Just a quick view of the latest three designs to go up at the TGTD store (www.cafepress.co.uk/theregoestheday)... Enjoy.

Ye gods (or goddesseses), we're almost at November. Where do the days go and has it really been almost a year since my head exploded?


Another weekend bites the dust in unremarkable fashion. I've managed to get some writing done, some more t-shirt designs up - with more to follow. Bills paid. Expenses sent. Of course, there's a list longer than a long arm of things I need to do. I didn't get around to putting ebay stuff up, but that's to come this week. I will, no doubt, be trumpeting the links to the various bits of movie merchandise etc that are going up. I'll probably do that on the website itself, so if you're reading this in your e-mail rather than on the actual blog page, bookmark the real site and check back often!

In the weeks to come I'm hoping to generate some more work - on both writing and design front. While I'm not exactly bread and watering it, the past year has had its unforseen expenses (aren't they always?) and I've needed to juggle a bit in the latter half of it - so I need to get things back on an even keel before too long.

And there's now less than fifty days until I head back to Iowa. That means I'm in that frustrating lull-period in which the trip is just in sight, but far enough away in the distance that there's almost everything to do or be prioritised ahead of it. At least two isues of Impact to get done before I go - and I'm writing more pages than ever. I'll also be moderating a panel at the Thought Bubble event, which should be fun but for which I'll need a bit of prep. Meanwhile, I'm often talking to Jill every few days on Skype - the webcam doesn't seem to like my wifi link - but it's hard to have any kind of naturally-flowing conversation when at least one of you is tired/working and the net frequently hiccups and you end up typing across each other's replies. Technology. Cheaper than phone-calls, but Peh. Not quite the same as being there. If all goes well, I'd like to be spending more time in Iowa next year as well, but the only way to see if that's realistically workable (financially, pragmatically, emotionally and geographysically) is to balance it all out and actually be there to discuss it and sort it. So, time will tell and, like I said, 49 days and counting - actually, almost to the minute.  I better start packing my thermals.

And yes, it's 3:25am now. Yes, I should be asleep.  But apparently I now do my best work/thinking at night and the clocks went back last night.  And I'm prioritising.

Dream on.

S ooooooooooo.... if you were in the UK last night and you're a glutton for punishment, you were probably watching the BBC's Question Time. The regular panel disussion programme had a line-up that largely came down to, at least according to the papers: Nick Griffin, lead of the the far-right BNP and some other people. The results were pretty much as expected...


I don't know anyone in the UK who likes Nick Griffin. Even his wife, one of the 'high-brow' *cough* tabloids tells us, doesn't like him very much either. But he is the leader of an extremist party that remarkably shamefully managed to get a couple of their people voted in as Euro-MPs. Therefore, the BBC pointed out, he's technically as 'worthy' of inclusion on a topical discussion show as, say, the Green Party and UKIP, both of which have been represented there before. Thanks to those political votes, the BBC was put in the unenviable position of not having to have him on, but would have had to justify never having him on if they went that route. The BBC Director General made the fair point that they would gladly not have Griffin on if the government made the BNP party illegal, but until they did so, it was wrong to pass the buck to the Beeb. They opted to include him under the reasoning that if he's so loathsome, stupid and opportunistic (and I think most of us can agree that the sneering little creep is) that he and his party would be exposed to the harsh spotlight and crumble.    Well, that was the plan.

Even before the show, huge amounts of protestors gathered outside the studios to show their hatred of the BNP. However some 'stormed' the BBC reception area (and let's be clear, that storming isn't the word I'd use, it indicates a somewhat misleading visual that is akin to saying '...the BBC switchboard was jammed with complaints!' which - for the record - only takes four calls coming in simultaneously. The same number  now apparently applies to protestors.). Some protestors demonstrated a lack of  understanding of the word  'irony' (equivalent to a whole Alannis Morresette concert) by trying to stop the recording of a show that puts all its panelists on an level playing field because they thought Griffin was a man who, shamefully, doesn't  put everyone else  on a level playing field and therefore didn't deserve to be included on a level playing field himself.  ( I swear, it's like raaaain on your wedding day, isn't it?)   Others, more understandably and rationally, simply noted any publicity for the BNP was regrettable. The recording went ahead as planned.

So, how was it for you? (And if you didn't see it it's on BBC iPlayer - and probably YouTube, by now)

Griffin was typically odious and shot himself in the foot several times on things he had said, things he said but denied saying, things he might have said previously but possibly changed his mind on and genrally squirmed through semantics and innuendo.  Jack Straw, Justice Secretary, (once a hugely miltant communist himself) was also rather embrassing to watch and lost a lot of people's respect when he refused to answer a fairly straight-forward question about whether immigration rules were working or not. Baroness Varsi seemed mostly rational and considerate in her responses (though one suspects any evaluation would have to be scored on whether she actually follows through on any promises hereafter). American Bonnie Greer was pithy, witty and nailed Griffin several times with intelligent sarcasm and rational facts. Liberal representative Huhne was okay but ultimately inconsequential  - he'll never be in power, either.

