Chatting to an artist friend, who also happens to be a skilled psychologist, I asked her how she managed to capture her landscapes so realistically. "Well," she said, "One of the most useful things anyone has ever taught me is that, when painting, you should always look at the spaces between things, as well as trying to paint the subject itself."
A similar rule applies in music. In music, timing is all important. It is often the pauses, the beats between the notes, that give a piece its own particular atmosphere. Without the pauses, the notes would jangle horribly together, and the result would just be noise. You need the spaces to enable the notes to reverberate together properly.
Sitting in communal silence this morning, it struck me how there are parallels to be found between music, art and life. We need these pauses for, without them, life is just noise. For me, silence is an important part of my music.
Sunday, 20 May 2012
Thursday, 10 May 2012
Calon Lân
I don't ask for a luxurious life,
the world's gold or its fine pearls:
I ask for a happy heart,
an honest heart, a pure heart.
Nid wy'n gofyn bywyd moethus,
Aur y byd na'i berlau mân:
Gofyn wyf am galon hapus,
Calon onest, calon lân.
the world's gold or its fine pearls:
I ask for a happy heart,
an honest heart, a pure heart.
Nid wy'n gofyn bywyd moethus,
Aur y byd na'i berlau mân:
Gofyn wyf am galon hapus,
Calon onest, calon lân.
Tuesday, 8 May 2012
Attempting to explain restorative justice to a three-year-old...
My daughter is three-and-a-half. She asks questions. Lots and lots of questions. Like 'where do pigeons sleep?' and 'what is France?' and 'Mummy, do you really exist or are you just pretend?' Usually she asks these questions just as I am about to tuck her into bed and switch off the light, because she's quite crafty, is my daughter.
Anyway, we were telling a story together over lunch, which is one of our favourite things to do, and she invented this story about a caterpillar who is sitting sunning himself on a leaf and along comes a Monster, who scratches him.
'So what shall we do to the Monster?' I ask her.
'Well...we could hit him,'
'But hitting is wrong, isn't it?'
She sits and thinks a while. 'I know,' she says, 'I've got an idea!' 'Yes?' 'We could get a Giant. And the Giant could come and squish the Monster. And then everyone'd be happy.'
'Maybe,' I say, 'But then we've got a big, horrible Giant and everybody is scared of the Giant...'
'Perhaps we can put the Monster in the bin!'
'A bit like 'time out'?'
'Yes. A bit like that. And then he will cry and say he is sorry and promise to be a friendly Monster and then they can all be friends again!'
It's only very recently that she has started talking about things in terms of 'goodies' and 'baddies' (which, possibly, she's picked up from the playground), a concept which was previously unfamiliar. It strikes me that most of the tales I grew up with revolved around 'bad guys' (or more frequently witches) getting punished by 'good guys' - and I remember playing 'goodies and baddies' in the playground, aged six. Perhaps the myths we give our children are those our society grows up with. Perhaps I am being silly. Maybe I am over-cautious. But I think that these things matter.
Yes, I'm back
I haven't posted for ages, but intend to restart this blog for several reasons. First, I really need somewhere to share my thoughts, rants, musings and so on. Also, I've just started the new course for Quakers, Becoming Friends, so I am hoping this will spin off into some interesting discussions, and intend on using this blog to share some of what I learn. I hope you enjoy xx
Tuesday, 20 July 2010
On a more positive note...
If you read my last entry and feel the same horror that I do, you may be interested in this.
http://www.peopletree.co.uk/content/humanity_in_fashion.php
"Ethical clothing retailer People Tree is among those campaigning for Humanity in Fashion to express the public's outrage at fashion companies' disregard for the basic human rights of garment factory workers and also strengthen and protect the principals of Fair Trade.
We believe the people who make our clothes should finally be given what they have been fighting towards for years;
Freedom of Association
Right to collective bargaining
No forced labour
No discrimination
Maximum hours of work
Health and safety
A living wage
Security of employment
On Monday 19th July 2010 The Daily Mail published a comprehensive report on the pleas of Bangladeshi garment workers to treble the minimum wage. Some of the high streets best known retailers claim they are seeking ethical sourcing but refuse to pay slightly higher prices.
The National Garment Workers Federation in Bangladesh has given the government until 27th July to treble the minimum wage. The government and big businesses need to hear how people are prepared to pay a little more to make a huge difference to the lives of thousands of people."
To sing the petition, visit:
http://humanity.epetitions.net/
Please. Do it now. And keep campaigning!
http://www.peopletree.co.uk/content/humanity_in_fashion.php
"Ethical clothing retailer People Tree is among those campaigning for Humanity in Fashion to express the public's outrage at fashion companies' disregard for the basic human rights of garment factory workers and also strengthen and protect the principals of Fair Trade.
