Cunningham Chronicle

Feature Article written last year: With respect, it's not working!

2012-02-06T14:16:00.001Z

So another season of football has come to end, and we have had no shortage in controversy and talking points. Managers fined for chastising and disrespecting referees, players fined for outbursts on the pitch and on online social media like Twitter. It seems not a game goes by without a storm of controversy. The game is always going to be highly charged and full of passion. But is the mark being overstepped too often? The level of criticism towards refereeing decisions and players and managers conduct in the professional game has been highlighted frequently this season. What does this mean for the Football Association’s Respect campaign? Is the lack of respect in football a far bigger problem than we realise? Has the campaign been a failure?

We are now into the fifth year of the F.A’s widely discussed Respect campaign. The Respect movement was introduced to address unacceptable behaviour on and off the pitch in football. In 2009 it was reported that around 7,000 qualified referees were quitting each season because of the abuse they received from players and from the sidelines. This posed a huge problem for the F.A to confront and deal with. The F.A claim that the Respect programme provides a series of tools leagues, clubs, coaches, referees, players and parents from grassroots to elite football to ensure a safe, positive environment in which to enjoy the game.

Looking at the statistics, the Respect campaign has enjoyed some significant success. On field discipline in the professional game has improved with cautions for dissent across the top four divisions down by nine per cent. Referee recruitment figures are up 7.4 per cent each year. Assaults on referees are down 13 per cent each year.

It is certain that the F.A introduced the Respect campaign with honourable intentions, and according to the stats the campaign is doing good work. However, not everyone has been pleased with its introduction. Former top Premier League referee Graham Poll has openly criticised the campaign saying it is doomed. According to Poll, no referees were asked for their opinions in the build up to the campaign’s launch.

“The FA said they'd researched the opinions of 11,000 people before embarking on the 'Respect' campaign, but they didn't ask one of the top referees for their views before they brought it in. Referees are the spearhead of it, and yet they didn't even get consulted."

The fact that top referees were not asked their opinions on the campaign before it was brought in does seem to undermine the campaign’s intentions. The programme was launched with referees very much in mind, but it seems they were still being ignored.

While one top referee has been critical of the campaign, another first class referee, Howard Webb, has praised the campaign. Webb feels the initiation of the Respect movement has had a positive effect on the game.

“I think that the Respect programme was fully justified and brought in at the right time," he said. "It was needed because we were in the position whereby something like 7,000 referees were walking away from the game each year and that means that something had to be wrong.

“We haven’t seen the surrounding of match officials in the same way that we have before and the common open dissent doesn’t seem to be there. Of course there are some cases and people will be able to point the finger at certain individuals who still behave in that way, but on the whole the interaction with the players I have had has been good and they seem to be aware of the importance of looking after the image of the game."

Webb also praised the campaign for its work at grass-foots level. "The County FAs are all rolling out the Respect campaign to everybody locally and the referees at grass-roots levels are aware of the programme and I think it's really important.”

The Hampshire Premier Football League is one grass-roots league that signed up to the Respect campaign. James Hardy is a footballer who plays in this league for Gosport side Fleetlands. He doesn’t really see any substantial change in behaviour despite the Respect movement.

“The only real difference I feel the Respect campaign has had on our matches in the league I play in is that we have to shake hands with the opposition players before each match. Most players see this as a laugh and a joke rather than an initial show of respect.

“Players, managers and fans still moan at the ref in the Premier League and that still happens in non-league football. I have heard referees verbally abused in nearly every game. It is just part and parcel of the game I’m afraid. I think the Respect campaign is founded on good, solid principles, but I don’t think it is having a real significant impact at non-league level.”

Despite the positive statistics, it could be argued that the Respect campaign is not having a real significant impact in the professional game too. The 2010-2011 season has seen many instances of disrespect towards match officials. Sir Alex Ferguson has been particularly outspoken about referees and their decision-making. In March he was hit with a five-match touchline ban and a £30,000 fine for criticising referee Martin Atkinson after a game at Chelsea.

Ferguson said: “You want a fair referee, or a strong referee anyway, and we didn't get that. I must say, when I saw who the referee was I feared the worst.”

The case of Sir Alex highlights the fact that the Respect campaign is not being considered with the seriousness it should be. We are still seeing the sight of players surrounding and intimidating the referee, questioning his authority with alarming regularity.

Professional Footballers' Association chairman Clarke Carlisle says that players support the guidelines of the Respect campaign, and that incidents involving players intimidating referees are not on the increase and they are being given too much attention.

“The number of incidents where referees are accosted are becoming fewer and fewer. It is just that where incidents are highlighted they now receive massive, global attention.”

The Respect campaign is having some success in changing behaviour in football, but there is a long way to go to stamp it out.

Radio Profile: Adam Chatfield

2010-12-15T17:42:00.003Z

For the second part of a university module I am taking entitled Photo and Documentary Journalism, I had to create a 3 minute radio feature profiling someone. The person I chose to profile was Adam Chatfield. Adam is a professional motocross rider and races around the world. Have a listen to the radio documentary below to find out more about life as a professional motocross rider.

'A Day in the Life' Photojournalism Assignment

2010-11-01T20:54:00.006Z

Exam Topics

2010-05-26T11:54:00.010+01:00

So another semester has flown by with alarming haste and the exam awaits...

The format for the exam is the same as the previous semesters, with five questions relating to topics previously discussed in lectures. The first question asks 'was Neitzsche a Nazi?'

In short, the answer this is no. Fredrich Neitzsche has often been referred to as a nazi because of similarity of themes expressed in his works, such as Thus Spake Zarathustra. Nietzsche is most famous for his expression that 'God is dead'. He asserts that there is no individual God figure in the Judeo-Christian religion. He hated this religion, stating it was something not to be tolerated and must be eradicated in order for people to become free. He said it was the religion of slaves. These religions hated his views and tar him with the brush of causing Nazi ideas. His anti-semetism is often mistaken as a racial idea, as with the Nazis, but racism cannot be attributed to Nietzsche. Unlike the Nazis, it is the collectivism of the religion he despises, not the individuals.

The two ideas that are associated with Nietasche and the Nazi regime are:

The concept of the will to power.
The 'overman'.

The idea of the will to power has been associated with Hitler. A person with a great intent of will power, with the power to move history. In his book Thus Spake Zarathustra, Nietzsche presents his great belief in the idea of the 'ubermensch' (the overman'). The Nazi's claimed this idea as their own and presented Hitler in this way, conveying him as superior with the will to power. Neitasche doesn't treat this theory in racial terms. For example, he would view a disabled person overcoming their difficulties to win a paralympic gold medal as an 'overman'. The Nazis however hated those with disabilities and labled them 'undermen'. Nietzsche was an extreme individualist which does not coincide with Nazi philosophy. Therefore Neitzsche has been unfairly dubbed a Nazi when he most certainly was not one.

The second question asks whether Meursault was a bad man?