My take on it:  Everyone but an embarassingly unprepared and excrutiatingly vascilating Jack Straw seemed to understand that the BNP's rise is largely attributable to governmental/european manhandling of the Immigration issue - a current fairweather, loose-knit set of polices that might have been well-intentioned but simply don't work.  I'm totally fine with stricter border controls when people enter the UK and greater enforcement/checks on when and how people leave (to the extent that it limits potential abuse). If you can lose 40,000 people in the system, the system isn't working, end of story. That seems common-sense as long as it's not implemented on a race/colour/creed directive and applied fairly and pragmatically.   Griffin made another basic comment that sudden and fast cultural changes scare people and maybe that IS a fair observation (If I'm being honest when I walked into our local supermarket a while back and literally everyone within earshot was speaking a foreign language, I did feel a little wrong-footed for a moment, but maybe that's MY problem. However I don't think that makes me 'racist'). I don't mind his observation of noting how things change around us and how that can be disconcerting, I do despise his methods and rationale for dealing with that.

Unfortunately the general Question Time format seemed to disintegrate into a 'let's trash the BNP' and much as though they deserve it, it did make the programme seem like a missed opportunity to expose the party's wider failings.

The only other things to add are that the final question was on Jan Moir's shameful Stephen Gately column and even the homophobic Griffin felt Moir's words had been ill-timed and inadvisable. When you're prejudices are taken to task by the BNP, you know you've reached rock-bottom! (It's like gooood advice, that you just can't take!)  And finally... that the Daily Mail's front-page (and indeed most of the UK papers) screamed that the BBC had given the BNP a platform and massive publicity that the heinous party didn't deserve... and they screamed that in the biggest blackest headline fonts they could fill their front-pages with.  It's like a freeee ride, when you've already paid. Non?  

And who would have thought.

It figures.

E ntertainment journalists and columnists don't have the best reputation. Ye gods, on an average day we rank somewhere between Roman Polanski and Paris Hilton on the table of respect. Today, however, our stock must have plummeted even further. This is largely due to a column by one Jan Moir of the UK's Daily Mail... a person who manages in a few column inches to demonstrate all that is wrong in the profession and yet still maintain that SHE's the victim... it would be an impressive passive-aggressive art if it wasn't also so tedious.


Okay, firstly, some context. This is the article I'm talking about. Read it all if you can. (Here).   Okay, done?

I don't know what to say. Moir's diatribe is merely a series of bigotted holes knitted together by barely-contained bile. Her whole tack of 'There's nothing wrong with being gay, but why do these dead people have to be so... gay about it?' stinks of the worst kind of ignorant prejudice and gossip rather than anything resembling basic research and facts. Her inference (which couldn't have been more single-entendre'd if she'd typed nudge-nudge, wink-wink at the end of every sentence) is that three gay men must have been doing something sleazy because, well... they're GAY dammit and just echoes the moral righteous indignation of a newpaper that loves to roll around in the subjects it despises (only so YOU don't have to!). The day before Mrs Gately buries her son, Moir dances on the grave, spits a little and bitch-slaps the mother for being naive.

Now, I don't know what did or did not happen on the night of Gately's death. Unless there was criminal activity, I don't want to know or need to. Frankly, it's not YOUR business either.  What Moir does though is use every sentence that apprently bemoans the 'gay' angle, to do nothing less than hammer the 'gay' relevance into her paragraphs, whether it fits or not. The coroner, clearly not on a par with Moir's CSI level of expertise has given me enough information to presume this was a tragedy rather than a crime, merely a sad death not a tabloid's wet-homophobic dream.  And apparently, again flying in the face of Moir's logic, people under 30 CAN actually die of natural causes. Sometimes, even  in their pyjamas. (Fuck you, Quincy!)

After Twitter reacted like only Twitter can (look, even Stephen Fry tweeted on it - maybe it's not so inane and pointless after all!) and advertisers began pulling out with a speed normally reserved for Glen Beck,  Moir poured petrol on the water fire, and 'clarified' that  she actually thinks gay people are kind of sooooper (presumably when not dying) and that her comments have been deliberately twisted and misquoted  to fit others' agendas. This must be true as she'd clearly know such an act when she sees it.

So... what next? Tomorrow will Moir asks why black people, some of whom are her friends so there's nothing personal,  so love them watermelons? A career at FOX clearly beckons...

I t has - once again - been a bit since my last entry. Since getting back from Iowa it's all been a bit fast-lane, except with no nice convertible cars involved. Last weekend (1st-4th Oct) I was attending Cinema Days and the line-up was pretty good. Sometimes the range of movies on offer can be a bit disappointing but this time there was a diverse bunch. Let's rattle through 'em...