Saturday 25 November 2017

You've Got A Lot Of Nerve


To Say You Are My Friend......

What is a friend anyway?

Well I have 225 according to Facebook, a fair proportion of which I have actually met in person (probably not too typical of social media in general).

Parking the virtual world for the present, I guess we all start making friends early on in life, usually one or two then maybe a whole bunch of them. With me, that was the pattern. By the time I'd left secondary school there was a group of ten/twelve of us who'd meet up at the pub and get pissed together while we planned the next adventure. As people found girlfriends/boyfriends, they joined the merry band for a while and, over time, numbers dwindled and we all moved away. Even Friends ended after ten seasons.

I'll be there for you (When the rain starts to pour)
I'll be there for you (Like I've been there before)
I'll be there for you ('Cause you're there for me too)


In the Friends theme tune, it's all pretty clear. A friend is someone who is there for you when you need them.

But is that true? Someone who is always there? We spend considerable amounts of our life interacting with the same group of people, whether it's family, social or work life but that time together doesn't make us friends necessarily. Or even friendly.

I know some people (most?) have close family relationships which mimic close friendships. I guess it's likely to happen if you share the same space for long enough (c/f school friends) but it's certainly not inevitable. I have five brothers, only a couple of which I would consider as being close. Girlfriends/Wives can end up being friends as well as lovers and companions. I've been lucky enough to have ones who were and still are, in the BFF category. The same can happen of course with your relationship with your child(ren) if you have any. I wasn't particularly close to my father, was to my mother but that wasn't a friendship. I do have a good relationship with my son, bordering on friendship (which is excellent of course)

Those early friendships from your youth are still usually there in varying degrees and there are one of two who I'd still consider very good friends after forty years or so. Often though, long term friends are scattered around the country/world so the best they can offer (assuming they know there's a need) is the non face-to-face support of phone/email etc. Even when people are geographically closer, everyone has their own lives and responsibilities which take up time and support for friends can end up being pushed back to the end of the queue/back of the mind.

So if it's not defined by longevity or availability to provide support then how about "I'll be there for you" as in "give a damn/actually care".

I moved to York about six years ago and have met lots of people within the city and further afield, mainly due to becoming involved in the music scene. I am constantly surprised how new people I meet (especially musicians) initially appear cold/unfriendly but when you dig a little deeper are incredibly lovely/friendly souls. I'm sure that the reverse is true i.e. people initially (possibly still) think I'm an unfriendly person especially if they only see me waiting to go up and sing at an open mic somewhere when I'm completely focused on the performance. What seems to be more common than not however is how these relative strangers do give a damn and show it by their actions (one of my favourite quotes is that one about "it's not what you feel that defines you, it's what you do") I am very grateful for their acts of kindness but it doesn't mean that we're friends.

I reckon the fundamental characteristic of friendship is the deep understanding between two people. If that's there then the basis of a deep friendship is there as well. Whether it's been a month or a lifetime, if it's there then you've got a friend (to quote Carole King :-) ). Which is a comfort to me at least, as it means that new friendships are always a possibility. As long as you/I allow people to get to know you. Not sure about that bit though....

Monday 4 September 2017

Girl From The North Country review (Old Vic production 2/9/17)


