10 Years Waiting to See Die Krupps and God Was It Worth It

For quite a while now I’ve been getting increasingly into industrial metal and industrial music in general, mainly listening to bands like Grendel, KMFDM, Fear Factory, VNV Nation, bands all of that ilk. But my interest in industrial music started about 10 years ago when, whilst listening to a mix tape my brother had made, I first encountered To the Hilt by Die Krupps. Later I started listening to more of their stuff, including such glorious gems as Fatherland, Metal Machine Music (One of my personal favourites) and Wahre Arbeit Wahrer Lohn. Of course, way back in 2004 they had yet to begin their reunion tours/anniversary tours, and I was to say the least saddened by the thought that I would never have the chance to see these musical artistes live.

Last night, Friday 1^st August, I got the chance to see all of these and more performed at the Talking Heads pub and live music venue in Southampton.

Now when I saw the tickets go on sale a few months ago I thought I was about to have a heart attack. I didn’t even question buying tickets, I just went for them. And boy am I glad I did.

The venue was perfect. The Talking Heads hosts a regular evening called Industrial Fallout, so having these kings of Industrial Metal perform was perfect. The atmosphere was very flowing. Everyone was getting into the groove of things very easily. You could tell that a lot of the people there had been waiting a while to see Die Krupps, or were excited to see them again. The support I have mixed feelings about.

The first support band was Beinaheleidenschaftsgegenstand (or BeinE, apparently meaning “The thing that is almost the thing you want…but not quite”), a duo of Tiffanie Wells on vocals and synths and Simon John Bowers on keyboards, synths and all other weird techno-wizardry used to make strange sounds. I’ll admit, at first I found them to be musically skilful but lyrically somewhat overdramatic and pretentious, almost having the feel of 16 year-old angst-ridden poetry. Then I tried closing my eyes and listening and found it much easier to get into…but there’s the problem – this is a very cerebral band, one that you listen to when you’re trying to write a piece of work at 3 am and you need something to calm and focus your mind. For me, it doesn’t work as well for a live gig. With that said, plenty of people were getting into it, almost 60’s student commune style, so what do I know? I will say that if I wanted a band to create ambient music for a game or film, I’d definitely ask these guys.

The second band, Dreams Divide, definitely worked better for me. A duo of David Crout on vocals, synths and programming and Gem Davison on vocals and synths. Now these guys have a lot of power and energy that can only come from one place – unadulterated love for their audience and their music, and both having equal importance. David Crout’s voice evokes a feeling of Dave Gahan from Depeche Mode with aspects of Ronan Harris from VNV Nation, but still maintaining a gruff and assertive identity of its own. Gem Davison immediately put me in mind of Anneke Van Giersbergen, but with her own exquisitely discordant feel. Now this could easily be as a consequence of being a live show instead of a recording, but if that is the case, I urge them to maintain this direction with their music because it is so wonderfully enticing and will help greatly set them apart from everyone else.

Their set was very emotionally charged and I have every respect for them for managing to perform because they had been to their friend’s funeral just earlier that day. Because of this they asked us, if we’re with someone we’re close to, to “take them by the hand and tell them you love them, because once they’re gone that’s the end and it’s so very sad”. I can not imagine the sheer strength of will it must have taken to carry on and perform. They are true performers, willing to give it their all, even when they’re feeling absolutely lousy. Dave, Gem, my hat is permanently off to you. You are an inspiration.

Finally, after whetting our appetite so gloriously, they come. Die Krupps come to the stage in a blue-tinted glow of strip-line L.E.D lights and bursting into They opened with the song Ein Blick Zurück im Zorn (a look back in anger).  I made a point of being certain I could see everything up-close and personal, and the darkness of the blue glow combined with my skinniness made this particularly easy. They started the show in a way that I love for bands to do – by playing songs I’d never heard before. As barmy as that may sound, I love to hear either new material or stuff I simply haven’t found the albums for first. It wasn’t until that day I’d even heard one of their most recent songs, Risikofaktor (Risk Factor), from the album The Machinists of Joy, and that heart-pounding explosion of a song was the immediate second to be played.

Now for those of you who don’t know, Die Krupps has been around for quite a while. 30 years to be exact. You’d think once he’s in his 50’s Jürgen Engler, their frontman, would’ve slowed down a bit…has he fuck? The guy was bouncing about and running around like a five year-old on a year’s supply of skittles. His energy really made the music and the crowd come to life. You could see that he was absolutely loving it up there, building up constant interplay with the crowd, hovering the mic stand over us at various points so we could interject on various songs. And my friends, you have not lived until you have heard a glockenspiel solo. Several songs featured this, in particular Der Amboss (The Anvil). I will warn though, brace your ears if you’re at the front. Never has the term “Ear-splitting” been more appropriate. This isn’t your everyday glockenspiel. This is a massive fuck-off hit with steel pipes glockenspiel. I’m likely using the wrong name for it, but I have no idea how to research “instrument made from industrial metal pipes and hit with smaller pipes”. I wish I did ‘cause I want one myself. Whilst I didn’t get to hear all of my favourites (Black Beauty, White Heat would have been a particularly welcome delight), I did get to hear a lot of them, including To the Hilt. Now there were technical difficulties during this song, the microphone’s wire deciding to cut out at odd moments, but Jürgen took it in his stride and encouraged the crowd to fill in the blanks whilst the techies fixed the problem. Again, the definition of a professional. Lesser frontmen would have easily gotten fed up and stormed off. Jürgen simply smiled when he could see that we all knew that we were aliens in our own land. After a very effectively teased encore that got us all pumped up for more, I got two of my absolute favourites (In fact four of my top five got played that night) in the forms of Crossfire, which is such a thundering piece that so perfectly evokes the feeling of absolute chaos and mania that was glorious to see live. And finally it closed with the exquisitely menacing and carefully crafted Bloodsuckers, a song that I swear gets better and better every time I hear it. Just the most perfect of their songs to close on. Still leaves us wanting more, but gives us just enough to keep us fed until next time.

And just when you didn’t think the night could get better, after the show we got to talk to the band in the beer garden. I myself got to speak to Jürgen and Bradley Bills, the drummer, also of tribal-infused apocalyptic drum project Chant fame. Jürgen was greatly pleased when I told him how long I’d been waiting to see them. Brad reaffirmed the feeling I got of how Jürgen has a love for the music and just lives for it. You had no feelings of divas or egos of any kind, you just got to talk to some really cool people who love the fans and live for the music.

If I ever get the chance again I would happily go to see them again. If you ever get the chance, immediately grab a ticket. Hell, grab a dozen, find as many people who are industrial fans as you can and take them along. You will not regret it.

Other Minorities and the LGBT community

Okay, so I found out today that this: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/14/michigan-same-sex-marriage-black-ministers/9094721/ is a thing.

