Mr.G’s Shed of Books and Jam

I don’t know about you but I tend not to buy that many books these days. When I do get around to parting with my sheckles, whatever I’ve purchased then tends to sit in the bookcase unread for an age. My reading list has grown at such an alarming rate over recent years that the book collection now resembles the stockroom of a recently closed library branch…

So, with that in mind, I was somewhat surprised when I found myself wandering into the local branch of Waterstones the other day. I suppose that, as is often the case, it was more the actions of a scholarly inquisitive automaton, rather than any particular desire to consume the latest artistic masterpiece and bestseller. You see I’ve never really been a great lover of novels or fiction, my reading has normally always revolved around subjective reference and/or biographical works.

I know electronics have taken over from real books for many, but as a result of my brief sojourn into this literary emporium, I got to thinking about the subject of books and reading; why is it there appears to be an ever decreasing number of people who actually read?

Apart from any enjoyment or relaxation aspect of the process, reading has also long been considered a mark of someone’s academic ability. Whilst thinking about that part of the process, I was reminded of Bamber Gascoigne and that iconic TV series University Challenge. In my youth I was often intrigued at the student’s introduction before taking part in the competition; ”Smythe – Oxford-Baliol - Reading Quantum mechanics and classical physics.”

Some used to suggest the whole university thing (then) was all about privilege and class, many socialists seek to continue that somewhat juvenile (pureile) argument. But for me, having grown up in Oxford, one of the most famous seats of further education, the whole process of university study was a perfectly natural progression through life and, one that was in reality, actually more ‘available’ than some of those socialists would be prepared to admit. But only available to those of sufficient academic ability after all, is there really any point in dumbing down educational standards, simply so they’re available to all, irrespective of ability, as often appears to be the case now? Doesn’t it simply devalue the whole process?

And, before anyone offers up a “bloody uni toff he would say that” I didn’t actually go to university per se, although I did understand the values of further education and studied at The Open University later in life, whilst holding down a full time career.

Over the years there have been considerable changes to our UK education system. The Further and Higher Education Act resulted in the conversion of Polytechnic’s to Universities back in 1992. Many new universities were created and (arguably) access to quality higher education was enhanced. But, as with all the (supposed) advancements within our schooling, many of the changes and standards in higher education would today tend to make me expect; “Smiff  – Teesside – Reading Geordie Shore and Big Brother.”

In those halcyon Gascoigne days I didn’t really know anything about ‘quantum’ whatever and, I’m happy to admit, it’s highly unlikely the subject would have interested me in any case. But it was that quest for knowledge that I found interesting. Finding out about something new, irrespective of whether or not it resulted in any subsequent personal interest, was the interesting part.

But TV, like books, can also be a useful medium for providing avenues of greater understanding, about all manner of subjects. We all need to learn about life, society, the world, history and science, we need to understand what goes on outside our own microcosm. In short, it’s all part and parcel of the important personal educational process but even TV is being dumbed down. Unfortunately today too much of it is often inane superfluous shite, virtual this and reality that. Simple escapism for the amusement of the uneducated and mostly socially inept and uninterested masses.

I’m one of those who has absolutely no interest in the immature ramblings of the inebriated and illiterate. Self-important orange stained oiks, pumped up on legal/illegal performance enhancing substances and destined for a booze induced NE Shag Fest each weekend. It defeats me how the mating habits of testosterone posturing ‘cocks’ chasing the vacuous air headed surgically and chemically enhanced bimbos can be seen by anyone as entertainment.

Viewing figures tend to suggest that this sort of tripe is actually enjoyed by many, that fact alone is socially worrying. It’s more worrying when you consider, how many of the ’followers’ take it as indicative of real life. But even worse, many are also intent upon modeling their life around the antics of those they revere. Watching the likes of Geordie Shore or TOWIE (simply for research purposes I hasten to add), does however help you to understand why we are surrounded by so many materialistic self-interested plastic people. 

Couple all this with the rest of this latter-day ’specialist subject’ and I’m concerned. How is it that so many in our society can be glued to a TV screen, observing the inane mutterings of often educationally challenged muppets and wannabe celebrities? It’s sad that so many people have been happy to live in the BB House goldfish bowl of public voyeurism. Perhaps there’s no limit as to what some people will do for the prospects of a little fame and fortune?

