Blogger have fixed it so that you can turn off the new markup they were forcing onto the site, thus avoiding the formatting and validation problem that it created. This site now validates and looks like it is supposed to. Any remaining layout problems are due to bad design. I’m not clear why Blogger couldn’t have put the new code in the templates in the first place, which is what I have now done, in the right place, so that I can use their new image thing without problems if I want to. But it’s their call I guess. What do I know? I’m just a doctor.
The main point here, as I have stated in an email to Blogger, is that for the first time (I think) Blogger has started publishing code on to people’s sites outside of the user’s control. I regard this as a seriously retrograde step. So far, the support on the Blogger site fails to grasp this issue. I
don’t want a workaround that will allow my site to look right
notwithstanding the new code that Blogger is inserting onto my site. I want to retain control of my own
site. If Blogger will no longer allow me to
decide what is published to my site, it’s a sad day,
because I’ll have to find an alternative content management solution
that will. Which I really don’t want to do, being lazy.
I’m not trying to sound like a whining ingrate here. If Blogger decides that it needs
to go this way for the users that it wants to support going forward,
that’s obviously a decision for it. But I don’t think that this approach
is going to work for me.
The formatting on this site has gone funny because Blogger appear to have changed something, such that <div style="clear:both;"></div> is inserted at the start of each post. The way my template is set up, this renders the html invalid and breaks the stylesheet. I’ve sent an email to see what is going on — hopefully, they can change it back so I don't have to redesign the stylesheets to make it work. I would note that this change will also render the html of their standard templates invalid, so it doesn’t seem like a very great idea.
Tony Blair was both booed and cheered today when he attempted to justify his record on Europe by telling Jacques Chirac “I’m a passionate pro; you’re a peon”.
Another advert for which I am not the target audience, which I therefore (or is there really a causal link — YOU DECIDE) thought totally sucked. The Special K “loser” advert. The idea is that the woman in the advert is successfully using Special K in her diet in order to lose weight. It shows the woman going about her day with people “complimenting” her with “morning, loser”, “this is X, she’s a real loser”, etc. This advert sucks because the epithet “loser” is intrinsically offensive and therefore makes the viewer feel uncomfortable. You can’t just apply it to losing weight, you idiots. It is inextricably linked in our minds with something distateful — i.e. being a useless/unfortunate twat. If someone said “morning, loser” to me, I’d want to punch them. A similar thing would be trying to sell gym equipment with “morning, lifter”, “this is X, he’s a real lifter”. It’s just not going to work, guys.
I see I’ve made it incidentally onto the California Superbike School website, as an extra in some footage of one of the instructors nearly chucking it down the road. Lucky that I’d taken my mirrors off, because seeing that happening behind me would probably have put me off somewhat.
Contemporary dance and motorcycles. It’s good to see this site getting back to its roots. Last night I went to see h2dance with Donald Hutera perform Choreographus Interruptus at the Robin Howard Theatre. So, what went down? I’ve written a review — show/hide review.
--------------------
H2 Dance and Donald Hutera — Choreographus Interruptus
This work focussed upon the intersubjectivity inherent in performance and the exploration of the relationship between performer and audience. The audience was placed around the outside of the space with their shoes removed. The performers were three dancers and a dance writer. The audience was encouraged to interject with suggestions for the movement, have dialogues with the performers or request changes to the sound and the lighting. Observers could decide to enter the performance arena to lie down among the dancers and in some cases even elected to participate in the movement. The dance writer — Donald Hutera — for the most part remained (in his own words) “the disembodied voice in the background”, guiding the interjections and keeping things moving. After the performance, Hutera led a discussion about what had taken place.
The dancers — Hanna Gillgren, Heidi Rustgaard and Dimitri Papakyriazis — were all proficient, with Gillgren in particular having an attractive open fluidity to her movement. Papakyriazis was much more introspective in style and indeed was challenged upon the “interior” quality of his work by the audience. Unlike Rustgaard and Gillgren, he did not seem particularly comfortable at engaging with the audience, which was ironic given the nature of this piece. Papakyriazis also stood out from the two women when working in duet, retaining a more spiky, aloof quality in comparison with the more natural and familiar feel of Rustgaard and Gillgren’s interaction.
The idea of using audience–guided improvisation around a pre–set choreographed theme was interesting but in practice the attempt to create something meaningful by responding to random audience interjections such as, for example, “dance that bit again as if you were 3 inches high and very long” was not always successful. The danger here was that the exercise became a kind of dance “Whose Line is it Anyway?” with the dancers attempting to show off their technical proficiency and creative ability with clever responses to silly audience interjections. This had the potential to be interesting if the dancers were very good or the suggestions particularly apt but could also hamper real communication and connection with the audience. Some of the improvised changes to the movement either lacked impact or alternatively were over–the–top. Also, a danger of inviting the audience to participate in a more or less free–form way was that a few extroverts ended up doing most of the participating. As these participants’ confidence grew and their contributions became more forceful, the performers were at risk of losing control and their opportunity to communicate with the rest of the audience was again in danger of slipping away.
