This Week I want to talk about thresholds, and not the boundaries around your house, that'd be a boring subject. Well less boring than this one anyway.
So the idea for this one came from a pretty surreal source, and like most small thoughts they evolved into something that actually I thought I may be able to write about. How wrong was I? I was watching Terminator 2 a few nights ago and I don't know if you've seen it but there is a scene where a little kid pokes Arnie in the cheek about 4 times, and since he's a robot, he isn't allowed to show emotions. Now think how many takes that scene actually took? I know he's a great actor and all but I'd get ruddy peeved off if a kid kept jabbing me in the face, and since the first rule of showbiz is not to work with kids, we have to immediately assume that the reason behind this is because kids make everyone annoyed with their crying and whining and ballsing up, so if he add a fair 15 takes onto that and times the amount of times Arnie gets poked (4) we get 60 pokes in the face. I would not have the threshold for that much facepokery, so on that note I thought to myself as I lie in bed, "what is my threshold for annoyance, and anything else for that matter?"
Annoyance
As previously mentioned my threshold for annoyance doesn't succeed a few pokes in the face. Ever since i was a kid I had a short fuse, I suppose it comes with having such ammunition as a surname, I got tired of jokes easily and I still cant stand someone repeating themselves over again, so that scene in terminator would have been very different if I was the Austrian body builder. this also accounts for the reason my acting career will never take flight, since imagine if there was a job where you have to repeat yourself 100's of times? Devastating.
Pain
Now here's a fun one, my threshold for pain is the equivalent to that of a small child thrown against a wall by an Austrian body builder after 1 too many pokes to the face. I am truly terrible with pain, in fact I seem to be cursed with this since every time I say that sentence; "I Don't Like Pain" I seem to get into an accident which proves my point exactly, last year whilst on a bike ride I said to a friend, I don't like pain, and I fell down a "cliff" (See Big Hill) and couldn't move for 2 days. On the beach the other day, a mere hour after stating the claim I attempted a downhill cartwheel chain and buggered my wrist up royally. I say royally, most people could have shock it off, but not this small child thrown against a wall! So Expect me next week to be talking about an accident with a brick involving my head since I've said "the" phrase twice in the last paragraph
Bad Comedy
I'm willing to give anything a chance, a sitcom, a stand up, a whiny celebrity with some merit. But I find it hard to put up with things I feel so strongly about, like drugs, abortion and the over use of the word random in today's youth. For instance I am not the worlds biggest fan of Dane Cook. He's a terrible comedian who isn't funny and steals other peoples jokes, plus he just LOOKS like a douchebag, and I have attempted to give him a chance I have, I watched him kill a theatre full of peoples sense of humour for 10 minutes straight, I watched him ruin the great film "waiting" hell, I even sat through "my best friends wedding" but he just isn't funny, in fact, I'd go as far to say he is UN funny. and a douche, don't forget that.
Film
My threshold for Film is also controlled by a few ground rules: If there are more than 3 explosions, various one liners, a guy that looks like Ben Folds or robots in the trailer, i will most likely see it, if the title ends in "....Movie" I wont touch it, if it has Keanu Reeves, the acting will most likely be more like cardboard than a "Shreddies" box, for full frontal nudity of Jason Segal there must be at least 1 hot actress. per testicle. and finally when it comes to chick flicks, soppy stories, rom com's involving Colin Firth, or a film where the pet is the mian character, the rule all boyfriends and dating men should abide by to avoid disappointment, If It gets Me Laid, It Gets Played.
Joe Strange
Attempted to go an entire blog about poking faces without mentioning Pokerface.
Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
The Television Graveyard
The television article saga is coming to an end, a joint cheer for some, a faint whisper for others. Me? I just thought I'd round the trilogy of TV off with something that can frustrate and delight so many people, Television Cancellations.
The TV graveyard has taken many a dear show of mine, and now, during the "current economical climate" as some people are calling it. I never really understood what happened, something about someone selling too much money or banks not making enough hedges, but anyway, it turns out it is important since it is effecting our television and enjoyment. Last week I mentioned how reality TV is cheap to make, whereas more in depth telly is more expensive, especially if you, like me, enjoy explosions and the special effects, I'm looking at you Heroes. So because of this, the networks have decided to cut some of our most loved shows, we had a prior warning when NBC dropped Scrubs, which was picked up majestically by ABC, who then realised they couldn't afford to pay the wages and had to finish it in a spectacular finale. (then realising they wanted it back with half the cast for at least another season)
But as we wave goodbye to another season of brilliant television (subjective of course, I'm looking at you Heroes), writers, directors, actors and viewers all wait biting their nails to see if their show will be the new headstone in the cemetery. One of my favourite shows; the demon filled Reaper was cancelled after a mid season start and poor viewings. well that's what the CW will tell you, why would they cancel a show with such a dedicated cult following (similar to my beloved Chuck)? The same reason I had to turn down that lovely lady in Vegas, cost. Reaper was full of effects, wit, groovy camera shots and a large cast, which made it a given to be cancelled.
