Tag: mental health

  • What Distracts You?

    What Distracts You?

    What Disrupts You?

    Happy Birthday, Fool

    Long ago, before people in the technologically advanced countries on Earth had mobile phones, adult siblings would often not wish each other a happy birthday on their actual birthdays. Of course, many of them sent birthday cards, mostly when distances were so great that travelling for the annual events to the area in which the celebrant lived; was too time-consuming; or expensive. It is this valuation that intrigues me, particularly in light of being the recipient of birthday wishes by text messages from my sister, when we, in the modern world, both had mobile phones; now, more accurately, they are personal phones. It is this idea of mobile phones being personal phones in that they are considered to be an actual facet of a person, and not just a handy conduit to a person, that, for me, is strange indeed. What I mean by this, is that we are all only a decision away from having a digital implant in our brains that operates just as a mobile phone does.

    How much someone values someone else used to be measured on whether someone visits someone else at Christmas and random times, or at least meets up with family; it used to be writing letters to family members; bringing back souvenirs, or sending postcards when you went abroad, or at least when someone went somewhere relatively far away.

    How rude of my sister when she sent me a text message wishing me ‘Happy Birthday’ on my birthday, instead of calling me from the same device she had in her hand. Perhaps, she might have excused herself by saying she had no credit to make a call because she had free texts; but free texts or calls were only to numbers on the same network, in those days. Now, of course we have unlimited everything. Perhaps, I was only worth 10p to her, or the time it takes to write fourteen characters and my number followed by ‘Send’.

    Furthermore, how did we come to think that an email was preferable to a birthday card? Did we really decide that a text with no nuances, or an email with no personalisation, such as handwriting, was suitable? When did we think that fulfilling a chore could be accomplished at arms-length and minimum effort or forethought, and that same desiccation of emotion would be welcome as an alternative to a kiss.

    I brought you some grapes. Mmmm, these are lovely?

    If we visit someone we know, in hospital, who are we doing it for? Do we feel a sense of duty, that for us, manifests within us as a personal need that we must fulfill; like having an itch that simply must be scratched; or do we visit them because the need we have is to make the hospital-bound person a little happier, by showing compassion towards them? Are we not merely satisfying our own need in both cases. So, when my sister sent me a text message on my birthday was she just being selfish?

    But, is being selfish taken to a new low level when we now think that when a tourist venue offers financial concessions for certain groups of persons that means those people may enter for free upon showing a letter of recognised disability or financial hardship that demonstrates eligibility for the full concession, we might ask if a screenshot from a website that shows eligibility is acceptable instead? To be clear about this: A cathedral in Kent, England gives full concessions to visitors who are on government granted financial benefits that are paid to jobseekers or workers whose earnings are below a certain threshold. The cathedral website states a ‘letter’ of eligibility needs to be produced for free entry.

    In Negotiation, there is an acronym, BATNA, which is: Best Alternative to A Negotiated Agreement. In Law, a contract is in place when an offer is accepted; there must also be something moving from one entity to another. That ‘something, can be either tangible, such as product; or intangible, such as a right or a freedom. A contract can often be expressed very simply using only a single condition; the presence of the conditional ‘if’ in a statement makes things clear for the average person – ‘If you give me that, I will give you this.’ Let us write this simple contract thus:

    If you prove, with a letter from a government body, that you are in receipt of a government-issued financial benefit (Universal Credit) we will completely waive any entry fee for you, and you can enter for free.

    What person would try to negotiate for the best alternative to this agreement? I will tell you: anybody in the modern world whose moral compass is so skewed by their acceptance that fulfilling one’s own need is the same as fulfilling a duty, or the same as making someone feel loved for a while. The recognition of duty to each other to comfort and offer assistance seems to have been completely washed away of late.

    Yet, the UK government has decided that it will not issue letters of entitlement to people in receipt of Universal Credit so they can accept an offer for free entry as a visitor to a Cathedral, and instead gives advice to renegotiate a new contract for free entry with a screenshot of the benefit-recipient’s entitlement. What this means for the average person in receipt of Universal Credit and hoping to visit a cathedral with a full entry fee concession, is that they need to check that free admission is applicable with new conditions being met; typically a phone call that very near to the beginning of the conversation will use the conditional ‘if’ in a question – ‘If I show you a screen-grab / screenshot of my entitlement to government benefits will you let me in for free?’ What was simple; click the checkbox for your visitor slot and show the letter eat the entry point, is now complicated by an erosion of common-sense right at the top of the Government and at the fabric of our society.

    When a government promotes that kind of behaviour we know we can expect a desertification of confidence in one another and a crumbling of the edifices of courtesy and manners through lack of maintenance because there are no more engineers left to check for decay.

    I understand that this laxity in manners has come about because by having personal phones we simply cannot be bothered to comply with instructions or conditions when there are clear rules and guidelines, and so many of us simply phone up and renegotiate the conditions we can’t be bothered to comply with. We do this because we get a buzz out of conversation, and we get a buzz out of settling something while avoiding greater effort to achieve the criteria a business has set out for eligibility; in other words – terms and conditions.

    An email to my grandma on her birthday saves me walking to the post office for a stamp and an envelope; I don’t need to find a pen. ‘I know I had one, when I was at school!’; and the emoji or emoticon for a smiley face is cute.

    Let me tell you why I am thinking that there is an overall erosion of sensibility in modern society. I was offered a job which I formally accepted. The start date was agreed and everything was in place and understood. I even received an email saying ‘Welcome…..see you on [date]’. And here is the kicker – it went on, ‘If you have any questions email me’. About a week later the recruitment agency, through which the job was arranged, questioned me on why I did not reply to that email. ‘I have no questions.’ I said. ‘But, you should thank them for giving you the job and tell them you are looking forward to starting.’ I sent an email to the business to tell them I cannot take the job because we must eliminate this third party element (job recruitment agency) immediately. I was told by the business that the third party element cannot be bypassed. I rejected the job. Apparently there is now, in the modern world, a requirement to unnecessarily and inanely chatter once a contract is in place. The agreement to work for the business was to do a particular job for x amount of money and for x amount of hours. – end of! Nothing else, terms and conditions fulfilled. No need for reassurance. Would you work for an insecure business owner? Not I! I owned and ran a very successful international relocation business. It worked like this. Tell us what you have to move; from where to where; and when to move it, and we will give you a guaranteed price and a guaranteed start-time AND FINISH TIME on your chosen day, with a GUARANTEED PRICE. (We also made it clear on the website that if you lie to us we will impose unlimited penalty charges, that equated to our penalty charges for being late to the next job, if we are delayed by your deceit).

    Once the quote was accepted we sent an email with the details in it to the booker. There was then no more communication. Now, ten years later, we would need to send an email every week just to say we have not forgotten our agreement, and everything is on target, and there are no changes to the price or the time or the dates. In effect, everything is the same. 

    We stopped trading at the peak of our success because suddenly, in 2020, everyone got scared and they have never got well again. Nothing had changed with us; we still honoured contracts and those contracts did not include petting and patting nervous entities. Successful businesses, offering excellent service at the best prices, do not have the resources to stroke and tickle nervous customers without different sensible people paying for it. Of course, ‘added services’ for product sales was already billowing, with an ill-wind, throughout honest trade to show, like a waggy-tailed puppy, shallow and delighted attention (that is likely to be revised and diverted at a moments notice when there is a distraction). 

