was a crazed sex ninja, you'll be glad of that adrenaline rush that makes you run faster and get away.

Relax though, 'crazed sex ninjas' are rare.  Mostly.

Of course that's fine in situations in which physical peril is at least a possibility, but a bit dumb if you're just trying to tell a joke on stage.  The brain struggles to tell the two apart though, so that fear is here to stay.

What you learn though, with experience, is ways to ensure that you stay ahead of the fireball.

Sheer experience is probably the best one.  I have been on stage many hundreds of times now doing stand up.  Sometimes the experience can be horrible, but mostly it is fine.  Sometimes even amazing.  This means that when I go on stage I don't pretend that there isn't a possibility of it going badly, I just know that it probably won't.  Because normally it does go well.

Aside from being on stage, I have experience in different processes that I know pay dividends... eventually.

Writing comedy can be a real chore, and can involve hours of coming up with nothing but crap.  However, I know from experience that if I put the time in, I can produce good material.  I have to have that faith that the effort is worth it.

All the time I'm writing though a voice in my head is going "why are you spending time doing this?  This isn't any good.  You'll look stupid when you present it to others, and you'll have wasted this time.  Hey, why don't you go on Facebook instead..."

And often I do.  I will go on Facebook, then realise I'm wasting my time and get upset at myself for it.  Facebook is a devil, because it's sole reason to exist is to waste your time, and get you clicking on link, after link, after link.

And it's hard not to.  Seriously, I was reading an article on there the other day and in the corner of the screen was another link demanding my mouse click with the headline "robot roller-derby disco dodgeball is as amazing as you'd expect."

Good God!  I mean, if they hinted at a confusing dress colour and Madonna falling over that would be the most successful thing on the internet ever!

If I've learnt one thing, it's that if I am working I cannot go on Facebook.  Of course, if the only reason you're reading this blog is because you clicked on a link on Facebook... that's fine.  If anything, it's commendable.  Well done.

It's not really the fault of Facebook if I don't get work done, it is mine.  At the root of all my procrastinating is self-doubt.  If I am procrastinating I am letting self doubt take control.

Like with anything that takes work you have to think 'is this worth it?'

My audience, yesterday

Mark Steel gets to sit in cafes thinking about theoretical science because he earns a living that allows him to do it.  He earns a living by working hard and creating things that people want to watch, hear and experience.

If you are in an office all day you give of yourself 8 hours of labour each day.  That's if you're lucky and not in a particularly shitty job.  If you work in the creative field you still have to sell your labour, but in smaller chunks.

An article for a magazine here, booking a comedy gig there, teaching an improv workshop over here... etc, etc.  Instead of giving all of me to one employer, I give bite size chunks to lots of people.  It's like my working day is being torrented.  Downloading tiny bits of me from different sources to make up who I am.

The fear tries to stop you working.  It is the fireball that wants to burn you up.  If you give up though, you give up everything.  No more laughter, no more fun, no more expressing yourself in a meaningful way.

That's why you keep running from the fireball, because you know it's worth it.  As for the fear, you realise that it's good thing.  It's the fear that makes you run just fast enough.

Keep running.

Saturday Night Live at 40 - A Brit tries to understand an American institution

Saturday Night Live to me is a lot like getting my car serviced.  I know that it's important, but I don't really understand it.

Saturday Night Live (SNL) is an American late night sketch and variety show which has just celebrated it's 40th year with an anniversary show.  The online hype leading up to it has been huge, with fans excitedly anticipating the return of past favourite cast members, their characters and recurring sketches.

Being British, SNL is not something I've grown up with.  To Americans it's as much a mainstay as Coronation Street is here - you would struggle to imagine it not being there, because it always has been.

Whilst I have not been brought up with SNL as a TV show I am aware of it's influence.  SNL characters have been put directly in to their own films, some wonderful examples being 'Wayne's World' and the utterly sublime 'Blues Brothers'.  Also, films made by former cast members with original characters, such as 'Anchorman' and 'Bridesmaids'.

To try and school myself then, I decided the watch the 40th anniversary special.  See if I could 'get' it.