Despite the inane and frivolous entertainment value aspect, which wouldn’t be such a bad thing, the fact that so much of this innocuous shite has also become an acceptable and popular scaffold to our social framework is sad.

But before the staff at Teesside University explode in anger at some of the above, I have no wish to detract from the undoubted value of the education they provide. As many of the Alumni will no doubt attest, this is now one of the finest, critically acclaimed and multi-award winning academic institutions within the UK. I merely wished to illustrate the changes that have occurred to our social and academic framework within my life thus far.

Neither am I falling into that all too easy trap suggested by Owen Jones (now blogging at The Independent) in his book Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class. For a start, many of those people don’t work, have never worked and probably, have absolutely no intention of working. Yes, I acknowledge that real and meaningful work is more of a rarity now than was once the case however; our social and political attitude to work (and life in general) has changed. Too many are now content to be little more than party animals in a world of virtual reality, mostly at someone else’s expense and often, wholly to the detriment of those around them.

 Any way, to return to that original spark that ignited the content of this post. In Waterstone’s I had been drawn to a title by Marcus Berkmann who, like many others, has realised that we all eventually reach a difficult point in our life. So let’s talk sheds for a moment…

Whilst using some inimitable humour, Berkmann examines how best to manage this awkward period in one’s life. In his book A Shed Of One’s Own: Midlife Without the Crisis, described by Mark Wilson (Independent on Sunday) as “a sort of “Zen and the Art of Midlife Management” Berkmann atempts to offer some much-needed guidance.

Like some others who have reached this stage in their life, I’ve got a shed load of experiences and thoughts from the past but also, my particular ‘shed’ contains considerable concerns about the future, on both personal and social issue fronts. But, as with Berkmann, I haven’t actually got a bloody shed to go and hide in. At least not one suitable as a personal escape - one where I can sit in comfort and ponder all my life issues, relaxed by a little light refreshment and some background music.

I suppose it’s concerns, like those alluded to above, which help to induce that infamous midlife crises. Is it any wonder so many of us to go scurrying headlong into our sheds, in an attempt to gain relief and solitude from all the realities of life? But this trait isn’t anything new, it’s something that’s actually been prevalent and around for generations. As our society progresses (or regresses) and we get older, we find it ever more difficult to comprehend and/or accept all the changes around us… Thank your god for sheds!

The book Shed Men examined the quirky phenomenon of sheds and sheddism, arguing that a bloke’s shed begins where a boy’s room leaves off. It can provide a “home to prized objects and boyish dreams” or simply provide a form of escape from life’s realities. The home-from-home created by a murky little hut at the end of the garden, although much maligned and misunderstood,  is a vastly important male sanctuary to preserve one’s sanity.

It’s been said that a shed is to a man what a handbag is to a woman - both contain all the essentials for surviving the modern world and, in the same way that no decent man would ever consider looking in a woman’s handbag uninvited ergo, no reasonable woman should dream of setting foot in a man’s shed. In another book of this somewhat quirky genre entitled Men and Sheds, a study of more than 40 men and their sheds in the UK was carried out, which looked at the personalities and the passions hidden within our sheds. Within The Shed Book you will find that these structures are ”an icon of national identity, which hold a “special place in the hearts of British men.” A shed is ”a sanctuary from the outside world and the other half.”

But if I did have a suitable escape, the shed would be probably be full of beer, wine, books, a kettle and some brew kit, along with a radio and CD or mp3 player. Oh yes, and a myriad of other stuff loved by me, but probably, of absolutely no bloody interest to anyone else, except perhaps for some of the music.

You see to me, and many others I would hope, music is or can be so much more than just noise. In many ways it’s also a form of social commentary. Artists like Bob Dylan and Bob Marley or Billy Bragg and Paul Weller in more recent times, have all become renowned as sages of sociopolitical musical observation.

The ghost of a steam train – echoes down my track. It’s at the moment bound for nowhere – just going round and round. Playground kids and creaking swings – lost laughter in the breeze. I could go on for hours and I probably will – but I’d sooner put some joy back – In this Town called Malice…(Paul Weller)

The Eton Rifles (also by Paul Weller) was another one of those, now iconic, musical observations of our society, and some of its social ills.

