look upon my works

as a child I was told I was creative. still running with it.

Bootstrapping : stream of conscious mess

Starting to wonder if my urge to write is more akin to the occasional impulse I get at the Bullring to jump spectacularly off the balcony than a desire for a legitimate encounter with the muse. Not a wish to jump in pursuit of extinction so much as in the spirit of bold experiment. What would it be like, I seem to want to know? Shopping centres are meant to be chased through and no chase is complete without a bold leap. Ask Jackie Chan. But I am never going to jump and I feel as if I am never going to write more than one hundred and forty characters at a time. I can’t even bungee jump. Cursed as I am with myopia and rogue sinuses that route to excitement and action has been denied to me.

Whenever I start something off by opening a document and applying thumb to touchscreen my awful lack of writing equipment becomes apparent. I lack anything to say or the means to say it in a way that anyone would actually want to read or that would say anything new. And I love run on sentences too much.
If I ever had the capacity to construct interesting sentences that nobody had read before about subjects people didn’t know they were interested in till they read what I wrote I don’t seem to have it now. That gift has either atrophied from lack of use or has been amputated by physical or chemical intervention. Too many bangs on the head, too many pints down the neck.
But I still want to write and do everything a writer does. I think I know what being a writer is like and what I would be like as a writer. I have a rich alternate fantasy world in which I have already written all the books and films and comics I have thought of and they have all been massively popular and critically acclaimed.

I occasionally have to remind myself that this hasn’t happened even though I have the black leather jacket and the laptop and the coffee habit.

Pity me. I wish to fly though I have no wings. I wish to sing though I have no voice.

I want to write like a man with a severed hand wants to crack the knuckles he doesn’t have.

Why do you trust a science book, but not the bible?

Why do you trust a science book, but not the bible?

image

It may surprise you to learn that I have often become embroiled, on twitter and face to face, in debates about science versus religion, evolution versus creationism and the existence or non existence of “god” or “gods” in general.

If the conversation doesn’t descend into name calling or theistic salivation at the prospect of me facing eternal torture for the crime of remaining unconvinced, it may at last come to rest on the nature of the evidence we are supposed to use to determine the facts of the matter.

I point out that I try to only act on ideas for which there is evidence while they act on ideas that were written down for them from 600 to 8000 years ago.

I think the question hinges on the idea that, superficially, I get a lot of information from books. What makes my many books better than their single book?

image

The earth as an archipelago.

The questioner sees books as the source of facts rather than, as I see them, merely a record of facts as they are known at this point in time.

To the “the bible says it, I believe it, that settles it” crowd this seems back to front, because everything that they believe in comes from the bible and if it’s in that book it must be true.

If they think that way, the logic seems to go, then everyone must think that way. Therefore, atheists and scientists must think of their science books as “Darwin (or whoever) said it, I believe it, that settles it”.

They want to believe that there is a single science book, or collection of books that is to rationalists what the bible is to Christians.

That is to say: A foundational document laying down the dogma and operations for a way of life.

This is an example of a kind of misunderstanding that theists commonly have.

Once you have made the initial decision to disregard factual information and just believe whatever you want to believe it’s very easy to continue piling error upon error by assuming that is what everyone else has done – i.e. picked a side and stopped thinking about it.

Religious books are written once and intended to last forever.  They are written to direct people towards a particular world-view, usually something along the lines of

  • there is a god

  • all the other gods are dicks or are not even real

  • this god made everything, including you, the reader, the laws of logic, fish, etc.

  • this god is in need of constant affirmation and submission from the intelligences (and, apparently, even the rocks) that it has created

  • it demands this affirmation and submission from us on pain of eternal punishment to be carried out in a place it has especially made for the purpose.


This nauseating and pointless message is usually interleaved with

  • stern lessons about diet and sex

  • contradictory or impossible instructions

  • the defining of normal human desires and behaviours as sinful. 

Sin is a word that

  • enables us to attach our primal reactions to harmful or dangerous behaviour to behaviours that don’t necessarily harm anyone

  • distorts our understanding of good and bad enough to enable us to carry out actions we would otherwise see as unacceptable such as stoning, mutilating children or discriminating against random groups of people in general

  • is anything god says it is. (in reality it’s anything the man (it’s usually a man) writing the book says it is)

image

This man read a book, and look what happened to him.


