Yoga – The eagle has (crash) landed

I’ve been to yoga this week.  I’ve flirted with yoga classes for years and years, never attending a class with any real regularity.

Nothing has changed.

I rate yoga classes on the experience with the teachers, their style of yoga and whether or not I can walk without pain the next day.

I like this teacher

She is a good vibey sort, not quite a hippy, but not averse to using words such as ‘universal’ ‘One’ ‘earth’ ‘ground’ ‘consciousness” in various sentences.  I like her because I like her attitude – she is relaxed about the class, she gives variations for people with back issues and easy poses for noobs.

I also like her for not putting her hands on me to ‘help‘ me into a better downward facing dog position.  This happened to me with a more hands-on teacher years ago.  She went round the class, as our asses were in the air (downward facing dog looks like this, for the uninitiated):

In this position you are already feeling a little vulnerable, not to mention green.

Anyway, if we weren’t doing it as perfectly as Kermit there, she’d push you into a better alignment.  This might involve some unexpected shoving of hips, re-positioning of feet and pushing on the back.

In any case, for a beginner, to stretch the muscles to far in the first sessions has the unremarkable result that the next day HURTS.  I remember I couldn’t walk without my muscles protesting for a couple of days after that ‘help’ from that teacher.

So now I pick my classes with the next day in mind.  This session we did ‘eagle’ pose, which I am not familiar with.  I have done sun salutes at home and know the basic names and positions since yoga is really good for your body and I do rate it highly as a  form of physical and mental exercise.

EAGLE POSE: Best left to the eagles?

Well, it’s a contortion.  My strongest yogic area are leg stretches – the forward bends feel easiest to my body.  My weakest area are the balancing acts.  The eagle involves wrapping one foot around the calf (so, balancing awkwardly on one leg), whilst battling with your arms to weave your fingers into a very unnatural position, and then… we bend forward.

FALL FROM GRACE

I am not too good at co-ordination of movement.  I am worse at balance.  I realised my eagle was going to fall and in the few seconds left between the thought and the action my brain went into overdrive.  I quickly assessed my falling options:

• Forward? An elderly lady in front of me = ABSOLUTELY NOT

• Try to redirect my imbalance to the back or side so that I would stagger back, hopefully avoiding collision? = BETTER

• Quick look to the side, ascertaining from the mirror the woman behind me is young = You’ll have to do!  Sorry love.

So, stagger I did.

Heavily putting the suspended leg back on the floor, whilst trying to untangle my hands in the process.  I freed my fingers, clumsily moving to the side and back whilst I got my balance back.

Luckily didn’t bang into anyone.  Apologised to the people I was keeling towards.  Leapt back on my own mat, two feet firmly on the ground.

Where eagles dare, I shall solemnly retreat.

ESA benefit changes – how will it affect me?

I started writing on this topic and the post became too long, so I’m splitting it.  I am one person, affected by a welfare benefits overhaul, who doesn’t know how to feel yet.  So, first part:

There is a massive change in welfare benefits in the UK at the moment, which is of concern to anyone who is already claiming sickness related benefits or will shortly need to.

If you are in the process of being assessed or wish to download the forms and information guides, then the dwp website has the links if you click—–> here.

Since there is the whole country to get through, people must feel the impact, for good or bad, at staggered times.

It’s my turn to be staggered.

Well, I completed the limited capability for work form, within the month, as required.  I then awaited for the results.

A few days ago I got the decision letter telling me that I had been placed in the work related activity group (as opposed to the ’support’ group, which is reserved for those with limited capability for work related activity - KEEP UP, WILL YOU, this stuff is reviting.  I’m about to RIVET you.

 I was totally anxious when I got that letter.  I’ve not had time to read through the time-consuming, dreary particulars, which I am endeavouring to do, one clause at a time, but it really set me in a tail spin of anxiety when it hit me that I knew nothing about the new structure.

The greatest fear comes from simply not knowing.

I only knew the true extent of my not-knowing, when I received the decision letter, which helped to clarify that I was in a very vague category, with vague responsibilities to attend and take part in job focused interviews (or my benefit could be affected).  That last part was pretty clear.

Phrases like taking reasonable steps, seeing a job focused adviser at regular intervals rang out crystal clear, like piccolo song across a frosty lake.

The People vs A. Mouse

Are mice more intelligent than they used to be?  Are we more stupid?

Why, oh why can’t we catch this little devil?

 

The facts of the case:

One rodent of mouse like proportions, brownish in colour, spotted by House Dwellers (HDs), about three weeks ago, in a bedroom.