The song to me, and our Prime Minister it would seem (see below), is one of those Tracks of My Years moments (if Ken Bruce ever asked me).

The song recounts a street battle which occurred in Slough back in 1978. As it happens, I was actually in the area attending a school Alumni event, although not an Eton one and I didn’t personally witness the battle. Elements of a Right To Work protest march had decided to take on some pupils from Eton College who had been jeering at them. Many of the participants in the fracas, rashly, thought that a bunch of ‘posh schoolboys’ would be an easy target; only for the outnumbered, but far fitter, college pupils to emerge as victorious.

The Eton Rifles: Thought you were smart when you took them on, but you didn’t take a peek in their artillery room. All that rugby puts hairs on your chest...(Paul Weller)

As I pointed out before, Weller has long been revered as a social champion and sage of the working class, something of a socialist icon. So it should hardly be a shock when David Cameron (an Old Etonian) announced that The Eton Rifles was one of his favourite songs, that it should cause consternation amongst the media and political groups.

Bands such as The Jam and The Smiths were at the forefront of the resistance to Thatcherism in the 1980s. Twenty years later, Tory leader David Cameron lists them as among his favourite acts. Is nothing sacred, asks John Harris..(guardian.co.uk)

Cameron was reported to have said at the time; “I don’t see why the left should be the only ones allowed to listen to protest songs” and he was right. As he also pointed out in interview (see here) at a later date, when questioned further about his musical likes;  ”…if you can only like music if you agree with the political views of the person who wrote it, well, it’d be rather limiting.”

Another recent Paul Weller track (from the #No1 album - Sonik Kicks) partly sums up this Dangerous Age! – “And when he wakes up in the morning, It takes him time to adjust, He’s so sick of the money, And all the life that is lost.”

But isn’t it the case that, even ’rebels’ with (or without) a cause, often have a tendency to mellow somewhat as they gain maturity, losing some of their (mostly) youthful and petulant political ideology or expectation? Perhaps if we were all a little more educated, a lot less self-interested and spent some time in our sheds, there might be a little less anger based (mostly) upon jealousy and then just maybe, the world could be a better place?

Related articles

• A Shed of One’s Own by Marcus Berkmann – review (guardian.co.uk)
• A Shed of One’s Own, By Marcus Berkmann (independent.co.uk)
• The new ages of man (independent.co.uk)

Criminal Justice System: why the constant public angst?

Our CJS Angst?

There is a mass of misunderstanding about the workings of our Criminal Justice System (CJS), a confusion often fuelled by the emotive headlines produced by an often mischievous media machine. This generally results in those who work within that sector being, almost constantly, berated by a dissatisfied public. But is all this vilification actually warranted?

In the main, the majority of those who work at the coal-face of the public sector are there to provide you and I with a service. People like police officers, fire fighters, paramedics and nurses et al, even teachers generally all do what they do because they want to build a better society. Yes they get paid for what they do, many a lot less than they used to, thanks to this govt but in short, the majority take pride in providing a service to others and most are simply trying to make a difference.

It’s strange that we rarely (but rightly) see any verbal condemnation of those who volunteer to do similar work, such as the RNLI Lifeboat crews or our Mountain Rescue teams. The only major difference is the remuneration aspect so does that mean, we expect as a society that, no one should get paid for helping others? Perhaps that thought process is behind many of the politically motivated austerity measures of recent years i.e. public sector cuts are ok because we can fill the void left by them with volunteers. Perhaps politicians should carry out their role on a similar basis?

In general, the public tend to be mostly supportive of the work actually carried out by most of those mentioned above (excepting the politicians I would suspect). They understand the roles performed by each of them however; what they have difficulty getting their heads around is, how come performance so rarely matches expectation these days?

Any failure to meet (or exceed) public expectation, be it justifiable or otherwise, simply results in the tax payers standard retort - ”I pay your bloody wages!” Commenting upon the recent news that MP’s are to get an increase in money to pay their staff one respondent wrote…

“We’re all in this together.” Are we? Absolute hogwash. What is the collective name for a group of self-serving, money-grabbing, self-centred morons? I don’t know, but “A British Parliament” springs to mind. Another appalling decision by a group of people who have no idea what it is like in the real world.