Coincidentally, this world-view once adopted enables huge groups of people to be controlled by small groups of people, to the benefit of those small groups.

image

I can see my house from here!

Each religion has one or more of these books, the number and canonicity of which being determined by whichever putative earthly representative has the most firepower.

New books are rarely added and when they are they usually signify a split in the congregation.

Christians naturally accept the New Testament as a continuation of the old. The OT still serves as main holy book for adherents to Judaism and those of the Jewish faith in general have proved reluctant to accept the New Testament for anything more than its curiosity value.

When Mohammed cheekily released his sequel, the final Testament known as the Qu’ran, proclaiming it as literally the summation of god’s message to his people, Christians, unsurprisingly, were as keen on this addition as the Jews had been about any of the christian gospels.

There is, sadly, no objective way to tell which of these books is correct, if any.

Science, on the other hand, is not itself dependent on books. Science books are one of the results of science, not the source.

image

A scientist, yesterday.

Science does not come to conclusions about reality based on the contents of a book or books, it bases them on the results of carefully conducted experiments and observations.

The best any particular science book can hope to be is a summary of the most recent consensus, subject to change at a moment’s notice in light of new evidence and doomed to greater irrelevance with each and every dawn.

The “information” contained in the bible is final and we are expected to take it to be true as given. There is no external evidence that it’s contents are correct except in the most trivial ways. Some of the cities and historical characters mentioned do or did in fact exist, although not as many as you might think and not necessarily in the way they are said to in the bible. Much of the historical information has been seen to be false or lacking in external verification.

 image

Seems legit.

Our experience of the real world suggests in fact that most of the bible is false. The creation account in genesis is one example of a primitive myth made up by a group of ancient people, possibly future shocked by the invention of cooking or wheelbarrows, to give some context to their daily experiences.

image

The biblical equivalent of the International Space Station.

When we test the claims made in those chapters against our observations of the real world it quickly becomes clear that not one part of it stands up.

Yet the book remains, translated, copied, bowdlerised before that word was invented, in equal parts ambiguous and self contradicting, with huge chunks being either disregarded or obsessed on by believers depending on their interpretation, prejudice or whim.

In contrast there are very few science books that remain current for more than a decade. Not necessarily because they have been found to contain errors, more often because they rapidly become incomplete as new discoveries and refinements are completed.

When Isaac Newton formulated his laws of motion and gravity he and his successors may have felt that the issue of motion was more or less settled. The dual hammer blows given to this conceit by quantum physics on the one hand and special and general relativity on the other put paid to that complacent notion.

What is sometimes less heavily emphasised though is that at a particular level, Newton’s laws work just fine. If we are talking about billiard balls or railway trains or pendulums or weights dropped from clock towers Newton’s laws of motion will give an answer that is accurate for most practical purposes.

It is only when we start to get into billiard balls the size of planets or travelling near the speed of light or when we consider the stuff billiard balls, and us, are made of, tiny bits of not-stuff like electron fogs and such like, that Newton’s laws break down.

image

Spacey, futuristic looking, billiards.

So, to answer the question “Why do I trust a science book but I don’t trust the bible?” concisely, we don’t, and we don’t have to. We can perform experiments and make observations that either confirm, deny or modify the claims or assertions the book contains. 

As for not trusting the bible, why would I trust a book that has been manifestly assembled with the purpose of trapping humanity in a mode of thought that originates with people who kept slaves, despite having been enslaved, who persecuted despite themselves having been persecuted, that reduces women to the status of property, that makes involuntary and ubiquitous emotions like lust punishable by death and damnation?

Why trust a book that instructs people to be grateful to an allegedly all powerful being that looks inside their mind to check if they are committing a thought crime, and not just to believe in all this against the evidence as a mere abstract concept but to submit to, and worship the sadistic concentration camp commandant-like being who put us in this awful predicament?

William Blake talked about “Mind forg’d manacles”.

Who in their right mind and given the choice would ever put them on?

image

A library. Try one today!

The horror continues.

I’m dealing with the twitter thing, but I have been delivered a stinging blow.

I have just tried to apply black pepper to my freshly microwaved cheese slice and the pepper grinder top has split off into three discrete chunks.

Someone up there has a grudge. 

I can not get any purchase on that grinder. 

I’ve probably seasoned my slice with bits of plastic.

I think it’s the guy in the flat over mine.

Twitter

I have been suspended from twitter. The reason given was ‘multiple unsolicited mentions to other users’.

