My mother has beaten good manners into me when I was a child. A great deal of these rules were communication based. I’m glad to tell you I’ve forgotten most of these lessons and can now delight in pissing people off.
It’s not really I’ve forgotten about those lessons, it’s just that I can’t be bothered. The self-righteousness of those people, those communication experts, those people who do social for the joy of it, they seem to get off on telling me how it looks to other people and how awkward I am communically (communicational and comically combined). As if I don’t know. I had my fair share of communication breakdowns. I’m perfectly aware of my short comings in communication. And now they seem to have infiltrated in my system, I’d like to tell them I can see what they’re doing and I know how I am contributing to it, but that won’t stop me from making a total and complete ass of myself.
The thing is I think I know better than a lot of people about communication and how to do it properly. I do, because I paid attention when I walked into these walls and I pay attention when I do. I’m fully aware of the effect it might have on them, on me, on anyone. It’s not my lack of knowledge about communication that makes me stumble; it’s my disinterest in communicating.
I never liked it for exactly the reason communication goes wrong so often. No matter how well you communicate, people will always have a different interpretation than you have of the matter. That’s not a criticism; it’s just a simple fact. I hate communication, because I’m always entirely sure that what I meant to say will be interpreted differently. I know the differences are often so slight it won’t harm the case, but to me it just almost feels like a waste of energy to try and be as exact as possible.
Yet, I can’t seem to stop being as exact as possible in word. As in non-verbal communication, then my dismay with the whole concept shines through.
And they, them, seem to think I don’t know and keep telling me the things I heard a million times, the things I already know. Knowing doesn’t equal action; those are two different things. There are barriers, problems and objections in place that will keep me from putting the knowing into action. My communication faults have more to do with other problems than me not knowing how to. What you people, communicating people, have to understand is that many a soul has tried to teach me about communicating, I did learn a few things over the years it’s true, but they fail to see the real problem; my lack in confidence of humankind.
Friday, April 29, 2011
Thursday, April 28, 2011
"10 O'Clock Live" - the Last Episode
Tonight will see the last episode of ‘10 O’Clock Live’. It’s been an interesting run if only to read all the criticism and some well meant advice. I’m guessing not many people will miss the show when it’s all over, and I’m guessing not many people are interested in discussing the possibilities for a second series. But looking back at the last few episodes, I think there is a promise we shouldn’t ignore.
It took long for the show to find its feet, if it has in the 15 episodes run at all. From start to finish the makers of the show have been trying things out, moving pieces around and pretty much stumbled to the finish line. It’s unfair to say it has been a total fail; there has been improvement and especially Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell have grown into their roles of live presenters.
You’d also think they must have learned something over the course of 15 weeks. It would be a waste of all that knowledge to evaporate. Also, a new series gives the opportunity to rebuild the show considerably giving it a new start. Maybe a personnel change could help too. They get almost a whole year to research and tweak the concept. Or for the first few months give it a rest and then return to look at it with fresh views.
Even though there are many reasons to not commission ‘10 O’Clock Live’ a second series, there are also a lot of reasons to commission a second series. If a second series is commissioned, a lot of work needs to be done, but it could grow out to be something good.
Looking back at the passed 14 weeks we saw a few things:
What does the show want to be? A discussion program, a commentady (commentary/comedy) show or a sketch show?
BTW, the sketches; what’s up with that?
Why are they trying to cover the whole world every week; there are too many items in there? I don’t think we were ever granted the opportunity to enjoy a conclusive discussion, or to breathe at all.
What’s the point of Lauren Laverne?
It’s a lefty, Guardian writers and readers fest.
And it’s not really a full fletched laugh out loud show, is it?
Improvements over the weeks:
Charlie Brooker.
David Mitchell is growing into his role of interviewer, be it very slowly.
They shut up the audiences for an important great deal of the show.
Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell have found their feet in the live format of the show; they’re less nervous than they used to be, or they now just think ‘Bollocks to them all’.
We’re still missing:
A nice pace, especially for the interviews;
Edgy comedy or if you will satire;
The promised unashamed intelligence;
A team that work well Together.
To conclude my ‘10 O’Clock Live’ rants series (I don’t think I will write a review for this evening’s show unless something remarkable happens which I don’t expect) I want to do a last rating of the presenters:
1. Charlie Brooker, because he’s the one who grew into it considerably and offers the most thought provoking and funny material.
2. David Mitchell, because he’s been from the start the most consistent even though his growth isn’t as notable as CB’s.
3. Jimmy Carr, because he sometimes says something intelligent at the table and he did at least 1 or 2 funny sketches, though overall he’s been sort of insufferable.
