Thursday 5 August 2010

Bears Will Be Bears

 OR WHY THE PONTIFF SHOULD AVOID AREAS OF FORESTATION

As a youth Hexhamite had the acquaintance of a chap who was fond of responding to obvious questions with the hoary old chestnut, “Does the Pope sh*t in the woods?” How we all used to laugh at that one. I was thinking about the old boy the other day and wondering if he was still alive, as he was a chronic alcoholic.

This maudlin meander down recollection alley was prompted by a couple of recent news stories which cannot have passed unnoticed. You will recall the “tragic” attack on two bambinos by a fox, which had the tabloids and Boris “Mad Dog” Johnson screaming for the eradication of urban foxes? How quickly we forgot the years of campaigning to end foxhunting!

Last week a gleefully hysterical media reported that investigators were using DNA evidence to identify a bear which had attacked and killed a camper and mauled several others in Yellowstone Park. If convicted the unfortunate bear would be slaughtered by  “Wildlife Officials.”

Both incidents were undoubtedly frightening, and in one case fatal, for the humans involved. But the real tragedy was the public's aberrant reaction to the animals involved. Stop and think for a moment. What sort of sentence would an assault carry? How about a murder? Not long enough possibly, but we can be fairly certain that it would be proportional.

Yet, two incidences of animals behaving perfectly naturally, carried an immediate death sentence and in the case of  foxes, calls for wholesale eradication. Is this a rational response?

Wild animal attacks are rarely unprovoked, unlike humans who are quite prepared to bludgeon each other to death for the sheer hell of it. Animals attack when they are  hungry, their territory is invaded or they are protecting their young. However, they do occasionally beset and kill humans for reasons we cannot understand. Let's keep a sense of proportion.

Should we destroy animals for killing humans? No! It is an absurd response. Animals have no concept of right and wrong. The anthropomorphising of animals persuades us of “killer sharks” or “man-eating tigers”, which don't exist. Animals follow instinct opportunistically, nothing more. Besides, in every case of animal attack – foxes, bears, “dangerous” dogs, killer gerbils – the blame always lies to a greater  or lesser extent with humans.





It offends me mightily that humanity destroys the habitat of countless species, then labels them vermin for having the audacity to impinge on our activities as they search for food and shelter. Cretins brutalise pitbulls to make them fight, but the "dangerous" dog is blamed. City slickers get back to nature, disturb a few bear cubs and reap the consequences, but somehow the bears are at fault? It's preposterous.

Humans may like to think that they are smarter than the average bear, but they would do well to remember that Yogi does more than sh*t in the woods. If you camp in bear country, you are just a pic-a-nic basket wrapped in a sleeping bag.

Sunday 25 July 2010

Choose Your Words Carefully

OR, WHEN ICE CREAM IS NOT ICE CREAM

It should be apparent to regular readers that Hexhamite adores words. Seeking new ways to express the mundane is a mission and a passion. Why call a spade a spade when you can call it a sturdy flat bladed excavator that can be pushed into the earth with the foot? I'll take loquacious over humdrum every time. Verbosity over bland suits me fine thank you. Exploring the beauty, complexities and flexibility of old Mother Tongue is a journey of adventure and constant source of delight. Her abuse wounds me.

Ergo, copywriting is a trade that is close to my heart - the use of words to promote a person, business, opinion or idea. It is skill and an art. Yet I recurrently find myself poring over adverts and notices and wondering if they were composed by a machine. Or perhaps a party of indolent primates hammering away at old typewriters in a back room somewhere?

I am bewildered by the profusion of pseudo-scientific claptrap, poor grammar and idiotically inappropriate use of words in the media. What exactly does “Pimp my Ride” mean? Or Bifidus Digestum? Or all those ridiculous made up ingredients in cosmetic products?

Queueing at the Xpress (No!!) checkout of my local greengrocer, Hexhamite muses that being au fait with language and grammar should rate highly on the list of requirements for a career in Marketing. Judging by the sign above the cash register this is transparently not the case.

“Fifteen items or less” screams the sign. The grinding of my teeth is audible from three aisles away as I growl, “Fifteen items or fewer!” One or two dullards may look at me strangely, but unless His Holiness, Stephen Fry happens to be standing behind me with his weekly grocery shop, it is unlikely that anyone will understand my rancour. Bring back the Grammar Nazis!


A recent promotion in a local deep fried chicken outlet (the one with the bearded fellow on the logo) caught my eye. Cadbury's Flake Avalanche Only 99p!

This is a tub of plain ice cream sprinkled with pieces of the well known erotic confectionery. Nothing remarkable in that. The carefully thought out small print made for interesting reading though – i.e. the rubbish that advertisers are compelled to append to their lies to fend off potential law suits.

It read, “At participating restaurants only. Product and price may vary.” Are they serious? The first sentence is reasonable. Apart from the use of the term restaurant, that is. But the second?

How can the product and price possibly vary? Are they suggesting that I could be presented with a rubber boot and charged a shiny farthing? The promotion is for ice cream, with a flake topping, priced at 99p. If any of those criteria vary then logically it is a different promotion.

Advertisers, think before you type! You haven't got the brains to be clever - stick with the tried and tested “subject to availability.”

Language is my mistress, treat her courteously.

Monday 19 July 2010

Recycling the O2 Way

OR HOW TO SOLVE POVERTY IN THE THIRD WORLD

With great fanfare the iPhone 4 has arrived and naturally, being a metrosexual technophile, Hexhamite is among the first to have acquired one. The Blackberry Curve was just soooo passé. Given the absurd levels of attention focussed on alleged reception problems and the ludicrously minuscule stocks supplied to the UK's telecommunication vendors, you might be forgiven for thinking that this weeks rant is about the iPhone.  Not so. iPhone 4  is superb. End of.



