Skip to main content

Just stop for a fucking second, okay?

Hi

I am in two minds about this post, well, three, possibly four. A couple of years ago I'd have dived (dove?) right in but now...um...

I have, as I have alluded to below, become uncomfortable with getting into stuff on the internet to any great extent. There're manifold reasons for this unease; I am primarily a paper and pen man when all's said and done, simply as there's clearly more effort involved, writing someone a letter is invested with equal gravitas to clicking "like" on fucking facebook and that simply isn't right to my elderly mind, there's too much unseemly display on the net, too much assumption that the minutiae of one's existence matters beyond the breakfast bowl. Too much self, simply put.

My brother's dead.

You see? Now this is news. Certainly is to me and my grieving, thunderstruck family. Is it right to put this on the internet? It's highly possibly that you will tab away from the news of my beautiful brother's death to a fucking lolcat or some such piece of vapid shit. I'm not gonna blame you for it, this is the digital condition.

So that was my dilemma. Telling the internet about the death of my brother after an all too brief battle with what turned out to be an absolute twat of a cancer seemed to me to cheapen it. Seems to me to cheapen it. Everything's inconsequential. Everything's ephemeral. I loathe it.

Conversely some may have wondered why I'd buggered off and hey, I've nothing against you, I'm pretty confident that you're good people. so you, y'know, you deserve some sort of explanation.

So yes. My beloved brother, Nicholas John Fallaize, died two weeks ago, on August 24th. A tuesday. At 3 o clock. My mother held his hand. My father stood at the head of the bed. I sent out a welsh rarebit and a lamb stew to table U3 and wondered why I had a missed call from my mum. I'm not going further. Talk is cheap, talk on the internet is even cheaper. Sentiment's a penny a pound, truisms less. Not one of them will bring my brother back.

normal snark will resumein a bit, just bear with me a while, okay?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Inedible

"He says it's inedible" said my front of house manager, as she laid the half-eaten fish and chips in front of me, and instantly I relaxed.  Clearly, I observed, it was edible to some degree. I comped it, because I can't be arsed arguing the toss, and I want to make my front of house's lives as simple as possible. The haddock had been delivered that morning. The fryers had been cleaned that morning. The batter had been made that morning (and it's very good batter, ask me nicely and I'll give you the recipe some time). The fish and chips was identical to the other 27 portions I'd sent out on that lunch service, all of which had come back more or less hoovered up, we have have a (justified, if I do say so myself) very good reputation for our chips. But it was, apparently, "inedible". When it comes to complaints, less is more. If you use a hyperbolic word like that, I'll switch off, you've marked yourself as a rube, a chump, I'm not g...
Post a Comment
Read more

Chop chop

I was completely ignorant of the fuss over the edited Trump speech in an edition of Panorama until, one moment later, I wasn't. And the reasons for my ignorance are instructive. I had no idea that the story was even brewing until the surprise Sunday night news of the resignations of Tom Davie and Deborah Turness. As I'm sure you are by now aware, this was occasioned by a clumsy edit in an old edition of Panorama, which has already been on the iplayer for a year. It's a non-story. Except people decided to make it a story. The reason I'd heard nothing of it until the resignations was that I'm not on X, where, apparently, it was all the media classes had been talking about for a week. It was an obsession of the unholy right-wing trifecta of the Mail, Telegraph and Times (who, given that they sent a bloke just last week to interview the wrong Bill di Blasio, you'd think would wind their necks in over factual inacccuracy). It was big news on GB news, all self-contain...
Post a Comment
Read more

Creepy old men

I note, somewhat wearily, that creepy old men are back in the news, being creepy. Creepy old men, and their apologists and enablers, who argue that their creepiness is somehow the natural order of things. Old men would have you believe that it is difficult to not be a creepy old man. That it is a task of epic proportions. It is not that difficult. It is a matter of intention. As yet more of the grimness of Epstein unfolds, creepy old men are, sadly, a flaccid topic once again. Whether it be pursuing students thirty years their junior, or simply not asking too many questions about the background of the probably legal young woman who you've just been introduced to by your good pal Jeff. To be clear, I am not referring to criminal creepy old men, the ones who actually committed statutory rape, the ones who fucked trafficked hirls. That is not something which is allowed to get away merely with the contempt of the observer.  That deserves prison.  No , I'm referring to the hinterla...
Post a Comment
Read more