In other words replying to other adult’s comments on a social network.

I did not bombard people with stuff if they weren’t engaging with me.

So some malicious twat has reported me and I am off twitter for a couple of days. 

So it goes.

Autokinetizoetropothing

Losing my temper with theists.

At certain times in your life you are confronted with something so vast, so different to your usual experience that you are changed by it. 

When you first go to the seaside or climb a mountain you find out that the world is not what you thought it was. This can be a disturbing time at first but it can also lead to new ways of thinking.

When you gaze into the abyss does it not etc.

Well, I have been gazing into the abyss all right. I’ve plumbed the depths. I have looked toward the horizon and however far I have looked I have not seen past the awesome stupidity demonstrated by people seeking to prove the unprovable.

You can imagine a mountain, you can imagine the sea but you can’t really feel it till you stand on the peak with the wind whistling round your nuts or till you doggie paddle way out of your depth and glance something large and sinister wending its way far below.

You can’t imagine the extent of humanity’s capacity for self deceit, mental gymnastics, intellectual dishonesty and arrogance, wishful thinking, delusions of grandeur and pure honest to goodness dumbfuckery until you have argued about the existence of god with a true believer.

This is truly an abyss that returns your gaze. That bright eyed fluffy bunny “god loves me and everything” attitude? Enjoy it while it lasts. Within a few minutes of serious questions and actual evidence that can flip into brattish pouting insults and the malicious savouring of your supposed hellbound destiny.

Logic isn’t real. Good things are bad. Science is myth and myth is “true science”. Throw out your dictionary, your encyclopaedia and whatever amount of common sense you think you possess because you may as well be talking in Swahili to these people.

They have caught on that onlookers to any debate are liable to be swayed by argument or evidence. Theists are sadly hampered by a lack of any evidence whatsoever so instead they have ramped up the crazy. Nothing they say relates to the previous sentence, or to any normal human standard of truth. Poor grammar, poor spelling, lazy biblical bigotry against minorities or whole genders are presented with pride. By offering nothing concrete they allow no purchase for the other team, and thus no chance for onlookers to learn anything.

Being able to form a coherent argument would expose them as not “simple god fearing folk” but “slippery college educated intellectuals”. And we know that education means sin.

This is a rant, done on my phone to test text entry on it. To cut a long story short I am sick of pious mealy mouthed liars claiming they have the moral high ground when they have the moral sense of a sewer rat and the honesty of a mafia lawyer.

Will this publish ok?

Meet @SamMaloneUK - Twitter’s foremost Apologist Sockpuppet

Last night I read an article on vice.com, tweeted by @TellMamaUK about a rising young fascist. I responded to them voicing my disapproval of him, and mentioned that while I have concerns about Sharia Law I was a million miles away from the likes of him, just in case they gave a flying fig.

(I do have concerns about Sharia - the same concerns any Guardian reader would. I have retweeted the occasional Pat Condell video. Fair disclosure).

This started an interesting thread in which I was challenged by one Sam Malone, not the Boston Barkeep of yore, but a self described ‘hater of right wing rhetoric and ideology’, who took it upon himself to talk to me as if I was wildly promulgating an anti-islamic philosophy.

I was at pains to disavow him of this impression. At the same time I thought it was important to assert my right to express concerns about a system of law which to me seems at best archaic and unyielding, and at it’s worst at odds with UK civil law.

I quickly referenced onelawforall.org.uk, a very reasonable organisation who campaign against the introduction of Sharia into the UK, and who specifically distance themselves from the likes of the EDL, the BNP and other far right wankers. These latter groups often try to use the reasonable concerns of leftie liberals like myself about Sharia to subvert our general multicultural leanings and make political capital.

Indeed, Mr Malone hashtagged his second tweet to me #EDL which got my back up immediately.

For a large part of the conversation, which took place over an evening, I thought Malone was a liberal like myself under the mistaken impression that I was some kind of right wing nutjob.

I now believe the truth to be far more sinister, but then again I have been awake for twenty four hours.

I have reconstructed the sequence as best I can, and will provide commentary where appropriate. The unedited tweets remain on my feed at @numbdave and presumably @SamMaloneUK.

KeyWho is tweeting. what they are tweeting, my commentary

Here’s my first tweet responding to the article linked to by @TellMamaUK, an organisation dedicated to exposing and preventing attacks and harassment against Muslims.