*sighs* Okay, where do I begin?

Let's just start off by saying this: If you are classified as a minority, that's it, you're already legless when you try to speak out against any other minority. If you are a black person in any country other than Africa, especially if you're a black person in either the USA or Britain, the last thing you have any right to speak out against is another minority gaining the same privileges you have. It's baffling that such a thing could even occur. Until the late 60's it was illegal in some states for black and white people to marry. That sound familiar at all?

Secondly, if you are a woman, again, you have no right to speak out against other minorities. You yourselves at one point in history and in certain countries today, have been and are regarded as "lesser" or even "sub-human". You weren't allowed to vote, own property, or any of those sorts of things. Do you think we should suddenly go back to those ideologies? Hmm? Didn't think so.

I could go on, but I'll get straight to the point of this - If you belong to some form of minority, be it based on sex, race, creed, sexual orientation, gender identification, having ginger hair, whatever, you should not be rallying against one another. You should be embracing the diversity of one another that you yourselves represent.

And the fact that a straight, white, cisgendered man is having to say all of this, that really speaks volumes.

A Day in the Life of a Park

For my subject I chose to take photographs within a park. I decided upon this subject matter because it seemed like an effective way to emulate the stylings of Henri Cartier-Bresson, whereby I would be taking advantage of the brief seconds to capture events as they happen as opposed to simply expecting to capture photos staged.

The park is a great focal point for relaxation, entertainment and simply a pleasant pathway to walk through or environment to be in as someone goes about their daily business. As such it grants a great opportunity to bear witness to any multitude of things as the day progresses.

Life in the Park Emerges

One Woman and Her Dog

Anything Interesting in the News Today?

A Cyclist's Rest

Home Time at Sunset

Night walking

Documentary and Photojournalism

The following is my piece for my Documentary and Photojournalism module on the Journalism course at the University of Winchester. This short documentary piece will chronicle the experiences of Gibraltar from the viewpoints of my grandfather, Joseph Mills, who grew up there and was evacuated during World War 2 at the age of six; and his daughter, my mother, Sally Scrivens, who visited there with both of my grandparents when she was 19.

It will at times switch back and forth between both subjects during points when it is appropriate to the narrative structure of the piece.

It discusses the emotional ties with the country, how often they have returned, whether they would like to return and asks why they would or wouldn’t want to.

For my grandfather it also discusses what it was like to be evacuated, this experience acting as the key conflict within the piece as, in his words “It was the biggest stab in the back”. It has also acted as a form of impetus for most future events proceeding from that point. Further questions can also be asked for attitudes towards returning had my grandfather not left in the first place.

I trust it to be found informative and entertaining. I certainly enjoyed researching and filming it.

Director’s Statement: - A Father and Daughter’s

Eyes of Gibraltar

Within this piece my intent is to inform, explain and attempt to expound upon the experiences of my mother and grandfather of Gibraltar. I wish to share with everyone some of the knowledge of what it has been like to grow up and then be forced to leave there, or to be introduced to the land that an ex-patriot once called home.

Given the brevity of the piece it will not have too great a level of detail, but it should hopefully give enough information to make people interested enough to potentially ask more and discover the richness of culture that the island possesses.

Depression

Disclaimer: I do not claim to know all the ins and outs of depression, this is merely my personal experience of it, both based on myself and some of my friends. There is plenty I haven't mentioned and I could quite easily go on for longer, but my mind is so addled that this is all that I can presently manage. There are also far more educated detailings on experiences with depression, but I felt it necessary to describe my experiences, if simply as an outlet for what I feel I can't vocalise.

Depression is...

Depression is...

Depression is...

.....

That's the problem, even trying to explain what it is is a task, because everyone experiences it differently, everyone has a different impetus, everyone has different manifestations of it and everyone has different ways of managing to live with it.

That's the key thing: LIVING WITH IT. It is not something that is simply gotten over. Even for those without clinical depression it can take months or even years before they can attempt to classify themselves as "not depressed". Depression is not simply a disease, it is a state of existence. Something which makes every day a struggle. Simply getting out of bed can be one of the most difficult tasks laid ahead of you, and it is your every right to feel a sense of achievement that you actually managed to do so, because you're making progress towards living with it.

So many people don't fully grasp the concept of depression. Some are under the impression that it is something that can be gotten over. They might think that you can continue fighting against something indefinitely, but eventually your last ounce of willpower will shrivel up and die. This is not your fault. It is never your fault. You've tried your damndest to survive and battle onwards, but there's only so much you can do when there is this all-consuming darkness running rampant throughout your mind.

One of the key things that depression does to you is make you feel completely powerless. As I said before, fighting against anything eventually breaks your will and you succumb, but even worse than that is the fact that it requires effort to convince yourself you can even attempt to fight against anything. So many times there will come a moment in which you think "Yes, I'm going to finally stand up for myself and say this!" but then you gradually begin to backpeddle, saying to yourself "Why should I bother? What would be the point in me saying anything? It won't get listened to, and even if it does, it'll be made to sound like my fault". You feel like any efforts made towards improving your life will just be met with derision and subjugation.

In conjunction with a feeling of powerlessness is a reduction in pleasure. The most simple things; your favourite music, your favourite food, everything like that, loses a spark that it once had. Interactions with friends become difficult simply by virtue of wanting to contribute more than you can. Sometimes you'll find yourself switching between the deadest of silences and the most verbose of ramblings because you are so terrified that you'll be caught out that you'll say just about anything. Eventually everything that makes you you becomes a suffocating smog that makes you want to completely reject it all. You'll find yourself saddened simply by the connections you can make between particular songs or meals. You could have loved something from the moment you experienced it, but because of the connections it has, even the mere mention of it makes you feel like you're about to drown.

Sleep can become either unnaturally easy or painfully difficult; you will either be so lacklustre that all you desire is complete oblivion and the easiest, least painful for anyone way of managing that is to not wake up, at least not until most of the day has vanished and so you only have to exist for a brief time. Alternatively your mind is swamped with every thought and reason that you are depressed and thus simply closing your eyes requires the greatest of efforts. You go on walks that are so long you hope you can exhaust yourself, but instead it simply gives you more energy to over-think things and you end up hating yourself even more.

Emotions become a chaotic mess that can not be predicted. In some cases depression governs you completely and the only respite is the occassional good humour to come from a close friend. Alternatively you could be switching between a sea of negative emotions, each set off by the tiniest of things. All it takes is for someone to say something at the wrong time and you end up breaking half your bed room.

And this makes you feel more worthless. You start thinking over things, wondering whether you're truly worth anyone's time if you are so prone to these horrible states. For those who it is brought on by a bad break-up, you don't simply wonder if you're worth another person's time romantically, you wonder if you're worth anyone's time at all. Moments when friends do voice concern and care become so invaluable to you that you become desperate to find a way to properly thank them. Nothing is sufficient for you because to you they have effectively saved your life, even if just for an extra day.