    Would you trust someone who says they will be at a meeting place once, or someone who constantly states that they will be there? Think for a moment; why would the second person feel the need to update you? Because one of you is unreliable. However, once you get used to obsequious service you kind of miss it and start to feel nervous when you don’t get it anymore. Ultimately though, the customer ends up paying more money for something that would otherwise have been very simple.

    According to Statista , in 2005, the USA sent a total of 81 billion text messages; in 2011, 2.3 trillion; and in 2021, 2 trillion (down from the years 2020 and 2019). With approximately 370 million people in the USA, including infants, that 2021 figure comes to 5405 messages received by each person in that year. (an average of 14 – 15 messages every day)

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/185879/number-of-text-messages-in-the-united-states-since-2005

    In the UK, according to sellsell.com, in 2012, almost 151 billion SMS and MMS messages were sent; and every year since 2012 the number has decreased so in 2022, 36,440,000,000 (36.44 billion) were sent. With approximately 70 million UK people, that means approximately 2,157 messages were received by each person in 2012; in 2022, approximately 520 messages were received by each person that year. That is an average of 10 messages per week. Clearly another form of social media is used in the UK.

    Realistically, we have to consider that these figures may only reflect the number of messages that were received by individuals because messages are also sent by businesses. The point is not lost in recognising that the recipient responds to a message by looking at their phone and reading the message; and even looks at their phone when their phone has not notified that a message has been received and when there is not a message to read.

    MTV, the music-TV channel, launched in 1981, was one of the first to put streaming ‘ticker-tape’ type text at the bottom of the music video. Some people had difficulty in watching the band playing and reading the scrolling text. However, we soon developed the ability to comprehend both. We now desire multiple streams of entertainment simultaneously; hence the anticipation of texting and social media interaction that many of us experience throughout the whole of our waking lives.

    While I do not condone recreational drug use, some studies have shown that a marijuana smoker is as attentive to their work environment as a person who consistently checks their SmartPhone and responds to messages throughout the day. Given the choice, as an employer, of whether to hire an illegal drug user or a regular user of a SmartPhone, the pot-head wins. The pot-head only loses out if they are dealing too. I mean let’s face it; try getting a SmartPhone addict to do a repetitive job. Each of these people-type examples, it seems clear, is trying to ameliorate, what they perceive to be a boring existence, with a panacea, different for each but still a panacea. It is sad that we need drugs to put up with our banal lives and make it through the day. ‘Whew! Made it! Oh, wait. One last check of my phone, or one last toke, to take away distraction and help me sleep. 

    So, what does all this come down to? The thrill of anticipation of a return text or expected telephone has become an addiction to dopamine, which in turn, has twisted into a malevolent paranoia that things are not well, when the pleasure centre (Am. center) of our brains in not triggered often enough, simply because all is not well because we are not getting our ‘fix’ of dopamine often enough. If nobody calls us or texts us, we feel unwanted and left out, if we have not yet become a junkie. And like all addicts, our judgement is impaired when we both, get our fix, AND when we don’t. As an employer, given the choice between a dopamine junkie and a clean person with the same experience and qualifications, the dopamine junkie would not even get an interview for a job I might offer. The questions that needs to be answered are: Are you selfish? Are you insecure? and, will work be a sufficient distraction from your need for connection?

    What distracts you?

    I once got asked when, conducting research, I applied for a job, ‘What distracts you?’ I thought, ‘Nothing’. The question was actually code for, ‘How many times a day do you look at your phone?’ I left their premises very much saddened.

    All of us are a single decision away from having digital devices implanted in our heads.

    Bibliography

    ‘About duty-based ethics’, Duty-based ethics, BBC,

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/duty_1.shtml

  • My sun is the same as your sun

    My sun is the same as your sun

    My sun is the same as your sun

    [ 8 minute read ]

    National debate used to be great. It got people talking. Loud people in the pub were popular entertainers. This is about conversation.

    I listen to phone-in radio. It used to be fun. In 2016 people phoned in to rant about Brexit. So funny; it got people talking.

    Today though, the same radio station has callers that are convinced that the media has a lot to answer for.

         ‘YOU are making me miserable.’

    My understanding is that these people are holding the news channels accountable for casting bad news into the homes of righteous people. What they actually mean, I think, is that by being aware of the news that media channels broadcast, people’s lives become more miserable. Hume, the philosopher, would be delighted to discover that the common man could independently come up with his strong idea that people are made happier by seeing people smiling and sadder by seeing people crying.

    Apparently, there is a mental health crisis in the UK these days. Yet, I read that there has been a suggestion that ‘admittance’ to the Peak District should be allowed only by paying an entrance fee. (A lot of beautiful hills in the middle of England, near Manchester). Harry in the pub, it seems, so far hasn’t noticed that snippet. I have come across a lot of people who say that they don’t listen to, or watch the news anymore, because it makes them down-heartened.

    Further to this, is that there is a suggestion that the NHS could save two hundred million pounds per year if they make the patient responsible for paying for notification of hospital appointments. We used to get these appointments through a letter box in our door – something that we all definitely have unless you don’t have a home; I once had letters delivered to my tent when I was homeless. While I am not against the NHS saving money, we should remember that it is not a private business. It is paid for by taxing the British population. I am not against raising income tax to pay for services that we all need; roads, policing and emergency services, doctors, nurses and hospitals.

    Personally, I don’t carry a mobile phone and I don’t own a SmartPhone. I hear people speaking with awe in their voices as they, nowadays, briefly mention how much computing power we ‘all’ carry in our pockets. ‘We have access to all the world’s knowledge’. No, you don’t, you really don’t. We all have a digital portal to information that someone else doesn’t care if you know, or wants you to know. That includes news.

    I ordered three things online last week. I received emails that related to all three being dispatched. Yeah, I paid so I expect them to be dispatched. Then I got emails saying two of your items are here, and now here, and ‘Oh, by the way, they are here now.’ There are only two places that I am concerned about: there, being somewhere where it is sent from; and here: where I live. In other words, does it exist? And do I have it? These two truths are separated by a time period known to be a few days; not next day or next month. Sending me emails to fuel my anticipation and cause me to produce addictive dopamine is setting me up for cognitive dissonance. It hasn’t arrived! I hate this world! Oh my God! How stupid are you people! Why can’t you just send it?

    One of the items did not arrive when the email said it would. I had a tiny panic attack. Was I not in and the delivery person knocked? Has it been stolen? Did it get delivered to the wrong address? Did I waste my money? I would not be worried if I had not had to open emails that I did not need, that gave me false information. Let me go back a bit. Does it exist? Yes, here is some money. Do I have it? Well, if I need it badly I will definitely look to see if I have it. ‘Ah yes. Here it is’. So sending me emails just made me anxious. I had to open them, because in my world you only send an email to a customer to tell them something is wrong. As a trader, in the past, it was unheard of to constantly tell the same customer, ‘You can trust me, you can trust me, you can trust me,’ then, ‘Ooops sorry, I messed up.’ If we had done that we we not be trusted every time we said, you can trust me. Think about the boy who cried wolf.

    I get my hospital appointments by post. I go for walks to chill out. Once or twice when things have gotten too much for me, I have taken a holiday. I don’t expect to live a life of luxury just because I am British. Goodness, if I thought that nationality was the determinant in who gets what, I would be racist.

         ‘Ah, you see! Those people are African, not British, so they shouldn’t have luxury’.