It is the “recycling” of the said defunct Blackberry that has me vexed. Let's be clear, recycling is good. Recycling is heartily approved of. Earth's resources are precious and must be preserved. My mobile telephone provider is to be energetically commended for their promise not to send any part of my old phone to landfill. Cynics argue that given the concentration of gold and other precious minerals contained in a typical handset, they are perhaps not as magnanimous as it might first appear. Meh!

How does recycling work? In a nutshell, Hexhamite sends off his old handset to O2 (for it is they of whom I speak) and in return they send a fistful of cash as a “reward” for my environmental conscientiousness. If the phone is still in working condition O2 send it off to “needy people in Africa”.

Err..excuse me? Has the definition of poverty in the third world been revised since last I checked? Has famine and water shortage been eradicated? The AIDS pandemic cured, political instability resolved and genocide curtailed perhaps? Am I the only person seeing the stark raving incongruity here?

Having spent many years in darkest Africa, Hexhamite has seen first hand the hardship and deprivation suffered by many Africans. Where people live in tin shacks with no running water and a pair of secondhand shoes is a luxury. The third world has immeasurable problems and the west has a moral duty to lend assistance, but  are we helping by foisting our redundant gadgets on them? “Terribly sorry to hear about the cholera old chap. No sorry, can't offer you any food or medicine but here's a shiny new smart phone!”


What are they expected to do with these things? Africa is a continent vast beyond imagination, with virtually no mobile telecommunications infrastructure. Many people live hundreds of miles from electricity. Reception from one side of Hexhamite's house to the other is patchy, and a few miles out of town is non-existent, so what is the coverage in Africa or the Indian subcontinent likely to be? Zero? Zilch? Nada conceivably?

Perhaps the idea was dreamed up by those fellows from the Orange commercials, where films are re-imagined to place the mobile at the heart of the plot. Slumdog Millionaire anyone? “I say Jamal, look at my spiffing new Blackberry. Why don't you get your arse on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire and win enough money to build a telephone mast and a house where I can plug my charger in?”

Priorities: food, water, shelter.  Hello, anybody there?

Monday 5 July 2010

Chicane Chicanery

It is universally acknowledged that Hexhamite is a superb driver. The King of the Road. Poop! Poop! Schumacher bows before my prowess at the wheel while the Stig is not fit to kiss my bumper.

Okay, perhaps a bit of an exaggeration. However, it is fair to say that I know how to handle a car, I know the Highway Code and I know when I have right-of-way. It seems sometimes that I am the only one.

As a dutiful son, I make a point of paying regular visits to my sprightly old Mater. Reaching the matriarchal pile involves driving along a meandering avenue, which the powers-that-be have determined poses a “road safety risk”. That being, children who enjoy a game of football in the road stand a good chance of falling under the wheels of a passing motorist.

In the dim and distance past our schools used to teach us that re-enacting the cup final on a busy thoroughfare is generally a bad idea and Darth Vader taught us the Green Cross Code to avoid unnecessary splattage. Roads were understood to be the domain of the motor vehicle, which made them dangerous places to play.

In these more enlightened times of course we think differently. Two legs good, four wheels bad and all that. The motorist is a menace who should be discouraged from using the roads at all costs.

Which is why the functionaries at Town Hall have installed a series of double chicanes along the mile long approach to the home of Hexhamite's grande dame. The theory goes that, by being made to weave through these obstacles cars will be forced to slow down. Naturally the boy racers see them as a challenge to be navigated at top speed. Q.E.D.


Each set of chicanes is accompanied by road signs at either end, indicating which lane has priority. This is to avoid drivers meeting bumper to bumper in the middle. Simple? Yes, if drivers actually understood what the signs mean! A cursory perusal of the Highway Code makes clear that priority applies across the whole distance between the two signs. If a car is already in the chicane section, then he has priority irrespective of what the sign says. So why do the road hogs come whizzing round the corner, see the priority sign and plough headlong toward the vehicle trying to leave the section?

Notoriously susceptible to road rage, Hexhamite has stopped remonstrating with the clowns who claim to have right-of-way when they do not. Now I simply switch off the engine and start reading the Telegraph, thus blocking the entire street. My opponents may curse until they are blue in the face, but they always concede defeat and back up to allow me to pass.

Drivers should realise that the chicanes are a road safety measure, not a game of chicken. Playing brinkmanship with Hexhamite in vexed mode is like playing Russian roulette with a bullet in every chamber. Not recommend. Poop! Poop!

Wednesday 30 June 2010

Football or Bust?

We are now at the half way mark in the Fifa World Cup. Hexhamite knows, because despite his detestation of the “Sport of Plebs”  it has been all but impossible to avoid the wall-to-wall media coverage given to this Festival of Poop.

I also gleaned that the bloke with a face like a potato did not live up to the expectation engendered by his colossal salary and the England manager is at risk of losing him job for failing to produce a world class team from a sows ear. Oh yes, and some hombre is receiving police protection because he did not award a hoop to “our boys” in some game or other. Apparently the hoi polloi were a tad miffed by this.



There are so many things about the Carnival of Shite that could raise my temperature, if only I cared. However, I fail to understand why the bourgeois get so excited by this interminably dull game. Why does anybody care about Dwayne Rooney's metatarsal or that Frank Limpdick did not score or that Tiddler Taylor is servicing Jimbo Jockstrap's NAG? (is that the expression they use?) Because they have no lives? The whole thing is simply a bloated soap opera in which the principles are paid the equivalent of a third world country's GDP to under perform.

But they are “our boys” I'm told. Our finest young men who represent national pride. The best of a generation blah blah. Rubbish! From where I am standing they look like a bunch of iritating millionaire wide boys who spend ninety minutes a week hoofing an inflated bladder around a field.