So this was an unusual idea which, in this setting, worked well up to a point. It was clear that most of the audience were “dance people” and some of them clearly knew each other and/or some of the performers. This was unsurprising — contemporary dance tends to be quite a participants’ art–form, with audience members often also being practitioners. This kind of “workshop–cum–performance” is a logical extension of that audience demographic. In the discussion afterwards, it was suggested that it was self–indulgent to show this kind of work in a dance venue in front of dance people. It was submitted that more would be gained by taking it outside of that environment. However, this would not be without difficulty. A more mainstream audience would initially expect a finished article, not a collaborative process. The challenge in taking this to a wider audience would be educating the audience at the outset in the different mode of thinking necessary to participate fully in the work.
In summary, this was an interesting piece that raised some unusual questions about the nature of the art and the relationship between audience and performer. It may not immediately appeal outside of a fairly practitioner–based audience, although I hope I’m wrong about that, because it certainly has the potential to grab the attention and get an audience thinking and I sense that, on the right night, it could develop into something very good.
15 June 2005
--------------------
For those who can’t be bothered with the review, I would note only that it was a pretty dancey, arty audience and there was audience participation. This extended in some cases to people barking like dogs and sniffing the dancers’ butts (yes, this happened) when asked to participate “as forest animals observing the dancers from outside as in the Disney movie Bambi”. In relation to that, I would say only, since when have dogs been forest animals? Like, duh. I suspect that when this kind of thing happens, the performers must be pretty concerned that things are spiralling out of control, in a bad way. And some of the audience were probably thinking the same. All sounds pretty whacked–out, doesn’t it? Well, I guess it was, which is why I say in the review that I don’t think that this would immediately translate terribly well to the wider world outside of a fairly arty, practitioner–based audience. But it certainly kept the attention. And Donald Hutera (who is apparently a big shot dance critic according to the other half) seemed like a nice guy.
Labels: contemporary dance
I wonder whether I should stop using the road bike on the track? To get it back to pristine is going to be £1,500+ in parts alone.
I’ve been thinking about why I crashed and had an exchange of emails with someone at the California Superbike School, which I hope he won’t mind me reproducing here for future reference with the email addresses taken out. It seems that I am thinking along exactly the right lines — it’s just a matter of executing correctly.
Show/hide emails
-----Original Message-----
From: tucola
Sent: 13 June 2005 19:29
To: motorcycling guru guy
Subject: Question
You said that you were happy to receive emails if we had any riding questions, so
if you don't mind, I'm going to fire away with something.
Today I did my first track day since I did level 3 on 18 May 2005, at Brands Indy. To spare you the suspense, this story ends with me chucking it down the road; - hence the question - but I'll start with the background. I was practicing the
techniques and felt things were going really well. The level 3 body position stuff was great, but as ever, a really useful thing was the quick turn and the two step vision drill. I really felt like I had loads of time and was able to carry plenty of speed into the corners without feeling at all out of control. I asked one of the instructors to have a look at my riding to make sure I had the lines more or less right for the track and he said my lines were great, with good late entries into the corners, smooth throttle control through the turns and good body position. He said I had plenty of ground clearance to spare and his only tip if I wanted to go
faster was, well, to try gradually going a bit faster - there was nothing
wrong with what I was doing.
So far, so good. But now the problem: I was going much quicker whenever I
got clear track (I reckon, like, 10 seconds a lap on a 60 second lap) and I
was getting really held up by traffic. Some of the other riders were going
much slower into the turns than I wanted to go, but when I came up on them,
that was slowing me down to the extent that when we both got on the gas on
the exit, I'd slowed down too much to get past on the straights, when of
course they were comfortable cracking open the throttle.
I was finding myself really distracted by the slower riders in the turns.
When thinking about passing, I was constantly worrying about what they were
going to do. This was causing me to roll off the throttle as I came up to them and bringing me down to their pace. Then, I couldn't get past. Occasionally, a quicker rider in the group would then ride around or inside both of us on a corner at a corner speed that I had been perfectly comfortable with when on clear track. In the end, I went in to Druids, got distracted by a guy I'd been trying to pass for about 3 laps who was suddenly right in front of me because he'd hit the brakes harder than I had, target-fixated on his bike, panicked, stood the bike up and ran wide onto the grass on the left hand side of the exit, losing control and low-siding it. Doh! Totally kicked myself as i was going down the road. I could have easily made that corner with a small push on the r/h bar or even a hook turn. Classic survival reaction self-sabotaging behavior! Anyway, I couldn't get the bike back
together in time to get back out so that was it for the day.
So, what do I need to do? Is my problem that I am not sufficiently
comfortable with my riding at this level, in that it goes to pieces when I
am distracted by other riders? Do I just need to practice when I can on
clear track and not worry about passing if I come up against someone slower
- i.e just go slower and leave passing for another day. Or do you have any
tips about how to deal with passing safely that might help me?
OK, for my spiritual growth, I'm going to try a bit of self-diagnosis -
please feel free to debunk: it's about looking in the right place. Don't look too
much at the bike in front beyond an initial assessment and then peripheral
awareness. Maintain your speed into the corner and look where you want to
go. You are going faster than the guy who is coasting so once you're through the door you see open in front of you, he's not going to close the door and hit you, because you're already on the gas and away.