4. Lauren Laverne; just lost in translation. Such a shame.
It took long for the show to find its feet, if it has in the 15 episodes run at all. From start to finish the makers of the show have been trying things out, moving pieces around and pretty much stumbled to the finish line. It’s unfair to say it has been a total fail; there has been improvement and especially Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell have grown into their roles of live presenters.
You’d also think they must have learned something over the course of 15 weeks. It would be a waste of all that knowledge to evaporate. Also, a new series gives the opportunity to rebuild the show considerably giving it a new start. Maybe a personnel change could help too. They get almost a whole year to research and tweak the concept. Or for the first few months give it a rest and then return to look at it with fresh views.
Even though there are many reasons to not commission ‘10 O’Clock Live’ a second series, there are also a lot of reasons to commission a second series. If a second series is commissioned, a lot of work needs to be done, but it could grow out to be something good.
Looking back at the passed 14 weeks we saw a few things:
What does the show want to be? A discussion program, a commentady (commentary/comedy) show or a sketch show?
BTW, the sketches; what’s up with that?
Why are they trying to cover the whole world every week; there are too many items in there? I don’t think we were ever granted the opportunity to enjoy a conclusive discussion, or to breathe at all.
What’s the point of Lauren Laverne?
It’s a lefty, Guardian writers and readers fest.
And it’s not really a full fletched laugh out loud show, is it?
Improvements over the weeks:
Charlie Brooker.
David Mitchell is growing into his role of interviewer, be it very slowly.
They shut up the audiences for an important great deal of the show.
Charlie Brooker and David Mitchell have found their feet in the live format of the show; they’re less nervous than they used to be, or they now just think ‘Bollocks to them all’.
We’re still missing:
A nice pace, especially for the interviews;
Edgy comedy or if you will satire;
The promised unashamed intelligence;
A team that work well Together.
To conclude my ‘10 O’Clock Live’ rants series (I don’t think I will write a review for this evening’s show unless something remarkable happens which I don’t expect) I want to do a last rating of the presenters:
1. Charlie Brooker, because he’s the one who grew into it considerably and offers the most thought provoking and funny material.
2. David Mitchell, because he’s been from the start the most consistent even though his growth isn’t as notable as CB’s.
3. Jimmy Carr, because he sometimes says something intelligent at the table and he did at least 1 or 2 funny sketches, though overall he’s been sort of insufferable.
4. Lauren Laverne; just lost in translation. Such a shame.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Dig
Lately, I've been obediently obsessively trying to find out how Charlie Brooker got to work with Chris Morris (and even ends up being quoted in the closest thing that can be called a Chris Morris biography).
This blog is not about that, but rather about misconceptions and misperceptions easily made, observed and put down rather crudely:
Source: Scotland on Sunday's Brooker Prize guy - Charlie Brooker interview.
Or maybe the writer's perceptions of this world aren't as accurate as he (check: can't quite tell if it's a boy or a girl) thought.
This blog is not about that, but rather about misconceptions and misperceptions easily made, observed and put down rather crudely:
Chris Morris a clown? Davina McCall a good sport and, what's more, "incredibly nice"? Brooker is definitely losing it.
Source: Scotland on Sunday's Brooker Prize guy - Charlie Brooker interview.
Or maybe the writer's perceptions of this world aren't as accurate as he (check: can't quite tell if it's a boy or a girl) thought.
Friday, April 15, 2011
"10 O'Clock Live" - General Progress
What number episode was it last night, 13? I must admit that I’m not following very strictly anymore. I do remember every Friday to read up on what happened and so far every week at least something happened that made me make a note to find the episode online and watch it, though I have to admit that I’m now 2 episodes behind (that’s including last night’s episode).
It seems I’m not the only one who ran out of steam concerning well meant analysis and advice. At the start of the run and 3 weeks in, there was so much to read I could easily fill a whole Friday reading up. There was also a lot to say about it, because everything they tried to do was new to them and for us, with our viewer excellence, expertise, knowledge and experience, a good reason to dump a shit-load of advice on them. After a good 10 weeks, after only minor improvements, there’s nothing new to say; you can only repeat so many times. Besides that, most people have lost interest and stopped watching all together.
Even though the show seems weaker than many a soul expected it to be, it’s been a run with fair quality, maybe even enough to have a 2nd series commissioned. I certainly hope a 2nd series will get commissioned, if only to give it the chance to let it mature. You’d think after 1 season they now have the experience under their belt to make it better, though that’s what we’ve been thinking after the 10th week as well. Just keep in mind it took ‘the Daily Show’ a few years to properly settle in as well. Maybe a change of personnel good do some good.