    No, no, NO!

         ‘I am British and I blooming well deserve luxury. So those people, in Africa, who are not British, also deserve luxury.’

    Is that better? 

    Not being racist means believing that all humans have the same rights because there is no discrimination. I don’t, however, give money to charities to help people to buy optional, discretionary goods (luxuries). An optional, discretionary good is a television, a car, and a SmartPhone. Some people do need the latter two; I don’t. I need to know that I do not need to have money to get a hospital appointment. Yet, it seems that by using an App on a device it costs me money. Sure, we can receive texts and messages on a phone for six months without paying, but then we lose our right to have a phone number.

    Mental ill-health, if it is personified, crouches, waiting to leap out, and possess anyone, (yes anyone) who finds it difficult to live with dwindling, inadequate or non-existent funds.

    Here then, is my SmartPhone which I need for the future NHS app so I can get an appointment with a clinician for my mental ill health, which (SmartPhone) has access to all the media’s current fascination with reporting on poor social conditions across my home country. Of course, I cannot just buy a phone plan that lets me keep my number and only receive messages. Oh no, I, like everyone else, am encouraged to overspend my data download limit, because while I am waiting for the appointment, or I am in the waiting room, I need to distract myself from what ails me. I look on my SmartPhone for news because I enjoy reading about other people’s misfortune, starvation, exclusion, ostracisation, mental and physical anguish. I think not!

    I think I will put my phone away now and go for a walk – except…..I can’t afford it. Because I can’t afford to go to the future Peak District I must make you, the nation, pay for my mental health appointments. Actually, I don’t have appointments for mental ill-health, because I have hand-written my own certification that says that I am entirely sane. I took a photo of it on my non-existent SmartPhone to prove it.

    The real issue is that mental ill-health is not addressed as such. Government representatives and even Ministers will say something like,

         ‘We need to tackle mental health’.

    No, we need to provide opportunities for good mental health to reduce mental ill-health. We shouldn’t be tackling mental health, we should be tackling mental ILL-health. I am amazed that the NHS does not have a chain of gyms and does not own the National Trust.

    And there it is. Reduce the proliferation of things that make us feel bad so we can have time to feel good (in the Peak District). I know; reduce the cost that the NHS incurs by treating a rising incidence of mental ILL-health (mental health issues) by making them pay the entrance fee to the Peak District for the people who would otherwise be in the waiting room. Yes, I know, my argument (above) rests on the proliferation of, or absence of, bad news in the pub and by digital means.

          ‘Today, on the news…The flowers in Mrs Brown’s garden have provided plenty of pollen and nectar for the local insects. No-one in Britain got stung by a stinging nettle, and the price of an ice-cream has returned to an affordable price. Now, over to Hannah, our reporter in the street.’

         ‘Helloooo! So far five hundred and sixty-eight people have said good morning to me; twelve elderly men have raised their hats; seven hundred women have smiled to each other as they passed; and four children have hugged my legs. It’s going to be another wonderful day in Britain. Back to the studio.’

         ‘In more serious news. The NHS is working hard. The police are catching criminals; here is a picture my daughter drew of a criminal in a stripey jumper being caught, and your neighbour is not going to have a better holiday than you, because the sun that shines on them is the same one that shines on you.’

    Tags: mental health, my sun is your sun

  • Giving up agency

    Giving up agency

    First published on Open University blog site
    Thursday, 27 Mar 2025, 21:54

    [ 11 minute read ]

    In case it is not understood: I am completely against recreational drugs and cannabis derived products. Comments is disabled for this post.

    Some of this might be historically true

    Mental Health issues

    People once had money……..

    Long ago, when humans were sane and had control over their own lives, they were happy. They had agency over their lives. They were a people who made decisions for themselves. ‘Ah ha!’, you cry, ‘Children had decisions made by their parents for them!’. You’re right; until they grew up, moved out, and experimented with the world under their own terms and then discovered that they were actually really rubbish at being responsible. That is when they made friends with their parents, instead of resenting them for interfering in (and ruining) their lives. Once these clueless teens realised that they needed help, they looked around for it and found it in their parents. They then respected their parents. They didn’t realise it, but they respected them. Advice was given to them, along with options that were available to them, and then they navigated the problems and nasty bits of life and got on with their lives. Mum and Dad didn’t fix it for them and so they gained respect for themselves. Because they respected themselves, they looked after themselves and then died; usually naturally, in old age, with money.

    Then the world was given home computers, but not before Atari gave some of the adventurous people, ‘Pong’, an on-screen tennis game. ‘Pong’ was fine, it wasn’t addictive; it was only played when they were bored. Boredom meant they had not done enough to entertain themselves. Boredom was a punishment for not leaving their homes and socialising through exercise.

    Granted, for some in the halcyon days of long ago, exercise was only given to the right arm that went from waist to chin height, waist to chin height, waist to chin height; with single repetitions of, perhaps, twelve to fifteen per hour, for four hours; and during, and between, this arm-exercise plenty of fluids were taken on-board, while a great deal of socialising took place. Scattered among these mostly male fitness-freaks were a few women. For most, that exercise was restricted to Friday and Saturday nights only; unless a religious holiday, or the last day of the year fell during the week. The reason the weekday restriction was in place was for two reasons only; it was expensive exercise; and this kind of exercise, conversely, impaired work capability. People were greatly respected for this self-imposed responsibility. Arriving at work on a Monday was much celebrated among work-colleagues.

    However, for many people, lifting an ever-decreasing weight, twelve to twenty-four times per hour for four to five hours per night was so enjoyable that they did not restrict it to only two days each week, and were so keen to feel the burn the next day that they took no nights off. These people had lots of money! Their work was well paid, and there were whole packs of them with well-fed spouses and children in their warm homes. The only drawback for these people was that too much of this kind of exercise impaired their judgement and they made decisions that they regretted the next day. However, this recognition of making a mistake meant that they were continuing to learn and they were pleasing themselves in making resolutions to improve; in effect, much like their recently ‘left-home’ offspring. Everyone was happy.

    Sensible people in the same industries, however, stayed at home during the weeknights. They had other harmless ideas that would never lead to harm. Many of us, today, fondly remember the grandparents of the presently afflicted. Bless them, they could never have known what they had harboured in their safe homes, while their raucous peers eschewed the three channels on the TV, in the UK.

    The digital two-player Atari ‘Pong’ game, played through a television set with a home-owned console, was as harmless as tilting a little glass-covered square to maneuver a ball-bearing through a maze. Yet, the analogue ball-bearing in maze game was better; Oh, far better! There was a building sense of anticipation that had rising waves and falling troughs of achievement, that if the maze was completed, resulted in such satisfaction and attendant cascading dopamine, that it took many seconds to recover from it; and a sibilant ‘Yes’ was commonly heard, at this time. The point is, that people mostly had agency over their lives. They could put the gadgets down.

