Monday 30 August 2010

A little follow-up

As a sequel to my piece on lies, damned lies and statistics, I am indebted to a good friend for pointing out that statistically, 5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette.

Dum Spiro Spero

Friday 27 August 2010

Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics

When  Lord Beaconsfield (Benjamin Disraeli to you and me!) uttered the quote in the title of this piece, he was expressing a cynicism rare for his time. At a time of great polarity ( maybe even bipolarity? ) in British politics, it was still widely accepted that reported facts were true. In those halcyon days before spin-doctors and lobbyists, protagonists may have disagreed as violently as today, but by and large the facts were agreed on.

In the current growth/recession/double-dip debate the extent to which the truth is the victim is being shown up more and more daily. In one of Terry Pratchett's books he defines the smallest measurable unit of time as the interval between a new York traffic light turning green and the taxi behind hooting. That has now changed - the smallest recorded interval now is the gap between a major piece of economic news and the first comment starting with the word "but".

I would not want to understate the complexity of modern economic systems and, equally, I see the Law of Unintended Consequences everywhere - far more the Adam Smith's dead hand. However (see - I am trying not to use the "b" word!), it seems that bedlam breaks out at every new set of numbers.  So often the debate seems more like the wonderfully named Diet of Worms - where Mediaeval Bishops debated how many angels could dance on the head of a pin - than an attempt at rational interpretation.

In the last week we have had a slew of numbers showing that the US is growing much more slowly than previously thought, that Germany was growing far more quickly and even this morning that the UK was growing a little more quickly than expected. Overall therefore we are being told that the huge economic stimulus packages of the last 18 months have kept the system alive but that things are tough still - errrrrrrrrr in what way is that news???? The deluge of Bear Porn that hits every figure, both good and bad is now getting positively silly and, as I have said before, I fail to see the point of the glee. Do the writers think that their foresighted rantings will get them a better cave, a warmer animal skin to wear and two square meals a week against one for the rest of us in their post-apocalyptic society? Unfortunately for them, those of us with family, financial obligations and social consciences will be trying (and most of the several billion people on the planet are in this category) to better things - not always with success, but at least trying. On a corporate level the same arguments will apply. Oh dear - the Lorry may be bearing down on us, but the doomsters seem not to have thought that we will simply get out of the way!

Give me facts as news and segregate the comment - from the BBC to Fox (and that is one hell of a jump) the journalists seem keener to get to their interpretation and pointless vox pop pieces  than to detail the facts.

Dum Spiro Spero

Wednesday 25 August 2010

Am I stating the bloody obvious?

Until recently (1986 in the UK with "Big Bang" and 1999 in the USA) there was a clear division, established by custom, practice and law in both these major financial centres that Investment Banking (what was really mainly stockbroking at that point) and Commercial Banking were kept strictly apart and an instiution had to be one thing or the other.

Of course the Commercial Banks were engaged in some levels of proprietary trading, but overall they took the view that their balance sheets were full of depositors' money and that anything more aggressive than that would be inappropriate. The main exceptions, as ever, were mainly in the US where these restriction - that had been imposed by the Glass-Seagall act in 1933 to curb speculation by Banks after the Wall Street Crash - were resented, particularly as it was seen that London was becoming a far stronger financial centre after deregulation.

At this point it might be good idea to address the abuse and calumny to which "bankers" are often treated these days. More often than not such abuse is based on ignorance (particularly on the part of journalists) or blatant misrepresentation (politicians - especially Vince Cable, who I otherwise respect).

The whole sub-prime and CDO debacle that triggered the banking crash - and here I believe the abuse is at least partly deserved - was the product of a global game of pass the parcel where the parcel was never to be unwrapped, indeed was to be ever more packaged and whose players, with a very few exceptions ( isn't that right Mr. Paulson? ) were in blissful ignorance of the realities of the game. The problem was that the capital required was truly vast and, being in turn geared (leveraged for the hard of thinking) multiply, was never properly accounted for in terms of risk. The "what-ifs" were never cautious enough.