HDs took prompt action to catch said intruder.  All rooms searched.  Pellets found in two bedrooms, kitchen and bathroom.

HDs have dealt with mice before.  Traps were set along the sides of the walls where ‘activity’ i.e. mouse crap, was present.

HDs believe mice prefer the sides of rooms as read and advised by other HDs.

Mouse is causing great disruption to HDs sleeping patterns and general level of well-being.

Mouse has not ventured onto a trap during the time of setting, starting with the first sighting two/three weeks ago.

Mouse is still present as it is still leaving small oval black presents overnight, particularly in the kitchen.

Mouse has been tempted with foods that have previously been successful:

• chocolate
• biscuit
• specialized bait from the shop
• peanut butter AND biscuit

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE CASE:

HD 1 – yours truly – was first to spot and scream report sighting.  She was a little unsure of herself since it was seen at night in her room, when she sat up and put on the light for only a few seconds, around 2am.

However, though HD 1 may have thought herself hallucinating, her story was corroborated the very next day, when HD2 – of sound judgement and good moral character – also screamed reported having seen ‘it’.

The second sighting was at 8pm, very early for a mouse in light of past experience.  HD2 has also complained of general noises, indicative of scratching, in her room.

HD1 now sleeps with the light on most of the night as well as a DVD playing as she doesn’t want to be frightened out of her mind by sudden appearance of A. Mouse.

HD2 has moved sleeping arrangements because she has alternatives.

The Mouse is still at large but there is a warrant out for its arrest, dead or alive.

This Mouse appears different to previous mice in a couple of ways:

1. It is not grey.
2. It does not keep the same hours as previous blighters (it doesn’t wait until the middle of the night to come out).
3. It isn’t going for the bait.
4. It appears cockier – it has been seen by HD2 while the light was on 8pm ish.

HD1 – myself – cannot bear the thought of a trap going off in her room and has therefore set two unsprung traps with food, to ascertain whether it is in that room and wanting food.  No food has been found missing.

All HDs have had disrupted nights and are getting very frustrated by this mouse-behaviour.

HDs realise that it is not A. Mouse’s fault that it has entered their abode, but nevertheless they are adamant that they will not live happily alongside it.

This case is complex, but if there are any new developments in mouse catching insight, HDs will try anything within reason.

 

Tinker Tailer is an odd film plus whatever else comes to mind

Tinker Tailer Soldier Spy – based on the John Le Carre novel, watched as a result of getting acquainted with Cumberbatch as Sherlock.  What else has he done?  Is it any good?  This also led me to watch the 2009 film of Sherlock with Robert Downey Junior.  But let’s have order at this meeting.  First, the TTSS film:

I haven’t read a John Le Carre novel, but I know they’re popular and I know they’re based around the obsessive surveillance of powerful people, set in the cold war period – spy novels.

Oh! My! God!  I did not enjoy the film at all.  It was so plodding.  It was so lacking in either character or action, one of which is a necessity to keep me engaged.  The lack of character was due to the ensemble style, the lack of action, or perhaps, interest, was due to the fact I didn’t care about any of the washed out (visibly and figuratively) characters – too many of them to get to know.

I expect it’s technically brilliant – most films I don’t enjoy are critically appreciated.  It felt like a cross between a mid-week episode of  Eastenders and James Bond without the fantasy.  This mixed in with a distinctly European feel – a film one would find with subtitles.

Gary Oldman plodded around, trying to find out who the mole is, the fly in the ointment.  He looks ill.  They all do.  Actually, did someone try to assassinate all our stellar British actors because their pallor left something to be desired, almost  like they all had gastroenteritis and were leaving the set to vomit and faint between takes.  Colin Firth, Ciaran Hinds, Benedict Cumberbatch (okay, he’s never rosy-cheeked), Gary Oldman, and the rest.  Are you all okay?  I hope it was merely a lens filter.

So, ensemble casts with intricate plots about moles and telephone calls and impeccable acting are not for me then, it would seem.

Next item?

Robert Downey Junior and Jude Law, as Holmes and Watson respectively, in the 2009 film.  Enjoyable.  I did quite like it.  I have read Conan Doyle, but not for ages (wishing I still had the stories so I could check up on the references – this always happens whenever an author gets a renewed interest – it’s always the book I think ‘I’ll probably not read that again.  May as well clear it out, and look at the three inches of dust Yuk

Yeah, back to RDJ – passable accent, I think.  I’m hampered in the analysis by my geographical distance from London and my chronological distance from Victorian London.

I’ve read that the T.V. people are keen to stress the lack of competition between the two portrayals of Sherlock – no no no, no competition, we’re doing modern Sherlock, not Victorian, no need for comparison here..