Meursault is the hero of Albert Camus existentialist novel The Stranger or The Outsider. The novel deals with existential concerns with choice. In the book Meursault is experiencing an existential void and through boredom simply murders an Algerian man without motive. Meursault is put on trial but simply does not care. It becomes clear that the predominately white justice system are keen to let him off as long as he says he was sorry and didnt mean and was upset about his mothers death. But Meursault does not care. He refuses to conform with the justice system. He is a bad man because he is convicted of a crime. He is also a bad man in the conventional sense as far as the jury are concerned. Meursault is bad in the sense that he is unconventional and refuses to go along with the social norms. As a result he is sentenced to death.

However, Meursault is an existential hero becauses he refuses to adapt his momentary consciouness to social convention. He lives by the existentialist slogan that existence precedes essance, where the act of living is to constantly confront moral decisions as they occur. You can't rely on moral frameworks. Camus explores this notion through the question of collaboration. So in the eyes of existentialists Meursault is not a bad man, he is a hero.

The third questions looks at the New Journalism. It asks, 'To what extent does the New Journalism (Tom Wolfe) reflect cultural and intellectual friends such as psychoanalysis and the politics of the 'me generation'?

Tom Wolfe created the concept of 'new journalism', which is journalism in the style of 19th century realist non-fiction novel. Wolfe writes in the conventions of 19th century realists writers like Charles Dickens and Emile Zola. New Journalism sees the move from digetic to mimetic storytelling, from telling to seeing. Everything detail is strange and appealing in new journalism. The strangest things are the things that are officially normal. Throughout this movement existentialism becomes the normal style in society and writing. The fact we don't tell in the New Journalism conveys the cultural trend of psychoanalysis, where the concept is seeing and listening. The task is to find the real in the apparent insignificant detail. New Journalism finds out the 'real' not just the story.

The New Journalism reflects the 'me generation'. This movement is all about individualism. Everyone should be happy and its all about self fulfillment, sexual liberty and pleasure. If it feels good then just do it, be it drugs or sexual deviance. Wilhelm Reich stated that you will become ill if you do not have sexual liberation. This 'me generation' resulted in the new agenda of personal issues.

The fourth question concerned itself with the Vienna Circle and asked the question, 'Why might journalists find the logical positivist school of philosophy to be useful and appealing. What faults have been identified in the approach of the logical positivists?

The Logical Positivists rejected all philosophy and metaphysics. The only thing they believe is science, which they view as everything. The key concept of this school of thought is the verification principle. This is the theory that knowledge is based on verification. The only thing that counts is whether a statement can be independently verified. If something cannot be verified then they simply ignore it as there will never be a scientific answer. For example, Nietzsche famously said that God is dead. The logical positivists would assert that this statement cannot be verified. The case is the same for Freud's theories, they are all metaphysics that cannot be verified as true or false. This is useful for journalists as it reflects the common practice of journalism highlighting comment and fact. In journalism any facts need to verifiable in order for them to be published.

Karl Popper found a fault in logical positivists verification principle. He discredited the theory with his falsification principle. This stated that the verification principle itself cannot be verified. With this theory he destroyed the logical positivists.

I found the fifth and final question the most difficult out of all of them. 'Keynes has been hailed as both the saviour and the destroyer of the capitalist system. Why?'

In his book 'General Theory' Keynes rejects all economic theory of his time, which was the idea of the free market. In the free market the government gives the unemployed benefits which results in them not bothering going back to work, but living off these state benefits. Keynes said that the more you cut wages and government spending you will eradicate unemployment. He urges the government to pay the unemployed to work, even if its just digging holes and filling them up again. They will earn a wage and then spend it. This is the multiplier affect, which creates a circle of economy flowing. The government should spend money, even if they don't have it. According to some people this principle saved capitalism.

However, the printing of money that the government does not have to spend creates huge inflation which can be seen to destroy the moral of society and thus Keynes can also been seen as the destroyer of capitalism.

The New Journalism

2010-05-07T21:29:00.002+01:00

"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone. But they've always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson.

New Journalism, or 'Gonzo' Journalism is a style of writing and journalism founded in the 1960s/70s. During this period there is a generational change in popular culture in the USA. This change is realised in journalism with the shift to the literary movement of The New Journalism. The main point of this new form is the shift in form of narrtation from digetic to mimetic. 'Seeing' became the new 'telling' and objectivity is neglected in favour of subject experience. The movement was shaped by the two key figures of Hunter S. Thompson and Tom Wolfe, both of whom were influenced by the culture of drug taking at the time. For instance, Thompson's most well-known work Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas details an LSD fuelled trip to Las Vegas.

Gonzo Journalism has made the jump from paper to television with a large degree of success. This is mainly due to the fact it is ultimately 'performance journalism', where entertaining is of more importance than informing. Documentaries such as Super Size Me have appeared baring the forms and conventions of gonzo journalism, placing more focus on the journalist and his/her experiences rather than objective reporting.

Wilhelm Reich

2010-05-02T11:03:00.002+01:00

In short, Wilhelm Reich believed that orgasms = happiness. Who am I to argue against this theory!?

Reich was a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst working in the 20th century. He was a contemporary of Freud and like the Freud discussed the issue of primitive urges within humans. Where Freud believed primitive sexual and aggressive forces were present in the human sub-conscious and would lead to chaos if they weren't suppressed and controlled. Reich proposed revolutionary ideas of Freud. He believed the complete opposite of Freud's theory, stating that the unconscious forces inside the mind were a good thing and it was societies suppression that destroyed them and made them dangerous. Reich detailed that the underlying energy was sexuality and if this was released then humankind would flourish.

Reich argued that Freud had completely ignored the human body, focusing simply on the mind which as a result ignored some important issues. Where Freud viewed sexual impulses as dangerous Reich claimed that sexual desire and pleasures were the essential key to happiness. Sexual repression was the real danger that led to damaging consequences. Reich's theory paid close attention to the act of orgasm.

I can imagine the majority of people willing to side with Mr Reich on this particular issue!

Reich believed there were three layers to the human mind, a similar idea to Freud's concept of the ego, superego and id. These layers were as followed:

The surface level, which is our everyday social form conveying politeness, compassion, and responsibility.
The second layer is a cruel, sadistic, rapacious one. In Freudian terms it is the 'unconscious' or 'what is being repressed'.
The third deepest layer is the biological core, conveying honesty, love, and rational hatred.

Reich paid particular attention to second layer in his book The Mass Psychology of Facism where he set out to explain why so many people supported the Nazis in Germany. He focused on the lower middle classes and stated their support for the Nazis was due to the strong paternal authority figure of their father which led to a love of authority and rebellion. He also suggested that any child who experienced sexual repression and an authoritarian social order would become submissive and thus more likely to submit to supporting the Nazis. The lower middle class were ultimately targeted because of their vulnerability.