So the boys in the "Casino Bank Departments" were making greater and greater demands on the capital of their parent establishments. What was the point of all the breast-beating after Leeson and Barings? A simple "follow the money" approach was needed there and history was repeating itself in a very obvious way. However, all this was happening at a time of perceived boom in the real economies - low interest rates, rising equity markets and (at a consumer level) seemingly endless rises in property prices. The "Good Bank" departments had the stuff coming out of their ears and couldn't work out what to do with it all. When the people on the first floor, whose activities they really didn't understand (or when they got a glimpse of understanding were too frightened to examine more closely) asked for more capital they got it and the two questions that were never asked were "why?" - to ensure it was not disappearing or over-exposing them and, perhaps most importantly "is this what we should be doing with depositors' funds" to answer the ethical questions. I have not mentioned shareholders' funds because they were the ones I believe were deceived in the matter of answering a simple question - "am I investing in a deposit-taking institution or an investment bank?".

So, to revert to the title - what I think is the bloody obvious -let us bring back the segregation to a  great extent. Deposit takers will be boring and safe and you can put your money in those shares - or you can go into an Investment Bank and get on the thrill-a-minute ride and all that entails, In the words of a certain famous mammal - Simples!!

Two side-effects of this would be a more honest rating of the risk-premium to be attached to financing Investment Banking, rather than just going to Daddy Bigbank for some of his surplus, and the second, I predict, would be a move back to a partnership or at least boutique approach.

On a personal level, I am happy with Investment Banks - all of the people I have ever worked with in this area (OK - I could name one or two exceptions - but won't) were above-average people, sometimes startlingly so, in terms of intelligence, integrity and work ethic. I just think the honest labelling is missing and required.

I want to see the sign above the door saying "Bank" or "Investment Bank"(Casino if you are still feeling bitter!!) - and know my risk profile as a depositor or investor.

Dum Spiro Spero.

Tuesday 24 August 2010

Next week's Lottery Numbers and where Stock Markets are going.

I have been involved in the wonderful world of Investment for 36 years now - and I would like, for the sake of posterity, if for no other reason, to share those things that I know with total certainty..............................................................

OK, I hope you all got that? If not, I have arranged with the Almighty  to have it repeated on every scrap of blank paper in the world.

From this the more perspicacious among you may have worked out that this post is, at least in part, an attack on the "Guru syndrome" that pervades much of the investment community.

Every day my inbox is flooded with utter garbage from the soothsayers, shamans and self-aggrandising morons who are, unfortunately, what the investing public see when they first try to tiptoe through the minefield that is money. The worst by far are the bulletin board fora that exist most of the time as a soapbox for those with an axe to grind with varying degrees of skill at disguising the fact. The companies that host these fora or "news services" also seem to have an advanced form of colllective amnesia at best - or possibly a cynical disregard for the realities. One such company has been sending me daily emails for some years now telling me the world as we know it is about to end or, alternatively, that I have to rush out, sell my children and put my entire wealth into a company in the wilds of Crapistan that has located, deep underground, a limitless supply of fossilised paleolithic mongoose droppings that will solve the world's energy crisis overnight and make me rich beyond my dreams of avarice - something I find particularly insulting as my dreams of avarice are pretty wild, let me assure you!!! To add (even more) insult to injury such articles tend to be interchangeable according to whether or not the FTSE went up or down 20 points the week before.

Yea verily I say unto you - the works of Murdoch and his ilk are now an intrinsic part of our society. Red-top journalistic language is the only valid language that seems now to be acceptable.Markets do not go up or down an amount that they usually do - they "soar on news" or "market woes" are at work. Reporting the news and allowing a little comment is a rare thing - the cult of the odious (but not stupid) Peston and his fractured robotic english is typical. The thing the wannabe Peston clones have in common though is the "Cassandra Complex" - the need to see an obvious conclusion nobody else has reached. It is not enough to observe that certain conditions have led, without exception, to growth or contraction over recorded history - there has to be a "but" that only the writer can see. Through the looking-glass of such writers boom and bust await out of sight just around the corner, ready to devour us all or (more rarely) to create the new Utopia.

My ire is particularly reserved for the doomsayers. Despite the wonderful phrase that "economists have predicted twenty of the last two recessions", there is  a very valuable role to be played by those that point up the pitfalls that might befall us, but only if they equally weight the actuality of what is happening. Almost every day I see an article starting with a headline such as "The UK is bankrupt" which goes on to describe what would happen if a certain set of circumstances were to simultaneously befall us. No thought is given to the fact that whatever scenario is described has never yet happened and that such circumstances would mobilise the full system to counter it - Oh No!! It is rather the mindset of the rubber-necker at the site of the accident who can't wait to see the blood and guts. There is something darkly wrong with those that want to see the suffering (including very tangible suffering) that such events would bring. It is the almost audible rubbing of hands with glee that angers me.