Girl From The North Country (bit of a review) - as someone who thinks only Dylan should sing Dylan songs (though I am unable to stop myself singing them) the play/musical did a really good job of presenting Bob's work with some really nice/imaginative arrangements. I was really surprised by how many they squeezed in and the range of songs from across his catalogue (apparently Bob gave the writer/director carte blanche rights to whatever he liked). After saying that it felt like there were two or three too many in the end and one or two too many medleys (some worked, some didn't).
But let me start again, from the beginning of the play (I'm not going to specifically reference any song titles as that was one of the best bits, not knowing what was coming up next). It was a relatively simple stage set with a cracking band of piano, bass and fiddle plus drums to one side which a couple of the cast played as they sang. A big(ish) cast of well known actors (though I didn't recognise any except for one from Father Ted :-) ) and a number of extra singers who boosted the chorus. The first song was really really good and had me in tears. A stunning start. The second one, not so much. It highlighted one of the flaws (in my eyes/ears) where a song had been selected which just didn't fit (I suspect it was just for the line which referenced Minnesota, the setting of the play). It was also sung in a more theatrical style (yes, I realise this is theatre but I think the show was trying for something different/more authentic with the rest of the songs). Generally though the singing was very good, especially where the cast provided backing harmonies. Lovely stuff. One of the things it did avoid (and I was dreading) was where the dialogue was contrived to lead into a song "You know I've always though of her as being JUST LIKE A WOMAN" :-)
A little bit on the play itself i.e. if you stripped away the music, would it stand up as a work? Yes and no. As it stands it probably should be titled Parents From The North Country as the 'girl' didn't have much of a focus for large parts. It was a pretty good story though, well told. The casting was always going to be tricky I imagine as they would have been looking for good singers and actors (where they broadly succeeded) My only issue was that they didn't look right, age/size wise. The mother was tiny and could easily play a teenager from a distance (which is the perspective in a theatre of course with no close ups) and the daughter was just about the tallest person on stage. I guess though they went for singing and acting first which is fair enough. Overall it was well worth seeing and very enjoyable for most part. It deserves to run longer than it is scheduled for at the Old Vic and would benefit from some pruning and reshaping on the way. 7 out of 10.
After saying that, the audience gave it a standing ovation so what do I know

CD of 'soundtrack' 

Monday 26 June 2017

The Thoughts of Chairman Stan

It's Glastonbury season and it's impact ripples once again across the media - print, online, social and tv. Year on year the ripples get larger with now, what feels like, saturation coverage.

It got me thinking about big events, big stuff generally. A Facebook post today asked whether it is a festival worth going to, to which I replied "if you're invited to play on the Pyramid Stage then Yes". And yes I would too. But otherwise I definitely wouldn't be interested. Even if there was a free ticket (parking the whole debate about cost and worth). I remember being not that attracted to the idea of Glastonbury in the 70s (went to a few festivals then) and over the years as it's grown in size, becoming now a medium sized medieval town for the duration, increasingly less so. I've progressively favoured smaller and smaller music events where now often the most enjoyable is one at a small local venue. Bigger to me doesn't equate to better. In most things generally.

Talking about the 70s, I also remember having lots of discussions/arguments about politics, it being the era of Baader-Meinhof, The Red Brigade, PFLP etc (when I was in Israel around that time, a German girl looked at my passport photo and said "Ah, Baader-Meihof". I did have that look about me). It seemed to be everyone saying how bad the Right is/was (sort of an obvious position but still worth reiterating periodically) and which flavour of Left was best. It struck me after a time that, in my head, it wasn't so much about Left or Right but about Big or Small.

The good thing about 'big' is that you can get more things, and more complex things, done. Which may or may not be a good thing depending on what the thing is and the knock on effect. Big business can create lots of jobs and wealth/money of varying degrees depending where you are on the food chain. It also can have an effect of stifling the small/independent businesses and it seems lead almost inevitably to corruption of one sort of another.

When it comes to multi-nationals and governments then potentially even more so. Even with layers of government/consultation, the individual becomes buried within the huge mass. Yes I voted to stay in the EU, mainly because I didn't feel comfortable siding with the vocal Leave people who appeared xenophobic at best. I like the idea of being able to move freely, a very positive outcome of the united Europe but can see how it has come at a cost where power is wielded further and further away from the individual.

I like the idea of small. Small so you and others can identify with the thing. Small so you can have some influence over it and care about its future. Ultimately we are all individual people living in a small network of friends/family/colleagues etc. Caring about those around you must be the starting point of living a good and fulfilling life. Trying to change the bigger world by making things bigger and having more power to do bigger stuff? Seems like there's more examples of it leading to bad rather than good outcomes.

After saying that, I joined the Labour party earlier in the year because Jeremy Corbyn seemed like the first politician for many a year who I had any time for, and just maybe if he is elected to run this shambles he may be able to make things better. Worth a try anyway, before it all goes to hell in a handcart