I bought a set of Penguin sci-fi book cover postcards a long while back. I must admit I was rather disappointed with the set, overall.
But I have chosen a few to frame and put up around the home. These are picked mainly for aesthetic reasons, rather than being sci-fi lit I particularly like.
I’d have like it if the two could coincide. But they don’t so far. Never mind!
The CDs on the bookshelves just below are discs I got free one way or another (with magazines, or off Freecycle). And are discs I’ve been keeping out of my main collection… segregating them on the basis that they’re mostly pop-culture shite!
Alright… so I’ve survived a thimble-full of Baileys, and the single dosage of beer. What have I learned from this?
First of all, I can control alcohol intake. But I’d be a fool to merrily return to the free range consumption of liquor. I intend, instead, to resume my tea-turtle stance for a good long period.
If, come say summertime, or something like that, I’m still under control, I might take the experiment a step further. How so? A bottle o’ wine… perhaps? That’d be a real test. As it’d entail maintaining control over time. Ie not just slugging the whole bottle.
But for now, it’s back to abstention. And very happily so. It’s saving me money. It’s undoubtedly good for my health, both physical and mental/psychological. and I’m joust enjoying the sense of control.
My star rating for this is based, primarily, on how much I’m enjoying this new Play-Tone mini-series, from the Hanks, Spielberg and Goetzman team that brought us Band, Pacific, and other superb WWII media.
It’s taking me longer to warm to the cast than it did with Brothers and Pacific. But I’m starting to thaw on that front. But everything else, and most especially the lengths to which the production crew go to bring this story to life, is terrific.
I’ve grudgingly taken out an £8.99 p/month Apple TV sub, just so’s I can watch this as it comes out. I resent having to do so. But hey-ho. Buy any beans necessary, as the Vegan Anarchist Front might say…
Tonight I watched episode three, and already we’ve seen characters built up just to be killed off. But the the ‘Bloody Hundredth’ did earn that soubriquet with an eye-watering loss of life.
For tonight’s post this is merely to register the fact I’m watching the series, and loving it. I’ll prob either expand this post, or add more on the topic, as the episodes drop. We shall see?
But for now? Yep… loving it.
Oh, and it was based, it would seem, on this book:
Not read the book.
Watching Pvt. Ryan lead to me reading a Stephen Ambrose book on D-Day. And viewing The Pacific was a prelude to reading With The Old Breed and Helmut Fur Mein Furher… er, I mean… Well, you see where I’m going with that?
I’ve bought a can of beer. And beer with alky-hole innit.
This is significant. As I’ve been tea-turtle for quite some time now. I haven’t been suffering maddening lusts for booze. I did have another minor ‘lapse’, a few days ago, and have a thimble-full of Baileys.
The Baileys was pleasant enough. But, rather gladdeningly, I didn’t want any more. It was nice. But not too nice.
Now, a few day later, I want to see what happens if I have a single beer. Can I maintain my control? My equilibrium? Can I resist a gradually-building turning to horribly-inevitable descent into addiction.
It sounds almost comical. But it ain’t. Not by a long bleedin’ chalk! It’s feckin’ serious.
Tried this recently. Pleasant enough.
Non-alcoholic and low-alcohol beers have been helpful. I find I like them. But I’m not crazy about them. And they kind of help put the flavour aspect of alcoholic beers in a new perspective.
Alcoholic beers taste ok. But it’s the alcohol that, rather sneakily, becomes the driver. You can kind of kid yourself you’re being discriminating. Well – in fairness I guess you are? – but there’s something revealing about removing the alcohol.
What I’m getting at is that returning to booze, and beer in particular, I’m slightly disappointed by it. Not in a major league way. It’s just a reminder that it’s not all that…
Anyhoo… I picked Shore Leave partly cause it just jumped out at me, and partly on account of the Tom Waits song by that name. And I’m enjoying it. I just hope I’m not enjoying it too much?
These are yummy!
Bought some me delish Lu French lemon flavoured cakey things. I thought they were flat biscuits. Turns out they’re quite chunky!
A ‘pregnant’ profile !
From the side they almost look a bit like Chinese dumplings. They don’t taste that way at all, needles to say (that’s a Patridgean pun!).
I bought some Jim Fitzpatrick Thin Lizzy prints, for my 50th birthday, over two years ago now.
I only remember ordering two? Jailbreak and Nightlife. But I have three! The third is the cover for Chinatown.
I’ll have to go back and check my order. Did I simply forget this one, or was it a gift? I somehow suspect the former. Because I do recall Jim Fitzpatrick wrote a note that went along with the order. And this mentions the inclusion of a free gift: a small black-and-white print of Phil Lynott himself.
Nightlife. Suitably (?) low-lot.
I bought the prints direct from Fitzpatrick. It’s nice to have had some kind of direct connection with Thin Lizzy, who I never saw live.