so with the public's favourites like, Reaper, My Name Is Earl Pushing Daisies and The Sarah Conner Chronicles all taking the 6 foot Deep Sleep does that mean that all our shows are doomed? If the networks don't take notice of us, what's to stop them taking away our Big Bang Theory, our How I Met Your Mother our House? They don't listen so why should we even bother complaining?
My friends, enemies, and nay sayers I give you the golden boy of comebacks, the phoenix of the talky box *fan-fair*...Chuck.
WB's Chuck and the Air have been on and off more times than Ross and Rachel, and like Ross and Rachel they finally ended up together, that analogy worked surprisingly well actually. Thanks to endless campaigns, badges and a 300-esk march on a Birmingham subway chuck was renewed after a killer season finale, obviously learning from their writer strike scare last year to let their finale go of with a bang. people rejoiced and danced in the streets like we had seen Poland beat Germany in a game of squash to make up for all the crap they put them through. The underdog had won and we had another season to look forward to come autumn. We like that.
So similar to a family pet, if you take care of TV, make sure you keep watch over it, feed it with viewing figures and brush it free of the mediocre crap, ur I mean fleas, then it'll be loving in return, and if it doesn't do what you want make a big enough noise and it'll be your bitch.
Joe Strange
67% of his analogies actually make some coherent sense.
The TV graveyard has taken many a dear show of mine, and now, during the "current economical climate" as some people are calling it. I never really understood what happened, something about someone selling too much money or banks not making enough hedges, but anyway, it turns out it is important since it is effecting our television and enjoyment. Last week I mentioned how reality TV is cheap to make, whereas more in depth telly is more expensive, especially if you, like me, enjoy explosions and the special effects, I'm looking at you Heroes. So because of this, the networks have decided to cut some of our most loved shows, we had a prior warning when NBC dropped Scrubs, which was picked up majestically by ABC, who then realised they couldn't afford to pay the wages and had to finish it in a spectacular finale. (then realising they wanted it back with half the cast for at least another season)
But as we wave goodbye to another season of brilliant television (subjective of course, I'm looking at you Heroes), writers, directors, actors and viewers all wait biting their nails to see if their show will be the new headstone in the cemetery. One of my favourite shows; the demon filled Reaper was cancelled after a mid season start and poor viewings. well that's what the CW will tell you, why would they cancel a show with such a dedicated cult following (similar to my beloved Chuck)? The same reason I had to turn down that lovely lady in Vegas, cost. Reaper was full of effects, wit, groovy camera shots and a large cast, which made it a given to be cancelled.
so with the public's favourites like, Reaper, My Name Is Earl Pushing Daisies and The Sarah Conner Chronicles all taking the 6 foot Deep Sleep does that mean that all our shows are doomed? If the networks don't take notice of us, what's to stop them taking away our Big Bang Theory, our How I Met Your Mother our House? They don't listen so why should we even bother complaining?
My friends, enemies, and nay sayers I give you the golden boy of comebacks, the phoenix of the talky box *fan-fair*...Chuck.
WB's Chuck and the Air have been on and off more times than Ross and Rachel, and like Ross and Rachel they finally ended up together, that analogy worked surprisingly well actually. Thanks to endless campaigns, badges and a 300-esk march on a Birmingham subway chuck was renewed after a killer season finale, obviously learning from their writer strike scare last year to let their finale go of with a bang. people rejoiced and danced in the streets like we had seen Poland beat Germany in a game of squash to make up for all the crap they put them through. The underdog had won and we had another season to look forward to come autumn. We like that.
So similar to a family pet, if you take care of TV, make sure you keep watch over it, feed it with viewing figures and brush it free of the mediocre crap, ur I mean fleas, then it'll be loving in return, and if it doesn't do what you want make a big enough noise and it'll be your bitch.
Joe Strange
67% of his analogies actually make some coherent sense.
Tuesday, 2 June 2009
Britain's Got Empathy
Considering last week I talked about secondary characters in TV and the media, today I'm going to continue that streak of media, mainly television.