But even for those who it isn't brought on by a break-up, even those who it is chemically caused for, you still feel like you're a waste of everyone's time. Even being in the same room you feel like you're a nuisance and should just flee from everyone's sight. People will try to convince you that you don't need to do this, but it feels more like they do this out of obligation as opposed to genuine opinion or belief. And it doesn't matter how much someone argues the case, it won't change your opinion that you're a worthless waste of space.

The absolute worst thing though, is the boredom that comes with being depressed. You get so painfully sick of constantly feeling depressed that you try to convince yourself that you're okay, that everything's fine and you can manage it. But you can't. You try but it's impossible. You just feel worse because of lying not simply to other people, but most of all to yourself. You start hating yourself for your lack of honesty, which just layers on further depressed feelings, ultimately driving you to a completely unwinnable situation. You get to a stage where in the words of the director Lars Von Trier, "you fall down and you're like a bird with a cat and you say 'Eat me for Christ's Sake'" just wanting it all to be over and done with, but not by your own hand, but by the decision of the universe at large. You're desperate for a release, but for so many it's terrifying the prospect of ending it all. It's why so many with depression come to actually admire those with the will to take it into their own hands and just end it all there and then. We don't see cowardice there, we see a bravery that we wish we could have. As warped as an ideology as that might be, it's the coldest, most clear-cut truth for so many with depression.

For those who wish to see an excellent collection of comics depicting a great many of the effects of depression, here it is: http://www.buzzfeed.com/hnigatu/comics-that-capture-the-frustrations-of-depression

An important thing to note: NEVER comment on how depressed someone has been or is. All this will do is to propogate the ideas of worthlessness in the person's mind and make them believe that they deserve to be depressed. My ex used to say this all the time when I would have dark moments and all that did was make me feel worse.

Never look for the specific reason why someone is depressed, just understand that they are and be there for them, because ultimately that is what they desperately need, despite anything they might say. They need a connection with someone they can trust, with someone that they know cares about them and loves them. Whether the love is voiced or simply understood, it is important for them to be aware that there are people around who do.

In closing, depression is all of what I've detailed and far more besides. It is a static existence that anyone with it has to find the will to fight against every day. But for all those who do, I salute you, for you give me the strength to carry on as well.

I truly wish there was more I could say, but there is so much to detail that I couldn't hope to do the subject matter justice.

Follow-Up

In continuation from my previous post I share with you all a petition lobbying the Olympics Committee to condemn Russia's anti-gay laws:

https://www.change.org/petitions/stand-against-russia-s-brutal-crackdown-on-gay-rights-urge-winter-olympics-2014-sponsors-to-condemn-anti-gay-laws

Another one petitioning a general protection of gay rights

https://www.allout.org/fr/actions/russia-attacks-taf

And fortunately this is not going unnoticed on an international scale:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-akprn1/1013533_180761818771304_729340625_n.png

More to follow

The Travesties of Reality

This post will predominantly be posting all manner of links to recent atrocities and a petition that can be signed against one of them that have happened over the recent months and years in both Greece and Russia.

To begin with I am going to share the petition link as it is the most immediately accessible thing that we can currently do something against:

http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/3322?share_ref=IUyNy_Ox9-8

Following are articles covering the most recent crimes against humanity that Russia and Greece have enacted upon:

http://www.queerty.com/russian-skinheads-using-social-media-to-lure-kidnap-and-publicly-torture-gay-teens-20130726/

https://www.amnesty.org/en/news/scores-musicians-urge-russia-release-pussy-riot-2013-07-22

 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/lgbt-campaigners-boycott-vodka-in-protest-at-russian-gay-rights-abuses--even-though-their-main-target-isnt-made-in-russia-8734981.html

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20130724/182399366/6-Gay-Rights-Activists-Briefly-Detained-Over-Rally-in-Moscow.html

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20130723/182385163/Russia-Issues-Travel-Ban-for-Dutch-Gay-Propaganda-Suspects.html

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20130723/182370139/US-City-Mulls-Breaking-Up-with-Russian-Sister-City-Over-Anti-Gay-Law.html

http://www.globaldetentionproject.org/countries/europe/greece/introduction.html

Now admittedly these are just limited to LGBT issues, but I will be following up on these matters and discussing them as they come. And one specifically for England, behold the desperate attempts of a despotic leader to further place a stranglehold upon us:

https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2013/sleepwalking-into-censorship

Undoubtedly a lot of you will not have heard about this, so you're welcome for the information.

This is Edmund Scrivens signing off.

Seminar Paper - Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

The scientific imperatives put across within this work are straight-forward enough to understand. The world is governed by facts and these facts operate within multiple capacities. Everything can be boiled down to atomic facts, that is to say, everything is constructed from a form of atomic structure, right down to the very words spoken as they are manipulations of air into specific patterns. However, that which does not exist can also be related to atomic truths as they do not possess an atomic structure to allow it existence.

The world is related to us as being a microcosm of the universe’s logical existence. The Earth is in existence, therefore the universe must exist. However, this is not necessarily a definitive inference of the true state of the universe as we can not automatically infer the existence or non-existence of other atomic structures. Each atomic structure is independent of itself and only by definitive empirical facts can we understand what exactly exists.

Accordingly statements of propositions of logic being tautologies apply. That is to say that logical statements are formed from reasoned, irrefutable evidence and that further logical statements can be made because of those easily understood and straight-forward statements. Furthermore all statements and propositions of logic are of equal rank as they are true regardless of interpretation of them. According to Wittgenstein, if a proposition is logical then it can not, unlike as Bertrand Russell suggests, have a contradictory state of being and must hold within itself tautological existence regardless of interpretation.

However, logical objects and logical constants are impossible as the universe because, as previously stated, atomic structures are independent from each other and therefore can only exist within their own personal universe. A logical object would require an object whose use has one singular, specific application (even food can be used for more than simply nourishment as can be seen in ancient practices of pagan worship) and a logical constant would depend on a world that does not change. It could be argued that the speed of light is a logical constant, but even that has been repeatedly revised and changed as technological advances have come to light

The propositions of truth are indicative of the ideas of logic and the state of existence. All truth, logic and existence propositions link together. A proposition of logic needs to be proven and existence is typically based within logic when broken down into a purely scientific mechanic. Thought influences logical ideals. It lends name and progression to the inspiration behind the proposition. Thought may manipulate truth and existence but can be drawn back into grounding through logical reasoning. Our perceptions may manipulate what we believe of this world but logic, according to Wittgenstein, as based in tautologies, can not be edited by them and remain the same until a time where their relevance ceases to be.

