Monsignor Willy.

Rome may try to lay claim to Catholicism but for me it’s Ireland. There’s a certain surrealism about the Irish and Catholics that transcends any construct I might fondly apply to the human race. Like the meanderings of dotage or the news from an altered universe I have no idea what they’re going to do next, or for that matter why they’ve just done it. Last evenings dinner was no exception. As a hundred and fifty of us sat down to our meal Kevin introduced our honoured guests, Tony Curry and Monsignor Willy. Unfortunately anything vaguely smutty sets Mothermouse off so the image of a stiff-backed reverential purple robed French penis was too much to bear. Under the table she texts her daughter, “At St Wilfreds do…. The bishop is called Monsignor Willy. I need help” and receives a reply, “There is no way out of it mum you’re trapped in a sitcom episode. Innuendos will only get worse from here. Good luck!” After the meal and Mothermouse shamelessly lusting after our handsome young waiter, who in return gave her an extra helping of bread and butter pudding, we are treated to Tony Curry’s life as a footballer. Tony, as with anyone who’s led an interesting life, was not that interested in talking about it so Kevin, assuming the role of a News of the World reporter, prompted him through the highs and lows of it, extracting anecdotes like teeth. After thirty minutes Mothermouse was playing with her phone, by an hour she was eating it, and when Kevin asked for questions we were both silently shouting, “No, please no questions!!” In response to the third Tony had to explain that after doing a synchronised roly-poly with a teammate they, in post roly-poly exuberance, kissed and that that was how he became a gay icon in Sweden. You can’t write this stuff. We donned our cloaks of invisibility and weedled our way out through the tables. From the foyer we heard Kevin ask if anyone wanted to sing. Pardon? Really? But sure enough two ladies were happy to do their operatic party pieces unaccompanied into the mike. The Catholic mind is a marvel to behold, to be sure.

Quick Change.

 This very morning it’s quiet in the streets of Kiev. President Victor Yanukovych is nowhere to be found, the police have disappeared and the protest leaders are in control. The dramatic images of Independence Square http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/ukraine-whats-happening-and-how-will-it-end-9139199.html (scroll down) have a look of apocalypse about them. I knew seventy or so protesters were killed, the police used live rounds etc but I wasn’t prepared to see an apocalypse. I’m struck by incredibly limited vision of news cameras. Like our own eyes only having a small circle of actual acute vision news photographers are always looking for the best shot to ‘show’ the story, at least the news story they’re focused on. So in a sense the momentum of the news story dictates the focus of their lens. It’s likely in Kiev just a few streets away from Independence Square life, or at least the look of it, is quite normal. What the protesters have created in that square, consciously or not, is a film set for the media. Black smoke from burning tyres smudges the buildings, central monument and protesters into a homogenous acrid grime and makes the clean police uniforms look even more alien and sinister. Somehow like a boy coming in from football covered in mud the look belies the simplicity of a bath to put things right. How this situation will evolve I’ve no idea but I find it interesting that you only need to create the look of devastation the width of a wide-angle lens to tell a story, a story that the media will flock to and that might to even make a president flea. Whatever our technology or status all of us are narrow vision-ed emotional beings: show us the pictures and we will create the narrative. 

Billiard Maths.

When I get down to play a shot I don’t really have a clue what to aim for. Obviously if you want the object ball to go right you hit it on the left side, but by how much? So I thought I’d work it out. Here’s the diagram to instantly improve your game. At the top the object ball (dark) is hit by the white ball (light) to go off at 50*. The large (light) circle shows the centre of the white ball as it hits the object ball. When the white ball approaches from a distance to get a 50* angle between the white and object balls you need to aim its centre line approximately half the radius away from the edge of the object ball. To get 30* you aim for the edge of the object ball. The bottom (dark) object ball and vertical lines show the different distances from its centre to get the angles from zero to 90*. It’s relatively easy to estimate the fractions of radius required but they’re not a simple proportion because we’re dealing with circles. This is fine when the white ball approaches from a distance but when it’s closer you have to take into account the angle between the ball centres and the line of the white ball to hit the object ball off to one side. This gets bigger the closer they are together and the lines of number show what you need to take off from the basic lines at closer distances. So for example where aiming for the edge of the object ball at distance gives 30* at 1 foot it only gives a 25* angle (30 – 5) or at 6 inches 20* (30 – 10). So to use the diagram estimate the angle required and distance, calculate where you need to aim the centre of the white ball centre as a fraction of the object ball radius required. Either that or just hit the bloody thing and hope for the best. I have yet to try this whole thing out.