1917
Posted on January 21, 2020 2 Comments
I had high expectations for this film, but ended up disappointed, as happens so often with films. I do worry that there are common factors that make many modern films problematic – some of which I cannot mention due to the reaction I would receive from certain quarters. Nevertheless, I found myself continuously disappointed with the film. Here is a list of some of the problems I had with it:
- What was the point of the film? A unit could be contacted in a number of ways despite having telephone lines cut – and why send the brother of one of the officers in that unit? And later another unit is going the same way. They could have told them. The plotline was as ridiculous as Saving Private Ryan
- walking through a front line trench without fire steps
- dugouts on both the British and German sides at ground level rather than dug deeply into the ground
- Not enough booby traps on the ground where the Germans had retreated, and when they finally came across one, a tripwire, there was an explosion that failed to injure either soldier, though they were both close to the tripwire, and then the dugout (on the surface remember) gradually collapsed like something out of one of those shoddy Harrison Ford archeology films
- German artillery within about 100m of the front line. Also not impressed that they had not recycled their shellcases, this was 1917 and they had huge shortages
- Perfectly untouched fields just behind the front line
- Your friend gets stabbed in the guts so you try and twist him around and pick him up? No wonder he died.
- A huge waterfall on the Somme battlefield along with rapids? Sorry, I have been around that area quite a lot and there is nothing like that. A totally spurious scene. And it was the Somme, there was mention of Bapaume.
- Token black actors among the soldiers. While many coloured troops fought in the war they would not have been individuals in the Devons. They would more likely be French colonial units
- British soldiers in a forward line that had only become a forward line no more than two days before. The trenches were huge, clearly dug by a JCB, and clean. The wrong shape of course but nothing can be right in this film
- All of the German fire came from artillery in the final attack. Where were the machine guns? Far more common and far more effective at killing large numbers of soldiers
- A Casualty Clearing Station 100m or so behind the front line? Really? Not only a CCS but it also had a mess tent. That would be pleasant next to the damaged soldiers
- Endless boring scenes that needed serious editing
- Dreadful music that tried to make out I was watching an epic.
That is probably enough. The film was as bad as Dunkirk. I am not sure why these war films are so bad at the moment, but clearly there are issues around historical inaccuracy.
Reducing waste
Posted on January 11, 2020 1 Comment
We all know plastic can be a bad thing and that we need to reduce its use. This is the case throughout the world. When I was a child in the UK in the 1960s and 1970s we did not really have a big problem with waste in the same way – though we had our own ways of creating unwanted waste. There were huge slag heaps from the coal mines, filth being chucked out of chimneys everywhere, polluted rivers, too many pesticides, and my personal favourite, visiting the coking plant to collect coke, which burnt on personal fires very efficiently, but in order to convert coal to coke various chemicals had to be burnt off, and the coking plant was like something out of Dante’s Inferno but with big dirty bells on.
At home it was different. My Dad was a self-employed joiner, and he recycled everything he could. The food waste was composted, newspapers and foil were taken for recycling, all forms of metal were taken to the scrapyard (later, when I was an impoverished student, he collected the scrap for me and I would take it to the scrapyard to make a few pounds; even later, when he was an impoverished pensioner I would help collect the scrap and then take it to the scrapyard so he could boost his pension). As a joiner he needed wood, and whenever possible he would use recycled wood. I remember Breadsall Hall being demolished and he bought some huge joists from there. Of course, recycled wood meant recycled nails, so I have no idea how many rusty nails I have pulled out of old bits of wood so that both wood and nails can be reused. At the back of his shed there was glass, old chimney pots, bricks, stone, asbestos roofing (1970s remember), and all manner of things that would come in usesful somewhere, and they usually did. When I was a child milk came in reusable bottles (we are still doing that because we have a milkman and it is becoming more popular again) and pop in glass bottles, so we would collect them and take them to the shop for a few pence. It all helped reduce waste. Why throw away a bottle that is worth 5p? And if you do then a child will find it and take it to the shop. Food that was too good to put in the compost was eaten the next day. Food was bought in recyclable packaging, and shopping bags lasted a lifetime (yes, the modern world is starting again on that one).
The list goes on, but that was then and this is now. We need to do something quickly. In India recenty we saw the problems of plastic waste. It litters the tropical beaches, the roads, the jungles, everywhere. Water in the tap is not fit to drink so you need to either buy water in plastic bottles or filter it, and the former is by far the most common. In India the piles of waste are everywhere, with little being done to clear it up, except what can be eaten by cattle, pigs and dogs. India provides a good example of what we must not be like when it comes to waste.
We can all start by doing something, by changing the way we behave (India had this effect on me in several ways!). Don’t buy pop in plastic. Don’t buy water at all in the UK, we have perfectly good tap water (sparkling water is an exception), so no water in plastic. The packaging in supermarkets is horrendous. When selecting vegetables don’t put anything in plastic bags, put them all in a basket and let the cashier sort them out and weigh them – if there were weighing machines by the fruit and veg we could do it ourselves and then have a ticket indicating overall cost. Do as others have suggested and leave unwanted packaging at the till. Eventually the supermarketes will realise we don’t want the packaging.
