25 April 2017 at 04:12 #56680
Broadchurch began well, but ended in a whimper. I was left waiting for the second shoe to fall, but it didn’t. If you know what I mean.
Missy25 April 2017 at 16:15 #56708nerys @nerys
I was OK with how Broadchurch ended. I felt the third season was vastly better than the second, and close to the level of the first. I also think it successfully replicated the theme of the first season by showing how the tentacles of one act reach out and destroy so many lives. For me, the ending was mostly satisfying. I will miss Hardy and Millaaah!25 April 2017 at 16:25 #56709JimTheFish @jimthefishTime Lord
My personal take is that Broadchurch has always been a flawed creation and that the first series benefited from being broadcast during a period of relative drought of quality drama. The second series was pants and Chibnall did himself no favours by lashing out at his critics instead of just putting his hand up to its failings and just carrying on. (It’ll be interesting to see if he can restrain himself when he takes on the Who job, otherwise the internet could become a very, very interesting place.)
The third series was a lot better and I did return to it late but I was impressed by the serious (more or less) way it handled the procedure of a rape investigation. It did valuable work, for example, in highlighting that the majority of rapists are known to their victims. But it threw all that away by reverting back to the tired old ‘it was a scary-assed psycho leaping out from the bushes’ scenario by the end.
Part of the problem with BC 2 & 3 is they’re operating against a broadcast climate in which Line of Duty was also operating. BC2 just looks risible compared to LoD2 and BC3, while an improvement, still looks ridiculously amateur compared to LoD3 (although that series has also had its wobbles this year)…
But that’s just my personal take on it….25 April 2017 at 18:25 #56711
Do you guys follow the elections in France ? Because I would be interested in your opinion xD
Just know it’s only out of curiosity i’m only 16 I won’t even vote ! 😀25 April 2017 at 19:48 #56712
DON’T LET ANYONE YOU KNOW VOTE FOR THE FASCIST! 😉
Am not sure whether to be reassured or worried that the French left is as clueless as the br… er English.25 April 2017 at 20:46 #56715
I didn’t understand the message… What’s the name of the fascist ?
Right now French people has to choose between a pretty young and a little handsome guy who doesn’t blink (but I don’t think it’s because he is afraid of the statues… He is weird. I feel very wrong about him like he is hiding something.) His name is Emmanuel Macron.
He is against a woman who doesn’t want any strangers in France she is really racist and kinda reminds me of a barking dog when she talks I don’t know why. She is mean, and cold (ok like almost everyone on this planet but she more than them) her only defense is very often attack because her plan doesn’t really please, the people who vote for her just fear terrorism… Her name is Marine Lepen.
So ? Which one is the less awful ?
And yeah I know France is screwed.
Is the French left me ? Oh my god I just read I don’t know how many fanfictions with the Doctor and Rose and my brain doesn’t want me to understand a simple message. I’m sorry ? (so so sorry as the Doctor would say)25 April 2017 at 20:55 #56717
Yes, I have been following the election, as I follow politics in Europe generally, although I am probably not as well informed as I ought to be. The newspapers and TV news programmes in Britain don’t cover French elections quite as extensively or in as much depth as they do elections in the USA, which is regrettable. We in England are also distracted at the moment by local government elections on May 4th, and now a General Election in June to complicate matters further, not to mention the bitter arguments between those of us who wish to remain within the EU and the misguided people who voted, by a small majority, to leave. I think I am right in saying, though, that most of the people here who do take an informed interest in wider European affairs are hoping very much that the polls are accurate, and that Macron will win the presidency by a handsome margin. He may be relatively unknown in the political arena, but the prospect of LePen, following on Brexit and the election of Trump is too worrying and depressing to contemplate.