All thought influences the progression of propositions and therefore all thought must at some point contain a form of logic and rationality. If our thought lacks logic or rationality then we must maintain silent contemplation until a more reasoned ideology presents itself.

The philosophy of mathematics

Mathematics in itself is an intriguing area of philosophy as it is potentially the basis for a great many things, primarily those of logic, understanding and overt meaning. Unlike language it has a far more straightforward existence and all that it truly relies upon to differ is the context of the time, whereas language is far more subjective.

The logic principles of mathematics are many and varied. Firstly they are based in the context of their time. For example, to modern audiences it is accepted that zero and one are the first two positive numbers to exist. To an Ancient Greek audience they are to be understood as a completely different ideological principle, that being that zero is representative of there being nothing present and thus can not be counted as a number would be, and one is a singular existence that warrants no recognition past the fact that there is an solitary item present, whether it is a person, animal, building or something else.

Furthermore, if we hail back to even earlier times the accepted means by which to count things would be "one thing", "more than one thing" and "many things". Even within modern audiences there are dramatic differences between smaller and larger numbers logically speaking. Smaller numbers, those which we do not necessarily have to count to recognise, are known as "Natural Numbers". These would be numbers which are minds can automatically recognise without counting and typically run up to seven (although there are extreme examples of more or less). Even a number as simple as 17 would not be considered a natural number as the average human mind can not automatically recognise the presence of such a number.

At its core basis mathematics is a language constructed for the purpose of grouping particular qualities together, whether it be a general genus, such as six cats, or a more specific aspect of a particular object, such as 42 windows. Yes there are many variations of this principle, such as measurements of distances or the quantifying of objects' capacities, but it all ultimately boils down to the same ideal: grouping the aspect of something into a definitive number. This is what addition and multiplication in essence are. Essentially non-natural numbers (numbers which we do not automatically recognise) are the equivalent of creating words from standard letters. As such they have their own particular syntax, though a much simpler and more direct one than that of language. Division and subtraction are means of analysis of the structure of numbers. They are a means by which to understand how precisely a number can be formed. Numbers such as 827 are predicates of simpler numbers and as such can be analysed through the use of division and calculation of square roots.

It is reasonable to say that the beginnings of any form of numerology begin in the assorted hieroglyphs of the ancient world. Although termed differently, modern numbers are for all intents and purposes, simply a newer version of hieroglyphs. This is one of the other reasons why zero was not present within numerology, that a figure had not been present to represent it until it had come from India via the Sufi Islamic language (although this is a minor reason compared to the ideology of being a different philosophical imperative altogether). The issue of the concept of zero as a number is that it contradicts Aristotle's imperatives that something can not contain its own negation, which the existence of zero effectively asserts. This issue is resolved by Leibnitz's monads which argue that an item can contain its own negation. Modern philosophers have reasoned that zero is a natural number and that the differential between 0 being equal to nothing and 1 being equal to something is as big as the universe itself.

Because of the perfection they represent, their impossibility to be anything other than what they are, numbers were once seen as a form of magic, particularly the numbers 3, 7, 12 and 13. They float in perfect Platonic forms. Out of context these numbers might seem strange, but when given the context of geometry, music or architecture it is far clearer to understand, as these particular numbers have in many ways a balance. A harmony in themselves which can be best displayed within mediums such as music. There is a beauty within them, and beauty is only possible through a balance and perfect ratio.

The logical underpinning for mathematics pioneered by Frege was based initially in his work on language. Frege argued that empirical data for arithmetic is unreasonable as it is not something that can be tested like you would the weight of something or the time it takes for something to reach point B from point A. Two water droplets added to each other result in just one larger water droplet. His argument, based in Plato, is that numbers are perfect and relatable to each other, but have no corresponding objects, that is to say that there is no one particular thing which has two of something or that can be grouped specifically as only two.

According to Russell numbers are neither empirical data nor Platonic ideal forms but are instead the result of a-priori propositions which are definable by a limited set of axioms or premises. Russell's ideology is that numbers are not "things in themselves" as Platonists believe, nor are the empirical generalisation as was the dominant opinion of the 19th century, fronted by Mill. Numbers are in effect fractions of the whole, retained from Hegel's teachings is that to understand the elements within the system one must first understand the system as a whole. Numbers only hold meaning upon being considered as elements of the whole.

Although retaining the empiricist view to a certain extent, it did not allow Russell the full extent of explanations necessary, those being the answers to the following questions:

1. What is a number?
2. What is 'a number'?
3. What is meant by arithmetic operators such as addition and subtraction?

Guiseppe Peano, the Italian mathematician, showed that numbers could be deduced from very specific axioms:

1. Zero is a natural number and can be used to count. To use it in counting is along the lines of saying that there is no one in the room. It is not nothingness in the metaphysical sense.
2. X=X. Every number is its own equivalence, which is further sub-divided into five types of equivalence
3. Every natural number has a successor
4. No natural number has the successor of zero. That is to say that negative numbers are non-existent as they are not a means by which to count
5. If the successor of N is equal to the successor of M, then N is equal to M for all numbers in the series

Zero, number and successor all remain undefined by Peano. Russell wished to create definitions for these through objective or further axiomatic means. As such he used the terms class, belonging to a class and similarity. Thus, a number is a means by which to establish the definition of a class or group, such as a 3 cats, 3 dogs or 3 philosophers. 

This ultimately resolves issues such as illogical additions, such as 3 cats + 4 dogs = 5 catdogs, as we have definitive specifications. Such a sum would be resolved through the simplification of using similarity, such as 3 animals + 4 animals = 7 animals.

Existentialism on a Political Level

Existentialism as far as political ideals go seems to operate by extremes, either that by the far right in the case of philosophers such as Heidegger (to such an extent that he was a member of the Nazi party), or the far left in the case of those like Sartre, who was himself a Marxist. It is easy to explain the extremes of such a philosophy, as given the core aspect of existentialism is the absurdity of existence and that we can only affirm our existence once we recognise the necessity of individual representation, then those following its teachings have everything to gain from placing themselves staunchly within a particular doctrine. However his philosophy stated that we also have become complacent and forgetful of what it truly is to be and simply focus upon existing in general, thus it could be argued that his membership in the Nazi party was part of the ideal of having a firm sense of what it is to truly be an individual. Many philosophers would contend his political views but they typically appreciate his reasoning behind where he stood.

An important aspect of political existentialism is that it is workable within all circumstances and allows for forcefulness within existence. This is why it was an effective philosophical standpoint to have during the 1954 -62 in Algeria, as Franz Fanon, a key thinker for this period of existentialism as well as a member of the FLN, encouraged the use of violence, essentially being a form of anti-Martin Luther King in this respect, stating that the only way towards freedom and identity, which were two of the key causes of the rebellion, the subjugation of the Algerian culture and its replacement with the French culture, was for the Algerian people to fight tooth and nail to attain it. Fanon urged for the Algerians to keep fighting as violently as possible until they had what they wanted.