    Then, after a fascinating period of new gadgets; which came about through the invention of the magic transistor; a digital switch (current on – current off) and other arcane digital discoveries and manifestations; a small fraction of the world’s population were told that they could have their own little spooky box that would not only replace their home typewriter, but allow them to make endless copies of their carefully scripted letters to their Councils and Bank-Managers, AND they had real-time editing of those letters. Many homes were cleared from rubbish, both on the floor and in the air; scrunched up balls of paper frustratingly hurled at a bin that didn’t respect their aim, and ‘Dammit!’ vanished. Not only was the typewrite gone but with one of these new digital typing machines that strangely also allowed home accounts to be digitally kept, the bin became nervous from lack of use, and miserably and quietly kept to heel. The kids liked this replacement box and keyboard too, because for a vast amount of treasure (that realistically materialised only two times a year – one being a religious holiday) the games that were played in the amusements arcades, the ones that had bred from the fecundity of new supplicants to the digital games, and moved from the peripheries of small nations surrounded by sand and salty water, into the medium sized conurbations, were now available at the flick of a switch. Nobody, however, could afford ALL the games in the palaces of flickering lights and digitally created ‘clangs and dings’, for their home use. The electronic section of a sea-side transported to a town stayed for a while longer next to the cinema, without the sea gulls and fish and chips.

    Initially though, it was only the serious adults who wanted to appear ‘mentally contained’ to their bosses, and bank managers who bought this home office. They wondered what else to do with it, and separated themselves from their, by now, dreary spouses, to instead push around some digital letters. The strongest mental exercisers found that they could produce digital images and psuedo-presentations. It was, at least, better than the telly, and since they almost never exercised only one arm and never the other arm, found that they could get some separation from their mindlessly raving peers, and a smidgeon of relaxation, not least through silence, unless you discount the music, (with rubbish sound reproduction) they kept on them. Their kids were a bit disappointed as well, because the anticipation of winning a reward of tiny financial wealth by inserting a two pence piece into a glass covered electric machine with a reciprocating wall that may serendipitously push their money into a pool of hundreds of other coins to make them move towards a edge of a precipice that had an access hole to the outside for players to collect their reward, still remained quite firmly at the edges of small countries and in large conurbations, next to the cinema. So, anticipation of a positive reward, lasting for only a few fleeting seconds, was still absent in their homes. Things, however, were about to change.

    A bit before 1996, there was a tribe of Japanese technocrats who realised that kids wanted to keep digital pets in their pockets. Finally, anticipation of a dead pet hooked a generation. They gave us ‘The Tamagochi’. The End was Nigh. The Sinclair ZX Spectrum and Atari’s Pong just could not cut the mustard; they were ‘Marmite’, while Tamagochi was crack cocaine.

    Today, everyone is an avatar extra in ‘Stepford Wives’ with a perfect life, despite living on a run-down UK Council Estate; or a blur of a person, more excitingly present in both the past and the present, simultaneously in multiple places, but not, consciously, at the breakfast table.

    Just so you know, in early 1990s Britain, no-one was surprised to have to wait ninety days for a parcel to arrive; To even think of Just-in-Time supply chains was quite simply madness. Inventory costs, or keeping things in warehouses makes up about 25 per cent of the cost of supplying an item, so if someone ordered something, before Just-in-Time logistics, it had to be ordered from China, or Taiwan, or some other far-off manufacturing country. Unless, it was manufactured in one’s own country or the one next door.

    ‘We had joy, we had fun. We had seasons in the sun. But, the joy couldn’t last because the season’s went too fast.’ Lyrics in ‘Season’s in The Sun’ sung by Terry Jacks.

    ……….and then technology arrived.

  • What distracts you?

    What distracts you?

    [15 minute read]

    Happy Birthday, Fool

    Long ago, before people in the technologically advanced countries on Earth had mobile phones, adult siblings would often not wish each other a happy birthday on their actual birthdays. Of course, many of them sent birthday cards, mostly when distances were so great that travelling for the annual events to the area in which the celebrant lived; was too time-consuming; or expensive. It is this valuation that intrigues me, particularly in light of being the recipient of birthday wishes by text messages from my sister, when we, in the modern world, both had mobile phones; now, more accurately, they are personal phones. It is this idea of mobile phones being personal phones in that they are considered to be an actual facet of a person, and not just a handy conduit to a person, that, for me, is strange indeed. What I mean by this, is that we are all only a decision away from having a digital implant in our brains that operates just as a mobile phone does.

    How much someone values someone else used to be measured on whether someone visits someone else at Christmas and random times, or at least meets up with family; it used to be writing letters to family members; bringing back souvenirs, or sending postcards when you went abroad, or at least when someone went somewhere relatively far away.

    How rude of my sister when she sent me a text message wishing me ‘Happy Birthday’ on my birthday, instead of calling me from the same device she had in her hand. Perhaps, she might have excused herself by saying she had no credit to make a call because she had free texts; but free texts or calls were only to numbers on the same network, in those days. Now, of course we have unlimited everything. Perhaps, I was only worth 10p to her, or the time it takes to write fourteen characters and my number followed by ‘Send’.

    Furthermore, how did we come to think that an email was preferable to a birthday card? Did we really decide that a text with no nuances, or an email with no personalisation, such as handwriting, was suitable? When did we think that fulfilling a chore could be accomplished at arms-length and minimum effort or forethought, and that same desiccation of emotion would be welcome as an alternative to a kiss.

    I brought you some grapes. Mmmm, these are lovely?

    If we visit someone we know, in hospital, who are we doing it for? Do we feel a sense of duty, that for us, manifests within us as a personal need that we must fulfill; like having an itch that simply must be scratched; or do we visit them because the need we have is to make the hospital-bound person a little happier, by showing compassion towards them? Are we not merely satisfying our own need in both cases. So, when my sister sent me a text message on my birthday was she just being selfish?

    But, is being selfish taken to a new low level when we now think that when a tourist venue offers financial concessions for certain groups of persons that means those people may enter for free upon showing a letter of recognised disability or financial hardship that demonstrates eligibility for the full concession, we might ask if a screenshot from a website that shows eligibility is acceptable instead? To be clear about this: A cathedral in Kent, England gives full concessions to visitors who are on government granted financial benefits that are paid to job-seekers or workers whose earnings are below a certain threshold. The cathedral website states a ‘letter’ of eligibility needs to be produced for free entry.

    In Negotiation, there is an acronym, BATNA, which is: Best Alternative to A Negotiated Agreement. In Law, a contract is in place when an offer is accepted; there must also be something moving from one entity to another. That ‘something, can be either tangible, such as product; or intangible, such as a right or a freedom. A contract can often be expressed very simply using only a single condition; the presence of the conditional ‘if’ in a statement makes things clear for the average person – ‘If you give me that, I will give you this.’ Let us write this simple contract thus:

    If you prove, with a letter from a government body, that you are in receipt of a government-issued financial benefit (Universal Credit) we will completely waive any entry fee for you, and you can enter for free.

    What person would try to negotiate for the best alternative to this agreement? I will tell you: anybody in the modern world whose moral compass is so skewed by their acceptance that fulfilling one’s own need is the same as fulfilling a duty, or the same as making someone feel loved for a while. The recognition of duty to each other to comfort and offer assistance seems to have been completely washed away of late.

    Yet, the UK government has decided that it will not issue letters of entitlement to people in receipt of Universal Credit so they can accept an offer for free entry as a visitor to a Cathedral, and instead gives advice to renegotiate a new contract for free entry with a screenshot of the benefit-recipient’s entitlement. What this means for the average person in receipt of Universal Credit and hoping to visit a cathedral with a full entry fee concession, is that they need to check that free admission is applicable with new conditions being met; typically a phone call that very near to the beginning of the conversation will use the conditional ‘if’ in a question – ‘If I show you a screen-grab / screenshot of my entitlement to government benefits will you let me in for free?’ What was simple; click the checkbox for your visitor slot and show the letter eat the entry point, is now complicated by an erosion of common-sense right at the top of the Government and at the fabric of our society.

