Grammar and spelling, innit.

Although I definitely didn't think so at the time, I am now very pleased to have studied Latin at school. I absolutely hated it. My attention span, even then, was woefully inadequate and I remember with crystal clarity the reverie I would enter as conjugations and declensions washed over me, if not all of the words themselves. An unruly child, the fact that my Latin teacher had the charisma of a tin of tuna didn't help me embrace the language with any of the passion I devoted to subjects in which I was more interested.

The thing about Latin though, is that it really does help you understand where our language comes from. It is also a very precise language - hence very good at steering away from ambiguity. I imagine this is why scientific phyla are given Latin designations. You know where you are with it. It does, as they say, exactly what it says on the tin. Which may seem obvious, except that so much of today's languages do not. They are, for the most part, derivations of a mish mash of other languages, strewn across the globe as one regime toppled another and mother tongues changed hands at the behest of tyrannical despots. There's bits of Viking, French, and doubtless other titbits rolled up in the words we use every day. We have irregular verbs, words that have two meanings, different spellings of the same word - none of this in Latin. Which is why it is a language that is still highly regarded.

I know that a lot of people are of the opinion that it doesn't really matter if you get the spelling right, because as long as the other person understands what you are trying to communicate, then its job is done. I'm afraid I have to say I don't agree. I think that language gives us identity, and I also think that if you want people to take what you have to say seriously, the very least you can do is present it correctly. I'm not too fussed on the '8 items or less' argument (In case you aren't aware, the correct phrase would be '8 items or fewer'). To me, that's possibly going a bit far. It does niggle me; but then I accept that I am more finickity than most.

I thought that to save me ranting every time I see it, I'd just get the right bits down here so anyone who likes can use it as a quick reference guide. Or tell me to sod off, whichever you deem appropriate. I don't want to get too stuffy about it, and start going into the overuse or misuse of some words (for example the trend to, like, put the word 'like' everywhere...) as I think this is more a reflection of current argot rather than a lazy or ignorant misuse of language. What would really make my day would be if you can spot a mistake in this blog. The last thing I want to do is come over all highbrow, but I can't even look at Facebook now without seething. Our kids use it every day, is it any wonder that we sometimes struggle to comprehend things they have written?

I hasten to add at this point that there is every chance there will be errors in this very piece - I don't want to get overly pedantic about it, and have quite deliberately adopted a conversational tone, not thinking too much about being obsessed with grammatical correctness. I also accept that it's very easy to get frightfully caught up in the finer nuances of inflection and suggestion inherent in different words and phrases. I just want to make a few basic observations.

So, here we go, in no particular order:-

THEIR - means belonging to them. It is possessive.

THERE - indicates something's position. As in, 'the car is over there'

THEY'RE - is a contraction of 'they are'

*

ARKS - a collection of large boats, such as the one used by Noah and a number of animals, to survive during a flood

ASK - to put a question to someone

*

YOUR - is possessive. 'I have borrowed your book'

YOU'RE - is a contraction of 'you are'

*

ITS - is a possessive pronoun, i.e. belonging to 'it' whatever 'it' may be. As in, 'the elephant is known for its fondness of sticky buns'

IT'S -  a contraction of 'it is' or 'it has'. As in, 'it's been great to see you'

ITS' - DOES NOT EXIST!!

*

BROUGHT - the past tense of 'bring'

BOUGHT - the past tense of 'buy'

*

EFFECT - more commonly a noun - Something brought about by an external influence. Can be used as a verb if the agent caused something to happen. For example, 'the manager effected positive improvements in the office'

AFFECT - almost always a verb - To have an influence on. For example 'High interest rates can affect house prices'

*

TO - in a direction so as to reach

TOO - another word for 'also'

*

PACIFIC - a large body of salt water occupying nearly half the surface of the earth

SPECIFIC - having a particular bearing or reference

*

LOOSE - not tied down

LOSE - unable to find any more

*

Correct - 'I would have remembered my coat had I known it would rain'

Incorrect - 'I would of remembered my coat had I known it would rain'

*

It's 'definitely', not 'definately'. Imagine it being from 'infinite'

*

The following are two separate words; not one

A lot

Thank you

THE APOSTROPHE

While we're here, let's have a little chat about the apostrophe. The purpose of the apostrophe is to denote ownership, or contraction.

