There are a couple of things I've been wanting to say, but none of them deserved a whole piece. Then it occurred to me I could kill a couple of birds with one stone (common mynahs perhaps) and I wrote the following.
Whilst I was reading Dave McGowan I appreciated it when he told his readers what he looked like. Whilst I have no desire to be famous, or recognised, or anything other such thing, (I don't call myself nobody for no reason) I can see how there's a lot to be said for a reader being able to attach an image or description to the fellow one's reading. The idea that people should communicate without knowing what the other party looks like is, in the span of human existence, absurdly recent, and as such vaguely unsatisfying. And far be it from me to go against a million years of human evolutionary psychology.
I also liked McGowan's means of doing this. He merely named the famous person whom he most closely resembled, that being Kevin Bacon. Funnily enough I've actually already written about the fellow whom I resemble with an in-joke that only I got - this being over at the cinema blog in my review of Blueberry. My precise words were, 'He is exactly that kind of cinematic French ugly'. Ha! I crack myself up! Anyway, the fellow I'm talking about is Vincent Cassel. Who? Exactly. Happily, hardly anybody has seen his films or noticed him when they did. But those who have, declare the resemblance spooky. Should M. Cassel ever appear in a movie playing some long-haired, ill-shaven variant of a hippy, switch the screen format into some kind of anamorphic squeeze so that he appears tall and skinny, and there you'll see yours truly.
You may also be interested to know that I have an indeterminate accent. It's not quite Australian and not quite English. It seems no one is able to place me. When they ask me where I'm from, I always answer, 'Nowhere in particular'. This is true of course, and sure enough I have the accent to prove it.
Writing here has been a very interesting exercise for me. I don't know about other people, but me, I love the actual physical act of it. One of the best things I ever did was to learn to touch type. I enjoy watching words appear on the screen without me giving the least thought to what my fingers are doing. As someone who spent most of his life working with his hands, this is as close as I get now. Actually that's kind of sad, but never mind.
To be honest, the physicality is the least of it. The biggest questions are: who am I writing for; and what point am I making. The first question is ever fluid. I hold no fixed position on this and will sometimes chop and change within a single piece. That light-as-a-feather 'Hitman 5' thing I wrote was a perfect case in point. That was simultaneously written for: unsuspecting gamers who dream of assassinating people; the game designers who train them to think this way; the ever lurking spooks; regular readers who hopefully will get the gag; and me, sure enough. Sometimes I declare who it is I'm addressing and sometimes I don't. I like to keep the ground shifting and it pays to be nimble.
Then there is the matter of what point I'm making. Sure enough, this depends on who I'm addressing, as in that Hitman thing - different points for different people. But if I'm in stentorian mode addressing the masses (ha ha ha, just for the record I now average 60-70 hits a day - masses indeed) I do attempt to focus on a single point (or view perhaps). Ideally I'll be running at 180º to conventional wisdom. I've no desire to write something we've all read a dozen times already. And sometimes I fail, sure. And sometimes I confuse people too. I'm rarely straightforward and embrace ambiguity and sideways attack. Sorry, but that is what it is.
Otherwise, for every piece I post, there'll be another rejected and consigned to the 'unfinished' folder on my hard drive. Some seem to go nowhere and some I just can't tie up in any kind of satisfying fashion. So I ditch 'em. And of what I do post, some fly off my fingers and some get torn down and rebuilt over and over. I prefer the former, sure enough. The latter are arduous. And sometimes they're worth it and sometimes they're not. Inspiration is a funny thing. Great ideas go nowhere and dull ideas round up nicely and get lots of comments. I'm always surprised by what does and doesn't inspire people to comment.
The Cinema Blog
For some reason the cinema blog gets about a tenth as many hits as the church blog. It's possible that this is because I post so sporadically. It's also possible that people don't groove on it. If it's the latter, I'll have to be honest and say, I don't get it. For mine, there's not much difference between the church and the cinema. In approximately half the reviews I write there, I barely talk about the film as such. Often as not the film is merely a prop or spur for some other point I want to make. Other times I address the context that surrounds the film. I do this because I'm bored to death with reviewers who discuss films in complete isolation from their sociological meaning, or intent, or impact. With this in mind, it's often a complete toss-up as to what blog I put it on. Annemarie (who's on sabbatical at the moment it seems) made exactly this point when I did The Ground Truth. She was probably right. I probably should have posted it here.
And so it is with the latest effort, Bloody Sunday. I bounced it backwards and forwards and in the end decided to write it for the cinema blog. Unsurprisingly I barely discuss the film itself. Instead I try to make a point about non-violence and also discuss the film that Bloody Sunday isn't - if that makes any sense.
Otherwise, I've seen a couple of flicks lately and they'll keep me over at the cinema blog for a bit. It's possible something will pop up and put a wild hair up my clacker in between times, and I'll be back here to have a spray. Um, believe it or not, that was the main point I wanted to say. For someone who doesn't have much to say, I do go on. I expect it's just the joy of the typing.
PS It seems African Warrior, apropos Bloody Sunday, is urging me to do 'better' movies. Like Dark Knight. Perhaps he's got a point.