In general, the disparity between performance and public expectation actually results from management failures within the sector. That and/or the political agenda being applied by those (often self-interested) individuals employed to manage these agencies on our behalf. The direction and administration of the organisations serving us is the problem, rarely the actual quality of work carried out by the practitioners.

Writing a guest blog for No Offence! Tessa Webb, Director Probation Chiefs Association, penned a brilliantly simple piece which goes someway towards explaining the issue. She equated our public sector to her car…

I just want it to work and if it doesn’t, I want the professional to ‘sort it out’ but I have little interest in what needs to be done, other than I hope it will not cost too much or take too long. A mechanic may wish to share with great pride their handiwork, but the reality is that I am only likely to get animated if it fails to work, after they have told me that they have fixed it, or I think it costs too much. But just think where would we all be if there were no car mechanics? Some jobs are simply essential and it is good to know there are people who will do them with skill and passion. Isn’t this the business that a ‘Big Society’ should recognise and engage with? As when it is effective everyone wins…(Tessa Webb)

There is no doubt that Tessa’s analogy was written from her own field of expertise within the sector however; similar can also be said in support of many public sector agencies, not least our police and the courts.

Despite so many of our public services currently being reduced at alarming levels, as a result of government austerity measures, the general condemnation continues, but why is this? Once again our media need to shoulder much of the blame, they the politicians and senior organisational leadership. All for whom it serves well to detract from the real issues involved here; self-protecting and self-motivated actions designed for self-protection. The actual concept of true public service rarely features in the overall scheme of things.

Because of this, I found it somewhat disconcerting to read the views of that well-known, but often controversial and predominantly left of centre,  journalist and TV presenter Janet Street-Porter. Writing in The Independent this week she said; The police must shape up, knuckle down, and change. Her article started by saying “the police service is stuck back in the days of Dixon of Dock Green!”  Janet went on to deride the police in general but in particular, she condemned the views of Paul McKeever, the chairman of the Police Federation.

Wouldn’t you think that a staff association, representing those who deliver the services that our communities are crying out for, must be in a better position to know what the public actually want? After all, they are the ones interacting with those people on a daily basis.

But again, Janet, like the rest of us, is being hood-winked and taken for a fool by our political masters; not hard when you take into account the ‘broken car’ analogy is it? Many of the current police reforms, already implemented and proposed for the future, have very little to do with delivering better policing services. They are more about placating public concerns and fears around the reduced levels of service we are already experiencing. A situation that is only set to worsen, despite all the “doing more with less” rhetoric.

What we’re suffering from now is actually the product of a myriad of previous failings, as opposed to any massive changes in role requirements per se. Yes there are some aspects of policing now that differ from those of twenty plus years ago however; the fundamentals of policing, the services that our communities probably need (arguably) more now than ever before, are broadly similar. Most of the current reforms are simply born out of the self-interest of senior police leaders and politicians; people who all have deep-seated and vested interest in disguising years of self-serving management failure.

Perhaps a good way of examining the whole issue, given that we’re looking at the legal world, would be from a more legal perspective? Within our civil law, attributing guilt is usually based upon ‘the balance of probability’ (onus probandi) however, some might even suggest that a ’beyond reasonable doubt’ burden of proof, as within our criminal law, would be even more appropriate.

To prove that someone was guilty of a crime, it must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) a prohibited act (actus reus) has taken place, (2) the intention or mental state (mens rea) of the ‘offender’ and (3) there was no legal excuse for committing the crime.

The choice of which definition you actually chose, when apportioning guilt to those responsible for the demise of our police (and other public services) is up to you.

Who the guilty party is in all this is debatable, be it the media, police senior leadership, our politicians, or indeed the Police Federation. But, despite all the mitigating circumstances being offered by the defence counsel for ACPO and the Government, someone IS guilty of what can only be described as; the criminal damage of  a once internationally respected system.

To my mind it’s not the rank and file police officers (or even their staff association) that are at fault or to blame. But, as a result of all the PR smokescreens and political spin constantly in play, only our society can be the ultimate judge!

Note: No Offence! is a Community Interest Company, not-for-profit, headed up by a Senior Management Team and Volunteers all with significant sector experience and specialisms. The organisation is focused on reducing waste and isolation in the Criminal Justice System within the Public Sector. It seeks to do this through facilitating and encouraging collaboration. There are currently more than 1500 members of No Offence! forum and that number is growing at a pace.