No, what has really boiled my urine has been the reaction of certain fans to England's heave-ho from the Jamboree of Feculence. The ones who paid five thousand notes to travel to  South Africa and are now bleating that the England manager (the one who looks like Garey Busey in The Buddy Holly Story) should reimburse them because his team failed to reach the final. England's ejection means they have had to cut short their drunken jaunt and come home early!

Quite apart from the staggering delusion these people are under (did anyone REALLY believe that our third rate squad of tossers were going to go all the way?), are these peasants really suggesting that there is now no reason to see out their holiday because “our boys” are no longer in the competition?



South Africa, one of the most staggeringly beautiful countries in the world? Africa's cradle of culture? A land so vast you could spend a thousand lifetimes there and never behold  all its wonder. But it's not worth seeing because our contingent of deadbeats are no longer kicking a leather blister around the park?

Are they for real? Would they cut short a holiday to New York, because the Empire State Building is no longer the tallest in the world?  Probably. This sums up the mentality of the commonality. Nothing matters but football. Arseholes.

Sunday 20 June 2010

Summer Scum

Aah, the first signs of Summer are here. The days are becoming long and sultry. Nights are sweaty and uncomfortable. Young ladies in flimsy summer dresses show off milk bottle white legs. Kiddies splash about in paddling pools. The dog lolls his tongue. Thoughts turn to firing up the barbecue and inviting the neighbours round for a beer and a burger. There is every possibility (with a bit of luck) you might poison the boss with a piece of undercooked chicken. Happy days.


Yeah right. You know that Summer is drawing near when after the first two consecutive rain free days of the year every white trash yobbo feels it is his solemn duty as an alpha male to strip off his shirt and parade around the town in all his semi-naked glory.

You cannot venture out without running a disgusting gamut of sweaty, tattooed oikdom, all crappy ripoff adidas clothing, I.Q.'s lower than a pensioners tits, and uglier than a hatfull of ass. They roam the city centres in herds like bare chested townie adonises, reeking of counterfeit Hugo Boss aftershave and cheap cider. Presumably exposure of the torso is part of a primitive mating ritual along the lines of, “If I takes my shirt off and shows my sixpack, den all da bitches will be gagging for it, innit.”


Yes it's warm, but for fucks sake! At least we can be grateful that the female of the species usually keeps (most of) her clothes on. Albeit these consists of a sleeveless vest and a white denim skirt that covers barely a quarter of her thighs, meaning that when she farts the skirt will reveal all. Phat clunge!

You have to pity the poor sods who use public transport during the summer. Fine weather guarantees that our buses and trains are packed to the rafters with these untermenschen flocking to seaside hellholes, erm... that is, hotspots like Seaton Carew. Imagine being crammed into a sweltering coach with no hope of escape from the stench of musky perspiration and being assaulted by the tinny sounds of So Solid Crew and Blazin' Squad emanating from a Motorola Razr V3i Gold D&G! Or worse, having to sit on a seat previously occupied by Bazza and Britny. You could catch a very nasty dose of chav.

No normal, self-respecting person goes around half-clad like this. You wouldn't go into the bank shirtless, or pop down to the post box with your wedding tackle swinging in the breeze. Hopefully you don't dangle your baps over the cold meat counter in Sainsburys. Decent people understand about modesty and decorum.

The uncomplicated, uninteresting and wholly unneeded Neds of urban Britain think it is elegant to amble around the Kwik E Mart with their out-of-a-bottle tanned (or never-been-washed grey) flesh on full display. Of course their idea of living is hanging around outside the local chip shop, car park or McDonalds shouting abuse at anyone not wearing burberry, drinking stolen alcohol and smoking/sniffing/trying to fuck drugs. That's real class.

Sunday 13 June 2010

Change Your Attitude

“I'm sure they pick the grumpiest ones they can find.” How many times have you spoken or heard someone else articulate those words? The curmudgeonly target of your ire is almost certainly a bus driver or train conductor. They've almost become a cliché.

How many times have you waited, hand outstretched with a fistful of cash and been astonished to have your head bitten off by the ticket collector? I am certain that at some time you have gone home and complained to your loved ones about the ferocious bus driver who remonstrated with you in front of a charabanc full of commuters. You may even have made a complaint to the transport company about the rudeness of their staff.



Did he wake up on the wrong side of the bed? Has his wife just left him for the milkman? Has he got toothache or a case of Delhi Belly? Is he just a terminally bad tempered old fart? No! I'll tell you what is wrong. It's you.

What's that you say? I haven't done anything wrong. I'm just trying to get to my destination and this officious oaf is being as unhelpful as possible. Think again buddy. It is 100%, unequivocally, irrefutably and entirely your fault.

I can see you shaking your head. Hexhamite must have lost the plot . He should be on our side. How can Mr Angry possibly be siding with the Transport Gestapo?

I repeat, if you've had a bad experience with a bus driver or train conductor then as sure as day follows night the fault lies at your feet, and the problem will have started before you boarded whichever clapped-out mode of transport you have deemed worthy of your patronage.

Open your hand. See that crumpled banknote? There is your problem. When Hexhamite was a boy and God still wore short trousers, it was considered extremely rude to get on a bus without the correct fare. If you did not have coins you went and bought a newspaper or a tube of extra strong mints so that you did. Expecting the conductor to provide change of more than £1 was unheard of.

In today's overly affluent, me-first society, showing such consideration is scoffed at. Handing over a £10 or £20 note for a £1.30 fare is the norm. Today's punter does not grasp the notion that a conductor carries a float. He is not a bloody bank!

When he asks if you have any smaller change, what do you reply? I was running late? The ticket office was closed? I usually have change? Not my problem? I thought you carried a float? Can't you do the rest of the tickets and return with my change? Everyone else is certain to have change.

95% of the idiots travelling our networks think this way and there is no acceptable excuse. It is discourteous and inconsiderate. See the Conductors point-of-view, and be grateful that the worse he does is scowl. You deserve a fat lip.