Well, they are a little disingenuous on that score, in my opinion.  This has happened loads of times when two similar versions of author’s works have hit the small screen and big screen at the same time – even worse if two similars hit the big screen close after each other.

Anyway, they are comparable, because, doh! they are playing a role – they are reliant on their ability to evoke emotions in the audience.  They are playing human beings.  It really doesn’t wash to say just because one of the portrayals lives in modern day Lan-dan, and the other lives in Victorian times, they are not in competition.

Having said that, liked them both, so no problems with one viewer – they’ll breathe a sigh of relief knowing that, I’m sure.

Couple of points I found interesting though.  The first was the infamous drug use, or lack thereof, in the cinematic and T.V. portrayals.  The second was the insistence on bringing in Irene Adler and inflating her relative importance.

The drugs are mentioned in the film, but by oblique reference “Holmes you do know this stuff you’re drinking is meant for eye surgery?”, and only really evident in a couple of scenes where Robert DJ is cooped up acting crazy. In the new T.V. version there’s a drug raid at his flat, a nod from his brother that he has some sort of history and will use it to coerce Sherlock to do his bidding.  So, neither of these versions man up and show him taking cocaine or properly include it.  They should just have left it out altogether instead of being so bloody coy.  The T.V. version has Cumberbatch addicted to…nicotine patches!!!

About The Woman.  I’ve read that she only appears in one, two at the most, of the Sherlock stories and yet she’s a major player in the film version – the only woman who’s outwitted him, a woman he has feelings for.  In the T.V. version she gets a large role in the episode which refers to the story in which she is mentioned.

WHY????  Are they afraid that if there’s no love interest the actors will blanch, like the Tinker Tailor lot and plod about listlessly?  This is about modern standards that require sexual tension to be inserted into every plotline.  I only despair at this because it does an injustice to the viewers.  Most of us can handle the fact that Conan Doyle wrote some fabulous detective fiction that involved a man for whom romance was not on the menu.  He’s cerebral, he’s a sociopath, he’s interested in his pipe, mental dexterity, cocaine and danger.  Oh, yeah, and nicotine patches.  Mustn’t forget those.

Both these recent T.V. and film versions…

I have lost my aitch…Crisis…had to shut down and restart and the aitch has come back into action – seriously hope it doesn’t conk out again.  I can’t spend the rest of my blogging avoiding words with h in them, look how many times I have used it in this paragrap (last word just preparing you for the worst)…

…Back on track, what was the last thing…oh, yes, cocaine and women – include the former, exclude the latter – the death of many a beloved T.V. drama turns on the problematic issue that sexual tension is riveting, until it is resolved.  Resolved it must be.  Pride and Prejudice ends with a wedding.  Downton Abbey will not survive over five years of sultry looks, parting  and reuniting Mary and Matthew.  Not that it wasn’t a great drama anyway – it was wonderful in other ways – but including the will-they won’t-they as a bit for us to chew, does shorten a dramas lifespan.

Sherlock the film and T.V. both have the rare opportunity to remove this love possibility – even if it is only mildly hinted at.  The drama is in the escapades, the mental flurries, the friendship betwixt the leads.  I say leads – Martin Freeman won some sort of best supporting actor gong.  This is a disservice, in my opinion.  To achieve the illusion that you are supporting a lead character, whilst being utterly responsible for allowing the lead to bounce off you and be the reflective surface from which they shine – that’s not a supporting actor.  That’s two excellent leading men.  Speech over.

Not really.  I’m soooo changeable (Graham Norton accent with sinister poolside backdrop).  Yes, just saying, they didn’t need to include the oh-so-fuckable women in roles they didn’t occupy in the author’s novels (if the lazy internet reading I did is correct in this matter regarding her prominent abscence).  Bring back the cocaine.  Sociopaths/psychopaths are well known for boredom that leads to reckless drug abuse among there other traits and many are high functioning, in racy jobs, getting their kicks without murdering anyone.

I am going to stop watching so much T.V. as soon as Spring comes and I remember there are other things in life, lingering glances, diets, friendships to re-kindle, books to read without a kindle, cleaning, drinking, exercising and watching that program on T.V. about the lambing season.  Oops…

Type ‘A’ Personality

 

Just wondering, was there a poll when they allocated letters of the alphabet to personality types?  If so, did the Type A’s (driven, neurotic, anxious, perfectionists, great fun at parties) all petition to be awarded the A Grade because nothing less would do? :p

I am in jest, of course.  I consider myself to have some of the ‘A’ traits, but I have reigned them in a lot and everyone knows those categories are tedious as hell.  They should be thought of as signs in the supermarket, pointers if you will – one aisle for the cereals, one for the meat.  If you need a packet of cheerios, you look in the cereal aisle, but you’re still going to have to skim the shelves through the mire of 100s of others.

