boy vs world
because it's not what you're like, it's what you like
a blog about nothing which may occasionally approach something
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
i want my brain back
and are for the mining super profits tax - "proposed under the former Rudd government [which is] no longer an option" - but will do NOTHING about either. furthermore, when did the Fairfax media start publishing libel as opinion? why did the constitution give this girl six years? and can someone explain to her the difference between principle and politics? possibly Peter Garrett? also, surely it was a desperate attempt to appear as popular as Tony Abbott...?
Monday, July 04, 2011
my thoughts on: delusionists
Monday, June 27, 2011
my thoughts on: the real world OR australian terrorists
Thursday, June 02, 2011
my thoughts on: God
Sunday, May 22, 2011
my thoughts on: the real world
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
my thoughts on: australian conservatism
dude. the australian (voting) public is inherently conservative/right wing. the media is irrelevant. julia stands for nothing. the greens are a one-policy party who are in favour of everything ("free hugs" for example). before you can do anything, you have to get elected. rudd was and did nothing. hence was summarily dismissed. julia produced the next best result at last year's election for the ALP other than losing. now she is hamstrung by a parliament that could swing with a heart attack. the greens are dominating the agenda. conservative parties are polling at 45% of the primary vote. most of thosed polled presumably do not want policy directed by the greens. Labor's primary vote is at 30%, its lowest ever. Julia complains that Abbott opposes everything. He does. He's the leader of the opposition. But instead of opposing him with principled policy, she presents to the public a hopefully palatable/electable version of Labor that distinguishes itself from no way from those who sit across from her in the house of representatives. if Labor truly were a progressive party, why not be one? why not support gay marriage? why not propose an ETS because it is the right thing to do and supported by the science? Gillard has always been about what can be done. not what should be done. she is the ultimate consensus/compromise politician. she successfully negotiated government for her party. but she will not lead them to the next election. if she does, they will not win it. she is unelectable
my thoughts on: men for others
Xavier College, in Kew, was responsible for most of my secondary education. The (illegal) behaviour of a contingent of their students yet again today is nothing short of reprehensible and contemptible. While I hold no particular affinity for my old school, it does sadden me that the school itself is now inescapably described as “notorious” in your news article.
My contemporaries are now lawyers, doctors, pharmacists, senior treasury officials. While these professional outcomes would certainly have been encouraged and desired when we were all at school, I do not believe the environment there was particularly conducive to producing them. This is because the archetypal Xavier student – the sporting jock – is recognised by the school as its and rewarded as such. These leaders go on to espouse the Ignatian ethos of being “men for others”. Unfortunately, these men are the said same who fail to realise that before you can call yourself a man for others you must first earn the title of a man.
And so to my sadness; I hold a great affection and gratitude towards my teachers. The Jesuits are deservedly recognised as renowned educators. They truly do instil in their students (or, at least, the ones who are responsive to it) a capacity to think for themselves. They do not deserve to be repaid for their endeavours by the bad press created because of the criminal behaviour of some of their charges. Sadder still is that, if this letter is published, I will be disowned and pilloried by the school, at least privately and that this will cause them further controversy. But what about this controversy is not deserved? What have I said that is not true? Surely something needs to change. It is a rotten state of affairs.
Malcolm Thomas, Class of 1997
my thoughts on: criticism
i myself have only got around to immersing myself if the festival in the last few days (and it ends on Sunday!). in that time i have seen amongst others two shows which i particularly enjoyed; they were deanne smith's about freakin' time and eddie perfect's misanthropology. as you would know deanne has been nominated for the Barry and is playing a quite small, poorly ventilated room in the basement of the vic hotel. i felt her show suffered from the critical acclaim (and her nomination) as the audience was (much) older than I and, i think, she expected. they were not prepared for the profanity/confrontational element to the show disguised, as it was, by the quirky/cutesie delivery. of course these comedic devices are the currency in which the performers trade. and hardened festival veterans are accustomed to such subject matter. the problem with a particularly favourable review is that it attracts a crowd who otherwise would not consider or even know of the existence of the show reviewed. it's the curse of popularity; as the number of people who know you increases, so too does the number who don't like you.
eddie acknowledged this also at the spiegeltent noting this was his first show since the success of offspring on channel ten and informing his newfound audience upon the conclusion of the musical number "daddy's tits" that he had always been this obscene, he "had to tone it back for television." the comedy festival is a strange beast or for the last decade, at least in my recollection, a stridently independent and creative one. in that time it has never embraced traditional forms. and it has been a wild ride.
daniel kitson, whom i have seen every year since his debut in 2002, finally won the Barry in 2007(ish?) for "its the fireworks talking." of course, he should have won is '03 for "something" (the show had won the perrier in edinburgh the year before). and 06 for "weltanschauung." he has, since his profile has risen, endeavoured to shun popularity/the mainstream. his sold out run of a 10pm theatre piece at the arts centre this year may act as commentary on the success or otherwise of his approach.
the herald sun is a populist, tabloid paper. they don't get it. and, understandably, as the media sponsor of the festival they struggled to appreciate and embrace the tenor and unpredictable nature of it. unfortunately for them, there is no other city in australia that could hold such an event. it is intrinsically and undeniably a melbourne institution. how the herald sun would wish it could say the same of itself.