By contraction, I mean as in doesn't (does not)

By ownership, I mean as in 'the dog's bone'

If you don't put in an apostrophe, it means the word has been made into a plural. For example 'We have over two hundred cars in stock'

Equally, if you put in an apostrophe when you mean to pluralise, you look like an absolute idiot:

'Get your Christmas Tree's here!' NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

REALISE/ REALIZE, etc.

This is an interesting one. Most people (myself included) assumed that 'realize' was an Americanisation, and that realise was the correct spelling. In fact, I was incorrect. Either is fine in this country. In these matters of debate, I refer to Oxford Dictionaries and they give their conclusions here

TEXT ABBREVIATIONS


Due to the shortened nature of texts/ tweets, abbreviations are often used. There are no hard and fast rules here, but I wonder if any of you share my opinions:

ur - You are
yr - Your

m8 - Not acceptable in any situation whatsoever if you are over 14. And even then, frowned upon.

luv - Hell no.

CAPITALISATION

Capital letters are for the beginnings of sentences and for proper nouns. Or acronyms. Nowhere else.

Yours Sincerely - NO


Yours sincerely - YES


When I started to type this, I thought it would be a paragraph or two. As you can see, it has expanded rather beyond that. I'd be delighted to know if you can think of anything I have missed, or if you think I am mistaken anywhere - by all means comment below. And feel free to pass it amongst your peers. Hope you like it, it makes a change from me banging on about Bromptons...

Pottering...

I started this blog post a couple of weeks ago, but have only just finished it, so it's slightly out of date, but hey ho. About 3 weeks out of date. But the content still relevant.

I cycle every day. Normally to work and back, about 9 miles in all, and nipping out on appointments during the day. Most weekends, I think I'll spend the days gadding about the capital, swooshing down back alleys and cobbled pathways with a sense of direction hovering somewhere in between a black cab driver and Sherpa Tensing. The reality is usually far from this. Usually it goes Friday, beer at the office, beers at a pub afterwards, home, sleep, wake up, sofa. Not very inspiring and certainly not the 'lad about town' persona I envisaged as a teenager. If I need to buy stuff, my beloved Brompton gets a cursory glance as I leave the flat, get on the bus, and engage in the melée of London shopping with all the other lemmings.

But this week has been different. A particularly nasty bout of food poisoning last weekend led me to the conclusion that I have been burning the candle at both ends. A couple of weeks of veg, salad and abstinence was self-prescribed. Saturday morning rolled around and lo and behold, I had made good on my pledge. It was therefore an altogether brighter eyed and bushier tailed creature that arose, needing to acquire some new shirts and a present for the little nephew (3 tomorrow...)

I have two bikes. One is a Marin Belvedere which is a mid-range commuter bike, and one is a Brompton M6L. The reality is, I never use the Marin. In my head I like the idea of touring about the place on it, but I think my bicycle use is only ever going to be confined to travelling to places I need to get to - in London there is no finer way to do this than on a Brompton. For a more detailed explanation of why the Brompton is a superior and sublime way of personal transportation; Will Self does it brilliantly here.

Well, there is - it's a Canondale Bad Boy 8 with a Rohloff 14 speed hub on the back end, but spending £2,300 on a bike is excessive even by my standards. And you can't quickly jump on a tube with it if it rains or you get a puncture. Or fall victim to spontaneous intoxication.