The issue of journalistic responsibility is also one that perhaps should be addressed. During the whole Banking Crisis we were treated to only just post-pubescent "reporters" that had managed to get out of the hair salon for long enough (OK - personal issue here as more comes out every time I brush mine!!) to report. The scene of BBC reporters "lining up" the queues outside Northern Rock's branch in Kingston-upon-Thames that I saw with my own eyes, together with camera crews lounging in the cafe opposite until the crowd looked newsworthy is one that makes me very reluctant to buy my TV license.

In order not to be a total hypocrite, it behoves me to offer a positive contribution. A huge amount of analysis is produced every day - most good, some bad and quite a lot excellent. Statistics bombard us from all sides - most of which are accurate and timely (although I am always amused by the american habit of trying to look for the "hidden meaning" in almost anything - it is almost usual for their market to react in a contrary fashion when figures are released). Fund managers are often attacked for doing little original and charging like wounded rhinos for the privilege - despite being constrained in a way similar to the medical doctrine of "first do no harm". Hippocrates or hypocrite?

My own favoured area is derivatives. While not being as complex as often described, unquestionably this is not an area for the faint-hearted. Many of my colleagues use complex models to predict current values - there is relatively little sooth-saying around. Such people are usually referred to as "quants" - although I have heard them often described by a word that sounds remarkably similar! One quant model I follow sees the fair value for FTSE at 5700 by the end of this year - a model based on a number of relatively easy-to-predict factors such as risk premia, dividend yield, interest rates and government bond levels among many others. Where it gets interesting is when the iterations that lead to a result are allowed to expand - i.e. look at all the worst and best scenarios. That makes a slightly less comfortable range of 4400 - 6300. Do you see the link with my comments above? - look at the negatives only and yes there is a case to be made for living in caves, look at the best alone and you might as well jump the waiting list and order the Ferrari now.

Reality (sorry to introduce such a dull concept) dictates however that we work (as individuals and collectively) to avoid the worst (sorry - we are not going to stage a massive accident just so you can pretend to be shocked while getting your frisson) and there are always those that are less fortunate and miss the very best. The concept of "mean reversion" which can be roughly translated as "business as usual" is a powerful one. One of my tutors in Quantum Mechanics at Oxford (i.e. a VERY clever man) used to enjoy calculating the probability of all the oxygen molecules in the room spontaneously shooting up to the corner of a room. It is a statistical possibility, but no need for the oxygen mask yet! Black Swans may be popular - but will never be seen on most duck ponds.

So - the Lottery numbers will be in the range 1 to 42 and the world markets will probably go sideways to gently up with a possibility of sharp falls. Government Bond yields will continue at derisory levels and Corporate Bond yields will continue to reflect the underlying credit risk.

Helpful? Though not - but to quote the X-files, The Truth Is Out There.

Now would anyone like to buy some snake oil before the Dow hits single figures??

Dum Spiro Spero

Monday 23 August 2010

Is there anything new under the sun?

The great "joke" in the financial world is the way in which we all seem doomed never to learn from previous mistakes (or more rarely triumphs). The refrain is "but it is different this time" - but it hardly ever is.

Many thanks for this quote, shamelessly stolen from a wonderful man who shares my interest in working for those with Multiple Sclerosis, but who does so much more than I or many others.

The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled,
public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be
tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be
curtailed lest we become bankrupt.

People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.


You would be forgiven for thinking it was Vince Cable c.2010, but it was Cicero in 55 B.C.

Dum Spiro Spero

Saturday 21 August 2010

BP, Bhopal, Bahaving honourably and being American

Of all the many things I fail to fully understand, high on the list is the confusing observation that the many US citizens I know (and those I am proud to call friends) seem to be an entirely different species to those prepared to launch into hysterical behaviour at the drop of a hat (such as the ill-informed hysteria about the Islamic centre in New York) and those that accept the shamelessly duplicitous and unapologetically hypocritical actions of their government. Please note, I am most certainly not holding up any European governement as a shining beacon of integrity, but I believe we are not told black is white so openly by our governments as US citizens are. (Actually I suppose all mentions of black and white are now no longer politically correct in the Obama White House.??). I don't understand how this could have happened - how long before those wonderful folks that gave you waterboarding and Guantanamo Bay are ousted by their own people? I fear that this is our only chance as, in the way I alluded to above, the collective ability to close ranks in that middle bit of North America is astonishing. To be branded as "anti-american" is the worst they can do - but they apparently fell that is a great punishment.