It may be relevant to add that one of my brothers has lived and worked in France for 45 years and now, finally, after the British (Scots and the citizens of my home city of Norwich excepted) have so stupidly voted to leave the EU, is applying for French citizenship. It has been an interesting process, since it seems that he is required to supply accurate documentation of his ancestry going back at least two generations before him. As the keeper of the family archive I have been helping him in the process 🙂
The Left and the Labour party in England may be clueless and in disarray, but if the forest of Labour placards round here is anything to judge by, I don’t think the results of either the local council election or the General Election are in doubt. The unofficial motto of the city is ‘Do Different’, and Clive Lewis is pretty popular round these parts.25 April 2017 at 21:15 #56719
<p style=”text-align: left;”>yeah everyone thinks everyone will vote for Macron to prevent LePen from being president. I don’t think anything special, I can’t choose and none of them deserves trust… and did you hear Macron talking in english ! His accent is a disaster but hey at least he had a phone call with Obama !</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>…Seriously I don’t know a thing about politic but I hope I won’t die because crazy angry people attacked my school… My city arrested many terrorist and even stopped an attack but nobody talks about it no one wants people to get too scared because if they do they will vote LePen and we will have crazy angry people attacking anything they can more than ever.</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>I really don’t feel safe and at school we have some exercises, simulations with an alarm that goes off and it’s kinda the same as for the bombings… Scary, and we have to lay down, not make sound, block the door gor those near of it, close the curtains and all. In the end if terrorists attacked my school I would be waiting in the dark and the silence broken by the gun shots… Waiting for them to open the door and slaugher the whole class. Because seriously ? A table to stop them from coming in ? –“</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>But hey, when I’m scared I’m not numb like I thought I would. One time I walked in my brother’s bedroom and my mother was trying to kill him in his sleep (long, very long and complicated story) and I reacted fast I saved my bro ! No one knows what you can do when you are afraid. The Doctor is right : fear is a superpower.</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>… Omg what I just told you was creepy. Don’t worry about me my mother isn’t a serial killer xD</p>25 April 2017 at 22:17 #56722lisa @lisa
I can tell you are quite disturbed about your election. I was really upset about Trump getting elected
here in the states. I volunteered for Clinton however since I live in California I don’t think I had
much effect on the election (my state went for HRC pretty overwhelmingly).
Here’s the thing. Le Pen is not getting any financial support from the French banks. Its all coming
from Russia. It was the Russians thru hacking and financial interference that helped put Trump
in the White House and he is a disastrous idiot. So I’d say go with Macron cause at least you can say
that you voted for the politician that didn’t try to commit treason. He will keep France on life support
where as Le Pen will create a lot of disruption thru a Frexit just like what has been happening with
Brexit. However, the EU dream of free movement and services etc. isn’t working out as
smoothly as anticipated. You have lots of problems there with your unemployment and refugees
and this has created a big powder keg. Plus all the issues like with the Euro are also undercutting the EU.
It should have just remained a trade union.
I give lots credit to those in the UK that understood this and wanted the divorce.
It will be a lot harder for France to go for many reasons not the least of which is that your
banking system isn’t enormously solvent and you don’t have your own independent currency.
So although Macron will avert the sudden shock of a Frexit but it may only be an extension ?
Good Luck ! We are all living in strange days together25 April 2017 at 22:32 #56723
Le Pen. Like her father before her, and everybody she associates with.
The explains more clearly that I could. There is never a good reason to vote for a fascist.
It is a catastrophic mistake to grab onto the “they are all the same” meme. It is nonsense, and the French left’s refusal to endorse Macron is as stupid as the American left’s (such as it is) refusal to get behind Clinton or our left’s bone-headed attachment to struggles that were lost in the 1980s.
Is Macron and bit of a bureaucrat, with a banking background? Yes. Does he think the gassing of 6 million Jews was a pretty good thing? No. That’s Le Pen. And that is the only measure that matters.
So there is also never a good reason to fail to oppose a fascist. Fascism isn’t just an idea. It is a war on civilisation. There’s a reason ISIS wants Le Pen to win. They want the war too. With a more reasonable right wing candidate – an old school French conservative, say – then there would be much more to it. But not with Le Pen.