I have a more radical idea for takeaways. Whenever you are within a certain radius of one of these hideous monuments to what is wrong with society there is packaging everywhere. Instead, they should not be allowed to put food in throwaway packaging, we should all carry our own packaging, which could, for instance, be in the form of a plastic (nothing wrong with reusable plastics) click-together tray which can hold burgers, chips and so on; and we are all supposed to have our own takeaway cups now for the drinks (that will also limit the size of drinks). Collect your takeaway, eat it, don’t throw the tray out of the car window, take it home, wash it, and put it back in the car for next time. I am sure that if I was at all bright in the business sense I could make a few million with this idea. McDonalds and KFC and so on could all produce their own versions with their logos on. There would have to be a substantial minimum charge for them so that no one would want to throw them away.
It can be done. We did a lot of it in the past anyway. Some of it is just going back to previous recycling days when people were not so rich they could afford to throw things away. It does need action on the part of governments though. Unless there is profit for the big businesses they will not be interested. Governments too will not be interested unless they think there are votes involved. So get to it, write to your MP (or non-UK equivalent) and start making some real changes.
Mysore to Tranquilandia
Posted on December 25, 2019 Leave a Comment
Today we drove a little over 200km and saw something of rural India. While we in the West are, or appear to be, horrified by the levels of poverty in India, while visiting there is nothing to be done about it except pay tourist rather than local prices. India is extreme in terms of how wealth sits side by side with poverty. One house might be magnificent, newly built, brightly painted, with large garden walls and big gates, and next to it there are rows upon rows of hovels, where many people live and often also work. As a child I built dens in my garden. My favourites were brick built, with a tin or asbestos roof, and an old curtain for a door, with a fire burning at the entrance cooking potatoes or bacon. Except for the bacon, many of the houses here are like my brick dens.
We passed hundreds of small businesses being run by people living in poverty, many tea shops, places selling plastic drinks (you know, coke and all that), repairing bikes, mending punctures, and so on. There were also many people, particularly men, who just appeared to be sitting doing nothing, a subject I may return to when I am feeling controversial.
We have only been in India for a few days, and the food is very good, but already I am getting cravings for British food. While I have no problems with curry for breakfast, having it three meals a day every day is a little excessive in my humble opinion. In the end every meal, whether meat, fish or veg, is flavoured with the same set of 7 or 8 spices. I managed to get plain scrambled egg on toast this morning. It made me happy. That is not to say I am not enjoying the food here; I am, very much, but in the end I want more variety. My taste buds are too weak to understand the subtleties of flavour that apparently differentiates the various dishes, but not so weak that I cannot declare that roast beef and the trimmings is the best dish in the world.
My rules for Indian driving (previous blog) have not really changed. Yesterday we were in a tuc tuc – sorry Shruti, auto rickshaw – driving around Mysore, so I experienced being one of the buzzing flies I described previously. Unfortunately the driver would not let me have a go. The experience of driving here was similar to driving from Bangalore to Mysore, though often a little more rural, and with a mountain to cross – going down the steep side of the mountain with 27 hairpin bends (yes, they were labelled), at the same time passing as many lorries as possible without being hit by the lorries coming up the hill was, I admit it, great fun and something I could not possibly do in Europe, even in the Mediterranean. It is only day 3 of driving, but I do know to expect the unexpected. Today we were stopped by a policeman. We told him where we were going, he was very friendly, shook my hand and pointed off the road, down a cart track to the river, where we had to drive along a rough track and then takes our chances at fording the river and up a steep hill on the other side. All went well, but I am glad we are in a crossover rather than some little hatchback. We have also extended the list of animals that forced us to stop or detour around them. We already had cattle, oxen, and dogs. Today we added piglets, wild boar (it stood in front of the car as if it had a death wish. Wild boar sausages did run through my mind) and monkeys. We drove through sanctuaries for elephants, tigers and cheetahs, but none emerged. Hunting is now banned in India, and this was illustrated with a picture of a Kalashnikov. I am not sure how effective such a weapon would be against an elephant.
We finally arrived at Tranquilandia, our hotel for the night in the middle of the jungle. This really is an interesting place, but more of that later.
Driving in India
Posted on December 22, 2019 Leave a Comment
We arrived in India very early on Friday morning. On Saturday we picked up a rental car, drove it 20km plus through the middle of Bangalore, went to a wedding, and then today, Sunday, we drove down to Mysore, around 150km. So what, you might say? Well, everyone I meet tells me that you have to be crazy to drive in India. Travel by train, by bus, by taxi, or hire a car with a driver, all are relatively cheap ways to get around. But I don’t like to be driven around. I don’t evven like someone else piloting a plane when Iam aboard, even though I don’t have a pilot’s licence.