We believe the people who make our clothes should finally be given what they have been fighting towards for years;
Freedom of Association
Right to collective bargaining
No forced labour
No discrimination
Maximum hours of work
Health and safety
A living wage
Security of employment
On Monday 19th July 2010 The Daily Mail published a comprehensive report on the pleas of Bangladeshi garment workers to treble the minimum wage. Some of the high streets best known retailers claim they are seeking ethical sourcing but refuse to pay slightly higher prices.
The National Garment Workers Federation in Bangladesh has given the government until 27th July to treble the minimum wage. The government and big businesses need to hear how people are prepared to pay a little more to make a huge difference to the lives of thousands of people."
To sing the petition, visit:
http://humanity.epetitions.net/
Please. Do it now. And keep campaigning!
Boy of 7 works 98-hour week
Just as you think there's a vague possibility the ethical message is getting through, something like this comes along to depress you:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3049651/Slumdog-7-works-98-hours-a-week-in-a-sweatshop.html
It concerns a boy of seven found working 98 hours a week to produce decorative Christmas goods for the British high street. The photos alone are horrific - the poor kid looks utterly exhausted, and at just seven years old. This is nothing short of child slavery.
The high street store claims they knew nothing about it and will now stop getting goods from this supplier. But that, of course, leaves me wondering about what will happen to the little boy in the story. It's unlikely there will be a happy ending, as he is so vulnerable to exploitation due to grinding poverty.
The sad reality is that, if we want bargains, others will pay. It may be many hundreds of miles away, rather than in the factories on our streets as it was in the times of Dickens, but the reality is no less horrific. Children deserve a childhood, an education and the right to be free from oppression and exploitation, no matter where they happen to live.
(p.s. I wouldn't normally link to something I read in The Sun, but it was in The Sunday Times as well, only I couldn't get to that without subscribing).
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3049651/Slumdog-7-works-98-hours-a-week-in-a-sweatshop.html
It concerns a boy of seven found working 98 hours a week to produce decorative Christmas goods for the British high street. The photos alone are horrific - the poor kid looks utterly exhausted, and at just seven years old. This is nothing short of child slavery.
The high street store claims they knew nothing about it and will now stop getting goods from this supplier. But that, of course, leaves me wondering about what will happen to the little boy in the story. It's unlikely there will be a happy ending, as he is so vulnerable to exploitation due to grinding poverty.
The sad reality is that, if we want bargains, others will pay. It may be many hundreds of miles away, rather than in the factories on our streets as it was in the times of Dickens, but the reality is no less horrific. Children deserve a childhood, an education and the right to be free from oppression and exploitation, no matter where they happen to live.
(p.s. I wouldn't normally link to something I read in The Sun, but it was in The Sunday Times as well, only I couldn't get to that without subscribing).
Thursday, 6 May 2010
So, I finally voted. I hope you did too. Whatever happens, it looks like being an historic election this time, with all three parties too close to call and the possibility of a hung parliament likely.
There's been a lot of talk about electoral reform, with many people, my friends included, saying they think a hung parliament would be the best result all round, giving all three parties a say and with less power held by one party exclusively. I've mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I do feel that our current First Past the Post system is unfairly biased in favour of one main party getting in. There's the cold, hard fact that if Labour (for instance) get in this time, two-thirds of the electorate will have voted against them (and that's discounting all those who haven't even bothered to vote). But, then again, I have issues with Proprtional Representation and all its many variants. Primarily, I feel the advantage of our current system is that we each have local representation through an MP we can go to, or write to, to get our views heard at Westminster. That is a precious right, which we should not fritter away.
Also, our current system is based on an adversarial system. Now, there are many disadvantages to that. If we're not careful, it leads to the kind of 'Punch and Judy' politics David Cameron has spoken out against (but still participates in), where whoever shouts the loudest and most convincingly wins the day, regardless of how well thought-out their views are. I don't know about you, but whenever I watch Today in Parliament or any of the parliamentary chanels I feel frankly embarrassed to be British. It's like watching a bunch of old school rivals having a bunfight. You shouldn't need to employ someone to stop grown men shouting at each other. That's pathetic.
On the other hand, an adversarial system has its advantages. Like our legal system, the giving of one opinion followed by the opposing one, followed by, hopeefully, some form of informed debate, tends to be the best way to take a considered view of an issue. It protects against just getting a one-slanted viewpoint or judging things purely based on an emotional response. This system is very much a part of our national politics, and the First Past the Post System, with its party wrangling, is central to that.
There are other issues I feel much more strongly about - I think, for instance, the whips system ought to be abloshed. What's the good of me voting for my local MP because he's a fine, upstanding, ethical citizen, only to later find that he votes against his conscience because he was forced to toe the party line?