Am I Anti-American? -  most certainly not, but I do find it sad that a country founded in liberty is now a pariah state in most of the world. The White House is trusted as much as the "Dear Leader" from North Korea. The only reason this is not broadcast more is because of political expediency - or to put it another way, they have a bigger stick than us and recent history tells us they use it fairly indiscriminately. What is saddest of all is that most Americans do not realise the way they are regarded.

Two relevant aphorisms are firstly that "Power Corrupts, Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely" and "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel". With regard to the first one, history is seemingly dealing with that for us. The EU now has a bigger GDP that the United States and within 7 years so will China. With the US on track to be the Number Three economic power, one can only hope they will revert to what I hope is their true type.

Why do I lead off on this path? I do so because of the horrific treatment meted out to BP by the lame ducks quacking around behind Obama. Despite the Gulf Oil crisis being caused by a US rig, owned and operated by US companies and almost entirely under the control of US  legislation, the rapacious, mendacious and totally integrity-voided "system" swung into action to find someone to blame and if possibly sue. The same ambulance-chasing legal system laughed at thoughout much of the world had their collective little faces light up with joy when BP stepped up and admitted their element of responsibility from the very start.

BP - That is the name of the company, live with it!!! It has not been called British Petroleum for many years and quite rightly so. Since it bought Amoco, the company has been roughly 30% US operated and has around 40% of its shares owned in the US. Unfortunately Obama saw a way to swing attention away from his own manifold failures and decided it was British Petroleum who were to blame. Can we tell a lie and get away with it? All together now "Yes we can!!". It was regarded as a public relations failure when the Chairman and Chief Executive stood up and said they would make good any damage. Oh no - not the American way! That would require an identical silver-haired avuncular figure making a lengthy speech without phrases like "our fault" and "we will make good damage". Never before have I seen such totally one-sided and dishonest behaviour from an allegedly friendly government. The gloves seemed to be slipped off at last and the truth told. "This is just about making money - nothing else matters".

As the dust settles - a little reflection is in order. The total spill is (if the Gulf were a closed system and it is not - it washes through from the Atlantic) equivalent to a half a teaspoon of oil in a full Olympic-sizes swimming pool. All the other spill problems - The Torrey Canyon, The Amoco Cadiz and the Exxon Valdiz come to mind - were "ecological disasters" that Mother Nature quietly dealt with in weeks if not months. The main pollution to be found in 12 months is more likely to be from the shrill voices of shyster lawyers than tar balls.

As for doing the right thing - I note in today's press that the compensation claims include one for $4000 for a Florida florist twenty miles from the sea on the grounds that "Some of my clients used to get married on the beach and that business has been hit by all the oil". Bad enough in isolation, but the thing that upset me most was the way that at the same time, indeed the very same few days, corrupt US politicians were trying to get their snouts in the BP trough and the same people were trying to weasel out of reponsibility for the Bhopal tragedy - with over HALF A MILLION people injured and many, many thousands killed.

From today's Times:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/asia/article2693184...

A senior White House official has warned India that it risks damaging its investment relationship with the United States if it seeks justice from the American company behind the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy in which many thousands died. Michael Froman, President Obama’s deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, told an Indian counterpart in an e-mail: “We are hearing a lot of noise about the Dow Chemical issue. I trust that you are monitoring it carefully.”


http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/asia/article2694291...


The e-mail written by Michael Froman makes for galling reading. An Indian official had asked for US backing to ensure that India could have access to World Bank loans. Mr Froman, a close friend of Mr Obama who is regarded as one of the most powerful behind-the-scenes technocrats in Washington, promised to look into the issue. He then sought assurances that India was monitoring pressure groups calling for the American commercial interests behind the Bhopal tragedy of 1984 to face fresh legal proceedings. The implication was that India needed to quash such initiatives if it wanted US help.

The e-mail was written last month as the White House was berating BP for its role in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. The victims of Bhopal, as many as half a million, say that America has not applied the same levels of accountability to Dow Chemical.

As one writer put it -."Put bluntly, the message from the White House seems to be that the lives of Indians are not as valuable as the livelihoods of US fishermen."