Well, as most of you will have heard "Britain's got the X factor" finished on Friday night and whether you watch it or not, you must of heard some of the crazy stories coming from it, the main reason for this being that the news is talking about it more than Clarkson talks about foxes, which is a lot. With a lot of these reality tv programs I tend to steer clear, who's coming out of the jungle? I don't care, but if it's mentioned that some deadbeat celeb' got jiggly with a banana tree or an ex footballer got attacked by an alligator, you can bet your house that I'll know all about it. but when it comes to these talent shows, the only reason I tune in at all is to watch the auditions, cos who doesn't love a crazed sith lord dancing to Michael Jackson? just a little note, he made it to the semi finals, you can see it here, give it a go, it's hilarious.
So, back to Fridays final. I always thought that like me, people tuned into watch idiots in fancy dress be torn down by Simon Cowell, or to see some surprisingly good dance by some kids or something, you know to have a good laugh at people a million times braver than us, apparently not, 19 million people tuned in on Friday to watch the final, the highest viewing figures ever since the dawn of time, and by the dawn of time I mean 2003, OK, so it isn't a huge deal, but it's something that got me thinking.
Reality shows are cheap to make, they cost hardly anything really, compared to hugely awesome shows such as the American "heroes" or our "Dr Who" and as we can see, people now are taking interest in the stories as oppose to just laughing when some old guy with his trousers too high say that a 60 year old puppy juggler has no chance. That's right, Britain has empathy. If you don't believe me then look at all this uproar about this Susan Boyle character (just one story of the millions.) Now I wont pretend to care what went wrong in the final, but apparently she is suffering exhaustion, and a child involved with the show also is in trauma or dead or something bad because Simon said some nasty things.
So Reality shows dominate the airwaves because they are cheap and now people of Britain actually care, they are getting brilliant viewing figures. so does this mean the end for brilliant dramas or comedies like "How I met your mother" "Dr Who" "House" "Heroes" and all the other well thought out, well acted (occasionally) and well loved shows? No, it doesn't, and Ill tell you one reason why, well I could give you a million reasons why. Ill ask you, does anyone remember Steve Brookstein? What about Brian Dowling? Or even Racheal Rice? Any one remember? No, well they are all winners of reality shows of television past. What about "Martin Hoberg Hedegaard" well you shouldn't really, he's the 2008 winner of Denmark's Xfactor. The reason these shows just wont succeed is simple, they are like the television version of milk, really good for bringing in the money, but have a shelf life as long as Tom Cruise is tall. they're not like shows such as "vicar of Dibley", or "only fools and horses", real British comedy which people still remember today people forget about them as soon as the next one comes along. which is why proper television will always prevail, because people can remember more than one sitcom at a time.
Joe Strange
I say we'll forget them all, but I will NEVER forget Darth Jackson. Ever.
Well, as most of you will have heard "Britain's got the X factor" finished on Friday night and whether you watch it or not, you must of heard some of the crazy stories coming from it, the main reason for this being that the news is talking about it more than Clarkson talks about foxes, which is a lot. With a lot of these reality tv programs I tend to steer clear, who's coming out of the jungle? I don't care, but if it's mentioned that some deadbeat celeb' got jiggly with a banana tree or an ex footballer got attacked by an alligator, you can bet your house that I'll know all about it. but when it comes to these talent shows, the only reason I tune in at all is to watch the auditions, cos who doesn't love a crazed sith lord dancing to Michael Jackson? just a little note, he made it to the semi finals, you can see it here, give it a go, it's hilarious.
So, back to Fridays final. I always thought that like me, people tuned into watch idiots in fancy dress be torn down by Simon Cowell, or to see some surprisingly good dance by some kids or something, you know to have a good laugh at people a million times braver than us, apparently not, 19 million people tuned in on Friday to watch the final, the highest viewing figures ever since the dawn of time, and by the dawn of time I mean 2003, OK, so it isn't a huge deal, but it's something that got me thinking.
Reality shows are cheap to make, they cost hardly anything really, compared to hugely awesome shows such as the American "heroes" or our "Dr Who" and as we can see, people now are taking interest in the stories as oppose to just laughing when some old guy with his trousers too high say that a 60 year old puppy juggler has no chance. That's right, Britain has empathy. If you don't believe me then look at all this uproar about this Susan Boyle character (just one story of the millions.) Now I wont pretend to care what went wrong in the final, but apparently she is suffering exhaustion, and a child involved with the show also is in trauma or dead or something bad because Simon said some nasty things.
