My little problem

9 January, 2012 (12:33) | All articles | By: Stuart Fraser

I’m going to share a confession with you.

There is a part of my body, a small part, with which I am far from happy. It is not big enough. It’s sort of dumpy, and bent a bit at the end. People have been known to laugh at it. I wish I had a bigger, longer, straighter, more impressive one.

But should you pay for me to have the big one of which I’ve always dreamed? Should the NHS offer to fix my little problem for free?

Of course not.

I’ve had to learn to live with my little nose – what? What? – all these years, and shall carry on doing so. It’s me, after all, just like all my other imperfections.

Why is the debate about whether or not we should replace faulty breast implants for free even being aired? If they’ve been shoved in for purely cosmetic reasons, the answer is no. Tough. Surely there have to be limits to societal responsibility (and this is old leftie me talking) – and that limit has to be reached when somebody has chosen to do something to their body for no medical reason. At that point that person must take responsibility for her actions, even if some quack shoved in a lump of plastic that may or may not do them any good in the future.

But here, of course, there is a can of big wiggly worms. Those of us who choose to drink – should we have our livers treated for free? Smokers? What about people who choose to play rugby on a Saturday afternoon and then break their leg? Skiers?

No easy answers, then. But I do firmly believe that part of the way to an answer to the implant issue is to have a society where women don’t feel it necessary to have bigger breasts.

Books and films

I think the BBC is wonderful, which is why the gaps between programmes anger me beyond measure: the Beeb fills them with expensive-looking trailers and adverts for itself, helping all those who say that if the Beeb is going to open itself up for advertising, it should allow adverts for things other than its own products.

These are unfairly exploiting its monopoly on the one hand and wasting public money on the other. More to the point, they’re wasting thousands of pounds that could be better spent buying scripts from extremely talented yet widely ignored writers.

It’s not just the existence of these trailers, it’s their ubiquity: endlessly, the BBC screens them, on and on and on. I suppose Auntie has spent so much money on these things there’s a sort of mindset that says “we have to do everything, anything, to make this a success…”

I’m not going to watch the latest subject of this: the adaptation of Sebastian Faulks’ very great novel, Birdsong, the trailer for which has been screened at least five million times so far this month.

Birdsong was one of the finest novels of the last 50 years. With the First World War at its centre, it was deeply moving, full of phrases of spare power and images that haunt me to this day: packets of love and memory spinning to the ground on the first day of the Somme, our lives the beat of a wing against the weight of time.

Why film it? Films of books are never an improvement. Why does Birdsong need a film – to make it better? Or because the story’s so good it needs a wider audience than the book? Well, that’s specious. The story’s only good because it’s told with words that paint pictures for each of us. We don’t need to share the pictures a film director sees.

Look at Great Expectations over Christmas: a nation was divided over the BBC’s adaptation. I thought it clichéd and disliked it intensely, though I know there are Brothers and Sisters here who did enjoy it. My point is this: did we need it? Captain Kay suggests David Lean’s adaptation was all we ever needed, but I think even that, fine though it was, was one too many.

With films of books, I’m with the famous quote about preferring radio to television – I prefer the pictures on the radio. Or in the book.

That’s not to say there are no good films based on books:  Far From the Madding Crowd, for example, with Julie Christie and Terence Stamp offering definitions of male and female beauty. Dr Zhivago, come to that. Brother Kempthorne offers two Jack Nicholson movies that were, he says, better than the books – The Shining and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. The apotheosis of the argument for films based on books is Apocalypse Now, as the good bearded Brother says, based on Conrad’s Heart of Darkness but saying a great deal more about a different period of history, and different men, in a different way.

Well, over to you… Films and books. The comment boxes await your fingers.

Austerity for posterity

It’s always reassuring to read those little bits of news that tell us the country has a firm grip on the austerity crisis.

David Cameron, for example, enabling shareholders to curb bosses’ pay in the wake of news that the average FTSE 100 chief executive salary – average – is £5.1 million. Lots of those packages are made up of shares, of course, but I’m sure chief executives, chairs and other board members will be queuing up to vote for smaller salaries.

And what about Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs? They’re going to help us all out by investigating small businesses to see if they can claim back those few hundred quid that have been squirreled away from the taxman all these years.

How like the government for which HMRC works. Why target corporations like Vodafone for their billions of unpaid tax when you can attack a small businessman who can’t afford lawyers or offshore accounts? Why have a go at your friends the bankers when you can sack a few public sector employees instead?

Meanwhile, for all those of you placing faith in George Osborne’s austerity plans – have you heard the latest from Ireland? There, the government is about to introduce its fifth austerity budget. Why?

Well, after the first four austerity budgets of cutbacks, reduced spending, lost jobs and a shrinking public sector, how much smaller do you think Ireland’s budget deficit is?

It isn’t. It’s bigger. It’s grown from £18billion to £25billion. Because of welfare payments. And reduced spending by people who’ve lost jobs. And reduced spending by people who fear they’re losing their jobs. And reduced spending by people who’ve had their wages cut. And less jobs going in public sector areas. And less tax income because fewer people are working.

And so on and so on… but who says we’re ignoring the lessons of history?

Comments

Comment from One Old Fiddle
Time January 9, 2012 at 1:44 pm

Actually, I’d quite like to have smaller breasts……

Comment from Iain
Time January 11, 2012 at 8:11 pm

Mmmm………

Comment from Hamster
Time January 13, 2012 at 12:06 pm

If somebodies life or health is at risk no matter how caused, under the current system in our country they should definitely be treated for free or else where do you stop with that can o’ worms – but in the case of cosmetic implants they should be removed and not replaced.
I will largely leave the books/films to those that read more often than myself but the odd book-film combo I have done I have found my imagination did a better job with the book and the film was a let down.
And finally if taxman comes looking for my little stash he will be disappointed, wifey has already found it, counted it, nicked it and spent it

Comment from Hamster
Time January 13, 2012 at 12:09 pm

and a little advice to help you with your little problem. Rhinoplasty! don’t do it, you will only be cutting your nose of to spite your face.

Write a comment

You need to login to post comments!