And all my friends and all their jobs and all the bloody waste

[j4]

Interview yesterday at CUP (for the position of Development Editor: Humanities and Social Sciences) went okay -- I don't have high hopes for it, but it wasn't as dreadful as some other interviews I've had. And the "short test" they'd threatened turned out to be quite fun; they said "Here's the proposal for a book [it was a Political Philosophy textbook], here's the first chapter and some notes from the author; write the blurb, 200 words max." This is the sort of thing that an English degree is for, goddamnit: blatant bullshitting and spurious soundbiting. (And also alliteration, and assonance.)

Skiving off work early for the interview meant that I got home earlier than usual, so I had a while to play with Patricia before it got dark (mostly just cleaning her windows, having decided it'd be nice to be able to see out of them). I was going to clean the spark plugs but they're so tightly wedged on that I couldn't budge them. :-( Will have to get somebody stronger to do them and then NOT TIGHTEN THEM SO MUCH.

(Checked the radiator and it seemed to be more full than it had been at the weekend. Surely this can't be possible? Or does this mean something else is leaking into it somewhere?)

...

Work today has been pretty depressing on the whole. I have got some work done, but only markup, which is tedious and unrewarding and, quite frankly, the sort of thing they could probably train chimps to do. On the other hand, we did get email telling us that we'll get a 2.5% bonus ... which is good, in that it might put my current account back into the black; but at the same time I can't help feeling that I've done nothing to deserve it, that it's just as meaningless as everything else.


I haven't been keeping up the diary of how much money I've spent at all. I'm going to start again as of today, because while I've failed so far that doesn't mean I have to carry on failing. I'll see if I can back-fill the days I didn't keep track (I've been keeping receipts, in the hope of catching up at some point), but going forward, keeping going from now rather than worrying about then, is more important.

I tried ages ago to move my cc balance to a new cc account, so that at least I wouldn't be paying interest; it's taken two months so far to persuade First Direct to do anything useful. I received an application form in the post yesterday but couldn't believe that filling in all my details on the web just resulted in them sending me another application form to fill in; so I phoned again today, to be told that all I have to do is sign that form, and send it back. "But presumably I'll have to fill in some of my details, so that you know who this signature is from?" I asked, puzzled. "Oh -- yeah," says the droid (who had the same birthdate as me). "Just put your name and date of birth, and ... hang on, here's your ID number; write on the form that you've already filled this information in on the web, and quote your ID number." For heaven's sake. You'd think they'd never done this before! However, hopefully soon I will have a new cc account, so I can pay it off without having to pay the interest as well.

Despite laziness on my part and uselessness on First Direct's, I have been sticking to the spirit of the money diet, namely trying not to spend too much money. I don't think I've bought any items of clothing since I decided to try to keep a money diary, I've definitely bought no CDs, and I've bought very few books (but then I haven't been reading any either). I have bought random gifts for people that I probably shouldn't be buying, but I tend to think that making people smile is more important than having lots of money in the bank. Maybe this is why I never have any money... now if only I was always smiling as well. :-/

It annoys me that I have to think about money at all. I don't like money, though obviously I like the things it can buy. But it feels like I have to keep concentrating on the money anyway, just to keep it coming in and not all going out again. I resent that. I don't dream of being rich. I dream of being able to afford to buy things for people when they need them and can't afford them, and when I can make them happy by buying them things. I dream of being able to pay my share in pubs and restaurants without worrying about the cost.

However, these aren't worthwhile dreams, according to a fellow LJ user. My dreams, apparently, should be all fire and air and other naff pseudo-pagan imagery, rather than concentrating on mundane things like being what I want to be, and doing what I want to do. Or rather, the things I want to be and do shouldn't be realistic. If I needed one more thing to make me really depressed today, it's being told that I should be trying to "change the world", when I have enough trouble just living in it from day to day. It's bad enough that my reality doesn't live up to my expectations; being told that my dreams don't live up to somebody's expectations is just ... beyond.