Reich's ideas are still relevant in today's society. He stressed that one shouldn't wait to marry to have sex, that you should exercise sexual freedom. This notion is clearly present today, where the majority do not wait til marriage to engage in sexual intercourse. A quick look at the Sunday tabloids portrays a society that is sexual obsessed not repressed. Here are a few of Sunday 2 May's headlines:

Boxing Hero Amir Khan Sends Naked Snaps and Twisted Sex texts

Rihanna And the Sex Toy

Abbey's centre back and silky smooth forward shows why she took Peter's Clancy

The above stories are all sex obsessed, conveying society's sexual freedom and want for sexual content. Reich would be pleased with this notion.

Reich's key idea was to simply 'let it out!' I experienced this notion recently at my dog's puppy class. The dog trainer said we were to obtain a rag toy attached to a lengthy piece of rope and give it to the dog. She said the idea behind this was for the dog to let its aggression and anger out on the toy. This conveys Reich's idea that it is better out than in.

So people remember; be free! Sexual liberty is the ultimate freedom!

Wings of Desire

2010-04-29T11:45:00.003+01:00

After an Easter severely lacking in bunnies and chocolate it is time to catch up on my blogging on the HCJ topics.

In week four we were given the screening of a film entitled Wings Of Desire. I am of the opinion that is a good thing I didn't blog in the immediate aftermath of the initial viewing of this film. On first viewing I found it not to my style or tastes whatsoever. The film seemed to drag without events of real notice and I have concentrating on it a struggle. However, with hindsight I can appreciate the beauty and importance this piece has an example of existential film making.

Put simply, existentialism has two sides to it. One side is that of horrifying angst, questioning the meaning of your very existence. The other side is the much more uplifting outlook of making what you want with your life. Wings of Desire acknowledges both of these arms of existentialism. We hear the refrain that is repeated throughout the film of someone asking themselves, 'why am I here and not there? Why am I me and not him?' This sort of questioning can lead to a terrifying angst-ridden existence, or an uplifting existence with the realisation that you are able to make what you want of your life, without the need to question anything. It conveys a personal liberation that being nothing gives scope to be everything.

The film is set against the backdrop of 1980's Berlin and follows two angels Damiel and Cassiel who float around the city watching different individuals' existence and listening to their inner most thoughts and feelings. In the film Cassiel states that the angels existence is 'to assemble, testify and preserve reality.' The use of the camera in the film adds to existential theme. The camera seems to slowly float around the city alongside with the angels, observing the inhabitants' existence below.

Damiel begins to fall in love with a young circus performer named Marion and longs to renounce his immortal existence for a physical one. He grows tired of merely observing existence, he longs to experience it. With his becoming mortal the camera transforms alongside him. The film had been shot in a monochrome sepia, but when Damiel becomes mortal the camera displays colour. This is clearly metaphorical for the fact that Damiel now sees the world in a different tone, through an entirely different colour scheme, representative of his new-found mortality.

Marion was a lonely soul desperately seeking the existence of love to transform her life into colour and Damiel brings this to her, creating an uplifting ending conveying the positivity of existentialism.

Its To Exist That's Essential

2010-03-10T16:49:00.005Z

The internet website allaboutphilosophy.org informs me that existentialism is a philosophy centered upon the analysis of existence and the way humans find themselves existing in the world. The notion is that humans exist first and then each individual spends a lifetime changing their essence or nature. Put simply, existentialism is a philosophy concerned with finding self and the meaning of life through free will, choice, and personal responsibility.

Last week in my other subject of English we discussed issues of gender and how society constructs and molds the individual. This and an influential quote from the French writer Simone de Beauvoir is highly relevant to the theme of existentialism. Simone de Beauvoir wrote in her book The Second Sex that, "One is not born a woman, one becomes one." It was her belief in existentialist feminism that the social construction of a woman is paramount to oppression. Beauvoir anticipated that women were moving beyond this constraint and would reach a position where they would take personal responsibilities for their own choices.

This view neatly corresponds with the philosophy of Existentialism. A person is at their best when struggling against their individual nature, with the human free will to discover their self.

Nietzsche's Fight Club

2010-03-10T16:36:00.002Z

A couple of weeks back I blogged on the impact Nietzsche's work had on Stanley Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey. Last night, as part of a conscious attempt to view films I really should have seen by now, I watched Fight Club. Once the big twist hit me I discovered the influence our German friend has had on another film. Tyler Durden is the mental creation of the narrator. He is everything he wished he was. Out of the despair and confusion he finds residing in his life, the narrator creates his very own 'Nietzschean Overman'. The super-human that embraces violence with superior will to power.

Interesting to see Friedrich pop up again. I'll be keeping my eye out for him.

Nietzsche's Space Odyssey

2010-02-24T12:22:00.001Z

Critics have called Stanley Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey "the first Nietzchean film", stating that its essential thematic influence is derived from Nietzsche's concept of man's evolution from ape to human to super-human.

I first came across the film during a GCSE music class where we were studying the opening chapter, The Dawn of Man in preparation for a task to compose a film score for a fictional scene. My first impression of the opening scenes in 2001: A Space Odyssey was one of incomprehension. At the height of my immaturity I found the howls and foot-stomping of various blokes attired in monkey suits extremely humourous. At no point did it occur to me the significance of the appearance of a geometrically perfect black monolith, nor did I really understand why some monkey was bashing about a load of bones. However, looking at this scene with my (only slightly) maturer manner, I can see the importance of the impact of philosophy and in particular the works of Nietzsche had on the art form.

Director Kubrick has said of the meaning of the film that; "You're free to speculate as you wish about the philosophical and allegorical meaning of the film." However, it is difficult to not include Nietzsche's beliefs as a clear reference point in the film.

Nietzsche's belief in the 'will to power' is clearly evident in the The Dawn of Man. Nietzsche stated that the human race will be superseded by a successor species who will rise due to their superior will to power. This replacing of authority is conveyed in the scene where one of the apes begins to think about the animal bones in front of him and devises how to create a deadly weapon out of them to assist him in further acts of violence towards other apes and to kill animals for food. In this act we can see the first Super-Ape, which is thus, the first human.This process will then continue within the human race, where a Super-Human will emerge. This idea of a Super-Human is a key concept of Nietzsche. He believes this has already happened through the figures of Jesus Christ, Napoleon, Alexander the Great etc. Interesting for Nietzsche is that in these evolutionary surges forward occurs in the personality of the individual.

In 2001: A Space Odyssey the moments of evolutionary advancements are preceded by the appearance of the mysterious black monolith which seems to act as a marker for the different stages in the journey of humankind.

Nietzsche

2010-02-10T16:36:00.002Z

So another semester beckons with History and Context of Journalism Part Four commencing tomorrow afternoon. The first topic is concerning Frederick Nietzsche.