Sunday 6 June 2010

Chimps On Push Bikes

I hate BMX bikes and the people who ride them. Really, truly loathe them. Bicycle motocross? My arse! How can it be a motocross when it does not have an engine? It is not even a proper bicycle. The BMX was designed as a toy for children too young for proper motocross, who fancied hopping over a few jumps.

Somehow this prepubescents plaything has become the preserve of teenage show-offs and street urchins. The ragamuffins who congregate in gangs around shopping precincts, doing 180 barspins and annoying decent people. You know, underclass scumbags who think they are cool. They are too stupid to realise that when you reach your late teens and are pushing six feet, you do not look cool on a cycle designed for a six year old. You look precisely what you are - a lanky chimp on a push bike.



The BMX is not designed to be ridden. No one goes out for a ride on a BMX. They pootle about, do tricks and jumps. Trash it down some steps or clatter off a park bench. But nobody uses it to get from A to B.

Yesterday I spoke with two kids on a train who were dragging their two wheeled pieces of junk along for the ride. They were only travelling one stop and the journey was less than two miles, so I asked them why they did not simply cycle. The reason given, (and delivered entirely without irony) was that the bikes only have one gear which would make it too difficult to climb the big hill they would encounter on the way home.

Aside from a damning indictment of the fitness of the modern youth, this proved what I have always believed. These things are no good for anything other than performing circus tricks and crashing off curbstones. Because the wheels are so stupidly small, it takes ten times the effort to pedal the damned thing the same distance as a proper bike.

This is why snot nosed punks are forever pleading with train conductors to be allowed to take their BMXs on busy commuter trains. One of my favourite sights is seeing their faces as he tells them the train only carries two bicycles. They argue feverishly over who gets to travel, then six or seven are left on the platform looking sick as chips while the train pulls away. They should get themselves proper bicycles. The exercise would do them good.

Later the same afternoon I watched a man board a train with his BMX. He must have been about 40 and weighed as many stone. Union Jack t-shirt and Burberry flat cap. Visualise Dom Deluise in denim Bermuda shorts. Rakishly unshaven and studious round glasses. The type of guy who thinks he's still one of the kids. Typical BMX bandit. Possibly the most tragic looking loser I have ever seen.

If you are older than 12 you really should not be riding a BMX. It's not big. It's not clever.

Sunday 30 May 2010

Lawn Sharks

The mowing season is well and truly upon us, and Hexhamite again turns his attention to giving the lawns their regular paring down. Nothing is more therapeutic than putting the old motor-mower through her paces on a fine day. A well manicured bit of turf does wonders to soothe a choleric brain.

As the MowMaster 5000 trundled around the park west of the château, the heady aroma of two-stroke and grass clippings tickled my nostrils as the early afternoon sun beat gently on my brow. Birds chirruped. My mind sauntered to thoughts of warm beer and cricket on the village green. Perhaps the vicar could be persuaded to bowl a few overs. The district nurse on her sit-up-and- beg velocipede might stop to cast an appraising eye over the gentlemen decked out in their best flannels. Then back to the clubhouse for cucumber sandwiches followed by strawberries and cream.

Thunk! With a pained grunt the pasture chopper shuddered to a halt and the engine cut out. On investigation it transpired that the blade had sliced into a section of wrought iron railing poking out of the sod. Several minutes of excavation with a turf cutter revealed the aforementioned railing to be attached to a flagstone path buried 6 inches beneath the grama.

What kind of muttonhead would lay turf over paving slabs? Surely only a complete ninny would consider such an act of doltishness? Actually my prized turf was laid by a “professional” subcontracted by the same posse of cowboys responsible for erecting my homestead.

Is there no regulation of subcontractors? No gilded certificate which confirms that an artisan is vaguely qualified? Apparently the only requirement for proclaiming oneself a Landscape Gardner is possession of a shovel and a van emblazoned with a logo to that effect. Some of the more enterprising fellows may stretch to a petrol mower with which to scalp your verdant patch. Many are simply scheming dole wallahs aiming to score a few bob to supplement their subsistence handouts with promises to lay what is euphemistically termed “meadow turf”. This means that they have stopped by the side of the road and torn up a few strips of Old Macdonald's best grazing, which they will happily throw down on your rock scattered plot.

When I was seven years old, I managed to accidentally split open the head of a school chum using a hammer. I do not however, lay claim to being a brain surgeon! I own a leather biker jacket, but I do not believe I am a MotoGP champion. I possess a set of socket spanners still I pay a trained mechanic to service my car. Yet armies of itinerant pikies who don't know a dandelion from a dachshund are roaming the countryside claiming to be professional garden architects and arborists.

Astonishingly these unskilled lawn rangers are employed by building contractors throughout the land to cover up the rubble strewn landfill that will soon become your garden. Alan Titchmarsh they are not.

Sunday 23 May 2010

Bedroom Bedlam

Ninja nincompoop Toshitsugu Takamatsu spouted that “Life is Change”. His followers seized on this statement as evidence of the honourable fraud's wisdom and sound judgement. But if the old boy had possessed real wit or understanding he would have said “Change is Irritating”, or even “Life is full of changes designed to wind you up the wrong way.”

Take retailers, a breed who delight in changing things around for sport. Every time you pop into the local Hypermarket for a frozen pizza they have been relocating the damned things to where you least expect. Like all males I want to steam into a store, stride to the correct aisle, retrieve my groceries and high tail it out again without pausing for thought. But we cannot do this can we? No! Because the nightshift fairies at the local stack-em-high have been moving everything around again. Instead of a margherita, we find ourselves clutching a less than appetising pack of pan scrubs or a potted plant. So you now waste half a day of your life trawling up and down every aisle in search of the mozzarella topped comestibles. That is time you are never getting back people.