It opens with Jimmy Fallon and Justin Timberlake doing a rap tribute to the various recurring characters that have appeared on the show.  To me, of course, this means nothing, as I don't know much of the history.

It soon becomes apparent that this is going to be a problem, as the anniversary special is all about the history.  This is a big nostalgia trip, but like looking through someone else's family photo albums, these memories may be treasured, but they are not meant for me.

Hey look, it's that guy who tried to destroy 'Community'

Following the rap opening we have the title sequence itself, with the cast listed in alphabetical order with the live band playing in the background.  As it's such a special show they have invited on a lot of people.  And I mean a lot!

The sequence goes on for so long its hilarious, but, it's not meant to be.  It's just giving everyone a doff of the cap, but it feels utterly surreal.  For those who have seen the viral spoof sitcom commercial "Too Many Cooks", it reminded me of that.

But where-as that is intentionally surreal, descending in to gory, murderous insanity, this has no point.  No punchline.  It's not a joke.  In the end you're just glad we get to 'Kristen Wiig' and the credits can end.

That is at the heart of the problem with this special.  It tries to fit everyone and everything in.  Instead of just doing a really good show including some old cast members, it descends in to a bit of a cluster fuck.

It reminds me of Comic Relief where, in a bid to garner an audience for the charity, they bring together a significant and diverse selection of celebrities and entertainers.  They are then mashed together, almost at random, in to different sketches and scenarios.  'Eastenders' meets 'Doctor Who', won't that be hilarious?

No.  It never is.

If anything, it's an insult.  If you want us to give money at least have the decency to actually try and produce something funny.  Instead it's just a mess.  Yes, lots of people may have given their time, but that means nothing.  It would be like having an entire breakfast menu all served on one plate.  An unappetising mess.

After the insane credit sequence we are greeted by the legendary Steve Martin.  He does something of an opening monologue that has a few good laughs in it.  He says about the different people who have hosted, then other former hosts comes on stage to ask why they are not being mentioned.

Again, this is quantity over quality.  What could be a funny bit is diluted to nothing as former host after former host enters the fray.  By the end of the bit, on stage with Steve Martin is Tom Hanks, Peyton Manning, Billy Chrystal, Chris Rock, Alec Baldwin, Miley Cyrus, Melissa McCarthy, Paul Simon and Paul McCartney.

One of the bits that is funny in that 'monologue' by Steve Martin is him remembering former cast members who have passed away, including Gilda Radnor, John Belushi and Jon Lovitz.  Cut to shot of Jon Lovitz sat in the audience gesturing 'what the hell?'

Very funny joke.  However, I wouldn't have known before watching that who Jon Lovitz is.  I recognise his face, because he has been in an awful lot of second rate comedy films.  It acted as a reminder of how many former cast members, instead of achieving greatness on a global scale, instead just produce mediocrity.  People like David Spade, Jim Belushi and, lest we forget... Rob fucking Schneider.

Martin Short with Maya Rudolph as Beyonce.  Genuinely hilarious.

But then, in terms of SNL history, many of those are still revered, even if their later work hasn't amounted to much.

During the special there was a passionate and heart felt piece from Chris Rock to introduce Eddie Murphy to the stage.  He explained how wonderful he was, how important he was, even saying that without Eddie Murphy SNL would probably have been cancelled.

With a introduction like that it isn't that surprising that Eddie Murphy walked out to receive a standing ovation.

After the crowd had settled he said some bland stuff about how good SNL was and how he enjoyed his time on the show, then there followed a delightfully cringe worthy bit where he says to the camera that he thought they were going to cut there.  He talks a bit more before it fades out.

Seriously, Chris Rock says you're the best and you can't even bust out one funny?

But then, why should it be surprising?  Eddie Murphy isn't funny, and hasn't been for well over 20 years.  Comedy is like a muscle, it needs to be exercised.  He was without doubt a great and influential act in his time, but he's spent too long just doing mediocre family movies.