Ultimately existentialism only works within the realms of politics when taken to extremes. The purpose of it is to recognise the absurdity of existence and that there is no meaning to it other than the one we create for ourselves, thus mediums are not possible for once things are taken lightly, the philosophy begins to undermine itself.

Consumer Television Society

Even before the advent of television media has greatly reflected what the consumer seems to demand. Initially upon creation of such innovations as the Gutenberg Press in 1436 were designed specifically for the purpose of   Bible production. However, as printing became more easily accessible by distributors with the emergence of things such as the steam-driven rotary press in the mid-19th century, the idea of demographics started to emerge and evolve. Aiming for groups such as middle-class women and working-class men became a standard for news circulation.

Upon the emergence of cinema the circulation of news became much more accessible in America and distribution was much cheaper as they would typically broadcast the news before or after a main feature. Although some newspaper moguls had difficulty in the increasingly technologically orientated age across the seas, in Britain the businesses flourished for a great many more decades owing to the BBC's monopoly on radio and television broadcasting, any British channel aside from their's not emerging until 1955 and until the 1970's any sort of non-BBC radio broadcast was illegal.

All this said, it wasn't until the late 50's and early 60's that television use actually came into its stride, so newspapers were still able to subsist for a while (even today they're in use across the world, just not as effective as a singular source of income). Newspapers such as the Daily Mirror widely ignored the prominence of this medium as they had a 12 million circulation and 8 million sales. They were not observant of demographics such as the baby boomers of 1948-49, and as such could not maintain the circulation they had. Television, especially ITV owing to its commercial style and importing of American TV, was very attractive to the boomers. An emphasis was placed on key demographics with disposable incomes. Teenagers and house-wives were also useful for means of marketing. An explosion happened of "cultural" media, such as particular records, films, specific programmes broadcast by both the BBC and ITV and similar entertainment. In some views the development of television and the rise in its popularity saw the end, or at least the transformation, of the Age of Enlightenment. This is because TV is seen to have the effects of "dumbing down" the populace, which is a view that could be subscribed to, as it could be argued that greater control on the information disseminated exists. However the counter argument can be that if this were the case then live programming would not be used and everything would be pre-recorded. However, it has resulted in such demographics as the "lowest common denominator", which the idea of dumbing down can be ascribed to.

Although television has taken the greatest forefront in news distribution, papers still have a modicum of relevance and almost act as a secondary regulatory body for television, recent issues of trust with the BBC being a key example, and going further back, the war waged by Mary Whitehouse.

Moguls of today such as Rupert Murdoch have latched on to the idea of television and newspapers being a lucrative business and have gained an empire through creating daily supplements and TV channels such as the Sun and SKY which were "Born of the age we live in", aiming less for middle class or the college/university-educated, but specifically aiming for Joe-Average, working class white males who have gone straight from O-level/CSE/GCSEs into work. This has also been done through exploiting gaps in the market created by the regulatory standards put in place on the less commercial stations and newspapers.

Finally the power television holds in connection with political campaigns is quite vast in that they have ensured that politics has a means of getting through to greater masses. Campaigns are fought as much on television as they are through pamphleteering and the like. Party political broadcasts are a frequent sight during election times. It is a powerful tool. However it is a double-edged sword as it also risks recrimination and public humiliation if the politicians are embroiled in any form of scandal.

Overall, both newspapers, radio and television are effective tools and, despite the rises and falls in popularity, have seen through decades, or even centuries of development and advancement. Whether any of them will become completely obsolete is hard to say. All that is certain is that it will likely be a long time before any of them completely die out.

The Three Great Sceptics and Universal Truths

The three great sceptics of the mid- to late 19th and early 20th centuries were essentially the ones to sound the death knell for the Enlightenment, being primarily about the ideals that it is the individual who should shape the world around them as opposed to allowing the world to shape the individual. Each teacher feeding into the subsequent one's ideals in some way shape or form.

The Three Great Sceptics were, in chronological order, Karl Marx (5 May 1818 – 14 March 1883), Friedrich Nietzsche (15 October, 1844 – 25 August, 1900) and Sigmund Freud (6 May 1856 – 23 September 1939). Each of these theorists in some way or another could be said to have engaged in some form of Epistemology, particularly subjective epistemology, which argues that knowledge is not necessarily possible to attain in the first place, in the case of Nietzsche to the extent where he would at times be accused of solipsism, the ideal that the only certainty is that one's own mind exists.

The Marxist and Nietzschean views can logically be said to largely clash with each other based on the grander scopes of their beliefs, Marxists believing that particular levels of democracy are the means by which to progress towards a Socialist society and thus the means by which humanity is to further develop, however it was believed that the style of democracy necessary for the restructuring of society was not that present within that time as it was the democracy governed by the rich and powerful, thus the proletariat never having the true opportunity for freedom. Marx (and Engels) put forth that the only way towards a true democracy would be for first a revolution to come and topple the existing governing by the bourgeoisie class and then for a new democratic order to arise.

Conversely Nietzsche was radically against the ideals of democracy, believing that only the strong and intelligent should lead and that this would be the true means by which the human race could evolve and develop. His belief was that the human race in itself must be destroyed as a means by which to lead the way to the next evolutionary steps of the individuals deemed worthy and tenacious enough to progress onto the next stage of existence which he termed the Ubermensch or overman. He advocated indulgence instead of abstinence as a means by which to truly experience life and progress to the next stage of existence. Of all the Sceptics, he could be said to be the most detached from any ideals of religion or morality as he was purely about the self and feeding the self. His ideals were primarily based within the ID, though it is apparent he did not believe in subconscious desires and merely conscious ones that were suppressed by misconceived preconceptions of enforced morality dictated by religion - "I condemn Christianity", he said this because he believed that Christianity, along with most other organised religion, had forced an intolerable doctrine upon the people that must be removed - "We must do philosophy with sledgehammers", with this Nietzsche was saying that everything should be smashed to pieces and built up from scratch, opening the possibilities to advance within humanity into the creation of the ubermensch.

This said, both are at odds with the Freudian theories owing to a lack of anthropological basis or a form of political framework to explain why particular individuals might experience the psychological ailments they suffer from. Whereas Nietzsche and Marx extensively researched various cultures and ritualistic systems and thus were fully aware that certain practices such as cannibalism and child marriage, whilst seen as abhorrent within our own culture, could be viewed as entirely normal within another culture. Therefore to simply categorise all under one specific set of rules to both Nietzscheans and Marxists would seem unreasonable and lacking in any truly empirical basis.