For Nietzsche the greatest, most powerful, and honest emotion is that of hatred. He was a man who embraced 'ruthlessness, war, and aristocratic pride.' He was of the opinion that evil was good as its end result was the production of 'a great man'. Bertrand Russell writes of Nietzsche in his book History of Western Philosophy that 'he alludes habitually to ordinary human beings as the 'bungled and botched', and sees no objection to their suffering if its necessary for the production of a great man.' Russel cites the example of Napoleon to convey this point. So does this indicate that Nietzsche would be complementary of other 'great men' who have inflicted mass suffering to the 'bungled and botched' such as Hitler and Stalin? Would he be in favour of Tony Blair and George Bush for their implicit responsibility for bringing suffering to the 'bungled and botched' in Iraq and Afghanistan? For Nietzsche 'the misery of a whole nation is of less importance than the suffering of a great individual.'

Chris described in his webcast lecture on Nietzsche how he agreed with him that hatred is the most powerful and honest emotion. Chris used the example of football fans as evidence to convey Nietzsche's belief. I have to agree with Chris on this one. If you conduct a study of football fans terrace chants you are likely to find more references to hatred of the other team rather than the glorification of your own side. This can also be seen through the booing of opposition players. Just because they turn out in different colours, the powerful and honest emotion of hatred comes to the forefront. The hatred for the opposition is the more powerful emotion than the want for your own team to win.

Video Presentation

2010-01-25T14:34:00.002Z

2010-01-25T14:34:00.001Z

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytm8phNytSs

Information for 'unseen' test on Thursday

2009-12-15T14:24:00.003Z

Been a while since I've blogged so its redemption time. I'm treating this blog post as a revision aid for the test on Thursday; basically just typing my notes into the form of legible sentences.

The first question we looked at in the elaborate 'symposium' was in reference to modernisn, James Joyce's Ulysses, and how they have no single point of view...

It's pretty clear to me that the literary work of Joyce conveys the complexion of the modernist movement that he himself pioneered. In life, and in the mind of the individual there is no single point of view, but many versions and diverse ways of looking at things. Joyce uses the narrative technique of a 'stream of consciousness' to convey this idea. It creates a de-centred narrative with no single point of view. Through the use of this form of narrative Joyce has broken free from traditional forms of literature, where the structure of beginning - middle - end rule the book. Life is not like this, it contains a vast amount of beginnings, middles, and endings, with many ways of looking at each. There is a clear Freud influence in Joyce's work, just look at the sexual content of Molly Bloom's soliloquy!

The second question was to summarize the work of Freud and his cultural impact...

The first point I think of when looking at Freud's works is his obsession with sex. Freud detailed that all of our actions were revolved around sex, with motivations defined through sexual desires. He noted that many of his patients had sexual hang ups and he stated that this caused mental issues. He viewed that civilisation causes people to suppress their natural urges, which damages the individual. For example, a young child wishes to defecate freely, but society creates rules that this is unacceptable. Also, there is a masturbation taboo, when it is a natural human desire.
Freud's analysis method was to interpret peoples dreams. He said that 'dreams are the royal highway to the sub-conscious'. He stated that in each human mind there was a constant conflict between the conscious and sub-conscious which caused mental distress.
The cultural impact Freud's work has had is huge. His work has been viewed as sexist (he stated that women are hysterical because they have 'penis envy') and thus he has had a great impact of the debate of gender politics. Also the impact of Freud in advertising is highly significant. Companies have used Freud's work as a guide of how to appeal to consumers desires.

The third question we looked at was how the control of language can control behaviour and thought with reference to George Orwell's 1984...

In '1984' Orwell suggests that the control of language by an authoritarian government is such a powerful notion to the extent that if they were to remove a word, they remove the idea. For example, without the word 'rebellion' there can be no action of rebellion. Through the control of language, the government in the novel are able to control the thoughts and actions of the people. The new edition of the Newspeak dictionary in the novel is described as 'going to be tiny', clearly showing the eradication of words, and thus the ability to think about the meanings behind the words. The government also changed meanings of words to control the thoughts of people, for example, 'love is hate' and 'peace is war'. This Orwellian idea can be seen in modern terms. For example, the British Army used to be ruled by the Ministry of War, but now the exact same ministry is known as the Ministry of Defence. The use of language changes the implication of meaning.

The fourth question was a look at Steinbeck's great novel The Grapes of Wrath and whether it was a work of journalism...

Steinbeck's novel was a very controversial book, with some people criticizing Steinbeck accusing him of exaggerating the conditions of the migrants in the book. The book itself was born from a photojournalism project for Life magazine. Steinbeck wrote the book as a journalistic campaign to highlight the experience he had seen through his research into the plight of the migrating people. It is a very political book, a propaganda book even. A campaign for massive state aid in the wake of the Great Depression which resulted in worldwide economic meltdown and mass unemployment.
It is a journalistic book, written in a very journalistic style. In fact it has been used as a guide for journalists to write in the correct style. It is clear to see the journalistic style research Steinbeck conducted before writing the book in his dialogue, with quotes conveying a journalistic form. The novel gives a voice to the voiceless, which is what all good journalism should do.
The fact that the book won the Nobel Prize conveys it in a literary light, not a work of journalism.

The fifth and final question was an extremely long winded question about Emile Zola's Germinal, social inequality, violence and realism...

Zola's novel is an example of the movement of realism. The vivid descriptions within the book are like none I have ever read, with many moments of genuine breathlessness. The best example is when the miners are escaping from the flooded mine, with the only means of escape through a rusty metal ladder which sliced through them like razors. The book is an incredibly crude metaphor of people with different political outlooks dropped under ground like seeds that germinate. It is a sensational and phenomenally violent book describing the politics of anarchism and the embracing of violence - a very Nietzsche idea, with violence being good.
Woman are described in the novel much more realistically than had previously been seen in much of literary works. They are described as pillars of strength, keeping society going in the most inhumane conditions.

Now I just have to remember all this for Thursday...

Citizen Kane

2009-11-12T12:43:00.003Z

"Rosebud." - The last word of a dying man that starts an intrusive investigation into that man's extraordinary life.

'Citizen Kane' is a remarkably significant film that conveys many themes and motifs. It offers a damning verdict of the 'American Dream' and materialism while also mourning the loss of childhood and innocence.

I have read that 'Citizen Kane' was one of the first movies to oppose the traditionally positive view of the 'American Dream' to gain financial prosperity and material luxury. Kane's accumulation of wealth and material goods is done for love and control, not happiness. For Kane the 'American Dream' is seen as a hollow one. He is depicted as a happy child playing in the snow during his childhood where his family were poor and had no elements of materialism. This is in stark contrast to his death where his seen as an lonely isolated figure, surrounded not by the love he craves, but by his material possessions that symbolize all that is wrong about the perception of the 'American Dream'.

I wonder whether Kane's obsession with acquiring statues and other possessions portrays his want, his need perhaps, to control people. He is able to control them whereas in the real world he found difficulty controlling things the way he wanted. His mother sending him away, his failed political career, and Susan's failure as an opera singer. In his lavish palace Xanadu, he is able to exert control over everything.