New Year’s List (+ why resolutions don’t work)

Things I’m looking forward to in the New Year:

1. Getting my new cameras.  After painstaking pricing versus features comparisons, I’ve ordered two.  A cheap Kodak compact (not had a Kodak before) and a Nikon ‘bridge’ camera to try out some manual controls.
2. Not going out on New Year’s Eve, having ‘contrived’ fun, as Alison Graham of Radio Times so aptly puts it.
3. Not feeling left out for not going out this New Year’s Eve.  I’m virusy to exactly the right amount – past the sweating/shivering stage, able to keep boredom at bay, but not well enough to want to par-tayyy!!
4. Maybe a bit of good luck?  I don’t mind in what way, but I’m putting it out there to the God’s of Luck.  Chuck a bit my way and I’ll be grateful

I don’t have resolutions.  I’m going to give you a choice – a cerebral la-di-da reason (go to answer ‘a’), and a down-t-to-earth reason (go to answer ‘b’)

a)  Resolutions don’t work because

the New Year is only a new year for a few days.  We don’t change our habits just because we’ve reached the end of a year, and when we aim to do so, we invariably fail.  This isn’t our fault.  It is a product of  forced ideals of change without the conscious volition to carry them through.  It’s like a diet that always starts on a Monday and finishes on the Tuesday.  When you want to create a change, Wednesday afternoon is as good a time as Monday morning or New Year’s Day.

b)  Resolutions don’t work because

they suck.  Most of the naughty stuff that goes on the ‘I won’t do this anymore’ list at New Year – smoking, drinking, drugging, cheating, lying, donuts etc – are pleasures.  January signals a return to work for most, an end to the holidays and Christmas festivities.  Now, does that sound like a good time to forgo your 10-a-day habit?

Depression Poem

Depression seeps through

And, for

A Moment

Is terrifying.

 

Fortunately

The especial type of terror

Lasts but 

 

A Moment

 

Unfortunately

Depression has an eclectic taste

In Terror

The next 

 

Moment

 

Filled, as expertly

As the former.

 

Grab on to something

Lest you be consumed.

a lily by any other name would smell as bad

 

 

Anti-Ode: Lily In The Vase

 

 

Oh, Lily, I did not expect thee,

your essence erased from my memory.

My, my, we meet again,

Your once forgotten smell,

nay, pong, I rightly say,

has besieged my nasal cavity.

 

Why, now, after all these years, must we meet again?

‘Must’, Aye! For that your presence is,

an antique wardrobe re-opened,

a grandma-scented knicker drawer,

a must I must forbear.

 

You are a birthday gift for Mother,

a romantic gesture,

in a marriage long-lived,

I must leave you alone.

 

You, with pride of place, the table in the hall,

Your fumes, slowly creeping,

ensconce all rooms by stealth.

 

“You either love them or hate them,” quothe Mother.

Well, such consolation for my infected nostrils,

I shall pass the sentiment on.

 

I would not wish you for myself,

not even on my grave,

thou odious, olfactious, weed of nature.

 

Though beguiling in aspect,

with a countenance one might say graceful,

But if thou must be must and mothball smelling,

I would we had never met.

 

TV Crushes – deep south dramas

I’m currently infatuated with the influx of American deep south drama and the actors represented in said dramas.  In particular, Timothy Olyphant (I know, stupid last name, but overlooking that) in Justified.  The gun-toting, cowboy hat-wearing, southern-drawling LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER with his own interpretation of the rules.  I paraphrase: “You draw first, and I’ll put ‘ya down.”  Hell yeah!

Having had time to gather a few T.V. crushes over the years it has become glaringly obvious that I’m attracted to the persona, not the person.  At first I thought I really did LOVE Scott from Neighbours; then I got older and moved on to Dean Cain from Superman: The New Adventures (think that was its title).  So, now I’m aware that my latest T.V. crushes are but ephemera, destined to disperse like the smoke trails from the caterpillar’s pipe in Alice in Wonderland.  But for now-

Behold my crushes:

Timothy Olyphant.  It’s in the eyes.