I bought my Brompton through the cyclescheme. Basically, your employer buys the bike, and you pay for it over the year, but they take the deductions from your salary before deductions - mine is £72 a month, but after tax in real terms it means I lose about £40 a month from my take home pay. It's a good way to get a better bike than you might be able to otherwise. You need to keep the tyres pumped up on a Brompton, to between 85 and 100psi as the wheels are small and you notice the traction loss if you don't, but apart from that, the sturdy steel frame and hub gears mean it is pretty much maintenance free. I could bang on about how much I love it til the cows come home, so I'll leave it there as that's not really what I'm on about today.

I left home at about 10am having looked at a map and attempted to commit it to memory. The problem is that the River Thames twists as it goes through London, rather than going in a straight line, and my sense of direction is flawed at best. In theory, you head west from where I live, come to Westminster Bridge, pop over and follow the river. In practice, you ride merrily around in circles for a while before finding a main road and going the way you know. But herein lies the rub. As anyone who knows me will tell you, my patience is in short supply. I used to become incredibly frustrated when getting lost and reach for the iPhone maps app to find where I was and hare off in the correct direction. The solution is an attitude adjustment. The way I approach it now is to figure that I know roughly what direction I'm going in, I know what I want to achieve, but if I take a wrong turn and end up a bit lost it's not the end of the world. For more details on this philosophy, you could do worse than read 'Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency' by Douglas Adams. I get to see a bit more of London and hopefully the cumulative result is that I ultimately learn more about this awesome city. I ended up going over Vauxhall Bridge, then just turned left and headed down the embankment. I have to admit, I thought Battersea Power Station was west of Battersea Bridge, so I've learnt a bit there. One of the things I love most about cycling is that you really learn how London fits together. I know lots of people (and I daresay there are millions living here) who perceive the geography of London to be accurately reflected in the tube map. Honestly, nothing could be further from the truth. I do not cycle quickly, I stop at lights (mostly), and don't really know my way around and I still guarantee I get places quicker by bike than any other method of transportation. It took me 30 minutes door to door to get from Bermondsey St to Battersea Bridge. To get to Sloane Square by equivalent public transport is quoted by TFL as being 34 minutes. Not much difference you might think, until you bear in mind that a) You have to walk to Bermondsey tube station, through one of the less salubrious areas of London, b) I got lost. If I hadn't it would have been a lot quicker, and c) The health and aesthetic benefits of cycling. Lovely morning of shopping, nice amble home. 

A lot of people bang on about the perils of cycling in London. As this is a bit of an intro to my cycling aspect of the blog, I shall set my beliefs on this topic out here:- 

Some people in the world are idiots. 

Not all cyclists are idiots, not all cab drivers are psychos, not all white van men are potential murderers, car drivers are not the modern day incarnation of the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Therefore, comments like 'Cyclists are a  bunch of idiots' or 'F***ing white van man, they AIM for cyclists' are greeted by me with scorn and derision. Let me give you an example from only this morning. If you go over London Bridge, you bear left after the top and go up King William St and come to some traffic lights outside the Bank of England. The second the lights turn green, if you pedal like mad, you will make the lights at the beginning of Cheapside to go up to St Paul's cathedral. As the lights are about to go red, the build up of traffic waiting for them to change has gone, so pedestrians think it's safe to cross. Therefore when a young lady casually strolled out into the road and across, little did she realise that there was a courier on a hybrid and me just behind him hammering it for all we were worth to make the lights. he rammed on the anchors, I went slamming into the back of him. Whose fault is this? The pedestrian didn't look. They assumed the traffic had gone and couldn't hear an engine. The guy in front of me was doing the same as me, no blame on him for pulling up short. We were cycling perfectly legally. The pedestrian crossing indicator was on 'red man', the lights were green. I do add at this point that electric cars (Prius, Gwhizz, etc) make no noise either. I'm amazed no-one's died yet from not hearing them - I think a lot of people have to admit they rely as much on their hearing as anything else when judging approaching traffic. Darwinian...?

The reality is, we were all a little bit to blame. Pedestrian should have looked. We shouldn't have been going so fast. I hasten to add that the lack of damage to bikes or people illustrate that this wasn't the worst collision to have ever hit the headlines. If you are nervous, cycle slowly. Pretty much anywhere you need to get to can be reached using back roads or parks. 