So Reality shows dominate the airwaves because they are cheap and now people of Britain actually care, they are getting brilliant viewing figures. so does this mean the end for brilliant dramas or comedies like "How I met your mother" "Dr Who" "House" "Heroes" and all the other well thought out, well acted (occasionally) and well loved shows? No, it doesn't, and Ill tell you one reason why, well I could give you a million reasons why. Ill ask you, does anyone remember Steve Brookstein? What about Brian Dowling? Or even Racheal Rice? Any one remember? No, well they are all winners of reality shows of television past. What about "Martin Hoberg Hedegaard" well you shouldn't really, he's the 2008 winner of Denmark's Xfactor. The reason these shows just wont succeed is simple, they are like the television version of milk, really good for bringing in the money, but have a shelf life as long as Tom Cruise is tall. they're not like shows such as "vicar of Dibley", or "only fools and horses", real British comedy which people still remember today people forget about them as soon as the next one comes along. which is why proper television will always prevail, because people can remember more than one sitcom at a time.
Joe Strange
I say we'll forget them all, but I will NEVER forget Darth Jackson. Ever.
Wednesday, 27 May 2009
Seconds anyone?
So, something I have thought about for a long time now; in films, TV, books, video games, any form of entertainment media, The secondary characters are always the show stealer's.
Think about the best sitcoms around today, now my bias may come through here but, Scrubs, How I Met Your Mother, Chuck, The Big Bang Theory, The Simpsons And Family Guy. I mean do you really prefer JD over Dr Cox? Barney will always steal a scene from Ted Or Robin, Jeff, Casey, Sheldon, Kuthripoli, Willie, Ralf and the incarnations of Bill Cosby all beat their main characters to the metaphorical punch(line). Now Don't get me wrong, I love the main characters, they drive the show, and I'm not saying that we should scrap them and make way for the second in commands. But the phenomenal characters that we get from this, a prime example is How I Met Your Mother, in season 1 Barney was an awesome, suit wearing, womanising 1 dimensional character, now 3 seasons later he's a awesome, suit wearing womanising 2 dimensional character because the writers realise he's an asset, making the viewing experience better for all of us. of course using a second character for views and laughs is all fun and games until it goes too far.
"If Secondary characters be the food of laughs, give us excess of it." Yeah you do that and you will burst in an implosion of a thing I like to call lack-of-story-amite, a hilarious implosion, but a breakdown all the same. A brilliant example of this is a very beloved show for a lot of people I know, "The Big Bang Theory". When this first started we were told it will be a show about Penny and Leonard, but now, with the second season at an end, I can't help to think we may as well change the name to "the Sheldon Show". 67% of the airtime of that show is now "sheldon does something funny" I mean don't get me wrong, I love it. But it stops a good comedy, from becoming a great show.
Now I complain about these characters being both a blessing and a curse for a television show, but what about the Barney and Sheldon's of the big screen? Well In a sense, the rule about "Little Airtime = great characters" stands for these as well,since we don't become as attached to these characters we don't question it when they stick a polecat down their trousers and run around a police station. When I think about a few recent comedies that come to mind now, Forgetting Sarah Marshal, Dodgeball(recent?), Anchorman, All the secondary characters shine through, Who doesn't love Paul Rudd's watchless surfer in FSM, Or Pete the Pirate in Dodgeball? And who can look me in the screen and say to me, I prefer Ron Burgundy over Brick Tamland? No one, because they are all amazing.
I often think that perhaps they should have had more time, or perhaps another movie for them, then realise, No. that would involve getting to know them, and having a serious character development. can you truly imagine Tamland going through a divorce?
I can, and it would be Hilarious. Not Good. Hilarious.
Now looking back a few more years, to shows and films passed, you realise this is a fairly new phenomenon, friends didn't have an amazing secondary cast. Kenan And Kel was all about the orange soda and catdog, Pinky and the Brain, they had themselves to make funnies. It seems the 90's were a time of doubleacts, and groups, this is the comedy of the 90's, but for the '00's I can assure you it is secondary characters, so sit back, relax cos Barney isn't going anywhere.
Joe Strange
All data presented in this blog is 100% accurate. Don't check, just trust me.