Oh, and France isn’t screwed. You are at an age where you are most vulnerable to emotions and thoughts that make you feel that fear. Don’t worry – I’m pretty sure everyone here has been through it (some of us quite a long time ago!).
But France is a bastion of civilisation – that’s why ISIS’s crazies attack it, because they fear civilisation. Le Pen would give them more than they could possibly dream of.
Experience has taught me that placards are a very unreliable metric.25 April 2017 at 22:56 #56725
Experience has taught me that placards are a very unreliable metric.
True, but experience plus placards are a bit more reliable. I have been living here for long enough, I think, to be able to gauge the temper of this ward and this constituency.25 April 2017 at 23:38 #56728
I am very sorry that the fear of terrorism appears to be having such an affect on your life, because that is precisely what the terrorists want: to create an atmosphere of uncertainty and fear in the population. The best way that ordinary people have of opposing them is to carry on living as normally as they can, rather than cowering in fear of what, statistically speaking, is unlikely to happen.
For nearly three years during the 1970s I lived in Belfast, in Northern Ireland, during the height of ‘The Troubles’, when almost every night we heard the sound of gunfire and the explosion of car bombs, some of it very close by where I lived. It made life inconvenient sometimes, because there were armed soldiers on the streets and security checks in every shop, cinema and theatre, but as far as possible life continued as normal and most people refused to be intimidated, despite the real possibility of being killed by a car bomb or a paramilitary fanatic. That possibility was much higher then, in that relatively small community, than the is possibility now of being involved in a terrorist attack in western Europe or Britain.
Think of it this way: although the recent terrorist attacks in France and other countries have had a devastating effect on the lives of those involved, statistically you are far more likely to be involved in a car accident or something equally mundane than to be the victim of a terrorist attack, so to live in fear of such an attack is to harm yourself unnecessarily.26 April 2017 at 06:09 #56742
Mmm! What bastion of civilisation celebrates Bastille Day , when innocent people were slaughtered along with the guilty.
Please don’t take offense @zeyra, every country was uncivilised at some time or other.26 April 2017 at 08:11 #56745
Handy tip for future reference: putting “no offence” after something really offensive doesn’t neutralise it.26 April 2017 at 10:03 #56746
Probably the same sort of people who celebrate the invasion of someone else’s country, and the establishment of a prison. No offence.
It’s very easy to revise history so that it becomes a tale of oppression and victimisation. I mean, heck, you can rewrite the Doctor as someone drenched in blood and in the death of civilisations. He crashes in from the sky and tears your world apart.
But it’s the view of those who wish to tear down, not to build up.26 April 2017 at 10:15 #56747
@pedant: A handy one for you too, don’t hand out advice or tips, unless they are asked for. Especially when one is stating a fact.
@bluesqueakpip: The same applies to you. My intention was not to ‘offend’ which I hope @zeyra accepted. Every nation has done something in the past for which they should be ashamed, and mostly are. I can’t see why the deed should be celebrated. An example is Australia Day, when my people took the land from the native population.26 April 2017 at 10:37 #56748
You may perhaps be unaware that the crime of manslaughter exists precisely because it is possible to cause a great deal of damage without intending it.
However, someone who unintentionally offends would never be aware enough to say ‘no offense’. That’s a get out of jail free phrase used when the poster knows exactly how offensive they’ve just been.
As to why both Bastille Day and Australia Day are celebrated; they’re celebrated because they’re the beginnings of their respective modern countries, with all their faults and virtues. Just as we have birthday parties even when children can be appalling little brats. Most countries don’t begin in sweet tranquility; they begin in blood and mess and yells – like any birth.26 April 2017 at 11:44 #56750
Waow uh… What am I supposed to say ? Maybe Missy didn’t want to offend me but then she wouldn’t have said “no offense” so I don’t know it’s confusing…
Why are you fighting ?26 April 2017 at 12:35 #5675426 April 2017 at 13:26 #5675726 April 2017 at 14:11 #56758
This forum is supposed to try and keep a polite and civil atmosphere. We don’t always succeed, but we’re supposed to try. 🙂
Both @phaseshift and I felt that saying something offensive about someone else’s country doesn’t follow site etiquette and doesn’t help to maintain a polite and civil atmosphere – especially when it’s directed at a new poster. Hence the fight.