TheCuratesEgg @numbdave: @TellMamaUK I’ve got my concerns about Sharia law, who hasn’t, but I’m a million miles away from this racist: http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/jack-buckby-is-proud-to-be-britains-next-nick-griffin … 

enter Malone

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave @TellMamaUK Islam is just an easy target at the moment. Another time and this fool would be talking abt Catholics, blacks, Irish..

At this point I assumed he meant the fool in the vice.com article, now I’m not sure. 

@NotReallyInvolved (this is not the real name of this person.): @SamMaloneUK @numbdave @TellMamaUK Experienced more terrorism from the IRA than Islam, but support Home Rule.”Sharia law” highly subjective.

I took up this assertion with @NotReallyInvolved in another thread and those tweets are available on twitter but not relevant to this post.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave :@NotReallyInvolved @SamMaloneUK @TellMamaUK My concern isn’t about Islamic terrorism per se - it’s about the erosion of hard won human rights.

This seems clear, right? It is clear where my concern is, isn’t it? 

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Truth is the ‘creeping Shariah’ thing is plain fearmongering. Anyone who understand how UK laws are passed knows it. #edl

First mention of ‘Creeping Shariah’ and the EDL hashtag. I was not happy.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave : @SamMaloneUK woah, don’t lump me in with those pricks. I’d love you to reassure me it’s not true. http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/ 

I am horrified that anyone could think I have any sympathies with the EDL, and am now very keen to convince this guy that I don’t.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUKI haven’t. But can I ask if you would have same concerns re. Beth Din?

Not ‘oh no, I didn’t mean that’ just ‘I haven’t’ and straight on with the script. Why hashtag it EDL then? 

Beth Din is the Jewish legal system btw. What has that got to do with this discussion? But OK, I can go there.

TheCuratesEgg @numbdave@SamMaloneUK I’d be concerned if any religious laws took precedence over civil law. I would advocate a separation of ‘church’ and state. 

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK :@numbdave Again I agree. My argument is the fear of Shariah law being imposed, even on UK Muslims, is exaggerated.

This isn’t an argument, it’s an assertion. And I haven’t actually mentioned what my actual concerns are at this point - apart from general human rights issues.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave :@SamMaloneUK I would call myself a secularist in this matter - freedom of and freedom from religion protects us all, religious or not.

By this time I feel something is up. Admiral Akbar is shouting in my ear. But I don’t listen.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK :@numbdave I agree with you. But if we think of Shariah ‘courts’ purely in terms of law they are little more than a mediation service.

This answer looks odd now  - what, you agree with me that I would call myself a secularist or that freedom from and of religion protects us all? Still, I persevere.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK Mediation based on religious grounds?

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Yes. And, under the law it is voluntary.

Do his replies seem stilted to you, like he’s following a flowchart?

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK If someone can’t talk to her doctor because she knows he will go straight to her family, what does the word ‘voluntary’ mean?

Though perhaps badly phrased, this is a reasonable question, seeing as he seems to have taken on the mantle of ‘All knowing Defender of Sharia’.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave You’re changing the discussion. We’re talking about the fear of Shariah law being imposed on UK being unfounded.

Are we? I was talking to @TellMamaUK about some racist they’d tweeted about and you butted your big nose in, and now you are telling me I’m changing the discussion? He uses the same phrase several times.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK Yes. Under English law mediation by Sharia council is voluntary. I’m suggesting that community pressure affects that.

I feel this is a major flaw in any voluntary system - if you are liable to be pressured into volunteering it’s voluntary in name only.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Implementation/flaws therein is another discussion. But you have to agree the imposition of Shariah under UK law is far flung idea

Implementation/flaws is another discussion bzzzt click whirr. No it isn’t, Calcubot, how things actually work is integral to the discussion you have insisted we have. If people submit to a system because of unbearable family or cultural pressure it has been imposed on them and calling it voluntary does not change this. That is fundamental to an understanding of human rights. 

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Bottom line is purely in terms of law, Shariah courts are voluntary mediation services.

You’re the bottom line.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK It’s not voluntary if your entire community will shun you for not taking part. Do you disagree?

Here’s where the ‘Sam is a robot’ theory moves from amusing to sinister, like the rabbits in Father Dougal’s head moving into the real world. Shut up, I haven’t slept in twenty four hours.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK :@numbdave Implementation/flaws therein is another discussion. Argument here is that the imposition of Shariah under UK law is far flung idea

Bzzzt. Revert. Bzzzt. I mean, ‘Implementation/Flaws therein’? are you kidding?

