Horse meat

A horse from a different joke, possibly the one about the long face

I haven't gone wildly off topic for yonks now. [Cries of "Oh yes you have."] Anyway, regardless of that, a horse walks into a pub and the barman says "Sorry, we don't serve food."

So, is food adulteration merely a cause for humour? I take it as given that it is a topic for humour in the first place because everything is. As Aristotle once said 'Humour is the only test of gravity, and gravity of humour, for a subject which will not bear raillery is suspicious and a jest which will not bear serious examination is false wit.'. Anyway, the answer to the rhetorical question is no, absolutely not.

A chap with a beard

Instead it is yet another chance to stand up and say that once again Karl Marx was right about something. In a footnote to Chapter 6 of Das Kapital Volume 1 he classifies bakers in to 'full-price' and 'undersellers', the latter - the majority - adulterating their flour in all manner of ways. The explanations that he quotes as to why people are forced to buy this cheap, unnutricious food are still as valid now as they were then.

A chap with a beard

 An article on this subject

Django Unchained

Much funnier than I had expected, but just as violent. I'm not sure what else to say except to recommend it highly.

The violence seems to be treated in two ways. That inflicted on the slaves is portrayed in a realistic, uncompromising fashion whereas the gun fights are in a more cartoon, fantasy style. I'm assuming, as an amateur film critic, that the intent is to stress that slavery is bad. I think that Tarantino is rather pushing at an open door there, but who am I to argue against a polemic?

It's interesting that two films based around the same issue have come out at the same time. Both Lincoln and this are actors' films, but here they get to ham it up somewhat more with an awful lot of scenery being chewed, especially by the wonderful Samuel L. Jackson.

There are various anachronisms; I'm pretty sure that dynamite hadn't yet been invented in 1858, but presumably its inclusion is an homage to spaghetti westerns. And watch out for a very funny scene featuring the proto-Ku Klux Klan.

Vapnartak !!!

At last, the moment that you have all been waiting for. What did Epictetus make of Vaprnartak having had a full week to digest and cogitate? Well, after due consideration I can say that it was OK.

The venue is of course wonderful. The previous venue, the Merchant Adventurers' Hall, is a lovely building, but a crap venue. Apart from anything else it was very dark inside. The Knavesmire by contrast, with its glass walls is spacious and airy with plenty of natural light. The attendees bring their usual accessories of beer bellies and BO, but possibly they have less impact there because one knows that the ambience would be far worse at a race meeting. The dress code at a flat race meeting is better, but there are ten times as many people and, by the end of the afternoon at least, they are all very, very drunk.

A typical wargamer

It was good to catch up with some friends. Mark Dudley of 'Ilkley Old Fashioned Wargaming' put on a game of Maurice using Prince August figures. The game with its plain terrain and large units was a nostalgia fest and the rules seemed to live up to being as good as my reading of them last year. I think that one reason it attracted the attention was that pretty much all the other display games were far too crowded. Those putting them on probably said to themselves 'I've painted it so I'm bloody well going to put it on the table'.  Understandable, but it means that the games never progress much, let alone finish and that anyone with any wargaming experience at all (which yes, cynics, does include me) knows that they're not representative of real life games anyway.

Re-enactors

There are some English Civil War re-enactors marching around noisily outside my apartment at the moment. Possibly it would be more accurate to say that they are marching around outside the Royal Armouries as I certainly didn't organise them.

The noise comes from the drum, not from the numbers

The photo was obviously taken from some distance (in this case the balcony of my sixth floor bachelor pad), but then that is the safest place to be when re-enactors are involved. This bunch are obviously not as bad as the truly dreadful Star Wars stormtroopers from a few weeks ago, but nevertheless shouldn't be approached too closely.

So, I hear you ask, were there re-enactors at Vapnartak? Now I know that you are keen, indeed desperate, for my review of that event, but please be patient. Anyway, there were. I think that they were some sort of dark ages types, but I'm not sure because I hurried past with my gaze averted in order to avoid any risk of making eye-contact. I recommend that as a useful tactic if one can't maintain a sufficient vertical gap. You're welcome.

Richard III

So, how come I haven't written anything about Richard III yet? I have been a member of the Richard III Society since 1985 although as inactive as one could possibly be. I did once get a letter published in the Ricardian Bulletin on the vital subject of whose side the Calais Garrison were on during the bombardment of London by the Bastard of Fauconberg in 1471 (no, really!), but that's about it. However, even I have been stirred from my torpor by the great man's sudden reappearance. Absolutely fascinating for the sheer improbability of it all as much as anything else. And it does make one question historical analysis in general. Pretty much every book I've ever read says that there was no evidence that he had a crooked back and that it was an invention of Tudor propaganda. Well, now there is and oh no it wasn't. 