Two more weeks to go (I just counted and I was right; last night’s was episode 13) and then we and they will have about 7 months to breath and reflect.
It seems I’m not the only one who ran out of steam concerning well meant analysis and advice. At the start of the run and 3 weeks in, there was so much to read I could easily fill a whole Friday reading up. There was also a lot to say about it, because everything they tried to do was new to them and for us, with our viewer excellence, expertise, knowledge and experience, a good reason to dump a shit-load of advice on them. After a good 10 weeks, after only minor improvements, there’s nothing new to say; you can only repeat so many times. Besides that, most people have lost interest and stopped watching all together.
Even though the show seems weaker than many a soul expected it to be, it’s been a run with fair quality, maybe even enough to have a 2nd series commissioned. I certainly hope a 2nd series will get commissioned, if only to give it the chance to let it mature. You’d think after 1 season they now have the experience under their belt to make it better, though that’s what we’ve been thinking after the 10th week as well. Just keep in mind it took ‘the Daily Show’ a few years to properly settle in as well. Maybe a change of personnel good do some good.
Two more weeks to go (I just counted and I was right; last night’s was episode 13) and then we and they will have about 7 months to breath and reflect.
Monday, April 4, 2011
And on....
By now you, reader, should have caught up on how I stumble upon new interests, usually in the entertainment business. I go from one person to another, most of the times linked in some way. The link only needs to exist; there’s no need for a close relationship between the two different persons for me to jump bandwagon. For instance, I got deeply interested in Alan Rickman, because John Sessions did a stellar AR-impression and AR was in ‘Truly, Madly , Deeply’. I came to watch that specific QI-episode because someone posted a link on the Dutch Jason Mraz forum. That’s how I jumped from Mraz to Rickman.
It happened again. My latest interest flow has been an incredible rollercoaster ride. I went very quickly from Alan Rickman to David Mitchell with a Steve Coogan impromptu to Charlie Brooker to Chris Morris with more Steve Coogan impromptu’s. It’s been a hot ride.
I was talking about how links were made. This particular jump from CB to CM has been an interesting and mind blowing one. Let’s just say that yesterday evening I spent a great deal of my evening (the whole evening) watching the first series of ‘the IT crowd’ in parts and bits and in every break from clip to clip I thought: “Fuck that’s hot,” referencing to the CB/CM link and had not that much to do with ‘the IT crowd’ even though I did develop a bit of a crush on Katherine Parkinson who plays Jen Barber the Relations Manager.
But that’s beside the point.
Just so you know how my mind has been boiling, I watched 5 episodes (1 I couldn’t find) in clips no longer than 2,5 minutes which results in every episode being watched in separate 10 mini clipped sessions. In between every clip I thought the above mentioned which resulted in me thinking “Fuck, that’s hot!” 50 times. Remember the link CB/CM. Yes, that.
I’m not even sure where in my brain things go wrong. Neither CB nor CM really attracts me physically. I can’t even point a finger on the reason why I think that or feel that way about, in this case, CM. Big difference, by the way, is that with CB I wasn’t even bothered about it. I always thought ‘that’s how it is, deal with it’. I can’t approach it like that with CM for some strange reason.
In some strange way it’s those long limbs. Or the slick back combed hair with stubborn curlies in his neck. Or the sneery, insisting bossy way of interviewing. Or the dominant bullying way of treating people. Or the absurd way of pushing people’s faces in stupidity. Or his arrogant I’m-above-you intellectual way of rubbing people the wrong way. Or the fact that all this is just an act in the name of comedy.
“Fuck, that’s hot!”
Now I come to think of it, the reason why I think the same about CB is shrouded in even thicker mists. CB has no long limbs. CB’s sneering tends to be more superficial. CB is actually quite a nice person. CB tends to be a bit lazy and single focused. CB’s sneering only carries that far. CB’s work is not as edgy as CM’s though he makes up in absurdness.
CB does have interesting hair with a life on its own though. Only his hair waves on top of his head prominently present instead of being slicked down in a vague attempt to rule it except for some mutiny in the neck. His hair is mutiny all over and he’s not even trying to rule it in.
That’s hot in a whole different way.
