Life has got in the way, somewhat, since my last entry. Apologies to my reader. Now, seated, glasses on and 5 jumpers – it is freezing outside and so bleak – let me give you the benefit of my wisdom … yes, that even made me smile!
I happened to catch the very first episode of ‘Friends’, last week, and I now have a post-it note stuck on the fridge door to remind me of the dialogue which made me laugh so much … and then I realized that I was Rachel! Yes, this time, I appreciate that that comment will have made a lot of other people smile but you know what I mean:
To Rachel: ‘You get a job?’
Rachel: ‘Are you kidding me? I’m trained for nothing!’
Why does that make me laugh so much? Is it the irony? Yes and no. On paper, it does look as though ‘I am trained for nothing’ but, then, what sort of comment does that make about the world today? One can be intelligent, well-educated, have a degree and a wealth of experience in different fields and, yet, be deemed unemployable because one does not possess the appropriate computer skills or ‘the skills’ which lend themselves to ‘pigeon-holing’! In fact, the world, itself, is like a giant computer programmed to recognize black and white, alone; any deviation and ‘the computer’ malfunctions. ‘Cloning’, ‘the sheep syndrome’… Think about it. Individuality is rare. Most people strive to be the same as everyone else; to be lost in the crowd. What do they think? Oh, right, easier just to go along with that, then. Can’t be seen to rock the boat or express an opinion contrary to others. If I’m really brave, though, I might just get up the nerve to sit on the fence!!
Is it just me or do cars all look the same now, let alone the same colour? I, actually, recorded a series about cars which were around – and cherished – in days gone by. Alright, those who know me will automatically substitute ‘the seventies’ for ‘days gone by’ (might just be easier if I refer to them as ‘the golden days’ in future – what a ridiculous combination of words!). The point is, I do remember all the classic cars from that era because they were all different and each had their own character. A BMW looked like a BMW and a Mercedes looked like a Mercedes! Each was instantly recogniseable and memorable. They were cars of quality – remember those with walnut dashboards – not just churned out, to say nothing of the cheap plastic interiors …
God knows why I’ve gone down this road! Sorry, I couldn’t resist that. I was merely using cars as an analogy of life today and the desire, by most, to stay under the radar – think the same, dress the same, look the same, the same, the same, the same … Has the record got stuck or are we all just prisoners of the same groove?! I find it suffocating and totally soul destroying.
On the subject of ‘being trained for nothing’, one of my dalliances of the past week involved a consultation with Counsel. For those, unlike me, not involved in an ongoing 5 year divorce, that means a trip to the advocate – and a greatly diminished bank balance. So, as one would imagine, my advocate being a female, it was a meeting of minds … not! Don’t get me wrong, she is perfect for the task in hand – and one would definitely want her in one’s corner – but there in front of me was a cold, ruthless business woman who referred to clauses by number as though she were a computer in a black suit … and stilettos! Given, they weren’t towering but they were definitely stilettos. For me, the justification was hard to grasp. An extremely intelligent, career-driven, high-powered woman paying little heed to hair nor make-up and, yet, conforming as it were. I defy any woman to argue that heels are comfortable or a necessity at work … so does the male dominated environment play a part?!
Being a day of weather similar to today, I was dressed as though for a hike in the hills but, that aside, I came away having been described by the aforementioned advocate – for legal purposes, of course – as ‘a woman in her fifties with no skills’. Is there a pattern emerging here?! I, actually, only mentioned it to Becca yesterday and, not only was she aghast at the description, but more so that I had taken it on the chin! Water off a duck’s back now …
On the subject of lawyers – my favourite – that brings me to Amal Clooney. I happened to pass a newspaper stand, recently, and notice a headline becrying the supposed cost of her ‘pregnancy wardrobe’ – something in the realms of £168,000. Fair enough. Almost digestible given her earnings. However, some time earlier, I had made a note of a considerably inflated – and, to my mind, controversial – figure relating to the Clooneys …
Now, do the Clooneys fall into the unspoken ‘no criticism’ category? Both Amal and her husband, the delectable George, seem to be close to deification: she, a high-profile human rights lawyer – with a wardrobe to die for and Clark Gable II as her husband – and he, a second Clark Gable with a penchant for good causes on the world stage. A power couple who, together, are worth a fortune and, of course, have several homes. Apparently, the most recently acquired – in Gloucestershire, I think – is in need of some refurbishment in preparation for the arrival of the twins. All good.
Meanwhile, in another part of the world – namely, East Africa – 16 million people are on the brink of starvation. Without help, more than a million children are at risk of dying. I made notes: £25 represents a month’s supply of life-saving peanut paste for a malnourished child; £60 could provide clean drinking water for 2 families for a month; £100 would cover a week’s critical supplies for a clinic.
Back to the Clooneys and their house refurbishment … should newspaper reports be believed, the cost is a mere £45 million. An exclamation mark is too flippant. Of course, it could be argued – and I suspect is true – that they do give much of their fortune to good causes. Plausible as that is, how can anyone – let alone someone devoted to the cause of human rights – justify spending £45 million on any home, let alone a third one? Look back to the figures in the paragraph above. Once again, the human capacity for such excess in the face of reality, defies belief.
Amongst my notes, I have just found another scribble pertaining to my meeting with Counsel! Always good to finish on a cheery note and even better that it be self-deprecating – serves as my ‘end of blog quote’, too, which I know you have come to relish … So this is me, at the end of the meeting, expressing one of the many reasons I cannot wait for it all to be over:
Me: ‘I’ve bored my friends to tears for five long years!’
Advocate (deadpan): ‘They should just be grateful they’re not in your position.’