To be honest it just makes his achievements more impressive; at least those up until the Battle of Bosworth. I have refought Bosworth a few times, but it hinges too heavily on whatever one decides about the Stanleys and about the Duke of Northumberland. In fact the only Wars of the Roses battle that ever plays out satisfactorily on the table top is Tewkesbury. And, in my experience, Richard of Gloucester always dies even when his brother wins. Strange but trueish.

Vapnartak?

Is it time? No.

Instead, I'm going to talk about 'Lincoln' which I saw this afternoon. It jumps the queue because the American Civil War often features in wargames and it's therefore relevant. [Hang on says the rhetorical pedant, one couldn't get more relevant to wargaming than Vapnartak; what with it being a wargames show and all.]

Anyway, brushing RP to one side Daniel Day-Lewis is as magnificent as one would expect and the film overall is exceptionally good. Sally Fields deserves a mention as does Tommy Lee Jones as Thaddeus Stevens. Our old friend Robert E. Lee pops up - what a gift to popular culture that man is - albeit he doesn't say very much, or indeed anything. The opening sequence is the only battle scene, and it is shot as a fight; a lethal fight, but a fight nonetheless. This is an interesting way of stressing that war is nothing more than men trying to dominate, hurt and kill other men.

There is also a scene where Lincoln tours a battlefield in the aftermath of victory. Although the sprawling corpses are another powerful vision of the huge cost even of being on the right side, they just didn't look very real to me. Obviously I've never seen the immediate aftermath of any battle (*) let alone an ACW one, but it just all looked very, er, Hollywood to me. Despite that one small caveat it's a marvellous film and you should see it.

(*) I was actually at the battle of Bradford, but that is firstly a story for another day and secondly not actually that much of a basis for criticising Stephen Spielberg's portrayal of mid 19th century death and destruction.

Vapnartak

I went to Vapnartak and will at some point review it. But not now. Instead I'm briefly going to mention 'The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists' which I saw yesterday in the studio at Harrogate Theatre. It was basically Marx's Theory of Surplus Value set to music and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

 The Harrogate run is sold out, but the production is coming to the Carriageworks in Millenium Square. The set is designed by Fine Time Fontayne, who I think I last saw on stage in the Lenny Henry Othello. (As an aside, regular readers of the blog will be keen to find out that Northern Broadsides pronounce Desdemona with the stress on the penultimate syllable.) Anyway, this tour, which is sponsored by a number of trades unions is highly recommended.

'Actions...

...lie louder than words' - Carolyn Wells

'Short is the joy that guilty pleasure brings' - Euripides

mutato nomine, Epictetus, mutato nomine

So me and you, just we two got to search for something new

The above lines from Roxy Music's 'Virginia Plain' (surely the best debut single ever) were quoted in the Guardian this morning, which served to remind me that the lyric also references Robert E. Lee.

Neither the commander of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia nor a steamboat

 Now that's about as tenuous a wargames connection as you can get, but the staff of the blog are somewhat desperate to up the relevant content. Anyway other Robert E Lee references (to the general rather than to boats named after him) can be found in songs by Johnny Cash and, of course, in 'The Night They Drove Old Dixie Down' by Robbie Robertson which also mentions the Union general George Stoneman.

Not the sister-in-law of Sir Michael Jagger

Otello

I've been to see Verdi's Otello and very fine it was too. It's a proper opera: good tunes and it ends badly. More verismo than bel canto of course, but none the worse for that. Operatic heroines have a habit of singing the strongest just as they expire from some dread disease - usually consumption. Desdemona (apparently pronounced in Italian with the stress on the second syllable) goes one better by singing on after she's actually dead.

So what's that got to do with wargaming? (Do I detect a rhetorical question creeping back in there? And a second? Or third? etc ad nauseam). Nothing much, although Shakespeare's Othello is supposed to be a successful general. Boito's libretto makes him out to be a complete numpty so it's a mystery how he got to win any battles. Presumably the Turkish generals were even worse.

Last night...

...I ventured out for the first time in ages to see the Be Good Tanyas. It left me exhausted, but was rather excellent.

I am getting a bit stronger every day and hope to make it to Vapnartak this Sunday, raising the possibility of some hobby related posting. Who'd have thought it?

Come on...

...you Bees!

I was wrong

I did have shingles after all.

Good news

I haven't got shingles.

'If you must...

...play, decide on three things at the start: the rules of the game, the stakes, and the quitting time.' - Chinese proverb

The Hobbit

I enjoyed it, but to be honest it is basically the same scenes and dialogue from Lord of the Rings shuffled into a different order. There are more hedgehogs in this one though.