If they are not changing the location, they are changing the product. This weekend, (for reasons which need not be elaborated on), Hexhamite Hall found itself in want of a marital bed. The previous one having collapsed in a heap of duck down and tinder. In spite of my protestations about the glorious barbecue weather, the Lady of the Manor determined that we should sojourn in a certain well known Swedish purveyor of flat pack furnishings. The prospect of meatballs and lingonberry sauce aside, this is not how I envisaged spending a sunny afternoon. However needs must, when the alternative is a pillow on the flagstones.

Being people of taste and decorum, our boudoir is furnished with all matching furniture from the big blue and yellow store. Obtaining a matching wood effect bedstead would be relatively straightforward, would it not? It would not. The Ikea elves in their wisdom have decided to “revamp” our bedroom range. Rather than having the hassle of choosing from a range of elegant stained woods, wouldn't we prefer that all our furniture look as if it has been limewashed by Tom Sawyer? Understated sophistication is out, in favour of design that appears as if a toddler has been left in charge of the paint pots. Furthermore, they have also decided that a range of sizes is out, so Ikea beds now come in two sizes – gymnastics beam and too-bloody-big-for-your-house.

This Scandinavian thinking means that we now have a bed that no longer matches anything else and which fills the room from wall to wall. The mattress looks like a postage stamp surrounded by a moat of springs, and the moggies now have to approach a nap on the eider like an assault on Fort Smerzen.

Retailers of the world, hear my heartfelt plea. For pity's sake stop changing things!

Sunday 16 May 2010

Postman Prat

I despair at our morning postal service. Long gone are the days of receiving the mail before going to work. The residents of the leafy corner that I am annoyed to call home are grateful if our Postie manages to drag his lethargic backside around the doors by 2pm.

What use is that? Heaven forbid that a letter requires same day attention. Anything important now spends half the day lying on the doormat of Hexamite Towers, being harried by the two aggressive felines who rule my roost.

If our army of Postal Delivery Operatives are incapable of delivering at anything resembling a sensible time, can I suggest that the Royal Mail mandarins dispense with the “morning” delivery altogether ? Instead they could pop round in the evening in their shiny red vans, so our correspondence is at least on hand to be dealt with at cock crow.

This would allow us to be home to sign for Recorded Delivery items. This is what Royal Mail calls its guaranteed next day delivery service. I thought that was called First Class post, but apparently not. First Class these days takes on average 3-4 days. Second Class is anybodies guess.

We are told a signature is required for our security and convenience and guarantees that our valuable mail does not fall into the wrong hands. Fair enough in the days when we were on hand to answer the door in our dressing gowns, FT tucked under one arm and chomping down on a slice of wholemeal smothered in finest golden shred. When the Postie is only knocking on the door in the middle of the afternoon it is a different matter. “Aha, but we have a solution,” say Royal Mail. “we’ll leave a card informing you that we called. Just pop round our depot and collect it at your convenience.” To facilitate this process they’ve made the opening times of the collection office a very convenient 7am - 12pm. Wonderful!

What world are these people living in? Slap me with a damp cauliflower if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure that most of us are already facing the daily rat race by 7am. Yours truly will have already been at the sharp end for a good couple of hours. By the time we are able to steal a lunch break, the buggers have shut up shop and gone home! That is assuming the collection depot is close enough at hand to nip out to in the first place. In any case they need at least 24 hours to return items to the depot, which is barely two miles away. This means you cannot collect your cherished post until the next day at the earliest. In my case I have to wait for a day off, which could be anything up to six days. So much for guaranteed next day delivery.

In our 24/7, world that never sleeps, is it really too much to ask that Royal Mail set opening hours convenient to the customer, rather than the postal worker who fancies an afternoon off?

Sunday 9 May 2010

What's In a Name? - Part Two

So we have established the principle that our names should be used properly unless we give express permission to do otherwise. This leads me on to the question of when it is appropriate to use that name at all.

When I am not at the keyboard sharing my thoughts with you dear reader, I indulge in what is popularly known as a “real job”. That is to say, a pointless, unrewarding pursuit which occupies some eight to nine hours of every day, distracting me from my true vocation, whilst lining the pockets of the shareholders of a large Dutch multinational. This so-called work also enables the Chancellor of the Exchequer to rob me of a significant proportion of my income with impunity. But we will leave the issues of taxes and the exploitation of labour for another day, suffice to say that for the moment my current “career” subsidises my real job, which is writing.

However, I digress. The company for whom I prostitute my labours have a strict policy of insisting that its employees all wear shiny little badges with our names on. This, it is believed, makes us more approachable to customers. More accurately it is a weapon for an ever more irascible and demanding public to beat the poor unsuspecting employee with.

Contrary to popular misconception, most customer facing staff do their utmost to be courteous and helpful to the great unwashed. They may curse them behind their backs, but face to face there is always a genuine attempt at being helpful. The name badge could therefore be used to offer congratulations to a diligent soul for a job well done or simply to offer thanks for going beyond the call of duty in helping an ungrateful hooligan. How often do you think this occurs dear friend? The answer would be a big fat zero! Nix, nada, zilch, the big goose egg. It never happens.

Instead the name badge is used by the public to castigate employees whom it is felt have not been sufficiently deferential or in some other way not lived up to the massively over inflated level of expectation demanded in these modern times. Every little thing that goes wrong in the day to day running of the business is the direct result of incompetence on the part of the man or woman who serves as its public face. If they do not immediately have to hand the answers to Joe Public's most obscure enquiry, they are berated for being surly and unhelpful. If a train passenger arrives two minutes after the train has left, that is the fault of the platform staff. If a Conductor asks a Mother to fold up her pushchair on a crowded commuter train, he is deemed to be acting unreasonably, and that Mother will exercise her right to complain.