There is something very. very rotten in the state of US politics - and especially with regard to its relationship with business. You have lost a lot of friends in the last few years and are losing more fast. To play the playground bully is unworthy.

I still admire the US enormously - but how long can anyone justify this?

Dum Spiro Spero

Friday 20 August 2010

Investing into uncertainty - Black Swans and Lame Ducks

Let me start with the obvious - Investing has never been more difficult or more important. I hear and read a lot on the subject and polarisation between the doomsters and the optimists is stronger today than I have ever known it to be in the past. Time to try and take out my torch and shine it in a few dark corners,

After the meltdowns of the 2008/9 period, a lot of people have been left shocked, confused and a lot poorer. The unsinkable certainties of yesteryear, the Banks, were the ones that perhaps did most damage, but even now the shocks are coming thick and fast. The disgraceful behaviour of Obama over BP did almost as much damage to that fine company as it did to the remnants of his own etiolated reputation. The feeling I picked up from all around me was that the question being asked was "is anything safe?". Savings rates and Government Bonds yielding lower than rates of inflation say it all. The first and almost the only consideration for many is the safety of their capital. Only after that fear begins to wane as a prime motivation can wealth begin to seek out future opportunities.

The Great Divide is Deflation versus Inflation. The Deflationists would point to 20 years of deflation in Japan as that nation retrenched from a Banking/Property/Shares bubble and ploughed its still mighty surplus into savings at rates far below 0.5%. With all that money going in to savings, less and less was spent on consumption, investment in buildings, plant or machinery and a general stasis was reached. I have often felt that the Japanese adopted the "Sleeping Beauty" model - sleeping for a thousand years until awakened by a kiss of economic stimulation from the rest of the world. Well the 90's saw that kiss and Sleeping Beauty failed to wake, not having the confidence to do so despite having more than enough money. This is the possible downside of economic austerity - that by cutting spending and shrinking an economy it implodes in a deflationary spiral. As yet the need to cut back (and here I am talking about most of the G20) on profligate behaviour and to get both personal and public finances on a sound footing almost certainly outweighs the deflationary risk and we have a long way to go before this and the famous "double dip" scenario it is associated with are a looming problem.

The other side of the Grand Canyon of Opinion is the Inflationist argument, and yet the symbiotic connection between the two side is rarely made clear. They are usually portrayed as opposing theories. Deflation has historically only ever been beaten by pumping money into a system to get things moving (a Keynesian stimulus as it is usually known). Roosevelt initiated the "New Deal" to combat the Great Depression of the 1930's and Hitler expanded public works in Germany, as did most European governments. It worked and we should not lose sight of the fact that Dr. Bernanke, Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, made his academic reputation through the study of the Great Depression. Pumping money into any system devalues it ( Google for Gresham's Law for that discussion) as the total value of cash seeking a finite number of goods and services competes. I still believe we are yet to fully pay the price for the stimulus after 9/11 by Bernanke's predecessor Alan Greenspan. The inflationist argument is that we will inflate our way out of trouble as money becomes worth less and asset prices such as investment and property seem to grow. Of this are bubbles made.

For my part, I see a clear synthesis of the two as the stimulus required to avoid the deflationist crisis is maintained at sufficient levels (but never more than that) to keep economic growth from at least not turning negative. At this point the prudent action is to take action by withdrawing stimulus, putting up interest rates and refinancing Government Bonds at a sufficient level to stop the artificial "boom" from running away. It can be argued that the failure to do this after the 9/11 stimulus was at the centre of the bubble which caused out current woes. A former Fed. Chairman - William McChesney Martin - famously described his job as "Taking away the Punchbowl just as the party got going". If only Greenspan and Bernanke had noticed people swinging from the chandeliers.

Of course a little inflation is usually concomitant with growth and is not to be feared too much. It is MUCH easier to choke off growth than stimulate it. Adam Smith's Invisible Hand is weaker and slower than it is often given credit for.

So - where do we go from here? While fear and risk-aversity are so high on the agenda it seems to me that for the short term the deflationist fears will ensure that rates are kept low and that saving rather than investing will be predominant. With property (the preferred form of investing in the UK, Ireland, Spain and the US in recent decades) likely to fall further or stagnate (except China which is more and more taking on the characteristics of creating its own bubbles) there are few safe havens - and paradoxically I see this as a reason for investing in shares.