It is somewhat ironic that Sigmund Freud is considered one of the great sceptics, given that a huge amount of his theories are widely disregarded owing to a lack of sufficient empirical data.

All this said, each are regarded as Great Sceptics for the fact that their theories constantly challenged a vast majority of established ideals.

Marx's ideals of the ruling law being that of the ruling class and that the lower classes should rise up against the bourgeoisie greatly rivals a long-believed ideal put forth by Onosander that people will not follow one who is not of noble birth.

Schopenhauer's 'Will to Live', written a generation before Nietzsche, put forth the ideal that everything in the universe was striving towards the desire to exist and procreate and therefore above all else this was what was prioritised. Nietzsche's 'Will to Power' contested this ideal by putting forth the suggestion that in truth everything is striving for power. According to Nietzsche this can be seen in both the natural and man-made worlds in the act of warfare, mating rituals and the like, in which the individual will risk their life for the sake of honour, glory and power. Simply living is not enough for them, for quite often they will die for the sake of gaining immortality in the minds of others. The will to power also stands as an argument against the ideals of Utilitarianism and Platonism, desires for goodness and unity, because these ideals do not explain why humans have often such volatile and unpredictable natures.

Freud is probably regarded as the most radical and pessimistic of the Great Sceptics as he believed that humanity on the whole had no point to which they would advance towards and that they would simply constantly strive for sheer self-destruction and the destruction of others. This contests all theories placed forth, including those of Nietzsche and Marx, who contrarily believed that humanity could advance if it learned how specifically to do so. Strangely enough, despite being a self-proclaimed atheist, his theories on the status of being were steeped in the ideals of abstinence and self-control, reinforcing the ego through his techniques so as to better control the Id.

In all cases there would have been great contesting of the supposed universal truths in three sentences presented by Frege:

1 - That the Morning Star is the same as the Evening Star

2 - That the present King of France is not bald

3 - That there was no one on the road

The significance of these sentences is that all of them can be argued against being universal truths as follows:

1 - You would require prior knowledge and understanding of certain mechanics to know that this is actually fact

2 - This entirely depends upon the context of the time and each individuals knowledge of France at that time

3 - Although at any one time on any given road there may be no one on it, that does not mean that on another road there will not be someone. It also depends upon what you consider to be the road in question, whether it is just one particular stretch or the entirety of all roads connected up.

In each case the evidence for these statements can be disputed and as such can not be considered universally true.

Freud

Sigmund Freud is considered to be one of the most influential figures of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Born in Moravia in 1856, Freud proved himself over the course of his career both an impressive psychologist (being the one to create the term psychoanalysis) and a controversial theorist, many of his theories being either called into question at the time or as of now completely disregarded as insane or completely baseless.

However, it is important to note that regardless of how recognised within the context of psychological analysis, he is still a relevant historical figure in how he managed to shape a great many of our current perceptions, manners of speech and overall ideals of typical behaviour when isolated from the opinions of more learned experts.

The theories he held which can be called into question but for the most part seem to hold water are those of he tripartite mind (originally only bipartite as he had only initially theorised on the existence of the Id and Ego), which dictated that the mind is separated into three parts: The Id, the Ego and the Super Ego. These three sections he theorised operated as follows:

The Id - This was believed to be the unconscious desires. These would be the innermost primal, violent, sexual predilections, the central part of a man's soul that can not be directly contacted through normal means and constantly hungering for more. Supposedly through hypnosis Freud could draw this part out to attempt to gain greater insight to the patient's mind. However, it supposedly can not be reasoned with and it must simply be put to a more efficient and creative use or suppressed in some manner, though the latter was highly advised against as the consequences could be disastrous.

The Ego - This is the concious and logical, reasonable section of the mind, designed to regulate between the Id, Super Ego and outside world and supposedly the weakest of the three sections because of this fact, constantly under attack from the demands of all three and attempting to find a reasonable middle-ground between them all. Freud suggested that through his techniques he could help strengthen the resolve of the Ego so as to prevent a mental breakdown through the Ego failing.

The Super Ego - Believed to only come into existence subsequent to a person's formative years when they have become aware of the outside world and society's specific ideals, feeding off of these influences and twisting them so that they become less necessary regulations and beliefs and more demanding, impossible requirements that the Super-Ego imposes on your mind. Typically this is characterised as a form of policeman within the mind, ordering everything rigidly.

This theory was not new, hailing back to the time of Plato. However, the exact manifestations and arguments put forth on the matter differ dramatically. Plato theorised that it was the Rational side of the soul which controlled the mind, acting as a charioteer controlling the horses of the Spirited and Appetitive sides. Freud however believed that ultimately the Ego was more holding on for dear life, attempting to reign in wild stallions which could only be calmed for a time before the chariot would break.

The issue with this theory is that there is no determinate way of defining the existence of the Id in such a precise and clear-cut manner. Theorising on its existence is all very well, but to attempt to pin it down as anything tangible as Freud was suggesting was possible through his techniques does not seem logically plausible.

That said, this theory has been the influence for a great many works, particularly outstanding being those of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, in which the Ego and Id are physically represented in the titular characters and the Super-Ego in the investigators and L'age D'Or, in which the main male character appears to be the ultimate representation of everything which supposedly comprises the Id, being sexually ravenous and monstrously violent to all who are either perceived to or definitively do get in his way. It can be argued that the film is entirely devoid of a representation of the Ego, being purely of the extremes between the Id and Super Ego and the effects if the Ego were to completely deteriorate into nothingness.

However, at odds with his theory of the extremes being primarily in control was Wilhelm Reich, who believed in a more layered, less disparate soul, still in a tripartite form, but more inter-connected as opposed to being independent of each other; his belief was that on the surface everyone is reasonable and well-mannered, acting in a logical fashion; the second layer he believed to be the cruel, callous, selfish, irrational side of a human; however the third layer, at the very core, he believed all humans to be inherently good and decent, and that their innermost love superseded the violent nature.

In both cases these theories simultaneously have logic to them and could be laughed out of any medical council for being insane and nonsensical. The primary issue is finding a way to bridge the gap between what is logically definable and what is simply speculation on the composition of the psyche.

The theories of Freud's which do not really hold any water are theories such as penis envy, which had no logical explanation and seemed to simply be based in having had a little too much cocaine on a particular day and projecting his own acquired insecurities onto women. Furthermore his idea of the Oedipus Complex feels like a somewhat tacked on belief as it was suggested that it was a symptom typically only found in infants, whose perceptions of the world can not possibly extend past that of their parents and thus have no comprehension of any instinctual habits past personal, physical survival.

However, another theory of his which has wormed its way into society today and appears to hold a modicum of truth to it is the "Freudian Slip". This theory is that you may slip up on a word or sentence and reveal your true feelings or desires. For example, instead of saying "The moon is big tonight" you slip up and say "Your breasts are big tonight". However sometimes the slip can just be a slip, which coined the phrase "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar".