The company goes so far as to provide telephone helplines and actively encourages the public to report those who do not tug at their forelocks sufficiently hard – or to put in corporate speak “live up to our high levels of customer service.” In everyday parlance it means you have not shoved your tongue sufficiently far up their fat greasy backsides.

This, it is claimed, makes the company accountable. The most outrageous, bile filled lies are reported about staff by ordinary members of the public for the tiniest of infractions. A polite request for a customer to move their inconveniently dumped personal belongings can result in a venomous tirade of verbal abuse, and the hapless employee being hauled in front of management for a dressing down. And the complaint, however spurious, is lent weight because the complainant has a name to attach to it. It is almost as if they go home and think to themselves “That fecker asked me to move my shopping so a child in a wheelchair could get past!! I'm going to see to it that he loses his job.”

If they are not complaining, then they are over familiar and condescending, using your name at every opportunity. They see your name on a badge and assume that it gives them a divine right to address you by your first name. Whoop-di-doo, they can read! You want to grab them by the scruff of the neck and bellow into their patronising faces, “Yes that's my name! Don't wear it out!”. Call me a reactionary old fart, but I find it highly discourteous. I was brought up in a country and era where people still believed that you do not use a persons first name unless you have been introduced and that person has invited you to do so. Otherwise it is Mister, Missus, Sir, Madam what-have-you.

You are probably thinking, “How quaint”, or perhaps more likely, “what a feckin' tosspot, this guy actually actually believes in good manners and old fashioned etiquette.” And yes I do, make no bones about it. I do not just expect good manners, I demand them. I am the bloke who stands glaring at you as you bark your instructions at me. The officious little Hitler who won't respond until the magic word is spoken. Oh I may occasionally offer helpful hints along the lines of “PLEASE is the word you are looking for”, but more usually mine is the back you see moving away from you as you splutter and gulp like a beached goldfish.

I absolutely draw the line at children and snotty teenagers using my first name when I am at work. I simply will not tolerate it. Again, blame my hopelessly old fashioned upbringing, but where I come from children do not use an adults first name. Mum, Dad, Uncle, Auntie, Mr, Mrs, Sir, Madam are the only acceptable forms of address a child may use to an adult. Don't like it? Call the helpline.

The other day, as I dealt with a customer, I was approached by a pre-teen rabble all squawking and generally making everyone's life utter misery. I heard one of the little cretins say to one of his companions, “His name's David”. Well hallelujah, literacy has reached a point where brats can master five letter words.

Sadly it is not within my authority to simply ignore the little bastards, so I gritted my teeth and gave them what they asked for. As he handed over his money, the ringleader looked me in the eye and said “Thank you David”, with a smug grin of satisfaction on his chubby face. They others stood around sniggering. “Excuse me,” I replied, “Have we been introduced?” His stupid smile subsided somewhat. “Eh?” he grunted. I pressed home the advantage. “I asked you if we had been introduced, and the answer is no. So, until we have been, and you have grown out of short trousers you do not have the right to call me David. Do you understand me?” He nodded dumbly, clearly not having a clue why I was annoyed. “If you really must call me something, then it's Sir. Is that clear?”

I stalked away as the gang huddled together, an agitated buzz of profanity emanating from their midst. A elderly lady nearby gave me a tight lipped smile. I am not sure if it was a show of solidarity or an attempt to ward off my wrath.

We are told that we live in a classless society. We are told that using our first names emphasises our equality and mutual respect for each other. This is why cold callers and call-centre employees insist on trying to use your first names in every sentence. It is meant to be chummy, disarming, putting people at their ease. Sorry, but with me it promotes antagonism, embarrassment for the caller and a swift end to the conversation.

It is all bullshit of course. First names do not break down class barriers, they throw up artificial new ones. In decades past, the upper classes called the lower classes by their first names to emphasise their own superiority over the lower orders. Servants were John or Jane, whilst the masters were Sir or Madam. And this is precisely the relationship which modern society has created between Customer and Seller or Service Provider. A shop assistant is expected to call a customer Sir or Madam, whilst a customer gets to call that lackey by their name. It is designed to promote the notion that only money counts and that those who serve the public are inferior. This is why every Vicky Pollard up and down the country thinks that she is entitled to respect every time she pulls a wad of twenties out of her Burberry handbag. People who work in shops and on public transport are there to treated like servants, while spending power is lauded. It is a triumph of new affluence over age-old breeding.

When sales people use your first name, they are trying to get around your defences so they can flog you some pointless service that you do not want. When a customer uses an employees first name, they are trying to put that person in their place. As Sidney Poitier once said, call me Mister.

Sunday 2 May 2010

What's In a Name? - Part One

We all have one. It is who we are. Our names say much about our backgrounds, our self-image, our aspirations and the pretension of our parents. To most people, our name is pretty important, even if we don't realise it. Our names are our public face and determine the way society sees and reacts to us. Just take a moment to consider the different images that names conjure in your mind – William, George, Jack, Tyler, Wayne, Emily, Charlotte, Sharon, Alopecia? We have a range of contrasting preconceived notions of a child depending on whether he is a James, a Jamie or a Jimmy. You know instinctively that you are talking to a chav if they are called Liam, Kyle, Tiffany or Chardonnay. You know without needing to ask, that they own a pitbull terrier called Tyson.

Throughout my childhood, right up until my mid twenties I was known as Dave. I didn't choose to be known as Dave, any more than I chose to be christened David. I didn't object to it, indeed I was quite happy with it. The only time I was ever called David was when I was in trouble with my Mother. Once I reached my teens Dave seemed more cool. My adolescent hero was Dave Mustaine, frontman of seminal thrash metal band Megadeth. Dave was the archetypal angry rock 'n' roll rebel. The one who got the girls, the one with the good hair and sexy guitars. The one people wanted to emulate. His long suffering sidekick David Ellefson may have been equally wild away from the public eye but his public persona was always that of the quiet, steady one who stayed in the background. The one who didn't give many interviews and didn't have sexy hair. Dave was the exciting one, David the ever so slightly dull one. In short, it was much better to be Dave than David.