Taking the UK domestic Share Index - the FTSE 100 - as an example, a current yield of around 4.5% (the re-introduction (?) of BP dividends obscures an accurate figure for this a little) for a "self-cleansing" index (i.e. weak companies are always leaving and stronger ones joining) means that for it to reflect similar total returns as a UK Government Bond yielding just under 3% it could reasonably be expected to be at least 50% higher than current levels. The FTSE index is also very international in make-up, thus providing an extra layer of smoothing to risk directly aimed at a domestic economy. A little Stop Press item here. As I write I see an article in the FT in which slightly more optimistic numbers than mine calculate prices should be 100% higher.
Discussions about risk premia and the Reverse Yield Gap are for another day if this seems simplistic (which I admit is partly is).

Stimulation of money supply (and also velocity of circulation - but that is another discussion altogether) are not, in my opinion, likely to be given up at any time in the near future. Lower rates and effective support for commerce are the left hand side of an equation that simply has "buy shares" on the right. I am talking about markets rather than stock-picking here and the opportunity to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory will alway be with us if the wrong portfolio is chosen. Buying an Index Tracker is not sophisticated investing - but in the case under discussion works adequately.

A final word for the Gold Bugs. Actually I would prefer the final word to be just "goodbye" - but fat chance unfortunately. Gold as an investment yields nothing and is great if we implode into savagery and revert to a Mad Max scenario - but only if you have it secreted about your person. Ignoring the more extreme survivalist ravings (if they are true, forget Gold and buy bottled water, shotgun cartridges and tinned beans - all to be kept in your bunker in the Highlands). It is a "reverse bubble" built on the same psychology as the "system" it purports to eschew. If the ordure ever did hit the air conditioning that badly what good would a few bits of paper saying you own Gold be worth?

Dum Spiro Spero

Tuesday 17 August 2010

Starbucks and implied dishonesty.

The following article was in The Daily Telegraph today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7949440/English-professor-thrown-out-of-Starbucks-after-objecting-to-corporate-language.html

It got me thinking, not only about Starbucks, but also about the sort of corporate doublespeak that we are continually exposed to. They are as good an example to dissect as any, without wanting to seem as if my spleen is being vented specifically at them.

The rise of Starbucks was at least partly due to good timing. The Cafe Culture idea was ripe for implementation in parts of the world where it was relatively new. In the U.S.A. it was to be found in a slightly louche purlieu, with implications of liberal, academic even slightly revolutionary patrons. Simultaneously the plastic and neon generic model of diners and McDonalds was losing any attraction it might once have had. The idea of a place to sit and meet, drink coffee and to do so in a "clubbable" environment was perfectly constructed and timed.

In Europe there were different considerations. Personally, I can only question the sanity of someone that would seek out a Starbucks in France, Germany, Italy, Spain or above all Austria. Here. the Cafe Culture is established almost to perfection with enough variations in the model to ensure the match is right for almost any individual. The U.K. was another matter - with a vacuum that needed to be filled as the loathsome British Cafe (pronounced KAYFE) was and is hugely overdue for a mass extinction event.

Then it got silly - Starbucks opened within sight of each other. This was not going on unobserved even in the country that spawned it - I remember an episode of The Simpsons in which Homer goes to a Shopping Centre (no I will NOT call it a Mall - that is where The Queen lives!!!!) where every shop-front is a Starbucks and when he goes to the loo, there is a branch inside the bog itself!

The implied dishonesty in the title is a subtle force. First of all is the hint of individuality and quirkiness that we are meant to take from the Starbucks environment. Very individual, very quirky and terrifyingly identical in every respect. Who could honestly say that they couldn't be led blindfold into one and identify it immediately? Then there are the poor minimum-wage immigrant kids behind the bar who are not permitted to vary from the script. This alone is a great shame as most of them could enrich the experience enormously with their colourful and fluent use of the language, albeit that the language in question is probably Albanian. I have friends who have worked hard for many years to call themselves Barristers and although I do appreciate it is meant to be jokey, the "Barista" pun still sticks in my craw. Why not "Coffee Priests"?  "Caffeine Rabbis"? "Imams of the Sacred Bean"? OK - a weak objection, but one I stand behind.

Professor Rosenthal's objections resonate with me more than usual as I always ask for a small, medium or large coffee in this or similar establishments. I am astonished that Trading Standards laws have not enforced straight english in such cases (and I am astonished it has not been made a capital offence in France).