Think about the best sitcoms around today, now my bias may come through here but, Scrubs, How I Met Your Mother, Chuck, The Big Bang Theory, The Simpsons And Family Guy. I mean do you really prefer JD over Dr Cox? Barney will always steal a scene from Ted Or Robin, Jeff, Casey, Sheldon, Kuthripoli, Willie, Ralf and the incarnations of Bill Cosby all beat their main characters to the metaphorical punch(line). Now Don't get me wrong, I love the main characters, they drive the show, and I'm not saying that we should scrap them and make way for the second in commands. But the phenomenal characters that we get from this, a prime example is How I Met Your Mother, in season 1 Barney was an awesome, suit wearing, womanising 1 dimensional character, now 3 seasons later he's a awesome, suit wearing womanising 2 dimensional character because the writers realise he's an asset, making the viewing experience better for all of us. of course using a second character for views and laughs is all fun and games until it goes too far.
"If Secondary characters be the food of laughs, give us excess of it." Yeah you do that and you will burst in an implosion of a thing I like to call lack-of-story-amite, a hilarious implosion, but a breakdown all the same. A brilliant example of this is a very beloved show for a lot of people I know, "The Big Bang Theory". When this first started we were told it will be a show about Penny and Leonard, but now, with the second season at an end, I can't help to think we may as well change the name to "the Sheldon Show". 67% of the airtime of that show is now "sheldon does something funny" I mean don't get me wrong, I love it. But it stops a good comedy, from becoming a great show.
Now I complain about these characters being both a blessing and a curse for a television show, but what about the Barney and Sheldon's of the big screen? Well In a sense, the rule about "Little Airtime = great characters" stands for these as well,since we don't become as attached to these characters we don't question it when they stick a polecat down their trousers and run around a police station. When I think about a few recent comedies that come to mind now, Forgetting Sarah Marshal, Dodgeball(recent?), Anchorman, All the secondary characters shine through, Who doesn't love Paul Rudd's watchless surfer in FSM, Or Pete the Pirate in Dodgeball? And who can look me in the screen and say to me, I prefer Ron Burgundy over Brick Tamland? No one, because they are all amazing.
I often think that perhaps they should have had more time, or perhaps another movie for them, then realise, No. that would involve getting to know them, and having a serious character development. can you truly imagine Tamland going through a divorce?
I can, and it would be Hilarious. Not Good. Hilarious.
Now looking back a few more years, to shows and films passed, you realise this is a fairly new phenomenon, friends didn't have an amazing secondary cast. Kenan And Kel was all about the orange soda and catdog, Pinky and the Brain, they had themselves to make funnies. It seems the 90's were a time of doubleacts, and groups, this is the comedy of the 90's, but for the '00's I can assure you it is secondary characters, so sit back, relax cos Barney isn't going anywhere.
Joe Strange
All data presented in this blog is 100% accurate. Don't check, just trust me.
Tuesday, 19 May 2009
Nature Deserves An ASBO
First of all, I am dreadfully sorry about my fortnightly absence, It seems college and exams got the better of me and I was too strained to write, or do anything for that matter, even revise.
Now to this weeks topic.
Today, on one of my many walks around my village, I decided to take a scenic route to my house, as oppose to the straight line that I normally take. A straight line to and from somewhere? Why that's impossible! I disagree, While turning on the spot may, to passers by, make you look like an indecisive fool, it has it's uses if you live in a relatively linear village. So, I walked straight passed my house and went down A delightful country lane. Down this lane I happened upon a majestic, colourful, regal pigeon, well a large pigeon, it could very well have been a pheasant. Anyway, this inquisitive creature was poking around a garden, most likely trying to find a way into the abode to steal an MP3 player, I hear they fetch a high price on the foul market.
Now, as I live in the estate of the village and only ever leave to go to college or work this was a rare sight for me. I reached for my camera to catch the culprit in the act of theft, but I was too slow and it hopped to the next garden, I proceed to pursue the thief but was outmatched by the fact that god preferred them over us and gave birds wings.
The sad thing is I will most likely see that bird on the nearby road since people insist on driving 1,000,000 MPH along my village.
And then, continuing my walk, having had a bitter taste of wildlife "photography" and by the term I mean pointing the camera at the bird, and then catching only the garden as it has flown away. (A very nice garden it is too.) I grasp my camera looking for more fluffy creatures or more of gods examples of favouritism. not long was I strolling along the meandering lane as I stopped, looked down to my feet and saw a small wild rabbit staring at me in the face. This brought back fond memories of when I was walking along the road to work and stopped, looked down to see a small brown rabbit staring me down, I stepped cautiously to try not to startle it it bolted towards the road, and then back into the hedge, once again I cursed god for not giving me that comically quick movement, I smiled at seeing the lovely 'ickle bunny and continued on. My fond memories brought to a halt as I remember the poor brown shape that lay on the same road two days before. The rabbit had gone, AND the bastard has stolen my MP3 player.