For months I said I would never cycle, you must be mad, it's a death sentence, etc etc. Now, I'd never travel any other way. I used to watch cyclists haring up the outside of queues of traffic and wonder how on earth they knew what they were doing or if they were just kamikaze. When you start, you will learn through observation how people get around, and it is up to you to decide what you feel comfortable doing. I take it pretty easy, but if I'm on the way home I'll boot it a bit and work the heart rate up as I know I can have a shower when I get home. 

It's certainly more healthy than sitting on the 43 from Friern Barnet. 

My beloved Brompton

I wanted to do a little piece about my bicycle

Lucky you, you can even see a reflection of me taking the picture in the background if you squint. I wanted to explain the make, model, spec, and a little about how it works, what makes it different, and why I configured it the way I did. Certainly, before I bought it, there was a lot on the net raving about Bromptons, some disparaging vignettes, but not a huge amount in terms of practical explanation about why it does what it does. Even the guy in the shop struggled with explaining some of it as they are a bit of a specialised field.

I have a Brompton M6-L, and the individual constituents and costs are itemised below:-

Brompton M Type bike           £600
Standard ratio 6 speed gearing £120
Mudguards, no rack                 £45
Black Frame                             £0
Orange extremities                   £25
Brooks B17 Special Saddle     £50
Schwalbe Marathon Tyres       £10
Battery Lighting                       £35
C Bag Set                                 £95
Eazy [sic] wheels                     £15

There are 3 types of Brompton - M, S, and P. The S is sporty (not really in my repertoire), with flat handlebars, and the P has handlebars I cannot understand. Check the Brompton website for details. The M type is the original, and has 'sit up and beg' handlebars, as befits a more upright riding style. If you want to race, get a bloody Trek Cyclo Cross. Incidentally, more on lycra clad Adonis' with cleats on their 2 mile commute from Highbury to Houndsditch another time. Brompton say no bike is standard, a cynic might see this as a great way to charge for all kinds of bolt-ons, but there you go.

I went for 6 gears. You can get single speed, or 3 speed also. For me, I always knew I didn't need 27+ gears (no-one does, certainly not in London. Marketing and little else) but the thought of leaping to single speed was a little daunting. The gears are definitely one of the best things about the Brompton. They are hub gears. Basically, this means that there is a barrel on the back axle which contains a load of cogs. As you change gear, the different cogs engage with each other and made it harder or easier to pedal. Remember Grifters? Same thing. On the rear, there is a dérailleur, similar to the cogs on the rear cassette of a road/ mountain bike, but there are just two. The great thing about hub gears is that you can change them when you are stationary and start off in the right gear without having to do all that clicky clacky business to get where you want. It really makes me hoot when the lights go green and I pootle off whilst the be-sunglassed hi-vis athlete honks high out of the saddle, looking like he's pedalling through black treacle as his shimano gears clatter in panic like a foot-treadle loom circa 1790. The hub gives you the three gears you use, the dérailleur gives you the option of a slight variance in each gear - you can change the dérailleur on the left hand control while pedalling like on a normal bike with cassettes and dérailleurs. For the one on the right, you should stop pedalling for a split second to allow the cogs to engage, particularly if down-shifting. If this sounds complicated or labourious, trust me it isn't. Bear in mind this is a bike used for cycling around London - lots of stop starting, and top end speed not the be all and end all. Ask any cyclist and they will tell you that Bromptons have a turn of speed and acceleration that is alarmingly impressive. Don't bother off the lights, you won't win.