Butter, Jam, Bagels? The thought (or rather lack of thought) process that goes into making the poor servers have to ask the questions (my understanding is that the optimum is to try to sell three other items according to staff training manuals) is just plain greedy. So here we have the perfect synthesis of a software license where you just have to tick the box to say you have read the agreement (which makes War and Peace look like a short story) and the sort of telesales rubbish that disturbs much of our days with unwanted phonecalls.

To recap then - a faux environment that is meant to say "neighbourhood coffee house", a rigidity of product and language that could easily be regarded as "take it ir leave it" - but which we are not meant to see because the kid behind the counter calls us "guys" and a plethora of  marketing tricks that insult our collective intelligences.

Reading the above, I can see how it might be regarded as somewhat OTT in the specific case of Starbucks, but this is now everywhere. We, the consuming population, are being conned to the limit of the law in so many ways and what is worse we are being conned into believing we want or enjoy it. The original newspaper article was about language and that is where I will end. We have a rich and varied mother-tongue in this country, as of course do the other beknighted countries subjected to the same sort of treatment in the Telegraph article. It is laziness (worldwide around 90% of those with some English speak "English English" rather than "American English" or a variation clsoe to) combined with a belief (which I believe to be at the core of this dishonesty) that "A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth", to quote Dr. Goebbels.

Of course Starbucks is not going to rot the fabric of civilised society, but enough companies or individuals behaving the same way will.

Dum Spiro Spero

Monday 16 August 2010

Art for Art's sake?

On Saturday I went to the Summer Exhibition at the Royal Academy. A few minor things have been gently gnawing at my vitals ever since and, as ever, it has taken a few days to grok (look up Robert Heinlein if this word is alien to you) the experience in totality.

Firstly I want to make it clear that this is not a "what is Art?" rant. Art is what you want it to be and must be prima facie subjective. You will, I am sure, not be too surprised to learn the next word is but...

I was left breathless by the room of architectural models. Those in ivory-coloured plastic, made by the laser-guided deposition of powder and fused into a solid in particular. The delicacy and beauty was inherent in the small scale - and since that was beyond human skill, were the computers running the lasers or the programmers the artists just as much as those originally conceiving the structures?

Outside the models, I found myself confronting many of the old dichotomies. Did a single line in purple paint convey a female leg better than the work of days to portray the same thing? Did a single shocking daub (and some did shock - both for the right and wrong reasons) have the same merit as a more intensive construct? Do I even have the right to use the word merit?

Inevitably I found myself thinking that at least some of the emperors had new clothes and that others were naked. Is that reactionary? Should I care?

A few pieces construed beauty in art from beauty in nature. There is another whole new question (or many questions perhaps?). Is Hockney's photographic print of a tree any the less art because it is of something intrinsically beautiful? To put it another way - does a portrayal of a butterfly have more merit because it's subject is in some way "better" than, say a portrayal of a decomposing animal? I am forced to think of Rodin and the ugliness built in at a superficial level to his sculpture and yet I am moved to tears by his "Caryatid fallen under her stone" precisely because of the suffering, humiliation and pain it projects so effortlessly.

Oh dear! I have to close on the words of that great sage, Alf Garnett.  I don't know if it is Art, but I know what I like.

Dum Spiro Spero

Friday 13 August 2010

Gundogs, Songs and Perfect Blogging

A few observations on life, or more accurately the way circumstances can change one's view on it.

A grey morning, somewhat colder than usual whilst still short-sleeve weather. A little overnight rain still on the long grass which seems almost overnight to have tender green shoots sprouting from the ground. Even the yellow straw that was the lawn 72 hours ago is now close to being an overall green. All this so very different from last week, with cerulean blue skies, a skylark high overhead and an insane Springer snuffling in the long grass.

Last week was "hippy weather" - just accept and enjoy the feeling. Easy to see how the hippy movement came from California as much as from anywhere else. This week is (so far) "philosphers weather" - I would find myself 10 minutes on in the dog-walking route, deep in thought and with no sense of time elapsed. To my embarrassment and the eternal  shock of any fellow dog-owners, I realised I had been singing (to myself and not too loudly thank The Lord) Tallis's anthem "If ye love me" to myself. I wonder what dark recesses of my subconscious that came from? I am sure Messrs. Freud and Jung would have a field day analyzing these observations, but to the weather the mood it seems.