Ultimately you must take from Freud's teachings what you personally feel ring true. Some may believe that the Oedipus Complex is correct and the tripartite soul is complete rubbish. It is all down to the reader's/listener's discretion.

Modernism and Citizen Kane

Modernism, having primarily started in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (though the philosophies it was based in are widely regarded as having begun and ended between the 17th and 20th centuries), is a broadly nuanced and heavily reactionary movement. It can in some ways be seen as the result of the disenfranchisement with and dissolution of the Romanticist ideals for far more pragmatic and realistic beliefs. For example, the flowery and idealistic imagery and language of Byron and Shelley's poetry had fallen out of favour and a more functional, direct, matter-of-fact approach became the preferred direction for a great many, being pioneered by poets such as Ezra Pound and T.S. Elliot, whose production, together with other like-minded poets, of the imagist manifesto in 1912, established an entirely new era of straitforward, unobtuse poetry.

Of course to discuss modernism and where many of the ideals of modernism derive from it is necessary to look at some of the psychanalytical theories being presented at the time, chiefly by psychologists such as Sigmund Freud, who posited that all human endeavour is in some way linked to the self in primal, animalistic manners, so that the most complex and efforted works to the most simplistic, through to the completely convoluted and seemingly unlinked, could in some way be linked to primal, sexual desires and vies for dominance according to Freud. This can easily be seen as holding strength within the context of the time when you observe classical pieces such as The Rites of Spring by Stravinsky and Prokofiev's Dance of the Knights, both of which conjure up the images of powerful, empassioned, primal men and women, brutal and savage beasts vying for dominance. Visions of chaotic, driven, mad monsters, both overt and insidious filter through the mind.

It can be argued that both the writing and the music which evolved during this period developed out of a wish to become both something more and something less than what had come before. It developed out of the desire to be far more clear-cut and pure, without hiding behind metaphor, simile and hyperbole. This is outlined in the Imagist Manifesto, in which the authors specifically state that they wish for pieces "To use the language of common speech, but to employ always the exact word, not the nearly-exact, nor the merely decorative word". It can also be said that the movement developed from a desire to reconstruct and to some extent revitalise classical works into a far more accessible medium. Pieces such as Wagner's Der Ring des Nibelungen and James Joyce's Ulysses were reworkings of ancient Norse and Greek mythologies respectively, thus presenting them to the more common audience of the time (These pieces now holding high regard primarily within the upper classes).

The journalistic style of the time was typified by a far more vicious and cut-throat manner, further supporting Freud's theories of the self and desires for social and sexual dominance. It also plays into the ideals of a much more functional and subversive mindset in much of the modern world. Figures such as Alfred Harmsworth, aka Lord Northcliffe and William Randolph Hearst, who were the primary influences for the 1941 film Citizen Kane, were, for the most part, self-made business moguls, achieving heights of success through sheer tenacity and a desire for dominance within the publishing world. Political hunger and megalomania, along with conflicting, self-contradictory viewpoints displayed them as voracious men with the ability to manipulate their circumstances to suit their needs. William Randolph Hearst himself was a devilishly efficient publisher and reporter, prioritising within his own paper the fact that the systematic extermination of the Jews in Europe was happening, whereas all other newspapers attempted to downplay the news of the Holocaust. Both displayed a desire for power and glory, Hearst having been elected as the New York Democrat member of the House of Representatives between 1903 and 1907 and having vied for the positions of Mayor in both 1905 and 1909 and Governor in 1906. Alfred Harmsworth ascended from Lord to Baronet in 1904 and only a year later elevated to Baron, then in 1916, most likely as a consequence of his political influence through his exposure of the weakness in Prime Minister Herbert Henry Asquith's government and role in bringing David Lloyd George to power he was appointed Director for Propoganda, his anti-German publications being so powerful that a warship was sent to bomb his Elmwood country home in an attempt to assassinate him. Two years later he was made Viscount of St Peter's in the County of Kent. His and Hearst's levels of success, combined with their general attitudes, were the primary contributors towards the character of Citizen Kane, particularly aspects such as Hearst's long-lived affair with Marion Davies, his quests for power and glory, his pushes for a war between America and Spain (This particular part being mirrored almost completely within the film down to the line "You provide the prose poems, I'll provide the war", reflecting Hearst's "You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war), and his construction of a palacial mansion.

To actually examine Citizen Kane you need to analyse it in three different ways; cinematographically, psychologically and how it has been constructed through the derivation from various sources.

As a piece of cinema it has both its successes and its failures. It is effective at constructing a story through multiple source materials, every shot appears to have a purpose and there is no breakdown in coherency or contradictory information. That said certain scenes feel as though they last too long and outstay their welcome. Furthermore, the ending reveal of Rosebud being the name of the sled, although arguable as a misdirection for the audience, also feels as though Welles is saying that the audience is not intelligent enough to purely speculate on their own as to what Rosebud could truly be. From a directorial standpoint, I would have had it end on the journalists suggesting that Rosebud was something he had lost long ago and could never regain, and be done with that.

From a psychoanalytical standpoint, the character of Kane is very intriguing, his mind appearing to have been twisted from a very early point to firstly a man obsessed with success to any cost, feigning ideals which he would later disregard because to maintain them would mean the sacrifice of all that he was working towards and secondly a being that feeds upon love and yet can not reciprocate. All of this could logically be reasoned as being a consequence of his being taken from his parents against his will, thus meaning that he developed a far more hungry, yearning attitude, needing love and affirmation from all possible sources.

Kane's twisting of his own principles, as well as his complete disregard for them, can be viewed as, from a psychological standpoint, being the result of his hunger for success over-taking him and being incapable of recognising such a failing. . You could summarise it as that he is Charles Foster Kane and he will be granted every success he aims for, no matter how high the cost.

Throughout the film Kane almost constantly displays a methodical, thought out personality, but this can be seen to de-evolve when Susan Alexander leaves him and he tears apart their bedroom in a fit of primal, savage, unfettered rage. Through this scene it is being made clear to the audience that failure has become too great an enemy for his mind to take rationally.

His use of Rosebud as his dying word can be seen as a significant in that Rosebud signifies the point where not only did everything for him change, but also lost a life in which he knew both how to love and had unconditional love. Rosebud can be seen as signifying an instantaneous rise and fall of the emotional side of Kane.

As a collective representation of several real life source materials, particularly Hearst and Northcliffe, it is effective in combining the sources into a believable character whose sums do not contradict the intentions of the film itself; the character at times may contradict himself, but this is to affect and impress upon the audience that he is not above going against his previous statements. It is a powerful and effective legion of important figures used to outline that regardless of the level of power a man possesses, they can still have an unseemly and ignoble end.