I believe the fact that Kane's last words 'rosebud' represents his realization that the life he has led hasn't given him the happiness or love he craved. It conveys the loss of his childhood innocence, where he was happy, playing in the snow with his sled 'rosebud'. This is contrasted with his lonely existence in the grand palace of Xanadu. The significance of 'rosebud' to Kane is of paramount importance. It is the only love he truly encountered.

More Ulysses...

2009-11-01T20:07:00.002Z

I have just read Molly Bloom's soliloquy in the final chapter of Joyce's and I feel it really conveys the groundbreaking modernist aspect of Joyce's novel. It is an enormous section of interior monologue narrative, with minimal use of punctuation. In fact it is split into eight 'paragraphs', with just two marks of punctuation.

Alongside the narrative technique and distinct lack of punctuation, Joyce makes use of sexually explicit language and vulgar phrases. For example:

'Ill let him know if thats what he wanted that his wife is I s l o fucked yes and damn well fucked too up to my neck nearly not by him 5 or 6 times handrunning theres the mark of his spunk on the clean sheet I wouldnt bother to even iron it out'
'if he wants to kiss my bottom Ill drag open my drawers and bulge it right out in his face as large as life he can stick his tongue 7 miles up my hole as hes there my brown part'
'I know every turn in him Ill tighten my bottom well and let out a few smutty words smellrump or lick my shit '

It was this use of language that found Joyce's work banned in many countries over the world. It was too different, too modern for the audience of its time. It is a mark of the change of times that nowadays people, myself included, can read this passage and feel offended. The text will always have the shock factor, but in this modern age, taboo is becoming a thing of the past. Most products are sold by sex, beit newspapers such as The Sun, The News of The World or men's deodrant. This is the age where sex sells, and Molly's sexually vibrancy would produce millions!

Modernism and Freudism

2009-11-01T15:01:00.004Z

I have to admit to being slightly disappointed that we were not shown a screening of James Joyce's Ulysses as scheduled for the lecture of week 4. I was looking forward to seeing a cinematic represenation of Joyce's great work. (I guess I'll have to watch it in my own time.) However, I must also state that the material shown in its place was of high interest.

Intrigued would be the best word to describe how I felt after reading Chris warn us that the lecture would contain 'SEXUALLY EXPLICIT MATERIAL OF AN ADULT NATURE INCLUDING SEXUAL CONTENT OF A POTENTIALLY DISTURBING OR OFFENSIVE NATURE.' Now if you want people to attend a lecture, this is the way to do it! Offer a group of young adults a lecture containing sexual material and more than likely they will turn up!

However, this wasn't just some big screen porn show (although I did take down some notes on how Chris has an average sized member, potentially a homosexual, and something about a nazi disco!), this was a lecture of interesting observations in reference to psychoanalysis and modernism.

Early on in the lecture Chris commented on the fact that with todays technology we can use incredible advanced machines to see how each and every one of our brains and bodies function. Through the advancement of science we can literally see inside someones brain, which is essentially what Sigmund Freud set out in doing. His machine was mythological literature and comparing ancient myths with patients' problems in his practice. The most classic example of this is the Oedipus complex. Wikipedia explains:

The complex is named after the Greek mythical character Oedipus, who (albeit unknowingly) kills his father and marries his mother. According to Sigmund Freud, the Oedipus complex is a universal phenomenon, built in phylogenetically, and is responsible for much unconscious guilt.

So basically, within our subconscious, we all want to kill our fathers and have sex with our mothers. On the face of it this seems a truly rediculous theory. Who in their right mind has ever even considered this act? Freud maintained that the supression of this subconscious desire could result in neurosis, paedophilia, and homosexuality.

I think it is interesting to compare Freud's reading of the brain with some of the material Chris showed us in the lecture. The fact that the parts of the brain called the Amygdaline and the Hippocampus light up when sex, rage, fear; emotions are engaged shows Frued's work as mere speculation. It conveys my earlier point that scientific breakthroughs in neurology seem to undermine Freud's methods and theories. You cannot aruge with this sort of high level science, but people have been arguing over Freud for years.

BNP Fiasco

2009-10-22T19:23:00.002+01:00

"Anti-fascist protesters broke into BBC Television centre ahead of British National Party leader Nick Griffin's appearance on Question Time."

Today my friends is a sad day in British politics, and NOT because the BBC scheduled the BNP leader Nick Griffin to attend Question Time, but because of the actions of the 'anti-fascist' protesters. The actions of those people plays straight into the BNP's hands.

In using violence and force to protest against the BNP these people are in fact making themselves appear no better than the party they are opposing. Why are they trying to deny the BNP the chance to show themselves and their politics to a widespread audience on BBC? By allowing Nick Griffin to speak, there is the opportunity for him to highlight the pathetic, ridiculous, and racist views of the far-right party.

It is a golden opportunity for the people of Britain to fully understand the extreme and dangerous opinions of the BNP, why give them a chance to make the accusation of people attempting to silence them? The main way the BNP have been damaged is when they have been interviewed in detail. This is when their true colours are shown and they make themselves look laughably stupid.

I have read much about the protesters saying that people died in the Second World War to oppose fascism and its views. But these heroes also died for our freedoms, and one of the main freedoms we have as British citizens is freedom to thought and expression. By attempting to stop a man air his views (albeit disgusting views) they are guilty of doing exactly what the fascists our forefathers died to stop did sixty years ago.

Let this man speak. Let him dig his own grave.

A thought for now

2009-10-15T18:29:00.002+01:00

I will blog more on Brian's lecture today once I have had a proper chance to reflect on it. But for now I feel obliged to write a little on one of the topics from the lecture.

Einstein's theory of relativity is not one I expected to be blogging on, yet after Brian mentioned it today I felt I should. Wise old Albert said that time is relative. Brian gave the example of young lovers holding hands and being with each for 30 minutes can feel like a a measly five minutes, whereas five seconds of your hand being on a hot stove can feel like 30 minutes! I definitely support Einstein's theory in regards to the relativity of time, and I'm sure the majority of married couples do too! The first three months with someone special can pass without relent in a week. Yet after a year with the same 'special' someone it can begin to feel like a century!

An interesting thought for now.

(And I'm not bitter at all!)

James Joyce's Odyessy

2009-10-14T17:24:00.003+01:00

The first experience I had of James Joyce's groundbreaking novel Ulysses was during my ill-fated stay at Bath Spa University. I had signed up for a degree in 'Creative Writing' and it was on my way to one of those lectures that I overheard first year English students complaining about the fact Joyce's book was one of the texts they had to study. Comments like, "it doesn't make sense" reverberated around the walls of the holding pen outside the lecture room. Thus, my first impression of Joyce's work of imperative importance in modernist literature was a negative one.

However, after doing a little bit of research into the book I became fascinated of its contents. I discovered that the title and contents of the book paralleled Homer's Odyssey, an epic poem that I had great pleasure in reading during my college days.

After dipping into Ulysses I did have sympathy for those poor Bath Spa students (mainly because they are still at Bath Spa). It is a difficult text to get to grips with. It's premise is of Leopold Bloom passing through an ordinary day in Dublin. Joyce uses a stream of consciousness narrative technique which makes for highly descriptive reading, sometimes overwhelming the reader.