    When a government promotes that kind of behaviour we know we can expect a desertification of confidence in one another and a crumbling of the edifices of courtesy and manners through lack of maintenance because there are no more engineers left to check for decay.

    I understand that this laxity in manners has come about because by having personal phones we simply cannot be bothered to comply with instructions or conditions when there are clear rules and guidelines, and so many of us simply phone up and renegotiate the conditions we can’t be bothered to comply with. We do this because we get a buzz out of conversation, and we get a buzz out of settling something while avoiding greater effort to achieve the criteria a business has set out for eligibility; in other words – terms and conditions.

    An email to my grandma on her birthday saves me walking to the post office for a stamp and an envelope; I don’t need to find a pen. ‘I know I had one, when I was at school!’; and the emoji or emoticon for a smiley face is cute.

    Let me tell you why I am thinking that there is an overall erosion of sensibility in modern society. I was offered a job which I formally accepted. The start date was agreed and everything was in place and understood. I even received an email saying ‘Welcome…..see you on [date]’. And here is the kicker – it went on, ‘If you have any questions email me’. About a week later the recruitment agency, through which the job was arranged, questioned me on why I did not reply to that email. ‘I have no questions.’ I said. ‘But, you should thank them for giving you the job and tell them you are looking forward to starting.’ I sent an email to the business to tell them I cannot take the job because we must eliminate this third party element (job recruitment agency) immediately. I was told by the business that the third party element cannot be bypassed. I rejected the job. Apparently there is now, in the modern world, a requirement to unnecessarily and inanely chatter once a contract is in place. The agreement to work for the business was to do a particular job for x amount of money and for x amount of hours. – end of! Nothing else, terms and conditions fulfilled. No need for reassurance. Would you work for an insecure business owner? Not I! I owned and ran a very successful international relocation business. It worked like this. Tell us what you have to move; from where to where; and when to move it, and we will give you a guaranteed price and a guaranteed start-time AND FINISH TIME on your chosen day, with a GUARANTEED PRICE. (We also made it clear on the website that if you lie to us we will impose unlimited penalty charges, that equated to our penalty charges for being late to the next job, if we are delayed by your deceit).

    Once the quote was accepted we sent an email with the details in it to the booker. There was then no more communication. Now, ten years later, we would need to send an email every week just to say we have not forgotten our agreement, and everything is on target, and there are no changes to the price or the time or the dates. In effect, everything is the same. 

    We stopped trading at the peak of our success because suddenly, in 2020, everyone got scared and they have never got well again. Nothing had changed with us; we still honoured contracts and those contracts did not include petting and patting nervous entities. Successful businesses, offering excellent service at the best prices, do not have the resources to stroke and tickle nervous customers without different sensible people paying for it. Of course, ‘added services’ for product sales was already billowing, with an ill-wind, throughout honest trade to show, like a waggy-tailed puppy, shallow and delighted attention (that is likely to be revised and diverted at a moments notice when there is a distraction). 

    Would you trust someone who says they will be at a meeting place once, or someone who constantly states that they will be there? Think for a moment; why would the second person feel the need to update you? Because one of you is unreliable. However, once you get used to obsequious service you kind of miss it and start to feel nervous when you don’t get it anymore. Ultimately though, the customer ends up paying more money for something that would otherwise have been very simple.

    According to Statista , in 2005, the USA sent a total of 81 billion text messages; in 2011, 2.3 trillion; and in 2021, 2 trillion (down from the years 2020 and 2019). With approximately 370 million people in the USA, including infants, that 2021 figure comes to 5405 messages received by each person in that year. (an average of 14 – 15 messages every day)

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/185879/number-of-text-messages-in-the-united-states-since-2005

    In the UK, according to sellsell.com, in 2012, almost 151 billion SMS and MMS messages were sent; and every year since 2012 the number has decreased so in 2022, 36,440,000,000 (36.44 billion) were sent. With approximately 70 million UK people, that means approximately 2,157 messages were received by each person in 2012; in 2022, approximately 520 messages were received by each person that year. That is an average of 10 messages per week. Clearly another form of social media is used in the UK.

    Realistically, we have to consider that these figures may only reflect the number of messages that were received by individuals because messages are also sent by businesses. The point is not lost in recognising that the recipient responds to a message by looking at their phone and reading the message; and even looks at their phone when their phone has not notified that a message has been received and when there is not a message to read.

    MTV, the music-TV channel, launched in 1981, was one of the first to put streaming ‘ticker-tape’ type text at the bottom of the music video. Some people had difficulty in watching the band playing and reading the scrolling text. However, we soon developed the ability to comprehend both. We now desire multiple streams of entertainment simultaneously; hence the anticipation of texting and social media interaction that many of us experience throughout the whole of our waking lives.

    While I do not condone recreational drug use, some studies have shown that a marijuana smoker is as attentive to their work environment as a person who consistently checks their SmartPhone and responds to messages throughout the day. Given the choice, as an employer, of whether to hire an illegal drug user or a regular user of a SmartPhone, the pot-head wins. The pot-head only loses out if they are dealing too. I mean let’s face it; try getting a SmartPhone addict to do a repetitive job. Each of these people-type examples, it seems clear, is trying to ameliorate, what they perceive to be a boring existence, with a panacea, different for each but still a panacea. It is sad that we need drugs to put up with our banal lives and make it through the day. ‘Whew! Made it! Oh, wait. One last check of my phone, or one last toke, to take away distraction and help me sleep. 

    So, what does all this come down to? The thrill of anticipation of a return text or expected telephone has become an addiction to dopamine, which in turn, has twisted into a malevolent paranoia that things are not well, when the pleasure centre (Am. center) of our brains in not triggered often enough, simply because all is not well because we are not getting our ‘fix’ of dopamine often enough. If nobody calls us or texts us, we feel unwanted and left out, if we have not yet become a junkie. And like all addicts, our judgement is impaired when we both, get our fix, AND when we don’t. As an employer, given the choice between a dopamine junkie and a clean person with the same experience and qualifications, the dopamine junkie would not even get an interview for a job I might offer. The questions that needs to be answered are: Are you selfish? Are you insecure? and, will work be a sufficient distraction from your need for connection?

    What distracts you?

    I once got asked when, conducting research, I applied for a job, ‘What distracts you?’ I thought, ‘Nothing’. The question was actually code for, ‘How many times a day do you look at your phone?’ I left their premises very much saddened.

    All of us are a single decision away from having digital devices implanted in our heads.

    Bibliography

    ‘About duty-based ethics’, Duty-based ethics, BBC, https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/duty_1.shtml

  • When arrogance meets complacence

    When arrogance meets complacence

    I like to play mind-chess with unsolicited visitors to my home

    Sometimes, a person on my doorstep, tries to sell me Broadband or something, and because I don’t respond to marketing or sales techniques at all, rather than just poke them in the chest with a broom and shoo them away, I give them the time of day and allow them to practice their elevator-pitch (an opening spiel that is intended to open a door of curiousity). I ask questions and let them respond. Eventually, the conversation peters out and they quietly go, at least a little rejuvenated and not immediately shunned.