Bear in mind these tweets are spread out over a whole evening. At the time I just took each one at face value.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK Do I think I will ever be subject to Sharia Law? No. This does not diminish my concern for those who will be.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave : @SamMaloneUK your bottom line was that it was voluntary. Your words. My point is that in this case ‘voluntary’ is a meaningless term.

I’ve said this several times in different ways. Acknowledge it!

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave My bottom line is that under UK law it is voluntary. Implementation and abuse is another discussion.

Beep! Voluntary always means voluntary. Implementation and abuse bzzzt! Return Return Return to your seats! (hitch hikers reference).

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK If I had tweeted ‘I am concerned about women’s rights’ would we be having this discussion? Muslim women have the same rights.

'as any women', I would have said given a little more space. Admiral Akbar is screaming at me but I pay no mind.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave My point from the first has been that the idea of ‘Creeping Shariah’ imposed in UK is unfounded. You’re having a different debate

Who the fuck are you? I don’t know what debate you are having, I’m being polite by even responding to your cybernetic trolling ass. You have no idea what my concerns about Sharia Law are, for all you knew at the start I was concerned it wasn’t being introduced fast enough! But  you’ve just banged on obsessively about it not being ‘creeping’ and have paid no real attention to anything I’ve said. But if that’s what you want, suck on this, Tin Man.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK If there are people in this country ‘voluntarily’ submitting to Sharia Law, that counts as ‘creeping’ in my book.

And the mask slips: 

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Guess what - every single Muslim in this country is voluntarily submitting to Shariah law. That’s millions. Would you deny them?

Every Single Muslim. Voluntarily. Millions, that’s a lot. That must definitely be true Sam, I assume you’ve met them all and asked them. Never mind what I have told you about my opinion of your use of the word ‘voluntarily’. 

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK You haven’t absorbed a single thing that I have said about the use of the word ‘voluntary’ in this context have you?

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave : @SamMaloneUK You may not agree with what I have said about it, but you cant pretend not to have understood it.

Sambot went a bit quiet for a while, so I thought I’d big up his startling foot in mouth tweet just in case any one following needed it highlighting.

RETWEETED Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK : @numbdave Guess what - every single Muslim in this country is voluntarily submitting to Shariah law. That’s millions. Would you deny them?

Turns out silicon Sam hadn’t cottoned on.It’s like one of those canned phrases they give vaccuum cleaner salepeople as ‘solid closers’.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Can I ask why you retweeted that tweet of mine?

 It’s a public forum. You sought me out with your pre-scripted agenda. Most people love to be retweeted. Why shouldn’t I retweet it?

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK I was wondering why you were so keen to accept Sharia Law on other people’s behalf. I wanted people to read the thread.

Not true. I was baiting him so I could get some closure.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave I would say that you are being disingenuous in implying that I was. Lastly, I think anyone reading our thread will see through you

I think he means disingenuous in implying that he was accepting Sharia on other’s behalf. What does he mean by ‘see through you’? That I am after all a terrible terrible Muslim hating racist? Ooh Lordie! What do you think dear reader?

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave I don’t think you’ll find any implication of me accepting anything. My position has been clear from my first tweet.

Your position was very clear, right up to the point you said this and completely reversed it :

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK ‘every single Muslim in this country is voluntarily submitting to Shariah law’. That is a bold statement.

He doesn’t even know it. He’s already dead in the water.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK and it is in complete contradiction to your assertion that ‘Creeping Shariah’ is a myth. Do you disagree?

It isn’t good for him at all now. You may wish to look away.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK Millions of people want to bring back hanging. I would deny them that as well.

Just rubbing it in really. I’m a monster. Sue me.

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave In fact, rereading my tweets, I have repeated my position time and again. So for you to suggest anything different is poor.

You read everything apart from the part where you completely contradicted the one point you have been repeatedly making all night?

Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Lastly, your use of the straw man fallacy discredits you. I’m done with you. Goodbye.