I see some Bromptons with racks on the back. I don't know why - the clearance from the ground is so low that anything you could get on there would hardly carry anything. The way to carry things on the Brompton is by way of front luggage. The bike can come (they all do, although they are theoretically optional) with a tapered plastic block which fits directly to the chassis of the bike just above the front wheel. To this, you clip on a frame onto which you can slip any of the types of Brompton luggage. I bought the C Bag which has a 25 litre capacity, and then later on the basic fabric basket which is 24 litres. The C Bag has pockets all over the shop, and a bright yellow lining so you can find things easily. Tip: You can remove the frame and use it as a messenger bag easily. Often I was lugging the whole thing round with me when I didn't need to. Once you've got the frame, you can buy any of the Brompton bags to fit on it. I use the basket on a daily basis, capacity only a bit less than the C bag, but arguably more usable as it is a square space. You can chuck everything in it and pop it on and off as and when. It costs £16.50. Here it is:

I was umming and ahhing for a while about the colours. Plain black was what I defaulted to, but I knew if I went for that option I would be annoyed I hadn't been more adventurous. I got the orange front and rear extremities at an additional cost of £25. I've not seen another like it. The Brooks saddle in brown clashes a bit with the black tubular frame (see my hatred of this colour clash elsewhere in the blog) but I can live with it. If I had my time again, I'd probably go for burgundy or dark blue. Although I quite like the white one, 70s Porsche Carrera styley. Hey ho. The Brooks saddle is an essential for any bicycle. Vastly superior to the ones that come with. Bikes and their saddles are a bit like ipods and their headphones. A shame to have such good hardware and be so dismissive of the peripherals.

The standard Brompton tyres are ok, especially now they have Kevlar lining, but the Schwalbe marathons are much superior for a modest cost. Don't bother with the Kojaks unless you're mental and live in a country where it never rains.

If you test ride a Brompton, you may find that your feet catch on the standard trolley wheels at the base of the seat pillar as your foot comes up at the back - this problem will be averted if you use the Eazy wheels - they are a lot thinner. Essential. I've seen roller blade wheels on the back of some which I will get one day when I get around to it. Which means I'll never do it. What a lot of people don't realise is the sheer brilliance of the design. When folded, the carrier block protrudes in such a way that you can attach your bag to it and tow it around the shops like a trolley.

Not only does this save hugely on bags and so forth, it means you don't have to leave your bike unattended.

So that is a brief description of my bicycle. There is also something more about a Brompton that it's difficult to  put into a little bit of writing. The way it has a distinct 'Londonness' to it. The way it collapses like something out of Harry Potter into a confusing mesh of metal and rubber.  I have cycled it off road - it's a complete disaster whatever their website says. This is an animal for the urban jungle, and it is, like so many animals found throughout nature, perfectly suited to it's environment. More than that, it is a beautiful example of pure British, illogical, brilliant design. It's as British as cucumber sandwiches and the smack of leather on willow. I love that it makes no sense to flip the back wheel under the frame. I love the fact the frame and pillars seem to bend round corners to make it into this compact package in less than 30 seconds when you need to jump on a bus or in a cab . Or that you can use it as a trolley. Or that it has a part called 'the nipple'. I wouldn't want to ride anything else.

Lock it. Leave it. Lose it?

My hesitation with cycling around town shopping, apart from laziness, is the fact I hate leaving bikes in London locked up. If someone here wants to nick your bike here, they will nick it. I work in affluent Islington; home to media darlings, politicians, and other simliar Eloi. However, a local bobby told me that on the nearby Packington estate, the fire engines have police escorts. The reason for this is that 'yoofs' set off bin fires just to get the fire engines in the estate so that they can nick the 'jaws of death' off the back of the vehicles. These intimidating tools, used to cut people trapped out of smashed up cars, can snip through pretty much anything you can wrap around your trusty steed like a knife through butter. So a certain degree of judgment has to be employed. To me it's absolutely ridiculous to not use something you own for fear of it's theft or damage - what's the point of owning anything? My bike is insured (you can put it as an add on to your home insurance, but I'd advise against it as you probably don't want to lose the no claims benefit) on a stand alone policy at a cost of £10 a month through cycleguard. It specifies that I have to lock it with a silver graded lock or better if I leave it. The specification of lock obviously varies with the cost of the bike. I use a Magnum courier lock pictured here:-

