Monday 29 December 2014

The Final Mac'n'Cheese.

Because I'm going on this diet, I'm having a few foods over the next few days that I won't be able to have anymore!

The one thing I was certain I had to have was macaroni cheese. It's one of my favourite dishes and I'll miss it a lot. I want to share my recipe so other people can enjoy it.

Disclaimer: This is NOT good for you- it is serious comfort food. It is massively heavy, cheesy and indulgent. Great for a treat, or if you really want to impress.


Scott's Final Macaroni Cheese.

Ingredients:-

2oz extra mature cheddar
2oz Red Leicester 
2oz Parmigiano Regganio (Parmesan)
250ml Double cream
250ml milk
2oz butter
1oz plain flour
1tsp ground black pepper
1tsp sea salt.
250g macaroni
Approx 3tbsp breadcrumbs
150g smoked bacon lardons- or slice some of your own to 1cm width

Directions:-
Melt butter in saucepan. Using a whisk, gradually add the flour to make a roux. Whisk constantly. It should thicken, bubble and pale, but not become solid. If it does, you've added too much flour.

Gradually whisk in the cream and milk. Add salt and pepper and whisk constantly until the mixture thickens and bubbles. Add the cheese, a little bit at a time, and whisk in until completely melted. Set this to one side.

Fry bacon pieces in a pan with a little butter or oil until well crisped. Set aside on kitchen roll to soak excess grease.

Cook your macaroni as per packaging instructions. Combine with your cheesy sauce, and stir in bacon lardons. Spoon into a small lasagne dish or pie dish, and top with breadcumbs and a little extra cheddar if desired.

Bake at 200°C for 30 mins, or until the topping is golden and bubbling. Set aside for ten mins before serving!

Enjoy!

Thursday 25 December 2014

Christmas by Numbers

Gifts
Cards received: 4
Cards recycled: 4
Presents received: 5
Presents given: 3
Presents deferred until January sales: 6
Presents disliked and reactions concealed: 0

Food
Courses eaten: 2
Chipolatas eaten: 7
Alcoholic Beverages Consumed: 4
Mince pies scoffed: 0
Cakes ingested: 3
Chocolates eaten: toofuckinmany.
Foods eaten that I won't be able to have when I start Paleo: 8

Interaction and People
"Merry Christmas!" Heard: innumerable.
People hugged: 1
Hands shaken: 6
Christmas Hats seen: 2
Festive jumpers spotted: 1
Crackers Pulled: 1
Awful jokes:
"Humbug" uttered by myself: 1

Media
Films watched: 1
TV watched (hrs): 7
Religion mentioned: 1
Jesus seen: Nope.
Santa mentioned: 3
Santa Seen: once.
Snowfall: 0cm
Snow Mentioned: 2


Appropriate this.

Something common to Tumblr (that hovel of online humanity) reared its ugly head recently. I read an article a few weeks back about how Hip-Hop is a music of black origin (true) and that it's wrong for white people to perform in this genre.
This is another example of what is referred to as supposed "cultural appropriation". Meaning you are taking a part of a culture that isn't yours and using it to entertain or as decoration etc. It's the same reason that people frown upon Native American head-dresses at Halloween, or white people getting certain tribal tattoos, or displaying a Zulu spear, or dream catcher in your house.

Now that I've explained it; allow me to to illustrate why I think the whole concept is complete bullshit:

Culture is what makes small groups of people different. By learning about it, we learn about the world. For that reason, it is something to be respected, but it's also something to be shared.

 There are plenty reasons why people shouldn't wear a Native American war bonnet- in a way it's like someone dressed in full military gear wearing a Victoria Cross or Congressional Medal of Honour- when they have never been in the armed forces. However, stating that you shouldn't wear it because you're white is complete nonsense. Used in a costume at Halloween, either is completely harmless- the person in costume is not trying to pass themselves off as what they're dressed as (I did not get people to refer to me as Solid Snake this year) and are not stating they are deserving of any honours or possessing of any skills their attire would suggest (I am in no way stealthy, and there's nothing wrong with my eye.)