Doug Stanhope, who is certainly a brilliant comedian, did a bit when he played in Manchester years ago about being compared to Bill Hicks.  He said of Hicks (as best as my memory serves):

"They say he was great because he never sold out, but who knows what would have happened if he had lived.  He might have sold out.  Just imagine all the great things we'd be saying about Eddie Murphy if he had died after doing Beverley Hills Cop 1."

Funny, sad and true, all at the same time.

One other annoying thing about the SNL 40th Special were the amount of montages they did.  The show was 3 and a half hours long!  If they had just done sketches and produced a proper show, they could easily have done it in 2 hours.

But then, these montages did serve a purpose.

They painted a broad picture about the effect this show must have had on generations of Americans.  Eddie Murphy may be very much a fallen star now, but without him on Prime time, would Chris Rock have considered comedy as an option?  Maybe not, and the same can be said of many comics over the years influenced by the SNL alumni.

As I said before, this show wasn't really for me.  This was someone else's family memories, not mine.

Did watching this 40th year anniversary special convert me in to a fan of the show?  No.

Did it get across how important SNL is for the development of comedy as an art form in America, and there-fore across the world?  Yes.

SNL picked up writers and performers from improv and sketch troupes such as Second City and beyond and gave them the best platform TV can give you.  This process developed them and on they went in to the wider world of TV and film.

Aside from the films already mentioned, former cast members have made 'Animal House', 'Austin Powers' and 'Trading Places'.  Many of the writers went on to write for 'The Simpsons'.  When it was good!

"It's right here Ray... It's looking at me..."

But, forget all that.  Without SNL would we have had 'Ghostbusters'?  If we are talking about treasured memories, there are few films more important to my childhood than that.

So, whilst the show has never directly been a part of my life, it's influence certainly has.  Happy 40th birthday Saturday Night Live!

(but maybe for the next anniversary special, turn it down a notch eh?)

January in Seville

The gardens of the Alcazar in Seville

January has always been a fairly pointless month for me.  Christmas and New Year celebrations out of the way, the next thing to look forward to is Spring.  Unfortunately, it's still winter, so you have to put up with crap weather and no festivals to look forward to.  That's what January has always been to me - a month to "put up with".

14 months ago I started a relationship and I put this theory to my, at the time, new girlfriend: that January was pointless.  As her and her sister's birthdays were in January, she didn't quite agree.  So now it was time to reassess.

One thing that changed for January is that it is now a time when I go on holiday because it's her birthday, which means there is something very much to look forward to.

Last year was Vienna.  Snow laden, it was extraordinarily beautiful.  Palaces, theatres, monuments, there is so much historical opulence to take in.  To the degree that frankly, it feels like they're taking the piss a bit.  It's like "yeah, we get it, you have nice buildings, just give it a rest already".

Well this year we went to Seville.  Frankly, it's also a bit silly.

From arriving and walking the streets from the bus stop looking for our hotel, there was a lot to take in.  Whilst yes, palace's are a feature, more impressing is the river, endless churches and ornate gardens.

The hotel we stayed at was the Boutique Hotel Moro.  Highly rated by travellers, this is a good budget hotel with uniquely decorated rooms with full facilities set around a pleasant, tranquil courtyard.  A bonus as well was that if you booked direct through their website you got extras included such as breakfast, use of bikes whenever you wanted, and use of their roof top jacuzzi.

The hotel was based in the Barrio Santa Cruz part of Seville.  The Moorish influence is certainly present in this maze of tiny, winding streets.  Somewhere you can get lost in, whether you want to or not.  Seriously, I don't think we ever made it back to the hotel the same way twice!

We were in very close proximity to one of the main landmarks of Seville, the Cathedral.  The third largest church in the world, this is a significant building.  If anything, it's too big.  When you see it from any angle there is so much going on.  It's impressive but also a bit of a mess at the same time.

Part of the Cathedral is the Giralda Tower.  This was originally a minaret built to be part of a Mosque.  Seville was the centre of a civilisation where Muslims, Christians and Jews lived in peace together for hundreds of years.  Don't worry though, some Christians fucked it up.  Cheers guys.

Cathedral and the Giralda Tower

We had arranged a guide to show us round the Cathedral and the Alcazar, the close by royal palace.