Unfortunately I was born in a year when every parent up and down the land decided that David was a good name to bestow upon their sons. I couldn't begin to count the number of my peers who were called Dave, and to be honest it bugged me. I never considered going by any other name, but I did experiment with changing the spelling of my surname and by inventing wild rock 'n' roll middle names. For some reason it didn't occur to me that I could distinguish myself from the herd by simply calling myself David. Part of the problem was that I was painfully shy right up until my twenties. I wanted to stand out from the crowd, but I was too afraid. Friends and family would instinctively call me Dave rather than David – perhaps because it trips off the tongue easier for most people. I never bothered to correct them, mainly because it came as a welcome relief from the horrendous nicknames I suffered from the bullies at school. Yes I suffered a lot of bullying at school. Explains a lot doesn't it?

I can clearly remember the day I decided that I would become David. The day when I would become a leader rather than a sheep, and demand the respect I am due. I was at a Conservative Party meeting about fourteen years ago, being introduced to a senior regional official when the local chairman asked me if I preferred Dave, David or Davey. Without hesitation I said David. It was so obvious and natural. It sounded more professional, more serious, more educated and more in keeping with the image I wanted to project. Who ever heard of a Prime Minister called Dave? I made the decision that the only people who would be allowed to continue calling me Dave were my closest family and a tiny circle of close friends, who had always known me by that name. It would become a mark of the intimacy I felt with those people. That is the way it has been ever since.

Not much to get angry about so far, is there? Apart from the bullying. Well in fact there is, because there is a certain element in society who seem incapable of calling people by their proper names. If I introduce myself as David then I expect to be called David and not Dave or worse Davey. Just as someone who introduces themselves as James does not expect to be called Michael or Steve. So why do people do it? It's discourteous and rude, and just plain lazy. They are effectively saying, “I can't be bothered to remember or use your proper name” and is therefore a measure of their lack of respect. They might as well call you thingy or wossisname. It displays the ignorance and utter lack of breeding of the speaker.

I worked for a financial institution for almost five years. A nightmare world of artificial pressure, self-aggrandisement, backstabbing and lack of ambition. A world where the dull and incompetent massage their tiny egos with a pretence of professionalism and importance. Let us be clear, there is nothing more worthless and less important in society than a group of bankers.

However, it is the one profession where people are guaranteed to use your correct name. A commitment to “professionalism” and political correctness means no one would dare call you by anything other than the name you introduce yourself by. It's also compulsory to use a persons surname when mentioning a colleague. So you always refer to Jack Jones rather than simply Jack. This rule applies regardless of how unique or unusual a persons name might be. So you would say Rumpilstiltskin Smith, to differentiate that person from all the other Rumpilstiltskins in the office. Maybe it's because the PC brigade live in terror of being sued for lack of professionalism. Maybe it's simply because they are all a bunch of bankers.

Contrast this with my next job, with a regional transport provider. A former nationalised industry where the trade unions still rule supreme and attitudes have not moved on since the seventies. A workplace founded on antagonism between “the workers” and management, where casual racism, sexism and homophobia are an accepted fact of life. Professionalism, tolerance and common courtesy are considered political correctness gone mad.

It's also an industry where staff seem pathologically incapable of using someone's correct name. There are no Williams, Michaels, James' or Davids here. No matter what you were named at birth, you can expect to have it it shortened and a Y added at the end. So we have a plethora of Billys, Mickeys, Tommys, Jimmys and Daveys. It is unrelentingly proletarian and it makes me squirm.

For the first few weeks I was plagued with people calling me Davey. Now let me be utterly clear on this point. I loathe being called Davey with a passion. The only thing worse is being called Davey Boy. It is thoroughly working class to be known as Davey. It is a name which sums up everything in life which I disdain – lack of education, lack of ambition and lack of class.

I began by correcting my colleagues. “Actually, it's David” I would say. “Ooh la de dah” would be the inevitable reply. I would explain that I preferred to be known as David, plain and simple and that I would not respond to anyone calling me Davey. Therefore I would appreciate it if they respected my wishes. “Wotsamatter with Davey?” would be the puzzled reply, to which I would have to give the honest answer that I found it both common and beneath my dignity. I am very big on truth and honesty.

This kind of answer does not compute with your average railway worker. “Are you a f#@king poof?” is fairly typical of the responses I received. Now I believe in rubbing along with my colleagues and treating people with equal respect and I expect the same in response. I certainly do not expect people to deliberately ignore my wishes. Naturally things came to a head. There were about half a dozen of us in the Supervisors office one afternoon when I corrected someone for calling me Davey. Naturally this resulted in much hilarity and comments along the lines already described. I must have been having a difficult day because I decided to abandon all pretence at professionalism and opted to speak to the blue collar Neanderthals in their own language. “Listen,” I said “I will only say this once. If any of you ignorant f#@kwits calls me Davey again, I will rip your bollocks out through your throat and shove them back up your a#@ehole. Ok?” Well you could have heard the jaws crashing onto the floor. I must explain that I would normally find profanity in the workplace to be abhorrent, but naked aggression is the only language some people understand. One or two people have still not managed to stop calling me Dave, but no one calls me Davey any more.

Friday 23 April 2010

Nanny T-Mobile

You'll Learn To Love Her. Warts And All. Nanny T-Mobile

I should not need to point out that it is a fairly well established fact that Britain is a nanny state, fond of cocooning our offspring in cotton wool. We pop them into Chelsea Tractors (because any other auto-mobile is just not safe for our precious offspring) and ferry the horrid little scrotes everywhere their cholesterol saturated little hearts desire. This saves them the embarrassment of having to use their poor obese little legs to take exercise. Perambulating is so last century. Besides we can't possibly allow our little darlings to walk to and from school for heaven's sake. Don't you know there's a paedophile lurking behind every lamp post?