Or to put it another way, if posters want to say something about every nation having shameful deeds in their past, they can, but they should start the discussion with examples from their own country. 😀26 April 2017 at 15:21 #56759
Oh waow thank you then but it’s ok I’m not offended ’cause everyone can be clumsy sometimes ^^”
All my friends hope that the adults will vote Macron in order to stop LePen.26 April 2017 at 17:41 #5676026 April 2017 at 17:53 #56762
@pedant I know I don’t live in fear but like I said before I day-dream a lot, and when the teacher explains something about terrorism my brain starts to simulate an attack and my emotions follow. yay.
The same thing happens in the car when my father drive a little to fast or when he tries to scare other drivers (omg I hate it when he does that) or in the bus… Like, I look at a child and around me and I start simulating a car accident, an attack, something that could go wrong, even something impossible. Just a situation. And I think about who save who, which one would care about the others, which one would have the courage to protect, and protect who. And as I look at the child I think about how far I could go to save one little child I don’t know a thing about.
Yeah, that’s the sort of weird things my brain does when I’m bored.
So no I don’t live in fear, I don’t think that is living in fear. XD
I don’t know what I could call that though. Living in the clouds ? (A french expression for day-dreaming)26 April 2017 at 18:10 #56763
At your age (I think you said 16, nearly 17?) I would be more worried if you didn’t daydream a bit and occasionally find yourself looking into the dark. We have a similar expression “head in the clouds”.
I get a bit full-on when it comes to fascism. Both my parents fought against it the last time it brought Europe to ruin, and I don’t want my nieces and nephews – or you, for that matter – to have to do it all again.27 April 2017 at 01:23 #56776lisa @lisa27 April 2017 at 05:00 #5678227 April 2017 at 05:02 #56783
@bluesqueakpip: Or to put it another way, if posters want to say something about every nation having shameful deeds in their past, they can, but they should start the discussion with examples from their own country.
How odd, I could have sworn that I did exactly that? *sigh*
Missy27 April 2017 at 17:38 #56799
I’ve mentioned 13 Reasons Why a few times, for all sorts of good reasons.
But one side effect was triggering a very specific chain of thought in me. So, naturally, I blogged it. Old school, me. The apparently passing reference to the armed forces is non-trivial.28 April 2017 at 05:53 #5681728 April 2017 at 06:16 #56819
@pedant There can never be too much kindness in this crazy world of ours. Thanks for sharing.
Janette29 April 2017 at 03:56 #56850Anonymous @
thx for sharing. I think it’s fair to say we all appreciate it.
@janetteb on your “not that he pays much attention” regarding your son and assignments, may I say (in honour of the Bowie tangent):
“You’re not alone!”
@tardigrade thought I’d move the conversation here
I think that whilst it appears we have “choices” in streaming or television/media in general it seems to me that reducing government control has some problems. Namely of an historical nature. Oftentimes we think “this is inevitable because the government and the Market God has determined that choice is limited and we’re going to abdicate our choice. Because any kind of choice is indulgence.”
Oftentimes the idea that we need to “just do this” (cut out the BBC for instance, though I understand that wasn’t exactly what you were saying) causes the general populace to believe in their inherent self-interest connected to a ‘production of a global dynamic spreading wealth and unleashing democracy everywhere!!’
To me it’s a slippery slope where certain loud voices emanating from the corporate and economic domain are heard claiming: “govts have lost control of the commanding heights of the national Economy with its ability to protect sovereignty and national identity.” They don’t mention how govts and the public purse protects the public good.