    Every now and then, a pair of people knock on my door to talk to me about Jesus and God. I thoroughly enjoy these moments because I have a deep belief in the spiritual world, so I am not afraid of any witchcraft or hypnotism they might try to trap me with. Some time ago, I came to understand that ‘omnipresent’ means, in the past, present and the future. That means that, theoretically, we can pray in the future for our sins in the past and God, being in the future, hears those prayers and prevents us being spoiled by sin, or even committing sin. I use this as a universal truth with the evangelists on my doorstep, and we play mind-chess for a while. If, towards the very end of the conversation, I mention that ‘omniscient’ means knowing what will happens in the past, present, and future, it shows that planning to pray in the future, like next Sunday, to cover a sin we are about to commit today, is useless because it is not sincere. God and I have a good laugh at this over a brandy and a cigar. Neither of us smoke or drink, so we just laugh instead.

    I created James and Brian, two characters to show how foolish most of us are, and especially me. At the end, you can hear God laugh at James’ stupidity. This is just a story. I have taken a strong view as narrator to make a case for James.

    two men either side text reading, Half Penny Stories

    Mind Chess

    (With a nod to Transactional Analysis)

    The allotment was empty when James got there. The gate was open but there were no delusional would-be market-gardeners to be seen. The exposed dry soil made James think of water. It even smelt dusty today; humidity levels were low, and it hadn’t rained for over five weeks. His own plot was green and abundant with fresh growth but everywhere else was a scene of abandonment. Bare soil with random segregated weeds moping in the sun made James contemptuous of the absent hobbyists and pretenders. Only gooseberry bushes seemed to be growing; gooseberries bushes scattered across arid plots surrounded by congregating weeds vying for position, like unruly football fans at a match that hadn’t started yet.

    Nobody, it seemed, was concerned with neatness or order, yet farmers, James thought, with all the land they cultivate were tidier than these lazy losers. Some things came easy for James. Having self-propagating flowering plants with lots of ground-covering foliage that prevented the soil drying out and kept weeds down in early Spring was just the obvious thing to do; knowing this allowed him spare time. He had long ago concluded that if he hadn’t expended any energy sowing these seeds or tending the plants he really didn’t mind digging them up to plant other preferred seedlings. Some things were difficult for James. Compassion and empathy were alien to him, so much so that he was ruthless even with himself. He had had his turn at suffering and avoided any circumstance that had a probability of happiness, as he saw it. Happiness, he felt, could be taken from him, by accident or by someone’s will. He was disappointed with life and lived a life of asceticism, with no expectation of joy. You might expect him to be in fine physical shape but he was lazy, preferring to use his brain to find ways to alleviate or avoid the toil of hard work. He was also young; not even sixty-two yet.

    Pushing his bicycle with day-glow green handlebars and front forks, he went further in, hoping for something stimulating that was emotionally free, but finding nothing of interest. His own plot, he saw, was just as he had left it, green and luscious with its covering of Limnanthes douglasii, or Poached Egg plant. This was safe for him; no emotion or effort put in and free aesthetic value taken out. His mental cost – benefit analysis said ‘win – win’. He was about to leave when he spied a man painting a tiny shed, going just beyond scumbling and changing its colour from grey to duck-egg blue.

    James quickly learned that Brian used to be a secondary school teacher, because Brian wanted him to know that he used to be useful. By association with his career, Brian hoped that everyone he told would continue to think that he was a hero, a modern day crusader in driving forward decades of young minds into a bright future but was realistically a voracious and gaping maw of banality in the North East of England; an unattended torpidity that would swallow up even the sharpest of students. James, on the other hand, was an unqualified educator; a corrector of intellectual mistakes, and a ruthless and unfeeling man who had dedicated himself to proving everyone he met, wrong, stupid, a waste of space, or obsolete. 

    James had strong views and knew the far-reaching extent of his mind outstripped most others. Where others relied on heuristics, James experimented; where others got information from newspapers, television and social media, James parasitically sucked dry selected information he found in the people he met; though never the information that the host thought valuable and had gleaned from their favourite media sources. James was instead searching for tiny connecting pieces to complete his collection of finished thinking. He needed to understand his world in fine detail, so he could eventually show the rest of the world that he was right to hate everyone for their stupidity and and right to be a loner.

    There are two types of people according to James; sublime people of high spiritual, moral, or intellectual worth who were beneficial to him; and the rest of the world. James categorised Brian to be obsolete and a drain on public learning. However, Brian, innocently holding his small tin of paint in one hand and a brush in the other, and comfortable in his fug of accumulated miscomprehension had roused James’ interest. Mental stimulation was the drug that kept James alive. He never showed his true colours when he first met someone. Instead, he let them rudely promote themselves and then gave them reasons to go away and think about how they might wake from the weary slumber that was home to their comforting insensibility. James thought himself special. Conversely, he knew this and that is why he hated himself. Self-flagellation had eaten away at James’ confidence and left only a paradigm of behaviour almost completely devoid of compassion.

    Initially, Brian was friendly and not alarmed and after general conversation on plants and how he had moved his shed, Brian suddenly swerved onto a blustering, and clearly unrefined, path with an outburst on people dumping their rubbish in the Birmingham streets. Brian wasn’t quite ranting and James knew that he wasn’t crazy by the standards of the time. He recognised a man that spent at least a couple of hours with a pint in his hand at the bar of his local pub on Sundays. Like everyone else, talking, for Brian,  was almost entirely only mental exercise.

    ‘They just dump their rubbish in the streets’, cried Brian indignantly. ‘I mean their mattresses and things. They should take it all to the tip.’

    James, calm in his thinking, knew that not everyone had access to a van or trailer in Birmingham, and there was a rubbish removal-person strike in Birmingham, so no-one could arrange for a mattress or old cupboard to be taken away either. To James, Brian was certainly, by the standards of the day, completely average in his thinking; clearly insane. James, however, was charitable in classing it as ‘lazy and crust coated thinking’. He recognised the patina on Brian’s thinking; patina that was a result of poor maintenance and a reactive exposure to lazy thinkers. ‘Get your thoughts out, use them, Brian, and embellish them with facts and fresh ideas. Where is your inventiveness, Brian?’ he thought. He could almost ‘see’ extraneous bits of thoughts being sheared off in Brian’s head as they were shaped to fit with other similarly corroded thoughts, and cobbled together, to quickly throw up a feeble scaffold so flimsy that only a minor test would knock it down, but sufficient enough for him to formulate his own opinion to use as a remedial buttress; an opinion that once it had reached his fore-brain and left his mouth would be his long-standing fall-back position because it was the only one he had. It would be a buttress to a non-existent scaffold that becomes the foundation for the next scaffold. Now that it had been recently and neatly placed on the wobbly shelves in the library of Brian’s mind, he would be attracted to its shiny newness. The attendant analogue library filing card for where it was stored, would, with its crisp corners and uncreased facade, for a long while be more attractive than its dog-eared, mis-filed, and stained neighbours. Brian had made all his relatable experiences obsolete. Thinking stalled.

    James felt compelled to help Brian restart his donkey-engine, cement-mixer type mind; a mind that needed to first be pulled free from a bog of mistreatment.

    Unfortunately, the mind is not hermetically sealed from the outside world and the gatekeepers in charge of inward-bound information in Brian’s mind were now baffled and throttled by newly installed governors that came in a box-set with a belief that his education was completed when he achieved a recognised teaching qualification.

    Brian’s unconscious source thought was, ‘I know my subject and the University has told me that I can adequately teach it. I have experience of teaching in secondary schools as part of my degree, so I now know everything I need to bend young minds to think like me. They really should, you know, because I am right. No! More than that, because I care, I am a hero!’