If you use anything less sturdy, you might just as well leave it unlocked with a note wishing them enjoyment of your bike in the future. Or enjoyment of the small amount of crack they will receive from the fence they pass it to. NB if it does get nicked, wait a couple of hours, go on gumtree where it will pop up for sale, and visit with a large friend/ baseball bat *insert disclaimer*

A tip for locking: make sure the lock goes through the triangle of the frame. Not through the wheels or forks or saddle post or crank: they'll have it off in a second. Try and lock it as tight as you can so potential thieves can't wedge anything in to get it off. Park near a security camera. None of these things will ensure it won't be nicked, but do your best and get it insured. If it gets nicked, it gets nicked. I lock mine in Brompton 'parked mode' with the back wheel flipped under the frame. Here it is on Kings Road in Chelsea

The triangular part of the frame is a lot smaller on the Brompton, but I've done a close up so you can see it going through the triangle of the frame which is an unbroken steel barrier.

Even despite this, I'm never too comfortable leaving it for more than 20 mins. Goes without saying, don't lock it to a short post or even a post that's just over head height - they'll whip it over in no time. So, good luck, try and remember not to affix it to anything that isn't set in concrete, and console yourself with the fact that if it does get pinched, you can always claim and get a nice new one. 

That one you wish you'd got. The one with the carbon forks and the disc brakes. Because no-one will nick that one...

Soft in the head

A word on helmets. I wear one. Here it is, a bit battered and bruised, but rather it than my swede

I have fallen off twice and hit my head not wearing one. The first time (Cheapside) I was on the outside of a group of cyclists and the lights went green. I was probably a bit too far on the right, the white van which hit me was probably too far towards the kerb. I was doing about 2 mph and pitched off. Lucky escape. Don't get me started on righteous cyclists who think they can bosh about the place with impunity while all other road users swerve to avoid them, more on that in a different post. The second time, I was waiting for someone outside a gated group of houses. Thought they might be at the other end, jumped on the bike and straight away got the front wheel jammed in a storm drain I didn't see and flew over the handlebars. If I had been wearing a helmet I'd have laughed it off. As it was there was not even a chuckle. I landed heavily on my side, and the top of my head smashed into the tarmac of the road. Very very sore, and I sported a shiner for the weekend - lovely. My point is that on both these occasions, I was doing less than 3mph. If I'd been going faster, who knows. 

Here is a list of common occurrences while cycling:-

• A fly goes in your eye
• A dog runs out in front of you
• Someone just walks into the road in front of you without looking
• You are cycling up a cycle lane inside a queue of stationary traffic, someone crossing the road walks out from in between two buses from the right
• A pigeon attacks you (Kudos to @karmacycle, who blogs about it and other cycle related activity here)
• Vehicle door opens into your path
• It's just started raining after a dry spell. The road is oily.
• A car does not see you

This is off the top of my head. There are probably others but trust me, if any of these things happen, you stand a good chance of falling off your bike. It goes with the territory If you cycled at a snail's pace, you would probably be unaffected by many of these tribulations, but you don't. Don't even pretend that you do. One of my most passionate beliefs (right up there with NEVER wearing brown shoes with black trousers) is that generations have fought for us to live in a society where you can choose how you behave, so I have made my observations and leave you to make your own mind up.

I sometimes don't wear one myself - especially if it's hot in the summer and I'm only nipping round the corner. Kind of feel superstitiously that it is sod's law for me to crack my skull open on one of these jaunts, but I was ever the contrary one. 

In any case, you might feel you look a bit silly in a helmet which is an excellent reason not to bother. Not as silly, perhaps, as you will look dead or being fed through a tube and wearing a nappy, but to each their own.

Politically Incorrect...

I like to think of myself as polite. Whatever cruelty, mental anguish, or scathing sarcasm I lavish on people, it is always done with the requisite ps and qs. I've found being pleasant and considerate not only disarms your antagonists, it gets you a lot further than you might expect with usually ambivalent members of 'customer service teams'.