So, I worry that arguments about changing funding and removing it from the public purse (our own trusted public purse emerging from ballot box fury) are turned into a subsidiary outcropping of “more” important economic progress. As far as the ABC, the govt needs even tighter controls. With less govt control the ABC will dwindle further and we’ll be dwelling on an outcrop of dwarfish size.
Puro29 April 2017 at 13:33 #56863
Your solution is an excellent way of turning a public service broadcaster into a state broadcaster.
Until such time as cross-media ownership rules are reinstated (which isn’t going to be any time soon) we need a powerful service provider not in the hands of foreign billionaires. For all its failings, successive governments of all hues have found the BBC very resistant to editorial intervention. That is a direct consequence of the way it is funded. And it is hard to think of a more effective way to top up that funding than to make fabulously successful drama to sell around the world.30 April 2017 at 03:30 #56893
@pedant ABC has always been state funded and has avoided becoming a state broadcaster despite pressures from recent government. Their failure to bend the ABC to their will has led to continual decreased funding. I am not expert but ABC was established to be “independent” and not a voice for the government. It has always been perceived by right wing governments to have a left bias simply because it attempts to be neutral and not toady to them. Research indicates that there is actually more right leaning content than left leaning content on the ABC but it is still far more “balanced” than any of the commercial stations. In fact ABC operates very much as a underfunded, infant sibling of the BBC. I don’t think the license fee would work in Oz. People who don’t watch ABC, which is a large swath of the population would object to paying for a public service but when the money is taken from their tax they don’t know or care.
Janette30 April 2017 at 05:17 #56900
Janette:I think that speaks for the public everywhere in the Western world. What they don’t see, they don’t worry about. Once upon a time, if you had a TV you had to pay for a licence, this enabled the BBC to bring us good (mostly) programmes without adverts. Do you still need a licence?
Missy30 April 2017 at 06:19 #56903tardigrade @tardigrade
thought I’d move the conversation here
Sure- should have done so myself at the point I noted it was getting off-topic
As far as the ABC, the govt needs even tighter controls.
I don’t think I get what you’re saying here. The government would like to exert more control over the ABC. It’s because successive governments (particularly Coalition governments) haven’t been able to exert control that the ABC has been punitively and chronically underfunded. For news services, the ABC was set up to be government funded, but independently controlled, and I think that’s its appropriate role. Government-controlled media is a feature of dysfunctional states. With regards entertainment content, I don’t see that as a role of government- whether via funding or active control. I think the ABC charter goes far enough- dictating hours of children’s programming and locally-produced content for example.
Your solution is an excellent way of turning a public service broadcaster into a state broadcaster.
I’m not sure why you’d think that changing from one government-funded model to another would affect independence (especially as my thought experiment reduced dependence on government funding). Refer to @janetteb’s comment on how the ABC (or CBC as I understand it) functions. At present, to reduce the BBC’s budget all the UK government would need to do would be to do nothing in the guise of not raising taxes and let the budget erode as the number of TVs drops and inflation affects the real value of the licensing fee. At least if they’re funding it directly, then they’d need to openly cut the budget, and it’s always an easier sell for the BBCs supporters to promote spending than to raise taxes. As I’ve noted, I think the licensing fee will become untenable as a funding method- peak TV is now in the past, and the number of license fees providing funding is only going to drop, and increasing the fee to attempt to cover that is not viable politically or financially.30 April 2017 at 08:52 #56910Anonymous @
Forgive me, when I speak of ‘government’ I speak, of us, as polis, rather than an ‘us’ and ‘them’ approach. Indeed, the government, successive Coalition governments to which you refer, underfund the ABC. Most certainly I am not suggesting a totalitarian, dictatorial vision. Unfortunately, the echo chambers of the ABC’s facebook page and those Young Liberals on other plentiful social media platforms are whining about the continual “left leaning media as seen on the ABC”. That’s a problem. From there we’ll end up with a Coalition practicum which sees most services disappear in favour of a so-called User Pays Mentality. I can see my response was entirely confusing and I apologise.