I don't particularly want to change the world; what is "the world" anyway? None of us experiences "the world" as a single entity; we experience our own world, our own subset of what's out there. The biggest way in which I could change my world would be by dying; because then my unique viewpoint would cease to exist. Maybe changing the world isn't always a good thing, hm?

No, I don't really want to radically change it; I just want to make the tiny bit of it that I inhabit benefit from my being there, or at least not be worse off for it. I want to be the best that I can be, not try to live up to somebody else's dreams. Perhaps if I had superpowers that allowed me to stop wars, and make trees grow, and bring fluffy bunny rabbits back to life, then I'd have dreams about changing the world. As it is, the dreams I have (of making the people around me happy, of making people's lives better) are quite unattainable enough for me as a vision that will never be reached but will keep on driving me forwards; I certainly don't see what sitting around dreaming about Big Ideas like World Peace is going to achieve.

I dream of doing things, rather than spending all my time dreaming. And (as one great dreamer said) "there's the rub". My imaginings of being able to do things are so vivid that they paralyse me; dreaming about doing things -- even just the tiny day-to-day things that I fail to do -- captivates my mind to the extent where I can't even get up from my chair and do anything.

I dream of not being hurt, not being affected by it when people tell me that my dreams are as worthless as my life.

Comments

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

Comic Relief on Friday reminds me [...]

I'm afraid I tend to feel (not think, logically, but feel) that "charity begins at home" -- it's awful that people have to be shown pictures of starving brown children in order to be made to reach into their purses, just because if you show them pictures of the white children who are starving Right Outside Their Goddamn Front Doors, well, then, they're criminals, and/or they should just Get A Job and stop whining.

That's my point entirely. I have far more time for Comic Relief/Children In Need and those of their ilk than I do for the charities that solely help "the far away" - not that those people don't need help but because damn it, there are people living within half a mile of most of us who need help just as badly, in different ways. They just don't make good TV. There are still kids starving to death in Britain - not because we have famine and drought but because their parents are neglectful, criminal, whatever. [I felt this before SC but of course now it's so much more personal when I read about child abuse and neglect.]

There's someone on a newsgroup I frequent who is refusing vaccinations for her children, who will not register them with a GP, who was abrupt with the Health Visitor when refusing assistance for a newborn - and then she gets indignant at the suggestion that Social Services may want to check up on her. I'm perfectly willing to believe she has made alternative arrangements for her children's healthcare - but how many neglectful and actively cruel people make the same choices every day? How many kids slip out of the system because no one bothered checking up when they disappeared from "official" view? The next time we hear about them they're on page 5 of a newspaper, and another headshot on the "failure of Social Services" story. I don't think we should be monitored every second of our lives, but it makes me mad that she can't see that for every wasted preliminary investigation of a competent mother, they might uncover a child* that is desperately in need of help.

* or adult. There are plenty of neglected/abused elderly and disabled people out there too. Sigh.

[j4.livejournal.com]

That's my point entirely. I have far more time for Comic Relief/Children In Need and those of their ilk than I do for the charities that solely help "the far away" - not that those people don't need help but because damn it, there are people living within half a mile of most of us who need help just as badly, in different ways. They just don't make good TV.

Yes, but Comic Relief has always focussed on "the far away" -- I've yet to see an advert for Comic Relief that says anything about helping people in the UK. Actually, this year I haven't seen anything about Comic Relief that has even mentioned the charity aspect -- it's all been about noses, and hair-dye, and trolley dashes, and jumble sales, and sponsored Pestering Your Neighbours, and so on.

There's someone on a newsgroup I frequent who is refusing vaccinations for her children, who will not register them with a GP

Good lord, why on earth is she doing that?

it makes me mad that she can't see that for every wasted preliminary investigation of a competent mother, they might uncover a child* that is desperately in need of help.

I'm not surprised. Yes, I agree that we shouldn't be monitored all the time, but doesn't she understand the (quite legitimate) concerns that people may have for her kids' health? How would she feel if other people refused to help her kids, when they did need it, on the grounds that it might be considered to be interfering?