Furthermore I imagine the vast majority of  Native American people don't really care if you have a dream catcher or tribal pipe in your house, so the idea of some white person on their high horse being offended FOR them just makes me laugh. People get replicas of these traditional items (because usually they aren't genuine) because they are somewhat interested in the culture. They can become a talking point, or simply be to study out of self interest. This is harmless.

Tradition is a vacuous concept. Because something is traditional does not make it acceptable or correct. Ancient Mayan cultures offered up human sacrifices to their gods at certain times of the year. It was tradition. Does that make it okay? This complacent "we've always done it that way" thinking is a load of rubbish. Like human beings and other life on Earth, culture evolves. It moves in the wake of the moral zeitgeist, and old useless traditions are thrown away- with new ones accepted in their place.

The idea of an object being sacred is also complete rubbish. An item is only valuable if people place value upon it. Therefore, how can a decorative African mask in a british living room be sacred? Furthermore, that something is sacred usually means that supernatural powers and superstition is ascribed to it- such as the mask granting the wearer the ability to travel to "the spirit world" or talk to a god. These are thoughts which no rational person would entertain for a moment without evidence. Such historical superstitions have long been debunked- and history is now the object's only value- because such relics come from a time when certain things could not be explained. Now, they can. Older cultures as a whole have only historical value in a modern world, and I firmly believe modern religions will be the same. I also am firmly of the opinion that if something is irrational, and continues to be, despite amassed evidence to the contrary; it does not deserve respect. In fact it should be disdained and ridiculed.

"The religion of one age, is the literary entertainment of the next."

However, as for music, with which I opened this post, I have to say only this- music has no colour or ethnicity. Music, like laughter, is a universal language. The fact that Requiem Mass has Christian religious themes sung in Latin, does not make it any less a beautiful piece of music- much as Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries is no less valuable or appealing being based on old Norse mythology. If you deny yourself music because it isn't part of the culture you were born in, you're an idiot. If that was the case, only people in the Mississippi delta would listen to Blues, and the rest of the world would have no Rock, no Metal, no modern Pop, no RnB and no Jazz. Music is to be shared and explored- in fact- today I urge you to go and find a piece of music on an instrument you've never heard of. Try the Guzheng, or the Harp-Guitar, or the Djembe, or the Hurdy-Gurdy. Go and do it right now, and you'll be all the better for it! 

As for my own culture- I am a Scottish person. I don't care who wears tartan, I don't care who wears a kilt. If say, an American citizen wanted to relocate over here, wear a Stuart tartan kilt every day of their life, eat haggis, drink single malt, attend and dance at ceilidhs, and learn how to bagpipe- I would have no qualms whatsoever. The vast majority of Scots would welcome them heartily. 

How you kill a culture, is not by allowing people to take inspiration from, and imitate it. How you kill a culture is by fencing it off and watching it slowly become extinct.

Wednesday 24 December 2014

What You Buy With Free Speech.

Yesterday, a young man in Sunderland was arrested, for making an insensitive,  and disgusting joke on Twitter, at the expense of those killed in Glasgow's George Square.

I won't mention his name, nor will I lend him a platform for his bile to be spread further, by copy-pasting his tweet. I do this out of respect for the victims of the incident- one of whom I knew and worked with. Jack was a kind, generous, talkative and genial soul.

In the wake of his arrest- many Twitter users (Twits?) are claiming injustice, and protesting it with the ever predictable cries of "it was only a joke" and "freedom of speech". 

Such nonsense makes me groan.

Yes, it is important to maintain freedom of speech- even if it is a view we disagree with, we must fight for people's right to say it. However, having freedom to say something, and exercising that right, doesn't  absolve a person of all responsibility and accountability for their words. Furthermore, when you sign up to a social media site, you agree to abide by the terms and conditions of use, including conduct.

The fact of the matter is, this individual grossly insulted not only the victims, their friends and family, but their whole nation. It caused a large amount of people considerable distress and upset. It violated Twitter's terms of use, and apart from anything else, it was also racist and thus in contravention of the law.