    He had, a long time ago, in younger years, consciously thought, ‘I am so excited. I want to help young people. I really care.’

    Any observer could, in retrospect, suggest that the demons were ready and waiting to leap into him to corrupt his valiant hope while he fervently clutched his University approbation, but already they were in him, part of his core, inherited from his parents, and encouraged by his friends and peers.

    ‘No new information is needed. Don’t explore. You have all the information you need to teach empty heads. Relax.’

    ‘Well done!’ to Brian meant, ‘You have done enough. You can stop now.’

    This necrotic stagnancy was starkly evident to James in the rest of their discussion. Brian had opinions on Government handouts; criminal records preventing people from ever working in their whole lives; and who might attend and be an appropriate recipient at Food Banks. James, with a robust understanding of these social issues through diligent research and empirical knowledge threw in ‘Shame on them!’ as the conversation segued from benefit cheats to habitual scroungers. This left-over salty seasoning of the stew of Brian’s opinion on righteously moaning benefits recipients was too much for Brian’s palate. But James had carefully measured that condiment into his hand to check its volume and supposed effect, and smiled at Brian’s donkey engine mind chewing on old slime and chunks of debris from his socially-conscious 1990s history, when it balked at the jet-wash of fresh briny thinking.

    Brian, with his self-assurance, had already made his first mistake with James; thinking that everyone watches television and have similarly long straws that are permanently thrust into the same soup of Orwellian nonsense and thus everyone is supplied with the same delectable but mentally-hostile nourishment. One of the reasons why James did not eat media-cake was because it tastes delicious but is hostile to the body. It satisfies a want, yet secretly poisons a need.

    Subconsciously, Brian was reconnoitering for people to add to his group of confirmation-bias addicts; searching for another stumbling mess of a person who prefers an easy route through a jungle of information; a route that was crudely cut by a man with a machete following an animal track, that became a track for illegal loggers. A path that is there by dint of its availability. The more people use it, the more easily it is found, due to its wide and trampled aspect. Brian was used to following the pack. His younger self would have wept.

    ‘They just dump their rubbish outside other people’s homes in Birmingham.’ Brian remarked, alluding to, though not saying outright, people leaving their rubbish outside the homes of people of colour, and not instead gently placing it outside white people’s homes. James was aware of that happening. He suspected that Brian thought he would jump on his band-wagon of aggrieved righteousness because James was closer in colour to Indians and Middle-Eastern people than the old-school notion of what a European should look like; Scandinavian and Danish Vikings from 1000 years ago. In any case, James didn’t bite. He went the other way in thinking and held one idea back for the shock value, if it was needed.

    In his head he went with an idea that, in a lawless environment there is no infrastructure to guide someone towards making mutually beneficial decisions, which came out as, ‘Why not, everyone else is; and where else is there to put it?’ James had now set himself up to fatally fail in his mission to destroy the canker in Brian’s mind. He would never recover from this outward attitude of simplistic laissez-faire.

    It was not the first time James had been mistaken for an Asian or Middle-Eastern man. He spent a lot of time outside and grew tanned even by the winter sun. Certainly, he wasn’t going to, without question, be waving a flag for a brown ethnic minority people he did not belong to, and crying foul at every mistake made by a Viking, which Brian, it seems, thought he would.

    Neither was he about to run around shouting ‘Up the Vikings!’

    ‘Is that what you think happens, Brian?’ James thought, ‘Brown people will always have opinions that support only brown people?’ He never said it, though, because he still believed he held the central position in the game of chess, that was, to him, their conversation. He knew that attack would cause Brian to defend, and then there would only be a game of attrition; Brian would never have a confident gambit if he was forced to defend himself. It was his opponents’ gambits that James liked to publicly dissemble.

    Brian still believed that James was from the same economic background as himself and maintained his ‘friendly pontificating over a Sunday pint in the village local’ attitude. He breached the subject of criminality and having a criminal record forever preventing young adults from getting jobs. As a teacher, he’d had an enhanced criminal record check because he was working with vulnerable people. He presumed that everyone has the same check; James knew they don’t.

    ‘On application forms, hopeful people, in the UK, must confess to any convictions within the last ten years. After ten years, their records are deleted, and they are considered reformed and no longer a threat to themselves, the shop-keepers’ sweets, or other people. Actually’, James continued, ‘the records are not deleted. Convictions for most offences are simply not revealed when requested by a potential employer, except for certain crimes.’

    Brian looked uncomfortable at this, inconveniently sure that young criminals were eternally doomed and condemned to be forever unemployed by their foolish earlier actions. By this time in the conversation, James knew that Brian, the ex-teacher, still foolishly believed that education universally solves unemployment in all environments, and is the sole and absolute requirement for opportunities for success to emerge. Brian, born in the North East of England has lived in the south of England for too long, and, in James’ mind had forgotten his home. When James added that as an employer, he had worked closely with recruitment agencies to get people at very short notice for some of his contracts, Brian’s spluttering, pollution-spreading engine of a mind encountering a steep incline in the road to progress, switched on the automatic choke because its core temperature still remained too low, and so more stale fuel from his tank of denial was sucked in, at the expense of fresh air. He refused to learn something new or believe that he was wrong. He did not recognise that he needed to purge his system.

    Brian shifted back to talking about food banks, believing that it was, in fact, James who was clearly exhibiting signs of mental disorder, and he tried to link education, criminality, and poverty with a circumstance he had read about and seen on the news. From his self-imposed, though much supported by his peers, elevated position of superiority over mentally aberrant individuals, such as this moron before him, he thought that James would agree with his confused and blind belief that all visitors to food banks are food-poor. ‘How can he not see the truth? It is in the newspapers, for goodness sake!’, he irately pondered.

    However, when Brian demonstrated this fabricated empathy for peasants living on bread and water, James had to make sure Brian knew that many of them indeed eat cake. He had attended a food bank perhaps five times over as many years. Extra money went out as a larger direct debit than he was anticipating and five more times because he was ineffective in temporarily saving money by switching utility providers.

    ‘As someone interested in social enterprises, I spent a lot of hours talking to the organisers of local food banks and hubs.’ James explained.

    ‘All of them complained about rising numbers and how to tax people with a set ‘donation’ of around five pounds for each visit. My input with them was, as a general rule, to not allow people to attend if their benefit is paid that same week.’

    James was now beginning to reveal his ruthlessness, but he knew that the same people week after week were getting free food so they could buy luxuries such as eating out and expensive day-trips with the money they saved. This at the expense of both the needy and the food-hubs which spent money on food to accommodate the greedy as well as the hungry.

    ‘Shame on them’, he said again.

    Brian, in his turn, was irritated by James’ arrogance and finally ended the conversation when James tried to explain how needs and wants change as people mature, so financial income has a different utility for different age groups.

    ‘I really must get on with painting this shed. My wife will kill me if I waste this paint.’

    James turned his bike around. A duck in the pond laughed when an opportunistic jackdaw who had delightedly watched the whole thing croakily called, ‘Hear! Hear!’.

    Brian blinked and stared, confounded, and watched, paint pot in one hand and brush in the other, while James pushed his bicycle away, towards the gate at the edge of the allotment and back to the road.More cars were parked at the gate.