So after being mugged, and slowly being convinced nature is a hoodie, I decide to take the back route to my house, now this involves climbing an overgrown hedge and traversing a tree and THEN clambering over the fence. I haven't done this for a few years and forgot what neglect can do to both a body and a back entrance. I swung over some nettles using an overhead branch, and then pulled myself up the bank using another branch, pleased at my efforts I smiled, peered over the fence to realise, this was not my house. Nor was the one to the left or right of me, in fact my house was 2 houses along from this one. Obviously in precautions for the Thieving ferrets or scheming squirrels of the neighbourhood, this branch was fitted with an anti burglar device and broke, I, thinking fast reached for the overhead branch, unfortunately my ankle had attracted some thorns and this stopped me from avoiding the fall, tearing my jeans and causing me to fall into a mixture of nettles and rocks. Disgruntled I walked around and came in the front door, where I proceeded to write to you. Because I care about you and don't want you to get mugged by a rabbit, assaulted by a vine or tricked by a pheasant.
So in conclusion, Stay inside make less attempts to change your routine, because nature is a bully who wants your dinner money.
Joe Strange
Proceeding outside can cause many side effects, worst of all the horrible growth known as a social life, you have been warned.
Now to this weeks topic.
Today, on one of my many walks around my village, I decided to take a scenic route to my house, as oppose to the straight line that I normally take. A straight line to and from somewhere? Why that's impossible! I disagree, While turning on the spot may, to passers by, make you look like an indecisive fool, it has it's uses if you live in a relatively linear village. So, I walked straight passed my house and went down A delightful country lane. Down this lane I happened upon a majestic, colourful, regal pigeon, well a large pigeon, it could very well have been a pheasant. Anyway, this inquisitive creature was poking around a garden, most likely trying to find a way into the abode to steal an MP3 player, I hear they fetch a high price on the foul market.
Now, as I live in the estate of the village and only ever leave to go to college or work this was a rare sight for me. I reached for my camera to catch the culprit in the act of theft, but I was too slow and it hopped to the next garden, I proceed to pursue the thief but was outmatched by the fact that god preferred them over us and gave birds wings.
The sad thing is I will most likely see that bird on the nearby road since people insist on driving 1,000,000 MPH along my village.
And then, continuing my walk, having had a bitter taste of wildlife "photography" and by the term I mean pointing the camera at the bird, and then catching only the garden as it has flown away. (A very nice garden it is too.) I grasp my camera looking for more fluffy creatures or more of gods examples of favouritism. not long was I strolling along the meandering lane as I stopped, looked down to my feet and saw a small wild rabbit staring at me in the face. This brought back fond memories of when I was walking along the road to work and stopped, looked down to see a small brown rabbit staring me down, I stepped cautiously to try not to startle it it bolted towards the road, and then back into the hedge, once again I cursed god for not giving me that comically quick movement, I smiled at seeing the lovely 'ickle bunny and continued on. My fond memories brought to a halt as I remember the poor brown shape that lay on the same road two days before. The rabbit had gone, AND the bastard has stolen my MP3 player.
So after being mugged, and slowly being convinced nature is a hoodie, I decide to take the back route to my house, now this involves climbing an overgrown hedge and traversing a tree and THEN clambering over the fence. I haven't done this for a few years and forgot what neglect can do to both a body and a back entrance. I swung over some nettles using an overhead branch, and then pulled myself up the bank using another branch, pleased at my efforts I smiled, peered over the fence to realise, this was not my house. Nor was the one to the left or right of me, in fact my house was 2 houses along from this one. Obviously in precautions for the Thieving ferrets or scheming squirrels of the neighbourhood, this branch was fitted with an anti burglar device and broke, I, thinking fast reached for the overhead branch, unfortunately my ankle had attracted some thorns and this stopped me from avoiding the fall, tearing my jeans and causing me to fall into a mixture of nettles and rocks. Disgruntled I walked around and came in the front door, where I proceeded to write to you. Because I care about you and don't want you to get mugged by a rabbit, assaulted by a vine or tricked by a pheasant.
So in conclusion, Stay inside make less attempts to change your routine, because nature is a bully who wants your dinner money.
Joe Strange
Proceeding outside can cause many side effects, worst of all the horrible growth known as a social life, you have been warned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