Kindest, Puro.30 April 2017 at 08:59 #56911Anonymous @
I think my post #56850 was clearer -I am most concerned about economics, and the belief (often sprouted) that we have “no choice” ; that the financial purse rather than societal values must come first. I’m well aware I’m alone in such a belief system but I feel I ought to “throw that out there into chaos.” 🙂 Certainly the Purse must be ‘well spent.’ But I wouldn’t wish for a world where people exchange the worship of one god, with another -that of Economics. I’m probably horrendously naïve in that respect! Actually, not ‘probably’ but ‘certainly’ 🙂
Puro30 April 2017 at 17:17 #56939
Do you still need a licence?
Yes we do. Currently it is £145.50 a year, which in my view is stonkingly good value for the range of services and the variety of programmes the BBC provides.30 April 2017 at 18:14 #56940toinfinityandbepond @toinfinityandbepond
“Yes we do. Currently it is £145.50 a year, which in my view is stonkingly good value for the range of services and the variety of programmes the BBC provides.”
I would gladly sell my house and all it’s contents to help the BBC
£145? That’s far too low, in my point of view it should be at least £40030 April 2017 at 19:35 #56944
I would certainly be prepared to stump up a good deal more than that for the license fee. The problem is that if a household owns a TV set or sets the license fee has to be paid, whatever their financial circumstances and whether or not anyone in the household watches BBC programmes, and there are a good many vociferous people of doubtful judgement who claim not to watch BBC programmes at all, and who resent what they consider a tax to support a service they do not value.
The revenue from the license fee is, of course, supplemented by the revenue from BBC programmes sold overseas, which is why such programmes as Doctor Who are a valuable property, but the BBC should never, in my opinion, become a wholly commercial enterprise. The ‘suits’ and bean counters have acquired too much influence as it is.
I suspect that many of those same people who resent the licence fee are nevertheless willing and able to find the means to fork out for a Sky or Virgin Media subscription, which is something like £50 a month for even the basic entertainment package, and a lot more for access to the sports channels or the various movie packages. The basic package would give you access to several hundred channels, and of those the majority which are worth watching are available anyway on the free-to-air digital service. Sky does have a monopoly on HBO productions which are shown on Sky Atlantic, but the subscription is scarcely worth it for that alone, or for Sky Arts, which can in any case be accessed elsewhere. It isn’t even as if the programmes on those channels are free of commercials. If the main attraction is the premium movie channels, it would probably be cheaper simply to buy the DVDs, so it really comes down to the sports channels, since Sky has collared the rights to show Premier League football matches and Test Cricket. Anyway, a significant share of Sky is owned by the evil empire of Murdoch, who been trying for many years to acquire a majority share – and Rupert Murdoch regards the BBC as a rival to be exterminated. How many people on this forum can visualise Murdoch as the evil twin of Davros?.
Sorry, got a bit carried away there, but it’s something I feel very strongly about.1 May 2017 at 03:08 #56962
@mudlark Count me in. There is even a facial likeness. The very concept of a public broadcaster is anathema to Murdoch. He has the sharpened blades aimed at the ABC too and as for his influence over politics well. I do believe that the world would be in considerably less mess if it weren’t for Rupert and his evil empire.
Janette2 May 2017 at 04:50 #57020
Mr Murdoch ins’t popular here either. I hope with all my heart that he doesn’t get his claws into the BBC.
@mudlark: Thank you for that. You have to pay for each TV don’t you? That would cut people having one in every room. Does the VAN still go round the streets checking everyone?
I still feel that if they brought in the same here, we’d get better TV programmes because the ABC would be able to afford them
Missy2 May 2017 at 10:33 #57032
No, you don’t have to pay the license fee for every TV in the house. One license covers the entire household, whether they have only one TV set or one in every room in the building. It also covers the use of computers to view BBC programmes on iPlayer, so even if you don’t have a TV set at all, and watch all TV programmes on a computer, you still, technically need a license.
