Hammocks, the wave of the future.

[davywavy]

Promenading around the palatial grounds of Stately Wade Manor* on Friday evening, glass of something fortifying in hand, I found myself thinking what a pleasant evening it was. "In order to make this evening complete, what the garden really needs", I thought, "other than a rose bower, a forelock-tugging retainer, a couple of fountains, a gallop, a maze and a scullery maid to romp with in the bushes, is a hammock".

So began Operation: Acquire Hammock.
This was hindered by the fact that the Rolls was nicked last week by a denizen of the local estate and, whilst the police have subsequently recovered it (and found that the theif was so mind-boggling stupid that they not only left their dabs all over it but also left their address book on the passenger seat, much to my hoots of derision), they've still got it impounded as evidence material to an ongoing investigation.
You might also be surprised how difficult it is to buy hammocks in the shops these days. Most garden accessories shops carry 'portable hammocks', which are rubbish, but eventually I tracked a proper, hang-it-from-two-trees hammock here.

And what an excellent purchase it was. Only a fiver and, in terms of quality of life, almost certainly the best fiver I've spent in as long as I can remember. An entire afternoon of reclining with booze and a good book in delightful weather. What could be better?
So that's my recommendation to you lot. Tired? Stressed? Borne down by the vicissitudes of life? Get a hammock. They're great, they're cheap, and the cheery feeling of contentment they afford is worth the effort.

Oh, and then I had my evening slightly spoiled by a particularly rubbish episode of Dr. Who. Shame.

^{*A description as accurate as 'Holy Roman Empire'.}

Comments

[christ1974.livejournal.com]

Are you saying you don't like Russell T Davies writing?

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

He's good at writing soap opera, but he can't write SF to save his life.

[christ1974.livejournal.com]

See now I don't really see Dr. Who as a Serious SF series, it seemed like science fictio when I was 8 but now I see it more as Entertainment. I would say something like Star Trek was more Science Fiction. then again that might not be the best example but I think you know what I mean.
I guess it depends on how serious you want to take it all. I see Dr. Who as light entertainment aimed at the Family audience. There's only so Sci Fi it can get before Kids don't understand it and stop being interested. I think Russells writing is good for the Audience it's aimed at, as someone else said in thier Journal wait till Torchwood comes out before your too critical of his writing skills in the Sci Fi genre.
Maybe your right and his writing is good.
I try not to be too critical as I know it's better than anything I could come up with and more entertaining. Some episodes are better than others and the ones I have enjoyed I couldn't tell you who the writer was. Maybe if they had a little bit t the end of each episiode with the writer telling us what he/she was going for maybe we might be less critical and more 'ok that makes sense with what you were goign for'

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

Well, look at it like this - I regard the 'Golden age' of Who as being the Tom Baker era; whilst it might look cheap now, the scripting remains excellent. Series like "Pyramids of Mars" (in which Sutekh is defeated by a rather clever use of Newtonian Laws of Motion) or City of Death felt like they could happen - if the Universe allowed for Time Travel , that is.
It's the difference between the 'science' in science fiction feeling more like science and less like magic (such as the talking pavestone in the latest episode, whihc was just stupid). RTD plainly has no scientific education and feels that science doesn't matter so long as he can get his blow-job jokes in.
Dr. Who has always been light entertainment aimed at a family audeince. However, Terrence Dicks and Douglas Adams assumed that the audience would be smart enough to follow clever stuff, whilst RTD plainly has no confidence in his audience to follow anything which might require intelligence or education.

[christ1974.livejournal.com]

I agree that a talking paving slab isn't remotely beliveable, but then again is the old cybermen can only be killed by gold saga. Some of the science in dr who seemed to work at times and then other times it was just complete fiction.

I must have missed the Blow Job joke either that or it forgot about it. I think they were going for light in Saturdays episode as the previous story was quite dark.

You did see that he was likening the group to the legions of Dr Who fans who followed him for years and then did other things like chat and make bands whilst it was off air, and then coming back later. Well thats what I thought he was doing.

I get the impression you don't like Russell T Davies work whatever the form? or is it because he messed with a classic as it were. (That sentence sounds a bit arsey it's not meant that way)

Mind you i'm not the most scientific of people which is perhaps why I don't feel it insulted my intelligence. After all I don't undertsand how doing maths on a board can prove or disprove time travel, my simple mind would have thought trial and error might work better. Like when you have some nerdy guy doing sums ona board then puts them into a computer which fires up the particle Accelerator to stop time and it fails....he then plays with the equation on the board and types the new one into the computer and stop time? he didn't make any physical changes so I just don't get it.
As I said my scientific knowledge isn't that great or indepth but maybe I just don't take Dr Who that seriously, after all it's only a TV programme nor a way of life. (No insult intended)

[davywavy.livejournal.com]

Dr. Who is the only RTD I've ever seen; I've heard people praise his soap opera writing, and I can understand why - he's good at character development and interaction, but I've never seen any and so don't know if I'd like it either way.
I also know that, since, Babylon 5, the Soap Opera format for SF has been the mainstay of the genre (Firefly, Battestar Galactica, Lost, etc). the things is, all of these tend to be internally consistent - things tend to work, or they don't, and there's a feeling that there's a reason why things work. Okay, there's a suspension of disbelief in things like Faster than light travel, but that is consistent.
The new Dr. Who has had things like Prince Albert building some sort of laser out of a moon-telescope, and the internal consistency of suspension of disbelief just isn't there. I get the feeling that the writers think that the audience will accept anything because it's SF, rather than making an effort to reach both the general audience and those who expect some thought.
I could see the point of the latest episode, and as a soap opera-y tribute to the show it was amusing, but I really don't think it worked as an episode of Who.

[christ1974.livejournal.com]

He wrote some more adult orientated tv shows Queer as folk being one of them. which was aoap opera type I suppose, but incredibly accurate might have been because he is gay and has personal experience of what he was writing about.

Oh well we shall see if things improve.

[gwaunquest.livejournal.com]

As Davy says, he is a good writer. I loved cassanova, but he can't write Sci Fi. Unfortunately he thinks that the Fiction part is allowed to obscure the Science.

[christ1974.livejournal.com]

As Above ;->