It is interesting to note that Orson Welles himself appeared to follow a very similar path to Kane. He became self-destructive, lost his looks, aside from weight his image almost mirrored Kane's. It is rather strange how self-prophetic for Welles the film was.

A Century On and Still No Change

So earlier today an American congretional committee finally agreed to push for the Obama administration to recognise the 1915 Armenian Genocide, committed by the Ottoman Empire, in which 1.5 MILLION Armenians were murdered and there was a definitive concerted effort to exterminate the Armenians. Now, this has been pushed for for at least 20 years, so it is refreshing to finally see some progress. However, what is quite disheartening is that there are still people within the government who claim that it would be counter-productive to recognise the genocide, arguing that it is not in their interests and it is not the way to peace, clearly ignorant to the facts: Primarily that, to paraphrase the Iranian satirist Shappi Khorsandi, within Turkey there is freedom of speech, however no freedom after you have spoken. Turkey has a policy of arresting, trying and imprisoning any who speak out against the government.

Clearly regardless of the time period it is money that overrides all. America trades with Turkey, people have holidays in Turkey, so on and so forth. It is only counter-productive to those who stand more to gain by keeping the genocide unrecognised (Thatcher, Major, Blair, Bush Senior and Bush Junior I'm looking at all of you).

Furthermore, despite having supposedly been a republic for 87 years, Turkey insists on denying the Armenian genocide, going to such lengths as on certain editions of promotional DVDs for Turkey, there would be full chapters denying the genocide (See the System of a Down produced documentary "Screamers" for further details). Therefore they are intentionally displaying themselves as effectively congratulating the former Empire for committing the mass murder of 1.5 million innocent civilians.

And as a little footnote of history, a quote from Hitler regarding the Master Plan: "And anyway, who remembers the Armenian Genocide of 1915?"

Just to finish: it truly shows the inability in human nature to progress if the government which has supposedly been a republic for the past 87 years can not recognise its failings from almost 100 years ago. And to link to the ideas of Hegel and the belief that we are constantly progressing and developing, this, as well as many other, similar circumstances prove that although there may be steady "progress" in western countries, socially, ideologically, even chemically, there is stagnation, even de-evolution, within Eastern countries. Not even outside of Europe. Hegel's belief that we will constantly progress towards paradise is a much vaunted and far too optimistic view of the world. Soon enough we will be wallowing in the pits of despair and de-evolution if we do not start to open our eyes to what is becoming of this world.

Edit for 5/3/2010: Hilary Clinton is pushing to block the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. I am shocked that anyone would be so invested in preventing the revelation of the truth. It is truth, regardless of your beliefs. There are survivors of the genocide and they can attest to the atrocities committed. Truly nothing has changed

1984 Exists!

With the existence of the internet , as well as proposals of means by which to monitor innocent adults (keeping their dna database indefinitely), suggested microphones planted in lamp posts, the mangling of words to simultaneously simplify and complicate language, the "Special Relationship with America and Britain supposedly being the most monitored of all European countries, George Orwell's nightmare future is feeling ever more realistic.

The internet itself is a major culprit for misdirection and misinformation, and thus historical re-writing. One error in an article can cause every subsequent article to contain this error. And just like Chinese whispers, the error filters through and causes the entirety of the source to be mangled. A prominent perpetuator of this crime is Wikipedia, which I frequently visit and edit. The errors can be minimal such as spelling errors, to completely mis-informing the reader. A case in point is the articles on System of a Down and Serj Tankian, in which it typically suggests that the band has either seperated or Tankian has left the band, despite the fact that there are several interviews in which he specifically states that the band are purely on hiatus. Although this is a minor example in the grand scheme of things, it is still an example of the readers being misinformed. This is not a new symptom of the world, but the rise of the internet has seen it become far more violently virulent, far more than schools, text books, radio or tv could ever manage.

Onto the monitoring; Today Labour were stating that they wished for a dna database on all adults, innocent or guilty of any crimes, should be kept for a minimum of six years, their argument being that this would reduce the risk of offending or reoffending. Alone this seems simply unnerving, but coupled with the fact that had they not been reprimanded by the Human Rights Office they would have wished for the database to be kept indefinitely, it could be considered downright despotic. The fact of the matter is that regardless of whether Labour or Conservative, the party wishes for the database to exist, some Conservatives saying that they wish to adopt the Scottish system in which a database must be destroyed immediately if there is no arrest or conviction. Interestingly enough it was pointed out that we are already placed on various other databases when we sign for things such as credit/debit cards, driver's liscence, etc, thus further proving we are constantly being watched. Most importantly with this whole matter is the fact that there is the risk that innocent people will be convicted purely because of either similarities in the dna between they and someone else, or their dna being in the same location as the one guilty. Further information and views on the matter will be forthcoming.

Although an old matter it is worrying. 5 years ago a scheme in Central London, Soho was being piloted, in which sound levels were being measured by having microphones fitted in lamp posts. This was done to monitor noisy areas such as loud neighbours or night clubs, sending the information back to a council control room via a wireless connection. Although not sophisticated enough to pick up every word, they appeared still capable of picking up enough sound to give Soho residents call for concern. Although not one for fear-mongering, it does seem slightly worrying that it's believed there is a necessity for such equipment.

Language itself seems to mirror the Orwellian future, although not in its form, certainly in its frequency. A very common and incredibly grating example is the phrase "well good/bad". It raises the important question of why people are not educated enough to actually use the rich and varied language we have. More importantly it makes the idea of words dying out ever more real, Oxford Dictionary deeming it necessary to delete words no longer typically used. This effectively reflects the destruction and simplification of words within the 1984 dystopia.

When reading 1984, it is clear that Britain has been taken over, both by Communism and America. It is quite easy to argue that Britain, through the "Special Relationship" has become ever more submissive and subservient to America, as well as dominated by it, littered with 1950's America-style burger bars, fast food chains and American merchandise, and increasingly traditional British companies becoming owned by America (Cadbury's alone recently being in ownership talks with both Kraft and Hershey's). We are effectively becoming the 51st state, or alternatively part of the United States Empire.

To return to the previous matters of microphones and dna databases, cctv was the beginning of our being monitored so heavily. It is somewhat frightening that the government is believing that it is necessary for them to do this. I would honestly be unsurprised to see the government begin to call themselves the Party and to declare their leader Big Brother. It is plausible and conceivable to imagine them, as the residents of Soho feared, developing the monitoring technology so that cctv would have more sophisticated microphones attached to them to better invade the privacy of the general public.

In all honesty, when reviewing matters, it is only a matter of time before Britain becomes Airstrip 1, though with a different name most likely and we are at war with the world and his wife. The public are too stupid and apathetic to sustain the necessary revolution to avoid this fate so we might as well just despair for the future and pray for quick death.