As for the comedy aspect- I agree that there should be no boundaries in what can, and cannot be joked about. Tragedy and comedy have always gone hand in hand. Invoking humour- especially around the darker events in our history and humanity- makes life more bearable. It is an important part of our culture, and it helps in how we deal with such events emotionally. However, comedy has a qualifier. If people don't find it funny, it's not a joke- despite what your intentions were. If you have to explain why it's funny, the joke has failed. If it's set out to hurt some people and make others laugh, I'm not sure that meets the criteria of a joke either- and it should be noted that this is profoundly different to being the butt of a joke. Jokes should not aim to have a selective audience- surely they should aim to entertain all? Humour is very individual, but comedians all have one goal; to entertain. This is why despite not appealing to everyone, the likes of Frankie Boyle and Ricky Gervais are an important facet of the genre. 

I recently wrote a post about offence, and I feel I need to make a differentiation between what I am saying here, and what I was saying there. When I go on the attack in my writings; I attack ideas, not people. Ideas do not have rights- people do. Sometimes, in support of my criticism of ideas, I may invoke an opinion or criticism of someone- but you will never find me sincerely wishing someone physical harm or relishing in suffering. It's also important when making criticisms, to restrict oneself to use of the facts, and refrain from use of ad hominem attacks, which undermine your point. 

So before you leap to the defence of someone exercising their "freedom of speech" or decide to do so yourself:

Think.

Tuesday 23 December 2014

The Only Real Power of Prayer.

Everytime there is a tragedy, or someone is going through a loss, people often say they are praying for those involved. 

If we are to believe in the so called "power of prayer", Somehow, by clasping their hands and casting their eyes skyward, or speaking aloud to the air in front of them- another person's suffering will somehow be alleviated by God. However- in truth, prayer only helps one person.

The person doing the praying.

The reason for this, is that by indulging in such activities, or typing as much in a Facebook comment, it makes the praying person feel like they have actually done something- when in fact they've not done anything at all. It requires absolutely zero effort. At most, they have talked to themselves- and that's supposed to make people feel better? There is no evidence to suggest that prayer helps the sick either- see the results of "The Great Prayer Experiment", Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) 2006. The study actually seemed to demonstrate people who knew they were being prayed for, actually deteriorated in health. People who didn't know they were being prayed for (some were the targets of prayer and some were not) displayed no difference in results between them.

Apart from anything else, if God does exist, then it's been made quite apparent that he doesn't give a fiddlers fuck about what human beings pray for. If that was the case, any benevolent all-powerful overseer would surely ease the suffering of- for talking's sake- babies in Africa who are born with AIDS; which will surely kill them, if starvation and contaminated water doesn't first. But hey, maybe he is too busy helping well-off British and American Christians find their car keys or pass assessments; perhaps their prayers are worth extra. Or maybe it's all part of "Gods plan" that so many of the pious frequently carp about. Some plan. I want no part of it.

I haven't seen many faith healers going in  to clean up the Ebola outbreak either as an alternative to modern medical care. What does that tell you?

By all means pay your respects and condolences to the bereaved and the hurt, but invoking God in times of tragedy is at best hollow and at worst completely insensitive. If you want to do something to help someone; actually DO it.

Primal Urges.

I often make New Years resolutions. I very rarely stick to them. I want to get fitter. I'm hardly obese, but I could stand to be a bit happier in my own skin. 

This year however, will be different. Because starting on January first, I'm going Paleo.

"Dude, what in the name of the wee man does that mean?" I hear you ask; it's quite simple really. I'm going to go on what's called a Palaeolithic or Primal diet. Also known as the "caveman diet", the core idea is; if the cavemen couldn't have it, then neither can I. I won't be going 100% strict with it- and I will still be eating some of the "grey area foods" like bacon and cheese. However, some of the main things I definitely cannot eat are:

•| Potatoes (Though I can have sweet potatoes)
•| Bread
•| Pasta
•| Pastry
•| Legumes
•| Sugar
•| Processed stuff
•| Artificial stuff.

There are other things here and there that I won't be allowed, and I have downloaded an app that answers the question "Is it Paleo?" with a simple yes or no, and links to reasons. I'm still allowed chocolate, but only dark chocolate over 70% in cacao content, and another "grey area" allows for whole (blue top) milk in moderation. Alcohol wise- it's red wine only for the foreseeable.