If one is going to have an effective conversation with a fellow being, I find that a good way to start is by addressing the person correctly. In my line of work, I have a tendency to deal with what you might call 'duff old traditionalists'. I find it delightfully endearing that there are still people in society who really appreciate being addressed as 'Mr abcxyz' or 'Mrs 123456' etc, etc. Once a certain degree of familiarity has been acquired, I normally ask (if appropriate) if it's ok to use the first name. It is probably true that working in the environment I do, it's more relevant to me than to a lot of others. Maybe not. I don't know what you do to earn a crust.

A lady sat at my desk today, and started asking me about what sort of thing she might expect to buy for a certain price in a certain area. We started chatting, and it quickly transpired she had two properties, both within my catchment area. She hasn't bought or sold for about 10 years, and has very little idea of what they might be worth or what the best strategy was to adopt to move to a different property, but maybe retain one as an investment, or not, or blah blah blah. You're losing interest already, and to be honest so am I. It bears no relevance to the matter at hand.

Long story short, rapport firmly established, the time had come for me to get down to nitty gritty. So I asked her name. For the sake of argument, let's say she replied, “Helen Smith”.

“And your title?” I asked.

The reason I ask it like that is because all too often if I ask “Miss or Mrs?” I get the response “Actually, it's Dr...” with a bit of a sneer, and do you know what? That's fine. If I had studied long and hard and been recognised for such diligence, I'd want every bugger to recognise the fact also.

Helen Smith responded by scrunching up her face and saying “Sorry?”

Here we go, I thought.

“Well, is it Miss, Mrs, Dr...?” I asked.

“What relevance does that have?” Helen replied, eyes narrowing...

And herein lies my issue, dear heart. I resent the fact that it is suggested that my asking for the correct term of address is assumed to be some kind of misogynistic stereotyping. It doesn't have any relevance at all, Helen Smith. I couldn't care less if you are a Sergeant-Major, a Grand Wazoo, the CEO of ICI, or the manager of Boodles. The fact is that I have a computer system whereby, if I do not input a correct title, it will refer to you in printed letters and e-mails as 'Smith' rather than Professor Smith, or Mr. Smith, or Lady Smith or whatever. If a missive came to me addressed to just my surname, I would consider quite discourteous. I don't think I'd use that company. And yes, you can check every letter and e-mail, but in my job, when we are not communicating directly we send mail outs to maybe 200 people at a time.

I had a Dame once, incidentally. She said “Oh just call me Joyce, dear...” Bless.

I wonder how people feel about this. I am dreadfully sorry that we have a social convention whereby for some reason of tradition, women have their marital status defined by their title in a way that men do not. It would piss me off royally if the boot was on the other foot. However, I really don't think that reacting in a hostile and aggressive way when you are asked, in a perfectly pleasant fashion, how you would like to be addressed is the best way to an enlightened society. I was trying to be polite. What was I supposed to say?  

Not a good start...

This is my first blog post. It may well be my last, as I am on the verge of throwing my macbook out of the window and I'm not sure it would survive plummeting 8 storeys to the concrete pavement below. Occasionally, there are things I feel strongly about, but not that often. These will probably be labelled under 'Ranting' IF I COULD WORK OUT HOW, IN A SIMPLE WAY, YOU CAN DIVIDE YOUR BLOGS IN TO SUB CATEGORIES! I used to be a software engineer, although that was in the days of Windows 3.1. I suspect things have come on from there and evolved to a state of definite computer/ human symbiosis, and probably fiddly procedures that I used to revel in, but now have neither the time nor the inclination for. Someone has pointed out that I should read the introduction. I'm a 38 year old man, I've never heard such a ridiculous idea. My page looks awful as well, and I'm neither patient nor savvy enough to pimp it in the appropriate fashion.

Ooh - what's this little box that says 'Labels:' next to it....