More Dream Stuff

Ok, so again last night I dreamt a song, except this time it was very vivid, I mean the words just came pouring into my head, like they'd already been sung somewhere else. I woke up and typed up what I could remember (probably about 1/3 of it) and then filled in the rest as best I could.

Without being able to play a bloody instrument all I can do is stick the lyrics up. Have a look, don't judge... Im not saying they are any good, just that it's incredibly wierd to get something like that coming out of nowhere, especially when most of my dreams arn't particularly vivid. 

It's a homage to Phil Ochs (the man with the skull lol), my favourite folkie who had a very interesting life, one which has produced plenty of great eulogies over the years. The whole mtv thing has a couple of levels to it. He always thought that the best way to make a difference with music was to bring the words of the great thinkers and poets of our time and cross them with the elvis presley style mass pop music. Thats why he went through his gold suit phase and tried to find a way to appeal to the masses. I think a modern parallel might be if a political folkie of today like David Rovics were to play on mtv. Pretty much zero chance of it happening, but the same could be said of Ochs efforts back in the late 60's. The other side of it is that semi-selfish wish that maybe we would have another folk revival, like that of the 60's when the mainstream would embrace political music again...

BTW, he was never actually referred to as the highwayman, it was a song he adapted from the Alfred Noyes poem, but I think he might have liked it. 

Anyway here goes:

He was the man who fought for change,
 But for fortune he might have won,
He was the man who spoke for peace,
 Though Dylan had him shunned,
The movement slowly died,
 Sixty-Seven was history,
But he had no time for LSD,
 He was too busy trying to protect our liberties.

He was the man who told us the war was over,
 Long before the last troops left Vietnam,
He was there in Chicago,
 When the tear gas struck them down,
And it wasn’t just for him,
That the sorrow hit so hard,
In his rehearsals for retirement we let him be,
 Now Phillip David Ochs must rest in peace.

CHORUS:
You’ll march to no more battles,
 There’ll be no more sad refrains,
We all saw your crucifixion,
 You carried all that pain,
I wish I could have known you,
 But one day we all shall see,
The highwayman go marchin’ on mtv,
One day we’ll see Phil Ochs on mtv.

The man who hung in far rockaway,
 Was not the one who sung in Lincoln Park,
Now he’s just one more martyr,
 We’ve got too many of them,
A hero to us all,
 Though we didn’t see,
I still believe one day it just might be,
That the highwayman will go marchin’ on mtv.

Marketing not quite as dull as one might think

Ok, maybe i've not made a mistake in taking sports marketing as a degree, but tonight's lecture on how to promote your club was certainly worth the trip. I have to admit that years of the Old Parks attitude to the outside world has left me missing some of the important points that sucessful clubs take on board. There were several key things:

Welcome - since when do you see old parks welcoming someone they dont know who turns up at the club? It is simple and we need to realise it can help change the clubs image.

Funding - It's no suprise that we are struggling to stay solvent. We have no real idea of the direction we are heading and we just dont organise enough events that tap into potential growth areas.

The Neighbourhood - We really need to sell ourselves to the local area. There must be plenty of people in Barkingside who would be interested in some aspect of Parks, but I can't think of anyone that actually comes from there. Most of us live miles away from the place. I'm going to take it upon myself to do some door to door advertising - to let people know that we are there and that they are welcome.

The next few years will be very important. We really need to increase our retention rate (which is something I had been worried about for a while) and make sure we follow up lapsed members. Most of all we need to know exactly why people stay with us and what we can do to improve. I dont think Ive ever heard anyone ask members whether they want anything new before, its all been a matter of 'this is the way it happens here'. We really need to change if we are to survive the coming years and we need to bring the club together socially more. It's just not feasible to stay as only cricket club any more.

Disrespect

It isn't a bloody verb! why do people keep using it as such.

Musical Dreams

I dont know if this happens to everyone, but every few weeks or so I dream music. When it happens it's the best dream you can have, but I hate the fact that as soon as you begin to wake up it slips away, and by the time you drag yourself out of bed, it's completely gone - can't even remember a note. This is one of those days and it's also when I rue not being able to play an instrument, because even if I do remember something, I've no way of repeating that experience of the dream. Frustrating, but that's life I suppose.

First Chance Averages

Having just watched Andrew Strauss' terrific effort today, I'm completely cheesed off with various people who decide to ignore the importance of an innings due to the batsman getting a let off at some point. Its utterly ridiculous.

I've had this argument with someone before, who keeps banging on about first chance averages (FCA) (ie. a batsman's average if you take them to be out after the first drop in their innings). They are useless. Firstly, are we to assume that cricket follows some strange system whereby random events such as drop catches and lucky breaks arn't following random patterns? The only way FCA's can have any use (i.e. arn't relative to normal averages) is if one batsman has more luck than another - and luck by definition is random and therefore will not give one batsman more chances than another over a good sample period.

It is completely logical to therefore ignore these chances in the context of evaluating a players career as long as:

a) Fielders dont have some sort of agreement to drop more catches of one batsman than another.

b) Umpires dont have a vendetta against a player.

I think its safe to assume this doesnt occur.