The only thing is -- do they keep a record of whether or not people have been checked out by the Social Services? I mean, will she end up with a record of "No problems with children at all" or a record of "Has been INVESTIGATED by the Social Services SIX BILLION TIMES, and while they failed to find anything SO FAR... [ominous music]"? If it was likely to be anything approaching the latter then I'd understand her reluctance... on the other hand, "has resisted all attempts to let people see her kids" probably rings more alarm bells than "Has been investigated & nothing has been found".

Mind you I know that for every person who says "That's crazy, she should accept that it's better for her to be checked unnecessarily than for kids to die because of lax checking procedures" there'll be another person saying "How dare you suggest that we should all be constrained by blah blah blah nanny-state moo? How are our kids going to grow up autonomous if neighhhhhh oink oink?" ... I guess in the end we just have to do what we think is best.

[bopeepsheep.livejournal.com]

Yes, but Comic Relief has always focussed on "the far away" -- I've yet to see an advert for Comic Relief that says anything about helping people in the UK.
VBG. You have no idea how old I feel now. :-D I have the original Comic Relief single (Cliff Richard and the Young Ones doing Livin' Doll, as seen on TOTP2 earlier this week - it was No.1 on my 14th birthday!) and on the back there's a bit about how the charity splits its focus between Africa and the UK. If you watch the CR shows there are always bits about the projects they do in the UK too, btw. They don't make documentaries about that bit, admittedly, possibly because it's a lot harder to get celebrities to put their time into UK-based stuff when it's not for the big main telethon. [Have you read Cause Celeb, btw, by Helen Fielding? Predates BJ but got rereleased on the back of that success. Worth reading.] Anyway, they have publicised the UK work in the past, and still do. http://www.comicrelief.org.uk/entry.shtml - work in the UK. (With a not-very-flattering picture of Sue Johnston...)

WRT the non-vaccinating mother who refuses "all state aid" (!), she's driving me nuts. She'd sooner risk encephalitis (a common side-effect of true measles) and is quite happy to allow her children to infect other people. She thinks that it's not her obligation to explain why she is opting out of the system, but refuses to see that that might be viewed as suspicious by anyone.

Records ARE kept, but if she tells them what alternative arrangements she's made, the record will say that and they'll probably leave her alone. It's not like the TV Licensing people who refuse to believe that one could ever live without broadcast TV... Refusing to give information though would set off warning bells and I can't see any justification for behaving like that. If you've nothing to hide, why hide it? I don't like the nanny-state idea, but I detest the "two-year-old starved to death" headlines even more.

[j4.livejournal.com]

If you watch the CR shows there are always bits about the projects they do in the UK too, btw.

I don't watch the shows, because I can't face watching hours and hours of third-rate celebrities tipping custard over each other, interspersed with heartfelt pleas from people with BIG EYES for me to phone and give money. If I'm going to give money, I will do so, regardless of how many BIG EYES and big-bellied children they show me. (Gah.)

it's a lot harder to get celebrities to put their time into UK-based stuff

And this annoys me. Not you, I mean, just the way things are. The way it's impossible to get people to do anything unless a celebrity is pasting their skinny body all over it. The way celebrities and the media are the judge of what causes are "worthy".



It's not like the TV Licensing people who refuse to believe that one could ever live without broadcast TV...

It's weird, I've always thought that the TV licensing people were like this, but when I did stop having a TV for a while (when I was expecting to move in with sion_a imminently, and he already had a TV licence which was a long way from expiring) they phoned me up. "Why haven't you renewed your TV licence?" They said. "Because I no longer have a television," I said. "Oh. Okay," they said, and hung up shortly afterwards.

If you've nothing to hide, why hide it?

Oh dear, oh dear, the crypto folk will be at your throat any minute now. "Why do you send your letters in envelopes?" etc. (My answer to this is usually "Because the stuff I want to say won't fit on a postcard", but they never seem to accept that that's my real reason...)

I do agree with you about this madwoman though. Hopefully her kids will grow up healthy and well-adjusted anyway, though.

[ewx.livejournal.com]

IME also, TV licensing have been perfectly polite and at worst displayed mild bureaucratic incompetence (though less so than credit card companies, apparently...)