I haven't been able to read all of Ulysses so I can't comment on themes within the text or what the text promotes, but I can see from what I have read that Ulysses is a very progressive novel, a complete standout novel of its generation and highly deserving of its place in the modernist literary canon.

Year Two, Lecture One

2009-10-07T12:21:00.006+01:00

So another year of higher education has begun, and for this blog it begins with the topic of socialism with particular attention paid to Karl Marx.

Chris lectured us on the works of German idealist philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and his theory of dialectical argument to convey how change occurs. Hegel developed the formula for change that went as such:

Thesis
Anthesis
Synthesis

Chris showed us how this formula could be used to describe any sort of change. He gave the example of:

Thesis - Home team
Anthesis - Away team
Synthesis - Football match

Interestingly enough he also showed us how Hegel's works anticipated atomic theory:

Thesis - Electron
Anthesis - Proton
Synthesis - Matter

German socialist philosopher Karl Marx, best known for his Communist Manifesto, supported Hegel's ideas and adapted and incorporated them in his own works. He embraced Hegel's theory for change. Marx described the 'story of history' as such:

Thesis - Ruling Class
Anthesis - Slave Class/Working Class
Synthesis - Revolution

Marx's vision of historical change came true most memorably in 1917 through the Russian Revolutions. The ruling class of Tsar Nicholas II was victim of an uprising from organised workers (Soviets) and this resulted in revolution. True to Marxist theory the workers had 'nothing to lose but their chains' and they claimed state control of Russia.

Looking at things with a modern day hat on, the British government were recently accused of adopting socialist policy during the nationalisation of banks during the credit-crunch bail outs. The government insisted this was a crucial step to ensure the stability of the country's economy, but critics were quick to throw out the comparison of 2009 Britain to Leninist Russia where all banks were immediately nationalised.

Generally Speaking

2009-05-20T14:32:00.002+01:00

The front pages have been flooded with stories about MP's ludicrous expenses claims and the speaker has been forced out of parliament for the first time in 300 years. Welcome to UK democracy folks.

When I was first taught about politics and the political system I was told how an MP was representative of your local area, presented your ideas in the House of Commons, listened to your opinions and did what was best for you.

However, now that I have roamed this Earth for 20 years I have learned the real truth about MPs. Shady, slimey and sleazy.

These bungling fools have been spending the taxpayers money by claiming everything under the sun for their 'essential second home' in London:

Bed sheets
DVD players
A massage chair
A moat
Mortgage interest payments

I'm not sure how constructing a moat helps represent the people of Sleaford and North Hykeham. In fact I highly suspect that the building of moats feature prominently in their political views and opinions.

The prime minister MUST call a general election immediately and allow the British people to hold these MPs to account. The Sun have (for a change) started a campaign which the leader of the opposition David Cameron has given his support to.

It is time for the people of Britian to have there say on this matter.

Catch Up 1

2009-05-12T11:45:00.007+01:00

I realise I've fallen behind in terms of blogging on topics introduced in Chris Horrie's Tuesday lectures. Time to catch up...

So the lecture a couple of weeks ago concerned itself with the topic of political parties and the history of the party system in the UK. What started with the Torys and Whigs has resulted in well known parties such as:

Conseratives

Labour

Liberal Democrats

Green Party

There are also many other minor parties such as:

Official Monster Raving Loony Party

Revolutionary Communist Party of Great Britain

Pensioners Party

And so on...

The political period I have been interested in since school is the Liberal welfare reforms between 1906-1914. This period essentially saw the birth of the modern 'welfare state' in the UK.

In short, the Liberals, under the chancellorship of David Lloyd George, issued a series of reforms to improve working and living conditions in the UK. They created the Children's Charter, introduced pensions for the elderly, set up Labour exchanges to help the unemployed find work, and created the National Insurance Act.

The reforms were paid for using Robin Hood tactics. Lloyd George named his Finance Bill 'the People's Budget' where he taxed the rich to benefit the poor, ill and working class.

Cartoon from Punch, 1908

Despite a number of limitations and problems with the reforms, I believe they really were a positively pioneering set of Acts aimed for the good of the country. A far cry from the greedy MPs claiming expenses for horse manure and swimming maintenance.

Mexico Sneezes and the Whole World Catches a Cold

2009-04-29T11:34:00.003+01:00

The end is nigh, and it came from a pigsty.

So the dreaded 'swine flu' has spread to the sacred shores of Great Britain, cue the fear-mongers. We're all going to catch a cold, cough a few times and spend the day in bed. Spare a thought for the male population as we all know the men are going to be hit worse from this horrible outbreak.

I can't really take this 'pandemic' that serious at this moment in time. Its not the first time we've been told we're all doomed. Bird flu seems to have flown away and SARS, BSE and Foot-and-mouth never really got going.

In fact, I can't help but think about the timing of this 'crisis'. It couldn't have come at a better time for Gordon Brown and his withering Labour party. What better way to get the collapse of Labour off the front pages than to go into full crisis mode?

My thoughts were shared in yesterday's Sun. Columnist Fergus Shanahan wrote an article entitled 'Epidemic...or Porkies?' where he discussed the timing and over exaggeration of the whole disease.

One particular paragraph struck me as highly relevant:

"Swine flu may escalate here, but it is unlikely to kill as many as the
NHS bumps off on dirty wars."

Remember the awful 'good time to bury bad news' email in the wake of 9/11? Seems like this attitude is being adopted again.

I'm probably just scared about catching a cold...

Lecture 5. The West Lothian Question

2009-03-16T11:51:00.003Z

Lecture five dealt with the intensely joyful and extremely intriguing topic of local government. (Feel free to go back on facebook now...)

I learned the differences between Whitehall 'civil servants' and Town Hall 'executive officers'. In short, Whitehall runs the country (subject to parliament) and the Town Hall runs counties and cities.

The main area of interest for me within the lecture was the issue of the West Lothian Question.

According to Kingdom the question is:

"Should Scottish MPs at Westminster be permitted to debate policy for England, while English MPs are excluded from the Scottish Parliament? Should Scotland maintain its existing over-representation at Westminster?"

How is it fair that Scottish MPs have a say in important issues in Westminster, but English MPs cannot influence law in Scotland? I don't think it is. Surely it would make much more sense for England to have a seperate parliament where the Scots couldn't stick their whiskey soaked red roses in?

Or maybe let the Scots have their independence. They have moaned about the English for many years now. (Mel Gibson has done his bit to stir things up with great success!) The SNP had drafted a bill to stage a referendum on Scottish independence but that doesn't have the legs to take off according to the Guardian.

Alex Salmond's Scottish independence referendum bill 'dead in the water'

So it doesn't look like the Scottish folk will be getting their independence anytime soon. And don't we all get along too well to split up?!