Ive also heard it said that some batsman are more likely to spurn chances than others being an argument for FCA's usefulness. This is negated by the fact that players giving more chances will be out more quickly anyway! FCA's are a complete waste of time.

BBQ in march

Last night I decided to get the bbq out, needless to say it got dark and cold and I ended up cooking in starlight, then our outdoor lights went out and I was left with only the glowing embers to light me. Oh well, the bbq is going away til june now me thinks. Didnt help that the coals were shite as well.

More pope bashing

Click this link at your own risk, theres a picture of a dick awaiting you.

Evil Bastard.

More Cds

After a couple of months avoiding buying any cds, Ive finally sucumbed. Today I got a couple of discs Ive been waiting to get for ages. Rod MacDonald's 'White Buffalo' and John Gorka's 'Land Of The Bottom Line'. No more buying for another month or so now though, there's far too much to save for this summer. Lots of things on my list though; I was under the impression that staying away from amazon would at list stop my wants list from getting any longer, unfortunately it is growing by the day.

Another post on personal liberties

Interesting post on reddit today. As usual this sort of debate always sparks a war of words from both sides, but some of the arguments laid down there are nicely put and I think I'd like to summarise my favourites here for later heated discussion. I am a fairly hard line libertarian for the most part I suppose, though I wouldn't call myself conservative in any way other than the fact I endorse small government and individual liberty. Without trying to take the best of both worlds, I guess I'd like to see a government based around promoting a society of cooperation and community without inpinging on important liberties such as freedom of speech (which is so often where communism falls flat on it's face).

I particularly find the idea of illegal drugs absurd. I think one should be allowed to say and do whatever they wish as long as they do not compromise others ability to do the same. I do not find this statement to be a 'cop out'. There are many areas where total freedom to do as we wish would damage others social freedom - one example of this would be climate change - I don't consider someone to have an absolute right to have a gas guzzling car for instance. Drugs on the other hand are a completely different issue - and here's why: Every externality that drugs lead to are already illegal! Sure, some drugs may lead to violence and thats why we have laws against physical abuse. Using the logic of those who condemn drugs, we should make alcohol illegal, advertising of any remotely harmful product illegal, football matches should be illegal, short skirts should be illegal, in fact if you want to take away negative effects on society you should start banning any activity which reduces peoples productivity - maybe video games, mobiles and tv? The difference between drugs and other crimes is simple. Violence, for example, has a direct damaging effect on anothers freedom, drugs 'might' lead to an infringement of anothers freedom. If we start making all these 'mights' unlawful, where do we stop? It's a frankly scary and endless road towards complete control of peoples lives.

Having said this I'm not against regulation. Areas such as gun crime in the US is a prime example of where proper regulation of these 'mights' are very important. The idea that anyone could go and buy a machine gun is horrifying to say the least. 

Governments, in my opinion, are there to decide the way forward on large scale issues which cannot be decided on an individual level. I cannot speak for the nation on whether we should join the Euro, I believe that these sorts of decisions are questions best left to our democratically elected experts (not that we can't complain when they make mistakes). Individual issues, such as whether I drink or take drugs, as long as conducted in a responsible manner are none of the governments business in my opinion. If I then go on to commit a crime because of this, sure, you trial someone on that crime, but this should not be an issue if the population are well informed and regulated in an effective way. 

One may say that is easier said than done, yet it seems to work so well in other areas. We dont criminalise skirts because they incite rape? We criminalise rape. Why are drugs any different? It's not as if criminalisation actually has a great deal of effect. I havent discussed some of the positive effects of regualtion over criminalisation, I have been merely focussing on a moral standpoint. By legalising drugs, we would instantly cut the need for criminal enforcement, saving billions and remove the need for criminal organisations on the grand scale that we have now. Regulation removes dangerous cut drugs from the black market, allows better healthcare and education to be afforded to users and creates an opportunity for taxation for the government.

Reading

Well today Ive been doing some reading for my environmental management course; gotthrough a chapter this afternoon. Unfortunately this text has a very poor first chapter. I'm sure that it isnt particularly relevant to the rest of the course, but it doesnt exactly fill me with a great deal of hope that Mr. John Brady has edited the rest of the book to a decent standard. It's basically an introduction, but it is filled with factual inconsistencies (the first line states the the Earth is 10 Billion years old!). It goes on to adopt the same old falacy of arctic ice melt affecting sea level and is far too heavily laced with 'lovelockism's' for my liking. Still, maybe chapter 2 will be better; it is afterall, supposed to be a book on environmental management, not on the sad hopeless future we are all heading for. There must be some light at the end of the tunnel or they wouldn't have bothered with the book, surely?

Frederick Douglass Kirkpatrick

Im gradually working my way through the smithsonian folkways catalogue (it may take some time!). Discovery of the week is Rev. Frederick Douglass Kirkpatrick. Very bluesy protest folk from the late 60s, with a great voice as well. The guy is a bit of a hero of the civil rights movement, setting up Deacons for Defence and Justice in 1964 to oppose the KKK in the south. Give it a go, the whole album is up on Spotify.

Today Im planning a clear out of my room. List of suprise finds to be posted later.