Bread and pasta I think will be among the things I will miss the most- but looking for and trying alternatives will be interesting and fun. Anything containing corn syrup and such is out- so I will probably have to make my own ketchup and barbecue sauce if I can't find a nice organic one- that'll be fun too! Removing all of the items from the house I can't have will make it all much easier, as will shopping with my app in hand.

This, along with my cycling and exercise- will hopefully make a big difference in me over the coming months! I'll share good recipes I come across incase people want to try them. 

I can see me hating myself for this, but it's for my own good!


Monday 22 December 2014

Interview with the Dictator.

Last week, Sony decided to pull the release of "The Interview" : a satirical movie starring Seth Rogen and James Franco. The film depicts an assassination attempt on North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un by two hapless journalists. 

Since its initial announcements, it received massive backlash from the North Korean government, including threats of violent reprisal. Meanwhile, a group known as the "Guardians of Peace" have subjected Sony Pictures with almost relentless cyber attacks, incuding the seizure and leak of the studio's internal documents. Eventually they buckled, and cancelled the scheduled Christmas Day release. 

I am under no illusions; there's a good chance that this film will suck. It's probably juvenile, full of sex jokes, toilet humour and probably devoid of artistic merit and acting panache. That however is completely besides the point.

As President Obama reacted to the news he remarked that Sony pictures actions in this had been "a mistake".

"I wish they had spoken to me first. We cannot have a society in which some dictator someplace can start imposing censorship here..."  

The Commander in Chief then extrapolated on this, saying that if producers back down under this kind of external pressure, what is to stop it happening again? What will happen to satire as a comedic genre? In addition, could this lead to investigative documentaries a country or group doesn't like being denied airtime? Some commentators have suggested that there would be similar reaction if another nation mocked the president or the queen. Really? Why then, did we not do away with the likes of Black mirror, Spitting Image and The Thick of It, all of which brazenly stab at the heart of how the UK is run, how it conducts itself, and the figures who do it?

What happened here is a failure. Sony has succumbed to a temper tantrum by a country widely recognised as lunatic. North Korea are trying to bully, but in reality, they are the Yorkshire terrier of the world; barking and yapping at anybody who gets too close, but with very little to back it up. Yes, they aren't shy about attacking their neighbouring South, but they are ever under the UN's watchful eye. Allegedly they have nuclear weapons, but they would not dare use them; lest a Trident Submarine pop up, or B2 Stealth sail overhead to snuff them out. They would be the ant, and the rest of the world would become the boot. 

In the grand scheme of things they are utterly powerless- despite their regular proclamations of grandeur. This is the country that only allowed its citizens to view James Cameron's Titanic in cinemas within the past couple of years. This is the only country in the world still officially ruled by a dead person (the current leader's grandfather, Kim Il-Sung).This is the country that allegedly claimed to have sent a manned mission to the sun. How is that not worthy of ridicule? Hell, most of the time the studios needn't bother, because truth is stranger than fiction and more often than not, they already make an arse of themselves without outside help. After all, that is how you truly defeat a terrorist or threatening figure; you make a joke of them.

This is not even the first time the nation has been mocked; the previous "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il having been torn to shreds in the universally irreverent Team America: World Police, created by Trey Parker and Matt Stone of South Park fame. Presumably they received threats before and after the release of the film; but it was released.

Echoing President Obama, this cannot be allowed to become a regular occurrence. Kim Jong-Un already has control over an entire country who revere and adore him out of brainwashing or fear- are we really going to allow him to do the same to us?


Thursday 18 December 2014

The true reason for the season- This blogger's festive message.

I love winter, but there are elements of the festive season that bother me. 

One thing that keeps coming up year on year in various levels of focus, is the supposed "War on Christmas". By this, I mean Christians whining at people saying "happy holidays" and "taking the Christ out of Christmas". 