I hope that makes sense and I'd be grateful for any insight.
Thanks
tucola
-----Original Message from motorcycling guru guy
Hi tucola
You will put me out of a job! :)
The last paragraph is perfect, I only have one question for you:
Are you looking for the door to open on the inside or outside of the rider
infront?
All the best
-----Original Message-----
From: tucola
Sent: 14 June 2005 14:29
To: motorcycling guru guy
Subject: Re: Question
Depends on the corner, but mostly inside, I'd say.
To take somewhere like Graham Hill bend at Brands as an example, I'd find
myself coming alongside the rider in front, with me to his right-hand side.
I'm waiting for my lateish turn-in point to square the corner off. He's
already turned and is going slower, hence I've come alongside him. I want to turn quick and late and come past on the inside as the other rider takes a
more looping line through the corner, being leaned over for much longer and
carrying less speed. I then straighten up and get away on the gas down the
left-hand side of the straight, ready to pull over to the right in front of
him, ready for Surtees. But what I found myself doing was worrying about
what the other guy was going to do and slowing down, meaning that although I was still taking the more squared off line, I wasn't coming alongside until
the exit, by which time we'd both straightened up, with me on the left and
him on the right. Then, we both get on the gas and unless the other guy is
on a less powerful bike, I have to drop in behind because he stays abreast
of me and I need the right-hand side of the track for the entry to the next
corner.
But round Clearways, outside. I was able to carry more speed around
Clearways than quite a few people in the group, meaning that a door was
opening on the left-hand side just after the apex to fire away down the
straight on the left. My worry here was that the guy in front would
unpredictably drift to the left, causing me to run out of track and forcing
me onto the grass. This meant that I only dared use this move to get past
people who were going MUCH slower - such that I could blast past them very
quickly. With people who were just five seconds a lap slower, I'd lose my
nerve and back off. Partly because the speeds were high around Clearways and I felt that being forced wide there could have pretty bad consequences.
Is there a preferred option?
You're going to say that this is just a matter of practice to build
confidence in traffic and stop worrying so much about the other riders,
aren't you...!
Incidentally, do you get this sort of thing a lot? You tell people how to go round corners; great, on clear track, it works!! Then, they go to a track
day and they're like "hey, what are all these other guys doing in the
'wrong' places on the track here getting in my way, I think I'm going to
crash"... Shortly followed by a crash.
tucola
-----Original Message from motorcycling guru guy -----
Hi tucola
You are correct in what you trying to do. The only problem is your target
fixation. What you need to practise is your Wide View. Do you recall that
from Level 2?
All the best
-----Original Message-----
From: tucola
Sent: 14 June 2005 14:58
To: motorcycling guru guy
Subject: Re: Question
Think so.
Trying to move the awareness to different points without moving the vision,
wasn't it?
I can check in TOTW this evening.
Thanks for your help.
-----Original Message from motorcycling guru guy-----
Yes, but if you get stuck then contact me
All the best
Was out on track today at Brands Hatch with No Limits trackdays, trying to put some of the California Superbike School stuff into action. Everything was going fine until I binned it two sessions before the end by getting distracted by another rider and running wide on the exit from Druids hairpin. The bike’s a bit worse for wear (argh, my lovely bike!). I’m basically unhurt. Earlier on in the day, someone who was there from the Ninjas’ site snapped a pretty cool picture of me on one of the two left–handers, Graham Hill bend. Quite a tricky corner, due to curving downhill approach, but the first place I ever got my left knee down (on California Superbike Level 2 last Summer).
“Poorly–drawn cartoons inspired by actual spam subject lines”. Very funny.
I’ve just heard that they’ve cancelled the second parking ticket as well. A pleasing victory for the little man. In the words of Norman Stanley Fletcher, “You can’t beat the system; mad to try. But you can lift the heart with an occasional little victory”.
Phallic logo awards. Pretty funny, in a childish Captain Pugwash “surely that can’t have been inadvertent” way.
Further to my post about CCTV parking tickets, I was delighted to get a letter this morning informing me that one of the tickets has been cancelled and apologising for the delay in dealing with my correspondence. Without counting any chickens, that has got to bode somewhat well for the remaining ticket, which is for an identical alleged “offence”.
You might be amused by this — the most misleading headline of the week.
A good comment in the Times about Marks & Spencer:
“Every time I hear a story about the company’s problems I worry that it might disappear and then, if I wanted to buy clothes, I’d be forced to go shopping. In M & S you can buy a suit, shirt and shoes in ten minutes. How can it be in trouble? What’s wrong with you people?”
I agree. Long live M & S. But it does have a real image problem. Funnily enough, someone asked me just yesterday “where do you get your suits from?”, the implication being that they liked the suit I was wearing and expected an expensive, fancy retailer as the answer. I was embarrassed to answer “this one is from M & S, actually”. Their image is much worse than their products. Why is that and what can M & S do about it?
want more?