I don’t know whether or not they still use detector vans to catch license dodgers, or whether they now have more efficient means of finding them.3 May 2017 at 03:22 #57048
@mudlark; Ah! I thought, when we lived back home, that you did need a license for each TV. It’s good to hear that I was mistaken.
Whilst I’m here, have responded to my comments about technology? I feel that you did and I didn’t respond. Even clicking on your name and reading all your posts revealed nothing. *scratches head*
Missy3 May 2017 at 20:53 #57061
I’m pretty sure that I didn’t reply to your comments on technology. I can usually sort out problems with my computer, but setting up a WiFi connection between my new printer and the computer probably marks the limit of my current technical expertise so I’m not the best person to give advice on matters of that sort. I don’t even have a smart phone or a tablet, because they seem at the moment superfluous to my needs – why complicate life unnecessarily 😉4 May 2017 at 04:14 #57073
@mudlark: Ah, well thank you for that. Frankly the thought of having to fix up our TV so that it can stream programmes, fills me with dread. Like you sorting out the computer when there is a problem, is about as far as my expertise stretches. Most things can be sorted simply by re starting the machine. There is always STAN, I suppose similar to Netflix, but even that makes my blood pressure rise.
Missy4 May 2017 at 05:44 #57076Anonymous @
@nick and any others
I thought I’d move the conversation here. Thane’s here. Mum’s looking on and checking my punctuation.
I can’t recall why people thought Clara’s character wasn’t particularly well liked prior to series 8? Was that so?
I quite liked The Impossible Girl business! Running thru time saving each one. I remember people were thrilled about this. And yet…time seems to have produced a certain dislike for this character as if ‘saving’ someone is a bad thing?
I found when she was in the spaceship and was Dalek Clara, that was clever, and then meeting her again when all of a sudden she had a Computer Head -then the doctor sitting outside her house whilst she was nanny and talking about her mother, the soufle making and her leaf: actually wasn’t the leaf given credence in the episode with the sacrifice of the girl singing to the planet? I thought Clara was awesome there. Yes, people thought her “too clever and too attractive” which is plain envy and sexism. I see it at school everywhere: even amongst the blokes. They want to be “buff” and ‘sexy’ and if you’re clever, well, that’s not cool.
How totally dumb!
So, yeah, Clara wasn’t my favourite character but then neither was Martha nor Rose but I loved Amelia and River. Strong women, just like Clara. I like Bill a lot too. But I wonder about the focus on her colour, her sexuality and her deep voice. On the most horrible threads of the BTLers there’s much talk of her being a ‘man’ which is rude and gross. Mum’s had a word or two and then they attack her!
Still, one has to stand up! If they’re shooting at you, you know you’re doing something right.
All the best,
Thane4 May 2017 at 05:46 #57077Anonymous @
no go as yet on the email of the sound file and recording. Mum drafted in her brother but his phone may not be email connected as he’s retired and doesn’t need that. Dad’s own phone is to be buried shortly which is good because had it not died I would’ve killed it happily with a hammer. Mum’s phone: don’t ask! It’s 9 years old and doesn’t even take pictures. Still, where she worked before they wouldn’t let people take their phones in anyway unless they were really old -like Mum.
Thane4 May 2017 at 05:49 #57078Anonymous @
oops, I meant “really old, like Mum’s phone” not Mum. She’s not that old. She’s not old at all really.
I’ll shut up now.
I have a new meaty unit: Romeo and Juliet. I bet they’re going to make us watch the Leonardo movie first before reading the play. How pathetic. Why do teachers do this? The students don’t want to watch the film. They actually have their own TVs (or phones!). Let’s play the damn parts! That’s fun. After the short story unit we all felt like throwing things….Plays -now that’s good stuff.
The topic ‘The Maldovarium’ is closed to new replies.