Well, that cheered me up, I don’t know about you!!
This is Trish, signing off.
I happened to catch the very first episode of ‘Friends’, last week, and I now have a post-it note stuck on the fridge door to remind me of the dialogue which made me laugh so much … and then I realized that I was Rachel! Yes, this time, I appreciate that that comment will have made a lot of other people smile but you know what I mean:
To Rachel: ‘You get a job?’
Rachel: ‘Are you kidding me? I’m trained for nothing!’
Why does that make me laugh so much? Is it the irony? Yes and no. On paper, it does look as though ‘I am trained for nothing’ but, then, what sort of comment does that make about the world today? One can be intelligent, well-educated, have a degree and a wealth of experience in different fields and, yet, be deemed unemployable because one does not possess the appropriate computer skills or ‘the skills’ which lend themselves to ‘pigeon-holing’! In fact, the world, itself, is like a giant computer programmed to recognize black and white, alone; any deviation and ‘the computer’ malfunctions. ‘Cloning’, ‘the sheep syndrome’… Think about it. Individuality is rare. Most people strive to be the same as everyone else; to be lost in the crowd. What do they think? Oh, right, easier just to go along with that, then. Can’t be seen to rock the boat or express an opinion contrary to others. If I’m really brave, though, I might just get up the nerve to sit on the fence!!
Is it just me or do cars all look the same now, let alone the same colour? I, actually, recorded a series about cars which were around – and cherished – in days gone by. Alright, those who know me will automatically substitute ‘the seventies’ for ‘days gone by’ (might just be easier if I refer to them as ‘the golden days’ in future – what a ridiculous combination of words!). The point is, I do remember all the classic cars from that era because they were all different and each had their own character. A BMW looked like a BMW and a Mercedes looked like a Mercedes! Each was instantly recogniseable and memorable. They were cars of quality – remember those with walnut dashboards – not just churned out, to say nothing of the cheap plastic interiors …
God knows why I’ve gone down this road! Sorry, I couldn’t resist that. I was merely using cars as an analogy of life today and the desire, by most, to stay under the radar – think the same, dress the same, look the same, the same, the same, the same … Has the record got stuck or are we all just prisoners of the same groove?! I find it suffocating and totally soul destroying.
On the subject of ‘being trained for nothing’, one of my dalliances of the past week involved a consultation with Counsel. For those, unlike me, not involved in an ongoing 5 year divorce, that means a trip to the advocate – and a greatly diminished bank balance. So, as one would imagine, my advocate being a female, it was a meeting of minds … not! Don’t get me wrong, she is perfect for the task in hand – and one would definitely want her in one’s corner – but there in front of me was a cold, ruthless business woman who referred to clauses by number as though she were a computer in a black suit … and stilettos! Given, they weren’t towering but they were definitely stilettos. For me, the justification was hard to grasp. An extremely intelligent, career-driven, high-powered woman paying little heed to hair nor make-up and, yet, conforming as it were. I defy any woman to argue that heels are comfortable or a necessity at work … so does the male dominated environment play a part?!
Being a day of weather similar to today, I was dressed as though for a hike in the hills but, that aside, I came away having been described by the aforementioned advocate – for legal purposes, of course – as ‘a woman in her fifties with no skills’. Is there a pattern emerging here?! I, actually, only mentioned it to Becca yesterday and, not only was she aghast at the description, but more so that I had taken it on the chin! Water off a duck’s back now …
On the subject of lawyers – my favourite – that brings me to Amal Clooney. I happened to pass a newspaper stand, recently, and notice a headline becrying the supposed cost of her ‘pregnancy wardrobe’ – something in the realms of £168,000. Fair enough. Almost digestible given her earnings. However, some time earlier, I had made a note of a considerably inflated – and, to my mind, controversial – figure relating to the Clooneys …
Now, do the Clooneys fall into the unspoken ‘no criticism’ category? Both Amal and her husband, the delectable George, seem to be close to deification: she, a high-profile human rights lawyer – with a wardrobe to die for and Clark Gable II as her husband – and he, a second Clark Gable with a penchant for good causes on the world stage. A power couple who, together, are worth a fortune and, of course, have several homes. Apparently, the most recently acquired – in Gloucestershire, I think – is in need of some refurbishment in preparation for the arrival of the twins. All good.
Meanwhile, in another part of the world – namely, East Africa – 16 million people are on the brink of starvation. Without help, more than a million children are at risk of dying. I made notes: £25 represents a month’s supply of life-saving peanut paste for a malnourished child; £60 could provide clean drinking water for 2 families for a month; £100 would cover a week’s critical supplies for a clinic.
Back to the Clooneys and their house refurbishment … should newspaper reports be believed, the cost is a mere £45 million. An exclamation mark is too flippant. Of course, it could be argued – and I suspect is true – that they do give much of their fortune to good causes. Plausible as that is, how can anyone – let alone someone devoted to the cause of human rights – justify spending £45 million on any home, let alone a third one? Look back to the figures in the paragraph above. Once again, the human capacity for such excess in the face of reality, defies belief.
Amongst my notes, I have just found another scribble pertaining to my meeting with Counsel! Always good to finish on a cheery note and even better that it be self-deprecating – serves as my ‘end of blog quote’, too, which I know you have come to relish … So this is me, at the end of the meeting, expressing one of the many reasons I cannot wait for it all to be over:
Me: ‘I’ve bored my friends to tears for five long years!’
Advocate (deadpan): ‘They should just be grateful they’re not in your position.’
Well, that cheered me up, I don’t know about you!!
This is Trish, signing off.