Honestly, I thought this was just sad, It’s like the flow chart has a box marked ‘in emergency cry ‘fallacy” with a numbered list and a d20.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdaveYou brought up ‘Creeping Shariah’. RT @SamMaloneUK: Lastly, your use of the straw man fallacy discredits you. I’m done with you. Goodbye.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave : @SamMaloneUK Your position has been that ‘Creeping Shariah’ does not exist. You then state that millions of Muslims are submitting to it.

I’m making it clear to him and his superiors (I have no evidence that there are any superiors) that he has failed. 

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave@SamMaloneUK You are the one who built the straw man. I then beat you with it till you exposed your own hypocrisy. The end.

It’s a bit like in Alien when Ash is just a head and they pull the plug.

Say the next two RTs like Hal singing Daisy Daisy and you’ll get the idea.

RT Sam Malone ‏@SamMaloneUK@numbdave Truth is the ‘creeping Shariah’ thing is plain fearmongering. Anyone who understand how UK laws are passed knows it. #edl

This is his ‘main point’.

TheCuratesEgg ‏@numbdave : And yet RT @SamMaloneUK: every single Muslim in this country is voluntarily submitting to Shariah law. That’s millions. Would you deny them?

This is him fucking his main point up. 

Reading the transcript back like this makes it obvious to me that @SamMaloneUK is some kind of apologist sockpuppet doing its best to muddy the waters of reasonable dissent by conflating critical enquiry with unthinking prejudice and bigotry. 

If ‘his’ purpose was to deflect attention from the very real effects Sharia Law is having on Muslim women and LGBT people across the planet, ‘he’ has failed. 

I have never been more interested in human rights, freedom, equality,and one law for all.

But hey, enough of my yakkin’, visit www.onelawforall.org.uk and www.councilofexmuslims.com to talk to the experts.

coda: around 4am today I had convinced my self that I was paranoid, and @SamMaloneUK was just some guy. Then I looked at his account. He is on 8 lists on twitter - variously titled ‘fake account’, ‘spammers’, ‘autotweeters’ and sadly ‘liars’.  What is his story?

books are great.

joehillsthrills:

collectivehistory:

London readers continue to browse at a bombed-out library, WWII. 

Had to retumbl this cos it’s been almost 24 hours since I last retubml’d summin from Matt Fraction.

books are great.

joehillsthrills:

collectivehistory:

London readers continue to browse at a bombed-out library, WWII. 

Had to retumbl this cos it’s been almost 24 hours since I last retubml’d summin from Matt Fraction.

An artist at work: Behind the scenes of a future page in progress from ‘badly drawn barbarian’I have had very little artistic training. (Taken with instagram)

An artist at work: Behind the scenes of a future page in progress from ‘badly drawn barbarian’I have had very little artistic training. (Taken with instagram)

blockhead

The white rectangle begins to fill. Characters appear one by one from the top left corner, oddly dressed, old fashioned, individuals all, family resemblances rippling through the ranks with the algorithmic jerkiness of a poorly rendered crowd scene. Marching, hesitant at first they bleed across the arena. Faltering, unsure of their purpose, they advance.

They enter more quickly, groups forming one by one with the drip drip of a Chinese torturer, each appearing in answer to the eternal cry ‘drop the other boot!’, invisible footprints across an intangible chess board, experimental stratagems to outfox an imagined opponent.

Act at random, defy the logic of alphabets, race to the finish line but savour every step.

Find the others.

Dissent. Confusion. We are here because we are here rode up with where. A critical mass bemused by the strange attractor that the shopping centre cannot hold. Can’t go over it. No gerund in it. But if it gets you round the block, then even if nothing has been said, something has been done.

Stillness. The sentence is pronounced. The game is a footnote. The trapdoor opens, and your feet won’t touch the ground.

milcbar

there are now 10 tunes by milcbar on the island of the lost

http://islandofthelost.tumblr.com/

sample the haunting garage rock of ‘i wanna kill you pts 1 and 2’, the driving gospel rock of ‘what would jesus do’ and the sexy warlikeness of ‘sexxxwar’ or the disturbing subtext of ‘eliminate/girls in the park’.

there’s something to everyone’s taste, if that taste is for badly recorded sub demo standard rehearsal room jams.

regrets are for the mundane.

loads of new milcbar stuff on island of the lost, better rush right over there and base your life on the revelations therein contained.

islandofthelost:

milcbar - i wanna kill you parts one and two

sometimes you just want to rock. and/or kill someone.

http://islandofthelost.tumblr.com/

milcbar were an improvisational trio from birmingham