British colonialism has left behind a bloody history of barbarism and exploitation.  However, one good thing out of this is that if you are an English speaker you can expect to travel practically anywhere in the world and be able to speak in your own language.  Hurrah!

Seriously, we just learn how to say "hello" and "thank you" in the native tongue just out of sheer politeness rather than any necessity.  The tourist centres of Spain certainly fit in to that mould, but Seville is different.  In Seville they speak their own language, and that's it.  Of course plenty speak some English, but expect to do some work to be understood.  This is no bad thing of course.

Menu's are available in English, but you will usually struggle if you have any specific questions about any of the dishes if you don't speak Spanish.  I will go as far as to say that if you have any specific dietary requirements at all, perhaps it's best to avoid.  It's hard to get across the question "does this contain wheat" with just hand gestures! 

Our guide was a very pleasant chap, but to say we had paid for a service his English wasn't great.  That's fine, but it does mean I can't really explain intricate historical details about the city because I just don't know them.  Go on Wikipedia, that's what I'd do.

He also had the laugh of a psychopath.  He has killed before, I am sure, and will probably kill again.  However, the love he had for his home city was certainly infectious.

And understandable.  Taking the bikes out one day we went through the Maria Luisa Park.  A large and gorgeous park, this was the centrepiece of the 1929 American/Spanish exposition.  Celebrating their relationship with America, the exposition was designed to showcase Spain, and Seville, to the world.

As it was about the relationship with America, all the American countries were invited to build Pavilions as part of the exhibition.  The delicate pretty buildings do not feel out of place at all in the park, and give a sense of living history that can still be enjoyed today.

An alternative to this is the site of the 1992 Exposition, which lies to the North on the other side of the City.  It's an alternative, because it's a dump.

The exposition's theme was the "age of discovery".  Many countries contributed to the exposition with it's themes around Science and technology.  Today, however, it's a mess.  Some of the buildings are used by Universities and industry, but many just lie empty.

Expo '92 as it is now

Overgrown with weeds, this is a sorry looking, albeit fascinating, site.  Like gaining access to a ghost town, you almost expect to look through a window and see a table set with dinner that has been left uneaten for two decades.

Over 40 million visitors were attracted by the exposition that year, which means it was an extraordinary success.  It's just a shame it's legacy doesn't live up to that of the 1929 expo in terms of beauty.

January, as it turns out, is an odd time to visit Seville.  The city is at it's coldest and quietest.  We still got a few nice sunny days where it went up to 19 degrees, so that was certainly an improvement on England.

A constant theme was walking past so many tapas bars to see the only occupants being a bored member of bar staff on their phone.

Deciding on a special meal one night me and Sally, dressed up, went to a nice restaurant which was particularity known for it's paella.  Service was not a problem as we were literally the only people in there all night.

We had a waiter who was never more than a few feet away, apart from when you heard a huge cheer from the kitchen where he would nip off quickly.  We found out Seville were playing that night in the Copa del Rey.  He gave us a drink on the house each on the night because they were so glad we were there so they didn't get too bored!

On the last night I surprised Sally by moving us to a 5 star hotel.  This was quite the experience, much of which you might expect.  What I didn't expect was a free bar that you could help yourself too, which included Moet champagne, sherry, etc.

An indicator that we are not used to this level of service was that we both stock piled booze, so much so that I was pouring away a number of glasses of champagne the next morning.  I think we worried we would be found out as the working class scum that we are and booted out!

Just one week in Spain had this effect on Sally

That night we went out on a wander and found a Jazz club.  A theme of the trip to that point had been that most entertainment wasn't on as it was the quiet part of the year.  Here we found a great quartet playing and also, after time, discovered that we were sitting next to a guy who was originally from Devon.

The quartet also included a very good young clarinettist, and as that is my instrument, I was very happy.  He even spoke some English as well, so we had a very good geeky conversation about playing the clarinet afterwards.

Whilst many things are hard to translate, music is universal.  It left me feeling bad that I hadn't played my clarinet in ages.  Perhaps I should get it out of the case soon, and just play thinking about wandering through the streets of Seville with the woman I love, without a care in the world.