The Special Blog

2009-03-12T13:48:00.004Z

I've just come across this on the BBC website...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7939501.stm

Despite Mourinho's alleged boxing antics, it was Nemanja Vidic and Cristiano Ronaldo that delivered the real knock out blows for Jose and his Inter team.

A real sucker punch...

Lecture Numero 4. Smash the (electoral) system!

2009-03-09T12:48:00.004Z

Unfortunately I missed last Tuesdays lecture due to having a stomach that felt like a womb at the wrong time of the month...

I have read through the notes on the Public Affairs Web and the relevant chapters in Kingdom, and the one thing that really struck me was the issue of our electoral system and whether it is fair etc.

The electoral system that is used in the UK general election is known as first-past-the-post (FPTP). In short, citizens vote for a local MP to represent their constituency in Parliament. The party with the most seats in parliament forms government. This system, like everything in life has its pros and cons.

I'll keep it simple. In short, the pros are:

It is simple and easy to understand for the mass plebs that form the British public.
It develops a close link between MPs and their constituencies.
It produces a strong, stable, single-party government. FPTP lends itself to enable one party to have a majority of seats and therefore able to govern to their own principles. Not having to compromise in a a weak coalition.
It prevents dangerous extremist parties gaining power.

Despite these positive aspects of FPTP there are also many disadvantages of this system:

Many votes are considered 'wasted'. In a single-member constituency only one set of opinions can be expressed.
The issue of 'safe seats'. Many constituencies have had the same MP or political party in control for a number of years. For example, my constituency of Fareham has had the same useless MP ever since I have lived here. So a vote for Labour in this constituency is pretty much wasted.
Voters have become more interested in the leaders of the political parties rather than their local MPs. The Prime Minister is becoming an ever more 'presidential' figurehead.
Voter Apathy. Due to the reasons above, (and some I will explain below) many voters have become disenchanted with the electoral system. Too many votes simply don't count towards the final result.

The main gripe most have with the first-past-the-post electoral is that on the face of it, it just isn't fair! It is disproportional. Looking at the 2005 general election results highlights this:

Percentage of votes Seats
Lab.: 35.2% 354 MPs
Cons.: 32.3% 196 MPs
Lib Dem.: 22% 62 MPs
Others: 10.5% 34 MP

There are 646 seats in the House of Commons. So depsite getting 35.2% of the total votes cast in the election, Labour actually received 54.8% of seats. This is clearly disproportionate. In contrast, the Lib Dems got 22% of votes cast, but only 9.6% of seats. How can this be fair? It's not really is it.

Now for something completely different...John Cleese describing Proportional Representation.

Of course PR has its weaknesses. It was used during the 1920s in the Wiemar Republic (Germany) but that eventually led to Hitler so....

Lecture 3. A Stones Throw from Home

2009-03-02T13:59:00.004Z

Yet again this blog is a bit overdue, but here it is...

So Chris gave us a lesson in British history describing the various invaders and settlers. From the intellectual prowess of the Romans bringing with them their roads, to violent Vikings bringing with them their well rehearsed skills in rape and pillaging.

The one thing that stuck out to me from the lecture was the various mentions of Stonehenge.

Now, despite settling down south (no rape or pillaging involved) I originally hail from the west country. Yes that is correct, I am a country bumpkin. My mother speaks like a farmer, but she is not also my sister and lover. I have had the pleasure of witnessing the musical genius of the Wurzels and meeting them after. I drink up thee zider etc etc.

The majority of my family still live in Wiltshire and we frequently drive up to visit them. Just coming out of Salisbury, along the A360, on a clear day, you can see the mysterious sight of Stonehenge from your window.

I have done this journey loads of times since I was four years old, and those stones have also interested me. I can remember watching a video my nan had about them over and over again.

Archeologists had believed that the iconic stone monument was erected around 2500 BC. However one recent theory has suggested that the first stones were not erected until 2400-2200 BC, whilst another suggests that it could have been as early as 3100 BC.

Stonehenge is believed to have served as a burial ground from its earliest days. According to Professor Mike Parker Pearson, head of Stonehenge Riverside Project:

"Stonehenge was a place of burial from its beginning to its zenith in the mid third millennium B.C. The cremation burial dating to Stonehenge's sarsen stones phase is likely just one of many from this later period of the monument's use and demonstrates that it was still very much a domain of the dead."

It all seems a far cry from all the druids, wizards, warlocks etc that turn up at the site for the Solstice festivals. How jolly of a bunch of 'stoned' simpletons to dance on people's graves!

My mother used to tell me how she and her sisters would have picnics on the stones. The health and safety police have since put a stop to this sort of outrageous behaviour. That seems fair. I mean a prawn sandwich is far more damaging to those sacred stones than a one eyed wizard armed with a bongo drum!

Its incredible how after thousands and thousands of years, Stonehenge remains a site of mystery and intrigue. The sheer force of human power needed to carry the stones from one part of the world over to Salisbury plain is one that baffles me to this day.

Empiricism vs A Priori

2009-02-21T22:08:00.002Z

Disclaimer: The following blog is in response to a lecture delivered by Chris Horrie on Tuesday 17 February. I apologise to my vast readership for my slack timekeeping.

The first thing that occurred to me whilst listening to Chris's description of empiricism was my old teacher from junior school. I always knew Mrs Rendal was an empress within the land of her classroom, but I never knew she was an empiricist. In fact she had encouraged me to think empirically from the tender age of ten years old.

She said: "Never take anything anyone says as fact. Always question them, and make sure they can prove it."

In essence this is what the ideology of empiricism is all about. The notion that evidence is everything. To never succumb to blind faith and assertions. That seeing is believing.

Empiricism has lead to a highly sophisticated technological advance. Particularly in science.

I read recently about studies at the University of Texas and the University of Bath that scientists specializing in genes had created headless mice and headless tadpoles. This is a dangerous discovery. I mean, take the mouse-frog technology, apply it to humans, combine it with cloning, and become a god. With a single cell you could produce a headless replica of yourself! A sort of mutant twin, arguably lifeless, that becomes your own personal organ farm. Dangerous stuff. But certainly highlights the extent of the search for fact and evidence of how our bodies work, how we are created and what we are made of.

Speaking about how we are created, everyone is talking about the 'baby face baby maker' Alfie Patten and his want of a DNA test to empirically prove he is the biological father. What I want empirically proven is how he managed to get fuel in the engine to produce human life at that age?! Pretty sure there was no lead in my pencil...

From what I gathered 'a priori' is knowledge independent of evidence or experience. Something that can't really be proven either way. The classic example of this is the hysterical view of David Icke that the world is run by super intelligent lizards. No evidence will defeat this view. In fact, the nutjob might have a point, there are certainly plenty of slimey characters about!

Now I am sure poor old Mrs Rendal regretted saying the empiricist stuff to me as I took her words very literally.

"Miss, how can you prove that Christopher Columbus discovered America?"

"Its written in books Chris."

"Can you show me these books?"

"We only have this cartoon version of the events."

"But you said everything should be proven."

"Shut up and get out Chris."