There can be few joys in life to compare with walking an insanely wagging Springer (or to be entirely accurate following the random direction he chooses to lead me in - it would be egregious to claim much control! ) in any weather conditions.

When I was a very young man, there were "grey days" where the feeling permeated the workplace as one saw the wet shining pavements outside. It has often been suggested I suffer from SAD to some extent. I am tempted to speculate if modern, climate-controlled boxes with little real connection to the outside world can be changing this. Could changing the lighting and environment in the office be the 21st. Century equivalent of Huxley's Soma?

Dum Spiro Spero

Thursday 12 August 2010

A personal profile

I just rediscovered this fragment of Dryden.

Funnily enough, I used this as a sort of jokey dedication to my tutor at Oxford in my first thesis (I was a chemist and he was a true renaissance man) in the 70's.

As I age, I feel it applies more and more to me.

A man so various, that he seem'd to be
Not one, but all mankind's epitome.
Stiff in opinions, always in the wrong,
Was everything by starts, and nothing long;
But in the course of one revolving moon
Was chemist, fiddler, statesman, and buffoon:
Then all for women, painting, rhyming, drinking,
Besides ten thousand freaks that died in thinking.
Blest madman, who could every hour employ
With something new to wish, or to enjoy!
Railing and praising were his usual themes,
And both, to show his judgment, in extremes:
So over violent, or over civil,
That every man with him was god or devil.
In squandering wealth was his peculiar art:
Nothing went unrewarded but desert.
Beggar'd by fools, whom still he found too late,
He had his jest, and they had his estate.



Dum Spiro Spero

Political Coalition - What is wrong with the British media? (Or is it just the British?)

Three months into a coalition government and the media are telling us what to think yet again!

When talking to others about the basic moralities that bind us together, be it as families, friends, colleagues, lovers or (to use that most inclusive of modern usages) whatever - the watchwords include tolerance, friendship and respect. In other words, the best of families or any other relationship grouping is one we regard as a coalition. Included in that word are overtones of respect, understanding, tolerance and a lack of self-interest (or at least keeping it under control).

Whatever the political divide, be it left/right, Conservative/Socialist, I am sure the basic values preached at home are those I mention in the paragraph above. I am equally sure that the tribalism that seems endemic to British society is at fault in blinding otherwise intelligent, thinking men and women for acting in the wider interest. I fail to see any other reason for ingrained voting patterns in this country.

To nail my colours to the mast - I have voted for the Labour party more often during my life than I have for any other party. Despite a brief spell as Deputy Chairman of a Constituency Conservative Party, I believe my politics to be centrist if not a touch to the left of that - what Harold MacMillan would have called a "One Nation" Tory.
Does this make me weak and vacillating? I rather hope not, I would rather choose to believe that I make my mind up on the basis of current circumstances.

Perhaps I risk digression here. The idea of a group of very different people hammering out their differences, agreeing to disagree and working out a compromise seems to me to be a major opportunity for Great Britain to extricate itself from the dystopian mess created by the previous years of excessive or possibly even mis-government. The idea of the government as servant to the people and not as a mechanism to reward its faithful is an idea whose time has returned with a vengeance.

I am puzzled that the media seem to be defending positions adopted in the mists of history and do not see the groundswell of support for a chance of a new political paradigm. I fear the answer must lie in most cases in their inability to eschew tribalism.

Although I see it as a parody of the Blair/Brown state and not a right-wing pastiche, I strongly advise you to see "V for Vendetta" - a film that failed to achieve a great deal of box-office success, but which I found very thought -provoking.

Dum Spiro Spero

Here we go!

Gentle Readers,

I suppose a first post on a Blog should contain something of importance, but for now I am happy just to introduce myself.

 Much of what I want to post about is so obvious to me ( I hate the word self-evident as it implies an insult to the perception of anyone to whom an issue is not evident ) and yet I seem to be part of a very small minority that sees abuses creeping into our daily lives.

Journalism ( especially tabloid and satellite/cable varieties ), Politics and Politicians, Economic Iniquities and the very nature of reasoned debate are among my main interests - but I reserve the right to wander off-topic from time to time to discuss the more important issues such as stamp collecting and the joys of being owned by a Springer Spaniel.

Welcome!

Yours in anticipation

Roy