    James, alone with his thoughts again, was convinced that he had proved himself right. Students really are held back by coasting teachers. Yet, blindly, he had corrupted himself because he had no evidence to back this up. It was still supposition. Nonetheless, he closed his thought-experiment examination of teacher and pupil interaction, and added one more theory to his collection of completed thoughts.

    The duck, unable to keep the smile off its face, put its head beneath the water, then needing air, withdrew it,  shook it, and laughed again at the jackdaw as it shamefacedly flew away.

  • I met myself and now I want to be a better person

    I met myself and now I want to be a better person

    You make me want to be a better person

    Because we cannot hear what our voices sound like to others we are surprised to hear it when we first hear a recording of our own voice. Similarly, I once heard that if we met ourselves in the street we would always thereafter cross the road whenever we saw ourselves to avoid another meeting; such is the distaste we would have at our own selves. In other words, we would not want to be friends with ourselves.

    two silhouettes of men surrounding text Half Penny Stories

    The man in his fifties

          ‘What, you don’t need me anymore?’, said the man in his fifties to me as he came down the library stairs.

    This man did not seem to be offended nor surprised, merely bemused. I suspected he was not significant in improving my day, and he seemed to be wondering what he would do before he finally disassembled after gradually fading, if I continued to ignore him. At least, that is what I was wondering.

    I ignored this familiar, though not recognised man. I had no idea who he was, simply because I had never seen myself before without prejudice, and never heard my own voice coming from outside my own head, without the resonances in my mouth and nasal passages acting as feedback.

    At the time I didn’t realise that I had imagined and created him to guard me and warn me of impending danger, which he had so far done exceedingly well, though not in a language that I understood, more as an uncomfortable feeling, of concern in a particular direction. I knew that it had been useful, really useful, to be somehow connected to someone unbiased and disconnected from the world by a slight phase shift; a delay of a few milliseconds. I had also used him as a counselor, or just someone to act as devil’s advocate; a sounding board, if you will; this was, after all, someone I had never met in the real world, would never be punitively accountable to, or ever expect him to tell my secrets. But at this time of first meeting a visible, seemingly solid, manifestation I was still clueless.

    Later, when I was talking to an elderly lady, the man in his fifties came back, talking nonsense, well, almost nonsense; certainly interjecting himself in a boorish manner. He seemed to be someone else’s idea of confident and open, and desperately, though dismally, trying to demonstrate some kind of learnedness that encompassed the current situation and everything in it.

    Disgusted, I walked away and left him to it – not wanting to become engaged in any kind of difficult dialogue with him. I felt sorry for the elderly woman, leaving her talking to, what was really just obfuscation of her slight problem with a shopping trolley; a bit like inclement weather. I didn’t know it was myself she was talking to, me just a few days, weeks, years ago, but now projected as a probable future outcome. It was that same person, me in the past and recent present, compressed into a single moment. I had, in fact, two decades ago as a teenager, created a manifestation to fill the gap in my own emotional mis-education. No wonder no-one liked me now if I was going to be like that.

    During the next few days a few people, strangers I met, looked at me a bit too long as though they recognised me, or  puzzled as though I had sworn out loud for no reason, or saw a change in me. How could they? They had never met me. No, but it soon became apparent they had met the man in his fifties. To be fair, they hadn’t actually met the man in his fifties. Instead, their own being, imagined, created or organically existing, inside of these strangers, who in their cases happened to be the same age as themselves, had met the man in his fifties; this being my future self if I did not change my ways. They knew each other, and on days off had sometimes met and wildly pontificated their theories on everything; they were, after all, not bound by a fear of failure and consequently were supremely confident.

    Later that day, I met the elderly woman again. The wheel on her stolen shopping trolley was still about to fall off, much like it had been ‘borrowed’ in the 1990s and had never been properly maintained up to today. That in itself was strange, but that she looked like how my wife might look in forty years was overwhelmingly disturbing.

           ‘Who was that awful man?’ she asked. I had a strange feeling then that I was not going to remain married. This fleeting feeling of deja-vu and prescience broke the veil of incomprehension. I understood in a small way who the man in his fifties might be.

    Hakim, my outrageously handsome childhood friend met me at the bar in the pub that evening. He was much more sanguine about how my day had played out. When I say handsome, I mean that I try not be seen with him in public because, although my features are plain, in comparison with his, I would be arrested for being in possession of an offensive face. My only advantage was that being slightly taller than average height I towered over his diminutive one metre fifty stature.

    We stayed sitting at the bar, our usual place. ‘Don’t worry about it, it’s nothing’, he said, ‘I have had whole conversations with animals about re-incarnation.’ He climbed down from his stool and flambuoyantly limped over to the docile dog in the corner.

          ‘Jean-Paul’, he said, ‘When will you give me that ten Francs you borrowed from me twenty years ago in Paris?’ Hakim has a sense of humour that makes it difficult for me to know when he is joking or just crazy.

    While Hakim was in the toilet, the man in his fifties came in, stood briefly at the bar, then took a stool there, two stools away, waiting to be served. My heart sank. It plummeted into depths of despair when Hakim walked jauntily back in without his limp and climbed his stool again. Please don’t talk to him, Hakim, I prayed.

    ‘Long time no see, Martin! Have a beer?’ My name is Martin but Hakim was not looking at me. I was beginning to realise that Hakim might actually have whole conversations with dogs, and why he is supremely confident; he could see my older self, just as I could. For the first time, I regretted reading that book. ‘Mind Games’, when I was fourteen, and particularly the chapter titled. ‘How to manifest a being’. A kaleidoscope of jigsaw pieces fell into place as developing thoughts in my mind. Most of these I knew to be only suppositions, such as virgins have a greater ability to manifest in the spirit world, like Oracles in ancient civilisations. I had manifested ‘Martin’, my avatar, before I had scratched the itch of carnal desire with someone else. ‘Martin’ was consequently, not a temporary being.

    Alarmingly, it seemed that my manifestation now had agency over itself. I suspected that Hakim already knew this. I knew that I would not shake ‘Martin’ off, as me in thirty years time, without help. I looked hopefully at Hakim, who ignored me.

           ‘Get Martin whatever he is drinking, please.’ he said to the barman, gesturing to the man in his fifties.

    Oh no! I thought, This is the avatar that connected with the being that guided me, without tripping, through a completely dark wood, after I fell in a ditch. I didn’t like this manifestation but I should.

    – end –

    silhouette of a female face in profile

    Are these the persons who precede us? 

    Do these persons judge us before we ever arrive? So when first impressions in the real world count, they really don’t?

    Realistically, I think first impressions in the real world do count, yet not necessarily in the ways that many people postulate. We can tell if someone is fit by the way they walk. We can tell if someone is polite or merely aware of social protocols. I am fairly certain that it is how we perceive ourselves that causes us to shape ourselves to a reasonable conformity of our expectations. I slouch, not so much because I am tall, but because I am jaded. I make mock gestures of tipping my hat to strangers to let them know I have a sense of humour and a recognition of manners past, because I feel isolated. There are a myriad of tiny things I do which I do not recognise because I have not met myself and can’t see them. If I met myself coming down the street, I would see a man tipping an invisible hat and jauntily and happily moaning about his perception of the world. I would cross the road to avoid myself. The little story is about how awkward I would feel if I had to introduce my embarrassing invisible friend (me) to my other friends, as someone I love and respect. Strangely, this invisible friend is someone my friends and family have already met.

    ‘Old Martin, You make me want to be a better person.’