Maybe it has something to do with curlies. Jason Mraz had curlies. When his unruly hair grew a bit long it tended to curl up in his neck. Lovely. Steve Coogan has curly hair which supplied him with some pretty shoulder length curly wurly. It’s his face mainly though; those eyes and that utterly helpless look which makes his mouth drop open in a slight ‘oh’. Or that annoyed look with the pursed lips. And then we have a CM/SC link.
I love the scene from ‘the Day Today’ in which CM asks SC’s alter-ego Alan Partridge something to which AP guesses an answer. Don’t ever guess an answer around CM, cause he will call you out on it. AP gets seriously flustered and does that helpless look not knowing how to react or how to move away from that situation.
And there’s the scene in which CM, after announcing AP, throws a ball at AP and hits him in the neck causing AP to get annoyed (cue narrowing eyes and pursing lips) and straining to move on with his announcement. SC can pull brilliant faces. But what hit me as brilliant about it is that you know AP has the ability to go off in immature annoyance and behaviour, but he will think twice of doing that in front of CM.
Oh, hold on, I think I love Steve Coogan too. Hello impromptu!
Anyway, had to get that off my chest.
It happened again. My latest interest flow has been an incredible rollercoaster ride. I went very quickly from Alan Rickman to David Mitchell with a Steve Coogan impromptu to Charlie Brooker to Chris Morris with more Steve Coogan impromptu’s. It’s been a hot ride.
I was talking about how links were made. This particular jump from CB to CM has been an interesting and mind blowing one. Let’s just say that yesterday evening I spent a great deal of my evening (the whole evening) watching the first series of ‘the IT crowd’ in parts and bits and in every break from clip to clip I thought: “Fuck that’s hot,” referencing to the CB/CM link and had not that much to do with ‘the IT crowd’ even though I did develop a bit of a crush on Katherine Parkinson who plays Jen Barber the Relations Manager.
But that’s beside the point.
Just so you know how my mind has been boiling, I watched 5 episodes (1 I couldn’t find) in clips no longer than 2,5 minutes which results in every episode being watched in separate 10 mini clipped sessions. In between every clip I thought the above mentioned which resulted in me thinking “Fuck, that’s hot!” 50 times. Remember the link CB/CM. Yes, that.
I’m not even sure where in my brain things go wrong. Neither CB nor CM really attracts me physically. I can’t even point a finger on the reason why I think that or feel that way about, in this case, CM. Big difference, by the way, is that with CB I wasn’t even bothered about it. I always thought ‘that’s how it is, deal with it’. I can’t approach it like that with CM for some strange reason.
In some strange way it’s those long limbs. Or the slick back combed hair with stubborn curlies in his neck. Or the sneery, insisting bossy way of interviewing. Or the dominant bullying way of treating people. Or the absurd way of pushing people’s faces in stupidity. Or his arrogant I’m-above-you intellectual way of rubbing people the wrong way. Or the fact that all this is just an act in the name of comedy.
“Fuck, that’s hot!”
Now I come to think of it, the reason why I think the same about CB is shrouded in even thicker mists. CB has no long limbs. CB’s sneering tends to be more superficial. CB is actually quite a nice person. CB tends to be a bit lazy and single focused. CB’s sneering only carries that far. CB’s work is not as edgy as CM’s though he makes up in absurdness.
CB does have interesting hair with a life on its own though. Only his hair waves on top of his head prominently present instead of being slicked down in a vague attempt to rule it except for some mutiny in the neck. His hair is mutiny all over and he’s not even trying to rule it in.
That’s hot in a whole different way.
Maybe it has something to do with curlies. Jason Mraz had curlies. When his unruly hair grew a bit long it tended to curl up in his neck. Lovely. Steve Coogan has curly hair which supplied him with some pretty shoulder length curly wurly. It’s his face mainly though; those eyes and that utterly helpless look which makes his mouth drop open in a slight ‘oh’. Or that annoyed look with the pursed lips. And then we have a CM/SC link.
I love the scene from ‘the Day Today’ in which CM asks SC’s alter-ego Alan Partridge something to which AP guesses an answer. Don’t ever guess an answer around CM, cause he will call you out on it. AP gets seriously flustered and does that helpless look not knowing how to react or how to move away from that situation.
And there’s the scene in which CM, after announcing AP, throws a ball at AP and hits him in the neck causing AP to get annoyed (cue narrowing eyes and pursing lips) and straining to move on with his announcement. SC can pull brilliant faces. But what hit me as brilliant about it is that you know AP has the ability to go off in immature annoyance and behaviour, but he will think twice of doing that in front of CM.
Oh, hold on, I think I love Steve Coogan too. Hello impromptu!
Anyway, had to get that off my chest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)