Instead we glue them to the sofa in front of the X-Box or Wii and stand by ready to shovel crisps and happy meals into their rapacious maws whenever they utter a grunt. Contact with friends is strictly through social networking sites because it's so much more modern and up-to-date than having to deal with the hassle of speaking to people face to face. Beware of psyber-bullying though – one in four children is bullied by text message or through a social networking site. Be prepared to prove your credentials as a cool, caring 21st century parent by campaigning for a “panic button” on your child's hi-tech gadget of choice - remember the internet is made up entirely of dirty old men masquerading as schoolgirls. Don't do anything silly like filtering offensive emails or texts or worse, not allowing your child to have a mobile in the first place! It's every three year olds human right to carry the latest multimedia communication device. When your beautiful bundle of joy throws themselves under a bus because they can't live with the shame of not having this weeks must-have fashion item it could well jeopardise your status as victim and subsequent claims for compensation if you can be proven to have taken any action which could be construed as common sense. Don't do it.

Eventually they reach an age where they can legally fornicate and purchase alcohol - assuming they haven't died of a coronary or mutilated themselves in a cry for help along the lines of “Help me please, I don't know what to do! I'm a middle class spoilt brat with doting parents and far too much disposable income. I going to kill myself.” Then and only then, do we allow them outdoors to hang around on street corners where they can inject heroin into their rectums and film themselves gang banging goats to post on You-tube. Oh yes, there are so many dangers out there from which we need to protect the little ones.

However, Hexhamite prides himself that having recently entered my fourth decade on this small green-blue ball of rock and water, that I am no longer a child and have the nous to decide for myself what's good for me. I've developed an uncanny skill with the delete key for emails that offend me. I know that a knife is sharp and that I shouldn't insert it in myself or others. And the only panic button I need is the one which alerts the barman to the fact that my pint glass is less than a third full.

It therefore came as more than a little mild annoyance to discover that T-Mobile feel that I am some sort of simpleton in need of protection from the big bad world. Picture the scene: it's a Friday afternoon and I'm stranded in Newcastle Railway station for five and a half hours. Nothing else for it, I'll have to fire up my wireless broadband dongle (am I the only person who thinks dongle sounds like a dirty word?) and get to work updating the old blog.

Aha but you can't do that say T-Mobile. On the basis that all their customers are infants or imbeciles they have installed a parental filter as a default to protect us from “user generated content and social networking sites”. User generated content? Isn't that a fairly accurate summation of everything contained on the world wide web? To be fair T-Mobile haven't gone quite that far. To date they have contented themselves with filtering out Blogger and similar sites, presumably to spare our youth from coming into contact with anything not sanitised by the apparatchiks of Big Brother. Youtube is also on the proscribed list, to spare their tender eyes from the horrors of a teenage would-be Danny Boyle's graphic depiction of drug fuelled goat banging in the Gorbals. More peculiarly social networking sites are also off limits, thereby negating about 90% of internet users reasons for logging on in the first place.

What's he whining about I hear you cry. Why don't you just turn the bloody filter off? Now hold on there Jonny, credit me with some intelligence. You don't imagine our Deutsch Mary Poppins is going to make this simple do you?

The stark warning message advising me that my access has been blocked tells me to click here to turn off the parental filter. At which point it demands my credit card details in order to “register” for this service. As I'm sitting on platform nine and three quarters, I'm not inclined to whip out my gold card. Even if I was so inclined I couldn't because the card used to set up this festering turd of an account belongs to Mrs Angry and is currently languishing amongst the cobwebs at the bottom of her purse several miles from here. Fear not, there's a number I can ring from my T-Mobile handset. Except I don't have a T-Mobile handset! I have a T-Mobile sim card, contained in the T-f@#king -Mobile dongle which I'm using to read these wretched instructions. The mobile in my pocket is locked to O2.

To cut a long story short, several texts and telephone calls to the long suffering Mrs Angry, followed by the sainted lady making several calls to T-Mobile's Ministry of Truth eventually resulted in the Blogger embargo being lifted and my being able to post the present tract. It was pure chance that Mrs A happened to be at home on a weekday. Had she not been, the Hexhamite would probably be staring at the Cbeebies webpage and singing the theme tune to Thomas the Tank Engine.

Does it really have to be this way? Are we as a society so far gone that we have abrogated our own powers of judgement to a faceless telecommunications company? Are we so lazy as parents that we need our internet providers or the state to monitor what our children get up to online? It seems so. Except in this case it's gone step further, and it's we the adults who are being cocooned in cotton wool in the name of “protecting the children”. Oh sure we can turn the filter off. For now. How long before until Big Brother decides that adults should be protected too? Protected from what? Anything deemed subversive or which undermines the status quo. Anything which might encourage us to think for ourselves or question the actions of our rulers. In short anything which might cause us to raise our aspirations above the level of subservient drones.

When did it become acceptable for an ISP to set itself up as a moral arbiter, deciding what is and is not acceptable for us to view? By all means provide the tools so that we can determine for ourselves what we and our children view, but why should we have to go cap in hand to our ISPs to get permission to use the service for which we've paid good money? I am an adult and if I want to blog my insane views to the world that is my privilege. If I choose to watch grainy footage of Glaswegian junkies buggering Bovidae ruminants that should be my choice too. When restrictions are put in place by default it sets a dangerous precedent, because we don't know who determines what is acceptable and what is not. Well-intentioned do-gooding today is politcal repression tomorrow.

Government and big business are in each others pockets and when business starts setting up controls on access to information you can be sure that government is looking for ways to exploit those controls. T-Mobile's approach is censorship by stealth and I for one believe it needs to be nipped in the bud.