Herbie - as not featured in The Hobbit

Do you remember the beat combos of your youth? Whenever they had a hit record they just made another one that was basically the same in the hope that people would buy that as well. Peter Jackson obviously does because that's what he's done. Pick your favourite scene from LotR and there will be a version of it here.

One further thought: why do the baddies fill their armies with Orcs and Goblins when they are so useless at fighting? Oh, and another thought: Barry Humphries is very good, as is Sylvester McCoy.

And, finally, apropos of nothing, I have had my first roast turkey of the season.

Culture

Or at least entertainment. My not-gaming has involved a bit of going out recently. I saw Martin Simpson last week as well as the new film version of Great Expectations and very good they both were.

Then on Monday I went to see June Tabor and the Oyster Band at Leeds Town Hall. What a voice she has. Having said that, both her and John Jones are among the least dynamic and agile front people that I have ever seen. James Brown and Mick Jagger do not bother to eat your hearts out. Tabor favours a sort of shuffling from side to side while slightly stooped, whereas Jones goes for a rigid-armed look reminiscent of a well wrapped up baby in a push-chair. Lovely music though.

Then last night it was off to the Grand for the National Theatre's 'One Man, Two Governors' with Rufus Hound. It was extremely funny. Northern Broadsides did their own version of Goldoni's 'One Servant, Two Masters' a few years ago with Barry Rutter in the title role which was also very good. 'The Man With Two Gaffers' was set in mid 19th century Yorkshire. The NT's version, set in Brighton in 1963, drew more on the Commedia dell'Arte influences and was positively pantomimic including audience 'volunteers' and so on. Obviously Northern Broadsides' version was still very broad though. When Rutter directed Lenny Henry in Othello he also played Brabantio. The review in the Financial Times referred to his overacting in the part. I was tempted to write in and say that if the reviewer thought that was Rutter overacting then he obviously wasn't familiar with his body of work. Still, while NB may have clog-dancing, the NT had a bloke playing the washboard.

Too busy to ask

My readers that is. They're too busy to ask questions or, most days, to read the blog. So what questions would they ask? [Is that a rhetorical question creeping in there? No, it is not; and here's the proof.] They would ask the following about 'Lawrence of Arabia':

Firstly, what about the gay subtext? Where was that it your review? [I am watching these questions sonny.] Well, I'd like to think that I am as sensitive and metrosexual as the next man, but I couldn't see it. The only person that Lawrence is in love with throughout the film is himself. And Omar Sharif as Sherif Ali spends the entire time looking at Lawrence as if the Englishman is completely nuts. And one can readily understand why.

Secondly, and perhaps more pertinently to the espoused subject of this blog (which is wargaming by the way) they would ask whether having rewatched the film makes me want to rush out and start a new period. (For any non-wargamers who have stumbled across this in the belief they were likely to learn something about Stoic philosophy can I just explain that 'starting a new period' is a curse under which all wargamers suffer. The details are not important, but please have sympathy for the afflicted.)

Anyway, no. The film is, I would suggest, resolutely anti-war; one of a number of British films with that message made at around the same time. War in the desert is not portrayed as glorious, but as squalid, nasty, inhuman and, ultimately futile. Many deaths and much suffering happen in what is 'a sideshow of a sideshow' and ultimately everyone involved is sold out by the politicians.

Others may differ, or reasonably ask what sets this apart from every other war in every other place and time. “It is not for me to judge another man's life. I must judge, I must choose, I must spurn, purely for myself. For myself, alone.”- Herman Hesse

We can't all be lion tamers

It is this blog's proud boast that it is never knowingly up to date. In that spirit about ten days ago I went to see 'Lawrence of Arabia' at the cinema in celebration of the 50th anniversary of its release. It was, of course, visually magnificent on the big screen.

I'm not entirely sure about the historical accuracy; surely even the British during the Great War wouldn't have employed anyone as obviously bonkers as T.E. Lawrence is made to appear by Bolt, Lean and O'Toole. Would they?

Recon

My readers would, apart from the minor technical issue of there not actually being any, by now have been asking "Where's the report from Recon?". Well unfortunately I didn't go. And I am sad about that because it's the first time in many years that I haven't been and it's always a show that I have thoroughly enjoyed. However, even wargaming philosophers - or the somewhat smaller group of philosophising wargamers - must sometimes defer to an outbreak of real life. And so it was for me on Saturday.

Yet more dressers-up

The Royal Armouries is once again hosting people who like nothing better than to wear fancy-dress, although this lot are, to me anyway, substantially sadder than the comic-book fans. The concourse below my balcony is playing host at the moment to a Darth Vader look-alike (cloak and mask-alike anyway) and a number of those blokes in white armour with ray guns whose proper name escapes me. It does so largely because I have never seen the film - indeed any of the films - and have never had any particular wish to do so.