Then we have True Blood and its cornucopia of “talent”, both male and female.  This really is a smorgasboard of lusty choice.  It depends on your type.  Guy’s/bi’s you could have Tara, Sookie, or the Lesbian Dominatrix Vampire who hangs out at Fangtasia.  For male crush-material, we have much to choose from, but I’ve settled on Eric – vampire and club owner.  However, he wasn’t crushworthy from the start.  Let me illustrate.  Here we have his first incarnation – greasy long hair, reminiscent of Cobain grunge plus suit:

Yeah, not-so-much.  I’ll pass.

Then, a revelation.  CUT HIS HAIR!, give him a human angle in the storylines and, here we have, new and improved bad but sexy:

The internet is perilous where crushes are concerned.  It is AT YOUR PERIL that you look back into the history of your current idol.  You will be disappointed to find that they weren’t always this buff/cute/heart-melt material.  This last picture is also of Eric (Alexander Skarsgaard), but it has moved into gay icon territory, rather than brooding intensity.  If you are a heterosexual squeamish male, look away now:

(‘scuse me while I just go throw up)  Yuk!  Why?  This is not smouldering sexuality that lets the imagination fill in the blanks.  This is way too gay porn for my taste.  Maybe that’s where this pic was targeted.  But see how little it takes for our crushes to be..crushed..

I don’t know why the Deep South has had such a popularity explosion.  I think it has something to do with the heat.  Heat that’s dry, tastes like sand in your mouth, a million miles from our temperate rainy island.  Everyone loves a change and I’m loving the southern drawling dramas, dripping with heat and sweat, greasy fried chicken and vampires who own nightclubs.

Anyone care to share current crushes?  Go on!  I won’t tell anyone.

Should suicide discussion forums be banned on net?

 

Okay, bear with me here.  I just came across this article in the Guardian on line – I didn’t search for it, it was one of those daily headlines you can have pop up in your browser from different papers each day.

Apparently a guy, aged 35, and another woman, got in touch on the internet on a forum that allows people to appeal for ‘suicide partners’, like some sort of macabre dating ad I suppose??

In any case, they met up two weeks later and followed through with their plans.  In this article it’s the father of the man involved who is saying these websites should be banned.  An understandable point of view for someone suffering a recent loss of a loved one, especially as he says his son hadn’t shown signs of depression or other issues.

I’m just a bit shocked, really.  I thought I was reasonably conversant with mental health on the internet, but I haven’t heard of this one before.  Putting aside the ethics of such a website, why would people want a suicide partner?  I mean, I can see why a tiny minority of suicidal people might prefer not to die alone.  I can see why they might think doing it with another person could reduce the chance of something going wrong.  Well, sort of.  But even so, there’s a leap between thinking it’d be nicer to die with someone else, to actually seeking out a website like that and fixing it up with a stranger.  Am I missing something?  This is odd, right?

Moving away from my reaction, though, what about the other issues raised?  Let’s take the legal side first – it’s much less thorny than the ethical debate.  The article states,

Helping others kill themselves is illegal under British law. Following growing concern about misuse of the internet to promote suicide methods, it is now an offence to undertake an act “capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide or attempted suicide of another person with the intention to so encourage or assist”.

The person committing the offence does not need to know the other person.

So, the law is pretty clear, then.  I’m going to assume the offence only relates to actually aiding a person physically.  I mean they would have to meet up with the person (as these two did), procure something for the person and/or be present at the attempt, to break the law.  If I’m wrong let me know, but from that paragraph quoted, I can’t see how merely posting on such a website would fall under the category of an “act”.

Apparently a website is only forced to remove illegal material, under European law, when it has been notified of the illegality of the content.  But that’s another issue.

My first inclination, when I thought about whether a suicide discussion forum should be banned, was OF COURSE NOT.  We have no right to stop people talking about whatever subject they wish.  It would be as silly as commanding patients in a psychiatric ward never to discuss suicide (whether inside or when they leave the ward) and prohibiting them from making suicide pacts with one another.  I mean, just the idea of bringing that up as a not-to-do seems absurdly self-defeating.

My gut feeling is that people will get information, if they really want it.  If they go to the trouble of creating an on-line identity, finding a site which caters to their desires, then are you really telling me that they couldn’t have done that anyway?  In terms of discussion of ‘what works best’ for suicide methods, if we didn’t have the internet, we’d still have libraries.  A brief look in the medical/psychiatric section of the library would probably furnish a determined person with the information they require.

I’m ready to be told I’m wrong, if I am.  If there are statistics showing that the internet has considerably increased successful suicides then I can understand why a call to ban them might be suggested.  I don’t think the internet can be censored this way though, even if we want to.  As long as responsible mental health sites exist in greater quantity than these odd offshoots then I would think splashing an article about them in a national newspaper would make the situation worse.  Just my thoughts there…