Before we came to India I did a little study of the driving. Yes, it looks chaotic on a video, people who have been to India say it is chaotic, Indians who have driven in India say it is chaotic. They are wrong. As a psychologist I decided to look at it a little more closely. If driving in India really was chaotic then there would be continual accidents, and no one would get anywhere. While the accident rate is high people do generally get to where they want to go. It is not just Brownian motion, with random movement, there is direction and purpose.
Indian driving is just driving with different rules. The rules are very different to what we in the West are used to. Driving in Italy – boring, driving in Paris – do it blindfold, driving in Eastern Europe, more interesting but definitely more like the West than India.
To drive in India means to accept a new set of rules. Now, having only driven for two days (though without accidents), I have begun to establish some of these. As we will be driving for the next 10 days or so these should develop, and I will hopefully add to this. Please take these rules as a beginner’s draft, from someone with limited experience.
- If you drive like a Westerner in India you will never pull away from the kerb. If you drive like an Indian in the West, you will be in an accident within about one minute
- Use your horn in the way we are supposed to in the West, to show you are there. Horns are constantly used. They are not used in the way they usually are in the West, as a means of shouting at someone you are angry with.
- Indians are very courteous, I have yet to see and anger or road rage. This is the essential rule. Without it, all else falls apart.
- All round vision, high levels of attention, and perceptual acuity are essential. If you cannot focus these attributes then don’t drive, seriously.
- Understand the size of your vehicle. Other vehicles will come within centimetres of yours, and you will go through gaps with similar dimensions
- Be brave. You have to pull out in front of other vehicles in a way that is incredible in the West. How else are you going to get across that junction, get round that roundabout, or cross the road to the fuel station?
- Drivers interdigitate at junctions. Critical rule. Link to rule 3.
- Motorbikes, pushbikes, tuc tucs and other small vehicles create a sort of atmosphere similar to having buzzing flies all around. Just don’t swat them. They will use the tiniest space on any side of your vehicle to pass, and you will let them. See Rule 3.
- Undertaking is as common as overtaking, and perfectly acceptable. Use that left mirror
- Vehicles will come towards you in your lane on your side of the road. Deal with it. There is space.
- Oxen and cows will be using the road, and they are very slow. Ox carts are used on dual carriageways, but they tend to keep to the left
- People walk across the roads (including main highways) but they are taking account of traffic and you have to take account of them. Sometimes you let them through, sometimes not
- Drive slowly. The limit on open roads is often 80kph. The roads are potholed and have speedbumps. All the above only work because traffic moves slowly, but it keeps moving – generally
- Apparently 13 is unlucky, so I have added this rule. If you believe that then you should probably not drive in India. Success is not about luck, it is about driving like an Indian.
There we are. That is a start. I am not claiming these are the definitive rules, but they are a start, and I will hopefully be back with an update after more driving experience here in India.
Craiglockhart
Posted on June 23, 2019 Leave a Comment
I am delivering a public lecture in Edinburgh on Wednesday evening at the site of the World War One hospital for war trauma, Craiglockhart – made famous because Wilfred Owen and Siegfried Sassoon were treated there for war trauma, and because Pat Barker used it extensively for her regeneration trilogy.
The lecture is about the contribution of WHR Rivers to the treatment of war trauma, and how his ideas are still, in some ways, with us now. Rivers was something of a polymath, being an anthropologist and ethnographer as well as a psychologist/psychiatrist. He supervised the PhDs of well-known psychologists such as CS Myers, the writer of the first published mention of shell shock in 1915; Frederick Bartlett, whose work on memory in the early 20th Century is still important today; and William McDougall – on the other hand let’s not say too much about him as his pet topic was eugenics.
Rivers published a wide range of material, went on several anthropological expeditions around the world, at one point was in charge of two psychology labs, and did many other things, but he was rarely able to work more than four hours a day. Perhaps that should tell our employers something about the best way to look after employees.
In World War One Rivers treated people with war neuroses, firstly at Maghull near Liverpool and then at Craiglockhart. Many doctors treated soldiers with neuroses very harshly, imposing a high level of discipline, providing electric shocks as therapy, and generally continuing with army discipline in the hospital. Yealland used electric shock therapy with soldiers who had lost their voice. A case is described in Barker where a soldier is locked into a room. He cannot speak, the doctor (Yealland) insists that the soldier cannot leave the room until he is speaking, and then provides a series of electric shocks until the person does speak. There is no record of the long term effectiveness of this treatment.
Rivers preferred a more gentle approach, one more in keeping with the modern world. He essentially used talking therapy, essentially arguing that soldiers with war neuroses tended to repress the memories as the are too painful to articulate or have in consciousness. Rivers encouraged the men to talk about their memories, and through this cleanse them, making the memories manageable.
We still do versions of this now, and in the talk I describe one such therapy, Narrative Exposure Therapy, which explicitly involves talking in detail about the traumatic memories. We have good evidence from a range of sources for its effectiveness, having used it in China, Iraq, Bosnia and Saudi Arabia.
The talk will illustrate, through ideas about narrative, how Rivers has influenced the development of psychological thought regarding the treatment of war trauma. If you are interested in going, follow this link:
Dr Nigel Hunt 