Having said that, it is surprising how much of the story of the original film at least that I have picked up by osmosis along the way. A few years ago Charles Ross brought his one man Star Wars show to the West Yorkshire Playhouse. I knew that my ex-wife would want to go - unlike me she is a big fan - but I also knew that she wouldn't go alone. So I volunteered to go with her. The show takes about an hour and covers the original trilogy. To my astonishment I followed the first twenty minutes without any problems and even laughed in some of the right places. Sadly, the rest of the show went completely over my head. However, for those who feel the force I would recommend it. Ross, a very good performer, apparently also does a one man Lord of the Rings and I would certainly like to see that.

Not not-gaming

I'm on a roll of gaming, thereby somewhat undermining the raison d'etre of the blog. However, being a stoic (A stoic? Who am I kidding? I am the stoic's stoic) I shall just have to man up and persevere.

I have acquired a copy of 'A Blood-Red Banner: The Alamo' by Victory Point Games (available in the UK from www.boardgameguru.co.uk) and damn fine it is too. Yeehaw etc.

It's a solitaire game and basically one plays the Texians and has to try - and fail - to defend the Alamo from Santa Anna and the Mexicans. The best I have managed so far is a Texian moral victory using the Jim Bowie optional rule. Without that rule it is a series of crushing Mexican wins. However, as what must be a sign of it being a good game, that doesn't make it any less enjoyable. It's quick to set up, different every time and only takes about 20 minutes. What's not to like?

I own a copy of 'Field Commander: Napoleon', but have struggled to get into it. I've no doubt that it's excellent, but it's just so big and takes so much time to set up and play. Until my wargaming mojo fully returns I shall be trying out some more Victory Point titles. 'Zulus on the Ramparts' looks tempting.

Old School

During my absence from these pages I actually took part in a couple of games courtesy of Mark 'Ilkley Old School' Dudley. During my wanderings trying to keep one step ahead of the forces of Babylon I found myself temporarily living just round the corner from him and indeed from Tim and Euan as well; a veritable denseness of wargamers - which I believe to be the appropriate collective noun. Anyway he kindly invited me round. Game 1 was either Charge or the War Game. I know that they are different and I also know from experience that one is quite a bit better than the other, but I'm buggered if I can tell them apart. Or perhaps I'm buggered if I can be bothered to tell them apart.

Game 2 was a run through Lasalle. I think that Mark was keen to try these because he had played and enjoyed Maurice (of which I have a copy, currently languishing along with everything else in the marital home). My memories of the game are a bit vague except that I strongly suspected that we weren't playing properly as it seemed impossible to cause any damage with artillery. Also Mark had a suspiciously pokey unit of Hussars who saw off Tim and I's heavy cavalry remarkably easily.

Why am I back?

Well, the blog had its first reader, the esteemed Conrad Kinch no less, and so I thought 'Why not?'.

I have taken up residence pro tem in Clarence Dock and can see the entrance to the Royal Armouries from where I sit typing this. I haven't set foot inside there since I've been here except to have the odd double espresso in their coffee bar. I have however been into their conference centre, which when I moved in was known as Savile's and now isn't, as part of the abrupt disappearance of the apparently flawed disc-jockey. This is because that's where the Fiasco wargames show is held. My visit there was disappointingly short because I had badly hurt my back a couple of days before, sneezing violently. Sadly this is a true story.

Anyway, I didn't get to see much at the show except to chew the fat with James Roach and Peter Jackson around their ancient galley warfare game. I did get a chance to admire Brian's marvellous scratchbuilt Bismark made from, among other things, cornflake packets. I then spent the afternoon laying on my floor to ease my back pain.

The other notable event held there recently (I discount the European Conference on Bio-Solids which appeared to be about exactly what you imagine when you first see the word Bio-Solids) was a comic book convention at which it seems to have been compulsory to attend in costume. Being old and not down with the kids I didn't recognise most of the characters, but there was a splendid Batman, Joker and Penguin. My early favourite was a very good David Tennant era Doctor Who complete with a Dalek and an Amy Pond stylee assistant. However, they were overshadowed by the arrival of Wonder Woman, who was, how can I put this, a very healthy girl. I was obliged to inspect the details of her costume rather closely. [Note to self - this type of behaviour is how you got into trouble in the first place.]

Return

'There is nothing like returning to a place that remains unchanged to find the ways in which you yourself have altered.' - Nelson Mandela

'It is not......

....what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters.'

I just have to keep reminding myself of my own words.

Scripturience

That's the only reason I'm here. Well, that and the fact that it gives me a platform for a bit of ultracrepidariance, which obviously I would be loath to spurn.