So when did this "war" start? Well, Christianity, unfortunately you started it. In order to better spread among people and gain more followers in your fledgling years, you adapted. You made your own holy days and festivals fall at the same times as existing solstice celebrations- an awkward fact, but a fact nonetheless. Christmas isn't even Christian- it's made from bits of Yule and Saturnalia; Germanic and Roman holidays respectively. 

But does it really matter?

People have been exchanging gifts for centuries, and for a long time before the current idea of. Christmas was invented. What does it matter what we call it?

I feel I have something to share with you though, for I know the true "reason for the season". The real reason we do this every year.

Ready?

Axial tilt.

No really, that's it. Because the earth is tilted on its axis as it orbits and spins, this provides us with distinct seasons and varying day lengths. Of them all, winter is the most dark, cold and miserable time of our year, and we could use the cheering up. It's not about spirituality, it's not about God, it's about making it all a bit more bearable,for ourselves and those we care about.

Another thing I dislike is how commercial it all is. For that reason, I buy very few presents and don't write any cards. This year, my family and friends that I am buying for will be getting their gifts in January, simply because my payslip will be better, and the festive price bubble will have burst, so I'll be able to get better things for people, without the mad dash. Anyone that does send me a Christmas card this year, as any other year; please be assured, any cards I receive are not thrown away: I recycle.

This is the most festive I've been in years, hope you enjoyed reading, and if you're reading for the first time, please enjoy the blog!

Happy holidays!!

Tuesday 16 December 2014

Love your bumps.

Us guitarists can be an awfully strange bunch. 

Like any group, getting those among us to agree on what should and shouldn't be is tantamount to impossible. Be it the debates on active or passive pickups, tone woods, picks, guitar shapes, number of strings, etc etc...

But what I'm here to share with you all today, are my feelings on what are known as relic'd guitars.

What does that mean? Well, several guitar companies offer guitars that have a worn-in look. The guitar is made and finished, and then artificially aged, giving it bumps, scrapes, a faded retro finish, and wear marks in all the expected places a guitar would accrue over a long period of time. 

I can see two advantages to this. Firstly, the guitar will feel more "broken in" at first touch. A brand new guitar can be like a new pair of shoes in a manner of speaking; it can take time before it becomes familiar and feels like it is yours. Secondly, being all beat up looking absolves the player of any guilt for bashes they might make in the guitar on their own- what's another little chip, right?

The thing is, it costs. 

An example: a brand new American-made Fender Stratocaster will cost you in the region of £800. Modern build quality, attention to detail, a trusted brand and a classic design. You get all of this in pretty much any colour you like, there are a ton of different finishes, from candy-apple red to tobacco-sunburst to sea foam green. 

However, if you want a relic Stratocaster, the price rises- nay, skyrockets- to around £2000-2500. For a beat-up looking guitar. Why? 

The only reason I can think of, is that the process of making a guitar look 50 years older than it is, convincingly, must be quite time-consuming and therefore expensive to produce. Another reason, is that no two are exactly the same, because it's all done by hand. But if you really love the look of relic'd guitars, there is a much cheaper way to get what you want.

Buy the brand new one, and play it every day, for decades. A relic won't make you a better player- spending time with a guitar however, will. I can also guarantee that you will amass bashes and chips aplenty- and what's more- they will mean something to you. It becomes not just a bash, but a memory. It's a scar, and you and the guitar earned it somehow. The stories that they tell will be your stories. They can be tragic when they happen, but they become part of it and you learn to love it- it makes it yours. Relic guitars are the equivalent of a young hipster wearing "vintage" clothes. They have no history, they have no stories, they just try to look the part.

On top of this- I do want to take the opportunity to say that an old guitar, (or old guitar design) is not necessarily a good one. New designs have learnt a lot from their predecessors; what worked, what didnt, what felt wrong, and what felt right. Build quality has also improved over time as luthiers have learnt new techniques in how to get the best sounds out of the instrument, as well as making it ergonomic and easy to pick up and play. Back in the 50s and 60s, many of the classic guitars (particularly electric ones) were still finding their feet sound-wise, and had not yet made the tones they are now famous for. 

But these are just my opinions. If you are reading this and are a guitarist, what do you think? Leave a comment in the section below!