But perhaps all the current to-ing and fro-ing and tinkering with the system is masking the real issue here - people deserve better politicians, as well as better politics.
The real reason we are likely facing a hung parliament is, quite simply, that there is no clear winner. None of the current candidates stands out above any other. Even their policies are not so very far removed from one another. So, really, we end up choosing according to who we think is the least inept/ least dangerous for the country. I think this is a sorry state of affairs.
People have become disillusioned with politics and not surprisingly. The MP's expenses scandal has revealed many (not all) of our politicans to be, frankly, in it for their own good. We have watched those we voted for come into power and break all the promises they gave us, we have been taken into an illegal war nobody wanted and thousands marched against. On issues like climate change, for instance, we have watched as the promises we had hoped for were watered down into vague intentions. Is it any wonder we are fed up?
So, whoever comes into power tomorrow, I'd simply like to say this: What we need is not a new political system, but a new outlook. Please do not spend thousands of your hours and our money devising something even more complex that may well be worse than the imperfect system we already have. What we need is for you to get back to the basics of being a politician. We deserve politicians who are at least as ethical as those who vote for them. We deserve people who care passionately about this country and will listen to the people they serve. We deserve people who will take a long-term view on issues like climate change and global poverty, and will leave this world a better place for our children. If you do all this, you won't need to deluge our homes with election leaflets, you won't need to call on us demanding our vote, you won't need to shell out thousands on designer suits and spin doctors to sharpen up your image. We'll vote for you because we believe in you. We'll vote for you because you care.
There's been a lot of talk about electoral reform, with many people, my friends included, saying they think a hung parliament would be the best result all round, giving all three parties a say and with less power held by one party exclusively. I've mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I do feel that our current First Past the Post system is unfairly biased in favour of one main party getting in. There's the cold, hard fact that if Labour (for instance) get in this time, two-thirds of the electorate will have voted against them (and that's discounting all those who haven't even bothered to vote). But, then again, I have issues with Proprtional Representation and all its many variants. Primarily, I feel the advantage of our current system is that we each have local representation through an MP we can go to, or write to, to get our views heard at Westminster. That is a precious right, which we should not fritter away.
Also, our current system is based on an adversarial system. Now, there are many disadvantages to that. If we're not careful, it leads to the kind of 'Punch and Judy' politics David Cameron has spoken out against (but still participates in), where whoever shouts the loudest and most convincingly wins the day, regardless of how well thought-out their views are. I don't know about you, but whenever I watch Today in Parliament or any of the parliamentary chanels I feel frankly embarrassed to be British. It's like watching a bunch of old school rivals having a bunfight. You shouldn't need to employ someone to stop grown men shouting at each other. That's pathetic.
On the other hand, an adversarial system has its advantages. Like our legal system, the giving of one opinion followed by the opposing one, followed by, hopeefully, some form of informed debate, tends to be the best way to take a considered view of an issue. It protects against just getting a one-slanted viewpoint or judging things purely based on an emotional response. This system is very much a part of our national politics, and the First Past the Post System, with its party wrangling, is central to that.
There are other issues I feel much more strongly about - I think, for instance, the whips system ought to be abloshed. What's the good of me voting for my local MP because he's a fine, upstanding, ethical citizen, only to later find that he votes against his conscience because he was forced to toe the party line?
But perhaps all the current to-ing and fro-ing and tinkering with the system is masking the real issue here - people deserve better politicians, as well as better politics.
The real reason we are likely facing a hung parliament is, quite simply, that there is no clear winner. None of the current candidates stands out above any other. Even their policies are not so very far removed from one another. So, really, we end up choosing according to who we think is the least inept/ least dangerous for the country. I think this is a sorry state of affairs.
People have become disillusioned with politics and not surprisingly. The MP's expenses scandal has revealed many (not all) of our politicans to be, frankly, in it for their own good. We have watched those we voted for come into power and break all the promises they gave us, we have been taken into an illegal war nobody wanted and thousands marched against. On issues like climate change, for instance, we have watched as the promises we had hoped for were watered down into vague intentions. Is it any wonder we are fed up?
So, whoever comes into power tomorrow, I'd simply like to say this: What we need is not a new political system, but a new outlook. Please do not spend thousands of your hours and our money devising something even more complex that may well be worse than the imperfect system we already have. What we need is for you to get back to the basics of being a politician. We deserve politicians who are at least as ethical as those who vote for them. We deserve people who care passionately about this country and will listen to the people they serve. We deserve people who will take a long-term view on issues like climate change and global poverty, and will leave this world a better place for our children. If you do all this, you won't need to deluge our homes with election leaflets, you won't need to call on us demanding our vote, you won't need to shell out thousands on designer suits and spin doctors to sharpen up your image. We'll vote for you because we believe in you. We'll vote for you because you care.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