The prints are on special paper that has a Jim Fitzpatrick monogram embossed upon it. They are giclée, or so-called ‘fine art prints’. All are signed by the artist.
Chinatown. Severely cropped!
The frames, in stark to contrast, are from B&M. And are dirt cheap. But they do the job. One thing that isn’t right, with any of them. And that’s the internal card frame/mount. I never know what to call this; it’s the thick cardboard window that sits inside the main outer frame, and both protects and also frames the print.
I suspect I will ultimately create bespoke card window mounts for all of these prints. As none of them are displayed to their best effect, as is. The worst of the three is undoubtedly Chinatown, as pictured directly above.
Frequently I’m confronted with scenes – on this day (and many similar occasions) it’s stunningly gorgeous skies – that my iPhone’s camera totally fails to capture. It’s really frustrating.
The photo at the top of this post, above, is the best of the many wherein the camera is focussed on the screen, not the view beyond. I keep/include this example, crap as it may be, because it does at least go part of the way towards capturing the colours in the sky, which were simply sublime.
One of the few that’s even simply in focus.
Yesterday I picked Teresa up, mid-shift, as a drop I made was right next door to where she works, and the timing’s were perfect: dropped off the packages, drove to her workplace – literally seconds, as it was right next door – and there she is, walking out of work chatting with a co-worker.
From this point onwards, and for about the next hour or more, there was an absolutely sublime sunset. One unusual feature of which was a visual phenomenon I’ve rarely if ever seen before, and desperately wanted to capture. A perfectly vertical ‘column of light’. But, alas, due to the crapness of the iPhones’ cam’, I was unable to.
At last, a reasonable ‘in car’ shot!
One of the most annoying things about this iPhones’ camera is that 99% of the time it’ll focus on the car windscreen, not the landscape beyond. This is so infuriating! Above and below are two rare instances where this didn’t occur.
Zoomed in a bit. Poss’ even better?
Of maybe 30-40 attempted shots, the few here are the best. And, frankly, they fail miserably at capturing the awesome majesty of this incredible sunset. I really must get a better camera!
The most annoying part was the cam’s complete failure to capture the ‘column of light’ effect that was the most singular aspect of this particular evening’s display.
Arrowhead over Oakington, all that remains…
The ‘Flying V’, or arrowhead of cloud, was all that remained of the spectacular display, by the time I’d dropped my last delivery. This was also the first moment on the route that had found me stationary and with a view of the sky not totally blocked by buildings. So I took the above shot. But by then the really spectacular display was over.
The thing was, that the only times I had an unimpeded view of the skies were between drops, whilst driving. And on this occasion it was frustrating how, at no point, did a natural opportunity for a decent photo opp’ occur.
This little paperback volume, that I recently got for £3 (from a charity shop in Cambridge), is a publication by/for the Marlborough Fine Art Gallery, of Bond St, London.
Self-Portrait, 1947.
It’s described as ‘a small loan retrospective… based around his visit to London in 1938.’ I’m looking forward to learning more about this artist, who I first got to know and love – very much in passing – as an eager young kid, with naïve dreams of my future life as an artist!
Carnival, 1920.
The painting pictured above, Carnival, was the first Beckmann work that drew me in. Now I feel less drawn to it. It’s rather unctuously smooth! I think I now prefer his later slightly rougher ‘hatchet’ style, which looks like a cross between lino-cuts, stained glass (with all the black linear elements), and Expressionist painting.
Quappi & Parrot, 1936.
I love green! So this painting is a new favourite. It’s not one I recall seeing in my previous youthful encounters with Beckmann.
Snake Charmer & Clown, 1948.
I’m not usually one for figurative art, to be honest. But with certain artists I can make exceptions. I don’t go a bundle on many of Beckmann’s landscapes or still lives – though there are some I like – but occasionally Max’s people do it for me.
Bathing Scene, 1934.
As usual, I’m keen to see what I might learn or absorb from a study of another artists’s style. I’d like do a series of figurative paintings – not sure what subject on as yet (jazz musicians, military subjects?) – with a very deliberate Beckmann influence.
Poss’ combining that with a bit of Stanley Spencer’s? To my mind and eye they share an approach to the picture space: their paintings are often like 3-D shallow relief friezes. They have depth and solidity, but all squeezed into a pretty compressed space.
These qualities – along with their distinctive palettes and predilection for expressive distortion – give their works an impressive energy.
I only ever owned one Eagle publication. The one pictured above. How I came to have it, I forget. I have a vague notion that I bought it at a village fete.
Too steep for me!
I’d prob’ have bought this copy, for nostalgia’s sake. But I felt £7.99 was too much, for me. Esp’ as it’s only one article that I really recall. This one:
Chest-thumping Boys Own stuff.
This story was a catalyst for my burgeoning interest in the Napoleonic era.
Nicely illustrated, Eagle style.Short, but to the point.
It was a short piece. But packing a hefty punch. At least as far as I was concerned.