Murray Gains Edge Over Nadal

2009-02-15T16:07:00.002Z

I watched Andy Murray collect his 10th tour title at Rotterdam this afternoon. Not only did he win over £200,000, he has got into Nadal's head.

The world number one, who has now lost his last three matches against Murray, is starting to look fairly one-dimensional and doesn't seem to have any ideas how to beat the brit.

Obviously the deciding set (which Murray won 6-0) can be written off as it was apparent Rafa was clearly injured and struggled to move. But, the first two sets highlighted the problems Rafa has with Murray. He can no longer just power him off the court with his heavy groundstrokes, because Murray has the same weapons.

It will be very interesting to see how future encounters between the two go, because Murray certainly has the measure of the world number one.

Lecture 10 Feb - What a State

2009-02-10T23:06:00.004Z

I found Chris's mention of city states interesting in today's lecture.

It is common knowledge that each city in the UK has its own identity, so wouldn't it be interesting if we were divided into city states?

Ancient Greece housed some wonderful contrasts just miles apart from each other. In one Polis you had the military efficient, socially strict, blood-thirsty Spartans; and just miles away was the center for the arts, learning, philosophy, the young male shagging Athenians with their direct democracy.

Can you imagine some of the variations the UK would get? Norwich would be ruled by the webbed feet masses passing laws encouraging breeding between relations, Lemington Spa would be controlled by turn of the century gents, and can you imagine Glasgow governing itself?!

In all seriousness, it is highly unlikely to happen. The first step would of course be devolution for Scotland and Wales, but that still seems some way off.

Interesting thought though.

End of the Road for Gary?

2008-12-17T12:31:00.002Z

"Gary and Wes are England's best right full-backs. But they have a little problem because this young boy Rafael has really taken off."

The above were the words of Sir Alex Ferguson, and they must be of worry to Gary Neville.

United's consistent right-back for over 10 years now is in serious danger of having to wind down his career.

Young Brazilian Rafael Da Silva's emergence in the United first team has been nothing short of sensational. The 18-year-old hadn't played a game of competitive football for over a year before wowing the crowd at Peterborough in a pre-season friendly. Now he is a regular in the first team, even notching up a superb volleyed goal against Arsenal at the Emirates earlier in the year.

All this is seriously worrying for Gary Neville's career at United, and for England. No spring chicken at 33 and struggling for form and fitness after being out for over a year with ankle and hamstring problems, the signs don't look good for Gary.

No-one can doubt his contribution to the United cause over the years, but there comes a time when we must look to the future, and whether Gary likes it or not, Rafael is the future.

Tevez Turmoil

2008-12-03T22:31:00.002Z

Ok, so my team, Manchester United have just beaten Paul Ince's Blackburn Rovers 5-3 at Old Trafford in the Carling Cup quarter final.

We put a great shift in, with promising youngsters such as Possebon-bon-bon-bon, Rafael Da Silva, Anderson-son-son-son and Darren Gibson showing their outstanding talent. But the one stand-out performance had to be from Carlos Tevez.

The currently out of favour striker scored 4 goals showing Fergie just what he has been missing by putting him on the bench throughout the season. Since Berbatov arrived in January, Tevez has been the player that has missed out. This has led to tremours form the player and his agent, with our old transfer foe Real Madrid suposedly lurking around him.

But why has Fergie left him out?

Tevez plays with such enthusiasm and has to be the hardest working player in the squad. To go with this, his finishing is clinical, so why doesn't he get enough games nowadays? It's clear Fergie has an embarrassment of riches situation on his hands. In an ideal world you would love to have Rooney, Ronaldo, Berbatov AND Tevez on the pitch at the same time. What a devestating prospect that would be to any defence in the world. But, it would mean one of Rooney, Tevez and Berbatov playing out of position. They all operate best as a central striker. Rooney has always been prepared to sacrifice himself for the team, but he is a striker, not a winger. Berbatov would not be able to do a job out wide, and Tevez would lose his effect out there too.

So, why doesn't Fergie start to operate a rotation system? It would be his biggest mistake since he let Jaap Stam leave United if Tevez were allowed to follow suit. His 4 goals tonight show just how important he is to the team. If he didn't score we would have lost 3-1.

So, Sir Alex (I know you're a reader of this blog) I plead that you start to give Carlos more playing time. He is a crucial member of the squad both short term and long term. The fans love him and rightly so!

Murray Looking to Buck the Trend

2008-10-22T10:16:00.002+01:00

Andy Murray starts his title defence at the St. Petersburg Open against Serbian Viktor Troicki today.

He will be looking to avoid what has become a familiar formula of dropping out of tournaments disappointingly early after winning big the week before.

After winning the tournament in Doha, he dropped out of the Australian Open in a poor manner. He struggled at Rotterdam after winning in Marseille, and he flopped big time at the Olympics after his maiden Masters Series win in Cincinnati.

It is clearly an issue Murray will be looking to address coming into Russia on the back of his superb second Masters Series title last week in Madrid.

It has been well documented the amount of work Murray and his trainers have been putting in off the tennis court, so the issue must not be a physical one. So what is it Murray struggles with? Can it be mental? Im not sure. I will be waiting to find out with keen interest later on today to see how the tournament in Russia goes for the British number one.

The Fat Cats that Do Sweet FA

2008-10-08T17:47:00.002+01:00

"Racism has no place in football.

Fifa is determined to continue broadcasting this message around the globe and deploying all of the means at its disposal to eliminate this form of discrimination."

The above quote was from a Fifa statement after they handed out the worst punishment possible on the Croatian FA last month. Yes thats right, in a sport where money is as rare as grass in the countryside, they fined the Croats £15,000 for rascist behaviour form their fans during the 4-1 defeat by England.

The impact of that fine must have been catastrophic. I can remember being as severely punished. One night I came home an hour late (rebel) so my mum grounded me for one night! Crazy times we live in eh?

Rascism has no place in football, but mediocore governing bodies do.

Rio Ferdinand has today spoken out against the football authorities, stating they talk a great game, but never get out there and put a performance in. Not only is he the countries best defender at the moment (im a United fan), but he's clearly got a bit between his ears too.

"Croatia were fined a few thousand quid. What's that going to do? That is not going to stop people shouting racist or homophobic abuse.

"(Fifa president) Sepp Blatter likes to speak up about things that are good for Fifa's image but I would love to see them stand up and dish out the right punishments for these incidents.

"If things like this keep happening you have to take points off them. Then the punters will realise the team is going to be punished."

I have to agree with Ferdinand's views. Football, simply, is a sport. In football you win points. Points win prizes.

So if Mr Blatter and his world football organisation are serious in the threat of "deploying all of the means at its disposal to eliminate" racism in football, lets see some truly sufficient and meaningful punishments.

Blog out.

Welcome

2008-10-08T11:34:00.001+01:00

Welcome all to my section of the web.

By some means you have stumbled across my thoughts and views of what I hope will be a wide range of issues.

Enjoy!